used as a covering for the leg and foot. The word has been used for various forms of a long stocking covering both the foot and leg (see Hosiery), and this is the usual modern sense. But it also formerly meant a kind of gaiter covering the leg from the knee to the ankle only, of the long tight covering for the whole of the lower limbs, and later of the short puffed or slashed breeches worn with the doublet—at this period, from the early part of the 16th century onwards, comes the distinction between the “hose” or “trunk hose” and the stocking (see Costume). The term is applied to certain objects resembling such a covering, as in its application to flexible rubber or canvas piping used for conveying water (see Hosepipe), and in botany, to the “sheath” covering, e.g. the ear of corn. The term “hose-in-hose” is thus used in botany for a flower in which the corolla has become doubled, as though a second were inserted in the throat of the first; it occurs sometimes in the primrose.
HOSEA, the son of Beērī, the first in order of the minor
prophets of the Old Testament. The name Hosea (ֵהוֹשֵׁע, LXX.
Ὠσηέ, Vulg. Osee, and so the English version in Rom. ix. 25)
ought rather to be written Hoshea, and is identical with that
borne by the last king of Ephraim, and by Joshua in Num.
xiii. 16, Deut. xxxii. 44. Of the life of Hosea[1] we know nothing
beyond what can be gathered from his prophecies. That he
was a citizen of the northern kingdom appears from the whole
tenor of the book, but most expressly from i. 2, where “the
land,” the prophet’s land, is the realm of Israel, and vii. 5,
where “our king” is the king of Samaria. The date at which
Hosea flourished is given in the title, i. 1, by the reigning kings
of Judah and Israel. He prophesied (i) in the days of Uzziah,
Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah; (2) in the days
of Jeroboam the son of Joash, king of Israel. The dates indicated
by the title, which may be regarded as editorial, are,
for the four kings of the southern kingdom, 789–740, 739–734,
733–721 and 720–693 B.C. respectively; and, for Jeroboam II.,
782–743 (cf. Ency. Bib. col. 797–798). The book itself, however,
plainly belongs to the period prior to 734 B.C. since, in that
year, (a) the Syro-Ephraimitic war began, to which there is
here no reference, nor is Assyria yet the open foe it then became;
(b) Gilead became Tiglath-Pileser’s (2 Kings xv. 29), whereas
it is here described as still part of the territory of Israel (vi. 8;
xii. 11; cf. the included place-names of v. 1). On the other hand,
the prophet connects with the birth of his eldest child the
approaching fall of the house of Jehu (i. 4), thus anticipating
the death of Jeroboam II. in 743, and the period of anarchy
which followed (2 Kings xv.). Thus the prophetic work of
Hosea may be dated, with practical certainty, as beginning
from some point previous to 743 and extending not later than
734.[2] This is corroborated by the general character of the
book. Of its two parts, i.-iii. reflects the wealth and prosperity
of the reign of Jeroboam II., whilst iv.-xiv. contains frequent references
to the social disorder and anarchy of the subsequent years.
The first part of Hosea’s prophetic work, corresponding to chs. i.-iii., lay in the years of external prosperity immediately preceding the catastrophe of the house of Jehu in or near the year 743. The second part of the book is a summary of prophetic teaching during the subsequent troublous reign of Menahem, and, perhaps, that of his successor, Pekahiah, and must have been completed before 734 B.C. Apart from the narrative in chs. i.-iii., to which we shall presently recur, the book throws little or no light on the details of Hosea’s life. It appears from ix. 7, 8, that his prophetic work was greatly embarrassed by opposition: “As for the prophet, a fowler’s snare is in all his ways, and enmity in the house of his God.” The enmity which had its centre in the sanctuary probably proceeded from the priests (comp. Amos vii.), against whose profligacy and profanation of their office our prophet frequently declaims—perhaps also from the degenerate prophetic gilds which had their seats in the holy cities of the northern kingdom, and with whom Hosea’s elder contemporary Amos so indignantly refuses to be identified (Amos vii. 14). In ch. iv. 5 Hosea seems to comprise priests and prophets in one condemnation, thus placing himself in direct antagonism to all the leaders of the religious life of his nation. He is not less antagonistic to the kings and princes of his day (vii. 3-7, viii. 4, viii. 10 Septuagint, x. 7-15, xiii. 11).[3] In view of the familiarity shown with the intrigues of rulers and the doings of priests, it has been conjectured that Hosea held a prominent position, or even (by Duhm) that he was himself a priest (Marti, p. 2).
The most interesting problem of Hosea’s history lies in the interpretation of the story of his married life (chs. i.-iii.). We read in these chapters that God’s revelation to Hosea began when in accordance with a divine command he married a profligate wife, Gomer, the daughter of Diblaim. Three children were born in this marriage and received symbolical names, illustrative of the divine purpose towards Israel, which are expounded in ch. i. In ch. ii. the faithlessness of Israel to Jehovah (Yahweh), the long-suffering of God, the moral discipline of sorrow and tribulation by which He will yet bring back His erring people and betroth it to Himself for ever in righteousness, love and truth, are depicted under the figure of the relation of a husband to an erring spouse. The suggestion of this allegory lies in the prophet’s marriage with Gomer, but the details are worked out quite independently, and under a rich multiplicity of figures derived from other sources. In the third chapter we return to the personal experience of the prophet. His faithless wife had at length left him and fallen, under circumstances which are not detailed, into a state of misery, from which Hosea, still following her with tender affection, and encouraged by a divine command, brought her back and restored her to his house, where he kept her in seclusion, and patiently watched over her for many days, yet not readmitting her to the privileges of a wife.
In these experiences the prophet again recognizes a parallel to Yahweh’s long-suffering love to Israel, and the discipline by which the people shall be brought back to God through a period in which all their political and religious institutions are overthrown. Throughout these chapters personal narrative and prophetic allegory are interwoven with a rapidity of transition very puzzling to the modern reader; but an unbiassed exegesis can hardly fail to acknowledge that chs. i. and iii. narrate an actual passage in the prophet’s life. The names of the three children are symbolical, but Isaiah in like manner gave symbolical names to his sons, embodying prominent points
- ↑ Traditions about Hosea.—Beērī, the prophet’s father, is identified by the Rabbins with Beērah (1 Chron. v. 6), a Reubenite prince carried captive by Tiglath-Pileser. This view is already expressed by Jerome, Quaest. in Paralip., and doubtless underlies the statement of the Targum to Chronicles that Beērah was a prophet. For it is a Jewish maxim that when a prophet’s father is named, he, too, was a prophet, and accordingly a tradition of R. Simon makes Isa. viii. 19, 20 a prophecy of Beērī (Ḳimcḥi in loc.; Leviticus Rabba, par. 15). According to the usual Christian tradition, however, Hosea was of the tribe of Issachar, and from an unknown town, Belemoth or Belemon (pseudo-Epiphanius, pseudo-Dorotheus, Ephraem Syr. ii. 234; Chron. Pasch., Bonn ed., i. 276). As the tradition adds that he died there, and was buried in peace, the source of the story lies probably in some holy place shown as his grave. There are other traditions as to the burial-place of Hosea. A Jewish legend in the Shalshelet haqqabala (Carpzov, Introd., pt. iii. ch. vii. § 3) tells that he died in captivity at Babylon, and was carried to Upper Galilee, and buried at צפת, that is, Safed (Neubauer, Géog. du Talmud, p. 227); and the Arabs show the grave of Nebi ’Osha, east of the Jordan, near Es-Salt (Baedeker’s Palestine, p. 337; Burckhardt’s Syria, p. 353).
- ↑ The supposed reference of viii. 9-10 to the tribute paid by Menahem to Tiglath-Pileser (2 Kings xv. 19), and dated, on the monuments, 738 B.C., depends on a corrupt text: read v. 10 with Septuagint.
- ↑ Some scholars hold that his attack is directed against the very principle of monarchy (Nowack, p. 8; Smend, p. 209: “Hosea rejects the kingship in itself”; Wellhausen, p. 125: “The making of kings in Israel is for him, together with the heathen cultus, the fundamental evil”). This view depends on a disputed interpretation of the reference to Gibeah (x. 9; cf. ix. 9); and on the words: “I give thee kings in mine anger, and I take them away in my wrath” (xiii. 11), which may refer to the rise and fall of contemporary kings (cf. Marti, ad loc.). In any case, as Wellhausen himself says (p. 132): “He does not start from a dogmatic theory, but simply from historical experience.”
