THE

ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA

ELEVENTH EDITION

COPYRIGHT

in all countries subscribing to the
Bern Convention

by

THE CHANCELLOR, MASTERS AND SCHOLARS

of the

UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE

All rights reserved

THE

ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA

A

DICTIONARY

OF

ARTS, SCIENCES, LITERATURE AND GENERAL

INFORMATION

ELEVENTH EDITION

VOLUME XIII

HARMONY to HURSTMONCEAUX

New York

Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.

342 Madison Avenue

Copyright, in the United States of America, 1910,
by
The Encyclopædia Britannica Company.

Articles in This Slice

INITIALS USED IN VOLUME XII. TO IDENTIFY INDIVIDUAL
CONTRIBUTORS,1 WITH THE HEADINGS OF THE
ARTICLES IN THIS VOLUME SO SIGNED.

PRINCIPAL UNSIGNED ARTICLES

1

HARMONY (Gr. ἁρμονία, a concord of musical sounds, ἁρμόζειν to join; ἁρμονική (sc. τεχνή) meant the science or art of music, μουσική being of wider significance), a combination of parts so that the effect should be aesthetically pleasing. In its earliest sense in English it is applied, in music, to a pleasing combination of musical sounds, but technically it is confined to the science of the combination of sounds of different pitch.

I. Concord and Discord.—By means of harmony modern music has attained the dignity of an independent art. In ancient times, as at the present day among nations that have not come under the influence of European music, the harmonic sense was, if not altogether absent, at all events so obscure and undeveloped as to have no organizing power in the art. The formation by the Greeks of a scale substantially the same as that which has received our harmonic system shows a latent harmonic sense, but shows it in a form which positively excludes harmony as an artistic principle. The Greek perception of certain successions of sounds as concordant rests on a principle identifiable with the scientific basis of concord in simultaneous sounds. But the Greeks did not conceive of musical simultaneity as consisting of anything but identical sounds; and when they developed the practice of magadizing—i.e. singing in octaves—they did so because, while the difference between high and low voices was a source of pleasure, a note and its octave were then, as now, perceived to be in a certain sense identical. We will now start from this fundamental identity of the octave, and with it trace the genesis of other concords and discords; bearing in mind that the history of harmony is the history of artistic instincts and not a series of progressive scientific theories.

The unisonous quality of octaves is easily explained when we examine the “harmonic series” of upper partials (see Sound). Every musical sound, if of a timbre at all rich (and hence pre-eminently the human voice), contains some of these upper partials. Hence, if one voice produce a note which is an upper partial of another note sung at the same time by another voice, the higher voice adds nothing new to the lower but only reinforces what is already there. Moreover, the upper partials of the higher voice will also coincide with some of the lower. Thus, if a note and its octave be sung together, the upper octave is itself No. 2 in the harmonic series of the lower, No. 2 of its own series is No. 4 of the lower, and its No. 3 is No. 6, and so on. The impression of identity thus produced is so strong that we often find among people unacquainted with music a firm conviction that a man is singing in unison with a boy or an instrument when he is really singing in the octave below. And even musical people find a difficulty in realizing more than a certain brightness and richness of single tone when a violinist plays octaves perfectly in tune and with a strong emphasis on the lower notes. Doubling in octaves therefore never was and never will be a process of harmonization.

Now if we take the case of one sound doubling another in the 12th, it will be seen that here, too, no real addition is made by the higher sound to the lower. The 12th is No. 3 of the harmonic series, No. 2 of the higher note will be No. 6 of the lower, No. 3 will be No. 9, and so on. But there is an important difference between the 12th and the octave. However much we alter the octave by transposition into other octaves, we never get anything but unison or octaves. Two notes two octaves apart are just as devoid of harmonic difference as a plain octave or unison. But, when we apply our principle of the identity of the octave to the 12th, we find that the removal of one of the notes by an octave may produce a combination in which there is a distinct harmonic element. If, for example, the lower note is raised by an octave so that the higher note is a fifth from it, No. 3 of the harmonic series of the higher note will not belong to the lower note at all. The 5th is thus a combination of which the two notes are obviously different; and, moreover, the principle of the identity of octaves can now operate in a contrary direction and transfer this positive harmonic value of the 5th to the 12th, so that we regard the 12th as a 5th plus an octave, instead of regarding the 5th as a compressed 12th.1 At the same time, the relation between the two is quite close enough to give the 5th much of the feeling of harmonic poverty and reduplication that characterizes the octave; and hence when medieval musicians 2 doubled a melody in 5ths and octaves they believed themselves to be doing no more than extending and diversifying the means by which a melody might be sung in unison by different voices. How they came to prefer for this purpose the 4th to the 5th seems puzzling when we consider that the 4th does not appear as a fundamental interval in the harmonic series until that series has passed beyond that part of it that maintains any relation to our musical ideas. But it was of course certain that they obtained the 4th as the inversion of the 5th; and it is at least possible that the singers of lower voices found a peculiar pleasure in singing below higher voices in a position which they felt harmonically as that of a top part. That is to say, a bass, in singing a fourth below a tenor, would take pleasure in doubling in the octave an alto singing normally a 5th above the tenor.2 This should also, perhaps, be taken in connexion with the fact that the interval of the downward 4th is in melody the earliest that became settled. And it is worth noticing that, in any singing-class where polyphonic music is sung, there is a marked tendency among the more timid members to find their way into their part by a gentle humming which is generally a 4th below the nearest steady singers.

The limited compass of voices soon caused modifications in the medieval parallelisms of 4ths and 5ths, and the introduction of independent ornaments into one or more of the voices increased to an extent which drew attention to other intervals. It was long, however, before the true criterion of concord and discord was attained; and at first the notion of concord was purely acoustic, that is to say, the ear was sensitive only to the difference in roughness and smoothness between combinations in themselves. And even the modern researches of Helmholtz fail to represent classical and modern harmony, in so far as the phenomena of beats are quite independent of the contrapuntal nature of concord and discord which depends upon the melodic intelligibility of the motion of the parts. Beats give rise to a strong physical sense of discord akin to the painfulness of a flickering light (see Sound). Accordingly, in the earliest experiments in harmony, the ear, in the absence of other criteria, attached much more importance to the purely acoustic roughness of beats than our ears under the experience of modern music. This, and the circumstance that the imperfect concords3 (the 3rds and 6ths) long remained out of tune owing to the incompleteness of the Pythagorean system of harmonic ratios, sufficiently explain the medieval treatment of these combinations as discords differing only in degree from the harshness of 2nds and 7ths. In the earliest attempts at really contrapuntal writing (the astonishing 13th and 14th-century motets, in which voices are made to sing different melodies at once, with what seems to modern ears a total disregard of sound and sense) we find that the method consists in a kind of rough-hewing by which the concords of the octave, 5th and 4th are provided at most of the strong accents, while the rest of the harmony is left to take care of itself. As the art advanced the imperfect concords began to be felt as different from the discords; but as their true nature appeared it brought with it such an increased sense of the harmonic poverty of octaves, 5ths and 4ths, as ended in a complete inversion of the earliest rules of harmony.

The harmonic system of the later 15th century, which culminated in the “golden age” of the 16th-century polyphony, may be described as follows: Imagine a flux of simultaneous independent melodies, so ordered as to form an artistic texture based not only on the variety of the melodies themselves, but also upon gradations between points of repose and points in which the roughness of sound is rendered interesting and beautiful by means of the clearness with which the melodic sense in each part indicates the convergence of all towards the next point of repose. The typical point of repose owes its effect not only to the acoustic smoothness of the combination, but to the fact that it actually consists of the essential elements present in the first five notes of the harmonic series. The major 3rd has thus in this scheme asserted itself as a concord, and the fundamental principle of the identity of octaves produces the result that any combination of a bass note with a major 3rd and a perfect 5th above it, at any distance, and with any amount of doubling, may constitute a concord available even as the final point of repose in the whole composition. And by degrees the major triad, with its major 3rd, became so familiar that a chord consisting of a bare 5th, with or without an octave, was regarded rather as a skeleton triad without the 3rd than as a concord free from elements of imperfection. Again, the identity of the octave secured for the combination of a note with its minor 3rd and minor 6th a place among concords; because, whether so recognized by early theorists or not, it was certainly felt as an inversion of the major triad. The fact that its bass note is not the fundamental note (and therefore has a series of upper partials not compatible with the higher notes) deprives it of the finality and perfection of the major triad, to which, however, its relationship is too near for it to be felt otherwise than as a concord. This sufficiently explains why the minor 6th ranks as a concord in music, though it is acoustically nearly as rough as the discord of the minor 7th, and considerably rougher than that of the 7th note of the harmonic series, which has not become accepted in our musical system at all.

But the major triad and its inversion are not the only concords that will be produced by our flux of melodies. From time to time this flux will arrest attention by producing a combination which, while it does not appeal to the ear as being a part of the harmonic chord of nature, yet contains in itself no elements not already present in the major triad. Theorists have in vain tried to find in “nature” a combination of a note with its minor 3rd and perfect 5th; and so long as harmony was treated unhistorically and unscientifically as an a priori theory in which every chord must needs have a “root,” the minor triad, together with nearly every other harmonic principle of any complexity, remained a mystery. But the minor triad, as an artistic and not purely acoustic phenomenon, is an inevitable thing. It has the character of a concord because of our intellectual perception that it contains the same elements as the major triad; but its absence of connexion with the natural harmonic series deprives it of complete finality in the simple system of 16th-century harmony, and at the same time gives it a permanent contrast with the major triad; a contrast which is acoustically intensified by the fact that, though its intervals are in themselves as concordant as those of the major triad, their relative position produces decidedly rough combinations of “resultant tones.”

By the time our flux of melodies had come to include the major and minor triads as concords, the notion of the independence of parts had become of such paramount importance as totally to revolutionize the medieval conception of the perfect concords. Fifths and octaves no longer formed an oasis in a desert of cacophony, but they assumed the character of concord so nearly approaching to unison that a pair of consecutive 5ths or octaves began to be increasingly felt as violating the independence of the parts. And thus it came about that in pure 16th-century counterpoint (as indeed at the present day whenever harmony and counterpoint are employed in their purest significance) consecutive 5ths and octaves are strictly forbidden. When we compare our laws of counterpoint with those of medieval discant (in which consecutive 5ths and octaves are the rule, while consecutive 3rds and 6ths are strictly forbidden) we are sometimes tempted to think that the very nature of the human ear has changed. But it is now generally recognized that the process was throughout natural and inevitable, and the above account aims at showing that consecutive 5ths are forbidden by our harmonic system for the very reason which inculcated them in the system of the 12th century.

II. Tonality.—As soon as the major and minor triad and their first inversions were well-defined entities, it became evident that 3 the successions of these concords and their alternations with discord involved principles at once larger and more subtle than those of mere difference in smoothness and artificiality. Not only was a major chord (or at least its skeleton) necessary for the final point of repose in a composition, but it could not itself sound final unless the concords as well as the discords before it showed a well-defined tendency towards it. This tendency was best realized when the penultimate concord had its fundamental note at the distance of a 5th or a 4th above or below that of the final chord. When the fundamental note of the penultimate chord is a 5th above or (what is the same thing) a 4th below that of the final chord, we have an “authentic” or “perfect” cadence, and the relation between the two chords is very clear. While the contrast between them is well marked, they have one note in common—for the root of the penultimate chord is the 5th of the final chord; and the statement of this common note, first as an octave or unison and then as a 5th, expresses the first facts of harmony with a force which the major 3rds of the chords can only strengthen, while it also involves in the bass that melodic interval of the 4th or the 5th which is now known to be the germ of all melodic scales. The relation of the final note of a scale with its upper 5th or lower 4th thus becomes a fundamental fact of complex harmonic significance—that is to say, of harmony modified by melody in so far as it concerns the succession of sounds as well as their simultaneous combination. In our modern key-system the final note of the scale is called the tonic, and the 5th above or 4th below it is the dominant. (In the 16th century the term “dominant” has this meaning only in the “authentic” modes other than the Phrygian, but as an aesthetic fact it is present in all music, though the theory here given would not have been intelligible to any composers before the 18th century). Another penultimate chord asserts itself as the converse of the dominant—namely, the chord of which the root is a 5th below or a 4th above the final. This chord has not that relationship to the final which the dominant chord shows, for its fundamental note is not in the harmonic series of the final. But the fundamental note of the final chord is in its harmonic series, and in fact stands to it as the dominant stands to the final. Thus the progression from subdominant, as it is called, to tonic, or final, forms a full close known as the “plagal cadence,” second only in importance to the “perfect” or “authentic cadence.” In our modern key-system these three chords, the tonic, the dominant and the subdominant, form a firm harmonic centre in reference to which all other chords are grouped. The tonic is the final in which everything ultimately resolves: the dominant stands on one side of it as a chord based on the note harmonically most closely related to the tonic, and the subdominant stands on the other side as the converse and opposite of the dominant, weaker than the dominant because not directly derived from the tonic. The other triads obtainable from the notes of the scale are all minor, and of less importance; and their relationship to each other and to the tonic is most definite when they are so grouped that their basses rise and fall in 4th and 5ths, because they then tend to imitate the relationship between tonic, dominant and subdominant.

Now, in the 16th century it was neither necessary nor desirable that chords should be grouped exclusively in this way. The relation between tonic, dominant and subdominant must necessarily appear at the final close, and in a lesser degree at subordinate points of repose; but, where no harmonies were dwelt on as stable and independent entities except the major and minor triads and their first inversions, a scheme in which these were confined to the illustration of their most elementary relationship would be intolerably monotonous. It is therefore neither surprising nor a sign of archaism that the tonality of modal music is from the modern point of view often very indefinite. On the contrary, the distinction between masterpieces and inferior works in the 16th century is nowhere more evident than in the expressive power of modal tonality, alike where it resembles and where it differs from modern. Nor is it too much to say that that expressive power is based on the modern sense of key, and that a description of modal tonality in terms of modern key will accurately represent the harmonic art of Palestrina and the other supreme masters, though it will have almost as little in common with 16th-century theory and inferior 16th-century practice as it has with modern custom. We must conceive modal harmony and tonality as a scheme in which voices move independently and melodiously in a scale capable of bearing the three chords of the tonic, dominant and subdominant, besides three other minor triads, but not under such restrictions of symmetrical rhythm and melodic design as will necessitate a confinement to schemes in which these three cardinal chords occupy a central position. The only stipulation is that the relationship of at least two cardinal chords shall appear at every full close. At other points the character and drift of the harmony is determined by quite a different principle—namely, that, the scale being conceived as indefinitely extended, the voices are agreed in selecting a particular section of it, the position of which determines not only the melodic character of each part but also the harmonic character of the whole, according to its greater or less remoteness from the scale in which major cardinal chords occupy a central position. Historically these modes were derived, with various errors and changes, from the purely melodic modes of the Greeks. Aesthetically they are systems of modern tonality adapted to conditions in which the range of harmony was the smallest possible, and the necessity for what we may conveniently call a clear and solid key-perspective incomparably slighter than that for variety within so narrow a range. We may thus regard modal harmony as an essentially modern scheme, presented to us in cross-sections of various degrees of obliquity, and modified at every close so as either to take us to a point of view in which we see the harmony symmetrically (as in those modes4 of which the final chord is normally major, namely the Ionian, which is practically our major scale, the Mixolydian and the Lydian, which last is almost invariably turned into Ionian by the systematic flattening of its 4th degree) or else to transform the mode itself so that its own notes are flattened and sharpened into suitable final chords (as is necessary in those modes of which the triad on the final is normally minor, namely, the Dorian, Phrygian and Aeolian). In this way we may describe Mixolydian tonality as a harmonic scheme in which the keys of G major and C major are so combined that sometimes we feel that we are listening to harmony in C major that is disposed to overbalance towards the dominant, and sometimes that we are in G major with a pronounced leaning towards the subdominant. In the Dorian mode our sensations of tonality are more confused. We seem to be wandering through all the key-relationships of a minor tonic without defining anything, until at the final close the harmonies gather strength and bring us, perhaps with poetic surprise, to a close in D with a major chord. In the Phrygian mode the difficulty in forming the final close is such that classical Phrygian compositions actually end in what we feel to be a half-close, an impression which is by the great masters rendered perfectly artistic by the strong feeling that all such parts of the composition as do not owe their expression to the variety and inconstancy of their harmonic drift are on the dominant of A minor.

It cannot be too strongly insisted that the expression of modal music is a permanent artistic fact. Its refinements may be crowded out by the later tonality, in which the much greater 4 variety of fixed chords needs a much more rigid harmonic scheme to control it, but they can never be falsified. And when Beethoven in his last “Bagatelle” raises the 6th of a minor scale for the pleasure he takes in an unexpectedly bright major chord; or when, in the Incarnatus of his Mass in D, he makes a free use of the Dorian scale, he is actuated by precisely the same harmonic and aesthetic motives as those of the wonderful opening of Palestrina’s eight-part Stabat Mater; just as in the Lydian figured chorale in his A minor Quartet he carries out the principle of harmonic variety, as produceable by an oblique melodic scale, with a thoroughness from which Palestrina himself would have shrunk. (We have noted that in 16th-century music the Lydian mode is almost invariably Ionicized.)

III. Modern Harmony and Tonality.—In the harmonic system of Palestrina only two kinds of discord are possible, namely, suspensions and passing-notes. The principle of the suspension is that while parts are moving from one concord to another one of the parts remains behind, so as to create a discord at the moment when the other parts proceed. The suspended part then goes on to its concordant note, which must lie on an adjacent (and in most cases a lower) degree of the scale. Passing-notes are produced transiently by the motion of a part up or down the scale while other parts remain stationary. The possibilities of these two devices can be worked out logically so as to produce combinations of extreme harshness. And, when combined with the rules which laid on the performers the responsibility for modifying the strict scale of the mode in order to form satisfactory closes and avoid melodic harshness, they sometimes gave rise to combinations which the clearest artistic intellects of the 16th century perceived as incompatible with the modal style. For example, in a passage written thus the singer of the lower part would be obliged to flatten his B in order to avoid the ugly “tritone” between F and B, while the other singer would be hardly less likely on the spur of the moment to sharpen his G under the impression that he was making a close; and thus one of the most complex and characteristically modern discords, that of the augmented 6th, did frequently occur in 16th-century performances, and was not always regarded as a blunder. But if the technical principles of 16th-century discord left much to the good taste of composers and singers, they nevertheless in conjunction with that good taste severely restricted the resources of harmony; for, whatever the variety and artificiality of the discords admitted by them, they all had this in common, that every discord was transient and could only arise as a phenomenon of delay in the movement of one or more parts smoothly along the scale (“in conjunct motion”) or of a more rapid motion up and down the scale in which none but the rigorously concordant first and last notes received any emphasis. No doubt there were many licenses (such as the “changing-note”) which introduced discords by skip, or on the strong beat without preparation, but these were all as natural as they were illogical. They were artistic as intelligible accidents, precisely like those which make language idiomatic, such as “attraction of the relative” in Greek. But when Monteverde and his fellow monodists tried experiments with unprepared discords, they opened up possibilities far too vast to be organized by them or by the next three generations. We have elsewhere compared the difference between early and modern harmony with that between classical Greek, which is absolutely literal and concrete in expression, and modern English, which is saturated with metaphors and abstractions. We may go further and say that a 16th-century discord, with its preparation and resolution, is, on a very small scale, like a simile, in which both the figure and its interpretation are given, whereas modern discord is like the metaphor, in which the figure is a substitute for and not an addition to the plain statement. It is not surprising that the sudden opening up of the whole possibilities of modern harmony at the end of the 16th century at first produced a chaos of style.

Another feature of the harmonic revolution arose from the new habit of supporting a single voice on chords played by an instrument. This, together with the use of discords in a new sense, drew attention to the chords as things in themselves and not as moments of greater or less repose in a flux of independent melodies. This was as valuable an addition to musical thought and expression as the free use of abstract terms is in literature, but it had precisely the same dangers, and has until recent times vitiated harmonic theory and divorced it from the modest observation of the practice of great masters. When, early in the 18th century, Rameau devoted much of his best energy to the elaboration of a theory of harmony, his field of observation was a series of experiments begun in chaos and resolved, not as yet in a great art, but in a system of conventions, for the contemporary art of Bach and Handel was beyond the scope of contemporary theory. He showed great analytical genius and sense of tonality in his development of the notion of the “fundamental bass,” and it is rather to his credit than otherwise that he did not emphasize the distinction between discords on the dominant and those on other degrees of the scale. But his system, with all subsequent improvements, refutations and repairs only led to that bane of 19th-century theory and source of what may be called the journalese of harmonic style, according to which every chord (no matter how obviously artificial and transient) must be regarded, so to speak, as a literal fact for which a root and a scientific connexion with the natural harmonic series must at all cost be found. Some modern theorists have, however, gone too far in denying the existence of harmonic roots altogether, and certainly it is neither scientific nor artistic to regard the coincidence of the major triad with the first five notes of the harmonic series as merely accidental. It is not likely that the dominant 7th owes all its naturalness to a resemblance to the flat 7th of the harmonic series, which is too far out of tune even to pass for an augmented 6th. But the dominant major 9th certainly gains in sonorousness from its coincidence with the 9th harmonic, and many cases in music could be found where the dominant 7th itself would gain from being so far flattened as to add coincidence with a natural harmonic to its musical significance as an unprepared discord (see, for example the “native wood-notes wild” of the distant huntsmen in the second act of Tristan und Isolde, where also the 9th and 11th are involved, and, moreover, on horns, of which the natural scale is the harmonic series itself). If the distinction between “essential” and “unessential” discords is, in the light of history and common sense, a difference only in degree, it is thus none the less of great aesthetic importance. Arithmetic and acoustics show that in proportion as musical harmony emphasizes combinations belonging to the lower region of the harmonic series the effect will be sonorous and natural; but common sense, history and aesthetics also show that the interaction of melody, harmony and rhythm must produce a host of combinations which acoustics alone cannot possibly explain. These facts are amply competent to explain themselves. To describe them in detail is beyond the scope of the present article, but a few examples from different periods are given at the end in musical type.

IV. The Minor Mode.—When the predecessors of Bach and Handel had succeeded in establishing a key-system able to bear the weight of free discord, that key-system took two forms, in both of which the three chords of tonic, dominant and subdominant occupied cardinal points. In the one form the tonic chord was natural, that is to say, major. In the other form the tonic chord was artificial, that is to say, minor. In the minor mode so firm is the position of the tonic and dominant (the dominant chord always being major) that it is no longer necessary, as in the 16th century, to conclude with a major chord, although it long remained a frequent practice, rather because of the inherent beauty and surprise of the effect than because of any 5 mere survival of ancient customs, at least where great masters are concerned. (This final major chord is known as the Tierce de Picardie.) The effect of the minor mode is thus normally plaintive because it centres round the artificial concord instead of the natural; and, though the keynote bears this minor artificial triad, the ear nevertheless has an expectation (which may be intensified into a powerful emotional effect) that the final conclusion of the harmonic scheme may brighten out into the more sonorous harmonic system of major chords. Let us once more recall those ecclesiastical modes of which the 3rd degree is normally minor. We have seen how they may be regarded as the more oblique of the various cross-sections of the 16th-century harmonic scheme. Now, the modern minor mode is too firmly rooted in its minor tonic chord for the 16th-century feeling of an oblique harmonic scheme to be of more than secondary importance, though that feeling survives, as the discussion of key-relationships will show us. But it is constantly thrust into the background by the new possibility that the minor tonic chord with its attendant minor harmonies may give place to the major system round the same tonic, and by the certainty that if any change is made at the conclusion of the work it will be upon the same tonic and not have reference to some other harmonic centre. In other words, a major and minor key on the same tonic are felt as identical in everything but expression (a point in which the Tonic Sol Fa system, as hitherto practised, with its identification of the minor key with its “relative” instead of its tonic major, shows a most unfortunate confusion of thought). The characteristics of the major and minor modes may of course be modified by many artistic considerations, and it would be as absurd to develop this account into a scheme of pigeon-holed passions as to do the same for the equally obvious and closely parallel fact that in drama a constant source of pathos is the placing of our sympathies in an oblique relation to the natural sequence of events or to the more universal issues of the subject.

V. Key-Relationships.—On the modern sense of the identity of the tonic in major and minor rests the whole distinctive character of modern harmony, and the whole key-system of the classical composers. The masters of the 16th century naturally found it necessary to make full closes much more frequently than would be desirable if the only possible close was that on the final of the mode. They therefore formed closes on other notes, but they formed them on these exactly as on a final. Thus, a close on the second degree of the Ionian mode was identical with a Dorian final close. The notes, other than the final, on which closes could be made were called modulations. And what between the three “regular modulations” (known as the dominant, mediant, and participant) and the “conceded modulations,” of which two were generally admitted in each mode simply in the interests of variety, a composer was at liberty to form a full close on any note which did not involve too many extraneous sharps or flats for its correct accomplishment. But there was a great difference between modal and modern conceptions of modulation. We have said that the close on the second degree of the Ionian mode was Dorian, but such a modulation was not regarded as a visit paid to the Dorian mode, but merely as the formation of a momentary point of repose on the second degree of the Ionian mode. When therefore it is said that the modulations of 16th-century music are “purposeless and shifting,” the criticism implies a purpose in change of key which is wholly irrelevant. The modal composers’ purpose lay in purely local relationships of harmony, in various degrees of refinement which are often crowded out of the larger and more coarse-grained scheme of modern harmony, but which modern harmony is perfectly capable of employing in precisely the same sense whenever it has leisure.

Modulation, in the modern sense of the term, is a different thing. The modern sense of tonality is so firm, and modern designs so large, that it is desirable that different portions of a composition should be arranged round different harmonic centres or keys, and moreover that the relation between these keys and the primary key should be felt, and the whole design should at last return to the primary key, to remain there with such emphasis and proportion as shall leave upon the mind the impression that the whole is in the primary key and that the foreign keys have been as artistically grouped around it as its own local harmonies. The true principles on which keys are related proved so elastic in the hands of Beethoven that their results utterly outstripped the earlier theory which adhered desperately to the limitations of the 16th century; and so vast is the range of key which Beethoven is able to organize in a convincing scheme of relationship, that even modern theory, dazzled by the true harmonic possibilities, is apt to come to the conclusion, more lame and impotent than any ancient pedantry, that all keys are equally related. A vague conception, dubbed “the unity of the chromatic scale,” is thus made to explain away the whole beauty and power of Wagner’s no less than Beethoven’s harmonic system. We have not space to dispute the matter here, and it must suffice to state dogmatically and statistically the classical facts of key-relationship, including those which Beethoven established as normal possibilities on the suggestion of Haydn, in whose works they appear as special effects.

a. Direct Relationships.—The first principle on which two keys are considered to be related is a strengthening of that which determined the so-called modulations of the 16th-century modes. Two keys are directly related when the tonic chord of the one is among the common chords of the other. Thus, D minor is related to C major because the tonic chord of D minor is the common chord on the supertonic of C (see Ex. 6). In the same way the four other related keys to C major are E minor the mediant, F major the subdominant, G major the dominant and A minor the submediant.

This last key-relationship is sometimes called the “relative” minor, partly because it is usually expressed by the same key-signature as the tonic, but probably more justifiably because it is the point of view from which to reckon the key-relationships of the minor tonic. If we take the minor scale in its “harmonic” form (i.e. the form deducible from its chords of minor tonic, minor subdominant and major dominant, without regard to the exigencies of melody in concession to which the “melodic” minor scale raises the 6th in ascent and flattens the 7th in descent), we shall find it impossible to build a common chord upon its mediant (Ex. 10). But we have seen that A minor is related to C major; therefore it is absurd to suppose that C major is not related to A minor. Clearly then we must deduce some of the relationships of a minor tonic as the converse of those of a major tonic. Thus we may read Ex. 6 backwards and reason as follows: A minor is the submediant of C major; therefore C major is the mediant or relative major of A minor. D minor is the supertonic of C major; therefore C major is related to D minor and may be called its flat 7th. Taking A minor as our standard key, G major is then the flat 7th to A minor. The remaining major keys (C major to E minor = F major to A minor) may be traced directly as well as conversely; and the subdominant, being minor, does not involve an appeal to the major scale at all. But with the dominant we find the curious fact that while the dominant chord of a minor key is major it is impossible to regard the major dominant key as directly related to the minor tonic, since it does not contain the minor tonic chord at all; e.g. the only chord of A in E major is A major. But the dominant minor key contains the tonic chord of the primary minor key clearly enough as subdominant, and therefore when we modulate from a minor tonic to a minor dominant we feel that we have a direct key-relationship and have not lost touch with our tonic. Thus in the minor mode modulation to the dominant key is, though frequent and necessary, a much more uphill process than in the major mode, because the naturally major dominant chord has first to be contradicted. On the other hand, a contrast between minor tonic and major dominant key is very difficult to work on a large scale (as, for example, in the complementary key for second subjects of sonata movements) because, while the major dominant key behaves as if not directly 6 related to the minor tonic, it also gives a curious sensation of being merely on the dominant instead of in it; and thus we find that in the few classical examples of a dominant major second subject in a minor sonata-movement the second subject either relapses into the dominant minor, as in Beethoven’s Kreutzer Sonata and the finale of Brahms’s Third Symphony, or begins in it, as in the first movement of Brahms’s Fourth Symphony.

The effect of a modulation to a related key obviously depends upon the change of meaning in the chords common to both keys, and also in the new chords introduced. Thus, in modulating to the dominant we invest the brightest chord of our first key with the finality and importance of a tonic; our original tonic chord becomes comparatively soft in its new position as subdominant; and a new dominant chord arises, surpassing in brilliance the old dominant (now tonic) as that surpassed the primary tonic. Again, in modulating to the subdominant the softest chord of the primary key becomes tonic, the old tonic is comparatively bright, and a new and softer subdominant chord appears. We have seen the peculiarities of modulation to the dominant from a minor tonic, and it follows from them that modulation from a minor tonic to the subdominant involves the beautiful effect of a momentary conversion of the primary tonic chord to major, the poetic and often dramatically ironical power of which is manifested at the conclusion of more than half the finest classical slow movements in minor keys, from Bach’s E♭ minor Prelude in the first book of the Forty-eight to the slow movement of Brahms’s G major String Quintet, Op. 111.

The effect of the remaining key-relationships involves contrasts between major and minor mode; but it is otherwise far less defined, since the primary tonic chord does not occupy a cardinal position in the second key. These key-relationships are most important from a minor tonic, as the change from minor to major is more vivid than the reverse change. The smoothest changes are those to “relative” minor, “relative” major (C to A minor; C minor to E♭); and mediant minor and submediant major (C to E minor; C minor to A♭). The change from major tonic to supertonic minor is extremely natural on a small scale, i.e. within the compass of a single melody, as may be seen in countless openings of classical sonatas. But on a large scale the identity of primary dominant with secondary subdominant confuses the harmonic perspective, and accordingly in classical music the supertonic minor appears neither in the second subjects of first movements nor as the key for middle movements.5 But since the key-relationships of a minor tonic are at once more obscure harmonically and more vivid in contrast, we find that the converse key-relationship of the flat 7th, though somewhat bold and archaic in effect on a small scale, has once or twice been given organic function on a large scale in classical movements of exceptionally fantastic character, of which the three great examples are the ghostly slow movement of Beethoven’s D major Trio, Op. 70, No. 1, the scherzo of his Ninth Symphony, and the finale of Brahms’s D minor Violin Sonata (where, however, the C major theme soon passes permanently into the more orthodox dominant minor).

Thus far we have the set of key-relationships universally recognized since the major and minor modes were established, a relationship based entirely on the place of the primary tonic chord in the second key. It only remains for us to protest against the orthodox description of the five related keys as being the “relative” minor or major and the dominant and subdominant with their “relative” minors or majors; a conception which expresses the fallacious assumption that keys which are related to the same key are related to one another, and which thereby implies that all keys are equally related and that classical composers were fools. It cannot be too strongly insisted that there is no foundation for key-relationship except through a tonic, and that it is through the tonic that the most distant keys have always been connected by every composer with a wide range of modulation, from Haydn to Brahms and (with due allowance for the conditions of his musical drama) Wagner.

b. Indirect Relationships.—So strong is the identity of the tonic in major and minor mode that Haydn and Mozart had no scruple in annexing, with certain reservations, the key-relationships of either as an addition to those of the other. The smoothness of Mozart’s style makes him prefer to annex the key-relationships of the tonic minor (e.g. C major to A♭, the submediant of C minor), because the primary tonic note is in the second key, although its chord is transformed. His range of thought does not allow him to use these keys otherwise than episodically; but he certainly does not treat them as chaotically remote by confining them to rapid modulations in the development-portions of his movements. They occur characteristically as beautiful purple patches before or during his second subjects. Haydn, with his mastery of rational paradox, takes every opportunity, in his later works, of using all possible indirect key-relationships in the choice of key for slow movements and for the trios of minuets. By using them thus sectionally (i.e. so as not to involve the organic connecting links necessary for the complementary keys of second subjects) he gives himself a free hand; and he rather prefers those keys which are obtained by transforming the minor relationships of a major primary key (e.g. C to A major instead of A minor). These relationships are of great brilliance and also of some remoteness of effect, since the primary tonic note, as well as its chord, disappears entirely. Haydn also obtains extreme contrasts by changing both modes (e.g. C minor to A major, as in the G minor Quartet, Op. 72, No 6, where the slow movement is in E major), and indeed there is not one key-contrast known to Beethoven and Brahms which Haydn does not use with complete sense of its meaning, though his art admits it only as a surprise.

Beethoven rationalized every step in the whole possible range of key-relationship by such harmonic means as are described in the article Beethoven. Haydn’s favourite key-relationships he used for the complementary key in first movements; and he at once discovered that the use of the major mediant as complementary key to a major tonic implied at all events just as much suggestion of the submediant major in the recapitulation as would not keep the latter half of the movement for too long out of the tonic. The converse is not the case, and where Beethoven uses the submediant major as complementary key in a major first movement he does not subsequently introduce the still more remote and brilliant mediant in the recapitulation. The function of the complementary key is that of contrast and vividness, so that if the key is to be remote it is as well that it should be brilliant rather than sombre; and accordingly the easier key-relationships obtainable through transforming the tonic into minor do not appear as complementary keys until Beethoven’s latest and most subtle works, as the Quartet in B♭, Op. 130 (where we again note that the flat submediant of the exposition is temporarily answered by the flat mediant of the recapitulation).

c. Artificial Key-relationships.—Early in the history of the minor mode it was discovered that the lower tetrachord could be very effectively and naturally altered so as to resemble the upper (thus producing the scale C D♭ E♮ F, G A♭ B♮ C). This produces a flat supertonic (the chord of which is generally presented in its first inversion, and is known as the Neapolitan 6th, from its characteristic use in the works of the Neapolitan school which did so much to establish modern tonality) and its origin, as just described, often impels it to resolve on a major tonic chord. Consequently it exists in the minor mode as a phenomenon not much more artificial than the mode itself; and although the keys it thus connects are extremely remote, and the effect of their connexion very surprising, the connexion is none the less real, whether from a major or a minor tonic, and is a crucial test of a composer’s sense of key-perspective. Thus Philipp Emanuel Bach in a spirit of mere caprice puts the charming little slow movement of his D major Symphony into E♭ and obliterates all real relationship by chaotic operatic 7 connecting links. Haydn’s greatest pianoforte sonata (which, being probably his last, is of course No. 1 in most editions) is in E♭, and its slow movement is in F♮ major (= F♭). That key had already appeared, with surprising effect, in the wanderings of the development of the first movement. No attempt is made to indicate its connexion with E♭; and the finale begins in E♭, but its first bar is unharmonized and starts on the one note which most contradicts E♮ and least prepares the mind for E♭. The immediate repetition of the opening phrase a step higher on the normal supertonic strikes the note which the opening had contradicted, and thus shows its function in the main key without in the least degree explaining away the paradoxical effect of the key of the slow movement. Brahms’s Violoncello Sonata Op. 99, is in F; a prominent episode in the development of the first movement is in E♯ minor (= G♭), thus preparing the mind for the slow movement, which is in F♯ major (= G♭), with a central episode in F minor. The scherzo is in F minor, and begins on the dominant. Thus if we play its first chord immediately after the last chord of the slow movement we have exactly that extreme position of flat supertonic followed by dominant which is a favourite form of cadence in Wagner, who can even convey its meaning by its mere bass without any harmonies (Walküre, Act 3, Scene 2: “Was jetzt du bist, das sage dir selbst”).

Converse harmonic relationships are, as we have seen, always weaker than their direct forms. And thus the relation of C major to B major or minor (as shown in the central episode of the slow movement just mentioned) is rare. Still more rare is the obtaining of indirect artificial relationships, of which the episode in the first movement just mentioned is an illustration in so far as it enhances the effect of the slow movement, but is inconclusive in so far as it is episodic. For with remote key-relationships everything depends upon whether they are used with what may be called cardinal function (like complementary keys) or not. Even a near key may occur in the course of wandering modulations without producing any effect of relationship at all, and this should always be borne in mind whenever we accumulate statistics from classical music.

d. Contrary and Unconnected Keys.—There remain only two pairs of keys that classical music has not brought into connexion, a circumstance which has co-operated with the utter vagueness of orthodox theories on the subject to confirm the conventionally progressive critic in his conviction that all modulations are alike. We have seen how the effect of modulation from major tonic to minor supertonic is, on a large scale, obscured by the identity of the primary dominant with the secondary subdominant, though the one chord is major and the other minor. Now when the supertonic becomes major this difference no longer obviates the confusion, and modulation from C major to D major, though extremely easy, is of so bewildering effect that it is used by classical composers only in moments of intensely dramatic surprise, as, for example, in the recapitulation of the first subject of Beethoven’s Eroica Symphony, and the last variation (or coda) of the slow movement of his Trio in B♭, Op. 97. And in both cases the balance is restored by the converse (and equally if not more contradictory) modulation between major tonic and major flat 7th, though in the slow movement of the B♭ Trio the latter is represented only by its dominant chord which is “enharmonically” resolved into quite another key. The frequent attempts made by easy-going innovators to treat these key-contrasts on another footing than that of paradox, dramatic surprise or hesitation, only show a deficient sense of tonality, which must also mean an inability to see the intensely powerful effect of the true use of such modulations in classical music, an effect which is entirely independent of any ability to formulate a theory to explain it.6 There now remains only one pair of keys that have never been related, namely, those that (whether major or minor) are at the distance of a tritone 4th. In the first place they are unrelated because there is no means of putting any form of a tonic chord of F♯ into any form of the key of C, or vice versa; and in the second place because it is impossible to tell which of two precisely opposite keys the second key may be (e.g. we have no means of knowing that a direct modulation from C to F♯ is not from C to G♭, which is exactly the same distance in the opposite direction). And this brings us to the only remaining subjects of importance in the science and art of harmony, namely, those of the tempered scale, enharmonic ambiguity and just intonation. Before proceeding we subjoin a table of all the key-relationships from major and minor tonics, representing the degrees by capital Roman figures when the second key is major and small figures 8 when minor. Thus I represents tonic major, iv represents subdominant minor, and so on. A flat or a sharp after the figure indicates that the normal degree of the standard scale has been lowered or raised a semitone, even when in any particular pair of keys it would not be expressed by a flat or a sharp. Thus vi♭ would, from the tonic of B♭ major, express the position of the slow movement of Beethoven’s Sonata, Op. 106, which is written in F♯ minor since G♭ minor is beyond the practical limits of notation.

TABLES OF KEY-RELATIONSHIPS

VI. Temperament and Enharmonic Changes.—As the facts of artistic harmony increased in complexity and range, the purely acoustic principles which (as Helmholtz has shown) go so far to explain 16th-century aesthetics became more and more inadequate; and grave practical obstacles to euphonious tuning began to assert themselves. The scientific (or natural) ratios of the diatonic scale were not interfered with by art so long as no discords were “fundamental”; but when discords began to assume independence, one and the same note often became assignable on scientific grounds to two slightly different positions in pitch, or at all events to a position incompatible with even tolerable effect in performance. Thus, the chord of the diminished 7th is said to be intolerably harsh in “just intonation,” that is to say, intonation based upon the exact ratios of a normal minor scale. In practical performance the diminished 7th contains three minor 3rds and two imperfect 5ths (such as that which is present in the dominant 7th), while the peculiarly dissonant interval from which the chord takes its name is very nearly the same as a major 6th. Now it can only be said that an intonation which makes nonsense of chords of which every classical composer from the time of Corelli has made excellent sense, is a very unjust intonation indeed; and to anybody who realizes the universal relation between art and nature it is obvious that the chord of the diminished 7th must owe its naturalness to its close approximation to the natural ratios of the minor scale, while it owes its artistic possibility to the extremely minute instinctive modification by which its dissonance becomes tolerable. As a matter of fact, although we have shown here and in the article Music how artificial is the origin and nature of all but the very scantiest materials of the musical language, there is no art in which the element of practical compromise is so minute and so hard for any but trained scientific observation to perceive. If a painter could have a scale of light and shade as nearly approaching nature as the practical intonation of music approaches the acoustic facts it really involves, a visit to a picture gallery would be a severe strain on the strongest eyes, as Ruskin constantly points out. Yet music is in this respect exactly on the same footing as other arts. It constitutes no exception to the universal law that artistic ideas must be realized, not in spite of, but by means of practical necessities. However independent the treatment of discords, they assert themselves in the long run as transient. They resolve into permanent points of repose of which the basis is natural; but the transient phenomena float through the harmonic world adapting themselves, as best they can, to their environment, showing as much dependence upon the stable scheme of “just intonation” as a crowd of metaphors and abstractions in language shows a dependence upon the rules of the syllogism. As much and no more, but that is no doubt a great deal. Yet the attempt to determine the point in modern harmony where just intonation should end and the tempered scale begin, is as vexatious as the attempt to define in etymology the point at which the literal meaning of a word gives places to a metaphorical meaning. And it is as unsound scientifically as the conviction of the typical circle-squarer that he is unravelling a mystery and measuring a quantity hitherto unknown. Just intonation is a reality in so far as it emphasizes the contrast between concord and discord; but when it forbids artistic interaction between harmony and melody it is a chimera. It is sometimes said that Bach, by the example of his forty-eight preludes and fugues in all the major and minor keys, first fixed the modern scale. This is true practically, but not aesthetically. By writing a series of movements in every key of which the keynote was present in the normal organ and harpsichord manuals of his and later times, he enforced the system by which all facts of modern musical harmony are represented on keyed instruments by dividing the octave into twelve equal semitones, instead of tuning a few much-used keys as accurately as possible and sacrificing the euphony of all the rest. This system of equal temperament, with twelve equal semitones in the octave, obviously annihilates important distinctions, and in the most used keys it sours the concords and blunts the discords more than unequal temperament; but it is never harsh; and where it does not express harmonic subtleties the ear instinctively supplies the interpretation; as the observing faculty, indeed, always does wherever the resources of art indicate more than they express.

Now it frequently happens that discords or artificial chords are not merely obscure in their intonation, whether ideally or practically, but as produced in practice they are capable of two sharply distinct interpretations. And it is possible for music to take advantage of this and to approach a chord in one significance and quit it with another. Where this happens in just intonation (in so far as that represents a real musical conception) such chords will, so to speak, quiver from one meaning into the other. And even in the tempered scale the ear will interpret the change of meaning as involving a minute difference of intonation. The chord of the diminished 7th has in this way four different meanings—

and the chord of the augmented 6th, when accompanied by the fifth, may become a dominant 7th or vice versa, as in the passage already cited in the coda of the slow movement of Beethoven’s B♭ Trio, Op. 97. Such modulations are called enharmonic. We have seen that all the more complex musical phenomena involve distinctions enharmonic in the sense of intervals smaller than a semitone, as, for instance, whenever the progression D E in the scale of C, which is a minor tone, is identified with the progression of D E in the scale of D, which is a major tone (differing from the former as 8⁄9 from 9⁄10). But the special musical meaning of the word “enharmonic” is restricted to the difference between such pairs of sharps with flats or naturals as can be represented on a keyboard by the same note, this difference being the most impressive to the ear in “just intonation” and to the imagination in the tempered scale.

Not every progression of chords which is, so to speak, spelt enharmonically is an enharmonic modulation in itself. Thus a modulation from D flat to E major looks violently enharmonic on paper, as in the first movement of Beethoven’s Sonata, Op. 110. But E major with four sharps is merely the most convenient way of expressing F flat, a key which would need six flats and a double flat. The reality of an enharmonic modulation can be easily tested by transporting the passage a semitone. Thus, the passage just cited, put a semitone lower, becomes a perfectly diatonic modulation from C to E flat. But no transposition of the sixteen bars before the return of the main theme in the scherzo of Beethoven’s Sonata in E♭, Op. 31, No. 3, will get rid of the fact that the diminished 7th (G B♭ D♭ E♮), on the dominant of F minor, must have changed into G B♭ D♭ F♭ (although Beethoven does not take the trouble to alter the spelling) before it could resolve, as it does, upon the dominant of A♭. But though there is thus a distinction between real and apparent enharmonic modulations, it frequently happens that a series of modulations perfectly diatonic in themselves returns to the original key by a process which can only be called an enharmonic circle. Thus the whole series of keys now in practical use can be arranged in what is called the circle of fifths (C G D A E B F♯ [= G♭] D♭ A♭ B♭ F C, from which series we now see the meaning of what was said in the discussion of key-relationships as to the ambiguity of the relationships between keys a tritone fourth apart). Now no human memory is capable of distinguishing the difference of pitch between the 9 keys of C and B♯ after a wide series of modulations. The difference would be perceptible enough in immediate juxtaposition, but after some interval of time the memory will certainly accept two keys so near in pitch as identical, whether in “just intonation” or not. And hence the enharmonic circle of fifths is a conception of musical harmony by which infinity is at once rationalized and avoided, just as some modern mathematicians are trying to rationalize the infinity of space by a non-Euclidian space so curved in the fourth dimension as to return upon itself. A similar enharmonic circle progressing in major 3rds is of frequent occurrence and of very rich effect. For example, the keys of the movements of Brahms’s C Minor Symphony are C minor, E major, A♭ major (= G♯), and C (= B♯). And the same circle occurs in the opposite direction in the first movement of his Third Symphony, where the first subject is in F, the transition passes directly to D♭ and thence by exactly the same step to A (= B♭♭). The exposition is repeated, which of course means that in “just intonation” the first subject would begin in G♭♭ and then pass through a transition in E♭♭♭ to the second subject in C♭♭♭. As the development contains another spurious enharmonic modulation, and the recapitulation repeats in another position the first spurious enharmonic modulation of the exposition, it would follow that Brahms’s movement began in F and ended in C sextuple-flat! So much, then, for the application of bad metaphysics and circle-squaring mathematics to the art of music. Neither in mathematics nor in art is an approximation to be confused with an imperfection. Brahms’s movement begins and ends in F much more exactly than any wooden diagonal fits a wooden square.

HARMOTOME, a mineral of the zeolite group, consisting of hydrous barium and aluminium silicate, H2BaAl2(SiO3)5 + 5H2O. Usually a small amount of potassium is present replacing part of the barium. The system of crystallization is monoclinic; only complex twinned crystals are known. A common and characteristic form of twinned crystal, such as is represented in the figure, consists of four intercrossing individuals twinned together according to two twin-laws; the compound group resembles a tetragonal crystal with prism and pyramid, but may be distinguished from this by the grooves along the edges of the pseudo-prism. The faces of the crystals are marked by characteristic striations, as indicated in the figure. Twinned crystals of exactly the same kind are also frequent in phillipsite (q.v.). Crystals are usually white and translucent, with a vitreous lustre. The hardness is 4½, and the specific gravity 2.5.

The name harmotome (from ἁρμός, “a joint,” and τέμνειν, “to cut”) was given by R. J. Haüy in 1801, and has a crystallographic signification. Earlier names are cross-stone (Ger. Kreuzstein), ercinite, andreasbergolite and andreolite, the two last being derived from the locality, Andreasberg in the Harz. Morvenite (from Morven in Argyllshire) is the name given to small transparent crystals formerly referred to as phillipsite.

Like other zeolites, harmotome occurs with calcite in the amygdaloidal cavities of volcanic rocks, for example, in the dolerites of Dumbartonshire, and as fine crystals in the agate-lined cavities in the melaphyre of Oberstein in Germany. It also occurs in gneiss, and sometimes in metalliferous veins. At Andreasberg in the Harz it is found in the lead and silver veins; and at Strontian in Argyllshire in lead veins, associated with brewsterite (a strontium and barium zeolite), barytes and calcite.

HARMS, CLAUS (1778-1855), German divine, was born at Fahrstedt in Schleswig-Holstein on the 25th of May 1778, and in his youth worked in his father’s mill. At the university of Kiel he repudiated the prevailing rationalism and under the influence of Schleiermacher became a fervent Evangelical preacher, first at Lunden (1806), and then at Kiel (1816). His trenchant style made him very popular, and he did great service for his cause especially in 1817, when, on the 300th anniversary of the Reformation, he published side by side with Luther’s theses, ninety-five of his own, attacking reason as “the pope of our time” who “dismisses Christ from the altar and throws God’s word from the pulpit.” He also had some fame as a hymn-writer, and besides volumes of sermons published a good book on Pastoraltheologie (1830). He resigned his pastorate on account of blindness in 1849, and died on the 1st of February 1855.

HARNACK, ADOLF (1851-  ), German theologian, was born on the 7th of May 1851 at Dorpat, in Russia, where his father, Theodosius Harnack (1817-1889), held a professorship of pastoral theology.

Theodosius Harnack was a staunch Lutheran and a prolific writer on theological subjects; his chief field of work was practical theology, and his important book on that subject, summing up his long experience and teaching, appeared at Erlangen (1877-1878, 2 vols.). The liturgy of the Lutheran church of Russia has, since 1898, been based on his Liturgische Formulare (1872).

The son pursued his studies at Dorpat (1869-1872) and at Leipzig, where he took his degree; and soon afterwards (1874) began lecturing as a Privatdozent. These lectures, which dealt with such special subjects as Gnosticism and the Apocalypse, attracted considerable attention, and in 1876 he was appointed professor extraordinarius. In the same year he began the publication, in conjunction with O. L. von Gebhardt and T. Zahn, of an edition of the works of the Apostolic Fathers, Patrum apostolicorum opera, a smaller edition of which appeared in 1877. Three years later he was called to Giessen as professor ordinarius of church history. There he collaborated with Oscar Leopold von Gebhardt in Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschithte der altchristlichen Litteratur (1882 sqq.), an irregular periodical, containing only essays in New Testament and patristic fields. In 1881 he published a work on monasticism, Das Mönchtum, seine Ideale und seine Geschichte (5th ed., 1900; English translation, 1901), and became joint-editor with Emil Schürer of the Theologische Literaturzeitung. In 1885 he published the first volume of his epoch-making work, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte (3rd ed. in three volumes, 1894-1898; English translation in seven volumes, 1894-1899). In this work Harnack traces the rise of dogma, by which he understands the authoritative doctrinal system of the 4th century and its development down to the Reformation. He considers that in its earliest origins Christian faith and the methods of Greek thought were so closely intermingled that much that is not essential to Christianity found its way into the resultant system. Therefore Protestants are not only free, but bound, to criticize it; indeed, for a Protestant Christian, dogma cannot be said to exist. An abridgment of this appeared in 1889 with the title Grundriss der Dogmengeschichte (3rd ed., 1898). In 1886 Harnack was called to Marburg; and in 1888, in spite of violent opposition from the conservative section of the church authorities, to Berlin. In 1890 he became a member of the Academy of Sciences. At Berlin, somewhat against his will, he was drawn into a controversy on the Apostles’ Creed, in which the party antagonisms within the Prussian Church had found expression. Harnack’s view is that the creed contains both too much and too little to be a satisfactory test for candidates for ordination, and he would prefer a briefer symbol which could be rigorously exacted from all (cf. his Das apostolische Glaubensbekenntnis. Ein geschichtlicher Bericht nebst einem Nachworte, 1892; 27th ed., 1896). At Berlin Harnack continued his literary labours. In 1893 he published a history of early Christian literature down to Eusebius, Geschichte der altchristl. Litteratur bis Eusebius (part 2 of vol. i., 1897); and in 1900 appeared his popular lectures, Das Wesen des Christentums (5th ed., 1901; English translation, What is Christianity? 1901; 3rd ed., 1904). One of his more recent historical works is Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten (1902; English translation in two volumes, 1904-1905). It has been followed by some very interesting and important New Testament studies (Beiträge zur Einleitung in das neue Testament, 1906 sqq.; Engl. trans.: Luke the Physician, 1907; The Sayings of Jesus, 1908). Harnack, both as lecturer and writer, was one of the most prolific and most stimulating of modern critical scholars, and trained up in his “Seminar” a whole generation of teachers, who carried his ideas and methods throughout the whole of Germany and even beyond its borders. His distinctive characteristics are his claim for absolute freedom in the study of church history and the New Testament; his distrust of speculative theology, whether orthodox or liberal; his interest in practical Christianity as a religious life and not a system of theology. Some of his addresses on social matters have been published under the heading “Essays on the Social Gospel” (1907).

HARNESS (from O. Fr. harneis or harnois; the ultimate origin is obscure; the Celtic origin which connects it with the Welsh haiarn, iron, has phonetic and other difficulties; the French is the origin of the Span. arnes, and Ger. Harnisch), probably, in 11 origin, gear, tackle, equipment in general, but early applied particularly to the body armour of a soldier, including the trappings of the horse; now the general term for the gear of an animal used for draft purposes, traces, collar, bridle, girth, breeching, &c. It is usually not applied to the saddle or bridle of a riding animal. The word, in its original meaning of tackle or working apparatus, is still found in weaving, for the mechanism which shifts the warp-threads to form the “shed,” and in bell-hanging, for the apparatus by which a large bell is hung. The New English Dictionary quotes an early use of the word for the lines, rod and hooks of an angler (Fysshing with an Angle, c. 1450).

HARO, CLAMEUR DE, the ancient Norman custom of “crying for justice,” still surviving in the Channel Islands. The wronged party must on his knees and before witnesses cry: “Haro! Haro! Haro! à l’aide, mon prince, on me fait tort.” This appeal has to be respected, and the alleged trespass or tort must cease till the matter has been thrashed out in the courts. The “cry” thus acts as an interim injunction, and no inhabitant of the Channel Islands would think of resisting it. The custom is undoubtedly very ancient, dating from times when there were no courts and no justice except such as was meted out by princes personally. The popular derivation for the name is that which explains “Haro” as an abbreviation of “Ha! Rollo,” a direct appeal to Rollo, first duke of Normandy. It is far more probable that haro is simply an exclamation to call attention (O.H.G. hero, hara, “here”!). Indeed it is clear that the “cry for justice” was in no sense an institution of Rollo, but was a method of appeal recognized in many countries. It is said to be identical with the “Legatro of the Bavarians and the Thuringians,” and the first mention of it in France is to be found in the “Grand coutumier de Normandie.” A similar custom, only observed in criminal charges, was recognized by the Saxon laws under the name of “Clamor Violentiae.” Thus there is reason to think that William the Conqueror on his arrival in England found the “cry” fully established as far as criminal matters were concerned. Later the “cry” was made applicable to civil wrongs, and, when the administration of justice became systematized, disappeared altogether in criminal cases. It naturally tended to become obsolete as the administration of justice became systematized, but it was long retained in north-western France in cases of disputed possession, and was not actually repealed until the close of the 18th century. A survival of the English form of haro is possibly to be found in the “Ara,” a cry at fairs when “settling time” arrived.

HAROLD I. (d. 1040), surnamed Harefoot, the illegitimate son of Canute, king of England, and Ælfgifu of Northampton. On the death of his father in 1035, he claimed the crown of England in opposition to Canute’s legitimate son, Hardicanute. His claims were supported by Leofric, earl of Mercia, and the north; those of Hardicanute by his mother, Queen Emma, Godwine, earl of the West-Saxons and the south. Eventually Harold was temporarily elected regent, pending a final settlement on Hardicanute’s return from Denmark. Hardicanute, however, tarried, and meanwhile Harold’s party increased rapidly. In 1037 he was definitely elected king, and banished Emma from the kingdom. The only events of his brief reign are ineffectual inroads of the Welsh and Scots. Hardicanute was preparing to invade England in support of his claims when Harold died at Oxford on the 10th of March 1040.

HAROLD II. (c. 1022-1066), king of the English, the second son of Earl Godwine, was born about 1022. While still very young (before 1045) he was appointed to the earldom of the East-Angles. He shared his father’s outlawry and banishment in 1051; but while Godwine went to Flanders, Harold with his brother Leofwine took refuge in Ireland. In 1052 Harold and Leofwine returned. Having plundered in the west of England, they joined their father, and were with him at the assembly which decreed the restoration of the whole family. Harold was now restored to his earldom of the East-Angles, and on his father’s death in 1053 he succeeded him in the greater earldom of the West-Saxons. He was now the chief man in the kingdom, and when the older earls Leofric and Siward died his power increased yet more, and the latter part of Edward’s reign was virtually the reign of Harold. In 1055 he drove back the Welsh, who had burned Hereford. In 1063 came the great Welsh war, in which Harold, with the help of his brother Tostig, crushed the power of Gruffyd, who was killed by his own people. But in spite of his power and his prowess, Harold was the minister of the king rather than his personal favourite. This latter position rather belonged to Tostig, who on the death of Siward in 1055 received the earldom of Northumberland. Here, however, his harshness soon provoked enmity, and in 1065 the Northumbrians revolted against him, choosing Morkere in his place. Harold acted as mediator between the king and the insurgents, and at length agreed to the choice of Morkere, and the banishment of his brother. At the beginning of 1066 Edward died, with his last breath recommending Harold as his successor. He was accordingly elected at once and crowned. The men of Northumberland at first refused to acknowledge him, but Harold won them over. The rest of his brief reign was taken up with preparations against the attacks which threatened him on both sides at once. William challenged the crown, alleging both a bequest of Edward in bis favour and a personal engagement which Harold had contracted towards him—probably in 1064; and prepared for the invasion of England. Meanwhile Tostig was trying all means to bring about his own restoration. He first attacked the Isle of Wight, then Lindesey, but was compelled to take shelter in Scotland. From May to September the king kept the coast with a great force by sea and land, but at last provisions failed and the land army was dispersed. Harold then came to London, ready to meet whichever enemy came first. By this time Tostig had engaged Harold Hardrada of Norway to invade England. Together they sailed up the Humber, defeated Edwin and Morkere, and received the submission of York. Harold hurried northwards; and on the 25th of September he came on the Northmen at Stamford Bridge and won a complete victory, in which Tostig and Harold Hardrada were slain. But two days later William landed at Pevensey. Harold marched southward as fast as possible. He gathered his army in London from all southern and eastern England, but Edwin and Morkere kept back the forces of the north. The king then marched into Sussex and engaged the Normans on the hill of Senlac near Battle (see Hastings). After a fight which lasted from morning till evening, the Normans had the victory, and Harold and his two brothers lay dead on the field (14th of October 1066).

HARP (Fr. harpe; Ger. Harfe; Ital. arpa), a member of the class of stringed instruments of which the strings are twanged or vibrated by the fingers. The harp is an instrument of beautiful proportions, approximating to a triangular form, the strings diminishing in length as they ascend in pitch. The mechanism is concealed within the different parts of which the instrument is composed, (1) the pedestal or pedal-box, on which rest (2) the vertical pillar, and (3) the inclined convex body in which the soundboard is fixed, (4) the curved neck, with (5) the comb concealing the mechanism for stopping the strings, supported by the pillar and the body.

HARPENDEN, an urban district in the Mid or St Albans parliamentary division of Hertfordshire, England, 25 m. N.W. by N. from London by the Midland railway, served also by a branch of the Great Northern railway. Pop. (1901) 4725. It is a favourite outlying residential district for those whose work lies in London. The church of St Nicholas is a modern reconstruction with the exception of the Perpendicular tower. In the Lawes Testimonial Laboratory there is a vast collection of samples of experimentally grown produce, annual products, ashes and soils. Sir John Bennet Lawes (d. 1900) provided an endowment of £100,000 for the perpetuation of the agricultural experiments which he inaugurated here at his seat of Rothamsted Park. The success of his association of chemistry with botany is shown by the fact that soil has been made to bear wheat without intermission for upwards of half a century without manure. The country neighbouring to Harpenden is very pleasant, including the gorse-covered Harpenden Common and the narrow well-wooded valley of the upper Lea.

HARPER’S FERRY, a town of Jefferson county, West Virginia, U.S.A., finely situated at the confluence of the Potomac and Shenandoah rivers (which here pass through a beautiful gorge in the Blue Ridge), 55 m. N.W. of Washington. Pop. (1900) 896; (1910) 766. It is served by the Baltimore & Ohio railway, which crosses the Potomac here, by the Winchester & Potomac railway (Baltimore & Ohio) of which it is a terminus, and by boats on the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal, which passes along the Maryland side of the Potomac. Across the Potomac on the north rise the Maryland Heights; across the Shenandoah, on the West Virginia side, the Virginia or Loudoun Heights; and behind the town to the W. the Bolivar Heights. A United States arsenal and armoury were established at Harper’s Ferry in 1796, the site being chosen because of the good water-power; these were seized on the 16th of October 1859 by John Brown (q.v.), the abolitionist, and some 21 of his followers. For four months before the raid Brown and his men lived on the Kennedy Farm, in Washington county, Maryland, about 4 m. N.W. of Harper’s Ferry. The engine-house in which Brown was captured was exhibited at the Columbian Exposition at Chicago and was later rebuilt on Bolivar Heights; a marble pillar, marked “John Brown’s Fort,” has been erected on its original site. On Camp Hill is Storer College (state-aided), a normal school for negroes, which was established under Free Baptist control in 1867, and has academic, normal, biblical, musical and industrial departments.

The first settlement here was made about 1747 by Robert Harper, who ran a ferry across the Potomac. The position of Harper’s Ferry at the lower end of the Shenandoah Valley rendered it a place of strategic importance during the Civil War. On the 18th of April 1861, the day after Virginia passed her ordinance of secession, when a considerable force of Virginia militia under General Kenton Harper approached the town—an attack having been planned in Richmond two days before—the Federal garrison of 45 men under Lieutenant Roger Jones set fire to the arsenal and fled. Within the next few days large numbers of Confederate volunteers assembled here; and Harper was succeeded in command (27th April) by “Stonewall” Jackson, who was in turn succeeded by Brigadier-General Joseph E. Johnston on the 23rd of May. Johnston thought that the place was unimportant, and withdrew when (15th June) the Federal forces under General Robert Patterson and Colonel Lew Wallace approached, and Harper’s Ferry was again occupied by a Federal garrison. In September 1862, during General Lee’s first invasion of the North, General McClellan advised that the place be abandoned in order that the 10,000 men defending it might be added to his fighting force, but General Halleck would not consent, so that when Lee needed supplies from the Shenandoah Valley he was blocked by the garrison, then under the command of Colonel Dixon S. Miles. On Jackson’s approach they were distributed as follows: about 7000 men on Bolivar Heights, about 2000 on Maryland Heights, and about 1800 on the lower ground. On the 13th of September General Lafayette McLaws carried Maryland Heights and General John G. Walker planted a battery on Loudoun Heights. On the 14th there was some fighting, but early on the 15th, as Jackson was about to make an assault on Bolivar Heights, the garrison, surrounded by a superior force, surrendered. The total Federal loss (including the garrisons at Winchester and Martinsburg) amounted to 44 killed (the commander was mortally wounded), 12,520 prisoners, and 13,000 small arms. For this terrible loss to the Union army the responsibility seems to have been General Halleck’s, though the blame was officially put on Colonel Miles, who died immediately after the surrender. Jackson rejoined Lee on the following day in time to take part in the battle of Antietam, and after the battle General McClellan placed a strong garrison (the 12th Corps) at Harper’s Ferry. In June 1863 the place was again abandoned to the Confederates on their march to Pennsylvania. After their defeat at Gettysburg, the town again fell into the hands of the Federal troops, and it remained in their possession until the end of the war. On the 4th of July 1864 General Franz Sigel, who was then in command here, withdrew his troops to Maryland Heights, and from there resisted Early’s attempt to enter the town and to drive the Federal garrison from Maryland Heights. Harper’s Ferry was seriously damaged by a flood in the Shenandoah in October 1878.

HARPIES (Gr. Ἅρπυιαι, older form Ἀρέπυιαι, “swift robbers”), in ancient mythology, the personification of the sweeping storm-winds. In Homer, where they appear indifferently under the name of ἄρπυιαι and θύελλαι, their function is to carry off those whose sudden disappearance is desired by the gods. Only one of them is there mentioned (Iliad, xvi. 150) by name, Podargē, the mother of the coursers of Achilles by Zephyrus, the generative wind. According to Hesiod (Theog. 265) they are two in number, Aëllo and Ocypetē, daughters of Thaumas and Electra, winged 15 goddesses with beautiful locks, swifter than winds and birds in their flight, and their domain is the air. In later times their number was increased (Celaeno being a frequent addition and their leader in Virgil), and they were described as hateful and repulsive creatures, birds with the faces of old women, the ears of bears, crooked talons and hanging breasts; even in Aeschylus (Eumenides, 50) they appear as ugly and misshapen monsters. Their function of snatching away mortals to the other world brings them into connexion with the Erinyes, with whom they are often confounded. On the so-called Harpy monument from Lycia, now in the British Museum, the Harpies appear carrying off some small figures, supposed to be the daughters of Pandareus, unless they are intended to represent departed souls. The repulsive character of the Harpies is more especially seen in the legend of Phineus, king of Salmydessus in Thrace (Apollodorus i. 9, 21; see also Diod. Sic. iv. 43). Having been deprived of his sight by the gods for his ill-treatment of his sons by his first wife (or for having revealed the future to mortals), he was condemned to be tormented by two Harpies, who carried off whatever food was placed before him. On the arrival of the Argonauts, Phineus promised to give them particulars of the course they should pursue and of the dangers that lay before them, if they would deliver him from his tormentors. Accordingly, when the Harpies appeared as usual to carry off the food from Phineus’s table, they were driven off and pursued by Calaïs and Zetes, the sons of Boreas, as far as the Strophades islands in the Aegean. On promising to cease from molesting Phineus, their lives were spared. Their place of abode is variously placed in the Strophades, the entrance to the under-world, or a cave in Crete. According to Cecil Smith, Journal of Hellenic Studies, xiii. (1892-1893), the Harpies are the hostile spirits of the scorching south wind; E. Rohde (Rheinisches Museum, i., 1895) regards them as spirits of the storm, which at the bidding of the gods carry off human beings alive to the under-world or some spot beyond human ken.

HARPIGNIES, HENRI (1819-  ), French landscape painter, born at Valenciennes in 1819, was intended by his parents for a business career, but his determination to become an artist was so strong that it conquered all obstacles, and he was allowed at the age of twenty-seven to enter Achard’s atelier in Paris. From this painter he acquired a groundwork of sound constructive draughtsmanship, which is so marked a feature of his landscape painting. After two years under this exacting teacher he went to Italy, whence he returned in 1850. During the next few years he devoted himself to the painting of children in landscape setting, and fell in with Corot and the other Barbizon masters, whose principles and methods are to a certain extent reflected in his own personal art. To Corot he was united by a bond of warm friendship, and the two artists went together to Italy in 1860. On his return, he scored his first great success at the Salon, in 1861, with his “Lisière de bois sur les bords de l’Allier.” After that year he was a regular exhibitor at the old Salon; in 1886 he received his first medal for “Le Soir dans la campagne de Rome,” which was acquired for the Luxembourg Gallery. Many of his best works were painted at Hérisson in the Bourbonnais, as well as in the Nivernais and the Auvergne. Among his chief pictures are “Soir sur les bords de la Loire” (1861), “Les Corbeaux” (1865), “Le Soir” (1866), “Le Saut-du-Loup” (1873), “La Loire” (1882), and “Vue de Saint-Privé” (1883). He also did some decorative work for the Paris Opéra—the “Vallée d’Egérie” panel, which he showed at the Salon of 1870.

HARP-LUTE, or Dital Harp, one of the many attempts to revive the popularity of the guitar and to increase its compass, invented in 1798 by Edward Light. The harp-lute owes the first part of its name to the characteristic mechanism for shortening the effective length of the strings; its second name—dital harp—emphasizes the nature of the stops, which are worked by the thumb in contradistinction to the pedals of the harp worked by the feet. It consists of a pear-shaped body, to which is added a curved neck supported on a front pillar or arm springing from the body, and therefore reminiscent of the harp. There are 12 catgut strings. The curved fingerboard, almost parallel with the neck, is provided with frets, and has in addition a thumb-key for each string, by means of which the accordance of the string is mechanically raised a semitone at will. The dital or key, on being depressed, acts upon a stop-ring or eye, which draws the string down against the fret, and thus shortens its effective length. The fingers then stop the strings as usual over the remaining frets. A further improvement was patented in 1816 as the British harp-lute. Other attempts possessing less practical merit than the dital harp were the lyra-guitarre, which appeared in Germany at the beginning of the 19th century; the accord-guitarre, towards the middle of the same century; and the keyed guitar.

HARPOCRATES, originally an Egyptian deity, adopted by the Greeks, and worshipped in later times both by Greeks and Romans. In Egypt, Harpa-khruti, Horus the child, was one of the forms of Horus, the sun-god, the child of Osiris. He was supposed to carry on war against the powers of darkness, and hence Herodotus (ii. 144) considers him the same as the Greek Apollo. He was represented in statues with his finger on his mouth, a symbol of childhood. The Greeks and Romans, not understanding the meaning of this attitude, made him the god of silence (Ovid, Metam. ix. 691), and as such he became a favourite deity with the later mystic schools of philosophy.

HARPOCRATION, VALERIUS, Greek grammarian of Alexandria. He is possibly the Harpocration mentioned by Julius Capitolinus (Life of Verus, 2) as the Greek tutor of Antoninus Verus (2nd century A.D.); some authorities place him much later, on the ground that he borrowed from Athenaeus. He is the author of a Λεξικὸν (or Περὶ τῶν λέξεων) τῶν δέκα ῥητόρων, which has come down to us in an incomplete form. The work contains, in more or less alphabetical order, notes on well-known events and persons mentioned by the orators, and explanations of legal and commercial expressions. As nearly all the lexicons to the Greek orators have been lost, Harpocration’s work is especially valuable. Amongst his authorities were the writers of Atthides (histories of Attica), the grammarian Didymus, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, and the lexicographer Dionysius, son of Tryphon. The book also contains contributions to the history of Attic oratory and Greek literature generally. Nothing is known of an Ἀνθηρῶν συναγωγή, a sort of anthology or chrestomathy attributed to him by Suidas. A series of articles in the margin of a Cambridge MS. of the lexicon forms the basis of the Lexicon rhetoricum Cantabrigiense (see Dobree, P. P.).

HARPOON (from Fr. harpon, a grappling-iron, O. Fr. harpe, a dog’s claw, an iron clamp for fastening stones together; the source of these words is the Lat. harpago, harpa, &c., formed from Gr. ἁρπαγή, hook, ἁρπάζειν, to snatch, tear away, cf. “harpy”), barbed spear, particularly one used for spearing whales or other large fish, and either thrown by hand or fired from a gun (see Whale-Fishery).

HARPSICHORD, Harpsicon, double virginals (Fr. clavecin; Ger. Clavicymbel, Kiel-Flügel; Ital. arpicordo, cembalo, clavicembalo, gravecembalo; Dutch, clavisinbal), a large keyboard instrument (see Pianoforte), belonging to the same family as the virginal and spinet, but having 2, 3, or even 4 strings to each note, and a case of the harp or wing shape, afterwards adopted for the grand pianoforte. J. S. Bach’s harpsichord, preserved in the museum of the Hochschule für Musik at Charlottenburg, has two manuals and 4 strings to each note, one 16 ft., two 8 ft. and one 4 ft. By means of stops the performer has within his power a number of combinations for varying the tone and dynamic power. In all instruments of the harpsichord family 16 the strings, instead of being struck by tangents as in the clavichord, or by hammers as in the pianoforte, are plucked by means of a quill firmly embedded in the centred tongue of a jack or upright placed on the back end of the key-lever. When the finger depresses a key, the jack is thrown up, and in passing the crow-quill catches the string and twangs it. It is this twanging of the string which produces the brilliant incisive tone peculiar to the harpsichord family. What these instruments gain in brilliancy of tone, however, they lose in power of expression and of accent. The impossibility of commanding any emphasis necessarily created for the harpsichord an individual technique which influenced the music composed for it to so great an extent that it cannot be adequately rendered upon the pianoforte.

The harpsichord assumed a position of great importance during the 16th and 17th centuries, more especially in the orchestra, which was under the leadership of the harpsichord player. The most famous of all harpsichord makers, whose names form a guarantee for excellence, were the Ruckers, established at Antwerp from the last quarter of the 16th century.

HARPY, a large diurnal bird of prey, so named after the mythological monster of the classical poets (see Harpies),—the Thrasaëtus harpyia of modern ornithologists—an inhabitant of the warmer parts of America from Southern Mexico to Brazil. Though known since the middle of the 17th century, its habits have come very little under the notice of naturalists, and what is said of them by the older writers must be received with some suspicion. A cursory inspection of the bird, which is not unfrequently brought alive to Europe, its size, and its enormous bill and talons, at once suggest the vast powers of destruction imputed to it, and are enough to account for the stories told of its ravages on mammals—sloths, fawns, peccaries and spider-monkeys. It has even been asserted to attack the human race. How much of this is fabulous there seems no means at present of determining, but some of the statements are made by veracious travellers—D’Orbigny and Tschudi. It is not uncommon in the forests of the isthmus of Panama, and Salvin says (Proc. Zool. Society, 1864, p. 368) that its flight is slow and heavy. Indeed its owl-like visage, its short wings and soft plumage, do not indicate a bird of very active habits, but the weapons of offence with which it is armed show that it must be able to cope with vigorous prey. Its appearance is sufficiently striking—the head and lower parts, except a pectoral band, white, the former adorned with an erectile crest, the upper parts dark grey banded with black, the wings dusky, and the tail barred; but the huge bill and powerful scutellated legs most of all impress the beholder. The precise affinities of the harpy cannot be said to have been determined. By some authors it is referred to the eagles, by others to the buzzards, and by others again to the hawks; but possibly the first of these alliances is the most likely to be true.

HARRAN, Haran or Charran (Sept. Χαῤῥάν or Χαῤῥά: Strabo, Κάῤῥαι: Pliny, Carrae or Carrhae; Arab. Harrān), in biblical history the place where Terah halted after leaving Ur, and apparently the birthplace of Abraham, a town on the stream Jullab, some nine hours’ journey from Edessa in Syria. At this point the road from Damascus joins the highway between Nineveh and Carchemish, and Haran had thus considerable military and commercial value. As a strategic position it is mentioned in inscriptions as early as the time of Tiglath Pileser I., about 1100 B.C., and subsequently by Sargon II., who restored the privileges lost at the rebellion which led to the conquest referred to in 2 Kings xix. 12 (= Isa. xxxvii. 12). It was the centre of a considerable commerce (Ezek. xxvii. 23), and one of its specialities was the odoriferous gum derived from the strobus (Pliny, H.N. xii. 40). It was here that Crassus in his eastern expedition was attacked and slain by the Parthians (53 B.C.); and here also the emperor Caracalla was murdered at the instigation of Macrinus (A.D. 217). Haran was the chief home of the moon-god Sin, whose temple was rebuilt by several kings, among them Assur-bani-pal and Nabunidus and Herodian (iv. 13, 7) mentions the town as possessing in his day a temple of the moon. In the middle ages it is mentioned as having been the seat of a particular heathen sect, that of the Haranite Sabeans. It retained its importance down to the period of the Arab ascendancy; but by Abulfeda it is mentioned as having before his time fallen into decay. It is now wholly in ruins. The Yahwistic writer (Gen. xxvii. 43) makes it the home of Laban and connects it with Isaac and Jacob. But we cannot thus put Haran in Aramnaharaim; the home of the Labanites is rather to be looked for in the very similar word Hauran.

HARRAR (or Harar), a city of N.E. Africa, in 8° 45′ N., 42° 36′ E., capital of a province of Abyssinia and 220 m. S.S.W. of the ports of Zaila (British) and Jibuti (French) on the Gulf of Aden. With Jibuti it is connected by a railway (188 m. long) and carriage-road. Harrar is built on the slopes of a hill at an elevation of over 5000 ft. A lofty stone wall, pierced by five gates and flanked by twenty-four towers, encloses the city, which has a population of about 40,000. The streets are steep, narrow, dirty and unpaved, the roadways consisting of rough boulders. The houses are in general made of undressed stone and mud and are flat-topped, the general aspect of the city being Oriental and un-Abyssinian. A few houses, including the palace of the governor and the foreign consulates, are of more elaborate and solid construction than the majority of the buildings. There are several mosques and an Abyssinian church (of the usual circular construction) built of stone. Harrar is a city of considerable commercial importance, through it passing all the merchandise of southern Abyssinia, Kaffa and Galla land. The chief traders are Abyssinians, Armenians and Greeks. The principal article of export is coffee, which is grown extensively in the neighbouring hills and is of the finest quality. Besides coffee there is a large trade in durra, the kat plant (used by the Mahommedans as a drug), ghee, cattle, mules and camels, skins and hides, ivory and gums. The import trade is largely in cotton goods, but every kind of merchandise is included.

Harrar is believed to owe its foundation to Arab immigrants from the Yemen in the 7th century of the Christian era. In the region of Somaliland, now the western part of the British protectorate of that name, the Arabs established the Moslem state of Adel or Zaila, with their capital at Zaila on the Gulf of Aden. In the 13th century the sultans of Adel enjoyed great power. In 1521 the then sultan Abubekr transferred the seat of government to Harrar, probably regarding Zaila as too exposed to the attacks of the Turkish and Portuguese navies then contending 17 for the mastery of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. Abubekr’s successor was Mahommed III., Ahmed ibn Ibrahim el-Ghazi (1507-1543), surnamed Gran (Granyé), the left-handed. He was not an Arab but, probably, of Somali origin. The son of a noted warrior, he quickly rose to supreme power, becoming sultan or amir in 1525. He is famous for his invasion of Abyssinia, of which country he was virtual master for several years. From the beginning of the 17th century Adel suffered greatly from the ravages of pagan Galla tribes, and Harrar sank to the position of an amirate of little importance. It was first visited by a European in 1854 when (Sir) Richard Burton spent ten days there in the guise of an Arab. In 1875 Harrar was occupied by an Egyptian force under Raouf Pasha, by whose orders the amir was strangled. The town remained in the possession of Egypt until 1885, when the garrison was withdrawn in consequence of the rising of the Mahdi in the Sudan. The Egyptian garrison and many Egyptian civilians, in all 6500 persons, left Harrar between November 1884 and the 25th of April 1885, when a son of the ruler who had been deposed by Egypt was installed as amir, the arrangement being carried out under the superintendence of British officers. The new amir held power until January 1887, in which month Harrar was conquered by Menelek II., king of Shoa (afterwards emperor of Abyssinia). The governorship of Harrar was by Menelek entrusted to Ras Makonnen, who held the post until his death in 1906.

The Harrari proper are of a distinct stock from the neighbouring peoples, and speak a special language. Harrarese is “a Semitic graft inserted into an indigenous stock” (Sir R. Burton, First Footsteps in East Africa). The Harrari are Mahommedans of the Shafa’i or Persian sect, and they employ the solar year and the Persian calendar. Besides the native population there are in Harrar colonies of Abyssinians, Somalis and Gallas. By the Somalis the place is called Adari, by the Gallas Adaray.

HARRATIN, black Berbers, dwelling in Tidikelt and other Saharan oases. Many of them are blacker than the average negro. In physique, however, they are true to the Berber type, being of handsome appearance with European features and well-proportioned bodies. They are the result of an early crossing with the Sudanese negro races, though to-day they have all the pride of the Berbers (q.v.), and do not live with or intermarry among negroes.

HARRIER, or Hen-Harrier, name given to certain birds of prey which were formerly very abundant in parts of the British Islands, from their habit of harrying poultry. The first of these names has now become used in a generic sense for all the species ranked under the genus Circus of Lacépède, and the second confined to the particular species which is the Falco cyaneus of Linnaeus and the Circus cyaneus of modern ornithologists.

One European species, C. aeruginosus, though called in books the marsh-harrier, is far more commonly known in England and Ireland as the moor-buzzard. But harriers are not, like buzzards, arboreal in their habits, and always affect open country, generally, though not invariably, preferring marshy or fenny districts, for snakes and frogs form a great part of their ordinary food. On the ground their carriage is utterly unlike that of a buzzard, and their long wings and legs render it easy to distinguish the two groups when taken in the hand. All the species also have a more or less well-developed ruff or frill of small thickset feathers surrounding the lower part of the head, nearly like that seen in owls, and accordingly many systematists consider that the genus Circus, though undoubtedly belonging to the Falconidae, connects that family with the Striges. No osteological affinity, however, can be established between the harriers and any section of the owls, and the superficial resemblance will have to be explained in some other way. Harriers are found almost all over the world,1 and fifteen species are recognized by Bowdler Sharpe (Cat. Birds Brit. Museum, i. pp. 50-73). In most if not all the harriers the sexes differ greatly in colour, so much so that for a long while the males and females of one of the commonest and best known, the C. cyaneus above mentioned, were thought to be distinct species, and were or still are called in various European languages by different names. The error was maintained with the greater persistency since the young males, far more abundant than the adults, wear much the same plumage as their mother, and it was not until after Montagu’s observations were published at the beginning of the 19th century that the “ringtail,” as she was called (the Falco pygargus of Linnaeus), was generally admitted to be the female of the “hen-harrier.” But this was not Montagu’s only good service as regards this genus. He proved the hitherto unexpected existence of a second species,2 subject to the same diversity of plumage. This was called by him the ash-coloured falcon, but it now generally bears his name, and is known as Montagu’s harrier, C. cineraceus. In habits it is very similar to the hen-harrier, but it has longer wings, and its range is not so northerly, for while the hen-harrier extends to Lapland, Montagu’s is but very rare in Scotland, though in the south of England it is the most common species. Harriers indeed in the British Islands are rapidly becoming things of the past. Their nests are easily found, and the birds when nesting are easily destroyed. In the south-east of Europe, reaching also to the Cape of Good Hope and to India, there is a fourth species, the C. swainsoni of some writers, the C. pallidus of others. In North America C. cyaneus is represented by a kindred form, C. hudsonius, usually regarded as a good species, the adult male of which is always to be recognized by its rufous markings beneath, in which character it rather resembles C. cineraceus, but it has not the long wings of that species. South America has in C. cinereus another representative form, while China, India and Australia possess more of this type. Thus there is a section in which the males have a strongly contrasted black and grey plumage, and finally there is a group of larger forms allied to the European C. aeruginosus, wherein a grey dress is less often attained, of which the South African C. ranivorus and the New Zealand C. gouldi are examples.

HARRIGAN, EDWARD (1845-  ), American actor, was born in New York of Irish parents on the 26th of October 1845. He made his first appearance in San Francisco in 1867, and soon afterwards formed a stage partnership with Tony Hart, whose real name was Anthony Cannon. As “Harrigan and Hart,” they had a great success in the presentation of types of low life in New York. Beginning as simple sketches, these were gradually worked up into plays, with occasional songs, set to popular music 18 by David Braham. The titles of these plays indicate their character, The Mulligan Guards, Squatter Sovereignty, A Leather Patch, The O’Regans. The partnership with Hart lasted from 1871-1884. Subsequently Harrigan played in different cities of the United States, one of his favourite parts being George Coggswell in Old Lavender.

HARRIMAN, EDWARD HENRY (1848-1909), American financier and railroad magnate, son of the Rev. Orlando Harriman, rector of St George’s Episcopal church, Hempstead, L.I., was born at Hempstead on the 25th of February 1848. He became a broker’s clerk in New York at an early age, and in 1870 was able to buy a seat on the New York Stock Exchange on his own account. For a good many years there was nothing sensational in his success, but he built up a considerable business connexion and prospered in his financial operations. Meanwhile he carefully mastered the situation affecting American railways. In this respect he was assisted by his friendship with Mr Stuyvesant Fish, who, on becoming vice-president of the Illinois Central in 1883, brought Harriman upon the directorate, and in 1887, being then president, made Harriman vice-president; twenty years later it was Harriman who dominated the finance of the Illinois Central, and Fish, having become his opponent, was dropped from the board. It was not till 1898, however, that his career as a great railway organizer began with his formation, by the aid of the bankers, Kuhn, Loeb & Co., of a syndicate to acquire the Union Pacific line, which was then in the hands of a receiver and was generally regarded as a hopeless failure. It was soon found that a new power had arisen in the railway world. Having brought the Union Pacific out of bankruptcy into prosperity, and made it an efficient instead of a decaying line, he utilized his position to draw other lines within his control, notably the Southern Pacific in 1901. These extensions of his power were not made without friction, and his abortive contest in 1901 with James J. Hill for the control of the Northern Pacific led to one of the most serious financial crises ever known on Wall Street. But in the result he became the dominant factor in American railway matters. At his death, on the 9th of September 1909, his influence was estimated to extend over 60,000 m. of track, with an annual earning power of $700,000,000 or over. Astute and unscrupulous manipulation of the stock markets, and a capacity for the hardest of bargaining and the most determined warfare against his rivals, had their place in this success, and Harriman’s methods excited the bitterest criticism, culminating in a stern denunciation from President Roosevelt himself in 1907. Nevertheless, besides acquiring colossal wealth for himself, he helped to create for the American public a vastly improved railway service, the benefit of which survived all controversy as to the means by which he triumphed over the obstacles in his way.

HARRIMAN, a city of Roane county, Tennessee, U.S.A., on the Emory river, about 35 m. W. by S. of Knoxville. Pop. (1900) 3442 (516 being negroes); (1910) 3061. Harriman is served by the Harriman & North Eastern, the Tennessee Central, and the Southern railways. It is the seat of the East Tennessee Normal and Industrial Institute, for negroes, and of the American University of Harriman (Christian Church, coeducational; 1893), which comprises primary, preparatory, collegiate, Bible school, civic research, commercial, music and art departments, and in 1907-1908 had 12 instructors and 317 students. Near the city are large deposits of iron and an abundance of coal and timber. Among manufactures are cotton products, farming tools, leather, tannic acid, furniture and flour. Harriman was founded in 1890 by a land company. A clause in this company’s by-laws requires that every conveyance of real estate by the company “shall contain a provision forbidding the use of the property or any building thereon, for the purpose of making, storing or selling intoxicating beverages as such.” Harriman was chartered as a city in 1891, and its charter was revised in 1899.

HARRINGTON, EARLS OF. The first earl of Harrington was the diplomatist and politician, William Stanhope (c. 1690-1756), a younger son of John Stanhope of Elvaston, Derbyshire, and a brother of Charles Stanhope (1673-1760), an active politician during the reign of George I. His ancestor, Sir John Stanhope (d. 1638), was a half-brother of Philip Stanhope, 1st earl of Chesterfield. Educated at Eton, William Stanhope entered the army and served in Spain, but soon he turned his attention to more peaceful pursuits, went on a mission to Madrid and represented his country at Turin. When peace was made between England and Spain in 1720 Stanhope became British ambassador to the latter country, and he retained this position until March 1727, having built up his reputation as a diplomatist during a difficult period. In 1729 he had some part in arranging the treaty of Seville between England, France and Spain, and for his services in this matter he was created Baron Harrington in January 1730. Later in the same year he was appointed secretary of state for the northern department under Sir Robert Walpole, but, like George II., he was anxious to assist the emperor Charles VI. in his war with France, while Walpole favoured a policy of peace. Although the latter had his way Harrington remained secretary until the great minister’s fall in 1742, when he was transferred to the office of president of the council and was created earl of Harrington and Viscount Petersham. In 1744, owing to the influence of his political allies, the Pelhams, he returned to his former post of secretary of state, but he soon lost the favour of the king, and this was the principal cause why he left office in October 1746. He was lord lieutenant of Ireland from 1747 to 1751, and he died in London on the 8th of December 1756.

The earl’s successor was his son, William (1719-1779), who entered the army, was wounded at Fontenoy and became a general in 1770. He was a member of parliament for about ten years and he died on the 1st of April 1779. This earl’s wife Caroline (1722-1784), daughter of Charles Fitzroy, 2nd duke of Grafton, was a noted beauty, but was also famous for her eccentricities. Their elder son, Charles (1753-1829), who became the 3rd earl, was a distinguished soldier. He served with the British army during the American War of Independence and attained the rank of general in 1802. From 1805 to 1812 he was commander-in-chief in Ireland; he was sent on diplomatic errands to Vienna and to Berlin, and he died at Brighton on the 15th of September 1829.

Charles Stanhope, 4th earl of Harrington (1780-1851), the eldest son of the 3rd earl, was known as Lord Petersham until he succeeded to the earldom in 1829. He was very well known in society owing partly to his eccentric habits; he dressed like the French king Henry IV., and had other personal peculiarities. He married the actress, Maria Foote, but when he died in March 1851 he left no sons, and his brother Leicester Fitzgerald Charles (1784-1862) became the 5th earl. This nobleman was a soldier and a politician of advanced views, who is best known as a worker with Lord Byron in the cause of Greek independence. He was in Greece in 1823 and 1824, where his relations with Byron were not altogether harmonious. He wrote A Sketch of the History and Influence of the Press in British India (1823); and Greece in 1821 and 1824 (English edition 1824, American edition 1825). His son Sydney Seymour Hyde, 6th earl (1845-1866), dying unmarried, was succeeded by a cousin, Charles Wyndham Stanhope (1809-1881), as 7th earl, and in 1881 the latter’s son Charles Augustus Stanhope (b. 1844) became 8th earl of Harrington.

HARRINGTON, or Harington, JAMES (1611-1677), English political philosopher, was born in January 1611 of an old Rutlandshire family. He was son of Sir Sapcotes Harrington of Rand, Lincolnshire, and great-nephew of the first Lord Harington of Exton (d. 1615). In 1629 he entered Trinity College, Oxford, as 19 a gentleman commoner. One of his tutors was the famous Chillingworth. After several years spent in travel, and as a soldier in the Dutch army, he returned to England and lived in retirement till 1646, when he was appointed to the suite of Charles I., at that time being conveyed from Newcastle as prisoner. Though republican in his ideas, Harrington won the king’s regard and esteem, and accompanied him to the Isle of Wight. He roused, however, the suspicion of the parliamentarians and was dismissed: it is said that he was for a short time put in confinement because he would not swear to refuse assistance to the king should he attempt to escape. After Charles’s death Harrington devoted his time to the composition of his Oceana, a work which pleased neither party. By order of Cromwell it was seized when passing through the press. Harrington, however managed to secure the favour of the Protector’s favourite daughter, Mrs Claypole; the work was restored to him, and appeared in 1656, dedicated to Cromwell. The views embodied in Oceana, particularly that bearing on vote by ballot and rotation of magistrates and legislators, Harrington and others (who in 1659 formed a club called the “Rota”) endeavoured to push practically, but with no success. In November 1661, by order of Charles II., Harrington was arrested, apparently without sufficient cause, on a charge of conspiracy, and was thrown into the Tower. Despite his repeated request no public trial could be obtained, and when at length his sisters obtained a writ of habeas corpus he was secretly removed to St Nicholas Island off Plymouth. There his health gave way owing to his drinking guaiacum on medical advice, and his mind appeared to be affected. Careful treatment restored him to bodily vigour, but his mind never wholly recovered. After his release he married,—at what date does not seem to be precisely known. He died on the 11th of September 1677, and was buried next to Sir Walter Raleigh in St Margaret’s, Westminster.

Harrington’s writings consist of the Oceana, and of papers, pamphlets, aphorisms, even treatises, in defence of the Oceana. The Oceana is a hard, prolix, and in many respects heavy exposition of an ideal constitution, “Oceana” being England, and the lawgiver Olphaus Megaletor, Oliver Cromwell. The details are elaborated with infinite care, even the salaries of officials being computed, but the main ideas are two in number, each with a practical corollary. The first is that the determining element of power in a state is property generally, property in land in particular; the second is that the executive power ought not to be vested for any considerable time in the same men or class of men. In accordance with the first of these, Harrington recommends an agrarian law, limiting the portion of land held to that yielding a revenue of £3000, and consequently insisting on particular modes of distributing landed property. As a practical issue of the second he lays down the rule of rotation by ballot. A third part of the executive or senate are voted out by ballot every year (not being capable of being elected again for three years). Harrington explains very carefully how the state and its governing parts are to be constituted by his scheme. Oceana contains many valuable ideas, but it is irretrievably dull.

HARRIOT, or Harriott, THOMAS (1560-1621), English mathematician and astronomer, was born at Oxford in 1560. After studying at St Mary Hall, Oxford, he became tutor to Sir Walter Raleigh, who appointed him in 1585 to the office of geographer to the second expedition to Virginia. Harriot published an account of this expedition in 1588, which was afterwards reprinted in Hakluyt’s Voyages. On his return to England, after an absence of two years, he resumed his mathematical studies, and having made the acquaintance of Henry Percy, earl of Northumberland, distinguished for his patronage of men of science, he received from him a yearly pension of £120. He died at London on the 2nd of July 1621. A manuscript of Harriot’s entitled Ephemeris chrysometria is preserved in Sion College; and his Artis analyticae praxis ad aequaliones algebraicas resolvendas was published at London in 1631. His contributions to algebra are treated in the article Algebra; Wallis’s History of Algebra (1685) may also be consulted. From some papers of Harriot’s, discovered in 1784, it would appear that he had either procured a telescope from Holland, or divined the construction of that instrument, and that he coincided in point of time with Galileo in discovering the spots on the sun’s disk.

HARRIS, GEORGE, 1st Baron (1746-1829), British general, was the son of the Rev George Harris, curate of Brasted, Kent, and was born on the 18th of March 1746. Educated at Westminster school and at the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, he was commissioned to the Royal Artillery in 1760, transferring to an ensigncy in the 5th foot (Northumberland Fusiliers) in 1762. Three years later he became lieutenant, and in 1771 captain. His first active service was in the American War of Independence, in which he served at Lexington, Bunker Hill (severely wounded) and in every engagement of Howe’s army except one up to November 1778. By this time he had obtained his majority, and his next service was under Major-General Medows at Santa Lucia in 1778-1779, after which his regiment served as marines in Rodney’s fleet. Later in 1779 he was for a time a prisoner of war. Shortly before his promotion to lieutenant-colonel in his regiment (1780) he married. After commanding the 5th in Ireland for some years, he exchanged and went with General Medows to Bombay, and served with that officer in India until 1792, taking part in various battles and engagements, notably Lord Cornwallis’s attack on Seringapatam. In 1794, after a short period of home service, he was again in India. In the same year he became major-general, and in 1796 local lieutenant-general in Madras. Up to 1800 he commanded the troops in the presidency, and for a short time he exercised the civil government as well. In December 1798 he was appointed by Lord Wellesley, the governor-general, to command the field army which was intended to attack Tipu Sahib, and in a few months Harris reduced the Mysore country and stormed the great stronghold of Seringapatam. His success established his reputation as a capable and experienced commander, and its political importance led to his being offered the reward (which he declined) of an Irish peerage. He returned home in 1800, became lieutenant-general in the army the following year, and attained the rank of full general in 1812. In 1815 he was made a peer of the United Kingdom under the title Baron Harris of Seringapatam and Mysore, and of Belmont, Kent. In 1820 he received the G.C.B., and in 1824 the governorship of Dumbarton Castle. Lord Harris died at Belmont in May 1829. He had been colonel of the 73rd Highlanders since 1800.

His descendant, the 4th Baron Harris (b. 1851), best known as a cricketer, was under-secretary for India (1885-1886), under-secretary for war (1886-1889) and governor of Bombay (1890-1895).

HARRIS, JAMES (1709-1780), English grammarian, was born at Salisbury on the 20th of July 1709. He was educated at the grammar school in the Close at Salisbury, and at Wadham College, Oxford. On leaving the university he was entered at Lincoln’s Inn as a student of law, though not intended for the bar. The death of his father in 1733 placed him in possession of an independent fortune and of the house in Salisbury Close. He became a county magistrate, and represented Christchurch in parliament from 1761 till his death, and was comptroller to the queen from 1774 to 1780. He held office under Lord Grenville, retiring with him in 1765. The decided bent of his mind had always been towards the Greek and Latin classics; and to the study of these, especially of Aristotle, he applied himself with unremitting assiduity during a period of fourteen or fifteen 20 years. He published in 1744 three treatises—on art; on music, painting and poetry; and on happiness. In 1751 appeared the work by which he became best known, Hermes, a philosophical inquiry concerning universal grammar. He also published Philosophical Arrangements and Philosophical Inquiries. Harris was a great lover of music, and adapted the words for a selection from Italian and German composers, published by the cathedral organist, James Corfe. He died on the 22nd of December 1780.

HARRIS, JOEL CHANDLER (1848-1908), American author, was born in Eatonton, Putnam county, Georgia, on the 8th of December 1848. He started as an apprentice to the printer’s trade in the office of the Countryman, a weekly paper published on a plantation not far from his home. He then studied law, and practised for a short time in Forsyth, Ga., but soon took to journalism. He joined the staff of the Savannah Daily News in 1871, and in 1876 that of the Atlanta Constitution, of which he was an editor from 1890 to 1901, and in this capacity did much to further the cause of the New South. But his most distinctive contribution to this paper, and to American literature, consisted of his dialect pieces dealing with negro life and folk-lore. His stories are characterized by quaint humour, poetic feeling and homely philosophy; and “Uncle Remus,” the principal character of most of them, is a remarkably vivid and real creation. The first collection of his stories was published in 1880 as Uncle Remus: his Songs and his Sayings. Among his later works are Nights with Uncle Remus (1883), Mingo and Other Sketches in Black and White (1884), Free Joe and Other Georgian Sketches (1887), Balaam and His Master and Other Sketches and Stories (1891), Uncle Remus and His Friends (1892), On the Plantation (1892), which is partly autobiographic, Sister Jane (1896), The Chronicles of Aunt Minervy Ann (1899), and The Tar-Baby and Other Rhymes of Uncle Remus (1904). More purely juvenile are Daddy Jake the Runaway and Other Stories (1889), Little Mr Thimblefinger and his Queer Country (1894) and its sequel Mr Rabbit at Home (1895), Aaron in the Wildwoods (1897), Plantation Pageants (1899), Told by Uncle Remus (1905), and Uncle Remus and Br’er Rabbit (1907). He was one of the compilers of the Life of Henry W. Grady, including his Writings and Speeches (1890) and wrote Stories of Georgia (1896), and Georgia from the Invasion of De Soto to Recent Times (1899). He died in Atlanta on the 3rd of July 1908.

HARRIS, JOHN (c. 1666-1719), English writer. He is best known as the editor of the Lexicon technicum, or Dictionary of the Arts and Sciences (1704), which ranks as the earliest of the long line of English encyclopaedias, and as the compiler of the Collection of Voyages and Travels which passes under his name. He was born about 1666, probably in Shropshire, and was a scholar of Trinity College, Oxford, from 1684 to 1688. He was presented to the vicarage of Icklesham in Sussex, and subsequently to the rectory of St Thomas, Winchelsea. In 1698 he was entrusted with the delivery of the seventh series of the Boyle lectures—Atheistical Objections against the Being of God and His Attributes fairly considered and fully refuted. Between 1702 and 1704 he delivered at the Marine Coffee House in Birchin Lane the mathematical lectures founded by Sir Charles Cox, and advertised himself as a mathematical tutor at Amen Corner. The friendship of Sir William Cowper, afterwards lord chancellor, secured for him the office of private chaplain, a prebend in Rochester cathedral (1708), and the rectory of the united parishes of St Mildred, Bread Street and St Margaret Moses, in addition to other preferments. He showed himself an ardent supporter of the government, and engaged in a bitter quarrel with the Rev. Charles Humphreys, who afterwards was chaplain to Dr Sacheverel. Harris was one of the early members of the Royal Society, and for a time acted as vice-president. At his death on the 7th of September 1719, he was busy completing an elaborate History of Kent. He is said to have died in poverty brought on by his own bad management of his affairs.

HARRIS, THOMAS LAKE (1823-1906), American spiritualistic “prophet,” was born at Fenny Stratford in Buckinghamshire, England, on the 15th of May 1823. His parents were Calvinistic Baptists, and very poor. They settled at Utica, New York, when Harris was five years old. When he was about twenty Harris became a Universalist preacher, and then a Swedenborgian. He became associated about 1847 with a spiritualist of indifferent character named Davis. After Davis had been publicly exposed, Harris established a congregation in New York. About 1850 he professed to receive inspirations, and published some long poems. He had the gift of improvisation in a very high degree. About 1859 he preached in London, and is described as a man “with low, black eyebrows, black beard, and sallow countenance.” He was an effective speaker, and his poetry was admired by many; Alfred Austin in his book The Poetry of the Period even devoted a chapter to Harris. He founded in 1861 a community at Wassaic, New York, and opened a bank and a mill, which he superintended. There he was joined by about sixty converts, including five orthodox clergymen, some Japanese people, some American ladies of position, and especially by Laurence Oliphant (q.v.) with his wife and mother. The community—the Brotherhood of the New Life—decided to settle at the village of Brocton on the shore of Lake Erie. Harris established there a wine-making industry. In reply to the objections of teetotallers he said that the wine prepared by himself was filled with the divine breath so that all noxious influences were neutralized. Harris also built a tavern and strongly advocated the use of tobacco. He exacted complete surrender from his disciples—even the surrender of moral judgment. He taught that God was bi-sexual, and apparently, though not in reality, that the rule of society should be one of married celibacy. He professed to teach his community a change in the mode of respiration which was to be the visible sign of possession by Christ and the seal of immortality. The Oliphants broke away from the restraint about 1881, charging him with robbery and succeeding in getting back from him many thousands of pounds by legal proceedings. But while losing faith in Harris himself, they did not abandon his main teaching. In Laurence Oliphant’s novel Masollam his view of Harris will be found. Briefly, he held that Harris was originally honest, greatly gifted, and possessed of certain psychical powers. But in the end he came to practise unbridled licence under the loftiest pretensions, made the profession of extreme disinterestedness a cloak to conceal his avarice, and demanded from his followers a blind and supple obedience. Harris in 1876 discontinued for a time public activities, but issued to a secret circle books of verse dwelling mainly on sexual questions. On these his mind ran from the first. In 1891 he announced that his body had been renewed, and that he had discovered the secret of the resuscitation of humanity. He published a book, Lyra triumphalis, dedicated to A. C. Swinburne. He also made a third marriage, and visited England intending to remain there. He was called back by a fire which destroyed large stocks of his wine, and remained in New York till 1903, when he visited Glasgow. His followers believed that he had attained the secret of immortal life on earth, and after his death on the 23rd of March 1906 declared that he was only sleeping. It was three months before it was acknowledged publicly that he was really dead. There can be little or no doubt as to the real character of Harris. His teaching was esoteric in form, but is a thinly veiled attempt to alter the ordering of sexual relations.

HARRIS, SIR WILLIAM SNOW (1791-1867), English electrician, was descended from an old family of solicitors at Plymouth, where he was born on the 1st of April 1791. He received his early education at the Plymouth grammar-school, 21 and completed a course of medical studies at the university of Edinburgh, after which he established himself as a general medical practitioner in Plymouth. On his marriage in 1824 he resolved to abandon his profession on account of its duties interfering too much with his favourite study of electricity. As early as 1820 he had invented a new method of arranging the lightning conductors of ships, the peculiarity of which was that the metal was permanently fixed in the masts and extended throughout the hull; but it was only with great difficulty, and not till nearly thirty years afterwards, that his invention was adopted by the government for the royal navy. In 1826 he read a paper before the Royal Society “On the Relative Powers of various Metallic Substances as Conductors of Electricity,” which led to his being elected a fellow of the society in 1831. Subsequently, in 1834, 1836 and 1839, he read before the society several valuable papers on the elementary laws of electricity, and he also communicated to the Royal Society of Edinburgh various interesting accounts of his experiments and discoveries in the same field of inquiry. In 1835 he received the Copley gold medal from the Royal Society for his papers on the laws of electricity of high tension, and in 1839 he was chosen to deliver the Bakerian lecture. Meanwhile, although a government commission had recommended the general adoption of his conductors in the royal navy, and the government had granted him an annuity of £300 “in consideration of services in the cultivation of science,” the naval authorities continued to offer various objections to his invention; to aid in removing these he in 1843 published his work on Thunderstorms, and also about the same time contributed a number of papers to the Nautical Magazine illustrative of damage by lightning. His system was actually adopted in the Russian navy before he succeeded in removing the prejudices against it in England, and in 1845 the emperor of Russia, in acknowledgment of his services, presented him with a valuable ring and vase. At length, the efficiency of his system being acknowledged, he received in 1847 the honour of knighthood, and subsequently a grant of £5000. After succeeding in introducing his invention into general use Harris resumed his labours in the field of original research, but as he failed to realize the advances that had been made by the new school of science his application resulted in no discoveries of much value. His manuals of Electricity, Galvanism and Magnetism, published between 1848 and 1856, were, however, written with great clearness, and passed through several editions. He died at Plymouth on the 22nd of January 1867, while having in preparation a Treatise on Frictional Electricity, which was published posthumously in the same year, with a memoir of the author by Charles Tomlinson.

HARRIS, WILLIAM TORREY (1835-1909), American educationist, was born in North Killingly, Connecticut, on the 10th of September 1835. He studied at Phillips Andover Academy, Andover, Massachusetts, and entered Yale, but left in his junior year (1857) to accept a position as a teacher of shorthand in the St Louis, Missouri, public schools. Advancing through the grades of principal and assistant superintendent, he was city superintendent of schools from 1867 until 1880. In 1858, under the stimulus of Henry C. Brockmeyer, Harris became interested in modern German philosophy in general, and in particular in Hegel, whose works a small group, gathering about Harris and Brockmeyer, began to study in 1859. From 1867 to 1893 Harris edited The Journal of Speculative Philosophy (22 vols.), which was the quarterly organ of the Philosophical Society founded in 1866. The Philosophical Society died out before 1874, when Harris founded in St Louis a Kant Club, which lived for fifteen years. In 1873, with Miss Susan E. Blow, he established in St Louis the first permanent public-school kindergarten in America. He represented the United States Bureau of Education at the International Congress of Educators at Brussels in 1880. In 1889 he represented the United States Bureau of Education at the Paris Exposition, and from 1889 to 1906 was United States commissioner of education. In 1899 the university of Jena gave him the honorary degree of Doctor of Philosophy for his work on Hegel. In 1906 the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching conferred upon him “as the first man to whom such recognition for meritorious service is given, the highest retiring allowance which our rules will allow, an annual income of $3000.” Besides being a contributor to the magazines and encyclopedias on educational and philosophical subjects, he wrote An Introduction to the Study of Philosophy (1889); The Spiritual Sense of Dante’s Divina Commedia (1889); Hegel’s Logic (1890); and Psychologic Foundations of Education (1898); and edited Appleton’s International Education Series and Webster’s International Dictionary. He died on the 5th of November 1909.

HARRISBURG, the capital of Pennsylvania, U.S.A., and the county-seat of Dauphin county, on the E. bank of the Susquehanna river, about 105 m. W. by N. of Philadelphia. Pop. (1890), 39,385; (1900), 50,167, of whom 2493 were foreign-born and 4107 were negroes; (1910 census) 64,186. It is served by the Pennsylvania, the Philadelphia & Reading, the Northern Central and the Cumberland Valley railways; and the Pennsylvania canal gives it water communication with the ocean. The river here is a mile wide, and is ordinarily very shallow and dotted with islets, but rises from 4 to 6 ft. after a moderate rain; it is spanned by several bridges.

The city lies for the most part on the E. slope of a hill extending from the river bank, several feet in height, across the Pennsylvania canal to Paxton Creek. Front Street, along the river, is part of a parkway connecting the park system with which the city is encircled. Overlooking it are the finest residences, among them the governor’s mansion. State Street, 120 ft. in width, runs at right angles with Front Street through the business centre of the city, being interrupted by the Capitol Park (about 16 acres). The Capitol,1 dedicated in 1906, was erected to replace one burned in 1897; it is a fine building, with a dome modelled after St Peter’s at Rome. At the main entrance are bronze doors, decorated in relief with scenes from the state’s history; the floor of the rotunda is of tiles made at Doylestown, in the style of the pottery made by early Moravian settlers, and illustrating the state’s resources; the Senate Chamber and the House Chamber have stained-glass windows by W. B. van Ingen and mural paintings by Edwin A. Abbey, who painted a series, “The Development of the Law,” for the Supreme Court room in the eastern wing and decorated the rotunda. The mural decorations of the south corridor, by W. B. van Ingen, portray the state’s religious sects; those in the north corridor, by John W. Alexander, represent the changes in the physical and material character of the state; and there is a frieze by Miss Violet Oakley, “The Founding of the State of Liberty Spiritual,” in the governor’s reception room. Two heroic groups of statuary for the building were designed by George Grey Barnard. The state library in the Capitol contains about 150,000 volumes. In the same park is also a monument 105 ft. high erected in 22 1868 to the memory of the soldiers who fell in the Mexican War; it has a column of Maryland marble 76 ft. high, which is surmounted by an Italian marble statue of Victory, executed in Rome. At the base of the monument are muskets used by United States soldiers in that war and guns captured at Cerro Gordo. In State Street is the Dauphin County Soldiers’ monument, a shaft 10 ft. sq. at the base and 110 ft. high, with a pyramidal top.

For several years prior to 1902 Harrisburg suffered much from impure water, a bad sewerage system, and poorly paved and dirty streets. In that year, however, a League for Municipal Improvements was formed; in February 1902 a loan of $1,000,000 for municipal improvements was voted, landscape gardeners and sewage engineers were consulted, and a non-partisan mayor was elected, under whom great advances were made in street cleaning and street paving, a new filtration plant was completed, the river front was beautified and protected from flood, sewage was diverted from Paxton Creek, and the development of an extensive park system was undertaken.

Harrisburg’s charitable institutions include a city hospital, a home for the friendless, a children’s industrial home, and a state lunatic hospital (1845). The city is the seat of a Roman Catholic bishopric. Both coal and iron ore abound in the vicinity, and the city has numerous manufacturing establishments. The value of its factory products in 1905 was $17,146,338 (14.3% more than in 1900), the more important being those of steel works and rolling mills ($4,528,907), blast furnaces, steam railway repair shops, cigar and cigarette factories ($1,258,498), foundries and machine shops ($953,617), boot and shoe factories ($922,568), flouring and grist mills, slaughtering and meat-packing establishments and silk mills.

Harrisburg was named in honour of John Harris, who, upon coming into this region to trade early in the 18th century, was attracted to the site as an easy place at which to ford the Susquehanna, and about 1726 settled here. He was buried in what is now Harris Park, where he erected the first building, a small hut, within the present limits of Harrisburg. In 1753 his son established a ferry over the river, and the place was called Harris’s Ferry until 1785, when the younger Harris laid out the town and named it Harrisburg. In the same year it was made the county-seat of the newly constituted county of Dauphin, and its name was changed to Louisburg; but when, in 1791, it was incorporated as a borough, the present name was again adopted. In 1812, after an effort begun twenty-five years before, it was made the capital of the state; and in 1860 it was chartered as a city. In the summer of 1827, through the persistent efforts of persons most interested in the woollen manufactures of Massachusetts and other New England states to secure legislative aid for that industry, a convention of about 100 delegates—manufacturers, newspaper men and politicians—was held in Harrisburg, and the programme adopted by the convention did much to bring about the passage of the famous high tariff act of 1828.

HARRISMITH, a town in the Orange Free State, 60 m. N.W. by rail of Ladysmith, Natal, and 240 m. N.E. of Bloemfontein via Bethlehem. Pop. (1904) 8300 (including troops 1921). It is built on the banks of the Wilge, 5250 ft. above the sea and some 20 m. W. of the Drakensberg. Three miles N. is the Platberg, a table-shaped mountain rising 2000 ft. above the town, whence an excellent supply of water is derived. The town is well laid out and several of the streets are lined with trees. Most of the houses are built of white stone quarried in the neighbourhood. The Kaffirs, who numbered in 1904 3483, live in a separate location. Harrismith has a dry, bracing climate and enjoys a high reputation in South Africa as a health resort. It serves one of the best-watered and most fertile agricultural and pastoral districts of the province, of which it is the chief eastern trading centre. Wool and hides are the principal exports.

Harrismith was founded in 1849, the site first chosen being on the Elands river, where the small town of Aberfeldig now is; but the advantages of the present site soon became apparent and the settlement was removed. The founders were Sir Harry Smith (after whom the town is named), then governor of Cape Colony, and Major Henry D. Warden, at that time British resident at Bloemfontein, whose name is perpetuated in that of the principal street. In a cave about 2 m. from the town are well-preserved Bushman paintings.

HARRISON, BENJAMIN (1833-1901), the twenty-third president of the United States, was born at North Bend, near Cincinnati, Ohio, on the 20th of August 1833. His great-grandfather, Benjamin Harrison of Virginia (c. 1740-1791), was a signer of the Declaration of Independence. His grandfather, William Henry Harrison (1773-1841), was ninth president of the United States. His father, John Scott Harrison (1804-1878), represented his district in the national House of Representatives in 1853-1857. Benjamin’s youth was passed upon the ancestral farm, and as opportunity afforded he attended school in the log school-house near his home. He was prepared for college by a private tutor, studied for two years at the Farmers’ College, near Cincinnati, and in 1852 graduated from Miami University, at that time the leading educational institution in the State of Ohio. From his youth he was diligent in his studies and a great reader, and during his college life showed a marked talent for extemporaneous speaking. He pursued the study of law, partly in the office of Bellamy Storer (1798-1875), a leading lawyer and judge of Cincinnati, and in 1853 he was admitted to the bar. At the age of twenty-one he removed to Indianapolis. He had but one acquaintance in the place, the clerk of the federal court, who permitted him to occupy a desk in his office and place at the door his sign as a lawyer. Waiting for professional business, he was content to act as court crier for two dollars and a half a day; but he soon gave indications of his talent, and his studious habits and attention to his cases rapidly brought him clients. Within a few years he took rank among the leading members of the profession at a bar which included some of the ablest lawyers of the country. His legal career was early interrupted by the Civil War. His whole heart was enlisted in the anti-slavery cause, and during the second year of the war he accepted a commission from the governor of the state as second-lieutenant and speedily raised a regiment. He became its colonel, and as such continued in the Union Army until the close of the war, and on the 23rd of January 1865 was breveted a brigadier-general of volunteers for “ability and manifest energy and gallantry in command of brigade.” He participated with his regiment in various engagements during General Don Carlos Buell’s campaigns in Kentucky and Tennessee in 1862 and 1863; took part in General W. T. Sherman’s march on Atlanta in 1864 and in the Nashville campaign of the same year; and was transferred early in 1865 to Sherman’s army in its march through the Carolinas. As the commander of a brigade he served with particular distinction in the battles of Kenesaw Mountain (June 29-July 3, 1864), Peach Tree Creek (20th of July 1864) and Nashville (15th-16th of December 1864).

Allowing for this interval of military service, he applied himself exclusively for twenty-four years to his legal work. The only office he held was that of reporter of the supreme court of Indiana for two terms (1860-1862 and 1864-1868), and this was strictly in the line of his profession. He was a devoted member of the Republican party, but not a politician in the strict sense. Once he became a candidate for governor, in 1876, but his candidature was a forlorn hope, undertaken from a sense of duty after the regular nominee had withdrawn. He took a deep interest in the campaign which resulted in the election of James A. Garfield as president, and was offered by him a place in his cabinet; but this he declined, having been elected a member of the United States Senate, in which he took his seat on the 4th of March 1881. He was chairman of the committee on territories, and took an active part in urging the admission as states of North Dakota, South Dakota, Washington, Idaho and Montana, which finally came into the Union during his presidency. He served also on the committee of military and Indian affairs, the committee on foreign relations and others, was prominent in the discussion of matters brought before the Senate from these committees, advocated the enlargement of the navy and the reform of the civil service, and opposed the 23 pension veto messages of President Cleveland. Having failed to secure a re-election to the Senate in 1887, Harrison was nominated by the Republican party for the presidency in 1888, and defeated Grover Cleveland, the candidate of the Democratic party, receiving 233 electoral votes to Cleveland’s 168. Among the measures and events distinguishing his term as president were the following: The meeting of the Pan-American Congress at Washington; the passage of the McKinley Tariff Bill and of the Sherman Silver Bill of 1890; the suppressing of the Louisiana Lottery; the enlargement of the navy; further advance in civil service reform; the convocation by the United States of an international monetary conference; the establishment of commercial reciprocity with many countries of America and Europe; the peaceful settlement of a controversy with Chile; the negotiation of a Hawaiian Annexation Treaty, which, however, before its ratification, his successor withdrew from the Senate; the settlement of difficulties with Germany concerning the Samoan Islands, and the adjustment by arbitration with Great Britain of the Bering Sea fur-seal question. His administration was marked by a revival of American industries and a reduction of the public debt, and at its conclusion the country was left in a condition of prosperity and on friendly terms with foreign nations. He was nominated by his party in 1892 for re-election, but was defeated by Cleveland, this result being due, at least in part, to the labour strikes which occurred during the presidential campaign and arrayed the labour unions against the tariff party.

After leaving public life he resumed the practice of the law, and in 1898 was retained by the government of Venezuela as its leading counsel in the arbitration of its boundary dispute with Great Britain. In this capacity he appeared before the international tribunal of arbitration at Paris in 1899, worthily maintaining the reputation of the American bar. After the Spanish-American War he strongly disapproved of the colonial policy of his party, which, however, he continued to support. He occupied a portion of his leisure in writing a book, entitled This Country of Ours (1897), treating of the organization and administration of the government of the United States, and a collection of essays by him was published posthumously, in 1901, under the title Views of an Ex-President. He died at Indianapolis on the 13th of March 1901. Harrison’s distinguishing trait of character, to which his success is to be most largely attributed, was his thoroughness. He was somewhat reserved in manner, and this led to the charge in political circles that he was cold and unsympathetic; but no one gathered around him more devoted and loyal friends, and his dignified bearing in and out of office commanded the hearty respect of his countrymen.

President Harrison was twice married; in 1853 to Miss Caroline Lavinia Scott, by whom he had a son and a daughter, and in 1896 to Mrs Mary Scott Lord Dimmock, by whom he had a daughter.

HARRISON, FREDERIC (1831-  ), English jurist and historian, was born in London on the 18th of October 1831. Members of his family (originally Leicestershire yeomen) had been lessees of Sutton Place, Guildford, of which he wrote an interesting account (Annals of an Old Manor House, 1893). He was educated at King’s College school and at Wadham College, Oxford, where, after taking a first-class in Literae Humaniores in 1853, he became fellow and tutor. He was called to the bar in 1858, and, in addition to his practice in equity cases, soon began to distinguish himself as an effective contributor to the higher-class reviews. Two articles in the Westminster Review, one on the Italian question, which procured him the special thanks of Cavour, the other on Essays and Reviews, which had the probably undesigned effect of stimulating the attack on the book, attracted especial notice. A few years later Mr Harrison worked at the codification of the law with Lord Westbury, of whom he contributed an interesting notice to Nash’s biography of the chancellor. His special interest in legislation for the working classes led him to be placed upon the Trades Union Commission of 1867-1869; he was secretary to the commission for the digest of the law, 1869-1870; and was from 1877 to 1889 professor of jurisprudence and international law under the council of legal education. A follower of the positive philosophy, but in conflict with Richard Congreve (q.v.) as to details, he led the Positivists who split off and founded Newton Hall in 1881, and he was president of the English Positivist Committee from 1880 to 1905; he was also editor and part author of the Positivist New Calendar of Great Men (1892), and wrote much on Comte and Positivism. Of his separate publications, the most important are his lives of Cromwell (1888), William the Silent (1897), Ruskin (1902), and Chatham (1905); his Meaning of History (1862; enlarged 1894) and Byzantine History in the Early Middle Ages (1900); and his essays on Early Victorian Literature (1896) and The Choice of Books (1886) are remarkable alike for generous admiration and good sense. In 1904 he published a “romantic monograph” of the 10th century, Theophano, and in 1906 a verse tragedy, Nicephorus. An advanced and vehement Radical in politics and Progressive in municipal affairs, Mr Harrison in 1886 stood unsuccessfully for parliament against Sir John Lubbock for London University. In 1889 he was elected an alderman of the London County Council, but resigned in 1893. In 1870 he married Ethel Berta, daughter of Mr William Harrison, by whom he had four sons. George Gissing, the novelist, was at one time their tutor; and in 1905 Mr Harrison wrote a preface to Gissing’s Veranilda (see also Mr Austin Harrison’s article on Gissing in the Nineteenth Century, September 1906). As a religious teacher, literary critic, historian and jurist, Mr Harrison took a prominent part in the life of his time, and his writings, though often violently controversial on political and social subjects, and in their judgment and historical perspective characterized by a modern Radical point of view, are those of an accomplished scholar, and of one whose wide knowledge of literature was combined with independence of thought and admirable vigour of style. In 1907 he published The Creed of a Layman, Apologia pro fide mea, in explanation of his religious position.

HARRISON, JOHN (1693-1776), English horologist, was the son of a carpenter, and was born at Faulby, near Pontefract in Yorkshire, in the year 1693. Thence his father and family removed in 1700 to Barrow in Lincolnshire. Young Harrison at first learned his father’s trade, and worked at it for several years, at the same time occasionally making a little money by land-measuring and surveying. The bent of his mind, however, was towards mechanical pursuits. In 1715 he made a clock with wooden wheels, which is in the patent museum at South Kensington, and in 1726 he devised his ingenious “gridiron pendulum,” which maintains its length unaltered in spite of variations of temperature (see Clock). Another invention of his was a recoil clock escapement in which friction was reduced to a minimum, and he was the first to employ the commonly used and effective form of “going ratchet,” which is a spring arrangement for keeping the timepiece going at its usual rate during the interval of being wound up.

In Harrison’s time the British government had become fully alive to the necessity of determining more accurately the longitude at sea. For this purpose they passed an act in 1713 offering rewards of £10,000, £15,000 and £20,000 to any who should construct chronometers that would determine the longitude within 60, 40 and 30 m. respectively. Harrison applied himself vigorously to the task, and in 1735 went to the Board of Longitude with a watch which he also showed to Edmund Halley, George Graham and others. Through their influence he was allowed to proceed in a king’s ship to Lisbon to test it; and the result was so satisfactory that he was paid £500 to carry out further improvements. Harrison worked at the subject with the utmost perseverance, and, after making several watches, went up to London in 1761 with one which he considered almost perfect. His son William was sent on a voyage to Jamaica to test it; and, on his return to Portsmouth in 1762, it was found to have lost 24 only 1 minute 54½ seconds. This was surprisingly accurate, as it determined the longitude within 18 m., and Harrison claimed the full reward of £20,000; but though from time to time he received sums on account, it was not till 1773 that he was paid in full. In these watches compensation for changes of temperature was applied for the first time by means of a “compensation-curb,” designed to alter the effective length of the balance-spring in proportion to the expansion or contraction caused by variations of temperature. Harrison died in London on the 24th of March 1776. His want of early education was felt by him greatly throughout life. He was unfortunately never able to express his ideas clearly in writing, although in conversation he could give a very precise and exact account of his many intricate mechanical contrivances.

HARRISON, THOMAS (1606-1660), English parliamentarian, a native of Newcastle-under-Lyme in Staffordshire, the son of a butcher and mayor of that town, was baptized in 1606. He was placed with an attorney of Clifford’s Inn, but at the beginning of the war in 1642 he enlisted in Essex’s lifeguards, became major in Fleetwood’s regiment of horse under the earl of Manchester, was present at Marston Moor, at Naseby, Langport and at the taking of Winchester and Basing, as well as at the siege of Oxford. At Basing Harrison was accused of having killed a prisoner in cold blood. In 1646 he was returned to parliament for Wendover, and served in Ireland in 1647 under Lord Lisle, returning to England in May, when he took the side of the army in the dispute with the parliament and obtained from Fairfax a regiment of horse. In November he opposed the negotiations with the king, whom he styled “a man of blood” to be called to account, and he declaimed against the House of Lords. At the surprise of Lambert’s quarters at Appleby on the 18th of July 1648, in the second civil war, he distinguished himself by his extraordinary daring and was severely wounded. He showed a special zeal in bringing about the trial of the king. Charles was entrusted to his care on being brought up from Hurst Castle to London, and believed that Harrison intended his assassination, but was at once favourably impressed by bis bearing and reassured by his disclaiming any such design. Harrison was assiduous in his attendance at the trial, and signed the death-warrant with the fullest conviction that it was his duty. He took part in suppressing the royalist rising in the midlands in May 1649, and in July was appointed to the chief command in South Wales, where he is said to have exercised his powers with exceptional severity. On the 20th of February 1651 he became a member of the council of state, and during Cromwell’s absence in Scotland held the supreme military command in England. He failed in stopping the march of the royalists into England at Knutsford on the 16th of August 1651, but after the battle of Worcester he rendered great service in pursuing and capturing the fugitives. Later he pressed on Cromwell the necessity of dismissing the Long Parliament, and it was he who at Cromwell’s bidding, on the 20th of April 1653, laid hands on Speaker Lenthall and compelled him to vacate the chair. He was president of the council of thirteen which now exercised authority, and his idea of government appears to have been an assembly nominated by the congregations, on a strictly religious basis, such as Barebone’s Parliament which now assembled, of which he was a member and a ruling spirit. Harrison belonged to the faction of Fifth Monarchy men, whose political ideals were entirely destroyed by Cromwell’s assumption of the protectorate. He went immediately into violent opposition, was deprived of his commission on the 22nd of December 1653, and on the 3rd of February 1654 was ordered to confine himself to his father’s house in Staffordshire. Suspected of complicity in the plots of the anabaptists, he was imprisoned for a short time in September, and on that occasion was sent for by Cromwell, who endeavoured in a friendly manner to persuade him to desist. He, however, incurred the suspicions of the administration afresh, and on the 15th of February 1655 he was imprisoned in Carisbrooke Castle, being liberated in March 1656 when he took up his residence at Highgate with his family. In April 1657 he was arrested for supposed complicity in Venner’s conspiracy, and again once more in February 1658, when he was imprisoned in the Tower. At the Restoration, Harrison, who was excepted from the Act of Indemnity, refused to take any steps to save his life, to give any undertaking not to conspire against the government or to flee. “Being so clear in the thing,” he declared, “I durst not turn my back nor step a foot out of the way by reason I had been engaged in the service of so glorious and great a God.” He was arrested in Staffordshire in May 1660 and brought to trial on the 11th of October. He made a manly and straightforward defence, pleading the authority of parliament and adding, “May be I might be a little mistaken, but I did it all according to the best of my understanding, desiring to make the revealed will of God in His holy scriptures a guide to me.” At his execution, which took place at Charing Cross on the 13th of October 1660, he behaved with great fortitude.

Richard Baxter, who was acquainted with him, describes Harrison as “a man of excellent natural parts for affection and oratory, but not well seen in the principles of his religion of a sanguine complexion, naturally of such a vivacity, hilarity and alacrity as another man hath when he hath drunken a cup too much, but naturally also so far from humble thoughts of himself that it was his ruin.” Cromwell also complained of his excessive eagerness. “Harrison is an honest man and aims at good things, yet from the impatience of his spirit will not wait the Lord’s leisure but hurries me on to that which he and all honest men will have cause to repent.” Harrison was an eloquent and fluent expounder of the scriptures, and his “raptures” on the field of victory are recorded by Baxter. He was of the chief of those “fiery spirits” whose ardent and emotional religion inspired their political action, and who did wonders during the period of struggle and combat, but who later, in the more sober and difficult sphere of constructive statesmanship, showed themselves perfectly incapable.

Harrison married about 1648 Katherine, daughter and heiress of Ralph Harrison of Highgate in Middlesex, by whom he had several children, all of whom, however, appear to have died in infancy.

HARRISON, THOMAS ALEXANDER (1853-  ), American artist, was born in Philadelphia on the 17th of January 1853. He was a pupil of the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts and of the École des Beaux-Arts, Paris, whither he went in 1878, having previously been with a United States government survey expedition on the Pacific coast. Chafing under the restraints of the schools, he went into Brittany, and at Pont Aven and Concarneau turned his attention to marine painting and landscape. In 1882 he sent a figure-piece to the Salon, a fisher boy on the beach, which he called “Châteaux en Espagne.” This attracted attention, and in 1885 he received an honourable mention, the first of many awards conferred upon him, including the Temple gold medal (Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, Philadelphia, 1887), first medal, Paris Exhibition (1889), and medals in Munich, Brussels, Ghent, Vienna and elsewhere. He became a member of the Legion of Honour and officier of Public Instruction, Paris; a member of the Société Nationale des Beaux-Arts, Paris; of the Royal Institute of Painters in Oil Colours, London; of the Secession societies of Munich, Vienna and Berlin; of the National Academy of Design, the Society of American Artists, New York, and other art bodies. In the Salon of 1885 he had a large canvas of several nude women, called “In Arcady,” a remarkable study of flesh tones in light and shade which had a strong influence on the younger men of the day. But his reputation rests rather on his marine pictures, long waves rolling in on the beach, and great stretches of open sea under poetic conditions of light and colour.

His brother, Birge Harrison (1854-  ), also a painter, particularly successful in snow scenes, was a pupil of the École 25 des Beaux Arts, Paris, under Cabanel and Carolus Duran; his “November” (honourable mention, 1882) was purchased by the French government. Another brother, Butler Harrison (d. 1886), was a figure painter.

HARRISON, WILLIAM (1534-1593), English topographer and antiquary, was born in London on the 18th of April 1534. He was educated, according to his own account, at St Paul’s school and at Westminster under Alexander Nowell. In 1551 he was at Cambridge, but he took his B.A. degree from Christ Church, Oxford, in 1560. He was inducted early in 1559 to the rectory of Radwinter, Essex, on the presentation of Sir William Brooke, Lord Cobham, to whom he had formerly acted as chaplain; and from 1571 to 1581 he held from another patron, Francis de la Wood, the living of Wimbish in the same county. He became canon of Windsor in 1586, and his death and burial are noted in the chapter book of St George’s chapel on the 24th of April 1593.

His famous and amusing Description of England was undertaken for the queen’s printer, Reginald Wolfe, who designed the publication of “an universall cosmographie of the whole world ... with particular histories of every knowne nation.” After Wolfe’s death in 1576 this comprehensive plan was reduced to descriptions and histories of England, Scotland and Ireland. The historical section was to be supplied by Raphael Holinshed, the topographical by Harrison. The work was eventually published as The Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland ... by Raphael Holinshed and others, and was printed in two black-letter folio volumes in 1577. Harrison’s Description of England, humbly described as his “foule frizeled treatise,” and dedicated to his patron Cobham, is an invaluable survey of the condition of England under Elizabeth, in all its political, religious and social aspects. Harrison is a minute and careful observer of men and things, and his descriptions are enlivened with many examples of a lively and caustic humour which makes the book excellent reading. In spite of his Puritan prejudices, which lead him to regret that the churches had not been cleared of their “pictures in glass” (“by reason of the extreme cost thereof”), and to exhaust his wit on the effeminate Italian fashions of the younger generation, he had an eye for beauty and is loud in his praise of such architectural gems as Henry VII.’s chapel at Westminster. He is properly contemptuous of the snobbery that was even then characteristic of English society; but his account of “how gentlemen are made in England” must be read in full to be appreciated. He is especially instructive on the condition and services of the Church immediately after the Reformation; notably in the fact that, though an ardent Protestant, he is quite unconscious of any breach of continuity in the life and organization of the Church of England.

Harrison also contributed the translation from Scots into English of Bellenden’s version of Hector Boëce’s Latin Description of Scotland. His other works include a “Chronologie,” giving an account of events from the creation to the year 1593, which is of some value for the period covered by the writer’s lifetime. This, with an elaborate treatise on weights and measures, remains in MS. in the diocesan library of Londonderry.

HARRISON, WILLIAM HENRY (1773-1841), ninth president of the United States, was born at Berkeley, Charles City county, Virginia, on the 9th of February 1773, the third son of Benjamin Harrison (c. 1740-1791). His father was long prominent in Virginia politics, and became a member of the Virginia House of Burgesses in 1764, opposing Patrick Henry’s Stamp Act resolutions in the following year; he was a member of the Continental Congress in 1774-1777, signing the Declaration of Independence and serving for a time as president of the Board of War; speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates in 1777-1782; governor of Virginia in 1781-1784; and in 1788 as a member of the Virginia Convention he actively opposed the ratification of the Federal Constitution by his state. William Henry Harrison received a classical education at Hampden-Sidney College, where he was a student in 1787-1790, and began a medical course in Philadelphia, but the death of his father caused him to discontinue his studies, and in November 1791 he entered the army as ensign in the Tenth Regiment at Fort Washington, Cincinnati. In the following year he became a lieutenant, and subsequently acted as aide-de-camp to General Anthony Wayne in the campaign which ended in the battle of Fallen Timbers on the 10th of August 1794. He was promoted to a captaincy in 1797 and for a brief period served as commander of Fort Washington, but resigned from the army in June 1798. Soon afterwards he succeeded Winthrop Sargent as secretary of the North-west Territory. In 1799 he was chosen by the Jeffersonian party of this territory as the delegate of the territory in Congress. While serving in this capacity he devised a plan for disposing of the public lands upon favourable terms to actual settlers, and also assisted in the division of the North-west Territory. It was his ambition to become governor of the more populous eastern portion, which retained the original name, but instead, in January 1800, President John Adams appointed him governor of the newly created Indiana Territory, which comprised until 1809 a much larger area than the present state of the same name. (See Indiana: History.) He was not sworn into office until the 10th of January 1801, and was governor until September 1812. Among the legislative measures of his administration may be mentioned the attempted modification of the slavery clause of the ordinance of 1787 by means of an indenture law—a policy which Harrison favoured; more effective land laws; and legislation for the more equitable treatment of the Indians and for preventing the sale of liquor to them. In 1803 Harrison also became a special commissioner to treat with the Indians “on the subject of boundary or lands,” and as such negotiated various treaties—at Fort Wayne (1803 and 1809), Vincennes (1804 and 1809) and Grouseland (1805)—by which the southern part of the present state of Indiana and portions of the present states of Illinois, Wisconsin and Missouri were opened to settlement. For a few months after the division in 1804 of the Louisiana Purchase into the Orleans Territory and the Louisiana Territory he also acted as governor of the Louisiana Territory—all of the Louisiana Purchase N. of the thirty-third parallel, his jurisdiction then being the greatest in extent ever exercised by a territorial official in the United States.

The Indian cessions of 1809, along the Wabash river, aroused the hostility of Tecumseh (q.v.) and his brother, familiarly known as “The Prophet,” who were attempting to combine the tribes between the Ohio and the Great Lakes in opposition to the encroachment of the whites. Several fruitless conferences between the governor and the Indian chiefs, who were believed to be encouraged by the British, resulted in Harrison’s advance with a force of militia and regulars to the Tippecanoe river, where (near the present Lafayette, Ind.) on the 7th of November 1811 he won over the Indians a victory which established his military reputation and was largely responsible for his subsequent nomination and election to the presidency of the United States. From one point of view the battle of Tippecanoe may be regarded as the opening skirmish of the war of 1812. When in the summer of 1812 open hostilities with Great Britain began, Harrison was appointed by Governor Charles Scott of Kentucky major-general in the militia of that state. A few weeks later (22nd August 1812) he was made brigadier-general in the regular U.S. army, and soon afterwards was put in command of all the troops in the north-west, and on the 2nd of March 1813 he was promoted to the rank of major-general. General James Winchester, whom Harrison had ordered to prepare to cross Lake Erie on the ice and surprise Fort Malden, turned back to rescue the threatened American settlement at Frenchtown (now Monroe), on the Raisin river, and there on the 22nd of January 1813 was forced to surrender to Colonel Henry A. Proctor. Harrison’s offensive operations being thus checked, he accomplished nothing that summer except to hold in check Proctor, who (May 1-5) besieged him at Fort Meigs, the American advanced 26 post after the disaster of the river Raisin. After Lieutenant O. H. Perry’s naval victory on the 10th of September 1813, Harrison no longer had to remain on the defensive; he advanced to Detroit, re-occupied the territory surrendered by General William Hull, and on the 5th of October administered a crushing defeat to Proctor at the battle of the Thames.

In 1814 Harrison received no active assignments to service, and on this account and because the secretary of war (John Armstrong) issued an order to one of Harrison’s subordinates without consulting him, he resigned his commission. Armstrong accepted the resignation without consulting President Madison, but the president later utilized Harrison in negotiating with the north-western Indians, the greater part of whom agreed (22nd July 1814) to a second treaty of Greenville, by which they were to become active allies of the United States, should hostilities with Great Britain continue. This treaty publicly marked an American policy of alliance with these Indians and caused the British peace negotiators at Ghent to abandon them. In the following year Harrison held another conference at Detroit with these tribes in order to settle their future territorial relations with the United States.

From 1816 to 1819 Harrison was a representative in Congress, and as such worked in behalf of more liberal pension laws and a better militia organization, including a system of general military education, of improvements in the navigation of the Ohio, and of relief for purchasers of public lands, and for the strict construction of the power of Congress over the Territories, particularly in regard to slavery. In accordance with this view in 1819 he voted against Tallmadge’s amendment (restricting the extension of slavery) to the enabling act for the admission of Missouri. He also delivered forcible speeches upon the death of Kosciusko and upon General Andrew Jackson’s course in the Floridas, favouring a partial censure of the latter.

Harrison was a member of the Ohio senate in 1819-1821, and was an unsuccessful candidate for the National House of Representatives in 1822, when his Missouri vote helped to cause his defeat; he was a presidential elector in 1824, supporting Henry Clay, and from 1825 to 1828 was a member of the United States Senate. In 1828 after unsuccessful efforts to secure for him the command of the army, upon the death of Major-General Jacob Brown, and the nomination for the vice-president, on the ticket with John Quincy Adams, his friends succeeded in getting Harrison appointed as the first minister of the United States to Colombia. He became, however, an early sacrifice to Jackson’s spoils system, being recalled within less than a year, but not until he had involved himself in some awkward diplomatic complications with Bolivar’s autocratic government.

For some years after his return from Colombia he lived in retirement at North Bend, Ohio. He was occasionally “mentioned” for governor, senator or representative, by the anti-Jackson forces, and delivered a few addresses on agricultural or political topics. Later he became clerk of the court of common pleas of Hamilton county—a lucrative position that was then most acceptable to him. Early in 1835 Harrison began to be mentioned as a suitable presidential candidate, and later in the year he was nominated for the presidency at large public meetings in Pennsylvania, New York and Maryland. In the election of the following year he attracted a large part of the Whig and Anti-Masonic vote of the Middle and Western states and led among the candidates opposing Van Buren, but received only 73 electoral votes while Van Buren received 170. His unexpected strength, due largely to his clear, if non-committal, political record, rendered him the most “available” candidate for the Whig party for the campaign of 1840, and he was nominated by the Whig convention at Harrisburg, Pa., in December 1839, his most formidable opponent being Henry Clay, who, though generally regarded as the real leader of his party, was less “available” because as a mason he would alienate former members of the old Anti-Masonic party, and as an advocate of a protective tariff would repel many Southern voters. The convention adjourned without adopting any “platform” of principles, the party shrewdly deciding to make its campaign merely on the issue of whether the Van Buren administration should be continued in power and thus to take full advantage of the popular discontent with the administration, to which was attributed the responsibility for the panic of 1837 and the subsequent business depression. Largely to attract the votes of Democratic malcontents the Whig convention nominated for the vice-presidency John Tyler, who had previously been identified with the Democratic party. The campaign was marked by the extraordinary enthusiasm exhibited by the Whigs, and by their skill in attacking Van Buren without binding themselves to any definite policy. Because of his fame as a frontier hero, of the circumstance that a part of his home at North Bend, Ohio, had formerly been a log cabin, and of the story that cider, not wine, was served on his table, Harrison was derisively called by bis opponents the “log cabin and hard cider” candidate; the term was eagerly accepted by the Whigs, in whose processions miniature log cabins were carried and at whose meetings hard cider was served, and the campaign itself has become known in history as the “log cabin and hard cider campaign.” Harrison’s canvass was conspicuous for the immense Whig processions and mass meetings, the numerous “stump” speeches (Harrison himself addressing meetings at Dayton, Chillicothe, Columbus and other places), and the use of campaign songs, of party insignia, and of campaign cries (such as “Tippecanoe and Tyler too”); and in the election he won by an overwhelming majority of 234 electoral votes to 60 cast for Van Buren.

President Harrison was inaugurated on the 4th of March 1841. He chose for his cabinet Daniel Webster as secretary of state, Thomas Ewing as secretary of the treasury, John Bell as secretary of war, George E. Badger as secretary of the navy, Francis Granger as postmaster-general, and John J. Crittenden as attorney-general. He survived his inauguration only one month, dying on the 4th of April 1841, and being succeeded by the vice-president, John Tyler. The immediate cause of his death was an attack of pneumonia, but the disease was aggravated by the excitement attending his sudden change in circumstances and the incessant demands of office seekers. After temporary interment at Washington, his body was removed to the tomb at North Bend, Ohio, where it now lies. A few of Harrison’s public addresses survive, the most notable being A Discourse on the Aborigines of the Ohio. It has been said of him: “He was not a great man, but he had lived in a great time, and he had been a leader in great things.” He was the first territorial delegate in the Congress of the United States and was the author of the first step in the development of the country’s later homestead policy; the first presidential candidate to be selected upon the ground of “expediency” alone; and the first president to die in office. In 1795 he married Anna Symmes (1775-1864), daughter of John Cleves Symmes. Their grandson, Benjamin Harrison, was the twenty-third president of the United States.

HARRISON, a town of Hudson county, New Jersey, U.S.A., on the Passaic river, opposite Newark (with which it is connected by bridges and electric railways), and 7 m. W. of Jersey City. Pop. (1890) 8338; (1900) 10,596, of whom 3633 were foreign-born; (1910 census) 14,498. It is served by the Pennsylvania, the Erie, and the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western railways. Harrison was chosen as the eastern terminal of the Pennsylvania railroad for steam locomotive service, transportation thence to New York being by electric power through the railway’s Hudson river tunnels. The town has an extensive river-front, along which are many of its manufactories; among their products are steam-pumps, steel, iron, machinery, roller bearings, 27 brass tubing, iron and brass castings, marine engines, hoisting engines, metal novelties, dry batteries, electric lamps, concrete blocks, cotton thread, wire cloth, leather, trunks, beer, barrels, lumber, inks and cutlery. The factory product in 1905 was valued at $8,408,924. The town is governed by a mayor and a common council. Harrison was settled toward the close of the 17th century, and for many years constituted the S. portion of the township of Lodi. In 1840, however, it was set off from Lodi and named in honour of President William Henry Harrison, and in 1873 it was incorporated. Harrison originally included what is now the town of Kearny (q.v.).

HARRODSBURG, a city and the county-seat of Mercer county, Kentucky, U.S.A., 32 m. S. of Frankfort, on the Southern railway. Pop. (1890) 3230; (1900) 2876, of whom 1150 were negroes; (1910 U.S. census) 3147. On account of its sulphur springs Harrodsburg became early in the 19th century a fashionable resort, and continues to attract a considerable number of visitors. The city is the seat of Harrodsburg Academy, Beaumont College for women (1894; founded as Daughters’ College in 1856); and Wayman College (African M.E.) for negroes. Among its manufactures are flour, whisky, dressed lumber and ice. About 7 m. E. of Harrodsburg is Pleasant Hill, or Union Village, a summer resort and the home, since early in the 19th century, of a Shaker community. Harrodsburg was founded on the 16th of June 1774 by James Harrod (1746-1793) and a few followers, and is the oldest permanent settlement in the state. It was incorporated in 1875. Harrodsburg was formerly the seat of Bacon College (see Lexington, Kentucky).

HARROGATE, a municipal borough and watering-place in the Ripon parliamentary division of the West Riding of Yorkshire, England, 203 m. N. by W. from London, on the North-Eastern railway. Pop. (1891) 16,316; (1901) 28,423. It is indebted for its rise and importance to its medicinal springs, and is the principal inland watering-place in the north of England. It consists of two scattered townships, Low Harrogate and High Harrogate, which have gradually been connected by a continuous range of handsome houses and villas. A common called the Stray, of 200 acres, secured by act of parliament from ever being built upon, stretches in front of the main line of houses, and on this account Harrogate, notwithstanding its rapid increase, has retained much of its rural charm. As regards climate a choice is offered between the more bracing atmosphere of High Harrogate and the sheltered and warm climate of the low town. The waters are chalybeate, sulphureous and saline, and some of the springs possess all these qualities to a greater or less extent. The principal chalybeate springs are the Tewitt well, called by Dr Bright, who wrote the first account of it, the “English Spa,” discovered by Captain William Slingsby of Bilton Hall near the close of the 16th century; the Royal Chalybeate Spa, more commonly known as John’s Well, discovered in 1631 by Dr Stanhope of York; Muspratt’s chalybeate or chloride of iron spring discovered in 1819, but first properly analysed by Dr Sheridan Muspratt in 1865; and the Starbeck springs midway between High Harrogate and Knaresborough. The principal sulphur springs are the old sulphur well in the centre of Low Harrogate, discovered about the year 1656; the Montpellier springs, the principal well of which was discovered in 1822, situated in the grounds of the Crown Hotel and surmounted by a handsome building in the Chinese style, containing pump-room, baths and reading-room; and the Harlow Car springs, situated in a wooded glen about a mile west from Low Harrogate. Near Harlow Car is Harlow observatory, a square tower 100 ft. in height, standing on elevated ground and commanding a very extensive view. A saline spring situated in Low Harrogate was discovered in 1783. Some eighty springs in all have been discovered. The principal bath establishments are the Victoria Baths (1871) and the Royal Baths (1897). There are also a handsome kursaal (1903), a grand opera house, numerous modern churches, and several hospitals and benevolent institutions, including the Royal Bath hospital. The corporation owns the Stray, and also the Spa concert rooms and grounds, Harlow Moor, Crescent Gardens, Royal Bath gardens and other large open spaces, as well as Royal Baths, Victoria Baths and Starbeck Baths. The mineral springs are vested in the corporation. The high-lying moorland of the surrounding district is diversified by picturesque dales; and Harrogate is not far from many towns and sites of great interest, such as Ripon, Knaresborough and Fountains Abbey. The town was incorporated in 1884, and the corporation consists of a mayor, 8 aldermen and 24 councillors. Area, 3276 acres.

HARROW,1 an agricultural implement used for (1) levelling ridges left by the plough and preparing a smooth surface for the reception of seeds; (2) covering in seeds after sowing; (3) tearing up and gathering weeds; (4) disintegrating and levelling the soil of meadows and pastures; (5) forming a surface tilth by pulverizing the top soil and so conserving moisture.

The harrow rivals the plough in antiquity. In its simplest form it consists of the boughs of trees interlaced into a wooden frame, and this form survives in the “bush-harrow.” Another old type, found in the middle ages and still in use, consists of a wooden framework in which iron pegs or “tines” are set. This is now generally superseded by the “zig-zag” harrow patented by Armstrong in 1839, built of iron bars in which the tines are so arranged that each follows its own track and has a separate line of action. This harrow is usually made in two or three sections which fold over one another and are thus easily portable, the arrangement at the same time giving a flexibility on uneven ground. Additional flexibility may be imparted to the implement by jointing the stays of the frame which are in the line of draught. The liability that the tines may snap off is the chief weakness of this type, and improvements have consisted chiefly in alterations in their shape and the method of fixing them to the frame.

The other type of harrow most used is the chain harrow, consisting of a number of square-link chains connected by cross links and attached to a draught-bar, the whole being kept expanded by stretchers and trailing weights. It is used for levelling and spreading manure over grass-land, from which it at the same time tears up moss and coarse herbage. Mention may also be made of the drag-harrow, a heavy implement with long tines, approximating closely to the cultivator, and of the Norwegian harrow with its revolving rows of spikes.

HARROWBY, DUDLEY RYDER, 1st Earl OF (1762-1847), the eldest son of Nathaniel Ryder, 1st Baron Harrowby (1735-1803), was born in London on the 22nd of December 1762. His grandfather Sir Dudley Ryder (1691-1756) became a member of parliament and solicitor-general owing to the favour of Sir Robert Walpole in 1733; in 1737 he was appointed attorney-general and three years later he was knighted; in 1754 he was made lord chief justice of the king’s bench and a privy councillor, the patent creating him a peer having been just signed by the king, but not passed, when he died on the 25th of May 1756. His only son Nathaniel, who was member of parliament for Tiverton for twenty years, was created Baron Harrowby in 1776. Educated at St John’s College, Cambridge, Dudley Ryder became member of parliament for Tiverton in 1784 and under-secretary for foreign affairs in 1789. In 1791 he was appointed paymaster of the forces and vice-president of the board of trade, but he resigned the positions and also that of treasurer of the navy when he succeeded to his father’s barony in June 1803. In 1804 he was secretary of state for foreign affairs and in 1805 chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster under his intimate friend William Pitt; in the latter year he was sent on a special and important mission to the emperors of Austria and Russia and the king of Prussia, and for the long period between 1812 and 1827 he was lord president of the council. After Canning’s death in 1827 he refused to serve George IV. as prime minister and he never held office again, although he continued to take part in politics, being especially prominent during the deadlock which preceded the passing of the Reform Bill in 1832. Harrowby’s long association with the Tories did not prevent him from assisting to remove the disabilities of Roman Catholics and Protestant dissenters, or from supporting the movement for electoral reform; he was also in favour of the emancipation of the slaves. The earl died at his Staffordshire residence, Sandon Hall, on the 26th of December 1847, being, as Charles Greville says, “the last of his generation and of the colleagues of Mr Pitt, the sole survivor of those stirring times and mighty contests.”

Harrowby’s eldest son, Dudley Ryder, 2nd earl (1798-1882), was born in London on the 19th of May 1798, his mother being Susan (d. 1838), daughter of Granville Leveson-Gower, marquess of Stafford, a lady of exceptional attainments. As Viscount Sandon he became member of parliament for Tiverton in 1819, in 1827 he was appointed a lord of the admiralty, and in 1830 secretary to the India board. From 1831 to 1847 Sandon represented Liverpool in the House of Commons. For a long time he was out of office, but in 1855, eight years after he had become earl of Harrowby, he was appointed chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster by Lord Palmerston; in a few months he was transferred to the office of lord privy seal, a position which he resigned in 1857. He was chairman of the Maynooth commission and a member of other important royal commissions, and was among the most stalwart and prominent defenders of the established church. He died at Sandon on the 19th of November 1882. His successor was his eldest son, Dudley Francis Stuart Ryder (1831-1900), vice-president of the council from 1874 to 1878, president of the board of trade from 1878 to 1880, and lord privy seal in 1885 and 1886. He died without sons on the 26th of March 1900, and was succeeded by his brother, Henry Dudley Ryder (1836-1900), whose son, John Herbert Dudley Ryder (b. 1864), became 5th earl of Harrowby.

HARROWING OF HELL, an English poem in dialogue, dating from the end of the 13th century. It is written in the East Midland dialect, and is generally cited as the earliest dramatic work of any kind preserved in the language, though it was in reality probably intended for recitation rather than performance; It is closely allied to the kind of poem known as a débat, and the opening words—“Alle herkneth to me nou A strif wille I tellen ou Of Jesu and of Satan”—seem to indicate that the piece was delivered by a single performer. The subject—the descent of Christ into Hades to succour the souls of the just, as related in the apocryphal gospel of Nicodemus—is introduced in a kind of prologue; then follows the dispute between “Dominus” and “Satan” at the gate of Hell; the gatekeeper runs away, and the just are set free, while Adam, Eve, Habraham, David, Johannes and Moyses do homage to the deliverer. The poem 29 ends with a short prayer: “God, for his moder loue Let ous never thider come.” Metrically, the poem is characterized by frequent alliteration imposed upon the rhymed octosyllabic couplet:—

The piece is obviously connected with the Easter cycle of liturgical drama, and the subject is treated in the York and Townley plays.

HARROW-ON-THE-HILL, an urban district in the Harrow parliamentary division of Middlesex, England, 12 m. W.N.W. of St Paul’s cathedral, London, served by the London and North Western, Metropolitan and District railways. Pop. (1901), 10,220. It takes its name from its position on an isolated hill rising to a height of 345 ft. On the summit, and forming a conspicuous landmark, is the church of St Mary, said to have been founded by Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, in the reign of William I., and Norman work appears at the base of the tower. The remainder of the church is of various later dates, and there are several ancient monuments and brasses.

Harrow is celebrated for its public school, founded in 1571 by John Lyon, whose brass is in the church, a yeoman of the neighbouring village of Preston who had yearly during his life set aside 20 marks for the education of poor children of Harrow; though a school existed before his time. Though the charter was granted by Queen Elizabeth in 1571, and the statutes drawn up by the founder in 1590, two years before his death, it was not till 1611 that the first building was opened for scholars. Lyon originally settled about two-thirds of his property on the school, leaving the remainder for the maintenance of the highway between London and Harrow, but in the course of time the values of the respective endowments have changed so far that the benefit accruing to the school is a small proportion of the whole. About 1660 the headmaster, taking advantage of a concession in Lyon’s statutes, began to receive “foreigners,” i.e. boys from other parishes, who were to pay for their education. From this time the prosperity of the school may be dated. In 1809 the parishioners of Harrow appealed to the court of chancery against the manner in which the school was conducted, but the decision, while it recognized their privileges, confirmed the right of admission to foreigners. The government of the school was originally vested in six persons of standing in the parish who had the power of filling vacancies in their number by election among themselves; but under the Public Schools Act of 1868 the governing body now consists of the surviving members of the old board, besides six new members who are elected respectively by the lord chancellor, the universities of Oxford, Cambridge and London, the Royal Society, and the assistant masters of the school. There are several scholarships in connexion with the school to Oxford and Cambridge Universities. Harrow was originally an exclusively classical school, but mathematics became a compulsory study in 1837; modern languages, made compulsory in the upper forms In 1851, were extended to the whole school in 1855; while English history and literature began to be especially studied about 1869. The number of boys is about 600. The principal buildings are modern, including the chapel (1857), the library (1863), named after the eminent headmaster Dr Charles John Vaughan, and the speech-room (1877), the scene of the brilliant ceremony on “Speech Day” each summer term. The fourth form room, however, dates from 1611, and on its panels are cut the names of many eminent alumni, such as Byron, Robert Peel, R. B. Sheridan and Temple (Lord Palmerston). Several of the buildings were erected out of the Lyon Tercentenary Fund, subscribed after the tercentenary celebration in 1871.

A considerable extension of Harrow as an outer residential suburb of London has taken place north of the hill, where is the urban district of Wealdstone (pop. 5901), and there are also important printing and photographic works.

HARRY THE MINSTREL, or Blind Harry (fl. 1470-1492), author of the Scots historical poem The Actis and Deidis of the Illustere and Vailzeand Campioun Schir William Wallace, Knicht of Ellerslie, flourished in the latter half of the 15th century. The details of his personal history are of the scantiest. He appears to have been a blind Lothian man, in humble circumstances, who had some reputation as a story-teller, and who received, on five occasions, in 1490 and 1491, gifts from James IV. The entries of these, in the Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer, occur among others to harpers and singers. He is alluded to by Dunbar (q.v.) in the fragmentary Interlude of the Droichis Part of the Play, where a “droich,” or dwarf, personates

and again in Dunbar’s Lament for the Makaris. John Major (q.v.) in his Latin History speaks of “one Henry, blind from his birth, who, in the time of my childhood, fashioned a whole book about William Wallace, and therein wrote down in our popular verse—and this was a kind of composition in which he had much skill—all that passed current among the people in his day. I, however, can give but partial credence to these writings. This Henry used to recite his tales before nobles, and thus received food and clothing as his reward” (Bk. iv. ch. xv.).

The poem (preserved in a unique MS., dated 1488, in the Advocates’ library, Edinburgh) is divided into eleven books and runs to 11,853 lines. Its poetic merits are few, and its historical accuracy is easily impugned. It has the formal interest of being one of the earliest, certainly one of the most extensive verse-documents in Scots written in five-accent, or heroic, couplets. It is also the earliest outstanding work which discloses that habit of Scotticism which took such strong hold of the popular Northern literature during the coming years of conflict with England. In this respect it is in marked contrast with all the patriotic verse of preceding and contemporary literature. This attitude of the Wallace may perhaps be accepted as corroborative evidence of the humble milieu and popular sentiment of its author. The poem owed its subsequent widespread reputation to its appeal to this sentiment rather than to its literary quality. On the other hand, there are elements in the poem which show that it is not entirely the work of a poor crowder; and these (notably references to historical and literary authorities, and occasional reminiscences of the literary tricks of the Scots Chaucerian school) have inclined some to the view that the text, as we have it, is an edited version of the minstrel’s rough song-story. It has been argued, though by no means conclusively, that the “editor” was John Ramsay, the scribe of the Edinburgh MS. and of the companion Edinburgh MS. of the Brus by John Barbour (q.v.).

HARSDÖRFFER, GEORG PHILIPP (1607-1658), German poet, was born at Nuremberg on the 1st of November 1607. He studied law at Altdorf and Strassburg, and subsequently travelled 30 through Holland, England, France and Italy. His knowledge of languages gained for him the appellation “the learned,” though he was as little a learned man as he was a poet. As a member of the Fruchtbringende Gesellschaft he was called der Spielende (the player). Jointly with Johann Klaj (q.v.) he founded in 1644 at Nuremberg the order of the Pegnitzschäfer, a literary society, and among the members thereof he was known by the name of Strephon. He died at Nuremberg on the 22nd of September 1658. His writings in German and Latin fill fifty volumes, and a selection of his poems, interesting mostly for their form, is to be found in Müller’s Bibliothek deutscher Dichter des 17ten Jahrhunderts, vol. ix. (Leipzig, 1826).

HARSHA, or Harshavardhana (fl. A.D. 606-648), an Indian king who ruled northern India as paramount monarch for over forty years. The events of his reign are related by Hsüan Tsang, the Chinese pilgrim, and by Bana, a Brahman author. He was the son of a raja of Thanesar, who gained prominence by successful wars against the Huns, and came to the throne in A.D. 606, though he was only crowned in 612. He devoted himself to a scheme of conquering the whole of India, and carried on wars for thirty years with success, until (A.D. 620) he came in contact with Pulakesin II., the greatest of the Chalukya dynasty, who made himself lord of the south, as Harsha was lord of the north. The Nerbudda river formed the boundary between the two empires. In the latter years of his reign Harsha’s sway over the whole basin of the Ganges from the Himalayas to the Nerbudda was undisputed. After thirty-seven years of war he set himself to emulate Asoka and became a patron of art and literature. He was the last native monarch who held paramount power in the north prior to the Mahommedan conquest; and was succeeded by an era of petty states.

HARSNETT, SAMUEL (1561-1631), English divine, archbishop of York, was born at Colchester in June 1561, and was educated at Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, where he was successively scholar, fellow and master (1605-1616). He was also vice-chancellor of the university in 1606 and 1614. His ecclesiastical career began somewhat unpromisingly, for he was censured by Archbishop Whitgift for Romanist tendencies in a sermon which he preached against predestination in 1584. After holding the living of Chigwell (1597-1605) he became chaplain to Bancroft (then bishop of London), and afterwards archdeacon of Essex (1603-1609), rector of Stisted and bishop of Chichester (1609-1619) and archbishop of York (1629). He died on the 25th of May 1631. Harsnett was no favourite with the Puritan community, and Charles I. ordered his Considerations for the better Settling of Church Government (1629) to be circulated among the bishops. His Declaration of Egregious Popish Impostures (1603) furnished Shakespeare with the names of the spirits mentioned by Edgar in King Lear.

HART, ALBERT BUSHNELL (1854-  ), American historian, was born at Clarksville, Mercer county, Pennsylvania, on the 1st of July 1854. He graduated at Harvard College in 1880, studied at Paris, Berlin and Freiburg, and received the degree of Ph.D. at Freiburg in 1883. He was instructor in history at Harvard in 1883-1887, assistant professor in 1887-1897, and became professor in 1897. Among his writings are: Introduction to the Study of Federal Government (1890), Formation of the Union (1892, in the Epochs of American History series), Practical Essays on American Government (1893), Studies in American Education (1895), Guide to the Study of American History (with Edward Channing, 1897), Salmon Portland Chase (1899, in the American Statesman series), Foundations of American Foreign Policy (1901), Actual Government (1903), Slavery and Abolition (1906, the volume in the American Nation series dealing with the period 1831-1841), National Ideals Historically Traced (1907), the 26th volume of the American Nation series, and many historical pamphlets and articles. In addition he edited American History told by Contemporaries (4 vols., 1898-1901), and Source Readers in American History (4 vols., 1901-1903), and two co-operative histories of the United States, the Epochs of American History series (3 small text-books), and, on a much larger scale, the American Nation series (27 vols., 1903-1907); he also edited the American Citizen series.

HART, CHARLES (d. 1683), English actor, grandson of Shakespeare’s sister Joan, is first heard of as playing women’s parts at the Blackfriars’ theatre as an apprentice of Richard Robinson. In the Civil War he was a lieutenant of horse in Prince Rupert’s regiment, and after the king’s defeat he played surreptitiously at the Cockpit and at Holland House and other noblemen’s residences. After the Restoration he is known to have been in 1660 the original Dorante in The Mistaken Beauty, adapted from Corneille’s Le Menteur. In 1663 he went to the Theatre Royal in Killigrew’s company, with which he remained until 1682, taking leading parts in Dryden’s, Jonson’s and Beaumont and Fletcher’s plays. He is highly spoken of by contemporaries in such Shakespearian parts as Othello and Brutus. He is often mentioned by Pepys. Betterton praised him, and would not himself play the part of Hotspur until after Hart’s retirement. He died in 1683 and was buried on the 20th of August. Hart is said to have been the first lover of Nell Gwyn, and to have trained her for the stage.

HART, ERNEST ABRAHAM (1835-1898), English medical journalist, was born in London on the 26th of June 1835, the son of a Jewish dentist. He was educated at the City of London school, and became a student at St George’s hospital. In 1856 he became a member of the Royal College of Surgeons, making a specialty of diseases of the eye. He was appointed ophthalmic surgeon at St Mary’s hospital at the age of 28, and occupied various other posts, introducing into ophthalmic practice some modifications since widely adopted. His name, too, is associated with a method of treating popliteal aneurism, which he was the first to use in Great Britain. His real life-work, however, was as a medical journalist, beginning with the Lancet in 1857. He was appointed editor of the British Medical Journal in 1866. He took a leading part in the exposures which led to the inquiry into the state of London workhouse infirmaries, and to the reform of the treatment of sick poor throughout England, and the Infant Life Protection Act of 1872, aimed at the evils of baby-farming, was largely due to his efforts. The record of his public work covers nearly the whole field of sanitary legislation during the last thirty years of his life. He had a hand in the amendments of the Public Health and of the Medical Acts; in the measures relating to notification of infectious disease, to vaccination, to the registration of plumbers; in the improvement of factory legislation; in the remedy of legitimate grievances of Army and Navy medical officers; in the removal of abuses and deficiencies in crowded barrack schools; in denouncing the sanitary shortcomings of the Indian government, particularly in regard to the prevention of cholera. His work on behalf of the British Medical Association is shown by the increase from 2000 to 19,000 in the number of members, and the growth of the British Medical Journal from 20 to 64 pages, during his editorship. From 1872 to 1897 he was chairman of the Association’s Parliamentary Bill Committee. He died on the 7th of January 1898. For his second wife he married Alice Marion Rowland, who had herself studied medicine in London and Paris, and was no less interested than her husband in philanthropic reform. She was most active in her encouragement of Irish cottage industries, and was the founder of the Donegal Industrial Fund.

HART, SIR ROBERT, Bart. (1835-  ), Anglo-Chinese statesman, was born at Milltown, Co. Armagh, on the 20th of February 1835. He was educated at Taunton, Dublin and Belfast, and graduated at Queen’s College, Belfast, in 1853. In the following year he received an appointment as student-interpreter 31 in the China consular service, and after serving for a short time at the Ningpo vice-consulate, he was transferred to Canton, where after acting as secretary to the allied commissioners governing the city, he was appointed the local inspector of customs. There he first gained an insight into custom-house work. One effect of the Taiping rebellion was to close the native custom-house at Shanghai; and as the corrupt alternatives proposed by the Chinese were worse than useless, it was arranged by Sir Rutherford Alcock, the British consul, with his French and American colleagues, that they should undertake to collect the duties on goods owned by foreigners entering and leaving the port. Sir T. Wade was appointed to the post of collector in the first instance, and after a short tenure of office was succeeded by Mr H. N. Lay, who held the post until 1863, when he resigned owing to a disagreement with the Chinese government in connexion with the Lay-Osborn fleet. During his tenancy of office the system adopted at Shanghai was applied to the other treaty ports, so that when on Mr Lay’s resignation Mr Hart was appointed inspector-general of foreign customs, he found himself at the head of an organization which collected a revenue of upwards of eight million taels per annum at fourteen treaty ports. From the date when Mr Hart took up his duties at Peking, in 1863, he unceasingly devoted the whole of his energies to the work of the department, with the result that the revenue grew from upwards of eight million taels to nearly twenty-seven million, collected at the thirty-two treaty ports, and the customs staff, which in 1864 numbered 200, reached in 1901 a total of 5704. From the first Mr Hart gained the entire confidence of the members of the Chinese government, who were wise enough to recognize his loyal and able assistance. Of all their numerous sources of revenue, the money furnished by Mr Hart was the only certain asset which could be offered as security for Chinese loans. For many years, moreover, it was customary for the British minister, as well as the ministers of other powers, to consult him in every difficulty; and such complete confidence had Lord Granville in his ability and loyalty, that on the retirement of Sir T. Wade he appointed him minister plenipotentiary at Peking (1885). Sir Robert Hart, however—who was made a K.C.M.G. in 1882—recognized the anomalous position in which he would have been placed had he accepted the proposal, and declined the proffered honour. On all disputed points, whether commercial, religious or political, his advice was invariably sought by the foreign ministers and the Chinese alike. Thrice only did he visit Europe between 1863 and 1902, the result of this long comparative isolation, and of his constant intercourse with the Peking officials, being that he learnt to look at events through Chinese spectacles; and his work, These from the Land of Sinim, shows how far this affected his outlook. The faith which he put in the Chinese made him turn a deaf ear to the warnings which he received of the threatening Boxer movement in 1900. To the last he believed that the attacking force would at least have spared his house, which contained official records of priceless value, but he was doomed to see his faith falsified. The building was burnt to the ground with all that it contained, including his private diary for forty years. When the stress came, and he retreated to the British legation, he took an active part in the defence, and spared neither risk nor toil in his exertions. In addition to the administration of the foreign customs service, the establishment of a postal service in the provinces devolved upon him, and after the signing of the protocol of 1901 he was called upon to organize a native customs service at the treaty ports.

The appointment of Sir Robert Hart as inspector-general of the imperial maritime customs secured the interests of European investors in Chinese securities, and helped to place Chinese finance generally on a solid footing. When, therefore, in May 1906 the Chinese government appointed a Chinese administrator and assistant administrator of the entire customs of China, who would control Sir Robert Hart and his staff, great anxiety was aroused. The Chinese government had bound itself in 1896 and 1898 that the imperial maritime customs services should remain as then constituted during the currency of the loan. The British government obtained no satisfactory answer to its remonstrances, and Sir Robert Hart, finding himself placed in a subordinate position after his long service, retired in July 1907. He received formal leave of absence in January 1908, when he received the title of president of the board of customs. Both the Chinese and the British governments from time to time conferred honours upon Sir Robert Hart. By giving him a Red Button, or button of the highest rank, a Peacock’s Feather, the order of the Double Dragon, a patent of nobility to his ancestors for three generations, and the title of Junior Guardian of the heir apparent, the Chinese showed their appreciation of his manifold and great services; while under the seal of the British government there were bestowed upon him the orders of C.M.G.(1880), K.C.M.G.(1882), G.C.M.G. (1889), and a baronetcy (1893). He has also been the recipient of many foreign orders. Sir Robert Hart married in 1886 Hester, the daughter of Alexander Bredon, Esq., M.D., of Portadown.

HART, WILLIAM (1823-1894), American landscape and cattle painter, was born in Paisley, Scotland, on the 31st of March 1823, and was taken to America in early youth. He was apprenticed to a carriage painter at Albany, New York, and his first efforts in art were in making landscape decorations for the panels of coaches. Subsequently he returned to Scotland, where he studied for three years. He opened a studio in New York in 1853, and was elected an associate of the National Academy of Design in 1857 and an academician in the following year. He was also a member of the American Water Colour Society, and was its president from 1870 to 1873. As one of the group of the Hudson River School he enjoyed considerable popularity, his pictures being in many well-known American collections. He died at Mount Vernon, New York, on the 17th of June 1894.

His brother, James McDougal Hart (1828-1901), born in Kilmarnock, Scotland, was also a landscape and cattle painter. He was a pupil of Schirmer in Düsseldorf, and became an associate of the National Academy of Design in 1857 and a full member in 1859. He was survived by two daughters, both figure painters, Letitia B. Hart (b. 1867) and Mary Theresa Hart (b. 1872).

HARTE, FRANCIS BRET (1839-1902), American author, was born at Albany, New York, on the 25th of August 1839. His father, a professor of Greek at the Albany College, died during his boyhood. After a common-school education he went with his mother to California at the age of seventeen, afterwards working in that state as a teacher, miner, printer, express-messenger, secretary of the San Francisco mint, and editor. His first literary venture was a series of Condensed Novels (travesties of well-known works of fiction, somewhat in the style of Thackeray), published weekly in The Californian, of which he was editor, and reissued in book form in 1867. The Overland Monthly, the earliest considerable literary magazine on the Pacific coast, was established in 1868, with Harte as editor. His sketches and poems, which appeared in its pages during the next few years, attracted wide attention in the eastern states and in Europe.

Bret Harte was an early master of the short story, and his Californian tales were regarded as introducing a new genre into fiction. “The Luck of Roaring Camp” (1868), “The Outcasts of Poker Flat” (1869), the later sketch “How Santa Claus came to Simpson’s Bar,” and the verses entitled “Plain Language from Truthful James,” combined humour, pathos and power of character portrayal in a manner that indicated that the new land of mining-gulches, gamblers, unassimilated Asiatics, and picturesque and varied landscape had found its best delineator; so that Harte became, in his pioneer pictures, a sort of later Fenimore Cooper. Forty-four volumes were published by him between 1867 and 1898. After a year as professor in the university of California, Harte lived in New York, 1871-1878; was United States consul at Crefeld, Germany, 1878-1880; consul at Glasgow, 1880-1885; and after 1885 resided in London, engaged 32 in literary work. He died at Camberley, England, on the 5th of May 1902.

HARTEBEEST, the Boer name for a large South African antelope (also known as caama) characterized by its red colour, long face with naked muzzle and sharply angulated lyrate horns, which are present in both sexes. This antelope is the Bubalis cama or Alcelaphus cama of naturalists; but the name hartebeest has been extended to include all the numerous members of the same genus, some of which are to be found in every part of Africa, while one or two extend into Syria. Some of the species of the allied genus Damaliscus, such as Hunter’s antelope (D. hunteri), are also often called hartebeests. (See Antelope).

HARTFORD, a city and the capital of Connecticut, U.S.A., the county-seat of Hartford county, and a port of entry, coterminous with the township of Hartford, in the west central part of the state, on the W. bank of the Connecticut river, and about 35 m. from Long Island Sound. Pop. (1890), 53,230; (1900), 79,850, of whom 23,758 were foreign-born (including 8076 Irish, 2700 Germans, 2260 Russians, 1952 Italians, 1714 Swedes, 1634 English and 1309 English Canadians); (1910 census) 98,915. Of the total population in 1900, 43,872 were of foreign parentage (both parents foreign-born), and of these 18,410 were of Irish parentage. Hartford is served by two divisions of the New York, New Haven & Hartford railway, by the Central New England railway, by the several electric lines of the Connecticut Company which radiate to the surrounding towns, and by the steamboats of the Hartford & New York Transportation Co., all of which are controlled by the N.Y., N.H. & H. The river, which is navigable to this point, is usually closed from the middle of December to the middle of March.

The city covers an area of 17.7 sq. m.; it is well laid out and compactly built, and streets, parks, &c., are under a city-plan commission authorized in 1907. It is intersected by the sluggish Park river, which is spanned by ten bridges. A stone arch bridge, with nine arches, built of granite at a cost of $1,700,000 and dedicated in 1908, spans the Connecticut (replacing the old Connecticut river bridge built in 1818 and burned in 1895), and connects Hartford with the village of East Hartford in the township of East Hartford (pop. 1900, 6406), which has important paper-manufacturing and tobacco-growing interests. The park system of Hartford is the largest in any city of the United States in proportion to the city’s population. In 1908 there were 21 public parks, aggregating more than 1335 acres. In the extreme S. of the city is Goodwin Park (about 200 acres); in the S.E. is Colt Park (106 acres), the gift of Mrs Elizabeth Colt, the widow of Samuel Colt, inventor of the Colt revolver; in the S.W. is Pope Park (about 90 acres); in the W. is Elizabeth (100 acres); in the E., along the Connecticut river front, is Riverside (about 80 acres); and in the extreme N. is Keney Park (680 acres), the gift of Henry Keney, and, next to the Metropolitan Reservations near Boston, the largest park in the New England states. Near the centre of the city are the Capitol Grounds (27 acres; until 1872 the campus of Trinity College) and Bushnell Park (41 acres), adjoining Capitol Park. Bushnell Park, named in honour of Horace Bushnell, contains the Corning Memorial Fountain, erected in 1899 and designed by J. Massey Rhind, and three bronze statues, one, by J. Q. A. Ward, of General Israel Putnam; one, by Truman H. Bartlett, of Dr Horace Wells (1815-1848), the discoverer of anaesthesia; and one, by E. S. Woods, of Colonel Thomas Knowlton (1749-1776), a patriot soldier of the War of Independence, killed at the battle of Harlem Heights. On the Capitol Grounds is the state capitol (Richard M. Upjohn, architect), a magnificent white marble building, which was completed in 1880 at a cost of $2,534,000. Its exterior is adorned with statues and busts of Connecticut statesmen and carvings of scenes in the history of the state. Within the building are regimental flags of the Civil War, a bronze statue by Olin L. Warner of Governor William A. Buckingham, a bronze statue by Karl Gerhardt of Nathan Hale, a bronze tablet (also by Karl Gerhardt) in memory of John Fitch (1743-1798), the inventor; a portrait of Washington, purchased by the state in 1800 from the artist, Gilbert Stuart; and a series of oil portraits of the colonial and state governors. The elaborately carved chair of the lieutenant-governor in the senate chamber, made of wood from the historic Charter Oak, and the original charter of 1662 (or its duplicate of the same date) are preserved in a special vault in the Connecticut state library. A new state library and supreme court building and a new state armoury and arsenal, both of granite, have been (1910) erected upon lands recently added to the Capitol Grounds, thus forming a group of state buildings with the Capitol as the centre. Near the Capitol, at the approach of the memorial bridge across the Park river, is the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ memorial arch, designed by George Keller and erected by the city in 1885 in memory of the Hartford soldiers and sailors who served in the American Civil War.

Near the centre of the city is the old town square (now known as the City Hall Square), laid off in 1637. Here, facing Main Street, stands the city hall, a beautiful example of Colonial architecture, which was designed by Charles Bulfinch, completed in 1796, and until 1879 used as a state capitol; it has subsequently been restored. In Main Street is the present edifice of the First Church of Christ, known as the Centre Congregational Church, which was organized in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1632, and removed to Hartford, under the leadership of Thomas Hooker and Samuel Stone, in 1636. In the adjoining cemetery are the graves of Thomas Hooker, Governor William Leete (1603-1683), and Governor John Haynes, and a monument in memory of 100 early residents of Hartford. In the same thoroughfare is the Wadsworth Atheneum (built in 1842; enlarged in 1892-1893 and 1907) and its companion buildings, the Colt memorial (built in 1908 to accommodate the Elizabeth Colt art collection) and the Morgan art gallery (built in 1908 by J. Pierpont Morgan in memory of his father, Junius Morgan, a native of Hartford). In this group of buildings are the Hartford public library (containing 90,000 volumes in 1908), the Watkinson library of reference (70,000 volumes in 1908), the library of the Connecticut historical society (25,000 volumes in 1908) and a public art gallery. Other institutions of importance in Hartford are the American school for the deaf (formerly the American asylum for the deaf and dumb), founded in 1816 by Thomas H. Gallaudet; the retreat for the insane (opened for patients in 1824); the Hartford hospital; St Francis hospital; St Thomas’s seminary (Roman Catholic); La Salette Missionary college (R.C.; 1898); Trinity college (founded by members of the Protestant Episcopal church, and now non-sectarian), which was 33 chartered as Washington College in 1823, opened in 1824, renamed Trinity College in 1845, and in 1907-1908 had 27 instructors and 208 students; the Hartford Theological seminary, a Congregational institution, which was founded at East Windsor Hill in 1834 as the Theological Institute of Connecticut, was removed to Hartford in 1865, and adopted its present name in 1885; and, affiliated with the last mentioned institution, the Hartford School of Religious Pedagogy. The Hartford grammar school, founded in 1638, long managed by the town and in 1847 merged with the classical department of the Hartford public high school, is the oldest educational institution in the state. In Farmington Avenue is St Joseph’s cathedral (Roman Catholic), the city being the seat of the diocese of Hartford.

During the 18th century Hartford enjoyed a large and lucrative commerce, but the railway development of the 19th century centralized commerce in New York and Boston, and consequently the principal source of the city’s wealth has come to be manufacturing and insurance. In 1905 the total value of the “factory” product was $25,975,651. The principal industries are the manufacture of small arms (by the Colt’s Patent Fire-Arms Manufacturing Co., makers of the Colt revolver and the Gatling gun), typewriters (Royal and Underwood), automobiles, bicycles, cyclometers, carriages and wagons, belting, cigars, harness, machinists’ tools and instruments of precision, coil-piping, church organs, horse-shoe nails, electric equipment, machine screws, drop forgings, hydrants and valves, and engines and boilers. In 1788 the first woollen mill in New England was opened in Hartford; and here, too, about 1846, the Rogers process of electro-silver plating was invented. The city is one of the most important insurance centres in the United States. As early as 1794 policies were issued by the Hartford Fire Insurance Company (chartered in 1810). In 1909 Hartford was the home city of six fire insurance and six life insurance companies, the principal ones being the Aetna (fire), Aetna Life, Phoenix Mutual Life, Phoenix Fire, Travelers (Life and Accident), Hartford Fire, Hartford Life, National Fire, Connecticut Fire, Connecticut General Life and Connecticut Mutual Life. In 1906 the six fire insurance companies had an aggregate capital of more than $10,000,000; on the 1st January 1906 they reported assets of about $59,000,000 and an aggregate surplus of $30,000,000. In the San Francisco disaster of that year they paid more than $15,000,000 of losses. Since the fire insurance business began in Hartford, the companies of that city now doing business there have paid about $340,000,000 in losses. Several large and successful foreign companies have made Hartford their American headquarters. The life insurance companies have assets to the value of about $225,000,000. The Aetna (fire), Aetna Life, Connecticut Fire, Connecticut Mutual Life, Connecticut General Life, Hartford Fire, Hartford Life, Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Co., National Fire, Orient Fire, Phoenix Mutual Life and Travelers companies have their own homes, some of these being among the finest buildings in Hartford. The city has also large banking interests.

The first settlement on the site of Hartford was made by the Dutch from New Amsterdam, who in 1633 established on the bank of the Connecticut river, at the mouth of the Park river, a fort which they held until 1654. The township of Hartford was one of the first three original townships of Connecticut. The first English settlement was made in 1635 by sixty immigrants, mostly from New Town (now Cambridge), Massachusetts; but the main immigration was in 1636, when practically all the New Town congregation led by Thomas Hooker and Samuel Stone joined those who had preceded them. Their settlement was called Newtown until 1637, when the present name was adopted from Hertford, England, the birthplace of Stone. In 1636 Hartford was the meeting-place of the first general court of the Connecticut colony; the Fundamental Orders, the first written constitution, were adopted at Hartford in 1639; and after the union of the colonies of New Haven and Connecticut, accomplished by the charter of 1662, Hartford became the sole capital: but from 1701 until 1873 that honour was shared with New Haven. At Hartford occurred in 1687 the meeting of Edmund Andros and the Connecticut officials (see Connecticut). Hartford was first chartered in 1784, was rechartered in 1856 (the charter of that date has been subsequently revised), and in 1881 was made coterminous with the township of Hartford. The city was the literary centre of Federalist ideas in the latter part of the 18th century, being the home of Lemuel Hopkins, John Trumbull, Joel Barlow and David Humphreys, the leading members of a group of authors known as the “Hartford Wits”; and in 1814-1815 the city was the meeting-place of the famous Hartford Convention, an event of great importance in the history of the Federalist party. The War of 1812, with the Embargo Acts (1807-1813), which were so destructive of New England’s commerce, thoroughly aroused the Federalist leaders in this part of the country against the National government as administered by the Democrats, and in 1814, when the British were not only threatening a general invasion of their territory but had actually occupied a part of the Maine coast, and the National government promised no protection, the legislature of Massachusetts invited the other New England states to join with her in sending delegates to a convention which should meet at Hartford to consider their grievances, means of preserving their resources, measures of protection against the British, and the advisability of taking measures to bring about a convention of delegates from all the United States for the purpose of revising the Federal constitution. The legislatures of Connecticut and Rhode Island, and town meetings in Cheshire and Grafton counties (New Hampshire) and in Windham county (Vermont) accepted the invitation, and the convention, composed of 12 delegates from Massachusetts, 7 from Connecticut, 4 from Rhode Island, 2 from New Hampshire and 1 from Vermont, all Federalists, met on the 15th of December 1814, chose George Cabot of Massachusetts president and Theodore Dwight of Connecticut secretary, and remained in secret session until the 5th of January 1815, when it adjourned sine die. At the conclusion of its work it recommended greater military control for each of the several states and that the Federal constitution be so amended that representatives and direct taxes should be apportioned among the several states “according to their respective numbers of free persons,” that no new state should be admitted to the Union without the concurrence of two-thirds of both Houses of Congress, that Congress should not have the power to lay an embargo for more than sixty days, that the concurrence of two-thirds of the members of both Houses of Congress should be necessary to pass an act “to interdict the commercial intercourse between the United States and any foreign nation or the dependencies thereof” or to declare war against any foreign nation except in case of actual invasion, that “no person who shall hereafter be naturalized shall be eligible as a member of the Senate or House of Representatives of the United States, nor capable of holding any civil office under the authority of the United States,” and that “the same person shall not be elected president of the United States a second time; nor shall the president be elected from the same state two terms in succession.” After making these recommendations concerning amendments the Convention resolved: “That if the application of these states to the government of the United States, recommended in a foregoing resolution, should be unsuccessful, and peace should not be concluded, and the defence of these states should be neglected, as it has been since the commencement of the war, it will, in the opinion of this convention, be expedient for the legislatures of the several states to appoint delegates to another convention, to meet at Boston in the state of Massachusetts on the third Thursday of June next, with such powers and instructions as the exigency of a crisis so momentous may require.” The legislatures of Massachusetts and Connecticut approved of these proposed amendments and sent commissioners to Washington to urge their adoption, but before their arrival the war had closed, and not only did the amendments fail to receive the approval of any other state, but the legislatures of nine states expressed their disapproval of the Hartford Convention itself, some charging it with sowing “seeds of dissension and 34 disunion.” The cessation of the war brought increased popularity to the Democratic administration, and the Hartford Convention was vigorously attacked throughout the country.

Hartford was the birthplace of Noah Webster, who here published his Grammatical Institute of the English Language (1783-1785), and of Henry Barnard, John Fiske and Frederick Law Olmsted, and has been the home of Samuel P. Goodrich (Peter Parley), George D. Prentice, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Charles Dudley Warner, Samuel L. Clemens (Mark Twain) and Horace Bushnell. More than 100 periodicals have been established in Hartford, of which the oldest is the Hartford Courant (1764), the oldest newspaper in the United States. This paper was very influential in shaping public opinion in the years preceding the War of Independence; after the war it was successively Federalist, Whig and Republican. The Times (semi-weekly 1817; daily 1841) was one of the most powerful Democratic organs in the period before the middle of the 19th century, and had Gideon Wells for editor 1826-1836. The Congregationalist (afterwards published in Boston) and the Churchman (afterwards published in New York) were also founded at Hartford.

HARTFORD CITY, a city and the county-seat of Blackford county, Indiana, U.S.A., 62 m. N.E. of Indianapolis. Pop. (1890) 2287; (1900) 5912 (572 foreign-born); (1910) 6187. The city is served by the Fort Wayne, Cincinnati & Louisville, and the Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago & St Louis railways, and the Indiana Union Traction line (electric). There are oil and natural gas wells in the vicinity, and the city has pulp and paper mills, glass and tile works, and manufactories of woodenware, and nitro-glycerine and powder. The municipality owns and operates its water-works system. The first settlement in the vicinity was made in 1832. Hartford City became the county-seat of Blackford county when that county was erected in 1837; it was laid out in 1839 and was first incorporated as a town in 1867.

HARTIG, GEORG LUDWIG (1764-1837), German agriculturist and writer on forestry, was born at Gladenbach, near Marburg, on the 2nd of September 1764. After obtaining a practical knowledge of forestry at Harzburg, he studied from 1781 to 1783 at the university of Giessen. In 1786 he became manager of forests to the prince of Solms-Braunfels at Hungen in the Wetterau, where he founded a school for the teaching of forestry. After obtaining in 1797 the appointment of inspector of forests to the prince of Orange-Nassau, he continued his school of forestry at Dillenburg, where the attendance thereat increased considerably. On the dissolution of the principality by Napoleon I. in 1805 he lost his position, but in 1806 he went as chief inspector of forests to Stuttgart, whence in 1811 he was called to Berlin in a like capacity. There he continued his school of forestry, and succeeded in connecting it with the university of Berlin, where in 1830 he was appointed an honorary professor. He died at Berlin on the 2nd of February 1837. His son Theodor (1805-1880), and grandson Robert (1839-1901), were also distinguished for their contributions to the study of forestry.

HARTLEPOOL, a parliamentary borough of Durham, England, embracing the municipal borough of Hartlepool or East Hartlepool and the municipal and county borough of West Hartlepool. Pop. (1901) of Hartlepool, 22,723; of West Hartlepool, 62,627. The towns are on the coast of the North Sea separated by Hartlepool Bay, with a harbour, and both have stations on branches of the North Eastern railway, 247 m. N. by W. from London. The surrounding country is bleak, and the coast is low. Caves occur in the slight cliffs, and protection against the attacks of the waves has been found necessary. The ancient market town of Hartlepool lies on a peninsula which forms the termination of a south-eastward sweep of the coast and embraces the bay. Its naturally strong position was formerly fortified, and part of the walls, serving as a promenade, remain. The parish church of St Hilda, standing on an eminence above the sea, is late Norman and Early English, with a massive tower, heavily buttressed. There is a handsome borough hall in Italian style. West Hartlepool, a wholly modern town, has several handsome modern churches, municipal buildings, exchange, market hall, Athenaeum and public library. The municipal area embraces the three townships of Seaton Carew, a seaside resort with good bathing, and golf links; Stranton, with its church of All Saints, of the 14th century, on a very early site; and Throston.

The two Hartlepools are officially considered as one port. The harbour, which embraces two tidal basins and six docks aggregating 83½ acres, in addition to timber docks of 57 acres, covers altogether 350 acres. There are five graving docks, admitting vessels of 550 ft. length and 10 to 21 ft. draught. The depth of water on the dock sills varies from 17½ ft. at neap tides to 25 ft. at spring tides. A breakwater three-quarters of a mile long protects the entrance to the harbour. An important trade is carried on in the export of coal, ships, machinery, iron and other metallic ores, woollens and cottons, and in the import of timber, sugar, iron and copper ores, and eggs. Timber makes up 59% of the imports, and coal and ships each about 30% of the exports. The principal industries are shipbuilding (iron), boiler and engineering works, iron and brass foundries, steam saw and planing mills, flour-mills, paper and paint factories, and soapworks.

The parliamentary borough (falling within the south-east county division) returns one member. The municipal borough of Hartlepool is under a mayor, 6 aldermen and 18 councillors, and has an area of 972 acres. The municipal borough of West Hartlepool is under a mayor, 8 aldermen and 24 councillors, and has an area of 2684 acres.

Built on the horns of a sheltered bay, Hartlepool (Hertepull, Hertipol), grew up round the monastery founded there in 640, but was destroyed by the Danes in 800 and rebuilt by Ecgred, bishop of Lindisfarne. In 1173 Bishop Hugh de Puiset allowed French and Flemish troops to land at Hartlepool to aid the Scots. It is not mentioned in Boldon Book as, being part of the royal manor of Sadberg held at this time by the family of Bruce, it did not become the property of the see of Durham until the purchase of that manor in 1189. The bishops did not obtain possession until the reign of John, who during the interval in 1201 gave Hartlepool a charter granting the burgesses the same privileges that the burgesses of Newcastle enjoyed; in 1230 Bishop Richard Poor granted further liberties, including a gild merchant. Edward II. seized the borough as a possession of Robert Bruce, but he could control it very slightly owing to the bishop’s powers. In 1328 Edward III. granted the borough 100 marks towards the town-wall and Richard II. granted murage for seven years, the term being extended in 1400. In 1383 Bishop Fordham gave the burgesses licence to receive tolls within the borough for the maintenance of the walls, while Bishop Neville granted a commission for the construction of a pier or mole. In the 16th century Hartlepool was less prosperous; in 1523 the haven was said to be ruined, the fortifications decayed. An act of 1535 declared Hartlepool to be in Yorkshire, but in 1554 it was reinstated in the county of Durham. It fell into the hands of the northern earls in 1563, and a garrison was maintained there after the rebellion was crushed. In 1593 Elizabeth incorporated it, and gave the burgesses a town hall and court of pie powder. During the civil wars Hartlepool, which a few years before was said to be the only port town in the country, was taken by the Scots, who maintained a garrison there until 1647. As a borough of the Palatinate Hartlepool was not represented in parliament until the 19th century, though strong arguments in its favour were advanced in the Commons in 1614. The markets of 35 Hartlepool were important throughout the middle ages. In 1216 John confirmed to Robert Bruce the market on Wednesday granted to his father and the fair on the feast of St Lawrence; this fair was extended to fifteen days by the grant of 1230, while the charter of 1595 also granted a fair and market. During the 14th century trade was carried on with Germany, Spain and Holland, and in 1346 Hartlepool provided five ships for the French war, being considered one of the chief seaports in the kingdom. The markets were still considerable in Camden’s day, but declined during the 18th century, when Hartlepool became fashionable as a watering-place.

HARTLEY, SIR CHARLES AUGUSTUS (1825-  ), English engineer, was born in 1825 at Heworth, Durham. Like most engineers of his generation he was engaged in railway work in the early part of his career, but subsequently he devoted himself to hydraulic engineering and the improvement of estuaries and harbours for the purposes of navigation. He was employed in connexion with some of the largest and most important waterways of the world. After serving in the Crimea as a captain of engineers in the Anglo-Turkish contingent, he was in 1856 appointed engineer-in-chief for the works carried out by the European Commission of the Danube for improving the navigation at the mouths of that river, and that position he retained till 1872, when he became consulting engineer to the Commission (see Danube). In 1875 he was one of the committee appointed by the authority of the U.S.A. Congress to report on the works necessary to form and maintain a deep channel through the south pass of the Mississippi delta; and in 1884 the British government nominated him a member of the international technical commission for widening the Suez Canal. In addition he was consulted by the British and other governments in connexion with many other river and harbour works, including the improvement of the navigation of the Scheldt, Hugli, Don and Dnieper, and of the ports of Odessa, Trieste, Kustendjie, Burgas, Varna and Durban. He was knighted in 1862, and became K.C.M.G. in 1884.

HARTLEY, DAVID (1705-1757), English philosopher, and founder of the Associationist school of psychologists, was born on the 30th of August 1705. He was educated at Bradford grammar school and Jesus College, Cambridge, of which society he became a fellow in 1727. Originally intended for the Church, he was deterred from taking orders by certain scruples as to signing the Thirty-nine Articles, and took up the study of medicine. Nevertheless, he remained in the communion of the English Church, living on intimate terms with the most distinguished churchmen of his day. Indeed he asserted it to be a duty to obey ecclesiastical as well as civil authorities. The doctrine to which he most strongly objected was that of eternal punishment. Hartley practised as a physician at Newark, Bury St Edmunds, London, and lastly at Bath, where he died on the 28th of August 1757. His Observations on Man was published in 1749, three years after Condillac’s Essai sur l’origine des connaissances humaines, in which theories essentially similar to his were expounded. It is in two parts—the first dealing with the frame of the human body and mind, and their mutual connexions and influences, the second with the duty and expectations of mankind. His two main theories are the doctrine of vibrations and the doctrine of associations. His physical theory, he tells us, was drawn from certain speculations as to nervous action which Newton had published in his Principia. His psychological theory was suggested by the Dissertation concerning the Fundamental Principles of Virtue or Morality, which was written by a clergyman named John Gay (1699-1745), and prefixed by Bishop Law to his translation1 of Archbishop King’s Latin work on the Origin of Evil, its chief object being to show that sympathy and conscience are developments by means of association from the selfish feelings.

HARTLEY, JONATHAN SCOTT (1845-  ), American sculptor, was born at Albany, New York, on the 23rd of September 1845. He was a pupil of E. D. Palmer, New York, and of the schools of the Royal Academy, London; he later studied for a year in Berlin and for a year in Paris. His first important work (1882) was a statue of Miles Morgan, the Puritan, for Springfield, Mass. Among his other works are the Daguerre monument in Washington; “Thomas K. Beecher,” Elmira, New York, and “Alfred the Great,” Appellate Court House, New York. He devoted himself particularly to the making of portrait busts, in which he attained high rank. In 1891 he became a member of the National Academy of Design.

HARTLIB, SAMUEL (c. 1599-c. 1670), English writer on education and agriculturist, was born towards the close of the 16th century at Elbing in Prussia, his father being a refugee merchant from Poland. His mother was the daughter of a rich English merchant at Danzig. About 1628 Hartlib went to England, where he carried on a mercantile agency, and at the same time found leisure to enter with interest into the public questions of the day. An enthusiastic admirer of Comenius, he published in 1637 his Conatuum Comenianorum praeludia, and in 1639 Comenii pansophiae prodromus et didactica dissertatio. In 1641 appeared his Relation of that which hath been lately attempted to procure Ecclesiastical Peace among Protestants, and A Description of Macaria, containing his ideas of what a model state should be. During the civil war Hartlib occupied himself 36 with the peaceful study of agriculture, publishing various works by himself, and printing at his own expense several treatises by others on the subject. In 1652 he issued a second edition of the Discourse of Flanders Husbandry by Sir Richard Weston (1645); and in 1651 Samuel Hartlib, his Legacy, or an Enlargement of the Discourse of Husbandry used in Brabant and Flanders, by Robert Child. For his various labours Hartlib received from Cromwell a pension of £100, afterwards increased to £300, as he had spent all his fortune on his experiments. He planned a school for the sons of gentlemen, to be conducted on new principles, and this probably was the occasion of his friend Milton’s Tractate on Education, addressed to him in 1644, and of Sir William Petty’s Two Letters on the same subject, in 1647 and 1648. At the Restoration Hartlib lost his pension, which had already fallen into arrears; he petitioned parliament for a new grant of it, but what success he met with is unknown, as his latter years and death are wrapped in obscurity. A letter from him is known to have been written in February 1661-1662, and apparently he is referred to by Andrew Marvell as alive in 1670 and fleeing to Holland from his creditors.

HARTMANN, KARL ROBERT EDUARD VON (1842-1906), German philosopher, was born in Berlin on the 23rd of February 1842. He was educated for the army, and entered the artillery of the Guards as an officer in 1860, but a malady of the knee, which crippled him, forced him to quit the service in 1865. After some hesitation between music and philosophy, he decided to make the latter the serious work of his life, and in 1867 the university of Rostock conferred on him the degree of doctor of philosophy. He subsequently returned to Berlin, and died at Grosslichterfelde on the 5th of June 1906. His reputation as a philosopher was established by his first book, The Philosophy of the Unconscious (1869; 10th ed. 1890). This success was largely due to the originality of its title, the diversity of its contents (von Hartmann professing to obtain his speculative results by the methods of inductive science, and making plentiful use of concrete illustrations), the fashionableness of its pessimism and the vigour and lucidity of its style. The conception of the Unconscious, by which von Hartmann describes his ultimate metaphysical principle, is not at bottom as paradoxical as it sounds, being merely a new and mysterious designation for the Absolute of German metaphysicians. The Unconscious appears as a combination of the metaphysic of Hegel with that of Schopenhauer. The Unconscious is both Will and Reason and the absolute all-embracing ground of all existence. Von Hartmann thus combines “pantheism” with “panlogism” in a manner adumbrated by Schelling in his “positive philosophy.” Nevertheless Will and not Reason is the primary aspect of the Unconscious, whose melancholy career is determined by the primacy of the Will and the subservience of the Reason. Precosmically the Will is potential and the Reason latent, and the Will is void of reason when it passes from potentiality to actual willing. This latter is absolute misery, and to cure it the Unconscious evokes its Reason and with its aid creates the best of all possible worlds, which contains the promise of its redemption from actual existence by the emancipation of the Reason from its subjugation to the Will in the conscious reason of the enlightened pessimist. When the greater part of the Will in existence is so far enlightened by reason as to perceive the inevitable misery of existence, a collective effort to will non-existence will be made, and the world will relapse into nothingness, the Unconscious into quiescence. Although von Hartmann is a pessimist, his pessimism is by no means unmitigated. The individual’s happiness is indeed unattainable either here and now or hereafter and in the future, but he does not despair of ultimately releasing the Unconscious from its sufferings. He differs from Schopenhauer in making salvation by the “negation of the Will-to-live” depend on a collective social effort and not on individualistic asceticism. The conception of a redemption of the Unconscious also supplies the ultimate basis of von Hartmann’s ethics. We must provisionally affirm life and devote ourselves to social evolution, instead of striving after a happiness which is impossible; in so doing we shall find that morality renders life less unhappy than it would otherwise be. Suicide, and all other forms of selfishness, are highly reprehensible. Epistemologically von Hartmann is a transcendental realist, who ably defends his views and acutely criticizes those of his opponents. His realism enables him to maintain the reality of Time, and so of the process of the world’s redemption.

HARTMANN, MORITZ (1821-1872), German poet and author, was born of Jewish parentage at Duschnik in Bohemia on the 15th of October 1821. Having studied philosophy at Prague and Vienna, he travelled in south Germany, Switzerland and Italy, and became tutor in a family at Vienna. In 1845 he proceeded to Leipzig and there published a volume of patriotic poems, Kelch und Schwert (1845). Fearing in consequence prosecution at the hands of the authorities, he abided events in France and Belgium, and after issuing in Leipzig Neuere Gedichte (1846) returned home, suffered a short term of imprisonment, and in 1848 was elected member for Leitmeritz in the short-lived German parliament at Frankfort-on-Main, in which he sided with the extreme Radical party. He took part with Robert Blum (1807-1848) in the revolution of that year in Vienna, but contrived to escape to London and Paris. In 1849 he published Reimchronik des Pfaffen Mauritius, a satirical political poem in the style of Heine. During the Crimean War (1854-56) Hartmann was correspondent of the Kölnische Zeitung, settled in 1860 in Geneva as a teacher of German literature and history, became in 1865 editor of the Freya in Stuttgart and in 1868 a member of the staff of the Neue Freie Presse in Vienna. He died at Oberdöbling near Vienna on the 13th of May 1872.

Among Hartmann’s numerous works may be especially mentioned Der Krieg um den Wald (1850), a novel, the scene of which is laid in Bohemia; Tagebuch aus Languedoc und Provence (1852); Erzählungen eines Unsteten (1858); and Die letzten Tage eines Königs (1867). His idyll, Adam und Eva (1851), and his collection of poetical tales, Schatten (1851), show that the author possessed but little talent for epic narrative. Hartmann’s poems are often lacking in genuine poetical feeling, but the love of liberty which inspired them, and the fervour, ease and clearness of their style compensated for these shortcomings and gained for him a wide circle of admirers.

37

HARTMANN VON AUE (c. 1170-c. 1210), one of the chief Middle High German poets. He belonged to the lower nobility of Swabia, where he was born about 1170. After receiving a monastic education, he became retainer (dienstman) of a nobleman whose domain, Aue, has been identified with Obernau on the Neckar. He also took part in the Crusade of 1196-97. The date of his death is as uncertain as that of his birth; he is mentioned by Gottfried von Strassburg (c. 1210) as still alive, and in the Krone of Heinrich von dem Türlin, written about 1220, he is mourned for as dead. Hartmann was the author of four narrative poems which are of importance for the evolution of the Middle High German court epic. The oldest of these, Erec, which may have been written as early as 1191 or 1192, and the latest and ripest, Iwein, belong to the Arthurian cycle and are based on epics by Chrétien de Troyes (q.v.); between them lie the romance, Gregorius, also an adaptation of a French epic, and Der arme Heinrich, one of the most charming specimens of medieval German poetry. The theme of the latter—the cure of the leper, Heinrich, by a young girl who is willing to sacrifice her life for him—Hartmann had evidently found in the annals of the family in whose service he stood. Hartmann’s most conspicuous merit as a poet lies in his style; his language is carefully chosen, his narrative lucid, flowing and characterized by a sense of balance and proportion which is rarely to be found in German medieval poetry. Gregorius, Der arme Heinrich and his lyrics, which are all fervidly religious in tone, imply a tendency towards asceticism, but, on the whole, Hartmann’s striving seems rather to have been to reconcile the extremes of life; to establish a middle way of human conduct between the worldly pursuits of knighthood and the ascetic ideals of medieval religion.

Erec has been edited by M. Haupt (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1871); Gregorius, by H. Paul (2nd ed., Halle, 1900); Der arme Heinrich, by W. Wackernagel and W. Toischer (Basel, 1885) and by H. Paul (2nd ed., Halle, 1893); by J. G. Robertson (London, 1895), with English notes; Iwein, by G. F. Benecke and K. Lachmann (4th ed., Berlin, 1877) and E. Henrici (Halle, 1891-1893). A convenient edition of all Hartmann’s poems by F. Bech, 3 vols. (3rd ed., Leipzig, 1891-1893, vol. 3 in 4th ed., 1902).

HARTSHORN, SPIRITS OF, a name signifying originally the ammoniacal liquor obtained by the distillation of horn shavings, afterwards applied to the partially purified similar products of the action of heat on nitrogenous animal matter generally, and now popularly used to designate the aqueous solution of ammonia (q.v.).

HARTZENBUSCH, JUAN EUGENIO (1806-1880), Spanish dramatist, was born at Madrid on the 6th of September 1806. The son of a German carpenter, he was educated for the priesthood, but he had no religious vocation and, on leaving school, followed his father’s trade till 1830, when he learned shorthand and joined the staff of the Gaceta. His earliest dramatic essays were translations from Molière, Voltaire and the elder Dumas; he next recast old Spanish plays, and in 1837 produced his first original play, Los Amantes de Teruel, the subject of which had been used by Rey de Artieda, Tirso de Molina and Perez de Montalbán. Los Amantes de Teruel at once made the author’s reputation, which was scarcely maintained by Doña Mencia (1839) and Alfonso el Casto (1841); it was not till 1845 that he approached his former success with La Jura en Santa Gadea. Hartzenbusch was chief of the National Library from 1862 to 1875, and was an indefatigable—though not very judicious—editor of many national classics. Inferior in inspiration to other contemporary Spanish dramatists, Hartzenbusch excels his rivals in versatility and in conscientious workmanship.

HĀRŪN AL-RASHĪD (763 or 766-809), i.e. “Hārūn the Orthodox,” the fifth of the ‘Abbasid caliphs of Bagdad, and the second son of the third caliph Mahdi. His full name was Hārūn ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Abdallah ibn Muḥammad ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Abdallah ibn ‘Abbās. He was born at Rai (Rhagae) on the 20th of March A.D. 763, according to some accounts, and according to others on the 15th of February A.D. 766. Hārūn al-Rashīd was twenty-two years old when he ascended the throne. His father Mahdi just before his death conceived the idea of superseding his elder son Mūsa (afterwards known as Hādī, the fourth caliph) by Hārūn. But on Mahdi’s death Hārūn gave way to his brother. For the campaigns in which he took part prior to his accession see Caliphate, section C, The Abbasids, §§ 3 and 4.

Rashīd owed his succession to the throne to the prudence and sagacity of Yahyā b. Khālid the Barmecide, his secretary, whom on his accession he appointed his lieutenant and grand vizier (see Barmecides). Under his guidance the empire flourished on the whole, in spite of several revolts in the provinces by members of the old Alid family. Successful wars were waged with the rulers of Byzantium and the Khazars. In 803, however, Hārūn became suspicious of the Barmecides, whom with only a single exception he caused to be executed. Henceforward the chief power was exercised by Fadl b. Rabi’, who had been chamberlain not only under Hārūn himself but under his predecessors, Mansūr, Madhi and Hādī. In the later years of Hārūn’s reign troubles arose in the eastern parts of the empire. These troubles assumed proportions so serious that Hārūn himself decided to go to Khorasan. He died, however, at Tus in March 809.

The reign of Hārūn (see Caliphate, section C, § 5) was one of the most brilliant in the annals of the caliphate, in spite of losses in north-west Africa and Transoxiana. His fame spread to the West, and Charlemagne and he exchanged gifts and compliments as masters respectively of the West and the East. No caliph ever gathered round him so great a number of learned men, poets, jurists, grammarians, cadis and scribes, to say nothing of the wits and musicians who enjoyed his patronage. Hārūn himself was a scholar and poet, and was well versed in history, tradition and poetry. He possessed taste and discernment, and his dignified demeanour is extolled by the historians. In religion he was extremely strict; he prostrated himself a hundred times daily, and nine or ten times made the pilgrimage to Mecca. At the same time he cannot be regarded as a great administrator. He seems to have left everything to his viziers Yahyā and Fadl, to the former of whom especially was due the prosperous condition of the empire. Hārūn is best known to Western readers as the hero of many of the stories in the Arabian Nights; and in Arabic literature he is the central figure of numberless anecdotes and humorous stories. Of his incognito walks through Bagdad, however, the authentic histories say nothing. His Arabic biographers are unanimous in describing him as noble and generous, but there is little doubt that he was in fact a man of little force of character, suspicious, untrustworthy and on occasions cruel.

HARUSPICES, or Aruspices (perhaps “entrail observers,” cf. Skt. hira, Gr. χορδή), a class of soothsayers in Rome. Their art (disciplina) consisted especially in deducing the will of the gods from the appearance presented by the entrails of the slain victim. They also interpreted all portents or unusual phenomena of nature, especially thunder and lightning, and prescribed the expiatory ceremonies after such events. To please the god, the victim must be without spot or blemish, and the practice of observing whether the entrails presented any abnormal appearance, 38 and thence deducing the will of heaven, was also very important in Greek religion. This art, however, appears not to have been, as some other modes of ascertaining the will of the gods undoubtedly were, of genuine Aryan growth. It is foreign to the Homeric poems, and must have been introduced into Greece after their composition. In like manner, as the Romans themselves believed, the art was not indigenous in Rome, but derived from Etruria.1 The Etruscans were said to have learned it from a being named Tages, grandson of Jupiter, who had suddenly sprung from the ground near Tarquinii. Instructions were contained in certain books called libri haruspicini, fulgurales, rituales. The art was practised in Rome chiefly by Etruscans, occasionally by native-born Romans who had studied in the priestly schools of Etruria. From the regal period to the end of the republic, haruspices were summoned from Etruria to deal with prodigies not mentioned in the pontifical and Sibylline books, and the Roman priests carried out their instructions as to the offering necessary to appease the anger of the deity concerned. Though the art was of great importance under the early republic, it never became a part of the state religion. In this respect the haruspices ranked lower than the augurs, as is shown by the fact that they received a salary; the augurs were a more ancient and purely Roman institution, and were a most important element in the political organization of the city. In later times the art fell into disrepute, and the saying of Cato the Censor is well known, that he wondered how one haruspex could look another in the face without laughing (Cic. De div. ii. 24). Under the empire, however, we hear of a regular collegium of sixty haruspices; and Claudius is said to have tried to restore the art and put it under the control of the pontifices. This collegium continued to exist till the time of Alaric.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY, the oldest of American educational institutions, established at Cambridge, Massachusetts. In 1636 the General Court of the colony voted £400 towards “a schoale or colledge,” which in the next year was ordered to be at “New Towne.” In memory of the English university where many (probably some seventy) of the leading men of the colony had been educated, the township was named Cambridge in 1638. In the same year John Harvard (1607-1638), a Puritan minister lately come to America, a bachelor and master of Emmanuel college, Cambridge, dying in Charlestown (Mass.), bequeathed to the wilderness seminary half his estate (£780) and some three hundred books; and the college, until then unorganized, was named Harvard College (1639) in his honour. Its history is unbroken from 1640, and its first commencement was held in 1642. The spirit of the founders is beautifully expressed in the words of a contemporary letter which are carved on the college gates: “After God had carried us safe to New-England, and wee had builded our houses, provided necessaries for our liveli-hood, rear’d convenient places for Gods worship, and setled the Civill Government; One of the next things we longed for, and looked after was to advance Learning, and perpetuate it to Posterity; dreading to leave an illiterate Ministry to the Churches, when our present Ministers shall lie in the Dust.” The college charter of 1650 dedicated it to “the advancement of all good literature, arts, and sciences,” and “the education of the English and Indian youth ... in knowledge and godlynes.” The second building (1654) on the college grounds was called “the Indian College.” In it was set up the College press, which since 1638 had been in the president’s house, and here, it is believed, was printed the translation of the Bible (1661-1663) by John Eliot into the language of the natives, with primer, catechisms, grammars, tracts, &c. A fair number of Indians were students, but only one, Caleb Cheeshahteaumuck, took a bachelor’s degree (1665). By generous aid received from abroad for this special object, the college was greatly helped in its infancy.

The charter of 1650 has been in the main, and uninterruptedly since 1707, the fundamental source of authority in the administration of the university. It created a co-optating corporation consisting of the president, treasurer and five fellows, who formally initiate administrative measures, control the college funds, and appoint officers of instruction and government; subject, however, to confirmation by the Board of Overseers (established in 1642), which has a revisory power over all acts of the corporation. Circumstances gradually necessitated ordinary government by the resident teachers; and to-day the various faculties, elaborately organized, exercise immediate government and discipline over all the students, and individually or in the general university council consider questions of policy. The Board of Overseers was at first jointly representative of state and church. The former, as founder and patron, long regarded Harvard as a state institution, controlling or aiding it through the legislature and the overseers; but the controversies and embarrassments incident to legislative action proved prejudicial to the best interests of the college, and its organic connexion with the state was wholly severed in 1866. Financial aid and practical dependence had ceased some time earlier; indeed, from the very beginning, and with steadily increasing preponderance, Harvard has been sustained and fostered by private munificence rather than by public money. The last direct subsidy from the state determined in 1824, although state aid was afterwards given to the Agassiz museum, later united with the university. The church was naturally sponsor for the early college. The changing composition of its Board of Overseers marked its liberation first from clerical and later from political control; since 1865 the board has been chosen by the alumni (non-residents of Massachusetts being eligible since 1880), who therefore really control the university. When the state ceased to repress effectually the rife speculation characteristic of the first half of the seventeenth century, in religion as in politics, and in America as in England, the unity of Puritanism gave way to a variety of intense sectarianisms, and this, as also the incoming of Anglican churchmen, made the old faith of the college insecure. President Henry Dunster (c. 1612-1659), the first president, was censured by the magistrates and removed from office for questioning infant baptism. The conservatives, who clung to pristine and undiluted Calvinism, sought to intrench themselves in Harvard, especially in the Board of Overseers. The history of the college from about 1673 to 1725 was exceedingly troubled. Increase and Cotton Mather, forceful but bigoted, were the bulwarks of reaction and fomenters of discord. One episode in the struggle was the foundation and encouragement of Yale College by the reactionaries of New England as a truer “school of the prophets” (Cotton Mather being particularly zealous in its interests), after they had failed to secure control of the government of Harvard. It represented conservative secession. In 1792 the first layman was chosen to the corporation; in 1805 a Unitarian became professor of theology; in 1843 the board of overseers was opened to clergymen of all denominations; in 1886 attendance on prayers by the students ceased to be compulsory. Thus Harvard, in response to changing ideas and conditions, grew away from the ideas of its founders.

Harvard, her alumni, and her faculty have been very closely connected with American letters, not only in the colonial period, when the Mathers, Samuel Sewall and Thomas Prince were important names, or in the revolutionary and early national epoch with the Adamses, Fisher Ames, Joseph Dennie and Robert Treat Paine, but especially in the second third of the 19th century, when the great New England movements of Unitarianism and Transcendentalism were led by Harvard graduates. In 1805 Henry Ware (1764-1845) was elected the first anti-Trinitarian to be Hollis professor of divinity, and this marked Harvard’s close connexion with Unitarianism, in the later history of which Ware, his son Henry (1794-1843), and Andrews Norton (1786-1852), all Harvard alumni and professors, 39 and Joseph Buckminster (1751-1812) and William Ellery Channing were leaders of the conservative Unitarians, and Joseph Stevens Buckminster (1784-1812), James Freeman Clarke, and Theodore Parker were liberal leaders. Of the “Transcendentalists,” Emerson, Francis Henry Hedge (1805-1890), Clarke, Convers Francis (1795-1863), Parker, Thoreau and Christopher Pearse Cranch (1813-1892) were Harvard graduates. Longfellow’s professorship at Harvard identified him with it rather than with Bowdoin; Oliver Wendell Holmes was professor of anatomy and physiology at Harvard in 1847-1882; and Lowell, a Harvard alumnus, was Longfellow’s successor in 1855-1886 as Smith Professor of the French and Spanish languages and literatures. Ticknor and Charles Eliot Norton are other important names in American literary criticism. The historians Sparks, Bancroft, Hildreth, Palfrey, Prescott, Motley and Parkman were graduates of Harvard, as were Edward Everett, Charles Sumner and Wendell Phillips.

In organization and scope of effort Harvard has grown, especially after 1869, under the direction of President Charles W. Eliot, to be in the highest sense a university; but the “college” proper, whose end is the liberal culture of undergraduates, continues to be in many ways the centre of university life, as it is the embodiment of university traditions. The medical school (in Boston) dates from 1782, the law school from 1817, the divinity school1 (though instruction in theology was of course given from the foundation of the college) from 1819, and the dental school (in Boston) from 1867. The Bussey Institution at Jamaica Plain was established in 1871 as an undergraduate school of agriculture, and reorganized in 1908 for advanced instruction and research in subjects relating to agriculture and horticulture. The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences dates from 1872, the Graduate School of Applied Science (growing out of the Lawrence Scientific School) from 1906, and the Graduate School of Business Administration (which applies to commerce the professional methods used in post-graduate schools of medicine, law, &c.) from 1908. The Lawrence Scientific School, established in 1847, was practically abolished in 1907-1908, when its courses were divided between the College (which thereafter granted a degree of S.B.) and the Graduate School of Applied Science, which was established in 1906 and gives professional degrees in civil, mechanical and electrical engineering, mining, metallurgy, architecture, landscape architecture, forestry, applied physics, applied chemistry, applied zoology and applied geology. A school of veterinary medicine, established in 1882, was discontinued in 1901. The university institutions comprise the botanic garden (1807) and the (Asa) Gray herbarium (1864); the Arnold arboretum (1872), at Jamaica Plain, for the study of arboriculture, forestry and dendrology; the university museum of natural history, founded in 1859 by Louis Agassiz as a museum of comparative zoology, enormously developed by his son, Alexander Agassiz, and transferred to the university in 1876, though under an independent faculty; the Peabody museum of American archaeology and ethnology, founded in 1866 by George Peabody; the William Hayes Fogg art museum (1895); the Semitic museum (1889); the Germanic Museum (1902), containing rich gifts from Kaiser Wilhelm II., the Swiss government, and individuals and societies of Germanic lands; the social museum (1906); and the astronomical observatory (1843; location 42° 22′ 48″ N. lat., 71° 8′ W. long.), which since 1891 has maintained a station near Arequipa, Peru. A permanent summer engineering camp is maintained at Squam Lake, New Hampshire. In Petersham, Massachusetts, is the Harvard Forest, about 2000 acres of hilly wooded country with a stand in 1908 of 10,000,000 ft. B.M. of merchantable timber (mostly white pine); this forest was given to the university in 1907, and is an important part of the equipment of the division of forestry. The university library is the largest college library in the country, and from its slow and competent selection is of exceptional value. In 1908 it numbered, including the various special libraries, 803,800 bound volumes, about 496,600 pamphlets, and 27,450 maps. Some of its collections are of great value from associations or special richness, such as Thomas Carlyle’s collection on Cromwell and Frederick the Great; the collection on folk-lore and medieval romances, supposed to be the largest in existence and including the material used by Bishop Percy in preparing his Reliques; and that on the Ottoman empire. The law library has been described by Professor A. V. Dicey of Oxford as “the most perfect collection of the legal records of the English people to be found in any part of the English-speaking world.” There are department libraries at the Arnold arboretum, the Gray herbarium, the Bussey Institution, the astronomical observatory, the dental school, the medical school, the law school, the divinity school, the Peabody museum, and the museum of comparative zoology. In 1878 the library published the first of a valuable series of Bibliographical Contributions. Other publications of the university (apart from annual reports of various departments) are: the Harvard Oriental Series (started 1891), Harvard Studies in Classical Philology (1890), Harvard Theological Review (1907), the Harvard Law Review (1889), Harvard Historical Studies (1897), Harvard Economic Studies (1906), Harvard Psychological Studies (1903), the Harvard Engineering Journal (1902), the Bulletin (1874) of the Bussey Institution, the Archaeological and Ethnological Papers (1888) of the Peabody museum, and the Bulletin (1863), Contributions and Memoirs (1865) of the museum of comparative zoology. The students’ publications include the Crimson (1873), a daily newspaper; the Advocate (1831), a literary bi-weekly; the Lampoon (1876), a comic bi-weekly; and the Harvard Monthly (1885), a literary monthly. The Harvard Bulletin, a weekly, and the Harvard Graduates’ Magazine (1892), a quarterly, are published chiefly for the alumni.

In 1908-1909 there were 743 officers of instruction and administration (including those for Radcliffe) and 5250 students (1059 in 1869), the latter including 2238 in the college, 1641 in the graduate and professional schools, and 1332 in the summer school. Radcliffe College, for women, had 449 additional students. The whole number of degrees conferred up to 1905 was 31,805 (doctors of science and of philosophy by examination, 408; masters of arts and of science by examination, 1759). The conditions of the time when Harvard was a theological seminary for boys, governed like a higher boarding school, have left traces still discernible in the organization and discipline, though no longer in the aims of the college. The average age of students at entrance, only 14 years so late as 1820, had risen by 1890 to 19 years, making possible the transition to the present régime of almost entire liberty of life and studies without detriment, but with positive improvement, to the morals of the student body. A strong development toward the university ideal marked the opening of the 19th century, especially in the widening of courses, the betterment of instruction, and the suggestions of quickening ideas of university freedom, whose realization, along with others, has come since 1870. The elimination of the last vestiges of sectarianism and churchly discipline, a lessening of parietal oversight, a lopping off of various outgrown colonial customs, a complete reconstruction of professional standards and methods, the development of a great graduate school in arts and sciences based on and organically connected with the undergraduate college, a great improvement in the college standard of scholarship, the allowance of almost absolute freedom to students in the shaping of their college course (the “elective” system), and very remarkable material prosperity marked the administration (1860-1909) of President Eliot. In the readjustment in the curricula of American colleges of the elements of professional training and liberal culture Harvard has been bold in experiment and innovation. With Johns Hopkins University she has led the movement that has transformed university education, and her influence upon secondary education in America has been incomparably greater than that of any other university. Her entrance requirements to the college and to the schools of medicine, law, dentistry and divinity have been higher than those of any other American university. 40 A bachelor’s degree is requisite for entrance to the professional schools (except that of dentistry), and the master’s degree (since 1872) is given to students only for graduate work in residence, and rarely to other persons as an honorary degree. In scholarship and in growth of academic freedom Germany has given the quickening impulse. This influence began with George Ticknor and Edward Everett, who were trained in Germany, and was continued by a number of eminent German scholars, some driven into exile for their liberalism, who became professors in the second half of the 19th century, and above all by the many members of the faculty still later trained in German universities. The ideas of recognizing special students and introducing the elective system were suggested in 1824, attaining establishment even for freshmen by 1885, the movement characterizing particularly the years 1865-1885. The basis of the elective system (as in force in 1910) is freedom in choice of studies within liberal limits; and, as regards admission to college2 (completely established 1891), the idea that the admission is of minds for the quality of their training and not for their knowledge of particular subjects, and that any subject may be acceptable for such training if followed with requisite devotion and under proper methods. Except for one course in English in the Freshman year, and one course in French or German for those who do not on entrance present both of these languages, no study is prescribed, but the student is compelled to select a certain number of courses in some one department or field of learning, and to distribute the remainder among other departments, the object being to secure a systematic education, based on the principle of knowing a little of everything and something well.

The material equipment of Harvard is very rich. In 1909 it included invested funds of $22,716,760 ($2,257,990 in 1869) and lands and buildings valued at $12,000,000 at least. In 1908-1909 an income of more than $130,000 was distributed in scholarships, fellowships, prizes and other aids to students. The yearly income available for immediate use from all sources in 1899-1904 averaged $1,074,229, of which $452,760 yearly represented gifts. The total gifts, for funds and for current use, in the same years aggregated $6,152,988. The income in 1907-1908 was $1,846,976; $241,924 was given for immediate use, and $449,822 was given for capital. The medical school is well endowed and is housed in buildings (1906) on Longwood Avenue, Boston; the gifts for its buildings and endowments made in 1901-1902 aggregate $5,000,000. Among the university buildings are two dining-balls accommodating some 2500 students, a theatre for public ceremonies, a chapel, a home for religious societies, a club-home (the Harvard Union) for graduates and undergraduates, an infirmary, gymnasium, boat houses and large playgrounds, with a concrete stadium capable of seating 27,000 spectators. Massachusetts Hall (1720) is the oldest building. University Hall (1815), the administration building, dignified, of excellent proportions and simple lines, is a good example of the work of Charles Bulfinch. Memorial Hall (1874), an ambitious building of cathedral suggestion, commemorates the Harvard men who fell in the Civil War, and near it is an ideal statue (1884) of John Harvard by Daniel C. French. The medical and dental schools are in Boston, and the Bussey Institution and Arnold Arboretum are at Jamaica Plain.

Radcliffe College, essentially a part of Harvard, dates from the beginning of systematic instruction of women by members of the Harvard faculty in 1879, the Society for the Collegiate Instruction of Women being formally organized in 1882. The present name was adopted in 1894 in honour of Ann Radcliffe, Lady Mowlson (ob. c. 1661), widow of Sir Thomas Mowlson, alderman and (1634) lord mayor of London, who in 1643 founded the first scholarship in Harvard College. From 1894 also dates the present official connexion of Radcliffe with Harvard. The requirements for admission and for degrees are the same as in Harvard (whose president countersigns all diplomas), and the president and fellows of Harvard control absolutely the administration of the college, although it has for immediate administration a separate government. Instruction is given by members of the university teaching force, who repeat in Radcliffe many of the Harvard courses. Many advanced courses in Harvard, and to a certain extent laboratory facilities, are directly accessible to Radcliffe students, and they have unrestricted access to the library.

The presidents of Harvard have been: Henry Dunster (1640-1654); Charles Chauncy (1654-1672); Leonard Hoar (1672-1675); Urian Oakes (1675-1681); John Rogers (1682-1684); Increase Mather (1685-1701); Charles Morton (vice-president) (1697-1698); Samuel Willard (1700-1707); John Leverett (1708-1724); Benjamin Wadsworth (1725-1737); Edward Holyoke (1737-1769); Samuel Locke (1770-1773); Samuel Langdon (1774-1780); Joseph Willard (1781-1804); Samuel Webber (1806-1810); John Thornton Kirkland (1810-1828); Josiah Quincy (1829-1845); Edward Everett (1846-1849); Jared Sparks (1849-1853); James Walker (1853-1860); Cornelius Conway Felton (1860-1862); Thomas Hill (1862-1868); Charles William Eliot (1869-1909); Abbott Lawrence Lowell (appointed 1909).

HARVEST (A.S. hærfest “autumn,” O.H. Ger. herbist, possibly through an old Teutonic root representing Lat. carpere, “to pluck”), the season of the ingathering of crops. Harvest has been a season of rejoicing from the remotest ages. The ancient Jews celebrated the Feast of Pentecost as their harvest festival, the wheat ripening earlier in Palestine. The Romans had their Cerealia or feasts in honour of Ceres. The Druids celebrated their harvest on the 1st of November. In pre-reformation England Lammas Day (Aug. 1st, O.S.) was observed at the beginning of the harvest festival, every member of the church presenting a loaf made of new wheat. Throughout the world harvest has always been the occasion for many queer customs which all have their origin in the animistic belief in the Corn-Spirit or Corn-Mother. This personification of the crops has left its impress upon the harvest customs of modern Europe. In west Russia, for example, the figure made out of the last sheaf of corn is called the Bastard, and a boy is wrapped up in it. The woman who binds this sheaf represents the “Cornmother,” and an elaborate simulation of childbirth takes place, the boy in the sheaf squalling like a new-born child, and being, on his liberation, wrapped in swaddling bands. Even in England vestiges of sympathetic magic can be detected. In Northumberland, where the harvest rejoicing takes place at the close of the reaping and not at the ingathering, as soon as the last sheaf is set on end the reapers shout that they have “got the kern.” An image formed of a wheatsheaf, and dressed in a white frock and coloured ribbons, is hoisted on a pole. This is the “kern-baby” or harvest-queen, and it is carried back in triumph with music and shouting and set up in a prominent place during the harvest supper. In Scotland the last sheaf if cut before Hallowmas is called the “maiden,” and the youngest girl in the harvest-field is given the privilege of cutting it. If the reaping finishes after Hallowmas the last corn cut is called the Cailleach (old woman). In some parts of Scotland this last sheaf is kept till Christmas morning and then divided among the cattle “to make them 41 thrive all the year round,” or is kept till the first mare foals and is then given to her as her first food. Throughout the world, as J. G. Frazer shows, the semi-worship of the last sheaf is or has been the great feature of the harvest-home. Among harvest customs none is more interesting than harvest cries. The cry of the Egyptian reapers announcing the death of the corn-spirit, the rustic prototype of Osiris, has found its echo on the world’s harvest-fields, and to this day, to take an English example, the Devonshire reapers utter cries of the same sort and go through a ceremony which in its main features is an exact counterpart of pagan worship. “After the wheat is cut they ‘cry the neck.’ ... An old man goes round to the shocks and picks out a bundle of the best ears be can find ... this bundle is called ‘the neck’; the harvest hands then stand round in a ring, the old man holding ‘the neck’ in the centre. At a signal from him they take off their hats, stooping and holding them with both hands towards the ground. Then all together they utter in a prolonged cry ‘the neck!’ three times, raising themselves upright with their hats held above their heads. Then they change their cry to ‘Wee yen! way yen!’ or, as some report, ‘we haven!’” On a fine still autumn evening “crying the neck” has a wonderful effect at a distance. In East Anglia there still survives the custom known as “Hallering Largess.” The harvesters beg largess from passers, and when they have received money they shout thrice “Halloo, largess,” having first formed a circle, bowed their heads low crying “Hoo-Hoo-Hoo,” and then jerked their heads backwards and uttered a shrill shriek of “Ah! Ah!”

HARVEST-BUG, the familiar name for mites of the family Trombidiidae, belonging to the order Acari of the class Arachnida. Although at one time regarded as constituting a distinct species, described as Leptus autumnalis, harvest-bugs are now known to be the six-legged larval forms of several British species of mites of the genus Trombidium. They are minute, rusty-brown organisms, barely visible to the naked eye, which swarm in grass and low herbage in the summer and early autumn, and cause considerable, sometimes intense, irritation by piercing and adhering to the skin of the leg, usually lodging themselves in some part where the clothing is tight, such as the knee when covered with gartered stockings. They may be readily destroyed, and the irritation allayed, by rubbing the affected area with some insecticide like turpentine or benzine. They are not permanently parasitic, and if left alone will leave their temporary host to resume the active life characteristic of the adult mite, which is predatory in habits, preying upon minute living animal organisms.

HARVESTER, Harvest-Spider, or Harvest-Man, names given to Arachnids of the order Opiliones, referable to various species of the family Phalangiidae. Harvest-spiders or harvest-men, so-called on account of their abundance in the late summer and early autumn, may be at once distinguished from all true spiders by the extreme length and thinness of their legs, and by the small size and spherical or oval shape of the body, which is not divided by a waist or constriction into an anterior and a posterior region. They may be met with in houses, back yards, fields, woods and heaths; either climbing on walls, running over the grass, or lurking under stones and fallen tree trunks. They are predaceous, feeding upon small insects, mites and spiders. The males are smaller than the females, and often differ from them in certain well-marked secondary sexual characters, such as the mandibular protuberance from which one of the common English spiders, Phalangium cornutum, takes its scientific name. The male is also furnished with a long and protrusible penis, and the female with an equally long and protrusible ovipositor. The sexes pair in the autumn, and the female, by means of her ovipositor, lays her eggs in some cleft or hole in the soil and leaves them to their fate. After breeding, the parents die with the autumn cold; but the eggs retain their vitality through the winter and hatch with the warmth of spring and early summer, the young gradually attaining maturity as the latter season progresses. Hence the prevalence of adult individuals in the late summer and autumn, and at no other time of the year. They are provided with a pair of glands, situated one on each side of the carapace, which secrete an evil-smelling fluid believed to be protective in nature. Harvest-men are very widely distributed and are especially abundant in temperate countries of the northern hemisphere. They are also, however, common in India, where they are well known for their habit of adhering together in great masses, comparable to a swarm of bees, and of swaying gently backwards and forwards. The long legs of harvest-men serve them not only as organs of rapid locomotion, but also as props to raise the body well off the ground, thus enabling the animals to stalk unmolested from the midst of an army of raiding ants.

HARVEY, GABRIEL (c. 1545-1630), English writer, eldest son of a ropemaker of Saffron-Walden, Essex, was born about 1545. He matriculated at Christ’s College, Cambridge, in 1566, and in 1570 was elected fellow of Pembroke Hall. Here he formed a lasting friendship with Edmund Spenser, and it has been suggested (Athen. Cantab., ii. 258) that he may have been the poet’s tutor. Harvey was a scholar of considerable weight, who has perhaps been judged too exclusively from the brilliant invectives directed against him by Thomas Nashe. Henry Morley, writing in the Fortnightly Review (March 1869), brought evidence from Harvey’s Latin writings which shows that he was distinguished by quite other qualities than the pedantry and conceit usually associated with his name. He desired to be “epitaphed as the Inventour of the English Hexameter,” and was the prime mover in the literary clique that desired to impose on English verse the Latin rules of quantity. In a “gallant, familiar letter” to M. Immerito (Edmund Spenser) he says that Sir Edward Dyer and Sir Philip Sidney were helping forward “our new famous enterprise for the exchanging of Barbarous and Balductum Rymes with Artificial Verses.” The document includes a tepid appreciation of the Faerie Queene which had been sent to him for his opinion, and he gives examples of English hexameters illustrative of the principles enunciated in the correspondence. The opening lines—

afford a fair sample of the success of Harvey’s metrical experiments, which presented a fair mark for the wit of Thomas Nashe. “He (Harvey) goes twitching and hopping in our language like a man running upon quagmires, up the hill in one syllable, and down the dale in another,” says Nashe in Strange Newes, and he mimics him in the mocking couplet:

Harvey exercised great influence over Spenser for a short time, and the friendship lasted even though Spenser’s genius refused 42 to be bound by the laws of the new prosody. Harvey is the Hobbinoll of his friend’s Shepheards Calender, and into his mouth is put the beautiful song in the fourth eclogue in praise of Eliza. If he was really the author of the verses “To the Learned Shepheard” signed “Hobynoll” and prefixed to the Faerie Queene, he was a good poet spoiled. But Harvey’s genuine friendship for Spenser shows the best side of a disposition uncompromising and quarrelsome towards the world in general. In 1573 ill-will against him in his college was so strong that there was a delay of three months before the fellows would agree to grant him the necessary grace for his M.A. degree. He became reader in rhetoric about 1576, and in 1578, on the occasion of Queen Elizabeth’s visit to Sir Thomas Smith at Audley End, he was appointed to dispute publicly before her. In the next year he wrote to Spenser complaining of the unauthorized publication of satirical verses of his which were supposed to reflect on high personages, and threatened seriously to injure Harvey’s career. In 1583 he became junior proctor of the university, and in 1585 he was elected master of Trinity Hall, of which he had been a fellow from 1578, but the appointment appears to have been quashed at court. He was a protégé of the Earl of Leicester, to whom he introduced Spenser, and this connexion may account for his friendship with Sir Philip Sidney. But in spite of patronage, a second application for the mastership of Trinity Hall failed in 1598. In 1585 he received the degree of D.C.L. from the university of Oxford, and is found practising at the bar in London. Gabriel’s brother, Richard, had taken part in the Marprelate controversy, and had given offence to Robert Greene by contemptuous references to him and his fellow wits. Greene retorted in his Quip for an Upstart Courtier with some scathing remarks on the Harveys, the worst of which were expunged in later editions, drawing attention among other things to Harvey’s modest parentage. In 1599 Archbishop Whitgift made a raid on contemporary satire in general, and among other books the tracts of Harvey and Nashe were destroyed, and it was forbidden to reprint them. Harvey spent the last years of his life in retirement at his native place, dying in 1630.

HARVEY, SIR GEORGE (1806-1876), Scottish painter, the son of a watchmaker, was born at St Ninians, near Stirling, in February 1806. Soon after his birth his parents removed to Stirling, where George was apprenticed to a bookseller. His love for art having, however, become very decided, in his eighteenth year he entered the Trustees’ Academy at Edinburgh. Here he so distinguished himself that in 1826 he was invited by the Scottish artists, who had resolved to found a Scottish academy, to join it as an associate. Harvey’s first picture, “A Village School,” was exhibited in 1826 at the Edinburgh Institution; and from the time of the opening of the Academy in the following year he continued annually to exhibit. His best-known pictures are those depicting historical episodes in religious history from a puritan or evangelical point of view, such as “Covenanters Preaching,” “Covenanters’ Communion,” “John Bunyan and his Blind Daughter,” “Sabbath Evening,” and the “Quitting of the Manse.” He was, however, equally popular in Scotland for subjects not directly religious; and “The Bowlers,” “A Highland Funeral,” “The Curlers,” “A Schule Skailin’,” and “Children Blowing Bubbles in the Churchyard of Greyfriars’, Edinburgh,” manifest the same close observation of character, artistic conception and conscientious elaboration of details. In “The Night Mail” and “Dawn Revealing the New World to Columbus” the aspects of nature are made use of in different ways, but with equal happiness, to lend impressiveness and solemnity to human concerns. He also painted landscapes and portraits. In 1829 he was elected a fellow of the Royal Scottish Academy; in 1864 he succeeded Sir J. W. Gordon as president; and he was knighted in 1867. He died at Edinburgh on the 22nd of January 1876.

HARVEY, WILLIAM (1578-1657), English physician, the discoverer of the circulation of the blood, was the eldest son of Thomas Harvey, a prosperous Kentish yeoman, and was born at Folkestone on the 1st of April 1578. After passing through the grammar school of Canterbury, on the 31st of May 1593, having just entered his sixteenth year, he became a pensioner of Caius College, Cambridge, at nineteen he took his B.A. degree, and soon after, having chosen the profession of medicine, he went to study at Padua under H. Fabricius and Julius Casserius. At the age of twenty-four Harvey became doctor of medicine, in April 1602. Returning to England in the first year of James I., he settled in London; and two years later he married the daughter of Dr Lancelot Browne, who had been physician to Queen Elizabeth. In the same year he became a candidate of the Royal College of Physicians, and was duly admitted a fellow (June 1607). In 1609 he obtained the reversion of the post of physician to St Bartholomew’s hospital. His application was supported by the king himself and by Dr Henry Atkins (1558-1635), the president of the college, and on the death of Dr Wilkinson in the course of the same year he succeeded to the post. He was thrice censor of the college, and in 1615 was appointed Lumleian lecturer.

In 1616 he began his course of lectures, and first brought forward his views upon the movements of the heart and blood. Meantime his practice increased, and he had the lord chancellor, Francis Bacon, and the earl of Arundel among his patients. In 1618 he was appointed physician extraordinary to James I., and on the next vacancy physician in ordinary to his successor. In 1628, the year of the publication of the Exercitatio anatomica de motu cordis et sanguinis, he was elected treasurer of the College of Physicians, but at the end of the following year he resigned the office, in order, by command of Charles I., to accompany the young duke of Lennox (James Stuart, afterwards duke of Richmond) on his travels. He appears to have visited Italy, and returned in 1632. Four years later he accompanied the earl of Arundel on his embassy to the emperor Ferdinand II. He was eager in collecting objects of natural history, sometimes causing the earl anxiety for his safety by his excursions in a country infested by robbers in consequence of the Thirty Years’ War. In a letter written on this journey, he says: “By the 43 way we could scarce see a dogg, crow, kite, raven, or any bird, or anything to anatomise; only sum few miserable people, the reliques of the war and the plague, whom famine had made anatomies before I came.” Having returned to his practice in London at the close of the year 1636, he accompanied Charles I. in one of his journeys to Scotland (1639 or 1641). While at Edinburgh he visited the Bass Rock; he minutely describes its abundant population of sea-fowl in his treatise De generatione, and incidentally speaks of the account then credited of the solan goose growing on trees as a fable. He was in attendance on the king at the battle of Edgehill (October 1642), where he withdrew under a hedge with the prince of Wales and the duke of York (then boys of twelve and ten years old), “and took out of his pocket a book and read. But he had not read very long before a bullet of a great gun grazed on the ground near him, which made him remove his station,” as he afterwards told John Aubrey. After the indecisive battle, Harvey followed Charles I. to Oxford, “where,” writes the same gossiping narrator, “I first saw him, but was then too young to be acquainted with so great a doctor. I remember he came several times to our college (Trinity) to George Bathurst, B.D. who had a hen to hatch eggs in his chamber, which they opened daily to see the progress and way of generation.” In Oxford he remained three years, and there was some chance of his being superseded in his office at St Bartholomew’s hospital, “because he hath withdrawn himself from his charge, and is retired to the party in arms against the Parliament.” It was no doubt at this time that his lodgings at Whitehall were searched, and not only the furniture seized but also invaluable manuscripts and anatomical preparations.1

While with the king at Oxford he was made warden of Merton College, but a year later, in 1646, that city surrendered to Fairfax, and Harvey returned to London. He was now sixty-eight years old, and, having resigned his appointments and relinquished the cares of practice, lived in learned retirement with one or other of his brothers. It was in his brother Daniel’s house at Combe that Dr (afterwards Sir George) Ent, a faithful friend and disciple (1604-1689), visited him in 1650. “I found him,” he says, “with a cheerful and sprightly countenance investigating, like Democritus, the nature of things. Asking if all were well with him—‘How can that be,’ he replied, ‘when the state is so agitated with storms and I myself am yet in the open sea? And indeed, were not my mind solaced by my studies and the recollection of the observations I have formerly made, there is nothing which should make me desirous of a longer continuance. But thus employed, this obscure life and vacation from public cares which would disgust other minds is the medicine of mine.’” The work on which he had been chiefly engaged at Oxford, and indeed since the publication of his treatise on the circulation in 1628, was an investigation into the recondite but deeply interesting subject of generation. Charles I. had been an enlightened patron of Harvey’s studies, had put the royal deer parks at Windsor and Hampton Court at his disposal, and had watched his demonstration of the growth of the chick with no less interest than the movements of the living heart. Harvey had now collected a large number of observations, though he would probably have delayed their publication. But Ent succeeded in obtaining the manuscripts, with authority to print them or not as he should find them. “I went from him,” he says, “like another Jason in possession of the golden fleece, and when I came home and perused the pieces singly, I was amazed that so vast a treasure should have been so long hidden.” The result was the publication of the Exercitationes de generatione (1651).

This was the last of Harvey’s labours. He had now reached his seventy-third year. His theory of the circulation had been opposed and defended, and was now generally accepted by the most eminent anatomists both in his own country and abroad. He was known and honoured throughout Europe, and his own college (Caius) voted a statue in his honour (1652) viro monumentis suis immortali. In 1654 he was elected to the highest post in his profession, that of president of the college; but the following day he met the assembled fellows, and, declining the honour for himself on account of the infirmities of age, recommended the re-election of the late president Dr Francis Prujean (1593-1666). He accepted, however, the office of consiliarius, which he again held in the two following years. He had already enriched the college with other gifts besides the honour of his name. He had raised for them “a noble building of Roman architecture (rustic work with Corinthian pilasters), comprising a great parlour or conversation room below and a library above”; he had furnished the library with books, and filled the museum with “simples and rarities,” as well as with specimens of instruments used in the surgical and obstetric branches of medicine. At last he determined to give to his beloved college his paternal estate at Burmarsh in Kent. His wife had died some years before, his brothers were wealthy men, and he was childless, so that he was defrauding no heir when, in July 1656, he made the transfer of this property, then valued at £56 per annum, with provision for a salary to the college librarian and for the endowment of an annual oration, which is still given on the anniversary of the day. The orator, so Harvey orders in his deed of gift, is to exhort the fellows of the college “to search out and study the secrets of nature by way of experiment, and also for the honour of the profession to continue mutual love and affection among themselves.”

Harvey, like his contemporary and great successor Thomas Sydenham, was long afflicted with gout, but he preserved his activity of mind to an advanced age. In his eightieth year, on the 3rd of June 1657, he was attacked by paralysis, and though deprived of speech was able to send for his nephews and distribute his watch, ring, and other personal trinkets among them. He died the same evening, “the palsy giving him an easy passport,” and was buried with great honour in his brother Eliab’s vault at Hempstead in Essex, annorum et famae satur. In 1883 the lead coffin containing his remains was enclosed in a marble sarcophagus and moved to the Harvey chapel within the church.

John Aubrey, to whom we owe most of the minor particulars about Harvey which have been preserved, says: “In person he was not tall, but of the lowest stature, round faced, olivaster complexion, little eyes, round, very black, full of spirits; his hair black as a raven, but quite white twenty years before he died.” The best portrait of him extant is by Cornelius Jansen in the library of the College of Physicians, one of those rescued from the great fire, which destroyed their original hall in 1666. It has been often engraved, and is prefixed to the fine edition of his works published in 1766.

Harvey’s Work on the Circulation.—In estimating the character and value of the discovery announced in the Exercitatio de motu cordis et sanguinis, it is necessary to bear in mind the previous state of knowledge on the subject. Aristotle taught that in man and the higher animals the blood was elaborated from the food in the liver, thence carried to the heart, and sent by it through the veins over the body. His successors of the Alexandrian school of medicine, Erasistratus and Herophilus, further elaborated his system, and taught that, while the veins carried blood from the heart to the members, the arteries carried a subtle kind of air or spirit. For the practical physician only two changes had been made in this theory of the circulation between the Christian era and the 16th century. Galen had discovered that the arteries were not, as their name implies, merely air-pipes, but that they contained blood as well as vital air or spirit. And it had been gradually ascertained that the nerves (νεῦρα) which 44 arose from the brain and conveyed “animal spirits” to the body were different from the tendons or sinews (νεῦρα) which attach muscles to bones. First, then, the physicians of the time of Thomas Linacre knew that the blood is not stagnant in the body. So did Shakespeare and Homer, and every augur who inspected the entrails of a victim, and every village barber who breathed a vein. Plato even uses the expression to τὸ αἷμα κατὰ πάντα τὰ μέλη σφοδρῶς περιφέρεσθαι. But no one had a conception of a continuous stream returning to its source (a circulation in the true sense of the word) either in the system or in the lungs. If they used the word circulatio, as did Caesalpinus,2 it was as vaguely as the French policeman cries “Circulez.” The movements of the blood were in fact thought to be slow and irregular in direction as well as in speed, like the “circulation” of air in a house, or the circulation of a crowd in the streets of a city. Secondly, they supposed that one kind of blood flowed from the liver to the right ventricle of the heart, and thence to the lungs and the general system by the veins, and that another kind flowed from the left ventricle to the lungs and general system by the arteries. Thirdly, they supposed that the septum of the heart was pervious and allowed blood to pass directly from the right to the left side. Fourthly, they had no conception of the functions of the heart as the motor power of the movement of the blood. They doubted whether its substance was muscular; they supposed its pulsation to be due to expansion of the spirits it contained; they believed the only dynamic effect which it had on the blood to be sucking it in during its active diastole, and they supposed the chief use of its constant movements to be the due mixture of blood and spirits.

Of the great anatomists of the 16th century, Sylvius (In Hipp. et Gal. phys. partem anatom. isagoge) described the valves of the veins; Vesalius (De humani corporis fabrica, 1542) ascertained that the septum between the right and left ventricles is complete, though he could not bring himself to deny the invisible pores which Galen’s system demanded. Servetus, in his Christianismi restitutio (1553), goes somewhat farther than his fellow-student Vesalius, and says: “Paries ille medius non est aptus ad communicationem et elaborationem illam; licet aliquid resudare possit”; and, from this anatomical fact and the large size of the pulmonary arteries he concludes that there is a communication in the lungs by which blood passes from the pulmonary artery to the pulmonary vein: “Eodem artificio quo in hepate fit transfusio a vena porta ad venam cavam propter sanguinem, fit etiam in pulmone transfusio a vena arteriosa ad arteriam venosam propter spiritum.” The natural spirit of the left side and the vital spirit of the right side of the heart were therefore, he concluded, practically the same, and hence two instead of three distinct spiritus should be admitted. It seems doubtful whether even Servetus rightly conceived of the entire mass of the blood passing through the pulmonary artery and the lungs. The transference of the spiritus naturalis to the lungs, and its return to the left ventricle as spiritus vitalis, was the function which he regarded as important. Indeed a true conception of the lesser circulation as a transference of the whole blood of the right side to the left was impossible until the corresponding transference in the greater or systematic circulation was discovered. Servetus, however, was the true predecessor of Harvey in physiology, and his claims to that honour are perfectly authentic and universally admitted.3

The way then to Harvey’s great work had been paved by the discovery of the valves in the veins, and by that of the lesser circulation—the former due to Sylvius and Fabricius, the latter to Servetus—but the significance of the valves was unsuspected and the fact of even the pulmonary circulation was not generally admitted in its full meaning.

In his treatise Harvey proves (1) that it is the contraction, not the dilatation, of the heart which coincides with the pulse, and that the ventricles as true muscular sacs squeeze the blood which they contain into the aorta and pulmonary artery; (2) that the pulse is not produced by the arteries enlarging and so filling, but by the arteries being filled with blood and so enlarging; (3) that there are no pores in the septum of the heart, so that the whole blood in the right ventricle is sent to the lungs and round by the pulmonary veins to the left ventricle, and also that the whole blood in the left ventricle is again sent into the arteries, round by the smaller veins into the venae cavae, and by them to the right ventricle again—thus making a complete “circulation”; (4) that the blood in the arteries and that in the veins is the same blood; (5) that the action of the right and left sides of the heart, auricles, ventricles and valves, is the same, the mechanism in both being for reception and propulsion of liquid and not of air, since the blood on the right side, though mixed with air, is still blood; (6) that the blood sent through the arteries to the tissues is not all used, but that most of it runs through into the veins; (7) that there is no to and fro undulation in the veins, but a constant stream from the distant parts towards the heart; (8) that the dynamical starting-point of the blood is the heart and not the liver.

The method by which Harvey arrived at his complete and almost faultless solution of the most fundamental and difficult problem in physiology has been often discussed, and is well worthy of attention. He begins his treatise by pointing out the many inconsistencies and defects in the Galenical theory, quoting the writings of Galen himself, of Fabricius, Columbus and others, with great respect, but with unflinching criticism. For, in his own noble language, wise men must learn anatomy, not from the decrees of philosophers, but from the fabric of nature herself, “nec ita in verba jurare antiquitatis magistrae, ut veritatem amicam in apertis relinquant, et in conspectu omnium deserant.” He had, as we know, not only furnished himself with all the knowledge that books and the instructions of the best anatomists of Italy could give, but, by a long series of dissections, had gained a far more complete knowledge of the comparative anatomy of the heart and vessels than any contemporary—we may almost say than any successor—until the times of John Hunter and J. F. Meckel. Thus equipped, he tells us that he began his investigations into the movements of the heart and blood by looking at them—i.e. by seeing their action in living animals. After a modest preface, he heads his first chapter 45 “Ex vivorum dissectione, qualis sit cordis motus.” He minutely describes what he saw and handled in dogs, pigs, serpents, frogs and fishes, and even in slugs, oysters, lobsters and insects, in the transparent minima squilla, “quae Anglice dicitur a shrimp,” and lastly in the chick while still in the shell. In these investigations he used a perspicillum or simple lens. He particularly describes his observations and experiments on the ventricles, the auricles, the arteries and the veins. He shows how the arrangement of the vessels in the foetus supports his theory. He adduces facts observed in disease as well as in health to prove the rapidity of the circulation. He explains how the mechanism of the valves in the veins is adapted, not, as Fabricius believed, to moderate the flow of blood from the heart, but to favour its flow to the heart. He estimates the capacity of each ventricle, and reckons the rate at which the whole mass of blood passes through it. He elaborately and clearly demonstrates the effect of obstruction of the blood-stream in arteries or in veins, by the forceps in the case of a snake, by a ligature on the arm of a man, and illustrates his argument by figures. He then sums up his conclusion thus: “Circulari quodam motu, in circuitu, agitari in animalibus sanguinem, et esse in perpetuo motu; et hanc esse actionem sive functionem cordis quam pulsu peragit; et omnino motus et pulsus cordis causam unam esse.” Lastly, in the 15th, 16th and 17th chapters, he adds certain confirmatory evidence, as the effect of position on the circulation, the absorption of animal poisons and of medicines applied externally, the muscular structure of the heart and the necessary working of its valves. The whole treatise, which occupies only 67 pages of large print in the quarto edition of 1766, is a model of accurate observation, patient accumulation of facts, ingenious experimentation, bold yet cautious hypothesis and logical deduction.

In one point only was the demonstration of the circulation incomplete. Harvey could not discover the capillary channels by which the blood passes from the arteries to the veins. This gap in the circulation was supplied several years later by the great anatomist Marcello Malpighi, who in 1661 saw in the lungs of a frog, by the newly invented microscope, how the blood passes from the one set of vessels to the other. Harvey saw all that could be seen by the unaided eye in his observations on living animals; Malpighi, four years after Harvey’s death, by another observation on a living animal, completed the splendid chain of evidence. If this detracts from Harvey’s merit it leaves Servetus no merit at all. But in fact the existence of the channels first seen by Malpighi was as clearly pointed to by Harvey’s reasoning as the existence of Neptune by the calculations of Leverrier and of Adams.

46

Harvey’s Work on Generation.—We have seen how Dr. Ent persuaded his friend to publish this book in 1651. It is between five and six times as long as the Exerc. de motu cord. et sang., and is followed by excursus De partu, De uteri membranis, De conceptione; but, though the fruit of as patient and extensive observations, its value is far inferior. The subject was far more abstruse, and in fact inaccessible to proper investigation without the aid of the microscope. And the field was almost untrodden since the days of Aristotle. Fabricius, Harvey’s master, in his work De formatione ovi et pulli (1621), had alone preceded him in modern times. Moreover, the seventy-two chapters which form the book lack the co-ordination so conspicuous in the earlier treatise, and some of them seem almost like detached chapters of a system which was never completed or finally revised.

Harvey’s other Writings and Medical Practice.—The remaining writings of Harvey which are extant are unimportant. A complete list of them will be found below, together with the titles of those which we know to be lost. Of these the most important were probably that on respiration, and the records of post-mortem examinations. From the following passage (De partu, p. 550) it seems that he had a notion of respiration being connected rather with the production of animal heat than, as then generally supposed, with the cooling of the blood. “Haec qui diligenter perpenderit, naturamque aeris diligenter introspexerit, facile opinor fatebitur eundem nec refrigerationis gratia nec in pabulum animalibus concedi. Haec autem obiter duntaxat de respiratione diximus, proprio loco de eadem forsitan copiosius disceptaturi.”

Of Harvey as a practising physician we know very little. Aubrey tells us that “he paid his visits on horseback with a foot-cloth, his man following on foot, as the fashion then was.” He adds—“Though all of his profession would allow him to be an excellent anatomist, I never heard any that admired his therapeutic way. I knew several practitioners that would not have given threepence for one of his bills” (the apothecaries used to collect physicians’ prescriptions and sell or publish them to their own profit), “and that a man could hardly tell by his bill what he did aim at.” However this may have been,—and rational therapeutics was impossible when the foundation stone of physiology had only just been laid,—we know that Harvey was an active practitioner, performing such important surgical operations as the removal of a breast, and he turned his obstetric experience to account in his book on generation. Some good practical precepts as to the conduct of labour are quoted by Percivall Willughby (1596-1685). He also took notes of the anatomy of disease; these unfortunately perished with his other manuscripts. Otherwise we might regard him as a forerunner of G. B. Morgagni; for Harvey saw that pathology is but a branch of physiology, and like it must depend first on accurate anatomy. He speaks strongly to this purpose in his first epistle to Riolan: “Sicut enim sanorum et boni habitus corporum dissectio plurimum ad philosophiam et rectam physiologiam facit, ita corporum morbosorum et cachecticorum inspectio potissimum ad pathologiam philosophicam.” The only specimen we have of his observations in morbid anatomy is his account of the post-mortem examination made by order of the king on the body of the famous Thomas Parr, who died in 1635, at the reputed age of 152. Harvey insists on the value of physiological truths for their own sake, independently of their immediate utility; but he himself gives us an interesting example of the practical application of his theory of the circulation in the cure of a large tumour by tying the arteries which supplied it with blood (De generat. Exerc. xix.).