Chapter 13

See Sir N. H. Nicolas,Life and Times of Sir Christopher Hatton(London, 1847); andCorrespondence of the Family of Hatton, being chiefly Letters addressed to Christopher, first Viscount Hatton, 1601-1704, edited with introduction by E. M. Thompson (London, 1878).

HATTON, JOHN LIPTROT(1809-1886), English musical composer, was born at Liverpool on the 12th of October 1809. He was virtually a self-taught musician, and besides holding several appointments as organist in Liverpool, appeared as an actor on the Liverpool stage, subsequently finding his way to London as a member of Macready’s company at Drury Lane in 1832. Ten years after this he was appointed conductor at the same theatre for a series of English operas, and in 1843 his own first operetta,Queen of the Thames, was given with success. Staudigl, the eminent German bass, was a member of the company, and at his suggestion Hatton wrote a more ambitious work,Pascal Bruno, which, in a German translation, was presented at Vienna, with Staudigl in the principal part; the opera contained a song, “Revenge,” which the basso made very popular in England, though the piece as a whole was not successful enough to be produced here. Hatton’s excellent pianoforte playing attracted much attention in Vienna; he took the opportunity of studying counterpoint under Sechter, and wrote a number of songs, obviously modelled on the style of German classics. In 1846 he appeared at the Hereford festival as a singer, and also played a pianoforte concerto of Mozart. He undertook concert tours about this time with Sivori, Vieuxtemps and others. From 1848 to 1850 he was in America; on his return he became conductor of the Glee and Madrigal Union, and from about 1853 was engaged at the Princess’s theatre to provide and conduct the music for Charles Kean’s Shakespearean revivals. He seems to have kept thisappointmentfor about five years. In 1856 a cantata,Robin Hood, was given at the Bradford festival, and a third opera,Rose, or Love’s Ransom, at Covent Garden in 1864, without much success. In 1866 he went again to America, and from this year Hatton held the post of accompanist at the Ballad Concerts, St James’s Hall, for nine seasons. In 1875 he went to Stuttgart, and wrote an oratorio,Hezekiah, given at theCrystalPalace in 1877; like all his larger works it met with very moderate success. Hatton excelled in the lyrical forms of music, and, in spite of his distinct skill in the severer styles of the madrigal, &c., he won popularity by such songs as “To Anthea,” “Good-bye, Sweetheart,” and “Simon the Cellarer,” the first of which may be called a classic in its own way. His glees and part-songs, such as “When Evening’s Twilight,” are still reckoned among the best of their class; and he might have gained a place of higher distinction among English composers had it not been for his irresistible animal spirits and a want of artistic reverence, which made it uncertain in his younger days whether, when he appeared at a concert, he would play a fugue of Bach or sing a comic song. He died at Margate on the 20th of September 1886.

HAUCH, JOHANNES CARSTEN(1790-1872), Danish poet, was born of Danish parents residing at Frederikshald in Norway, on the 12th of May 1790. In 1802 he lost his mother, and in 1803 returned with his father to Denmark. In 1807 he fought as a volunteer against the English invasion. He entered the university of Copenhagen in 1808, and in 1821 took his doctor’s degree. He became the friend and associate of Steffens and Oehlenschläger, warmly adopting the romantic views about poetry and philosophy. His first two dramatic poems,The Journey to GinistanandThe Power of Fancy, appeared in 1816, and were followed by a lyrical drama,Rosaura(1817); but these works attracted little or no attention. Hauch therefore gave up all hope of fame as a poet, and resigned himself entirely to the study of science. He took his doctor’s degree in zoology in 1821, and went abroad to pursue his studies. At Nice he had an accident which obliged him to submit to the amputation of one foot. He returned to literature, publishing a dramatized fairy tale, theHamadryad, and the tragedies ofBajazet,Tiberius,Gregory VII., in 1828-1829,The Death of Charles V.(1831), andThe Siege of Maestricht(1832). These plays were violently attacked and enjoyed no success. Hauch then turned to novel-writing, and published in succession five romances—Vilhelm Zabern(1834);The Alchemist(1836);A Polish Family(1839);The Castle on the Rhine(1845); andRobert Fulton(1853). In 1842 he collected his shorterPoems. In 1846 he was appointed professor of the Scandinavian languages in Kiel, but returned to Copenhagen when the war broke out in 1848. About this time his dramatic talent was at its height, and he produced one admirable tragedy after another; among these may be mentionedSvend Grathe(1841);The Sisters at Kinnekulle(1849);Marshal Stig(1850);Honour Lost and Won(1851); andTycho Brahe’s Youth(1852). From 1858 to 1860 Hauch was director of the Danish National Theatre; he produced three more tragedies—The King’s Favourite(1859);Henry of Navarre(1863); andJulian the Apostate(1866). In 1861 hepublished another collection ofLyrical Poems and Romances; and in 1862 the historical epic ofValdemar Seir, volumes which contain his best work. From 1851, when he succeeded Oehlenschläger, to his death, he held the honorary post of professor of aesthetics at the university of Copenhagen. He died in Rome in 1872. Hauch was one of the most prolific of the Danish poets, though his writings are unequal in value. His lyrics and romances in verse are always fine in form and often strongly imaginative. In all his writings, but especially in his tragedies, he displays a strong bias in favour of what is mystical and supernatural. Of his dramasMarshal Stigis perhaps the best, and of his novels the patriotic tale ofVilhelm Zabernis admired the most.

See G. Brandes, “Carsten Hauch” (1873) inDanske Digtere(1877); F. Rönning,J. C. Hauch(1890), and inDansk Biografisk-Lexicon, (vol. vii. Copenhagen, 1893). Hauch’s novels were collected (1873-1874) and his dramatic works (3 vols., 2nd ed., 1852-1859).

HAUER, FRANZ,Ritter von(1822-1899), Austrian geologist, born in Vienna on the 30th of January 1822, was son of Joseph von Hauer (1778-1863), who was equally distinguished as a high Austrian official and authority on finance and as a palaeontologist. He was educated in Vienna, afterwards studied geology at the mining academy of Schemnitz (1839-1843), and for a time was engaged in official mining work in Styria. In 1846 he became assistant to W. von Haidinger at the mineralogical museum in Vienna; three years later he joined the imperial geological institute, and in 1866 he was appointed director. In 1886 he became superintendent of the imperial natural history museum in Vienna. Among his special geological works are those on the Cephalopoda of the Triassic and Jurassic formations of Alpine regions (1855-1856). His most important general work was that of theGeological Map of Austro-Hungary, in twelve sheets (1867-1871; 4th ed., 1884, including Bosnia and Montenegro). This map was accompanied by a series of explanatory pamphlets. In 1882 he was awarded the Wollaston medal by the Geological Society of London. In 1892 von Hauer became a life-member of the upper house of the Austrian parliament. He died on the 20th of March 1899.

Publications.—Beiträge zur Paläontolographie von Österreich(1858-1859);Die Geologie und ihre Anwendung auf die Kenntnis der Bodenbeschaffenheit der österr.-ungar. Monarchie(1875; ed. 2, 1878).Memoirby Dr E. Tietze;Jahrbuch der K. K. geolog. Reichsanstalt(1899, reprinted 1900, with portrait).

Publications.—Beiträge zur Paläontolographie von Österreich(1858-1859);Die Geologie und ihre Anwendung auf die Kenntnis der Bodenbeschaffenheit der österr.-ungar. Monarchie(1875; ed. 2, 1878).

Memoirby Dr E. Tietze;Jahrbuch der K. K. geolog. Reichsanstalt(1899, reprinted 1900, with portrait).

HAUFF, WILHELM(1802-1827), German poet and novelist, was born at Stuttgart on the 29th of November 1802, the son of a secretary in the ministry of foreign affairs. Young Hauff lost his father when he was but seven years of age, and his early education was practically self-gained in the library of his maternal grandfather at Tübingen, to which place his mother had removed. In 1818 he was sent to the Klosterschule at Blaubeuren, whence he passed in 1820 to the university of Tübingen. In four years he completed his philosophical and theological studies, and on leaving the university became tutor to the children of the famous Württemberg minister of war, General Baron Ernst Eugen von Hügel (1774-1849), and for them wrote hisMärchen, which he published in hisMärchenalmanach auf das Jahr1826. He also wrote there the first part of theMitteilungen aus den Memoiren des Satan(1826) andDer Mann im Monde(1825). The latter, a parody of the sentimental and sensual novels of H. Clauren (pseudonym of Karl Gottlieb Samuel Heun [1771-1854]), became, in course of composition, a close imitation of that author’s style and was actually published under his name. Clauren, in consequence, brought an action for damages against Hauff and gained his case. Whereupon Hauff followed up the attack in his witty and sarcasticKontroverspredigt über H. Clauren und den Mann im Monde(1826) and attained his original object—the moral annihilation of the mawkish and unhealthy literature with which Clauren was flooding the country. Meanwhile, animated by Sir Walter Scott’s novels, Hauff wrote the historical romanceLichtenstein(1826), which acquired great popularity in Germany and especially in Swabia, treating as it did the most interesting period in the history of that country, the reign of Duke Ulrich (1487-1550). While on a journey to France, the Netherlands and north Germany he wrote the second part of theMemoiren des Satanand some short novels, among them the charmingBettlerin vom Pont des Artsand his masterpiece, thePhantasien im Bremer Ratskeller(1827). He also published some short poems which have passed intoVolkslieder, among themMorgenrot, Morgenrot, leuchtest mir zum frühen Tod; andSteh’ ich in finstrer Mitternacht. In January 1827, Hauff undertook the editorship of the StuttgartMorgenblattand in the following month married, but his happiness was prematurely cut short by his death from fever on the 18th of November 1827.

Considering his brief life, Hauff was an extraordinarily prolific writer. The freshness and originality of his talent, his inventiveness, and his genial humour have won him a high place among the south German prose writers of the early nineteenth century.

HisSämtliche Werkewere published, with a biography, by G. Schwab (3 vols., 1830-1834; 5 vols., 18th ed., 1882), and by F. Bobertag (1891-1897), and a selection by M. Mendheim (3 vols., 1891). For his life cf. J. Klaiber,Wilhelm Hauff, ein Lebensbild(1881); M. Mendheim,Hauffs Leben und Werke(1894); and H. Hofmann,W. Hauff(1902).

HAUG, MARTIN(1827-1876), German Orientalist, was born at Ostdorf near Balingen, Württemberg, on the 30th of January 1827. He became a pupil in the gymnasium at Stuttgart at a comparatively late age, and in 1848 he entered the university of Tübingen, where he studied Oriental languages, especially Sanskrit. He afterwards attended lectures in Göttingen, and in 1854 settled asPrivatdozentat Bonn. In 1856 he removed to Heidelberg, where he assisted Bunsen in his literary undertakings; and in 1859 he accepted an invitation to India, where he became superintendent of Sanskrit studies and professor of Sanskrit in Poona. Here his acquaintance with the Zend language and literature afforded him excellent opportunities for extending his knowledge of this branch of literature. The result of his researches was a volume ofEssays on the sacred language, writings and religion of the Parsees(Bombay, 1862). Having returned to Stuttgart in 1866, he was called to Munich as professor of Sanskrit and comparative philology in 1868. He died on the 3rd of June 1876.

Besides theEssays on the Parsees, of which a new edition, by E. W. West, greatly enriched from the posthumous papers of the author, appeared in 1878, Haug published a number of works of considerable importance to the student of the literatures of ancient India and Persia. They includeDie Pehlewisprache und der Bundehesch(1854);Die Schrift und Sprache der zweiten Keilschriftgattung(1855);Die fünf Gathas, edited, translated and expounded (1858-1860); an edition, with translation and explanation, of theAitareya Brahmana of the Rigveda(Bombay, 1863), which is accounted his best work in the province of ancient Indian literature;A Lecture on an original Speech of Zoroaster(1865);An old Zend-Pahlavi Glossary(1867);Über den Charakter der Pehlewisprache(1869);Das 18. Kapitel des Wendidad(1869);Über das Ardai-Virafnameh(1870);An old Pahlavi-Pazand Glossary(1870); andVedische Rätselfragen und Rätselsprüche(1875).For particulars of Haug’s life and work, see A. Bezzenberger,Beiträge zur Kunde der indogermanischen Sprachen, vol. i. pp. 70 seq.

For particulars of Haug’s life and work, see A. Bezzenberger,Beiträge zur Kunde der indogermanischen Sprachen, vol. i. pp. 70 seq.

HAUGE, HANS NIELSEN(1771-1824), Norwegian Lutheran divine, was born in the parish of Thunö, Norway, on the 3rd of April 1771, the son of a peasant. With the aid of various religious works which he found in his father’s house, he laboured to supplement his scanty education. In his twenty-sixth year, believing himself to be a divinely-commissioned prophet, he began to preach in his native parish and afterwards throughout Norway, calling people to repentance and attacking rationalism. In 1800 he passed to Denmark, where, as at home, he gained many followers and assistants, chiefly among the lower orders. Proceeding to Christiansand in 1804, Hauge set up a printing-press to disseminate his views more widely, but was almost immediately arrested for holding illegal religious meetings, and for insulting the regular clergy in his books, all of which were confiscated; he was also heavily fined. After being in confinement for some years, he was released in 1814 on payment of a fine, and retiring to an estate at Breddwill, near Christiania, he died there on the 29th of March 1824. His adherents, who did not formally break with the church, were calledHaugianer or Leser(i.e.Readers). He unquestionably did much to revivethe spiritual life of the northern Lutheran Church. His views were of a pietistic nature. Though he cannot be said to have rejected any article of the Lutheran creed, the peculiar emphasis which he laid upon the evangelical doctrines of faith and grace involved considerable antagonism to the rationalistic or sacerdotal views commonly held by the established clergy.

Hauge’s principal writings areForsög til Afhandeling om Guds Visdom(1796);Anvisning til nogle mörkelige Sprog i Bibelen(1798);Forklaring over Loven og Evangelium(1803). For an account of his life and doctrines see C. Bang’sHans Nielsen Hauge og hans Samtid(Christiania; 2nd ed., 1875); O. Rost,Nogle Bemaerkninger om Hans Nielsen Hauge og hans Retning(1883), and the article in Herzog-Hauck,Realencyklopädie.

HAUGESUND,a seaport of Norway in Stavangeramt(county), on the west coast, 34 m. N. by W. of Stavanger. Pop. (1900), 7935. It is an important fishing centre. Herrings are exported to the annual value of £100,000 to £200,000, also mackerel and lobsters. The principal imports are coal and salt. There are factories for woollen goods and a margarine factory. Haugesund is the reputed death-place of Harald Haarfager, to whom an obelisk of red granite was erected in 1872 on the thousandth anniversary of his victory at the Hafsfjord (near Stavanger) whereby he won the sovereignty of Norway. The memorial stands 1¼ m. north of the town, on the Haraldshaug, where the hero’s supposed tombstone is shown.

HAUGHTON, SAMUEL(1821-1897), Irish scientific writer, the son of James Haughton (1795-1873), was born at Carlow on the 21st of December 1821. His father, the son of a Quaker, but himself a Unitarian, was an active philanthropist, a strong supporter of Father Theobald Mathew, a vegetarian, and an anti-slavery worker and writer. After a distinguished career in Trinity College, Dublin, Samuel was elected a fellow in 1844. He was ordained priest in 1847, but seldom preached. In 1851 he was appointed professor of geology in Trinity College, and this post he held for thirty years. He began the study of medicine in 1859, and in 1862 took the degree of M.D. in the university of Dublin. He was then made registrar of the Medical School, the status of which he did much to improve, and he represented the university on the General Medical Council from 1878 to 1896. He was elected F.R.S. in 1858, and in course of time Oxford conferred upon him the hon. degree of D.C.L., and Cambridge and Edinburgh that of LL.D. He was a man of remarkable knowledge and ability, and he communicated papers on widely different subjects to various learned societies and scientific journals in London and Dublin. He wrote on the laws of equilibrium and motion of solid and fluid bodies (1846), on sun-heat, terrestrial radiation, geological climates and on tides. He wrote also on the granites of Leinster and Donegal, and on the cleavage and joint-planes in the Old Red Sandstone of Waterford (1857-1858). He was president of the Royal Irish Academy from 1886 to 1891, and for twenty years he was secretary of the Royal Zoological Society of Ireland. He died in Dublin on the 31st of October 1897.

Publications.—Manual of Geology(1865);Principles of Animal Mechanics(1873);Six Lectures on Physical Geography(1880). In conjunction with his friend, Professor J. Galbraith, he issued a series of Manuals of Mathematical and Physical Science.

HAUGHTON, WILLIAM(fl. 1598), English playwright. He collaborated in many plays with Henry Chettle, Thomas Dekker, John Day and Richard Hathway. The only certain biographical information about him is derived from Philip Henslowe, who on the 10th of March 1600 lent him ten shillings “to release him out of the Clink.” Mr Fleay credits him with a considerable share inThe Patient Grissill(1599), and a merry comedy entitledEnglish-Men for my Money, or A Woman will have her Will(1598) is ascribed to his sole authorship.The Devil and his Dame, mentioned as a forthcoming play by Henslowe in March 1600, is identified by Mr Fleay asGrim, the Collier of Croydon, which was printed in 1662. In this play an emissary is sent from the infernal regions to report on the conditions of married life on earth.

Grimis reprinted in vol. viii., andEnglish-Men for my Moneyin vol. x., of W. C. Hazlitt’s edition of Dodsley’sOld Plays.

HAUGWITZ, CHRISTIAN AUGUST HEINRICH KURT,Count von, Freiherr von Krappitz(1752-1831), Prussian statesman, was born on the 11th of June 1752, at Peucke near Öls. He belonged to the Silesian (Protestant) branch of the ancient family of Haugwitz, of which the Catholic branch is established in Moravia. He studied law, spent some time in Italy, returned to settle on his estates in Silesia, and in 1791 was elected by the Silesian estates general director of the province. At the urgent instance of King Frederick William II. he entered the Prussian service, became ambassador at Vienna in 1792 and at the end of the same year a member of the cabinet at Berlin.

Haugwitz, who had attended the young emperor Francis II. at his coronation and been present at the conferences held at Mainz to consider the attitude of the German powers towards the Revolution, was opposed to the exaggerated attitude of the Frenchémigrésand to any interference in the internal affairs of France. After the war broke out, however, the defiant temper of the Committee of Public Safety made an honourable peace impossible, while the strained relations between Austria and Prussia on the question of territorial “compensations” crippled the power of the Allies to carry the war to a successful conclusion. It was in these circumstances that Haugwitz entered on the negotiations that resulted in the subsidy treaty between Great Britain and Prussia, and Great Britain and Holland, signed at the Hague on the 19th of April 1794. Haugwitz, however, was not the man to direct a strong and aggressive policy; the failure of Prussia to make any effective use of the money supplied broke the patience of Pitt, and in October the denunciation by Great Britain of the Hague treaty broke the last tie that bound Prussia to the Coalition. The separate treaty with France, signed at Basel on the 5th of April 1795, was mainly due to the influence of Haugwitz.

His object was now to save the provinces on the left bank of the Rhine from being lost to the Empire. No guarantee of their maintenance had been inserted in the Basel treaty; but Haugwitz and the king hoped to preserve them by establishing the armed neutrality of North Germany and securing its recognition by the French Republic. This policy was rendered futile by the victories of Napoleon Bonaparte and the virtual conquest of South Germany by the French. Haugwitz, who had continued to enjoy the confidence of the new king, Frederick William III., recognized this fact, and urged his master to join the new Coalition in 1798. But the king clung blindly to the illusion of neutrality, and Haugwitz allowed himself to be made the instrument of a policy of which he increasingly disapproved. It was not till 1803, when the king refused his urgent advice to demand the evacuation of Hanover by the French, that he tendered his resignation. In August 1804 he was definitely replaced by Hardenberg, and retired to his estates.

In his retirement Haugwitz was still consulted, and he used all his influence against Hardenberg’s policy of arapprochementwith France. His representations had little weight, however, until Napoleon’s high-handed action in violating Prussian territory by marching troops through Ansbach, roused the anger of the king. Haugwitz was now once more appointed foreign minister, as Hardenberg’s colleague, and it was he who was charged to carry to Napoleon the Prussian ultimatum which was the outcome of the visit of the tsar Alexander I. to Berlin in November. But in this crisis his courage failed him; his nature was one that ever let “I dare not wait upon I will”; he delayed his journey pending some turn in events and to give time for the mobilization of the duke of Brunswick’s army; he was frightened by reports of separate negotiations between Austria and Napoleon, not realizing that a bold declaration by Prussia would nip them in the bud. Napoleon, when at last they met, read him like a book and humoured his diplomatic weakness until the whole issue was decided at Austerlitz. On the 15th of December, instead of delivering an ultimatum, Haugwitz signed at Schönbrunn the treaty which gave Hanover to Prussia in return for Ansbach, Cleves and Neuchâtel.

The humiliation of Prussia and her minister was, however,not yet complete. In February 1806 Haugwitz went to Paris to ratify the treaty of Schönbrunn and to attempt to secure some modifications in favour of Prussia. He was received with a storm of abuse by Napoleon, who insisted on tearing up the treaty and drawing up a fresh one, which doubled the amount of territory to be ceded by Prussia and forced her to a breach with Great Britain by binding her to close the Hanoverian ports to British commerce. The treaty, signed on the 15th of February, left Prussia wholly isolated in Europe. What followed belongs to the history of Europe rather than to the biography of Haugwitz. He remained, indeed, at the head of the Prussian ministry of foreign affairs, but the course of Prussian policy it was beyond his power to control. The Prussian ultimatum to Napoleon was forced upon him by overwhelming circumstances, and with the battle of Jena, on the 14th of October, his political career came to an end. He accompanied the flight of the king into East Prussia, there took leave of him and retired to his Silesian estates. In 1811 he was appointedCuratorof the university of Breslau; in 1820, owing to failing health, he went to live in Italy, where he remained till his death at Venice in 1831.

Haugwitz was a man of great intellectual gifts, of dignified presence and a charming address which endeared him to his sovereigns and his colleagues; but as a statesman he failed, not through want of perspicacity, but through lack of will power and a fatal habit of procrastination. During his retirement in Italy he wrote memoirs in justification of his policy, a fragment of which dealing with the episode of the treaty of Schönbrunn was published at Jena in 1837.

See J. von Minutoli,Der Graf von Haugwitz und Job von Witzleben(Berlin, 1844); L. von Ranke,Hardenberg u. d. Gesch. des preuss. Staates(Leipzig, 1879-1881), note on Haugwitz’s memoirs in vol. ii.;Denkwürdigkeiten des Staatskanzlers Fürsten von Hardenberg, ed. Ranke (5 vols., Leipzig, 1877); A. Sorel,L’Europe et la Révol. Franç., passim.

HAUNTINGS(from “to haunt,” Fr.hanter, of uncertain origin, but possibly from Lat.ambitare,ambire, to go about, frequent), the supposed manifestations of existence by spirits of the dead in houses or places familiar to them in life. The savage practice of tying up the corpse before burying it is clearly intended to prevent the dead from “walking”; and cremation, whether in savage lands or in classical times, may have originally had the same motive. The “spirit” manifests himself, as a rule, either in his bodily form, as when he lived, or in the shape of some animal, or by disturbing noises, as in the case of the poltergeist (q.v.). Classical examples occur in Plautus (Mostellaria), Lucian (Philopseudes), Pliny, Suetonius, St Augustine, St Gregory, Plutarch and elsewhere, while Lucretius has his theory of apparitions of the dead. He does not deny the fact; he explains it by “films” diffused from the living body and persisting in the atmosphere.

A somewhat similar hypothesis, to account for certain alleged phenomena, was invented by Mr Edmund Gurney. Some visionary appearances in haunted houses do not suggest the idea of an ambulatory spirit, but rather of the photograph of a past event, impressed we know not how on we know not what. In this theory there is no room for the agency of spirits of the dead. The belief in hauntings was naturally persistent through the middle ages, and example and theory abound in theLoca infesta(Cologne, 1598) of Petrus Thyraeus, S.J.; Wierius (c.1560), inDe praestigiis daemonum, is in the same tale. According to Thyraeus, hauntings appeal to the senses of sight, hearing and touch. The auditory phenomena are mainly thumping noises, sounds of footsteps, laughing and moaning. Rackets in general are caused bylares domestici(“brownies”) or the Poltergeist. In the tactile way ghostspushthe living; “I have been thrice pushed by an invisible power,” writes the Rev. Samuel Wesley, in 1717, in his narrative of the disturbances at his rectory at Epworth. Once he was pushed against the corner of his desk in the study; once up against the door of the matted chamber; and thirdly, “against the right-hand side of the frame of my study door, as I was going in.” We have thus Protestant corroboration of the statement of the learned Jesuit.

Thyraeus raises the question, Are the experiences hallucinatory? Did Mr Wesley (to take his case) receive a mere hallucinatory set of pushes? Was the hair of a friend of the writer’s, who occupied a haunted house, only pulled in a subjective way? Thyraeus remarks that, in cases of noisy phenomena, not all persons present hear them; and, rather curiously, Mr Wesley records the same experience; he sometimes did not hear sounds that seemed violently loud to his wife and family, who were with him at prayers. Thyraeus says that, as collective hallucinations of sight are rare—all present not usually seeing the apparition—so audible phenomena are not always experienced by all persons present. In such cases, he thinks that the sights and sounds have no external cause, he regards the sights and sounds as delusions—caused by spirits. This is a difficult question. He mentions that we hear all the furniture being tossed about (as Sir Walter and Lady Scott heard it at Abbotsford; see Lockhart’sLife, v. 311-315). Yet, on inspection, we find all the furniture in its proper place. There is abundant evidence to experience of this phenomenon, which remains as inexplicable as it was in the days of Thyraeus. When the sounds are heard, has the atmosphere vibrated, or has the impression only been made on “the inner ear”? In reply, Mr. Procter, who for sixteen years (1831-1847) endured the unexplained disturbances at Willington Mill, avers that the material objects on which the knocks appeared to be struck did certainly vibrate (seePoltergeist). Is then the felt vibration part of the hallucination?

As for visual phenomena, “ghosts,” Thyraeus does not regard them as space-filling entities, but as hallucinations imposed by spirits on the human senses; the spirit, in each case, not being necessarily the soul of the dead man or woman whom the phantasm represents.

In the matter of alleged hauntings, the symptoms, the phenomena, to-day, are exactly the same as those recorded by Thyraeus. The belief in them is so far a living thing that it greatly lowers the letting value of a house when it is reported to be haunted. (An action for libelling a house as haunted was reported in the London newspapers of the 7th of March 1907). It is true that ancient family legends of haunts are gloried in by the inheritors of stately homes in England, or castles in Scotland, and to discredit the traditional ghost—in the days of Sir Walter Scott—was to come within measurable distance of a duel. But the time-honoured phantasms of old houses usually survive only in the memory of “the oldest aunt telling the saddest tale.” Their historical basis can no more endure criticism than does the family portrait of Queen Mary,—signed by Medina about 1750-1770, and described by the family as “given to our ancestor by the Queen herself.” After many years’ experience of a baronial dwelling credited with seven distinct and separate phantasms, not one of which was ever seen by hosts, guests or domestics, scepticism as regards traditional ghosts is excusable. Legend reports that they punctually appear on the anniversaries of their misfortunes, but no evidence of such punctuality has been produced.

The Society for Psychical Research has investigated hundreds of cases of the alleged haunting of houses, and the reports are in the archives of the society. But, as the mere rumour of a haunt greatly lowers the value of a house, it is seldom possible to publish the names of the witnesses, and hardly ever permitted to publish the name of the house. From the point of view of science this is unfortunate (seeProceedings S.P.R.vol. viii. pp. 311-332 andProceedingsof 1882-1883, 1883-1884). As far as inquiry had any results, they were to the following effect. The spectres were of the most shy and fugitive kind, seen now by one person, now by another, crossing a room, walking along a corridor, and entering chambers in which, on inspection, they were not found. There was almost never any story to account for the appearances, as in magazine ghost-stories, and, if story there were, it lacked evidence. Recognitions of known dead persons were infrequent; occasionally there was recognition of a portrait in the house. The apparitions spoke in only one or two recorded cases, and, as a rule, seemed to have no motive for appearing.The “ghost” resembles nothing so much as a somnambulist, or the dream-walk of one living person made visible, telepathically, to another living person. Almost the only sign of consciousness given by the appearances is their shyness; on being spoken to or approached they generally vanish. Not infrequently they are taken, at first sight, for living human beings. In darkness they are often luminous, otherwise they would be invisible! Unexplained noises often, but not always, occur in houses where these phenomena are perceived. Evidence is only good, approximately, when a series of persons, in the same house, behold the same appearance, without being aware that it has previously been seen by others. Naturally it is almost impossible to prove this ignorance.

When inquirers believe that the appearances are due to the agency of spirits of the dead, they usually suppose the method to be a telepathic impact on the mind of the living by some “mere automatic projection from a consciousness which has its centre elsewhere” (Myers,Proceedings S.P.R.vol. xv. p. 64). Myers, inHuman Personality, fell back on “palaeolithic psychology,” and a theory of a phantasmogenetic agency producing a phantasm which had some actual relation to space. But space forbids us to give examples of modern experiences in haunted houses, endured by persons sane, healthy and well educated. The cases, abundantly offered inProceedings S.P.R., suggest that certain localities, more than others, are “centres of permanent possibilities of being hallucinated in a manner more or less uniform.” The causes of this fact (if causes there be, beyond a casual hallucination or illusion of A, which, when reported, begets by suggestion, or, when not reported, by telepathy, hallucinations in B, C, D and E), remain unknown (Proceedings S.P.R.vol. viii. p. 133 et seq.). Mr Podmore proposed this hypothesis of causation, which was not accepted by Myers; he thought that the theory laid too heavy a burden on telepathy and suggestion. Neither cause, nor any other cause of similar results, ever affects members of the S.P.R. who may be sent to dwell in haunted houses. They have no weird experiences, except when they are visionaries who see phantoms wherever they go.

(A. L.)

HAUPT, MORITZ(1808-1874), German philologist, was born at Zittau, in Lusatia, on the 27th of July 1808. His early education was mainly conducted by his father, Ernst Friedrich Haupt, burgomaster of Zittau, a man of good scholarly attainment, who used to take pleasure in turning German hymns or Goethe’s poems into Latin, and whose memoranda were employed by G. Freytag in the 4th volume of hisBilder aus der deutschen Vergangenheit. From the Zittau gymnasium, where he spent the five years 1821-1826, Haupt removed to the university of Leipzig with the intention of studying theology; but the natural bent of his mind and the influence of Professor G. Hermann soon turned all his energies in the direction of philosophy. On the close of his university course (1830) he returned to his father’s house, and the next seven years were devoted to quiet work, not only at Greek, Latin and German, but at Old French, Provençal and Bohemian. He formed with Lachmann at Berlin a friendship which had great effect on his intellectual development. In September 1837 he “habilitated” at Leipzig asPrivatdozent, and his first lectures, dealing with such diverse subjects as Catullus and theNibelungenlied, indicated the twofold direction of his labours. A new chair of German language and literature being founded for his benefit, he became professor extraordinarius (1841) and then professor ordinarius (1843); and in 1842 he married Louise Hermann, the daughter of his master and colleague. But the peaceful and prosperous course opening out before him at the university of Leipzig was brought to a sudden close. Having taken part in 1849 with Otto Jahn and Theodor Mommsen in a political agitation for the maintenance of the imperial constitution, Haupt was deprived of his professorship by a decree of the 22nd of April 1851. Two years later, however, he was called to succeed Lachmann at the university of Berlin; and at the same time the Berlin academy, which had made him a corresponding member in 1841, elected him an ordinary member. For twenty-one years he continued to hold a prominent place among the scholars of the Prussian capital, making his presence felt, not only by the prestige of his erudition and the clearness of his intellect, but by the tirelessness of his energy and the ardent fearlessness of his temperament. He died, of heart disease, on the 5th of February 1874.

Haupt’s critical work is distinguished by a happy union of the most painstaking investigation with intrepidity of conjecture, and while in his lectures and addresses he was frequently carried away by the excitement of the moment, and made sharp and questionable attacks on his opponents, in his writings he exhibits great self-control. The results of many of his researches are altogether lost, because he could not be prevailed upon to publish what fell much short of his own high ideal of excellence. To the progress of classical scholarship he contributed byQuaestiones Catullianae(1837),Observationes criticae(1841), and editions of Ovid’sHalieuticaand theCynegeticaof Gratius and Nemesianus (1838), of Catullus, Tibullus and Propertius (3rd ed., 1868), of Horace (3rd ed., 1871) and of Virgil (2nd ed., 1873). As early as 1836, with Hoffmann von Fallersleben, he started theAltdeutsche Blätter, which in 1841 gave place to theZeitschrift für deutsches Altertum, of which he continued editor till his death. Hartmann von Aue’sErec(1839) and hisLieder,BüchleinandDer arme Heinrich(1842), Rudolf von Ems’sGuter Gerhard(1840) and Conrad von Würzburg’sEngelhard(1844) are the principal German works which he edited. To form a collection of the French songs of the 16th century was one of his favourite schemes, but a little volume published after his death,Französische Volkslieder(1877), is the only monument of his labours in that direction. Three volumes of hisOpusculawere published at Leipzig (1875-1877).See Kirchhoff, “Gedächtnisrede,” inAbhandl. der Königl. Akad. der Wissenschaften zu Berlin(1875); Otto Belger,Moritz Haupt als Lehrer(1879); Sandys,Hist. Class. Schol.iii. (1908).

See Kirchhoff, “Gedächtnisrede,” inAbhandl. der Königl. Akad. der Wissenschaften zu Berlin(1875); Otto Belger,Moritz Haupt als Lehrer(1879); Sandys,Hist. Class. Schol.iii. (1908).

HAUPTMANN, GERHART(1862- ), German dramatist, was born on the 15th of November 1862 at Obersalzbrunn in Silesia, the son of an hotel-keeper. From the village school of his native place he passed to the Realschule in Breslau, and was then sent to learn agriculture on his uncle’s farm at Jauer. Having, however, no taste for country life, he soon returned to Breslau and entered the art school, intending to become a sculptor. He then studied at Jena, and spent the greater part of the years 1883 and 1884 in Italy. In May 1885 Hauptmann married and settled in Berlin, and, devoting himself henceforth entirely to literary work, soon attained a great reputation as one of the chief representatives of the modern drama. In 1891 he retired to Schreiberhau in Silesia. Hauptmann’s first drama,Vor Sonnenaufgang(1889) inaugurated the realistic movement in modern German literature; it was followed byDas Friedensfest(1890),Einsame Menschen(1891) andDie Weber(1892), a powerful drama depicting the rising of the Silesian weavers in 1844. Of Hauptmann’s subsequent work mention may be made of the comediesKollege Crampton(1892), Der Biberpelz (1893) andDer rote Hahn(1901), a “dream poem,”Hannele(1893), and an historical dramaFlorian Geyer(1895). He also wrote two tragedies of Silesian peasant life,Fuhrmann Henschel(1898) andRose Berndt(1903), and the “dramatic fairy-tales”Die versunkene Glocke(1897) andUnd Pippa tanzt(1905). Several of his works have been translated into English.

Biographies of Hauptmann and critical studies of his dramas have been published by A. Bartels (1897); P. Schlenther (1898); and U. C. Woerner (2nd ed., 1900). See also L. Benoist-Hanappier,Le Drame naturaliste en Allemagne(1905).

HAUPTMANN, MORITZ(1792-1868), German musical composer and writer, was born at Dresden, on the 13th of October 1792, and studied music under Scholz, Lanska, Grosse and Morlacchi, the rival of Weber. Afterwards he completed his education as a violinist and composer under Spohr, and till 1820 held various appointments in private families, varying his musical occupations with mathematical and other studies bearing chiefly on acoustics and kindred subjects. For a time also Hauptmann was employed as an architect, but all other pursuits gave place to music, and a grand tragic opera,Mathilde, belongs to the period just referred to. In 1822 he entered the orchestra of Cassel, again under Spohr’s direction, and it was then that he first taught composition and musical theory to such men as Ferdinand David, Burgmüller, Kiel and others. His compositions at this time chiefly consisted of motets, masses, cantatas and songs. His operaMathildewas performed at Casselwith great success. In 1842 Hauptmann obtained the position of cantor at the Thomas-school of Leipzig (long previously occupied by the great Johann Sebastian Bach) together with that of professor at the conservatoire, and it was in this capacity that his unique gift as a teacher developed itself and was acknowledged by a crowd of enthusiastic and more or less distinguished pupils. He died on the 3rd of January 1868, and the universal regret felt at his death at Leipzig is said to have been all but equal to that caused by the loss of his friend Medelssohn many years before. Hauptmann’s compositions are marked by symmetry and perfection of workmanship rather than by spontaneous invention.

Amongst his vocal compositions—by far the most important portion of his work—may be mentioned two masses, choral songs for mixed voices (Op.32, 47), and numerous part songs. The results of his scientific research were embodied in his bookDie Natur der Harmonik und Metrik(1853), a standard work of its kind, in which a philosophic explanation of the forms of music is attempted.

HAURÉAU, (JEAN) BARTHÉLEMY(1812-1896), French historian and miscellaneous writer, was born in Paris. At the age of twenty he published a series of apologetic studies on theMontagnards. In later years he regretted the youthful enthusiasm of these papers, and endeavoured to destroy the copies. He joined the staff of theNational, and was praised by Théophile Gautier as the “tribune” of romanticism. At that time he seemed to be destined to a political career, and, indeed, after the revolution of the 24th of February 1848 was elected member of the National Assembly; but close contact with revolutionary men and ideas gradually cooled his old ardour. Throughout his life he was an enemy to innovators, not only in politics and religion, but also in literature. This attitude sometimes led him to form unjust estimates, but only on very rare occasions, for his character was as just as his erudition was scrupulous. After thecoup d’étathe resigned his position as director of the MS. department of the Bibliothèque Nationale, to which he had been appointed in 1848, and he refused to accept any administrative post until after the fall of the empire. After having acted as director of the national printing press from 1870 to 1881, he retired, but in 1893 accepted the post of director of the Fondation Thiers. He was also a member of the council of improvement of the École des Chartes. He died on the 29th of April 1896. For over half a century he was engaged in writing on the religious, philosophical, and more particularly the literary history of the middle ages. Appointed librarian of the town of Le Mans in 1838, he was first attracted by the history of Maine, and in 1843 published the first volume of hisHistoire littéraire du Maine(4 vols., 1843-1852), which he subsequently recast on a new plan (10 vols., 1870-1877). In 1845 he brought out an edition of vol. ii. of G. Ménage’sHistoire de Sablé. He then undertook the continuation of theGallia Christiana, and produced vol. xiv. (1856) for the province of Tours, vol. xv. (1862) for the province of Besançon, and vol. xvi. (1865-1870) for the province of Vienne. This important work gained him admission to the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres (1862). In theNotices et extraits des manuscritshe inserted several papers which were afterwards published separately, with additions and corrections, under the titleNotices et extraits de quelques manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale(6 vols., 1890-1893). To theHistoire littéraire de la Francehe contributed a number of studies, among which must be mentioned that relating to the sermon-writers (vol. xxvi., 1873), whose works, being often anonymous, raise many problems of attribution, and, though deficient inoriginalityof thought and style, reflect the very spirit of the middle ages. Among his other works mention must be made of his remarkableHistoire de la philosophie scolastique(1872-1880), extending from the time of Charlemagne to the 13th century, which was expanded from a paper crowned by the Académie des Sciences Morales et Politiques in 1850;Les Mélanges poétiques d’Hildebert de Lavardin(1882); an edition of theWorksof Hugh of St Victor (1886); a critical study of the Latin poems attributed to St Bernard (1890); andBernard Délicieux et l’inquisition albigeoise(1877). To these must be added his contributions to theDictionnaire des sciences philosophiques, Didot’sBiographie générale, theBibliothèque de l’École des Chartes, and theJournal des savants. From the time of his appointment to the Bibliothèque Nationale up to the last days of his life he was engaged in making abstracts of all the medieval Latin writings (many anonymous or of doubtful attribution) relating to philosophy, theology, grammar, canon law, and poetry, carefully noting on cards the first words of each passage. After his death this index ofincipits, arranged alphabetically, was presented to the Académie des Inscriptions, and a copy was placed in the MS. department of the Bibliothèque Nationale.

Back to Index Next