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 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).