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, in Human 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 in Proceedings 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 his Bilder 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 as Privatdozent,
and his first lectures, dealing with such diverse subjects as
Catullus and the Nibelungenlied, 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 by Quaestiones Catullianae (1837), Observationes criticae (1841), and editions of Ovid’s Halieutica and the Cynegetica of 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 the Altdeutsche Blätter, which in 1841 gave place to the Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum, of which he continued editor till his death. Hartmann von Aue’s Erec (1839) and his Lieder, Büchlein and Der arme Heinrich (1842), Rudolf von Ems’s Guter Gerhard (1840) and Conrad von Würzburg’s Engelhard (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 his Opuscula were published at Leipzig (1875–1877).
See Kirchhoff, “Gedächtnisrede,” in Abhandl. 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 by Das Friedensfest
(1890), Einsame Menschen (1891) and Die 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 comedies Kollege Crampton (1892), Der Biberpelz
(1893) and Der rote Hahn (1901), a “dream poem,” Hannele
(1893), and an historical drama Florian Geyer (1895). He also
wrote two tragedies of Silesian peasant life, Fuhrmann Henschel
(1898) and Rose Berndt (1903), and the “dramatic fairy-tales”
Die versunkene Glocke (1897) and Und 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 opera Mathilde was performed at Cassel
