"[They thought] if you put $300 million behindphysics or sociology, that would unbalance [theCollege]," says one high-level source.

The more general wording won out in the finalagreement.

The two also squabbled on faculty appointments,Radcliffe arguing for a tenured faculty at theInstitute while Harvard pushed for temporaryscholars.

The issue was handed off to Knowles and Dunn.

The pair met repeatedly in Knowles' office onthe second floor of University Hall and for lunchat restaurants like Upstairs at the Pudding andSandrine's. They communicated by telephone andthrough endless faxes.

Knowles talks about Dunn with affection--a"marvelously warm and wise person," he calls her.They speak of each like good friends--and perhapsthey are. Knowles' wife Jane has served asRadcliffe College archivist in the SchlesingerLibrary for 20 years and has worked alongside Dunnsince she came to Radcliffe as director of theSchlesinger in 1995.

A former president of Smith College, Dunn isuniversally respected as someone who's been there.At 67, though, most thought the Schlesinger wouldbe the last stop in her career. She suffered asevere heart attack last Halloween, and hercolleagues feared she would need months to recoverfrom her triple-bypass surgery. Yet Dunn was backin a matter of weeks.

But the two dispatched the issue independentlyand efficiently. The new Institute would only havevisiting scholars appointed for up to five years.The two-page document Knowles and Dunn submittedended up an appendix to the final deal.

Stuck in Neutral

But despite the progress made by Knowles, Dunnand others, the negotiations stalled seriously inthe fall of 1998. The sticking points were morenumerous than the points of agreement.

Harvard and Radcliffe could not agree on whatrole, if any, Radcliffe should play inundergraduate life. They could not agree on whatproperty the new Radcliffe Institute shouldoccupy--after all, the College's admissions officeand one of its principal performance spaces sitsquarely in Radcliffe Yard.

They could not agree on fundraising--who couldproperly solicit whom. Or on governance issues,like whether the current RadcliffeBoard--including Sheerr--should have a formal rolein shaping the fledgling Institute.

Radcliffe tripped on Title IX law as well. SomeRadcliffe leaders had envisioned that parts of theInstitute might be open to women fellowsonly--until they were informed that that would beillegal. Laws prohibiting sex discrimination ineducation make an exception for traditionallyall-women undergraduate institutions, likeRadcliffe College, but not post-graduate programs,like the Radcliffe Institute.

Worst of all, says one source, Sheerr blunderedby showing what Rudenstine considered a private,incomplete document to members of her board inSeptember.

"It caused distrust to break out," one officialsays. "It made a lot [of Harvard negotiators]think there was too much chaos."