"My advice was...you go to PresidentRudenstine, and you make a proposal," he says.

Harvard saw the proposal as far too ambitious:It called for Radcliffe to maintain a large rolein undergraduate education and to have 15 or morepermanent faculty members. The new Institute wouldhave an annual budget of about $50 million, morediscretionary money than all but the largest ofthe University's faculties--or tubs, as they'reknown in Harvard-speak.

"They wanted big numbers and certain symbolicthings to show they weren't being unfaithful totheir alumnae," a Harvard official says."[Harvard's attitude] was that the numbers shouldbe based on actual programs and plans."

A month later, a new urgency would enter theprocess as the Boston Globe announced for thefirst time that the schools were in secret talksand that Radcliffe was on the verge ofrelinquishing its "college" title.

"The impact was monumental," says RadcliffeMedia Relations Officer Michael A. Armini. "Itshaped the coverage of Radcliffe for at least sixmonths."

Harvard publicly told an eager press whatRudenstine had been saying in private for months:Radcliffe must first figure out its own directionbefore a merger could be discussed. Radcliffechose to say virtually nothing at all.

By May, sources say Sheerr had sensed Harvard'sreluctance and produced a new and more realisticplan. Rudenstine considered it a leap forward,leading to an informal meeting between members ofHarvard's Corporation and Radcliffe's Board ofTrustees in June.

Discussions began in earnest in August, and bySeptember 1998, many thought a deal imminent. Butit would still be seven months before the signingin Fay House.

Nagging Questions

When the academic year began in September, thetwo sides had made significant progress on severalkey issues.

The financing of the Institute was agreed uponearly. Harvard understood it would have tocontribute a large sum--the final tally was $150million--to launch the Institute properly.

More problematic was the Institute's missionstatement. Negotiators had met repeatedly formonths to sketch a one-paragraph, two-sentencemission statement for the new Radcliffe Institute.

"People argued about prepositions," one sourcesays.

The crucial question was whether the Institutewould confine itself to women's and gender studiesor would examine a wide range of disciplines, withan important "focus" on women. Radcliffe wanted"women, gender and society" (a favoriteWilson-ism) to be included in the statement'sfirst sentence. Harvard insisted on emphasizing"advanced work in the academic disciplines,professions, or creative arts" first.

Harvard thought underscoring any one subject,like women's studies, so heavily would be amistake.