Right. But did Basset invent the term? Or does it come from an earlier source. I mean, I know how it reputedly is spelled but the meaning is very subtle and can shift about if one pays too much attention to the phrase itself. (You have been warned...)

Marie Theresa, thank you for reminding me of O.E! I am currently at a location where a copy is not at hand...but I do have the Internet!

"Harm" sound like some sort of Norse god or something in the phrase itself, especially with the possessive form. I think that it is an interesting turn of phrase that begs the question as to the full etymology of the word itself...

O.E. hearm "hurt, evil, grief, pain, insult," from P.Gmc. *kharmaz (cf. O.N. harmr, O.Fris. herm, Ger. harm "grief, sorrow, harm"). The verb is from O.E. hearmian "to hurt," and ousted O.E. skeþþan "scathe" in all but a few senses.

In that sense, how could you get in the way of any of that...other than intentionally doing so? It also seems to me that the plural is also true for the phrase...but not the spirit, if you will, of the actual usage. That is, the noun, 'harm' seems to be raised above the mundane and placed into a spiritual context implying some sort of deity or fate that must be encountered by the protagonist(s). Although, frankly, "In Scathe's way" does seem to be even more viscerally Norse, "harm" flowing off the English palette less gutturally and with more grace.

Unknowingly in harm's way is the way to look at this. If you are unknowingly in harm's way then can you also be unknowingly in harms way? Is there an implied fate fetish if you are in harms' way? Or ways? In the singular, only one harm is implied, yet many harms may befall. Being in harm's way is both a state of being, or potential being, and also an implied struggle with fate...and fates I suppose. Hmm. Anyways, it is a romantique notional phrase that implies a sense of commitment to purpose and grounding in the weird of the world...even if potentially unpleasant, consequentially.