EX 
 
 74 
 08 
 
 -788- 
 
 MEMOIR 
 
 Off 
 
 EINRICH LEBERECHT FLEISCHER, 
 
 BY 
 
 PROF. A. MttLLER, PH. D. 
 
 FROM THE .SMITHSONIAN KEPOKT FOR 188P. 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 GOVERNMKM' PRINTING ol'FICE. 
 
 1892.
 
 -788- 
 
 MEMOIR 
 
 HEINRICH LEBERECHT FLEISCHER, 
 
 BY 
 
 PROF. A. MtfLLER, PH. D. 
 
 FROM THE SMITHSONIAN REPORT FOR 1889, 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 
 1891*.
 
 MEMOIR OF I1EISRICH LEBERECHT FLEISCHER.* 
 
 By PROF. A. MULLER, Ph. D. 
 
 Translated l>y Miss HKXRIETIA SZOLD. 
 
 Were it desirable to single out the rarest and most admirable among 
 the many fine qualities of the great and good scholar to whose memory 
 these lines are devoted, 1 should not hesitate to name the perfect self- 
 denial which at all times prompted him to place his unparallelled attain- 
 ments at the disposal of others. Among German orientalists (if Assyrio- 
 legists beexcepted), few will be found who have not profited by his un- 
 selfishness; and abroad likewise there are many who are similarly in- 
 debted. We all knew where to seek when our meager stores were on the 
 point of giving out, and we stood in need of the gifts with which his treas- 
 ure-houses were abundantly filled. In dispensing these to great and small, 
 he was untiring, generous, and impartial as God's sun which shines 
 upon the just and the unjust alike. More than a year has passed since 
 his hand has grown numb and his eye dim, but where do they linger 
 who should have hastened to his grave, and wreathed with tributes of 
 gratitude the hillock which nature, slow though her processes are, lias 
 twice decked \vith fresh verdure? I blame, I accuse no one. Many -i 
 shrinking soul hides its gratitude in reverential silence rather than pa- 
 rade fine and tender feelings in the market-place. Doubtless there are 
 others who reluctantly find themselves forced by the cares of existence, 
 by daily new burthensome tasks, to deny themselves the fulfillment of a 
 warmly cherished desire. And most probably there are still others, 
 here and there, who, like the writer of these words, are even now, alter 
 unavoidable delay, on the point of paying the long-planned tribute of 
 piety. Nevertheless it remains a sad fact that, with the exception of 
 the somewhat business like though not unsympathetic announcements 
 of the French Institute and of the Bavai ian Academy, the brief remark's, 
 accompanying an excellent portrait of Fleischer in the Leipzig Illustrirte 
 Zeitung, an article in the AV/r York Times, and a barren notice in the 
 London Athencwm, only two attempts have up to this time been made 
 to give adequate and becoming treatment to the work of this distin- 
 guished scholar: Thorbecke's sketch in the Journal of the German 
 
 * From Bezzenberger's Bcitriiijt ;ur Kitndt der indogermanischen Sprachen, Guttingen, 
 1889, vol. xv, pp. 319-337. 
 
 507 
 
 2107671
 
 508 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 
 
 Oriental Society, and the more extended memorial address by Goldziher 
 before the Hungarian Academy. Indeed it will ever be humiliating to 
 German orientalists, that although more than a year has elapsed since 
 Fleischer's death, the only searching analysis published of his great 
 activity as a scholar and a teacher (and such Goldziher's* essay ob- 
 viouslj" is), has been written by an Hungarian in his native language, 
 with which no one of us is conversant. 
 
 In fact, the number is not very great of those who may without pre- 
 sumption undertake au exhaustive treatment of the life of so distin- 
 guished a scholar. I am far from counting myself among that number, 
 but I believe I have learned enough to enable me to appreciate to a 
 certain extent the great ability of him who acquired such vast learning 
 by means of his own exertions; and I truU I have sufficient judg- 
 ment to designate at least approximately the rank and position due 
 my deceased teacher in the history of our science. Precisely here 
 I can not permit the motive of modesty to hinder me from attempt- 
 ing this task, for the reader who is interested in the science of Indo- 
 European languages may justly wish to gain an idea of the general atti- 
 tude of a scholar whose investigations border upon his own sphere. 
 That my task also involves the duty of pointing out the natural limita- 
 tions of his activity shall not hinder me from carrying out my intention. 
 Next to unselfishness, Fleischer's most prominent trait as a scholar 
 was his love of truth. He himself would be the first to censure me if 
 I were to sketch his personality in white on a white back-ground, ac- 
 cording to the latest fashion among painters. Admiration without criti- 
 cism is valueless. If, feeling the former, I venture to U3e the latter, no 
 one may charge me with presumptuousness. He is a poor master who 
 trains disciples bereft of the critical faculty; a poor disciple he who 
 leans unquestioniugly upon the authority of even a deeply-revered 
 master. I must however refrain from giving a detailed description of 
 the purely human side of his being and life, incomplete though his pic- 
 ture will thus remain. I consider it improper to forestall a full presen- 
 tation by one more qualified for this task, who can base his assertions 
 upon intimate acquaintance with all the incidents and relations of his 
 private life. I shall confine myself to outlines, the data for which I 
 owe to the kindness of Prof. Dr. Curt Fleischer, of Meissen. They thus 
 may claim reliability on those points in which they disagree with state- 
 ments published elsewhere. 
 
 Heinrich Leberecht Fleischer was born at Schandau on February 21, 
 1801. His father, Johann Gottfried Fleischer, an officer in the custom- 
 service, died at the age of eighty-nine, on August 24, 1860, at Pirua, 
 enjoying at that time a pension as inspector of customs. His mother, 
 whom he lost as early as August 10, 1825, was the daughter of the 
 
 'Emle'kbeszeM Fleischer Leberecht Henrik ;i M. Tiul. Akade"mia kiiUaja felett. 
 Goldziher Ignac/ (a Majjy. Tiul. Ak. ellmnyt ta<rjai folott tarttot emle'kbesze'dek, 
 Vkot. 4. sziim). Budapest, M. T. Ak., 1889, 44 p., 8.
 
 MKMOIB OF FLEISCHER. 509 
 
 parish schoolmaster Uuruh, at Prietitz, near Pulsnitz. At Schaudau 
 the boy attended the public school, where his talents soon attracted 
 th^ attention of the principal, Edelnrmn, who undertook to teach young 
 Fleischer the elements of Latin. Thus his father was enabled to enter 
 him in 1814, as a student at the high-school in Bautzen, where he re- 
 mained until 1819. Here he was instructed in Hebrew, thus for the 
 first time coming in contact with the Orient. When next he became 
 interested in an Eastern subject it was by chance, and it decided his 
 whole future career. He accidentally found among the wrapping-paper 
 of a cheese-dealer at market sheets of an Arabic grammar, to the study 
 ot which he at once applied himself. He became so deeply interested that 
 when he entered upon his course in the University of Leipzig at Easter, 
 18i9, he not only did not neglect liis theological pursuits, nor fail to 
 devote himself under the guidance of Gottfried Hermann to classical 
 studies, but lie also indulged his love for Orieutalia. In fact, after hav- 
 ing passed with distinction a theological examination, he spent one more 
 year in the exclusive study of Oriental languages. He soon arrived at 
 the conviction that it was necessary for him to be at Paris with De Sacy. 
 By the assistance of a young French merchant named Bernard, with 
 whom he had become acquainted, he succeeded in obtaining a position 
 as tutor in the household of Mons. de Caulaincourt (under Napoleon. 
 Duke of Viceuza). On March 4, he received his degree, and on April 18, 
 he began his journey to Paris. For one year and a half he was in Caul- 
 aincourt's house. Later he lived alone, earning a livelihood by giving 
 private lessons. But during the whole time he was zealously occupied 
 with his studies under De Sacy, paying particular attention to Arabic, 
 Persian, and Turkish. The impression made upon him by the great 
 French savant was never obliterated, neither by the work, nor the suc- 
 cess, nor the honors with which his long life was replete. He continued 
 to pay the tribute of love and esteem to his master long after he himself 
 had come to belooked upon as the master Arabist. At the same time he 
 made diligent use of the valuable manuscripts in the library. Thus, 
 the first essay published by him was a review, in the Journal Asiatique 
 of 1827, of the first volume of Habicht's edition of the Thousand and 
 One Nights, based upon Galland's manuscript. His editions of Abul- 
 feda and Beidhawi, as well as the essay. De glossis Habichtianis, all pub- 
 lished later on, are also proofs of his industry in gathering material 
 while at Paris. At the same time he sought the society of Orientals, 
 especially of two Kgvptiaus, a Mohammedan Refa'a, and a Christian 
 Ayde, both mentioned honoris causa in the above named essay. Al- 
 though the article in the Journal dxiatique shows that he was a ripe 
 scholar at that time, he continued to devote himself after his return, in 
 18-3, to private study, partly at his own home and partly at Dresden, 
 where he catalogued the Arabic, Persian, and Turkish manuscripts in 
 the royal library. The catalogue was published at Leipzig in 1831; 
 likewise, his edition and translation of Abulfeda's Historic ante-ixhtmica.
 
 510 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 
 
 Both publications proved that he had reached the goal which he had 
 been pursuing during a twelve years' preparatory period, entailing con- 
 stant hard work and manifold sacrifices. In the preface to Abulfeda 
 he deplores the fewness of his notes, and craves indulgence for himself 
 on the plea of being a homo lectionis pauccc, memoricc paucioris, otiipau- 
 cissimi. But the character of his work is such as to invalidate all but 
 the last of the three excuses. Meantime he had accepted iu 1831, a 
 position as teacher in the Kreuz high-school at Dresden. Here he re- 
 mained until 1835, when, the above-mentioned works having spread his 
 fame, he was offered a professorship at St. Petersburg, later filled by 
 Dorn. He was about to leave for Eussia, when, in the nick of time, the 
 offer of a full professorship of Oriental languages, at his own university 
 of Leipzig, reached him. He was elected on October 19, 1835, but did 
 not enter upon the duties of his position until Easter, 183G. At first 
 he was considered a member of the theological faculty, but early iu the 
 next decade he was permitted, after active agitation on his own part, to 
 pass over to the philosophical faculty. On September 27, 1836, he mar- 
 ried Ernestine Mathilde Jiissiug, of Bautzen, the daughter of Friedrich 
 Leberecht Jassing, retired brigade judge of the royal Saxon service, 
 who lived at that time in Dresden. He was permitted to celebrate, with 
 his faithful and affectionate wife, who still survives, the fiftieth anni- 
 versary of his wedding-day, and was blessed with the joy marred only 
 by the death of their eldest daughter of seeing their children occupy 
 positions of honor in the community. Not less happy was his domestic 
 life, than were his official and scientific undertakings. When, in 
 1846, the Royal Saxon Scientific Society was founded, he at once became 
 an active member. In 1855, he became its assistant secretary, and later, 
 secretary in chief, a position which he filled with his customary scrupu- 
 lousness until 1883. In 1860, he received an honorable call from Berlin. 
 He refused the offer, remaining faithful to his native laud until his 
 death. 
 
 When Fleischer entered upon his professorship in Leipzig, iu 1836, 
 Arabic- Mohammedan studies had begun to flourish in all parts of Ger- 
 many. Between 1819 and 1829 there had been published five of the 
 Mffallaqat, with the scholia of Zauzaui, by Kosegarteu, Heugstenberg, 
 Roseumiiller, and Vullers; in 1828, the text of the Hamdsa, by Freytag; 
 between 1825 and 1831, the first six volumes of Habicht's Thousand 
 and One Nights; and in 1828, Kosegarten's Chrestomathy ; Fn-y tag's 
 Arabic Poetics (1830), and the first volume of his great lexicon (1830), 
 as well as the beginning of Ewald's Gmmmatica critica (1831), had es- 
 tablished the principle that the edition of texts should be prepared 
 with due regard to the laws of the language. Meantime another Ger- 
 man scholar Frahn, in the service of the Russian Government, by his 
 Recensio (1826), had laid a scientific foundation for Islamic numismatics. 
 Dorn was beginning to assist the Petersburg investigator, and Hammer- 
 Purgstall, unflagging, continued his magnificent work at Vienna. The
 
 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 511 
 
 last-mentioned scholars prove that the increased interest in Arabic 
 subjects can not be traced entirely to outward causes, but should be 
 connected with the renascence in Germany of philological studies from 
 an historical point of view. On the other hand, the efforts of the first 
 set of scholars depend entirely upon the work of I)e Sacy, who had 
 been the teacher of Kosegarten and Freytag, and indirectly through 
 the latter, also of Vullers and Ilengsteuberg. Even Ewald, inde- 
 pendent though he was, and striving to master for linguistic purposes, 
 the mateiial bequeathed by Arabian grammarians, had to lean upon 
 De Sacy in the development of the main features of his plan. 
 
 The times have been when it was customary, if not with Fleischer 
 himself, at any rate with a few of his disciples, to treat somewhat con- 
 temptuously the efforts of men like Freytag and Hammer-Purgstall in 
 behalf of Arabic philology. I myself must confess to the youthful folly 
 of having, in my tirst very imperfect essay, spoken of Hammer in away 
 which even vivid remembrance of Ahlwardt's Chalaf could not excuse, 
 certainly not justify. Deservedly, I was at once reproved by a more 
 sensible fellow-worker.* Freytag was also judged unkindly, though per- 
 haps not with equal severity. Even the numberless corrections which 
 had to be made in his lexicon, and will of necessity ever continue to be 
 made, cannot alter the fact that it was an eminent performance at the time 
 of its compilation, and still remains an exceedingly useful work. .Nat- 
 urally, neither Hammer nor Freytag, neither Kosegarten nor Vullers 
 can bear comparison with the master mind at Paris. The last three are 
 docile disciples, who praiseworthy for industry, and estimable for at- 
 tainments, do no more than follow in the footsteps of their master, with- 
 out reaching him, even in their happiest moments. Hammer, on the 
 other hand, was never more than a highly gifted dilettante, whose desire 
 for novelties stifled the faculty of maturing ideas. His capacity for 
 work was unbounded; its results howeverlaid down in numerous volumes, 
 but apparently solve the vast problems of history and literature. On 
 his bold excursions, he often paved the way to fields hitherto inaccessi- 
 ble, but keenly discovered by him to be worthy of cultivation. It will 
 always remain his distinction that he made it possible for us to gain a 
 bird's eye view over such fields, and cursory though it was, it is still 
 valuable on all points in which detailed research has not replaced his 
 superficial statements by more reliable data. Hence it is not astonish- 
 ing that the v ienna Orientalist enjoyed undisputed fame and exerted 
 great influence in the first third of this century. Thus the danger was 
 imminent, that his virtues being inseparable from his personality, his 
 pupils and imitators might after his death seize only upon his weak 
 points and develop them into a radically false and highly dangerous 
 system. It is doubtful whether any of the German representatives of 
 DeSacy w,ould have been able successfully to combat this method. De- 
 spite their merits, not oneof the investigators named was distinguished 
 
 * See H. Dereubourg, Rente critique, 1809, No. 35, p. 132.
 
 512 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 
 
 by that combination of wide knowledge and philological accuracy which 
 had marked De Sacy's work, and which in case his death occurred as 
 early as was feared,* would have to be the characteristics of a successor, 
 whose influence was to counteract Hammer's. Kosegarten approached 
 this ideal most closely, unless we except Kodiger, who if not totally in- 
 dependent of De Sacy, had at least not been trained in his school. But 
 neither devoted himself exclusively to Arabic- Mohammedan philology; 
 and the same objection, to a still stronger degree, holds of Kiickert, 
 whose interests were chiefly poetic. Thus it was Fleischer alone in 
 whom the ideal was fully realized. To him therefore naturally fell the 
 task of placing our science upon the same eminence in Germany that 
 it had occupied under De Sacy in France, a task rendered difficult by 
 the necessity of guiding it so that it might permanently be rescued from 
 the crooked path into which it might have been forced under Hammer's 
 influence. 
 
 It is impossible for me to judge whether Fleischer, at the time of en- 
 tering upon the duties of his Leipzig professorship, had conceived his 
 mission as clearly as we can now formulate it after its accomplish- 
 ment. At all events, the two essays with which he introduced himself 
 upon the arena of his future successes seems to bear unequivocal signs 
 that this was his conscious goal. When he was no more than " Pro- 
 fessor-elect of Oriental languages at the University of Leipzig," he pub- 
 lished, while at Dresden, his translation of Zamachshari's Golden Neck- 
 laces, with a preface and notes, containing a sharp attack on Hammer's 
 edition and translation of the same text. Almost at the same time he 
 reviewed Habicht's glosses, in which there is surely no lack of grave 
 mistakes. In this last review his tone was tht mildest imaginable, 
 and later, even when dealing with bunglers of the worst sort, he never 
 became vehement. If then in opposing Hammer he made use of more 
 violent language, he must have been actuated by serious and far-reach- 
 ing considerations. In fact, he states them at the beginning of the 
 preface in these words: '* If highly esteemed scholars in possession of 
 eveiy facility, at a time when science has reached its manhood, give 
 thoroughly useless work to the world, what should be the attitude of 
 criticism? It is our opinion that its sharpest weapons should be di- 
 rected against such abuses, and in this case it should combat even such 
 as are really beneath criticism, in order that their becoming contagious 
 may be prevented." The man, comparatively speaking a novice, who 
 thus met a scholar, universally looked upon as the most eminent orien- 
 talist in Germany, must have felt the assurance of victory. The con- 
 tents of his essay justified his bold language, and a still further justifi- 
 cation was furnished by his Dissertatio critica de glossis Habichtianis 
 in quatuor priores lomos Ml noctium, which appeared in the following 
 year (1836), on the occasion of his entering upon the duties of his chair. 
 On account of the minutise of mediaeval Muslim life described, the 
 
 * He died iu 1838.
 
 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 513 
 
 "Arabian Nights," require complete mastery of the whole domain of 
 Arabic-Mohammedan life, for a thorough understanding of all the 
 difficulties that grow out of the language and the subject-matter. Of 
 this mastery the essay testifies abundantly, as it does of the unerring 
 philological tact of the critic, whose emendations by no means are the 
 happy suggestions of an ingenious mind, but rather the results of wide 
 linguistic and historical knowledge, and of intimate acquaintance with 
 the habits of copyists and the manner of transmitting manuscripts. 
 
 For obvious reasons, it is not easy and so far as I am concerned it 
 is at this moment not possible to trace the impression made by the 
 two essays when first published; but their success shows that it must 
 have been deep and lasting. The same complete mastery of the sub- 
 ject is displayed by Fleischer's next works : All's One Hundred Proverbs 
 (1837), a description of the Arabic, Persian, and Turkish manuscripts 
 in the Catalogue Librorum MSS. BibL Cii'it. Lipsiensis (1838), and the 
 completion of Habicht's edition of the Arabian Nights (vols. ix-xn, 
 1842-'43). But the character of the subjects treated in these works was 
 not calculated to confer controlling influence upon them. Likewise his 
 edition in 1847 of Mirza Mohammed Ibrahim's Grammar of the modern 
 Persian Language (2d edition, 1875), merely strengthened the impression 
 derived from All's Proverbs, that this scholar had as wide an acquain- 
 tance with Persian as with Arabic. Thus, directly or indirectly, it 
 must be due to these two short essays that Fleischer, as early as the 
 fourth decade of this century, was freely acknowledged by all, except- 
 ing perhaps the immediate followers of Hammer, as the chief of Ger- 
 man orientalists. In fact, from that time on for a period of nearly half 
 a century, he became the chosen guide of all Germans and many 
 foreigners, desirous of thorough disciplining in Arabic Mohammedan 
 philology. The impression created by these two works was so strong, 
 because they are an exemplification of the true philological method for 
 which the Germans, after the death of Reiske, the vir incon^arabili.s, 
 once more had to resort to the Frenchman De Sacy, a method which 
 is nothing less than the use of common sense, coupled on the one hand 
 with faithful, untiring efforts to attain to the greatest possible complete- 
 ness and to scrupulous accuracy in the collecting and sifting of the 
 material handed down to us, and forbidding, on the other hand, all ar- 
 bitrariness, however ingenious, as well as all superficiality, however 
 grandiose. This definition by no means puts an interdict upon clever- 
 ness on the part of the philologist thus gifted. It merely provides that 
 cleverness must manifest itself in mastering the details acquired, not in 
 speciously hiding the imperfections of scientific research and then sat- 
 isfying one's conscience by a perfunctory though minute adherence to a 
 traditional method. That Fleischer realized in himself this ideal of a 
 philologist peihaps best marks his importance in the history of science; 
 his example as well as his precept have made it possible for all to gain a 
 knowledge of the correct method to be used in our department of re- 
 H. Mis. 2J4 33
 
 514 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 
 
 search. Many of the most prominent scholars of the present day have 
 in other ways arrived at a knowledge of this method, or have been in- 
 tuitively gifted with it, but its spread to extended circles we owe to 
 Eleischer, and to him alone 
 
 His disinclination to treat philological subjects according to routine 
 methods was shown by Fleischer in his edition of Beidhawi's Coian com- 
 mentary, which completed his fame, and which, in a way is to be con- 
 sidered the most important work of his life. He, Gottfried Hermann's 
 disciple, who surely knew what elements constitute a "methodical" 
 edition of a work, published this voluminous and difficult text with- 
 out any variant readings. I have elsewhere* shown what consider- 
 ations, in my opinion, justly led him to adopt a system unusual 
 even with himself. The character of a Corau commentary is, in every 
 respect, technical. He who would understand and edit it must first 
 have extensive and detailed acquaintance with the contents and techni- 
 cal peculiarities of the theological, juridical, and grammatical system 
 of the Islam. But so enviable a scholar, aided by all available manu- 
 scripts and super-commentaries, certainly has the ability in every case 
 to select the correct reading; and superfluous readings serve but to 
 confuse less learned readers. The responsibility incurred by an editor 
 who takes it upon himself to omit customary technicalities is propor- 
 tionately great. But whoever heard Fleiescher himself interpret his 
 own Beidhawi a single time, was forever delivered from all uneasiness 
 on the score of his power to meet such responsibility. This edition is 
 naturally not purged of every human imperfection. Fleischer himself, 
 in a lecture on one occasion, expressed his vexation that after the 
 
 
 
 feminine ^, ^\ the expression ^\ ^\ instead of the correct 
 J/ 
 
 i" 1 
 word y\ J had escaped him. ( Cf. Fell's Index, p. 07.) But such 
 
 instances assuredly are not numerous. On another occasion he related 
 that a copy of his book (I no longer remember how and when) had 
 been submitted to the Sheikh nl-Islam at Constantinople, and that the 
 latter had considered it beneath his dignity to throw even a superficial 
 glance at an ignorant infidel's disfigurement of the classical work of 
 Mohammedan theology. Finally however he had opened it and 
 glanced at a few lines ; then, amazed had eagerly continued to read, 
 at last giving expression to his astonishment that, in the Occident, there 
 could exist a man who apparently understood Beidhawi as well as an 
 orthodox doctor. I quote these remarks of Fleischer, which 1 heard 
 myself, since I should consider it presumption were I to praise his 
 Beidhawi. He only has the privilege of doing this who is so well 
 versed in Muslim theology, that he might on a proper occasion, criticise 
 it. Whether there are outside of the Orient a half-dozen scholars 
 
 * Golfing, gelehrte. Anzeigen. 1884, No. 24, p. 961.
 
 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 515 
 
 who may venture to make this assertion is doubtful ; at all events, I do 
 not reckon myself among them. 
 
 Aside from a small edition of the Hermes trismegistus, written in 1870, 
 on a special occasion, Beidhawi is the last work published by Fleischer 
 without assistance. Even Beidhawi was not complete when it left the 
 hands of the publisher. For years the Indices weighed heavily upon 
 his conscientious mind, until finally in 1878, they were brought out by 
 the helpful aid of Fell. With reference to this unusual delay, Fleischer 
 said in the preface with which he introduces his pupil's work: " Qui 
 me rescue meas norunt, eos me ultro excmatnm habere scio," and his mean- 
 ing was evident to all. During the period while he was busy with the 
 Beidhawi text, the claims made upon him from all sides had increased 
 with his growing fame. These claims were put forth chiefly by three 
 parties: his pupils, his co-laborers, and the community at large. His 
 manner of satisfying them illustrates the most admirable traits in his 
 character: extreme conscientiousness, faithful attention to the slightest 
 details, affability and absolute unselfishness. 
 
 His conscientiousness and faithfulness were pre eminently evinced in 
 his academic labors, as I can testify from personal experience in the 
 years 1867 and 1868. He knew Beidhawi thoroughly ; daily, at any 
 chance occasion, he excited admiration by his clear explanation of the 
 doctrines of Mohammedan scholasticism, or by his equally correct way 
 of tracing the history of a word and its development in meaning from 
 the Arabic through the Persian to the Turkish, all this without refer- 
 ring, except in rare instances, to his inter-leaved copy of Freytag, 
 famous on account of its marginal notes, literally covering the text as 
 well as the inter-leaves. Yet he never lectured on Beidhawi without 
 preparation. His students, coming to attend a lecture at his study 
 early in the morning, frequently found him standing by a high desk, 
 the text and a copy of Sheikh Zade's super commentary lying before 
 him. In his "Arabic Association," difficult passages in various texts 
 were discussed, opportunity was given to gain practice in the reading 
 ot manuscripts, etc. But outside of this, he gave instruction, at the 
 period spoken of, only in the writings of Arabic, Persian, and Turkish 
 authors. The texts selected for reading varied, frequently according 
 to the wishes of the students. But the two lectures a week on Beid- 
 hawi were inviolable. In these, he himself translated and explained, 
 frequently cross-questioning his hearers, in order to assure himself that 
 they had grasped his meaning and were making good progress. In 
 the remaining four to six hours a week, Arabic, Persian, and Turkish 
 texts were given to the students to translate, their translations being 
 corrected and elucidated by the professor on the spot. In conducting 
 this exercise his talk wandered from topic to topic, so that in looking 
 back it appears that not the reading of the texts was of prime impor- 
 tance, but rather the wealth of information, relating to the subject- 
 matter, chiefly however of a linguistic nature, which he fairly showered
 
 516 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 
 
 from out of the plenitude of his learning- upon the eagerly listening 
 and busily writing members of his class. Aside from the numerous 
 additions to one's knowledge, his apparently irregular and digressive 
 method of instruction possessed the advantage of at once ushering the 
 student into the Mohammedan world of language and ideas, giving him a 
 vivid conception of the wealth and pliability of the Arabic idiom, and 
 most emphatically reminding him at eveiy turn of the necessity of being 
 accurate in the slightest cletai!. Naturally it was at the same time 
 necessary to pursue private study systematically and unremittingly, 
 and it was pre-supposed as a matter of course. He who could and 
 would work, had to acquire rapidly a knowledge of the languages, and 
 yield with docility to a training in habits of accuracy ; the essentials 
 of Arabic, indeed of all philology. The undeniable but doubtless in- 
 tentional one-sidedness of this method is justified by the necessity of 
 helping the pupils to ground themselves thoroughly in these funda- 
 mentals. If I have been correctly informed, Fleischer in earlier jears 
 delivered regular courses of lectures, as for instance on the doctrinal 
 theology of the Islam. From this it can be inferred that his later 
 method meant to lay increased stress upon the important and essential 
 points which he had always emphasized. We were charged to acquire 
 Arabic, Persian, and Turkish, and to rid ourselves radically of any 
 tendency to superficiality. Having done that, we were prepared as 
 far as our ability went to do independent and philologically accurate 
 work in whatever special field any one of us might choose. However, 
 even from this point of view, there is one more desideratum, appa- 
 rently unprovided for in this method, namely, a knowledge of the tech- 
 nical working principles of philology, in any event a highly desirable 
 equipment of the future philologist. But every one had the opportu- 
 nity of acquiring them while preparing his thesis. For Fleischer's ac- 
 tivity as a teacher was by no means at an end when he had appeared 
 in the lecture room eight or ten times a week. His library, his knowl- 
 edge, his talents were at the disposal of his pupils, and if any one of them 
 in his first attempt at editing a text was perplexed by some difficult pas- 
 sage in the manuscript, he needed but to apply to his ever-obliging 
 teacher to have the difficulty cleared away. Either he might content 
 himself with carrying away the ready explanation or emendation, or if 
 he attended intelligently, he might, in addition, derive the restricted 
 number of principles and tricks of method, which, in fact, can be 
 summed up in the direction to scrutinize carefully the manuscript to be 
 explained and in the observance of the two main injunctions in Lehrs's 
 philological decalogue: "Thou shalt not prostrate thyself before manu- 
 scripts," and " Thou shalt not take the name method in vain." Finally, 
 when the time came for the young scholar to leave Leipzig, perhaps 
 soon after receiving his degree, the bond that linked him to Fleischer 
 was by no means severed. Whenever and in whatever way he wished 
 he could apply to Fleischer for a solution of problems and difficulties.
 
 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 517 
 
 In his kindness of heart he was indefatigable in replying and explain- 
 ing, often himself correcting proof-sheet upon proof-sheet. Each of us 
 was sure to find in him as long as we lived a firm scientific support. 
 I do not care to mar this remembrance of a teacher's touching unselfish- 
 ness and faithfulness by questioning whether these characteristics were 
 always appealed to with the reserve rendered doubly necessary by so 
 ample a benevolence. lie himself never gave this question a thought. 
 He existed for his pupils as long as he supposed them at all interested 
 in science. Therefore no one called him anything but "the Sheikh ;" 
 unless led by the exuberant spirits of youth, we translated the Arabic 
 expression by " the old man " (which after all was indicative of our un- 
 bounded respect for him), for this Arabic title of honor conveys an idea- 
 of the parental relation existing between the teacher and the pupil, 
 which is assumed as a matter of course in the Mohammedan East. 
 
 But he was not our u Sheikh " alone. Long before I was permitted to 
 become one of his disciples, he had been acknowledged the " sheikh- 
 ush slmyukh," the master of masters. To a certain extent it was natural 
 that he should have come to occupy this rank. His pupils had de- 
 veloped into co investigators, and they could not well entertain the idea 
 of supplanting him. But great as was their number, there was still no 
 lack of men, who, having been disciples of Ewald, Rodiger, Freytag, 
 and others, might preserve their independence. In a still higher degree 
 this was true of partial contemporaries, such as Dorn and Rodiger. Xo 
 one will deny that this state of affairs was salutary for our science. 
 Under all circumstances i is baneful for one school, no matter how ex- 
 cellent its principles or its representatives may be, to exercise autocratic 
 sway in a given domain. In some respects it must be one sided, and 
 one sidedness is fatal to science. Now, from what has been said of 
 Fleischer as a teacher, it follows that nothing was further removed from 
 his mind than to force his pupils into a narrow-minded course. If 
 nevertheless any one is disposed to harbor this opinion, let him but 
 read Fleischer's preface to Behruauer's translation of the Forty Viziers 
 to learn differently. But as was natural, his disciples at first had to 
 abandon themselves to his guidance. The necessity was constantly 
 arising to refer them to the Arabic grammar, when once they began to 
 do independent work in the preparation of texts, always of a grammati- 
 cal nature, since such are easiest for a well-trained Arabist. Thus it 
 had to come about that for a time Arabic grammar seemed to thrive 
 almost too luxuriantly in these circles. Since then it has become ap- 
 parent that the danger was not very great. It must be conceded how- 
 ever that its complete avoidance was greatly due to the efforts of those 
 scholars who remained independent of Fleischer; that is to say, inde- 
 pendent of his instruction, not of his influence. It could not be gain- 
 said ; he was the most learned of the learned, the most accurate of the 
 accurate. It is therefore not remarkable that the recognition of his 
 scientific superiority, readily yielded by all prominent scholars, with
 
 518 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 
 
 one or two exceptions, gradually led to the establish ment of personal 
 relations, in which he always gave more than he received. His co-la- 
 borers in Germany, as well as in more than one foreign land, by degrees 
 grew accustomed to ask his advice, claim his help, which he granted 
 to strangers as freely as to his own pupils. Thus it happened that for 
 many a year no Arabic text of any importance was printed in Germany 
 without owing to him considerable improvements, and likewise more 
 than one valuable work by foreign Arabists has received similar aid. 
 Sometimes he revised the proof-sheets as they were printed ; sometimes, 
 after the appearance of single volumes, he arranged the notes, taken 
 during its careful perusal, so that they might profitably be used in ap- 
 pendices, possibly to be added. There is quite a library of Arabic writ- 
 ings, in the building up of which he has thus participated. Here are 
 some of the important works, selected athap-hnzard: Ainari's Bibliotheca 
 Arabo-Sicula, Juynboll's Abulmahdsin, the Makkari, Tornberg's Ibn el- 
 Athir^ Wustenfeld's Jacilt, Fliigel's Fihrist, Wright's Kdmil, de Goeje's 
 Bibliotheca Geographorum, Jahn's Ibn Ta'ish. This critical work was 
 naturally accompanied by an extensive correspondence, which took the 
 more time as it was conducted with an almost exaggerated conscientious- 
 ness. But in no other way could these numberless connections have 
 been maintained so regularly and so steadfastly. 
 
 As Oriental studies advanced in Germany the necessity of establish- 
 ing closer connections between the representatives of the different de- 
 partments was keenly felt early in the third decade of this century. 
 To effect a union of this kind Ewald, Kosegarten, liodiger, Itiickert, 
 and some others established, in 1837, the Journal for the Science of the 
 Orient (Zeitschrift fur die Eunde des Morgenlandes). From 1838, the 
 philologists' conventions offered place and opportunity for personal 
 intercourse between men in all departments of Oriental research. Thus 
 BSdiger was but giving shape to fn idea that had long been enter- 
 tained when he proposed on the occasion of a visit, in September, 1843, 
 at Fleischer's house, where Pott, Olshauseu, von der Gabelentz, and 
 Brockhaus were also present, thatGerman orientalists, as a body, should 
 hold sessions annually in connection with the conventions of philolo- 
 gists. As is well known, this plan was executed in 1844, at the Dresden 
 meeting. The consultations held there resulted in the formation, at 
 next year's meeting, on October 2, 1845, at Darmstadt, of a German 
 Oriental Society, modelled after the Societe Asiatique and the Royal 
 Asiatic Society. The Journal of the new society absorbed, in 1847, the 
 Zeitschrift fur die Kunde di'S Morgenlandes. From the first, Fleischer 
 displayed zealous interest in the plan. The Dresden council was held 
 under his presidency, and the first draught of the constitution issued from 
 his pen. His certificate of membership was the first conferred, and, up 
 to the time of his resignation from the governing body, in 1880, it may 
 be said, without disparagement to many faithful and deserving men, 
 that he was the soul of the association, unselfishly, as always, devoting
 
 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 519 
 
 his best powers to the common good. His help was given wherever it 
 was needed ; he served as editor of the Journal, and again as chroni- 
 cler of the year's work; lie was called upon to pass judgment on 
 works that were to be published under the auspices of the society, and 
 to correct them ; and sometimes he Irid to act as mediator between 
 opposing parties that had sprung up within the society. The society 
 thus became dear to his heart, as does a child that has been raised with 
 care and trouble to man's estate. Nothing (unless it were a falsehood) 
 vexed him so much as an injury done the society, or failure to fullill 
 punctually the duties imposed by membership. While occupying the 
 position in the governing board of executive in matters relating to the 
 library, he took upon himself the unpleasant task of making a quar- 
 terly list of all books and pamphlets that had been sent to him, and in- 
 closing it in the chest of books forwarded to the librarian at Halle. 
 Later, when direct communications between the library and the corre- 
 spondents of the society were established, this work was no longer neces- 
 sary. Up to that time, while I was librarian of the society, many a list 
 of that kind passed from his hand into mine. I do not remember ever 
 to have found an error in a single one; but I know that I often wished 
 that he would not waste precious time on unimportant work, for which 
 he might have found dozens of willing hands near him. But he would 
 have eyed with suspicion the man who would suggest that he should 
 transfer to others what lie considered his own duty. Undoubtedly he 
 was right, for the society would never have turned out to be such as it 
 is if he had not had so conscientious a conception of duty. He was re- 
 paid by the pleasure of seeing it grow and thrive; soon it could fitly 
 range itselt by the side of older associations abroad; and among the 
 learned bodies of Germany it occupied a respected position. On one oc- 
 casion, to be sure, this position caused him much unpleasantness, namely 
 when the directors had to advise the Prussian Government as to the 
 purchase of the Moabite antiquities, which subsequently proved spuri- 
 ous. This is not the place and nowhere is it concern of mine to raise 
 anew the dust under which this unfortunate affair has finally been 
 buried. The proper conception of the province of a business committee 
 is expressed in a resolution, afterwards adopted by the general con- 
 vention of the German Oriental Society : " In consequence of the position 
 assigned by the constitution to the board of directors of the society, any 
 opinion published by them on scientific and more particularly on dis- 
 puted points, cannot be construed to express the opinion of the society."* 
 Fleischer may have permitted a 1'atal mistake to be made, but he after- 
 wards generously assumed more of the responsibility than was neces- 
 sary. 
 
 Surely no one who once more passes in review his extensive and 
 varied work, evtm in the incomplete survey that 1 have just made, can 
 find reason to doubt the truth of what Fleischer further says in the 
 
 * Zeit8chrift der Deutachen Morgenlandischen Gestllschaft, vol. xxxi, p. xv.
 
 520 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER 
 
 above quoted passage from his preface to Fell's Indices : "Ceteri* adsevero 
 otium mihi et vires defuisse, non voluntatcm ct sttidium." Certainly then 
 it was uot possible for him to find leisure for the preparation and exe- 
 cution of comprehensive works embodying the results of independent 
 research. The translation of the Goran, the work of many years, was 
 left uncompleted. However, not all his powers were absorbed by his 
 efforts in behalf of his pupils, his colleagues, and the learned world in 
 general. He devoted every leisure moment to his appointed task of 
 maintaining Arabic-Mohammedan philology upon the eminence to which 
 De Sacy had raised it, and if possible of elevating it still higher. He 
 diligently continued up to the last moment the critical work that had 
 opened new paths to science upon his first appearance. For a long time 
 he wrote reviews of new books in the Hallische Litter aturzeitung, in 
 Gersdorf's Repertorium and in other journals, but afterwards exclusively 
 in the Zcitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschafl. For the 
 readers of the Beitrage, special mention may be made of his detailed 
 notices of the re modelled edition of Eiickert's Poetics and Rhetoric of 
 the Persians, and of Bacher's edition of Sa'di's short poems, both repub- 
 lished in the third volume of his Minor Works. Besides, he contrib- 
 uted extensively to the improvement of the various editions of Arabic 
 texts, especially of Makkari and Abuluiahasin, and wrote a number of 
 short articles on chance topics connected with Arabic, Persian, and 
 Turkish literature, history, and archeology, as they were suggested to 
 him by hints in his correspondence, in his official work for the German 
 Oriental Society, etc. Two great series, by far the most important in 
 a mass of highly instructive material, must be noted : the celebrated 
 contributions (Beitrtige) to De Sacy's Grammaire Arabe, and those to 
 Dozy's Supplement aux dictionnaires arabes. 
 
 " Grammatici Arabes utilissimi nobis (suntenim thesauri for mar um totius 
 que antiquitatis promi condi)" was the opinion of E wald.* It is perhaps 
 De JSacy's greatest distinction that he put Arabic philology upon this 
 basis, and no less deserving of praise is Fleischer for having continued 
 and supplemented this work in a spirit of modesty and life-long devotion 
 to his beloved teacher, aided by the superior knowledge which he had 
 learned how to acquire in the school of De Sacy. Those endowed with 
 unusual talent, and furnished besides with a peculiar gift for the Arabic 
 language, may succeed in understanding Arabic, and in avoiding all the 
 hidden snares in the characters the vocabulary and the syntax, laid for 
 the guileless reader by this most treacherous of all languages with 
 which I am acquainted. But the average scholar is lost, that is to say 
 sinks back upon a lamentably low stage of philological development, 
 unless he masters thoroughly his De Sacy with Fleischer's additions. 
 That diligent and willing students are no longer exposed to this danger 
 of retrograding we owe to "the old man." And the place tilled in its 
 time by the worn, interleaved Freytag, or that filled in the domain of 
 
 * Gramm, crit. ling. Ar.,i, p. ir.
 
 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 521 
 
 grammar by De Sacy with the " Beitrage," is occupied, on the field of 
 lexicography, by Dozy's Xiipplem en f, enriched by Fleischer's corrections 
 and additions. His " Minor Works," covering, together with the others 
 mentioned, 2225 pages, are a legacy, the conscientious use of which will, 
 for a long time, continue to be the prime duty of every scientific Ara- 
 bist 
 
 We should use it however not only conscientiously, but also with 
 the most grateful remembrance. We should always bear in mind that 
 Fleischer, in order to become for his pupils and co-laborers what he was 
 to them, refrained from working for himself except by working for 
 others, and this at a time when his powers were at their height and his 
 comprehensive learning in its ripest state. 
 
 Possibly many a one has shared the feeling of a prominent and 
 clever co-laborer of mine, who said to me some years ago that it vexed 
 him to think that Fleischer, with his magnificent learning and ability, 
 was deserting from the solution of the highest problems. I can not 
 agree with my nameless friend. Diverse gifts one mind. Some, vent- 
 uring fearlessl}' abroad, are permitted to discover new domains ; others 
 secure law and order at home. Not the one by itself, nor the other is 
 the desideratum. The one cannot stand without the other. When 
 Fleischer came upon the stage we stood in need of law and order, 
 which he secured. Now, let the venturesome go forth upon voyages of 
 discovery; the less talented will still do well to remain at home and 
 watch lest law and order be undermined. Certainly it would have 
 been a great achievement if, for instance, our sheikh had built up the 
 edifice of Islamic doctrines for us. But has he not done better in sharp- 
 ening tools for many generations of workers, so that now they may 
 themselves build, not so quickly and not so high, but on a broad base 
 and with many wings ? 
 
 " Let me say briefly that from my early youth I have dimly felt the 
 desire and hope to cultivate myself, my whole self, such as it is," writes 
 Wilhelm Meister to his wise friend Werner. Man's duty with regard 
 to his own gifts has never been expressed more pertinently. Fleischer's 
 was a sagacious, acute, and sensible mind. He in nowise sympathized 
 with what is mystic and ambiguous. A critic by nature, he exercised 
 his critical faculties not only upon others, but also and chiefly upon 
 himself. Besides, he was faithful to duty, a lover of truth, benevolent, 
 humbly self-sacrificing, and single-minded. Not one of these natural 
 traits did he fail to cultivate conscientiously, nor did he ever attempt 
 to lay false claims to virtues which he did not possess. A man of this 
 kind could not fail to see that only by means of self-restraint can one 
 succeed in perfectly cultivating one's own nature. In no respect, 
 neither in his views, nor in his studies, was he one-sided; but he knew 
 accurately wherein his strength lay, and was too sensible to sin against 
 the proverb: " Qid trop embrasse, mal etreint." " // ucfnut pax courir 
 deux lievres a lafois," he once wrote to me, (he often delighted in using
 
 522 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 
 
 the French language, which he had mastered perfectly), and according 
 to this principle he consistently arranged his scientific career. In his 
 preface to the Golden Necklaces he says clearly and decidedly : " In Ara- 
 bic research neither good will, nor diligence, nor penetration of mind, 
 nor ingenuity, nor outside philological attainments, nor anything- in the 
 world, can relieve one from the necessity of modestly, faithfully, and dili- 
 gently studying with the Arabic philologists, and here in Europe, 
 above all with our master De Sacy ; however, I do not mean to imply 
 that Ewald and his compeers will not in time succeed in summarizing the 
 superabundant material of Arabic philology in a more fitting and con- 
 venient form, as well as in explaining many facts in a more scientific 
 way." The justification for Ewald's philological methods does not es- 
 cape his notice, as Ewald in turn admits that the Arabian grammarians 
 are the promi condi totius antiquitatis. But Fleischer avowedly limits 
 himself to the purely philological side of the task, for il nefautpas courir 
 deux lievres a lafois. Only once did he deviate from this rule, and then 
 it was done in order to venture upon a neighboring domain that could 
 not well be avoided, that of general Semitic etymology: He that wishes 
 to cast a stone at him on this account may do so after consulting St. John 
 viii, 7. To this wise self-restraint, among other things, he owes his pre- 
 eminence upon that field of philological research which was chosen by 
 him, or which (if you will) naturally fell to his share. At all events it is 
 hard to believe that any other field would have given the same scope to 
 his natural abili ties. The undeviating conformity to law that character- 
 izes the structure of the Arabic language and its perspicuity naturally 
 appeal to him, as on the other hand its boundless wealth and apparent 
 complexity of linguistic phenomena offered welcome problems for his 
 ingenuity to solve. He was thus, by right of birth, the expounder of 
 the Arabic poets and writers, whose peculiarities are analogous to those 
 of their language. This partial affinity (for in other respects, he was a 
 true German with very un- Arabian feelings), together with his linguistic 
 attainments and large information, permitted him to reach the incom- 
 parable skill and certainty in the criticism of Arabic texts which for 
 the time at least did more than anything else to shed luster upon his 
 name. Theoretically indeed there is no difference between the proper 
 philological treatment of a Greek or Latin and an Arabic or Persian 
 text. But many external circumstances connected with Mohammedan 
 literature, such as the relatively short period intervening between the 
 original writer and the manuscripts to be studied, the peculiarities of 
 Arabic characters, etc., causeless stress to be put in our specialty upon 
 the recensio, if I may be permitted to use technical terms. In some cases 
 the recensio is the most essential part of the work 5 in most however it 
 is very unimportant. With us it is the emendatio that taxes the critical 
 faculties to the utmost. Similarly, ours differs from classical philology, 
 inasmuch as conjectures with us are usually either entirely correct or 
 altogether incorrect rarely probabilis. Hence it may be said that, aside
 
 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 523 
 
 from mere copyists' blunders, it is easier to make conjectures in class- 
 ical philology, but, on the other hand ceterix paribus it is easier for us 
 to make correct conjectures or emendations. For both reasons we are not 
 justified in resting satisfied with the mere recensio, as our Grreco-Roman 
 philologiaus may sometimes do. It follows that a man like Fleischer 
 may not be disposed of by praising him as the lucky possessor of a talent 
 for conjecturing, and then casting him into the great lumber-room, where 
 the superannuated philologists' apparatus is stored. True, he is the 
 author of thousands of conjectural corrections, but at least two-thirds 
 of his conjectures, if this measure of worth be applicable, are emenda- 
 tions. Whoever admits this, will thereby agree with me in saying that 
 self-forgetful work limited by wise self-restraint, and undertaken with a 
 definite aim in view, is as a matter of course and almost in opposition 
 to the wishes of its author, rewarded with the prize. 
 
 It is time to conclude. Fleischer's prominent position in the history 
 of our science is due to these circumstances; by precept and example he 
 made a home in Germany for the scientific study of Arabic Moham- 
 medan philology ; he trained generations of scholars with this purpose 
 in view ; he similarly influenced his co-laborers in Germany and abroad; 
 he doubled the sum total of all the results reached by De Sacy in the spe- 
 cial field of Arabic language and literature, and by his help the work 
 of his contemporaries was raised to the eminence occupied by his own. 
 There was no lack of prominent scholars in his own department, nor of 
 such as took up and supplemented his work outside of the limits he 
 himself had drawn. Still he and no other can be called the true heir 
 and successor of De Sacy. In knowledge and ability he excelled his 
 great teacher. But he himself would have administered a sharp reproof 
 to him who might venture to rank him above his master, in scientific 
 
 matters : " Honor be to him who leads the way." ,A I " A\ \^u]\ 
 
 The unstinted recognition yielded to the great scholar on all sides 
 was commensurate with his deserts. The most prominent Orientalists of 
 Germany and others of foreign countries readily acknowledged that his 
 was unequalled knowledge and ability ; one learned society after another 
 conferred upon him honorary membership, and to several Saxon orders 
 and the Turkish Medjidie were added the two highest scientific distinc- 
 tions in the giving of Germany, the Bavarian order of Maximilian and 
 the Prussian pour le merite. For a long time it seemed as though age 
 itself could not impair the octogenarian's vigor nor destroy his love of 
 work. However, in the spring of 1884, there appeared the first symp- 
 toms of an abdominal disorder, which gradually grew. But whoever 
 saw him when he was not troubled with pain, scarcely noticed any change 
 in his appearance, none whatever in his manner. On October 19, 1885, 
 1 enjoyed the privilege of participating with many others in the celebra- 
 tion of the fiftieth anniversary of his official connection with the univer- 
 sity, and on October 4, 1886, when I again visited him during his stay at
 
 524 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 
 
 jNeti-Sohonefeld, the entry in my diary reads: "Fleischer as bright as 
 ever." But in 1886. he was compelled to avail himself of the permission 
 granted him, on the occasion of his jubilee celebration, to omit the lec- 
 tures of the summer session, and the physician's orders were constantly 
 limiting the amount of work he did. When again I visited him at Leip- 
 zig in October 7, 1887, I felt that I should have to bid him an eternal 
 farewell. In spite of his increasing debility he began a course of lect- 
 ures for the winter session, and continued them until November 17. 
 But on November 18 he took to his bed, never again to leave it. He 
 bore the pain entailed by his disease with admirable patience; no com- 
 plaint ever crossed his lips, until on February 10, 1888, a short while 
 before completing his eighty-seventh year, death released him from his 
 suffering. 
 
 The prominent features of Fleischer's character were truthfulness, 
 conscientiousness, unselfishness, and punctuality. I was never able to 
 decide how much he owed to nature, how much to the strict self-disci- 
 pline exercised in early years. But whatever he had acquired by habit 
 had come to be a part of his being. He became indignant nay wrath- 
 ful, the kindliness that marked his features and sprung from good 
 nature in the best meaning of the word, seemed to leave him, when he 
 met with falsehood, carelessness, or Lack of punctuality. As long as 
 there were no evidences of want of truth on the part of others, he was, 
 unsuspicious, sometimes too much so; but whoever shocked his deli- 
 cate sense of justice, had good cause to fear his anger. Yet there was 
 not a trace of dogmatism in his nature. He may in some instances 
 have chanced to form an incorrect judgment of certain people, but 
 he took the first opportunity to change it most willingly in their 
 favor, unless weighty reasons existed for the contrary. All that he 
 thought and did was characterized by objectivity, pure and simple. In 
 scientific debates he demanded that his conclusions be tested impar- 
 tially, and on the other hand he accepted instruction from the young- 
 est of his pupils, if he had chanced to find something that had es-. 
 caped the notice of " the sheikh." His polemics were never of a per- 
 sonal nature except when Ewald accused him, in a manner that even 
 now impairs the reputation of this great man of " being actuated by, 
 sordid impulses in science." In a published " statement addressed to 
 Prof. Dr. Ewald of Gb'ttingen," he expresses in plain, though moderate 
 terms, his just indignation. His misunderstanding with Dozy, whom 
 Fleischer had unintentionally offended, was cleared up in a way that 
 reflects credit upon both scholars. He was conscious of his abilities 
 and his achievements, but never boasted of them. To all work done by 
 others, in his or their department, he gladly yielded recognition. Un- 
 hesitatingly he subordinated himself in every respect to De Sacy, and 
 to Lane's knowledge of the Arabic, as (in his opinion) superior to his 
 own. He was never ambitious of empty honors, he never sought to 
 assert himself.
 
 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 525 
 
 What was called Fleischer's school, can scarcely be said any longer 
 to exist as such. Arabic studies, the preponderance of which formed 
 the most distinguishing mark of its unity, have been curtailed in Ger- 
 many. A cruel fate has prematurely removed the very best philologists 
 of Fleischer's school : Ralfs, Loth, Spitta, and, furthermore Kosut and 
 Huber. Some of us have struck out on new paths ; general interest has 
 been diverted to Assyriological research and to comparative philology. 
 The leadership in the Arabic domain is about to pass over to the Dutch 
 school. But it matters not what we do, if only \ve emulate the example 
 of " our sheikh," and do disinterested, honest, diligent, conscientious, 
 and modest work, m whatever is within the reach of our limited ability
 
 A 000130514 3