524 MEMOIR OF FLEISCHER. 



iNeii-Schonefeld, 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, unselfishuess, 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 Gottingen," 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 emj^ty honors, he never sought to 

 assert himself. 



