Page:Imperialdictiona03eadi Brandeis Vol3a.pdf/56

KLA which did not belong to him; this, however, cannot be proved. Klaproth was now free, and soon after published at Halle the first volume of his "Travels in the Caucasus and Georgia in the years 1807 and 1808;" the second volume came out in 1814. For some time he was very unsettled, owing to the distracted state of Germany. He was able nevertheless to publish in 1814 his "Historico-Geographical sketch of the Eastern Caucasus," and his "Description of the Russian provinces between the Black Sea and the Caspian." His great admiration of Napoleon, brought him into friendly relations with some of the chief men in the French army, and took him to Elba to pay the great general a visit during his detention there. After visiting Italy, Klaproth went to Paris at the invitation of his old patron Potocki, and for some time lived by his pen. While in Paris it was his good fortune to meet with Wilhelm von Humboldt, who knew his abilities, and warmly interested himself in his favour, with such success that in 1816 Frederic William III. was induced to appoint him professor of Asiatic languages and literature. To this there was added a pension, with permission to reside at Paris as long as was necessary, and a promise of such subsidies as might be required for the publishing of his works. Thus encouraged and supported, Klaproth commenced a new career, and one of almost unexampled literary activity, which was only terminated by his death. Great, however, as was his ardour for study, and numerous as were his publications, he has the character of having been fond of amusement as well as of society. The easy circumstances in which he was placed not merely raised him above the fear of want, and enabled him to print whatever he chose, but gave him a feeling of independence which enabled him to do more than he would otherwise have attempted. His abilities as a linguist were universally owned. His memory was retentive to an extraordinary degree; he had a profound insight into the principles of philological science, and his quick perceptions and critical sagacity were rarely at fault. These and other happy natural endowments, well disciplined, gave him a mastery over the recondite and difficult questions upon which he was engaged, which has rarely or never been equalled. He was naturally of a kind and courteous disposition, but in his latter years especially he was irritable, and in his literary controversies was not at all so urbane as he ought to have been. We can readily account for this, though not prepared to justify it. It may here be noticed that Klaproth was not only acquainted with Oriental and European languages, but was also well informed on many other subjects, and rendered himself especially conspicuous by his knowledge of Asiatic geography, &c. His mode of living in Paris contributed more than his studies to shorten his days, and in 1833 his health failed, and he removed to Berlin for a time with a view to seek its recovery. He returned to Paris, where he was again attacked with disease, and the prostration of his mental faculties, which after long and painful sufferings ended in his death, August 27th, 1835. The list of his works is extraordinary, including many separate publications, and almost innumerable articles in literary journals. One of the most remarkable is his "Asia Polyglotta, or a classification of Asiatic nations according to the affinity of their languages, with ample comparative vocabularies of all Asiatic idioms," accompanied by an atlas of languages; another is, the Observations upon the Map of Asia by Arrowsmith. Many others are remarkable, but we must refer for a complete account of them to Merlin's Catalogue de la Bibliotheque de M. Klaproth, Paris, 1839.—B. H. C.  KLAPROTH,, a distinguished German analytical chemist, born in 1743. A student in various public laboratories for nine or ten years, he at length became, in his twenty-eighth year, assistant to the celebrated Valentine Rose. This chemist dying a few months afterwards, Klaproth took his place, established a laboratory of his own, and ultimately became professor of chemistry in the university of Berlin. In early life mineralogy was his favourite study, but he soon found that he could make but little progress in this science without a knowledge of chemistry. He saw the importance of analyzing minerals, in arranging and classifying them, and this led him to make the many happy discoveries which have rendered his name so famous. His life was one of incessant labour, and he left six volumes, with materials for a seventh, consisting of upwards of two hundred analyses of mineral species, executed with such accuracy that his results even at the present day, with all the advantages of modern improvements, are quoted as models. Chemists owe to him the knowledge of zirconia which he discovered in the hyacinth of Ceylon. He demonstrated the presence of potassa in volcanic productions. He discovered sulphate of strontian, previously made known by Crawford and Hope, and in red schorl he discovered the peculiar metal titanium, though anticipated also in this by Gregor in Cornwall. To him also we owe the knowledge of the new metals, uranium and tellurium. His contributions, in fact, to processes of analytic chemistry were invaluable, and probably no chemist ever developed more of the characters of inorganic substances. Klaproth was a member of the Academy of Sciences at Berlin, an associate of the Institute of France, and member of several other learned societies and academies. He died at Berlin in 1817.—W. B—d.  KLEBER,, one of the most distinguished generals of the French republic, was born at Strasburg in 1754. His father, a servant in the household of Cardinal Rohan, intended him for an architect; but during his residence in Paris he was able to render service to two young Bavarians, who took him to Munich, and procured his admission to the military college. His first service was as sub-lieutenant in an Austrian regiment, in which he remained seven years, and in 1783 returned to Strasburg. He now became inspector of public buildings at Befort. At Befort in 1791 he sided with the revolutionary party, and took part in a republican revolt. He then enlisted as a private in a grenadier company of volunteers in the department of Haut-Rhin, and speedily rose to the rank of adjutant-major, in which rank he served with Custine. In 1793, at the siege of Mayence, he was promoted to the rank of brigadier-general. He then served in La Vendée, and at the battle of Tourfou was severely wounded. He was there accused of too great leniency, and removed to the army of the north, where he became general of division. In 1794 he commanded the left wing of the French army at the battle of Fleurus, and afterwards took Mons from the Austrians. He also took Maestricht, after a siege of four weeks. In 1795 he directed the passage of the French army across the Rhine, and in 1796 served with General Jourdan. He was offered the command of Pichegru's army, but did not accept it; preferring to return to Paris, where he was selected by Bonaparte to accompany him to Egypt. At the landing of the French army Kleber was severely wounded, and was placed in command of Alexandria; but he also served with his division in Syria, and was present at the capture of Jaffa, and at the siege of St. Jean d'Acre. From Acre he was sent to Nazareth to meet the large bodies of horse advancing against the French, and on the 17th April, 1799, fought the battle of Mount Tabor, in which he routed a greatly superior force. After the battle of the Nile, and the retirement of Bonaparte from Egypt, Kleber assumed the chief command, being empowered to do so by a letter in which Bonaparte named him his successor. Bonaparte appears to have taken a desponding view of the Egyptian expedition, and in fact to have forsaken his command. This view seems to have been taken by Kleber, who expressed himself perhaps too freely regarding the flight of his late chief. There can be little doubt that the position of the French in Egypt was sufficiently critical; and Kleber was authorized in the same letter that left him the command to take steps by convention or armistice for the evacuation of the country. He unfortunately drew up a representation of the state of affairs to the French directory. In that letter he stated that the army was reduced to one-half its original numbers, and was destitute of stores and provisions. A copy of this letter fell into the hands of the English, and was the cause of the expedition under Sir Ralph Abercromby, by which the French were compelled to evacuate. On the 28th January, 1800, a convention was signed at El Arish, by which it was agreed between the French and the grand vizier that the French army should return to Europe with arms and baggage. The convention appears to have met the concurrence of Sir Sidney Smith; but before it was carried into execution, or probably before it was concluded, the British government had sent orders to Lord Keith who commanded the Mediterranean fleet, not to agree to any terms unless the French capitulated as prisoners of war. Lord Keith therefore informed General Kleber that he could not allow the passage of vessels under the proposed agreement with the Turks. Kleber now came out in a new character. He had previously been dispirited by the posture of affairs; but now, when thrown on his own resources and obliged to provide for the safety of the army, he showed himself fully equal to the 