ebt, leidet am meisten." It is only going a step further then,
when Hamerling writes to his friend Moeser: "Schliesslich ist es doch nur
der Kranke, der sich das Leid der ganzen Welt zu Herzen nimmt."

Radestock, in his study "Genie und Wahnsinn," mentions and elaborates
among others the following points of resemblance between the mind of
genius and the insane mind: an abnormal activity of the imagination,
very rapid succession of ideas, extreme concentration of thought upon a
single subject or idea, and lastly, what would seem the cardinal point,
a weakness of will-energy, the lack of that force which alone can serve
to bring under control all these other unruly elements and give balance
to what must otherwise be an extremely one-sided mechanism. Here again
the exception may be taken to prove the rule. It is not too much, I
think, to assert that Goethe could never have become so uniquely great,
not even through the splendid versatility of his genius, but for that
incomparable self-control, which he made the watchword of his life. And
in the case of the poet of Weltschmerz the presence or absence of this
quality may even decide whether he shall rise superior to his beclouded
condition or perish in the gloom. The conclusion at which Radestock
arrives is that genius, as the expression of the most intense mental
activity, occupies the middle ground, as it were, between the normal
healthy state on the one hand, and the abnormal, pathological state on
the other, and has without doubt many points of contact with mental
disease; and that although the elements which genius has in common with
insanity may not be strong enough in themselves to induce the transition
from the former to the latter state, yet when other aggravating causes
are added, such as physical disease, violent emotions or passions,
overwork, the pressure or distress of outward circumstances, the highly
gifted individual is much more liable to cross the line of demarkation
between the two mental states than is the average mind, which is more
remote from that line. If this can be asserted of genius in general, it
must be even more particularly and widely applicable in reference to a
combination of genius and Weltschmerz. We shall find pathetic examples
in the first two types selected for examination.

Having thus introduced the subject in its most general bearings and
aspects, it remains for us to review briefly its historical background.

Weltschmerz is essenti