[Footnote 345: An article, in a recent number of the Fortnightly Review, on 'Hallucination of the Senses,' suggests a possible explanation of the mental condition of Lucretius, during the composition of some part of his work. The writer speaks of the power of calling these hallucinations up as being quite consistent with perfect sanity of mind, but as sometimes inducing madness. He goes on, 'Or, if the person does not go out of his mind, he may be so distressed by the persistence of the apparition which he has created, as to fall into melancholy and despair, and even to commit suicide.' Fortnightly Review, Sept. 1878.] [Footnote 346: E.g. Tusc. Disp, i. 21, especially the sentence--'Quae quidem cogitans soleo saepe admirari non nullorum insolentiam philosophorum qui naturae cognitionem admirantur, eiusque inventori et principi gratias exultantes agunt eumque venerantur ut deum.'] [Footnote 347: 'Multae tamen artis esse cum inveneris.' Munro's Lucretius, Third Edition, p. 315.] [Footnote 348: The theory of Lachmann and others that Q. Cicero was the editor may possibly be true. He dabbled in poetry himself, and he was more nearly of the same age as Lucretius, and thus perhaps more likely to have been a friend of his. The fact that Cicero's remark is in answer to one of his might suggest the opinion that the poem had been read by him before it became known to the older brother, and perhaps been sent by him to Cicero. This would explain Cicero's indifference on the subject. He makes a casual reply on a matter more interesting to his correspondent than to himself. But if Q. Cicero was the editor, Jerome must here also have copied his authorities carelessly. In the time of Jerome the familiar name of Cicero must have been understood as applying to the great orator and philosophic writer, not to his comparatively obscure brother. The only certain inference which can be drawn from this mention of the poem is that it had been read, shortly after its appearance, in the beginning of the year 54 B.C., by both brothers. Yet the consideration of the whole case does not lead to the rejection of the distinct statement that Cicero was the editor as incredible, or even as highly improbable. If it was he, he must have performed his task very perfunctorily.] [Footnote 349: At that time he would be about forty-one years of age--the same age as Lucretius, if, as is most probable, he was born in 99 B.C.] [Footnote 350: i. 643-4; cf. οὔτε ὡς λογογράφοι ξυνέθεσαν ἐπὶ τὸ προσαγωγότερον τῇ ἀκροάσει ἢ ἀληθέστερον.--Thuc. i. 21.] [Footnote 351: The lines (v. 999)-- 'At non multa virum sub signis milia ducta Una dies dabat exitio,' etc.-- might well be a reminiscence of the great massacre at the Colline gate.] [Footnote 352: Cp. Munro, Note II, p. 413. Third Edition.] [Footnote 353: 'Si jam violentior aliqua in re C. Caesar fuisset, si eum magnitudo contentionis, studium gloriae, praestans animus, excellens nobilitas aliquo impulisset.' In. Vatinium 6.]