Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 12.djvu/362

350 350 HUME a twelvemonth he sold only forty-five copies of it.&quot; This account must be accepted with great qualification. It expresses Hume s feelings rather than the real facts. In Edinburgh, as we learn from one of his letters, the book succeeded well, no fewer than 450 copies being disposed of in five weeks. Nor is there anything in Hume s corre spondence to show that the failure of the book was so com plete as he declared it to have been. Within a very few years the sale of the History was sufficient to gain for the author a larger revenue than had ever before been known in his country to flow from literature, and to place him in comparative affluence At the same time the bitterness of Hume s feelings and their effect are of importance in his life. It is from the publication of the History that we date the extraordinary virulence of his hatred towards everything English, towards society in London, Whig principles, Whig ministers, and the public generally. 1 He was convinced that to be a Scotchman and aTory was to be an object of contempt and hatred to all Englishmen ; and that on the whole there was a conspiracy to suppress and destroy everything that was Scotch. 2 As a consequence of these strong feelings, the remainder of the History became little better than a party pamphlet, written with a definite bias and a definite aim. The second volume, published in 1756, carrying on the nar rative to the Revolution, was better received than the first ; but Hume then resolved to work backwards, and to show from a survey of the Tudor period that his Tory notions were grounded upon the history of the constitution. In 1759 this portion of the work appeared, and in 17G1 the work was completed by the history of the pre-Tudor periods. The numerous editions of the various portions, for, despite Hume s wrath and grumblings, the book was a great literary success, gave him an opportunity of careful revision, which he employed to remove from it all the &quot; villainous seditious Whig strokes,&quot; and &quot;plaguy prejudices of Whiggism &quot; that he could detect lurking in it. In other j words, he bent all his efforts towards making his History more of a party work than it had originally been, and in his effort he was entirely successful. It has been the j business of subsequent historians to correct his misre presentations so far as they referred to the period of which he had fair knowledge, and to supersede his accounts of those periods which his insufficient knowledge disabled him from treating in a manner worthy of him. The early portion of his History may be regarded as now of little or no value. The sources at Hume s command were few, and he did not even use them all. None the less, the History has a distinct place in the literature of England. It was the first attempt at a really comprehensive and thoughtful 1 &quot; If a man have the misfortune, in the former place (i.e., London), to attach himself to letters, even if he succeeds, I know not with whom he is to live nor how he is to pass his time in a suitable society. The little company there that is worth conversing with are cold and unsoci able, or are warmed only by faction and cabal ; so that a man who plays no part in public affairs becomes altogether insignificant ; and, if he is not rich, he becomes even contemptible. Hence that nation are fast relapsing into the deepest stupidity and ignorance,,&quot; Burton, ii. 268. &quot;There aie fine doings in America. O ! how 1 long to see America and the East Indies revolted, totally and finally the revenue reduced to half public credit fully discredited by bankruptcy, the third of London in ruins, and the rascally mob subdued. &quot; Ib. , ii. 417. &quot; Our government has become a chimera, and is too perfect, in point of liberty, for so rude a beast as an Englishman, who is a man, a bad animal too, corrupted by above a century of licentiousness.&quot; Ib., ii. 434. &quot; The rage and prejudice of parties frighten me ; and above all, this rage against the Scots, which is so dishonourable and indeed so infamous to the English nation. We hear that it increases every day without the least appearance of provocation on our part. It has fre quently made me resolve never in my life to set foot on English ground.&quot; Burton, ii. 265 ; cf. ii. 148, 238. Perhaps our knowledge of John son s sentiments regarding the Scotch in general, and of his expressions regarding Hume and Smith in particular, may lessen our surprise at this vehemence. treatment of historic facts, the first to introduce the social and literary aspects of a nation s life as of importance only second to its political fortunes, and the first historical writing in an animated yet refined and polished style. It has received from later writers its due meed of praise and blame. 3 While the History was in process of publication, Hume did not entirely neglect his other lines of activity. In 1757 appeared Four Dissertations : The Natural History of Religion, Of the Passions, Of Tragedy, Of the Standard of Taste. Of these the dissertation on the passions is a very subtle piece of psychology, containing the essence of the- second book of the Treatise. It is remarkable that Hume does not appear to have been acquainted with Spinoza s analysis of the affections. The last two essays are contri butions of no great importance to a?sthetics, a department of philosophy in which Hume was not strong. The Natural History of Religion is a powerful contribution to the deistic controversy ; but, as in the case of Hume s earlier work, its significance was at the time overlooked. It is an attempt to carry the war directly into a province hitherto allowed to remain at peace, the theory of the general development of religious ideas. Deists, though raising doubts regarding the historic narratives of the Christian faith, had never dis puted the general fact that belief in one God was natural and primitive. Hume endeavours to show that polytheism was the earliest as well as the most natural form of religious belief, and that theism or deism is the product of reflexion upon experience, thus reducing the validity of the historical argument to that of the theoretical proofs. In 1763 he accompanied Lord Hertford to Paris, doing the duties of secretary to the embassy, with the prospect of the appointment to that post. He was everywhere received &quot; with the most extraordinary honours &quot;; in fact, he was &quot;lionized.&quot; The society of Paris was peculiarly ready to receive a great philosopher and historian, especially if he were known to be an avowed antagonist of religion. Hume basked in the sunshine of his popularity ; but at the same time he made some valuable friendships, especially with D Alembert and Turgot, the latter of whom admired sincerely and profited much by Hume s economical essays. In 1766 he left Paris and returned to Edinburgh ; but in the following year (1767) he accepted the post of under secretary to General Conway, and spent two years in London. He settled finally in Edinburgh in 1769, having now through his pension and otherwise the handsome- fortune of 1000 a year. The solitary incident of note in this period of his life is the ridiculous quarrel with Rousseau, an episode still amusing, and throwing much light upon the strange character of the great sentimentalist. Hume certainly did his utmost to secure for Rousseau a comfort able retreat in England, but his usually sound judgment seems at first to have been quite at fault with regard to his protege&quot;. That is surely an amusing likeness which Hume discovered between Rousseau and Socrates ; and it is inte resting to note the conflict between his preconceived opinion 3 We append the judgment of Macaulay on Hume s characteristic fault as an historian: &quot; Hume is an accomplished advocate. Without positively asserting much moie than he can prove, he gives pro minence to all the circumstances which support his case ; he glides lightly over those which are unfavourable to it ; his own witnesses are applauded and encouraged ; the statements which seem to throw dis credit on them are contioverted; the contiadictions into which they fall are explained away; a clear and connected abstract of their evidence is given. Everything that is offered on the other side is scrutinized with the utmost severity ; every suspicious ciicumstance is a ground for argument and invective ; what cannot be denied is extenuated, or passed by without notice ; concessions even are sometimes made ; but this insidious candour only increases the effect of the vast mass of sophistry.&quot; Miscell. Writings, &quot; History.&quot; With this may be compared the more favourable verdict by the late Prof. Brewer, in the preface to his edition of the Student s Hume.