Of the early education of
David Hume, we have not been able to learn almost any thing. His elder
brother and he were sent to the public school of Dunbar, then conducted
by Mr Andrew Simson, and there is abundant evidence that he made very
considerable progress in the acquisition of classical knowledge. He has
left a poem, entitled Daphn-Amaryllis, written at the age of fourteen,
and he incidentally mentions the expectations George Buchanan formed of
his future eminence from his early productions. After receiving, it may
be conjectured, the best education that a Scottish university then
afforded, Hume set out for France, accompanied by his relation, John
Haldane of Gleneagles. His intention was to have also made the tour of
Italy, and for that purpose he had gone to Geneva, when his brother’s
health became so bad as to make his return desirable. On receiving the
letters containing this information, he returned to Scotland without
delay, "and arrived," to use his own words in his History of the Family
of Wedderburn, "much about the time that Esme, lord Aubigny, (who was
afterwards made duke of Lennox,) was brought into Scotland—and that
Morton began to decline in his credit, he being soon after first
imprisoned, and then put to death;" that is about the beginning of 1581.
Sir George Home seems to
have recovered his health soon afterwards, and David was generally left
at his castle to manage his affairs, while he was engaged in
transactions of a more difficult or hazardous nature. This probably did
not continue long, for the earliest public transaction in which we have
found him engaged took place in 1583. When king James VI. withdrew from
the party commonly known by the name of the Ruthven lords, and
re-admitted the earl of Arran to his councils, Archibald, "the good
earl" of Angus, a relation of Hume’s family, was ordered to confine
himself to the north of Scotland, and accordingly resided for some time
at the castle of Brechin, the property of his brother-in-law the earl of
Mar. At this period Hume seems to have lived in Angus’s house, in the
capacity of a "familiar servitour," or confidential secretary.
When the Ruthven party
were driven into England, Hume accompanied his master and relation; and
while the lords remained inactive at Newcastle, requested leave to go to
London, where he intended pursuing his studies. To this Angus consented,
with the ultimate intention of employing him as his agent at the English
court. During the whole period of his residence at the English capital,
he maintained a regular correspondence with the earl, but only two of
his letters (which he has printed in the History of the Houses of
Douglas and Angus) have come down to us.
The Ruthven lords
returned to Scotland in 1585, but soon offended the clergy by their want
of zeal in providing for the security of the church. Their wrath was
still farther kindled, by a sermon preached at this time before the king
at Linlithgow, by John Craig, in which the offensive doctrine of
obedience to princes was enforced. A letter was accordingly prepared,
insisting upon the claims of the church, and transmitted to Mr Hume, to
be presented to Angus. A very long conference took place betwixt the
earl and Hume, which he has set down at great length in the
above-mentioned work. He begins his own discourse by refuting the
arguments of Craig, and shows, that although it is said in his text, "I
said ye are gods," it is also said, "Nevertheless ye shall die;" "which
two," Hume continues, "being put together, the one shows princes their
duty -- Do justice as God doth; the other threateneth
punishment—Ye shall die if you do it not." He then proceeds to
show, that the opinions of Bodinus in his work De Republica, and of his
own countryman Blackwood and having established the doctrine that
tyrants may be resisted, he applies it to the case of the Ruthven lords,
and justifies the conduct of Angus as one of that party. He then
concludes in the following strain of remonstrance:—"Your declaration
which ye published speaks much of the public cause and common weal, but
you may perceive what men think your actions since they do not answer
thereto by this letter, for they are begun to think that howsoever you
pretend to the public, yet your intention was fixed only on your own
particular, because you have done nothing for the church or country, and
have settled your own particular. And it is observed, that of all the
parliaments that were ever held in this country, this last, held since
you came home, is it in which alone there is no mention of the church,
either in the beginning thereof, (as in all others there is,) or
elsewhere throughout. This neglect of the state of the church and
country, as it is a blemish of your fact obscuring the lustre of it, so
is it accounted an error in policy by so doing, to separate your
particular from the common cause of the church and country, which, as it
hath been the mean of your particular restitution, so is it the only
mean to maintain you in this estate, and to make it sure and firm."
During the subsequent
short period of this earl’s life, Hume seems to have retained his
confidence, and to have acted the part of a faithful and judicious
adviser. After Angus’s death, which took place in 1588, it is probable
that he lived in retirement. Accordingly, we do not find any further
notice of him till he appeared as an author in 1605.
One of king James’s most
favourite projects was the union of the kingdoms of England and
Scotland, and soon after his accession to the English throne,
commissioners were appointed to consider the grounds upon which this
object could be safely and advantageously attained. It would altogether
exceed our limits were we to give even a faint outline of the
proceedings of these commissioners, and it is the less necessary as
their deliberations did not lead to the desired result. The subject,
however, met with the attention of the most learned of our countrymen.
The first work written on this subject was from the pen of Robert Pont,
one of the most respectable clergymen of his day, and a senator
of the college of justice, while ecclesiastics were permitted to hold
that office. His work, which was published in 1604, is in the form of a
dialogue between three imaginary personages -- Irenaeus, Polyhistor, and
Hospes, and is now chiefly interesting as containing some striking
remarks on the state of the country, and the obstacles to the
administration of justice. Pont was followed by David Hume, our author,
who published next year his treatise, De Unione Insulae Britanniae, of
which bishop Nicholson only says that "it is written in a clear Latin
style, such as the author was eminent for, and is dedicated to the king:
it shows how great an advantage such a union would bring to the island
in general, and in particular to the several nations and people of
England and Scotland, and answers the objections against the change of
the two names into that of Britain—the alteration of the regal style in
writs and processes of law—the removal of the parliament and other
courts into England," &c. The first part only of this work of Hume’s was
published. Bishop Nicholson mentions that a MS. of the second part was
in Sir Robert Sibbald’s collection, and Wodrow also possessed what he
considered a very valuable copy of it. It would be improper to pass from
this part of our subject, without referring to Sir Thomas Craig’s work
on the same subject, which still remains unprinted; although in the
opinion of his accomplished biographer, Mr Tytler, "in point of matter
and style, in the importance of the subject to which it relates, the
variety of historical illustrations, the sagacity of the
political remarks, and the insight into the mutual interests of the two
countries which it exhibits, it deserves to rank the highest of
all his works."
In the year 1608, Hume
commenced a correspondence on the subject of episcopacy and presbytery
with James Law, then bishop of Orkney, and afterwards promoted to the
archiepiscopal see of Glasgow. This epistolary warfare took its rise in
a private conversation between Mr Hume and the bishop, when he came to
visit the presbytery of Jedburgh in that year. The subject presented by
much too large a field to be exhausted at a private meeting, and
accordingly supplied materials for their communications for about three
years. But here again we are left to lament that so little of it has
been preserved. Calderwood has collected a few of the letters, but the
gaps are so frequent, and consequently so little connexion is kept up,
that they would be entirely uninteresting to a general reader. In 1613,
Hume began a correspondence of the same nature with bishop Cowper on his
accepting the diocese of Galloway. The bishop set forth an apology for
himself, and to this Hume wrote a reply, which, however, was not
printed, as it was unfavourable to the views of the court. Cowper
answered his statements in his Dicaiology, but printed only such parts
of Hume’s argument as could be most easily refuted. To this Hume once
more replied at great length.
Shortly before this
period he undertook the "History of the House of Wedderburn, (written)
by a son of the family, in the year 1611,"—a work which has hitherto
remained in manuscript. "It has sometimes grieved me," he remarks, in a
dedication to the earl of Home, and to his own brother, "when I have
been glancing over the histories of our country, to have mention made so
seldom of our ancestors, -- scarce above once or twice,—and that too
very shortly and superficially; whereas they were always remarkable for
bravery, magnanimity, clemency, liberality, munificence, hospitality,
fidelity, piety in religion, and obedience to their prince; and, indeed,
there never was a family who had a greater love and regard for their
country, or more earnestly devoted themselves to, or more frequently
risked their lives for, its service. It ought, in a more particular to
grieve you that they have been so long buried in oblivion, and do you
take care that they be so no more I give you, as it were, the prelude,
or lay the ground-work of the history; perhaps a pen more equal to the
task, or at least, who can do it with more decency, will give it the
finishing stroke." He does not enter into a minute inquiry into the
origin of the family, a species of antiquarianism of which it must be
confessed our Scottish historians are sufficiently fond:—"My intention,"
he says, "does not extend farther than to write those things that are
peculiar to the House of Wedderburn." The work begins with "David, first
laird of Wedderburn," who appears to have lived about the end of the
fourteenth century, and concludes with an account of the earlier part of
his brother’s life.
During the latter period
of his life, Hume appears to have devoted himself almost entirely to
literary pursuits. He had appeared before the world as a poet in his "Lusus
Poetici," published in 1605, and afterwards incorporated into the
excellent collection entitled "Deliciae Poetarum Scotorum," edited by Dr
Arthur Johnston. He seems to have added to his poetical works when years
and habits of study might be supposed to have cooled his imaginative
powers. When prince Henry died, he gave vent to his grief in a poem
entitled "Henrici Principis Justa," which, Wodrow conjectures, was
probably sent to Sir James Semple of Beltrees, then a favourite at
court, and by whom it is not improbable that it was shown to his
majesty. A few years afterwards (1617) he wrote his "Regi Suo
Graticulatio,"—a congratulatory poem on the king’s revisiting his native
country. In the same year he prepared (but did not publish) a prose work
"In a very short preface to his readers," says Wodrow, "Mr Hume observes
that nothing more useful to this island was ever proposed, than the
union of the two islands, and scarce ever any proposal was more opposed;
witness the insults in the House of commons, and Paget’s fury, rather
than speech, against it, for which he was very justly fined. After some
other things to the same purpose, he adds, that Mr Cambden hath now in
his Britannia appeared on the same side, and is at no small labour to
extol to the skies England and his Britons, and to depress and expose
Scotland,—how unjustly he does so is Mr Hume’s design in this work."
Cambden’s assertions were also noticed by William Drummond in his
Nuntius Scoto-Britannus, and in another of his works more professedly
levelled against him, entitled "A Pair of Spectacles for Cambden."
The last work in which we
are aware of Hume’s having been engaged, is his largest, and that by
which he is best known. The History of the House and Race of Douglas and
Angus, seems to have been first printed at Edinburgh, by Evan Tyler, in
1644, but this edition has several discrepancies in the title-page. Some
copies bear the date 1648, "to be sold by T. W. in London," and others
have a title altogether different, " A Generall History of Scotland,
together with a particular history of the houses of Douglas and Angus,"
but are without date. After mentioning in the preface that, in writing
such a work it is impossible to please all parties,—that some may say
that it is an unnecessary work—others, that it is merely a party
statement,—and a third complain of "the style, the phrase, the periods,
the diction, and the language," Hume goes on to say, "in all these
particulars, to satisfy all men is more than we can hope for; yet thus
much shortly of each of them to such as will give ear to reason: that I
write, and of this subject, I am constrained to do it, not by any
violence or compulsion, but by the force of duty, as I take it; for
being desired to do it by those I would not refuse, I thought myself
bound to honour that name, and in it and by it, our king and countrey....
Touching partiality, I deny it not, but am Content to acknowledge my
interest. Neither do I think that ever any man did set pen to paper
without some particular relation of kindred, countrey, or such like. The
Romans in writing the Romane, the Grecians in writing their Greek
histories; friends writing to, of, or for friends, may be thought
partiall, as countrymen and friends. The vertuous may be deemed to be
partiall towards the vertuous, and the godly towards the
godly and religious: all writers have some such respect, which is a kind
of partiality. I do not refuse to be thought to have some, or all of
these respects, and I hope none wil think I do amisse in having them.
Pleasing of men, I am so farre from shunning of it, that it is my chief
end and scope: but let it please them to be pleased with vertue,
otherwise they shal find nothing here to please them. If thou findest
any thing here besides, blame me boldly; and why should any be
displeased that wil be pleased with it? would to God I could so please
the world, I should never displease any. But if either of these
(partiality or desire to please) carry me besides the truth, then shal I
confesse my self guilty, and esteem these as great faults, as it is
faultie and blame-worthy to forsake the truth. But, otherwise, so the
truth be stuck unto, there is no hurt in partiality and labouring to
please. And as for truth, clip not, nor champ not my words (as some have
done elsewhere), and I beleeve the worst affected will not charge mee
with lying. I have ever sought the truth in all things carefully, and
even here also, and that painfully in every point: where I find it
assured, I have set it down confidently; where I thought there was some
reason to doubt, I tell my authour: so that if I deceive, it is my self
I deceive, and not thee; for I hide nothing from thee that I myself
know, and as 1 know it, leaving place to thee, if thou knowest more or
better, which, if thou doest, impart and communicate it; for so thou
shouldest do, and so is truth brought to light, which else would lye hid
and buried. My paines and travel in it have been greater than every one
would think, in correcting my errours; thine will not I bee so much, and
both of us may furnish matter for a third man to finde out the truth
more exactly, than either of us hath yet done. Help, therefore, but carp
not. . . For the language, it is my mother-tongue, that is, Scottish:
and why not, to Scottish men? why should I contemne it? I never thought
the difference so great, as that by seeking to speak English, I would
hazard the imputation of affectation. Every tongue hath its own vertue
and grace. Some are more substantiall, others more ornate and succinct.
They have also their own defects and faultinesses, some are harsh, some
are effeminate, some are rude, some affectate and swelling. The Romanes
spake from their heart, the Grecians with their lips only, and their
ordinary speech was complements; especially the Asiatick Greeks did use
a loose and blown kind of phrase. And who is there that keeps that
golden mean? For my own part, I like our own, and he that writes well in
it, writes well enough to me. Yet I have yeelded somewhat to the
tyrannie of custome and the times, not seeking curiously for words, but
taking them as they come to hand. I acknowledge also my fault (if it be
a fault), that I ever accounted it a mean study, and of no great
commendation to learn to write, or to speak English, and have loved
better to bestow my pains and time on forreign languages, esteeming it
but a dialect of our own, and that, (perhaps) more corrupt." The work
commences with a preface concerning the Douglases in general, that is,
their antiquity, to which is joined their original, nobility and
descent, greatness and valour of the family of the name of Douglas." The
history begins with Sholto Douglas, the first that bore the name, and
the vanquisher of Donald Bane, in the reign of king Salvathius, -- and
concludes with the death of Archibald, ninth earl of Angus, who has been
already noticed in the course of this memoir. With this work closes
every trace of David Hume. It is supposed to have been written about
1625, or between that period and 1630, and it is not probable that he
survived that period long. Supposing him to have been born about 1560,
he must then have attained to the age of three score years and ten.
Respecting Hume’s merits
as a poet, different opinions exist. While in the opinion of Dr Irving
he never rises above mediocrity, Dr M’Crie places him in a somewhat
higher rank: "The easy structure of his verse reminds us continually of
the ancient models on which it has been formed; and if deficient in
vigour his fancy has a liveliness and buoyancy which prevents the reader
from wearying of his longest descriptions." These opinions are, after
all, not irreconcilable; the poetry of Hume possesses little
originality, but the reader is charmed with the readiness and the
frequency of his imitations of the Roman poets.
As an historian, Hume can
never become popular. He is by much too prolix,—nor will this be
wondered at when we consider the age at which he wrote his principal
historical work. To the reader, however, who is disposed to follow him
through his windings, he will be a most valuable, and in many cases, a
most amusing author. As the kinsman of the earls of Angus, he had access
to many important family papers, from which he has compiled the history
prior to his own time. But when he writes of transactions within his own
recollection, and more especially those in which he was personally
engaged, there is so much judicious remark and honesty of intention,
that it cannot fail to interest even a careless reader.
Besides the works which
we have mentioned, Hume wrote "Apologia Basilica, Seu Machiavelli
Ingenium Examinatum, in libro quem inscripsit Princeps, 4to,
Paris, 1626." "De Episcopatu, May 1, 1609, Patricio Simsono." "A
treatise on things indifferent." "Of obedience to superiors." In the
Biographie Universelle there is a memoir of him, in which it is
mentioned that "Jaques I. l’employé a concilier les differends qui
s’estaient elevé entre Dumoulin et Tilenus au sujet de la
justification," and he is also there mentioned as having written "Le
Contr’ Assassin, ou Reponse a l’Apologie des Jesuites," Geneva, 1612,
8vo, and "L’Assassinat du Roi, ou Maximes Pratiquées en la personne du
defaut Henrie le Grand," 1617, 8vo.