MY OWN LIFE

                                  

                                  

                             David Hume

                                  

                                1777

                                  

                                  

                               5/1/95

                                  

                                  
Copyright 1995, James Fieser (jfieser@utm.edu). See end note for
details on copyright and editing conventions. This is a working
draft; please report errors.[1]

                                  
Editor's note: Anticipating his death, Hume wrote <My Own Life> in
April 1776 for inclusion in the next edition of his <Essays and
Treatises on Several Subjects>. His instructions are given in letter
to Adam Smith: "You will find among my Papers a very inoffensive
Piece, called <My own Life>, which I composed a few days before I
left Edinburgh, which I thought, as did all my Friends, that my
Life was despaired of. There can be no Objection, that this small
piece should be sent to Messrs Strahan and Cadell and the
Proprietors of my other Works to be prefixed to any future Edition
of them" (, Greig, Vol. 2, p. 318). In March of 1777,
Hume's  and Smith's <Letter from Adam Smith, LL.D. to William
Strahan, Esq.> (the latter of which describes the last four months
of Hume's life) were published under the title <The Life of David
Hume, Esq. written by himself>. The pamphlet is prefaced with the
following note by the editor:

                                  

     M/R\ H/UME\, a few months before his death, wrote the following

     short account of his own life; and, in a codicil to his will,

     desired that it might be prefixed to the next edition of his

     Works. That edition cannot be published for a considerable

     time. The Editor, in the mean while, in order to serve the

     purchasers of the former editions; and, at the same time, to

     gratify the impatience of the public curiosity; has thought

     proper to publish it separately, without altering even the

     title or superscription, which was written in Mr. Hume's own

     hand on the cover of the manuscript.

                                  
In spite of the editor's claim of not altering Hume's piece,
liberties were taken with spelling, punctuation and minor wording.
This is evident from a comparison with the original manuscript of
Hume's  which is in the Royal Society of Edinburgh (reprinted
in Greig, Vol. 1, pp. 1-7). A pre-print of the Hume's  and
Smith's  appeared in <The Scots Magazine>, January 1777,
Vol. 39, pp. 1-7. The <Scots Magazine> version is evidently based on
the text of the published 1777 pamphlet, rather than the manuscript;
for, although it departs slightly in punctuation, it retains the
altered wording found in the 1777 pamphlet. Contrary to Hume's
wishes, his  was not included in the subsequent edition of his
<Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects>. The reviews of Hume's
 reproduced almost the complete text of Hume's autobiography
within their reviews. The <Critical Review> concludes noting that
"The whole of this narrative breathes ingenuousness, and a noble
consciousness of integrity, not without that solicitude of literary,
as well as moral fame, which we may suppose to have animated a
writer, so distinguished, from his earliest years, for his ardor in
the pursuits of philosophy and general learning" (1777, Vol. 43, pp.
222-227). The <London Review> relates that Hume held at sword's
point the editor of <The History of the Works of the Learned> for
their 1740 review of the  (see editor's note to the Hume
Archives edition of the review of the ). The reviewer also
expresses surprise that Hume fails to mention Beattie's 
since, "It were difficult to speak of this work with more contempt
than, we are well assured, Mr. Hume entertained of it." Other
published reactions to Hume's  quickly appeared, many of which
were negative. Although most of the negative reaction was aimed at
Smith's  (see editor's not to the Hume Archives edition of
Smith's ), criticism was also directed at Hume's essay. For
example, an anonymous author comments in the <Weekly Magazine, or
Edinburgh Amusement> (Vol. 36, 364-365) that, "Though I am in some
degree an admirer of Mr. Hume's character and of his writings, yet I
am sorry to see that little biographical account of himself imposed
on the public." The author sees the work as having "an obvious,