Rousseau's Dog Read Online Free PDF Page A

on well, among them George Grenville, soon to be prime minister. Grenville and his Whig allies were all enemies of Bute, then the politically powerful tutor to the future George III, who described the Scottish earl as his “dearest friend.” The Whig belief that Bute was imbuing George with dangerous ideas of monarchical government stoked anti-Scottish sentiment. This probably contributed to the antagonism toward Hume, who, furthermore, was seen as a Tory sympathizer.
    Hume completed the two volumes of the
History of the House of Tudor
in 1759. “The clamour against this performance was almost equal to that against the
History
of the first two Stuarts.” Horace Walpole thought it “hasty,” inaccurate, and careless. Dividing his time between London and Edinburgh, Hume then labored until November 1761 on what would prove to be the final part of his marathon series, covering the period from Julius Caesar to Henry VII.
    The
History
series, ultimately, if belatedly, brought Hume respect, rewards, and renown. Certainly his command of prose and his philosophical insight combined to present history as it had never been presented hitherto. He could move the reader with his set pieces and penetrating character studies while deploying his gifts as a philosophic historian to explain the wider significance and motive of what was narrated. His use of satire, parody, and irony; his ability to shift effortlessly from factual statements to cleverly observed description; his command of language to create effect—all these enabled him to turn historical events and analysis into a seamless and compelling narrative. His compassionate portrayal of the death of Charles I made readers weep; his near-burlesque vision of Archbishop Laud at Communion made them cry with laughter.
    Controversy was inevitable, however. For Hume had involved himself in a fundamental political divide. What attitude should be taken to the Stuart kings and their overthrow? And historically, had the governance of England been based on an absolute or a limited monarchy? Toriesbelieved, broadly, in an absolutist inheritance of English government grounded in and exercising power through the royal prerogative. Equally broad, the Whig concept was of a prerogative conventionally limited by the traditional liberties of the people expressed through Parliament.
    Hume congratulated himself on arriving at a balance between both interpretations. “My views of things are more conformable to Whig principles; my representations of persons to Tory prejudices.” But as Hume also understood, his readers were more influenced by his character studies, and so saw him as writing from a Tory viewpoint. “Nothing can so much prove that men commonly regard more persons than things, as to find that I am commonly numbered among the Tories.”
    However, Hume always regarded himself as standing above political divisions, and in his writings Whigs could detect support. At the end of the
History,
while stressing the fragility and flux of the constitution, he claimed that the Glorious Revolution broke irrevocably with the past. “It gave such an ascendant to popular principles as has put the nature of the English constitution beyond all controversy. … We, in this island, have ever since enjoyed, if not the best system of government, at least the most entire system of liberty, that ever was known amongst mankind.”
    The
History
made Hume moderately prosperous. On Whitsunday 1762, he announced his purchase of the third story facing south (and the sixth facing north, as it was built on a slope) of James’s Court in Edinburgh, with magnificent views over Edinburgh and across the Firth of Forth. Katherine Home and the maid Peggy joined him, and he bought a chaise.
    W ITH THE LAST volume of the
History,
Hume had come to the end of his creative work; from now on, he would only be dealing with the devious behavior of his booksellers, reediting, and