variety. It does much more than narrate the acts of kings and the movements of armies, though these certainly occupy a prominent position. It is plainly the work of a man with a keen interest in social, economic, and cultural conditions, and, moreover, of a man with a strong philosophical bent who would gladly use his history in the interest of a political science if the opportunity offered. Hume's main interest is clearly in just these conditions: the character of the government, its power and the privileges and rights of citizens, the state of trade, the financial condition and policy of the kingdom, the extent and dissemination of learning, the customs and morals of the people. "Where a just notion is not formed of these particulars, history can be little instructive, and often will not be intelligible."[1] The value which Hume sets upon different periods of the history of England is clearly dictated by this principle. The portion dealing with the Stuarts is by far the most carefully prepared part of the work. Saxon England gets but very scant attention and, indeed, Hume promises in his Introduction to pass rapidly over this barbarous period.[2] The history of uncivilized peoples is always too obscure and uncertain, and too subject to violent and irrational revolutions, to be of interest to the enlightened student of history.
To Voltaire belongs the credit of having given the clearest expression to this method of writing history.[3] Hume's History of England, however, is written exactly in the spirit of Voltaire's contention that in the progress of manners and customs lies the real interest which enlightened people feel in the study of history, and the fact of Hume's priority is accordingly worthy of note. The volumes of the history dealing with the Stuarts appeared in 1754, two years earlier than the publication of the Essai. So striking was the coincidence with Voltaire's point of view that Hume was asserted to have borrowed the idea of his appendices from fragments of the Essai published surreptitiously in 1753 under the title Abrégé de l'histoire universelle.[4] There is no evi-
