Frederic L. van Holthoon is at the Department of Interdisciplinary Studies, University of Groningen, Groningen, 9700 AS Netherlands. email: firstname.lastname@example.org
1. J.Y.T. Greig, ed., The Letters of David Hume, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1932). Cited parenthetically in text as HL.
2. Manuscript from the British Library, 48800 Add, p.151b, entry for August 1766.
3. National Library of ... [Show full abstract] Scotland Ms 23156.
4. Strahan, who had admitted to Hume that he had joined Millar in deceiving him (HL II 219, n.1), put up a spirited defense and told Hume that neither he nor Cadell (Millar's successor) had ever deceived Hume since that one occasion on the subject of the further sales of the 1763 edition. In fact, he wrote there were only 76 copies left. He had done everything in his power to persuade ("or if you please, to seduce") Hume to continue his History. Whether it was was wise to press this advice time will tell. "I know I meant well; that to me is great cause of satisfaction" (HL II 360).
5. See 1773, vol.5, p. 13 = 139; p. 204 = 205; p. 70 = 370; and vol.6: p. 0 = 80, p. 30 = 139; p. 382 is missing. This, at least, is the case in the copy of the British Library. In the copy I recently bought myself only one misprint remains: vol. 5, p. 70 = p. 370. Such is the hazard of eighteenth-century books!
6. My definition of the "more important revisions" is as follows. I have selected from my notes all the excisions, additions and alterations of a sentence or more. To these I have added those revisions of words or passages of less than a sentence which—according to my judgment—change the meaning of the text.
7. According to Strahan's ledgers, the second edition of the Medieval volumes Ib and IIb were printed in December 1762; the first edition is of November 1761. Todd (198) mentions that the second printing is in the New York Public Library and the National Library of Australia. The copy in the New York Public Library, however, is of the first edition. My findings are based on the copy in the National Library of Australia (the second printing of the Medieval volumes is in a set with the shelfmark Cam. 440) and I wish to thank the staff who provided me with a microfilm of this set.
8. Excepting the rewriting of the Treatise in the form of the two Enquiries —which texts were (most of them) indeed rewritten—Hume's method of making revisions is that of a "scissors and paste" man. He uses the original text as the base of his revisions, adds to it, deletes certain words and passages and rewrites others.
9. In the National Library of Scotland a proof reading by Hume was bound up with Henry Grey Graham, Scottish Men of Letters in the Eighteenth Century (London, 1901) (MS. 1703 A); it is a sheet of the second volume of the octavo edition (referred to as chapter XI, which should be chapter X, sheet starting with signature E) bound between pages 42 and 43. All of the revisions can be found in the 1778 edition for the first time except one. On page 56.6, the "church which" is changed to the "church who." This revision was not taken up (cf.I 420.19) and shows how Hume in his preoccupation with revising could make mistakes. All of the revisions concern minor stylistic changes.
10. An important restriction on the reliability of the count in this chapter is my method of collation as explained in the text. Variants which only occur in editions between the first editions and the 1778 posthumous edition will have escaped my attention. I have also ignored spelling variants.
11. I cannot guarantee that I have found all the excisions, additions or alterations of the length of a sentence, but if these pertain to—say—five sentences or more, I would be surprised if I have missed any.
12. Last chapter in the manuscript, that is. Appendix II and...