Adam Smith’s first visit to Paris (part 1 of 3)

Note: Following my introduction (see my previous post), the next part of my revised paper “Adam Smith in the City of Lights”explains how Smith found himself in Paris in February 1764.

The road to Paris

Qu’elle me semblait la plus belle et la plus charmante de toutes les villes barbares. (Sorbière 1660, p. 574)

She [Paris] appears to me the most beautiful and charming of barbarian cities. (my translation)

Why did Adam Smith travel to Paris in early 1764? The second-largest capital in 18th-century Europe (after London), the City of Light boasted a comprehensive system of street lamps as well as many magnificent public spaces, including the Champs-Élysées, “la plus belle avenue du monde” (Hermant 1856, p. 226); the Church of Sainte-Geneviève, which would later become the Panthéon, the final resting place of such literary giants as Rousseau and Voltaire; and the Place de la Concorde, where one monarch was celebrated with a statue and another was put to death by a revolutionary tribunal. Finding himself in this magnificent European capital for the first time on 13 February 1764, Adam Smith had a powerful patron, British politician Charles Townshend, to thank for this chapter in his life, for the doors of this great city were first opened to Smith by Townshend in 1759. It was in that year that Smith published his first magnum opus, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, and first came to Townshend’s attention.

Townshend was a prominent politician who, four years earlier, had married into the British aristocracy when he wed a wealthy heiress, Caroline Campbell, the eldest daughter of the second Duke of Argyll and the widow of Francis, Lord Dalkeith, the eldest son of the second Duke of Buccleuch. Townshend thus became stepfather to Lady Dalkeith’s three surviving children, two boys and a girl: Henry Scott (1746–1812), Hew Campbell Scott (1747–1766), and Frances Scott (1750–1817). (See Alcouffe & Massot-Bordenave 2020, p. 33.) The eldest child, Henry (whose portrait is pictured below), was heir to the title of “Duke of Buccleuch”. A direct descendant of King Charles II of England and King Henry IV of France, Duke Henry was born into one of the wealthiest and most prestigious families in Scotland. Moreover, upon reaching the age of majority in September of 1767, Duke Henry would become one of Scotland’s largest landowners.

For his part, Charles Townshend was contemplating sending Henry to the continent upon the completion of his stepson’s studies at Eton (see, e.g., Hume’s 12 April 1759 letter to Smith; Letter #31). At the time, the “grand tour” was a rite of passage for the sons of elite British families, “the ‘crown’ of [their] education” (Cohen 2001, p. 129). Smith himself describes this aristocratic custom in Book V of The Wealth of Nations (Smith 1981, Glasgow edition, p. 773 (¶36)) as follows:

In England it becomes every day more and more the custom to send young people to travel in foreign countries immediately upon their leaving school, and without sending them to any university. Our young people, it is said, generally return home much improved by their travels. A young man who goes abroad at seventeen or eighteen, and returns home at one and twenty, returns three or four years older than he was when he went abroad ….

At some point in the summer of 1759, Townshend travelled to Scotland and met with Smith personally in Glasgow to discuss his appointment as Henry’s private tutor and guardian during his Grand Tour. (See Smith’s 17 September 1759 letter to Townshend (Letter #39, reprinted in Mossner & Ross, 1987), where Smith writes, “I had the pleasure of seeing you at Glasgow.”) After meeting with Townshend in Glasgow in the summer of 1759, Smith then drew up a list of fifty-three books for the future Duke to study. (Alcouffe & Massot-Bordenave 2020, p. 38.) Among Smith’s reading list were all the classics of ancient Greek and Roman literature, including Homer, Sophocles, and Virgil. (See Letter #41, note 2, reprinted in Mossner & Ross, 1987.)

Although Smith had already agreed in principle to accept the appointment as Henry’s tutor, in a letter to Smith dated 25 October 1763 (Letter #76), Townshend gives Smith an opportunity to back out of their arrangement:

The time now drawing near when the Duke of Buccleugh intends to go abroad, I take the liberty of renewing the subject to you: that if you should still have the same disposition to travel with him I may have the satisfaction of informing Lady Dalkeith and His Grace of it, and of congratulating them upon an event which I know that they, as well as myself, have so much at heart. The Duke is now at Eton: He will remain there until Christmass. He will then spend some short time in London, that he may be presented at Court, and not pass instantaneously from school to a foreign country; but it were to be wished He should not be long in Town, exposed to the habits and companions of London, before his mind has been more formed and better guarded by education and experience.

By the time Smith had received Townshend’s letter, the 1763/64 academic year at Glasgow University had already begun. As a result, Smith would have to either politely decline Townshend’s offer or take a leave of absence from his professorship at Glasgow University. In the event, Smith accepted the offer but tried to postpone the date of departure until after the end of the academic year. In a letter dated 12 December 1759 to his friend David Hume (Letter #78), Smith reports:

The day before I received your last letter I had the honour of a letter from Charles Townshend, renewing in the most obliging manner his former proposal that I should travel with the Duke of Buccleugh, and informing me that his Grace was to leave Eton at Christmas, and would go abroad very soon after that. I accepted the proposal, but at the same time expressed to Mr Townshend the difficulties I should have in leaving the University before the beginning of April, and begged to know if my attendance upon his Grace would be necessary before that time. I have yet received no answer to that letter, which, I suppose, is owing to this, that his Grace is not yet come from Eton, and that nothing is yet settled with regard to the time of his going abroad. I delayed answering your letter till I should be able to inform you at what time I should have the pleasure of seeing you.

Although the remaining correspondence between Smith and Townshend has not survived, Townshend must have rejected any postponement of Duke Henry’s Grand Tour, for by all accounts (see, e.g., Rae 1895, p. 174; Phillipson 2010, p. 183; Ross 2010, p. 210) Smith was in London by mid-January 1764, and he and the young Henry departed for the coast of France soon thereafter.

NPG D32258; Henry Scott, 3rd Duke of Buccleuch by John Dixon, after Thomas  Gainsborough
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

*Smith in the City* update

I forgot to mention that I have been making some substantial revisions to my paper “Adam Smith in the City of Lights”. Below is my revised introduction:

The general outline of Adam Smith’s grand tour has been retold many times, but little is really known about his comings and goings in Paris. What we can say, however, is that the Scottish philosopher’s time in the City of Light marks an important turning point in his personal and intellectual life. He began his Paris sojourns by permanently resigning his professorship. He concluded them by mourning the death of one of the teenage boys who had been entrusted to his care.

In all, Adam Smith made three separate visits to Paris. His first visit occurred in February of 1764 and lasted less than a fortnight, but his second and third stays lasted many months–from February to July 1766 and then from September to October 1766–interrupted only by a short stay in Compiegne in August.

Moreover, several important events took place in Paris during all three of Adam Smith’s stays in the City of Light, dramatic episodes that a keen observer of the world like Smith must have taken notice of, including the intense debate from May 1763 to April 1764 over taxation and royal finances that “took Paris by storm” (Darnton 2023, p. 72, p. 74); the political showdown known as the séance de la flagellation, when Louis XV made a rare appearance in the French capital to scold the members of the legislature at a session of the parlement of Paris on 3 March 1766; and the appearance of David Hume’s reply to Rousseau, Exposé succinct de la contestation qui s’est élevée entre M. Hume et M. Rousseau, avec les pièces justificatives, which was published in Paris on 21 October 1766.

Part 1 of this work revisits Smith’s first foray in Paris in February 1764. Next, Part 2 explores Smith’s second sojourn in Paris, from February to July 1766. Part 3 then concludes by revisiting Smith’s last days in Paris.

I will jump into Part 1 in my next post.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

In memoriam: Fred Schauer

Alas, I did not know Professor Schauer personally, but I am a huge fan of his work. (See also the three books by Schauer recommended below.)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Monday map: max speed limits

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Sunday song by Fall Out Boy

This catchy song is from 2007 (see here), so how come I heard it for the first time last week? In any case, thanks Shazam (again!).

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

*Adam Smith, David Hume, and the ‘Balliol College Conspiracy’*

This weekend, I will be reading the last few chapters of The Iliad as well as revising my paper “Smith in the City” about Adam Smith’s adventures in the City of Light. (Thanks to my referees for their detailed criticisms and excellent feedback.) In the meantime, my paper “Adam Smith, David Hume, and the ‘Balliol College Conspiracy'” was finally published in the History of Economic Ideas; here is an ungated version.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Friday funnies: *sampling bias*

Sampling bias: a presenter proudly shows the conclusion of a bar chart of responses from people who were asked if they love responding to surveys. A resounding 'yes'.
Source: https://sketchplanations.com/sampling-bias
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Food culture in The Iliad

Another aspect of The Iliad that has intrigued me are the many feasts and ritual sacrifices of various animals in Homer’s great epic, so I did a little scholarly digging, and it turns out a lot of ink has been spilled on this topic. Below is a just small sample of this fascinating literature in alphabetical order, by author:

1. Daisy Dunn, “Food of the Gods“, Idler Magazine (2006).

2. Tamara Neal, “Blood and Hunger in the Iliad“, Classical Philology, Vol. 101, No. 1 (2006), pp. 15-33.

3. Erik Robinson, “The Homeric Diet – ‘Equal Meals’“, Sententiae Antiquae (2019).

4. Susan Sherratt, “Feasting in Homeric Epic“, Hesperia, Vol. 73 (2004), pp. 301-317.

5. Valerie Stiver, “Grilling with Homer“, The Paris Review (2018).

6. Marek Wecowski, “Homer, the ‘Heroic Feast’, and the Symposion“, Chapter 4 in The Rise of the Greek Aristocratic Banquet (2014), pp. 191-248.

7. Erin Welty, “Emblematic Eating: Reading the Feasts of the Iliad as Models for Emblematic Eating: Reading the Feasts of the Iliad as Models for Social Order“, University of South Carolina, Senior Thesis (2018).

Bonus link: Wikipedia, Ancient Greek Cuisine.

Hecamede preparing kykeon for Nestor, kylix by the Brygos Painter, ca. 490 BCE, Louvre
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Wikipedia Wednesday: Helen of Troy

Via Wikipedia (links in the original): “Paris, a Trojan prince, came to Sparta to claim Helen, in the guise of a supposed diplomatic mission. Before this journey, Paris had been appointed by Zeus to judge the most beautiful goddess; Hera, Athena, or Aphrodite. In order to earn his favour, Aphrodite promised Paris the most beautiful woman in the world. Swayed by Aphrodite’s offer, Paris chose her as the most beautiful of the goddesses, earning the wrath of Athena and Hera. Although Helen is sometimes depicted as being raped (i.e. abducted) by Paris, Ancient Greek sources are often elliptical and contradictory.” See also: Judgement of Paris.

Meeting between Paris and Helen. Antique fresco in Pompeii, the House of the Golden Cupids
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Timeless questions about The Iliad

As I mentioned in a previous post, I spent most of my holiday weekend reading–and listening to–The Iliad. Now that I am two-thirds of the way through (16 out of 24 chapters), I want to pause to pose some select questions about this great epic:

  1. Homer’s paradox. First off is the age-old question: Why did Homer compose The Iliad? To celebrate the heroes of the Trojan War or to condemn their mortal combat? To quote the legendary North American general, William Sherman: War is Hell. But had the Trojans and the Achaeans never fought on the plains and shores of Ilion, the names of Achilles, Hector, Paris, and Odysseus, just to name a few, would have been lost to us forever. We remember their names and still read The Iliad today, however, precisely because of their extraordinary feats of courage in wartime!
  2. Fate versus free will. There are many instances in The Iliad in which the men on both sides of the war feel duty-bound to continue fighting even when the tide of battle is turning against them, but if the outcome of the Trojan War has already been decided by the immortal gods, why do the men on the losing side bother fighting at all?
  3. Partisan gods. Lastly, for now: Why do the gods take sides in the Trojan War? On this note, one episode in particular caught my attention (specifically, pp. 314-315 of the Caroline Alexander translation), where Zeus sends a messenger (Iris) to Poseidon imploring–nay, ordering–the sea god “to desist from war and battle” (Book 15, line 160). Poseidon, however, rejects his brother’s command outright (Book 15, lines 181-190). Are the immortal gods also “duty-bound” to fight?
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment