As a young man, Hume wrote at length about his fascination with knights and chivalry, an interest Doyle later shared, fondly recalling in his autobiography that his mother was an expert at spinning yarns about noble warriors. After college, Doyle became a devotee of Thomas Carlyle
and his theory of heroes and man’s purpose on Earth. In many ways, the character of Holmes is
recreated as a Victorian-era knight, sharing characteristics with the cavalier described by Hume as a man who “fights, not like another man full or passion and resentment, but with the utmost civility mixed with his undaunted courage” and who “generously gives his antagonist his life” (Burton Vol.
I 24). In 1762, Hume expanded on those ideas in an “Essay on the Feudal and Anglo-Norman
Government and Manners,” in which he wrote: “The virtuous knight fought not only in his own quarrel, but in that of the innocent, of the helpless, and, above all, of the fair, whom he supposed
to be forever under the guardianship of his valiant arm” (Burton Vol. I 25). Again, Hume lays out
a blueprint for Sherlock Holmes, who proves himself a courageous warrior on more than one
occasion, even daring to break the law, if need be, to bring a criminal to justice. (“The Bruce-
Partington Plans” and “Charles Augustus Milverton” are two notable examples of Holmes and
Watson’s engaging in escapades of illegal breaking-and-entering.) Holmes champions the cause of
the son wrongly accused of patricide in “Boscombe Valley”; salvages the reputation and familial affection of the ex-convict falsely accused of taking a priceless jewel in “The Blue Carbuncle”; and rescues the asthmatic young lawyer from the clutches of his mother’s spurned lover in “The
Norwood Builder.” Despite his frequent disdain for the female sex (“The motives of women are so
inscrutable,” he declares in “The Second Stain”), Holmes often takes up the cause of a fair lady:
Violet Smith in “The Solitary Cyclist,” Violet Hunter in “Copper Beeches,” Mary Morstan in “The
Sign of Four,” and Helen Stoner in “The Speckled Band,” are but a few (Vol. 1 1045). In “Thor
governess, Grace Dunbar, described by her smitten employer as “the best woman God ever made” (Vol. II 629). Readers can almost picture Holmes hoisting his sword high as he declares, “With the help of the god of justice I will give you a case which will make England ring!” (Vol. II 648). Ultimately, Holmes offers his life for the cause of righteousness, telling his evil archenemy, Professor James Moriarty, that if ending the criminal’s scourge of London means having to die himself, he will gladly do so: “If I were assured of the former eventuality, I would, in the interests
of the public, cheerfully accept the latter” (Vol. I 743). In “The Final Problem,” Holmes and
Moriarty face-off atop the Reichenbach Falls in Switzerland, engaging in a hand-to-hand struggle that (purportedly) results in the death of both hero and antagonist. (Spoiler alert: Holmes manages to escape, only to spend three years traveling the world until a remarkable murder finally draws him back to London – a literary tactic Doyle employed in 1903 to revive the character he had attempted to killed off ten years before).
Hume’s biographer, Burton, offers two additional descriptions of Hume that echo in the
Sherlock Holmes stories. He writes:
Perhaps Hume had acquired absent habits about trifles. But he could transact important business with ability, and keep important secrets with strictness. There is a general propensity to find, in the nature and habits of abstruse thinkers, an innocent simplicity about the passing affairs of the world, which is often dispelled by a nearer view of their characters. Hume was careless about small matters; but in the serious transactions of life, he was sagacious, prompt, and energetic. (Vol.1 422) In his narrative, Burton includes a litany of personal characteristics he believes Hume compiled in 1746. While some of the sixteen entries are self-deprecating (“very industrious, without serving either himself or others” and “a fool, capable of performances which few wise men can execute”), others are slightly sarcastic: “A very good man, the constant purpose of whose life is to do mischief.” Several entries certainly would be included on a list describing Sherlock Holmes:
humble; sociable, though he lives in solitude” (Vol. I 226). Doyle compiled a similar list about Holmes in “A Study in Scarlet,” when Dr. Watson, having just taken up residence at Baker Street, jots down what he knows about his peculiar flat mate. It follows Holmes’s explanation that “all knowledge which he possessed was such as would be useful to him,” and a conversation in which Watson is shocked by Holmes’s asking who philosopher Thomas Carlyle “might be and what had
he done” (Vol. 1 12). Watson’s evaluation of Holmes’s intelligence includes: “Knowledge of
literature, philosophy, astronomy - nil. Politics – feeble; botany – variable. Geology – practical, but limited. Chemistry – profound. Anatomy – accurate, but unsystematic. Sensational literature – immense. Practical knowledge of British law” (Vol. I 13-14). Watson is proven incorrect in his evaluation throughout the rest of the canon when Holmes often displays a remarkable intimacy
with philosophy and literature. In “The Red-Headed League,” for instance, Holmes blithely
quotes author Gustave Flaubert in French (“L’homme, c’est rien; l’oeuvre, c’est tout”) and tosses
out a Latin proverb (“Omne ignotum pro magnifico”) (Vol. I 266, 287). In an odd connection,
Doyle assembled a similar list in response to the “Proust quiz,” questions Marcel Proust designed to help establish characterization. In replying, Doyle also opted for some of the sarcastic tone Hume used in creating his own list. When asked, “What is your favorite occupation?” Doyle tersely replied, “Work.” His chief characteristic? “I don’t know.” His favorite characteristic in a man? “Manliness.” In a woman? “Womanliness” (“Autobiographical”). (A copy of Doyle’s list is included in Appendix B.)