If we are going to talk about personal identity, we will nevertheless stumble upon multiple famous philosophers, who studied this exceptional phenomenon. One of those philosophers is David Hume, who finalized his thoughts in his first book, the “Treatise of Human Nature”. In the Treatise there are numerous accounts, where Hume talks about personal identity. Foremost the chapter “Of personal identity” in the first book of the Treatise contains the main thoughts of Hume on this subject. But also in the second book of the Treatise, we can find numerous accounts, where Hume relies on a specific notion of personal identity. Thirdly he also addresses the issue in the so called “Appendix”, a chapter he published alongside the third book in 1740. In the “Appendix” Hume revises his position regarding personal identity and talks about errors and false assumptions he made in “Of personal identity”. These sources of Hume are the very basis of this work and serves as an anchor for further discussions regarding the subject. There are numerous different interpretations of Humes work, and all of those come to a different conclusion. If we were to divide the numerous interpretations in two distinct groups, we would end up with the so called “New Humeans” on the one side and the so called “Old Humeans” on the other. The “New Humeans”, represented by Galen Strawson, read the Appendix as a critique on Humes philosophy itself. The Appendix then not only threatens Humes account on personal identity, but rather his whole philosophical project. The “Old Humeans” on the other hand regard the Appendix as a critique on a specific problem in Humes philosophy, namely his account on personal identity. Lastly there is another interpretation which is to be discussed in this paper, which sees Hume as a member of the so called “No Self theory of personal identity”, wherein Hume negates the self and identity entirely.