E-text prepared by Frank van Drogen, Lisa Reigel, and the Project
Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team



THE

LIFE

Of the truly EMINENT and LEARNED

HUGO GROTIUS,

CONTAINING

A Copious and Circumstantial History of the several

Important and Honourable Negotiations

In which he was employed;

TOGETHER WITH

A Critical Account of his WORKS.

Written originally in French,

By M. DE BURIGNY.

LONDON

Printed for A. MILLAR, in the Strand; J. WHISTON and
B. WHITE, at Mr. Boyle's Head; and L. DAVIS, at
Lord Bacon's Head, both in Fleet-street.

M DCC LIV.




THE

AUTHOR'S

PREFACE.


_It were to be wished that such a celebrated Genius as_ Grotius _had
found an Historian equal to his fame: for in this high rank we can by no
means place those who have contented themselves with giving a
superficial account of his Life, and a catalogue of his Works. M._
Lehman, _to whom we owe_ Grotius's Ghost revenged, _is much fuller than
any that went before him; yet he is far from having taken in all that
deserves to be known of that illustrious writer, the two most
interesting Distinctions of whose Life have been entirely neglected by
all who have spoken of him; I mean his Negotiations, and his sentiments
in matters of Religion._

Gaspar Brandt _and_ Adrian Cattenburg _have indeed published a long Life
of_ Grotius; _but the_ Dutch _language, in which they wrote, is so
little known, that their book cannot be of general use; with a view to
which we have made choice of a more universal language, to communicate
farther light concerning this excellent man, whom every one speaks of,
tho' few with any certainty._

_His being one of the most learned Authors that ever wrote, was not our
sole motive for compiling his Life: for if we consider him only in that
light, and with regard to the excellent treatises with which he has
enriched the Republic of Letters, perhaps others may be found to compare
with him. But his Life was so diversified, and filled with so many
revolutions, that what regards literature is not the most curious part
of it; greatly differing, in this respect, from the generality of men of
letters, whole Lives are only the histories of their works. Besides_,
Grotius's _prudence on all occasions, his modesty in prosperity, his
patience in adversity, his steadiness in his duty, his love of virtue,
his eagerness in the search of truth, and the ardent desire which he
constantly maintained for uniting Christians in one Faith, distinguish
him so advantageously from most other Scholars, that his Life may be
proposed as a model to all who make profession of literature._

_It is divided into six Books. The first presents us with the brightest
genius ever recorded, of a Youth, in the history of the republic of
letters. The second contains all that is worth being known of the
disputes between the_ Gomarists _and_ Arminians; _the part_ Grotius
_took in them; his disgrace, and the manner of his escape out of prison.
The third relates his transactions at_ Paris, _and his retreat to_
Hamburg, _where he continued till the great Chancellor_ Oxensteirn _sent
for him, to employ him in the important and honourable post of
Ambassador from_ Sweden _to the Court of_ France. _The fourth and fifth
Books give a detail of his Negotiations; which have never yet been
published. We have been accustomed to consider_ Grotius _only as a
Scholar; his embassy is known but by report: we shall see, however, that
he was employed in affairs of the greatest importance; that he succeeded
in several; that he gave excellent counsels to the ministry; and that he
always conducted himself with zeal, firmness, and integrity._

_The sixth and last Book gives an account of such of his Works as we had
not occasion to mention before; and examines particularly his
theological sentiments, and his project for a coalition of Christians,
and bringing them to unite in one creed._

       *       *       *       *       *


_Advertisement by the Editor._

The Abbé RAYNAL[1], a judicious French writer, gives the following
character of this work.

"M. de BURIGNY hath executed his Plan with abundance of erudition, and
an astonishing depth of enquiry. He has introduced nothing but facts
well supported, or theological discussions delivered with the greatest
conciseness and accuracy. Such readers as aim at amusement only, will
think the author too minute in some places; those who are desirous of
information will think otherwise. The most valuable part of this work
is, in our opinion, the just and concise idea which it gives of
_Grotius's_ several Writings."

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Mercure François, an. 1752.




APPROBATION.

By Order of my Lord CHANCELLOR, I have read the _Life of
GROTIUS_. This History, which gives us a pleasing Idea of the
Extent of the Human Mind, farther informs us, that _GROTIUS_ died
without reaping any Advantage to himself from his great Talents. For the
rest, I think it deserves to be made public on account of its relation
to Literature, and to the general History of _Europe_.

DE MARSILLY




THE

TABLE

OF

CONTENTS.


BOOK I.


       I. Grotius's Origin: The Marriage of Cornelius Cornets with
          Ermengarda de Groot

      II. He has a Son named Hugo de Groot

     III. Life of Cornelius de Groot

      IV. Life of John de Groot

       V. Birth of Grotius

      VI. Great hopes conceived of him when a boy

     VII. State of affairs in the United Provinces

    VIII. Embassy from the States to Henry IV. of France; Grotius
          accompanies the Ambassadors; is very graciously received by
          the king

      IX. His mortification at not having seen M. de Thou; he writes
          to him; and keeps up an intimate correspondence with him till
          his death

       X. Grotius gives an edition of Martianus Capella

      XI. Publishes the Limneu[Greek: retichê]

     XII. Publishes the Phoenomena of Aratus

    XIII. Cultivates the study of poetry

     XIV. The States nominate him their historiographer

      XV. Henry IV. of France intends to make him his librarian

     XVI. Commences Advocate; dislikes this employment

    XVII. Is nominated Advocate General

   XVIII. Marries

     XIX. His treatise of the Freedom of the ocean is published

      XX. Prints his book De antiquitate Reipublicæ Batavicæ

     XXI. Is made pensionary of Rotterdam

    XXII. Voyage to England: dispute concerning the Fishery

   XXIII. Grotius's intimacy with Casaubon

    XXIV. A grand question decided by the States of Holland according to
          Grotius's opinion

     XXV. Sends Du Maurier a method of study


BOOK II.

       I. Dispute between Arminius and Gomarus

      II. Remonstrance of the Arminians

     III. The troubles increase

      IV. The edict of the States

       V. The States grant the Magistrates of the Towns permission to
          levy soldiers; which highly displeases the prince of Orange

      VI. Grotius is deputed by the States to Amsterdam; falls ill
          through chagrin

     VII. The project of reunion proves fruitless

    VIII. Prince Maurice disbands the new levies

      IX. Barnevelt, Grotius, and Hoogerbetz taken into custody

       X. The synod of Dort

      XI. Barnevelt's trial

     XII. The fruitless solicitations of the French court in favour of
          the Prisoners: Barnevelt's execution

    XIII. Trial and condemnation of Grotius

     XIV. Grotius is carried to the fortress of Louvestein, his
          occupations

      XV. Grotius escapes out of prison

     XVI. His writings on occasion of the disputes in Holland


BOOK III.

       I. Grotius arrives at Paris, where he is well received

      II. State of the French ministry: Du Vair's letter to Grotius: the
          court grants him a pension

     III. Grotius's occupations at Paris

      IV. Grotius publishes his Apology: it is condemned in Holland: the
          French king takes him again into his protection

       V. He still maintains great connections in Holland; corresponds
          with Prince Henry Frederic of Nassau

      VI. He publishes his Stobeus, and the Extracts from the Greek
          Tragedies and Comedies

     VII. Goes to Balagni; is seized with the dysentery; publishes the
          Phoenissæ of Euripides

    VIII. The death of Prince Maurice; Frederic is made Stadtholder;
          Grotius writes to him

      IX. Publishes his treatise, De jure Belli & Pacis

       X. Has thoughts of leaving France

      XI. Returns to Holland

     XII. Is obliged to leave Holland

    XIII. Goes to Hamburg


BOOK IV.

       I. The High Chancellor Oxensteirn invites Grotius to him: the
          high esteem in which the latter held the King of Sweden

      II. Grotius is appointed Ambassador from Sweden to the court of
          France

     III. Situation of the Swedes affairs

      IV. Grotius sets out for France, makes his entry into Paris, and
          has an audience of the King

       V. Discussions between France and Sweden

      VI. Arrival of the High Chancellor in France: a new treaty

     VII. Disputes between Grotius and the ministers of Charenton

    VIII. Grotius's several journeys to court, and his negotiations with
          the French ministry: abstains from visiting cardinal Richelieu

      IX. Uneasiness given Grotius

       X. Dispute for precedency with the Venetian Ambassador

      XI. Is of opinion that the Swedes ought not to send
          plenipotentiaries to Cologn

     XII. Disputes with the Venetian Ambassador

    XIII. Quarrel between the English and Swedes for precedency


BOOK V.

       I. Different audiences which Grotius has of the French King

      II. Conversation between the prince of Condé and Grotius

     III. Grotius's negotiations in relation to the truce which was
          proposed: misconduct of Schmalz

      IV. Grotius is in great danger of his life

       V. Divers audiences of the king and queen

      VI. The death of the duke of Weimar

     VII. The elector Palatine is arrested in France; Grotius obtains
          his liberty

    VIII. Grotius obtains the exchange of marshal Horn for John de
          Vert

      IX. Renewal of the alliance between France and Sweden

       X. Deaths of cardinal Richelieu and the French king; the regency
          of Anne of Austria

      XI. Cerisante is sent to France; Grotius demands to be
          recalled

     XII. He sets out for Stockholm, and applies to the queen to obtain
          his dismission

    XIII. Grotius's death


BOOK VI.

       I. Grotius's embassy does not interrupt his literary labours

      II. He again applies to the cultivation of poetry

     III. His notes on Tacitus

      IV. ---- notes on Statius

       V. ---- notes on Lucan

      VI. ---- Anthologia

     VII. Antiquities of the Goths

    VIII. Annals and history of the Low Countries

      IX. Treatise of the truth of the christian religion

       X. Florum sparsio ad jus Justinianeum

      XI. Commentaries on the Bible

     XII. Treatises on Antichrist, and other theological pieces

    XIII. Of the origin of the people of America

     XIV. Other printed pieces or Manuscripts of Grotius

      XV. Grotius's letters

     XVI. Grotius's sentiments in religion very distant at first from
          those of the Roman Catholics

    XVII. His attachment to antiquity

   XVIII. Leans towards the Roman Catholics

     XIX. Is a partisan of the Hierarchy

      XX. His sentiments concerning the Eucharist

     XXI. His sentiments concerning the seven Sacraments

    XXII. Grotius's sentiments concerning several other points
          controverted between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants

   XXIII. His project for reuniting all Christians

    XXIV. Is accused of Socinianism

     XXV. Opinions concerning Grotius

    XXVI. An account of his family

END of the TABLE of CONTENTS.




BOOKS printed for A. MILLAR in the Strand; Messieurs WHISTON and
WHITE, at Mr. Boyle's Head, and L. DAVIS, at Lord Bacon's Head, both in
Fleet-street.

QUARTO, Just Published, Printed on a fine Paper, illustrated with
Maps and Copper-plates, Price One Pound ten Shillings bound, The Second
Edition, Revised and Corrected, of

1. An Historical Account of the British Trade over the Caspian Sea: With
the Author's Journal of Travels from England through Russia into Persia;
and back through Russia, Germany, and Holland. To which are added, The
Revolutions of Persia during the present Century; with the particular
History of the great Usurper Nadir Kouli. By JONAS HANWAY,
Merchant.

2. Tables of ancient Coins, Weights and Measures, explained, and
exemplified in several Dissertations. By JOHN ARBUTHNOT, M.D. Fellow of
the Royal Society, and of the College of Physicians. The second Edition.
To which is added, An Appendix, containing Observations on Dr.
Arbuthnot's Dissertations on Coins, Weights, and Measures, by BENJAMIN
LANGWITH, D.D. Price 18 s. bound.

OCTAVO.

3. The Life of the Most Reverend Dr. John Tillotson, Lord Archbishop of
Canterbury, compiled chiefly from his Original Papers and Letters. By
THOMAS BIRCH, D.D. The second Edition, enlarged. Price 5 s.

4. Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Mr. WILLIAM WHISTON, M.A.
containing also Memoirs of several of his Friends. Written by HIMSELF.
The three Parts compleat, in Two Volumes. Price 9 s.

5. The Life of the Honourable Robert Boyle, Esq; with an Account of his
great Improvements in Natural Philosophy. By THOMAS BIRCH, D.D. Price 5
s.

6. The Life of Francis Bacon, Lord Chancellor of England. By Mr. MALLET.
Price 3 s. 6 d.

7. Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, 3 Vol. Price 15 s. 6 d. By JOHN
JORTIN, M.A. Rector of St. Dunstan's in the East.

N.B. The second and third Volumes may be had separate.

8. Discourses concerning the Truth of the Christian Religion. By JOHN
JORTIN, M.A. The Third Edition, Price 3 s. 6 d.

9. Mr. Whiston's Sacred History of the World, from the Creation to the
compleat Establishment of Christianity under the Emperor Constantine the
Great, Anno Dom. 317. Together with the Prophane History connected.
Wherein also the Completion of the Prophecies in the Old Testament are
shewn, and many difficult Passages of Scripture cleared up. Being an
Improvement of Dean Prideaux, Dr. Shuckford, and Mr. Eachard's
Histories. In Six large volumes Octavo. Price One Guinea bound.




BOOK I.


I. The learned and illustrious Writer whose Life we undertake to give,
derived the name of Grotius from his great-grandmother, married to
Cornelius Cornets. This was a Gentleman of Franche-Compté, who travelled
into the Low-Countries about the beginning of the sixteenth century, and
coming to Delft, got acquainted with a Burgomaster who had an only
daughter: He took a liking to her, asked, and obtained her in marriage.

The name of this magistrate was Diederic de Groot, or Diederic the
Great; his family was of the first distinction in the country; and had
produced several persons of great merit[2]. It is said the name of
Great was given to one of Diederic's ancestors, above four hundred years
ago, for a signal service done his country; and it has been observed[3]
that all who bore the name of De Groot distinguished themselves by their
zeal for the public.

Diederic de Groot had several important employments, in which he
acquitted himself with great honour. The name of his only daughter was
Ermengarda de Groot: Her father, on giving his consent to her marriage,
insisted that the children should bear the name of De Groot; and
Cornelius Cornets agreed to it in the marriage contract. There were
several branches of the Cornets: one settled in Provence, as we are
informed by[4] Grotius.

FOOTNOTES:

[2] Acad. Leid. ed. 1614.

[3] Vita Grotii ap. Batesium, p. 420.

[4] Ep. 264. ad Peyresc. p. 91.


II. Cornelius Cornets had by his marriage with Ermengarda de Groot a son
named Hugo de Groot, distinguished by his knowledge of the Greek and
Latin, and his skill in the Hebrew. He died in 1567, fifth time
Burgomaster of Delft. He married Elselinga Heemskerke, of one of the
ancientest noble families in Holland, and by her had two sons,
Cornelius, and John de Groot.


III. Cornelius de Groot, eldest son of Hugh, was born at Delft on the
25th of July, 1544. He studied with much success at the University of
Louvain, at that time very famous. The Greek and Hebrew he knew
perfectly, and was well acquainted with the Mathematics. The Platonic
Philosophy pleased him extremely, and he retained a liking to it all his
life: he had read all the books of the sect, had commented their works,
and knew them almost by heart.

The Law wholly took him up afterwards: he went to study it at the
faculty of law at Orleans, the most celebrated for that science, and
took the degree of Licentiate. Returning home he followed the Bar; some
time after, he was nominated Counsellor and Echevin: William prince of
Orange made him Master of Requests.

The University of Leyden being founded in 1575, Cornelius de Groot
resigned his post in the magistracy, to follow his ruling inclination of
being useful to youth; and did not think it beneath him to accept of a
Professor's place in the new University: he first taught Philosophy, and
was afterwards made Law-professor; an employment that pleased him so
much, he preferred it to a seat in the Grand Council at the Hague, which
was several times offered him, but which he constantly refused. His
reputation was so great, the Grand Council often consulted with him on
affairs of importance. Six times he was honoured with the dignity of
Rector, a place of great honour and authority: the members of the
University, and all who are enrolled in the Rector's book, depend on his
jurisdiction; before him their causes, civil and criminal, are brought,
and from his sentence there is no appeal: a revisal of it is all that
can be demanded. Cornelius de Groot died without issue in the year 1610,
on the same day of the month of July on which he was born. He left
several Law Tracts which have never been printed.


IV. John de Groot, brother to Cornelius and second son of Hugh, studied
under the famous Justus Lipsius, who esteemed him much: in some letters
of that learned man to John de Groot he speaks of him with great
commendation. There is one, written in 1582, in which Lipsius tells him,
"You have loved the Muses, they have loved you, they will love you, and
I too with them will love you." We have still preserved by his son[5] a
translation in verse, made by him in his youth of some Greek verses of
Palladas. He also wrote a Paraphrase on the Epistle of St. John; which
Hugo Grotius mentions in one of his Letters[6].

Four times he was Burgomaster of Delft, and Curator of the University of
Leyden: this last was a place of great consequence at that time. There
are only three Curators in the University of Leyden; one is taken from
the body of the nobility, and nominated by them; the two others are
chosen by the States of the Province from among the cities of Holland,
or the Courts of Justice.

The Curators with the Burgomasters of Leyden have the direction of
whatever regards the welfare and advantage of the University; they chuse
the Professors, and have the care of the finances and revenues for
payment of their salaries.

John de Groot filled the place of Curator with great dignity and honour.
Daniel Heinsius wrote some verses in his praise, in which he styles him
the Apollo and Protector of the Muses.

This dignity did not hinder him from taking the degree of Doctor of
Laws. In the remaining part of his life he attached himself to the Count
of Hohenloo, who made him his Counsellor.

In 1582 he married Alida Averschie, of one of the first families in the
Country; by whom he had three sons and a daughter. He died in the month
of May 1640. In the same year his wife lost her eyesight; she lived till
the beginning of the year 1643[7].

FOOTNOTES:

[5] Stobæus, Tit. 98. p. 413.

[6] Ep. xxii. p. 751.

[7] Ep. 499. p. 898. Grotii Ep. 638. p. 948.


V. Of the marriage of John de Groot with Alida Averschie was born the
celebrated Hugo de Groot, better known by the name of Grotius: he was
the first fruit of their coming together. Almost all who have mentioned
his birth[8] fix it on the tenth of April 1583. The President Bouhier
pretends they place it a year too late; and that he was born on the
tenth of April 1582. To prevent the authority of such a learned man,
which has already seduced several writers, from misleading others, we
shall shew that by departing from the general opinion he has fallen into
an error. Grotius writes to Vossius on Easter Sunday 1615[9], that on
that day he reckoned thirty-two years: He dates another letter[10] to
Vossius the twenty-fifth of March 1617; Easter-eve, "which, he observes,
begins my thirty-fifth year." April 11, 1643, he says he had completed
sixty years[11]. On Easter-day 1644 he reckons sixty-one years[12]. He
acquaints us in his Poems[13], that he was fifteen when he went first to
France: he went there in 1598; and speaking of Easter 1614 he informs
us[14] he was then one-and-thirty. From all these different calculations
it is manifest that Grotius was born in 1583.

It must be owned, however, that the proof on which the President Bouhier
builds his opinion, would be decisive, if there were no error in the
text of a[15] letter written by Grotius to his brother, April 14, 1640,
in which he says, "I have completed my fifty-eighth year:" but the other
passages of Grotius just cited demonstrate that the editors of this
letter, instead of _incepi_, I have begun, read _implevi_, I have
completed: which Grotius could not have written without contradicting
himself.

FOOTNOTES:

[8] Athenæ Batavæ, p. 205. Life of Grotius prefixed to his works. Le
Clerc, Hist. de Hollande, l. 12. t. 2. See the critical Remarks on
Bayle's Dict. ed. 1734.

[9] Ep. 55. p. 18.

[10] Ep. 95. p. 41.

[11] Ep. 648. p. 952.

[12] Ep. 697. p. 965.

[13] Page 213.

[14] Poemata, p. 217.

[15] Ep. 491. p. 896.


VI. It was therefore on the tenth of April in the year 1583, that
Grotius was born, at Delft. It was Easter-Sunday that year: and he
always observed the anniversary of that feast as his birth-day[16].

He came into the world with the most happy dispositions. Nature bestowed
on him a profound genius, a solid judgment, and a wonderful memory.
Several authors report[17] that being employed to review some regiments
he retained the name of every soldier. He was but eight years old, when,
in 1591, he wrote some elegiac verses, very pretty for that age:
afterwards he thought them not good enough to publish. M. le Clerc
informs us, that he had seen a copy of them in the possession of a very
able man, who purposed to write the life of Grotius.

Nothing contributed more to his amazing progress, than the excellent
education he received. He was so happy, as to find in his own father a
pious and able governor, who formed his mind and his morals. He did not
confine himself to making his son a man of learning, he purposed making
him a good man. The young Grotius, like Horace, has celebrated his
gratefulness for so good a father in some verses still extant. He often
declared in the course of his life,[18] that he could never sufficiently
acknowledge his obligation to his father and mother for the principles
of piety they instilled into him. We learn from his letters[19], that
his preceptor was one Lusson, whom he calls an excellent man; and seems
to have been greatly affected with his death: which is all we know of
him.

He was scarce past his childhood[20] when he was sent to the Hague; and
boarded with Mr. Utengobard, a celebrated clergyman among the Arminians,
with whom he kept up the most tender friendship till his death, in
return for the care he had taken of his education. Before he was twelve,
he was sent to the famous university of Leyden to perfect himself: and
continued there three years with the learned Francis Junius, who was so
kind to superintend his behaviour. Joseph Scaliger, the ornament of the
university of Leyden, who enjoyed the most brilliant reputation among
the learned, and whom his worshippers regarded as the Dictator of the
republic of Letters, was so struck with the prodigious capacity of young
Grotius, that he condescended to direct his studies. In 1597 he
maintained public theses in Mathematics, Philosophy, and Law with the
highest applause. Hence we may judge with what ardour he applied to
study. He tells us himself that he spent a part of the night in it.[21]
The device which he adopted[22] shews that he had reflected on the
swiftness of time, and the necessity of employing it well.

The reputation of this learned youth spread every-where; and learned men
spoke of him in their works as a prodigy. So early as the year 1597
Isaac Pontanus calls him a young man of the greatest hopes; Meursius, in
1599, declared he had never seen his equal. James Gilot, in a letter
written from Paris to Meursius in 1601, affirmed the capacity of young
Grotius bordered on prodigy; the famous Poet Barlæus said the childhood
of Grotius astonished all the old men. Daniel Heinsius maintained that
Grotius was a man from the instant of his birth, and never had
discovered any signs of childhood. He was scarce eleven when John Dowza
bestowed the highest encomiums on him in some verses that might deserve
to be copied entire: he can scarce believe that the great Erasmus
promised so much as the young Grotius: and foretels that he will soon
excel all his cotemporaries, and be fit to be compared with the most
esteemed of the Antients.

At this early age, Grotius ventured to form plans, which required very
great learning; and he executed them to such perfection, that the
Republic of Letters was struck with astonishment. But as he did not
publish these works till after his return from France, we shall defer
giving an account of them till we have first spoken of his journey
thither, and displayed the situation of affairs in Holland, in whose
government Grotius had soon a share.

FOOTNOTES:

[16] Ep. 490. p. 895.

[17] Borremansius. Crenius Anim. Hist. t. 1. p. 20. Du Maurier.

[18] Ep. 490, p. 895.

[19] Ep. 500. p. 884.

[20] Apol. c. 20.

[21] In natalem patris, p. 199.

[22] _Hora ruit._


VII. He came into the world precisely at that time when the affairs of
the United Provinces were in the greatest disorder. It was the year[23]
that the duke of Anjou wanted to surprize Antwerp; and that the
greatest lords, in despair of being able to resist the formidable power
of the king of Spain, were seeking to obtain a pardon. To add to their
distress, William prince of Orange, the greatest support of the infant
Republic, was murdered the year following, 1584, at Delft. His talents,
his experience, and his reputation were the principal resource of the
Malcontents. The confusion, in which he left affairs, grieved him so
much, that his last words were, _Lord, have pity on this poor people_.
Every thing was prepared, when he died, for proclaiming him Count of
Holland. The provinces of Zealand and Utrecht did not oppose it: only
the cities of Amsterdam and Goude made some difficulty: however, the
thing was so far advanced, that the States of Holland sent a deputation
to those two cities, to acquaint them, if they refused any longer to
give their consent, the States would nevertheless consummate the affair.
The deputation had been gone a month, when the prince was assassinated
on the tenth of July.

The States in this kind of anarchy requested Henry III. of France to
receive them for his subjects; but the embarrassments the League gave
him hindered his accepting their offer. On his refusal they had recourse
to Queen Elizabeth, who concluded a treaty with them, by which she
engaged to furnish five thousand foot, and a thousand horse, under an
English general, and to pay these troops during the war on condition of
being reimbursed when it was over: and it was stipulated that for
security of the payment some towns, particularly Flushing in Zealand,
and the Brille in Holland, should be put into her hands, to be restored
to the States when the money was repaid. The Queen of England at the
same time published a manifesto, setting forth, that the alliance
between the Kings of England and the Sovereigns of the Low Countries was
not so much between their persons as between their respective States:
from whence she concluded that, without violating her alliance with the
King of Spain, she might assist the people of the Low Countries
oppressed by the Spaniards.

The Earl of Leicester was appointed to command the succours sent by the
Queen to Holland. The States, to express their gratitude to England,
declared him Governor and Captain-General of the United Provinces. No
sooner did he see himself invested with this great power, than he began
under-hand to form projects destructive of the liberty of the country he
came to defend: it has been said, he designed to make himself Sovereign
of the Provinces of which he was only Governor. He soon became odious to
every one; and after a campaign, in which he performed no considerable
exploit, returned to England to take measures for facilitating the
execution of his ambitious designs.

The States, who had no longer any confidence in him, gave, in 1587, the
command of their own army to Count Maurice of Nassau, son of the Prince
of Orange. He was then only eighteen: but he quickly justified by many
signal successes the hopes they had conceived of him. The Earl of
Leicester, returning to Holland, resolved to employ force to accomplish
his design of making himself Sovereign: he wanted to get possession of
several places at once; but his scheme for surprizing Leyden being
seasonably discovered, all correspondence between the States and him was
entirely broken off. The Queen recalled him, and sent in his room Lord
Willoughby, who was to command only the English. The States thereupon
appointed Count Maurice of Nassau Captain-General: the Grand Pensionary
Barnevelt, who had distinguished himself by his firmness in opposing
Leicester, contributed greatly to this nomination.

FOOTNOTES:

[23] Ann. Grotii L. 4. p. 81.


VIII. The United Provinces had bravely defended their liberty for
several years: it was a subject of astonishment to all Europe, that such
a small State should be able to resist the formidable power of King
Philip II. Henry IV. having triumphed over the League, had nothing more
at heart than the restoring peace and order to his kingdom that had been
exhausted by a long series of misfortunes, and found it impossible to
bring about this without making peace with Spain. He communicated his
intentions to the Dutch[24] above a year before there was any talk of
negotiating: for though he had not been their adviser to take up arms,
he wished they might make their peace at the same time he did: but the
States would have no peace on the conditions on which Spain pretended to
grant it: the French king's resolution, of consequence, put them in a
great consternation, because they foresaw the whole force of Philip II.
was coming to fall on them. They took a resolution to send to Henry, in
1598, Count Justin of Nassau and the Grand Pensionary Barnevelt, to
intreat him to continue the war, and not make a separate peace.

The Dutch Ambassadors, in conjunction with Lord Cecil, Ambassador from
England, omitted nothing to determine the King to conclude a new treaty
of perpetual alliance with Holland and England against Spain. The King
prayed them to consider, that the state of his affairs required him to
make peace; but, for the rest, it would not hinder him, in case the
Queen of England and the States did not chuse to be comprehended in the
treaty, from doing them service; that the peace itself would enable him
to assist them with money, without leaving Spain any room to complain,
as he could pretend that he only repaid what money they had lent him in
his greatest wants.

The congress of Vervins, already begun, was still continued. Henry
sincerely desired a general peace: and accordingly ordered Mess. de
Bellievre and de Silleri, his plenipotentiaries, to obtain from the
Archduke Albert a truce of four months between Spain and Holland; hoping
that means of reconciliation might be found in that interval. The
Archduke at first refused it: and this denial had well nigh broke off
the congress: he consented at last to a truce of two months: but the
Dutch would not accept it, finding the term too short. The only
advantage which the States drew from this embassy was a promise from the
King to assist them, in four years, with two millions nine hundred
thousand florins; as Barnevelt informs us.

Grotius, who had a strong inclination to see France, seized the
opportunity of the Dutch ambassadors journey: he accompanied the Grand
Pensionary, for whom he had the highest esteem, and justly regarded as
one of the principal supports of the infant Republic.

The learned Youth was advantageously known in France before. M. de
Buzanval, who had been ambassador in Holland, introduced him to the
King, by whom he was graciously received: that great prince presented
him with his picture and a gold chain. Grotius was so transported with
this present, that he caused a print of himself, adorned with the chain
given him by Henry, to be engraved. He gives the history of this Embassy
in the seventh book of his _Annals_: but is so modest not to mention
himself. He reflects, however, with pleasure, in some part of his[25]
Poems, on the honour he had of speaking to such a great King. "I had the
honour to kiss the hand of that Hero, who owes his kingdom only to his
valour."

Grotius took advantage of this journey to get himself created Doctor of
Laws.

FOOTNOTES:

[24] Mem. de Bellievre & de Silleri, T. 2. p. 348.

[25] In Pasch. 1612.


IX. After having been near a year in France, he returned to Holland. He
had the greatest pleasure in his journey: one thing only was wanting to
his satisfaction, a sight of the celebrated M. de Thou, the person among
all the French whom he most esteemed. He had fought to get acquainted
with that great man; but did not succeed. As soon as he returned to
Delft, he wrote him[26] that he had been a year in France; had the
pleasure of seeing a fine kingdom, a great king, very valuable noblemen,
but had the mortification of not seeing him; that he would endeavour to
repair this misfortune by his letters; and that he took the liberty to
present him with a book he had just dedicated to the Prince of Condé.

This Letter was extremely well received by the President; and from that
time to the death of M. de Thou, notwithstanding the disproportion of
their age and fame, a most intimate correspondence subsisted between
them.

Grotius sent him, July 4, 1600,[27] the _Epithalamium_ he had written on
the Marriage of King Henry IV. with Mary of Medicis. Mention was made in
it of the Massacre on St. Bartholomew's day: this was an invidious
subject; but the author, after consulting Scaliger, thought he could not
dispense with recalling the remembrance of that horrid scene. He was in
doubt whether he ought to publish this piece: he asked the President de
Thou's advice; and till he had his answer, shewed the verses to none.
Whether it was that M. de Thou advised him to suppress them, or that he
took this step of himself[28] because there were several facts in the
_Epithalamium_ not strictly true, it is not to be found in the
collection of his _Poems_. He intended to dedicate some Work to the
President, as a public testimony of his profound esteem for that
excellent Magistrate, whom he regarded as the greatest Man of his
age[29].

M. de Thou soon perceived the great merit of young Grotius; and had the
highest affection for him[30]. They corresponded by Letter whilst the
President lived: Grotius sent him memoirs[31] for his _History_, and
hints relating to the lives and deaths of illustrious men in the United
Provinces.

It was a thing infinitely pleasing, and at the same time extremely
honorable to a youth between seventeen and eighteen, to be most
intimately connected with one of the greatest men of his time, already
advanced in years, who filled a post of much eminence, and whom all
Europe beheld with admiration. The friendship and esteem of such a
personage is the highest encomium.

M. de Thou gave Grotius, towards the end of his life, sincere proofs of
the concern he took in his quiet and welfare. That great Historian, who
had experienced the fiery zeal of some Divines, beheld with pain his
friend engaging in controversies which would render him odious to a
powerful party. As if he had foreseen what was soon to happen, he
advised him to drop these dangerous disputes. Grotius wrote him in
answer, that he had entered into them only through necessity, to serve
his Country and the Church; that he thought himself obliged to obey
those who wished he would write on those matters; that, for the rest, he
would avoid, for the future, all disputes which were not absolutely
necessary. This Letter is the last we have of the valuable
correspondence between those illustrious men: the President de Thou died
soon after. Grotius wrote his _Elogium_ in verse, addressed to Francis
Augustus de Thou his son, and in this Poem, which was composed at the
time he escaped from Antwerp to go to Paris, he appears to regret much
that he had not the felicity to see his illustrious Father. It is looked
on as one of the best Grotius ever wrote.

FOOTNOTES:

[26] Ep. 1. p. 1. April 1, 1599.

[27] Ep. 2. p. 1.

[28] Ep. 3. p. 1.

[29] Poemata, p. 262. Ep. 24. p. 7.

[30] Ep. 1581. p. 711. Ep. 325. p. 115.

[31] Ep. 3. p. 1. Ep 4. p. 1.


X. Grotius, who had resolved to follow the Bar, pleaded his first cause
at Delft in the year 1599, at his return from France. The study of law
and poetry employed one part of his time; he spent the other in
publishing the works he had prepared for the press. The first he gave to
the public was _Martianus Capella_. This is one of those obscure
authors, who are commonly not read till we have nothing else to learn:
the title of his work is, _Of the marriage of Mercury and Philology, in
two books; to which are annexed seven other books on the liberal arts_.
The author was an African, and his style, like that of most authors of
his nation, obscure and barbarous; which makes it not easy to be
understood. Before this there was no good edition of his works. John
Grotius had put into his son's hands a manuscript of Capella: Hugo
shewed it to Scaliger; and this learned man, whose counsels were
commands to the young Grotius, engaged him to study that author, and
publish a new edition of him.

Though Grotius was then but fourteen, the difficulty of the undertaking
did not discourage him: he read all the works that had relation to the
matters Capella treated of; and at length acquitted himself of the task
enjoined him by Scaliger with such abilities and success, as, to use Mr.
Baillet's words, astonished the whole world.

The work appeared in 1599. It would have been published before, but for
his journey to France, and some delays occasioned by the bookseller.
Grotius also informs us, that he would have printed it sooner, had he
been less taken up with the study of the law.

To judge of Grotius' labour it will be sufficient to read what he says
in the preface. "We have collated _Capella_ with the several authors who
have treated the same subjects: in the two first books with those who
have written of the sentiments of the ancient Philosophers, Apuleius,
Albricus, and others too tedious to name, on Grammar we have compared
him with Grammarians: what he has said on Rhetoric, with Cicero and
Aquila; on Logic, with Porphyry, Aristotle, Cassiodorus, Apuleius; on
Geography, with Strabo, Mela, Solinus, Ptolemy, but chiefly Pliny; on
Arithmetic, with Euclid; on Astronomy, with Hygin, and the rest who have
treated that subject; on Music, with Cleonides, Vitruvius, Boëthius."

Rightly to understand _Capella_ requires an acquaintance with all the
Sciences. The principal use of his book is to shew how far the knowledge
of the Ancients extended. Grotius, when in France, had often the honour
of paying his court to the young Prince of Condé, at that time
presumptive heir of the crown: he was so well pleased with his genius,
and learning, which was above his years, that he dedicated his _Capella_
to him. The dedication is dated December 29, 1598.

Men of the greatest learning publickly expressed their surprise to see a
child of fifteen produce a work that would have done honour to the most
celebrated Man of Letters. Scaliger made a very high encomium on the
young author in some fine verses which are much to Grotius' honour. The
President de Thou was very well pleased with _Capella_. [32]Casaubon
declared that whatever high idea he might have of Grotius' labour, the
success exceeded his hopes. [33]Vossius, in fine, after assuring Grotius
that he had very happily restored _Capella_, compares the editor to
Erasmus; and affirms that the whole world could not produce a man of
greater learning than Grotius[34].

The more we consider this work, the greater difficulty we have to
believe it to have been executed by a boy. We would sometimes be
inclined to think the great Scaliger had a hand in it; but this is only
a conjecture: that Grotius was assisted by his father is very certain;
he tells us so himself.

Some perhaps will be glad to know how Grotius managed with the
booksellers: for even little details that relate to famous men yield a
pleasure. He never took money for the copy, though, he tells us, some
people of good fortune were not so delicate: but he asked a hundred
books on large paper handsomely bound, to make presents to his friends;
it being unjust, he said, that while he served the public and enriched
the booksellers, he should injure his own fortune.

FOOTNOTES:

[32] Ep. Gr. 3. p. 1.

[33] Ep. Caus. 1030.

[34] De Hist. Lat. lib. 3


XI. The same year, 1599, Grotius published another work which discovered
as much knowledge of the abstract sciences in particular, as the edition
of _Martianus Capella_ did of his learning in general.

Stevin, Mathematician to Prince Maurice of Nassau, had by his orders
composed a small treatise for the instruction of pilots in finding a
ship's place at sea. He formed a table of the variations of the needle,
according to the observations of Plancius, a famous geographer, and
added directions how to use it.

Grotius translated into Latin this work, which he could not have
understood without knowing the Mathematics, and particularly Mechanics;
Statics, and the art of working a ship, and of finding her place at sea,
being branches of that science.

This translation he dedicated to the Republic of Venice by a letter
dated April 1, 1599; in which he says, that having been in France about
a year before, with the Ambassadors of the States, he there saw Signior
Contarini, Ambassador of Venice; that a comparison happening to be made
in conversation between the Republics of Holland and Venice, he
immediately resolved to dedicate to the Venetians the first work he
published that might be agreeable, or worthy to be presented to them;
that an opportunity now offer'd of fulfilling this resolution, and that
he dedicated to them the translation of Stevin's work because Prince
Maurice had recommended it to the colleges of the Admiralty to be
studied by all officers of the Navy; and as the Republic of Venice
attentively cultivated Navigation, this book might be as useful to her
as to Holland.


XII. The year following, that is to say, 1600, Grotius published the
Treatise which Aratus, of Sola in Cilicia, composed in Greek on
Astronomy, two hundred and some odd years before the birth of Christ.
It is known by the name or the _Phænomena of Aratus_. The title fully
shews what Grotius gives in this book. It contains the Phænomena of
Aratus in Greek with Cicero's Latin interpretation, the places where
Cicero's Translation is wanting being supplied; a Translation of the
same Phænomena, ascribed to Germanicus; the fragment of Aratus's
Prognostics, and the forms of the constellations as found in a
Manuscript; with Remarks upon the whole, the Paraphrase of Festus
Avienus, and marginal notes.

This work is dedicated to the States of Holland and West Friesland: the
author in the dedication promises them others more considerable. The
book is a prodigy of science and erudition: it discovers a great
knowledge of Physics, and especially of Astronomy. The Latin verses made
by Grotius to supply those of Cicero that were lost, are not inferior to
the lines of that great man, in the opinion of the Abbé d'Olivet, an
excellent judge, who likewise thinks the supplement a very good
commentary on Aratus's work. The corrections made by Grotius in the
Greek are most judicious; and his notes shew he had read several of the
Rabbi's, and had some tincture of the Arabic.

Scaliger[35], M. de Thou, and Lipsius, speak of this edition with the
highest praise. Lipsius, in thanking Grotius for his Aratus, says that
notwithstanding his childhood he looks on him as his friend: he
congratulates him, that, tho' so very young, he had by force of genius
and labour accomplished what few could do in the flower of their
age[36].

Casaubon[37] tells us, every one was surprised at such an extraordinary
production. Bonaventura Vulcanus, who took occasion from Grotius's
publishing this book, to write his elogium in verse, says in the
conclusion, that Apollo had opened to him his sanctuary, and that he was
himself an Apollo.

Grotius's modesty would not permit him to leave us ignorant that he had
been assisted by his Father in this work. It may be proper to observe,
that a library in Germany contains a copy of Grotius's edition of the
Phænomena of Aratus, collated with an ancient manuscript by the learned
Nicholas Heinsius, who has added some Notes[38].

FOOTNOTES:

[35] Ep. Scal. 375. Ep. Gr. 2.

[36] Ep. Lips. ad Belgas, Cent. 3. p. 83.

[37] Ep. 130.

[38] Fab. Bib. Gr. lib. 3. c. 18.


XIII. These grave and profound studies did not hinder Grotius from
cultivating Poetry. He had made some verses in his childhood which were
thought very pretty: he continued this manner of writing in the midst of
his greatest occupations, and with such success, that he was looked on
as one of the best Poets in Europe.

The Prosopopoeia[39] in which he makes the city of Ostend speak, after
being three years besieged by the Spaniards, is reckoned one of the best
pieces of verse since the Augustan age. Public fame gave it at first to
Scaliger because he was considered as the greatest poet of that time.
The celebrated Peyresc[40] hinted it to that learned man, who made
answer, he was too old not to be the aversion of the Virgins of Helicon;
and that the verses were not written by him, but by Grotius, a most
accomplished youth. Notwithstanding this declaration, Mathieu, in the
_Life of Henry IV._ ascribes them to Scaliger. They were thought so
excellent, several men of learning set about translating them into
French, particularly Du Vair, afterwards Keeper of the Seals; Rapin,
grand Provost of the Constabulary, and Stephen Pasquier. Malherbe
himself, the Oracle of the French Parnassus, did not think it beneath
him to put this Epigram into French verse: and Casaubon translated it
into Greek.

Grotius did not confine himself to writing small pieces of verse: he
rose to tragedy. We have three written by him. The first was called
_Adamus exsul_. He sent it to Lipsius, who liked it[41]; and it was
printed at Leyden in 1601. The author was afterwards dissatisfied with
it, and would not suffer it to appear in the collection of his Poems
published by his brother[42]. _Christus patiens_ was his second tragedy.
It was printed at Leyden in 1608, and much approved. Casaubon greatly
admires its poetic fire[43]. Sandes translated it into English verse;
and dedicated it to Charles I. It was very favourably received in
England; and in Germany it was proposed as the model of perfect Tragedy.

The subject of his third Tragedy was the story of Joseph; and its title
_Sophomphaneas_, which, in the language of Egypt, signifies the Saviour
of the world. Vossius assures Meursius it is the most perfect thing in
its kind the age has produced[44]: Vondel, a celebrated poet of Holland,
translated it into Dutch: and Grotius expressed a high sense of Vondel's
friendship, in condescending to translate his works, when he could write
much better of his own[45].

The most learned critics, many of whom were good versifiers, agreed that
Grotius excelled in Poetry. Scaliger acknowledged his epigrams were
admirable[46]. Casaubon being informed that Grotius had written some
verses on the death of Theodore Beza, says, "he heard with infinite
pleasure that so great a man had his elegy written by so great a
poet[47]." Baudius calls him the darling friend of the Muses, and
acquaints us that Scaliger thought some of his small poems equal to the
best of the ancients[48]. Gerard Vossius speaks of him as the greatest
poet of his age, and the prince of poetry. In fine, M. Baillet, who had
examined the many opinions given of Grotius, assures us, that all who
read his poems approved of them; that those of fine taste, and who could
judge of epigrams, found many of his admirable, some discovering the
subtilty of his genius, and the fertility of his imagination; others,
the happy turn which he could give to his thoughts and expressions.

Even his enemies did not presume to deny him the praise of an excellent
Poet; and Salmasius, in a letter written with design to lessen Grotius's
reputation, and dictated by jealousy, injustice, and spleen, allows
however he was a great Poet. "But," he adds, "every one in this country
prefers Barlæus; and many, even Heinsius." Balzac, who in other things
did justice to Grotius, wished he had employed his poetic talents only
on proper subjects. "I never saw," says he, "the Swedish Ambassador, but
I have long esteemed his genius: and if he had not put the _Institutes_
into verse, and published some other pieces of the same nature, I should
esteem him still more." But it is proper to observe that these were the
amusements of his childhood, and never intended to be made public.
Grotius had a meaner idea of his poetical talents, than even the rivals
of his glory. "As to merit in poetry (he writes to the President de
Thou) I yield it to every one."

It was William Grotius who published the collection of his brother's
poems. Some of them, and these not the best, had been printed before in
Germany very incorrect: which induced William to look over his brother's
papers, extract the poems, and publish them with those already printed.
This Collection is dedicated to Vandermile, son-in-law of the Grand
Pensionary Barnevelt, Deputy to the States General, Curator of the
university of Leyden, and the great friend of Hugo Grotius. The
dedication is dated September 1, 1616. A Letter of Grotius, written the
14th of December in the preceding year, informs us he was very averse to
his brother's project. He foresaw that he would one day be reproached
with this edition; which accordingly happened, particularly when,
endeavouring to reconcile the two Religions, he incurred the hatred of
Rivet and some other ministers, who seeking to destroy his reputation,
declaimed against his epithalamiums, and found fault with his
introducing the false divinities in the manner of the ancient poets, and
his speaking of war rather as a zealous citizen, than a pacific
Christian. These reproaches touched him: and in the latter part of his
life he wished only his sacred poems had been preserved[49]. But,
notwithstanding the peevishness of those Divines, Grotius's Poems had a
great run, were printed in England, and several times reprinted in
Holland.

FOOTNOTES:

[39]

     Area parva ducum, totus quam respicit orbis,
     Celsior una malis, et quam damnare ruinæ
     Nunc quoque fata timent, alieno in littore resto.
     Tertius annus abit; toties mutavimus hostem.
     Sævit hiems pelago, morbisque furentibus æstas;
     Et nimium est quod fecit Iber crudelior armis.
     In nos orta lues: nullum est sine funere funus;
     Nec perimit mors una semel. Fortuna, quid hæres?
     Qua mercede tenes mixtos in sanguine manes?
     Quis tumulos moriens hos occupet hoste perempto
     Quæritur, et sterili tantum de pulvere pugna est.

[40] Gassendi's Life of Pyresc, lib. 2. p. 79.

[41] Ep. 99. Feb. 3, 1602.

[42] Ep. 87. ad Vossium, p. 34.

[43] Casaub. Ep. 597. p. 313.

[44] Ep. 313. p. 317.

[45] Ep. 527. p. 204.

[46] Scaligerana p. 178. ed. 1695.

[47] Ep. 1089.

[48] Ep. Baudii, 100. Cent. 3. Scal. Poemata, p. 359.

[49] Discus. Apolog. Rivetiani, p. 740. Ep. 504, p. 885. Ep. 558. p.
924. Ep. 664. p. 956. Ep. 736. p. 974.


XIV. The United Provinces still bravely maintained their liberty against
the efforts of Spain, who since the peace of Vervins had collected her
whole force against them. The glory they acquired by this illustrious
defence determined them to make choice of an Historian who might
transmit with dignity to after-ages the signal exploits of this
memorable war. Several learned men made great interest for the place;
among others Baudius, the famous Professor of Eloquence in the
university of Leyden: but the States thought young Grotius (who had
taken no step to obtain it) deserved the preference: and what is still
more singular, Baudius himself did not find fault with their choice,
because he looked upon Grotius to be already a very great man.



XV. His high reputation was on the point of procuring him, about the
same time, a very honourable settlement in France. King Henry IV.
sensible that he ought to have a man of the greatest merit at the head
of his Library, had, at the recommendation of M. de Villeroi, while
Gosselin his librarian was yet living, fixed upon Casaubon, who at that
time had the greatest name for literature. This affair was carried on
mysteriously: The King desired to see Casaubon in private: he told him,
that he intended to make him his librarian; and that Gosselin could not
live above a year; adding, with the frank and noble air which so well
became that great Prince: "You shall see my fine books, and tell me what
they contain; for I don't understand them myself."

Gosselin lived three years after this conversation, till 1603. The
Jesuits being informed Casaubon was to be set over the King's Library,
represented to his majesty the inconveniences of confiding a treasure of
that nature to the most obstinate of all heretics. This made some
impression on the king: nevertheless he was afraid of a clamour were it
known that he refused an employment promised to a Protestant on account
of his religion. He consulted with some persons; and they advised him to
send to Holland for Grotius, whom he knew, and appoint him his
librarian; which would make the Public ascribe the change to some
private discontent, and not to religion. Casaubon, apprised of what was
doing, remained perfectly quiet: but the President de Thou, thinking the
King's honour concerned in keeping his word, warmly solicited in his
favour, and, after the affair had been suspended some weeks, Casaubon
was at length nominated. Grotius had had no part in this whole
proceeding: accordingly Casaubon was so far from being offended with
him, that, writing to Daniel Heinsius, December 29, 1603, he assures him
if the place could have made Grotius's fortune, he wished he had got
it, because he loved him, and admired his prodigious genius.


XVI. Grotius was at that time principally employed as an Advocate. He
tells us that to make himself master of the forms of law, he carefully
studied the practical part, transcribing precedents of Petitions,
Prosecutions, and Defences. He pleaded his first cause when he was but
seventeen, with universal applause, which he maintained whilst he
continued at the Bar. We learn the method he followed in his pleadings
from a letter to his son Peter advising him to imitate it. "That you may
not, says he, be embarrassed by the little order observed by those
against whom you speak, mind one thing, of which I have found the
advantage. Distribute all that can be said on both sides under certain
heads, which imprint strongly in your memory; and whatever your
adversary says, refer it to your own division, and not to his[50]."
Grotius's great attention was to avoid prolixity and confusion in his
pleadings[51].

The employment of an advocate, though he acquired infinite honour by it,
did not however please him. The reasons of his dislike we have in a
letter to Daniel Heinsius, dated July 21, 1603. "Besides that law-suits
are improper for a peaceable man, what doth he derive from them? They
procure him hatred from those against whom he pleads, small
acknowledgments from his clients, and not much honour with the Public.
Add to this, that the time spent in things so little agreeable, might be
employed in acquiring others much more useful. I should have been a
better philosopher, more master of the Greek, better acquainted with the
manners of the Ancients, with the Poets, and Philologists, if I had
practiced less as an Advocate."

FOOTNOTES:

[50] Ep. 1134. p. 512.

[51] Ibid.


XVII. His brilliant success at the Bar, which he treats as ungrateful,
procured him, however, a very considerable promotion. The place of
Advocate-general of the Fisc for Holland and Zealand becoming vacant, it
was unanimously conferred on Grotius. This is an employment of great
distinction and authority, the person invested with it being charged
with the preservation of the public peace and the prosecution of
offenders. It was in 1607 he took possession of this important office,
which he filled with so much reputation, the States augmented his
salary, and promised him a seat in the Court of Holland.


XVIII. John Grotius, on his son's being made Advocate-general, began to
think of a wife for him; and fixed upon Mary Reigersberg, of one of the
first families in Zealand, whose father had been Burgomaster of Veer:
the marriage was solemnised in July, 1608. The greatest encomium of the
new-married lady is, that she was worthy such a husband as Grotius. The
most perfect harmony subsisted between them, and Grotius held her in the
highest esteem[52]. This alliance gave occasion to a number of poems.
John Grotius wrote his son's Epithalamium; Daniel Heinsius composed a
Poem on that subject, which, in the opinion of Grotius, was the best of
the kind that ever had been written. Grotius himself celebrated his
nuptials in some Latin verses, approved of by Scaliger, and translated
them into Dutch: he also wrote some in French on that occasion.

FOOTNOTES:

[52] Ep. 423. p. 876.


XIX. At the time of his marriage he was employed in a work of great
importance, which was not published till the year following. This was
his _Freedom of the Ocean, or the Right of the Dutch to trade to the
Indies_; dedicated to all the free nations of Christendom, and divided
into thirteen Chapters. The author shews in the first, that by the law
of Nations navigation is free to all the world: In the second, that the
Portuguese never possessed the sovereignty of the countries in the
East-Indies with which the Dutch carry on a trade: In the third, that
the donation of Pope Alexander VI. gave the Portuguese no right to the
Indies: In the fourth, that the Portuguese had not acquired by the law
of arms the sovereignty of the States to which the Dutch trade: He shews
in the fifth, that the ocean is immense and common to all; that it is
absurd to imagine that those who first navigate a sea ought to be judged
to have taken possession of it; that a vessel which cuts the waves of a
sea, gives no more right to that sea, than she leaves marks of her way
in it; that, besides, the Portuguese are not the first who sailed in the
Indian sea, since there are facts which demonstrate it was neither
unknown to the Ancients, to the Spaniards, nor to the Carthaginians, nor
even to the Romans. The sixth chapter proves, that the right of
navigation in that sea cannot belong exclusively to the Portuguese by
virtue of Alexander VI's donation, because donation cannot take place in
things which enter not into trade; and that, besides, the Pope is not
master of the sea. In the seventh chapter it is shewn, that the Eastern
sea, or the right of navigation in it, cannot belong to the Portuguese
by prescription, since prescription being only by the civil law it
cannot operate against the law of nature, by virtue of which, navigation
in that sea is free to all the world; that, moreover, prescription doth
not take place in things that cannot be alienated, such as the sea, the
use of the sea, and things common to all men: add to this, that the
opposition of other nations, and their navigation in that sea would have
hindered the prescription. It is proved in the eighth, that by the law
of nations the commerce between nations is free, and cannot be
prohibited without injustice. In the ninth it is shewn that the trade to
the Indies doth not belong to the Portuguese, exclusive of other
kingdoms, because they first took possession of it, since the title of
first occupant takes place only in that which is corporeal. The tenth
proves, that the Pope could not grant the Portuguese an exclusive trade
to the Indies: the eleventh, that this trade does not belong to them by
prescription: the twelfth, that nothing is more unjust than the claim to
an exclusive trade set up by the Portuguese. The author concludes his
work with the thirteenth chapter, exhorting the Dutch to continue their
trade to the Indies in time of war, of truce, or of peace.

This work was printed without Grotius's knowledge, and published without
his consent. He appears not to have been quite satisfied with it: "My
intention (says he in a letter to Camerarius, May 20th, 1637) was good;
but the work favours too much of my want of years." They wrote against
him in Spain: "I know (he writes his brother, April 1, 1640) that a
treatise was written some time ago, at Salamanca, against mine _Of the
Freedom of the Ocean_, but it was suppressed by the King of Spain."
Another appeared, in 1625, at Valladolid, entitled, _De justo imperio
Lusitanorum Asiatico_, by one Francis Seraphin de Freiras. _The Freedom
of the Ocean_ was refuted in England by the famous Selden in his work
entitled _Mare clausum, seu de dominio maris_. Grotius thought the
Spanish author's book not ill done, and deserving of an answer[53]; and
was pleased with the politeness shewn him by Selden[54]. But at the time
these Answers appeared Grotius was so dissatisfied with the Dutch, he
did not think himself obliged to employ his time for people void of
gratitude. "Let them seek among my Judges (said he by way of irony on
their ignorance) for one to answer the Spaniard[55]." As to Selden's
book, Grotius seemed not to mind it; he looked on himself as no longer
concerned in the controversy. "I wholly forget what I have been, says
he, when I see those to whom I have done so great services, remember me
only to hurt me." These sentiments of an indifference bordering on
hatred he did not entertain till after the Dutch had done every thing to
make him uneasy, as we shall see in the sequel.

FOOTNOTES:

[53] Ep. 144. p. 796.

[54] Ep. 364. p. 858.

[55] Ep. 144. p. 796.


XX. The year after the publication of the treatise _Of the Freedom of
the Ocean_, Grotius printed his work _De antiquitate reipublicæ Batavæ_,
divided into seven chapters. In the first the author shews what is an
aristocratical government: In the second he gives the history of the
ancient Batavi, whose government, he says, was aristocratical, under the
command of a head, who was sometimes styled King. He explains, in the
third, the state of the Republic of the Batavi in the time of the Roman
empire; and building on a passage of Tacitus he pretends they were
allies, and not subjects of the Romans. In the fourth he enquires into
the government of the Batavi after the fall of the Roman empire; from
which æra till the establishment of the Counts of Holland we know very
little of that nation. The author treats, in the fifth chapter, of the
government of Holland in the time of the Counts. The first elected to
that dignity was named Diederic, of Friesland, and was Count of the
whole nation: He was not a vassal of the Empire, and, as Philip of
Leyden observes, he was Emperor in his County. He was not so absolute as
a Monarch, and though the Dutch in chusing their Counts generally
followed the order of primogeniture, they never set up a Prince without
first requiring of him an oath, to conform to the laws: so that he
reigned rather by the consent of the people, than by right of
succession. The power of the Counts was limited by law; and the taxes
were always imposed by the States. In the sixth chapter the author shews
that Philip II. King of Spain, endeavouring to change their form of
government, occasioned the grand war which procured Holland her liberty.
Grotius explains, in his seventh and last chapter, the form of
government established in Holland after the Dutch threw off the Spanish
yoke. The work is dedicated to the States of Holland and West-Friesland,
March 16, 1610.

The States were extremely pleased with it: they returned their thanks to
the author, and made him a present[56]. He afterwards added notes,
serving for proofs of the several facts: these were carried away with
his other papers at the time of his arrest; but the Elzevirs, intending
to publish a new edition of it, acquainted Grotius, who was at pains to
get the notes returned; and they are now printed at the end of the
Elzevir edition. His love to his country led him to advance several
things in this work, which he afterwards owned to be mistakes[57]; in
particular, that the Batavi had always been free, and not subject to the
ancient Franks[58].

While this book was in the press, Grotius, and his father, who commonly
assisted him in his writings, translated it into Dutch[59].

FOOTNOTES:

[56] Apolog. C. 1.

[57] Ep. 635. p. 947.

[58] Grotii manes, Conringius, Pope, p. 947.

[59] Ep. 662. p. 834.


XXI. Elias Oldenbarnevelt, Pensionary of Rotterdam, and brother to the
Grand Pensionary of Holland, dying in 1613, the city of Rotterdam
offered that important place to Grotius, whose name was so famous,
foreigners sought to draw him to them by offers of honours and lucrative
posts, which love to his Country made him constantly reject. It was some
time before he yielded to the desires of Rotterdam. By the ferment of
mens minds he foresaw that very great commotions would speedily shake
the Republic; this made him insist with the gentlemen of Rotterdam that
he should never be turned out of his place of Pensionary: and on their
promising accordingly, he accepted the employment, which gave him a seat
in the assembly of the States of Holland, and afterwards in that of the
States General.

Hitherto Grotius had had very little connection with the Grand
Pensionary; but from this time contracted an intimate friendship with
him, which gave him the greater pleasure as he was most desirous of the
counsels of a man of so much experience, who had been himself nine years
Pensionary of Rotterdam, and above thirty years Grand Pensionary of
Holland (in which employment he had done his Country most essential
services) and who was famous not only in Holland, but in foreign
countries, for his many embassies, and acknowledged prudence and
abilities.

The great intimacy between them gave rise to a report, that the Grand
Pensionary, who was sensible of Grotius's great merit, and who loved
him, designed to have him made Grand Pensionary. We have this particular
from Grotius himself[60], who assures us he never desired that high
office, the rather as his health would not then permit him to discharge
the many functions belonging to it. For by the Grand Pensionary the
States see, hear, and act; and though he has no deliberative voice, and
is the lowest in rank, his influence is the greatest. He manages
Prosecutions, receives Dispatches, and answers them, and is as it were
Attorney-General of the States: before he be called to be
Grand-Pensionary, he is nominated Advocate of the States.

FOOTNOTES:

[60] Apol. C. 19.


XXII. There was at that time a high dispute between the English and
Dutch concerning the right of fishing in the northern seas. Two vessels
had sailed from Amsterdam to Greenland to kill walrus, a sea-animal,
larger than an ox, with the muzzle of a lion, the skin covered with
hair, four feet, and two large teeth in the upper jaw, flat, hard, and
so white that in colour and value they equal those of the elephant: some
even give them the preference, because, besides their exceeding
whiteness, they are not subject to grow yellow. These two vessels having
caught twenty-two walrus, were met by some English vessels bound to
Russia, who hail'd them, and demanded whether they had pasports from the
King of Great Britain to fish at Greenland? The Dutchmen answered, that
the Sea was free, and they had pasports from Count Maurice their
Stadtholder. "That is not enough, said the English[61]: and to let you
know that that sea belongs to the King our master, if you will not give
us instantly the walrus you have taken, with your boats, nets, and
instruments for killing them, we'll send you to the bottom." The two
Dutch vessels, unable to resist, were obliged to obey. Returning to
Holland, they made their complaint; and the affair being laid before the
States, it was resolved that Grotius, who had written on the subject and
was more master of it than any one, should be sent to England to demand
justice: But, says the _Mercure François_, he found the old proverb
true: The strongest are masters of the sea, and such never care to make
restitution: so that he could obtain no satisfaction.

This denial of justice from the English determined the Dutch not to go
to Greenland for the future without a force sufficient to revenge
themselves on the English, or to have nothing to fear from them.

The dispute growing serious, to prevent any acts of hostility, and to
know on what grounds they went, a conference was held in 1615 between
the Commissaries of England and Holland, in which the debate turned
chiefly on the whale-fishery. Grotius, who was one of the Commissaries
from the Province of Holland, gives the history of this conference in a
Letter to Du Maurier, dated at Rotterdam, June 5, 1615. The Dutch
Commissaries put the English to silence, by demonstrating, that neither
the land nor the sea of Greenland belonged to them, and that they had no
right to hinder the Dutch to navigate and catch whales in that sea, of
which none could claim the property. That the land did not belong to
them, because till the year 1596 no mortal had set foot on it; that the
Dutch discovered it the year before, and gave it the name it still
retains, as may be seen in all the modern geographers, on the globes,
and carts. The English wanted to reply that Hugh Willoughby discovered
it in 1553: but the Dutch shewed even by the Journal of his voyage, that
setting out from Finland he landed on the Island which bears his name,
at a great distance from Greenland; that he died of hunger and cold,
with all his companions, on the coast of Lapland, where the Laplanders
found him, next summer, and from whence his Journals were sent to
England. The English, not knowing what to answer, said, it was a high
indignity to their master, to dispute a right of which he had hitherto
been in peaceable possession; and that their instructions imported, they
should break off the conference unless the Dutch would acknowledge
England's claim to Greenland. What was still more diverting (continued
Grotius) they added, that they had not then their titles, but would shew
them to Caron, the Dutch Agent in England, and, they flattered
themselves, on seeing them, he would yield the point. They like better
(adds he in the conclusion) to deal with him, than dispute with us,
because they will take his silence, as they have done already, for
submission.

FOOTNOTES:

[61] Mercure François, an. 1613.


XXIII. If Grotius had ground to be dissatisfied with the
disingenuousness and injustice of the English Ministry in his
negotiation concerning the Fishery, he had at least reason to be pleased
with the politeness of King James, who, Casaubon informs us, gave
Grotius a most gracious reception, and was charmed with his
conversation. But the greatest pleasure he received by this voyage was
the intimate friendship he contracted with Casaubon. They knew one
another before by character, and highly esteemed each other. They were
made to be intimate friends: in both the most profound erudition was
joined with the most perfect probity. They had still another sympathy to
knit faster the band of this union: both ardently wished to see all
Christians united in one faith and desired nothing more, than to be
employed in that great work. They have left behind them testimonies of
the satisfaction they found in each other's acquaintance. "For my part,
says Grotius in a letter to John Frederic Gronovius[62], I reckon it one
of the greatest felicities of my whole life to have been loved by a man
as illustrious for his piety, his probity, and his candor, as for his
extensive learning. It was by his counsels or those of persons he
approved that I conducted myself in the most difficult times."

"I respect no less, says he in another letter, his frankness and his
probity, than his uncommon erudition. His letters sufficiently prove
what great friendship he had for me."

We find in fact that they contain evidences of the highest esteem for
Grotius. To Daniel Heinsius he writes, April 13, 1613, "I am very well;
and cannot say enough of my felicity in enjoying the friendship of such
a great man as Grotius. O that incomparable man! I knew him before: but
fully to comprehend the excellency of his divine genius, one must see
him, and hear him converse. His countenance speaks probity, and his
discourse discovers the deepest learning and the most sincere piety.
Think not that I only am his admirer; all learned and good men entertain
the same sentiments for him, particularly the King."

Casaubon writes to the President de Thou, April 20, 1613, to acquaint
him what pleasure he had received by seeing Grotius. "I must let you
know, says he, that I have seen here Hugo Grotius. He is a man of
admirable probity and learning[63]."

They had long conversations together on religion. Casaubon ardently
desired a reunion of the Protestants with the Roman Catholics[64]: and
would have set about it, had he staid longer in France, as he informed
Descordes, who repeated it to Grotius. He greatly respected the opinions
of the ancient church[65], and was persuaded its sentiments were more
sound than those of the Ministers of Charenton. Grotius and he had
imparted their thoughts to each other before the voyage to England: for
Casaubon congratulates him, January 8, 1612, on his desiring nothing but
peace and a coalition; and communicated Grotius' sentiments to King
James; who approved of them. This shews that Grotius thought it was
wrong to depart from the discipline and forms of the ancient church:
Casaubon was of the same mind; and his Letter to M. de Thou is a
demonstrative proof that these two excellent men did not differ in
matters of Religion. "I esteem him highly, says he[66], on account of
his other great qualities; for he judges of the modern subjects of
religious controversy like a learned and good man; and in his veneration
for antiquity agrees with the wisest."

The last Letter which we have from Casaubon to Grotius comprehends all
these sentiments in few words[67]: "I heartily pray God to preserve you
ever: and as long as I live, I shall hold you in the highest esteem, so
much am I taken with your piety, your probity, and your admirable
learning."

FOOTNOTES:

[62] Ep. 1168. p. 530.

[63] Ep. 883 p. 531.

[64] Ep. Grotii 610.

[65] Ep. Grotii 613.

[66] Ep. 531.

[67] Ep. 890.


XXIV. After his return from England, Grotius happened to be one day at
the Assembly of the States of Holland and West-Friesland when an affair
of consequence was under consideration. The States had granted
commissions to several Privateers, some of which made depredations on
the friends of the Republic, and, afterwards quitting the country,
scowered the seas, refusing to return though summoned. Some people of
Pomerania who had been ill used by these Corsairs, applied to the States
for redress. The Question therefore was, Whether the States were
answerable for the act of those privateers, either as having employed
bad men in their service, or neglected to require security from them on
giving them commissions. Grotius' advice being asked, his opinion was,
that the States were only bound to punish the offenders, or deliver them
up, if taken; and, for the rest, to make satisfaction to the sufferers
out of the effects of the pirates. We learn from himself on what he
grounded his opinion[68]. The States, said he, were not the cause of
those unjust practices, nor had any part in them: so far from it they
have prohibited, by express ordonnances, the injuring of our friends.
They were not obliged to ask security from the privateers, since,
without granting formal commissions, they might permit all their
subjects to plunder the enemy, as was formerly practised; and the
permission they granted to those privateers was not the cause of the
damage they did to our allies, since any private person may, without
such permission, fit out vessels, and sail on a cruize. Besides, it was
impossible to foresee that these privateers would turn out wicked; and
there is no taking such precautions as to employ only honest men. When a
prince's troops, whether by sea or land, contrary to his order, injure
his friends, he is not responsable for it; as appears from what has been
acknowledged by France and England. To make one answerable for the acts
of those who are in his service, even when no fault of his gave any
occasion to them, would be to decide the question not by the law of
nations, but by the civil law; and even the rule is not general in the
civil law.

The States were determined by this opinion.

FOOTNOTES:

[68] De jure belli et pacis, lib. 2. c. 17. § 20.


XXV. The multitude of affairs with which Grotius was oppressed, and the
continual journeys he was obliged to make, left him no time for
cultivating Polite Literature. In the midst of his occupations Du
Maurier, the French Ambassador in Holland, and his particular friend,
having resolved to begin a course of study, applied to Grotius for
directions. We shall here give an extract from his answer[69], because
it may be of use to grown persons desirous of acquiring literary
accomplishments.

He shortened his method as much as he could out of regard to Du
Maurier's age, dignity, and affairs. He advises him to begin with Logic,
not that of Aristotle, which is too long, and contains many things of no
great use: an abridgment was sufficient, such as Du Moulin's, the most
esteemed at that time. "But your assistant, says he, must read the best
that has been written on the subject, and communicate to you what is
most remarkable: much may be learnt in an hour or two spent in this
manner." The same method he would have observed in the other sciences,
and even with regard to books; that is to say, the person under whom Du
Maurier studies must read the best writers on every subject; and extract
what is most essential, to be repeated to him. After Logic he directs
him to the study of Physics, which he would not have carried too far;
and recommends some plain and short abridgement: he could think of none
at that time but _Jacchæus_. He is of opinion, that as in Logic the
rules of syllogism are chiefly to be attended to, so in Physics the
enquiry into the nature and functions of the soul is of most importance.
After Physics he advises him to proceed to Metaphysics, of which he
might get some notion from Timplerus' book, which is neither long nor
obscure. The study of Moral Philosophy is to be begun with Aristotle,
whose books to Nicomachus are the best. "Your reader, says he, must give
you in a small compass what the ablest interpreters have said. It is
also necessary to be acquainted with the sentiments of the different
sects of Philosophers; for without that knowledge you will be much at a
loss in reading the Ancients, and profit little by them." To unbend
after this serious study, some other short and agreeable books that have
a relation to it may be read: such as _Ecclesiasticus_, the _Wisdom of
Solomon_, _Theognis_, _Phocilides_, the _Golden Verses ascribed to
Pythagoras_, _Epictetus's Enchiridion_, _Hierocles_, and the
_Commentaries of Arrian_; not omitting the _Characters of Theophrastus_.
What the Poets have written on Morality may also be perused; with some
select Tragedies of Euripides, _Terence's Comedies_, and _Horace's
Epistles_. Young people and grown persons admire different things in
these writings: the beauty of the style pleases the first: the others
learn by them to know men. To these works may be added _Cicero's
Offices_, a piece not enough esteemed, purely because it is in the hands
of every one; some of _Seneca's Epistles_, the Tragedies that go under
his name; and the best of Plutarch's smaller pieces. After having gone
through _Aristotle's Politics_, the excellent extract by Polybius of
Republics is to be read; with the _Harangues of Mecænas and Agrippa to
Augustus_, in Dion; and _Sallust's Letter to Cæsar_. _Plutarch's Lives
of Pericles_, _Cato_, _the Gracchi_, _Demosthenes_, _and Cicero_, must
not be omitted: much may be learned too from _Cicero's Letters to
Atticus_, if they were translated by one well acquainted with the Roman
History of that period.

After this would be the proper time for reading _Aristotle's Rhetoric_:
for, as is well remark'd by that great man, who possessed all the arts
and sciences in an eminent degree, from Morals and Politics must the
arguments be drawn that are to convince mens understandings; that is to
say, it is impossible to be truly eloquent without extensive knowledge.
The better to perceive the use of the precepts it would be proper to
read with attention some Orations of Demosthenes and Cicero,
particularly those which relate to public Affairs, such as the
_Philippics_, the _Olinthiacs_, the Oration _pro lege Manilia_, that
against the _Agrarian Law_, and some others. The next thing, to be
applied to is _Jus publicum_, that is to say, the knowledge of the
different forms of government, the Conventions between Nations, and, in
fine, whatever regards Peace and War. The treatises of Plato and Cicero
_On Laws_ shew in what manner the principles of this law are to be
deduced from morality. It will not be unprofitable to read likewise, or
at least to run over the second book of _St. Thomas Aquinas_, especially
what he says of Justice and Laws: The _Pandecta_, particularly the first
and last book, the first and the three last books of _Justinian's
Codex_, point out the use to be made of those principles. The Lawyers
who have best handled the questions relating to the Law of Nations and
_Jus publicum_, are Vasquès, Hotoman, and Gentilis. After the
acquisition of these several branches of knowledge, the study of History
will be extremely useful, by the application which may be made of the
examples to the precepts. History is to be begun with an abridgement of
universal history; such as _Justin_, _Florus_, and the abridgement of
_Livy_. But in reading History a man ought to please his own taste: for
they all contain many useful things: and we retain best those we read
with pleasure. In general, we ought not to begin with the most ancient,
but with such as, being nearer our own times, have greater relation with
what we know already: we may afterwards go back to what is more distant.
It is proper to observe, that there is more advantage to be reaped from
reading the Greek historians who have written the history of Rome, than
the Latin, who have treated the same subject; because Foreigners give
more attention to the public manners and customs, than the Natives.

M. du Maurier received this Letter with the highest satisfaction; he
permitted several copies to be taken of it, and it was printed by the
Elzevirs in 1637, in a collection of several Methods of Study, under the
title of _De omni genere studiorum recte instituendo_.

Grotius acquaints us[70] that it was published with out his consent.

FOOTNOTES:

[69] Ep. 54. p. 17.

[70] Ep. 740. p. 976.




BOOK II.


Grotius has hitherto appeared to us chiefly as a Man of Learning: we are
now going to consider him entering into the affairs of the Republic,
wholly employed in restoring the peace of his country, and receiving for
the reward of his pacific intentions an imprisonment, which would in all
probability have been perpetual, had not the ingenious friendship of his
wife with great address procured his liberty. But as the occasion of
these events was the warm dispute kindled in the United Provinces
concerning Grace and Predestination, we must resume things a little
higher.


I. In the year 1608, while the truce between the Spaniards and the
United Provinces was negotiating, Arminius, an eminent Professor in the
University of Leyden, departing from the rigid sentiments of Calvin,
publickly taught, that God, foreseeing Adam's sin, had resolved to send
his only Son into the world to redeem mankind; that he had ordained
Grace to all to whom the Law should be preached, by which they might
believe if they would, and persevere; that this grace offered to all
men was of such a nature, that not only it might be resisted, but men
actually did often resist it; and that God had only chosen or reprobated
those, who, he foresaw, would embrace or reject the grace offered them.

Gomar, another Professor in the University of Leyden, warmly opposed
this doctrine; maintaining, that by an eternal and irreversible decree
God had predestinated some to everlasting life, and others to eternal
damnation, without regard to their actions; that the grace given to the
Elect was so powerful, they could not resist it; and that Jesus Christ
did not die for the Reprobate.

The doctrine of Arminius was directly opposite to that of Calvin:
accordingly it met with great opposition; and he was accused before the
Synod of Rotterdam, in which Gomar's party prevailed.

Arminius, who knew that the Magistrates were as warm for him, as the
Clergy and Professors were against him, presented a petition to the
States of Holland and West-Friesland, praying that the Grand Council
might take cognisance of this dispute. His adversaries maintained that a
theological contest ought to be judged by a church judicature:
Arminius's petition, however, was granted, and Gomar obliged to appear
with him before the Magistrates, who promised to have the affair
speedily discussed in a Synod; and forbad, in the mean time, the
advancing any thing contrary to the Holy Scriptures, the Confessions of
faith, and Catechism. The Grand Council reported to the States, that the
whole dispute was about some obscure questions concerning Grace and
Predestination.

Barnevelt happening to say he thanked God that the fundamental points of
Religion were not in question, Gomar, who was present, obtaining leave
to speak, said, among other things, he would be very sorry to appear
before God with Arminius's sentiments.

The dispute still continuing with much bitterness, in 1611 the States of
Holland ordered the principal Ministers of the two parties to appear
before them: Twelve accordingly attended, six Arminians and six
Gomarists, and disputed in presence of the States on Predestination, the
Death of Christ, the necessity and nature of Grace and Perseverance. The
States heard them, but would determine nothing, only recommended to them
to live in peace. But the consequence of this conference was like that
of all other disputes, especially in matters of religion, mens minds
were the more inflamed and provoked.

Arminius died on the 19th of October, 1609, some time before this
conference; and Grotius made his elogium in verse. He had hitherto
applied little to these matters, and even, writing to Rutgersius,
December 24, 1609, he ingenuously owns, he did not understand a great
part of them, because they were foreign to his profession. He had no
inclination to offend Gomar in commending Arminius: he speaks with great
moderation of their disputes, and doth not even affirm that the
sentiments of Arminius were the only true ones: but entering afterwards
into a more strict examination of those points, he was convinced that
the idea we ought to have of God's goodness and justice, and even the
earliest tradition of the church, favoured Arminius's system, and
contradicted that of Gomar: and in these sentiments he persevered till
his death.


II. The partisans of Arminius, desirous to efface the bad impressions
which Gomar's discourses and those of his adherents had made on the
minds of the public, met privately, and drew up a Remonstrance, dated
January 14, 1610, which they addressed to the States of Holland, setting
forth, that they did not believe, like their adversaries.

1. "That God, by an eternal and irreversible decree, had predestinated
men, whom he did not consider as created, and still less as culpable,
some to everlasting life, and others to everlasting death, without
regard to their good or evil actions, from his mere good pleasure, for
the praise of his Mercy, or his Justice, or, as others say, to manifest
his saving grace, his wisdom, and his absolute power: And that God has
also, by an eternal and immutable decree, preordained the proper methods
of executing his will, by which those who are predestinated to salvation
are saved in a necessary and inevitable manner, so that it is impossible
they should perish; and such as are predestinated to eternal death (who
are the greater part of mankind) are necessarily and inevitably damned,
so that they cannot be saved.

2. "That God, according to others, willing from all eternity to make a
decree for electing some men and rejecting others, considered the human
race not only as created, but also as fallen and corrupted in Adam and
Eve our first parents, and thereby deserving of the curse; and that he
resolved to deliver by his grace some men from this fall and damnation,
for the manifestation of his mercy, and to leave others, both young and
old, and even the children of those who are in the Covenant, and died in
their infancy, by his just judgment, under the curse, for the
manifestation of his justice; and this without any regard to the
repentance or the faith of the first, or the impenitence and unbelief of
the others. They pretend that for the execution of this decree God makes
use of means by which the Elect are necessarily and inevitably saved,
and the Reprobate necessarily and inevitably damned.

3. "That accordingly Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, did not die
for all men, but for those alone who were chosen in the first or second
manner, as he was only appointed Mediator for the salvation of the
Elect, and of no others.

4. "That in consequence of this the Spirit of God and of Christ works so
efficaciously in the Elect, that they cannot resist it; but must be
converted, believe, and be necessarily saved: That this irresistible
grace and strength is given to the Elect alone, and not to the
Reprobate, to whom God not only refuses this irresistible grace, but
even denies them necessary and sufficient grace for their conversion and
salvation, though they be called and solicited to accept it, without
compulsion, externally, by the revealed will of God; but the inward
strength necessary to conversion and faith is nevertheless denied them,
by the secret will of God.

5. "That those who receive true and justifying faith by this
irresistible power, cannot totally or finally lose it, even when they
fall into gross sins; but are guided and supported by this irresistible
strength, so that they cannot totally or finally fall away, or perish."

The Arminians afterwards added their own sentiments on these matters,
comprehended in five articles. They declare their belief,

1. "That God, by an eternal and immutable decree, in Jesus Christ his
son, before the world was created, resolved to save in Jesus Christ, on
account of Jesus Christ, and through Jesus Christ, those from among
mankind fallen in sin, who by the grace of the Holy Spirit believe in
his same son Jesus, and through the same grace continue in the faith and
obedience to the end; and on the contrary, to leave under sin, and
wrath, and to condemn the obstinate and unbelieving, as having no part
in Christ; according to what is said _St. John_ iii. 36.

2. "That accordingly Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, died for
all and every man; and by his death on the cross has merited for all
reconciliation with God, and remission of sin; in such manner,
nevertheless, that no one can partake of them but Believers, according
to the words of Jesus, _St. John_ iii. 16. 1 _St. John_ ii. 2.

3. "That Man hath not saving faith of himself, and by the strength of
his own free will; since while in a state of sin and apostacy he cannot
of himself think, desire, or do that which is truly good, which is what
is chiefly meant by saving faith; but it is necessary that God in Jesus
Christ, and by the Holy Spirit, regenerate and renew him in his
understanding and affections, or in his will and all his powers; that he
may know the true good, meditate of it, desire, and do it. _St. John_
xv. 5. That to this grace of God is owing the beginning, the
progression, and accomplishment of all good; in such manner that even
the Regenerate, without this antecedent, of preventing, exciting,
concomitant, and co-operating grace, cannot think that which is good,
desire, or practise it, nor resist any temptation to evil; so that all
the good works or actions he can conceive, spring from the grace of God:
that as to what regards the manner of operation of this grace, it is not
irresistible, since it is said of several, they resisted the Holy
Spirit. See _Acts_ vii, and other places.

5. "That those who by a lively faith are engrafted into Christ, and
consequently made partakers of his quickening spirit, are furnished with
sufficient strength to be able to combat and even overcome Satan, sin,
the world, and their own lusts; and all this, as is carefully to be
observed, by the assistance of the grace of the Holy Spirit; and that
Jesus Christ succours them by his Spirit in all temptations, reaches to
them his hand (provided they be willing to engage, ask his assistance,
and are not wanting to themselves) supports and strengthens them so,
that they cannot be led away by any wile or violence of Satan, or
snatched out of Christ's hands, as he says himself, _St. John_ x. _My
sheep shall no man pluck out of my hands._ For the rest, if it be asked
whether these may not, through negligence, let go the confidence which
they had from the beginning, Heb. iii. 6, cleave again to the present
world, depart from the holy doctrine which was delivered, make shipwreck
of a good conscience? (2 Pet. i. 10. Jude iii. 1. Tim. i. 19. Heb. xii.
15.) This must be previously examined, with more care, by the
Scriptures, to be able to teach it with full assurance to others."

Such is the Arminians Confession of Faith, to which they gave the name
of Remonstrance, and thence were styled Remonstrants. It was drawn up by
Utengobard, Minister at the Hague, and signed by forty-six Ministers. It
was probably made in concert with Grotius, the intimate friend of
Utengobard, and at that time wholly employed in the subjects which were
disputed by the Arminians and Gomarists.

To resume in few words the doctrine of the Arminians, we shall say with
Bossuet[71], their principles were, That there is no absolute election,
nor gratuitous preference, by which God prepares for certain chosen
persons, and for them alone, the infallible means of bringing them to
glory; but that God offers to all men, and especially to those to whom
the gospel is preached, sufficient means to convert themselves; which
some make use of; and others not, without employing any other for the
Elect, than for the Reprobate: so that election is always conditional,
and a man may come short of it by failing in the condition: from whence
they conclude, first, that justifying grace may be lost totally, that
is, without any degree of it being left; and lost finally, that is,
without its ever being recovered: secondly, that there can be no
assurance of salvation.

FOOTNOTES:

[71] Hist. des Variations, Lib. xiv. 12. 30.


III. This remonstrance not satisfying the Gomarists, they opposed to it
a contra-remonstrance, which gained them the name of
Contra-Remonstrants. As these disputes gave the States a good deal of
uneasiness, they enjoined the Divines to deliver their thoughts of the
most proper means to put an end to them. The Remonstrants proposed a
Toleration; the Contra-Remonstrants, a national Synod, in which they
were sure of a majority. Both these opinions were laid before the
States, who declared for a toleration: this was the cause gained to the
Arminians; but the Gomarists were favoured by the People, and grew very
factious. The Grand-Pensionary, imagining that by making themselves
masters of the election of the ministers, the States would insensibly
appease these troubles, proposed the revival of an obsolete regulation,
made in the year 1591, by which the magistrates and consistory were each
to nominate four persons, who should chuse a Minister, to be afterwards
presented to the body of Magistrates, who might receive or reject him.

This motion was agreed to by the States, to the great mortification of
the Contra-Remonstrants: they complained that the States had exceeded
their power. Hence arose a grand contest who ought to be Judge in
ecclesiastical matters. The Arminians said it belonged to the Civil
Magistrate to decide them: the Gomarists maintained that the clergy
alone had that power. They separated themselves from the communion of
the Remonstrants[72], took possession of the churches by force, stirred
up seditions, wrote libels, and deposed the Arminian Ministers. In other
churches the Contra-Remonstrants were driven out as madmen and rioters.
These violences gave rise to schisms, some joining the old Ministers,
and others the new.

It was at this time of confusion Grotius was nominated Pensionary of
Rotterdam, and ordered to go over into England. It is imagined[73] he
had secret instructions to get the King and the principal divines of
the kingdom to favour the Arminians, and approve of the States conduct.
He had several conferences with his Majesty on that subject. At his
return to Holland he found the divisions increased. Barnevelt and he had
the direction of the States proceedings in this matter; and he was
appointed to draw up an edict which might restore tranquility. It was
approved by the States, and is as follows.

FOOTNOTES:

[72] Grot. Apolog. Cap. 9.

[73] Le Vassor, L. 4. p. 477.


IV. "Whereas great dissentions and disputes have arisen in the Churches
of this Country, on occasion of different explanations of some passages
of Holy Writ, which speak of Predestination and what relates to it; and
these contentions having been carried on with so much heat, that some
Divines have been accused of teaching directly, or at least indirectly,
that God has created some men to damn them; that he has laid certain men
under a necessity of sinning; that he invites some men to salvation to
whom he has resolved to deny it; other Divines are also charged with
believing that mens natural strength or works may operate their
salvation. Now these doctrines tending to the dishonour of God and the
Christian reformation, and being contrary to our sentiments, it has
appeared to us highly necessary, from a regard to the honour and glory
of God, and for the peace and harmony of the state, to condemn them. For
these causes, after having weighed the matter, and long examined it with
much conscience and circumspection, employing the authority which
belongs to us as rightful Sovereign, and agreeable to the example of the
Kings, Princes, and Cities which have embraced the Reformation, we have
ordained, and by these presents ordain, that in the interpretation of
the passages of Scripture above-mentioned every one give diligent heed
to the admonition of St. Paul, who teaches that no one should desire to
know more than he ought; but to think soberly, according as God has
dealt to every man the measure of faith; and agreeable to what the Holy
Scriptures every-where set forth, that salvation is of God alone, but
our destruction is of ourselves. Wherefore in the explanation of the
Scripture, as often as occasion shall offer, the Pastors shall declare
to the people, and instil into the minds of all under their care, that
men are not indebted for the beginning, the progress, and the completion
of their salvation, and even of faith, to their natural strength, or
works, but to the sole grace of God in Jesus Christ our Saviour; that we
have not merited it; that God has created no man to damn him; that God
has not laid us under a necessity of sinning, and that he invites no man
to be saved, to whom he has resolved to deny salvation. And, though in
the universities, in conversation, and in those places where the
Scriptures are expounded, passages may be treated of which relate to
predestination and what depends on it, and it may come to pass, as hath
happened formerly, and in our own times, to learned and good men, that
persons may give into these extremes and absurdities which we disapprove
and have forbidden; our will is, that they be not proposed publicly from
the pulpit to the people. But as to those who in relation to such
passages only believe and teach that God hath from all eternity chosen
to salvation, from the mere motion of his will, through Jesus Christ our
Saviour and Redeemer, those who by grace which they have not merited,
and by the operation of the Holy Spirit, believe in Jesus Christ our
Lord, and by free grace given them persevere in the faith to the end, we
will that they be not molested on that account, nor pressed to embrace
other sentiments, or teach other doctrine; for we judge these truths
sufficient for salvation; and proper for the instruction of Christians.
We moreover ordain, that all Pastors, in expounding the other articles
of the Christian faith, make use of explanations agreeable to the word
of God, to what is commonly received in the reformed churches, and what
has been taught in those of this country, which we have maintained and
protected, and now maintain and protect; that they exercise Christian
charity; and that they avoid greater divisions: for in this manner, we
judge, they ought to act for the good of the State and the Church, and
the restoration of her tranquility."

This Edict was too favourable to the Arminians not to give great offence
to the Contra-Remonstrants. They complained that it misrepresented their
sentiments[74] in order to render them odious, and that not only it
wanted the approbation of the Cities, but had not even been sent to
them: from whence they concluded that no regard was to be paid to it.

The States were very desirous that the King of Great Britain and the
English Bishops should be satisfied with the manner in which they had
explained themselves in the Edict: they were the more anxious as they
had reason to believe James unfavourable to the Arminians[75]. However
the King, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Bishops of England
allowed the doctrine of the Edict to be orthodox, and equally distant
from Manicheism and Pelagianism: the only thing which gave the King some
pain, was, to see the Civil Magistrate assume a right of making decrees
in matters of religion[76].

FOOTNOTES:

[74] Vossius, Ep. 3. p. 5. Pres. Vir. Epist. p. 388.

[75] Ep. Casaub. 933. Grot. Apolog. C. 6. Ep. Gr. 28, 29.

[76] Ep. Caus. 863.


V. This Edict served but to increase the troubles, by driving the
Gomarists, against whom it was levelled, into despair. The riots which
had already happened, and which they hourly apprehended, made the Grand
Pensionary Barnevelt propose to the States of Holland, that the
magistrates of the Cities of the Province should be impowered to raise
troops for the suppression of the rioters, and the security of their
towns. Dort, Amsterdam, and three others of the most favourable to the
Gomarists, protested against this step, which they regarded as a kind of
declaration of war against the Contra-Remonstrants. Barnevelt's motion
was, nevertheless, agreed to, and on the fourth of August, 1617, the
States issued a placard accordingly.

This fatal decree occasioned the death of the Grand Pensionary and the
ruin of Grotius, by incensing Prince Maurice of Nassau against them, who
looked upon the resolution of the States, taken without his consent, as
derogatory to his dignity of Governor and Captain General.

He had entertained a mortal enmity for several years against the Grand
Pensionary[77], who concluded the truce in 1609 without his concurrence.
Hitherto he had stifled his revenge for want of a proper opportunity of
executing it; but it blazed openly on occasion of this decree of the
States, which he considered as Barnevelt's act. He accused him of
labouring to diminish his authority: found fault with the Edict: that
was made to engage the two parties to live in peace; declared publicly
for the Gomarists, assisted at divine service only in their churches,
and forbad the soldiers to obey the States when they would employ them
to appease the riots. Some towns, however, levied men in consequence of
the States decree, whether they suspected their garrisons, or thought
there was no other way to suppress the enterprises of the rioters. The
Contra-Remonstrants seeing themselves powerfully protected by Prince
Maurice, separated from the communion of the Arminians in 1617.

FOOTNOTES:

[77] Grot. Hist. l. 17.


VI. Amsterdam, almost as powerful singly as all Holland, favoured the
Gomarists, and disapproved of the Toleration which the States wanted to
introduce. These resolved therefore to send a Deputation to that city,
in order to bring them over to their sentiments. The Deputies were
Grotius, Adrian Mathenes, Hugo Musius, and Gerard Deich. April 21, 1616,
they received their instructions to go to Amsterdam; on the morrow they
left the Hague, and arriving the same day at Amsterdam, sent to desire
the oldest Burgomaster to assemble the Town Council: they were told, the
Council would meet the 23d at three in the afternoon. They employed this
interval in removing a calumny spread by the Contra-Remonstrants, that
they were sent to change the religion. One of the City-Secretaries
waited on them to conduct them to the Council Chamber, and being come
there, Grotius, as spokesman, said, "That Sovereigns had a right to
watch over the proceedings of the Church; that the States had no
intention but to protect the reformed religion; that they ardently
desired the city of Amsterdam would agree with them in all that might
relate to the government of the Church and mutual toleration; that the
revival of the regulation of 1591, which gives the Magistrates a right
to chuse the Ministers, after being examined and found well affected to
the reformed religion, was of great service, by preventing the troubles
which followed the elections; of which there were several recent
instances: that mutual toleration was necessary when the difference in
opinion regarded only points not fundamental; that it had always been
practised by the reformed churches from the time of Calvin's
reformation; that it was more necessary in the doctrine of
Predestination, as this was a matter of great difficulty; that the first
reformers, though of different sentiments, tolerated one another; that
Bullinger and Melancton were tolerated by Beza and Calvin; that James I.
King of Great Britain, had advanced in his writings, that the two
opposite opinions concerning Predestination might be maintained without
danger of damnation; that Gomar himself declared Arminius had not erred
in fundamental points; that after the conference in 1611, the Ministers
of the two parties promised to the States of Holland to live in peace;
that the points controverted were not necessary to salvation, that they
were very difficult, that they never had been determined, either in the
ancient, or the reformed church; that the decisions of the councils held
in the church on occasion of Pelagianism enjoined only a belief, that
men are corrupted and have need of grace, and that the beginning of
grace is from God; that even the church of Rome permitted the Doctors of
different parties to dispute on these points; that it was not necessary
to call a synod to examine them, because the authority of a Sovereign is
sufficient in matters where only the preventing of schism for things
unnecessary to salvation, is in question; that the Sovereign has a right
to suppress disorders that arise in the church; that the business was
not a change of religion, but the hindrance of schism; that the King of
Great Britain and the Canton of Bern had justified the use of this right
by examples; that if the utility of a synod to inform the Sovereign what
he ought to do on such occasions should be maintained, it were easy to
answer, that it is not necessary to assemble a synod to know that men
must tolerate one another when their opinions differ concerning points
not necessary to salvation; that this was a truth acknowledged by
Calvin, Beza, Whittaker, Junius, Casaubon, Du Moulin, in fine by the
most famous Ministers, whose authority is at least equivalent to that of
a synod; that as the question was not about a point of heresy, there was
reason to apprehend the division would be increased by calling a synod,
so great was the ferment of mens minds; that, besides, the moderate
party in such synod would not be the most numerous; that perhaps the
Ecclesiastics would seek to diminish the sovereign authority; that they
might make decisions which could not be enforced without throwing the
Republic into the greatest confusion; that therefore, previous to the
convocation of a synod, mens minds ought to be prepared by gentle
methods; that the decree made in 1614 by the States of Holland, to which
the city of Amsterdam made some difficulty of submitting, was neither
partial, nor injurious to the reformed churches; that it was resolved
on after mature reflexion, and was in itself agreeable to sound
doctrine; that the reasonable men among the Contra-Remonstrants had
nothing to apprehend, since the deposition of some Ministers was
entirely owing to their attempts to introduce schism; that the
Remonstrants and Contra-Remonstrants, not differing in essential points,
ought to tolerate one another, and agree on what they should preach;
that if a Toleration were not admitted, they must depose such as would
not submit to the decision that might be given, or introduce two
churches, either of which steps would trouble the State, whereas a
Toleration would restore tranquility and union, and favour the
assembling of an impartial synod that might labour with success to
restore peace to the church."

The Senate, after hearing this Speech, made answer, that they would take
it into consideration: and on the twenty-fifth of April the Burgomasters
visited the Deputies, and told them, they would send to the States of
Holland to acquaint them with their sentiments. Grotius, who perceived
his discourse had not gained the Senate, replied, that if the Senate
would mention their difficulties, the Deputies of the States would
endeavour to resolve them. The Burgomasters answered, that the Senate
did not intend to grant them a new audience; adding, that as there was
reason to apprehend some alteration in religion, it was their opinion,
that in the present circumstances a synod ought to be assembled; and
that the city of Amsterdam could not receive the Edict of 1614, without
endangering the Church, and risking the ruin of her trade. The Deputies
wanted to answer, but were refused to be heard. Grotius drew up in
writing an account of all that passed in this deputation, and presented
it to the States at his return[78]. He flattered himself for a while
with the hopes of some good effect from his deputation[79]: and the
disappointment chagrined him so much, that he was seized with a violent
fever, which had well nigh carried him off. It appeared plainly by the
blood taken from him that melancholy was the occasion of his disorder.
He was removed to Delft[80], where he found himself better. As he was
forbid to do anything which required application, he wrote to Vossius
that he was very desirous to see him for a few days, or at least a few
hours; that it would be the means of restoring his health, since
conversation with true friends is the best remedy against melancholy. He
employed the time of his recovery in examining himself on the part he
had acted in the present disputes; and the more he reflected on it, the
less reason he found for blushing or repentance. He foresaw the danger
he incurred; but his resolution was taken, not to change his conduct,
and to refer the event to Providence.

FOOTNOTES:

[78] Grotius delivered his speech in Dutch. It was translated into Latin
by Theodorus Schrivelius, and printed in the third tome of his
theological works.

[79] Ep. 77.

[80] Ep. 83.


VII. The States of Holland, wholly employed in seeking ways to compound
matters, had come to a resolution on the twenty-first of February, 1617,
that certain wise and learned men should be chosen to draw up a Rule or
Formula, to which the Ministers of the two parties should be obliged to
conform; that nothing should be advanced in it contrary to the doctrine
of the reformed Churches; that it should be shewn to Prince Maurice,
and, after having his opinion, presented to the States, that they might
examine what was most for God's honour, the people's safety, and the
Nation's tranquillity.

In consequence of this resolution Grotius prepared a writing to be
presented to Prince Maurice, importing, That the States were desirous
the ministers should teach a doctrine agreeable to that of the Reformed
Churches, and that those who departed from it should be proceeded
against in the way of Church Censure, or even by the Civil Magistrate;
that the five Articles of the Remonstrants doctrine should be examined
in a Synod of Holland, and the decision carried to a Synod of all the
Provinces; that previous to its meeting, the Sovereignty of each
Province in things sacred should be settled; that no definition should
be fixed without an unanimous content; that if they could not agree they
should endeavour to convene a General Council of the Reformed Churches;
that in the mean time a severe Edict be published against rioters and
the authors of defamatory libels; that the ministers be charged not to
treat one another abusively; that after the holding of the Council they
should examine what was proper to be added to the Union of Utrecht
concerning the authority of the Provinces in matters of Religion.

This project did not please the Prince: he wanted a national Synod, of
which the States of Holland were afraid, because they foresaw the
Contra-Remonstrants would have more power in it than the Arminians, who
would consequently be condemned by it; and that instead of forwarding
the peace, it would increase the confusion and disorder.

The States-General, entirely devoted to Prince Maurice, determined, in
spite of the States of Holland, to convoke a national Synod in Holland
itself, at Dort. The Provinces of Holland, Utrecht, and Overyssel
protested against this resolution: Barnevelt was so thunderstruck by it,
that he wanted to resign his place of Grand Pensionary: But Holland, who
needed more than ever the counsels of such an experienced Minister,
sending a Deputation to beseech him not to abandon the Republic in times
of so much difficulty[81], he thought it his duty to yield to the
intreaties of his masters, and resumed the functions of his office.

FOOTNOTES:

[81] Grotii manes, p. 78.


VIII. Prince Maurice of Nassau, however, who saw with the utmost
displeasure several Cities, agreeable to the permission granted them by
the particular States, levy a new Militia without his consent, engaged
the States-General to write to the Provinces and Magistrates of those
Cities, enjoining them to disband the new levies, which were styled the
Attendant Soldiers: but the particular States, who looked on themselves
as sovereigns, and the Cities, who thought themselves obliged to obey
only the orders of the States of their Province, paid no attention to
the Letters of the States General[82]. The Prince considering this
conduct as a Rebellion, concerted with the States-General that he should
march in person with the troops under his command, to get these soldiers
who were levied irregularly, disbanded; that he should depose the
Arminian magistrates, and turn out the Ministers of their party.

The Prince accordingly set out, accompanied by the Deputies of the
States-General, in the year 1618. Beginning with the Province of
Gueldres, he removed from the Senate of Nimeguen all who were known or
suspected to favour Arminianism; and turned out the Ministers, obliging
them instantly to leave the town. At Overyssel he met with no
opposition. In Arnheim there was a numerous garrison of Attendant
Soldiers; but the Prince having intelligence in the place, got into it
by night: and the soldiers seeing themselves betrayed, laid down their
arms. Some Senators were deposed, and the Secretary of the Council
banished the City.

The States of Holland, knowing that the Prince was to treat Utrecht in
the same manner, sent thither Grotius, and Hoogerbetz, Pensionary of
Leyden. Their instructions bore, first that they should consider and
resolve on some method of opposing the commission given by the
States-General to Prince Maurice: secondly, that they should consult in
what manner the union between the particular States of the Provinces
might be strengthened, for their mutual aid and assistance.

The Magistrates of Utrecht, in consequence of the advices given them,
doubled the guards at the gates, and armed all the militia they could
assemble. Grotius and Hoogerbetz promised that the States of Holland
would not abandon them on this occasion when their sovereignty was at
stake: they also brought Letters from the States to the principal
officers of the ordinary garrison, tending to persuade them that it was
their duty to obey the States of Utrecht, who paid them, and to resist
the Stadtholder.

Every thing seemed ready for enabling the city to make a vigorous
resistance: the Burghers had taken up arms, and the Attendant Soldiers
were posted in the principal quarters of the town. These dispositions
did not divert the Prince from his design of seizing it. The old
garrison, from a jealousy of the new, declared for him; this occasioned
a mutiny: some of the Burghers left the interest of the city, which
being unprovided of good officers, the Prince and the Deputies of the
States found means to enter, and reduce it. The Prince being now master
of the town, disbanded the Attendant Soldiers, made Ledenberg, Secretary
of the States, and some Senators, prisoners, and turned out of their
places those who had distinguished themselves by their resistance,
putting in their room such as he could depend on. The States-General at
the same time published an Ordonnance at the Hague for disbanding the
new levies. Grotius, who was returned to Rotterdam, finding resistance
would only occasion new troubles, advised the city even before receiving
the Ordonnance of the States-General, to dismiss the Attendant Soldiers.

FOOTNOTES:

[82] La Neuvill's Hist. of Holland. B. iii. c. 5.


IX. The Prince of Orange's revenge was not yet satisfied: that was the
name Maurice went by after the death of his brother Philip William,
which happened at Brussels February 21, 1618. The destruction of the
Grand Pensionary he had resolved on. In an extraordinary assembly of
eight persons, who called themselves the States-General, he got an
Ordonnance passed, without any previous information, as Grotius
complained afterwards; importing, that Barnevelt, Grotius, and
Hoogerbetz should be taken into custody.

Accordingly on the 29th[83] of August, 1618, as Barnevelt was in the
court of the Castle of the Hague[84] returning home from the Assembly of
the States of Holland, one of the Prince of Orange's guards, attended
with some soldiers, commanded him, in the name of the States-General, to
follow him: He was carried to a room in the Castle, and there confined.
The Prince had sent to acquaint Grotius and Hoogerbetz that he wanted to
speak with them: they immediately came, and were arrested.

The same day was published the following Placard: "Messieurs the
States-General desire to acquaint all persons, that to avert the great
peril which threatened the United Provinces, and restore and establish
in the said Provinces harmony, peace, and tranquillity, they have caused
to be imprisoned John de Barnevelt, Advocate-General of Holland and West
Friesland, Romulus Hoogerbetz, and Hugo Grotius, it having been
discovered and made manifest that they were the first authors of the
insurrection at Utrecht, and of an attempt which would have been not
only highly prejudicial to the country and Province, but to several
other Cities. For these causes they have ordered, that the said three
persons be arrested and confined in the Castle of the Hague, till they
give an account of the administration of their offices." This Placard
was without any signature.

A report was at the same time spread by the prisoners enemies, that
Barnevelt and Grotius received money from the Spaniards to deliver up to
them the United Provinces; that they took money in 1609 to conclude the
truce; that they fomented the disputes in order to disunite the
Provinces; and that they had engaged to introduce into Holland the
public exercise of the Roman Catholic Religion.

It is said that Barnevelt had notice of the resolution taken to
apprehend him; that he talked of it to his friends; and told them he was
so secure in his innocence, he did not fear to take even his enemies for
judges, if any should dare to attack his conduct. It was represented to
him, that there were seasons of fanaticism and fury, in which innocence
was sacrificed to the violence of powerful enemies: but the testimony of
a good conscience hindered his attending to these remonstrances.

A few days after Grotius' arrest, his wife presented a petition, praying
that she might have leave to stay with her husband till the end of the
process. This grace was refused: she was not even permitted to see him;
and having asked to speak to him in presence of his guards, they were so
hard-hearted, as to deny even this slight favour.

Some days after these imprisonments, the Prince of Orange and the
Deputies of the States-General made a tour through the towns of Holland.
They had the power in their hands, and the Arminians were in the
greatest consternation. The Prince met with no opposition to his
designs: he deposed such magistrates as were relations or friends of the
three illustrious prisoners, putting in their place others that were
wholly devoted to him; and obliged some towns to receive a garrison,
particularly Rotterdam. The Arminians had hitherto been the more
powerful party there[85], and had excluded the Contra-Remonstrants from
preaching in the great Church: but the Prince took that church from
them, and gave it, with all the rest, to the Gomarists, leaving only two
to the Arminians. He placed a garrison of an hundred men in the town and
turned out and banished the Ministers who had distinguished themselves
by their zeal for Arminianism, such as Vorstius, Utengobard, and
Episcopius. Ledenberg, Secretary of Utrecht, hearing of these violences,
was so terrified, that he made away with himself in prison.

FOOTNOTES:

[83] Du Maurier says the three prisoners were arrested the 22d of
August; others assure us it was the 24th. La Neuville, Le Clerc. But it
is evident from what Grotius says himself, Ep. 104, that it was the
29th.

[84] Le Clerc.

[85] Mercure François, an. 1617.


X. The warmest opposers of a National Synod being disabled from giving
any further obstruction, the States-General proceeded to the holding of
it. The States of Holland, who in May, 1618, had renewed their protest
against the convocation of a National Synod, frightened by the violences
exercised against the three illustrious prisoners, at last gave their
consent; and it met at Dort.

It was opened on the fifteenth of November, 1618, in the name of the
States-General, who assisted at it by their Deputies; and was composed
of about seventy Contra-Remonstrants, with only fourteen Arminians. John
Bogerman, Minister of Leewarden in Friesland, was chosen President, and
had with him four assessors; all five declared enemies of the Arminians.
On the tenth of December the Remonstrants brought in a long Writing,
containing their reasons for not acknowledging the Synod, as being an
illegal assembly where the parties made themselves Judges, contrary to
the laws of equity and the Canons of the Church. They further shewed,
that most of those who composed the pretended synod were guilty of the
schism complained of; that it was publickly notorious they were their
declared enemies, and consequently incompetent judges. They afterwards
proposed twelve conditions, without which they could not acknowledge the
authority of the Synod, nor submit to any of its decisions. This paper
put the Synod into a very ill humour. Next day the Arminians giving in
a protest, it was censured, and a decree of the Deputies of the
States-General ordered that the Synod should proceed, without regarding
the protest.

The Arminians wanted to leave Dort; but an order from the States-General
obliged them to stay. Their five articles were condemned; and Episcopius
and the other Arminian ministers deposed, and declared guilty of
corrupting religion, breaking the unity of the Church, and occasioning
great scandal. The Synod's sentence was approved by the States-General
on the second of July, 1619. The same day the Arminian Ministers who had
been detained at Dort, were banished, or imprisoned: they were deprived
of their employments, and the effects of several were confiscated. They
continued to assert the irregularity of this Council; and the Bishop of
Meaux observes, that they employed the same arguments which the
Protestants use against the Roman-Catholics concerning the Council of
Trent.


XI. The Prisoners were not brought to their trial till after the rising
of the Synod of Dort. Their confinement had caused great murmuring in
the Province of Holland: for not only all honest men were persuaded of
their innocence; but it was also evident that the sovereignty of the
province of Holland had been openly violated. On the 29th of August,
1618, under the first surprise that an event of this nature must
occasion, when it was mentioned in the Assembly of the States-General,
the Deputies of the Province of Holland expressed great concern; they
complained the rights of Holland had been invaded; adding, that they
would ask their constituents what was to be done in such a melancholy
and singular occurrence. The City of Rotterdam and some others made loud
complaints: They acknowledged that if the three Prisoners were guilty of
treason, or of unlawful correspondence with the Spaniards, they ought to
be prosecuted; but maintained that they could not be legally tried but
by the States of Holland, who alone were their Sovereigns. The Prince of
Orange and the States-General found no way of putting a stop to the
opposition of such Magistrates as were zealous for their Country, or
friends to the Prisoners, but by deposing them. Nothing now remained to
obstruct the Prince of Orange in his projects of revenge: The States of
Holland, not being in a situation to hinder these violences, unwillingly
left the management of this affair to the States-General: but were so
much persuaded of the injustice done them, and the invasion made on
their Sovereignty, that in the end of January 1619[86], notwithstanding
the change of Deputies, they passed a Decree, importing that what had
been done in the imprisonment of the Grand Pensionary, and the
Pensionaries of Rotterdam and Leyden, should not be made a precedent for
the future.

The States-General, desirous of making an end of this affair, on the
nineteenth of November, 1618, nominated twenty-six Commissioners, chosen
from among the Nobility and Magistrates of the Seven Provinces, who were
ordered to repair to the Hague to try the Prisoners. The Decree
appointing these Judges mentioned that the Accused were taken into
custody to secure the tranquillity of the Republic, to hinder the ruin
of Religion and the destruction of the Union, and prevent disturbance
and bloodshed: they were represented as ambitious men, who sought by
secret practices to embroil the State: And to give some appearance of
satisfaction to Holland, it was said in the Decree, that the
States-General had issued it without prejudice to the rights of the
Provinces. Care was taken to chuse for Judges the declared enemies of
the Prisoners. Barnevelt objected to them; representing that he could
not be tried by the States-General: but no regard was paid to his
exceptions. Thus he was obliged to answer before incompetent judges,
who were notoriously known to have sworn his ruin. He entered a protest,
that his answering before them should not be construed an approbation of
their infringement of the jurisdiction of Holland.

In fine, after many iniquitous steps, which will be more particularly
mentioned in Grotius' trial, Barnevelt was condemned to be beheaded. The
principal grounds[87] of his condemnation were, That he had disturbed
religion; that he had advanced that each Province in its own
jurisdiction might decide in matters of religion, without the other
Provinces having a right to take cognizance of it; that he diverted the
King of France from sending the Reformed ministers of his Kingdom to the
Synod of Dort; preferred the interests of the particular States of
Holland and West Friesland to those of the States-General; made use of
the name of the States of Holland and West Friesland for holding
conventicles and unlawful assemblies; occasioned the insurrection at
Utrecht; authorised the levying of the Attendant Soldiers; slandered
Prince Maurice, accusing him of aspiring to the sovereignty of the
United Provinces; and that he received large sums from foreign Princes,
which he concealed from the State.

FOOTNOTES:

[86] Grotius, Apology, c. 15.

[87] La Neuville, lib. 3. c. 16.


XII. Lewis XIII. who had an affection for the United Provinces, with
which he was connected by their common interest, beheld the domestic
troubles of Holland with concern. The Prisoners, especially Barnevelt,
whose merit was well known at the Court of France, were held by him in
particular esteem. When he heard of their arrest he nominated Thumeri de
Boissise his Ambassador extraordinary to Holland, ordering him to repair
thither, immediately, and join Du Maurier the Ambassador in ordinary, in
soliciting the States-General in favour of the Accused, and labouring to
restore the public tranquillity.

December 12, 1618, they presented to the States-General a Writing from
the King, asking that the prisoners might have justice done them; that
their judges might be persons impartial and dispassionate; that the
States would rather chuse mild, than rigorous measures: "And, said the
Ministers, his Majesty will take for a high offence the little regard
you pay to his counsels, his prayers, and his friendship, which for the
future will be as much cooled as it was heretofore warm in your
interest."

The States made answer on the nineteenth of December following, that
they would act with all the lenity and clemency which justice and the
safety of the State would permit; and that they hoped the King would
leave it to their prudence.

The French Ambassadors continued their solicitations[88]; but the answer
made them March 23, 1619, must have left them no hope: it represented
the Prisoners as turbulent men, suspected of very heinous crimes, and
almost convicted of conspiring against the Republic, and projecting and
attempting to destroy the Union and the State. This answer was certainly
concerted with Prince Maurice, who was highly offended that the King of
France should interest himself so much to save men whom he looked on as
his declared enemies. Boissise quitted Holland, leaving Du Maurier alone
to act in favour of the Accused. On Monday morning, May 13, 1619, the
Ambassador was informed, that sentence had been passed the Day before,
and that Barnevelt was to be executed that day. He went immediately to
the Assembly of the States to get the execution suspended, but was
refused audience: he wrote to the States, conjuring them by the regard
they ought to have for the King his master, not to spill the blood of a
Minister who had served them so faithfully; and, if they would not
pardon him, to confine him to one of his country houses, his friends
being bound for him; or banish him the country for ever. This Letter had
no effect: their resolution was taken to destroy him. When the Grand
Pensionary was informed of his sentence, he seemed less moved at it,
than for the fate of Grotius and Hoogerbetz: he asked if they also were
to die? adding, It would be great pity: they are still able to do great
service to the Republic. The scaffold for his execution was erected in
the court of the Castle at the Hague, facing the Prince of Orange's
apartments. He made a short speech to the people, which is preserved in
the _Mercure François_: "Burghers, said he, I have been always your
faithful countryman: believe not that I die for treason; but for
maintaining the Rights and Liberties of my Country." After this Speech
the executioner struck off his head at one blow. It is affirmed that the
Prince of Orange, to feast himself with the cruel pleasure of seeing his
enemy perish, beheld the execution with a glass. The people looked on it
with other eyes: for many came to gather the sand wet with his blood, to
keep it carefully in phials: and the croud of those who had the same
curiosity continued next day, notwithstanding all they could do to
hinder them.

Thus fell that great Minister, who did the United Provinces as much
service in the cabinet, as the Princes of Orange did in the field. It is
highly probable that the melancholy end of this illustrious and
unfortunate man, to whom the Dutch are partly indebted for their
liberty, was owing to his steadiness in opposing the design of making
Prince Maurice Dictator. But this is a question discussed by several
writers[89], and foreign to our subject.

The French ministry discovered no resentment at the little attention
paid by the States General to Lewis's solicitations. There is reason to
think Barnevelt would have met with less cruel treatment, or at least
that France would not have passed it over so easily, had Cardinal
Richelieu, who was soon after Prime Minister, been then in place: for a
book[90] ascribed to him censures the conduct of Messieurs de Luines,
who were in power at that time, with regard to this affair.

FOOTNOTES:

[88] Apology, c. 15.

[89] See Du Maurier, Le Vassor, La Neuville, Le Clerc.

[90] Hist. de la mere & du fils, t. 2. p. 380.


XIII. Grotius's trial did not come on till five days after Barnevelt's
execution. September 3, 1618, the fourth day after he was arrested, the
Burgomasters of Rotterdam presented a petition to the Prince of
Orange[91], setting forth, that they had heard with great grief that
Grotius, Counsellor and Pensionary of Rotterdam, being at the Hague at
the assembly of the States, was arrested by order of the States General;
and representing to his Excellency that it was a breach of privilege, by
which no Deputy could be arrested during the sitting of the States; and
as they stood in need of Grotius's assistance and counsels, praying that
he, as Governor of Holland and West-Friesland, would prevail with the
States General to set him at liberty, and put him in the same situation
he was in before his imprisonment, promising to guard him at Rotterdam
or elsewhere, that he might be forthcoming to answer any charge brought
against him by the States General. The Prince gave only for answer, that
the affair concerned the States General. Their petition having had no
effect, on the 10th of September, 1618, the city of Rotterdam sent a
deputation to the States of Holland, praying that Grotius and the other
persons accused might be tried according to the custom of the country.
But the States themselves were under oppression.

Grotius's wife petitioned[92] for leave to continue with her husband
whilst his cause was depending; but this favour was denied her. On his
falling ill, she again pressed to be allowed to visit him, they had the
cruelty to hinder her: she offered not to speak to him but in presence
of his guards; this was also refused. Thus all the time of his
confinement at the Hague, no one was permitted to see him, even when he
lay dangerously ill.

We may judge to what length his enemies carried their blindness and
fury, by the following passage related by Selden[93]. When Grotius was
arrested, some who bore him ill-will, prevailed with Carleton,
Ambassador from Great Britain at the Hague, to make a complaint against
his book _Of the Freedom of the Ocean_: the Ambassador was not ashamed
to maintain that the States ought to make an example of him, to prevent
others from defending an opinion that might occasion a misunderstanding
between the two nations. Carleton and his advisers were the dupes of
this contemptible step: the States General paid no regard to his
complaint. The proposal was shameful in itself. Could they think that it
would be made a crime in Grotius to have written a book, dictated by his
love to his country, and deserving a recompence from the States to whom
it had been of great use in the dispute with England concerning the
right of navigation?

At the first examination which Grotius underwent, he answered[94] that
he was of the Province of Holland, Minister of a city of Holland; that
he had been arrested on the territories of Holland; that he acknowledged
no judges but that province, and was ready to justify all he had done.
He maintained that the States General had no jurisdiction over him, and
consequently could not nominate his Judges. He alledged also the
privilege of the citizens of Rotterdam and demanded permission to set
forth his reasons before the States of Holland and the States General;
and that the validity of his objections might be determined by Judges of
Holland. All these things were denied him. They insisted that he should
plead: he protested against this violence; but this did not hinder them
from proceeding against him, in contempt of all forms. He had been
allowed the use of pen and ink[95], but, after his first examination,
they were taken away.

The rigour and injustice, with which he and the other prisoners were
treated, are scarce conceivable. He tells us, that when they knew they
were bad, they chose that time to examine them; that they did not give
them liberty to defend themselves; that they threatened, and teazed them
to give immediate answers; and that they would not read over to them
their examinations. Grotius having asked leave to write his defence,
they allowed him for that purpose only five hours, and one sheet of
paper. He was always persuaded, that if he would own he had
transgressed, and ask pardon, they would set him at liberty: but as he
had nothing to reproach himself with, he would never take any step that
might infer consciousness of guilt. His wife, his father, brother, and
friends approved of this resolution[96].

On the 18th of May, 1619, the Commissioners pronounced sentence against
him, which we shall give at length.

"Whereas[97] Hugo Grotius, who was Pensionary of the Magistrates of
Rotterdam, and at present a prisoner before the Commissaries appointed
by the States General to try him, has acknowledged without being put to
the torture.

That he ventured to endeavour to overturn religion, to oppress and
afflict the Church of God, and for that end advanced heinous things
pernicious to the Republic, particularly, that each Province has singly
a right to decree in matters of religion, and that the others ought not
to take cognizance of the disputes which arise on this subject in a
particular province; that against order, and the custom of the reformed
churches, he endeavoured to get opinions received which are contrary to
the doctrine of those churches, without being sufficiently examined;
that he opposed the convocation of a National Synod in the name of the
States General, though it was judged by the King of Great Britain,
Prince Maurice, the majority of the nation, and the principal persons of
the province of Holland, a necessary and certain remedy for the
disorders which had crept into religion; that he advanced the convening
a synod would be prejudicial to the right of sovereignty belonging to
the province of Holland, unless the whole or the greater part of the
province would consent to it.

That he held private meetings with the Deputies of some towns, with
design to procure a majority in the assembly of the States of Holland.

That without the orders of the States of Holland, Utrecht, and
Overyssel, he ventured to make an act in the name of those provinces, in
the house of John Barnevelt, protesting against what the Deputies of the
other provinces might do, and declaring they would be the cause of the
disorders that the Synod might produce; which act he read in the
assembly of the States of Holland without being required, and carried it
to the assembly of the States-General.

That he made eight Deputies of the cities send back the letter of the
States-General for the convocation of the Synod.

That he wrote to the King of France in the name of the States of
Holland, informing him that the name of the States-General was falsly
made use of in the Letters for convoking the Synod, and desiring his
Majesty not to suffer his subjects to attend the Synod, and to protect
Holland against the other provinces.

That, by the counsel of Barnevelt, he bestirred himself to get Ministers
to come to the Synod who were of the new opinion.

That he embroiled the Republic in order to get every thing passed
according to his fancy and caprice.

That he assisted in so far changing the form of government, that those
who complained of oppression were not admitted to be heard, and the
Magistrates of cities disobeyed the orders they received.

That by the advice of John Barnevelt he held private meetings with the
Deputies of some towns, whose deliberations were carried to the States
of Holland, to serve for the model of their resolutions.

That he was concerned in the odious decree of the 4th of August, 1617,
permitting the cities of Holland to raise new troops for their defence,
and to require of them an oath of fidelity to those cities.

That he gave it as his opinion, the city of Rotterdam should raise those
soldiers.

That he also advised the city of Delft to raise them; that he wanted to
lay the expence of these new levies on the Generality.

That he asserted these new soldiers were not obliged to obey the
States-General, if their orders were contrary to those of the cities.

That he sent back the French auxiliaries in order to employ the money
assigned for their subsistance in paying the new soldiers.

That he pretended these soldiers ought to serve even against the
States-General and against Prince Maurice.

That he wanted to prevail with the cities to make a new union.

That he held conferences with a foreign Ambassador.

That he was concerned in the deputation sent to the Brille to oppose
Prince Maurice.

That, on the 14th of May, 1618, he made an act with eight Deputies of
cities, by virtue of which they were permitted to oppose what the
States-General might do for accelerating the holding of the Synod; which
act they wanted to get approved by the States of Utrecht; that he
endeavoured to divert the Deputies of Utrecht from disbanding their new
troops agreeable to the intention of the States of that province, by
promising them assistance.

That he accused the States-General, as well as Prince Maurice, of evil
designs.

That he maintained, they ought to be resisted, and the revenue and
forces of the State employed against them.

That he said the disbanding the new soldiers would increase the boldness
of the Disaffected, and the disorders in the State; that the ordinary
troops were not sufficient; that the members of the province of Holland
would abundantly succour such as did not obey the States-General; that
he suffered himself to be deputed to Utrecht to offer his assistance to
the States and the City; that this deputation was ordered only by a few
Nobles, three Deputies of Cities, and some Deputies to the States of
Holland, who had no instructions on that subject from their
Constituents.

That his acknowledged design, and that of those deputed to Utrecht, was
to engage the States to require the ordinary soldiers to obey the States
of Utrecht, in prejudice of the obedience due to the States-General.

That he carried Letters of Barnevelt, which had not been read in the
assembly of the States of Holland, declaring, that the soldiers ought to
obey the States, and oppose whatever might be done against them.

That he had combined with Ledemberg in the measures to be taken for
preventing the new soldiers from being disbanded by the States of
Utrecht.

That he spoke against the States-General and against Prince Maurice in
the assembly of the States of Utrecht; that he assisted the States of
Utrecht in preparing their answer to Prince Maurice and the States
General, by which they refused to acknowledge these Deputies as sent by
the States-General, though they were in fact; that he held a conference
with the Bailly of the city of Utrecht on the measures to be taken for
resisting Prince Maurice if he should come to Utrecht to disband the
new soldiers; and that he endeavoured to prevail with the States of
Utrecht to have recourse to open force on this occasion.

That he wanted to make the ordinary garrison oppose the Deputies of the
States-General when their orders were contrary to those of the States of
Utrecht; threatening to stop their pay if they did otherwise.

That he advised the Bailly of Utrecht to obey only the Deputies of
Holland or the States of Utrecht.

That he conferred with the said Bailly on the means of hindering Prince
Maurice from introducing soldiers into Utrecht; which might have
occasioned much bloodshed in the city, and put the Prince and the
Republic in the greatest danger; and which gave rise to dissentions and
new treaties, contrary to the union of the provinces: whence the public
order in Church and State was disturbed, the finances of the State
exhausted, divisions arose between the States-General and the Provinces,
and the union was on the point of being broke.

For these causes the Judges appointed to try this affair, administring
justice in the name of the States-General, condemn the said Hugo Grotius
to perpetual imprisonment; and to be carried to the place appointed by
the States-General, there to be guarded with all precaution, and
confined the rest of his days; and declare his estate confiscated.
Hague, May 18, 1619."

Grotius, who enters into an examination of this sentence, charges it
with many falsities: he maintains[98] that it makes him say several
things which he constantly denied: and that he never acknowledged
himself guilty. What is mentioned in the sentence concerning the
deputation to Utrecht, he shews to be palpably false[99]. On the 20th of
July, 1618, he acquaints us, certain Deputies to the States of Holland
wanted to go home; that the assembly was summoned for the 24th; that
some Deputies were indeed absent that day, but the Curators of the
Republic of those Cities, agreeable to the order they had received,
supplied their place; that the assembly was composed of the Deputies of
Harlem, Delft, Leyden, Amsterdam, Goude, Rotterdam, Alcmaër, and the
Nobles; that the Deputies of the other cities were summoned; that their
absence could not stay the proceedings of the rest; that, excepting the
Deputies of Amsterdam, all the others agreed to the deputation sent to
Utrecht; that it was thrice approved; and that the Deputies at their
return received the thanks of the States, who defrayed the expence of
their journey.

Grotius complains that he was not examined on the tenth part of the
facts specified in his sentence, that his examination was not read over
to him; in fine, that he was no ways reprehensible, since in all he did,
he exactly followed the orders of the States of Holland, or those of the
city of Rotterdam[100], as the States and the City allowed; and that if
he was to be tried, it ought to be by Judges of Rotterdam, according to
the privileges of that city. Hoogerbetz was also condemned to perpetual
banishment. The body of Ledemberg, Secretary of the States of Utrecht,
who, as hath been said, put an end to his life in gaol, was affixed in
the coffin to a gibbet. Moerbergen, Counsellor of Utrecht, had only his
country-house, for his prison, because, suffering himself to be moved by
the tears of his wife and children, he made a kind of submission
bordering on those which they wanted to draw from Hoogerbetz and
Grotius.

The Judges who condemned them were so ignorant of the laws, that they
decreed penalties which are only enacted against persons convicted of
high treason, yet omitted mentioning in the sentence that Grotius was
guilty of that crime. They were told of this irregularity, and saw they
were in the wrong: to remedy it, they declared, a whole year after the
trial, without rehearing the cause, that their intention was to condemn
Grotius and his accomplices as guilty of high-treason; which step was
the more irregular[101], as delegated judges cannot, by law, add to
their sentence after it is passed. This addition deprived Grotius's wife
of the liberty of redeeming, at a moderate price, her husband's estate;
a privilege which the law allows in all cases but those of treason. His
estate was therefore confiscated: but by this he was no great loser. At
that time he was very far from being rich: his father being alive, what
properly belonged to him was only the savings of his salary and his
wife's fortune.

FOOTNOTES:

[91] Hug. Grotii votum, p. 664.

[92] Apol. c. 13.

[93] Mare clausum l. 1. p. 198.

[94] Apol. c. 15.

[95] Apol. c. 13.

[96] Ibid. c. 16.

[97] Ibid. c. 19.

[98] Dedication of his Apology.

[99] Apol. c. 13. 17.

[100] Hug. Grotii votum, p. 669.

[101] Ep. Gr. 161.


XIV. In consequence of the sentence passed against Grotius, the
States-General ordered him to be carried from the Hague to the fortress
of Louvestein near Gorcum in South Holland, at the point of the island
formed by the Vahal and the Meuse; which was done on the 6th of June,
1619; and twenty-four sols per day assigned for his maintenance, and as
much for Hoogerbetz: but their wives declared they had enough to support
their husbands, and that they chose to be without an allowance which
they looked on as an affront. Grotius' father asked permission to see
his son; but was denied. They consented to admit his wife into
Louvestein, but if she came out, she was not to be suffered to go back.
In the sequel it was granted her that she might come abroad twice a
week.

Grotius became now more sensible than ever of the advantages men derive
from a love of the Sciences. Exile and captivity, the greatest evils
that can befal Ministers of ordinary merit, restored to him that
tranquillity to which he had been for some years a stranger. Study
became his business and consolation. From the time he was a prisoner at
the Hague[102], whilst he had the use of pen and ink, he employed
himself in writing a Latin piece on the means of accommodating the
present disputes. This treatise was presented to Prince Maurice; but it
did not mollify the indignation he had conceived against the
Remonstrants. Grotius maintained in it, as he had done often before,
that notwithstanding difference of opinion in some points relating to
grace and predestination, a mutual toleration ought to take place, and
no separation be made.

We have still several of his letters written from Louvestein, which
acquaint us in what manner he spent his time. He gave Vossius an account
of his studies. In the first of those Letters, without date, he observes
to him that he had resumed the study of the Law, which had been long
interrupted by his multiplicity of business; that the rest of his time
he devoted to the study of Morality; which had led him to translate all
the Maxims of the Poets collected by Stobæus, and the fragments of
Menander and Philemon. He likewise purposed to extract from the Comic
and Tragic Authors of Greece what related to Morality, and was omitted
by Stobæus, and to translate it into free verse, like that of the Latin
Comic writers. With regard to his translation of the fragments of the
Greek Tragic authors, he intended that the verses of his Latin
translation should resemble those of the original, excepting in the
chorus's, which he would put into the verse that best suited him. He was
in doubt whether he ought to print these additions with Stobæus, and
asks Vossius's opinion whether he should place them at the end, or
entirely new-mould that collection. Sundays he employed in reading
treatises on the truth of the Christian religion, and even spent some of
his spare hours in this study: on other days, when his ordinary labour
was over, he meditated some work in Flemish on religion. The subject
which he liked best at that time was Christ's love to mankind: he no
doubt intended to confute the extravagant opinions of the Gomarists. He
purposed also to write a Commentary on the Sermon on the mount.

Time seemed to pass very fast amidst these several projects. December
15, 1619, he writes Vossius, that the Muses, which were always his
delight, even when immersed in business, were now his consolation, and
appeared more amiable than ever. He wrote some short Notes on the New
Testament: these he intended to send to Erpenius, who was projecting a
new edition of it; but a fit of illness obliged him to lay them
aside[103]. When he was able to resume his studies, he composed in Dutch
verse his treatise _Of the Truth of the Christian Religion_, and sent it
to Vossius; who thought some places of it obscure. It makes no mention
of the Trinity or Incarnation, because, the authority and authenticity
of the sacred Books once proved, these great points ought to be held
demonstrated. Those who since Grotius have written against infidelity
with greatest success, have followed his example. Sacred and profane
authors employed him alternately. In the end of the year 1620[104] he
promises his brother to send him his observations on Seneca's Tragedies:
These he had written at Vossius's desire[105]. He acknowledges his
conjectures are sometimes very bold; but is not so attached to them, but
he will submit them to Vossius, and leaves them entirely to him. We have
seen that Du Maurier employed his best offices for Barnevelt and
Grotius. From the time they were arrested all correspondence between the
Ambassador and Grotius was probably cut off till the beginning of 1621;
for it is not till the fifteenth of January that year, he returns him
his thanks[106]. He says it is impossible for him to express his
obligations to the Most Christian King, to his wife Council, and to Du
Maurier in particular, for the pains they took to assist him in his
misfortunes; that tho' their intentions had not the effect which might
have been hoped for, it gave him great consolation to find persons of
such importance interest themselves in his troubles. He calls his
conscience, as the judge he most respected, to witness, that all he
intended was the prevention of schism; that he never had a thought of
making any innovation in the Republic; that he only purposed the
supporting the rights of his Sovereigns, without invading the legal
authority of the States-General; that such as were in the secret of
affairs knew that his whole crime was refusing to comply with the
caprices of those who wanted to rule according to their fancies; and
that he chose rather to lose his estate and his health, than to ask
pardon for a fault he had never committed.

Du Maurier losing his lady about this time, Grotius writes him, February
27, 1621, a very handsome consolatory letter, in which he deduces with
great eloquence every ground of support that Philosophy and Religion can
suggest in that melancholly event. The only method he took to unbend and
recreate himself, was to go from one work to another. He translated the
_Phoenissæ_ of Euripides: wrote his _Institutions of the Laws of
Holland_ in Dutch: and composed some short Instructions for his daughter
Cornelia[107] in the form of a Catechism, and in Flemish verse,
containing an hundred and eighty-five Questions and Answers: it was
printed at the Hague in 1619. The author afterwards translated it into
the same number of Latin verses for the use of his son: it is added in
the later editions of his Poems. He wrote also, while under confinement,
a Dialogue in Dutch verse between a father and a son, on the necessity
of silence, explaining the use and abuse of Speech, and shewing the
advantages of taciturnity. In fine, he collected, when in prison, the
materials of his _Apology_[108].

FOOTNOTES:

[102] Apolog. Pref.

[103] Ep. 126.

[104] Ep. 23. p. 761.

[105] Ep. 132.

[106] Ep. 133.

[107] Mem. Litt. de la Gr. Bretagne, t. xi. p. 66.

[108] Ep. 144.


XV. Grotius had been above eighteen months shut up in Louvestein, when,
on the eleventh of January, 1621[109], Muys-van-Holi, his declared
enemy, who had been one of his judges, informed the States-General, that
he had advice from good hands their prisoner was seeking to make his
escape: some persons were sent to Louvestein to examine into this
matter; but notwithstanding all the enquiry that could be made, they
found no reason to believe that Grotius had laid any plot to get out.

His wife however was wholly employed in contriving how to set him at
liberty. He had been permitted[110] to borrow books of his friends, and
when he had done with them, they were carried back in a chest with his
foul linen, which was sent to Gorcum, a town near Louvestein, to be
washed. The first year his guards were very exact in examining the chest
when it went from Louvestein; but being used to find in it only books
and linen, they grew tired of searching, and did not take the trouble to
open it. Grotius' wife observing their negligence, purposed to take
advantage of it. She represented to her husband that it was in his power
to get out of prison when he pleased, if he would put himself in the
chest that carried his books. However, not to endanger his health, she
caused holes to be bored opposite to the part where his face was to be,
to breathe at; and made him try if he could continue shut up in that
confined posture as long as it would require to go from Louvestein to
Gorcum. Finding it might be done, she resolved to seize the first
favourable opportunity.

It soon offered. The Commandant of Louvestein[111] going to Heusden to
raise recruits, Grotius' wife made a visit to his lady, and told her in
conversation, that she was desirous of sending away a chest full of
books, for her husband was so weak, it gave her great uneasiness to see
him study with such application. Having thus prepared the Commandant's
wife, she returned to her husband's apartment, and in concert with a
valet and a maid, who were in the secret, shut him up in the chest. At
the same time, that people might not be surprised at not seeing him, she
spread a report of his being ill. Two soldiers carried the chest: one of
them, finding it heavier than usual, said, There must be an Arminian in
it: this was a kind of proverb that had lately come into use. Grotius'
wife, who was present, answered with great coldness, There are indeed
Arminian books in it. The chest was brought down on a ladder, with great
difficulty. The soldier insisted on its being opened, to see what was in
it; he even went and informed the Commandant's wife that the weight of
the chest gave him reason to think there was something suspicious
contained in it, and that it would be proper to have it opened. She
would not; whether it was that she was willing to wink at the thing, or
through negligence: she told him that Grotius' wife had assured her
there was nothing but books in it; and that they might carry it to the
boat. It is affirmed that a soldier's wife who was present, said there
was more than one example of prisoners making their escape in boxes. The
chest however was put into the boat, and Grotius' maid, who was in the
secret, had orders to go with it to Gorcum, and put it into a house
there. When it came to Gorcum, they wanted to put it on a sledge; but
the maid telling the boatman there were some brittle things in it, and
begging of him to take care how it was carried, it was put on a horse,
and brought by two chairmen to David Dazelaer's, a friend of Grotius,
and brother-in-law to Erpenius, having married his sister[112]. When
every body was gone, the maid opened the chest. Grotius had felt no
inconvenience in it, though its length was not above three feet and a
half. He got out, dressed himself like a mason, with a rule and a
trowel, and went by Dazelaer's back-door, through the market-place to
the gate that leads to the river, and stept into a boat which carried
him to Valvic in Brabant. At this place he made himself known to some
Arminians; and hired a carriage to Antwerp, taking the necessary
precautions not to be known by the way: it was not the Spaniards he
feared, for there was then a truce between them and the United
Provinces. He alighted at Antwerp at the house of Nicholas Grevincovius,
who had been formerly a Minister at Amsterdam; and made himself known to
no body but him. It was on the 22d of March, 1621, that Grotius thus
recovered his liberty.

In the mean time it was believed at Louvestein that he was ill; and to
give him time to get off, his wife gave out that his illness was
dangerous; but as soon as she learnt by the maid's return that he was in
Brabant, and consequently in safety, she told the guards, the bird was
flown. They informed the Commandant, by this time returned from Heusden,
who hastened to Grotius's wife, and asked her where she had hid her
husband? She answered he might search for him: but being much pressed
and even threatened, she confessed that she had caused him to be carried
to Gorcum in the book chest: and that she had done no more than kept her
word to him, to take the first opportunity of setting her husband at
liberty. The Commandant in a rage went immediately to Gorcum, and
acquainting the Magistrate with his prisoner's escape, both came to
Dazelaer's, where they found the empty chest. On his return to
Louvestein the Commandant confined Grotius's wife more closely: but
presenting a petition to the States-General, April 5, 1621, praying that
she might be discharged, and Prince Maurice, to whom it was
communicated, making no opposition, the majority were for setting her at
liberty. Some indeed voted for detaining her a prisoner; but they were
looked on as very barbarous, to want to punish a woman for an heroic
action. Two days after presenting the petition, she was discharged, and
suffered to carry away every thing that belonged to her in Louvestein.
Grotius continued some time at Antwerp. March 30, he wrote to the
States-General that in procuring his liberty he had employed neither
violence nor corruption with his keepers; that he had nothing to
reproach himself with in what he had done; that he gave those counsels
which he thought best for appeasing the troubles that had arisen before
he was concerned in public business; that he only obeyed the Magistrates
of Rotterdam his masters, and the States of Holland his sovereigns; and
that the persecution he had suffered would never diminish his love to
his Country, for whose prosperity he heartily prayed.

Grotius's escape exercised the pens of the most famous poets of that
period. Barlæus wrote some very good verses on it[113]: and also
celebrated his wife's magnanimity[114]. Rutgersius composed a poem on
his imprisonment, in which he places the day of his arrest among the
most unfortunate for the Republic[115]. Grotius himself wrote some
verses on his happy deliverance, which were translated into Flemish by
the famous poet John Van Vondel. He made also some lines on the chest to
which he owed his liberty, and in the latter part of his life was at
great pains to recover it[116].

Henry Dupuis, a learned man settled at Louvain, being informed that
Grotius was at Antwerp, sent him a very handsome letter, to signify to
him the share he took in the general joy of all good men, and offered
him his house, and all that a true friend could give[117]: but Grotius
chose rather to come to France, agreeable to the advice of Du Maurier
and the President Jeannin; the latter assuring him he might depend on
the King's protection, the esteem of men of the greatest consideration,
and his friendship.

But previous to the account of his journey to Paris it will be proper to
say something of the writings that appeared relating to the disputes
which divided the church and state.

Among the Ministers who opposed the Arminians Sibrand Lubert was one of
the most zealous and in greatest reputation. This man was a Professor in
the university of Francker: he wrote against Worstius, who was suspected
of Socinianism; and insinuated that the States of Holland favoured that
heresy. He also complained of their renewing the law of 1591, concerning
the election of ministers, and their opposing the convocation of a
National Synod. The States, incensed at his presumption, employed
Grotius to write their Apology, which he published in 1613.

In this work he undertakes to shew that the Arminians have very
different sentiments on grace from the Pelagians; that they join with
the Greek and many Latin Fathers in their opinion about Predestination;
that the Reformed did not always entertain such rigid sentiments,
particularly Melancton, inferior to none in learning or piety; that
since the rise of the disputes Arminius and Gomar had declared in
writing, there was no difference between them in fundamentals; that
after the dispute of those two Divines in presence of the States, it was
determined that the two opinions might be tolerated; that since the
death of Arminius twelve Ministers of the two parties having been
heard, the States recommended to them mutual toleration and charity.

He afterwards proves that the Synod was not necessary; that it could be
of little use, because mens minds were too much inflamed; that as it
could not be assembled in the present circumstances, it belonged to the
States to find out ways of accommodating these disputes, which did not
regard fundamental articles; and that Socinus had no defenders in
Holland. He afterwards treats of the power which he ascribes to the
Sovereign in matters ecclesiastic, and his authority in convoking
Councils. He says the Sovereign has a right to judge in Synods, either
in person or by his commissioners, and to judge Synods themselves; in
proof of which he advances what passed in the first Councils; and
regards as acts of jurisdiction and examination all that has been done
by Princes for maintaining good order and polity. He is of opinion that
public acts, even those which regard the doctrine of the Church, ought
to proceed only from the Prince: he relates what Princes have done, at
the solicitation of Bishops, for the assembling of Councils, as proofs
of the Sovereign's authority over Councils; and omits nothing in
antiquity that favours the authority of the Civil Magistrate in matters
ecclesiastical, and especially in what regards elections: he shews that
too much precaution, cannot be taken against the presumption of the
reformed Ministers, who want to intermeddle with State Affairs, bringing
with them their caprices and passions. "Upon the whole (he says in the
conclusion) the more I read Church history, the more evident it appears
to me, that the evils we complain of are the same which have been
complained of in all past ages."

This account of the work is sufficient to shew that the author, with
much erudition, was strangely misled: if the proofs he makes use of are
susceptible of different interpretations, he has not sufficiently
unravelled their ambiguity and intent. It was received with great
satisfaction by the Magistrates of Holland[118]: and the States returned
him public thanks on the 31st of October, 1613, in very honorable terms.
Casaubon[119] and Vossius[120] speak of this book with the highest
commendation: but the Gomarists were greatly dissatisfied with it[121].
Bogerman wrote some notes on it, serving to confute it; which were
suppressed. Sibrand's friends complained that the author had dipt his
pen in gall, and not in ink: and Sibrand himself wrote an answer, to
which Grotius replied in some short remarks, exposing the false
citations, the errors, and abusive language of his adversary.

Sibrand's work was condemned by the States: but five years after, June
28, 1618, on the imprisonment of Grotius, the States revoked the
condemnation. Grotius's desire to bring about an union of sentiments led
him, in 1613, while in England, to compose a small treatise, entitled,
_A Reconciliation of the different Opinions on Predestination and
Grace_. This piece contains a display of the Arminian system, which he
endeavours to place in the most favourable light[122].

The Edict which Grotius prepared by desire of the States[123], ordering
the two parties to tolerate each other, having been warmly attacked by
the Contra-Remonstrants, Grotius reprinted it, with a collection of
passages justifying it against their censures. He afterwards wrote a
defence of that decree, in which he complains of the schismatical spirit
of the Gomarists; proves that the States did all that depended on them
to reconcile mens minds: maintains, against an anonymous writer, to whom
he gives the name of _Lucifuga_, that it is false the Remonstrants gave
the draught of that Edict; asserts, on the contrary, that several things
are omitted in it, which they wished to be inserted, and which had even
an appearance of reason and justice; and sets forth the moderation and
equity of the Edict upon the whole. Grotius did not finish this work;
but on occasion of the dispute concerning the power of Sovereigns in
things sacred; he composed a very considerable treatise. He had already
handled this subject in a tract on the Piety of the States of Holland:
he examines it more thoroughly in this, proceeding on the same
principles. It is certain that this book may be read with some
profit[124], that it contains many curious things, but some others also
that are very bold, and very false. Such as are acquainted with the just
rights of the two powers will never grant to Grotius, that the Sovereign
has a right to judge in councils, to alter their decisions, and to
depose the Ministers of the Church. Most of the proofs on which he
builds consist of ambiguous passages, which he strains to his opinion by
forced explanations. This work discovers rather the great lawyer, than
the exact divine; and, what is singular, the author is afraid he has not
granted enough to the Civil Magistrate, and been too favourable to the
claims of the Clergy. He knew, however, that it would not please the
King of Great Britain; and the Bishops of that kingdom were of opinion
he had given too much authority to the Secular Power in things sacred:
It is probable the Letter sent by the States of Holland and
West-Friesland, in 1618, to King James I. was written by Grotius: it is
his style and sentiments. The States, who foresaw that the troubles
would still go on increasing, begin with a short recital of the rise of
these disputes; they afterwards desire his Majesty to examine whether in
the present circumstances a Synod would be of use, and whether there
was not reason to apprehend it might occasion a schism: they ask the
King to grant them his protection, and promise to employ their authority
in supporting truth, and driving away error.

Endeavours being used to render the Remonstrants odious by accusing them
of Socinianism; Grotius, to shew that his sentiments were very different
from those of Socinus, attacks him in a treatise, entitled, _A Defence
of the Catholic Faith concerning the Satisfaction of Christ, against
Faustus Socinus_. This work was read with great applause by all who did
not profess an open enmity to the author; and many of the reformed
Divines allowed that the subject had never been handled with more
learning and strength of argument. It was approved of by several learned
men in Germany and England, particularly the famous Overal, Bishop of
Litchfield and Coventry.

We find in this treatise, as in all those of Grotius, many learned
discussions, which prove his profound knowledge of sacred and profane
antiquity. In treating of the expiatory sacrifices of the Pagans, he
examines with great depth of learning the custom of sacrificing men,
which obtained in all nations.

Grotius's enemies were very active in depreciating the merit of this
work. Herman Ravespenger, Professor at Groningen, attacked it with so
much rudeness, that Balthasar Lydius, who, however, was not of the
Arminian party, told him his criticism was wretched, and he was ready to
answer it. The Gomarists, far from recovering from their prejudices,
took occasion from the book of the Satisfaction of Christ to accuse the
author of Semi-pelagianism. He did not think it worth while to defend
himself against an anonymous author[125], because in his book of the
Piety of the States of Holland he had spoken of Semi-pelagianism as a
very grievous error. Afterwards he enquired in an express treatise,
whether the Arminians were Pelagians, and fully cleared them of teaching
that heresy.

It was during these contests, that he collected _The sentiments of the
Greeks and Romans on fate and man's power_. He translated all that he
found in the Ancients on this subject; and first published it at Paris
in 1624.

FOOTNOTES:

[109] Le Clerc Hist. lib. 9. p. 71.

[110] Du Maurier.

[111] Grotii manes, p. 208.

[112] Ep. 196.

[113] Præst. Vir. Epist. p. 655.

[114] Grotii manes, p. 230.

[115] Ibid. p. 204. He compared Grotius to Moses, Observat. Hallens. 15.
l. 7. p. 336.

[116] Ep. 720 p. 670.

[117] He wrote also some lines on the chest, in which Grotius was
confined.

[118] Burman's Collection of Letters, let. 211.

[119] Ep. 925.

[120] Ep. 1.

[121] Ep. Utengobardi. Præst. Vir. Ep. p. 383.

[122] It is printed among his theological works.

[123] See above, § IV.

[124] L'Abbé Longlet, Catalogue des Auteurs du Droit Canenique, p. 175.

[125] Ep. 19. p. 760.




BOOK III.


Grotius was at no loss what country to chuse for his asylum. As he was
invited by the men of learning in France, and sought after by the
virtuous Ministers whom Lewis XIII. honoured with his confidence, he
gave the preference to Paris, where he had already many friends. Du
Maurier, the French ambassador in Holland, sent him from the Hague to
Antwerp several letters of recommendation to persons in France: the
President Jeannin[126] wrote him, that he might depend on the king's
protection, who was informed by many good men that he had been unjustly
condemned in his own country; promising him, at the same time, the
friendship of the men of greatest distinction in France, and assuring
him he would do him all the service that lay in his power. Grotius,
therefore, set out for Paris with confidence. He would not ask an
escort[127] though he was not without apprehension of some violence from
the Dutch; but chose rather to travel in disguise and by bye-roads.

He arrived at Paris on the 13th of April, 1621, at night. The King was
at Fontainbleau. Boissise, who had been Ambassador Extraordinary in
Holland at the time of Barnevelt's trial, had not followed his Majesty;
but waited for Grotius at Paris, to direct him how to act. He assured
him that the King bore him much good-will, that he did not doubt his
Majesty would in a little time give him effective proofs of it, and
advised him to continue at Paris till his friends did something for him.
Grotius visited M. de Vic, and the President Jeannin, who received him
with the greatest marks of friendship, and repeated what Boissise had
already said. The States-General, in the mean time, ordered their
Ambassadors to do him every ill-office; a commission which they executed
with the greatest zeal. They did all they could to destroy his
reputation, but it was too well established to be shaken. The revenge he
took was by speaking of his Country like a zealous citizen; and by
seeking every occasion to serve her: this gained him the applause of the
King, who could not help admiring the greatness of his proceeding.

When the Dutch Ambassadors saw that the French Ministry were favourably
disposed towards Grotius, and that in all appearance the King would
speedily give him public marks of his esteem, they spread a report that
he had applied to the French Ministry, to use their influence with the
States-General for obtaining his pardon: they added, that the Ministry,
after praising the good disposition he was in, assured him the King
suffered him in France only because he knew these were his sentiments,
and that the way to obtain a pension from the Court was by seeking to
recover the favour of the States-General.

Grotius, informed of these reports, publicly declared he never
acknowledged that he had failed in any part of his conduct whilst in
place, and that his conscience bore him witness he had done nothing
contrary to Law. In a Letter[128] to Du Maurier he speaks of this
slander as what gave him great uneasiness. "An atrocious lye has been
spread, which vexes me extremely: it is reported that I being at liberty
have asked pardon, which I absolutely refused to do, even when it would
have saved me from ignominy, imprisonment, and the loss of my estate."

There was yet another sort of people of whom Grotius had no reason to be
very fond[129]: these were the Ministers of Charenton. They had received
the decisions of the Synod of Dort, and held the Remonstrants in
abhorrence: they would not therefore admit Grotius into their Communion.
But excepting these few all the French strove who should shew him
greatest civilities. Messieurs du Puis and Peyresc[130] made haste to
visit him as soon as they heard of his arrival. May 14, 1621, he writes
to Du Maurier that he had as much pleasure at Paris, as he had chagrin
in prison; that the Great gave him on all occasions marks of their
esteem, and the men of learning anticipated his wishes. The only thing
that troubled his joy for his happy escape was the thought of having
left in prison a wife to whom he had so great reason to be
attached[131]: this grieved him so much, as he afterwards declared,
that, had they kept her still in prison, he would have surrendered
himself to his persecutors, rather than have been separated from her for
ever.

The famous Peyresc took occasion to say, that by Grotius's arrival at
Paris the Dutch had made amends to France for having formerly carried
away from it the great Scaliger: this thought gave rise to two Latin
Epigrams[132].

FOOTNOTES:

[126] Præst. Vir. Epist. p 656.

[127] Ep. 136.

[128] Ep. 147.

[129] Du Maurier, p. 409.

[130] Ep 137.

[131] Ep. 164.

[132]

     Gallia, Scaligerum dederas male sana Batavis:
       Grotiadem reddit terra Batava tibi.
     Ingratam expertus patriam venerandus uterque est:
       Felix mutato erit uterque solo.

Ep. Grot. 401. p. 868.

     Gallia magnanimis dedit exorata Batavis
       Dîs geniti æternum Scaligeri ingenium:
     Fallor an humanis male dura Batavia Gallis
       Scaligerum magno reddidit in Grotio.

Buchner. Vind. Grot. p. 237.


II. The Constable De Luynes had the management of public affairs when
Grotius came to France; Silleri was Chancellor, and Du Vair keeper of
the Seals. This last had a particular esteem for Grotius, and employed
all his credit to engage the King to make him a present till he should
assign him a pension: He writes him a Letter, assuring him that he might
depend on his friendship, which deserves to be copied entire.

"Sir, Ingenuous and generous minds, such as yours, think themselves
obliged by small favours. I have always, that is, ever since I heard of
you, admired your excellent disposition and uncommon learning; and have
since lamented your misfortune in suffering for your too great love to
the liberties of your Country, and the favour you shewed to those who
were beginning to bring back the truth to it: I have done all that my
situation and my master's service would permit to alleviate your
misfortunes, and procure your deliverance. It has pleased God you should
owe it entirely to him, and not to the interposition of earthly powers,
that being freed from worldly cares, you might employ the many rare
talents, with which he has intrusted you, in advancing the work most
agreeable to him, which is the common peace of Christendom, by reuniting
the members which are separated from their spiritual mother, by whom
they or their fathers were conceived. And forasmuch as I see so many
honourable men hope for it from you, I cannot but rejoice with them, and
encourage by my applauses your happy career. I promise myself, the King,
whose liberality for the present only supplies your necessities, will
then reward your virtues and merit; and give them honourable employment
in the affairs of state, in the management whereof you have acquired
great knowledge and dexterity. I shall never be the last to promote what
may be agreeable to you, and shall always highly value, as I now do, the
friendship of such an extraordinary personage; offering all you can
desire of him who is, Sir, yours most affectionately to serve you. G. Du
Vair, Bishop of Lisieux. Camp at St. John d'Angeli, June 13, 1621."

Grotius answers this obliging Letter on the 24th of June following[133].
He owns he was always a lover of Learning; but modestly acknowledges
that his friends, by engaging him too early in the study of the law and
public business, retarded the progress which he might otherwise have
made. He hopes, with God's grace, that no worldly motives shall induce
him to act or speak against his conscience; and that if he has the
misfortune to be deceived, God will graciously enlighten him, or pardon
him for his good intention: and prays for the return of peace among
Christians, without prejudice to truth. "Some thousands, says he, of
whom I am one, most sincerely wish for such a desirable event; in the
mean time, if I can be of any use, you may command me. Though indeed the
more I consider myself, the more I see I have no merit but that of good
desires; but I will shew you by my obedience, that I have at least
inclination."

Du Vair died at Tonneins, August 3, 1621, six weeks after receiving
Grotius's Letter. This was a great loss to him: but it would have been
advantageously repaired, had the Seals, agreeable to the wishes of the
Public, been given to the President Jeannin, the most esteemed
Magistrate in the kingdom for his excellent talents and virtue. He had
the highest friendship for Grotius, who ardently wished that great man
might receive the reward of the signal services he had done the State:
"But, he writes to Du Maurier[134], those who know the court, dare not
flatter themselves with so much good luck." While the seals were vacant
the Constable De Luynes did the office of keeper: they were at length
given, not to the President Jeannin, but to De Vic, who had on all
occasions given Grotius proofs of his friendship. He made profession of
an esteem for men of learning; Casaubon held him in great veneration,
and Grotius flattered himself that he would be his friend. "His
behaviour to Casaubon, says Grotius to Du Maurier[135], proves his love
to learning; and before he left Paris he gave me some evident marks of
his good-will."

It had been determined in the King's Council to do something for
Grotius; but it was long before this resolution had its effect. Du
Maurier had written to all his friends warmly to solicit the issuing of
the warrant for the sum granted him: it was sent at length, but there
was no money in the treasury. The King was absent, and when he returned
to Paris, the thing, it was said, would be done. The Prince of Condé
openly interested himself for him. What made Grotius uneasy was, that on
the promises made him he had hired a house. His wife came to Paris in
October, 1621[136], and their expences so much exceeded the small
revenue which he had still left, that he wrote to Du Maurier, December
3, 1621, that if something were not done for him soon, he must seek a
settlement in Germany, or hide himself in some corner of France. He asks
a recommendation to the Chancellor De Silleri: "and as he is somewhat
slow, it would be proper (says he) to refresh the Marquis de Puysieux's
memory." The King returned to Paris January 30, 1622. Grotius was
presented to him by the Chancellor and the Keeper of the seals in the
beginning of March[137]: the Court was very numerous. His Majesty
received him most graciously, and granted him a pension of three
thousand livres. He was much obliged to the Prince of Condé and the
Keeper of the Seals on this occasion. The King did not only confer marks
of his favour on Grotius; but on his account protected all who were
persecuted by the States; and by his Letters Patent, dated at Nantes,
April 22, 1627, takes such as were condemned in Holland under his
protection as if they were his own subjects; willing, that in case of
death, their children and heirs should succeed, and that their effects
should not be liable to be escheated.

De Vic dying on the second of September, 1622, his death filled Grotius
and the Dutch Refugees in France with the greater concern, as the seals
were given to Caumartin, a professed enemy of the Protestants. As soon
as Grotius thought himself settled, he looked out for a better house,
intending to go the length of five hundred livres a year; but Tilenus
took half of it: its situation was in the Rue de Condé, opposite to the
Prince's hotel: He probably made choice of that quarter, to be more at
hand to pay his court to the Prince, with whom he had been in friendship
above twenty years, and who had on all occasions given him marks of his
esteem and protection. Tilenus's wife was very desirous of a coach;
Grotius thought one equipage would serve both; but he was against
setting it up immediately, in order to avoid an expence which perhaps he
could not support. What farther restrained him was, that though the King
had granted him a pension with the best grace that could be, and Marshal
Schomberg, superintendant of the Finances[138], had ordered it to be
paid quarterly, and one payment to be advanced on demand, he could not
however come at the money. They had forgot to put it on the Civil
List[139], and the Commissioners of the Treasury found daily some new
excuse for delaying the payment. He imagined[140] those who raised the
difficulty hoped by that means to make him turn Roman Catholic. A report
that he was not far from changing his religion had reached Holland[141].
It gave Vossius some uneasiness, and he wrote to him, acquainting him of
this report, and begging that he would do nothing to give it
countenance. Grotius removed his fears, assuring him he might make
himself easy; for he might have avoided, he says, the grievous sentence
passed upon him, and since his sentence would not have remained so long
in captivity, and might also hope for greater honours than his country
could bestow, if he would change sides. It is more probable that, the
bad state of the finances of the kingdom, or the greediness of the
Commissioners, were the only obstructions to his payment. He had at
length reason to be satisfied: by the solicitations of powerful friends,
who interested themselves for him, he received his pension; and it was
paid as grants were paid at that time, that is to say, very slowly, till
Cardinal Richelieu, who bore him ill-will, gave private orders to
prevent his enjoying the benefit of the King's favour: which obliged
Grotius to leave France, as we shall see in the sequel.

He sustained a heavy loss in April by the death of the President
Jeannin. This worthy Magistrate had so much acquired the esteem of the
Dutch by the great services he did them when the truce was concluded
with Spain in 1619, that all good men in Holland would have his picture.
Grotius received from him testimonies of the greatest friendship, and
regretted him most sincerely.

In a Letter to his brother William Grotius, dated April 23, 1623,
"Whilst I am now writing this, says he, I receive the melancholy news of
the President Jeannin's death: it is a great loss to good men, to the
King's business, and to me in particular."

FOOTNOTES:

[133] Ep. 150.

[134] Ep. 156.

[135] Ep. 171.

[136] Ep. 165.

[137] Ep. 29. p. 763.

[138] Ep. 175 p. 65.

[139] Ep. 32. p. 764.

[140] Ep. 37. p. 765.

[141] Ep. 158. p. 60.


III. The pains which he was obliged to take, and the trouble he
underwent at the beginning of his new settlement at Paris, did not
diminish his passion for literature. April 23, 1621, he informs Vossius
that the irksomeness of his solitary manner of life was relieved by his
daily conversations with men of the greatest abilities. He writes to
Andrew Schot from Paris, July 8, 1621, that, delivered from public
business which never leaves the mind at ease, and from that croud whose
conversation is contagious, he spent the greatest part of his time in
prayer, reading the Scriptures, and the ancient interpreters.

He enters into a detail of his studies in a letter to Vossius, September
29, 1621, "I persist, says he, in my respect for sacred antiquity: there
are many people here of the same taste. My six books in Dutch will
appear soon (this was his treatise on the Truth of the Christian
Religion, in Dutch verse) perhaps I shall also publish the Disquisition
On Pelagianism, with the precautions hinted to me by you and some other
learned men. In the mean time, I am preparing an edition of Stobæus; and
to render it more perfect I collate the Greek Manuscripts with the
printed copies." He sometimes attended the courts of Justice to hear the
Advocates plead, that he might judge of their talents and eloquence. To
be applauded for eloquence at that time, says the Abbé D'Olivet, an
Advocate was to say almost nothing of his cause; make continual
allusions to the least-known passages of antiquity, and have the art of
throwing a new kind of obscurity upon them, by, making his speech
consist of a string of metaphors. This fault shocked Grotius much. He
gives an account to his brother of the impression made upon him by the
studied harangues which were delivered at Martinmas term 1622, by M.
Servin and the First President: they were wholly taken from Greek and
Latin authors. "Such, says Grotius, is the eloquence in fashion: it is
much disliked by men of sound judgment." The celebrated Patru first
attempted, and accomplished the reformation of this bad taste.

Grotius's ardour for study did not prevent his employing a part of his
time in reading the Scriptures and books of Theology. The Ministers of
Charenton persisting in their refusal to receive him into their
communion unless he would renounce his opinions, he resolved to have
prayers read at home to his family.


IV. Notwithstanding the inveterate enmity of the Dutch, which pursued
him even to the French court, Grotius still preserved a sincere love to
his Country. He wrote to his father and brother-in-law that he was
continually soliciting all his friends in its favour; that no injuries
should ever make him cease to love it; and that he stifled every thought
of revenge as utterly repugnant to the precepts of the Gospel.

He did not however think this disposition ought to hinder him from
labouring to manifest to the world the innocency of his conduct, and
that of those who were condemned with him.

He had even collected when in prison some materials for his apology: the
President Jeannin advised him to finish it while the facts were fresh in
his memory, and he might print it at a favourable opportunity.

Grotius followed this advice, and his Apology in Dutch was finished in
the beginning of the year 1622. If it had appeared only in that language
it could not have been read out of Holland; but as he intended that
wherever he was known, that is to say, throughout all Europe, every one
might be enabled to judge of the regularity of his conduct, he
translated it into Latin: He was also desirous of having it done into
French, that it might be printed at the same time in the three
languages: but he could not find a French translator. He expected that a
work, which set in the clearest light the injustices and prevarications
of men in place, would increase their hatred to him: but this
consideration did not restrain him from publishing it, because he was
persuaded the laws of God and of nature allowed every man unjustly
accused to justify himself.

His Apology was soon translated into Latin, for it was published at
Paris in the year 1622. In the dedication to the people of Holland and
West Friesland the Author explains his reasons for so long delaying his
vindication. During his nine months confinement at the Hague he could do
nothing in it; when removed to Louvestein he wanted several necessary
pieces; since his happy escape he was much busied; besides it required
time to range the several parts of his defence in proper order. The work
is divided into twenty Chapters: in the first he shews that each of the
United Provinces is sovereign and independent of the States-General,
whose authority is confined to the defence of the Provinces: in the
second, that each Province is possessed of the Sovereignty in matters
ecclesiastical, and that this sovereignty resides in the particular
States of the Province: in the third and fourth, that the different
opinions about Predestination ought to be tolerated: in the fifth, that
the convocation of a Synod in the situation of affairs at that time must
have been attended with great danger; that the assembling of the Synod
of Dort was illegal, since it was done without consent of the Province
of Holland: in the sixth, he sets forth the measures taken by the States
of Holland to restore tranquillity; in the seventh, the reasonableness
of the regulation of 1591 relating to the share which the Magistrates
ought to have in the nomination of the Ministers of the Gospel; in the
eighth, that the approbation of the majority ought to be looked upon as
a decision: the excesses of the Contra-Remonstrants are particularised
in the ninth: the tenth and eleventh justify the province of Holland in
relation to the raising a new militia, which were called Attendants.
The informality of his arrest is displayed in the thirteenth Chapter;
Grotius there shews that he and the others arrested at the same time had
only executed the orders of their Superiors and Sovereigns; that those
who arrested him had no power to do it; that the States-General had no
authority over the subjects of the Provinces; that they were a party in
the dispute; that the persons arrested were members of the States of
Holland, and were arrested in the Province of Holland, where the
States-General had no jurisdiction. The fourteenth Chapter exposes the
want of formality in the proceedings from the time of their arrest to
the nomination of their judges. The fifteenth Chapter points out the
want of formality in the nomination of the judges: and proves the
extravagancy of making it a crime in them to maintain the rights of the
States their Sovereigns, agreeable to the express orders they received.
The sixteenth Chapter explains the informality committed after the
Judges were nominated. The seventeenth displays the irregularity of the
sentence passed upon them. The eighteenth gives a detail of the wrongs
done to them after the Sentence. The nineteenth Chapter contains several
remarks all tending to shew the irregularity of the sentence. The Author
concludes this work, with a Prayer, imploring the Divine Goodness to
pardon his enemies, and protect his Country. He farther prays that the
Prince of Orange may merit the love of the People over whom he is
governor; and that God may give himself grace to support with patience
the persecution he suffers, that it may be meritorious to him in the
other world.

The Apology was sent to Holland as soon as published: it incensed the
States-General the more, as they could not give a reasonable answer to
it. The approbation it met with throughout Europe would not suffer them
to remain silent; this would have confirmed all the disagreeable truths
which the necessity of a just defence obliged Grotius to advance: thus
destitute of any good arguments, they had recourse to authority, and
made themselves judges in their own cause. They proscribed the Apology,
and condemned it as slanderous, and tending to asperse by falshoods the
sovereign authority of the government of the Provinces, the person of
the Prince of Orange, the States of the particular Provinces, and the
towns themselves; and therefore forbad all persons to have it in their
custody on pain of death. The _Mercure François_ mentions this in the
following terms. "The Apology is prohibited; and all persons of what
quality soever are forbid to have it in their possession on pain of
death; thus making Grotius as it were a prey to any person who shall
apprehend him."

These menaces gave him uneasiness: he consulted the French Ministry, his
friends and protectors, how to behave in this situation, and what was to
be done to prevent the consequence which might result from the
proscription: he had several conferences on this subject with the
Chancellor de Silleri and the President Jeannin. The Chancellor, who was
naturally irresolute, contented himself with blaming the rigour of the
edict, and making general offers of service. The President Jeannin was
of opinion he should write a letter to a friend, shewing the injustice
of the proscription: others advised him to despise these vain threats,
and publish a new edition of the _Apology_ in which he might put the
Authors of the Edict to confusion: some were of opinion he ought to
complain to the States-General themselves; but others represented there
would be danger in having recourse to this last expedient, as he might
seem by it to acknowledge their authority. Against writing to the
particular States of the Provinces there was one great objection,
namely, the certainty of drawing upon himself a new proscription,
because the power was in the hands of his greatest enemies. Those who
wished to see him pass the rest of his days in France thought he should
get himself naturalized a Frenchman, because the King by that would
necessarily become his protector: they farther represented that this
formality would qualify him to hold a place in France.

What kept him in suspense was to know whether he should put himself
under the protection of the parliament, or ask a safe-conduct from the
king. In the beginning of the year 1623[142] he seemed resolved to
present a petition to the Parliament, and afterwards write to the
States-General. He was in doubt whether to write to the Prince of
Orange; at length he took the most proper step, which was to apply to
the King. He presented a petition to his Majesty to be protected against
the above-mentioned Edict, "which imported that he should be apprehended
wherever found;" these are the terms of the _Mercure François_; "and his
Majesty took him into his special protection, the letters for that
purpose being issued at Paris, Feb. 26, 1623."

Although the greatest part of the Roman Catholics would have found
nothing amiss in his _Apology_, yet many of them in the Low Countries
were scandalized that he had not spoken of religion as they would have
spoken: and it was condemned at Antwerp as dangerous to be read[143].

This work was never answered. Some years after its publication[144] a
report being spread that a private person had written against the
Apology without being employed by the States-General, Grotius desired
his brother to enquire into it. It is probable this news was without
foundation: at least we know nothing of that work. The malevolence of
those who were then in place made no change in Grotius's affection to
his country: in the height of the new persecution he wrote to his
brother that he would still labour to promote the interest of Holland;
and that if the United Provinces were desirous of entering into a
closer union with France, he would assist them with all his credit: for
the public interest was not to be sacrificed to the resentment of
injuries received from a few[145].

FOOTNOTES:

[142] Ep. 46, p. 768.

[143] Ep. 102. p. 784.

[144] Dec. 20, 1630.

[145] Ep. 50. p. 759, 769.


V. Though the Prince of Orange had taken care to leave none in place but
such as were entirely devoted to him, and consequently declared enemies
of the Remonstrants, Grotius still preserved many faithful friends who
ardently desired his return. He had scarce been a month at Paris when
they wrote to him that there were some hopes of his being recalled: but
he rightly judged that they were without foundation. He even writes to
his brother-in-law, Reigersberg, that he looked on that rumour as an
artifice of his enemies, who sought by it to engage him to silence,
which they intended to take advantage of to propagate their calumnies.
He was not duped by it, since, as we have just mentioned, it did not
hinder him from writing his Defence, and publishing it to the world.
Among those who preserved a friendship for him, there was one whom it
would seem he had no reason to count upon: this was Prince Frederic
Henry of Nassau, brother to the Prince of Orange, and who after the
death of Maurice was himself Stadtholder. They maintained a
correspondence by letters even at the time when the people of Holland
were most exasperated against Grotius; and by a Letter from that Prince,
which is still remaining, we may judge that Grotius did him good service
at Paris; and that Frederic Henry was greatly disposed to serve him.
This Letter deserves to be copied entire: it is dated August 4, 1622.

"Sir, I thank you for the good offices you have done me with some of the
King's Council, and beg of you to continue them both with these, and
with others, as you shall think proper; assuring you that I shall
acknowledge your friendship on all occasions where I can serve you;
being bound to it by the friendship which you have ever shewn to me. I
have asked your brother-in-law Mr. Reigersberg to write to you
particularly about an affair in which I should be glad to have your
opinion: you will oblige me much by sending it, as you have already done
by the memorial you remitted to me; for which I sincerely thank you. I
could wish to be of use in your affairs in this Country, and would
labour in them most chearfully: but you know the constitution of things
is such, that neither I, nor your other friends, can serve you agreeably
to our wishes. I would fain hope that time will bring about some change,
and that I shall see you again here esteemed and honoured as your great
qualities deserve; which will give me no less pleasure than I received
from your regaining your liberty. In the mean time, I wish you, while at
a distance from your country, all the satisfaction, prosperity, and
happiness which you can desire. This I pray God to grant, and to me an
opportunity of shewing by my actions that I am yours most affectionately
to serve you, Henry de Nassau."


VI. The year after the publication of the Apology, that is to say, in
1623, Nicholas Buon printed at Paris Grotius's improvements and
additions to Stobæus. This author, as is well known, extracted what he
thought most important in the ancient Greek writers, and ranged it under
different heads comprehending the principal points of Philosophy. His
work is the more valuable as it has preserved several fragments of the
Ancients found no where else. Grotius when very young purposed to
extract from this author all the maxims of the poets, to translate them
into Latin verse, and print the original with the translation. He began
this when a boy; he was employed in it at the time of his arrest, and
continued it as an amusement, whilst he had the use of books, in his
prison at the Hague. He tells us that when he was deprived of pen and
ink he was got to the forty-ninth title, which is an invective against
tyranny, that had a great relation to what passed at that time in
Holland. On his removal to Louvestein he resumed this work, and he
finished it at Paris. He made several happy corrections in the text of
Stobæus, some from his own conjectures or those of his friends, others
on the authority of manuscripts in the king's library, which were very
politely lent him by the learned Nicholas Rigaut, librarian to his
Majesty.

Prefixed to this book are Prolegomena, in which the author shews that
the works of the ancient Pagans are filled with maxims agreeable to the
truths taught in Holy Writ. He intended to dedicate this book to the
Chancellor Silleri: he had even written the dedication; but his friends,
to whom he shewed it, thought he expressed himself with too much warmth
against the censurers of his _Apology_. They advised him therefore to
suppress it; and he yielded to their opinion. It may be observed in
reading the royal privilege that the present title of the book is
different from what it was to have had. To these extracts from the Greek
Poets translated into Latin verse, Grotius annexed two pieces, one of
Plutarch, the other of St. Basil, on the use of the Poets; giving the
Greek text with a Latin translation. Fabricius informs us, that in the
Library of the College of Leyden there is a copy of the Geneva edition
of Stobæus, in the year 1609, with several notes in Grotius's own hand.
Three years after the publication of his Stobæus, Grotius printed a work
which may be looked upon as a continuation of it; being an extract of
the Comedies and Tragedies of the Greeks: the text is translated into
Latin verse. In this work he inserted only such maxims as he thought
best worth preserving. He began it, as we have observed, when a prisoner
at Louvestein. The learned Fabricius very judiciously remarks, that it
is to be regretted he did not mention the places of the Ancients from
whence he took these extracts.


VII. After having lived a year in the noise of Paris he was desirous of
enjoying for some time the quiet of the country. The President de Meme
offered him one of his seats, Balagni near Senlis. Grotius accepted it,
and passed there the spring and summer of the year 1623. In this castle
he began his great work[146] which singly would be sufficient to render
its author's name immortal; I mean the treatise _Of the rights of war
and peace_, of which we shall speak more fully elsewhere. He had with
him his family and four friends; and was visited by the most
distinguished men of learning, among others Salmasius and Rigaut. He had
all the books he could desire: Francis de Thou the President's son, who
succeeded to his father's library, one of the best in Europe, gave him
the free use of it. Grotius, who knew the President de Meme to be a most
zealous Roman Catholic, was careful to regulate his conduct in such a
manner that the President might never repent his favouring him with the
use of his house: he gave directions that while he was at Balagni no
butchers meat should be brought to table on Fridays or Saturdays; he
received none of the Dutch refugee Ministers there; no psalms nor hymns
were sung; in fine, he would have no public nor even private exercise of
the Protestant Religion performed; and would see only those whom he
could not decently refuse. From Balagni he sometimes made excursions to
St. Germain, where the court was, in order to cultivate the friendship
of the ministry. Having learnt that the President de Meme wanted to
reside himself at Balagni, he quitted it, and retired to Senlis in the
beginning of August: in October he came back to Paris.

His wife's affairs obliging her to make a journey to Zealand, she set
out for that province in the summer 1624. In her absence Grotius was
seized with a violent dysentery. October 18th, 1624, he writes to his
brother that he had been three weeks confined to his bed, and four times
blooded. The news of his illness threw his wife into a fever. As soon as
it was abated she set out for Paris without waiting the return of her
strength. The pleasure of seeing her again and the care she took of him
wrought a wonderful change in Grotius: in fine, after two months
dangerous illness he began to mend, and in a little time was perfectly
recovered, so that he was never in better health than in the beginning
of the year 1625.

His illness did not hinder his studies: in this last he was employed
about the _Phoenissæ_ of Euripides. A part of his translation of this
Tragedy had been lost when he was a prisoner at the Hague: he did it
over again while confined by his dysentery, and put the last hand to the
whole. It was not published till 1630. He dedicated it to the President
de Meme. The preface confirms that he did this work in prison; that
after his serious studies it served him for amusement and even
consolation, for he was of Timocles's opinion, that Tragedies might
serve to alleviate the idea of our misfortunes by carrying our
reflexions to the vicissitude of human affairs; and begs some indulgence
to a work done partly in prison and partly during illness. The
translation is in Latin verse such as the ancient tragic writers used.
In the preface Grotius enters into an examination of Euripides's
tragedy. He shews that the time of twenty-four hours has been exactly
kept to; that the unity of place is observed; that the manners are good;
that it contains many useful maxims, and is upon the whole very well
written.

FOOTNOTES:

[146] Ep. 56. p. 770. Ep. 57. p. 771.


VIII. The Prince of Orange, Maurice de Nassau, falling ill in November,
1624, died after six months indisposition, at the age of fifty-eight, on
the 23d of April, 1625. This event raised the hopes of Grotius's
friends: they flattered themselves that his return to his Country would
no longer meet with any obstacle. Prince Frederic Henry succeeded his
brother as Stadtholder. He had not entered into the malevolent projects
formed by Maurice against the Arminians. The Count D'Estrades has given
us some anecdotes on this subject, which we shall relate on his
authority. He assures us that, being one day _tête à tête_ with Prince
Henry Frederic in his coach, he heard him say that he had much to do to
keep well with his brother Maurice, who suspected him of secretly
favouring Barnevelt and the Arminians. "He told me (these are the Count
D'Estrades words) that it was true he kept a correspondence with them to
prevent their opposing his election in case his brother should die, but
that as it imported him to be on good terms with his brother, and to
efface the notion he had of his connection with the Arminians, he made
use of Vandermyle, one of his particular friends and Barnevelt's
son-in-law, to let the cabal know that it was necessary for him to
accommodate himself to his brother, that he might be better able to
serve them: which Barnevelt approved of."

Hoogerbetz's situation, who, as we have seen, was condemned with
Grotius, received some alleviation by the change of the Stadtholder.
Four months after the death of Prince Maurice he was allowed to come out
of Louvestein, and to reside at a country-house, upon condition of not
leaving the country on pain of forfeiting twenty thousand florins, for
which his friends and children were bound. "It is asserted (says the
author of the _Mercure François_) that this liberty was granted him
without any acknowledgment of his fault, and without asking pardon." He
did not enjoy it long, for he died three weeks after he was discharged.

Grotius's father, who knew his son was esteemed and even loved by the
new Stadtholder, advised him to write to that Prince. He obeyed his
father: but informed him that he was determined not to do a mean thing
to procure his return. It was from mere complaisance that he wrote to
the Prince, for he owns to his brother he had very little hopes of
success from his letter: he was even desirous that his correspondence
with the Prince might be kept a secret, lest its being publicly known
should vex his Highness. The enemies of the Remonstrants would, no
doubt, have been greatly offended with the Stadtholder, had they
discovered that he was favourably inclined to the Arminians: and the
Prince's authority was not yet sufficiently established to free him from
the necessity of keeping measures with so powerful a party. Grotius's
conjectures were but too true: and all that he and his friends could do
to procure his return was absolutely fruitless.

IX. He was now at the height of his glory by the prodigious success of
his admirable book _Of the rights of war and peace_, which a celebrated
writer[147] justly styles a master-piece. He began it in 1623 at
Balagni, and in 1625 it was published at Paris. It was the famous
Nicholas Peyresc, the Mecænas of his age and the ornament of Provence,
who engaged Grotius to handle this subject. He writes to that worthy
magistrate, Jan. 11th, 1624. "I go on with my work _Of the law of
nations_: if it may be of use to the world it is to you posterity will
owe the obligation, since you made me undertake it, and assisted me in
it." In the preliminary discourse he sets forth his motives for treating
this subject. "Many strong reasons determined me to write at this time.
I have observed in all parts of the Christian world such an unbridled
licentiousness with regard to war as the most barbarous nations might
blush at: they fly to arms without reason, or on frivolous pretexts; and
when they have them once in their hands they trample on all laws human
and divine, as if from that time they were authorised, and firmly
resolved to stick at no crime." Thus it was from a principle of
humanity that he composed this great work; and, as he writes to
Crellius[148], to shew how unbecoming it was for a Christian and a
reasonable man, to make war from caprice: which was too much practised.
In the dedication of this book to the King the author observes, that
Lewis XIII. like a propitious constellation, not satisfied with
relieving the misfortunes of princes and protecting nations, had
graciously supported him under his afflictions. He presented his book to
the King and the principal nobility; who, he writes to his brother[149],
received it very graciously, but made him no return. He imagined it was
because he had handled in it several points of divinity: and the court
would not shew any favour to heterodox works, in which such questions
were discussed: but the favourable reception it met with from all Europe
sufficiently made up this loss.

It will not be expected that we should make an analysis or enter into an
examination of the treatise _On the rights of war and peace_: that would
be a subject for a large work. We shall only observe that those who
would study the law of nations cannot read this book too often: they
will find in it the most agreeable learning joined to the strongest
reasoning. The whole is not equally correct: but what large work is not
liable to the same censure? Besides, we must consider that it has the
glory of being original in its kind[150], and the first treatise that
reduced into a system the most excellent and useful of all sciences.

It is divided into three books; to which is prefixed a preliminary
discourse treating of the certainty of law in general, and containing a
plan of the work.

The first book enquires into the origin of the rights of war and its
different kinds, as also the extent of the power of Sovereigns: he
explains in the second the nature and extent of those rights, whether
public or private, whose violation authorises the taking up arms: in
the third he treats of all that relates to the course of the war and the
treaties of peace which put an end to it.

The celebrated translator of Grotius and Puffendorf assures us that
Grotius took the hint of attempting a system of natural law from Lord
Bacon's works; and certainly, he adds, none was more proper for such an
undertaking. A clear head, an excellent judgment, profound meditation,
universal learning, prodigious reading, continual application to study
amidst many distractions and the duties of several considerable places,
together with a sincere love to truth, are qualities which cannot be
denied to that great man without wronging our own judgment and giving
room to suspect us of black envy or gross ignorance. It is said that he
designed at first to give his book the title, of _The law of nature and
of nations_; but afterwards preferred that which it now bears, _Of the
rights of war and peace_. Never book met with such universal
approbation: Commentaries have been written upon it by many learned men,
and it has been publicly read at Universities. Though M. Barbeyrac
thinks Puffendorf's book much more useful, he is at the same time
persuaded that if Grotius had not led the way, we should not yet have
had any tolerable system of natural law: "and, he adds, if Puffendorf
had been in Grotius's place, and Grotius in Puffendorf's, the treatise
_Of the rights of war and peace_ would in my opinion have been much more
defective; and that _Of the law of nature and nations_ much more
perfect." Puffendorf himself owns that there remained few things to be
said after Grotius.

Though the Latin language was at that time more used than at present,
the principal nations of Europe wanted to have this work in their mother
tongue. Grotius, on examining the Dutch translation, found the
translator often wilfully deviating from the true sense of the original.
The Great Gustavus caused it to be translated into Swedish: a
translation of it into English was preparing in the year 1639: Mr.
Barbeyrac thinks it was not finished in Grotius's life-time, but there
have been two English translations of it since his death. It was first
translated into German in 1707 by Mr. Schutz. The Leipsick journalists
speak of this translation as very correct. There are two in French; one
by Mr. Courtin, which that of Barbeyrac has totally eclipsed, and most
justly: for never did a great author meet with a translator more worthy
of him. Mr. Barbeyrac possessed all the necessary qualifications for
executing properly such a difficult translation as that of the treatise
_Of the rights of war and peace_.

This so excellent and highly esteemed work was however severely
criticised by one of the most learned men of the last century.
Salmasius, who had been Grotius's admirer, and who in the latter part of
his life did all he could to destroy his reputation, never spoke of _The
rights of war and peace_ but with the greatest contempt: which was the
more shocking; as, in his dispute with the English on the right of
Kings, he every where copies Grotius, and when he departs from him is
sure to blunder: with which Boëclerus has justly reproached him.

We cannot deny Salmasius profound learning; but he was a man swayed by
his humour, often judged from passion and jealousy, had too high an
opinion of himself and too much contempt for others, and in fine found
fault with whatever was not his own thought, as the learned Gronovius
remarks.

He ventured to advance, some time after Grotius's death, that a
professor of Helmsted had undertaken to prove that every page of
Grotius's book contained gross blunders; and he speaks it in such a
manner as gives room to think he was of the same opinion. This Professor
was called John de Felde; he published his notes against Grotius in
1653. Had the great Salmasius been still alive, I believe, says M.
Barbeyrac, that with all his secret jealousy against the author
censured, he would have found himself greatly disappointed in his
expectations from John De Felde's project: never was any thing so
wretched. One would be surprised a Mathematician could reason so ill,
did not other much more signal examples clearly demonstrate that the
knowledge of the Mathematics does not always produce justness of thought
in matters foreign to that science. We find here a man who seeks only
for censure, and knows not what he would have: he fights with his own
shadow, and for the most part does not understand the thoughts of the
author he attacks; and when he does understand them draws the most
groundless consequences that ever were heard of. His gloomy and
unhappily subtle mind cannot bear the light which Grotius presents to
him. The embroiled ideas and distinctions of his Peripatetic philosophy
form round him a thick cloud impenetrable by the strongest rays of
truth. This is Barbeyrac's judgment of him. Felde met with some
partisans of Grotius who confuted him: Theodorus Graswinckel, Advocate,
his relation and friend, undertook his defence; and the redoubled
efforts of the Helmsted Professor did not lessen his book in the esteem
of the public. Not that the work is perfect; this, his admirers and
those who were most disposed to do him justice, frankly own.

His general principles touching natural law are very solid; but they are
too intricate, and it requires deep meditation to unfold them. He does
not sufficiently shew the chain of consequences to be deduced from them,
and applied to particular subjects; which gave certain authors of little
penetration, or candour, occasion to say, that after laying down his
principles he makes no use of them, and builds his decisions on a quite
different thing. He might have prevented these rash censures by
enlarging somewhat more, and pointing out on each head the connection of
the proofs he makes use of, with the general principles from whence they
are drawn.

With regard to the law of nations, which he considers as an arbitrary
law in itself, but acquiring the force of a law by the tacit consent of
nations, Barbeyrac observes that in the sense he understands it, and has
endeavoured to establish its obligation, it has been shewn to be
insufficiently grounded: yet the questions which he builds upon it make
a great part of his work.

It has been thought that his style is too concise; that he often
expresses himself but by halves; that he supposes many things which
require great study, passes over subjects of importance, and handles
others which he might have omitted; such as questions relating rather to
Divinity, than the science of Natural Law: in fine, it has been said
that the desire of shewing his learning hurt him: and a very judicious
Magistrate[151] justly observes, that by displaying less learning he
would have appeared a greater Philosopher. Notwithstanding all these
defects, it is universally acknowledged to be one of the finest works
that ever was written.

When this book appeared at Paris, Cardinal Francis Barberin, who resided
there as Legate from his uncle Pope Urbin VIII. hearing it much spoken
of, was curious to see it; and read it with attention. It is said he was
shocked at first that the author, in speaking of the Popes, did not give
them the titles which they are wont to receive from Roman Catholic
authors; but was otherwise well pleased with the book. The reading of it
had been permitted at Rome two years, when on the 4th of February, 1627,
it was put into the _Index Expurgatorius_, with his _Apology_ and
_Poems_[152].

FOOTNOTES:

[147] Bayle.

[148] Ep. 280. p. 104.

[149] Ep. 91. p. 782

[150] Barbeyrac's Preface.

[151] M. Daube, Essais sur les principes du Droit, Preface, p. 6.

[152] Ep. 183. p. 798.


X. In the mean time Grotius began to grow tired at Paris: his pension
was ill paid, and his revenue insufficient to keep him decently with a
wife and a numerous family. July 12, 1623, he writes to his brother,
"Pensions are no longer paid here, which embarrasses me greatly. If any
Prince, such as the King of Denmark or the Elector of Saxony, would
employ me, and offer me a handsome salary, it would be worth my notice.
At present nobody thinks of me, because they imagine I am employed by a
great King. I have lost some powerful friends: those who are now in
power wish me well; but they have too much business on their hands, and
I don't love to importune."

M. D'Aligre being made Keeper of the Seals, Grotius flattered himself
that it would be an advantage to his affairs. "He is a good man, says
he, and I shall be well recommended to him. I shall go to see him when
he is less harrass'd with visits; and try whether his friendship can be
of use to me. However (he writes to his father and brother, Jan. 21,
1624) if any thing favourable should offer in Denmark or the Maritime
Towns, I would consider of it." He made a visit to the new Lord Keeper,
and received a promise of more than he hoped for: but he began to build
no longer on compliments: he wished his friends would try to get him a
settlement in the North; but would not have it known that he set them
on. Some advised him to go to Spires, where there was an Imperial
Chamber, and follow the profession of an Advocate: the writings there
were all in Latin, the Roman law was followed, and the Augsburg
confession the religion professed. January 26, 1624, he begs of his
father to inform himself of the manner of living in that country, for he
must soon come to some resolution.

In the mean time hopes were given him of his pension[153]: though no
pensions were paid, the Keeper of the Seals promised that he would take
particular care of him; and was in fact as good as his word: one of the
first things he did was to speak to the King in favour of Grotius[154],
and to obtain an order for the payment of the greatest part of the
arrears owing to him. However he still pressed his father and brother to
seek out a settlement for him[155]. Feb. 16, 1624, he wrote to them that
he persisted in his resolution of going to some town of the Augsburg
confession, where he might live cheap, and wait for better times. "The
state of the kingdom, says he, makes me uneasy; and I have no prospect
of a certainty for myself. These negotiations must be managed with
precaution and secrecy, lest the knowledge of them should lessen the
consideration in which I am held. It is sufficient that those who wish
me well know that I am not so fixed here but I can come away if any
thing better offers." In the mean time the Keeper of the Seals and the
Ministry heaped civilities on him[156]; they spoke of him to the King,
and at length he received three thousand Francs, part in money, and part
in bills.

There were at that time Dutch Ambassadors in France, who carried their
malice so far as to tell the King he could not be too much on his guard
against Grotius, who carried on a private correspondence with the
Spanish Ambassadors. He received information of this from one of his
friends. The foul calumny stung him with indignation; and though he did
not think it deserved to be confuted, he wrote of it to the Lord Keeper,
and in a letter on this subject to Du Maurier he calls God to witness,
that he had never seen any of the Spanish Ambassadors, and that there
was not a man in the United Provinces who wished better to his Country.

He had an offer of being Professor of Law in Denmark[157], but the
character of the Danes made him averse to that country: besides, he
thought the places he had already filled did not permit him to become a
Professor in a College; as to the Salary, he was satisfied with it.
While he was in suspense what he should do, the King nominated Cardinal
Richelieu Prime Minister. His Eminence had a mind to be particularly
acquainted with Grotius, and asked him to come to his house at Limours:
he was introduced by Marshal de Fiat. We are ignorant of what passed at
this interview: all we know is that the Cardinal, purposing to restore
the navy and trade of the nation, talked of these matters to Grotius;
who acquainted his brother with his visit to the Cardinal in a letter
dated May 21, 1626.

It is highly probable the Cardinal proposed to Grotius to devote himself
entirely to him: that minister protected none but such as professed an
absolute submission to his will in all things. He gave Grotius so great
hopes that he thought he might write to his father, "If I would forget
my country, and devote myself wholly to France, there is nothing which I
might not expect."

But there is room to imagine the proposals made to him by the Cardinal
were inconsistent with his principles; and he was not a man to act
against his conscience on any consideration. This sacrifice was the more
praise-worthy as he really loved France: he mentioned it in confidence
to Du Maurier. "I am extremely sorry, says he, that I can be of no use
to France, where I have found a safe asylum: but I think it my duty to
adhere to my former sentiments[158]."

Thus the Cardinal being displeased with Grotius's reservations, his
pension was unpaid, either for that reason or on account of the bad
state of the finances. Grotius was greatly perplexed: "A man must have
lived at Paris at his own expence, as I have done for eighteen months
(he writes to his brother, July 17, 1626) to know what it costs. I
should be extremely glad that you would inform yourself at your
conveniency, whether there be any hopes from the Hans towns, and
particularly Hamburg or Rostock." Sept. 19, 1626, he opens his mind to
Du Maurier: "This is the second year since they have ceased all regard
for me, and put in practice whatever might serve to depress a man of the
greatest steadiness." It was precisely since Cardinal Richelieu became
the Arbiter of France that Grotius was thus treated. The disgrace of the
Chancellor D'Aligre deprived him of all remains of hope: the Seals were
given to Marillac, who professed an open enmity to all that was
Protestant. Learning was no merit with him if joined to heterodoxy. He
gave a public proof of his zeal[159] when the parliament of Dijon
petitioned the King that Salmasius might be permitted to exercise the
office of Counsellor, which his father offered to resign in his favour:
the Keeper of the Seals warmly opposed it, declaring that he would never
consent to a Huguenot's acquisition of the office of Counsellor in any
parliament of France. Grotius was patient for some time longer; for he
liked Paris, and there were many persons in that city whose conversation
gave him infinite pleasure: He told the celebrated Peyresc[160], he was
so strongly attached to France on his account, that he would not leave
it till his patience was worn out; and he wrote to his great friend Du
Maurier, that he was resolved never to quit France till it deserted him,
that all the world might be forced to own he could not have acted
otherwise.

In fine, having lost all hopes of pleasing the Ministry, he began to
think in good earnest of retiring into some other Country. January 4,
1630, he writes to his brother, "I am wholly taken up with the thoughts
of settling in some part where I may live more commodiously with my
family." The first condition that he required was liberty of
conscience. Some advised his going to Rome, because Pope Urbin VIII. was
a great Poet, and loved men of learning[161]. He thought the proposal
very ridiculous, and joked on it to his brother. December 27, 1630, he
writes to him, "It is not reasonable that I should be always in
suspense. I shall leave this country too late, but I shall certainly
leave it soon." What heightened his embarrassment was his uncertainty
where to go. He writes to his brother, April 4, 1631, "I must speedily
come to a resolution: provisions become every day dearer, and the
payment of my Pension more uncertain: would it be proper to return to my
Country by stealth, and with so little hopes, after doing her so great
service? My Countrymen have not the same sentiments for me that I have
for them."

FOOTNOTES:

[153] Ep 64. p. 773.

[154] Ep. 65. p. 773.

[155] Ibid. 67. p. 774.

[156] Ibid. 68. p. 774. 69. p. 775. 7. p. 775.

[157] Ibid. 79. p. 778.

[158] Ep. 149. p. 84.

[159] Ep. 267 p. 100.

[160] Ibid. 201. p. 72.

[161] Ep. 85. p. 780.


XI. In fine, upon mature consideration, trusting to the good-will of his
friends, and the protestations of friendship from the Prince of Orange,
he ventured to return to Holland. He had always secretly wished to be
restored; but, however ardent this desire might be, he was incapable of
purchasing his restoration by any acts of meanness. They had discovered
his inclination; and in 1623 a rumour spread that he was seeking to be
reconciled to the States-General. He was sensible this report had
reached Du Maurier, and therefore wrote to him on the 24th of
September[162] that there was nothing in it; that the times were not
favourable, and that the publication of his _Apology_ put an obstacle in
the way of his return. Du Maurier was of the same opinion[163], and no
body had better opportunities of knowing the disposition of mens minds
and the situation of affairs.

However in the year following Du Maurier began to entertain better
hopes. Being come back from Holland to France, he wrote to Grotius that
his affairs went on so well, he might flatter himself with the prospect
of returning: but this agreed ill with other advices received by
Grotius; and he wrote to Du Maurier, July 30, 1624, that he consulted
his ancient friendship more than the situation of affairs; that his
enemies were so powerful he did not see there could be any hopes for
him; and that he was endeavouring to provide himself with patience to
support perpetual banishment and the inconveniences annexed to that
unhappy situation.

One would imagine the death of Prince Maurice must make a speedy
revolution in Grotius' favour: the friendship with which he was honoured
by Prince Frederic Henry gave his friends ground to hope for it; but he
himself was of a different opinion. July 31, 1625[164], he wrote to his
father that his return was an affair of great consequence, which perhaps
must not be mentioned at present. He sent his wife into Holland in the
spring 1627[165], that she might enquire herself how matters stood. She
found many friends[166]; but as she was convinced of her husband's
innocence, and knew that in all Holland there was not a man capable of
labouring so effectually for the interest of his Country, she imagined
they ought to make the first advances, ask him to forget what was past,
and pray him to return. This was to suppose the return of the Golden
age; and experience ought to have informed her better. She would not
therefore have recourse to petitions and entreaties to obtain Grotius'
return, lest they should be taken for some acknowledgment of a fault.
This encreased the malevolence of his enemies, and they fought to
revenge themselves on his brother-in-law Reigersberg, to whom they
wanted to make a crime of his corresponding with Grotius by letters; but
their malice was ineffectual, because the calumnies to which they had
recourse were too easily confuted. However his friends bestirred
themselves in his favour: of which Grotius being informed, he begged of
them to promise nothing in his name, that there might be no ground to
imagine he solicited leave to return. "For (he writes to his brother)
that is what my enemies want, that they may reproach me with asking
pardon for my pretended faults." The endeavours of his friends were
fruitless; and his brother wrote to him (February 21, 1630) that there
was no hope of success.

If they did not obtain his return they at least made him gain a cause of
consequence. He reclaimed[167] his effects which were confiscated,
grounding on the privilege of the Burghers of Delft; and his demand was
granted. He says neither favour nor solicitations had any influence in
his gaining this suit; and that he owed it to the incontestable right of
which the town of Delft was long in possession.

Though the information received from his brother of the inefficacy of
his friends solicitations might have made him forget his country[168],
he resolved to regulate his conduct by his wife's advice, who had been
on the spot. On her return from Holland she told him it was necessary he
should go thither. He immediately wrote to his brother that on his
wife's information he resolved to go to see him and his father and
mother; and that they would consult together what was best to be done
for his advantage. He adds, that if after so long patience he still
found his Country ungrateful, he had received advantageous proposals
from more than one quarter, where he might live with ease and honour. He
set out for Holland in the month of October, 1631.

FOOTNOTES:

[162] Ep. 199. p. 71.

[163] Ep. 200. p. 71.

[164] Ep. 98. p. 783. 99. p. 783. and 100. p. 784.

[165] Ep. 148. p. 797.

[166] Ep. 223. p. 77.

[167] Ep. 261. p. 89.

[168] Ep. 278. p. 838.


XII. The sentence passed against him was still in force. His friends,
afraid of his being arrested, as he had no safe-conduct, advised his
concealing himself: this step appeared to him shameful and timid. He
wrote to his brother on the nineteenth of November, 1631, that he would
rather retire than conceal himself; and that by not appearing in public
he had lessened the opinion of his innocence, and at the same time the
courage of his friends.

He came to Rotterdam[169], where he imagined he would be safest,
because, having filled the post of Pensionary with much honour, he was
greatly beloved in the town. He took it ill that the Magistrates did not
make him the first visit after the signal services he had done the city;
and hesitated whether he should go to see them: one of them sent his son
to acquaint him that it was not perhaps prudent, after the sentence of
condemnation passed upon him, to appear in public. Grotius made answer,
that he had such a good opinion of the gratitude of the Burghers of
Rotterdam, he was persuaded he had nothing to fear among them. The young
gentleman replied, that in a populous town there might possibly be some
one who would do him an ill turn to gain the reward. Grotius imagined
this advice proceeded from the Magistrates jealousy, who were afraid
that the people would discover too much attachment to him. They spread a
report that he was not in the Remonstrants sentiments, and that the
counsels formerly given by him had been frequently disapproved. In the
mean time he was much embarrassed in what manner to behave, and
consulted the most able lawyers on the subject, who refused to take any
fee from him. He had no objection to writing to the States-General,
provided the letter contained nothing to the disadvantage of his
innocence. He met with more difficulties than he imagined: and wrote to
his brother (November 28, 1631) "I am threatened with a storm; but I can
live elsewhere, and I leave all to God's disposal."

He left Rotterdam, and came in the end of the year 1631 to Amsterdam,
where he was extremely well received[170]. He did not, however, trust
his stay in the Low-Countries to the success of his negotiation, for he
wrote to his father, December 10, 1631, "You may say you understand that
I have taken my resolution to quit this cruel Country." He was not
satisfied with the Magistrates of Rotterdam: but he spoke extremely well
of the town of Delft[171]: however no City ventured publickly to protect
him[172]. His great friend Gerard Vossius did every thing in his power
to engage all who had any friendship for himself to befriend Grotius,
and keep him in Holland. We have a letter written by him on that subject
to Bevovicius, Magistrate of Amsterdam[173], who was in the interest of
his friend: he represents to him what dishonour the States would bring
on themselves by not permitting a man to live in their Country who was
its greatest ornament, and the wonder of the age. He exhorts him to
continue his good offices to prevent Amsterdam from disgracing herself
by opposing that great man's return, and assures him that France,
Germany, England, and all nations are waiting to see what Holland will
do on this occasion. "Let us not, says he, have ground to regret the
loss of a man whom it depends entirely on ourselves to keep."

Vossius's desire to have Grotius continue in Holland was so great, that
his friend's inflexibility gave him much uneasiness. He wanted him to
make application to the Prince of Orange, and, after obtaining his
consent, to write to those in power, asking permission to stay in the
Country: but this was precisely the step to which Grotius had the
greatest aversion.

To employ himself till his fate should be determined, he resolved to
exercise the profession of Consulting Advocate: with this view he
desired his brother, in a letter dated February 16, 1632, to send him
what law books he had, and which he might need for the proper discharge
of his office.

He could make no use of these books: for the States-General, thinking
themselves affronted by his boldness in continuing in the Country
without their leave, and by the repugnance he shewed to ask them pardon,
on the tenth of December, 1631, issued an Ordonnance enjoining all the
Bailiffs of the Country to seize his person, and give them notice. No
body would execute it: which obliged the States to renew it, on the
tenth of March in the year following, upon pain to those who would not
obey of losing their places; and with a promise of two thousand florins
to any one who would deliver Grotius into the hands of justice. There
were many who interested themselves for him: besides private persons he
was favoured by the Nobles, the Towns of Rotterdam, Delft, and
Amsterdam. But the States-General were his Judges and his Adversaries.

We do not find that the Prince of Orange, on whose friendship he had
some reason to depend, protected him on this essential occasion. The
intrigues of his enemies diverted him from it. They were at great pains
to prejudice the Stadtholder against Grotius, by representing that he
professed an inviolable attachment to the privileges of his Country;
and, being of Barnevelt's principles, would support them with equal
firmness; and that the Prince could never agree with him because he
would always oppose his views. These reasons made an impression on
Frederic, who being of the same character with all the Princes, of his
house, wanted, says Du Maurier, to be Prince of Holland. He approved
therefore of the proceedings of the States-General, who intended to give
Grotius to understand by their last Ordonnances, that they condemned him
to perpetual banishment.

It will perhaps be wondered at that a wise man, such as Grotius, would
hazard a journey to Holland without succeeding in the projects he had
formed for obtaining permission to stay there: but on some occasions it
is prudent to run hazards. The point is whether the appearance of
success was such as a man of sense ought to build on. He was sensible
this would be objected to him, and in some of his letters he endeavours
to justify his return. He writes to Martinus Ruarus, January 19, 1632,
that he came to Holland at the solicitations of his Friends, who
imagined time and his services had mollified his enemies; but that
immediately on his arrival he perceived his well-wishers would find
great difficulty in bringing them to more moderate sentiments. He
complains in another letter, written to Du Maurier Feb. 6, 1632[174],
that he found a want of courage in good men, and his misfortunes
prevented them from speaking with freedom.

Vossius explains his friend's reasons for coming to Holland in a letter
of the thirteenth of February, 1632[175], to William Laud, Bishop of
London. "Grotius is returned to his Country by the advice of several
illustrious men, some of whom are in great place. He has done this
without the knowledge of such as condemned him twelve years ago to
perpetual imprisonment, and of those who in that time of trouble
attained to the highest dignities by deposing such as were in power. All
these, excepting a few, think it their interest that this great man,
whose merit they know, should be buried in obscurity; and therefore
spoke against him with great warmth in the Assembly of the States. He
had several illustrious friends who stood up for him: the nobility,
three cities, Rotterdam, of which he was Pensionary; Delft, where he was
born; and Amsterdam, no less famous for her prudence than her riches.
Leyden is much against him: because the first Burgomaster was one of his
Judges: Harlem, for the like reason, is of the same sentiments. Of the
other towns some take a middle course: most of them join Leyden;
especially the smaller towns, in which the preachers have great
authority. Hence it is uncertain how this affair will end: he has the
flower of Holland for him; but it often happens with us that the
Zealots, like the rigid Puritans, by their menaces and clamour bear down
the honest party, who are more modest. If it should so happen I fear
much that this great man, fatigued with these squabbles, will of himself
quit his ungrateful Country: I am the more apprehensive of this as I
know for certain that some Kings and several Princes are endeavouring to
draw him to their courts by offers of great honours and a considerable
salary. If he is destined to live out of his Country, I shall be jealous
of any place he settles in if it be not Great-Britain, where, I foresee,
he would be of much service to the king and kingdom." Laud, in his
answer to this letter, owns[176] that he always looked on Grotius's
recall as a thing not to be expected: as to the proposal of employing
him in England, he tells him it was in vain to think of it in the
present circumstances.

Grotius seeing so much opposition, judged it most proper to seek his
fortune elsewhere; and left Holland.

FOOTNOTES:

[169] Ep. 297. p. 847.

[170] Ep. 301. p. 844.

[171] Ep. 304. p. 844.

[172] Ep. 305. p. 844.

[173] Ep. Vossii 38. p. 142.

[174] Ep. 289. p. 105.

[175] Præst. Vir. Epist. 507. p. 766.

[176] Præs. Vir. Ep. 508. p. 567.


XIII. It was on the seventeenth of March 1632 that he set out from
Amsterdam on his way to Hamburg; but did not take up his residence in
that City till the end of the year: the fine season[177] he passed at an
agreeable country-seat, called Okinhuse, near the Elbe, belonging to
William Morth, a Dutchman.

He had left many friends in France. William De Lusson, First President
of the Court of Moneys, was one who adhered to him most steadily: and
we find by Grotius' letter to him that he was very active to obtain the
payment of his pension though absent: In a letter whose date is
false[178], Grotius informs him[179], that while he lived he would never
forget the King's goodness and the gracious reception with which that
Prince honoured him: and promises to write to Boutillier, Superintendant
of the finances, as soon as an occasion offered. It is probable this
Minister had made him an offer of service; for in speaking of him
Grotius says, "It is very agreeable to me to be approved by a man who in
such a high station has not lost the taste for polite literature: I wish
him and his family uninterrupted prosperity, and the art of enjoying
it."

His wife, who had been in Zealand, came to join him, and the pleasure of
seeing her again was a consolation under all his troubles. He writes to
Vossius, August 17, 1632[180], "Oppressed by the violence of my enemies,
to which hand shall I turn me, and to whom shall I have recourse, but to
her who has been the faithful companion of my good and bad fortune; and
to you who have given me public marks of your attachment in my greatest
calamities? I have not yet (he adds) come to a resolution in my own
affair; but as far as I can see I shall have it in my power to chuse. It
ought not to appear hard to me to live under a Master, when I see that
after so many efforts for preserving your liberty you have little more
than the name of it. I am resolved to expose myself to every thing
rather than stoop to those who have treated me so unworthily after many
years patience. I value not that man who lays aside all sentiments of
generosity." He no doubt means the Prince of Orange, of whom he thought
he had reason to complain.

He was well pleased with the air of the place where he resided, and met
with so many Dutchmen[181], that he did not look upon himself as a
stranger. He wanted his books; but the learned Lindenbrogius gave him
access to his library to use it as his own.

When winter came on, he lodged at Hamburg with Van Sorgen, a Merchant,
who had a regard for men of learning: he was brother to Nicholas Van
Sorgen an eminent Advocate at the Hague.

Notwithstanding the embarrassment of his affairs he tells the First
President of the Court of Moneys, that he did not pretend to draw money
from the King of France for the future. "I shall always," says he,
"retain a most grateful sense of the King's liberality: but it is enough
to have been chargeable to you when in France. I have never done you any
service, though I made an offer of myself. But it would not be proper
that I should now live like a hornet on the goods of other men. I shall
never forget, however, the kindness of so great a King, and the good
offices of so many friends."

His wife was gone to Zealand, "to receive," says he, "the remains of our
wreck, which I am uncertain into what port to carry." He wrote to
Descordes, to whom he had already spoke his sentiments in several
Letters, that he most humbly thanked the King for his inclination to
honour him with his benefactions though absent, and that he was
extremely sensible of the constant attention of his friends to serve
him; but that he saw no just reason for accepting the King's favours
since his departure from France. "I earnestly wish," he adds, "that my
excuses may be well received: I have no less grateful sense of what is
offered me than of what was given me: and shall most chearfully testify
my gratitude for the favours received from a most excellent King as
often as occasion offers. In the mean time I pray God to give him a long
life and vigorous health, and to restore the tranquillity of the
kingdom, if France be capable of so great a blessing."

There might have been a prudential reason for his declining at this time
to be a pensioner of France, namely, lest his connexion with that crown
should hurt his projects of a settlement which were then on the carpet.
This conjecture is strengthened by what he writes himself to the First
President of the Court of Moneys, that the Ministers of some Princes
having asked him whether he were attached to any Court, as was reported;
he answered, that he would always remember with gratitude the favours
shewn him in France, but that since he came away he was free and his own
master: he adds, that several considerable settlements both with regard
to honour and profit were offered him; "but, says he, I keep always in
mind the maxim, to deliberate long before coming to a resolution. I hope
however that my situation will permit me to see France again, and my
dear friends, and to thank them personally; you, Messieurs de Thou,
Descordes, Du Puis, Pelletier, whose names will remain engraven on my
heart wherever fortune carries me." Lusson yielded to his reasons, and
approved of his disinterestedness[182].

He led a dull life at Hamburg. "I am extremely solitary here (he writes
to his brother August 3, 1633[183]:) even the men of learning keep up no
correspondence with one another. I might easily support this irksomeness
if I had my books and papers: for I could employ myself in some work
that would be useful to the public and no discredit to me: but at
present without these I am a kind of prisoner."

The disagreeableness of his situation and the uneasiness of his mind
were increased by the death of his Landlord after fourteen days
illness[184]. He was a Merchant of more knowledge and good sense than we
commonly find in men of that profession. He left some young children, in
whose education Grotius interested himself. Writing on this subject to
Vossius, he tells him that his Landlord's two sons were at the Hague
learning Grammar; that they were beginning to make Themes and Versions;
that if what they had already learnt were not cultivated, they would
soon forget it; and that the time which boys spent in their Studies at
Hamburg was lost, the method of teaching being only fit to make
blockheads. "Several, he adds, employ preceptors in the education of
their children; which method answers not expectation. I never approved
of it because I know that young people learn not but in company, and
that study languishes where there is no emulation. I also dislike those
schools when the master scarce knows the names of his scholars, and
where their number is so great that he cannot give that attention to
each, which his different genius and capacity may require. For this
reason I would have a middle course followed: that a master should take
but ten or twelve, to stay in the house together, and be in one form, by
which means he would not be overburdened." He begs of him to inform
himself whether there was not such a house in Amsterdam where he might
place Van Sorgen's sons. Vossius joined with Grotius in his thoughts on
education[185].

The death of his Landlord obliging Grotius to remove, he went to lodge
with a Dutchman called Ahasuerus Matthias[186], formerly Minister at
Deventer, which he left on account of his adhering to Arminianism. The
return of his wife from Zealand in Autumn 1633, who had always been his
consolation in adversity, rendered his life more agreeable. [187]He
mentions it to Descordes Nov. 13, 1633, and informs him that though
several settlements were offered him, he had not yet determined which to
embrace, but would soon come to a resolution. He passed his time in
writing his Sophomphanæus, or Tragedy of Joseph[188], which he finished
whilst at Hamburg. It is probable that if he had had his Books and
Papers he would have applied himself to something else at his age: but
this kind of study was suitable enough to his present situation.

Salvius, Vice-Chancellor of Sweden, a great statesman, and a man of
learning, was then at Hamburg. Grotius made acquaintance with him, and
saw him frequently. Polite Literature was the subject of their
conversation. Salvius conceived a great esteem for Grotius, and the
favourable report he made of him to the High Chancellor Oxenstiern
determined the latter to invite Grotius[189] to come to him, that he
might employ him in affairs of the greatest importance, as we shall see
in the following book.

FOOTNOTES:

[177] Ep. Grotii 245. p. 107. Ep. inter Vossianas 216. p. 131.

[178] This Letter is dated at Hamburgh Feb. 9, 1632. He was still in
Holland in the month of February. See the Letters written to his
brother, 308 and following, p. 845.

[179] Ep. 291. p. 106.

[180] Ep. 298. p. 108.

[181] Ep. 299. p. 108, and 300. p. 108.

[182] Ep. 319. p. 114.

[183] Ep. 322. p. 848.

[184] Ep. 327. p. 448

[185] Ep. Grotii 330. p. 119

[186] Ep. 336. p. 121

[187] Ep. 331. p. 113.

[188] Ep. 337. p. 122.

[189] Ep. 345. p. 123.




BOOK IV.


When it was known in Europe that Grotius had no longer any connexion
with the Court of France, the greatest Princes sought to draw to them a
Man who to the most profound learning and knowledge of public Law joined
the strictest probity.

In 1629 he was invited into Poland, as we learn from a letter to
Vossius, dated November 29 that year[190]. Three years after, December
30, 1632, Ruarus wrote to Grotius from Dantzick, "You have a very great
name at our Court, and the good odour of it has induced the King to
order Savasi, who goes as his Ambassador to Holland and England, to
advise with you. He has not done it, according to what the Secretary of
the embassy tells me; and I am ignorant of his reason: but this I know,
that many are labouring to bring you here with a pension from the King.
I know not what will become of this affair; but I believe it would be
pushed more briskly, if those who concern themselves in it were not
persuaded that you would decline the proposal." Grotius[191] answered,
that he would readily have waited on Savasi if he had sent him his
compliments; and that he guessed what it was that hindered him. "When
your King, he adds, shall be disposed to employ me, and I know in what
business, I shall not be long in taking my resolution." In the beginning
of the year[192] 1632 he was flattered with the hopes of being employed
by England.

Christiern IV. King of Denmark loaded him with civilities when he was at
Hamburg; and Vossius, who was well informed of every thing that related
to his friend's affairs, writes to Meric Casaubon, Oct. 25, 1633, that
the King of Denmark offered Grotius a considerable pension if he would
enter into his service. Henry Ernestus informed Vossius, that Grotius
had seen that Prince at Gluckstad, and was extremely well received by
him: this he had from Grotius himself. He concludes his letter with an
invective against the Dutch, who were so void of common sense, as to
refuse the services of so great a man.

It is said that even the King of Spain[193] had thoughts of taking him
into his service: but this Prince's court suited him ill for many
reasons easy to be imagined; one of which was that his going to Spain
would be matter of triumph to his enemies, who would represent it, with
some degree of probability, as a proof of what they had formerly
asserted, that Grotius was a private Pensioner of Spain.

The Duke of Holstein and several other[194] Princes made him likewise
advantageous proposals. It was reported that the famous Walstein
intended to take him into his service. Ruarus[195] wrote about it to
Grotius, and tells him he could scarce give credit to this news, from a
persuasion that Grotius would not employ his pen in writing things of
which no doubt he partly disapproved.

His remaining so long without coming to a resolution proceeded, it is
probable, from his unwillingness to attach himself to any Prince, till
he despaired of a reconciliation with his Country; of which he was so
desirous, that above two years and a half after he had been so
shamefully driven out, he had still thoughts of it. March 8, 1634[196],
he writes to his brother, "It is of great importance to me that my
affair may be no longer protracted, and that I know speedily whether I
can see my Country again, or must relinquish it for ever." A fortnight
after he writes to him[197], "I expect your letters with impatience, to
know what I have to hope for from my Countrymen. I have been too long
under uncertainty, and I am afraid of losing in the mean time the
opportunities which offer elsewhere. I would not however have any thing
asked in my name directly or indirectly; but if they make any proposal
of their own accord, I shall be glad to know it."

He ought to have determined himself long before. Convinced at last that
he must lay aside all thoughts of returning into Holland, he yielded to
the pressing instances of the High Chancellor of Sweden, who wanted to
employ him in affairs of importance. Grotius gave the preference more
readily to this Minister, the greatest man perhaps of his age, because
he followed Gustavus's plan, for whom Grotius had a singular veneration:
in January, 1628[198], he speaks of him as a Prince whose greatness of
soul and knowledge in civil and military matters placed him above every
other. March 12, in the same year, he writes to his brother[199], that
on every occasion he would do all in his power to serve such a virtuous
Monarch. On the 28th of April following, he congratulates
Camerarius[200], whose father was Ambassador from Sweden, on his serving
a Prince who merited every commendation. "The whole universe will not
furnish his equal in virtue[201]. Men of the greatest merit in this
country think the brilliancy of this Prince's actions and virtues must
strike even envy dumb. Happy are they who are under the protection of so
great a King. He proves the possibility of what appeared incredible in
the great men of antiquity: he is a witness who gives evidence in their
favour: he will serve for a master to posterity; and the best lessons in
the art of war will be taken from his history. He is no less eminent as
a warrior, than as a statesman[202]; and in him is found all that makes
a great King. He is the wisest Monarch now reigning, and knows how to
improve every opportunity to the best advantage, not only when the
injustice of his enemies obliges him to have recourse to arms, but also
when he is allowed to enjoy the blessings of peace." The Letters, in
which he expresses his profound esteem for the Great Gustavus, were all
written before the month of June, 1630, whilst he resided at Paris and
had no thought of entering into the Swedish service.

Gustavus had sent to Paris Benedict Oxenstiern, a relation of the High
Chancellor, to bring to a final conclusion the treaty between France and
Sweden. This Minister made acquaintance with Grotius, and in a short
time conceived such a high esteem for him, that he resolved to employ
his credit to draw him to his Master's court. A report of this spread in
Holland; and William Grotius wrote about it to his brother, who made
answer, Feb. 6, 1632, That these reports were without foundation; that,
besides, he had an aversion to following an army. It was said that King
Gustavus intended to employ him at the Court of France; and he answered
his brother on this subject, Feb. 18, 1632, That if this Monarch would
nominate him his Ambassador, with a proper salary for the decent support
of that dignity, the proposal would merit his regard.

This Prince, who was certainly the greatest Captain of his age, had at
the same time an affection for men of learning. The reading of the
treatise _Of the Rights of War and Peace_ gave him the highest opinion
of its author, whom he regarded as an original genius[203]; and he was
persuaded that one who wrote so well on the Law of Nations must be an
able Statesman. He resolved to gain him, and to employ him in some
embassy. The High Chancellor of Sweden, who was of the same opinion with
his Master, was Grotius's patron at Court.

Gustavus, who looked upon Grotius as the first man of his age, was on
the point of shewing all Europe how much he esteemed him, when he was
unhappily slain, on the 6th of November, 1632[204], in a famous battle
against the Imperialists, in which the Swedes gained a signal victory.
Some time before, this great Prince[205], as if he had had a foreboding
of his end being near, gave orders for several things to be done in case
of his death; among others that Grotius should be employed in the
Swedish Ministry. The High Chancellor Oxenstiern, who governed the
kingdom during the minority of Queen Christina, the daughter of Gustavus
Adolphus, thought it his duty and honour to conform to his Master's
intentions: he therefore pressed Grotius to come to him, promising him
an employment suited to his merit[206]. Grotius did not yield
immediately, not only because he had still hopes of being recalled to
Holland, but also because he was persuaded that one ought to deliberate
long before taking a resolution which cannot be altered. It may not be
improper to observe that the book _Of the Rights of War and Peace_ was
found in King Gustavus's tent after his death. Grotius also gives us an
anecdote concerning his entering into the Swedish service which deserves
to be mentioned, namely, that it was Marshal Bannier's brother, who gave
him the first hint of preferring Sweden to the other States, by whom he
was solicited.

FOOTNOTES:

[190] Ep. 250. p. 85.

[191] Ep. 336.

[192] Ep. 309. p. 845.

[193] Henry Dupuis. Grotii manes, p. 299. Niceron.

[194] Ep. Vossii, 257. p. 150.

[195] Ruari Ep. 36. p. 186.

[196] Ep. 326. p. 849.

[197] Ep. 326. p. 849.

[198] Ep. 163. p. 801.

[199] Ep. 170. p. 805.

[200] Ep. 173. p. 805.

[201] Ep. 184. p. 809. 212. p. 819.

[202] Ep. 215. p. 820. ep. 229. p. 824. & ep. 242. p. 829.

[203] Prefacio Man. Grotii Vir. Grot. p. 300.

[204] At Lutsen.

[205] Ep. Grotii, 87. p. 384.

[206] Ep. 344. p. 123. & 346. p. 124.


II. Grotius, on the invitation of the High Chancellor of Sweden, set out
for Franckfort on the Main where that Minister was. He had no notion
what they purposed to do with him; but he was quite easy with regard to
his settlement, being persuaded that a Minister of Oxenstiern's prudence
and credit would not engage him to take a wrong step: his only anxiety
was, lest the High Chancellor, whom he looked on as the greatest man of
his age[207], and fit to be compared with the most famous in antiquity,
should entertain too high an idea of his merit, from the advantageous
testimonies given of it, and lest he should be unable to answer the
hopes that Minister had conceived of him.

He arrived at Franckfort in May, 1634[208], and was received with the
greatest politeness by the High Chancellor, who did not however explain
his intentions: Grotius wrote to his brother, July 13, 1634, that the
Chancellor proceeded with great slowness in his affair; but that every
body assured him he was a man of his word: "If so, he adds, all will go
well." He wrote for his wife, and she arrived at Franckfort, with his
daughters and son Cornelius, in the beginning of August. The Chancellor
continued to heap civilities[209] on him without mentioning a word of
business: but ordered him to follow him to Mentz; and at length[210]
declared him Counsellor to the Queen of Sweden and her Ambassador at the
Court of France.

The authority of Oxenstiern was so great that this kind of nomination
needed not the Queen's confirmation: it was not till almost two years
after[211] that Christina ratified by her letters Grotius's embassy.
Before their arrival he enjoyed the same honours and prerogatives as if
the Queen herself had nominated him.

As soon as he could depend upon an establishment, he purposed to make it
known by some public act that he considered himself no longer as a
Dutchman. On the 13th of July, 1634[212], he sent his brother letters
for the Prince of Orange and the Dutch: but desired him to read them
first himself, and advise with the Counsellor Reigersberg and Beaumont
about them. "I have ceased, says he in another place[213], to be a
Dutchman since I entered into the service of Sweden; which I have
sufficiently intimated to the States of Holland. I have written to them,
but not as their subject. Thus the Spaniards used to act in such cases,
as Mariana informs us in several places of his History of Spain. When I
bad adieu to the United Provinces (he writes again[214]) I signified to
them that I was a member of another nation; that I should give myself
little trouble about what might be said or thought of it; and that I
reckoned never to see the Country again." We may judge by these
expressions that his patience was at length worn out.

He wrote to the City of Rotterdam, which had deferred nominating a
Pensionary since the sentence passed against Grotius, that they might
now chuse one, since they ought no longer to look on him as a Dutchman.

FOOTNOTES:

[207] Ep. 349. p. 125. & ep. 346. p. 124.

[208] Ep. 330. p. 849.

[209] Ep. 352. p. 127.

[210] Ep. 337. p. 851.

[211] Ep. 577. p. 227.

[212] Ep. 330. p. 849.

[213] Ep. 572. p. 958.

[214] Ep. 719. p. 970.


III. At the time that Grotius entered into the service of Sweden, the
affairs of that Crown were in a very bad situation. The death of the
Great Gustavus had made a strange change in them. He left at his death a
young Princess under age, whose right was even disputed. Ladislaus IV.
elected King of Poland on the death of his father Sigismond, set up a
claim to the Swedish crown, and had a party in the kingdom capable of
forming a dangerous faction. Sweden was unable singly to support the war
in Germany; and saw the allies, whom she had hitherto kept on her side
by her authority and the eclat of her victories, ready to fall off: the
weaker, in consternation at the death of their leader, wished for peace;
the more powerful, such as the Dukes of Pomerania, the Elector of
Brandenbourg, the Dukes of Meklenbourg, and some others, jealous of the
authority usurped by the Swedes in Germany, would acknowledge them only
as allies, and not as the head of the Protestant party. The Duke of
Brunswick was already levying men in his own name, and intended to form
a separate party composed of the Circle of Lower Saxony. The Elector of
Saxony carried his views still farther. He wanted to have the supreme
direction of affairs; and, if thwarted, there was reason to apprehend he
would soon relinquish the common cause. In this perilous situation the
Swedes, hardening themselves against danger, trusted to their courage
and address: and after nominating regents to govern the kingdom during
Queen Christina's minority, they committed the care of Sweden's
interests in Germany to Baron Oxenstiern the High Chancellor with an
almost absolute power.

That great man supported this important charge in the most difficult
times with a firmness, address, and capacity, which justly made him be
looked upon as one of the ablest Ministers of Europe. He inspired those
who were wavering through fear with new Courage; brought back those who
on private views had detached themselves from the common cause; broke
the measures of the Duke of Brunswick; suspended the effects of the
Elector of Saxony's jealousy, and made all the allies sensible that they
could only find their true interest, their security, and safety, in
their union. By this means the bands which knit them together were
strengthened, and Sweden preserved the principal direction of affairs,
and almost as much authority as she had in the time of Gustavus. The
Swedes had lately lost the famous battle of Norlingen in September; and
Marshal Horne their General was made prisoner. This disaster was
followed by the peace of Prague, in which the Emperor Ferdinand II.
engaged the Electors of Saxony and Brandenbourg to unite against the
Swedes; and it would have been all over with them in Germany, had not a
power which hitherto faintly seconded them, brought them powerful
assistance. Lewis XIII. by the advice of his Prime Minister, sent
Cardinal De la Vallette at the head of an army into Germany; and
concluded a treaty with the Duke of Weimar, engaging to pay him a
subsidy of one million five hundred thousand Livres, and the sum of four
millions yearly for maintaining an army of eighteen thousand men, which
the Duke obliged himself to furnish, and command under the direction of
France.

Such is the exact portrait which Father Bougeant gives of the state of
Germany. Let us hear what a cotemporary author says of it[215]. "Fortune
smiled on the Imperialists on every side. There was nothing but conquest
and victories and a happy change of affairs: for in less than a month
the Swedes, who were become so powerful and formidable, were defeated,
and entirely dispersed in one battle, and an unheard-of victory gained
most gloriously with inconsiderable loss on the side of the
Imperialists. Bavaria was entirely delivered; the Swedes driven out of
Swabia, the dutchy of Wirtemberg conquered; and almost all Franconia:
the rivers Ocin and Iser remained free; the Lek, the Danube, the Necker,
and almost all the Main cleared, with the loss of so many towns and
provinces in such a short time, almost deprived the Swedes of a
retreat; Ulm and Nuremberg refusing them admittance, whereas formerly
they were welcome, and masters every where."

These descriptions agree with that given by Grotius. Sept. 20, 1634, he
writes to Du Maurier[216], "Had I come sooner to the High Chancellor, I
should have found the times more favourable; but as his great courage is
most conspicuous in adverse circumstances, it is proper we should
conform to the example of so great a leader. France is at present the
sole resource of Germany in her affliction: since the loss of Ratisbon
and Donavert, and the unfortunate battle of Norlinguen, the towns are
all frightened, and it is a great happiness that the conquerors have not
approached Franckfort: they have divided their army; the King of Hungary
has led one into Bohemia, and his brother is marched with the other
towards the United Provinces. France alone is able to restore our
affairs." The Swedes, in the consternation occasioned by the defeat at
Norlinguen, were threatened with seeing Franckfort, Mentz, Augsburg,
Nuremberg, and Ulm fall into the hands of the Imperialists; but by good
luck they did not take the advantage of their victory. Grotius assures
us the Swedes were obliged to the King of France for it, who kept the
projects of the enemy suspended by the apprehension of his declaring
war. Such was the situation of affairs when Grotius received orders to
repair to the French Court. It was the most important commission with
which a Minister could be charged, since the principal resource of the
Swedes and their allies was in the protection of France; and
Oxenstiern's nominating Grotius to be the Ambassador who was to
strengthen the union between Sweden and France is a demonstration of
that great man's particular esteem for him.

FOOTNOTES:

[215] Mercure François, an. 1634, p. 621.

[216] Ep. 354, p. 127 et 355. p. 128.


IV. In the beginning of the year 1635 Grotius set out from Mentz on his
embassy to France. He was obliged to go a great way about, to avoid
being surprised by the enemies parties. Beginning his journey in very
rainy weather, succeeded by a hard frost, he arrived at Metz much later
than he expected, and indisposed with a cholic occasioned by the great
cold; which obliged him to continue there some time till he recovered.
It was five days before he could write to the High Chancellor. January
30, as soon as his pain abated, he wrote to him that he hoped to be able
to continue his journey in two or three days, and that the vexation of
his mind at being hindered from getting so soon as he wished to the
place of his destination, was greater than the indisposition of his
body. He was extremely well received by the Commandants of Haguenau and
Saverne. At the former of those towns he met some waggons going to the
army with a million of money, which it was said would soon be followed
by other two.

He left Metz February 2[217], and was at Meaux the 7th, from whence he
went to St. Denis. On the 14th he wrote to the High Chancellor, that by
the advice of his friends he had given the introductors of Ambassadors
notice of his arrival, that they might pay him the usual honours; and
that he would write to the Queen of Sweden as soon as he had his
audience of the King[218]. Francis de Thou, hearing of his arrival, came
immediately to visit him.

Grotius was suffered to remain long at St. Denis: February 12, he wrote
to Oxenstiern[219] that Count Brulon, introductor of Ambassadors, had
been with him to acquaint him that the troubles of the Court had
hitherto prevented the appointing a day for his entry. In fact, the Duke
de Puy-Laurens, and some other Lords, accused of giving bad counsels to
Gaston of France Duke of Orleans, had been just arrested.

But Grotius suspected that his entry was deferred for other reasons;
that they waited for the answers of La Grange and Feuquieres, employed
by the Court of France in Germany, to know whether the High Chancellor
would conform to the intentions of the French Ministry, and in
consequence to proportion the honours to be paid Sweden's Ambassador to
Oxenstiern's compliance. Count Brulon assured Grotius that in two or
three days every obstruction to his entry would be removed, and in the
mean time gave him an invitation to see _incognito_ the ballets and
entertainments that were to be given the Sunday following, in the King's
apartments: which the Ambassador thought fit to decline. February
23[220] Count Brulon came to make Grotius another visit, and asked, who
sent him into France? Grotius answered, that he was the Queen of
Sweden's Ambassador, and was nominated to that employment by the High
Chancellor of Sweden, by virtue of the powers given to his Excellency.
Brulon said, that the King of Spain had formerly empowered the Duke of
Mentz to nominate Ambassadors; but they were never regarded as such.
Grotius replied, that was owing to the war, and a dislike to the duke of
Mentz; that when the truce between Spain and the United Provinces was
treating at the Hague, the Ambassadors sent thither by the Arch-Dukes
were received by the French and English Ministers as Ambassadors of the
King of Spain; and that if during the late war in Italy Cardinal
Richelieu, who had very extensive powers, had nominated Ambassadors,
they would have been every where received in the same manner as those
sent by the King; that the High Chancellor's powers could not be
disputed; that they were given him by the whole kingdom; that the King
of France had already treated as Ambassadors Ministers nominated by his
Excellency; and that the Ambassadors of the King of France, in the
treaty which they made with Oxenstiern, acknowledged this power. Brulon
declared, that the difficulty did not proceed from any aversion to
Grotius, whom the King highly esteemed. He repeated this so often, that
the Swedish Ambassador imagined they wanted to make him quit the service
of Sweden, and enter into that of France. The Count promised to return
in three or four days: he did not keep his word; he sent however to
acquaint Grotius that the Wednesday following, which was the last of
February, every thing would be ready for his entry; but that he must
first receive the King's commands who was at Chantilly.

Du Maurier, Son of the Ambassador to Holland, an intimate friend of
Grotius, pretends, in his _Memoirs_, that the Swedish Ambassador was
suffered to remain so long at St. Denis because Cardinal Richelieu, who
had a dislike to him, was vexed to see him nominated Ambassador to
France; that he wrote to Oxenstiern, asking him to appoint some other,
and that the High Chancellor paying no regard to the Cardinal's whim, he
was obliged to acknowledge Grotius's quality. The Letters of Grotius
rather contradict than confirm this anecdote, though Du Maurier assures
us Grotius was fully informed of this secret negotiation.

Grotius made his public entry into Paris on Friday the 2d of March,
1635. The Marshals D'Estres and St. Luc were nominated to attend him;
but, the latter falling ill, Count Brulon, Introductor of Ambassadors,
supplied his place. They came in the King and Queen's coaches to take
him up. The coaches of the Venetian, Swiss, and Mantuan Ministers were
at this entry, together with those of the German powers allied to
Sweden. The Princes of the Blood did not send their coaches because they
were not at Paris; Gaston Duke of Orleans was at Angers; the Prince of
Condé had a cause depending at Rouen; and the Count De Soissons was at
Senlis with the Court.

Pau, Ambassador from Holland, greatly chagrined to see Grotius in such
an honourable place, was much embarrassed[221] in what manner to behave:
he wrote about it to the States-General, and in the mean time sent to
make him his compliments. The States-General answered, that they
intended their Ambassadors should shew the same regard to Grotius as to
the Ambassadors of powers in friendship with them. Pau, not satisfied
with this, wrote to the particular States of Holland. Grotius was
informed of it, and seemed little concerned, because, he said, they knew
little, were very inconstant, and took their resolutions on slight
grounds.

May 5, the Count de Nancei, Master of the Wardrobe, came to compliment
him on the part of the King. He told him that his nomination to the
French Embassy was most agreeable to his Majesty[222], who wished he
might long continue in that post. Count Brulon assured him that he had
orders to present his lady to the Queen, who remained at Paris, whenever
she pleased: but Grotius thought this ought to be deferred till he had
seen the King.

Grotius was carried to Court at Senlis on the sixth of March, by the
Duke De Mercoeur, whom he calls the most learned of all the
Princes[223]: on the death of his father he became Duke of Vendôme, and
in the end a Cardinal. The new Ambassador was extremely satisfied with
his reception: the King's guards were under arms[224]: Lewis XIII. spoke
much to him, and with so great goodness, that he conjectured from it he
should bring the affairs with which he was entrusted to the desired
conclusion. His Majesty gave him to understand by his gracious manner,
and by his[225] talk, that they could not have sent into France a
Minister so agreeable to him. He made him be covered in his presence,
and repeated his civilities on Grotius's presenting to him his son
Cornelius.

March 8, Grotius sent Queen Christina news of his entry and his audience
of the King: Next day he wrote to Salmasius: after acquainting him with
the agreeable revolution in his affairs, he adds, that the first
formalities of his embassy being over, he hoped to have leisure to
resume his studies. Salmasius had at that time the greatest esteem for
Grotius, and on hearing of his being nominated Ambassador to France,
took occasion to say that Grotius's friends were only sorry the affairs
of Sweden were not in such a good situation, as might render the embassy
of so great a man as agreeable as could be desired.

After having an audience of the King, Grotius made his visits to
Mademoiselle[226], the Prince of Condé, the Count of Soissons, the
Countess of Soissons the Count's mother, and to his lady the Princess of
Condé. The Prince[227] received him with the greatest politeness, spoke
to him of their old acquaintance, and next day returned his visit.
Cardinal Richelieu, before he would see him, wanted to know his
instructions relating to the treaty lately concluded between France and
several German Princes, with which the Swedes were dissatisfied. He went
to his Abbey of Royaumont till Grotius should see Boutillier,
Superintendant of the Finances, with whom he was to discuss the late
treaty; and as things passed at this conference the Cardinal was to talk
to the Swedish Ambassador.

FOOTNOTES:

[217] Ep. 360. p. 130 & 361. p. 610.

[218] Ep. 362. p. 130.

[219] Ep. 363. p. 131.

[220] Ep. 364. p. 132.

[221] Ep. 374. p. 137.

[222] Ep. 374. p. 137.

[223] Ep. 339. p. 851.

[224] Ep. 367. p. 134.

[225] Ep. 388. p. 142.

[226] Ep. 370. p. 135.

[227] Ep. 339. p. 851.


V. The subject of the dispute between France and Sweden was this: after
the unfortunate battle of Norlinguen, the Swedes and their allies being
reduced to the last extremity, judged the support of France must be
their principal resource. They made no doubt that such an able
statesman as Cardinal Richelieu would seize every opportunity to abase,
or at least embarrass the house of Austria, the eternal rival of France.
James Læfler and Philip Strect were sent in 1634, by the Protestant
Princes and States of the Circles and Electoral Provinces of Franconia,
Suabia, and the Rhine, to solicit succours from the King of France, and
prevail with him to declare war against the Emperor. They proposed that
the King should send an army to the Rhine, and advance a large sum of
money to enable the allies to recruit their army, which was almost
wholly destroyed. They treated with the Cardinal de Richelieu, who
endeavoured to avail himself of the situation of affairs and their
necessities, to make the most advantageous treaty he could for France.
He offered only five hundred thousand Livres, six thousand foot in six
weeks, and twelve thousand when they had put France in possession of
Benfield: but their powers did not extend to the cession of that place.
However they promised it without making any condition; and had not the
precaution to stipulate that France should furnish every year the same
subsidies which she engaged to give King Gustavus by a treaty which was
renewed at Hailbron. The Cardinal gave them hopes that France would
declare war against the Emperor; that after the declaration the King
would keep twelve thousand men in Germany, and a strong army on the
Rhine; advance immediately five hundred thousand Francs to be divided
among the army or the allies; nominate a Prince to command the army of
twelve thousand men, with a lieutenant under him as his collegue; and
have one to assist in his Majesty's name at the Councils of war.

After signing the treaty Læfler and Strect returned to Germany in
December 1634.

When a motion was made in the assembly of the Allies at Worms to ratify
this Treaty, the High Chancellor of Sweden opposed it. He maintained
that it was obscure and ambiguous, and discordant with the private
treaty made with Sweden. This Minister was chiefly chagrined at Sweden's
losing the principal direction of affairs in Germany by the nomination
of a German Prince to be Generalissimo of the allied army. He declared
that he thought himself obliged to propose his difficulties to the Queen
of Sweden: and besides would send an embassy to Paris on the subject.
This then was the business which Grotius had to manage at the Court of
France. The Commission was the more delicate as Cardinal Richelieu, a
positive man, absolutely required that the treaty made with the Envoys
of the German Princes should have its full effect.

It was to confer on this affair that Grotius made a visit to Boutillier,
Superintendant of the Finances. The Swedish Ambassador represented, that
the Treaty ought not to be in force till Sweden's ratification of it,
which could not be expected, as it made void the Treaty of Hailbron.
This was not what the Cardinal wanted: he commissioned Father Joseph to
employ all his address to bring Grotius into his measures. The Capuchin
was the Cardinal's confident, and it was then thought that he was
destined to succeed him in the Ministry in case of the Cardinal's death.
March 14, the Superintendant sent to acquaint Grotius that he purposed
to make him a visit with Father Joseph; but as the Father was taken ill
he asked him to go with him to the Convent of the Capuchins; that he
ought to have no reluctance to this, since the Cardinal himself had
lately visited Father Joseph there when he was ill. Grotius went to the
convent, and was conducted from thence to the Garden of the Thuilleries,
where he found Boutillier and Father Joseph. After the usual
compliments, the Capuchin shewed that the late treaty at Paris was made
in consequence of a full power given the Ministers of the German
Princes, and concluded and signed without any stipulation concerning
the necessity of ratifying it. Grotius replied, that the High Chancellor
himself had said the contrary; that the towns who approved of the treaty
owned the necessity of its being ratified; that a ratification was so
necessary to give a treaty the force of a law, that that which was
concluded at Ratisbon, in 1630, by Father Joseph himself, had not its
full execution because the King did not think proper to ratify it; that
the Swedes only asked what was just, and would consent that some
addition should be made to the treaty of Hailbron, if that were proper.
Grotius was asked, which article of the late treaty Sweden complained
of? he first mentioned that of the Subsidies, the disposition of which
was left to the four circles of Germany, though it was on the express
condition of receiving them that Sweden had engaged in the war: he
added, that it was unjust to take Benfield from the Swedes without
giving them an equivalent, since the Germans had given them that place
as a pledge. The two French Ministers, unable to make Grotius approve of
the treaty of Paris, had recourse to menaces and caresses: they imagined
that his instructions bore that he might ratify it provided it was not
till the last extremity. Grotius saw through their design, and told them
they deceived themselves. They said, they would write to Sweden to
complain of the High Chancellor; that the King would no longer treat
with Grotius as Ambassador; that orders would be sent to the Marquis de
Feuquieres to complain to Oxenstiern himself of his contempt of a signed
treaty, and want of due regard to the King. Grotius answered, that the
Marquis de Feuquieres had already made representations to the High
Chancellor, without effect, on this subject; that if France would not
have him for Ambassador, he would be employed elsewhere; that it would
be in vain to write to Sweden because Oxenstiern's reasons for not
ratifying the treaty of Paris would certainly be approved there. They
cooled a little; and gave him to understand, that an alteration might
be made in some of the articles, and that the King would consent that
the Swedes should not be excluded from the chief command, though the
treaty imported that a Prince should be General. Grotius shewed that
there were many other articles, which occasioned great difficulty both
by their ambiguity and their opposition to the interests of Sweden. The
two Ministers put themselves into a passion, and concluded with
complaining that they would inform the King and the Cardinal that they
could settle nothing with Grotius, and that the Swedes made a jest of
treaties. Father Joseph retiring, the conversation became milder with
the Superintendant: Grotius shewed that it was the promise of assistance
from France, which engaged Sweden in such a burthensome war; that the
High Chancellor had done essential services to the common cause; that if
the King should drop his alliance with the Swedes, they should be
obliged to take care of themselves; that France might give subsidies to
the Germans, but it was just that those promised to Sweden should be
exactly paid. Grotius informed the High Chancellor of this conference in
a letter of the 15th of March, 1635.

Cardinal Richelieu[228], to induce the Swedes to conform more to his
measures, spread a report, and even said himself often, that he was in
treaty with the Emperor, and the accommodation on the point of being
concluded: but Grotius, who knew the Cardinal's character, was not duped
by it; and wrote to the High Chancellor that it was only a stratagem of
that Minister, and the report ought to make no change in Sweden's
conduct.

On the 28th of March the Cardinal sending to acquaint Grotius[229] that
he wanted to confer with him, he immediately waited on his Eminence:
which shews the inaccuracy of Du Maurier, who assures us that Grotius
never saw Cardinal Richelieu whilst he was Minister from Sweden in
France, because his Eminence gave not the precedence to Ambassadors.

He complimented the Cardinal (with whom he found Father Joseph) in the
name of the Queen, the Regents of Sweden, and the High Chancellor, and
delivered to him his Letters of Credence. The treaty of Paris was soon
brought on the carpet: the Cardinal pretended that it ought to be
executed without any restriction; he said the King, by assisting the
Germans with men and money, sufficiently favoured the Swedes; adding,
that Sweden did not apply the subsidies granted by France to the uses
agreed on. Grotius made answer, that Læfler and Strect could not make a
treaty contrary to the interests of Sweden. Father Joseph added that the
King was informed that it was he (Grotius) who advised the High
Chancellor not to ratify the treaty of Paris, giving him hopes that he
through his friends would obtain one more advantageous. Grotius assured
him it was a falshood; and that what had been said of the misapplication
of the Subsidies was a gross calumny. The Cardinal interposing said that
he perceived Father Joseph and the Swedish Ambassador were not in good
understanding, and he would endeavour to reconcile them. Grotius sounded
high the wealth of France, as being more than sufficient to assist the
Germans without abandoning the Swedes, who had entered into the war
solely at her felicitation and on her promise of succours. The Cardinal,
without explaining himself what sum would be given, hinted that Sweden
must not expect for the future a Subsidy of a million. Father Joseph
pretended, that he knew from good hands the High Chancellor only wanted
that article changed which excluded the Swedes from the command in
chief, and that regard should be had to their interests in concluding a
peace. The Cardinal said the King would consent to this alteration; but
that he was surprised the High Chancellor, after giving so many
assurances of his satisfaction, should make new demands. Grotius still
insisted that it was but just to adhere to the treaty of Hailbron, and
that Sweden, which kept up armies and fleets, had a better claim to the
King's liberality, than several other Princes to whom the King
generously gave subsidies.

The Cardinal receiving notice that a Courier was just arrived with
Letters from the High Chancellor, ordered him to be brought in. He
presented Oxenstiern's Letters to the Cardinal, who, on reading them,
was much surprised to find the High Chancellor desirous of coming into
France to settle all difficulties in a conference. This journey was not
at all agreeable to the Cardinal: however, as it would have been
indecent and improper to oppose it, he answered that he would write
about it to the King, and he did not doubt but his Majesty would consent
to it; that it would give him the greatest pleasure to see Oxenstiern,
but if his errand was to set aside the treaty of Paris, he foresaw the
interview would do more harm than good; and that he would dispatch La
Grange to the High Chancellor to compliment him, and assure him he must
not think of concluding a treaty contrary to what had been agreed on
with Læfler and Strect.

FOOTNOTES:

[228] Ep. 375. p 137.

[229] Ep. 380. p. 139.


VI. The King being informed that Oxenstiern, to serve the common cause,
wanted to come to France, consented to it, and gave orders for his being
received with great magnificence: the Hotel for Ambassadors
Extraordinary at Paris was fitted up for him[230]. All business was
suspended till his arrival[231]: and the King went to Compeigne to be
nearer Flanders and Germany. The High Chancellor came thither. Grotius
had purposed to go to meet him as soon as he heard of his being on the
way; but Oxenstiern not giving him notice what rout he would take, nor
whether he would come directly to Paris, or alight at Compeigne, Grotius
remained in suspense till April 21, that a Courier[232] from the High
Chancellor brought him word that he had taken the road through the Three
Bishoprics and Champagne, and desired him to come to him. Grotius set
out immediately; and met him at Soissons, from whence they came to
Compeigne. The High Chancellor had two hundred men in his retinue. The
Count de Soissons was at first nominated to go to meet that
Minister[233]; it was however the Count D'Alais, Son of the Duke
D'Angoulême, who went with Count Brulon in the King's coach. They
proceeded the distance of three leagues, and on their coming up the High
Chancellor stept with them into his Majesty's coach. He was conducted to
the Hotel prepared for him, and splendidly entertained at the King's
expence. On the 26th of April, 1635, he came to Compeigne; and next day
had an audience of the King, who received him very graciously, and
expressed a high esteem for him. The visit lasted half an hour: the
Scots Colonels Hepburn and Leslie were present; and Grotius served as
Interpreter. He afterwards visited the Queen, and also Cardinal
Richelieu, who took the right hand of him; he offered it indeed to
Oxenstiern; but he in civility refused it. They were together at this
visit three hours, but said not a word of business; nothing passed but
compliments and mirth, says the _Mercure François_. Both spoke in Latin.
Two days after, that is to say, on the 29th, the Cardinal returned the
High Chancellor's visit: his Eminence was booted as if he were returning
from the country, that this visit, says Puffendorf, might not be looked
upon as a debt. They conversed long together about business. Oxenstiern,
like an able Politician, made no mention of the treaty of Paris, nor of
that of Hailbron: he foresaw that it would draw on discussions which
might breed ill blood, and hurt the common cause: he only talked of a
treaty with Sweden. There was some alteration made in the old one; and
it was agreed that no peace or truce should be concluded with the
Austrians without the consent of the two Crowns. The same day, according
to the _Mercure François_, or on the 30th of April, according to
Puffendorf, the High Chancellor had his audience of leave of the King:
his Majesty took a diamond ring from his finger, valued at that time at
ten or twelve thousand crowns, which he gave him, together with a box
set with diamonds, in which was his Majesty's picture. All the time he
was at Compeigne, he was served by the officers of the King's kitchen
with so much splendor and magnificence, that he complained to Grotius of
the too great expence they were at on his account. He set out from
Compeigne on Monday the 30th of April for Paris. He wanted to be there
_incognito_; and lodged with Grotius[234]; but as soon as his arrival
took air, the crowd to see him was so great that they could scarce keep
them from forcing into Grotius's house. Had he been one descended from
heaven they could not have shewn more eagerness. He staid only two or
three days at Paris, during which he went to see the Church of Notre
Dame, the Louvre, the Palace of Luxembourg, and some of the fine Seats
near the City. He was so well satisfied with the manner in which Grotius
received him, that he made a considerable present to his lady. She would
have refused it, if she could have done it with a good grace. Grotius,
in returning his humble thanks for it to the High Chancellor, told him
that he owed all he had to his goodness, and that if he could have done
more, he would have thought himself sufficiently recompensed by the
honour of lodging so great a man. Oxenstiern went from Paris to embark
at Dieppe; and Grotius accompanied him a part of the way[235]. As soon
as the High Chancellor arrived at Dieppe, he wrote Grotius a very
obliging letter[236]. The Court had prepared vessels at Dieppe, on
board which Oxenstiern embarked for Holland, from whence he proceeded to
Lower Saxony.

This treaty occasioned a difference between the Duke of Weymar and the
High Chancellor[237]. The Marquis de Feuquieres insinuated to that
Prince, that Oxenstiern, in treating with France, had shewn no regard to
the interests of Germany. The fact was most false; for Grotius was a
witness that the High Chancellor had recommended the affairs of Germany
to the King with great warmth: it was agreed that neither peace nor
truce should be concluded but in concert with the Allies; and he had
ordered Grotius to solicit their affairs, who had in consequence pressed
the sending the promised succours. It was not probable that Feuquieres
should of himself venture to talk in this manner, which was enough to
ruin him: there was therefore reason to suspect that he did it by
private orders from the Cardinal, that the Duke of Weymar, distrusting
the Chancellor, might place his confidence in his Eminence. It is
certain, that notwithstanding what was agreed on at Compeigne, the
Cardinal had the treaty with Læfler and Strect still much at heart; and
Avaugour[238], the French Minister at Stockholm, was ordered to demand
its ratification. But he was answered, that those Ministers were not
sent by Sweden, and exceeded their powers, and that the affair was
referred to Oxenstiern. After such a formal denial, Avaugour was forced
to confine his demands to the ratification of the treaty of Compeigne.

FOOTNOTES:

[230] Ep. 383. p. 140.

[231] Ep. 390. p. 142. & ep. 391. p. 143.

[232] Ep. 393. p. 143 & ep. 396 p. 144.

[233] Ep. 387. p. 141.

[234] Ep. 400. p. 146.

[235] Ep. 344. p. 853.

[236] Ep. 408. p. 1, 8.

[237] Ep. 432. p. 159.

[238] Puffendorf, l. 8. n. 4.


VII. Grotius was not only fatigued and embarrassed with State affairs;
the reformed Ministers gave him uneasiness at a time when he imagined
they had room to be satisfied with him.

He was at a loss[239] at first how to act with regard to the celebration
of divine service. March 30, 1635, he wrote to his brother: "You have
reason to ask how I must act in the affair of religion; it greatly
embarrasses me. It would be an odious thing, and might displease the
High Chancellor, to introduce, by my own authority, a new reformed
Church: besides, those, to whom I might apply for a Minister, are of
different sentiments from me. What you propose, that I should hear the
Ministers of Charenton, since they receive the Lutherans into their
communion, is not amiss."

We have seen that Grotius, on his arrival at Paris after his escape from
Louvestein, had room to be dissatisfied with the reformed Ministers,
who, under pretence of his refusing to receive the Synod of Dort, and
his attachment to Arminianism, would not communicate with him. The happy
revolution in his fortune made one in their minds, as he writes to
Vossius[240]. Immediately on his arrival at Paris in quality of
Ambassador from Sweden, he was visited by six of the principal reformed
Ministers, among whom were Faucher, Aubertin, Daillé, and Drelincourt.
They were not much attached to the rigid sentiments on Predestination:
some even seemed to prefer Melancton's system to that of Calvin. Before
Grotius had determined in what manner he should act with the Ministers
of Charenton, Faucher, Mestrezat, and Daillé came on the 2d of August,
1635[241], to ask him to join their communion; which, they assured him,
discovered a greater disposition than ever towards an union among
Protestants, having lately resolved to admit Lutherans. "They hoped,
they said, that he looked on their Confession of Faith as consistent
with Christianity; that they had the same charitable sentiments
concerning that of the Arminians; that they had not forgot what he had
formerly said, writing against Sibrand, 'that he wondered whether the
Contra-Remonstrants would refuse to admit St. Chrysostom and Melancton
into their communion, if they should offer themselves;' that they had
read and approved of his Treatise on the Truth of the Christian
Religion, and what he had lately written, exhorting Christians to live
in peace; that they had written to Holland, to make no more difficulty
about admitting the Remonstrants into their communion; and that the
Dutch, become more moderate in process of time, would give attention to
their reasons." Grotius answered, that he was ready to give them public
proofs of his willingness to join in communion with them, and that it
was not his fault he had not done this sooner: adding, that if he should
go into any Country where the Lutherans, knowing his sentiments on the
Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, should be willing to receive him into
their communion, he would make no difficulty of joining with them: which
the Ministers approved of.

He had not yet determined to go to Charenton on the 23d of August, 1635.
"I weigh matters (he writes to his[242] brother) that I may do what is
most agreeable to God, useful to the Church, and advantageous to my
Family."

This affair seemed almost finished when the Ministers sent to tell
him[243] that they would willingly receive him, but not as Ambassador
from Sweden, because that kingdom was of a different persuasion. "I am
surprised (he writes to his brother) at the fickleness of people, who
invite the Lutherans to partake with them, and say they cannot receive
me in quality of Ambassador from Sweden, on account of their differing
in opinion from that kingdom." To go to sermon as a private man would
have been no great inconveniency to him[244], but he could not do this
without contradicting his principles, which made him look on the Swedes
as orthodox. He resolved therefore to have Divine Service celebrated
for the future in his own house.

It is evident from this recital, which is faithfully taken from
Grotius's letters, that Du Maurier is mistaken in saying[245], that the
Ministers of Charenton, when they knew that Grotius was Ambassador from
Sweden, deputed one of their number to invite him to their Church; and
he answered, that having neglected him when a Fugitive he would now
neglect them when Ambassador.

Not having been able to settle matters with the reformed Ministers, he
resolved to have Divine Service performed at home. The Lutherans
attended his Chapel as if he publicly professed their religion. He
writes to his brother, Dec. 28, 1635[246], "We celebrated at my house
the Feast of the Nativity: the Duke of Wirtemberg, the Count de
Suarsenbourg, and several Swedish and German Lords assisted at it."

George Calixtus, an eminent Lutheran Minister[247], procured him
Brandanus for his Chaplain. This man was a zealous Lutheran: Grotius
recommended moderation to him, and took him upon condition[248] that he
should be upon his guard in his Sermons, and never enter into
controversy in public, either with the Roman Catholics or the Reformed.
But his zeal carried him away; and seeing his Master's Chapel much
frequented, he took occasion to rail sometimes against the Papists and
even sometimes against the Reformed. Grotius was much offended at it,
not only because it was contrary to agreement, but also because, by
publicly attacking in his own house the established Church and the
others who were tolerated, he exposed himself to the hatred of the whole
kingdom. He several times intimated to Brandanus[249] to behave
otherwise; but his representations and orders having no effect, in
autumn, 1637, he forbad him his Chapel: he kept him however in his house
till the end of February following. To supply the place of Brandanus he
pitched upon Francis Dor, who had been deposed at Sedan for his
adherence to Arminianism, and since lived by keeping a boarding-school,
and teaching French to young Flemings and Germans on their travels in
France. It was some time before he could resolve[250] to quit this
manner of life; but at length accepted of Grotius's offer. They lived in
good understanding together, because their opinions were almost the
same.

FOOTNOTES:

[239] Ep. 340. p. 151.

[240] Ep. 378. p. 138.

[241] Ep. 350. p. 854.

[242] Ep. 354. p. 856.

[243] Ep. 358. p. 857.

[244] Ep. 360. p. 857.

[245] Memoirs, p. 414, 415.

[246] Ep. 363. p. 858.

[247] Ep. 674. p. 275.

[248] Ep. 410. p. 872.

[249] Ep. 840. p. 369.

[250] Ep. 423. p. 879.


VIII. Soon after Oxenstiern left the kingdom, the peace of Vervins was
broken, and the French and Spaniards began that long war which was not
ended till the Pyrenean treaty. The King went to Chateau-Thierry; and
the Cardinal followed him, though indisposed. Grotius went to Court on
the eve of Whitsunday, 1635[251], as well to solicit the affairs of
Sweden, as to attend to the interest of their allies. France was at this
time in great joy on account of the victory at Ardenne, gained by the
Marshals de Brezé and de Chatilon over Prince Thomas of Savoy. The
Marshal de la Force had also gained a great advantage over the Cravats
in Lorrain: which happy beginning raised the hopes of the French
exceedingly. It was at this point of time Grotius arrived at Court. He
went first to Cardinal Richelieu, who was three leagues from
Chateau-Thierry; but as that Minister had been blooded on Whitsunday, he
referred the Ambassador to Boutillier the Superintendant. They talked
about several things: the chief was the payment of the Subsidies.
Grotius after this conference sending to ask how the Cardinal did, his
Eminence desired him to wait on the King. Grotius accordingly went to
compliment his Majesty on the victory of Ardenne, and afterwards begged
that he would be pleased to give orders about the money which was
demanded by the Swedes. The King heard him with great goodness, and
desired him to give in a state of his demands to Boutillier. At taking
his leave, Grotius told his Majesty that he should think himself most
happy if he could do him any service, or promote the common cause. The
King answered, that he might be of great use in what concerned the
affairs of Holland. He afterwards related to him what had passed between
the Marshal de la Force and the Cravats; the news of which, he had just
received.

Grotius was preparing to visit the Superintendant again, when the
Cardinal sent to acquaint him, that he should be glad to see him.
Grotius went: he spoke to his Eminence of the sums due to Sweden before
the death of King Gustavus, and which Chavigni, Secretary of State for
foreign affairs, and Boutillier's son, promised the High Chancellor
should be paid. The Cardinal answered, that his bad state of health and
greater affairs had made him much a stranger to those particulars; and
that since the Superintendant and Bullion said they were ignorant of the
King's intentions on the subject, he must wait Chavigni's return, who
was expected at Court in a few days.

Grotius after this visit went to the Superintendant, with whom he left a
memorial of his demands as his Majesty had desired. Boutillier talked in
the same strain the Cardinal had done concerning the money due to the
Swedes.

Things being in this situation, Grotius returned to Paris, leaving his
Secretary at Court, who was to give him notice of Chavigni's return.

The King drawing nearer Paris, Chavigni came back to that city. The
Swedish Ambassador[252] sent several times to demand an interview, which
he eluded; sometimes it was pretended he was gone out; at other times he
was busy: he once made a positive appointment with him; but when
Grotius came to his house, he was gone to wait upon the King at
Monceaux. At his return he appointed another meeting; Grotius did not
fail to be there: Chavigni assured him, that some pressing business
hindered him from conferring with him at that time. The Cardinal
returning very ill to Ruel, Chavigni went to see him; Grotius followed,
and pressed him so closely, he could not put him off. Bullion was
present: Chavigni pretended that there never had been any positive
promise to pay the arrears of the old subsidies; that he had only said
from the King, that as far as the situation of affairs would allow, his
Majesty would endeavour that the High Chancellor should have no reason
to complain. However Grotius recommended this affair to Bullion as being
just in itself; and Bullion answered, that he would give as much
attention to it as the state of the finances would permit. Grotius
shewed them his letters from Germany, informing him that the body of
twelve thousand men, which the King engaged to furnish, was in a very
bad condition, and that even the interest of France required that it
should be speedily completed. They made answer, that the King intended
it, and that this army would soon be increased to seventeen thousand
men.

Grotius's pressing solicitations were troublesome to Chavigni[253], and
we see that he was afraid of his visits. He sought pretences for delay,
and even often broke his appointments with so little decency, that
Grotius complained to the High Chancellor that Chavigni did not shew
proper respect to the dignity of an Ambassador from Sweden.

The King going to Fontainebleau in summer, 1635[254], and carrying
Boutillier with him, whose son was with the Duke of Orleans, Servin,
Secretary at War, remained at Paris. Grotius went to see him and was
received with great politeness and friendship.

He spoke to him of the subsidies; Servien promised his good offices.
Grotius also recommended to him the interests of the Duke of Weymar, who
was hard pressed by his enemies: and he received fair promises. Some
days after, Servien returned his visit[255]. July 20, 1635, Grotius went
to see the Cardinal at Ruel[256]; and spoke to him of the money owing to
Sweden. His Eminence owned it; but enlarged much on the great expence
France was put to for the allies; and wished the Swedish Ambassador
would confer on this and other matters with Father Joseph, who had an
apartment at Ruel near the Cardinal's. Grotius saw him, and received
much satisfaction. The Father said he had always disapproved of the
delays in the payment of the subsidies; that he would use his endeavours
to get the promises made to Sweden punctually performed, and to
perpetuate a good understanding between the two crowns, which would be
for the interest of both: he added, that the troops intended for
augmenting the army in Germany were already on their march.

Grotius met with the better reception as the French Court was under some
uneasiness lest the allies should make a separate peace. The Cardinal
gave some hints of what he apprehended on this subject: Grotius removed
his fears in relation to Sweden, and the Cardinal promised that France
would be faithful to her engagements. Grotius did not lose sight of the
affair of the subsidies[257]: he went several times to Bullion, on whom
it partly depended as belonging to his department: but Bullion always
refused to speak to him under pretence of indisposition or multiplicity
of business, which did not leave him master of his own time. Grotius
judging this behaviour equivalent to a positive denial, wrote to the
High Chancellor, that he thought his Excellency should write to the King
himself. The answers of the Ministry depended on the situation of
affairs[258]: when France had need of Oxenstiern they made fine promises
to Grotius, who was not duped by them. At last he saw Bullion[259], who,
after enlarging much on the King's great expence in maintaining an
hundred and fifty thousand men, promised to advance two hundred thousand
Francs; but never issued the order. Lewis XIII. making a progress
towards Lorain, Cardinal Richelieu was left at Paris with absolute
power. Grotius had an audience of him in September 1635. He found him in
a very bad humour. His Eminence said he was well assured the High
Chancellor was negotiating a separate treaty with the Elector of Saxony;
that it was vain to make alliances if they were not faithfully observed;
that for his part he was resolved to adhere to his engagements, and
chose rather to be deceived than to deceive. Grotius answered, that it
was true the Elector of Saxony had made proposals to the High
Chancellor, but his Excellency had written to the Elector himself, had
told his Envoys, and sent a deputation to inform him, that a separate
treaty would be injurious to France and the other allies of Sweden: The
Ambassador added, that he had orders to declare to his Eminence, that in
case Sweden should be abandoned by France, he must not be surprised if
the necessity of affairs should oblige the Swedish Ministers to have
recourse to expedients which were very far from their intention. The
Cardinal replied, that that was the usual style of such as depart from
their engagements and treat separately. Grotius assured him that there
was nothing yet done; that it were to be wished France would send a
Minister to Oxenstiern to act in concert with him; and that it was time
to pay the arrears which were still owing to Sweden notwithstanding the
frequent promises to the contrary, and whose payment Bullion always
deferred. The Cardinal made no answer to this article: he asked the
Ambassador whether he thought the High Chancellor had an inclination to
return to his own country. Grotius replied, that that illustrious
minister entertained no thoughts but what were honourable and great, and
that his principal object was to terminate with dignity the great
affairs with which he was entrusted. The Ambassador at the same time
took occasion to thank the Cardinal for the attention which the King and
his Eminence gave to what passed on the Rhine. The Cardinal intimating
that he heard the Princes in those parts had a great aversion to
Oxenstiern, Grotius replied, that it was impossible it should be
otherwise as things were situated; and that a Foreigner, however great
his prudence and modesty might be, would be always odious to Princes
whose authority and dignity he eclipsed. The end of the conference was
more calm: The Cardinal conducted Grotius to the door of the chamber,
excusing himself that his health did not permit him to go farther. A
month after this audience Grotius demanded another of his Eminence,
which he obtained, after asking it five days successively[260], at Ruel.
Grotius gave him to understand that the letters he received from Germany
ought to make them very uneasy. The Cardinal replied, that he
apprehended the bad state of affairs was exaggerated in order to excuse
a separate peace; but that no honourable or lasting one could be made
but in conjunction, as he desired. His Eminence grew more mild
afterwards, and promised that the Marquis de St. Chaumont should in a
little time set out for Germany with very ample powers to act in concert
with Oxenstiern for the good of the common cause. He desired the
Ambassador to see Bullion in relation to the subsidies. Father Joseph
was present at this audience. The Cardinal treated Grotius with more
respect than he had ever done: he waited on him a little beyond the
door of his Chamber, and gave him the upper hand.

Bullion being at Ruel, Grotius went to wait on him: he promised to give
two hundred thousand Francs, and even to add three hundred thousand more
as soon as the state of the King's affairs would permit it. The
Ambassador answered, that was putting off the payment to a long day.
Bullion represented that the King sent large sums into the Valtoline,
Italy, Germany, Lorain, Piccardy, and Flanders. All this was very true;
but the greatest part, Grotius said, remained in the hands of harpies.
He informed the Chancellor of these conferences in a letter dated at
Paris, October 12, 1635, which he concludes with saying that the
fidelity which he owed to the kingdom of Sweden and to his Excellency
obliged him to observe, that money was very scarce in France, and that
the way to derive advantage from the peace was to hasten its conclusion.
The Marquis de St. Chaumont, who was nominated to go to Germany, was not
liked by Grotius: he was a declared enemy of the Protestants[261], and
it has even been said that he was made choice of for the embassy into
Germany out of compliment to the Court of Rome, who complained loudly of
the protection given by France to Heretics. St. Chaumont's zeal, which
was to do him much honour at the Court of Rome, was no merit in Germany,
where it might even injure the common cause. He set out on his embassy
without having had any conference with the Swedish Ambassador[262], and
even without visiting him; which seemed contrary to custom and decency.

November 3, 1635, Grotius went to Ruel to see the Cardinal[263] whom he
found in a very bad humour. His Eminence thought Sweden wanted to make a
separate peace: he enlarged much on the respect due to the observance of
treaties, and that there could never be any necessity for acting
dishonourably; he added, that the design of Grotius's embassy was a very
bad one, and that he could only derive dishonour from it, since it had
led him first to make objections against the treaty of Paris, and
secondly to acknowledge that the Swedes would not abide by what they had
agreed on at Compeigne. Grotius answered, that the High Chancellor was
in the greatest dilemma, surrounded by enemies, and abandoned by his
allies; that he himself had long solicited the money promised, but could
never obtain payment; that the sending a French Minister into Germany,
so often demanded, was agreed to much later than the good of the common
cause required; and that the High Chancellor desired nothing more than
to remedy the unhappy situation of affairs. The Cardinal made no answer
concerning the remedy to be applied; and contented himself with saying
that these general discourses sufficiently shewed a formed design of
making a separate peace. He added, that all the Protestants were
treacherous; which was a reason not only for being on one's guard in
treating with them, but also for thinking their religion bad. Grotius
grew warm, and said, that he needed not produce former instances to
prove the integrity and sincerity of the Protestants, since the High
Chancellor and the Duke of Weymar had never departed from their
engagements. The Cardinal pretended that the peace which was just
concluded between Poland and Sweden, by the mediation of France, put the
Swedes in condition to continue the war against the Emperor. Grotius
answered, that it was not yet ratified; that, besides, the cession of
Prussia, stipulated by this treaty, was very disadvantageous to Sweden,
because that province not only covered the kingdom, but also yielded a
rich revenue. The Cardinal seemed to be in some emotion, and said that
it required a great command of temper to listen patiently to discourses
that bordered so near on ingratitude. Grotius assured him, that in all
he had advanced he exactly followed his instructions. The Cardinal
seemed displeased with those who had given them; and added that if the
High Chancellor was not content with the peace between Sweden and
Poland, it was from private views, because he lost the government of
Prussia. After this sharp conversation, the Cardinal appeared more calm;
and said, that he had nothing to do but hear what might be advanced, and
would not judge till he had seen what was done. Grotius answered, that
the High Chancellor would always act as a man of honour and a man of
courage.

November 5, Grotius had an audience of the King, who complained much,
that after having been at so great expence, to the prejudice of his own
affairs, on account of the Germans, they should break their treaties.

Grotius went to Ruel on the 14th of December[264], again to solicit the
payment of what was due to Sweden. He found there a courier from the
Marquis de St. Chaumont, who delivered to him some letters he had
brought with him from the High Chancellor. Grotius suspected that they
had been opened, for besides their being dirty, the Courier had been
arrived near a month; and he gave very bad reasons both for the
condition of the letters, and his not delivering them sooner; he said
they had fallen into the sea; that he had been at Paris, but could not
find Grotius's house; and that he had been since kept at Ruel. What made
Grotius easy, was that these letters were written with so much
circumspection, had they been intercepted, the reading of them would
rather have been advantageous than hurtful to Sweden. The French Court's
fears lest the Swedes should conclude a separate peace made the
Ministers promise him speedy payment of the arrears of the subsidies:
Bullion assured him that he would without delay advance three hundred
thousand Francs at several small payments (which Grotius disliked) and
that he had already given orders for paying other two hundred thousand
Francs: Servien promised that France would make greater efforts next
campaign, if Sweden would continue the war.

In the beginning of 1636[265] Grotius went to see the Cardinal, who
complained bitterly that Grotius had written to Holland that the affairs
of France were in a deplorable situation, and the French still on the
point of making their peace. Grotius assured him it was a pure calumny:
the Cardinal pretended that it was known to the French Ambassadors at
the Hague. Grotius assured him these false reports owed their rise to
the artifices of Pau and Aërsens his declared enemies, that Camerarius
the Swedish Ambassador in Holland, with whom he corresponded by letters,
would attest the contrary; that this report was probably occasioned by
an article inserted in the Brussels Gazette, that his letters had been
intercepted, representing France as in the greatest declension, of which
he had never had a thought; and that this was done with design to make
him lose the friendship of his patrons. He added, that he had forgot his
Country; that indeed he wished its preservation on account of the
friends and the small estate he had in it; but that he had given himself
entirely to Sweden, and was not so ignorant, not to know how much it
imported Sweden that whilst she was in arms the Dutch should continue
the war; nor so dishonest, to give counsels contrary to the interest of
Sweden and of the High Chancellor, to whom he owed every thing; and that
if his Eminence would put it in his power to do some service to France,
he would much more chearfully refute these calumnies by his actions,
than by his words. The Cardinal resumed an air of serenity, said several
obliging things, and assured him that for the future he would behave to
him with more openness. He reconducted him a pretty way, politely
excusing himself that he did not go farther lest he should be oppressed
by the croud that wanted to speak to him.

[266]The Duke of Parma arriving about this time at Paris to negotiate
with the Court of France, great difficulties arose with regard to the
ceremonial. The Pope's Nuncios, Mazarin, and Bolognetti, and the other
Ambassadors, would not visit him because they could not agree about the
manner in which he should receive them: the English and Swedish
Ambassadors did not even send their Coaches to meet him, because they
knew that those of the Nuncios would take the precedence. The Duke of
Weymar came to Paris in spring 1636. Grotius[267], who was extremely
circumspect, was in doubt whether he should pay him the first visit: and
before he determined, he wanted to see what the English Ambassador would
do. The Duke sent him his compliments, and the Ambassadors coming to an
agreement to wait first on that Prince[268], Grotius went to see him,
and was extremely well received: the Duke returned his visit. As it was
through the mediation of the Count d'Avaux that the truce of twenty-six
years between Sweden and Poland was concluded, Queen Christina[269]
ordered her Ambassador to return her thanks to the King of France.
Grotius obtained an audience, April 17, 1636, at Chantilly, and gave an
account of what passed at it in a letter to her Majesty, dated April
24[270]. Having presented to the King the Queen of Sweden's letter, his
Majesty assured him, that he interested himself most sincerely in her
Majesty's health and prosperity; that she might depend upon the
constancy of these his sentiments; that he had had the conclusion of the
war between Sweden and Poland the more at heart, as he hoped her Swedish
Majesty, having no longer any differences with the Poles, would give all
her attention to the affairs of Germany; that he already saw with
pleasure his hopes had not been without foundation: that he would write
to his Ministers to know how the payment of the subsidies stood; that he
had always had a good opinion of D'Avaux and therefore employed him in
affairs of importance, and intended to make farther use of his service.
Grotius sent the High Chancellor[271] a copy of this letter to the
Queen. He used to send her Majesty the substance of any affair of
importance without descending to particulars, as Oxenstiern[272] had
recommended to him.

He had an audience of Cardinal Richelieu[273] in the beginning of May,
1636: The affairs of the allies were in a good situation. His Eminence
greatly extolled the High Chancellor: he said what he had done was not
inferior to the exploits of the great Gustavus; that it was a kind of
miracle that the Swedes, after being betrayed by their friends, and
forced into a corner of Germany, should have been able in such a short
time to penetrate into the heart of the Empire. He assured Grotius, that
a part of the money due had been paid by St. Chaumont, and that in a
little time there would not be one sol owing. Afterwards embracing the
Swedish Ambassador with great cordiality, he begged of him in the name
of polite learning, which they both professed to cultivate, to do all in
his power for the advantage of the common cause, especially with the
English: and, to efface the remembrance of the ill treatment Grotius had
received, he told him with a smile, that the French were often fools in
the opinion of other nations, but they soon recovered their right
senses. This change in the Cardinal proceeded from the Queen of Sweden's
approving Oxenstiern's nomination of Grotius to be Ambassador in France;
from the confidence which the High Chancellor placed in him; from Pau's
having lost his authority in Holland; and from the Prince of Orange's
having spoken of him in terms of friendship. The Cardinal magnified the
preparations made by France at sea, from which great things, he said,
might be expected if the English would join: he wanted they should be
given to understand that the French and Swedes would undertake to obtain
the restitution of the Palatinate to Prince Charles Lewis the King of
England's nephew, if the English would unite their forces with those of
France and Sweden. He added that it was unjust in the English to claim
the Empire of the sea, but that it would be improper for some time
openly to dispute their pretensions, for fear of preventing their
joining in the treaty, or on the other hand to acknowledge directly the
right they assumed.

This was all that passed directly between Cardinal Richelieu and
Grotius: they never conferred together afterwards. The Swedish
Ambassador thought he should derogate from his dignity by visiting a
Minister, who, because he was invested with the Purple, refused to give
the upper hand to Ambassadors. He resolved therefore to see his Eminence
no more, but to treat with the other Ministers.

The English were the first who disputed the privileges of the
Cardinalship. Lord Scudamore, Ambassador in ordinary from England to
France[274], would not see Cardinal Richelieu: he sent to tell him that
he was expressly ordered to visit no one who assumed in his own house
the precedency of the Ambassadors of Kings. The English had been induced
to take this step by the representation of the Protestants, that to
suffer a Cardinal to take the upper hand of an Ambassador was to
acknowledge the Pope's dignity. Grotius informed the High Chancellor of
this by a letter of the fourth of September, 1635, where he adds, "I say
not this as if I thought the English ought to be imitated in every
thing, but that we may avoid whatever might expose us to contempt: than
which nothing, I am persuaded, can be of more prejudice to the interests
of kings and kingdoms."

He continued, however, to see the Cardinal till the arrival of the Earl
of Leicester, who came to Paris in spring 1636, as Ambassador
Extraordinary from the King of England, with orders not to visit the
Cardinal, because the British Court thought it indecent that Ambassadors
should yield the precedence to Cardinals; and that it was even contrary
to the ceremonial of the Court of Spain. "I commend, says Grotius
writing to the High Chancellor[275], those who defend their rights: I
dare not however imitate them without orders." He thought it most proper
therefore not to visit the Cardinal till he knew the High Chancellor's
intentions. Receiving no orders to continue his visits to him[276], he
wholly left them off; and the Queen's Ministry thinking the crown of
Sweden at least equal in dignity to that of England, approved of his
conduct. Count d'Avaux was ordered to use his endeavours with the
Swedish Ministry to write to Grotius that he should continue to visit
the Cardinal as formerly: D'Avaux spoke of it to Salvius, a
Privy-Councellor, and Chancellor of the Court, who was with him at
Hamburg negotiating a new treaty. Salvius answered, that Grotius had
received orders to conform to the Earl of Leicester's example; that it
would be absurd that the Minister of such a King as yielded not the
precedence to any other King, should yield it to a Minister; and, in
fine, that the dignity of Cardinal was unknown in Sweden.

Grotius informs us in several of his letters, that the English were the
first who refused to give the Cardinal the upper hand. He writes to the
High Chancellor, "[277]Chavigni asked, as by chance, whether I would see
the Cardinal? I answered, that since the English had ceased to visit
him, I was ordered not to see him. I have in fact letters on that
subject from Schmalz. I added, if the Earl of Leicester, who wished so
well to the common cause, and greatly desired the Cardinal's friendship,
should find an expedient to reconcile what is due to the dignity, of his
King to that of the Cardinal, it would be an example for me to follow:
but (continues Grotius) the Earl of Leicester has assured me that the
King will not change his resolution: and I dare make no innovation
without a new order." He writes to Muller[278], "I have no personal
dealings with the Cardinal: the Regents of the kingdom must send me
their orders if they would have me follow the example of the English. If
they think it improper, they need only speak, it is mine to obey. I have
no interest in the matter."

We have enlarged so much on this article, because Puffendorf, the author
of _Vindiciæ Grotianæ_, and Father Bougeant have pretended[279] that the
Earl of Leicester only followed Grotius's example, in refusing to give
the upper hand to Cardinal Richelieu; which they would not have advanced
had they read with attention the Ambassador's letters.

Grotius's steadiness in supporting the interest and dignity of the crown
of Sweden rendered him most odious to the court of France. The Marquis
de St. Chaumont was ordered to demand his recall. Oxenstiern, who knew
that it was his great zeal for the service of the Queen his mistress
that displeased the Cardinal, would not consent to it: he apprised
Grotius of what was plotting against him, and the Swedish ambassador
wrote him a long letter on this subject[280], in which he tells him that
St. Chamount's demand proved how greatly the Courtiers were changed
towards him, for he had been extremely well received by the King at his
last audience; Madam de Combalet, the Cardinal's niece, assured his wife
in presence of several persons, that the Cardinal had a high esteem for
him; and Count Brulon, Introductor of Ambassadors, had asked him to wait
upon the King whenever he pleased, even if he had no business, his
Majesty would take it extremely well. Grotius was persuaded that the
ill-offices done him proceeded from Pau the Dutch Ambassador, and some
Frenchmen. Pau and his accomplices hoped by this persecution to force
Grotius to seek a reconciliation with the Dutch by some meanness. As to
the Frenchmen, their dislike to Grotius was occasioned by his opposition
to their design of abasing the crown of Sweden. "If the dignity of the
crown of Sweden is to receive any diminution, I would rather, he says,
it should be by another than by me." Father Joseph was one of the
greatest opposers of Grotius[281], who would not visit him because the
Capuchin had no title; and, besides, the English Ambassadors had
declared they would not see him. As often as they met, Grotius treated
him with civility; but the Monk, who had all the Cardinal's confidence,
wanted to be considered as a Minister.

The Count d'Avaux was also against Grotius. There having been some
interruption in the payment of the subsidies, the Count said
publicly[282] it was owing to the Swedish Ambassador in France, who did
not make his court to the first Minister, though he was known to possess
all the King's authority; and even refused him the honours paid by the
other Ambassadors.

Grotius, informed of the French Ministry's dislike to him, wrote to the
High Chancellor[283], praying him to consider whether it would not be
better that Sweden should have no Ambassador in France, but only an
Agent without a public character, to enquire into what passed, and hear
what was said to him. The Swedish Ministry judged that the more Cardinal
Richelieu desired Grotius's removal, the greater reason they had for
supporting him, since he displeased only by doing his duty too well.
Grotius was informed of their sentiments, and wrote to Salvius[284],
that the justice which the Regents of Sweden did him would serve to
confirm his steadiness. Father Joseph said[285] publicly, the French
Ministers desired Grotius's removal, because it was evident to them that
he opposed the success of the affairs of France. This being repeated to
Grotius, he answered, that it was of little importance to him whether he
served Sweden in France or in another kingdom, but that the French might
be persuaded if a successor were sent he would be of the same opinion.
He himself informed the High Chancellor of what was plotting against him
in France; and the Regents of Sweden, notwithstanding this violent
opposition, wrote to him that they were well satisfied with his good
services[286].

The Cardinal's tools endeavoured to render Sweden suspicious of him, by
insinuating that he was a Pensioner of France. His friends told him one
day his name was in the list of pensioners. He immediately informed the
Chancellor of it; adding, that he did not know whether it was done by
mistake or with a bad design; that having been formerly a Pensioner of
the King, his name might possibly have been copied from some old list;
but there was also reason to think it was done with a design to injure
him: he farther adds, "I can assure your Excellency, before God, that I
have not received a farthing from the Court of France since I have been
in the service of Sweden; and that I am determined to accept of only
what is usually given Ambassadors when they have their audience of
leave."

It is probable that his name was put in the list of Pensioners, because
the Ministry imagined if they could get him to accept of a pension, they
would more easily bring him to their ends. It is certain they offered
him one[287]; and when they saw that he absolutely refused it, as not
thinking he could with decency be a Minister of Sweden and a Pensioner
of France at the same time, they rightly judged that he would never
sacrifice the interest of the Crown of Sweden to the pretensions of the
French Ministers. They sometimes caressed him[288], however, because
they saw him powerfully protected. Feuquieres was ordered to tell him
they were very well satisfied with him: but he believed these
compliments were made, that, being less on his guard, they might have a
better opportunity to hurt him. "For (he writes to Oxenstiern[289]) I am
persuaded they would be glad to see me gone, because I absolutely refuse
the presents they offer me; and suffer not myself to be led by them like
some other Ambassadors. For this reason they put me in such a situation
that I must either sacrifice the dignity of the kingdom, or expose
myself to be hated. I will never do any thing against the honour of
Sweden; and I will shun, as much as I can, what may render me odious.
Whatever I may do on such critical occasions, I shall be censured; but I
rely on the testimony of a good conscience."

They often threw difficulties in his way, hoping that the Regents of
Sweden, tired out with these disputes, would recall him. We are
assured[290], that when he went to see the Chancellor Seguier, one of
the Cardinal's creatures, Seguier seated himself in the higher place;
which obliged Grotius to take his chair himself to place it above the
Chancellor. Besides the vexation which they endeavoured to give him in
France, he met with some disgust even from the Swedes. It was intimated
to him at the Court of France, that the High Chancellor's nomination to
the embassy of Paris was not sufficient; it must be approved of by the
Regency of Sweden. This difficulty gave him uneasiness: he writes to
Schmalz, Feb. 28, 1636[291], "I know the High Chancellor has authority
enough to maintain me in the post to which he has raised me; but I think
I should be better able to defend the interest of the crown, if it were
made to appear that what the High Chancellor has done for me is approved
of in Sweden. He is mortal; and besides I find his power of sending
Ambassadors is sometimes called in question here." Grotius was soon
after satisfied, the Regency of Sweden confirming his nominations[292].

Having been some time without receiving letters from the Swedish
Ministers, it gave him much chagrin, because it disabled him from
serving them effectually: besides, he looked on it as a want of respect.
August 31, 1635, he wrote to the High Chancellor[293], "Since your
Sublimity set out for Hamburg, I have received no letter from you, nor
from any of your attendants: what grieves me is, that not knowing the
actual state of things, I scarce have assurance to speak to those to
whom I must recommend the affairs with which I am charged." Eight days
after, he renewed his complaint in a more bitter tone: "I have desired
nothing so much, says he, as to give proofs of my zeal and fidelity to
the kingdom of Sweden, and to your Sublimity, in this embassy: I have
not yet failed in my duty, and I hope I never shall fail; but it is
impossible for me to discharge it properly, if I am kept ignorant of
those things which an Ambassador ought to know. I have no accounts from
Sweden. If I have not received letters from your Sublimity since you
set out for Hamburg, I ascribe your silence to the multiplicity of your
affairs: but Schmalz has not written to me since; and for some time I
have had no letter from Camerarius or Grubbius. If they imagine my
enemies so powerful, that I ought to remain here Ambassador only in
name, without being let into affairs, and without doing any thing; that
will not suit me. I am not a man that would be chargeable or a dishonour
to those who nominated me to my employment. Besides, they are mistaken
if they think my enemies have so much credit in my native Country; and
those who know what passes there think as I do. I humbly beg you would
be pleased to indemnify me for the expences I have been obliged to be
at, and let me at liberty: wherever I go, it will be a sufficient
recommendation not to have displeased your Sublimity."

Whilst he was thus tormenting himself without much reason, he received
two letters from the High Chancellor which made him easy. He thanked him
for them, assuring him that he desired information of what passed, not
from any eager desire for news, but to enable him better to fulfil the
functions of his embassy. Oxenstiern fully satisfied him; and Grotius
was extremely pleased, in the end of 1635 and the beginning of 1636,
with the attention paid him by that great minister. Dec. 20, 1635[294],
he writes, "I cannot sufficiently thank your Sublimity for the care you
have taken of my private affairs and my dignity; it is my duty so to act
as not to appear unworthy such great and continual favours. God forbid
that I should want to penetrate into those things which prudence
requires to be buried in mystery; but as to public matters, I would not
be the last to know them, and to learn them from strangers." "It gives
me great satisfaction (he writes to Oxenstiern's Secretary[295]) that
the High Chancellor is pleased to remark that I discharge my embassy
with honour."

Besides the embarrassment which always attends difficult negotiations,
the trouble of contenting several masters, and the difficulty of
treating with Ministers to whom one is disagreeable, Grotius, who
thought it essential to an Ambassador to live with dignity, received
almost continual uneasiness from the ill payment of his appointments.
Sep. 14, 1635, he wrote to the High Chancellor[296], that the Treasurer
of Sweden refused to pay his quarter's salary; that the expences of his
journies were still unpaid, and that he had exhausted all his private
resources. He repeats in a letter of the 8th of November, 1635[297],
that he had received but one quarter, which was owing even before his
arrival at Paris; that there were two others due since: that he spared
no expence in order to live with more dignity; that his journies and the
furnishing of his house were very expensive; that he could borrow no
more, and what he had already borrowed, was done on very disadvantageous
terms. At the end of 1638 there were six quarters owing, amounting to
twelve thousand rixdollars, besides twelve hundred which he had laid out
for the service of Sweden. He was desirous of being permitted to pay
himself out of the subsidies given by France. He represented that his
expence was considerably increased by the high tax laid on all sorts of
goods, which made living so dear, that his salary was insufficient for
supporting his dignity. For two whole years he received no remittance,
and in the end of May, 1639[298], there were forty thousand francs owing
besides what he had laid out on several occasions. His salary was,
therefore, twenty thousand francs _per annum_. Salvius ordered one half
of what was owing him to be paid out of the subsidies received by
Sweden from France; but it was long before Grotius got the money: for on
the 9th of July, 1639[299], he pressed Salvius very warmly to order
immediate payment; and went so far as to tell him that if he still left
him in this perplexity, he would demand to be reimbursed and recalled.
It was in these critical circumstances that the French Ministry offered
him a supply, which he refused with great disinterestedness[300].

Living at Paris growing every day dearer, the Swedish Ambassador, not
knowing how to support his dignity, took a resolution to ask of the
Queen of Sweden, Jan. 21, 1640[301], that, as he was unable to make any
more advances, and his anxiety about this matter hindered him in some
measure from attending to her Majesty's more important concerns, he
might be permitted to pay himself out of the French subsidy. Without
waiting for an answer he took sixteen thousand rixdollars of it; and
wrote to the High Chancellor, April 14, 1640[302], that he was compelled
to this by necessity, and that it was no more than had been usually done
by the Ambassadors who resided in France. There is reason to think that
Oxenstiern, who had a friendship for the Ambassador, found no fault with
his boldness, as he did not venture on this step till all his resources
were exhausted.

FOOTNOTES:

[251] Ep. 413. p. 150.

[252] Ep. 419. p. 153.

[253] Ep. 426. p. 157.

[254] Ep. 434. p. 160.

[255] Ep. 436. p. 162.

[256] Ep. 437. p. 162.

[257] Ep. 438. p. 163.

[258] Ep. 468. p. 177.

[259] Ep. 475. p. 181.

[260] Ep. 491. p. 188.

[261] Ep. 475. p. 180. 492. p. 189. 504. p. 194. & 517. p. 200.

[262] Ep. 475. p. 180.

[263] Ep. 505. p. 194.

[264] Ep. 528. p. 204.

[265] Ep. 534. p. 208.

[266] Ep. 556. p. 219.

[267] Ep. 560. p. 221.

[268] Ep. 562. p. 222.

[269] Ep. 577. p. 227.

[270] Ep. 580. p. 228.

[271] Ep. 581. p. 229.

[272] Ep. 557. p. 210.

[273] Ep. 585. p. 231.

[274] Ep. 475. p. 180.

[275] Ep. 598. p. 239.

[276] Ep. 800. p. 347.

[277] Ep. 1135. p. 513.

[278] Ep. 226. p. 553.

[279] Puffendorf, l. 11. § 78. Vindiciæ Grotianæ, p. 396. Hist. des
guerres de Vestphalie, t. 1. l. 5. p. 362.

[280] Ep. 636. p. 256.

[281] Ep. 598. p. 235.

[282] Vin. Grot. p. 394.

[283] Ep. 690. p. 284. Vin. Grot. p. 378.

[284] Ep. 716. p. 301.

[285] Ep. 739. p. 313.

[286] Ep. 745. p. 317 & 754. p. 323.

[287] Ep. 636. p. 257. 1263. p. 575. & 1289. p. 583.

[288] Ep. 958. p. 428.

[289] Ep. 958. p. 428.

[290] Puffendorf, l. 11. § 78. Bougeant, l. 5. p. 362. See Ep. 1414. p.
645.

[291] Ep. 557 p. 219.

[292] Ep. 585. p. 231.

[293] Ep. 470. p. 178.

[294] Ep. 528. p. 204.

[295] Ep. 533. p. 207.

[296] Ep. 475. p. 181.

[297] Ep. 505. p. 195.

[298] Ep. 1177. p. 533. 1183. p. 536. & 1199. p. 542.

[299] Ep. 1203. p. 544.

[300] Ep. 1263. p. 573. & 1289. p. 583.

[301] Ep. 1308. p. 592.

[302] Ep. 1350. p. 612.


IX. The French Ministry carried their animosity against Grotius so far,
that, if we may believe the Swedish Historian[303], they instigated the
Venetian Ambassador to dispute with him for precedency at the public
entry of the Ambassador in ordinary from England. The French took the
part of the Venetians. Grotius imagined they did it to make their court
to the Pope. He wrote to the High Chancellor, that Father Joseph, who
had a great desire to be a Cardinal, always favoured such counsels as
might please the court of Rome. Besides, the Capuchin fought to make a
merit with the Cardinal of vexing Grotius, whom they both hated.

About a year after this dispute between the Venetian Ambassador and
Grotius, when they both were waiting in a hall for the King, the
Introductors of Ambassadors placed their seats in such manner, that the
Swedish Ambassador might be dissatisfied. They expected a quarrel, which
would have afforded them diversion. Grotius disappointed them by chusing
rather to stand, than take the seat intended for him. It was on this
occasion he wrote to the High Chancellor, desiring him to consider,
whether, to avoid all those difficulties, it would not be most expedient
to have only a Resident at Paris: but Oxenstiern thought his honour and
duty was the more concerned in protecting Grotius, as his strong
attachment to the honour and interest of his Masters was the reason of
his being harrassed.

FOOTNOTES:

[303] Puff. l. 8.


X. The war which was at this time ravaging Europe gave the greater
uneasiness to the Court of Rome, as there was ground to apprehend that
the success of the Swedes, who were the allies of France, might greatly
prejudice the Roman-Catholic Religion in Germany. Pope Urbin VIII.
ardently desired the re-establishment of Peace, and offered his
mediation for attaining that laudable end. The City of Cologn was chosen
for the place of holding the conferences. The Pope deputed Cardinal
Ginetti in quality of Legate and mediator between the Roman Catholic
Princes; and the Emperor and the King of Spain sent thither their
plenipotentiaries: all this was done without consulting the Dutch and
the Swedes. The great point was, to gain their consent, without which
nothing could be done. The Count de Berlise was ordered to talk with the
Swedish Ambassador on this head. Accordingly he made him a visit,
November 12, 1636[304], and after conversing some time asked Grotius
whether Sweden intended to send plenipotentiaries to Cologn. The
Ambassador made answer, he concluded from the High Chancellor's letters
that the President of the kingdom, to whom that matter had been
referred, would determine it; that the Pope's mediation would be
objected to; but that difficulty, however, might be got over; and then
Oxenstiern would chearfully come himself to Cologn, if business
permitted him, in order to act in concert with the French
Plenipotentiaries, who, he did not doubt, would be persons of the
greatest merit.

Grotius was of opinion that the Swedes ought not to accept of the Pope's
mediation, or send Ministers to Cologn. He wrote a letter about it to
the High Chancellor, Dec. 12, 1636[305], in which he acquaints him, that
talking with Lord Scudamore, Ambassador in ordinary from England, he
told his Lordship that he foresaw the Protestant Plenipotentiaries would
suffer many mortifications in a city where the Pope was held in so great
consideration, and the dignity of Cardinal so much respected.

The Venetian Ambassador, who, agreeably to the intention of his Masters,
ardently desired that the congress might take place, came to make
Grotius a visit: he told him that the Protestants apprehensions of ill
offices from the Pope were without foundation; that he knew from the
Nuncio that the Legate was ordered to concern himself only with the
affairs of the Roman Catholic Princes, and had no intention to
intermeddle with those of the Protestants: he added, that Pessaro, whom
the Republic of Venice had nominated her Plenipotentiary to the
Congress, was extremely well affected to the Swedes. Grotius could not
discover whether the Venetian came of himself, or was sent by the French
Ministry: he suspected that Cardinal Richelieu, who wanted him
[Grotius] out of the kingdom, wished he might go to Cologn.

The learned Godefroy[306], whom the Court of France nominated to
accompany and direct the Plenipotentiaries, had several conferences with
Grotius concerning the peace which they seemed desirous to conclude. The
Swedish Ambassador gave the High Chancellor an account of them in a
letter of the 22d of January, 1637. [307]He acquaints him that Godefroy
himself thought the Swedes ought not to send Plenipotentiaries to
Cologn. He gave for his reasons, that the whole town hated the Swedes;
that the Legates had such aversion to the Protestants, that at Vervins
the Legate declared he would withdraw rather than admit the English
Ministers to the conferences; and that the disputes, which would
infallibly arise between the Plenipotentiaries concerning precedency,
would serve only to sour their minds.

This discourse from one, who was only to speak agreeable to the
intentions of the French Ministry, made Grotius doubt whether Cardinal
Richelieu ever sincerely desired peace. Godefroy also insinuated that
the King of France ought to have the first place after the Emperor, in
political assemblies. Grotius would not allow this claim: he maintained
that the rank granted to Princes in Ecclesiastical Councils ought not to
serve for a rule in Congresses, because in the former regard was only
had to the time of their embracing Christianity; and that the Archbishop
of Upsal had proved at the Council of Basil that the Kingdom of Sweden,
on account of its antiquity and extent, the two most decisive arguments
that could be used in this matter, ought to take place of all others.
Godefroy opposing to them the French King's possession of the
precedency, Grotius, like a zealous Minister of Sweden, maintained, that
that title could only serve against such as had never disputed it; that
in former times the Kings of Sweden had no transactions of this kind but
in the North, where they never yielded the precedency to any person; and
that since they had affairs with France, they always treated upon an
equality. Such were Grotius's pretensions, the validity of which remain
to be proved.

The minds of the contending parties were not yet disposed to conform to
the good intentions of the Pope: and the congress of Cologn did not take
place because the Swedes positively refused to send thither
Plenipotentiaries[308].

FOOTNOTES:

[304] Ep. 632. p. 277 & 278.

[305] Ep. 690. p. 284.

[306] Ep. 699. p. 288.

[307] Ep. 709. p. 296.

[308] Ep. 389. p. 865


XI. Some time after, the Republic of Venice acted in conjunction with
the Pope in order to procure peace to Europe. She made an offer of her
mediation to the Swedes[309], and engaged to send an Ambassador to
Cologn, who would be less suspected of partiality than the Pope's
Legate. The Doge, writing on this subject to the Queen of Sweden, in the
titles given to her omitted that of _most powerful_: this gave great
offence to the Swedes[310]; and the Venetian Ambassador being informed
of it, came to visit Grotius in order to discuss the point. He told him
that the Republic had followed the ancient ceremonial in the titles
given to the Queen; that she gave the King of France only the title of
_most serene and most christian_, and to the King of Spain that of _most
serene and catholic_, without adding _most powerful_. Grotius answered,
that, without presuming to prescribe to the Senate, he would only
observe, that as the Kings of France and England gave the King of Sweden
the title of _most serene and most powerful_, it did not become any
other Prince, much less a Republic, to treat him with less distinction.
He added several facts tending to give a high idea of the dignity of the
Swedish nation. The Venetian promised to write about it to his Masters.
The Queen of Sweden[311] declared that she would accept of the mediation
of the Venetians provided the Republic gave her the honours that were
due to her. Christina had at length satisfaction[312], and the Venetian
Ambassador promised to conform to her intentions.

The name of this Venetian Minister was Corraro. Grotius had reason to be
dissatisfied with him[313]: he had been to visit him, and the Venetian
gave him not the title of Excellency, nor the precedency due to an
Ambassador of Sweden. Grotius determined to cease visiting him for some
time. One thing, however, embarrassed him: as the Republic of Venice was
to be mediator for a general peace it was necessary he should confer
with Corraro: for this reason he wrote to the High Chancellor to know,
whether, in consideration of the public good, he ought to dissemble his
grounds of complaint against the Venetian Ambassador. He had not time to
receive Oxenstiern's answer when Corraro came to visit him[314], and
gave him satisfaction; he assured him, that if he had given him any
offence, it was not from design, but through ignorance and want of
attention. Grotius informed the High Chancellor of this, adding that he
accepted of Corraro's excuses; that he would go to see him, and do all
in his power to gain his friendship. Accordingly he visited him some
days after, and no notice was taken of what had passed, the conversation
turning wholly on public affairs and the projects of a peace.

FOOTNOTES:

[309] Bougeant l. 4. n. 30. Puffendorf l. 10. n. 63.

[310] Grotii Ep. 851. p. 374.

[311] Ep. 949. p. 421.

[312] Ep. 1014. p. 457.

[313] Ep. 947. p. 419.

[314] Ep. 960. p. 429.


XII. There happened at this time a more considerable broil between the
English and Swedes at Paris. Pau the Dutch Ambassador in France being
recalled, Oostervich, Ambassador of the United Provinces at Venice, was
appointed to succeed him[315]. He had been formerly very intimate with
Grotius; and signified to him by their common friends that he intended
to renew their ancient friendship, and live with him in that good
understanding which ought to subsist between the Ministers of allied
powers. Grotius made a proper answer to these advances. Oostervich
preparing to make a public entry into Paris, informed the Swedish
Ambassador of it, February 16, 1637, by his Secretary, asking him at the
same time to send his coach to his entry on the second day following,
according to custom[316]. Grotius sent to make his compliments to the
Dutch Ambassador, and to tell him that he would not fail to send his
coach. He sent it accordingly. There were at that time at Paris an
Ambassador in ordinary and an Ambassador extraordinary from England, who
both sent their coaches, with a great number of their attendants. The
Swedes took the precedency of the English and kept it some time. They
quarrelled; and swords were drawn. The Swedes were worsted, for the
English were much more numerous. The Marshal de la Force, who conducted
the Dutch Ambassador, came to make up the quarrel. The Swedes maintained
that they ought to have the precedency of the English, because the
kingdom of Sweden was more ancient than that of England. The Marshal de
la Force pretended that this question had been decided in the reign of
Henry III. in favour of the English. The Swedes being unequally matched,
agreed to the Marshal's proposal, that the coach of the English
Ambassador in ordinary and that of Grotius should withdraw, without
prejudice to the rights of Sweden.

On the nineteenth of February the two Ambassadors from England sent to
Grotius, to know if it was by his order that his attendants had acted
and spoke in the dispute they had with the English. Grotius answered,
that he had ordered them to support the dignity of the kingdom of Sweden
the most ancient and extensive in Christendom; but that he had no
intention to offend the English; that in the treaties which Sweden made
with France there was always one copy in which Sweden was named first;
that if his people had transgressed in point of form, it was not by his
order; that the small number he sent to the entry, was a demonstration
he did not think the quarrel ought to be determined by strength; that as
to the accommodation, he had no power to make it, nor consequently given
any order on the subject: that he was desirous of maintaining the good
understanding between the two kingdoms, and to live well with the two
English Ambassadors. The Deputies, without making any reply to this
answer, civilly withdrew.

The quarrel was mentioned in the Gazette of France[317]; and Renaudot,
in the account he gave, named the English before the Swedes, and spoke
of the affair as accommodated. Grotius was very angry at this: he sent
to tell him, to name the Swedes first in another Gazette, and to retract
what he had said of the accommodation: Renaudot was even threatened,
that if he did not give this satisfaction to the Swedes, he would be
made to feel to his cost that Sweden was powerful enough to do herself
justice. The Gazetteer replied, that he was obliged to obey only the
King and the Cardinal.

This grand dispute did not hinder[318] the English Ambassador from
visiting Grotius on public business. The Earl of Leicester[319],
Ambassador extraordinary from England, had a long conference with him
concerning their quarrel: he pretended that what Grotius advanced in
favour of the precedency of the Swedes, was a thing unheard of. The
Ambassador from Sweden replied, that the same facts had been already
maintained in the Council of Basil; and took occasion to set forth the
extent and antiquity of the kingdom of Sweden. Leicester said, that they
had been of the same opinion formerly in France, since they decided
against the Swedes. Grotius answered, that he much questioned this
decision, and that at the time it was pretended to be made he did not
think there was any Ambassador in France from Sweden, which nation was
little known to those of the South: The English Ambassador wanted to
avail himself of the Pope's authority in favour of his nation: Grotius
rejected it. Leicester insisted that England had been converted to
Christianity before Sweden: Grotius replied, that this was a very bad
reason for precedency; and the employing it might be a prejudice to the
Christian religion by hindering the conversion of the Pagans and
Mahometans.

The King of England was not offended with Grotius on account of this
dispute; for after it happened Lord Scudamore, Ambassador in ordinary
from King Charles, told him from his Master, that he would be glad to
see him in England to restore the union between the English and Swedes.
The Earl of Leicester, who had the affair of the precedency much at
heart, had another conferrence on that subject with Grotius, of which
the latter gives an account to the High Chancellor, July 26, 1637. The
English Minister represented, that as the Danes and Norwegians, whose
kingdoms were very ancient, yielded the precedency to England, the
Swedes ought to follow their example. Grotius answered, that he did not
know how the Danes and Norwegians acted; but their conduct ought not to
prejudice the rights of Sweden. Leicester asked, how high the antiquity
of Sweden reached. Grotius answered, that it was older than the most
ancient annals; that, without going higher, it was sufficient to mention
the testimony of Tacitus, who speaks of the Swedish nation as very
powerful by sea and land. Leicester replied, that a long space of time
had elapsed since Tacitus wrote, in which no mention was made of the
Swedes. Grotius shewed him that in every age they were spoken of by the
Germans, French, and English; and that even if less frequent notice had
been taken of them, it would not be matter of surprise, since in those
times the Swedes had no disputes but with the Russians, the Sclavonians,
the Danes, and Norwegians; that their embracing Christianity late could
not prejudice the dignity of the kingdom, or the claims of the Swedes.
The Ambassador of Sweden afterwards asked Leicester what rank the
English pretended to give the Czar, to whom the Kings of Sweden would
never yield the precedency. He added, that many people were surprised
when the truce was negociating at Holland, that the French always
preceded the English, who contented themselves with a writing,
signifying that it was without prejudice to their rights. Leicester said
he did not see how it was possible to assemble a congress of ministers
of Princes who would all have the first place. Grotius made answer, that
several expedients might be found to save the claim of each.

This quarrel, from which a rupture between the two nations was
apprehended, had no bad consequence, and did not even lessen the
friendship which subsisted between the Ministers of the two kingdoms.
Lord Scudamore's lady being brought to bed at Paris, the lady of the
Swedish Ambassador stood godmother[320] to the child in the month of
March, 1638, that is, during the height of the quarrel.

FOOTNOTES:

[315] Ep. 718. p. 302.

[316] It is surprising that Father Bougeant, after reading the
DCCXVIIIth letter of Grotius, should contradict him so manifestly by
placing this quarrel in 1639. Hist. l. 5. n. 5.

[317] Ep. 719. p. 304.

[318] Ep. 722. p. 305.

[319] P. 306. & epist. 395. p. 866.

[320] Ep. 919. p. 406.




BOOK V.


Grotius, notwithstanding his resolution to abstain from visiting
Cardinal Richelieu, often paid his court to the King, and was well
received. His Majesty returning to Paris after the campaign of 1636,
Grotius went on the 22d of November[321] to compliment him. The speech
he made was short, such as Kings love. It is in these terms he speaks of
it to the High Chancellor, to whom he sent it. He has preserved to us
the substance of his Majesty's answer. "The King, says he, answered me
with great goodness, that the success of the Swedes would always give
him much pleasure; that they began the year well, and the French
followed their example; that the Spaniards made great efforts, but were
nevertheless driven out of Picardy and Burgundy; that Cardinal Richelieu
deserved thanks for what he did in the recovery of Corbia, and that the
Marshal de Chatillon also behaved well: he concluded with complaining of
the Germans, who did not observe their treaties."

The divisions in the court being healed up for some time, by the
reconciliation of Gaston of France with the King, who was returned to
Paris, Grotius, at an audience of his Majesty on the 23d of February,
1637[322], complimented him on the restoration of peace in the Royal
Family. The King assured him that he and his brother were on the best
terms, and that this reunion gave him the highest satisfaction: he
promised to make very great efforts against the common enemy, and never
to separate his interests from those of Sweden. The Ambassador did not
fail to represent[323] in strong terms to his Majesty all the pains
taken by the High Chancellor to keep together the allies, who were
oppressed by such a burthensome war; and took occasion to beseech the
King to redouble his assistance, that they might extricate themselves
with honour from so great embarrassments.

The King going in August, 1637, to Chantilli, Grotius went thither[324]
to compliment him on the success of the Campaign; and at the same time
recommended to his Majesty the sending a reinforcement of men to the
Duke of Weymar, who had crossed the Rhine, that so he might be enabled
to make farther progress, and to keep the German allies of the two
crowns from joining with their enemies. He assured him recruits were
raising in Sweden for Marshal Bannier's army, that he might make an
invasion into Silesia or elsewhere; and that the Swedes had rejected all
the proposals of peace made to them, because they believed the intention
of the enemy was to sow division between them and the French. The King
answered, that he most sincerely wished the prosperity of the Queen his
sister; and that he would send the Duke of Weymar as many troops as the
state of his affairs would permit; adding, that the enemy laboured
chiefly to divide them, against which they could not be too much upon
their guard.

September 23, in the same year, 1637, Grotius[325], agreeable to the
orders received from the Queen of Sweden, demanded an audience of the
King, which he obtained at St. Maur. He represented to his Majesty, that
the Queen had nothing so much at heart as the success of the common
cause; and that she hoped her zeal would induce the King to make
powerful efforts to triumph over their enemies. He gave a particular
account of what the High Chancellor had done, and the marvelous
resistance of Marshal Bannier, besieged as it were by five armies,
against which, however, he could not make head much longer without
speedy and powerful succours. He assured him that Sweden was making
numerous levies, but would be obliged to keep a part of her troops at
home on account of the frequent broils she had with the Poles, the
Danes, and the Russians. He then enlarged on the interest which France
had in maintaining the Swedes in Germany; for no sooner would they quit
it, he said, than the Austrians would turn all their efforts against
France. He shewed, that, besides being in possession of the Imperial
crown, the house of Austria was very powerful by the hereditary
dominions of Hungary, Austria, Bohemia, Silesia, Moravia, Lusatia,
Tirol, Carinthia, Dalmatia, and Croatia, which furnished her with large
supplies of men and money; that the branch which ruled in Spain had
dominions in the four parts of the world; that the Emperor knew well
France was the greatest obstacle to his projects of ambition; that he
would leave nothing unattempted to destroy a power which gave him so
much umbrage; that the Emperors, even before the empire came into the
house of Austria, had always regarded the Kings of France as their
Rivals and Enemies; that this hatred and jealousy were much increased
since the Austrian family obtained the Imperial throne; that it was so
difficult to make any accommodation with them, they would not consent to
peace even if the King yielded up his late conquests, since they had the
assurance to claim the three bishoprics, and to demand that the kingdom
of Arles, comprehending the three best provinces of the kingdom, the
dutchy of Burgundy, Provence, and Dauphiny, should be re-annexed to the
empire. He represented the importance of making great efforts, and
carrying the war into the enemy's country before their armies should be
augmented. He beseeched his Majesty to make such a powerful diversion as
might oblige the Austrians to recall a part of the army sent against the
Swedes: and shewed that nothing was more easy, since the Duke of Weymar
had fortified himself beyond the Rhine; that it was only sending him a
powerful reinforcement, the princes and towns which groaned under the
Austrian yoke would then be seen joining themselves to the French and
Swedes; and that the Swedes, no longer so hard pressed, would return
into the heart of Germany or penetrate into the hereditary estates.
After this harangue, the Swedish Ambassador presented a letter from the
Queen, adding that her Swedish Majesty begged of the King to make speedy
efforts worthy of himself, and he might depend on the Queen's doing all
that could be expected from a steady and magnanimous Princess. He
concluded with complimenting his Majesty on the happy success of affairs
in Italy, the transactions on the Rhine, and the retaking of Capella.
The King sometimes interrupted him during this long Speech; but it was
only to approve of what he said, to confirm the facts, and acknowledge
that his reflections were most judicious. He assured him that he had
already sent succours to the Duke of Weymar, that he was resolved to
augment the troops of that Prince in order to enable the Swedes to enter
Germany; and that Marshal de Chatillon would have already been on the
banks of the Rhine if the siege of Ampvillers had not detained him. He
ended with protesting that it was his earnest desire to be more closely
united with the Queen his most gracious sister; which his future actions
would shew. Grotius gave an account of this audience in a letter to the
Queen of the 26th of September, 1637, a copy of which he sent to the
High Chancellor. By the letter that he wrote the same day to Oxenstiern
we are informed, that the Count de Berlise, Introductor of the
Ambassadors, came to him before he had this last audience of the King,
to know if he would not first have a conference with Chavigny, Secretary
of State for foreign affairs, agreeable to the usage of the Ministers
from England, Venice, and Savoy. Grotius replied, that he understood
from the English Ministers themselves they did not always observe this
custom; which Berlise acknowledged. The Ambassador added, that at
another time he would consider what would be most proper; but, on the
present occasion, having a letter from the Queen to the King, he thought
it his duty to give the first notice of it to his Majesty; that he was
afraid if he acted otherwise the King might be offended; but if, after
reading it, his Majesty were desirous he should confer with his
Ministers, he would not fail to wait upon them.

The Swedes being still very hard pressed in Germany, the Queen sent
fresh orders to her Ambassador at Paris to represent their situation to
the King. Grotius demanded an audience, which he obtained on the 1st of
October, 1637, at St. Germains. He assured his Majesty, that it was not
without reluctance he so frequently laid the necessities of the allies
before him, and the importance of their being assisted by France, but he
did it by express order; that he was particularly charged with two
things; first, to compliment his Majesty on the advantages gained in
Piccardy and Burgundy; and secondly to solicit him to send speedily a
powerful force over the Rhine. He added, that the Queen would not have
thought this request necessary, had she received the letters in which he
gave her a particular account of what passed at the last audience he had
of his Majesty. He beseeched the King to be pleased to give orders that
the promises, which he had graciously made, might be speedily executed.
He represented, that if succours were not immediately sent into Germany,
the Austrians, after vanquishing their enemies, would go and overpower
the Duchess of Savoy the King's sister, and penetrate into France. He
afterwards shewed that the Swedish army was in great danger of being
overwhelmed, if a powerful diversion were not speedily made. After this
speech, Grotius presented a letter from the Queen, of the 19th of
August, 1637. Lewis XIII. replied to the Swedish Ambassador, that he was
determined to fulfil his promises; that he had already sent some troops
to the Duke of Weymar; that he would speedily send him a farther
reinforcement, and employ all the forces of his kingdom in defence of
his sister the Duchess of Savoy.

The Duke of Weymar began the campaign of 1638 in a very brilliant
manner[326]: he gained a signal victory over the Imperialists on the 2d
of March; and, what was very remarkable, all the enemy's generals were
taken in this engagement, and among the rest the famous John de Vert,
whose name was become the terror of the Parisians. The King, on
receiving this important news, immediately sent notice of it to Grotius;
signifying that he knew no body would receive it with more pleasure.
March 16[327], he had an audience of the King, at which he thanked his
Majesty for sending him the first news of the victory gained in Germany,
and doing him the justice to believe that it would give him infinite
satisfaction: he added, that it was a happy prognostic for the rest of
the campaign: that God had confounded the pride of the Imperialists, who
publicly gave out that they intended to come to pillage Paris[328]. He
said he had certain advice by letters from the army, that the enemy's
generals had been at great pains to provide themselves with maps of
France, in order to examine at what part they could best enter it. He
pressed the King to put the Duke of Weymar in a condition, by sending
him immediately a considerable reinforcement, to make a proper advantage
of this happy beginning of the campaign; and concluded his compliment
with good wishes for the King's happiness and that of his posterity, of
which there began to be then some hope. People flattered themselves the
Queen was with child; and she was actually in the third month of her
pregnancy. The King received this compliment with great gaiety: he
promised to send immediately five or at least three thousand foot to the
Duke of Weymar, with some horse, under the command of the Count de
Guebriant. Grotius had a fresh audience of the King on the 19th of
April, 1638[329]. He represented to his Majesty, that though the Duke of
Weymar had begun the year well, he could not make great progress if an
additional force were not sent him: that by proceeding so slowly in this
measure, the enemy had got time to recruit their army: and if it were
not now taken with great expedition, they would lose the fruits of their
late advantages, and the affairs of the allies suffer much; that her
Swedish Majesty was in the same disposition with the King, and had no
other view than to procure an equitable, honourable, and lasting peace;
that the only way to obtain this great end was by making the most
powerful efforts: that the Queen, agreeable to his Majesty's desire,
would accept of the mediation of the Venetians, provided the republic
would treat her with due respect: that his most Christian Majesty being
of opinion that a long truce would lead to a peace, the Queen, who was
sensible of his great prudence, had given her Ambassador in France full
power to treat of this affair, and to draw up a plan of it in
conjunction with such persons as the King should nominate. After this
speech Grotius delivered to Lewis XIII. a letter from the Queen,
acquainting him at the same time, that had her Swedish Majesty been
informed of the Queen's pregnancy, she would undoubtedly have ordered
him to signify to the King her extreme satisfaction at such important
news; that he knew the Queen and all the Swedes passionately desired
that the posterity of St. Lewis, of Henry the Great, and Lewis the Just,
might long govern France; and that under them the kingdom might flourish
in piety, increase in power, and be established in justice. The King
received these good wishes with much satisfaction, and desired Grotius
to acquaint her Swedish Majesty that the Queen was certainly with child.
He farther assured him that the Count de Guebriant was already on his
march to join the Duke of Weymar, and he was going to give orders for
sending an additional reinforcement, and seconding that Prince's
efforts. He desired him to press her Swedish Majesty to send numerous
recruits to her armies: adding, that he hoped the Venetians would do
nothing derogatory to the dignity of the crown of Sweden; that he would
attend to that point himself; and would nominate Chavigny to confer with
him in relation to the truce. Grotius also set forth on this occasion
what pains the High Chancellor had taken for the advancement of the
common cause; and the King did justice to the merit of that great
Minister. The Queen's pregnancy being declared at court, Grotius's lady
went to make her compliments: on the 8th of May, 1638[330], he himself
waited on her Majesty for the same end: he had demanded an audience for
this purpose as soon as it was publicly known that she was with child.
He told the Queen, that, being eager to express his joy, he could not
think of waiting for orders from his court, to make his compliment; that
well knowing the sentiments of the Queen his mistress he could affirm,
with great certainty, that her Majesty and all her subjects were filled
with the highest joy; that he had lately met with a Greek inscription in
honour of a Queen, containing a very short but very emphatical encomium:
it was said of this Princess, that she was the daughter, sister, wife,
and mother of a King, yet without any pride in so high elevation: that
this modesty was the more to be admired in the Queen of France, as she
was much above the Grecian Queen, and even all other Queens, since she
was the consort of a King, whose provinces and even towns were
equivalent to kingdoms; that she had a King for her father, and was
descended from Kings and Emperors who conquered and long possessed
kingdoms in the four parts of the world; in fine, that she was sister of
a most powerful King; that only one thing was wanting to her happiness,
to be mother not of a King, since France and all the friends of France
wished that the King might attain to the most advanced age, but of a
Prince capable of ruling over a great nation; that God had at length
granted her this felicity, and rendered her fruitful when it was no
longer expected, as happened formerly to an illustrious woman of the
same name mentioned in Scripture; that history sacred and prophane
informs us, that children born at a time when they are no longer
expected are designed by God for great things; that in reflecting on the
Queen's pregnancy he attended to what the Naturalists teach, that the
tumbling of the Dolphin [_Fr._ Dauphin] predicted the end of the
tempest, and fine weather; that there was reason to hope peace would
re-appear in the world at the birth of a Dauphin, which was so
passionately desired; and what increased this hope was, that at the time
her Majesty's pregnancy was declared he received orders to confer with
the French Ministers on the means of obtaining a peace, or at least a
truce, if the conclusion of a peace met with too many difficulties;
that he laboured in it with the more chearfulness, as he knew he would
be aided by the Queen's prayers, the efficacy of which was so great that
they could obtain of heaven things almost miraculous; that her Swedish
Majesty would shew that the Great Gustavus and she had never any other
intention, than to insure the quiet and tranquillity of Christendom;
that he earnestly wished the negotiation for a peace might turn out
well; that the Queen might have a happy delivery, and be the mother of a
Prince, whose glory and posterity would continually increase. The Queen
answered, that she did not doubt of the sincerity of her Swedish
Majesty's wishes; that she reciprocally desired the prosperity of that
Princess, and offered her all that was in her power.

In the beginning of June, 1638[331], Grotius waited on the King at St.
Germains: he first thanked his Majesty for intimating to him the Queen's
pregnancy; and afterwards enlarged on the praise of justice, and on the
title of Just which the King had merited by the laws he enacted,
particularly that for abolishing duels, and the protection granted to
foreign princes. He entered into a detail of the favours which the King
had received from Providence since his accession to the throne: the
extinction of the civil wars, the restoration of the royal authority,
the successes both by sea and land, the passage of the Alps forced, and
the frontiers of the kingdom enlarged. He added, that after such a
series of felicity, the only thing left to be desired was that his
Majesty's posterity might long reign in France; and for this her
Majesty's pregnancy entitled them to hope; that the Swedes entertained
the same sentiments, and flattered themselves a perfect harmony would
always subsist between the two kingdoms. He concluded with soliciting
the King to augment the Duke of Weymar's troops, against whom the
Imperialists made the greatest efforts; and to procure Marshal Horne's
liberty, who was made prisoner at the battle of Nordlinguen: he
represented that his Majesty might obtain it when he pleased, since he
had so great a number of the enemies generals in his power, and assured
him that the Queen his mistress would take it as a very high obligation.
The Ambassador presented afterwards letters from the Queen of the
twelfth of April, and concluded with observing, that he had reason to
think a considerable body of troops would be sent from Sweden into
Germany this same month of June. The King replied, that he had a great
friendship for the Queen of Sweden, and had already given proofs of his
good disposition towards her; that he had sent succours to the Duke of
Weymar, and would send still more considerable ones if necessary; that
as to the exchange of Marshal Horne, there was only John de Vert with
whom it could be made; and that General was not his prisoner, but the
Duke of Weymar's, to whom he had promised to deliver him on demand.
Grotius replied, that he did not doubt but the Duke of Weymar would shew
all possible deference to the King's inclination, if he should find his
Majesty disposed to procure Marshal Horne's discharge, and that the
Queen had written to the Duke on that subject.

Some days after this audience, Chavigny[332] informed the Swedish
Ambassador that John De Vert was the King's prisoner, though Lewis XIII.
had said the contrary.

Grotius had another audience of the King in the middle of July
1638[333]. He complimented his Majesty on the happy success of the
French arms on the frontiers of Spain, and exhorted him to set about the
recovery of Navarre, which belonged to him of right, and was unjustly
usurped by Spain; he also recommended to him the Duke of Weymar's
affairs, and gave reason to hope that something great would be done by
General Bannier, who had just received reinforcements from Sweden. At
this audience the Ambassador presented Crusius to the King as a Swedish
Nobleman who was returning to Stockholm, and would soon be employed in
public affairs, and might contribute to strengthen the union between the
two kingdoms. The King received him very graciously, and desired him to
make his compliments to the High Chancellor.

FOOTNOTES:

[321] Ep. 688. p. 281.

[322] Ep. 719. p. 303.

[323] Ep. 720. p. 303.

[324] Ep. 813. p. 354.

[325] Ep. 327. p. 363.

[326] Ep. 923. p. 408.

[327] Ep. 926. p. 410.

[328] Ep. 927. p. 411.

[329] Ep. 949. p. 421.

[330] Ep. 957. p. 426.

[331] Ep. 968. p. 434.

[332] Ep. 971. p. 495.

[333] Ep. 988. p. 447.


II. Grotius had always been attentive to cultivate the friendship of the
Prince of Condé: they visited one another often. The Swedish Ambassador
relates in one of his letters[334] that the Prince having been nominated
to command in Paris in the absence of the King and Cardinal Richelieu,
he waited on him in the beginning of February 1637: the Prince returned
his visit soon after. The conversation turned on the marriage of
Monsieur, which the King had hitherto considered as void, because it was
made without his consent. Gaston's constancy in persisting to keep his
wife had in the end obliged the King to approve of the match. The Prince
told Grotius that he had always thought this marriage valid, and did not
doubt but he was of the same mind. Grotius answered, that the opinion of
those who regarded such marriages as good, was without doubt most
generally received. They afterwards talked of Divinity: the Prince had
been well educated, and loved this kind of conversation. The grand
controversies concerning the Eucharist and the Pope's authority came
under consideration; but we know not the particulars.

FOOTNOTES:

[334] Ep. 714. p. 299.


III. The Pope, foreseeing that the conclusion of a peace was still very
distant, proposed a truce, in hopes that while it continued they might
labour more effectually in bringing about a peace. France[335] and
Sweden discovered no reluctance to suspend for some time the operations
of the war; and Grotius received orders, as we have already seen, to
confer with the French Ministry in order to settle the subsidies to be
given Sweden, and the conditions of the truce. Chavigny was nominated to
treat with the Swedish Ambassador on this matter. He visited Grotius on
the twenty-seventh of April, 1638[336], and the Swedish Minister telling
him, that he had full powers from the Queen to examine, in concert with
the Minister whom the King should nominate, what was necessary to obtain
an advantageous truce; Chavigny asked if he had also power to conclude
the truce. Grotius answered, if France and Sweden could agree, he had in
that case permission to sign the truce. Chavigny replied, that Cardinal
Richelieu had learnt from Schmalz, lately arrived from Sweden with
instructions for Grotius, that the Swedes wanted to have the same
subsidies during the truce as they had during the war; which appeared
very surprising; that he did not doubt but Grotius himself would think
the claim unreasonable, since the truce was to be of long continuance,
and the expence would be much less than in the time of war. Grotius
answered, that the truce would be attended with as much expence as the
war, since the Swedes could not keep the countries, of which they were
in possession, without great armies. Chavigny replied, that the number
of troops to be kept on foot during the truce might be settled: upon
which Grotius observed, that during the truce between the Spaniards and
the United Provinces the latter preserved the liberty of maintaining as
large garrisons as they thought necessary for their security; and that
the King, after the example of Henry the Great his father, furnished
them with the same succours during the peace as in time of war. Chavigny
maintained that the Swedes would have nothing to fear from their
enemies whilst the truce lasted, on account of the great number and
power of its guarantees: to which Grotius answered, that the countries
possessed by the Swedes were so distant from their allies, that if they
did not continue in arms to guard against any unlooked-for invasion,
those countries would be lost before they could receive assistance.

The King was gone to Chantilly, and from thence he was to proceed to
Compeigne. Chavigny, who was to follow him, but had not yet fixed the
time of his departure, told Grotius he would speak to Cardinal Richelieu
to know whether the conferences in relation to the truce were to begin
before he went to Chantilly, or after his return, and would signify to
him the Cardinal's intentions. Grotius answered, that he would bring
Schmalz with him, because he knew the sentiments of the Swedish
Ministry, and that he might make an exact report of what passed at his
return to that kingdom. Schmalz was present at this conversation: he was
Secretary of the High Chancellor and his confident: Grotius till now had
numbered him among his friends.

April 30, Chavigny sent to acquaint Grotius that if he pleased they
would hold a conference the next day. They accordingly met on the first
of May[337], 1638, at Chavigny's house. Grotius asked that Minister what
conditions of truce the King would have. Chavigny answered, that the
conditions were not yet agreed upon; that a truce had only been barely
proposed, and that his Majesty, as a good friend and faithful ally, was
willing the Queen of Sweden should be informed of it; that the custom in
truces was, that each one should keep the countries of which he had
possession; that it was proper the Princes who had been driven from
their estates should receive a decent pension during the truce, to be
paid by those who enjoyed their country; that it was the King's opinion
they ought not to be too hasty, but wait with patience for the proposals
of the mediators. Grotius said, if the King would signify on what
conditions he would agree to the truce, it would be highly agreeable to
the Swedish Ministry. Chavigny assured him that he had no instructions
on that head; but if he would acquaint him with the intentions of the
Swedes, he would lay them before the Cardinal. They entered on the
business. In the claims of the Swedes there were two articles which met
with much difficulty: they took it for granted that France should
continue the same subsidies whilst the truce lasted, and wanted not only
to keep that part of Pomerania which they had already, but that the
other should also be ceded to them. These proposals were put in writing.
Chavigny promised to send them to the Cardinal, and to give a speedy
answer. May 18[338], Chavigny went to Grotius's house, who immediately
sent for Schmalz: the matter under consideration was the amount of the
subsidies: Chavigny said the Swedes asked too much for a time of truce;
that the King could only give three hundred thousand florins a year
whilst it lasted. Grotius maintained that the sum was too small in
proportion to the expence which the Swedes were obliged to be at; and
that in one word he could consent to no diminution of the subsidies.
Pomerania was next brought on the carpet. Chavigny pretended that the
King neither ought, nor could with decency propose to the enemy to yield
to Sweden what they still held in Pomerania. Grotius maintained that
Sweden's right to that province was not founded on force, but supported
by treaties made with the Duke and the people; that, besides, Sweden was
in no hurry about a truce; that it would even be burdensome to her if
she were not furnished with sufficient subsidies for paying her
garrisons; and if she were not left in the possession of all Pomerania.
He added, that to enable the Swedish Ministry to judge whether the truce
would be of advantage to the kingdom, they must first be made acquainted
with its conditions. The conference was concluded by a promise from
Chavigny that he would communicate the King's intentions to Grotius in
writing. Schmalz in the mean time did Grotius all the ill offices he
could: he wrote to Court that they could no longer refuse the instances
of France to recall the Ambassador: but it was from jealousy or hatred
that he acted in this manner; for at the same time that he was seeking
to hurt Grotius, the Count de Feuquieres waited on him from the
Cardinal, to tell him that they were extremely well pleased with him in
France, and that far from desiring he should be recalled, his Eminence
would solicit his stay at Paris.

Schmalz, displeased with Grotius's firmness[339], went privately and
told Chavigny, that the Ministry of Sweden had resolved to consent to a
considerable diminution of the subsidies: which he could prove by their
letters written in Swedish. Grotius was informed of this, and complained
to the High Chancellor; at the same time assuring him, that Schmalz had
presumed to vent the highest menaces against him and his wife, because
(says he) we oppose his unjust designs.

Chavigny falling ill, Desnoyers[340], Secretary at war, was appointed to
confer with Grotius: He came to his house, and after making him the King
and the Cardinal's compliments, delivered an answer to the memorial he
had given Chavigny; acquainting him that every thing was settled between
the Cardinal and Schmalz. On reading this answer, Grotius said, that
before he explained himself he must speak with Schmalz, who was joined
with him in this negotiation; and therefore it was improper for him to
act alone. Desnoyers being withdrawn, Grotius informed Schmalz of his
visit. Schmalz maintained that he had settled nothing, and had made
only a draught of a convention; which he at the same time pressed
Grotius to approve of, because, he said, it was agreeable to his Swedish
instructions, which empowered him to accept of two hundred thousand
florins. Grotius answered, that as this article was directly contrary to
his instructions, he would, give them the preference; especially as he
did not understand Swedish. The dispute grew warm[341]; Schmalz asserted
that he had full powers to act independently of Grotius not only in this
negotiation, but even in every affair which regarded his embassy: "If it
be so, the latter writes to the High Chancellor, the French will make a
jest of him and of me: they, will look on me as Ambassador only in name;
and on him as Ambassador in fact, though he has not the name: nay he
actually allows himself to be treated at home as if he were Ambassador,
and to be written to as if he had the title. It is indeed very hard that
I, who am advanced in years, should have disputes with a hot-headed
youth." This quarrel gave him great uneasiness: he writes to
Oxenstiern[342], "I beg it as a favour of your Sublimity, that if I can
be of any use to you, you would be pleased to protect me, as you have
done hitherto. I have had nothing in view in all I have done but the
welfare of Sweden; and it has cost me much pains to raise, by my words
and actions, the credit of a nation hitherto little known in this
country. If I cannot serve with utility, I had much rather return to the
condition of a private man, than be a burden to the kingdom, or
dishonour myself."

Schmalz lived on very ill terms with Crusius, a Swedish Lord, whom
Grotius, as we have just seen, had presented to the King.
Notwithstanding the grounds of complaint which the Ambassador had
against Schmalz, he thought the public service required him to reconcile
them, and for this end he often made them dine with him. One day, at
the Swedish Banker's, both rose from table after dinner heated with
wine, and came together to Grotius's: there was only his lady at home.
They quarrelled, and Schmalz had the impudence to call Crusius several
times a rascal; with the addition of some threatening gestures. Crusius,
highly provoked, gave him a box on the ear, and an English colonel in
company was so enraged against Schmalz, that had it not been for
Grotius's lady he would have run him through. Notwithstanding this gross
insult, Schmalz and Crusius[343] were reconciled at Grotius's house; but
Schmalz still continued his extravagancies. He had the indiscretion one
time to let his tongue loose against the Duke of Weymar: Baron Erlac,
who was attached to that Prince, was highly incensed, and the
consequences might have been very fatal. Grotius again employed his good
offices to pacify Erlac. But this wrought no change in Schmalz's
behaviour towards the Swedish Ambassador. In a letter of the sixteenth
of October, 1638[344], Grotius observes: "It is near two months since
Schmalz was to see me, though I have been ill; his reasons I neither
know nor enquire. I am conscious he has no subject of complaint against
me; but I have much to complain of him. He will return to you richer
than he came out: I do not envy him the money, which, it is said, he
received above two months ago from the French; being firmly resolved to
adhere to the rule I have laid down, and hitherto observed, to accept of
nothing from them." Schmalz continued to seek every opportunity of
injuring Grotius[345], who, he said, was a burden on Sweden; and
Grotius[346] was persuaded that Schmalz had betrayed the secret of
affairs to the French Ministry in order to prejudice him. Schmalz
returned to Sweden, where his misconduct being made manifest, he
incurred the displeasure of the Ministry[347]. He afterwards embraced
the Roman Catholic Religion, privately abjuring Lutheranism in Baron
Roste's chapel, the French Resident at Stockholm. The Regency hearing of
it, complained bitterly that the Resident should suffer it. Schmalz was
thrown into gaol under pretence of some malversation; but had the good
fortune to make his escape, and took refuge in Germany, entering into
the service of the Emperor.

To return to the truce. The negotiation not succeeding at Paris, it was
transferred to Hamburg, to be managed by D'Avaux and Salvius; but as it
was very coldly desired either by the French, the Swedes, or even by the
Imperialists, the conditions could not be settled, and the project was
dropt.

FOOTNOTES:

[335] Bougeant, l. 5. n. 33.

[336] Ep. 950. p. 421.

[337] Father Bougeant Hist. l. 5. n. 35, places this negotiation in
1639, in which he contradicts Grotius. See Ep 954. p. 424.

[338] Ep. 960. p. 428.

[339] Ep. 974. p. 438.

[340] Ep. 976. p. 439.

[341] Ep. 976. p. 440.

[342] Ep. 982. p. 444.

[343] Ep. 993. p. 450.

[344] Ep. 1046. p. 472.

[345] Ep. 1111. p. 500.

[346] Ep. 1237. p. 560.

[347] Ep. 1263. p. 573. & 1301. p. 590. Bougeant l. 6. n. 32.


IV. As Grotius was returning from the audience of the King, at which he
introduced Crusius, there happened a melancholy adventure which had like
to have cost them both their lives. In passing through a village where a
great crowd was assembled to see the execution of some highwaymen[348],
one of the Swedish Ambassador's domestics on horseback, to make the mob
give way for his master's coach, struck some of them with his whip: the
alarm was instantly given that they were persons come to rescue the
prisoners: upon which some shot were fired at the coach: the coachman
received two balls in his body, of which he died some days after: the
balls passed within two inches of the Ambassador's head. On calling out
who they were, the tumult ceased. The King being informed of this
outrage, ordered Count Brulon, one of the Introductors of Ambassadors,
to wait on Grotius, and assure him that he was extremely sorry for his
misfortune; and that as soon as the offenders were taken, they should
receive the punishment they merited. Count Berlise, the other
Introductor of Ambassadors, came also to visit Grotius, and acquaint
him that the King was greatly concerned at the danger he underwent, and
that his Majesty had ordered the Chancellor to prosecute the offenders
with the utmost rigour. Grotius answered, he was so far from being
animated by a spirit of revenge, that he intended to solicit a pardon
for the offenders; but that it was proper, however, the King should
publickly express his indignation, both for the safety of Ambassadors,
and from a regard to the Law of Nations.

In consequence of his Majesty's orders the Chancellor[349] sent to the
Swedish Ambassador's to take the depositions; and seven or eight persons
of the village where the crime was perpetrated were taken up and thrown
into prison at Paris. The Lady of the Manor came to Grotius, to solicit
for the prisoners: he told her she must have patience till the trials
were over, and then he would employ his interest in behalf of those who
should be found guilty. He informed the High Chancellor of all these
particulars; observing to him that he was very glad the King gave public
proofs that he had the safety of Ambassadors at heart; and that for his
part he would do all in his power to save the offenders from capital
punishment.

The most guilty had had the precaution to abscond[350]: these, for their
contempt of the court, were condemned to be broke on the wheel: but the
sentence was not made public, because the Judges imagined they might
suffer themselves to be taken if the affair seemed to be dropt. Some
Lords, however, who had got notice of the sentence[351], were preparing
to ask their forfeited effects: the Count de Berlise informed Grotius of
it, and the Ambassador desired him to beg the favour of the King not to
dispose of their effects, but to order them to be sequestrated, that he
might restore them to the owners, when the time of their pardon came.
"I have the honour to inform you of this, he writes to the High
Chancellor, that it may not be thought I wanted to take advantage of the
misfortune of these wretches, as some here are wicked enough to
believe."

The sentence was at length executed on them[352]: but it was only in
effigie; for none of the offenders had been taken. Grotius was then ill
of an ague[353], and postponed his application for their pardon till his
recovery. As soon as he could go abroad[354] he asked an audience; at
which, after thanking the King for doing justice on them, which proved
how much his Majesty had the respect due to Ambassadors at heart, he
entreated him to grant a pardon to the offenders, and not only spare
their lives, but also restore their effects; of which he claimed no
part, though the King had left them to his disposal. Lewis XIII. seeing
him earnest in his request, made answer, that he would give directions
to the Chancellor that their pardon should pass the seals. Grotius
promised to go to that Magistrate to solicit it; which he did
accordingly[355], and the Chancellor promised to finish the affair
agreeable to his desire.

FOOTNOTES:

[348] Ep. 988. p. 447.

[349] Ep. 993. p. 450.

[350] Ep. 438. p. 879.

[351] Ep. 1025. p. 462.

[352] Ep. 1028. p. 463.

[353] Ep. 1043. p. 470.

[354] Ep. 1038. p. 468.

[355] Ep. 1041. p. 469.


V. It was on the first of October, 1638, that Grotius went to solicit
the King in favour of those who had insulted him: the Court was then in
great joy for the happy birth of the Dauphin[356], who came into the
world on the 5th of September. The Swedish Ambassador saw the King, the
Queen, and the Dauphin, and made them his compliments such as the
occasion required, though it was not the principal object of his journey
as he could not have received orders on the subject. He recommended to
the King the affairs of the Duke of Weymar, whom the Imperialists were
going to attack with a force infinitely superior. His Majesty promised
to augment that Prince's army as much as his other affairs would
permit. Grotius having represented of what advantage an extraordinary
gratification might be to the good of affairs in Germany, the King
exclaimed against the great expences with which he was overpowered, but
gave hopes that he would advance a sum of money beyond what he engaged
to furnish. November 10, 1638[357], Grotius had another audience of the
King, to entreat him not to abandon the Duke of Weymar in his present
extremity: he assured his Majesty that he had precise orders to
recommend to him the affairs of that Prince with the same zeal as those
of Sweden. The King contented himself with giving a vague answer, which
did not satisfy the Ambassador. December 4[358], he waited on the King
and Queen to compliment them, by order of the Queen of Sweden, on the
birth of the Dauphin. A letter written by him next day to Queen
Christina relates all that passed at these audiences. After observing
that he had publicly expressed his joy for the desired birth of the
young Prince by bonfires, entertainments, and distributions of wine to
all the neighbourhood, he tells her that he had seen the King, whom he
informed of the entertainments made in Sweden on occasion of the birth
of the Dauphin of France; that he observed to his Majesty, if it were
true, as the Ancients believed, that names were not given by chance, one
ought to prognosticate great things of the Dauphin [_Anglicè_ Dolphin];
that the signs which surrounded the Constellation bearing his name,
denote the most happy presages; that it was surrounded by the Eagle,
Pegasus, Sagittarius, Aquarius, and the Swan; that the Eagle denoted a
superior genius; Pegasus presaged that he would be powerful in cavalry,
Sagittarius in infantry, and Aquarius in naval force: the Swan signified
that his great actions would be celebrated by poets, historians, and
orators: that the nine stars in the sign of the Dolphin denoted,
according to astrologers, the nine Muses, who were to render the Prince
illustrious and receive lustre from him: that the Dolphin being near the
Equator, signified that the King's justice would be hereditary to his
son; that naturalists had remarked three properties in the Dolphin,
which ought to be considered as happy presages of what the Dauphin of
France would be: that it loved men; that it came quickly to maturity;
and had much activity.

Grotius, it is probable, had recourse to these unnatural and
consequently ridiculous allegories in compliance with the bad taste of
the age. It is to be presumed that such an elevated genius, who knew the
rules of eloquence, and disapproved of the wretched strain of the
advocates of that time, was not pleased with himself on this occasion.
He concluded his harangue with beseeching the King to be persuaded that
her Swedish Majesty would faithfully execute her treaties; that nothing
would be more agreeable to her, than to live in the best understanding
with the King, and to hear of the prosperity of his kingdom; and that
she would chearfully employ all her forces to encrease the power of
France. He afterwards excused the Queen for not sending an Ambassador
extraordinary to compliment the King, giving as a reason, that such a
commission could only be executed by one of the first Lords of the
Kingdom, who were all employed in the army, or in the ministry; and the
Queen presumed his Majesty would like better that they should discharge
their duty, than undertake so long a journey. The King seemed much
pleased with the conclusion of this compliment. He promised to be
constant in his friendship, and faithful in the execution of his
treaties, and to continue the war with the fame ardour as his good
sister.

Grotius afterwards waited on the Queen, to whom he said, that his
complimenting her so late on the part of the Queen of Sweden, was owing
to the distance of Stockholm: he observed to her that Gothland was a
province of Sweden, from which the Kings of Spain were not ashamed to
derive their origin: he expressed his joy at seeing on the throne of
France a Queen descended from the Goths, and who had brought forth a
Prince who by his mother belonged to that nation: he assured her that of
all the Princes who had borne the name of Deodatus, none deserved it so
well as the Dauphin, whom Providence had given to the prayers of the
kingdom almost against all hope; that he was born on the day of the Sun,
which presaged that by his heat and light he would confer happiness on
France, and the friends of France, among whom her Swedish Majesty held
the first rank; that he was born in Autumn, the season of the year
abounding most in fruit, which denoted that with him would be found the
fruit of all virtues. The Queen received the compliment with great
politeness, and made an offer of her services to her Swedish Majesty.

The important fortress of Brisac having been obliged to surrender to the
Duke of Weymar in the end of the year 1638[359], Grotius went to
compliment the King on that event: he first thanked him for sending
reinforcements to the Duke, and afterwards enlarged on the advantages of
taking Brisac, the conquest of which contributed to the security of
Burgundy and Champaigne, facilitated the preservation of Lorain, the
towns of Alsace, and the liberty of the Swiss, and, in fine, enabled
them to make farther progress in Germany: he concluded with beseeching
his Majesty to order the money promised, to be paid to the Swedes, that
they might put Marshal Bannier in a condition to accomplish what might
be of service to the King. Lewis assured him, that he would take care
the money should be remitted.

Grotius having asked an audience of the King in the month of March,
1639[360], Count Brulon, Introductor of Ambassadors, waited on him to
know what he purposed to say to the King, under pretence that when his
Majesty was not previously apprised of certain affairs, he was too much
affected by them. Grotius answered, that he should say nothing
disagreeable to the King. Brulon wanting to enter into farther
particulars, the Ambassador told him, he would follow his orders. The
audience, however, was granted: he remonstrated to the King the
necessity of sending speedy succours to the Duke of Weymar to enable him
to penetrate into the heart of Germany, whilst Marshal Bannier did the
same on his side: and assured him, that the Queen was determined to
embark the recruits and provisions for that General's army as soon as
the season would permit. The King answered, that he had affairs in so
many places he could not do at once all that he desired.

Grotius ascribed the King's explaining himself so coldly to the offence
taken by Cardinal Richelieu at the Duke of Weymar. His Eminence wanted
to prevail with that Prince to come and pass the winter at Paris, in
order to enter into a closer connection with him, and to get from him
the possession of Brisac. The Duke, who was informed of his intentions,
chose rather to remain in Germany, than to be near an absolute Minister
whom it was dangerous to contradict. It is said that from this time the
Cardinal resolved to obstruct the progress of a Prince, whose ambition
and valour filled him with apprehensions. Grotius had a new audience of
the King in the middle of April following, to represent to him the
necessity of augmenting the army commanded by the Duke of Weymar, who
had sent Erlac to court to obtain speedy succours. The King promised
that Erlac should be satisfied.

FOOTNOTES:

[356] Ep. 1038. p. 468.

[357] Ep. 1064. p. 480.

[358] Ep. 1079. p. 485.

[359] Ep. 1090. p. 490. & 1093. p. 491.

[360] Ep. 1137. p. 514.

VI. These were only vague promises which the Ministry never intended to
fulfil. The Cardinal had made no secret[361] of his desire to gain the
Duke of Weymar by giving him his niece in marriage: the Prince's refusal
and his desire to keep Brisac had so much offended his Eminence, that he
even told Erlac that the Duke hearkened to bad counsels, and that his
behaviour to France was not such as gratitude and civility required. The
malevolence of the French Minister[362] chagrined the Duke so much that
he fell ill: it was only a slight indisposition, but, however, he did
not long survive it[363]: a violent fever seized him at Neubourg, which
on the fourth day cut off a Prince, whom Grotius calls the honour and
last resource of Germany[364]: the tenth of July, 1639, was the last of
this illustrious personage. It was at that time very doubtful[365]
whether he died of the plague, which prevailed in those parts, or of
poison. Grotius tells us[366], that the Duke himself thought they had
shortened his days: he even cites on this subject the Prince's funeral
oration delivered at Brisac, wherein the author was not afraid of
advancing this anecdote. Grotius was also persuaded[367] that the Prince
died by poison: he mentions it in a letter to the High Chancellor of the
10th of October, 1639. "The more I reflect on the Duke of Weymar's
death, the more I am persuaded that he had on his body no marks of the
plague, and that it was not in his house: accordingly the reports of his
being poisoned again prevail, and the suspicion falls upon the Geneva
physician, who was brought to remove his cholic."

As this Prince's victories made even his allies uneasy, they were
accused of contributing to his death. Cardinal Richelieu's enemies
spread the report, without ground, that it was he who caused the poison
to be given to the Duke, that he might get Brisac more easily; and the
Swedish historian[368] seems inclined to think he was poisoned, without
imputing it, however, to the Cardinal. "At the time of the Duke of
Weymar's death, says he, there was a grand negotiation on foot to know
whether Brisac should be yielded to France. Grotius pressed the Prince
to keep it; and the refusing to yield that place disgusted France. He
died soon after, not without suspicion of poison. The court of
Vienna[369], to whom his death was of great advantage, was also accused
of committing the crime: but these were all vague and ill-grounded
reports, which consequently merit little attention." The Duke of
Weymar's death[370] occasioned the greatest consternation among the
Swedes; the army was left without a leader, the towns without a master,
and for some time there was nothing but anarchy in the country where he
commanded. This Prince placed the greatest confidence in Grotius, who
had for him the most perfect esteem. When at Paris he was most intimate
with the Swedish Ambassador[371], and deposited with him some valuable
things which he would neither intrust to the King, nor to any of his
subjects.

FOOTNOTES:

[361] Grotii Ep. 1153. p. 524.

[362] Ep. 1140. p. 516.

[363] Ep. 1226. p. 548.

[364] Ep. 1207. p. 549. & 1224. p. 553.

[365] Ep. 1223 p. 557.

[366] Ep. 1254. p. 569.

[367] Ep. 1249. p. 566.

[368] Puffendorf, l. 11. § 39.

[369] Le Vassor, l. 45. p. 265, 266.

[370] Ep. 1216, p. 548.

[371] Ep. 876 p. 384.


VII. When the Duke of Weymar's death was publicly known, Charles Lewis,
Elector Palatine, son of the unfortunate King of Bohemia, purposed to
get the Weymarian army to acknowledge him for their General. This
negotiation could not be carried on without a large sum of money. The
Elector went to his uncle the King of England, from whom he got 25000 l.
sterling, with the promise of a larger sum in case of need. He might
have returned into Holland, and would in all probability have succeeded
in his project, but the King of England, it is said, advised him to act
in concert with France, whose interest was connected with his, and
without whose assistance he would have much difficulty to accomplish his
design. King Charles spoke of it to Bellievre[372] the French
Ambassador at London: he told him the Elector was determined to go to
France, and lodge with the Earl of Leicester, the English Ambassador at
Paris, that he might have an opportunity of conferring with the King.
Bellievre, who was informed of the intentions of the French Court, and
those of the Elector, represented to the King, that the Prince, before
he embarked for France, ought to get a passport from the Court,
otherwise he would be in danger of being arrested by the Governor of the
first town. Bellievre was desired to write to France about it: the
Ministry were in no hurry to give him an answer, because they disliked
the prince's project. The Elector in his impatience resolved to go over
_incognito_ to France. M. Pelisson assures us[373] it was Montreuil, one
of the first Academicians, at that time employed by France in England,
who gave the Court notice of the Elector's design. That Prince managed
his matters with so little address, that his journey was a secret to no
body. He went on board publicly[374], suffered the English ships to
salute him at his departure, and on landing him at Boulogn, the King his
uncle's ships, which escorted him, made a general discharge of their
great guns.

After coming on shore[375] he set out with five of his servants for
Paris; and, changing his name, would not lodge with the Earl of
Leicester; but took the road to Lyons, where the King was, and travelled
very slowly. His design was to turn off to Switzerland, and proceed from
thence to the Weymarian army. The Cardinal, who was informed of his
rout, suffering him to advance into the heart of the kingdom, caused him
to be arrested at Moulins in the Bourbonoise. He denied at first that he
was the Elector Palatine; but was at last obliged to own it. [376]He was
confined in the citadel; where he was civilly treated, till orders
should be received from the King. He was from thence carried to
Vincennes[377], where he was permitted to see no body, and denied the
use of pen and ink. For six days he was not suffered to walk in the
garden. The Prince had two brothers at Paris, Maurice and Edward, who
came there to learn Riding and Fencing. They were narrowly watched, and
ordered not to leave Paris; and their Governor was charged to attend
them wherever they went. About a month after the Elector's confinement,
they were permitted to see him[378]; but it was in presence of
witnesses: the Elector was also suffered to walk sometimes in the garden
on condition that the guard went with him.

Cardinal Richelieu and the French Ministers, to justify this conduct,
gave out that it was not allowable for a foreign Prince to pass through
the kingdom without the King's permission; that the Elector's conduct
shewed that he had some bad design; that they knew he wanted to go to
Geneva, to proceed from thence to the Duke of Weymar's army, to seize
the towns of Alsace, and exchange them afterwards with the Emperor in
order to obtain restitution of the Palatinate; and that such a project
must be very prejudicial to France, to whom the conquest of Alsace had
cost so many men and so much money. This imprisonment made a great noise
in Europe: the Earl of Leicester, Ambassador from England, demanded the
Prince's release; and Christiern King of Denmark used some strong
expressions. The King of England wrote to the French King, that it was
he who sent his nephew into France to confer with his Majesty on the
state of his affairs; and that if the King would not give him an
audience he ought at least to send him back to England. This letter
having produced no effect, the English applied to the Queen of Sweden
to intercede for the discharge of the captive Elector; and the King
declared at last that he would let Grotius treat with the Ministry about
the accommodation of this affair. He drew up a plan, in concert with the
Earl of Leicester, for giving satisfaction to the Court of France that
the Prince might be set at liberty. The Elector was to give it under his
hand, that he never intended to negotiate with the Duke of Weymar's army
without the concurrence of the Queen of Sweden and the most Christian
King: and on making this declaration he was to remain at Paris, giving
his parole not to leave it without the King's permission; and the
English Ambassador was to be security for the observance of it.

Grotius, in communicating this project to Camerarius the Swedish
Ambassador in Holland, acquaints him that he was persuaded nothing could
have greater weight with the French Ministry than what he had suggested;
and that he expected letters from the Queen his mistress, who was much
affected with the Elector's misfortune. Chavigny made two visits on the
subject of this negotiation to Grotius, who communicated to him what he
had concerted with the English Ambassador.

As the French Ministry had need of Grotius in this affair[379], he was
now treated by them with more civility. Chavigny came to him, by order
of the King, about the middle of January, 1640[380], and told him that
his Majesty and the Cardinal esteemed him highly, and for the future
would treat him with friendship and candour; that if any thing had
happened formerly, which might displease him, it was wholly owing to
Father Joseph; and that Cardinal Richelieu was now sensible he had been
injustly blamed. Grotius returned his thanks for these civilities; he
assured Chavigny that the Ministry might expect from him all that could
be hoped for from an honest man; that he knew the disgusts he had
received proceeded from the Dutch, who, after having treated him
unjustly, still continued to persecute him; and that he had determined
to meddle no otherwise in their affairs than as they were connected with
those of Sweden. Chavigny commended this resolution; adding, that the
King intended to employ him in accommodating the affair of the Elector
Palatine; which might be accomplished, if the Prince would only declare,
that he had not proposed to himself any views on the Duke of Weymar's
army but with the King's consent, whom he designed to consult; and if he
would promise to carry on no intrigue for the future in that army
without the approbation of the Queen of Sweden and the French King; that
he might then be permitted to remain at Paris, after giving his parole,
and engaging the English Ambassador to give his, that he should not
leave it without the King's permission. Grotius answered he would be
always glad to serve the King. After this conversation Grotius visited
the Earl of Leicester, and communicated the project to him as his own;
for Chavigny had desired him not to speak of the conversation which they
had together: he assured the English Ambassador, that he knew for
certain if he approved of the proposal the Prince would not only obtain
his liberty, but might also hope to recover his dominions if his
Britannic Majesty would bestir himself for that purpose; and that he
hoped his mediation would not be less agreeable to the King of England,
than to the French King. The Earl of Leicester answered, that he had
orders to demand the Elector's discharge without any condition; that he
would write to England; and till he received an answer must exactly
follow his instructions. He asked Grotius to continue his good offices
in this affair, assuring him that they would be most agreeable to the
King of England. The Swedish Ambassador informed the High Chancellor of
these particulars, in a letter dated Jan. 22, 1640[381].

Chavigny soon returned to Grotius to know what had passed between him
and the English Ambassador: and on this occasion assured him of the
Cardinal's favourable disposition towards him. Some time after, a person
belonging to Chavigny brought Grotius some papers relating to the
accommodation of this affair; in which the Weymarian army was supposed
to belong to the King of France, because he alone paid it. Grotius, on
the contrary, was persuaded that that army belonged to Sweden and the
confederate Princes of Germany; and that the Duke of Weymar, as he
himself had several times said, received the French subsidies in quality
of ally of that crown, as the Landgrave did in his life-time. On reading
these papers he told the person who brought them, they would not please
the English; and asked permission to make some alteration in them.
Chavigny's Secretary answered, that he had orders to leave them with
him, that he might shew them to the Earl of Leicester. Grotius replied,
that he would first examine them farther, and see what was to be done.
Some days after, Chavigny sent another Secretary, asking him to confer
as soon as possible with the Earl of Leicester. Grotius answered, that
he had read the papers with attention; and finding in them some things
to the prejudice of Sweden, he would consult the Queen that he might do
nothing to the prejudice of her rights; that he was sorry the distance
would not permit him to receive her orders soon, but if the other
Ambassadors who had offered their good-offices in this affair could
obtain the Prince's liberty he would be well satisfied.

These papers differed in many places from what had been settled between
Chavigny and Grotius. They had agreed that the Elector, on coming out of
Vincennes, should remain at Paris: the new regulation obliged him to
follow the Court, that he might be more easily observed; besides, it
only made mention of the King of France, and said nothing of Sweden. The
French Ministry would absolutely[382] have the Weymarian Army to be the
King's; and that it was a high offence against him to attempt to get the
command of it without his consent. The Landgravine of Hesse[383], Amelia
Elizabeth of Hanau, whose uncommon merit and attachment to France had
gained her the greatest confederation at Court, wrote to the King in
favour of the captive Prince, assuring him, that all Germany was under
affliction on account of his situation. The Queen of Bohemia[384], the
Elector's mother, approved of the difficulties started by Grotius; and
Queen Christina ordered him to demand an audience of the King to present
a letter from her, dated Dec. 19, 1639[385]. It was some time before he
could obtain this audience, the King being ill of the gout. Some
imagined this was only a pretext, and that his Majesty refused to see
him because the Ministers were treating directly with the Elector, who
was to be set at liberty as soon as they could agree with him, without
its appearing to be done at the solicitation of any foreign Prince.

The 18th of February, 1640, was at last appointed for the audience:
Grotius told the King that by clemency men approached nearest to the
Divinity, and that it became no Prince so well as him who bore the title
of Most Christian King; that the Kings of France had always
distinguished themselves by this virtue, particularly Henry IV; and that
he himself had on several occasions given signal proofs of his clemency.
He afterwards set forth the ancient splendour of the Palatine house, the
most illustrious of the empire, whose heir was now in captivity, without
lands, without subjects, and reduced to seek shelter among strangers:
he shewed that his house was ever closely attached to France; that it
defended with all its forces the rights of Henry the Great to the Crown
when unjustly disputed; that the Austrians were always declared enemies
of this house, and now kept the second Prince of it in prison; that the
Courts of Vienna and Madrid ardently desired the continuation of the
Elector's captivity; that this Prince deserved the better treatment in
France, as during his minority he was ever an ally of the Crown of
Sweden, and those, who managed his affairs in his youth, conformed with
the greatest zeal and fidelity to all the desires of the King's
Ministers, and contributed much to the success of their demands in the
diets of Hailbron, Francfort, and Worms; that his Majesty, by setting
the Prince at liberty, would not only do a great pleasure to Germany,
but her Swedish Majesty would consider it as a high obligation, and take
every opportunity to express her gratitude. The King seemed to be
affected with this discourse. He said, Grotius was not ignorant of his
reasons for arresting the Elector Palatine; that the good of the common
cause induced him to do it; that he had always had the restoration of
the Palatine house much at heart, and caused it to be mentioned to the
King of England, whom this affair regarded more, and had made several
proposals on the subject to the Earl of Leicester. Grotius replied, that
it did not become him to enter into a dispute concerning the reasons
which determined so great a King to act as he had done; but if, without
breach of the respect due to his Majesty, he might be permitted to speak
his sentiments, he thought the best measure that could be taken was to
forget what was passed, and attend only to the advantage of the common
cause; adding, that some allowance must be made for the Prince's youth,
and it ought to be considered, that the bad situation of his affairs did
not permit him to engage in his service such as were most capable of
giving him good advice. The King said, he had heard what the Ambassador
represented, and that he was going to read the Queen of Sweden's
letters. The audience concluded with the Swedish Ambassador's instances,
that the King would remember clemency and goodness. Grotius acquainted
the Queen of Sweden with all these particulars, in a letter dated the 3d
of March, 1640[386].

As soon as it was known in France, that Grotius had received orders to
intercede for the Prince, he was confined more closely; so that those of
his family, who were at Paris, had no communication with him, as before;
hence it was concluded, that the French Ministers wanted to negotiate
directly with him, and prevent his holding any correspondence with such
as might divert him from giving the King the satisfaction he desired.
These suspicions were well grounded[387]: Chavigny was treating at
Vincennes with the Prince, who, tired of his confinement, signed the
declaration which the King wanted, namely, that he had no design to get
the command of the Weymarian troops contrary to his Majesty's
inclination, and would not leave France without his permission. The King
alone was mentioned in this writing, and no notice taken of the Swedes.

The Court being satisfied[388], Chavigny went on the 13th of March,
1640, at night, to Vincennes, and brought the Prince to the Earl of
Leicester's house; where he staid _incognito_ till the Hotel of the
Ambassadors Extraordinary, then occupied by Prince Casimir, should be
empty. In this manner the Prince recovered his liberty[389], which he
owed to the powerful solicitation of the Queen of Sweden, and the
good-offices of her Minister. Grotius informed the Queen, that the
Prince was come out of Vincennes, by a letter of the 7th of April,
1640[390]. He went to pay his compliments to his Highness, and gave him
all the honours due to an Elector, though he was not treated as such by
the French, because they were in negotiation with the Duke of Bavaria,
who was invested with the title of Elector, which the Palatine house
enjoyed before the troubles in Bohemia. But Sweden had still continued
to regard the Prince as if he had been in possession of his electorate.
Grotius held a correspondence with him before this event: we have a
letter of that Ambassador, written on the 16th of November, 1638, to the
Elector Palatine, in which he allures him, that he had spoken to the
Most Christian King and his Ministers, and to the English Ambassador,
for the restoration of the Palatine house; and that he had also written
about it to the Queen of Sweden and the Grandees of the kingdom.

The Elector came to make Grotius a visit[391], and begged he would
recommend him to the favour of the Queen of Sweden. Grotius demanded an
audience of the King, to thank him for the regard he had shewn to the
Queen his Mistress's recommendation.

The Prince made his court so well to the King, and so managed the French
Ministry, that he at last got the title of Elector. He was extremely
well received at Court: but grew weary, however, of France, and was
desirous of obtaining full and entire liberty by the Queen of Sweden's
credit. He spoke of it to Grotius; who promised him his good-offices.
The uneasiness, which the protracting of this negotiation gave the
Prince, threw him into an ague. At length, after much ado, he obtained
full liberty. July 25, 1640, the King gave him permission to go where he
pleased, after giving assurances, that he would adhere to the writing
signed at Vincennes, by which he engaged to do nothing against the
interest of France. He came to acquaint Grotius with this agreeable
news; adding, that he was resolved to go to Holland, and continue there
till the troubles in Scotland were ended. It was not then foreseen that
they would last so long, and still less that they would bring the King
to the block.

FOOTNOTES:

[372] Ep. 1876. p. 578.

[373] Hist. de l'Acad. p. 162.

[374] Ep. Grot. 1629. p. 575.

[375] Ep. 1250. p. 576.

[376] Ep. 1271. p. 576.

[377] Puffendorf, l. 11. § 60.

[378] Ep. 1283. p. 581.

[379] Ep. 1311. p. 593.

[380] Puffendorf, l. 11. § 78.

[381] Ep. 1312. p. 594.

[382] Ep. 1313, p. 595.

[383] Ep. 1317. p. 596.

[384] Ep. 1320. p. 598.

[385] Ep. 1319. p. 597.

[386] Ep. 1328. p. 601.

[387] Ep. 1333 p. 613.

[388] Ep. 1337. p. 607. Puffendorf, l. 12. § 52.

[389] Ep. 1338. p. 607.

[390] Ep. 1344. p. 609.

[391] Ep. 1548. p. 611.


VIII. Grotius was at this time engaged in another very delicate
negotiation at the Court of France. Marshal Horn, the High Chancellor's
son-in-law, had been taken at the battle of Nordlinguen, and Sweden was
most desirous to recover her General. The famous John de Vert was at the
same time prisoner at Vincennes[392]: nothing seemed more natural or
easy than the exchange of these two great Captains: it was obstructed,
however, by two considerable difficulties. The Duke of Weymar pretended
that John de Vert was his Prisoner, and that he only sent him into
France to be kept there till he should redemand him. Besides, the French
Court were afraid that Marshal Horn's return would be rather hurtful,
than advantageous to the common cause: there was no longer any
employment for the Marshal in the army, and as he was supported by the
credit of his father-in-law, his return to it might occasion a dangerous
division, the consequences whereof were to be apprehended even by France
herself. Grotius[393] nevertheless was ordered to solicit the King in
favour of this exchange: he spoke of it first to Bullion[394], who
frankly promised to do all in his power for Sweden in the affair. He
afterwards spoke of it to the King at an audience in the beginning of
November, 1639; an account of which he sends to the Queen, in a letter
of the 9th of November. He tells her, that, having pressed the King to
procure the Marshal's liberty, Lewis discovered great readiness to do
it, and promised to propose it in council. The Ambassador, to engage the
King more warmly for this exchange, represented to his Majesty, that the
late Duke of Weymar designed the generals John de Vert and Enkefort to
be exchanged for Marshal Horn: that the Prince thought his glory
concerned in making this exchange; that he had mentioned it to the Queen
of Sweden; and often written to his Majesty about it, and several times
employed others to solicit it, and that he died in these sentiments.

Marshal Horn's liberty could not be obtained without the consent of
another Prince, the Duke of Bavaria, with whom he was a prisoner. That
Prince, being spoke to, readily gave his consent to the exchange.
Marshal Horn wrote this to Grotius, in a letter delivered to him by John
de Vert: and the Ambassador immediately wrote to the High Chancellor,
May 16, 1640, that he thought the Queen should make new instances by
letter to the King, and give him [Grotius] fresh orders on the subject.

The taking of Arras furnishing an occasion to compliment the King,
Grotius went to St. Germains in the beginning of November, 1640. He
expressed to his Majesty the joy he received by his happy return, his
good health, and the conquest of such a considerable town as the capital
of the Artois: he added his sincere wishes for the further increase of
the prosperity of France, and the happy delivery of the Queen, who was
then with child of the Duke of Anjou, afterwards Duke of Orleans. The
King seemed to be pleased with this compliment, and mentioned some of
the difficulties which attended the siege of Arras. Grotius afterwards
spoke to the King of Marshal Horn: he told his Majesty that he had
received letters from him, assuring that the Duke of Bavaria consented
to his being exchanged for John de Vert. The Ambassador added, that the
Duke of Weymar always desired the exchange: and that, if his Majesty
would do Sweden this pleasure, John de Vert might be sent to Benfeld,
and Marshal Horn to Landau, and both be afterwards set at liberty at
Basil. The King answered, that he would think seriously of it.

In fact, Chavigny came soon after to see Grotius, and told him that the
King, after reflecting on the proposals he had made to him concerning
Marshal Horn's release, had resolved to send John de Vert to Nancy as
soon as the troops were in winter quarters, that he might be sent back
with a more considerable escort; that he consented the Marshal should be
exchanged for John de Vert, on condition, however, that the treaty
between France and Sweden should be renewed. Chavigny added, that the
King, having learnt that Grotius complained of the Chancellor Seguier
for denying him the honours due to an Ambassador, had signified his
intentions, that he should be treated as the other Ambassadors of
crowned heads. Grotius having made a visit a little before[395] to the
Chancellor of France, he had neither advanced to meet him, according to
custom, nor given him the place that was due to him, nor re-conducted
him on coming away. The Ambassador complaining of it, Count Brulon came
and told him in presence of the Chancellor's servants, that if any
offence had been given him, it proceeded from inattention, and not from
design; for the King would have him treated with the same honours as
other Ambassadors of Kings. Grotius replied, that he expected to receive
the same treatment as the English Ambassador: on which Count Brulon
said, France gave to each power the honour due to its rank.

The exchange, however, was not executed. Grotius made a journey to
Rheims, where the King was, to speak to him of it[396]. The King gave
him the most positive promises, and engaged to give John de Vert his
liberty, if the Duke of Bavaria sent Marshal Horn to Landau. Grotius
wrote to the Court of Bavaria; John de Vert was conducted to Selesdad:
and at last the exchange was made at Strasbourg. Grotius wrote a
letter[397] of compliment on it to the Marshal, and desired him to come
and lodge with him, if he purposed to pass through Paris in his way to
Sweden.

FOOTNOTES:

[392] Bougeant, l. 6. § 14.

[393] Ep. 1259. p. 371.

[394] Ep. 1263. p. 573. 1276. p. 578.

[395] Ep. 1414. p. 645.

[396] Ep. 1512. p. 685. 1517. p. 687. 1523. p. 690 & 1532. p. 693

[397] Ep. 1565. p. 708.


IX. The renewal of the treaty of alliance between France and Sweden,
which was almost expired, was now on the carpet. This grand affair was
negotiating at Hamburg between Claude de Même count d'Avaux, and John
Adler Salvius, Vice-Chancellor of Sweden. Grotius[398], who was
attentive to give such counsels as might be useful to the crown of
Sweden, wrote to the High Chancellor on the 29th of September, 1640,
that if the subsidies made the only difficulty to the conclusion of the
treaty, he knew the Cardinal would augment them. And accordingly,
instead of a million, which France promised to Sweden by the last[399]
treaty, by this she gave her twelve hundred thousand Francs. The
negotiation meeting with many obstacles, it was drawn into a great
length and not concluded till the last of June, 1641.

In the beginning of November in the preceding year, Chavigny came to
acquaint Grotius, that the King was astonished that nothing was done in
the eight months that the renewal of the alliance had been negotiating
at Hamburg; that it would seem the regents of Sweden imagined by these
delays to obtain better conditions; but the King could add nothing to
the former subsidies by reason of his exorbitant expences both on his
own account and that of the allies; that he was desirous of being
speedily informed of the intentions of the Swedish Ministers; that the
renewal of the treaty would contribute to the obtaining a good peace;
that if they would not renew it, it was time the King should know it,
that he might take his measures; and that the peace was greatly retarded
by the hopes which the enemy entertained of a difference between France
and Sweden. He added, that if a separate treaty should be set on foot,
France could obtain better terms than Sweden. The whole drift of this
discourse was to let Grotius know they were not ignorant that he had
written to Sweden, advising the Regency to take advantage of the present
occasion to obtain more advantageous conditions from France; which would
be granted. The Swedish Ambassador answered Chavigny, that he had
received a letter from the Queen for his Majesty, which he purposed to
deliver immediately; that the war was very burdensome to the Swedes, who
had so many enemies to combat with, especially this year and last; and
that as to the renewal of the treaty, he had nothing to say to it; for
that affair did not concern him, but Salvius.

He demanded an audience; but it was denied on several pretexts[400];
because they wanted farther information of what was doing at Hamburg. It
was at last granted[401] on the 16th of November, 1640. He saw the Queen
first, whom he complimented on the birth of the Duke of Anjou: he
afterwards saw the King, and delivered to him the Queen's letters of the
10th of September. He congratulated him on the advantages gained last
campaign, and on the birth of a second son of France; and entreated his
Majesty to send a greater force into Germany as the only means to obtain
a glorious peace. The King promised it, and afterwards repeated to
Grotius what Chavigny had said; that the treaty of alliance would soon
expire; that he would be glad to renew it on the former conditions; but
that if her Swedish Majesty disliked them, he wished to know it
immediately, that he might regulate his measures accordingly. He often
repeated that it was not in his power to augment the subsidies, though
the Ambassador proved that he could never make a better use of his
money. Grotius informed the Queen of what passed at this audience by a
letter of the 17th of November, 1640, in which he assures her that the
true reason why the King deferred seeing him was his waiting for
Cardinal Richelieu, with whom he wanted to concert the answer he should
make. He acquainted this Princess at the same time, that it was from the
Superintendant's own friends he understood the Swedes might hope for an
increase of the subsidies on renewing the alliance.

Salvius informed Grotius of the state of the negotiation[402], that they
might act in concert. The Vice-Chancellor was the _primum mobile_ of
this great affair: Grotius was subordinate to him, and did him great
service by the instructions which he sent him.

FOOTNOTES:

[398] Ep. 1420. p. 647.

[399] Bougeant. l. 6. n. 38.

[400] Ep. 1440. p. 653.

[401] Ep. 1442. p. 654.

[402] Ep. 1472. p. 666.


X. Cardinal Richelieu died the year after the renewal of the treaty of
alliance between France and Sweden, on the 4th of December, 1642. This
famous Minister was not much regretted by the Swedish Ambassador:
independent of the grounds of complaint which Grotius thought he had
against the Cardinal, it is not surprising that he should have no great
veneration for him; they were of too different sentiments to esteem, or
perhaps to do one another justice.

Lewis XIII. did not long survive his Prime Minister; the fourteenth of
May, 1643, was his last. Anne of Austria, his widow, was Regent of the
Kingdom during the minority of her son Lewis XIV. She told the Swedish
Ambassador by Chavigny, and repeated it herself, that the King's death
would make no change in the alliance between France and Sweden; that she
would follow the intentions of the late King in every thing, and observe
with the greatest fidelity the treaties made with the allies.

The Duke of Orleans and the Prince of Condé were of the same
sentiments[403]. Cardinal Mazarin soon gained all the Queen's
confidence, and the principal part in the Ministry: he pretended to
support the dignity of Cardinal with the same grandeur as his
predecessor: which made Grotius resolve[404] to wait for orders from
Sweden before he saw his Eminence. September 26, 1643, he writes to
Salvius[405], "I received with great pleasure your Excellency's letters.
I caused them to be delivered to Cardinal Mazarin, whom I have not seen,
nor will see, unless the Queen order it. He takes the precedence of the
Ambassadors of Kings; and though the title of Eminence be given him, he
refuses that of Excellence to Ambassadors." Sweden having declared war
against the King of Denmark[406], who had taken several Swedish ships
trading in the Sound, Grotius communicated the Queen of Sweden's motives
to the French Queen[407], without having orders for it, in an audience
which he had of her Majesty about the middle of April, 1644; acquainting
her that justice and necessity obliged Sweden to have recourse to arms
against the Danes; he also shewed her the declaration of war, which he
translated into Latin, and printed at Paris. Some time after, Christina
sent him orders to inform the Queen of France of the reasons which
obliged the Swedes to enter into a war with Denmark; which Grotius did
accordingly at an audience in the beginning of June, 1644.

FOOTNOTES:

[403] Ep. 1594. p. 743.

[404] Ep. 632. p. 946.

[405] Ep. 1611. p. 717.

[406] Bougeant, l. 8. p. 542.

[407] Ep. 1661. p. 721.


XI. It was the adventurer Cerisante who brought Grotius Queen
Christina's letters, ordering him to lay before the Queen of France
Sweden's grounds of complaint against Denmark. He had had interest to
get himself nominated Agent of the crown of Sweden at Paris, with orders
however to do nothing but in concert with the Ambassador[408]. Some
years before, the continual jars between Grotius and the French
Ministers made the Regents of Sweden[409] hesitate whether it would not
be proper to recall Grotius: he himself had wrote to the High
Chancellor[410], that, to obviate all difficulties raised against him,
it would perhaps be more proper to have only an Agent at Paris. It is
pretended that the inclination which he was suspected to have for the
Roman Catholics contributed to set the Swedes against him; and Crusius
wrote from Bremen, November 27, 1642[411], "It is publicly reported that
Grotius is become a Papist, and has lost all credit in Sweden." He was
not consulted in the nomination of Cerisante; accordingly it gave him
much uneasiness, which he did not dissemble[412]: he regarded this Agent
as a spy sent to observe his conduct, and his mission as a proof that
the Ministry were not satisfied with him: this greatly contributed to
increase the disgust he had taken to his embassy, which he had already
hinted in confidence to some of his friends. February 16, 1641, he wrote
a letter of compliment to Lewis Camerarius[413] on his being recalled
from his embassy to Holland, and assures him that it would give him
great pleasure to live in such quiet. He writes to his brother, November
1, 1641[414], "If they threatened to recall me from my embassy I should
not be sorry: it is not a lucrative thing. I am surfeited with honours;
old age comes on, and will soon demand ease." A year after, he writes to
him[415], "I am come to the age at which many wise men have voluntarily
renounced places of honour. I love quiet, and would be glad to devote
the remainder of my life to the service of God and of posterity. If I
had not some hope of contributing to a general peace, I should have
retired before now."

The headstrong and forward temper of the person who was appointed his
coadjutor crowned all his uneasiness. In effect, no body could be more
the reverse of Grotius than Cerisante. The Memoirs of the Duke of Guise
have placed this man in a very ridiculous light: his family indeed
complain that the duke of Guise did not do him justice; but we know from
others that he was as vain as he was inconsiderate. He was the son of
Duncan, Minister of Saumur, and being perfect master of the Belles
Lettres, he had been nominated Governor to the Marquis de Foix, who
afterwards made him Lieutenant-Colonel of the regiment of Navarre; but a
quarrel with the Duke of Candale in the beginning of Anne of Austria's
regency obliged him to quit the kingdom. He retired into Sweden, in
hopes that the Queen, who loved men of wit, would make his fortune. He
was not disappointed: she gave him a commission to levy a regiment,
which he never raised; and sent him into France with the titles of
Colonel and Agent of Sweden.

He soon laid aside that regard for Grotius which was recommended to him;
and gave on all occasions proofs of his rash and vain-glorious humour.
Grotius tells us that he sent very false intelligence to Sweden, which
he affirmed that he had from the first hand: in short, he was guilty of
so many extravagancies, that Queen Christina, being informed how little
he was esteemed, and that she was in some sort censured on his account,
dismissed him her service; but it was not till after Grotius's departure
from Paris.

It will readily be judged that a man of this character could ill agree
with Grotius: accordingly they were soon at great variance. Their
misunderstanding was quickly known. Sarrau wrote to Salmasius, June 1,
1644[416], "Duncan the Swedish Agent at this Court gives the Ambassador
much uneasiness." Grotius's patience being therefore worn out, he wrote
to Sweden, desiring the Queen to recall him: his request was granted
with great readiness. As she did not dignify to him where he must
go[417], he wrote to Baron Oxenstiern, the Swedish Plenipotentiary to
the peace of Munster and Osnabrug, and son of the High Chancellor,
desiring him to inform him of the Queen's intentions, if he knew them;
or to advise him whither he ought to go, to Osnabrug or elsewhere; and
in fine, to send him a safe-conduct from the Ambassadors of the Emperor
and the King of Spain, and even, if he could, from the Elector of
Cologn. Grotius was strongly persuaded that they would employ him
elsewhere[418]. He demanded an audience of Queen Anne, whom he informed
of his being recalled. The Queen of Sweden wrote to the French Queen a
letter highly to Grotius's honour[419], in which she said that she would
never forget his great services. She wrote also to himself[420],
signifying to him her satisfaction with his fidelity and prudence, and
making him the fairest promises: which confutes what we find in the
_Menagiana_[421], that Queen Christina began her reign with recalling
Grotius; since it is beyond doubt that it was Grotius himself who asked
to be recalled. But we must not expect great exactness in this kind of
works, compiled for the most part by persons who relate ill what they
heard, and are not always acquainted with the matters of which they
write.

Before we consider Grotius returned to a private station, we shall
observe that he always supported with great firmness the rights and
honours belonging to the rank of Ambassador, not from vanity, but
because he thought it his duty to prevent a dignity conferred on him
from being depreciated. He imagined[422], that the Dutch, from ill-will
to him, had entered into a kind of conspiracy not to treat him as
Ambassador, and to make him be considered as a simple Resident[423];
and afterwards to make a crime of his weakness in giving up any part of
his right. They denied him the title of Excellency when speaking to him
of private business, under pretext that his embassy was not concerned:
but he shewed this to be a very bad reason, since the greatest Noblemen
in Sweden treated him as Ambassador even in private letters: he
therefore burnt all those letters which did not give him the proper
titles, without answering them; and even would not receive in his house
such persons as denied him the honours due to the Ambassadors of crowned
heads.

FOOTNOTES:

[408] Ep. 716. p. 970.

[409] Puffendorf, l. 13. n. 77.

[410] Ep. 690. p. 284.

[411] Inter Vossianas Ep. 656.

[412] Ep. 1689, p. 731.

[413] Ep. 1477. p. 668.

[414] Ep. 572. p. 928.

[415] Ep. 620. p. 942.

[416] Ep. 83. p. 84. Sarravii.

[417] Ep. 1743. p. 746.

[418] Ep. 1745. p. 746.

[419] Ep. 1757. p. 749.

[420] Ep. 1753. p. 748.

[421] Tom. 2. p. 298.

[422] Ep. 532. p. 912.

[423] Ep. 542. p. 918.


XII. When the news of Grotius's recall was known at Paris, it was
publicly said that he was going to Sweden to complain of his collegue.
Sarrau writes thus to Salmasius, March 15, 1645[424]. "Grotius is
preparing to set out for Sweden after Easter, to complain of the injury
done to him by appointing for his successor a young man who was his
rival. He must however obey; and return into a private station: but this
Colossus, though thrown down, will be always great; this statue will
still be very high without its base." Whilst Grotius waited for Baron
Oxenstiern's answer, he wrote to Spiringius, the Swedish Agent in
Holland, asking him, in case he should not receive a favourable letter
from Osnabrug, to send him a ship of war to some French port, on board
of which he might embark for Gottenburg; or, if that could not be done,
to obtain a passport to go from Holland to Gottenburg; but on condition
that no mention should be made of what passed in his youth; otherwise,
he declared, he would take another rout. It is probable he obtained such
a passport as he desired; for embarking at Dieppe[425], he went to
Holland, where he was extremely well received. The Burgomasters of
Amsterdam paid him all honour, and he was entertained at the public
expence. He had also reason to be satisfied with the town of Rotterdam:
not but there were at this time some mean souls in Holland, who wanted
to make the States of Holland, then assembled, deny him a passage
through the Province: but this shameful step served only to draw upon
them the public indignation. The City of Amsterdam fitted out a vessel
to carry him to Hamburg, where he was May 16, 1645, on which day he
writes to his brother[426] that the wind had been against them; that he
had been eight days by the way; and that Schrasvius, the Dutch Resident
at Hamburg, came to visit him, and had a conversation with him full of
friendship. He was resolved to set out next day for Lubeck, and hoped to
find at that town, or at least at Wismar, a vessel that might carry him
to Calmar, where he believed the High Chancellor to be with the French
and Dutch Ambassadors. In this letter he asked his brother to give him
only the title of Counsellor to her Swedish Majesty. He speaks much of
the honourable reception which the Magistrates of Lubeck gave him[427].
"You cannot believe, he writes to his brother, how many friends I have
found." He was in the end of March at Wismar[428], where Count Wrangel,
Admiral of the Swedish fleet, gave him a splendid entertainment, and
afterwards sent a man of war with him to Calmar[429]. The High
Chancellor was not there, but at Suderacher, four leagues distant,
negotiating a peace between Sweden and Denmark. Grotius wrote to him
immediately, and received a speedy answer: on the 8th of June the High
Chancellor sent a Gentleman with his coach to bring him to Suderacher,
where he remained a fortnight[430] with the Chancellor and, the other
Ambassadors, who treated him with great honours: returning to Calmar, he
went by land to Stockholm. Queen Christina was then at Upsal: but, as
soon as she heard of Grotius's arrival in her capital, she came back to
see so great a man: a desire to be acquainted with such as distinguished
themselves in the republic of letters is well known to have been one of
her favourite passions. On the morrow of his arrival[431], she gave him
a long audience, with which he appears, by a letter written to his
brother July 15, 1645, to be well satisfied. "I am now at Stockholm,
says he, and have seen the Queen. She makes me great promises. I do not
know yet what she will do with me. The Senators seem well satisfied with
all that I have done."

Christina gave him several audiences; made him dine with her; and he
appeared to be abundantly pleased with the honours he received: but as
he saw they were in no haste to do any thing for him, and only rewarded
him with compliments, he grew uneasy, and asked permission to retire. He
was confirmed in this resolution by finding the Court filled with
persons who had conceived a jealousy against him; besides, the air of
Sweden did not agree with him. The Queen several times refused to grant
him his dismission, and signified to him that if he would continue in
her service in quality of Counsellor of State, and bring his family into
Sweden, he should have no reason to repent it: but he excused himself on
account of his own health, which was much altered, and of his wife's
health, who could not bear the cold air of that kingdom. He asked a
passport, which they delayed granting. In the mean time he grew so
uneasy at Stockholm, that he resolved to be gone without a passport.
Leaving that city therefore, he went to a seaport two leagues distant,
in order to embark for Lubeck. The Queen being informed of his
departure, sent a Gentleman to inform him that she wanted to see him
once more; otherwise she should think that he was displeased with her:
he returned therefore to Stockholm, and explained himself to the Queen,
who seemed satisfied with his reasons, and made him a present in money
amounting to twelve or thirteen thousand Imperials[432], about ten
thousand French Crowns, adding to it some silver plate, that was not
finished sooner: which, he was assured, delayed the granting of his
passport. It was afterwards issued, and the Queen gave him a vessel, on
board which he embarked the 12th of August for Lubeck.

The _Menagiana_ contains an anecdote relating to the last audience that
Grotius had of Queen Christina, which we shall relate rather to throw
contempt on this kind of works, than to give weight to it. When Grotius,
it tells us, had his audience of leave of Queen Christina, she said some
sharp things to him; on which he immediately left her, saying only,
Madam, I remain your most humble servant. The Queen was afterwards vexed
at it, and could not help observing, that he ought not to have gone away
without taking leave of her. Marigny said to her, Madam, he did take
leave of you. You do not know what you say, replied the Queen; if he
had, I should have known it. Madam, added Marigny, what I say is true; I
was there; when they say in France, on going away, I remain your most
humble servant, it is taking leave of a person. The Queen sustained
this; and sending for Grotius, made him a present of copper to the
amount of forty thousand livres.

FOOTNOTES:

[424] Ep. Sarr. p. 116.

[425] Le Clerc, l. 12. t. 2. Latin Life of Grotius. Barleus, in
Vicquefort's Letters, Ep. 79. p. 416. Vind. Grotii, p. 472.

[426] Ep. 760. p. 749.

[427] Ep. 761. p. 749.

[428] Ep. 1762. p. 749.

[429] Ep. 1793. p. 749.

[430] Ep. 1764, p. 750.

[431] Ep. 1765. p. 750.

[432] Vind. Grot. p. 478.


XIII. Grotius's departure from Stockholm gave rise to several very
uncertain reports. Vondel, a famous Dutch Poet, and a friend of that
learned man, pretends that he designed to go to Osnabrug[433], where the
peace was negotiating; others assure[434], that he was desirous of
retiring to Holland, where the Republican party was beginning to gain
the ascendant. A modern author has advanced[435], that he resolved to go
into Poland, in hopes that the King would send him Ambassador to the
court of France: but it is more probable, that, disgusted with
negotiations and business, he only sought a place of retreat, where he
might complete his imaginary project of forming a coalition of
Christians, and prepare for his latter end.

The vessel was scarce sailed for Lubeck, when she was overtaken by a
violent storm, which obliged her to put in, on the 17th of August,
fourteen miles from Dantzick. Grotius set out in an open waggon for
Lubeck, and arrived at Rostock[436] on the 26th of August very ill.
Nobody knew him: his great weakness determined him to call a physician:
his name was Stochman, who, on feeling Grotius's pulse, said his
indisposition proceeded from weakness and fatigue; and that with rest
and some restoratives he might recover: but next day he changed his
tone; on seeing his weakness increase, with a cold sweat, and other
symptoms of nature being spent, he judged that his end was near. Grotius
then asked for a clergyman. John Quistorpius was brought, who, in a
letter to Calovius, gives us the particulars of Grotius's last moments.
We cannot do better than copy it.

"You are desirous of hearing from me how that Phoenix of Literature,
Hugo Grotius, behaved in his last moments, and I am going to tell you.
He embarked at Stockholm for Lubeck; and after having been tossed for
three days by a violent tempest, he was shipwrecked and got to shore on
the coast of Pomerania, from whence he came to our town of Rostock,
distant above sixty miles, in an open waggon, through wind and rain. He
lodged with Balleman; and sent for M. Stochman, the physician, who
observing that he was extremely weakened by years, by what he suffered
at sea, and the inconveniences attending the journey, judged that he
could not live long. The second day after Grotius's arrival in this
town, that is, on the 18th of August, O.S. he sent for me about nine at
night. I went, and found him almost at the point of death. I said there
was nothing I desired more than to have seen him in health, that I might
have the pleasure of his conversation. He answered, God had ordered it
otherwise. I desired him to prepare himself for a happier life, to
acknowledge that he was a sinner, and to repent of his faults: and
happening to mention the publican, who acknowledged that he was a
sinner, and asked God's mercy, he answered: _I am that publican._ I went
on, and told him, that he must have recourse to Jesus Christ, without
whom there is no salvation. He replied, _I place all my hope in Jesus
Christ._ I began to repeat aloud in German the prayer which begins _Herr
Jesu_[437]; he followed me, in a very low voice, with his hands clasped.
When I had done, I asked him, if he understood me. He answered, _I
understand you very well._ I continued to repeat to him those passages
of the word of God which are commonly offered to the remembrance of
dying persons, and asking him if he understood me, he answered, _I heard
your voice, but did not understand what you said._ These were his last
words: soon after he expired, just at midnight. His body was delivered
to the Physicians; who took out his bowels. I easily obtained leave to
bury them in our principal Church, which is dedicated to the Virgin."

Thus died this celebrated man, on the 28th of August at night, or rather
in the morning of the 29th, 1645. A number of falshoods were published
on occasion of his death. Du Maurier relates[438], that a Roman Catholic
Priest, and Ministers of different persuasions, hearing that Grotius was
dying, came to him to dispose him to die in their communion: that he
made them no answer, but, _I don't understand you_; and on their silence
said to them, _Exhort me to die like a Christian._

Quistorpius's relation, ill understood, has given rise to several
groundless stories. M. Arnaud[439] assures us that he had the
particulars of Grotius's death from one of his Secretaries, who told
him, that when he was at Rostock a Lutheran Minister came to see him in
his illness, and speaking to him of religion, Grotius answered, I don't
understand you; willing to let him know that his conversation was not
agreeable. M. Jurieu[440] maintains, that he died without making any
profession of religion, and that he answered those who exhorted him to
prepare for death in these words, I don't understand you: turning his
back to them.

If we may believe the _Menagiana_, the Minister who came to wait upon
him at his death, said to him what was very poor; and Grotius, to gain
time, and let him know that he could well dispense with his
exhortations, said to him, I am Grotius. To which the Minister answered,
What! are you the great Grotius? M. Le Clerc[441] mentions his having
seen in an English book that Grotius said when dying, "By undertaking
many things I have accomplished nothing."

Not even so much as the cause of his death has escaped without
misrepresentations. M. Le Clerc informs us, that some of his enemies
spread a report, that he was killed by lightning: and not long ago, he
adds, a learned man of my acquaintance asked me by letter if it was
true.

Patin[442] writes, that it was suspected he had been poisoned. "We hear,
says he, that Grotius is dead at Rostock, on his return from Sweden, of
a fever, not without suspicion of being poisoned by the Lutherans, on
account of what he says about Antichrist in favour of the Pope: but I do
not think that poisoning is used in that country."

They carried their wickedness to such a height as to accuse Queen
Christina of shortening that great man's days. The new Memoirs of the
Abbé d'Artigny[443] acquaint us, that Antony Argoud, Dean of the
Cathedral of Vienne, haranguing Queen Christina the 13th of August,
1656, pleased her so much, that she gave him broad hints that she would
do great things for him if he would attend her in quality of first
Chaplain. The Queen had in her retinue Lesseins, one of the Gentlemen of
the King's Bedchamber, who was ordered to accompany that Princess from
Marseilles to Lions. Argoud telling him of the Queen's proposals, he
diverted him from accepting them by painting out Christina as an
inconstant and capricious Princess. "He forgot nothing to set him
against her, even to telling him that Grotius would have been still
alive, if he had had nothing to fear from the jealousy of the Swedes;
but that the ill treatment of the Queen brought that great man to his
grave." It is very possible that not having been treated by the Queen so
well as he expected, it chagrined him much: but whatever is not
conformable to Quistorpius's letter, against which nothing solid can be
advanced, ought to be rejected as apocryphal. His corpse was carried to
Delft, and deposited in the tomb of his ancestors. He wrote this modest
Epitaph for himself[444]:

     _Grotius hîc Hugo est, Batavûm captivus et exul,
           Legatus regni, Suecia magna, tui._

Grotius had the precaution to make his will at Paris on the 27th of
March, 1645, a little before his departure. He had a very agreeable
person, a good complexion, an aquiline nose, sparkling eyes, a serene
and smiling countenance. He was not tall, but very strong, and well
built.

FOOTNOTES:

[433] Vind. Grot. p. 478.

[434] Menagiana.

[435] Hist. du Socinianisme, c. 42. p. 831.

[436] Observat. Hallen. 15. t. 7. p. 341.

[437] It is a prayer addressed to Jesus Christ, and suited to the
condition of a dying person who builds his hope on the Mediator. M. Le
Clerc has recited it at large in the Sentimens de quelques Theologiens
de Hollande, 17 Lettre, p. 397.

[438] Memoirs, p. 431.

[439] Sentimens des Theologiens de Hollande, p. 395.

[440] Esprit de M. Arnaud, t. 2. p. 308.

[441] Sentimens des Theologiens de Hollande, Lettre 17. p. 402.

[442] T. 1. Lettre 7.

[443] T. 1. p. 340.

[444] Ep. 536. p. 915.




BOOK VI.


However much Grotius was employed in the business of his embassy, he
still found time for study, which was one of the greatest pleasures of
his life. He has even been accused of applying too much to literature
for an Ambassador[445]; but his letters testify that he did not go to
study till he had finished what his duty to the crown of Sweden required
of him, and spent in it the time only which other Ministers give to
their pleasures, to conversations often useless, and visits sometimes
unnecessary.

Eight days after making his entry into Paris in quality of Ambassador,
he wrote to Salmasius, March 9, 1635[446], informing him of the happy
change in his affairs. He acquaints him, that when he shall be a little
used to business, he hopes to have leisure enough to continue the
cultivation of learning. "How desirous soever I may be of serving the
public in this respect, he says, I know not where I ought to begin. My
Commentaries on the Evangelists would be apt to expose me to hatred in
the present age, when every one maintains his opinions with obstinacy.
The History of the Low-Countries, tho' written with great simplicity,
will find malevolent readers. Shall I return again to trifles, such as
are not unworthy men of learning, and turn into Latin the Epigrams
collected by Planudas? One thing hinders me: I know you have made
several corrections in the Manuscripts, and I am unwilling to translate
from a faulty copy. Yet I cannot expect that you should interrupt your
studies, to send me the corrections you have made."

"My greatest relief from the languors of the Court, he writes to
Schmalz[447], is the conversation of men of learning, to whom I
chearfully give all the time that I can spare from business."

FOOTNOTES:

[445] Du Maurier, p. 418. & 423. Wiquefort Ambas. l. 1. p. 95.

[446] Ep. 368. p. 134.

[447] Ep. 373. p. 136.


II. Neither his serious studies, nor his public occupations, ever made
him relinquish the Muses: Amidst his embarrassments and anxiety in the
beginning of his embassy, he put his tragedy of Joseph to the
press[448], which had all the success that could be hoped for; and wrote
several Latin Epigrams. June 26, 1637[449], he sent some to his brother
that were just finished; observing to him that he would possibly one day
add to them a Greek translation in verse of the Latin verses in
Suetonius; and a Latin translation of Euripides's Iphigenia in Tauris.

He wrote to Gronovius, February 17, 1638[450], that he unbended himself
at times, after his weightier business, in the company of the Muses.
"However much I am busied, he writes to Freinshemius[451], I still
preserve my affection for the Muses, and look upon them as the most
agreeable of all Amusements."

FOOTNOTES:

[448] Ep. 378. p. 138 & 339, p. 851.

[449] Ep. 402 p. 869.

[450] Ep. 915. p. 402.

[451] Ep. 909. p. 435.


III. He made _Tacitus_ his particular study, and, writes to Vossius,
July 6, 1635[452], to inform himself, whether a new edition of that
celebrated Historian, was any where printing, because he had a mind to
communicate his notes to the Editors[453]. "They are neither," says he,
"political dissertations, nor a commentary; but corrections which may be
useful. I call them, to speak modestly, conjectures[454], tho' I am
persuaded most of them will appear to be well grounded." However, as
they filled but a few sheets[455], he did not think proper to print
them, at Paris; but sent them, in 1640, to his brother, who
communicating them to the Elzevirs, they were published the same year in
their edition of _Tacitus_[456], and have been several times reprinted.

FOOTNOTES:

[452] Ep. 430. p. 159.

[453] Ep. 573. p. 225.

[454] Ep. 402. p. 869.

[455] Ep. 444. p. 897.

[456] Fabricius, Biblioth.


IV. The learned Gronovius, intending to publish an edition of _Statius_,
requested Grotius to send him his remarks on that Poet: this he complied
with, in a letter of the 28th of October, 1636[457], containing the
several corrections he had made in the margin of this author, whom he
had often read with pleasure and application. The edition of _Statius_
was published: and Gronovius, without receiving Grotius's letter[458],
had made most of the remarks that were sent to him: Grotius, however,
suspected[459] Gronovius had perhaps been persuaded to pretend that he
did not receive his letter, that he might be under no obligation of
commending a man, whose name was odious to those in power.

FOOTNOTES:

[457] Ep. 673. p. 274.

[458] Ep. 808. p. 357.

[459] Ep. 406. p. 871.


V. Grotius also wrote notes on _Lucan_, which he offered to any
bookseller who would make use of them. He wrote to his brother[460], to
enquire when any new edition of that Poet should be printed, that he
might contribute to make it better by communicating his remarks. They
are to be found in some of the editions printed in Holland, and are
very highly commended by Vossius[461], who says the learned world is
much obliged to their author.

A letter from Grotius to his brother[462] informs us, that the latter
part of the notes of _Lucan_ were by William Grotius.

FOOTNOTES:

[460] Ep. 859. p. 377. & 402. p. 869.

[461] Præs. Vir. Epist. p. 377.

[462] Ep. 128. p. 792.


VI. A work, which he had much at heart, was the collection of Greek
Epigrams, known by the name of _Anthologia_: he was long about it, and
thought to publish it soon after his return to Paris in quality of
Ambassador. As he knew that Salmasius had made this collection his
particular study, he requests him, June 11, 1635[463], to communicate to
him the corrections he had made in the Greek text, either by the
assistance of manuscripts, or from his own conjectures. He gives a long
account of his design to Gerard Vossius, in a letter of the 20th of
December, 1635. "When I was here a private man, says he, in order to be
useful to the lovers of learning, after translating Stobæus and the
Maxims of the Comic and Tragic Poets, I also translated the Collection
of Greek Epigrams by Planudas; adding several Epigrams which are not in
Henry Stephens's edition: on coming here Ambassador, I thought I should
do well to finish what I had begun; and knowing that the great Salmasius
had collated these Epigrams with ancient manuscripts, I prevailed on him
to communicate to me his remarks; and I had the satisfaction to find my
conjectures confirmed by the authority of manuscripts. The whole is now
ready to be printed in the same form as _Stobæus_ and the Extracts from
the Greek Tragedies and Comedies. When I think of a Bookseller, Blaeu
first occurs to me: he loves me and all my friends: but one thing vexes
me; if I give him my manuscript, I shall not know when it will be
published: besides, I doubt whether he has any one that can correct the
Greek proofs, and make the Indexes which are necessary for rendering the
book useful to youth. If I could be assured of this, I would readily
give him the preference. I shall afterwards think of publishing more
considerable works." New reflections on Blaeu's dilatoriness set him
against him, especially as he was not satisfied with his Greek
types[464]: he therefore wrote to his brother, to consult with Vossius
what he ought to do. "I would not, he adds, have recourse to the
Elzevirs, not so much on account of this book, as of some others which I
am preparing for the press, and which will not be to their taste." It is
unlucky for the republic of letters, that Grotius was obstinately bent
on printing his _Anthologia_ in Holland; Morelle would gladly have
printed it at Paris[465]; Cramoisi would not have refused it. Grotius
writes to his brother, June 26th, 1637, "I am deliberating, whether to
make use of Cramoisi, the eminent Bookseller; but I have some reason to
question the abilities of his corrector." He once thought to send it to
England[466]; but he was diverted from this by reflecting, that
Franciscus Junius, who resided in that country, printed his works out of
the kingdom. The answers he received concerning the printing of the
_Anthologia_ not satisfying him, he wrote to his brother, April 20,
1639[467], "If my _Anthologia_ cannot be printed, or not printed
correctly, I would have it sent back to me; Cramoisi, the richest
Bookseller in this country, will undertake it." He was kept in hopes of
its appearing in Holland; but the printing of it was put off from time
to time: he wrote to several of his friends about it; however no
progress was made. Isaac Vossius, son of the famous Gerard, who
inherited his father's sentiments for Grotius, making an offer of his
service for his literary commissions, Grotius thanked him most
affectionately, in a letter of the 12th of November, 1644[468], in which
he says a great deal about his _Anthologia_. "I cannot sufficiently
thank you for the kind offer of your good services in relation to the
printing of my works. No body can be of more use to me than you: for who
has more friendship for me, or better understands those matters? I would
have the _Anthologia_ printed directly; and have desired my brother to
shew you my Prolegomena, and inform you in what manner I would have the
Indexes made. I shall repeat it, for fear that I have not sufficiently
explained myself in what I wrote to my brother. I would first have an
Index of the Poets, expressing exactly from what places the Epigrams are
taken. There must also be another Index of the persons who are the
subject of the Epigrams, and of those to whom they are addressed: there
should be a third, which may be called Chorographical, containing the
mountains, rivers, towns, baths, bridges, and other public works
mentioned in the Epigrams. There must be an Historical one for the great
actions which have happened in war or peace. To the two last Indexes I
would have the names of the authors added, who have mentioned such of
those actions as are least known; as Strabo, Pausanias, Procopius, and
others. After these Indexes there must be another, comprehending the
natural history, morality, and other particulars omitted in the
preceding ones. This work may be useful; but I would not, however,
charge any one with it, who could employ his time better. If, without
losing too much time, you could do it yourself, it would give me the
highest satisfaction, not only on my own account, but on the reader's,
to whom these Indexes would render the edition much more useful: for it
is proper to observe, that these Epigrams contain what is most important
in history, from the time of Plato to that of Justinian, and even
later."

This was the subject of the Preface, or Prolegomena, that was to be
prefixed to the work, and which, with his usual modesty, he says will
not be wholly useless[469].

The _Anthologia_ appears to have been put to press in Jan. 1645, under
the inspection of Isaac Vossius: for, on the 21st of that month, Grotius
writes thus to him. "I have seen a proof of the _Anthologia_, and like
the type very well. I would absolutely have it printed in quarto, like
_Stobæus_, and the Extracts from the Tragic and Comic Poets: but if it
will make too large a volume, it may be divided into two, and the Greek
and Latin printed to face one another."

Grotius left France a little after the date of this letter; and his
death, which soon followed, was no doubt the greatest obstacle to the
publication of the _Anthologia_, the printing of which Blaeu
discontinued. Grotius's copy falling into Le Clerc's hands, he gave
hopes that he would publish it with considerable additions. He has a
great deal about it in his _Bibliotheque Choisie_[470]. "Those who shall
read Grotius's version, says he, will equally admire the happy genius,
and the uncommon patience of that excellent man, who translated the
whole book in the same number of verses as in the original, which he
very often equals, and sometimes even surpasses. There will be an
excellent Preface by Grotius, treating of the _Anthologia_ and his
version of it."

Unhappily M. le Clerc did not fulfil the engagement he entered into with
the public. Father Berthier, a famous Jesuit, who, to solid piety joins
extensive learning, has lately given us, in the _Memoirs de Trevoux_, a
very curious article relating to Grotius's _Anthologia_. It is entitled,
_An Account of a Manuscript version of the Greek Anthologia by Grotius_.
He tells us, that the original, in Grotius's own hand, is in the library
of the Jesuits College at Paris, where it was deposited in the year 1665
by Edmund le Mercier, Grotius's Secretary. This work, the learned Jesuit
observes, is valuable on three accounts. First, because the Latin verses
are excellent, and of the same measure with the Greek; so that if the
text be Elegiac verses, or pure Hexameters, or Iambics of six feet, or
Anacreontics, the version is always of the same species of poetry.
Secondly, he has every where confined himself to the number of verses in
the original, being never more laconic nor more prolix; which discovers
a very ready genius, and a singular patience. Thirdly, he corrects the
text from time to time by short notes placed in the margin.

Father Berthier gives afterwards Grotius's translation of several
Epigrams; which makes it earnestly to be wished, that the learned Jesuit
would publish the whole work: but the present prevailing taste for
trifles gives us ground to apprehend, that the booksellers of France
dare not undertake this work, which deserves so well to be transmitted
to posterity.

Besides the Epigrams that are to be found in all the editions, Grotius's
manuscript contains, first, those which were collected by Henry
Stephens, and are placed at the end of his edition of the _Anthologia_.
2dly, A very large number of inscriptions from Gruter. 3dly, A
collection made by Grotius himself from manuscripts.

A note at the beginning of this valuable manuscript informs us, that the
version of the seven books of the _Anthologia_ was begun by Grotius in
September, 1630, and finished before next September: which shews the
wonderful ease with which this great author wrote.

FOOTNOTES:

[463] Ep. 418. p. 153.

[464] Ep. 368. p. 859.

[465] Ep. 612. p. 244, 692. p. 285. & 402. p. 869.

[466] Ep. 964. p. 432.

[467] Ep. 505. p. 885.

[468] Ep. 1698. p. 733.

[469] Ep. 486. p. 896. & 369. p. 860.

[470] Fabric. Bibl. Gr. l. 3. c. 28. p. 707. tom. 2


VII. He was so sensible of his obligations to Sweden, that, as a public
testimony of his gratitude, he undertook to throw light on the History
of the Goths, in hopes of doing honour to the Swedes, who regarded them
as their ancestors. He wrote to Rome to[471] get what was wanting in
Heschelius's Greek edition of Procopius communicated to him, and
obtained it by the recommendation of Messieurs du Puis; as we learn from
a letter to the celebrated Nicholas Peyresc, dated April 8, 1636, in
which he adds, "I have translated the History of the Goths and Vandals
by Procopius, in honour of a nation who adopted me after being thrice
sold by my Country."

He communicated this project to Schmalz, July 24, 1636[472], "The time,
says he, which I am not obliged to spend in public business, I devote to
an enquiry into the antiquities of Sweden. Be so kind to send me, for
this work, a Swedish Dictionary, a New Testament in Swedish, and the
ancient inscriptions in that language, which are to be met with on
tombs, or in other places. I have seen a Latin translation of the
Swedish laws, which I should be glad to see again if possible. If you
can procure me all these, I shall think myself highly obliged by you;
and I hope you will not find me ungrateful."

He explains his project more at large in a long letter to Oxenstiern,
Aug. 28, 1636[473]. "Your Sublimity, he writes to him, shews me so much
favour, and you interest yourself so much in what concerns me, that I
think it my duty to give you an account, not only of my negotiations,
but of my leisure hours. As I intend to devote the time that is not
employed in the affairs with which I am charged, to the honour of a
kingdom which has loaded me with honours, I had begun to read all that
has been written on the great Gustavus in Latin, Italian, German, and
French: but soon perceiving that these writers did not know the
intentions of the ministry, were unacquainted with the places of which
they speak, and were ignorant of the art of war, I concluded that it was
impossible, with such materials, to complete a work that might deserve
the approbation of posterity. This has made me turn again to
antiquities. Of all the Ancients Procopius has best handled the History
of the Goths and Vandals: he was an able man, was Secretary to
Belisarius, had been on the spot, and speaks not only of what happened
in his own time, but also of the facts which happened before his time.
The Latin version is very faulty, imperfect, and inelegant: I have made
a new translation from the Greek Edition of Heschelius; with the
assistance of two manuscripts in the King's library, which enabled me to
make several corrections in the text; others I made by conjecture. I
intend to extract all that has relation to this subject from the Secret
History of Procopius, printed by Alemannus at Rome, and from Agathias.
Being informed, that the manuscript of the History of the Goths and
Vandals, in the Vatican library, was more complete than what Heschelius
followed, I have asked my friends at Rome to fill up the gaps in the
printed copies: which I hope they will do. That nothing may be omitted,
which has a relation to the antiquities of Scandinavia, I intend to add
what is contained in Strabo, Pliny, Tacitus, Ptolemæus, and those who
have written since, as Helmoldus, Eginhart, Adam of Bremen, and others.
I shall farther add the Gothics of Jornandes, the Epistle of Sidonius
Apollinaris on the manners of Theodoric King of the Wisigoths; the
Panegyric of Ennodius of Pavia in honour of Theodoric King of the
Ostrogoths and Italy; the Laws of the Ostrogoths, Westrogoths, and
Lombards, with the Book of Paulus Diaconus, who was himself a Lombard,
and makes his nation come from Scandinavia. We shall add, at the end,
the appellative names contained in the laws, with their original and
explication. I would beg of your Sublimity, that being now returned to
Sweden, you will give orders for communicating to me the old
inscriptions, the ancient laws, and, in fine, whatever is not printed
and may contribute to throw light on the antiquities of Sweden; that the
work which I am about may be the more perfect. I earnestly intreat your
Sublimity to be assured, that I will do all that depends on me, not only
to procure the advantage of Sweden, but also to contribute to her
glory."

Schmalz going to Rome about this time with Reigersberg, son to Grotius's
wife's brother[474], Grotius took that opportunity of renewing his
acquaintance with Holstenius, his ancient friend, who resided at Rome;
and to ask of him what was wanting in the printed editions of Procopius.
On receiving these valuable additions[475], he communicates the good
news to the High Chancellor, whom he entertains with a further account
of his work, in a letter dated June 25th, 1637[476]. "Your Sublimity, he
says, will pardon me, if, having little public business on my hands, I
give you an account how I employ my time. I send you a pretty long
Preface, in which I inscribe the new translation of Procopius, which
differs greatly from the old one, to your Sublimity, who have deserved
so well of Sweden, and to whom I am under so great obligations. The work
itself will include the authors who have written of the antiquities of
the Goths, Vandals, Wisigoths, and Lombards. Two reasons induced me to
make the Preface so long: the first, that I was obliged to answer
Cluverius, who, either from envy, or hired by the Danes, first sought to
darken our glory; but I have confuted him by such clear evidence, that I
think no person of sense will now attempt to repeat the same falsities.
The other was, that, the testimonies in favour of a nation being liable
to suspicion when built only on the assertions of the natives, I have
collected the authorities of foreigners, who have spoken honourably of
the Swedes and of the nations sprung from them."

Thus in appears that his design was to dedicate this work to the High
Chancellor[477], who heard with infinite pleasure of this new occupation
of Grotius. He liked the Preface much; spoke of it with the highest
esteem[478], and wrote to Grotius[479], thanking him in his own name and
in the name of the whole nation, and pressing him to publish the work.

However he was in no hurry[480], because he wanted to exhaust the
subject, and to make all proper enquiries for enabling him to treat it
thoroughly. He imagined he should find in Gallia Narbonensis, and the
neighbouring places, several things that might contribute to embellish
his work; and that the French, from envy to the Swedes, hindered his
friends from communicating them.

This work was finished before Grotius died; but it was not printed till
after his death: and whether it was that the intended Dedication to the
High Chancellor was never written, or was suppressed, it is not now to
be found. The title of the work is: _Historia Gothorum, Vandalorum, &
Longobardorum, ab Hugone Grotio partim versa, partim in ordinem digesta:
præmissa sunt ejusdem Prolegomena; ubi Regum Gothorum ordo e
Chronologia, cum elogiis; accedunt nomina appellativa & verba Gothica,
Vandalica, Longobardica, cum explicatione. Auctorum omnium ordinem
tabula centenorum indicat. Amstelodami, apud Ludovicum Elzevirium,
1655._

At the head of this work is a very learned Preface, in which the author
acquaints us, that he revised the Gothics and Vandalics of Procopius by
the Greek manuscripts; that he new-translated them because there were
many things omitted in the old translations, which were otherwise badly
done; and that, by the assistance of the Vatican manuscripts, he filled
up large gaps. There follows a geographical description of the ancient
country of the Goths, a character of the people, much in their favour; a
catalogue of their Kings; a chronological table of the time when they
lived; a list of the Lombard Kings, and another of the Kings of the
Vandals; the testimonies of the Ancients in favour of the people of
Sweden and the nations which derive their origin from the Swedes.

After the translation of all that Procopius has concerning the Goths and
Vandals there follows an Index, with this title: _Nomina appellativa &
verba Gothica, Vandalica, & Longobardica, quæ in hoc volumine
reperiuntur._ It appears from the author's researches, that almost all
the appellative names of the Lombards had, like those of the Greeks,
some signification. This collection concludes with the following pieces:
Jornandes _De Getarum sive Gothorum origine & rebus gestis_; the
_Chronicle_ of St. Isidorus, and Paulus Wanefridus _De Gestis
Longobardorum_. The Prolegomena acquaint us, that Grotius intended to
expound the ancient laws of the Goths and Vandals: but unhappily death
prevented his executing this design, for which no one was better
qualified.

FOOTNOTES:

[471] Ep. 572. p. 225.

[472] Ep. 622. p. 250.

[473] Ep. 641. p. 259.

[474] Ep, 645. p. 263.

[475] Ep. 676. p. 275.

[476] Ep. 780. p. 331.

[477] Ep. 825. p. 360.

[478] Ep. 408, p. 871.

[479] Ep. 410, p. 872.

[480] Ep. 1667, p. 727.


VIII. The nomination of Grotius, when very young, to be Historiographer
of the States, led him to enquire particularly into the troubles of the
Low Countries and their consequences with regard to the Seven Provinces.
He was employed about this in the year 1614, as appears by a letter,
written on the 8th of February, to the President de Thou. He informs
him[481], that love to his Country had engaged him in a work very like
his, but as much inferior as Holland is to France. "I own, indeed, the
work is above my abilities, but I shall not publish it till years and
judgment enable me to mend it." Communicating this work to Heinsius,
with whom he was then very intimate, that learned youth wanted words to
express his admiration. Balzac informs us of these particulars in a
letter to Chapelin, dated Sept. 20, 1640, in which he mentions a letter
from Heinsius concerning this History when Grotius was very young.

An author, more fond of his works than Grotius, would have made haste to
publish this, which appears to have been finished in 1636; for that year
he wrote to Martinus Opitius[482], "My Belgic annals are transcribing."
He writes to his brother the year following[483], "My Annals and my
History of the Low Countries are transcribed: but I think I must still
keep them a while." He consulted several of his friends on this subject,
and among others Gerard Vossius.

The sudden deaths of many of his acquaintance leading him to reflect on
the uncertainty of life, he wrote to his brother, May 21, 1639[484], "I
would have my works printed before my death, that I may be useful to
those that shall come after me; and would therefore have my Annals
correctly printed as soon as possible; but I would not have them printed
by those, who, from a party spirit, would tell what was in them before
they were published, and thereby prevent perhaps their ever appearing. I
therefore beg of you to find out some honest man to whom I may intrust
my copy."

In the mean time he was still revising them; and near two years after he
wrote to his brother, March 23, 1641[485], "Till I put the last hand to
my History, I would not have any one see it: you must therefore find a
handsome excuse to those who ask you for it. Read it, however, yourself,
and send me your remarks." Grotius had not the satisfaction to see his
History printed: it was not published till twelve years after his death,
by his two sons Cornelius and Peter, who dedicated it, in 1657, to the
States of Holland and West-Friesland.

This work is divided into two parts, Annals and History, in imitation of
Tacitus. The Annals begin with the year 1566, and contain five books:
there are eighteen of the History, which begins with the year 1588, that
is, when Prince Maurice had the greatest influence in the affairs of the
United Provinces, and concludes with the year 1609, when the twelve
years truce was made. Had his love to truth and honesty been less, he
had a fine opportunity of revenging himself on Prince Maurice. But he
every where does him justice[486], and even speaks of him as if he had
been always satisfied with his conduct to him.

M. Baillet thinks very advantageously and at the same time very justly
of this work. "That great man (says he, speaking of Grotius[487]) has
discovered in this work all the capacity, accuracy, judgment, solidity,
industry, perspicuity, honesty, and integrity, of a true historian. His
impartiality would almost make him pass for a foreigner, who had no
interest in what he relates: he appears a Dutchman, only by his thorough
knowledge of the causes, motives, ends, and other circumstances of the
subject he has undertaken to handle."

The only thing for which he can be censured, is the stiffness of the
style, by affecting to make it resemble that of Tacitus, which renders
it obscure and unnatural. We are assured, that the eminent
Advocate-general, Jerom Bignon, took notice of this fault to Grotius,
with whom he was very intimate; and that learned man, yielding to his
friend's advice, promised to do his work over again, and had even begun
it, but could not finish it; and his sons published it as it was at
first.

Peter Grotius tells us this History was his father's favourite work.
Grotius intended to dedicate it to the Queen of Sweden. Dec. 5, 1637, he
writes to the High Chancellor[488], "I have written a great part of the
History of the Low Countries: what I have done till the truce in 1609 is
ready to appear with some advantage. I purpose to dedicate it to our
Queen, unless your Sublimity determine otherwise. Of all the histories
of our time, it appears to me the most useful. It presents us with the
speedy rise of a republic, whose forces in its weak beginning were
scarce able to defend its small frontier; and which afterwards carried
its arms to the extremity of the globe: we no where find the art of
besieging or defending towns brought to such a height; in fine, we see
her Mistress of the Sea after her marine had been long neglected."

It should not be forgot, that the celebrated[489] Peyresc was of great
use to Grotius in compiling this work: he communicated to him several
important papers, and procured him the memoirs collected by Antonius
Querengius, who purposed to write the History of the famous Alexander
Farnese, Duke of Parma. Grotius's History was translated into French by
M. L'Heritier, father of Mademoiselle L'Heritier, famous for her
writings: but it deserves a new translator to turn it into better
French.

FOOTNOTES:

[481] Ep. 24. p. 8.

[482] Ep. 595. p. 236.

[483] Ep. 402. p. 869.

[484] Ep. 454. p. 883.

[485] Ep. 539. p. 916.

[486] Parhasiana, t. 1. p. 161.

[487] Preface de l'Hist. de Hollande.

[488] Ep. 873. p. 384.

[489] Vie par Gassendi, l. 3. p. 182.


IX. It was during his embassy that Grotius revised and enlarged his book
Of the Truth of the Christian religion. He had written a treatise on
this subject in Dutch whilst a prisoner; and turning it afterwards into
Latin, it had prodigious success. In the year 1637 it had been
translated into all languages[490], French, German, English, and even
Greek. The universal approbation this book met with, did not hinder
Grotius's enemies from doing all they could to depreciate it. They said
it contained the venom of Socinianism. Voetius, among others,
distinguished himself by his rage against it. "It is surprising, says
Grotius in a letter to his brother, October 22, 1637, that Voetius
should think he sees what the Doctors of the Sorbonne, who examined the
book, before it was printed, could not find in it. Doth Cardinal
Barbarinus, who recommended this work[491], and constantly carries it
with him, favour Socinianism? The Bishops of England have caused it to
be translated into their language; the Ministers of Charenton have
approved of it; a Lutheran has translated it; will he say these are all
favourers of Socinianism?"

After this letter was written, Grotius learnt[492] that his book had
been translated into Swedish. He justifies himself again in a long
letter written to Reigersberg December 19, 1637[493], "I have often
doubted which was best, to answer the censures of fools and knaves, or
resting in a good conscience to despise them. I have constantly done the
last; but your example makes me at present prefer the first: you have
defended me with so much friendship and steadiness, that if I should sit
still, I might justly be accused of indolence. My book of the Christian
Religion is read with applause by pious and learned men, not only in the
languages in which I composed it, but also in Swedish, French, German,
and English. Those who think it their interest that I should not pass
for a good Christian, seek every pretext to hurt me: they censure me for
making use of Castellio's version; but it is very certain that I had not
seen it when I wrote my book. I translated myself from the Hebrew and
Greek all the passages of Scripture I employed. They say I have
interpreted something in the fifth Chapter of St. Mathew in the same
manner as Socinus. These simple people know not that my explanation is
the same with what almost all the Greeks and Latins of greatest
abilities and piety have adopted. How many things are there in the same
Chapter of St. Matthew, which I have explained quite different from
Socinus?"

The great argument of those who wanted to hinder the success of his[494]
book was, that the author sufficiently shewed his inclination to
Socinianism by his silence concerning the Trinity. He opens his mind
about this matter to his brother, September 25, 1638, "The book of the
truth of the Christian Religion will live and flourish in spite of the
envy of my enemies. It was not proper for me to speak directly of the
Trinity; and such as have heretofore brought their arguments to prove it
from natural reason or the authority of Plato, have done more hurt than
service to Christianity." The men who since Grotius's time have acquired
the greatest reputation in France by writing for the truth of the
Christian Religion, such as Abbadie and Houteville, have followed his
example, and avoided the discussion of questions which suppose the
Divinity of the Scriptures.

Grotius had the satisfaction to find the Roman Catholics very well
pleased with this treatise: he writes to his brother[495], December 4,
1638, "My book of the Truth of the Christian Religion, which the
Voetians look upon as Socinian, is so far from being Socinian here, that
Roman-Catholic Monks are translating it into Persian, in order to make
use of it in converting the Mahometans. I have not attempted a direct
proof of the Trinity (he writes to Gerard Vossius[496]) for I always
remembered what I heard Junius your father-in-law say, who was a great
man, that Du Plessis, and those who, like him, in their disputes with
Atheists, Pagans, Jews, and Mahometans, endeavoured to establish the
Trinity by arguments drawn from the light of nature, and by passages
from Plato often misapplied, acted very imprudently, because they ought
first to have convinced them of the truth of the Scriptures, which alone
contain the doctrines which God has been pleased to reveal."

A new edition of the book on the truth of the Christian Religion, with
considerable additions, was published in 1639, which Grotius dedicated
to his illustrious friend Jerom Bignon; and this great Magistrate, in
returning him his thanks[497], gives the most favourable testimony to
the work. He says,[498] that tho' the subject had already been well
handled by several learned men, none of them had acquitted himself so
well, nor discovered so great knowledge of the learned languages, and so
much erudition, as Grotius. He admires the order and conciseness of the
work, and congratulates himself on living in Grotius's time, and sharing
in the friendship of so great a man. Some time after the publication of
this work, an Englishman[499] who had lived long in Turky, came to see
Grotius, and acquaint him that he had translated it into the Turkish
language, thinking no book more proper for instructing Christians who
live in Turky, and converting the Mahometans. He promised to use his
endeavours to get it printed in the Turkish language in England.

Besides the translations already mentioned, and which came to Grotius's
knowledge, there were others in Greek, in Chinese, in Flemish, in
Danish, in the language of Malacca, and five French translations. An
Arabic translation of it by the learned Pococke was printed at London
in 1660. We are assured[500] that there have been three translations of
it into Arabic, which gave occasion to Spon and Vehler to say that
Grotius copied an Arabic treatise, taking the very version of his book
for an ancient work: in fine, it had such a great run, that the history
of it makes the subject of a treatise[501].

This work of Grotius has been equally esteemed by dispassionate
Protestants and Roman Catholics. "Few pieces, says[502] Colomiers, have
succeeded better than the treatise _On the Truth of the Christian
Religion_. It is an excellent book, and ought to be the _Vade mecum_ of
every Christian. I have read it several times, and always with new
pleasure."

"Grotius's book, says the Abbé Houteville[503], is the first in which we
find these great characteristics, just reasoning, accuracy, and
strength; he is extremely concise, but even this brevity will please us
when we find it comprehends so many things without confounding them, or
lessening their evidence or force: it is no wonder the book should be
translated into so many languages."

FOOTNOTES:

[490] Ep. 411. p. 872.

[491] Ep. 181. p. 808. Ep. Coleri 37.

[492] Ep. 412. p. 873.

[493] Ep. 880. p. 387.

[494] Ep. 439. p. 880.

[495] Ep. 444. p. 881.

[496] Ep. 1096.

[497] Ep. 1232. p. 557.

[498] Ep. præs. vir. 451. p. 728.

[499] Ep. 534. p. 914.

[500] Fabric. Delect. Argum. c. 30. p. 551.

[501] Joannis Christophori Lockeri Dissertatio Epistolica, Historiam
libelli Grotiani _De Veritate Religionis Christianæ_ complectens, 1725,
in quarto; see also the Journal des Scavans de Pan. 1724.

[502] Colomiers, p. 586.

[503] Preface.


X. In the midst of his greatest occupations and most serious studies,
Grotius still found time to study Civil Law. Blaeu printed, in 1643, his
_Remarks on Justinian's Laws_. They are chiefly philological notes,
drawn from the Poets and Philosophers[504], serving to illustrate some
passages of the _Corpus Juris_[505]. "This book, the author modestly
tells us, is not of much use to those who frequent the bar: but it is
entertaining: and though I set no great value on it, I think it is
better to publish it, than suffer it to be lost. It will possibly give
pleasure to men of learning[506], and some such in this place are not
dissatisfied with it, because they love to see Grammar and History
united with Law[507]."

What we cannot sufficiently admire in a man of so great learning, and so
much business as Grotius, is, that he should make the Holy Scriptures
his favourite study in every period of his life. They were his
consolation in prison; he always devoted a part of the day to them: and
they were his principal study during a great part of his embassy. His
_Commentary on the Evangelists_ was finished in 1637; but before he
printed it[508], he wanted to see the _Aristarchus Sacer_ which Heinsius
was going to put to press. This was a Commentary on the New Testament,
which Grotius imagined to be much in the manner of his, and which piqued
his curiosity the more as Heinsius was Grotius's rival in literature,
and his secret enemy. Heinsius's credit with the Elzevirs, who were his
booksellers[509], was one of the reasons which hindered Grotius from
employing them. "We must not think of the Elzevirs, he writes in
confidence to Vossius[510], on account of that man who has so much
credit with them, and bears us ill-will. I should be glad to know
whereabouts are his notes on the sacred books, and when they will be
published, for I postpone till then the revisal of mine." There was at
that time in Holland a Jew very famous for his learning, Manassah
Ben-Israel. Grotius consulted him sometimes, and always with profit. In
a letter to him without date he tells him, "The answer you have given to
my difficulties about some places of the law of Moses and the historical
books of Scripture, has yielded me great pleasure; and I do not think
any one would have given an answer more solid. I have read many
Interpreters; but I see that you know them better than I, and that you
have read many more, and are master of them. I return you therefore my
sincere thanks; and encouraged by this favour shall take the liberty to
apply to you when I have any difficulty, being ever ready to return you
the like, when it lies in my power. Your books, which I have mentioned
to several persons here, are read with pleasure and profit: I would
therefore beg and conjure you to employ the leisure you may have in
explaining the obscurities of the Law, which will be a signal service to
all men of learning."

This was not a compliment void of truth, but his real sentiment of this
learned Jew: he speaks in the same manner in a private letter to Gerard
Vossius[511]. "I have written again, he says, to Manassah, and beg of
you to deliver to him my letter. I esteem very highly not only his
erudition, but also his judgment. He treads successfully in the steps of
Abenezra, Maimonides, and Abrabanel. I have made his works known here,
and they are much read and valued."

Grotius foresaw that his Commentary on the New Testament would occasion
him some disputes. "I am at a loss, says he, to Vossius, what to do with
my Notes on the New Testament. I shall easily find a bookseller here;
but I am afraid of meeting with some difficulties from the Divines, who
will have nothing of this kind published without their approbation: and
for my own part, I cannot submit in every thing to either of the two
parties, nor can I be silent when I have something that may be of use to
deliver. I shall see how to remedy this inconveniency. I have no hopes,
says he to his brother[512], that the Divines of the Sorbonne will give
their approbation to my Notes, especially since they censured
Milletiere. It remains to be considered whether I shall print them in my
own house without approbation, of which there have been examples."

Heinsius's work, which was expected with so much impatience, had no
success[513]. Salmasius (his declared enemy indeed) said publicly, he
was ready to shew, that, abstracting what he had borrowed, there would
not remain one remark of importance: and it was held in no higher esteem
by others of the first rank in learning[514]. Cardinal Richelieu, being
informed that Grotius leaned more to the sentiments of the Roman
Catholics, than to those of the Ministers of Charenton, gave orders[515]
that his work should be printed without being obliged to pass the
censors. He kept measures however with Heinsius; and desired his brother
William Grotius to tell him[516], that he had always said there were
several things in his Notes which pleased him much; and that he had made
the same remarks in some places that Heinsius had done, by mere chance.

As Grotius had a very great esteem for the learned Father Petau, he
communicated to him his works. On sending him his Notes on the Old
Testament, he desired him to hint what alterations he thought necessary.

When his Commentary on the Evangelists was printed at Amsterdam[517], he
sent a copy to Father Petau, desiring him to read it, if he had time,
and acquaint him what ought to be omitted, added, or changed, that the
second edition might appear with more advantage. "The booksellers of
Amsterdam offer to print what I have written on the Old Testament: but I
chose rather to have it printed here, that I may see the last proofs. I
shall expect your remarks, or those of the persons to whom you have
communicated what I have written on the first part of the Old Testament.
I would have come for them myself had I not been confined by sore eyes.
I have a high sense of your goodness, he writes again to Petau[518], in
taking the trouble to revise my Annotations on the Old Testament, in
giving them to those who have time to examine them more strictly, and in
contributing by your recommendation to the success of the work. As I
have now an opportunity of putting them to press, I must beg of you to
return them as soon as may be with your remarks. When the rest is
transcribed, relying on your goodness I shall take the liberty to
interrupt your occupations, however important and useful, by sending
it."

The Dutch Booksellers[519] had prefixed to Grotius's Commentary on the
New Testament his head, with a high elogium annexed to it; which vexed
him much. He wrote very seriously to his brother that it was the more
improper, as this effect of vanity was prefixed to a book designed to
inspire humility; that he had tore out the picture in his own copies,
and desired that he would endeavour to get the same done to all the
rest, because it concerned his reputation; and he chose rather to
suppress his Preface, than publish it with this picture. A short
advertisement before his Notes on the New Testament acquaints us that he
began them when a prisoner, that he finished them when a private man,
and printed them when Ambassador. Though this work was far advanced
before he was employed by the Court of Sweden, it is evident from his
letters that he made many additions and amendments to it during his
embassy.

He met with new difficulties after Cardinal Richelieu's death from the
Chancellor Seguier, who never loved him. "The Chancellor of France, he
writes to his brother, August 27, 1644[520], will not grant a privilege
for printing my Commentary on the Old Testament, though very able
Doctors have assured him that it contains nothing contrary to the
doctrine of the Roman Catholics; but he refuses to give any even for
good books, if the authors are not of his communion."

Cramoisi however printed it, but he was afraid of being a loser by the
great expence of a handsome edition in folio if he did not obtain a
privilege, because the Dutch, who could print it much cheaper, would
bring it into France, and undersell him.

The refusal of a privilege[521] did not hinder another Paris bookseller
from undertaking an edition of the Notes on the New Testament, which
Grotius calls his favourite work[522].

M. Simon, whose opinion is not always agreeable to the strictest
justice, judges very favourably, however, of Grotius: "His Notes, says
he, are esteemed by every body; and stand in no need of a particular
recommendation from us. We shall only observe that he abounds too much
in quotations from the Poets, and many profane authors; in which he
seems rather to affect appearing a man of learning and erudition, than a
man of judgment and a critic. Had he avoided this fault, his Notes would
have been much shorter, and not less excellent. They are chiefly
valuable for his frequent collation of the ancient Greek translation of
the bible with the Hebrew text, and his freedom from prejudice in favour
of the Masoretic version: though he generally chuses the best
explanation of the text, he sometimes multiplies the various readings
without necessity. After all (adds the author of the Critical history)
though I blame Grotius for quoting too frequently the profane authors,
these quotations contain some very good things, serving to explain the
difficulties in Scripture. I could only have wished, that, agreeable to
the rules of criticism, he had not adduced the testimonies of profane
authors, and especially the Poets, except in places that required those
elucidations."

M. Le Clerc, after examining this judgment, speaks thus of Grotius[523]:
"If you desire to know what is chiefly valuable in Grotius's Notes on
the Old Testament, and not to be found elsewhere, it is first his
explanation of an infinite number of passages of Scripture by the
assistance of Pagan antiquity. Secondly, an admirable knowledge of the
different manners of speaking used in Scripture, which he so happily
compares with one another, that no interpreter ancient or modern has
thrown so much light on them; and in fine, an extraordinary penetration
in discovering the true sense of the prophecies."

M. Fabricius[524] tells us, that one thing which highly recommends
Grotius's Commentary on the New Testament is the design, which he
happily executed, of proving the truth of the Christian Religion by the
Scripture itself.

Before we conclude this article we must take notice that it has been
pretended by some learned men, who otherwise do him justice, that
Grotius is frequently mistaken in his quotations from the Rabbis,
because he took them at second-hand. Esdras Edzardi, well skilled in
these matters, made a small collection of his mistakes, which he shewed
to Morhof[525].

FOOTNOTES:

[504] Ep. 1520. p. 689.

[505] Ep. 639. p. 948.

[506] Ep. 640. p. 949.

[507] Ep. 648. p. 952.

[508] Ep. 859. p. 377. & 964. p. 432.

[509] Ep. 1056. p. 476.

[510] Ep. 1056. p. 476.

[511] Ep. 1256. p. 570. & 1315. p. 596.

[512] Ep. 503. p. 884.

[513] Ep. 507. p. 884.

[514] Ep. 465. p. 886.

[515] Ep. 476. p. 890.

[516] Ep. 481. p. 891.

[517] Ep. 1531. p. 693.

[518] Ep. 1534. p. 694.

[519] Ep. 570. p. 928.

[520] Ep. 720. p. 970.

[521] Ep. 740. p. 976.

[522] Ep. 1253. p. 553.

[523] Sentimens des Theolog. p. 388.

[524] Delect. Argum. c. 2. p. 40.

[525] Polihistor. t. 3. l. 5. p. 54. Vind. Grot. 463.


XII. This deep study of the Holy Scriptures led Grotius to examine a
question which made much noise at that time. Some Protestant Synods had
ventured to decide that the Pope was Antichrist; and this extravagance,
gravely delivered by the Ministers, was regarded by the zealous
Schismatics as a fundamental truth. Grotius undertook to overturn such
an absurd opinion, that stirred up an irreconcileable enmity between the
Roman Catholics and the Protestants, and of consequence was a very great
obstacle to their reunion, which was the sole object of his desires. He
entered therefore upon the consideration of the passages of Scripture
relating to Antichrist, and employed his Sundays in it[526].

It was this work that raised him up most enemies. We see by the letters
he wrote to his brother that his best friends were afraid lest they
should be suspected of having some hand in the publication of the books
in which he treated of Antichrist. "If you are afraid of incurring
ill-will, he writes to his brother[527], you may easily find people that
are far from a factious spirit who will take care of the impression.
Nothing has incensed Princes against those who separated from the Church
of Rome more than the injurious names with which the Protestants load
their adversaries; and nothing is a greater hindrance to that reunion
which we are all obliged to labour after in consequence of Christ's
precept and the profession we make of our faith in the Creed. Perhaps
the Turk, who threatens Italy, will force us to it. In order to arrive
at it we must first remove whatever obstructs a mutual quiet hearing. I
hope I shall find assistance in this pious design. I shall not cease to
labour in it, and shall rejoice to die employed in so good a work."

Reigersberg, Blaeu, Vossius himself, however much devoted to Grotius,
beheld with concern[528] the printing of this book, because they did not
doubt but it would increase the number of his enemies. Grotius informs
his brother of the uneasiness which Vossius gave him on this
subject[529]: "Among those who wish this work destroyed, says he, I am
astonished and grieved to see Vossius. Whence could he have this idea?
I imagine somebody has told him, that it would injure the fortune of his
children if he approved of such books; and that, on the contrary, he
would find favour by hurting me. We must, therefore, have recourse to
Corcellius or Corvinus." He elsewhere complains of the too great
timidity of this old friend[530], who at bottom approved of Grotius's
sentiments, but durst not own them publicly because he was not so
independent as Grotius.

The treatise on Antichrist made much noise among all the declared
enemies of the Romish Church[531]. Michael Gettichius wrote to Ruarus,
that he had only glanced over Grotius's book on Antichrist; but as far
as he could judge by the first reading, that learned man, who was
possessed of such an excellent genius, and such singular erudition, had
no other intention than to engage the Learned in a further enquiry
concerning Antichrist; and to determine them to attack with greater
strength the Romish Antichrist; or, if he wrote seriously, he wanted to
cut out a path for going over, without dishonour, to the Papists. Ruarus
answers this letter, Dec. 16, 1642, from Dantzic. "I have always, he
says, looked on Grotius as a very honest, and at the same time a very
learned man. I am persuaded that love of peace engaged him in this work.
I don't deny but he has gone too far; the love of antiquity perhaps
seduced him: no Remonstrant, that I know of, has as yet answered him;
but he has been confuted by some learned Calvinists, particularly
Desmarets, Minister of Boisleduc, who has written against him with much
bitterness."

Grotius's work was printed in 1640, with this title: _Commentatio ad
loca quædam Novi Testamenti, quæ de Antichristo agunt aut agere
putantur, expendenda, eruditis._

It contains an explanation of the second chapter of the second epistle
of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, in which he undertakes to prove, that
the Man of Sin, there mentioned, is the Emperor Caius Caligula, who
wanted to place his statue in the temple of Jerusalem, as may be seen in
Philo; and was desirous to be thought a God, as Philo and Josephus
relate. He afterwards explains the eighteenth verse of the second
chapter of the first epistle of St. John. _You know that Antichrist is
come, and that there are many Antichrists._ He thinks the Antichrist
already come was Barchochebas, and that the other Antichrists are Simon
the Magician and Dosithæus.

The beast, in the thirteenth chapter of the Revelation, is, according to
him, Rome pagan; the power, which is given to it for forty-two months,
signifies Domitian's persecution, which lasted three years and a half.
The beast that ascended out of the bottomless pit, mentioned chap. xi.
ver. 7. is magic, and Apollonius Thyanæus: in fine, he finds the famous
number 666, mentioned in the last verse of the thirteenth chapter of the
Apocalypse, in Trajan's name, who was called Ulpius, of which the
numeral letters form the number 666.

The Reformed were strangely scandalized at this work. Samuel Desmarets
answered it with great bitterness, which drew another piece from Grotius
in defence of the former, with this title: _Appendix ad interpretationem
locorum Novi Testamenti, quæ de Antichristo agunt, aut agere putantur,
in qua via sternitur ad Christianorum concordiam_. Desmarets is never
mentioned in it but under the name of Borboritus. It has been observed,
that Grotius was guilty of a slight inaccuracy in this treatise: he says
the Emperor Barbarossa's enemies ascribed to him the pretended book _De
tribus Impostoribus_: he confounds the grandson with the grandfather,
for it was Frederic II. against whom this calumny was advanced, as
appears from the letters of Peter Desvignes, his Secretary and
Chancellor, and as Grotius himself remarks in his observations on
Campanella's philosophy.

He printed at the same time his treatise _Of Faith and Works_ against
Desmarets, and against the error of the inadmissibility of grace, under
the title of _Explicatio trium illustrissimorum locorum Novi Testamenti,
Capitis I. Pauli ad Ephesios posterioris, Capitis II. Jacobi Commatis
XIV. & sequentium, Capitis III. Epistolæ I. Johannis, in quibus agitur
de fide & operibus_. This work shews, that faith is not sufficient for
Justification; and that if those who have faith live in sin, they are
hated by God.

_Via ad pacem ecclesiasticam_ was printed in 1642: it contains the
_Consultation_ of Cassander presented to the Emperors Ferdinand I. and
Maximilian II. accompanied with remarks by Grotius. He expected that
these works, which were compiled solely with a view to promote union
among Christians, would procure him many enemies; and he adopted, on
this occasion, what was said in 1557 by an author who laboured in the
same design, That for persons to endeavour to make mankind live in
peace, was commendable; that they might indeed expect a recompence from
the blessed Peace-maker, but they had great reason to apprehend the same
fate with those, who, attempting to part two combatants, receive blows
from both. "Perhaps, by writing to reconcile such as entertain very
opposite sentiments, I shall offend both parties: but if it should so
happen, I shall comfort myself with the example of him who said, If I
please men I am not the servant of Christ."

Grotius, content with gratifying his pacific desires, expected his
reward from posterity; which he clearly intimates in some verses written
by him on this subject

     Accipe sed placidis, quæ si non optima, certe,
       Expressit nobis non mala pacis amor.
     Et tibi dic, nostro labor hic si displicet ævo,
       A gratâ pretium posteritate feret.

Rivetus, the Clergyman, treated Grotius with as much indignity, as if he
had attempted to destroy the foundations or Christianity. Grotius
answered him in a tract, entitled: _Animadversiones in animadversiones
Andreæ Riveti_.

This work was followed by two others on the same subject: _Votum pro
pace ecclesiasticâ, contra examen Andreæ Riveti_, and _Rivetiani
Apologetici Discussio_: this last did not appear till after the author's
death.

He wrote, in 1638, a small piece, entitled: _De Canæ administratione ubi
Pastores non sunt, item an semper communicandum per symbola_. The design
of this pernicious work is to shew, that Laymen, in the absence of
Priests, and in cases of necessity, may do their office.

Rigaut had already maintained this error, and been smartly attacked by
M. De l'Aubepine, Bishop of Orleans: all the defenders of the hierarchy
were scandalized at it, and Father Petau, among the Roman Catholics, and
Dodwell, among the English Clergy, have refuted it.

In the tract, _An semper communicandum per symbola_, the Arminians
endeavour to maintain, that we are not obliged to communicate with such
as require subscriptions to which we cannot assent without acting
against our consciences. Grotius's design was to shew, that the
Arminians might dispense with communicating with the
Contra-Remonstrants, if these insisted on retractions.

Another theological work of Grotius (of whose publication we cannot fix
the time) is entitled: _Dissertatio historica ac politica de dogmatis &
ritibus & gubernatione Ecclesiæ Christianæ, de dogmatis quæ reipublicæ
noxia sunt, aut dicuntur._ In this piece he treats of the end of the
priesthood, and the duties of the Priests: he places what relates to the
distinction and unity of the three Persons, the two Natures, and their
properties, among the points of which we may be ignorant without ceasing
to be good Christians. It is probable this piece was written before
those concerning Antichrist, the author appearing in it less favourably
disposed towards the Roman Catholics and the Pope.

It is apparent that Grotius had not sufficiently examined this subject,
since he speaks of it in a manner so heterodox. He would not have held a
language so opposite to Christianity, at, or after the time of his
dispute with Rivetus.

FOOTNOTES:

[526] Ep. 416. p. 874.

[527] Ep. 477. p. 890.

[528] Ep. 480. p. 891. & 482. p. 891.

[529] Ep. 485. p. 892.

[530] Ep. 445. p. 895. 507. p. 901. 511. p. 902. & 514. p. 904.

[531] Ep 61. p. 276. & 89. p. 415.


XIII. Grotius, even whilst engaged in the dispute against the zealous
Protestant Ministers, undertook to clear up the origin of the Americans;
which enquiry involved him in a controversy that gave him much
uneasiness. John de Laët of Antwerp, who had much studied these matters,
printed Grotius's work, with Notes, under this title: _Joannis de Laët
Antverpiani Notæ ad dissertationem Hugonis Grotii de Origine gentium
Americanarum, & Observationes aliquot ad meliorem indaginem difficillimæ
illius questionis. Amstelodami apud Ludovicum Elzevirium, anno
1643_[532].

Grotius first confutes those, who think that the people of America came
from Great Tartary, because they had no horses before the Spanish
conquest, and that it is impossible the Scythians, who abounded in
horses, should bring none with them; besides the Tartars were never
seamen. His opinion is, that North-America was peopled by persons from
Norway, from whence they passed into Iceland, afterwards into Greenland,
from thence to Friseland, then to Estotiland, a part of the American
continent, to which the fishers of Friseland had penetrated two
centuries before the Spaniards discovered the New World. He pretends,
that the names of those countries end with the same syllables as those
of the Norwegians; that the Mexicans and their neighbours assured the
Spaniards they came from the North; and that the country which the
Norwegians inhabited, after quitting Estotiland, has retained almost
the name of Norway; that there is yet a town in it called Norembega; in
fine, that there are many words in the American language, which have a
relation to the German and Norwegian; and that the Americans still
preserve the customs of the country from whence they are originally
sprung. As to the people of Jucatan, and the neighbourhood, Grotius
makes them come from Ethiopia by the way of the Ocean. He grounds this
opinion on the practice of circumcision among these nations of America,
which was also used by the Ethiopians. He pretends that the Peruvians
are descended from the Chinese, because the wrecks of Chinese vessels
have been found, he says, on the coasts of the Pacific Ocean, and they
worship the sun: besides, the Peruvians, he adds, write from the top to
the bottom of the page like the Chinese.

Laët easily shewed that Grotius's conjectures were ill founded, and that
he had even advanced several facts which were not strictly true: he
denied the existence of the city of Norembega, and maintained that
Jucatan is too distant from Africa for the Ethiopians to penetrate into
America, it being at least two months sail from Ethiopia to Jucatan. He
refutes the pretended traces of Christianity, which Grotius said were
found in that part of America before the discovery of the Spaniards,
supporting his confutation on the authority of Spanish writers; in fine,
he denies that any Chinese wrecks have been found on the coasts of the
Pacific Ocean, and censures, as a very great inaccuracy in Grotius, what
he advances concerning the Peruvian manner of writing.

After doing justice to the excellent judgment and profound erudition of
Grotius, he ventures to assert, that he found nothing in his
Dissertation that could satisfy a man moderately acquainted with the
History of America; and approves of what was observed by Joseph Acosta,
that it was easier to confute what was written on the origin of the
Americans, than to know what to hold; because there were no monuments
among them, nor any books of Europeans to throw light on this matter:
and hence concludes, that it is rashness to promise truth on such an
obscure subject.

Laët's answer vexed Grotius: he replied to it in a second Dissertation,
entitled, _Adversus obtrectatorem, opaca quem bonum facit barba_.
Printed at Paris by Cramoisi, in 1643. Laët answered in a piece, printed
in 1644, by Lewis Elzevir, in which he inserts Grotius's second
Dissertation. There is nothing new in these two last books: and it were
to be wished that they had been written with less bitterness. It has
been[533] observed, that Grotius's system is not new; and that it had
been already advanced by Myl, whom Grotius does not once quote.

FOOTNOTES:

[532] This work was printed at Paris the same year.

[533] Hornius, de Orig. Gent. Amer. l. 1. c. 2. p. 17.


XIV. It now remains to give some account of the other works of Grotius,
which hitherto we have not had occasion to mention. In 1629, he printed
at William Blaeu's the History of the Siege of Grolla: _Grollæ obsidio
cum annexis anni 1627_. This piece would have been brought into his
History[534] if he could have continued it. He speaks of it with great
modesty[535] in his letters to his brother. "I don't expect, he says,
much honour from such a small tract."

He published, in 1631, _An Introduction to the Laws of Holland_, in
Dutch. Simon Groenovegius de Madin, a Lawyer, wrote Notes on this work,
which Grotius thought well done and very useful; and sent the author a
letter of thanks[536].

He left several manuscripts prepared for the press, which were published
after his death.

Lewis Elzevir printed, in 1652, a small collection in twelves with this
title: _Hugonis Grotii quædam hactenùs inedita, aliaque ex Belgicè
editis Latinè versa, argumenti Theologici, Juridici, Politici._ It
contains, among other Dissertations, _Remarks on the Philosophy_ or
rather _on the Politics of Campanella_; and a tract entitled: _Hugonis
Grotii Responsio ad quædam ab utroque judicum consessu objecta, ubi
multa disputantur de Jure Summarum Potestatum in Hollandiâ,
Westfrisi[^æ], & Magistratuum in oppidis_. The disputes of the Province
of Holland with the States-General probably gave occasion to this
treatise. Grotius intended to publish the Golden verses of
Pythagoras[537], with a translation by himself: but what he could not do
in his life-time was done in England after his death, in the year
1654[538].

Of all the tragic Poets, his favourite was certainly Euripides. We have
already seen that he translated the _Phoenissæ_ in 1630. He afterwards
revised and corrected it, as appears by a letter to his brother,
September 3, 1639[539]. His translation of the _Iphigenia in Tauris_ is
mentioned in several letters[540]. He likewise turned into Latin the
_Supplicantes_ of Euripides, of which he speaks to his brother[541]. The
learned Father Berthier[542] has lately informed us, that this
translation still exists in the library of the Jesuits college at Paris.
"One of the most precious pieces, and which alone would have been
sufficient to give value to this manuscript, is the entire translation
of Euripides's piece, entitled _Supplicantes_, added at the end of the
volume by way of desert: the whole is in excellent Iambic verses: we
would cite some part, if we had not already trespassed too far on the
complaisance of the reader."

In 1629, Grotius wrote to his brother[543], that he had finished a
piece, proving that the war between different Princes ought not to
injure the free trade of the powers not engaged in it. This is all we
know of the treatise, which is now lost: we are equally ignorant of a
work, entitled, _The Portrait of Zeno_, which he mentions in several
letters[544], and seems very desirous of having it printed. He left
several manuscripts in his closet, which, after his death, were
purchased by the Queen of Sweden from his wife: among these[545] were,
_Notes on some of the most difficult Laws_; _A Comparison of the
Republics of Athens and Rome with that of Holland_; _Notes on the Hymns
of Orpheus_, and an _Illustration of the Books of Moses by the Writings
of the Pagans_. The author of _Vindiciæ Grotianæ_[546] speaks of a
manuscript of Æschylus with Notes by Grotius. Many of his books were
filled with marginal notes. He tells us[547], that he had collected,
with great care, the remains of the apostolical Fathers, and that he had
thoughts of translating that part of Josephus's history, which relates
to the law, and of adding notes to it. But probably the execution of
this project was hindered by his other studies, and the information he
received, that Samuel Petit, who was well skilled in the learned
languages, had the same design.

FOOTNOTES:

[534] Ep. 191. p. 811.

[535] Ep. 194. p. 814. & 196, p. 113.

[536] Ep. 1627. p. 719.

[537] Ep. 683. p. 961.

[538] Fab. Bib. Græc. tom. 1. p. 471. & 472.

[539] Ep. 506. p. 885.

[540] Ep. 402; p. 869. & 595. p. 236.

[541] Ep. 683. p. 961.

[542] Art. 91. August, 1751. p. 1807.

[543] Ep. 207. p. 817.

[544] Ep. 465. & 466. p. 886. Ep. 469. p. 887.

[545] Observat. Hallenses, 24. t. 7. p. 350. Bib. Remons. p. 80.
Fabricius Bib. Græca, t. 1. l. 1. c. 19, p. 117.

[546] Vindiciæ, p. 841.

[547] Ep. 391. p. 866. & 768. p. 330.


XV. His Letters may be regarded as Treatises; the collection we have of
them is a treasure not only of public but of literary history, and
contains many dissertations on the most important subjects. The
XXXIst, to Gerard Vossius, and XXXIIId, to John Utengobard, treat
of Predestination and Grace, according to the Arminian system. We have
already spoken of the LIVth, addressed to Du Maurier, the French
Ambassador in Holland, and containing a method of study for grown
persons. The LXIId, to the Baron de Langerac, the Dutch Ambassador in
France, is a formal treatise on a piece of Du Moulin concerning the
government of the ancient Church; the means of reconciling Grace with
Free-will; and the authority of Sovereigns in matters ecclesiastical.
He treats in the XCIst, to Vossius, of the effects of Christ's death.
The CCLXIVth, to the celebrated Nicholas Peyresc, Counsellor of the
Parliament of Aix, is rather a book than a letter, being a collection of
all that the Ancients have said of Nicholas Damascenus, which leaves us
at a loss with regard to nothing that could be known concerning that
celebrated writer.

The CCCXXIXth, to John Descordes, Canon of Limoges, treats of the
power of Bishops over the Monks, and several other points of the ancient
Church discipline. He proves, in the CCCLVIIth, to Jerom Bignon,
Advocate-General, that the letter ascribed to Pope Clement, which was
published in 1633, is really his. His letters to his brother treat of
the Law of Nature and several points of Civil Law: and a letter,
addressed to John Isaac Pontanus, contains his remarks on what Cluverius
has said of the antiquities of Germany.

The most interesting literary occurrences of his time are to be found in
his letters, always accompanied, with instructing reflections: in fine,
his negotiations, and the great events of the last ten years of the
reign of Lewis XIII, are very particularly, and, for the most part, very
truly related in them.

We must not conceal that Du Maurier, the son, whose anecdotes are full
of blunders, advances[548] that, when Grotius desired to be recalled,
the High Chancellor readily took him at his word, because, says he,
Grotius sent him only the news that every body knew. Father Bougeant
repeats this passage with great complacency; but he would have done much
better to have read Grotius's letters with attention, than to censure
them without reason. By their assistance he might have rectified several
dates in his work, which, otherwise, deserves the public esteem.
Another author, whose history is written with indiscretion and
partiality, but who was nevertheless well acquainted with the events of
the age of Lewis XIII, sets a high value on Grotius's letters[549]: I
mean Le Vassor, whose judgment deserves the more regard as he had little
turn for panegyric. He refutes those who advanced that Grotius employed
his fine Latin to send Oxenstiern the lies of the day; and maintains
that such as say this, have either never read Grotius's letters, or are
unacquainted with the history of Lewis XIII. He does not deny, that,
among the many pieces of news contained in them, there are some without
foundation; but he excuses him, because a Minister is obliged to write
what is generally reported. He adds, "Those, who shall read Grotius's
letters with a little discerning, will find in them the most secret
affairs of the times of his embassy touched upon in few words, with
great delicacy and moderation." Grotius himself acquaints us, that he
used great circumspection in writing news to the High Chancellor[550].
"I must beg, says he, of your Sublimity, to pardon the shortness of my
letter: I chuse rather to say little, than write what is false; and
would fain send you nothing that is uncertain: but this is attended with
much difficulty amidst so great obscurity.--Living among people, he says
in another letter[551], who are very close, and receiving news which are
often mixed with falshood, I am sorry to be obliged to give you my
conjectures in the room of certainty; but there is nothing to apprehend
from such an equitable Judge, who has regard to the good intention."

This made him easy; and what ought to give us a high idea of his
Letters, is, that they greatly pleased the High Chancellor[552]; and
Muller, the Swedish Ambassador, set a high value on them[553].

The author of _Vindiciæ Grotianæ_ assures us[554], after Morhof, that
Grotius's Letters are not all printed; and he adds, that he knew a
cabinet in which were preserved upwards of two hundred and sixty,
written to Queen Christina and the High Chancellor. Bunau, a Privy
Counselor at Dresden, is said to have had many of them. Puffendorf saw
several in cypher, to which he had a key. Among those, which are printed
in the collection of Grotius's letters, there are some in cypher,
relating to the general affairs and secret intrigues of the Court of
France. M. de Boze has a copy of these letters in his curious cabinet,
with an explanation of the cypher, given him by a Swedish gentleman,
which he communicates to those who desire it, with a politeness that it
were to be wished were common to all men of learning.

FOOTNOTES:

[548] Memoires, p. 423.

[549] Le Vassor, t. 8. 2 partie, l. 40. p. 277.

[550] Ep. 537. p. 210.

[551] Ep. 550. p. 214.

[552] Ep. 55. p. 492.

[553] Ep. 1094. p. 492.

[554] P. 846.


XVI. One of the most interesting parts of Grotius's life is the
knowledge of his sentiments in religion, and the ardent zeal with which
he undertook to reunite Christians in one belief. Brought up in the
principles of Protestantism, he had in the former part of his life a
great aversion to Popery. A letter to Antony Walæus, Nov. 10, 1611[555],
in which he opens all his mind, acquaints us, that however much he might
be attached to the prevailing religion in the State wherein he lived, he
was persuaded that the Roman Catholics held all the fundamental truths;
but they superadded, he thought, several other articles, which he
treated as new opinions. The zeal of the Jesuits for the Roman Catholic
religion, and their attachment to the Pope, had rendered them extremely
odious to all the enemies of the Romish church. Grotius viewed them in
the same light, agreeably to the sentiments which had been instilled
into him in his infancy, as we find in a letter written, April 1,
1617[556], to his brother then in France; but when he came to riper
years, he did them justice, highly valuing their society, and receiving
many of them into his confidence, particularly the learned Dionysius
Petavius.

FOOTNOTES:

[555] Ep. 14 p. 4.

[556] Ep. 15. p. 759.


XVII. Even when farthest removed from the Roman Catholic Church, he paid
the greatest regard to the decisions of the ancient councils, to the
discipline of the primitive Church, and the authority of the Fathers. He
writes, June 6, 1611, to John Utengobard[557], that he highly respected
the ancient councils which condemned Manicheism and Pelagianism. He
declared to Vossius, July 17, 1616[558], that none held the doctrine
condemned by the ancient Church in greater detestation. "Besides the
hatred, says he to Antony Walæus, which I profess to the tenets that
were unknown to pious antiquity, nothing more engages me to condemn, and
overturn, as far as I can, this sort of opinions, than their being an
obstacle to peace."

In the explanation of Holy Scripture he would have the sentiments of the
ancient Church adhered to. This point he treated at a conference with
the Prince of Condé, in the beginning of 1639[559]; in which he shewed,
that to be a Christian, and have a right to the surname of Catholic, one
must receive the Sacred Scriptures, and explain them not according to
the interpretation of private persons, which had often given occasion to
seditions, schisms, and even wars, but according to the sentiments of
the ancient Churches, chiefly to be found in the Creeds, and in the acts
of General Councils.

He was so persuaded of the truth of these principles, that in an
advertisement, prefixed to his _Commentary on the New Testament_, he
declares that if he had written any thing inconsistent with the
interpretation of Holy Scripture by the ancient Church, which he hoped
he had not, he would chuse to have it neglected, and was most ready to
alter it.

FOOTNOTES:

[557] Ep. 28. p. 9.

[558] Ep. 77. p. 54.

[559] Ep. 1108. p. 498. See also Ep. 622. p. 943.


XVIII. This profound veneration for antiquity contributed greatly to
render him more favourable to the Roman Catholics. At a time when it was
looked upon by the Protestants as a kind of Apostacy, to speak with
decency and temper of the sovereign Pontiffs, he ventured to commend
Pope Urbin VIII in some verses made in honour of the blessed Virgin. He
speaks thus of him in a Letter to his brother of the 21st of February,
1625[560]. "I send my father the Poem on the Mother of God. I would not
however have it published, not only because the honour, distinct from
superstition, given to the saints offends several of our people; but
also because Pope Urbin is commended in it. He is an excellent Poet, as
appears from his elegant Pindaric odes. God grant he may be able to
unite Christians, who are too much divided, in one faith."

The Reformers were held by him in no great esteem. In 1633 he wrote to
Gerard Vossius[561], "I think nothing can be truer than your judicious
remark, that the best way to prevent good men from approving of so many
different sects would be to shew them, without animosity or passion,
from the sole motive of love to truth, that those who avail themselves
so much of antiquity have it not always on their side, and that such as
promised to restore the Church to its primitive state have not at all
times succeeded." He no doubt meant the pretended Reformed.

"The Protestants, says he to his brother[562], go too far when they
accuse the Roman Catholics of error; they attack at the same time the
whole Greek and Latin Churches, those of Syria, Arabia, and Egypt, and
thereby very imprudently furnish arms to their adversaries. I see, he
writes to Vossius[563], that those who have erected new Churches among
us, have followed their own ideas, but have not always advanced the
affairs of Religion."

Salmasius was as zealous for the pretended reformed religion, as he was
become indifferent to Grotius. However they visited one another, but it
was with much coldness. "Salmasius (he writes to his brother[564],
February 10, 1641) came to see me: he is ready to defend the most
outrageous opinions; among others, that St. Peter never set foot in
Italy. It is surprising what a party spirit will do."

Grotius looked upon almost all the Reformed as factious men[565]. He had
no esteem for Calvin; speaking of Cassander, he says he was a very
excellent, and at the same time a very able man, and therefore most
worthy of Calvin's hatred: he advised James Laurentius to read, instead
of Calvin's _Institutions_, Vincent de Lerins. "I hear[566], says he to
him, that you are less seditious than most of your order (that is, the
Protestant Clergy) and that you only suffer yourself to be drawn away by
others: wherefore I will give you one good counsel: read the Scriptures
in the original, the confessions of faith of the ancient Christians,
instead of the Belgic Confession, the Catechisms of Cyril in the room of
Ursinus's Catechism, and the acts of the General Councils, and not those
of the Synod of Dort: you will then easily perceive that Grotius is not
become a Papist, but Laurentius turned a Calvinist." Laurentius wrote
against him: but Grotius took his revenge[567] by silence. He did not
approve of the separation of the Protestants; he thought these new
Churches, these new Rites had not at all contributed to the promoting of
piety. "It is just, said he[568], to reform our manners: but would it
not have been better for us, after reforming ourselves, to have prayed
to God for the reformation of others; and for the Princes and Bishops,
who desired a reformation to have endeavoured to procure it by general
councils, without breaking the unity." A Minister called D'Or, turning
Roman Catholic[569], Grotius discovered little concern at it, and speaks
of it with great calmness in a letter to his brother. "What D'Or has
just done, says he, the learned Pithou did before him: Casaubon was
resolved to do the same had he remained longer in France, as he assured
several persons, and among others Descordes. I would fain, continued he,
have the abuses that have crept into the church remedied, and will
always say so; but is it just, or are there any examples, that it should
be done by schism? This ought to be the more weighed, as we easily
perceive that those who have formed new parties had not always the
Spirit of God; that they have propagated new abuses, and that this
licence to separate themselves has given rise to different parties which
will never be united." He speaks in another place of Casaubon's
sentiments[570], and pretends that this learned man thought the Roman
Catholics of France better informed than those of other countries, and
came nearer to truth than the Ministers of Charenton.

He explained himself very frequently and very sharply against the schism
of the Protestants. "Viretus, and the rest, says he[571], ought not to
have erected new churches: yet they have done it before they were
excommunicated: even an unjust excommunication would not have entitled
them to erect altar against altar." He recites several passages from the
Fathers on this subject, by which he pretends to confute the first
reformers[572]. He came so near the Roman Catholics in the end, that in
a letter to his brother he has these words: "It cannot be denied that
there are several Roman Catholic pastors here who teach true religion,
without any mixture of superstition: it were to be wished that all did
the same." In his later works he speaks of Calvin with the highest
indignation[573]: "I know, he says, with what injustice and bitterness
this Calvin treated Cassander, Baudoin, and Castellio, who were much
better men than himself."

In refuting the apology of Rivetus he speaks with all the zeal of a
Roman Catholic Disputant, and proves that the Calvinists are
Schismatics, and had no mission; that they neither had miracles for
them, nor any particular command from God: that the Ministers are
factious spirits, who seek only to disturb the State: that their
religion is new, and has not antiquity on its side. In his youth he had
commended Beza in some anapest verses; extolling him as one of the most
zealous defenders of the truth: he afterwards retracted this elogium,
and wished it buried in eternal oblivion.

In fine, the Jesuits, who were the objects of his aversion before he
knew them, became his friends. He was reproached with this; and mentions
the accusation in a letter to his brother[574]. "I am not, says he, the
common defender of Jesuits; but the King looks on them as good subjects
and employs them on several occasions." He publicly took their part in
some of his works. He maintains in his pieces against Rivetus[575] that
the Society had produced very able men of an irreproachable life, and
that there were more such among them than among others. "I know many of
them, he says, who are very desirous to see the abuses abolished, and
the church restored to its primitive unity. The King entrusts them with
his most valuable concerns." Father Petau, among others, possessed his
confidence, as we have already observed, and shall see again.

FOOTNOTES:

[560] Ep. 85. p. 780.

[561] Ep. 935. p. 120.

[562] Ep. 487. p. 864.

[563] Ep. 1004. p. 641.

[564] Ep. 593. p. 913.

[565] Ep. 534. p. 914. 537. p. 916. & 1520, p. 689.

[566] Ep. 1570. p. 709.

[567] Ep. 1078. p. 711.

[568] Ep. 607. p. 938.

[569] Ep. 610. p. 939.

[570] Ep. 613. p. 940.

[571] Ep. 674. p. 959.

[572] Ep. 677. p. 959.

[573] Animad. in animad. Riveti, p. 640.

[574] Ep. 628. p. 915.

[575] Animad in anim. Riveti, ad Art. 6. p. 658. Discussio Rivet.
Apolog. p. 694. & p. 681.


XIX. His great knowledge of antiquity and that singular veneration which
he always paid to the primitive church made him even in his youth look
upon the abolition of episcopacy, and of a visible head of the church,
as something very monstrous. He went much farther in the sequel; shewing
that[576] Melancton himself wanted the Pope to be left in the Church,
and that King James of England and several able Protestants acknowledged
the utility of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome: adding, "If several
Protestants had made the same reflection, we should have had a church
more reformed."

He thinks that this Monarchy (these are his own terms[577]) is of use in
the church for maintaining its unity. In fine, in a piece against
Rivetus[578], he proves the primacy of the Pope from a passage of St.
Cyprian, and adds, "You see that the primacy is hereby established; and
this name in every society implies some jurisdiction. The Bishop of
Rome, says he[579], is Prince of the Christian Aristocrasy, as it has
been called before our time by the Bishop of Fossombrone. This primacy
is under Jesus Christ, and may be exercised without tyranny, and without
destroying the rights which the Bishops have over the churches committed
to them." He entertained favourable sentiments of the Episcopal
authority even before his embassy; and thought it necessary to preserve
the unity of the Church[580]. "It is a question only in name[581](says
he to his brother some years after) to ask whether Episcopacy be of
divine right: it is sufficient that Jesus Christ has set the example in
the college of Apostles; that the Apostles have followed it, and that
this establishment has been approved by the universal consent of the
Church, excepting some innovators of the present age."

He handles this point in the eleventh Chapter of the treatise _Of the
power of Sovereigns in matters of Religion_[582]; he says it is
fanaticism to advance that a Bishop has nothing above a simple Priest.
"Episcopacy, says he[583], that is to say the preheminence of a Pastor,
is not contrary to the Divine right. It is incumbent on him who thinks
otherwise, that is, who accuses the whole ancient Church of folly and
impiety, to prove his opinion. That Episcopacy[584] was received by the
whole Church appears from the general councils, which have always had
great authority with all devout men; witness the national and provincial
councils, where we find certain marks of the Episcopal precedency;
witness all the Fathers without exception. Episcopacy began with the
Apostles[585]: to be convinced of this we need only have recourse to the
catalogues of Bishops in Irenæus, Eusebius, Socrates, Theodoret, and
others, who all make them begin with the Apostles. It would be very
great obstinacy or disrespect to reject authors of so great weight, who
unanimously agree in an historical fact. The history of all ages informs
us of the advantages which the Church has derived from Episcopacy[586]."
However he did not yet venture to say[587] that Episcopacy was of Divine
establishment: he contented himself with maintaining that it was of
Apostolical institution. This was sufficient to offend a party among
whom there were some who carried their fury and ignorance so far, as to
maintain that Episcopacy was an invention of Satan: an expression which
scandalized Grotius even in his youth, as appears by a letter written
in 1614 to Daniel Heinsius[588]. He became more bold afterwards; and was
not afraid to maintain in the face of the pretended reformation[589],
that Episcopacy was established by Christ, and that it were to be wished
it were restored wherever it had been abolished.

It was in consequence of this respect for the Episcopal College, and its
head, that he exposed himself to the indignation of the whole Protestant
party, and the bitter invectives of the Ministers, by maintaining that
nothing was more absurd than what they had written against the pretended
Romish Antichrist.

One of his principal reasons for writing on this subject was a
persuasion not only of the truth of his sentiments, as he writes to his
brother[590], but that it was his duty to remove every obstacle that
obstructed the reunion, "of which I have greater hopes than ever, he
says, December 3, 1639. If it is not granted us to enjoy that great
blessing (he adds) it is our duty to throw water on the flames, and not
oil; and to plant trees that will bear fruit perhaps in another age." He
was so pleased with himself for breaking the ice in this matter, that he
tells his brother[591] in a private letter, he is persuaded God inspired
him with the thought: that he returns him his most humble thanks for it,
and that he thought himself in consequence obliged to labour in it with
all his might, not only to support the truth, but also because he judged
nothing was more capable to appease mens minds and prepare the way to
the reunion. "I hope, he says to Vossius[592], to find at least among
posterity equitable readers who will thank God for the light which he
has been pleased to communicate to me for the understanding several
obscure passages of Holy Scripture. I owe all that I have written on
Antichrist[593] that is good, not to my own researches, says he to his
brother, but to my prayers, and to the goodness of God, who has been
pleased to enlighten me, though I did not deserve it." He flattered
himself that his works on this subject had undeceived several
Protestants[594], and that Rivetus, his grand adversary, was looked upon
even by his collegues as a Divine of little judgment and a moderate
share of erudition.

FOOTNOTES:

[576] Comment. ad. loca de Antichristo.

[577] Via ad Pacem, Art. 7. p. 17.

[578] Ad. Art. 7. p. 641.

[579] P. 642. & p. 695. Discussio Apolog. Rivet. & p. 696.

[580] Ep. 318. p. 115.

[581] Ep. 534. p. 914. see Ep. 739. p. 975.

[582] No 2.

[583] No 3.

[584] No 4.

[585] No 5.

[586] No 9.

[587] No 10.

[588] Burman's Collection, t. 2. Ep. 211. p. 434.

[589] Via ad Pacem, Art. xiv. p. 621.

[590] Ep. 474. p. 889.

[591] Ep. 490. p. 895.

[592] Ep. 1441. p. 653.

[593] Ep. 499. p. 898.

[594] Ep. 501. p. 899.


XX. He had been at first much prejudiced against the opinion of the
Romish Church concerning the real presence. We may judge of it by the
letter which he wrote June 7, 1622, to Episcopius[595]. "I think, says
he to him, that you would do well to confute those who with Cassander
believe that one may disapprove the errors of the Romish Church, and yet
not be obliged to separate from her communion. Two points especially
appear to me to deserve discussion: the first is, whether an action
lawful in itself, as the adoration during the time of the supper,
ceaseth to be so on account of the error of the Ministers of the Church,
who would have this adoration referred to the visible signs."

In process of time he departed from the manner of speaking at least of
the Ministers. He acknowledged[596] that in the Eucharistical bread some
change is made, which the ancient Latin Church called Transfiguration,
and the modern Transubstantiation: when Jesus Christ, being
sacramentally present, favours us with his substance, as the Council of
Trent speaks, the appearances of bread and wine remain, and in their
place succeed the body and blood of Christ.

It is certain that he did not approve of the sentiments of the
Calvinists concerning the Eucharist: he reproached them with their
contradictions[597]. "The Disciples of Calvin, says he, speak very
differently on this subject in their Confessions and in their disputes:
you will hear them say in their confessions, that they really,
substantially, and essentially partake of Christ's body and his blood;
in their disputes they maintain that Christ is received only spiritually
by faith. The ancients go much farther, admitting a real incorporation
of Jesus Christ with us, and the reality of Christ's natural body, as
St. Hilarius speaks."

Thus Grotius was persuaded the term _transubstantiation_, adopted by the
Council of Trent, was capable of a good interpretation[598]: but it is
not clear however, that, though he admitted the expressions used by the
Catholic Church, he was of her opinion. After approving the term
transubstantiation, he adds[599], "And because what is spiritual among
the Jews is called real, the terms really, substantially, and
essentially, are used in the Protestant Confessions, and by their
Doctors." It is plain from what he subjoins, that he sought rather to
unite different sentiments by means of equivocal expressions, than by an
exact Creed, which might be susceptible of only one sense. "We must not
condemn, says he, those who assure us that the Eucharist is but the sign
of the body of Jesus Christ, since St. Augustine, with several other
Fathers, speak in this manner; and the sacrament is defined to be the
visible sign of an invisible grace."

He made a draught of a kind of Formulary, in which the Catholics and
Protestants were to join: it was this. "We believe that in the use of
the supper we truly, really, and substantially, that is to say, in its
proper substance, receive the true body and the true blood of Jesus
Christ in a spiritual and ineffable manner." Grotius informs us that
this formulary was approved of by the Roman Catholic Doctors and by
Protestants: which is not surprising of the Catholics, since the
expressions he employs, when taken in their natural sense, comprehend
the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church: it is more surprising of the
Protestants; but it must be observed that Calvin himself said[600], that
under the Eucharistical signs we receive truly the body and blood of
Jesus Christ; that Christ's flesh is distributed in this sacrament; that
it enters into us; that we are partakers not only of Christ's spirit,
but also of his flesh; that we have its proper substance, and are made
partakers of it; that whole Christ is united to us, and therefore is
united to us in body and spirit, that we must not question our receiving
his proper body, and that if there is any man upon earth who sincerely
acknowledges this truth, it is he.

These expressions of Calvin were certainly favourable to the opinion of
the Roman Catholics: he found himself obliged to make use of such terms,
because they had been so long authorised, that he was afraid of
appearing desirous to change the ancient doctrine; but the sense he gave
them took away their force. The Protestants whom Grotius consulted,
agreeable to the opinion of their Master, thought the expression,
substantial presence, might be reconciled with their confession of
faith; which, denying the real presence, teaches that Christ is united
to us only in a figure in the sacrament, and in spirit by faith.

Though Grotius believed that one receives substantially Jesus Christ in
the use of the supper, there is no proof of his admitting the real
presence in the sense of the Council of Trent: for, besides that his
Formulary scarce makes stronger mention of it than Calvin, he seems not
to condemn those who admitted only the sign of Christ's body: an
indulgence which will never be approved of by a Roman Catholic.

FOOTNOTES:

[595] Ep. 181. p. 67.

[596] Via ad pacem art. x. p. 619. & 642.

[597] Votum pro pace, p. 687.

[598] Animad. in Animad. art. x. p. 642.

[599] Via, p. 619.

[600] Variations, l. 9. p. 37.


XXI. He justifies the decision of the Council of Trent concerning the
number of the sacraments in his works against Rivetus. "The word
sacrament, though sometimes taken in a more general signification, may
nevertheless, says he[601], be understood in a more limited one of these
seven external signs, which are designed for the good of our souls, and
more distinctly mentioned in Scripture; Baptism in St. Matthew xxviii.
19. Confirmation, Acts viii. 17. Penance, Matthew xvi. 19. the
Eucharist, Matthew xxvi. 26. Ordination, 1 Tim. iv. 22. Extreme Unction,
Mark vi. 13. James v. 14. and Marriage; Ephes. v. 32."

FOOTNOTES:

[601] Rivet. Apol. discussio, p. 698.


XXII. In the examination of the other articles, which divide the Roman
Catholics from the Protestants, Grotius continued to lean towards the
Romish Church. In 1638 he acknowledges in a letter to Corvinus[602],
that pious and able men, who were well disposed towards the Protestants,
owned they were mistaken in the decision of the principal controversies
between the Protestants and the Romish Church.

After the year 1640 he took no offence at the use of images in churches,
and prayers for the dead. He writes to his brother this year[603], "The
Lutherans have images, and there are some in several places of England.
Montaigue and others have proved that it is not idolatry to have
recourse to the prayers of the Apostles and Martyrs."

He explains himself afterwards much more strongly in favour of the
Romish Church. He was persuaded[604] that the Cherubims of Moses clearly
shewed that images were not forbid. "The honour due to Martyrs, says he,
in his _Via ad pacem_[605], is much greater than what we owe to living
Saints, because the Apocalypse tells us, that the Martyrs reign with
Jesus Christ: there is therefore no harm in publicly testifying our
esteem for them, and celebrating their memories on days set apart for
that purpose, and in the places where they suffered martyrdom. The
Protestants acknowledge that they pray for the Church: they are in the
wrong therefore to look on those as Idolaters; who, agreeable to the
opinion of several ancients, think the knowledge of our wants and our
prayers may be communicated to the Martyrs by a revelation from God, or
by the ministry of Angels. Such, he says in another place[606], as think
it idolatry to address, the Martyrs, that they may pray for us, accuse
St. Chrysostom, and the other holy Doctors of the Greek and Latin
Church, of a horrible crime. For my part, I dare not do this; neither
would I blame those who abstain from praying to the Saints. I have also
said that true Relics of true Martyrs deserve to be respected."

In fine, in his _Votum pro pace_[607], he proves by a long series of
passages from the Fathers, that the invocation of saints was used by the
ancient Church, and therefore cannot be treated as idolatry; that there
is no law in the Gospel against the use of Images in Churches, that it
cannot be said they are forbid by the law of nature, and that in the
times of St. Ambrose and St. Augustine the relics of Martyrs were
honoured in the Church. He defends in several places Praying for the
Dead, which was practised in all the Churches of the East, as well as of
the West[608]: he proves that the ancient Church prayed for the Dead,
and that St. Augustine[609] regarded the opposers of this practice as
heretics. He maintains[610] that every ancient liturgy has prayers for
the Dead, and that as Tertullian relates, they were used in all the
Churches in his time. He asserts[611], that the Jews knew and admitted
of a Purgatory. One of the articles which made most noise in the
beginning of the grand Schism in the sixteenth Century was that of
justification, Grotius declares[612], that the more he examined the
Scriptures, the greater agreement he discovered between them and the
tradition of the Roman Church concerning justification. He was persuaded
that it had the same idea of the Catholic Church mentioned in the Creed,
as the ancients entertained. He would have men submit to the decisions
of general councils[613]; and maintains that a pious and peaceable man
ought not to contradict them when their decrees are received by almost
all the Churches, especially those which were founded by the Apostles.
He means no doubt the Council of Trent.

Grotius must have supposed that the Church could not err, when he
wrote[614], "The Bishops of Rome may be in an error, but they cannot
long remain, in it, if they adhere to the universal Church." He was
persuaded that we run no danger in embracing a doctrine taught by the
Greek and Latin Churches[615]: "For, says he, the points in which these
two Churches agree have been decided by the Apostles or by general
Councils." He maintains that expressions tho' new, ought to be received
in Theology[616], when they are supported by the authority of General
Councils. This was in opposition to the Protestants, who maintained that
the term transubstantiation ought to be rejected on account of its
novelty. He is positive that such as depart from what was practised by
the whole Church, and confirmed by Councils[617], are guilty of a most
insolent folly, as St. Augustine said. He acknowledged the utility of
tradition. Had he lived in the time of the Apostles he would have
believed, he tells us, what they said, as well as what they wrote[618].
He was persuaded that the goodness of God[619] had not permitted the
doctrine of the universal Church to be corrupted, though the manners of
the Pastors of the Church might be reprehensible. He entertained the
same opinion, he tells us[620], concerning the authority of the Fathers
as the illustrious Father Petavius in the Prolegomena prefixed to his
most useful body of Divinity.

The works of the Apostolical Fathers were, next to the Scriptures,
Grotius's favourite study. When he heard that the Epistle of St.
Clement, which had been long lost to the world, was published in England
by Junius[621], from a Manuscript brought from Egypt, and written about
the time of the Council of Nice, he expressed his satisfaction to
Descordes[622], in a letter from Hamburg, dated June 1, 1633. "You gave
me great pleasure by informing me of the discovery of the Epistle of St.
Clement of Rome. No pains should be spared to recover those Fragments,
which partake much of the nature of the apostolical Writings: and they
ought not to be wholly rejected on account of interpolations: we must do
with them as with metals, separate the dross from the pure metal. Would
to God that Father Sirmond, or some one of his society like him, would
give us the Epistle of Barnabas, from which there are some quotations in
Clement of Alexandria. I remember to have heard Father Sirmond himself
say that the Jesuits have this letter."

St. Clement's Epistle was not sent to Grotius till after his departure
from Hamburg, and arrival at Francfort[623]. He examined it immediately,
and wrote his thoughts of it, July 17, to the famous Jerom Bignon,
Advocate-General: After reading it over and over, he remained satisfied
that it was the same which Photius had seen, and which St. Jerom,
Clement of Alexandria, and before them St. Irenæus, had; and which was
written in the end of Nero's reign, or some years before that of
Vespasian; and that it was most authentic, without the least
interpolation. As to the second Epistle, ascribed to St. Clement, he did
not think it written by that Pope: but at the same time did not question
its being a work of the first Century. Grotius agrees in this with the
most learned Critics even among the Roman Catholics[624].

He obtained a sight of St. Barnabas's[625] Epistle, of which he was so
desirous; but he had not the satisfaction to see it printed. Usher
undertook to publish it in 1643; but before it was finished a fire
consumed at Oxford what was already printed[626]. Two years after,
Father Menard's edition appeared: but this was the year of Grotius's
death. To return to his opinion concerning the points controverted
between the Roman Catholics and Protestants: he speaks with great
contempt of the inadmissibility[627] of grace. His treatise _Of faith
and works_ is written against this error. He maintains that it is the
most pernicious system that can be introduced; that it is not to be
found in any of the Fathers; and was not so much as tolerated in ancient
times.

He proves that fasting was very early observed in the Church, as we may
be convinced by reading St. Irenæus[628]; that Lent was always observed
by the ancient Church; that the sign of the Cross has something
respectable in it, and was used in the first ages, as Tertullian, and
others after him, observe; that Virginity[629] is a more perfect state
than marriage, as the Fathers taught; that the Romish Church preserved
the ancient discipline of the Western Church with regard to the celibacy
of the Priests; that Jesus Christ himself taught[630] that such as
lived in celibacy were more proper for the ecclesiastical functions;
that the African Church agreed in this point with that of Rome; and
that, besides, the Romish Church did not refuse to communicate with
Churches which permitted Priests to marry. Of all the religious orders
he approved most of the congregation of the Fathers of the Oratory, and
the institution of the Jesuits, because the first retired when they
pleased; and the others might leave the society with permission of their
Superiors.

In fine, he speaks of the Council of Trent with great respect. "Those,
he says[631], who shall read its Decrees with a mind disposed to peace,
will find that every thing is wisely explained in them, and agreeable to
what is taught by the Scriptures and the ancient Fathers, as may be seen
by the passages cited in the margin."

Such as were displeased with these pacific sentiments, objected to him
that he had formerly thought otherwise. Laurentius wrote a piece on this
subject, which is mentioned by Grotius in a letter to his brother[632],
"Laurentius, says he, objects to me that what I have formerly written
contradicts my later works: however, if they be examined by the true
rules of criticism, no such contradiction will be found. Farther, if, as
I have advanced in years, conversation with able men, and a more perfect
examination, have made me change my sentiments, I ought not on that
account to be accused of inconstancy, no more than St. Augustin, who
retracted many things." He again touches on this point in his _Votum pro
pace_[633]. "If in my youth, says he, having less knowledge than now,
the prejudices of education, or a blind attachment to authors of same,
carried me too great lengths, shall I not be permitted at present, when
I am old, to adopt more reasonable sentiments, after long enquiry and a
renunciation of all party spirit?"

It is not surprising that after such a declaration the zealous Clergy
sought to render him odious. They printed a book against him, under the
title of _Grotius papista_[634]. It is certain that he gave the
preference to the Roman Catholic religion above all the others, and it
has even been reported that he promised to M. Bignon, before leaving
Paris, to declare himself openly a Roman Catholic[635]. It has also been
said that M. Arnaud asserted, that he was informed by a man of honour,
who had it from M. Bignon, that Grotius, on setting out for Sweden,
declared to this last Gentleman, that as soon as he came back he would
make profession of the Roman Catholic Religion. The Jesuits have
published a Flemish book under the title of the _Testament of
Grotius_[636], in which they advance that he was ready to turn Roman
Catholic: the Author of _Vindiciæ Grotianæ_ has pretended to confute
this assertion by some passages in Grotius's earlier works: but his
reasoning must appear absurd, since it was only in the latter part of
his life that he preferred the Romish Religion. A Protestant, who could
not deny that Grotius gave the preference to the Roman Catholic
religion, has ventured to advance, that it was perhaps with a view to be
made a Cardinal: this wretched conjecture is Osiander's; but besides
that Grotius had a wife of whom he was very fond, he was a man incapable
of embracing an opinion from motives of interest.

It is very certain that Grotius was most intimate with Father Petau, who
cultivated his friendship (as this learned Jesuit tells us himself in
one of his letters) in hopes of bringing him to an open profession of
the Roman Catholic faith. This gave M. Varlois occasion to say, in his
elogium of Father Petau[637], "What did he not do to gain over the
illustrious Grotius to the Catholic Religion? He did not dislike us, he
was even almost one of us, since he publicly declared his acceptance of
the doctrine of the Council of Trent. One thing only was wanting to him,
to resort to our Churches, which he only deferred till he could bring
many with him to the unity of the Catholic faith." Father Briet says
much the same in his _Annals of the World_ for the year 1645. "This year
died Hugo Grotius, the honour and glory of men of learning: his
intention was to die a Catholic, but he wanted time; for, as he assured
me, he believed as we do."

We read in the _Menagiana_[638], that when Grotius's death was known at
Paris, Father Petau, persuaded that he was a Catholic at heart, said
mass for his soul: it was even reported at that time, if we may believe
the compiler of those Anecdotes, that Grotius wanted to declare himself
before his journey to Sweden, but was advised by Father Petau to go
there first, and return afterwards to Paris to settle, and fulfil his
resolution. It is improbable that such a zealous Catholic as Father
Petau would advise Grotius to defer for a moment the edification of all
the Catholics by his return to the Church; but it is certain that Father
Petau said mass for his friend. The tradition of this fact is preferred
among the Jesuits, and there are people of credit alive who remember to
have heard it affirmed for certain by Father Harduin and M. Huet Bishop
of Avranches[639].

As Grotius's religion was a problem to many, Menage wrote an Epigram on
this occasion, the sense of which is, that as many different sects
claimed his religion, as there were towns which contended for the birth
of Homer:

     Smyrna, Rhodes, Colophon, Salamis, Argos, Athenæ,
     Siderei certant vatis de patriâ Homeri:
     Grotiadæ certant de religione Socinus,
     Arrius, Arminius, Calvinus, Roma, Lutherus.

FOOTNOTES:

[602] Ep. 966. p. 434.

[603] Ep. 489. p. 894.

[604] Ep. 622. p. 943.

[605] Via ad pacem, p. 623, art. xx.

[606] Animad. in animad. ad. ar. 19. p. 645.

[607] P. 705.

[608] Via ad pacem, p. 626.

[609] Votum pro pace, p. 916.

[610] Animad. in animad. p. 646.

[611] Via ad pacem, p. 626. Animad. in anim. p. 646

[612] Ep. 622. p. 943.

[613] Votum pro pace, p. 727.

[614] Ep. 613. p. 940.

[615] Ep. 668. p. 957.

[616] Via ad pacem art. 1. p. 615.

[617] Art. 7. p. 617.

[618] Via ad pacem, p. 628. Anim. in anim. p. 647. Votum pro pace, p.
724.

[619] Anim. in anim. p. 642.

[620] Votum pro pace, p. 681.

[621] Tillem. t. 2. p. 158.

[622] Ep. 318. p. 113.

[623] Ep. 357. p. 124.

[624] Tillemont, t. 2. n. 13. p. 567.

[625] Ep. 391. p. 866.

[626] Fabric. Bib. Græc. l. 4. p. 174. tom. 3.

[627] Commen. ad loca de Antichrist. Anim. in anim. p. 649.

[628] Commen. ad loca de Antichrist. Via ad pacem, p. 617.

[629] Votum pro pace, p. 750.

[630] Matt. xix. 12. 1 Cor. vii.

[631] Votum pro pace, p. 682.

[632] Ep. 647. p. 951.

[633] P. 702.

[634] Ep. 615. p. 944.

[635] Sent. des Theolog. de Hollande, p. 393. Menagiana, t. 2. p. 298.

[636] Vin. Grot. p. 506.

[637] Vin. Grot. p. 505.

[638] Tom. 4. p. 180.

[639] See Vie du P. Petau, Niceron, t. 37. p. 159.


XXIII. That which contributed to the removal of Grotius's prejudices
against the Catholic Church was undoubtedly the project he had formed of
reconciling all the different parties which divide Christendom. He saw
well the necessity of having the Catholics on his side; and he flattered
himself that having gained them, he would easily bring over the rest. M.
Huet did not think such a project absolutely chimerical[640]: "The
religious differences, says he, which have long disturbed the peace of
Christians, are not impossible to be accommodated. If the parties would
set about it sincerely, without obstinacy or private interest, they
would soon find ways of accommodation; but some of all parties are so
warm, that they censure such of their own party as seek to accommodate
differences, with no less severity than they do their adversaries. With
what presumptuous rigour did Rivetus the Minister treat Grotius for
proposing the means of peace? Grotius, in a modest answer, humbles his
pride without naming him; humorously pointing him out by that title
taken from Catullus[641], _Adversus quemdam opaca quem facit bonum
barba_."

M. Bayle differed from M. Huet concerning the attempt to unite the
different religions: he thinks it as great a chimera as the Philosophers
stone, or the quadrature of the circle. The truth is, to hope for
success in such a project, one must suppose in all men a sincere love of
truth, and a readiness to renounce their prejudices, good
understandings, and upright hearts.

In this undertaking one essential thing, which must not be forgot, is,
that if the Catholic Church, by a condescendance worthy of her charity
and her desire that all men should come to the knowledge of the truth,
should remit some point of her discipline, she cannot shew this
indulgence with regard to any tenet condemned by the Council of Trent,
without betraying her principles: there is therefore only one way of
reunion, namely, that those who separated from the Catholic Church
acknowledge that they have no argument that can justify their schism,
and humbly praying to be received into the bosom of their mother, seek
to obtain this favour by sacrificing their errors.

It was very common in the last age for men to busy themselves in finding
out ways of reconciliation between the Protestants and Roman Catholics:
the Reformed set about it; and I cannot forbear relating here the
extravagance of Cregutius, Minister of Montelemar, who in a small
treatise, which I have in Manuscript, on the question, Whether an union
with the Romish Church is to be hoped for or not? decides it in the
affirmative, provided (says he) the Church of Rome begin with renouncing
the doctrine of transubstantiation: of which he doth not despair.
Grotius with more good sense laboured from his youth in the grand
project of reconciling all the parties into which Christians are
divided. His good intentions were known to Europe before his escape from
Louvestein: Du Vair, Keeper of the Seals, complimented him on his
design. "God, says he, has ordered it so that you should owe your
deliverance entirely to him, to the end that being delivered from
worldly distractions, you may employ the rare talents with which he has
entrusted you, in promoting that work which is no doubt most agreeable
to him, namely the common peace of Christendom by a reunion of all the
members which have separated from their spiritual mother, in whom they
or their fathers were conceived. And for as much as it is the thing
which many men of honour expect[642] from you, I cannot forbear
rejoicing with them, and accelerating by my applause such a happy
course." Grotius's answer confirmed the Keeper of the Seals in the idea
he had entertained. "God is my witness, says he, how much I am afflicted
when I compare the first ages of the Church with our unhappy times, in
which the people, differing in articles of faith, have divided into
factions, and thereby given occasion to wars of which even the nations
of the heathen would have been ashamed. There are doubtless many good
men, who grieve to see such a great evil; and, preserving charity for
all Christians, ardently desire to see union restored; and are disposed
to procure this great blessing by following the Apostle's counsel, to
bear with the infirmities of others, and extend their patience and
candour to their utmost length: but those rigid notions, which a party
spirit has instilled into many, is a great obstacle to the obtaining of
this happiness. May God pour out a spirit of charity and meekness on the
heads of the Church, on Kings and Potentates, that, surmounting every
difficulty, they may without delay restore to the Church her primitive
beauty, and above all a solid peace, without prejudice to truth. Many
thousands, of whom I am one, pray without ceasing for the execution of
this pious design, and desire nothing more than to be employed in it."

Filled with this idea, he proposed to Lewis XIII, in his dedication _Of
the Rights of War and Peace_, to compose the differences of the
Churches, and direct the age in which he lived how to terminate them in
conformity to the sentiments of that time, when all allow that
Christianity was in its purity. He imagined the alliance between France
and England would facilitate the execution of a project worthy of such
mighty Kings: he had it so much at heart, that he thought himself
destined to labour in it from his mother's womb[643]. "It is a vocation,
says he to his brother, which God has given me.--I have many witnesses,
he writes to Duræus[644], who knew me in my native country, and can
attest not only how much I have desired, but also how much I have
laboured to lessen the disputes among Christians, in order to promote
gradually the restoration of unity. I might even appeal to yourself, in
relation to what has since been done both in Germany and Sweden.--I
shall never cease, he says to his brother[645], my utmost endeavours for
establishing peace among Christians; and if I should not succeed, it
will be honourable to die in such a pious enterprize."

He had the consolation to be seconded in his pacific projects by Duræus,
a Clergyman in Sweden, with whom he cultivated a correspondence for
advancing the coalition of Christians[646]. "What you labour in with so
much zeal is precisely what I have been employed about since I began to
have any relish for divine things. Experience teaches me how many
difficulties we must expect both from Statesmen and Divines bigotted to
their own opinions, and averse to those of others: but all these
obstacles ought not to prevent our undertaking such a good work: if we
do not succeed, we shall at least enjoy the satisfaction of having
entertained very sublime ideas. For my part, as I have done it already,
so I shall still continue to recommend to the High Chancellor your
piety, your learning, your good intentions, and your zeal, to which I
ardently wish success; and the accounts of your progress from time to
time will give me the greatest pleasure.--Duræus's enterprize is
attended with particular difficulties at this time, he writes to
Berneggerus[647]: but things as difficult have often had a happy issue:
besides, it affords much satisfaction to a man's conscience to have
attempted what is highly useful, even though he should fail of success."

Duræus meeting with great obstacles, Grotius consoles him on that head,
in a letter of the 21st of November, 1637. "What gives me hopes, he
says, is your constancy, and the countenance of the High Chancellor. I
have conferred on this subject with the two English Ambassadors, the
Earl of Leicester and Lord Scudamore: they are of my opinion, that the
present time, while Europe is engaged in war, is not favourable for
convoking a general assembly of Protestants."

Duræus's project regarding only a union among Protestants, Daillé and
the ablest men among the reformed Ministers approved of it, with some
limitations: there was, however, little prospect of success[648] on
account of the intollerant spirit of some turbulent Ministers, such as
Voetius.

Grotius had much higher views; he proposed nothing less[649] than to
reunite all Christians: in this, he said, he would not cease to labour;
and, that it would yield him pleasure to die so well employed[650]; that
he gave himself little pain about the hatred he might incur, for if men
gave way to this fear, never any vice would be corrected.

What encouraged him farther, in this idea, was the number of great men
who entertained it before him. "I am not the only one who hath conceived
this project, he writes to his brother[651]: Erasmus, Cassander,
Vecelius, and Casaubon had the same design. La Miletiere is employed at
present in it: Cardinal Richelieu declares that he will protect the
coalition; and he is such a happy man that he never undertook any thing
in which he did not succeed: and even if there were no hopes of success
at present, ought we not to sow the seed which may be useful to
posterity[652]? Even if we should only diminish the mutual hatred among
Christians, and render them more sociable, would not this be worth
purchasing at the price of some labour and reproaches?"

Arminius may likewise be numbered with those who were desirous of
reuniting Christians[653]. The method he proposed was to distinguish
fundamental points from such as were not, and leave men at liberty to
believe or disbelieve the latter. He communicated his project to
Casaubon, who highly approved it: but how shall men settle what articles
are fundamental? This question is a source of endless disputes. Besides,
they must be able to answer the Roman Catholic Divines, who, building on
the doctrine that has been always taught, justly pretend that whatever
has been decided to be part of that doctrine ought to be regarded as
fundamental. Men could not help approving Grotius's intention; but even
those, by whom he was held in the greatest esteem, had no confidence in
the success of his project. This made him write to Baron Oxenstiern on
the subject[654]. "Even if religious differences, he says, had not given
occasion to bloody wars, I should still think it the duty of Christians
to restore the unity; since, as the Apostle of the Gentiles tells us, we
ought to be all members of one body. But even those, who say they desire
it, doubt whether the thing be practicable. I know well that all schism,
the further it has extended, and the longer it has lasted, will be more
difficult to heal; so many being employed to throw oil on the flames:
however, there are examples of inveterate evils that have been cured in
the Church. After the Council of Chalcedon there was a very great schism
in the East, which continued an hundred years till the reign of
Justinian, by whose authority, Pope Vigilius listening at last to terms
of peace, an end was put to it. Charles V, Ferdinand, and Maximilian
thought that the schism between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants
of the Augsbourg confession was not incurable. Melancton and other
learned men, whose writings are still extant, were of the same opinion.
I have heard from great men, that Henry IV. of France said that he would
undertake to obtain, for the King of England and his Protestant allies,
such conditions of returning to the unity of the Church, as they could
not handsomely refuse; and that he purposed to send some of his Bishops
into England to confer on this subject with the Prelates of that
kingdom: but this project, which had been concerted with several great
men, was defeated by the King's death. I believe the chief difference
between the tenets of the Augsbourg confession and those of the Council
of Trent lies in the ambiguity of some expressions, which are understood
differently; but may be explained, by men of understanding and friends
to peace, in such manner, that no difference will remain but in those
things which may be left to the free discussions of the Learned, without
any injury to the peace of the Church. It is evident, from the examples
of the Maronites and Greeks, that those who communicate in both kinds,
and use a liturgy different from that of the Romish Church, provided it
be susceptible of a Catholic sense, even were it in the vulgar tongue,
may be received into the communion of the Apostolical See; and likewise
those Churches which allow the Priests to marry. What has been done in
Sweden and elsewhere, for the reformation of discipline, by suppressing
simony and superstition, ought not only to be retained; but there is
room to hope that when unity is restored other nations will follow this
example, there being many among them who ardently desire, that the
abuses which have crept in may be removed according to the ancient
Canons. It is very difficult to render the supremacy of the Bishop of
Rome useful, or at least not hurtful to the Church: but if one
considers, that the Kings and Bishops of the Romish religion are as much
concerned in this matter, as the Protestants, and reflects on the
precautions taken in it by France and Spain, he will not despair of
finding expedients for securing the authority of Kings, their right in
the election of Bishops and the prerogatives of the Primates,
Archbishops, and Bishops, agreeable to the Canons and the ancient Church
discipline. If the Christian world could have rest from war, the Kings
of the Romish communion, who are favourably disposed towards the
Protestants, might prepare matters at Rome in such manner as to give
hope of a happy issue. I grant that these things are attended with
difficulties; but so is every great, and useful, and glorious
undertaking; and in such a salutary work we may confide in the
Almighty's aid."

After this manner did Grotius write to the Swedish Plenipotentiary, in
the end of the year 1614, handling with greater delicacy, as he wrote to
Protestants, the nice article of the Pope's Supremacy, in favour of
which he had spoken more strongly in the pieces he had just published.

We learn from his first letters, that he communicated his pacific ideas
to his father, and that he was early sensible of the great difficulties
attending a reunion. He writes to his brother, Oct. 27, 1623[655],
"What my father writes, of restoring things to the condition they were
in before the Council of Trent, would be a great step; but
transubstantiation, and the adoration ordained by the Lateran Council,
and the invocation of Saints, which is received in all the liturgies,
will be great stumbling-blocks to tender consciences."

Some years after, he imagined that the shortest way to a coalition of
Christians would be to reduce the articles of faith to a small number.
"It were well, says he[656], if Christians would reflect how few the
points are, and how clearly expressed in Scripture, which constitute the
Rule of Faith laid down by St. Irenæus and Tertullian; and as it is not
allowed to doubt of these, the liberty left to men in others might
contribute to the peace of the Church."

Afterwards he went much farther. "I could wish, he says to his
brother[657], Nov. 14. 1643, that Utengobard, when his health will
permit, would write something, if he has not done it already, on the
necessity of restoring the unity of the Church; and by what means it may
be done. Many think that the true way would be to distinguish between
what is necessary, and what is not; and to leave men at full liberty in
the latter: but it is as difficult to know what is necessary, as to know
what is true. The Scriptures, they say, are the rule: but interpreters
vary on the passages referred to. I know not, therefore, whether it
would not be best to adhere to the sentiments of the Catholic Church
concerning faith and good works: for I think they hold all that is
necessary to be believed in order to salvation. As to other articles
which have been determined by Councils, or received by the first
Christians, we must adopt the moderate interpretation, and such we shall
find on every point. If any one cannot prevail with himself to be silent
in relation to things, of which he has no certainty, but will disturb
the unity of the Church, instead of labouring to restore it, matters
will proceed from bad to worse."

Sometimes Grotius imagined he should succeed. Nov. 23, 1641, he writes
to Gerard Vossius[658], that Codurus, Justellus, and Melitiere, three of
the most learned Protestants, had thanked him for what he had written on
the Consultation of Cassander. "I perceive, says he to his brother, by
conversing with the men of most learning among the Reformed, and
explaining my sentiments to them, that they are of my opinion: their
number will increase if my treatises are dispersed; in which, I can
truly affirm, I have said nothing from a party spirit, but followed
truth as closely as I could."

He writes to his father[659], that he was not without hopes of some good
effect from his incessant labours to restore peace to Christendom. "That
day will at length shine forth, of which we now perceive the dawn: for
many great, pious, and learned men, of both parties, begin to see how
unreasonable it is to neglect the reformation of manners while we are
framing new tenets, and censuring old ones, which require only a good
comment. This excellent design I recommend to your prayers; it was you
gave me the first hint of it."

He writes to his brother[660], June 15, 1641, "I have received a visit
from some Catholic Counsellors of State, and Codurus the clergyman, who
expect the coalition will quickly take place, and pay great regard to my
opinion. May the God of peace direct the whole to the advancement of
truth and piety."

He received the agreeable account, that the pieces he had written to
promote the coalition were approved of in Denmark, Sweden, England,
Germany, and Poland.

He imagined several Catholics entered into his views. Divers doctors of
the Sorbonne, he said[661], thanked him for the remarks he wrote on the
Consultation of Cassander. "The ablest men among the Catholics think
what I have done, he tells his brother[662], is written with great
freedom and moderation, and approve of it."

"We ought not, he says in another letter[663], to regard only the
present age, but posterity also: yet I find some people who think they
shall live to see the union restored."

He imagined his manner of handling the controversy was approved of by
the ablest men of the Romish Communion, and even at Rome because there
were most great men in that city.

For some time he entertained hopes that Cardinal Richelieu would favour
him: Jan. 19, 1641, he writes thus to his brother[664]: "When my book is
published, many Protestants will see that the reconciliation of the
Churches is easier than they imagined: for the principal basis of the
Reformation may subsist with the Pope's consent, provided the affair be
managed with mildness and without giving him offence. I write this on
good grounds: Cardinal Richelieu thinks the thing will succeed: he has
said so to several."

Grotius had either been misinformed, or the Cardinal changed his
language: for the former writes to his brother[665], March 24, 1642, "As
Cardinal Richelieu speaks differently from what he did some time ago
about the peace of the churches, I am afraid this change conceals some
ill design against the Reformed."

Grotius, finding at length that the project of a coalition was
impracticable without the approbation of the Catholics, contracted an
intimacy with Father Petau, to whom he communicated all his works
relating to religion and the reconciliation of the churches. In a letter
of the 3d of December, 1640, he desires him to send him his remarks on
his works, "That, says he, by your assistance I may add, suppress, or
correct, as shall be most necessary for promoting truth and peace. Would
to God that I had as much genius and learning as some others: I would
accomplish what it is great barely to attempt."

He communicated to Father Petau the manuscript of his answer to
Rivetus[666], desiring him to point out what was not agreeable to truth,
or had not a tendency to promote peace. "I am resolved, says he, to
publish my answer as soon as I have your opinion, to which I pay great
regard."

Father Petau gives us the history of his acquaintance with Grotius, in
his XIIth letter[667]. "I had, says he, a great desire to see and
converse with him; we have been long together, and very intimate. He is,
as far as I can judge, a good man, and of great candour. I do not think
him far from becoming a Catholic, after, the example of Holstenius, as
you hoped: I shall neglect nothing in my power to reconcile him to
Christ, and put him in the way of salvation."

Father Petau mentions him again in another letter, written to Cardinal
Francis Barberinus[668]. His Eminence had applied to that learned Jesuit
for information in what state Grotius had left, at his death, his work
on the Antiquities of Sweden. Father Petau makes him this answer. "I had
some connection with Hugo Grotius, and I wish I could say he is now
happy. Our love to learning began our acquaintance, which I kept up in
hopes of being useful to him. Accordingly I saw him often, and he also
visited me, and wrote to me frequently." He concludes with assuring the
Cardinal, that he would enquire of his widow about his work relating to
Sweden.

Grotius's several attempts to restore the peace of Christendom made him
be looked upon as a good man by pacific people; but they occasioned him
much uneasiness from those, who, being obstinately attached to the
opinions of the first Reformers, regarded all that kept any measures
with the Romish Church as Apostates. He laid his account with
contradictions. Feb. 23, 1641, he writes to Israel Caski[669], "Those
who had the same design that I have were generally evil-treated by both
parties, and met with the fate of such as would separate combatants: but
the God of peace will judge them with justice. They have also on their
side pious and learned men, whose merit outweighs the number of the
others.--I believe, says he to his brother[670], my Remarks on Cassander
will please few, because there are not many skilled in the Scriptures
and Antiquity: most people are bigotted to their opinions. I except
against such Judges; I regard them not; nor have I any desire to know
what they say. I have granted nothing to the Roman Catholics, but what
antiquity gives them." The zealous Clergy, not content with writing
against him themselves, every where stirred him up enemies: he speaks in
his letters[671] of one Seyffectus of Ulm, who, instigated by Rivetus
and others of that party, wrote against him.

Several learned men, who had the highest esteem and the most perfect
friendship for Grotius, conceived a violent hatred to him on seeing him
lean towards the Catholics. He had been extremely intimate with
Salmasius: he had received letters from him filled with the most
expressive testimonies of friendship[672]; and Grotius had informed him
of the happy change of his fortune, because he looked upon him as one of
his best friends: they had long kept up a learned correspondence by
letters, in which we find a reciprocal esteem and the greatest
politeness; but when Grotius set up for a Mediator, Salmasius publicly
declared, that he disapproved of the way of reconciliation proposed by
Grotius[673]; and from that time his friendship changed into bitter
enmity.

Sarrau, Counsellor in the parliament of Rouen, who had been one of
Grotius's best friends, as we may see by the letters that passed between
them, withdrew his friendship when he thought him in the interest of the
Romish Church. May 31, 1641, he writes[674], "What is reported for
certain, that Grotius is gone over to the Popish party, is not true: but
with great concern we see him every day employed in something very like
it: he will not suffer us to rank him in any class of Protestants
whatever, because he has used them all too ill in his Treatises on
Antichrist and the Consultation of Cassander."

Sarrau also writes to Salmasius[675], that it was publicly said these
projects of reconciliation had set the High Chancellor and several other
Lords against Grotius. He flattered himself, however[676], that Sarrau
approved of his project: for he writes to his brother, William Grotius,
"Among some others of the Reformed, Sarrau, who was a Counsellor in the
parliament of Rouen, and is at present in that of Paris, praises my
design." But it is probable that Grotius took compliments for realities.
It is certain that Grotius's schemes displeased Sarrau, and that there
was a coldness between them, for the latter writes thus to Salmasius,
Feb. 10, 1644[677], "I am not reconciled to the Swedish Ambassador: if
I had an inclination to it I believe it might easily be done. The
alteration in our friendship does not proceed from my fault, but solely
from his plan of pacification, which I do not approve. I esteem him
highly, on account of the great services he has done to learning; and
shall even never cease to love him: but, far from commending or
approving his late pieces, I am greatly dissatisfied with them: however,
I would not have the many excellent things he has done slighted on that
account. Every one acknowledges you to be the first man in the republic
of letters; but it cannot be denied that he holds the second rank. You
have no superior, nor even any equal; suffer him to be after you the
first."

The celebrated Schurman, whose extensive knowledge had at that time
gained her a very high reputation, signifies to Rivetus, Jan. 20,
1643[678], the general discontent of the greater number of the Reformed
against Grotius. "Hitherto, says she, every one had a high idea of
Grotius's genius and erudition. But since he departed from sound reason,
changed the object of his studies, and insulted by gross invectives the
whole body of Protestants, and the principal authors of the reformation,
everyone seeks for Grotius in Grotius. Nothing can be more ridiculous or
foolish than to see a man, who neither agrees with others, nor with
himself, as you have well shewn, undertake, without our desire or
consent, to reconcile us with the Roman Catholics, and positively decide
that we may, and that we ought to come into his views."

Ruarus[679] had predicted to Grotius himself, that he would reap no
other fruit of his labours, than the hatred of both parties: but he was
at the same time persuaded that no worldly interest entered into
Grotius's views, more honest in this respect than the zealous protestant
clergy, who were ready to adopt the most gross and groundless calumnies,
provided they were levelled against Grotius.

So much contradiction chagrined him greatly, and altered his
temper[680]: by seeking to establish peace among men, he lost the
tranquility of his own mind, which he had preserved in his deepest
adversity. It is said he became suspicious, and peevish, and lost that
politeness towards his friends, which had so advantageously
distinguished him from other men of learning. It is even reported (but
by one of his enemies, indeed) that one day he abused M. du Puis in his
[Grotius's] own house, and turned him out of doors, for presuming to
contradict him[681]. Yet it is evident from his letters, that he was
most intimate with the two illustrious brothers, Mess. du Puis, and was
under high obligations to them. "You have always been my best friends
(he writes to them, Nov. 19, 1633[682]) and almost my only ones since
Rigaut went to Metz, Salmasius to Leyden, and Tilenus died."

A letter to his brother[683], Nov. 1, 1641, clearly shews the change of
his temper. Blondius having used Reigersberg, Grotius's friend and
relation, very ill, he writes to his brother William: "If Blondius
should speak to you, tell him I have a son here, who will send him a
challenge, for affronting the Senator Reigersberg." This menace, which
seemed to be an approbation of duelling, much surprised William Grotius,
who had read in the _Rights of War and Peace_[684], that this doctrine
was clearly condemned by the gospel. Grotius proves in another part of
the same book, "That honour being nothing but the opinion we have of
our distinguishing qualities, he who bears with a slight injury, thereby
discovers a patience above the common; and thus, instead of lessening
his honour, adds to it; and that if some people, from a wrong judgment,
bestow improper epithets on this virtue and turn it into ridicule; these
wrong judgments change not the nature of the thing, nor lessen its real
value. This has not only been acknowledged by the first Christians, but
by the ancient Philosophers, who, as we have elsewhere shewn, ascribed
an impatient resentment of insults to meanness of soul. Should any one
even publish things capable of hurting us with good men, that will not
authorise us to kill him. If there are authors who maintain the
contrary, it is an erroneous opinion which clasheth even with the
principles of natural law: for killing the person who attacks our
reputation is a bad way of defending it." Thus Grotius thought in his
best days. We have enlarged on this head, to shew into what
contradiction, and excess of weakness, great men may fall. William
Grotius was no doubt astonished at his brother's vivacity, and probably
gave him some check for it; for Grotius afterwards writes to him, "What
I wrote to you, relating to my son and Blondius, I did it not because I
approved of such things, but because that or something worse might
happen."

FOOTNOTES:

[640] Huetiana, S. 16. p. 46.

[641] M. Huet is mistaken: it was not Rivetus whom Grotius meant by this
verse of Catullus, but Laet.

[642] See _Votum pro pace_, p. 744.

[643] Ep. 534. A matris visceribus.

[644] Ep. 1471. p. 666.

[645] Ep 383. p. 804.

[646] Ep. 801. p. 357.

[647] Ep. 835. p 367.

[648] Ep. 411. p. 871.

[649] Ep. 477. p. 890.

[650] Ep. 487. p. 894.

[651] Ep. 491. p. 895. & 1478. p. 668.

[652] Ep. 494. p. 896.

[653] Ep. præs. vir. p. 251.

[654] Ep. 1706. p. 736.

[655] Ep. 60. p. 772.

[656] Ep. 444. p. 165.

[657] Ep. 678. p. 960.

[658] Ep. 1538. p. 696. & 573. p. 926.

[659] Ep. 496. p. 897.

[660] Ep. 551. p. 922.

[661] Ep. 1533. p. 696.

[662] Ep. 528. p. 400.

[663] Ep. 610. p. 938.

[664] Ep. 530. p. 911.

[665] Ep. 592. p. 934.

[666] Ep. 1569. p. 708. See also Ep. 1576. p. 710.

[667] P. 284.

[668] L. 3. ep. 9. p. 278.

[669] Ep. 1478. p. 668.

[670] Ep. 595. p. 929.

[671] Ep. 637. p. 948.

[672] Ep. 260. p. 88. Ep. 265. p. 99. & 368. p. 134.

[673] Ep. 525. p. 908.

[674] Ep. 42. p. 41.

[675] Ep. 83. p. 84.

[676] Ep. 579. p. 930.

[677] Ep. 111. p. 110.

[678] Ep. p. 203.

[679] Cent. 2. p. 448.

[680] See a letter from Henry Villeneuve, p. 345, after the treatise _Of
the truth of the Christian religion_, by M. Le Clerc.

[681] Osiander. Vind. Grot. p. 464.

[682] Ep. 333. p. 119.

[683] Ep. 572. p. 928.

[684] L. 2. c. 1.


XXIV. The hatred, which his projects of reconciliation drew upon him,
contributed to the revival of the invidious accusation of Socinianism,
which had been formerly laid against him: they founded it on his silence
concerning the Trinity in his treatise _Of the truth of the Christian
religion_, on his praises of Crellius, his connection with the
Socinians, and, in fine, on his setting aside, or weakening several
passages which established Christ's divinity, particularly that in which
it is said, that Christ was before Abraham; Grotius explaining it with
the Socinians of Christ's existence in the eternal decrees of God.

It was not only his declared enemies, such as Desmarets, Osiander, and
many others, that wanted to make him pass for a Socinian: some
celebrated Roman Catholics, among whom we may number M. Bossuet,
maintained that he was a favourer of Socinianism.

It is true he did not always express himself with the greatest
exactness, and sometimes enlarged more on the necessity of good works,
than on that of regulating our faith according to the decisions of the
Church[685]: but besides that his expressions are susceptible of a
favourable sense, it is evident that there are several tenets, the
belief of which he thought necessary for salvation: this manifestly
appears from the detail he enters into concerning these doctrines in his
later works.

If even some mistakes have escaped him, of which the Socinians might
take advantage, these will not authorise us to accuse him of being a
favourer of that heresy. We know that never any carried a love to truth,
or an abhorrence of falsehood, farther than he did: now he always
expressed the greatest aversion to Socinianism: he writes to Gerard
Vossius[686], in 1613, that there was no body of any authority in the
republic, who held not Socinianism in abhorrence. He wrote against
Socinus the book entitled _A defence of the Catholic faith concerning
Christ's satisfaction against Faustus Socinus of Siena_, in which he
proves that there is nothing contrary to justice in Christ's suffering,
though innocent, for offenders; that even the Pagans believed that God
punished the crimes of the fathers on the sons; and that, in the early
ages of the world, the innocent children were often punished with the
guilty fathers. In fine, he shews that the opinion of Socinus is
repugnant to Scripture, which tells us that Christ's death has
reconciled us to God, according to the expressions of St. Paul, that he
died for us, and that by his death our sins are expiated.

He was very orthodox on the article of original sin; for, he says, the
only true opinion on this matter is that of the ancient Church, which is
well set forth by the Council of Trent.

The Socinians were far from thinking Grotius so favourable to them:
Ruarus writes to one of his friends, "You have reason to think, that
hitherto no body has written so learnedly against Socinus, as Grotius:
he was always much attached to the doctrine of Christ's divinity, even
in his earlier years." Grotius wrote to Walæus[687], in 1611, "I do not
look upon the Samosatenians, and others, like them, as Christians, nor
even as heretics; for their doctrine is repugnant to the belief of all
ages, and all nations. They retain Christianity in name, but destroy it
in fact. I therefore make no great difference between them and the
Mahometans, who even do not revile Christ." M. Bossuet, tho' far from
being prejudiced in favour of Grotius, allows however that he did not
deny the divinity of Christ, nor the efficacy of his sacrifice.

In several of his letters he clears himself from the charge of
Socinianism in such a manner as leaves us no room to doubt his regarding
it as a very dangerous heresy. "I give myself little trouble, he writes
to his brother[688], June 4, 1639, about the calumnies spread against me
by the worst of men, in relation to Socinianism. They may be easily
confuted before equitable judges by the writings which I have already
published, and by those I shall yet publish. I have defended the
sentiments of the ancient Church concerning the Trinity, Christ's
satisfaction, and future punishments, by Scripture and the consent of
antiquity; and have confuted the contrary opinions. Calvin might more
justly be[689] accused of Arianism, than I of Socinianism." Sorbiere,
who had been his Secretary; discovering a great propensity to some
opinions of Socinus, Grotius earnestly admonished him[690] to abstain
from such dangerous innovation.

One of the principal grounds on which they went, was, as we have already
seen, his silence concerning the Trinity, in his book _Of the truth of
the Christian religion_: but he has justified his method in such a
manner, that this objection cannot be sustained by an equitable judge:
he seems to have foreseen it; for, writing to his brother from his
prison at Louvestein whilst he was composing this treatise in Dutch
verse, "My intention, he says, is not to explain the doctrines of
Christianity, but to make the profane, the Pagans, Jews, and Mahometans
acknowledge the truth of the Christian religion, and afterwards have
recourse to our sacred books to be informed of its tenets. The Trinity,
and Christ's divinity could not be introduced into my arguments; for
these doctrines will never bring over unbelievers to the Christian
faith, and those who attempt to demonstrate them by other arguments than
such as are drawn from scripture, absolutely lose their labour: but the
authority of the scriptures being once established, these doctrines
ought to be held proved." He omitted therefore all mention of these
points, not because he disbelieved them, but because he judged it more
proper to prove first the divinity of the sacred books, and the mission
of Christ: and, as we have already observed, the same method has been
followed by the most successful writers on the Truth of Christianity.

He has been much reproached with his letter to Crellius. Grotius had
written against Socinus, and Crellius, to vindicate his master, answered
Grotius with a politeness and good-breeding seldom found in a polemical
divine. Grotius thought it his duty to reply to him, and the measures he
kept with this adversary were looked on by his enemies as a betraying of
the truth. Here follows the letter, which has been so much talked of. "I
was so far from being offended, most learned Crellius, with your book
against mine that I inwardly thanked you at that time, and now do it by
this letter, first, for treating me with so much civility, that the only
thing I have left to complain of is your complimenting me in some places
too much: next for informing me of many very useful and entertaining
things, and exciting me by your example, to examine thoroughly into the
sense of the sacred scriptures: you judge very rightly of me, that I
bear no ill-will to any one who differs from me, without prejudice to
religion; nor decline the friendship of any good man. I have found in
your book of the True Religion, which I have already gone through, and
shall read again, many judicious remarks: and I congratulate the present
age, that there are men in it who make religion consist, not so much in
subtle controversies as in amendment of life and a continual progress in
holiness. God grant that my writings may produce these sentiments in the
minds of my readers: I should then think my life not spent in vain. The
treatise on the truth of the Christian religion I wrote more for my own
satisfaction, than for the instruction of others. I don't see how it can
be useful, after so many other works on the same subject, but by its
brevity. If there be any thing in it that pleases you, or such as you,
it is a happiness beyond my expectation. My great aim, in the _Rights of
War and Peace_, was to suppress, as much as was in my power, that savage
barbarity unworthy not only of a Christian, but of a man, which, to the
misfortune of nations, is now too common, of beginning and carrying on
wars by caprice. I hear with pleasure that this work has got into the
hands of Princes: God grant they may retain what is good in it; for that
would be the most agreeable fruit I could reap from my labour. If ever
any occasion should offer of serving you, of your friends, be assured
that I shall be ready to give you proofs of my high esteem. Since I can
do no more, I sincerely pray that God would protect you, and those who
promote religion."

There is another letter from Grotius to Crellius, which has made much
noise. After thanking him for a book he had sent him, he adds, "I am
resolved to read your works again and again with care, having already
reaped much benefit from them. I have always loved peace, and love it
still; and am grieved to see so much enmity between those, who call
themselves Christians, for such trifling matters[691]."

Crellius having shewn these letters to several, the Socinians and
Grotius's enemies spread a report, that he favoured Socinianism: even
extracts of these letters were printed. He protested against the abuse
made of them, and maintained[692] that if people would candidly read his
works, they would easily be convinced of the injustice of ranking him
with Socinians.

It is certain, that, notwithstanding the terms which he makes use of in
writing to Crellius, he did not at bottom approve of his book: he writes
thus in confidence to his brother[693], "I have read Crellius's book: he
writes with candour, and doth not want learning; but I cannot see how he
will promote religion by departing from the Scripture manner of speaking
authorised by antiquity."

"If I have not answered Crellius, he says in another letter[694], it was
for prudential reasons, and even by the advice of the Protestants of
France, who think that the questions being unknown in this country,
ought not to be made public by a confutation. It is easy to refute them
with glory, though every one is not capable of it: but, it is still
better that they should remain unknown." He speaks, in the same letter,
of Socinus as a man very little versed in the sentiments of antiquity,
and whose errors he had confuted in many of his works. "Must I also
excuse myself, he asks, for not shutting my door against Martinus
Ruarus, who desired to see me? The time was not lost that I spent in
conversing with him, nor am I sorry for his visit. I acquainted him with
my reasons for enquiring into the opinions of the ancient Churches, and
for following them: I shewed him that the doctrine of satisfaction was
no ways contrary to reason, even in the judgment of the Jews, and
brought him some signal proofs of it. I did not conceal what violence it
was to the Scripture, and of how dangerous consequence, to deny the
eternity of hell torments; and I flatter myself I advanced more with
him, than those would have done who abound in reproaches; nor do I see
why I should abstain from writing to him, when I find the pillars of the
Greek Church corresponding by letters even with Pagans. For my part, I
am resolved and accustomed to preserve friendship for all men,
particularly Christians, although erring; and I shall never blush at
it."

He advances almost the same reasons to clear himself from the charge of
Socinianism, in a long letter to Gerard Vossius[695], of which we shall
make no extract to avoid repetitions.

In fine, those who knew Grotius best have defended him on this head. The
celebrated Jerom Bignon, who lived in much intimacy with him, could not
bear to [696]hear him accused of Socinianism: he said he knew him
perfectly, and so far from being a Socinian, he had sometimes seen him
almost in a disposition to turn Roman Catholic. His intimate connection
with Father Petau, whose zeal for the orthodox faith was equal to his
profound learning, is a clear evidences that the Jesuit did not think
him a Socinian. No man was more exposed than Grotius to groundless
accusations. An anonymous piece was written against him, accusing him of
being a Semi-Pelagian: he did not think proper to publish a defence; but
he mentions this accusation in a letter to his brother[697] of the 29th
of May, 1618. "In my treatise _De ordinum Hollandiæ pietate_, I have
mentioned Semi-Pelagianism as a very grievous error. The sentiments of
the Remonstrants are very different from Semi-Pelagianism, for the
Priests of Marseilles, who were called Semi-Pelagians, or the remains of
the Pelagians, in speaking of the necessity of grace, denied that grace
preceded good motions in the foul, at least in some men: the
Remonstrants, on the contrary, maintain, that all that is spiritually
good in us, even the beginning of it flows from antecedent grace.
Consult the Synod of Orange, by which the Priests of Marseilles were
confuted. But those that believe predestination is a consequence of
prescience, or that grace is given to all men, or in fine that it may be
refilled, are certainly not Semi-Pelagians."

They carried their calumnies so far, as even to accuse him of Judaism.
We read in the _Patiniana_[698] that M. Bignon, Advocate-General,
affirmed that Grotius had acknowledged, if he would change his religion,
he would turn Jew. John Mallet, in his book _Of Atheism_[699] has not
only advanced that Grotius judaised in his Commentary on the Prophets,
but that if he had lived much longer he would have become a Turk.

Even the immortality of the soul, said others, he did not believe[700]:
this ridiculous tale is grounded on these words of the _Chevreana_[701]:
"Charles Lewis, Elector Palatine, formerly told me, that having asked
the celebrated Grotius, whether the immortality of the soul could be
demonstrated, he answered, Not well, my Lord; not well."

It is universally known that these books in _Ana_ are of little
authority. We must be informed of all the circumstances of this
pretended conversation before we can determine Grotius's meaning: one
thing is certain, that he has proved the immortality of the soul by
arguments drawn from reason in his treatise _On the Truth of the
Christian Religion_[702].

FOOTNOTES:

[685] Theological works.

[686] Ep. 20. p. 7.

[687] Ep. 14. p. 5. See also Oper. Theol. t. 3. p. 99.

[688] Ep. 556. p. 883.

[689] Ep. 502. p. 884.

[690] Ep. 1564. p. 708.

[691] These expressions afterwards gave occasion to the accusations of
Socinianism brought against Grotius.

[692] Ep. 440. p. 880.

[693] Ep. 135. p. 794.

[694] Ep. 880. p. 387.

[695] Ep. 1096. p. 492.

[696] Menag. t. 2 p. 298.

[697] Ep. 19. p. 760.

[698] Patiniana, p. 18.

[699] Vind. Grot. p. 557.

[700] Animad. Phil. & Hist. Crenii, part. 10. p. 113.

[701] T. 1. p. 168.

[702] L. 1. S. 23.


XXV. If Grotius's merit stirred up envy, and if his projects of
reconciliation procured him hatred, the more irreconcilable as it was
founded on a religious pretext, he had also a great number of friends
and judicious persons for him, who did justice to his virtue and his
talents. We shall not enter into a detail of all the testimonies in his
favour, they would fill a large volume: we shall confine ourselves to
the Elogiums of those whose suffrages deserve most attention. We have
already seen, that even when a boy he was highly extolled by the
greatest men of his age. Isaac Pontanus, Meursius, James Gillot,
Barlæus, John Dousa, M. de Thou, the great Scaliger, Casaubon, Vossius,
Lipsius, Baudius, celebrated his childhood. He justified the great hopes
that were so early conceived of him, and the praises he received were an
additional motive to merit the public esteem. Baudius compared him to
Scaliger[703], who, he said, was his favourite author. This he wrote on
the third of March, 1606, when Grotius was yet much under age. In a
scazon, written in his praise, he calls him [704]a great, an admirable,
and an original man. "If any, says he in a letter dated October 8,
1607[705], can form a just notion of Grotius's merit, which exceeds all
that can be said of it, I am one; and I think him equal to any office.
Ignorant people, who judge of virtue by years and a long beard, may
object to him his youth; but in my opinion that makes for him, since in
his earliest youth he possesses the prudence and ripeness of
understanding of the most aged."

The celebrated Peyresc having made a journey into Holland in 1606, would
not leave the Hague[706] till he had made acquaintance with Grotius,
already famous for universal learning. "Though he was but very young,
says Gassendi[707], when Peyresc heard of his arrival at Paris, he said,
that France, by gaining Grotius, had a sufficient reparation for the
loss of Scaliger; and that if some others had been the ornament of the
age, he was the wonder of it; and it is with reason (adds M. Mesnage,
after relating this story of Peyresc) that we still consider Grotius as
a prodigy of learning, since he has made a greater proficiency in most
of the sciences, than many of those who have wholly applied to one of
them in particular."

In the funeral Elogium of Peyresc, delivered at Rome December 2, 1637,
mention is made of the learned men with whom he was connected. James
Bucard, who spoke it, distinguisheth Salmasius and Grotius from the
rest, styling them the Princes of literature and of the fine arts. We
cannot conceive a higher idea of Grotius than the celebrated Gerard
Vossius entertained, as appears from the beautiful poem written by him
in honour of his friend: we would give it at length if it were not too
long, but we cannot omit the last stanza:

     _Felici omine dicte magne, quid te
     Sol majus videt? ô decus tuorum,
     Delfi gloria, Patrii Deique amores,
     Splendor inclute, Belgices ocelle,
     Orbis delicium, Deique amores!_

He never mentions Grotius without admiration. "He is, says he[708], one
of the greatest ornaments of our times, or rather the miracle, the
eternal honour, of Holland, and of his age." He wrote to Meursius[709],
"If we would do him justice, there is none we can place above him, nor
even any we can compare with him."

Utengobard, who had been his master, said, that to speak after Grotius,
was to expose one's self to be laughed at.

Balzac has employed his most eloquent phrases to express his thoughts of
Grotius: he writes to Mesnage, "Is it true, what you tell me, of the
Swedish Ambassador, and shall I be so happy to share in his esteem? I
tell it you as solemnly as if I were by the altar on which we swore to
be friends, that my ambition was dead, but you have revived it, and my
transports would be as great as yours, if my blood were as fine and
sparkling: who would not glory in the esteem of one whose birth our age
ought to be proud of? he is a modern whom the President Jeannin sets in
opposition to the greatest of the ancients." In another letter written
to Chapelain[710], he says: "Whatever comes from Grotius is a high
recommendation of him to me; and besides the solidity of his learning,
the strength of his reasoning, and the graces of his language, I
observe in it an air of probity, that one may put entire confidence in
him, excepting in what regards our Church, to which he is unhappily a
stranger."

Colomiez, in his _Bibliotheque choisie_[711], has collected some of the
Elogiums which had been then made of Grotius: "The President Jeannin,
says he, according to the relation of Balzac, opposes Grotius to the
greatest men of antiquity. Salmasius, in his notes on Solinus, styles
him _Virum excellentissimæ doctrinæ in omni genere litterarum_; Selden,
in his _Mare clausum, virum acuminis et omnigenæ doctrinæ præstantiâ
incomparabilem_; Gerard Vossius, in his Latin Poems, _Seculi nostri
grande ornamentum_; Pricæus, on the xivth of St. Matthew, _Virum
ingentem, quem non sine horrore mirati sumus_: In fine, M. Blondel, who
was not lavish of his praise, says of him in his _Sibyls_, that he was a
very great man, whether we consider the sublimity of his genius, the
universality of his learning, or the diversity of his writings; in fine,
says Colomiez[712], he appears a great critic in his _Martianus
Capella_, his _Aratus_, and his _Stobæus_; in his _Notes on Lucan_ and
_Tacitus_ a great historian, a great statesman, a great divine; but
however excellent these different works may be, we must however
acknowledge that Grotius's _Letters_ and _Poems_ much surpass them; and
that if he appeared great in those, in these he is incomparable. But
what astonishes me is, that he should have written so many letters, and
made so many verses, and all should be of equal strength, that is, that
all should partake of the powerful and divine genius which animated that
great man." Episcopius, who was regarded as an oracle by his party,
looked on Grotius as his oracle. "Your opinion, he writes to him[713],
shall be to me the decision of an oracle; for I know your love to truth
and friendship for me to be such, that in giving it you regard only
truth."

Christian Habsoeker and Philip Limborch speak of him with raptures in
the _Preface_ to the _Letters of illustrious men_: "At the name of the
incomparable Grotius, who is above all praise, and even all envy, we are
in a sort of transport. How shall we sufficiently praise the virtues of
that most illustrious hero, whom all true scholars regard as the most
learned of the Learned: we shall only relate the prophecy concerning him
in 1614 by Daniel Heinsius in some verses which ought to be put under
his picture."

Those lines are in fact the most complete Elogium that can be made of a
man.

     _Depositum Coeli, quod jure Batavia mater
       Horret, et baud credit se peperisse sibi;
     Talem oculis, talem ore tulit se maximus Hugo:
        Instar crede hominis, cætera crede Dei._

Heinsius and Grotius had been most intimate in their youth: the
divisions which happened in the Republic destroyed this close union:
Heinsius joined the Contra-Remonstrants, and was Secretary to the
Commissioners of the Synod of Dort. Grotius had reason to complain of
him on several occasions: nevertheless, talking with Cardinal Richelieu
about him, Grotius greatly commended his genius and learning. He gives
an account of this conversation to his brother; adding, "In this manner
I am wont to revenge myself on those who hate me." Cardinal Richelieu,
though not prejudiced in favour of Grotius, ranked him however among the
three first scholars of the age: the other two were Claudius Salmasius,
and Jerom Bignon. This famous Advocate-General said of Grotius[714],
that he was the most learned man who had appeared in the world since
Aristotle.

Foreigners who loved the sciences would not leave France without seeing
Grotius. John Christenius, who was at Paris in 1629, had more
satisfaction in seeing him, than in the whole kingdom beside: he writes
thus to John Kirkman, June 20, 1629. "The pleasure I have had, received
considerable addition not only from having seen, but also often
conversed with that great and eloquent man who has no fellow, I mean
Hugo Grotius; for whom I have the highest esteem, and have been for many
years of the same opinion with all who know that he possesses singly
what would be sufficient to entitle many to great praise. He is master
of all that is worth knowing in sacred and profane literature. Besides
the Eastern languages, there is no art nor science with which he is not
perfectly acquainted: this appears from his agreeable conversation: ask
him about any thing, he immediately gives you an exact answer, and in
such a manner as to excite the admiration of those who hear him. After
talking about the sciences, if you enquire of him what passes in this
part of the world, or the other, you will imagine you heard the answer
of an oracle who delivers what is most worthy to be known. His virtue is
above all I can say of it, and I want eloquence sufficiently to extol so
great a man."

Sarrau[715], who had been prejudiced against Grotius since his leaving
the Protestants, ventures not however to decide whether Salmasius or
Grotius excelled in literature; and he hesitates to make the
determination, even in a letter written to Salmasius, wherein he appears
much dissatisfied with Grotius. "Whether the first place in literature
in this age be due to you or to him, posterity will judge more equitably
than this generation."

On hearing of Grotius's death, he writes to Salmasius in these
terms[716]: "Hugo Grotius was certainly a great man in name and in fact:
he was the star of our age. How great a loss has learning sustained!
Whilst books and sciences are held in honour his name will flourish. For
my part, whilst I live I shall glory in my intimacy with him. You now
reign singly (he concludes, addressing himself to Salmasius) I pray God
you may reign long." He calls him elsewhere[717] the Coryphæus of
learning sacred and prophane.

Queen Christina, hearing of his death, wrote to his widow to make her
compliments of condolence, and to get the manuscripts he left. "My
Ambassador, she says, may have acquainted you in part with my high
esteem for his admirable learning and the good services he did me: but
he could not express how dear I hold his memory, and the effects of his
great labours. If gold and silver could contribute any thing to the
redeeming such a valuable life, I would chearfully employ all I am
mistress of for that purpose." She concludes with asking his widow to
procure her all the manuscripts of this learned man, whose works had
always given her great pleasure: assuring her that they could not fall
into better hands, and that the author having been of use to her in his
life-time, it was just that she should not be deprived after his death
of the fruits of his illustrious labours.

Duncomius wrote to Gerard Vossius, February 2, 1646[718], "It is certain
and beyond dispute that Grotius was a very illustrious hero, _usque ad
stuporem ferè et miraculum_; that he joined science with wisdom; that he
was above all praise; and that he was deeply skilled in divine and human
learning."

Meric Casaubon, son of Isaac, had no less esteem for Grotius than his
illustrious father had had before him. In his preface to Hierocles's
book _Of providence and destiny_, "Hugo Grotius, he says, was a great,
an incomparable man: in him was seen what is very rare, a peaceable
spirit, with much judgment, and infinite erudition." Augustus
Buchner[719] calls Grotius the greatest ornament of his time, the oracle
of human wisdom, and the wonder of the age.

Lewis du Moulin comparing Grotius with Salmasius[720], allows Grotius
much more judgment, but gives to Salmasius a greater extent of
knowledge. In another place[721], where he censures Grotius for the part
he had acted with regard to religion, he bestows on him, after all, in
other respects the highest praises. "Neither the present nor the last
age, he says, hath produced a man superior to Grotius in judgment and
erudition. He was great in everything: a very great Divine, Lawyer,
Orator, Poet, Philosopher; his genius, far from being confined within
the limits of the bar, was scarce bounded by those of nature."

Guy Patin writes[722], February 24, 1662, "They have finished in
Holland, in nine volumes in folio, an edition of all the works of
Grotius, whom I formerly knew: he was the finest genius of his time; a
man of surprising knowledge, and perfect master of polite and useful
learning." "He and Salmasius were the greatest scholars or their time,"
he writes in another letter[723]. And in another place, "Peter Grotius,
says he[724], was son of the first man of his age."

"I would not mention the most learned and greatest man of this country,
says Wicquefort[725], were I not forced to it by the remarks published
at Brussels on what I have said of him in my Memoirs: it will be readily
conceived that I mean Hugo de Groot. I admire, with the rest of the
world, the genius, the probity, and the works of this great man; and
besides this there are particular considerations, which inspire me with
a veneration for his memory."

Morhof calls him the phoenix of his age[726]: Hofman gives him the same
commendation.

"He is the greatest of men, says Meibomius[727], the light and support
of letters; on whom we can bestow no praise but what will fall short of
his virtue and erudition. His uncommon penetration makes us compare him
to an eagle in the clouds," says Oldenburg.

In 1727 was printed at Hall in Saxony, under the false name of Delft, a
book entitled _Hugonis Grotii Belgarum Phoenicis manes ab iniquis
obtrectationibus vindicati_. The author, who was said to be M.
Lehman[728], speaks of Grotius as the greatest man Holland ever
produced, and fit to be compared with the most illustrious of other
Countries, and he flatters himself that the Dutch will in the issue
agree with all nations, that he was the greatest ornament of their
country. He gives his thoughts of Grotius in the following lines.

     _Hic ille est Grotius, majus quo doctior orbis
     Nil habuit; credo, nil habiturus erit:
     Gallia quem stupuit, stupuit quem Suecia, verus
     Qui Phoebus Delphis, orbe pharusque fuit._

Salmasius, who so unmercifully fell foul of Grotius's memory, had
formerly been one of his greatest admirers. Grotius gave him the title
of Most Eminent, which Pope Urbin VIII. had a very little time before
attributed to the Cardinals. Salmasius answers him[729] August 8, 1630.
"You not only offend the Cardinals, but, more than most eminent Grotius
(_super eminentissime_) you offend me, by giving me a title which you
much better deserve yourself."

These two Princes of Literature, as they were styled, had at this time a
great reciprocal esteem and friendship for each other. We learn from
Grotius's letters[730], that Salmasius, notwithstanding the advantageous
idea he entertained of his own knowledge, sometimes consulted him. He
changed all of a sudden: Grotius imagined[731] it was to make his court
to those in power in Holland; but Sarrau, who knew both, assures us[732]
that Salmasius's coldness wholly proceeded from the change of Grotius's
sentiments in religion. The news of Grotius's death was scarce spread
over Europe, when Salmasius poured out all his venom in a letter written
from Leyden, Nov. 20, 1645, to Sarrau[733].

"You think Grotius, says he, the first among the learned; for my part, I
give that rank to Vossius. I do not think it is necessary to wait for
the judgment of posterity, to know whose opinion is most just: it will
be sufficient to consult the learned in Italy, Germany, in this country,
and even in France: but till we have their suffrages let us go through
all the sciences, and examine the extent of Grotius's capacity. There is
no one whom I would desire to resemble less in divinity: he is every
where a Socinian, both in his treatise _On the Truth of the Christian
Religion,_ and his _Commentary on the Old and New Testament_. As to
Philosophy, he can scarce be compared with the moderately skilled. If we
consider him with regard to the art of Disputation, I have never seen a
person reason with less force, as is evident from his pieces which
Rivetus and Desmarets have answered. There are several who may be ranked
with him as to knowledge of polite learning, and even a great number
who excel him: not a few have had as much Greek and Latin, and many of
the learned have been more masters of the Oriental Languages. His
_Florum sparsio in jus Justinianeum_ shew his skill in the Law. A
Professor of Helmstat has undertaken to confute his book _Of the Rights
of War and Peace_, and has told some friends, whom I have seen, that he
would prove that every page contained gross blunders[734]. He was a
great Poet; but every one here prefers Barlæus; some even Heinsius. But
besides, when the point to be decided is priority in learning, poetry is
set aside by consent of all good judges. Vossius excels Grotius in every
thing. This is not only my opinion, but that of all the learned in
Italy, Germany, Poland, and Holland, as I have had an opportunity to
know by their letters, their writings, and their conversation. If we
compare their writings, which of Grotius's works can we prefer to those
of Vossius? Is it his _Notes on Martianus Capella_, written when he was
but a boy? Is it his _Aratus_? in which he has ostentatiously introduced
some Arabic terms, for he scarce knew the elements of that language, as
he acknowledged to me himself in some letters which I keep, written in
answer to my enquiry about some Arabic words that puzzled me. Will you
tell me of his _Notes on Lucan_? what Vossius has done on the fragments
of the ancient Tragic and Comic Writers appears to me of much greater
value. We know from other pieces what a poor critic Grotius was, though
a great man in some respects. As inconsiderable as I am, I would not
have my name prefixed to his _Commentary on the Old Testament_; for
nothing can be more childish, or unworthy a man of his great character,
than many of his notes. I shall take notice in another place of his
_Commentary on the New Testament_, and frankly declare what I think of
it. Such are my sentiments of the person who merits the first place in
literature. I have the suffrages of many of the learned in different
branches for me, and shall name them when you inform me who are of your
opinion."

This letter, in which hatred, jealousy, and partiality openly shew
themselves, rather hurt Salmasius than injured Grotius's character: the
contempt with which he speaks of the excellent treatise _Of the Rights
of War and Peace_, which is worth all that Salmasius ever wrote,
incensed the whole republic of letters against him. It has been observed
that all that was good in his pieces _On the power of Kings_, is taken
from Grotius, whom he hath not once named; and that when he departed
from him, he sinks much beneath Grotius. But such was Salmasius's
character: jealous of the reputation of those who might be put in the
scale against him, he had too high an opinion of himself, and too much
despised others, in the judgment of the wise Gronovius. Grotius's wife
being informed of the indiscreet stories published by Salmasius against
the memory of her husband, gave him to understand, that if he would not
forbear, the only answer she should make to his invectives would be the
publication of his former letters to Grotius, filled with elogiums. For
the rest, Salmasius's invectives injured only himself: and it was said
publicly, that he plucked the hairs of a dead lion.

Two medals were struck in honour of Grotius, which we find in the end of
the first volume of the _History of the United Provinces_ by Le Clerc,
one of his greatest admirers. The first has on one side the bust of that
great man, with his name, HUGO GROTIUS, which is to him instead of an
elogium: and on the other a chest, on which are the arms of Sweden and
France, to express his retreat into France, and his embassy from Sweden
at that Court: at the side of the chest is the castle of Louvestein, and
opposite to it a rising sun, with these words: MELIOR POST ASPERA FATA
RESURGO; I rise brighter after my misfortune. In the exergue is, _natus
1583, obiit 1645_. The second medal, larger than the first, also
represents Grotius on one side with the time of his birth and death.
HUGO GROTIUS NATUS 1583, 10 APRILIS, OBIIT 1645, 28 AUGUSTI: on the
reverse is this inscription in Dutch verse: _the Phoenix of his Country,
the Oracle of Delft, the great Genius, the Light which enlighteneth the
earth_.

FOOTNOTES:

[703] Ep. 22. p. 181.

[704] Vir magne, vir mirande, vir sine exemplo. Ep. 100. p. 474.

[705] Ep. 68. Cent. 2.

[706] Life, B. 2. p. 93.

[707] Life, B. 3. p. 182. Anti Baillet. c. 3.

[708] Popo Blanet, p. 746.

[709] Ep. 277.

[710] 2 Lettre du xxi. Livre, p. 831.

[711] Bibliotheque choisie, p. 461.

[712] P. 487.

[713] Ep. 13. Præs. vir. p. 23.

[714] Du Maurier, p. 393.

[715] Ep. Sar. p. 145.

[716] Ep. Sar. 128. p. 143.

[717] Ep. 21. p. 24.

[718] Ep. Vossi, 728. p. 38.

[719] Vind. Grot. p. 446.

[720] Crenii Anim. phil. et hist. Part 5. p. 95.

[721] In jugulo causa, c. 5. Crenius, Anim. phil. Part 5. p. 85.

[722] Lett. 265.

[723] Lett. 545.

[724] Lett. 538.

[725] Amb. l. 1. p. 95.

[726] Polihist. l. 1. c. 24.

[727] Pope Blount, p. 946.

[728] Supplement de Moreri.

[729] Ep. 21. p. 45.

[730] Ep. 229. p. 78.

[731] Ep. 697. p. 964.

[732] Ep. Sarr. 165. Ep. 163. p. 168.

[733] In Crenii Anim. Phil. & Hist. t. 1. p. 23.

[734] See Book 3. § 9. p. 243.


XXVI. It remains that we should relate what we know of Grotius's family.
After his death, his wife communicated with the Church of England;
which, it is reported, she said she did in conformity to the dying
intentions of her husband. It is certain[735] that Grotius had a respect
for the Church of England; but it is difficult to believe, that he
should desire his wife to declare he died in the communion of that
Church: for, besides that this fact is not easy to be reconciled with
his later works, it has no foundation but a letter written June 23,
1707, which is supported only by a hearsay ill-circumstantiated.

Grotius's wife died at the Hague in the communion of the Remonstrants;
which, according to Le Clerc, was not contrary to her husband's last
orders, as the Remonstrants allowed of communion with the Church of
England.

Grotius had three sons and three daughters by his marriage. His eldest
son, Cornelius, studied in Holland under the direction of his
grandfather[736]. Grotius sent for him afterwards to Paris, where he
himself superintended his studies. He wrote to his brother, William
Grotius[737], Aug. 16, 1630, that Cornelius had learned the Hebrew
grammar; that he was studying the Greek and Logic; and had made himself
matter of the Art of Oratory, without neglecting Poetry, for which the
young Cornelius had a particular turn. Some very good verses, written by
him, are published in the poems of Vincent Fabricius. Grotius made him
read Vossius's pieces on rhetoric, which he thought could not be
excelled; he afterwards wanted Cornelius to study the Roman Law, and the
Laws of Holland: he also made him read Physics and Metaphysics; but his
progress in these sciences was inconsiderable, according to Du Maurier,
on account of his indolence and love of pleasure. Grotius sent him after
this to make his court to the High Chancellor, who passed the beginning
of the year 1636 at Straelsund: Oxenstiern received him very graciously,
and took him into his service as Latin Secretary[738]. Grotius was at
the height of his joy on seeing his son in a capacity of meriting the
esteem and protection of such a great man as Oxenstiern: he flattered
himself[739], that the honourable place, which his son held, would
induce him to shake off his indolence; and he made him frequent
remonstrances on this subject: but Cornelius's natural temper prevailed,
and he considered his employment as attended with too much trouble. He
imagined that a military life would suit him better[740], and wrote to
his father on that head. Grotius opposed this new turn for some time;
but his remonstrances producing no effect, he wrote to Muller[741],
April 4, 1638, that his son had preferred Mars to the Muses, and that he
had thought fit to yield to his choice, as war was also a road to glory;
and moreover the time, which Cornelius had spent in literature, would
not be absolutely lost for war. He added, that the Duke of Weymar being
the greatest and most experienced general of his age, he was very
desirous that his son should serve under such an able master; and that
he would send him with a reinforcement that was marching to that
Prince, who, he hoped, would assist him with his advice. Cornelius was
very well received by the Duke[742]; and for some time kept up an exact
correspondence with his father by letters, who complimented him on his
diligence in writing. The Duke of Weymar promised to advance him, if he
paid a proper regard to his father's counsels. Cornelius was by nature
so inconstant, that he soon took a dislike to the army: he had even
thoughts of returning to his father, who diverted him from it as a step
which would dishonour him.

On the Duke of Weymar's death, Reigersberg advised Cornelius to write
that Prince's history. Young Grotius mentioning this project to his
father, he pressed him to execute it, because it would give him an
opportunity of expressing his gratitude to a Prince who had laid him
under great obligations, and done such important services to Sweden.
Besides, this work would be of use to the author, by obliging him to
study the Art of War, in order to speak of it properly. Cornelius
contented himself with projecting this design[743]: he changed his
service, and entered into the Marshal de Chatillon's army, in which he
continued not long: he made the campaign of 1640, in quality of Cornet
in the Colonel's company of a German regiment of horse in the French
service. Soon after he got a company: however he wanted to serve in the
Valtoline[744]. He had not been long there before he took a fancy to
enter into the Venetians service; and, without consulting his father,
went to Venice to make his contract with them: but it is probable they
could not agree; for Grotius writes[745], July 16, 1644, "Cornelius will
return from the Antenorides without doing any thing." This fickleness of
temper much displeased Grotius[746], who in the latter part of his life
spoke of his son with great indifference.

In the sequel, when the States of Holland wanted to indemnify such as
were unjustly persecuted during the overgrown power of the
Stadtholders[747], they gave Cornelius Grotius a company in the guards;
to Peter, a troop of horse; and to Mombas, their brother-in-law, a
regiment; with leave to dispose of them, or sell them to the best
advantage: which was contrary to custom and law.

It was in 1633 that the States thus sought to repair the injuries which
Grotius had formerly suffered. Cornelius died unmarried. Peter,
Grotius's second son, was more like his father. In his infancy he was
very sickly: having received a hurt in his leg[748], the Surgeons and
Physicians treated it so ill, that he remained lame all his days. His
father, thinking his education would be cheaper in Holland than at
Paris, sent him to his native country. The young Grotius gave great
satisfaction to his parents, as we learn by a letter from Grotius to his
brother William[749], Oct. 4, 1630, "Your accounts of my son give me
great pleasure: if he goes on in the same manner, he will have reason to
be satisfied with me." Gerard Vossius directed his studies; and by a
letter[750] of thanks from Grotius to him, we learn that he was of an
indolent turn. "The exhortations you give Peter are worthy of the
friendship you have always entertained for me and mine. I cannot think
why my children should be so idle; perhaps it is because they see their
father's diligence has turned to so little account."

In 1634 Peter Grotius was sent to[751] Amsterdam to learn the use of the
globes and navigation: Grotius intended that he should afterwards serve
in some expedition at sea: he seems at this time to have designed him
for a Sailor. Peter had an inclination to learn Arabic under the learned
Golius at Leyden: but his Father would only suffer him to visit this
eminent professor, and consult him about the pronunciation of that
language, which he thought his son might learn without a master at his
leisure hours.

Grotius was desirous that his son should make a voyage to the
East-Indies[752], or, if that was too long a voyage, that he should go
to the Brasils, or some other part of America, to learn what was not to
be learnt at home, and might be of use to him afterwards.

Vossius, in the mean time, gave ample testimonials not only of Peter's
progress in the sciences, but also of his moral conduct. He wanted to
join, to the studies recommended to him by his father, that of Law; and
Grotius was not against it. He appears to have been somewhat uneasy
about what this youth would do: May 17, 1635, he writes to Vossius, "I
should be glad to know what my son's health will permit him to do, and
to what his inclination leads him: there are some things which will
prevent his being agreeable at court, or his undertaking long journies
by land. I am not against his trying the sea; but I would not force any
of my children against their inclination. The make of his body would
require a sedentary life; but I am afraid he has too much vivacity to
bear with it. I would beg of you to consult with himself and his friends
on this subject; and at the same time to give me your own opinion."

He writes again to Vossius some time after, that if his son had a
dislike to long voyages, he would nevertheless have him study Commerce
and Navigation rather than the quibbles of the Law: "Not but a general
knowledge of public law, and the laws of his own country, may be of use
to him whatever manner of life he chuses: but I would not have him make
it his principal study; and remember Horace's precept, to keep his eye
ever on the mark. If it is out of regard to me he wants to translate the
Tragedy of _Sophomphaneus_, he deserves to be commended, even if he
should make some mistakes: however I should not be sorry if it were done
by one more advanced in years, and better skilled in poetry."

This youth, uncertain what course to take, was in doubt whether he ought
not to seek his fortune in Sweden under the credit of his father's name.
Grotius, hearing of this design, writes to his brother[753], "If my son
thinks to raise himself in Sweden, I see no other way of doing it, than
by a perfect knowledge of Navigation and Commerce. The profession of a
Lawyer is not lucrative, nor doth it succeed with every one."

Vossius was still well pleased with him[754]. The ardour he discovered
for the study of the Law determined Grotius to propose to him a
translation of the Institutes of the Law of Holland into good Latin,
like that of the Digests; and he asked his brother, William Grotius, and
all his friends, to encourage and assist his Son in the execution of
this design, which might be useful to the public and to the author. He
wrote to Gerard Vossius[755] to the same effect. William Grotius
laboured with his nephew in this translation. Grotius, in returning him
his thanks for assisting his Son, desires him to make him read, as he
went on, what was contained in the Digests relating to the matter he was
translating.

In summer, 1636, Peter Grotius had an offer of going to the Brasils in
Count Nassau's retinue. Grotius approved of it, provided his Son might
have a creditable post, in which he might learn Navigation: he was the
more desirous that his Son might make this voyage, as the present state
of his affairs would not permit him to keep him in the way the latter
chose to live.

If this project did not succeed, Grotius wanted that his Son should pass
the winter at the Hague in the study of the Law, and come to France in
the spring, 1637, to take his degree in the university of Orleans; then
return to the Hague to study some time longer, and afterwards go to
Amsterdam to practise as an Advocate, this profession being there most
lucrative.

The voyage to the Brasils did not take place. Peter Grotius came to his
father in summer, 1637. He seems to have been well satisfied with him,
as we may judge by a letter written to his brother[756], Aug. 15, this
year. "Peter is arrived here: he is much indebted to you, to his
grandfather, and all his friends and relations, for instilling into him
such good principles. I am very well satisfied with his diligence." He
writes six months after[757], "I am only afraid for his ambition, which
is the vice of youth: he will live with more ease, and gain more as an
Advocate. I would beg of you, that as soon as he returns, which will be
immediately, you would put him upon studying the precedents in law. But
what is chiefly to be inculcated is diligence and love of labour." Peter
was preparing to return to Holland, when a Surgeon undertook to make him
walk without halting[758]. There were some hopes of his succeeding in
whole or in part; but the event did not correspond with the Surgeon's
promises, and Peter set out soon after for Holland, in the end of April,
1638. Grotius did not regret the time his Son had passed in France. "The
time Peter has been here, he says to his brother[759], was not lost
either for him or me: for he has learnt several useful things, and it
has been a great pleasure to me to communicate what I have learnt to one
of my children, or at least to have put him in a way of informing
himself. I recommend him to you, and would beg of you to give him such
exercises as may fit him to hold a distinguished rank amonst the Orators
and Advocates, that his merit may silently reproach the Dutch for what
they did against his Father. But, above all things, I would recommend to
you the cultivation of those sentiments of piety which I have instilled
into him, and to keep him from bad company."

Grotius wrote to Vossius[760], when his Son set out on his return to
Holland, begging of him to continue to watch over the studies of this
youth; and assuring him at the same time, that the friendship, which the
city of Amsterdam preserved for him, was the only reason which induced
him to consent that any part of him should live in a country where he
had been so ill-treated.

Vossius and William Grotius were highly satisfied with Peter Grotius,
and made great encomiums on him to his father, who wrote to his son,
commending his diligence in the study of the Law. He informed him at the
same time of a successful method of pleading, which he himself had
formerly used with advantage. We have spoken of it elsewhere[761]. He
was desirous of settling him as soon as possible at Amsterdam, that he
might learn navigation and commerce, the municipal laws of the town, and
whatever might contribute to raise his fortune. He wanted to accustom
him to a labour, by which he might live without his father's assistance.
"If he thinks, says Grotius to his brother[762], to make his fortune
with what money he will get from me, he is greatly deceived: let him do
as I did, and cut out a path for himself; otherwise he must not count
upon my liberality." April 21, 1640, he caused him to be chid[763] for
running about too much, and for his learning Italian and several things
for which he had little occasion. "That is not the way, says he, to
please me, nor to be useful to himself."

In fine, Peter Grotius began to plead at the Hague, in[764] spring 1640.
There was a prospect at that time of getting him made Pensionary of
Boisleduc: this design required some money, which Grotius refused not to
advance; but he could scarce believe that the Prince of Orange would
consent to have his son in this place, unless he abjured Arminianism.
Besides, Peter Grotius had so little experience in the law, that his
father did not yet think him capable of filling a place, the
difficulties of which he knew by experience: he would much rather have
had his son go to Amsterdam, to follow the bar, and seek some
advantageous match, that his children might one day enter into the
magistracy of a city, which alone kept alive expiring liberty.

Peter Grotius seems to have had a dislike to Amsterdam; for his father
writes thus to his brother William Grotius[765], March 9, 1641. "I have
consulted with my wife about Peter's affairs: we are of opinion that he
should go to Amsterdam, if he can be prevailed with; if not, you must
tell him to come here: he will serve me for Secretary, and I shall give
him lectures in law, which perhaps he would not have received from any
other. Let him bring with him what he has translated of the Institutes
of the Laws of Holland." Grotius soon changed his opinion; for he writes
to his brother[766], April 13, in the same year: "I would not have Peter
come here: therefore keep him with you."

The irresolution of Peter Grotius chagrined his father: "I am much
afraid, he writes to his brother[767], that he will some day smart for
his continual disobedience." Grotius told his son[768], that he must
expect no letters from him, unless he sent him the Latin translation of
the Institutes of the Laws of Holland, which he had long before enjoined
him to set about. Writing to his brother[769], he says, "I am much
afraid, that the counsels which Peter follows, and will follow
hereafter, are inconsistent with a good conscience. I am resolved to
refer the whole to God, and not intermeddle in it. I should be sorry to
have a repetition of the grief I suffer on his account."

Some time after, he was better satisfied with him, and wrote to his
brother William[770], Feb. 28, 1643, "I commend Peter highly for
applying to the bar: it is the way to acquire much useful knowledge, to
gain a character, and in time to lay up something, or to rise higher."
This is all that Grotius's letters inform us about his son: the sequel
of whose life is more interesting.

In 1652, he married, for love, an Attorney's daughter, rich and
handsome; but his mother and his other friends disliked the match. In
the year following, a powerful party wanted to get him made Greffier of
Amsterdam; but Veue Linchovius opposed him with great virulence and
violence; maintaining that such a place ought not to be given to the son
of an out-law, whose religious sentiments were erroneous. The
declamations of this hot-headed man preventing Grotius from being
nominated to the place, he bore the disappointment with great
tranquility. In 1655, he purposed to publish a complete edition of his
father's works, as appears by the privilege of the Emperor Ferdinand
III. dated Oct. 2, 1655, prefixed to his theological works. This
edition, which unfortunately he did not go on with, was to be in nine
volumes in folio. The first was to contain his _Annotations on the Old
Testament_; the second, the _Commentary on the New_; the third would
have comprehended his smaller theological pieces; the fourth, the
treatise _De Jure Belli & Pacis_, the _Apology_, and the work _De
Imperio summarum potestatum circa Sacra_; the fifth, _Law Tracts_; the
sixth, _Writings Historical_; the seventh, _Philological Works_; the
eighth, _Poetical Translations_, the _Anthologia, Stobæus_, and the
_Extracts from the Tragedies and Comedies_; and, lastly, the ninth, his
_Poems_ and _Letters_. It is probable, that this design was defeated by
Grotius's departure from Holland. It was not till long after, in 1679,
that the handsome edition of Grotius's theological works was published
in three volumes in folio, dedicated to King Charles II. of England by
Peter Grotius, Feb. 28, 1678. The bookseller promised, in an
advertisement prefixed to it, to print all Grotius's other works, even
those that had never been published; but he did not fulfil his
engagements.

Grotius's enemies still opposing his son's advancement, he entered into
the service of Charles Lewis, Elector Palatine, to whom Hugo Grotius had
done singular service during his misfortunes. This Prince nominated him
his Agent at the Hague.

The ferment in mens minds having subsided, and the face of affairs being
changed in Holland, Peter Grotius was nominated Pensionary of Amsterdam
in 1660; which important place he filled for seven years with great
reputation. This office was the height of Hugo's wishes for his son. The
Count D'Estrade, at that time Ambassador from France in Holland, was
dissatisfied with the Pensionary of Amsterdam, who opposed the interest
of the French King, in resentment of that Prince's having driven Mombas,
Peter Grotius's brother-in-law, out of France. Feb. 1, 1633, he writes
to the King, "I have not been at Amsterdam, because the Pensionary M. de
Groot is brother-in-law to M. de Mombas, whom your Majesty ordered to
quit the kingdom for some affair in which you were dissatisfied with his
conduct: since that time M. de Groot has constantly opposed your
Majesty's interest at Amsterdam. He is a man of spirit and firmness; and
has much credit in that city. I shall neglect nothing to bring him back
to his former sentiments." The King answered him, May 23, 1633, that he
had had reason to be dissatisfied with Mombas's conduct; that if any
consideration could make him forget it, it would certainly be a regard
for M. de Groot, whose person, says the King, I esteem: In fact, Lewis
XIV, as he writes to his Ambassador, Sept. 22, 1665, dropt his
resentment against Mombas out of consideration for the Pensionary of
Amsterdam. After the conclusion of the triple alliance, the necessity of
regulating the subsidies with the northern powers induced the States of
Holland to send Grotius to Denmark and Sweden. He went first to
Copenhagen, and afterwards to Stockholm, where he assumed the quality of
Ambassador in ordinary. The States used only to keep a Minister of the
second rank at this Court; but it was thought proper, says Wicquefort,
to do something more than common for such an extraordinary person; and
he was ordered to make a splendid entry at the expence of the States.

The fourth volume of M. de Wit's _Letters and Negotiations_ concludes
with the correspondence of Peter Grotius with the Grand Pensionary
during his embassy at Stockholm. The Dutch Minister discovers in it
great knowledge of mankind. "The more I reflect, says he to M. de Wit,
Dec. 8, 1668, on the regency of Sweden, the more clearly I discover that
the most important affairs are not regulated agreeable to the public
interest, but according to that of the principal Ministers; and the
surest and easiest way to succeed, is to gain him who has the King's ear
rather than the King himself; because what is done for the good of the
nation obliges no one in particular, and procures glory, but no
acknowledgments. When I passed through Denmark, I perceived that more
might be done by means of M.G. with a hundred thousand crowns, than can
be done with the King with five times that sum."

The negotiations of Peter Grotius were in a promising way at the death
of William Borell the Dutch Ambassador at Paris. Grotius was nominated
by the States of Holland to succeed him, and at the same time the town
of Rotterdam chose him for their Pensionary. M. de Wit was of opinion
that Grotius ought to prefer the place of Pensionary: he wrote to his
friend, May 14, 1669, "Messieurs the Burgomasters and Counsellors of the
town of Rotterdam have unanimously made choice of you to be their
Counsellor Pensionary. I believe your nomination to the French embassy
will be set aside, if the Gentlemen of Rotterdam apply for that purpose
to their Noble and Great Mightinesses; and I imagine you will prefer
this honourable establishment in a post your father was undeservedly
turned out of, to a gilded exile, for such an embassy may be styled.
Other reasons will occur for your taking this step, without its being
necessary for me to mention them."

Grotius was greatly embarrassed: he writes to M. de Wit, May 22, 1669,
that his situation would not suffer him to give a positive answer; that
he had written to the Gentlemen of Rotterdam, acknowledging their great
civility and goodness in thinking of him; but that he had not declared
himself with regard to the accepting of the place.

Holland had occasion at this time for the ablest of her Ministers at the
Court of Lewis XIV. and Peter Grotius could not refuse to serve his
Country in such critical circumstances. The point was to bring about a
reconciliation between the United Provinces and the King, who resolved
to declare war against them, imagining he had great reason to complain
of their behaviour. Grotius was the only Minister who could succeed in
this negotiation, had a reconciliation been practicable, says
Wicquefort. The King, though highly incensed against Holland, shewed the
greatest respect to her Ambassador. War being declared in 1672, Peter
Grotius was again sent to the King, to try if an accommodation could be
accomplished: but the King had made too great preparations for war to
conclude a peace so soon.

Grotius returned to the Hague to serve the Republic in quality of Deputy
to the States-General; but in a short time experienced a cruel reverse
of fortune. Being involved in the disgrace of the De Wits, he was stript
of his dignities, and threatened with assassination; which determined
him to leave Holland: he went to Antwerp, where an attempt was made on
his life.

He retired to Liege, and afterwards to Aix-la-Chapelle, and Cologn. A
general peace was at this time negotiating; and Grotius having done
singular services to the Dutch Plenipotentiaries, he was permitted to
return to Holland, after being two years absent. He continued some time
undisturbed in the country; but Wicquefort, the Duke of Brunswick's
Minister at the Hague, being taken into custody, among his papers were
found several letters from Grotius, containing, it is said, some
indiscreet things concerning state affairs, and against the Republic's
Ministers. He was arrested and prosecuted. Of the fifteen judges
appointed to try him, nine declared him innocent. This was in November,
1676. Nicholas Heinsius, who was not prejudiced in his favour, writes to
Grævius on the 6th of December following: "There was certainly
imprudence and malice in what Grotius did; but I leave others to judge
whether he was guilty of high treason."

It is improbable his judges would have shewn him favour, had he been
convicted of a capital crime: he was known to be hated by the Prince of
Orange, whom the Dutch at that time sought very much to please.

Peter Grotius, thus escaping out of the hands of his enemies, retired
with his family to a country seat he had near Harlem, where he spent the
rest of his days in educating his children, and reading the best
authors. He died at the age of seventy. Some pretend, but without
foundation, that he was poisoned. Those who knew him particularly speak
of him as one of the best heads of his time. "Peter de Groot, son of the
great Grotius, was not so learned as his father, says Wicquefort; but I
may venture to assert he was as able a Minister. We can't say too much
of this man, who was above all praise. I write this after receiving the
news of his death. How much is Holland to be pitied for losing a man who
would have assisted in repairing the breaches made by the disorders
which have for some years prevailed in the state! He joined solidity of
judgment to the graces of wit, and must have possessed these qualities
in an eminent degree since they shone thro' such a disagreeable figure.
It may be said of M. de Groot, that never did such a deformed body lodge
such a fine and great soul: he had a surprising ready wit, his
conversation was delightful, his understanding clear and solid, and his
sentiments just and equitable: he possessed great knowledge of all sorts
of business, foreign and domestic, and especially of what the French
call the art of pleasing."

Grotius's third son, Diederic, began his studies in a very promising
manner. Grotius writes to his brother William, August 16, 1630, "I am
overjoyed to hear that Diederic's progress even exceeds my hopes. I wish
he may continue." His grandfather John Grotius was his tutor. When he
came to be old enough to be put to some business, Grotius designed him
for an Engineer. He learned under the famous Boschius, and came
afterwards, in the beginning of 1636, to see his father at Paris.
Grotius having applied to the Duke of Weymar to take Diederic into his
service, he entered into that Prince's houshold as one of his Pages, and
was much respected: the Duke soon after made him his Aid-de-Camp.
Grotius seemed to be well satisfied with his son at the time this youth
had the misfortune to lose his Patron.

On hearing of the Duke of Weymar's death Grotius immediately thought of
sending Diederic to Marshal Bannier. He wrote a letter to that
General[771], October 13, 1639, in which he puts him in mind that it was
his Excellency's brother first proposed to him his entering into the
Swedish service: he afterwards makes an offer of his son, who had served
two years under Boschius, chief Engineer to the Prince of Orange, and
had since been several years one of the Duke of Weymar's Pages. After
the death of that illustrious Prince, who shared with Bannier the glory
of being the greatest general in Europe, he thinks he cannot do better
than give him to Marshal Bannier, who was unanimously allowed to hold
the first rank in the art of war. He begs that his son may be only
employed in things of which he is capable. On the same day he wrote to
Salvius, desiring him to recommend Diederic to the Marshal.

Whilst Grotius was thus employed in placing his son, Diederic
entertained a design of entering into the Dutch service. His father was
highly displeased with this project; and wrote to him, and to William
Grotius, that it was most improper for him to expose his life for his
cruellest enemies; and that Sweden was his true country, and to that
kingdom he ought to devote his life, and from it to merit and expect
honours. "If my son dislikes the activity of a military life, Grotius
writes to his brother, he may find ease, and acquire honour in General
Bannier's houshold, or by exercising his profession of Engineer. I shall
always give him my assistance, and I hope I have as many friends
elsewhere, as I have enemies in Holland. If my son disgraces himself so
far, as to ask favours from the Dutch, he is unworthy to call me father.
If he chuses rather to be an Ensign with you, than a Captain among
others, he is mean-spirited, and forgetful of what he has been."
Diederic had a design of writing the history of the Duke of Weymar;
which project Grotius approved of, as worthy of a grateful mind. He sent
him word, that if he would set about this work whilst he was with
Marshal Bannier, he would make his court by it to that General, who had
it in his power to reward him. Diederic at last complied with his
father's desire, and went to Marshal Bannier's camp. He was made a
prisoner of war by the Bavarians in an unfortunate action near Dillingue
and Memingue, in the end of the year 1643. Grotius immediately set all
his friends to work to procure his son's liberty: he wrote to the famous
John de Vert, and applied to the Duke of Bavaria that he would be
pleased to send him back as soon as possible: and at the same time wrote
to his son to come to him as soon as he should be at liberty, that they
might consult together what was best to be done. Diederic sent his
father the history of the unfortunate action in which he was taken; and
Grotius printed it to give copies to his friends, and to send others to
the Swedish Ministry. Diederic was carried to Tubingen, from thence to
Ulm, and confined in a citadel between Ulm and Augsburg: he did not
continue there long: immediately on receiving his father's letter, the
Duke of Bavaria gave orders that Diederic might be set at liberty, after
settling his ransom, which was fixed at a thousand florins. He came to
Paris, and on his arrival Grotius wrote a letter of thanks to the
Elector of Bavaria, telling him, that as he had but one way to express
his gratitude, namely by promoting a general peace, which his Electoral
Highness wished for, he would do all in his power to bring it about. He
wrote to Ketner the Bavarian Minister to the same effect.

Diederic went back to serve under Marshal Turenne in Germany, and made
the campaign of 1644. He was again taken Prisoner, but soon released;
and served in the end of the same campaign. He was detached by the Duke
d'Anguien and Marshal Turenne to take Fridelshem and Neudstad, and was
afterwards sent by them to the Landgravine of Hesse: he acquitted
himself with honour of all the commissions that were given him. The Duke
d'Anguien spoke of him in the highest terms; and the Landgravine
received him in the best manner, in consideration of the services which
his father had done to the house of Hesse: he was sent a second time by
Marshal Turenne to the Landgravine. The Duke d'Anguien promised to take
care of this youth's fortune; and the approbation of a prince, who was
the Mars of his time and knew men so well, is the highest elogium that
could be given of Diederic.

He came to an unhappy end when but young and unmarried. Queen Christina
having abdicated the Crown in favour of Charles Gustavus, Diederic and
Cornelius Grotius took a resolution to wait on that Prince, who had
known and highly esteemed their father in France, with an intention to
offer him their services, and get employment. Setting out from Holland
with this design, they were got between Embden and Bremen, halfway to
Hamburg, when a villain, who had served Diederic several years as his
valet, resolved to murder both the brothers for the sake of their money:
he went in the night-time into Diederic's chamber, and shot his master
dead while asleep: he was preparing to serve Cornelius Grotius in the
same manner, but he was awake: he happened to be employed in composing
a Latin epigram. On hearing the shot, he took a pistol which lay on a
chair by his bed side, and seeing the murderer advance softly to him (it
was moon-light) he fired, and laid him flat on the floor: the people of
the inn got up on the noise, and delivered the villain, who was
dangerously wounded, into the hands of justice, and he was broke on the
wheel.

Hugo Grotius had also three daughters, Frances, Mary, and Cornelia;
Frances, the youngest, was born in October, 1626, before her time, her
mother being delivered of her in the eighth month: accordingly this
young person was short-lived, for she died in the beginning of the year
1628. Mary, his second daughter, died at Paris in the month of March,
1635, of the fatigue and cold she received in her journey to that city.
Grotius informed his father of her death by a letter[772] dated March
23, 1635, in which he tells him she died almost without pain, and with a
deep sense of religion. "My wife and I, says he, bear this misfortune
like people accustomed to adversity: besides, why should we call her
death a misfortune? has not God a right to take back what he gave? and
ought not we to flatter ourselves that she is arrived at that happy
state, which the young ought to long after as much as the old? We are
delivered from the care of procuring a husband for her: perhaps we
should have had much difficulty to find one that would have been
agreeable to her and to all her family: and even if we should have found
one that pleased us all at first, would there not have been room to
apprehend that he had concealed his true character for a time, and that
he would afterwards make her unhappy? She is now delivered from the
pains of bearing children, and bringing them up. More happy than her
mother, she will not see judges incensed against her husband, because he
is innocent: she will not be obliged to shut herself up in prison for
her husband; nor to lead a wandering life to accompany him. Let us
congratulate her that God has taken her out of the world before she knew
too much of the evil or what are called the good things of it. Let us
congratulate ourselves on her having lived with us as long as life was
agreeable to her, and free from any mixture of bitterness. What is there
at present in Christendom to make us desire life? Divisions in the
Church, bloody wars, men slaughtered, women violated, cruel murders, and
multitudes reduced to beggary; Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia pillaged;
the heirs of the most noble families reduced to the necessity of living
on alms, if it can be called living to drag out their days in misery,
wishing for death, which alone can put an end to it."

Cornelia, the eldest of Grotius's daughters, who survived her father,
married John Barthon, Viscount of Mombas, a Gentleman of Poitou, who was
obliged to quit France for having displeased Lewis XIV. He went to
Holland, from whence he was also forced to fly, having been involved in
the misfortunes wherein the De Wits perished, and which gave Peter
Grotius, his brother-in-law, so much uneasiness.

Grotius had a brother named William, with whom he kept up the greatest
intimacy during his whole life, and made him the confident of his
studies and designs. It appears by his letters that they lived in the
strictest friendship. Hugo, who was the eldest, contributed to his
brother's education, and directed his studies. We have a letter from
Grotius to his brother, dated at Rotterdam September 28, 1614,
containing a plan of study. "I am of opinion, says he, that in order to
acquire the knowledge of Law, before you touch upon law tracts you
should read with attention Aristotle's second and fifth book of Ethics,
to Nicomachus, or the excellent paraphrase of them published by
Heinsius; then Aristotle's Rhetoric, with the learned commentary on it;
afterwards Cicero's _Offices_, the _Paradoxes_, _De Finibus_, _Of Laws_,
the _Topica_, and _De Inventiene_. I could wish that whilst reading you
would make extracts, or at least mark in the margin of your book
whatever has relation to the Law of Nature and of Nations, to the origin
of Laws and Magistrates, to _Jus publicum et privatum_. When you have
done this, we shall think of the rest." It was Grotius who corrected his
brother's Law Theses.

William Grotius came to France in 1617 to learn the language; and
retiring to Senlis made great progress in it: he purposed to go to
Tours, and Grotius approved of his journey, because the air was pure,
and they spoke good French there.

William Grotius, as well as his brother, had a turn for theological
studies: he wrote something in verse on the Decalogue, which Grotius
mentions in a letter dated from his prison at Louvestein, November 1,
1620. "I have read with pleasure, he says, what you have done on the
Decalogue: the maxims are excellent, and the verses easy."

William had his brother's confidence during his whole life. Grotius
writes to him from Paris, April 14, 1622, "You are never weary of
assisting me under my afflictions: if ever fortune enables me to testify
my gratitude, I will forgive her all the tricks she has played me." He
was desirous, in the end of the year 1622, that his brother should
settle his matters so, as to come to see him in the beginning of the
following year; but this journey did not take place. Grotius's disgrace
affected his brother: he despaired of attaining to honours, and Grotius
advised him to think only of raising himself by the study of the Law.

In April 1623 he married Alida Grasvinkel. About this time a Dutchman
was seized at Lillo, with letters from William Grotius to his brother.
It was expected that something would be found in them against the State,
and they talked of nothing less than imprisoning him; but
notwithstanding the malice of his enemies, they could not find the least
pretext from these letters to trouble him. In the mean time William
followed the profession of an Advocate with much success: Grotius
compliments him on it in a letter of the 28th of November, 1625, in
which he tells him, that the life he led in shining at the bar was much
more agreeable than that which is spent in public employments.

William Grotius wrote about this time the lives of the Advocates, under
the title of _Vitæ Jurisconsultorum quorum in Pandectis exstant nomina,
conscriptæ a Gulielmo Grotio Jurisconsulto Delphensi_. He sent this book
to his brother, who writes to him that he read it with pleasure, and was
delighted to see a work which demonstrated his brother's genius,
learning, and good sense.

William Grotius, whose marriage had prevented his going to France to see
his brother, went thither however in 1629: he returned again to Holland.
William being desirous to have his brother's picture, Hugo had the
complaisance to sit for it, and send it to him. The enmity of the
Magistrates was still so violent at this time, that William made a
mystery of this picture; in which Grotius thought he acted very
prudently. In 1638 there was a talk of making William Grotius Pensionary
of Delft. The conditions on which the place was offered did not suit
him, and he declined it. This refusal was approved of by Grotius; for he
writes to him, March 13, 1638, "As to the place of Pensionary of our
native town, the more I think of it, the happier I imagine you in
having got rid of it, and in preferring honour to profit: for in these
times it would have been impossible to have preserved that place and
your honour."

The East-India Company chose him for their Advocate in 1639. Grotius
compliments his brother on it March 26, that year. "I always loved that
Company, he says: I look upon it as the support of the Republic; and if
I could be at present of any use to it, I would most gladly embrace the
opportunity."

Grotius's writings concerning Antichrist were approved of by William and
their Father. However, as there was reason to apprehend that the
printing of these pieces might increase the number and animosity of his
enemies, Grotius proposed to his Brother not to take upon him their
publication, especially as he might easily find persons that were far
from a factious spirit, who would willingly undertake it: but William
Grotius ran the hazard of this publication, without being frightened at
the consequences.

Grotius had always discovered great impatience when denied the tides of
honour due to the Ambassadors of crowned heads. He imagined it to be the
consequence of a plot of his enemies to depreciate him. William did not
approve of his brother's great heat on this subject: and thought there
was reason to presume that it was owing rather to inattention, than a
premeditated design. Grotius, whose mildness of temper was greatly
altered by his late disputes with the Reformed Ministers, as Henry de
Villeneuve observes in a letter to the Abbé Barcellini, was much
dissatisfied with his brother's manner of excusing those of whom he
thought he had reason to complain; and wrote to him very sharply on this
subject, December 12, 1643. "I imagine, says he, I see and hear you
pleading at the Bar: you find reasons to excuse my enemies for things
for which no body here excuses them: you blame me for things for which
no body here blames me, nor will any others except your Dutchmen. It is
fit that I should support my dignity: the thing is done on purpose; and
the Swedes, whom it concerns, would be offended with me if I acted
otherwise. I would therefore ask of you, for the future to address the
letters you receive for me to my wife; and I shall afterwards see what
is to be done."

This small altercation did not interrupt the friendship of the two
brothers, nor their correspondence by letters, which continued till
Grotius's death.

William, besides the book we have already mentioned, wrote another on
the law of nature, entitled, _Willelmi Grotii de principiis Juris
Naturalis Enchiridion_. This work is much inferior to the treatise _Of
War and Peace_. However, it has its merit, and is particularly valuable
for containing in a small compass all the principles of Natural Law
clearly displayed.

Grotius had still another brother, named Francis, who was the second son
of John Grotius. He died young. Grotius wrote a Poem on his death, and a
consolatory piece in Prose and Verse to his Father: they are both in the
collection of his Poems.

John Grotius had a daughter of fine accomplishments. Grotius acquaints
us[773], that she wrote an useful book on Widowhood, which was very well
done. The design of this work was not to condemn second marriages, but
only to shew that it was more becoming a reasonable woman to content
herself with having had one husband. After her death it was proposed to
print it; and Grotius, to make it a more considerable book, translated
into Dutch three treatises of Tertullian, one of St. Ambrose, two of St.
Chrysostome, and three of St. Jerom, on the same subject. We have not
learnt whether this Collection was ever published.

The END of the SIXTH and LAST BOOK.

FOOTNOTES:

[735] See the Testimonia at the end of Le Clerc's edition of the
treatise on the truth of the Christian religion, p. 344. & 351.

[736] Ep. 195. p. 813.

[737] Ep. 253. p. 832.

[738] Ep. 368. p. 859. & 369. p 860.

[739] Ep. 419. p. 875.

[740] Ep. 421. p. 876.

[741] Ep. 936 p. 415

[742] Ep. 1129. p. 510. & 1133. p. 512.

[743] Ep. 506. p. 885. 465. p. 886. 1371. p. 623

[744] Ep. 1607. p. 716. 1616. p. 717. 537. p. 916. 670. p. 958. & 678.
p. 960.

[745] Ep. 714. p. 968.

[746] Ep. 1746. p. 746. & 720. p. 970.

[747] Ann. de Basnage, t. 1. p. 700.

[748] Ep. 64. p. 773. 68. p. 774. & 72. p. 776.

[749] Ep. 258. p. 833.

[750] Ep. 324. p. 115.

[751] Ep. 326. p. 849.

[752] Ep. 353. p. 855.

[753] Ep. 357. p. 856.

[754] Ep. 364. p. 858. & 369. p. 860.

[755] Ep. 573. p. 225.

[756] Ep. 406. p. 870.

[757] Ep. 421. p. 876.

[758] Ep. 425. p. 876.

[759] Ep. 426. p. 877.

[760] Ep. 946. p. 419.

[761] See Book I. § 16.

[762] Ep. 455. p. 883. & 465. p. 887.

[763] Ep. 469. p. 887.

[764] Ep. 492. p. 896.

[765] Ep. 537. p. 916.

[766] Ep. 542. p. 918.

[767] Ep. 553. p. 924.

[768] Ep. 555. p. 925.

[769] Ep. 588. p. 933.

[770] Ep. 641. p. 949.

[771] Ep. 1257. p. 571.

[772] Ep. 377. p. 138.

[773] Ep. 550. p. 920.




A

CATALOGUE

OF

GROTIUS's WORKS.


_Hugeiani Grotii Batavi Pontifex Romanus, Rex Galliarum, Albertus
Cardinalis, Regina Angliæ, Ordines Foederati: ex officinâ Plantinianâ,
apud Christophorum Raphelengium, Academiæ Lugduno-Batavæ Typographum_,
1599.

Grotius's Poems are in two collections; the prophane, in that published
by his brother, which has gone through many editions; in the latter ones
are inserted the Tragedy of Sophomphaneus, the _Catechism_ in Latin
verse, and _Sylva ad Franciscum Augustum Thuanum_. See the _Life of
Grotius_ Book 1. § 13. B. 2. § 14. B. 5. § 2. The sacred poems were
printed, in quarto, at the Hague, in 1610, in a collection wherein we
find _Adamus exsul_, a tragedy; _Exordia quatuor Evangeliorum_;
_Paraphrasis metrica Hymnorum in Evangelio & Actis Lucæ, variique
Psalmi, & alia carmina_; _Martiani Minei Felicis Satyricon, seu de
nuptiis Philologiæ & Mercurii libri duo_; _& de septem artibus
liberalibus libri totidem: emendati & notis illustrati_.
_Lugduni-Batavorum_, 1599. See the Life of Grotius, B. 1. § 10.

Limneu[Greek: retichê], _sive portuum investigandorum ratio, metaphraste
Hugone Grotio Batavo: ex officinâ Plantinianâ, apud Christophorum
Raphelengium, Academiæ Lugduno-Batavæ typographum_, 1599. See the Life
of Grotius, B. 1. § 11.

_Hug. Grotii Batavi Syntagma Aratæorum, opus poëticæ & astronomiæ
studiosis utilissimum. Ex officinâ Plantinianâ, apud Christophorum
Raphelengium, academiæ Lugduno-Batavæ typographum_, 1600.

_Hoc opere continentur Arati Phoenomena, & Diosemeia Græcè Ciceronis
interpretatio H. Grotii versibus interpolata._

_Phoenomena Aratea Germanico Cæsare interprete, multo auctiora &
emendatiora, ope manuscripti profecti ex bibliothecâ nob. dom. Jacobi
Susii de Grisendorf._

_Ejusdem fragmenta Prognosticorum, imagines siderum Germanici versibus
interpositæ, ex manuscripto desumptæ, & a Jacobo Gheinia æri incisæ._

_Notæ H. Grotii ad Aratum._

_Notæ ejusdem ad Germanici Phoenomena._

_Notæ ejusdem ad imagines, in quibus siderum & singularum stellarum
nomina Arabica, Hebræa, Græca, & Latina, & situs exponuntur._

_Notæ ad Fragmenta Ciceronis._

_Festi Avieni paraphrasis, cum notis brevibus in margine appositis._

_Mare Liberum, seu de jure quod Batavis competit ad Indica commercia._
_Lugduni-Batavorum_, 1609. See the Life of Grotius, B. 1. § 19.

_De antiquitate reipublicæ Batavicæ._ _Lug. Bat._ 1610. See the Life of
Grotius, B. 1. § 20.

The theological works were printed in four volumes in folio, by the
heirs of Blaeu, at Amsterdam, in 1679.

The three first tomes contain the _Commentary on the Holy Scriptures_.
See the Life of Grotius, B. 1. § 14. B. 6. § 11.

The fourth volume contains divers theological pieces.

_De Veritate Religionis Christianæ._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 2. §
14. B. 6. § 9.

_Ordinum Hollandiæ & Westfrisiæ pietas ab improbissimis multorum
calumniis, præsertim vero a Sibrandi Luberti Epistolâ, quam
Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi scripsit, vindicata._ See the life of
Grotius, B. 2. § 16.

_Bona Fides Sibrandi Luberti._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 2. § 16.

_Ordinum Hollandiæ & Westfrisiæ decretum pro pace ecclesiarum, munitum
S. Scripturæ, Conciliorum, Patrum, Confessionum, & Theologorum
testimoniis._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 2. § 4. & 17.

_Oratio_ IX. _cal. Maii habita in senatu Amstelodamensi, versa è Belgico
sermone per Theodorum Schrevelium._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 2. § 6.

_Defensio decreti pro pace ecclesiarum._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 2.
§ 16.

_De Imperio summarum potestatum circa sacra._ See the Life of Grotius,
B. 2. § 16.

_Defensio fidei Catholicæ de satisfactione Christi, adversùs Faustum
Socinum Senensem._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 2. § 16.

_Conciliatio dissidentium de re predestinatoriâ atque gratiâ opinionum._
See the Life of Grotius, B. 2. § 16.

_Disquisitio, an Pelagiana sint illa dogmata, quæ nunc sub eo nomine
traducuntur._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 2. § 16.

_Philosophorum veterum sententiæ de fato, & de eo quod est in nostrâ
potestate._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 2. § 16.

_Commentarius ad loca quædam Novi Testamenti de Antichristo._ See the
Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 12.

_Appendix ad Commentationem de Antichristo._ See the Life of Grotius, B.
6. § 12.

_Dissertatio de Coenæ administratione ubi Pastores non adsunt._ See the
Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 12.

_Dissertatio an semper communicandum per symbola._ See the Life of
Grotius, B. 6. § 12.

_Explicatio trium utilissimorum locorum N.T. in quibus agitur de fide &
operibus._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 12.

_Via ad pacem ecclesiasticam; quo tractatu continentur Bulla Pii Papæ
IV. super formâ juramenti professionis fidei exhibitâ invictissimo
Imperatori Carolo V. in comitiis Augustanis, 1530. Georgii Cassandri
Consultatio de articulis Religionis inter Catholicos & Protestantes
controversis. Hugonis Grotii Annotata ad Consultationem Cassandri,
ejusdem disquisitio de dogmatibus Pelagianis, ejusdem baptizatorum
institutio & de eucharistiâ; denique Syllabus auctorum, qui de
conciliatione controversiarum in religione scripserunt._

_Animadversiones in Andreæ Riveti animadversiones._ See the Life of
Grotius, B. 2. § 12.

_Votum pro pace ecclesiasticâ, contra examen Andreæ Riveti._ See the
Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 12.

_Rivetiani apologetici discussio._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 12.

_De summo sacerdotio._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 5. § 12.

_De dogmatis, ritibus, & gubernatione Ecclesiæ Christianæ._

_De dogmatis quæ reipublicæ noxia sunt aut dicuntur._

_M. Annæi Lucani Pharsalia, ex emendatione & cum notis H. Grotii. Lug.
Bat._ 1614. See the Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 5.

_Dicta poëtarum quæ apud Joannem Stobeum extant, emendata & Latino
carmine reddita ab Hugone Grotio: accesserunt Plutarchi & Basilii Magni
de usu Græcorum poëtarum. Parisiis_, 1622. See the Life of Grotius, B.
2. § 14. B. 3. § 6.

_Apologeticus eorum, qui Hollandiæ, Westfrisiæ, & vicinis quibusdam
nationibus ex Legibus præfuerunt ante mutationem anni_ 1618. _Parisiis_,
1622. See the Life of Grotius, B. 2. § 14. B. 3. § 4.

_De Jure Belli ac Pacis Libri tres._ _Parisiis_, 1625. The best edition
of this celebrated work is that published at Amsterdam, in 1720, by John
Barbeyrac, who has translated it so happily. At the end of this edition
he subjoined a small tract of Grotius: _De equitate, indulgentiâ, &
facilitate, liber singularis._ See the Life of Grotius, B. 3. § 9.

_Excerpta ex tragoediis & comediis Græcis, tùm quæ extant, tùm quæ
perierunt: emendata & Latinis versibus reddita ab Hugone Grotio, cum
notis & indice auctorum ac rerum. Parisiis apud Nicolaum Buon_, 1626.
See the Life of Grotius, B. 2. § 14. B. 3. § 6.

_Grollæ obsidio, cum annexis anni_ 1627. _Amstelodami, apud Guillelmum
Blaeu_, 1629. See the Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 14.

_Euripidis Tragoedia Phenissæ, emendata ex manuscriptis, & Latina facta
ab Hugone Grotio. Parisiis_, 1630. See the Life of Grotius, B. 2. § 14.
B. 3. § 7.

An Introduction to the Laws of Holland, in Dutch. Hague, 1631. See the
Life of Grotius, B. 2. § 14. B. 6. § 14.

_C. Cornelius Tacitus, ex J. Lipsii editione, cum notis & emendationibus
H. Grotii. Lugduni-Batavorum, ex officinâ Elzevirianâ_, 1640. See the
Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 3.

_Florum sparsio in Jus Justinianeum, & in loca quædam Juris Civilis.
Parisiis_, 1642. See the Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 10.

_De origine gentium Americanarum dissertatio prior. Parisiis_, 1642. See
the Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 13.

_De origine gentium Americanarum dissertatio altera, adversùs
obtrectatorem opaca bonum quem fecit barba. Parisiis_, 1643. See the
Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 13.

_Hugonis Grotii quædam hactenùs inedita, aliaque ex Belgicè editis
Latinè versa, argumenti theologici, juridici, politici. Amstelodami_,
1652.

_Consilium juridicum super iis, quæ Nassavii in Juliacum & Geldriam
competere sibi dicunt._

_Epistola ad Car. V. an Provinciæ Foederati Belgii inferendæ sunt
imperio Germanico._

_F. Thomæ Campanellæ Philosophiæ realis pars tertia, quæ est de
politicâ, in aphorismos digesta._

_De pace Germaniæ epistola ad clarissimum virum N.P. An supposititia sit
dijudicet sagax lector._

_Hugonis Grotii responsio ad quædam ab utroque judicum consessu objecta,
ubi multa disputantur de jure summarum potestatum in Hollandiâ
Westfrisiâque, & Magistratuum in oppidis._ See the Life of Grotius, B.
6. § 14.

_Historia Gothorum, Vandalorum, & Longobardorum; ab Hugone Grotio partim
versa, partim in ordinem digesta, cum ejusdem prolegomenis, ubi regum
Gothorum ordo & chronologia cum elogiis; accedunt nomina appellativa cum
explicatione. Scriptores sunt Procopius, Agathias, Jornandes, B.
Isidorus, Paulus Warnefridus. Amstelodami_, 1655. See the Life of
Grotius, B. 6. § 7.

_Annales & Historiæ de rebus Belgicis, ab obitu Philippi regis usque ad
inducias anni 1609. Amstelodami, anno_ 1657. See the Life of Grotius, B.
6. § 8.

_Hugonis Grotii Epistolæ, quotquot reperiri potuerunt. Amstelodami_,
1687. See the Life of Grotius, B. 6. § 15.




INDEX.


A.

Adamus exsul, a tragedy, 19.

Aligre, keeper of the seals, Grotius flatters himself with being
protected by him, 114
  The services which he accordingly receives from him, ibid.

America, Grotius's treatise of the origin of its inhabitants, 275.

Amsterdam, that city favours the Gomarists, and declares against a
toleration, 50
  Deputation sent to it on this subject, ib. et seq.

Anne of Austria, queen, is declared regent during the minority of her
son Lewis XIV., 230
  Gives Grotius an audience, 231.

Anthologia, Grotius purposes to publish an edition of that
collection, 247
  The several indexes he would have to it, 249
  The printing of it begun, but stopt, 250
  Where the original of this work is to be found, 251
  The time employed by the author in it, ibid.

Antichrist, Grotius's book on that subject, 269
  It occasions him many enemies, 270
  Made a great noise among the enemies of the Romish Church, 271
  The offence which it gave to the reformed, 272
  A mistake of the author in this book, ibid.

Aratus, Grotius's edition of his Phoenomena, 16
  Commended, ibid
  A copy of this edition collated by Nicholas Heinsius, who added some
    notes, 18.

Ardenne, battle of, 158.

Arminians, their conference with the Gomarists in presence of the states
of Holland, 41
  Their remonstrance to the states, ibid
  By whom it was drawn up, 45
  A summary of their doctrine, 45
  Acknowledge the civil magistrate to be judge of ecclesiastical
    disputes, 46
  Persecuted by prince Maurice, 59
  Refuse to receive the synod of Dort, 60
  Their protest against that assembly, ibid
  Are condemned in it, 61
  The pretexts they make use of against that synod, ibid
  Favoured by prince Henry Frederic of Nassau, 107.

Arminius, his dispute with Gomar, 39 et seq.
  His doctrine concerning predestination and grace, ibid
  He is complained of to the synod of Rotterdam, 40
  Presents a petition to the states of Holland and Westfriesland, ibid
    et seq.
  His death, 41
  Grotius's Elogium of him, ibid.
  Method proposed by him for a reunion of christians, 307.

Arnaud, his relation concerning Grotius's death, 241.


B.

Bacon, Lord, the reading of his Works gave Grotius the first hint of
compiling a system of natural law, 110.

Baillet, his judgment of Grotius's poems, 20
  Of his annals of the Low Countries, 258.

Balzac, what he said of Grotius's poems, 20
  His esteem for that learned man, 328.

Bannier, Marshal, his brother first put it into Grotius's head to enter
into the Swedish service, 136.

Barberin, Cardinal Francis, what he found fault with in Grotius's book
of war and peace, 113.

Barbeyrac, his commendation of Grotius's treatise of the rights of war
and peace, 100 et seq.
  Character of his translation of that book, 111
  His judgment of John de Felda's notes against it, 111, 112
  Defects observed by Barbeyrac in it, 113.

Barlæus, his elogium of Grotius when a boy, 7.

Barnevelt, grand pensionary of Holland, his firmness in opposing the
earl of Leicester's designs, 9
  Contributes to the nominating count Maurice of Nassau captain general,
    ibid
  Sent ambassador to Henry IV., 10
  Success of his negotiation, ibid.
  Grotius's connection with him, 29
  The report it gave rise to, ibid
  His behaviour in the dispute between the Arminians and Gomarists, 40,
    46, et seq.
  He and Grotius have the direction of the states conduct in this
    affair, 44
  Decree proposed by him to the states, 49
  Rise of count Maurice's hatred to him, 50
  Wants to resign his employments, 55
  Arrested by count Maurice, 58
  Crimes of which his enemies accuse him, 59
  Is brought to his tryal, 62
  Excepts against his judges, ibid
  His condemnation, and its grounds, 63
  The court of France interests itself in his behalf, ibid
  His death and elogium, 65.

Baudius, his opinion of Grotius's poetical talents, 19
  A candidate for the place of historiographer of the United Provinces,
    which he yields to that learned man, 21
  Scazon written by him in honour of Grotius, 327.

Bayle, his opinion of Grotius's project for reuniting the religions,
  302.

Berthier, father, the jesuist, his information concerning the original
manuscript of Grotius's Anthologia, 251
  What he says of his translation of the _Supplicantes_ of Euripides,
    278.

Bignon, Jerom, advocate general, his observation to Grotius concerning
his Annals of the Low Countries, 258
  His opinion of the treatise of the truth of the christian religion,
    262
  Cannot bear to hear Grotius accused of socinianism, 324
  His esteem for him, 330.

Bishops, their authority favoured by Grotius, 288 et seq.
  He says they were established by Christ, ibid.

Blondius, his ill treatment of Reigersberg, 317
  How threatened by Grotius on that account, ibid.

Boissise, Thumeri de, on what occasion nominated ambassador from France
to Holland, 63
  Success of his negotiation, 64
  Receives Grotius at his arrival in France, 89.

Bossuet, his summary of the Arminian doctrine, 45
  Accuses Grotius of favouring Socinianism, 319
  Allows that he did not deny Christ's divinity, 320.

Bouhier, the president, his mistake concerning the year of Grotius's
birth, 4.

Boutillier, superintendant of the finances, makes Grotius offers of
service, 126
  His conference with him concerning the treaty concluded in France with
    the envoys of the allies, 147.

Boze, a collection of Grotius's letters in cipher in his cabinet, 282

Brandanus, Grotius's chaplain, 157
  His character, ibid
  Is turned away by Grotius, 158.

Briet, father, a jesuit, what he says of Grotius's disposition to turn
Roman Catholic, 301.


C.

Calvin, spoken of by Grotius with the greatest indignation, 287
  His equivocal expressions concerning the Eucharist, 293.

Calvinists, Grotius disapproves of their sentiments on the Eucharist,
and reproaches them with their contradictions, 292

Capella, Martianus, Grotius's edition of that author, 13
  The nature of his work, and its character, 13, 14
  Its use, 15.

Carleton, the english ambassador in Holland, demands that Grotius should
be punished for writing the book of the Freedom of the ocean, 67.

Casaubon, Isaac, his commendation of Grotius's edition of Capella, 15
  What he says of his edition of Aratus's Phoenomena, 17
  Translates into Greek verse Grotius's Prosopopoeia of the town of
    Ostend, 19
  His commendation of his Christus patiens, ibid.
  His opinion of his talents for poetry, ibid.
  Henry IV. has thoughts of making him his librarian, 22
  Difficulties that design meets with, ibid
  Is nominated Librarian, ibid
  Grotius contracts a great friendship with him, 31
  His esteem for that learned man, 32
  His thoughts of the re-union of the roman catholics with the
    protestants, 33
  The last testimony of his sentiments for Grotius, 33
  Commends his Apology against Sibrand Lubert, 84
  What Grotius says of Casaubon's resolution to turn Roman Catholic, 286
  His opinion of the Roman Catholics of France, ibid.

Casaubon, Meric, his esteem for Grotius, 332
  His elogium of Grotius in the Preface to Hierocles of Providence and
    Fate, ibid.

Caumartin, is made keeper of the seals, 94.

Cerisante, nominated agent from Sweden at the court of France, 231
  His character and birth, 232, 233
  His adventures, ibid
  Is dismissed by the queen of Sweden, 233
  His disputes with Grotius, ibid.

Charenton, the ministers of, refuse to receive Grotius into their
communion on his first arrival in France, 90
  His discussions with them when he returned in quality of ambassador
    from Sweden, 154
  Send a deputation to him, 155.

Charles I. of England, invites Grotius into that kingdom, 187.

Charles Lewis, Elector Palatine, purposes to put himself at the head of
the Weymarian army on the duke of Weymar's death, 215
  Goes into France, and is arrested, 216
  Is conducted to Vincennes, 217
  Princes who interest themselves in procuring his liberty, 217
  He comes out of prison on certain conditions, ibid.

Chavigny, his negotiations with Grotius, 159
  Treats with him concerning a truce that was proposed, 201
  Another negotiation between them concerning the elector Palatine's
    discharge, 218

Christenius, John, his satisfaction on seeing Grotius when he was in
France, 331
  Esteem with which he speaks of him, ibid.

Christian IV. King of Denmark, his offers to Grotius to draw him into
his service, 131.

Christina, queen of Sweden, state of affairs at her accession to the
throne, 92
  Her right to the crown disputed, ibid
  Approves of Grotius's nomination to the French embassy, 169
  Honours paid by her to Grotius at his return to Sweden, 237
  Her present to him at his departure, 238
  Accused of shortening that learned man's days, 243
  Purchases several of his manuscripts after his death, 279
  Her compliment to his widow on the death of her husband, 332.

Church, Grotius's thoughts of her infallibility, and the submission due
to her, 297.

Clement, St. publication of his epistle, 297
  Grotius's thoughts of it and of the second letter ascribed to him,
    ibid.

Clerc, Le, his relation of the manner of Grotius's death, 241
  Gives hopes of his publishing an edition of that learned man's
    Anthologia, 250
  His opinion of his commentary on the Scriptures, 269.

Colomiez, his opinion of Grotius's treatise of the truth of the
christian religion, 267
  Elogiums of Grotius related by him, 329
  His own opinion of him, ibid.

Condé, prince of, Grotius dedicates his Capella to him, 15
  Is entirely in Grotius's interest, 93
  Renews his acquaintance with him on his arrival in France in quality
    of ambassador from Sweden, 145
  Their conversation together, 200.

Contra-remonstrants. See Gomarists.

Cornets, Cornelius, who he was, 1
  His marriage with Ermengarda de Groot, 2
  A branch of his family in Provence, ibid
  His children, ibid.

Corraro, the Venetian ambassador at Paris, Grotius's complaint against
him, 184
  How the affair was made up, ibid.

Crellius, answers Grotius's book against Socinus, 321
  That learned man's letters to Crellius on this subject, 322.

Crusius, a Swedish lord, his quarrel with Schmalz, 206.


D.

D'Avaux, acts against Grotius, 173
  his Negotiation with Salvius for a renewal of the alliance between
    France and Sweden, 228.

Daube, his opinion of Grotius's treatise of the rights of war and peace,
113.

Dead, Grotius's opinion of praying for them, 294.

Desmarets writes with great bitterness against Grotius's treatise on
Antichrist, 272
  His answer to him, ibid.

Desnoyers, secretary at war, treats with Grotius about a truce, 204.

De Vic made keeper of the seals, 93
  Grotius flatters himself with being favoured by him, ibid
  Services which De Vic doth that learned man, 94
  His death, ibid.

D'Or, Francis, enters into Grotius's service as his chaplain, 158
  Who he was, ibid
  Turns Roman Catholic, and not censured by Grotius, 288.

Dort, Synod of, its convocation, 55
  the holding of that assembly, 60
  It proscribes the Arminians, 61.

Douza, John, his Elogium of Grotius when a boy, 7.

Du Maurier, ambassador from France to Holland, 35
  Grotius gives him a method of study, ibid
  He sends Grotius a recommendation for France, 88
  Gives him false hopes of a return to his country, 117.

Du Maurier, the son, his account of the circumstances attending
Grotius's death, 241
  His criticism of his letters, 280.

Du Moulin, Lewis, what he says to Grotius's advantage, 333.

Duncomius, what he writes Vossius concerning Grotius, 332.

Dupuis, Henry, congratulates Grotius on his escape out of prison, and
makes him an offer of his services, 81, 82.

Dupuis, Mess. visit Grotius on his arrival at Paris, 90
  His great intimacy with them, 317.

Duræus, minister of the church of Sweden, seconds Grotius's project of
pacification, 305
  Obstacles to the execution of his design, 306.

Du Vair, keeper of the seals, his esteem for Grotius, 92
  Letter to him assuring him of his friendship, ibid
  His death, 92
  Compliments Grotius on his good intention of forming a coalition of
    all christians, 303.


E.

Elizabeth Queen of England takes the United Provinces under her
protection, 8
  Her treaty with them, ibid.

English, their dispute with the Dutch concerning the Greenland fishery,
29
  Were the first who disputed with cardinal Richelieu the privileges of
    the cardinalship, 170
  Their broil with the Swedes about precedency, 184.

Episcopius, is deposed by the synod of Dort, 61
  What Grotius writes to him concerning the Eucharist, 291
  Regards that learned man as his oracle, 329.

Estrades, an anecdote related by him of prince Henry Frederic of Nassau,
107
  Is displeased with Peter Grotius pensionary of Amsterdam, 348.

Eucharist, Grotius is at first prejudiced against the opinion of the
Romish church concerning this sacrament, 291
  His thoughts of it afterwards, ibid.

Euripides, most esteemed by Grotius of all the tragic poets, 278
  Several of his pieces translated by him, ibid.


F.

Fabricius, his opinion of Grotius's Commentary on the Scriptures, 269.

Felda, John de, his notes against Grotius's treatise De jure belli et
pacis, 111.

Freiras, Francis Seraphin, his answer to Grotius's treatise of the
freedom of the Ocean, 26.


G.

Gettichius, his opinion of Grotius's writings concerning Antichrist,
271.

Gilot, James, his praise of Grotius when a boy, 7.

Gomar, rise of his dispute with Arminius, 39
  His doctrine concerning predestination and grace, 40
  Is summoned to appear before the magistrates, ibid
  What he says there, ibid.

Gomarists, their conference with the Arminians in presence of the States
of Holland, 41
  On what occasion they were called Contra-remonstrants, 45, 46
  Are favoured by the people, 46
  Disturbances raised by them, ibid
  Their complaint against the edict published by the States, 49
  Separate from the communism of the Arminians, 50.

Goths, Grotius writes their antiquities, 252
  The plan and design of this work, ibid
  Its publication, 255.

Grasvinkel, Theodore, who, 112
  undertakes a defence of Grotius's treatise of war and peace, ibid.

Gronovius, suspected by Grotius of having availed himself of his notes
on Tacitus, 246.

Groot, Cornelius de, his birth, 2
  His employments, 2, 3
  His death, 3
  Leaves several Pieces in MS., ibid.

Groot, Diederic de, origin and signification of his name of Groot, 1
  Marries his daughter to Cornelius Cornets, 2.

Groot, Ermengarda de, who she was, 1, 2
  Her marriage with Cornelius Cornets, ibid
  Her children, 2.

Groot, Hugo de, his birth, 2
  How he distinguished himself, ibid
  His death, ibid
  His children, ibid.

Groot, John de, studies under Justus Lipsius, 3
  That learned man's esteem for him, ibid
  His works, ibid
  His employments, 4
  Verses by Heinsius in his praise, 4
  His marriage and children, ibid
  His death, ibid
  Assists his son Grotius in the edition of Martianus Capella, 15
  His verses on his son's marriage, 21
  Translates into dutch, in conjunction with him, his book of the
    antiquities of the Batavi, 28
  Directs his grandson Diederic Grotius's studies, 352.

Grotius, Cornelia, Grotius's eldest daughter, her marriage with viscount
Mombas, 357.

Grotius, Cornelius, son of Hugo, his studies, 338
  Enters into the high chancellor Oxensteirn's service, 339
  Goes to serve under the duke of Weymar, 339
  His fickleness, ibid
  His death, 341.

Grotius, Diederic, son of Hugo Grotius, distinguishes himself by his
studies, 352
  Enters into the duke of Weymar's service, 353
  Diverted by his father from entering into the Dutch service, ibid
  Goes to serve under marshal Bannier, and is made prisoner, 354
  Obtains his liberty, ibid
  Serves under marshal Turenne, 355
  The duke D'Anguien's esteem for him, ibid.
  His death, ibid.

Grotius, Frances, Grotius's youngest daughter, her birth and death, 356.

Grotius, Francis, brother of Hugo Grotius, verses by the latter on his
death, 361.

Grotius, Hugo, whence he derived the name of Grotius, 1
  his family and ancestors, ibid
  Æra of his birth, 4
  Great hopes given by him in his childhood, 5
  Writes elegiac verses at eight years of age, 6
  The good education he receives, ibid
  Rise of his connection with Utengobard the clergyman, ibid
  His studies at Leyden, his masters, and the progress he makes, ibid
  His first journey to France, 11
  Honours he receives from Henry IV., ibid
  Takes the degree of Doctor of Laws, ibid
  His correspondence with the president de Thou, 11, 12
  His elogium of that magistrate after his death, 13
  Pleads his first cause, ibid
  His edition of Martianus Capella, ibid
  The praise this work procures him from the Learned, 15
  His management with the booksellers, ibid
  Translates into latin the Limneu[Greek: retichê] of Stevin, 16
  Publishes an edition of Aratus's Phoenomena, 16
  Compliments he received on it from several men of learning, 17
  Cultivates poetry, 18
  His prosopopoeia of the town of Ostend, ibid
  His tragedies, and their success, 19
  Opinion of the learned concerning his poetical talents, ibid
  Edition of his poems, 20
  His own thoughts of them in the latter part of his life, 21
  Nominated Historiographer of the United Provinces, ibid
  Henry IV. has thoughts of making him his librarian, 22
  Applies to the bar, 23
  His method of pleading, ibid
  Takes a dislike to this occupation, ibid
  Appointed advocate general of the provinces of Holland and Zealand,
    23, 24
  His marriage, 24
  His book of the freedom of the ocean, ibid
  His own thoughts of this work, 26
  His book De antiquitate Reipublicæ Batavicæ, 27
  Nominated pensionary of Rotterdam, 28
  Contracts an intimacy with Barnevelt, 29
  Makes a voyage to England, about the Greenland fishery, 29
  Nominated commissioner in this affair, 30
  Is graciously received by king James I., 31
  The great friendship he contracts with Casaubon, ibid
  His esteem for that learned man, ibid
  A grand question decided by the States of Holland according to
    Grotius's opinion, 33, 34
  The method of study sent by him to Du Maurier, 35
  His elogium of Arminius, 41
  He declares for his doctrine, ibid
  The remonstrance of the Arminians drawn up in concert with him, 45
  He and Barnevelt have the sole direction of what the States do in this
    affair, 47
  Rise of count Maurice's enmity to him, 50
  Deputed by the States to the town of Amsterdam, 50
  His speech on that occasion, 51
  The bad success of his negotiation throws him into a fit of illness,
    53, 54
  His scheme for a coalition proves ineffectual, 54, 55
  Deputed to Utrecht, 56
  Arrested by order of prince Maurice, 58
  The crimes he is accused of by his enemies, 59
  His prosecution, and sentence, 66
  Rotterdam interests itself for him in vain, ibid
  Hard-heartedness and rage of his enemies, 66 et seq.
  His condemnation, and its grounds, 68
  Confutes them, and complains of his sentence, 72
  Irregularity of his sentence, 73
  Is removed to the fortress of Louvestein, 74
  His employment in prison, 75
  Makes his escape, 78
  His Apology for the States of Holland against Sibrand Lubert, 79
  Publishes another work concerning predestination and grace, 84
  Prints the decree of the States, and its defence, ibid
  His treatise De imperio summarum potestatum circa sacra, 85
  Writes against Socinus, 86
  Censure it draws upon him, ibid
  Publishes a tract, proving that the Arminians are not Pelagians, 87
  His work on destiny, ibid
  He arrives at Paris, 89
  Ill offices which the States do him by their ambassadors in France,
    ibid
  Has no reason to speak well of the ministers of Charenton, 90
  Epigrams occasioned by his arrival in France, 91
  The court grants him a pension, 93
  A report spread of his going to change his religion, 95
  His employment at Paris, 96
  His opinion of the eloquence of the advocates of those times, 96
  Publishes his Apology, 97
  Its contents, 98
  It is condemned by the States, who proscribe the author, 99, 100
  His uneasiness on this subject, 100
  Taken by the French king under his protection, 101
  The connections he still keeps up in Holland, 102
  Corresponds by letters with prince Henry Frederic of Nassau, 102
  Publishes his Stobeus, 103,
    and his extract of the Greek tragedies and comedies, 104
  Begins his work De jure belli ac pacis, 105
  Is taken ill, 106
  Publishes a translation of Euripides's Phoenissæ, 106
  Writes in vain to prince Henry Frederic of Nassau to obtain leave to
    return to Holland, 107
  Publishes his treatise De jure belli ac pacis, 108
  Purposes to leave France, 113
  A place offered him in Denmark, which he refuses, 115
  His conference with cardinal Richelieu, by whom great hopes are given
    him, 116
  Grotius returns to Holland, 118
  Gains an important law-suit, 120
  Disgusts he receives, 121
  Is again outlawed by the States, 121
  Leaves Holland, and goes to Hamburg, 125
  Refuses a pension from France, 127
  His thoughts on the education of children, 129
  His first acquaintance with Salvius, 130
  Is courted by several princes, 131
  Is desirous of a reconciliation with Holland, 133
  The high Chancellor Oxensteirn sends for him, ibid
  His veneration for the great Gustavus, ibid
  Goes to Oxensteirn at Francfort, 136
  Is nominated ambassador from Sweden to France, ibid
  His public declaration that he ought no longer to be looked on as a
    Dutchman, 137
  His journey to and arrival in France, 141
  Objections made to his nomination, 142
  His public entry into Paris, 143
  His first audience of the king, 144
  Renews his acquaintance with the Prince of Condé, 145
  His conference with Boutillier and father Joseph concerning the treaty
    concluded in France with the envoys of the allies, 147
  Another conference on the same subject with cardinal Richelieu, 150
  His discussions with the ministers of Charenton, 154
  Resolves to have divine service celebrated in his own house, 156, 157
  His several journeys to court, and negotiations with the ministers,
    158 et seq.
  His audiences of the cardinal, 162, 164, 167
  Abstains from visiting his eminence, 170
  Becomes odious to the court, 172
  Accused of being a pensioner of France, 174
  Disgusts he receives, 175
  Is uneasy about the payment of his salary, 178
  The Venetian ambassador contends with him for precedency, 179
  Opposes the Swedes sending plenipotentiaries to the congress of
    Cologn, 181
  His dispute with Godefroy concerning the right of precedency between
    France and Sweden, 182
  Another dispute with the Venetian ambassador, 183
  His explanation with the earl of Leicester in relation to the
    precedency of England and Sweden, 186
  Several audiences which he has of the king, 189
  Compliments the queen on her pregnancy, 196
  His conversation with the prince of Condé, 200
  His negotiation with Chavigny concerning the truce that was proposed,
    ibid
  Smalz's bad behaviour to him, 204
  Is in great danger of his life, 207
  His compliments to the king and queen on the birth of the Dauphin, 210
  His esteem for the duke of Weymar, 215
  Labours to obtain the elector Palatine's liberty, and succeeds, 218
  He negotiates the exchange of marshal Horn for John de Vert, 225
  The share he has in the renewal of the alliance between France and
    Sweden, 228
  His small regret for the death of cardinal Richelieu, 230
  Visits not cardinal Mazarine, 231
  His audience of the queen mother, ibid
  The regency of Sweden are instigated against him, 232
  The distaste he takes to his embassy, ibid
  Desires be recalled, which request is readily granted, 233, 234
    The gracious letter queen Christina writes to him on that subject,
      234
  His departure for Stockholm, 235
  Honours he receives by the way, 236
  His reception in Sweden, 237
  He asks leave to retire, ibid
  His departure from Stockholm, ibid
  Anecdote concerning his last audience of the queen, 238
  Conjectures to which his departure gave rise, 238
  His arrival at Rostock, and his death, 239
  Reports spread in relation to it, 241
  His epitaph by himself, 244
  His portrait, ibid
  His embassy did not interrupt his literary labours, 244
  He again cultivates Poetry, 245
  His notes on Tacitus, 246
  On Statius, ibid
  On Lucan, ibid
  His Anthologia, 247
  His prodigious readiness at writing, 251
  His history of the antiquity of the Goths, 252
  The account he gives of this work to the high chancellor, ibid.
  His annals of the Low Countries, 256
  His treatise of the truth of the christian religion, 259
  Is accused, on account of this book, of Socinianism, 260
  His defence, ibid
  His Florum sparsio ad jus Justinianeum, 263
  His Commentary on the scriptures, 264
  His esteem for father Petau, 266
  His writings on Antichrist, 269
  The many enemies they stir up against him, 270
  His treatise of faith and good works, 273
  His Via ad pacem ecclesiasticam, ibid
  Expects his reward from posterity, ibid
  His writings against Rivetus, 274
  His other theological works, ibid
  His treatise of the origin of the Americans, 275
  His history of the siege of Grolla, 277.
  His Introduction to the laws of Holland, ibid
  His other writings, ibid
  His translation of the Supplicantes of Euripides, 278
  Manuscripts he left at his death, ib. et seq.
  His Letters, and their praise, 279
  Why censured, and for what esteemed, 280, 281
  His circumspection with regard to the news he wrote to the high
    Chancellor, 281
  His sentiments in relation to the Jesuists, 282, 288
  His veneration for antiquity, ibid
  Leans towards the Roman Catholics, 284
  His elogium of pope Urbin VIII., ibid
  His disesteem of the reformers, ibid
  Disapproves of the separation of the protestants, 286
  Indignation with which he speaks of Calvin, 285, 287
  Is a partisan of the Hierarchy and the pope's supremacy, 288
  Entertains hopes of reuniting christians, 290
  His sentiments concerning the Eucharist, 291
  A kind of formula proposed by him in relation to it, 292
  Justifies the decision of the council of Trent concerning the number
    of sacraments, 294
  His sentiments on several other controverted points, ibid.
  His fondness for the works of the apostolic fathers, 297
  What order of Monks he most esteemed, 299
  In what manner he speaks of the council of Trent, ibid
  What has been said of his disposition to turn Roman Catholic, 300
  His connections with father Petau, ibid
  His religion problematical, 301
  His project of reuniting all christians, 302
  Proposes to Lewis XIII. to pacify the differences which prevailed in
    Christendom, 304
  What encouraged him in this project, 306
  Flatters himself with being supported by cardinal Richelieu, 307, 312
  His letter on this subject to baron Oxensteirn, 307
  Communicates to his father his project of a coalition, 309
  The shortest way which he proposed of bringing it about, 310
  Entertains hopes of success, 311
  His connection with father Petau on this occasion, 313
  The enemies which this design raised up to him, 314
  It embroils him with Salmasius and several others, ibid
  He becomes suspicious and peevish, 317
  Is accused of socinianism, 318
  His vindication from this charge, 319
  His letters to Crellius, 321
  Is accused of being a Semi-pelagian, 325
  Other accusations brought against him, ibid.
  Elogiums and opinions of the learned concerning him, 326
  Medals struck in honour of him, 337
  His regard for the church of England, 338
  Plan of study sent by him to William Grotius, 357
  Altercation between them, 360.

Grotius, William, prints his brother's poems, 20
  Grotius directs his studies, 357
  His verses on the Decalogue, 358
  The confidence which his brother places in him, ibid
  His marriage, 359
  Is a successful pleader, ibid
  His Lives of the advocates, ibid
  Refuses the place of pensionary of Delft, ibid.
  The East India Company chuse him for their advocate, 360
  His altercation with his brother, 360
  His book on the Law of Nature, 361
  The merit of this work, ibid.

Grotius, Mary, second daughter of Grotius, her death, 356
  Grotius's letter to his father on that occasion, ibid.

Grotius, Peter, advice given him by his father with regard to his method
of pleading, 23
  What he relates concerning his father's Annals of the Low-Countries,
    259
  His bad state of health while a child, and his studies, 341
  His uncertainty what course of life to follow, 344
  Applies to the study of the law, 346
  Uneasiness which his irresolution gives his father, ibid
  His marriage, 347
  The edition which he purposed to publish of his father's works, ibid
  Enters into the service of the elector Palatine, 348
  Is nominated pensionary of Amsterdam, ibid
  Rise of his displeasure against France, ibid.
  Goes ambassador to Stockholm, 349
  His great knowledge of men, 349
  Is made pensionary of Rotterdam, and nominated ambassador from
    Holland to France, 350
  Success of his embassy, ibid
  Involved in the disgrace of the De Wits, 351
  Arrested and acquitted, ibid
  His death, 352
  His elogium by Vicquefort, ibid.

Gustavus, king of Sweden, Grotius great veneration for that prince, 133
  His esteem for Grotius, 135
  Purposes to engage him in his service, ibid
  Gives orders before his death for employing him in the Swedish
    ministry, ibid
  The value he set upon his treatise of War and Peace, ibid.


H.

Heemskerke, Elselinga, her family, and marriage with Hugo de Groot, 2
  Her children, ibid.

Heinsius, Daniel, his elogium of Grotius when a boy, 7
  His Aristarchus Sacer, 264
  The rival and secret enemy of Grotius, ibid
  Ill success of his commentary on the New Testament, 266
  Grotius's management of him, ibid.
  Verses by Heinsius to be put under Grotius's picture, 330.

Heinsius, Nicholas, 18, 351.

Henry IV., the reception given by him to Grotius, 11.

Hoffman, calls Grotius the Phoenix of his age, 334.

Holland, the counts of, who was the first, 27
  Their power and authority, ibid.

Holland, the states of, their first regulation with regard to the
Arminians and Gomarists, 41
  They declare for a toleration, 46.
  Their edict on this subject, 47
  Authorise the magistrates of the towns to raise troops, 49
  Deputation sent by them to the town of Amsterdam, and its success, 50,
    57
  Vain scheme prepared by them for a re-union, 54
  Afraid of the holding of a national synod, why, 55
  Deputation sent by them to Utrecht, on what occasion, 56
  Consent to the holding of the synod of Dort, 60
  Their complaints against the imprisonment of Barnevelt, and the rest,
    61
  They are accused of favouring Socinianism, 82
  Their apology by Grotius, ibid.

Holland, the grand pensionary of, his office, and power, 29.

Hoogerbetz, pensionary of Leiden, deputed to Utrecht, on what occasion,
56
  Arrested by order of prince Maurice, 58
  Is condemned to perpetual imprisonment, 73
  Is removed to the fortress of Louvestein, 74
  He comes out of prison, 107
  His death, ibid.

Horn, Marshal, made prisoner at the battle of Norlinguen, 139, 225
  Grotius negotiates his exchange for John de Vert, 225.

Houteville, the Abbé de, his opinion of Grotius's treatise of the truth
of the christian religion, 263.

Huet, his thoughts of the project of reuniting christians, 302.


I.

James I. king of England, the gracious reception he gives Grotius, 31
  He approves of the project of that learned man and Casaubon for a
    coalition of the Protestants and Roman Catholics, 33
  Does not disapprove, upon the whole, of the edict published by the
    States in the dispute between the Arminians and Gomarists, 49
  What he finds fault with in it, ibid
  Assistance given by him to his nephew the elector Palatine, 215.

Jeannin, the president, writes a letter to Grotius, inviting him to
France, 88
  His friendship for him, 93.

Images, Grotius's thoughts on the use of Images in churches, 294.

Joseph, Father, a Capuchin, cardinal Richelieu's confident, 147
  Confers with Grotius on the treaty concluded in France with the
    ambassadors of the allies, ibid
  Another conference between Grotius and the Cardinal, at which father
    Joseph was present, 159
  Confers with Grotius concerning the subsidies, 161
  A warm opposer of Grotius, 173
  Wants to be treated as a minister, ibid.

Jurieu, his account of the circumstances attending Grotius's death, 241.


L.

Laet, John de, attacks Grotius's book on the origin of the Americans,
275
  Grotius's answer, and Laet's reply, 277.

Laurent, James, Grotius advises him to read the works of Vincent de
Lerins instead of Calvin's Institutions, 285
  Reproaches Grotius with changing sides, 299.

Ledenberg, secretary of the city of Utrecht, arrested by order of prince
Maurice, 57
  Makes away with himself in prison, 60.

Lehman, his elogium of Grotius, 334.

Leicester, earl of, made governor and lieutenant general of the United
Provinces, 9
  Makes a bad use of his power, ibid
  Sent ambassador extraordinary to France, 171
  ordered not to visit cardinal Richelieu, ibid
  His conference with Grotius, concerning the precedency of the English
    and Swedes, 186
  Solicits the elector Palatine's liberty, 217
  Negotiation with Grotius on that subject, 218.

Limneu[Greek: retichê], the design of that work, and its author, 16
  Translated by Grotius into latin, ibid.

Linchovius, hinders Peter Grotius from being made Greffier of Amsterdam,
347.

Lipsius, Justus, John de Groot studies under him, 3
  Lipsius's esteem for him, ibid
  Letter which he writes to him, ibid
  His commendation of Grotius's edition of Aratus, 17
  His opinion of the tragedy entitled Adamus exsul, 19.

Lewis XIII. in vain solicits a pardon for Barnevelt and his associates,
63
  Grants Grotius a pension on his arrival in France, 94
  Out of regard to him takes under his protection such as were condemned
    in Holland, 94
  Takes Grotius under his special protection, 101
  The treatise of war and peace dedicated to him, 109
  Grotius proposes to him the pacification of the differences among the
    churches, 304.

Lewis XIV. the confederation which he expresses for Peter Grotius, 349.

Low Countries, Grotius's Annals of the, 256
  Baillet's opinion of this book, 258.

Lubert, Sibrand, writes against Vossius and the States of Holland, 82
  Is confuted by Grotius, ibid
  His answer to this confutation, 84.

Lusson, preceptor to Grotius, 6.

Lusson, William de, his endeavours to serve Grotius, 126
  The latter's acknowledgments to him, 127.


M.

Malherbe, translates into French verse Grotius's Prosopopoeia of the
town of Ostend, 19.

Mallet, what he says in his book on atheism of Grotius's religion, 325.

Manassah Ben Israel, Grotius's particular esteem for that Jew, 264

Mazarine, cardinal, made prime minister, 230, 231
  Grotius does not visit him, ibid.

Meibomius, his elogium of Grotius, 334.

Menage, his epigram on the diversity of sentiments concerning Grotius's
religion, 302
  In what terms he speaks of that learned man's merit, 327.

Menagiana, anecdote related in it concerning Grotius's last audience of
queen Christina, 238
  What it says of his death, 241
  And of father Petau's thoughts of Grotius's disposition to turn
    Catholic, 301.

Mercoeur, the duke de, styled by Grotius the most learned of all the
princes, 144
  His adventures, ibid.

Meursius, his high commendation of Grotius when very young, 7, 326.

Mombas, John Barthon viscount of, driven out France, 349, 357.
  Marries Cornelia, Grotius's eldest daughter, and is obliged to leave
    Holland, 357.

Morhof, calls Grotius the phoenix of his age, 334.


N.

Nassau, prince Henry Frederic of, corresponds by letters with Grotius,
102
  Succeeds count Maurice his brother in the post of Stadtholder, 107
  He enters not into the projects against the Arminians, ibid
  Approves of the proceedings of the states general against Grotius,
    123.

Nassau, count Maurice of, rise of his hatred against Grotius and
Barnevelt, 50
  Declares for the Gomarists, ibid
  The project of re-union rejected by him, 55
  Causes Barnevelt, Grotius, and Hoogerbetz to be arrested, 58
  Persecutes the Arminians, 59
  Is offended at the court of France for protecting Barnevelt and the
    other prisoners, 64.


O.

Ocean, contents of Grotius's treatise on the freedom of the ocean, 24
  The several answers to it, 26.

Oldemburg, his elogium of Grotius, 334.

Orange, William prince of, his death, 8
  What confusion it occasions in the United Provinces, ibid.

Ostend, Prosopopoeia of that town, written by Grotius, 18
  The great character of this piece, ibid.

Overchie, Alida, her marriage with John de Groot, 4
  Her family, ibid
  Her death, ibid.

Oxensteirn, high Chancellor of Sweden, sends for Grotius, 133
  Is his patron at Gustavus's court, 135
  Nominated regent of Sweden during the minority of queen Christina,
    ibid
  Opposes the treaty made with France by the envoys of the allies, 147
  His journey to France and arrival at court, 151
  Makes a new treaty with the french king, 153
  His satisfaction with Grotius's preface to his history of the
    antiquity of the Goths, 255.

Oxensteirn, Benedict, a relation of the high Chancellor, sent to France
by king Gustavus, 134
  Esteem which he conceives for Grotius, ibid.


P.

Patin, Guy, what he says of the manner of Grotius's death, 242
  His elogium of that learned man, 333.

Patiniana, what it says of Grotius's pretended inclination to judaism,
325.

Pau, ambassador from Holland to France, at a loss how to behave to
Grotius, 144
  The ill offices which he doth him, 173

Petau, Father, Grotius's esteem for him, 266
  Sends him his commentary on the Gospels, ibid
  His connection with Grotius, 300
  Says mass for his soul, 301
  The account he gives of his first acquaintance with that learned man,
    313.

Peyresc, Nicholas, visits Grotius on his arrival at Paris, 90
  Sets him about writing the treatise of war and peace, 108
  Services which he did him when compiling his annals of the Low
    Countries, 259
  His esteem for him from his youth, 327.

Pontanus, Isaac, his elogium of Grotius when a boy, 7, 326.

Pope, Grotius maintains and proves his supremacy, 288.

Provinces, United, state of their affairs at Grotius's birth, 7
  Embassy sent by them to Henry III. of France, ibid
  refuse to make peace with Spain, 10
  Embassy sent by them on that subject to Henry IV., ibid
  Refuse the truce offered them, 11
  Nominate Grotius to be their historiographer, 21
  See Dutch.

Puffendorf, allows that little remained to be said after what Grotius
had written of war and peace, 110.


Q.

Quistorpius, John, minister of Rostock, assisted Grotius at his death,
239
  Relation which he gives of it, ibid.


R.

Reigersberg, Grotius's brother-in-law, troubles which Grotius's enemies
endeavoured to stir up to him, 119
  Blondius's ill treatment of him, 317.

Reigersberg, Mary, her birth, 24
  Her marriage to Grotius, and her elogium, ibid
  Is denied permission to continue with him, even to see him, or speak
    with him during his imprisonment, 59, 66
  Obtains liberty to see him in his prison at Louvestein, 74
  The means she made use of to obtain his liberty, 78
  Is confined, but afterwards discharged, 80, 81
  Comes to her husband at Paris, 93
  Her journey to Zealand, and return, 105
  Goes to her husband at Francfort, 136
  Waits on the french queen to compliment her on her pregnancy, 196
  Her answer to Salmasius's slanders against her husband, 337
  Professes the religion of the church of England, 338
  Her death, ibid.

Religion, Grotius first composes in Dutch verse his treatise of the
truth of the christian religion, 76
  Afterwards publishes it in latin, 259
  The general approbation, and several translations of this work, 259,
    260
  Accusation brought against the author on account of it, 260
  A new edition of it with additions, 262
  The opinion of the learned concerning this performance, ibid.

Remonstrants, see Arminians.

Renaudot, publishes an article in his Gazette which gives offence to
Grotius, 186.

Richelieu, cardinal, seems to blame the conduct of Mess. de Luynes with
regard to Barnevelt's death, 66
  Nominated prime minister, 116
  Confers with Grotius, ibid
  Gives him great hopes, ibid
  His stratagem to make the Swedes comply with his desires, 149
  Is unwilling the high Chancellor should come to France, 151
  Makes a new treaty with him, 153
  The English dispute the privileges of his cardinalship, 170
  He purposes to take Brisac out of the duke of Weymar's hands, 213
  His uneasiness at not gaining that prince, ibid
  Is suspected of contributing to cut him off, 214
  The death of the cardinal, 230
  Gives orders that Grotius's works may be printed without passing the
    examination of the censors, 266
  Grotius flatters himself without reason that the cardinal will favour
    his project of re-uniting christians, 312
  The cardinal ranks Grotius among the three most learned men of his
    age, 330

Rights of war and peace, the author's view in writing this book, 109
  Barbeyrac's commendation of it, 110
  Translations of it, 110, 111
  Its defects, 112
  Put into the Index Expurgatorius at Rome, 113.

Rivetus, how he treats Grotius with regard to his writings in favour of
a coalition, 274
  Grotius's answer, ibid.

Ruarus, his opinion of Grotius's writings on Antichrist, 271
  His judgment of Grotius's scheme for a coalition, 316.


S.

St. Chaumont, the marquis, sent ambassador from the French king into
Germany, 164
  Is disliked by Grotius, ibid
  Is ordered to demand Grotius's recall, 172.

Saints, Grotius's opinion of the invocation of Saints, 295.

Salvius, vice-chancellor of Sweden, the esteem he conceives for Grotius,
135
  Advantageous report which he makes of him to the high chancellor,
    ibid.

Sandes, translates Grotius's tragedy, entitled Christus Patiens, into
English verse, 19.

Sarrau, his friendship for Grotius, 315
  Rise of their quarrel, ibid
  Rank which Sarrau assigns Grotius in the republic of letters, 316, 332
  How he speaks of him after his death, 332.

Salmasius, his opinion of Grotius's poems, 20
  Speaks with contempt of his treatise of the rights of war and peace,
    111
  His character, ibid
  He communicates to Grotius his corrections of the Anthologia, 247
  A coldness between him and Grotius, 285
  Rise of their difference, 315
  In what manner he spoke of Grotius during their friendship, 334
  The letter, in which he cruelly treats that learned man's memory, 335
  The answer of Grotius's wife to it, 337.

Scaliger, Joseph, is looked upon as the dictator of the republic of
letters, 6
  Directs Grotius's studies, ibid
  Engages him to publish a new edition of Martianus Capella, 4
  His encomium of Grotius's edition of the Phoenomena of Aratus, 17
  His testimony in Grotius's favour, with regard to the Prosopopoeia of
    the town of Ostend, 18
  His thoughts of his poetical talents, 19.

Schmalz, 202
  Ill offices which he does Grotius, 204
  Grotius complains of him to the High Chancellor, ibid
  Schmalz's quarrel with Crusius, 205
  He continues to injure Grotius, 206
  His return to Sweden, ibid
  Sequel of his adventures, 207.

Scriptures, holy, studied by Grotius at all times, 97
  His commentary on them, 264
  Opinion of the learned concerning it, 268 et seq.

Seguier, chancellor, the affront he put upon Grotius, 175, 227
  The difficulties he throws in his way with regard to the printing his
    commentary on the New Testament, 267.

Selden, his Mare clausum, on what occasion it was composed, 26
  The instance he gives of the rage of Grotius's enemies against him,
    67.

Servien, secretary at war, is visited by Grotius, 160
  Promises him his good offices in the affairs he recommended to him,
    161.

Sibrand, See Lubert.

Silleri, chancellor, his irresolution, 100
  Grotius thinks of dedicating his Stobæus to him, 104.

Simon, his opinion of Grotius's Commentary on the Bible, 268

Sophomphaneus, a tragedy by Grotius, 19, 130.

Soul, Grotius falsly accused of disbelieving its immortality, 326.

States General, entirely devoted to prince Maurice, 55
  Convene the synod of Dort, ibid
  Disband the new levies, 56
  The placard issued by them in relation to the imprisonment of
    Barnevelt and the others, 58
  The ill offices they do Grotius by their ambassadors on his arrival at
    Paris, 89
  Condemn his Apology, and proscribe him, 95
  The new ordinance which they publish against him, 123.

Statius, Grotius's notes on that poet, 246.

Stobeus, the subject and use of his work, 103
  Grotius gives a new edition of it, ibid
  A copy of it found with notes in Grotius's hand writing, 104.

Swedes, state of their affairs when Grotius entered into their service,
137
  Their defeat at the battle of Nordlinguen, 139
  The assistance they received from Lewis XIII., ibid
  Discussions between them and France, 146
  The difficulties they make about the treaty concluded with that crown
    by the envoys of the allies, 147
  Grotius diverts them from sending plenipotentiaries to the congress at
    Cologn, 181
  Their dispute with the English for precedency, 184
  Consternation into which they are thrown by the death of the duke of
    Weymar, 215
  Renew their alliance with France, 228.


T.

Tacitus, Grotius's notes on that historian, 246.

Thou, the president de, Grotius's esteem and veneration for him, 11
  Their correspondence together, 12
  The friendship which that magistrate expresses for Grotius, ibid
  Grotius's elogium of him, 13
  His approbation of Grotius's edition of Martianus Capella, 15
  commends his edition of Aratus's Phoenomena, 17.

Thou, Francis de, son of the president, generously gives Grotius the use
of his library, 105
  His visit to him on his arrival in France in the character of Swedish
    ambassador, 141.

Trent, council of, its decision concerning the number of sacraments
defended by Grotius, 293
  Respect with which he spoke of that council, 299.


V.

Valois, M. what he says of Grotius's connection with father Petau, and
his disposition to turn Roman Catholic, 300.

Vassor, character of that historian, 281
  His judgment of Grotius's letters, ibid.

Venice, its ambassador disputes with Grotius for precedency, 179
  another discussion between them, 183

Vert, John de, made prisoner by the duke of Weymar, 194
  Is exchanged for marshal Horne, 227.

Voëtius, attacks Grotius's treatise of the truth of the christian
religion, 260
  Grotius's opinion of his criticism, ibid.

Vondel, a famous Dutch poet, translates Grotius's tragedy of Joseph into
Dutch, 19
  His conjectures concerning Grotius's departure from Stockholm, 238.

Vossius, Gerard, his encomium of Grotius on occasion of his edition of
Martianus Capella, 15
  His opinion of the tragedy of Joseph, 19
  His thoughts of his poetical talents, 20
  Grotius gives him an account of his studies while in prison, 75
  His commendation of Grotius's Apology against Sibrand Lubert, 84
  The pains he took to keep Grotius in Holland, 122
  His letter, containing that learned man's reasons for returning
    thither, 124
  The value he set upon Grotius's notes on Lucan, 246
  Grotius complains of his too great timidity, 270
  His poem in honour of Grotius, 328.

Vossius, Isaac, inherits his father's esteem for Grotius, 248
  Offers him his service for his literary commissions, 249
  Superintends the printing of the Anthologia, 250.

Urbin VIII., 180
  His elogium by Grotius, 284
  Gives the cardinals the title of Most eminent, 334.

Utengobard, prepares the remonstrance delivered to the States by the
Arminians, 45
  The esteem with which he speaks of Grotius, 328.

Vulcanus Bonaventura, his encomium of Grotius on occasion of his edition
of Aratus's Phoenomena, 17.


W.

Wallæus, Antony, letters written to him by Grotius, concerning his
religious sentiments, 282, 283.

Weymar, duke of, confidence which he placed in Grotius, 215

Wicquefort, his encomium of Grotius, 333
  In what manner he speaks of Peter Grotius his son, 352.

Witt, the grand pensionary de, advises Peter Grotius to prefer the place
of pensionary of Rotterdam to that of ambassador at the court of France,
350.