GROTIUS, Hugo, one of the most illustrious characters of modern times, was born at Delft on the 10th of April 1583. His great-grandfather was Concille Cornets, a gentleman of Franche-Comté, who settled in Holland, and married Ermengard the only daughter of Diederik de Groot, a burgomaster of Delft. Her father stipulated that the children born of this marriage should assume his own name, which literally signifies the Great, and is pronounced like the English word groat. Her son, named Cornelis de Groot, was distinguished by his learning. By Eselina van Heemskerck, related to one of the first families in Holland, he had two sons, Cornelis and Jan, or John. The younger of these brothers married Alida van Overschie, who likewise belonged to a very genteel family, and the issue of this marriage were three sons and a daughter. Jan de Groot had studied the law, and with his juridical knowledge he united much elegant erudition. He was four times burgomaster of Delft, and was one of the three curators of the university of Leyden. His eldest son, Huig de Groot, commonly known by the more classical appellation of Hugo Grotius, was a youth of the most amiable disposition and of the most promising talents: so premature indeed was his genius, that he seemed to pass immediately from the state of infancy to that of manhood. He was indebted to his father for a pious as well as a learned education; and one of the first fruits of it was a successful attempt, at the age of twelve, to convert his mother from the Romish faith.

At a very early age, he was sent to school at the Hague, where he was committed to the domestic care of Uytenbogard, a clergyman of great note and influence among the Arminians; and to his connexion with this individual, with whom he contracted a lasting friendship, the colour of his subsequent life may to a great extent be attributed. At the age of twelve, he was sent to the university of Leyden, which about that period was the most learned seminary in Europe. Here he continued for three years, residing in the house of Junius, a distinguished professor of divinity, from whom he might perhaps imbibe his decided relish for theological studies. Of that university Joseph Scaliger was then the brightest ornament, and he may indeed be safely characterized as the most learned man in modern times: he was greatly struck with the uncommon capacity of this young scholar, and not only encouraged, but likewise directed his studies. In 1597, when he had only reached the age of fourteen, he with much applause defended public theses in mathematics, philosophy, and jurisprudence, and thus exhibited a maturity of talents and attainments far beyond his years. He was speedily regarded as a literary prodigy, and was celebrated as such by various poets and scholars of that learned age. During the ensuing year, he accompanied count Justin of Nassau and the grand-pensionary Oldenbarneveldt, who were sent on an embassy to the court of France. Μ. de Buzanval, formerly ambassador to Holland, presented him to the king, who received him in a gracious manner, and gave him his portrait, together with a chain of gold. He had however to regret that he did not find an opportunity of paying his respects to the illustrious president De Thou; but on his return to Delft, he addressed to him a letter which produced a very friendly correspondence between a venerable judge and a beardless lawyer. In France he now resided for nearly twelve months; and it was at this period that he took the degree of LL.D, in the university of Orleans. He had not then attained the age of seventeen; but he had doubtless acquired a much larger fund of learning than has fallen to the share of many, not to say most, of those who have subsequently taken the same degree at a more mature age. On returning to his native country, he was called to the bar, and he pleaded his first cause at Delft in the year 1599.

But the practice of the bar, and the study of jurisprudence, did not engage his undivided attention. He continued to devote himself with great ardour to the study of classical literature, and had already distinguished himself by the spirit and elegance of his Latin verses. Among the earliest of his publications was an edition of the Satyrico of Martianus Capella, which was printed at Leyden the year 1599. When only fourteen years of age, he had received from his father a manuscript of this author, and, on communicating it to Scaliger, had been honoured with his injunctions to prepare a new edition. This task, which [7:11:2]was by no means easy, he ventured to undertake, and he not only revised the text, but likewise wrote elaborate annotations. His edition excited the admiration of those who were most competent to judge of its merits or defects; and if he had not given many other proofs of his early proficiency, we might have been induced to suppose that he had received very material assistance from some scholar of riper years. His Syntagma Arateorum, printed at the same place in 1600, increased his reputation as a classical critic. This includes the Greek verses of Aratus, the Latin versions, so far as they could be recovered, of Cicero, Germanicus Caesar, and Festus Avienus, together with the annotations of the editor, who was then seventeen years of age. As this metrical work relates to astronomy, it afforded him an opportunity of displaying his science as well as erudition. His brief notes on Lucan, accompanying an edition of the text, made their appearance in 1603. Some of his Latin verses had been printed so early as the year 1598, and others followed in 1599 and 1600. “Adamus Exul, tragoedia,” was published in 1601; but this tragedy he afterwards considered as too juvenile to be admitted into the general collection of his poems. The use to which it was applied by Lauder, in his dishonest attempt to convict Milton of plagiarism, is well known to the more critical reader.^[1. Lauder’s Essay on Milton’s Use and Imitation of the Moderns in his Paradise Lost, p. 50. Loud. 1750, 8vo. ] His “Tragoedia, Christus patiens,” was printed in 1608, and was received with great applause. It was translated into English by George Sandys, and, at a more recent period, into German by D. W. Triller. With the former version he appears to have been much pleased. His third drama, “Sophompaneas, tragoedia,” was not published till 1617. It relates to the history of Joseph, whom he thus describes by an Egyptian name. Of this tragedy a Dutch version was undertaken by Vondel, a poet of great note. The literary reputation of Grotius speedily procured him the appointment of historiographer to the republic; an appointment which he did not himself solicit, though it was eagerly solicited by several other scholars, and, among the rest, by Dominicus Baudius, a well-known professor of eloquence in the university of Leyden.

His first appearance at the bar produced a very favourable impression, and he soon rose to eminence in a profession which in most countries is considered as lucrative. In 1607, that is, at the age of twenty-four, he was promoted to the important office of advocate general of Holland and Zeeland. During the following year, he married Maria van Reygersberg, allied to one of the first families in Zeeland; and, as one of his biographers has remarked, it is sufficient commendation to add that she was a wife worthy of such a husband.^[2. Burigny, Vie de Grotius, tom. i. p. 42. edit. Amst. 1754, 2 tom. 12mo. ] Their nuptials were commemorated in the verses of many learned poets. About this period, he was occupied with a professional work, which appeared in 1609, under the title of “Mare Liberum, sive de Jure quod Batavis competit ad Indicana Commercia, Dissertatio,” and produced a controversy of no vulgar denomination. After an interval of some years, it was opposed in the “Mare Clausum” of Selden, an antagonist worthy of Grotius. The British cause was likewise maintained by William Wellwood, who had been a professor of law in the university of St Andrews; and his treatise “De Dominio Maris” was answered by Graswinckel, who published three different tracts in support of his countryman’s positions. Other learned writers engaged in the same controversy, which however must ultimately be decided by the sword, rather than by the law of nature and nations. In 1610 he published a work “De Antiquitate Reipublicae Batavae” and in the same year a Dutch translation, which was partly executed by his father. The book was afterwards translated into French. In 1613 Grotius was appointed pensionary, or syndic, of Rotterdam, and then fixed his residence in that city. In the course of the same year, he was sent on a mission to the court of London, for the purpose of remonstrating against the arbitrary proceedings of the English, who claimed an exclusive right to the Greenland fisheries. His diplomatic exertion^ appear to have been attended with little or no success; but he was very graciously received by the learned monarch, and likewise had the satisfaction of forming a personal acquaintance with Isaac Casaubon, a man of great worth and learning.

The republic was at this time agitated by theological dissensions. Arminius, an eminent professor in the university of Leyden, had publicly dissented from the doctrines of Calvin respecting predestination and grace. He was immediately opposed by Gomarus, another professor in the same university, and many controversial proceedings flowed from this origin.^[3. Brantii Historia Vitre Jacobi Arminii. Amst. 1724, 8vo. ] Many of the magistrates were disposed to adopt the new opinions, but the clergy, and the great body of the people, very generally adhered to the established creed. Arminius died in the year 1609; and his adherents soon afterwards obtained the name of Remonstrants, from the circumstance of their having addressed to the states a remonstrance, subscribed by forty-six ministers, and containing a summary of their distinctive tenets. It was digested by Uytenbogard, and Grotius is supposed to have lent his assistance. The Gomarists produced a counter-remonstrance, and thus obtained the name of Counter-remonstrants. In order to allay the animosities that now prevailed between the two parties, the states issued an edict which was prepared by Grotius, but which was too favourable to the Arminians to prove satisfactory to the Gomarists. It was attacked by Sibrand Lubert, a professor in the university of Franeker, and was defended by Grotius, in a work published in 1613, under the title of “Ordinum Hollandiae Pietas, a calumniis multorum, praesertim Sibrandi Luberti, vindicata.” The professor replied in 1614; and before the close of the year, his antagonist produced “Bona Fides Sibrandi Luberti, ex libro quem inscripsit Responsionem ad Pietatem Hugonis Grotii.” During the same year he likewise published “Ordinum Hollandiae et Westfrisiae Decretum pre Pace Ecclesiarum, munitum, S. Scripturae, Conciliorum, Patrum, Confessionum, et Theologorum Testimoniis.” At this crisis, the learned author was deeply engaged in theological studies; and in 1617 he printed his “Defensio Fidei Catholicae de Satisfactione Christi, adversus Faustum Socinum Senensem,” which was speedily attacked by Ravensperger, and was defended by Vossius, an intimate friend of the author. It was afterwards attacked by Crellius. a person of no small consideration among the Socinians.

While he was thus exerting his powerful talents, the republic was torn by intestine divisions. With the view of repressing the seditions which followed these theological altercations, the grand-pensionary Oldenbarneveldt proposée to the states of Holland that they should empower the magistrates of the province to levy a military force; and although the proposal was strenuously opposed by Amsterdam, Dordrecht, and other three towns where the Gomarists had the chief influence, a decree to that effect was issued on the 4th of August 1617. Maurice of Nassau considered such a step as this, taken without his concurrence, to be highly derogatory to his authority as governoι [7:11:3]and captain general; and he now found an opportunity of satiating the hatred which he had formerly conceived against the grand-pensionary. Availing himself of the rancour of party-feeling, he exerted all his influence in favour of the Gomarists; and before the close of that year, they were emboldened to discontinue all communion with the Arminians. His elder brother the prince of Orange died on the 21st of February 1618, and Maurice thus became more formidable to his opponents. Supported by an armed force, and accompanied by the deputies of the states general, he made a progress through different provinces, and displaced the Arminian ministers and magistrates. Grotius and Hoogerbeetz, pensionary of Leyden, were dispatched to Utrecht by the states of Holland, for the purpose of encouraging the authorities to oppose the prince in his violent attempt upon that city: they accordingly made preparations for a vigorous defence, but some seditious move-, ments took place among the soldiers as well as the citizens, and Maurice becoming master of the city, introduced such changes as suited his particular views. Having suddenly called together eight individuals, who described themselves as the states general, he procured a decree for the arrest of Oldenbarneveldt, Grotius, and Hoogerbeetz. On the 29th of August, the grand-pensionary was seized at the Hague, as he was returning to his own house, after attending a meeting of the states of Holland. The prince sent for Grotius and Hoogerbeetz, and when they presented themselves, they were immediately taken into custody, and committed to the castle of the Hague. The synod of Dordrecht was opened on the 13th of November 1618: the five Arminian articles were there condemned, and sentence of deposition was pronounced against the Arminian clergy. The fate of the state-prisoners was next decided. Oldenbarneveldt, a man distinguished by his talents and patriotism, was beheaded on the 13th of May 1619, all the principles of justice having been signally violated to remove a formidable obstacle to the ambition of the prince of Orange.

The trial of Grotius was conducted in the most irregular manner; and on the eighteenth day of the same month, being convicted of divers imaginary crimes, he was condemned to perpetual imprisonment, and all his property was confiscated. His wife’s fortune, and whatever he had saved from his public appointments, were absorbed by this flagitious sentence; but as his father was still living, he was not left in a state of destitution. On the 6th of June he was removed to the fortress of Louvestein, near the town of Gorcum in South Holland. His father was denied the consolation of visiting him in his prison. While he remained at the Hague, his wife was refused all access to him, and was not even permitted to attend him during a severe illness. She was at first admitted to Louvestein under the express condition of remaining constantly in the fortress, but was afterwards allowed to quit it on obtaining leave for each occasion, and it was finally conceded that she might quit it twice a week. The presence of this excellent woman was a great source of consolation; and a mind regulated like that of Grotius was habitually sustained by the consolations of religion. In his literary pursuits, which were so numerous and diversified, he likewise found unabating delight, and he alternately applied himself to the study of philosophy, jurisprudence, and theology. Sunday and a portion of the other days of the week he devoted to his theological studies. He now wrote some short annotations on the New Testament, and a work in Dutch verse on the truth of the Christian religion. For the use of his daughter Cornelia, he composed a metrical catechism in the same language. It was printed at the Hague in the year 1619, and he afterwards translated it into Latin verse. Another of his labours during his imprisonment was his introduction to the Dutch law, “Inleydinge tot de Hollandse Rechtsgelehrtheyt.” It was published in 1631, or perhaps earlier, and underwent many editions, several of which contain the additions of Groenewegen, well known for his treatise “De Legibus abrogatis et inusitatis in Hollandia.” The course of his literary studies led him to examine the fragments of Greek poets preserved by Stobaeus, and these he now began to translate into Latin verse, together with the reliques of Menander and Philemon. It is impossible to contemplate these various occupations of a man condemned to perpetual imprisonment, without being very deeply impressed with the value and importance of sound learning, united with a religious frame of mind. To an ordinary lawyer or statesman, under a similar sentence, the fortress of Louvestein would have proved a very desolate habitation.

After he had been imprisoned for about twenty months, his wife, who appears to have possessed a mind not less firm than tender, devised and executed a plan for his escape. On the 22d of March 1621, when the commander of the fortress had gone to Heusden for the purpose of levying soldiers, she shut her husband in a large chest, which had been in common use for sending clothes to Gorcum to be washed: she had previously ascertained that he was able to endure this confinement for the necessary length of time, and had taken the precaution of boring several holes for the admission of air. During the first year of his imprisonment, the guards had been accustomed to make a careful inspection of the chest; but having always found that it contained nothing but books and linen, they at length suffered it to pass without examination. She had taken occasion to inform the wife of the commanding officer that she was about to send away a chest full of books; and that her husband being in a very feeble state of health, she was grieved to see him apply so closely to his studies. When two soldiers took up the chest, they found the weight so great, that one of them exclaimed, “There must be an Arminian in it an expression which for some time became proverbial. Some demur however took place, but this precious load was at length deposited in a boat, and was safely conveyed to Gorcum, under the inspection of a female servant, to whom the secret had been confided. On reaching the town, the master of the boat proposed to place it on a sledge; but the servant informing him that it contained very brittle ware, and must be conveyed with caution, it was supported on a kind of litter carried with two poles, and was thus conveyed to the house of David Daet-zelaer, the friend of Grotius, and the brother-in-law of Erpenius. Here he disguised himself as a mason, and, with a rule and trowel in his hands·, hastened to embark in a boat,’ which landed him at Walwyck in Brabant. He there made himself known to some Arminians, and hiring a carriage to Antwerp, alighted at the house of Nicoaus Gre-vinchovius, who had formerly been a clergyman at Amsterdam. In the mean time, his faithful wife had acted with much presence of mind. She at first pretended that her husband was seriously indisposed; but when her servant returned with the intelligence that he had been conveyed across the Rhine, she boldly declared to the guards that their prisoner had escaped. On the arrival of the commanding officer, she was committed to close confinement. On the 5th of April she addressed to the states general a petition for her release; and although some individuals had the baseness to propose she should be retained as a prisoner, she obtained her liberty two days after this petition was presented, and she was permitted to remove all her goods from Louvestein. The escape of this illustrious man furnished a theme to some of the well-known poets of the time, particularly to Heinsius and Barlaeus.

Grotius remained for a short while in the city of Antwerp; where on the 30th of March he wrote a letter to the states, informing them that he had effected his escape without either violence or corruption, and that the persecution [7:11:4] to which he had been subjected would never diminish his love of his native country. Having resolved to seek an asylum in France, he was furnished with letters of recommendation by his zealous friend Du Maurier, the French ambassador in Holland; and from the president Jeannin he received a letter, which encouraged him to expect the protection of the king, as well as the friendship of the most distinguished persons in the kingdom. He reached Paris on the 13th of April 1621, and experienced a very kind reception from the president and other men of rank and eminence. One of those who hastened to wait upon him was Peiresc, who, without being himself an author, has enjoyed a degree of literary reputation to which but few authors attain. The states general lost no time^in instructing their ambassador to exert his diplomatic arts in depressing the credit of Grotius, who still displayed his greatness of mind by speaking of his country as became a good citizen. Such arts were attended with no ultimate success, but, from the exhausted state of the treasury, a considerable interval elapsed before he received any pecuniary aid; and his wife having joined him in the month of October, he had been induced to take a house without having any adequate means of supporting himself in credit and comfort. The king, who had been absent from Paris, returned about the end of January 1622; and in the ensuing month of March, Grotius was presented by the chancellor and the keeper of the seals. His majesty received him very graciously, and bestowed upon him a pension of three thousand livres. On this occasion, he was chiefly befriended by the keeper of the seals, and by the prince of Condé.

Being placed in a situation of comparative tranquillity, he now resumed his literary labours. Before the close of the year 1622, he published an apology for himself and the party with which he had acted. It bears the title of “Apologeticus eorum qui Hollandiae, Westfrisiaeque, et vicinis quibusdam Nationibus, ex legibus praefuerunt, ante mutationem anni cι□ ιoc xvili; quo ea referuntur quae adversus Hugonem Grotium et alios acta judicatave fuerunt.” This apology, which speedily passed through several editions, he likewise published in the Dutch language. The statements which it contains are such as could not be refuted; and, instead of attempting a refutation, the states general condemned it as a most injurious libel on the sovereign authority of the provinces, and on the character of the prince of Orange: they commanded the author to be seized where-ever he could be found, and, under the pain of death, prohibited their subjects from having the book in their possession. The violence of these denunciations induced him to address a requête or petition to the king, from whdm he obtained a formal letter of protection, dated on the 26th of February 1623. During this year he published a work which he had commenced at Lou vest ein: “Dicta Poetarum quae apud Joannem Stobaeum exstant, emendata et Latino carmine reddita: accesserunt Plutarchi et Basilii Magni de Usu Graecorum Poetarum.” Another of a similar description, and likewise begun in this prison-house, appeared in 1626, under the title of “Excerpta ex Tragoediis et Comoediis Graecis, tum quae exstant, tum quae perierunt, emendata et Latinis versibus reddita.” Both these works were printed at Paris in quarto. Although the order of chronology is not strictly preserved, it may here be proper to add, that in 1630 he published, at the same place, but in an octavo form, “Euripidis Tragoedia Phoenissae, emendata ex manuscriptis et Latina facta.” This edition, which is dedicated to the president De Même, is unaccompanied with notes, but contains copious prolegomena. His poetical version is inserted in the very elaborate edition of Valckenaer, published at Franeker in the year 1755.

The president had offered him the use of one of his country houses; and at that of Balagni near Senlis he spent the spring and summer of 1623. Here he was engaged in the composition of the greatest of all his works, his treatise on the rights of war and peace. Here likewise he was visited by several men of eminent learning, and, among others, by Saumaise and Rigaut, more extensively known by the names of Salmasius and Rigaltius. In his literary researches he was greatly benefited by the liberality of François de Thou, who inherited the magnificent library of his father, and permitted Grotius to use it as his own. His wife had occasion to visit Zeeland in the summer of 1624, and during her absence he was attacked by a violent dysentery. On hearing of his illness, she was so much affected that a * strong fever supervened; but as soon as it had abated, and without waiting to recover her strength, she hastened to Paris, and by her presence, as well as by her tender care, he was restored to health after a dangerous malady of two months. His first labour after his convalescence was upon his version of the Phoenissae, of which he had lost some portion before he quitted his prison at the Hague. He next devoted himself to the completion of his great work, which was printed at Paris in quarto in the year 1625: “De Jure Belli ac Pacis libri tres.” The plan of such a treatise appears to have been suggested to him by Pciresc,^[4. Gassendi Vita Nicoai Claudii Fabricii de Peiresc, p. 198. Paris. 1G41, 4to. ] who had evidently formed a very skilful estimate of his peculiar powers of mind. This work, which he gratefully inscribed to Louis the Thirteenth, was crowned with the most signal success: it has passed through a great variety of editions, and has been translated into many different languages; it was at once received as a standard production, and a mere enumeration of the writers who have illustrated it with notes or commentaries, would occupy no small space. It was speedily translated into the Dutch language. A Swedish version was executed by the command of Gustavus Adolphus. It was likewise translated into English. There are two French versions, by Courtin and Barbeyrac; and a German version was published by Schütz, with a preface by C. Thomasius. Of all these translators, Barbeyrac is the most celebrated. He was a professor of law in the university of Groningen, and to his juridical knowledge he added no inconsiderable fund of general erudition. The notes which accompany his translation are for the most part able and judicious; and he likewise published an edition of the original work, accompanied with Latin notes. Grotius may justly be considered as the founder of a new science, that of the law of nature and nations; for the subject is much more extensive than the title of his book. His treatise De Jure Belli ac Pacis will never cease to be regarded as a singular monument of his genius and learning. The previous labours of AlbericoGentili, and some other writers of inferior note, had but little effect in smoothing his path; but the resources of his own talents and erudition were not easily exhausted; and if he has not produced a perfect work, he has at least produced a work which in many respects is still unrivalled. “Grotius,” says Dr Smith, “seems to have been the first who attempted to give the world any thing like a system of those principles which ought to run through and be the foundation of the laws of all nations; and his treatise of the laws of war and peace, with all its imperfections, is perhaps at this day the most complete work that has yet been given upon this subject.”^[5. Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments, p. 610. ] The copiousness of his classical quotations [7:11:5] cannot be supposed to be equally relished by readers of every denomination, but they certainly are not without their attraction to readers of classical learning and taste; and it is necessary to distinguish between such as are introduced to prove particular facts, and such as are merely introduced for the purpose of illustration. “Of what stamp,” it has been asked by Bentham, “are the works of Grotius. Pufendorf, and Burlamaqui? Are they political or ethical, historical or juridical, expository or censorial? Sometimes one thing, sometimes another: they seem hardly to have settled the matter with themselves.” In these suggestions we perceive nothing very ingenious or original. The principles of natural law are closely blended with the principles of ethical science, nor is it easy to make an entire separation between the general principles of law and politics; and examples, drawn from the history of mankind in various stages of society, may certainly find a suitable place in a work intended to illustrate the law of nature and nations.^[6. “Morum disciplina,” says Mosheim, ςς quam Christus ejusque legati tradiderunt, meliorem formam, plurauue praesidia contra varii generis incommoda nacta est, postquam jus, quod natura seu recta ratio imperat, diligentius quam antea indagatum, et clarius explanatum est. Ducem se in hoc genere praebuit Hugo Grotius, vir incomparabilis, libris de Jure Belli et Pacis; quem ut maxima quaeque ingenia alacriter sequerentur, ipsa rei dignitas et utilitas effecit.” (Institutiones Historiae Ecclesiasticae, p. 851. Helm-stadii, 1755, 4to.) ]

The treatise of Grotius “De Veritate Religionis Christianae,” was published at Leyden in the year 1627, and the subsequent editions of this work are very numerous. It has been translated into almost all the cultivated languages of Europe, and into various languages of Asia. An Arabic version was executed by the learned Dr Pococke.

In the mean time, his residence in France was not entirely free from inquietude and mortifications. His pension had never been paid with any degree of regularity; and when the entire management of the state was entrusted to Cardinal de Richelieu, Grotius had too much self-respect to recommend himself to the good graces of that haughty and unprincipled politician. The death of Maurice prince of Orange, which took place on the 23d of April 1625, naturally inspired him with the hope of returning to his native country. Four months after that event, Hoogerbcetz was permitted to leave the fortress of Louve-stein, on finding security, to the amount of twenty thousand florins, that he would not quit the United Provinces; but this liberty he did not long enjoy, having died in the space of about three weeks after he was released from confinement. Grotius, who relied on the favourable disposition of the new stathouder Frederick Henry, found that, his enemies being still numerous and powerful, his return to Holland was opposed by many obstacles. An action at law however enabled him to recover his property, which had been unduly confiscated. The advice of his beloved wife, and the encouragement of some distinguished friends, at length induced him to take the hazardous step of returning to a country in which he had received such unworthy treatment. He began his journey in the month of October 1631, and soon presented himself at Rotterdam, where he met with a reception less favourable than his former services had led him to anticipate. Before the close of the year he went to Amsterdam, and was there better satisfied with his treatment; but no city ventured to offer him an asylum, and he found himself environed with difficulties. Conscious of his innocence, he felt the utmost repugnance to solicit a pardon from the states general, nor did he seem to have any prospect of obtaining it without solicitation. With the view of occupying himself till his fate should be decided, he adopted the resolution of betaking himself to practice as a chamber-counsel; but all his plans were speedily disconcerted by an ordinance of the states general, which commanded all bailifs to use their endeavour to seize his person. To this ordinance, issued on the 10th of December 1631. little attention was however paid; and on the 10th of March 1632 it was followed by another, promising a reward of two thousand florins to any person who should deliver him into the hands of justice, and containing a threat of deprivation against any functionary who should neglect to make the attempt. On the 17th of the same month he left Amsterdam, and, taking the route of Germany, halted near the banks of the Elbe. Having spent a few months in a pleasant district, he fixed his residence at Hamburg before the close of the year. As he had not brought his books along with him, he was greatly indebted to the liberality of Lindenborg, who allowed him the free use of his library. Here he formed an intimacy with Salvius, vice-chancellor of Sweden, who was skilled in literature as well as politics, and who himself conceiving a high esteem for the illustrious exile, contributed to strengthen -the favourable opinion already entertained by the grandchancellor Oxenstiern. Gustavus Adolphus was solicitous to engage him in the service of the Swedish crown, but his own brilliant career was arrested at the battle of Lützen, fought on the 6th of November 1632. During the minority of his daughter Christina, the kingdom was chiefly governed by Oxenstiern, one of the first characters of the age. One anecdote of this great statesman deserves to be repeated. When his son had expressed great diffidence in accepting of some public employment which was offered to him, the chancellor rejoined, “Go, my son, and see with how little wisdom the world is governed.” It appears that several other princes, and the king of Denmark among the rest, had signified a wish to obtain the services of Grotius, but he finally listened to the invitation of the Swedish chancellor; to whom he first paid his respects at Frankfort on the Main in the month of May 1634, and experienced a very gracious reception. After a short interval he was nominated ambassador to the court of France; and as he had now entered into the service of another state, he thought it expedient to make a formal renunciation of all connexion with his ungrateful country.

About the beginning of the year 1635, he took his departure from Germany, and soon arrived at St Denis; but it was not till the 2d of March that he made his public entry into Paris. The important functions of an ambassador he appears to have discharged with equal zeal and ability. The part which he had to perform was attended with no inconsiderable difficulties. The death of the victorious king of Sweden had necessarily impaired the national energies, and the arms of the protestant confederates experienced a great reverse in Germany. It had therefore become highly important to secure the aid of the French monarch against the formidable power of the emperor; and Grotius laboured with great assiduity and perseverance to fulfil his instructions, but was frequently exposed to the mortification which an honest man must feel in his transactions with mere politicians, who in all ages of the world have set honesty at open defiance. The Swedish finances were at this period in an exhausted condition, and his salary was but irregularly paid. Neither his public business nor private mortifications impaired his ardent love of letters; and during his diplomatic residence at Paris, he engaged in a great variety of literary pursuits. His brief annotations on Tacitus, who was one of his favourite authors, [7:11:6]appeared in an edition printed at Leyden in the year 1640. Reverting to his juridical studies, he published a volume of more than 400 pages, under the title, of “Florum Sparsio ad Jus Justinianeum.” Paris. 1642, 4to. Of this work, which is still prized by civilians,^[7. Schraderi Prodromus Corporis Juris Civilis, p. 262. Berolini, 1823, 8vo. ] two different editions, both in duodecimo, were printed at Amsterdam in the course of the following year. It contains a series of annotations on the body of the civil law, and, as the title suggests, many of them are philological. He had long contemplated a poetical version of the Anthology, a task sufficiently formidable; and at the beginning of the year 1645 he had brought it so near a conclusion that he sent a specimen to Bleau, an eminent printer of Amsterdam; but as he soon afterwards quitted France, and did not long survive, this work was not then conducted through the press, nor indeed did it make its appearance till a very recent period. Another of his labours was the history of the Goths, likewise a posthumous publication; and a more considerable undertaking was the history of his native country, which was also published after the death of the author. To this latter subject he had naturally directed his attention on being appointed to the office of historiographer. In the composition of such a work he appears to have been engaged so early as the year 1614, but it had probably been laid aside during a long interval.

At this busy era of his life he completed most of his theological works. The publication in 1640 of his “Commentatio ad Loca quaedam Novi Testamenti quae de Antichristo agunt aut agere putantur,” exposed him to many severe animadversions. Here he endeavours to prove that the pope is not Antichrist, and thus departs from the common opinion of protestants, an opinion which seems to be placed on a very solid foundation. His work was immediately assailed by Des-Marets, Du Moulin, Cocceius, and Slichtingius. The last of these writers was a Socinian, and published his tract under the assumed name of Joannes Simplicius.^[8. Sandii Bibliotheca Anti-Trinitariorum, p. 128. Freistadii, 1684, 8vo. ] To the first two Grotius replied in an appendix to a new edition; and Des-Marets, or Maresius, who soon afterwards became professor of divinity at Groningen, defended his own dissertation in a very copious work, entitled “Concordia discors, et Antichristus revelatus; id est, Hugonis Grotii Apologia pro Papa et Papismo modeste refutata.” Amst. 1642, 2 tom. 8vo. Jacobus Laurentius, a clergyman of Amsterdam, likewise assailed him with great fierceness in a work of which the title sufficiently indicates the scope and spirit. “FIugo Grotius papizans: hoc est, Notae ad quaedam Loca in H. Grotii Appendice de Antichristo, Papam Romanam, et Doctrinam ac Religionem papisticam spectantia, et in quibus via sternitur ad Papismum Anti-Christianum.” Amst. 1642,8vo. The censure which he had thus incurred did not prevent Grotius from publishing another volume of a similar tendency: it bears the title of “Via ad Pacem Ecclesiasticam.” Amst. 1642, 8vo. His professed object is to effect what is manifestly impossible, to conciliate the differences between the protestants and the papists. The principal portion of the volume consists of Cassander’s consultation on the articles of religion controverted between the two parties, with the annotations of the editor subjoined. Both of them were men of a pacific spirit, and under almost every form the love of peace is entitled to commendation; but to expect a union of protestants with catholics, the parties still remaining catholics and protestants, is certainly to expect what is morally impossible. Is an infallible church to acknowledge itself guilty of error; or is a reformed church to stifle the clearest convictions of which the intellect is susceptible, in order to gain a hollow and miserable semblance of peace? Grotius, like Bishop Forbes and other learned individuals, was led by the spirit of conciliation to make unwarrantable concessions to the Romanists, not considering, what however was abundantly obvious, that all concessions short of the most absolute submission, must prove utterly unavailing. Beside the common bond of Christian charity, protestants can have no spiritual union with catholics. One of the most extraordinary projects of union was that which Dr Wake, archbishop of Canterbury, discussed with Du Pin, an eminent doctor of. the Sorbonne.^[9. See Blackburne’s Confessional, p. lxxvi. 3d edit. Lond. 1770» 8vo. ] This union was to proceed on the principle of the respective churches of England and France retaining the greatest part of their peculiar doctrines: what portion either the one or the other was expected to relinquish, does not so clearly appear. Any advances from a poor protestant church, especially if it had renounced the name and forms of episcopacy, would probably have been received with abundant coldness; but this popish church was sufficiently rich and splendid to attract the regard of a primate who evinced no particular inclination to conciliate the English dissenters.

On the religion of Grotius, the following epigram was written by Menage:

Smyrna, Rhodos, Colophon, Salamin, Pylos, Argos, Athenae, Siderei certant vatis de patria Homeri:

Grotiadae certant de relligione Socinus,

Arrius, Arminius, Calvinus, Roma, Lutherus.^[10. Menagii Poemata, p. 140. edit. Amst. 1587, 12mo. ]

Although he was completely entangled in the cobwebs of Arminianism, the charge of Socinianism seems to be destitute of foundation, nor do poets very strictly confine themselves to what is true or probable. But with respect to the claim of the Romanists, it must be admitted to be somewhat more plausible. Grotius had found an asylum in a catholic country: he may in some degree have been misled by his respect for antiquity, and attracted by the splendour of the popish hierarchy. He expressed a great veneration for the church of England, which has likewise dazzled the eyes of more modern presbyterians. His Via ad Pacem was immediately attacked by several antagonists, the most formidable of whom was André Rivet, professor of divinity in the university of Leyden. Grotius defended himself in a work entitled “Votum pro Pace Ecclesiastica,” printed in 1642, and Rivet rejoined in the course of the following year. In 1645 Grotius published “Rivetiani Apologetici, pro Schismate contra Votum Pacis facti, Discussio,” and in 1646 Rivet endeavoured to assert the genuine peace of the church against suspicious mediators. Grotius was about this period engaged in a theological undertaking of much greater importance, namely, his annotations on the different books of the Old and New Testaments. His notes on the·Old Testament and the Apocrypha were printed at Paris in 1644, in three volumes folio. His notes on the gospels had been published in the same form three years earlier, but the concluding portions of this great work do not appear to have been printed before the year 1648. This is one of the works which have chiefly recommended his name to posterity; and writers of every denomination have agreed in ranking him among the ablest of biblical critics. “The learning,” says Dr Campbell, “as well as the critical acumen and ingenuity of Grotius, has stamped [7:11:7]a value upon his commentaries, especially on the gospels, which has hardly been equalled by any that has come after him. Yet I am far from saying he is to be followed implicitly. He has fallen into gross mistakes, which men of much inferior genius have detected and avoided.”^[11. Campbell’s Lectures on Systematic Theology, p. 239. Lond. 1807, 8vo—Dr Lardner, a learned divine of another creed, speaks of him in the following terms s “I much prefer Grotius’s interpretations, upon the comparison, above Dr Clarke’s. So far as I am able to judge, Grotius explains texts better than the professed Socinians. The reason may be, that he had more learning, and particularly was better acquainted with the Jewish style. But I am apt to think their late writers have borrowed from him, and improved by him.” (Letter on the Logos, p. 43.) ]

After having long discharged the functions of an ambassador, he at length solicited and obtained his recall. He had encountered many discouragements in the course of his negotiations; and the arrival of a Swedish agent, of whom he entertained a very unfavourable opinion, seems to have confirmed his wish to retire. This agent was Μ. de Cerisante, the son of Dr Duncan, a learned Scotish physician residing at Saumur. Having embarked at Dieppe, the ambassador landed once more in his native country, and was received with due honour at Amsterdam. He proceeded by sea to Hamburg, where he arrived about the middle of May 1645. On reaching Stockholm, he was very graciously received by the queen, who made him ample promises, and was anxious to retain him in her service. He could not however be induced to fix his residence in Sweden; and having been presented with a large sum of money, said to have amounted to twelve or thirteen thousand imperial crowns, he sailed for the port of Lubeck on the 12th of August. The vessel was speedily overtaken by a storm, and on the 17th was driven ashore within fourteen German miles'of Dantzig. Travelling in an open carriage, he arrived at Rostock on the 26th, being then in a very feeble and exhausted condition. Here he had recourse to the aid of a physician, who speedily perceived that his case was hopeless. On requesting the attendance of a clergyman, he was visited by Quistorpius, professor of divinity in the university of Rostock, who has left an account of his last hours,^[12. Hugonis Grotii, Belgarum Phoenicis, Manes ab iniquis Obtrectationibus vindicati, part. ii. p. 482. Delphis Batavorum, 1727, 2 part. 8vo—The author of this anonymous work was Lehman, a copious, but not a very exact writer. ] and they appear to have been spent in a manner suitable to his former professions of Christian piety. He expired on the 28th of August 1645, in the sixty-third year of his age. His remains were conveyed to Delft, and were deposited in the tomb of his ancestors.

He had prepared for the press various works which he did not live to publish. Soon after his death, one of these appeared under the subsequent title: “De Imperio Summarum Potestatum circa Sacra.” Lutet. Paris. 1647, 8vo. This was soon followed by “Philosophorum Sententiae de Fato, et de eo quod in nostra est potestate, collectas partim et de Graeco versas.” Paris. 1648, 4to. Amst. 1648, 12mo. Next appeared “Historia Gotthorum, Vandalorum, et Langobardorum, partim versa, partim in ordinem digesta.” Amst. 1655, 8vo. His history of his native country was published not long afterwards: “Annales et Historiae de Rebus Belgicis.” Amst. 1656, fol. Amst. 1658, 12mo. This very title at once suggests Tacitus as the writer’s model, and his style is evidently formed on that of the ancient historian. Whether this model was judiciously selected, may perhaps admit of some doubt. Such a style necessarily partakes of the enigmatical; and what may be admired in Tacitus is not so easily relished in his imitators. Notwithstanding the grievous injuries which he had sustained from Prince Maurice, he had the magnanimity to do justice to his character in this work.^[13. Gibbon has justly censured the historian for his inconsistency in one very essential particular. “I am not satisfied with Grotius (de Rebus Belgicis, Annal, p. 13. 14. edit, in 12mo), who approves the imperial laws of persecution, and only condemns the bloody tribunal of the inquisition.” (Hist, of the Roman Empire, vol. x. p. 192.) ] Another posthumous publication was his tract “De Eucharistia,”^[14. Several theological tracts of Grotius, which we have not enumerated, are to be found in the collection of his Opera Theologice.. Amst. 1679, 3 tom. fol. Of his tracts on other subjects, we have not attempted a complete catalogue. ] which was fiercely attacked by Salmasius under the assumed name of Simplicius Verinus. A very ample and interesting collection of his letters, consisting of nearly one thousand pages in double columns, was published by two of his grandsons: “Epistolae quotquot reperiri potuerunt; in quibus praeter hactenus editas, plurimae theologici, juridici, philologici, historici, et politici argumenti occurrunt.” Amst. 1687, fol. The poetical version of the Anthology, on which he had bestowed so much labour, was not communicated to the public till a century and a half after his death. The manuscript at length came into the possession of De Bosch, a man of learning and taste, who published the work in a splendid form, and added copious illustrations.^[15. Of the first four volumes, a notice may be found in Wy ttenbach’s Philomathia, lib. ii. p. 201. ] “Anthologia Graeca, cum versione Latina Hugonis Grotii, edita ab Hieronymo de Bosch.” Ultrajecti, 1795-8, 3 tom. 4to. “Hieronymi de Bosch Observationes et Notae in Anthologiam Graecam, quibus accedunt Cl. Salmasii notae ineditae.” Ultraj. 1810, 4to. “Hieronymi de Bosch Observationum et Notarum in Anthologiam Graecam volumen alterum, quod et indices continet. Opus Boschii morte interruptum David Jacobus van Lennep absolvit.” Ultraj. 1822, 4to.

Grotius was a man of a goodly appearance, large and vigorous in his person, and possessing an agreeable countenance.^[16. Du Maurier, Mémoires pour servir à l’Histoire de Hollande, p. 393. Paris, 1680, 8vo. ] He was uniformly distinguished by the integrity of his character, and the generosity of his sentiments. That he had acquired uncommon stores of variegated learning, it seems scarcely necessary to state in formal terms, after the details which have already been given; and it was accompanied with those vigorous powers of mind, without which, learning cannot be rendered very available. He was a man of original genius, aided by unwearied industry. As a philosophical jurist, he has no equal, and among historians he occupies a high rank. His merits as a theologian have been amply acknowledged by writers of every communion. As a Latin poet, he is to be classed among the best of the moderns, and his talents as a commentator on the ancient classics are of no mean order. W r hat individual of modern times has exhibited the same extent and variety of intellectual attainment?

His wife, who lived to deplore his loss, had borne him three sons and three daughters. The eldest and the youngest of his sons, Cornelis and Diederik, followed the profession of arms, without obtaining any considerable promotion. Pieter, the second son, having chosen the profession of an advocate, became pensionary of Amsterdam, and was employed as an ambassador to Sweden and France. The only daughter who survived their father was the eldest, named Cornelia, married to Jean Barthon, vicote de Mombas, a nobleman of Poitou.

Gulielmus Grotius, or Willem de Groot, the brother of this illustrious man, must not be passed in total silence. Being bred to the legal profession, he became eminent at the bar, and was appointed advocate to the East India [7:11:8]Company. He was likewise a man of erudition, and the author of several works. One of these is an “Enchiridion de Principiis Juris Naturalis,” in which he illustrates the principles of a science that was so deeply indebted to another member of the same family. Another of his works, which was published after his death, and which is still held in great estimation by civilians, bears the title of “Vitae Jurisconsultorum quorum in Pandectis extant Nomina.” Lugd. Bat. 1690, 4to. He appears to have been a most affectionate brother, and to have sympathized very deeply in the fortunes of a kinsman whose moral and intellectual endowments reflected so much lustre on the family to which he belonged. (x.)