SOME OF THE PRINCIPAL WORKS OF GROTIUS.

1. His Edition of Stobaeus.

2. His Treatise de Jure Belli et Pacis.

3. His Treatise de Veritate Religionis Christianae.

4. His Treatise de Jure summarum potestatum circa sacra.

5. His Commentary on the Scriptures.

6. Some other Works of Grotius

That literature is an ornament in prosperity, and a comfort in adverse fortune, has been often said by the best and wisest men; but no one experienced the truth of this assertion in a higher degree than Grotius, during his imprisonment at Louvestein. In that wreck of his fortune and overthrow of all his hopes, books came to his aid, soothed his sorrows, and beguiled the wearisome hours of his gloomy solitude. His studies often stole him from himself, and from the sense of his misfortunes. In the exercise of his mental energies, he was sensible of their powers; and it was impossible that he should contemplate, without pleasure, the extent, the worth, or the splendour of his labours; the services, which he rendered by them to learning and religion, and the admiration and gratitude of the scholar, which he then enjoyed, and which would attend his memory to the latest posterity. He himself acknowledged that, in the ardour of his literary pursuits, he often forgot his calamities, and that the hours passed unheeded, if not in joy, at least without pain.

X 1.

His Edition of Stobaeus.

Being ourselves unacquainted with this work, we cannot do better than present our readers with the account given of it by Burigni.

“The year after the publication of his Apology, that is to say in 1623, Nicholas Huon printed at Paris, Grotius’s improvements and additions to Stobaeus. 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 to 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 finished it at Paris. He made several happy corrections in the text of Stobaeus; some, from his own conjectures or those of his friends; others, on the authority of manuscripts in the King’s library, which were 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 writ 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.”

The work was received with universal approbation.

X 2.

His Treatise de Jure Belli et Pacis.

Grotius may be considered as the founder of the modern school of the Law of Nature and of Nations. He was struck with the ruthless manner, in which wars were generally conducted; the slight pretences, upon which they were generally begun; and the barbarity and injustice, with which they were generally attended. He attributed these evils to the want of settled principles respecting the rights and duties of nations and individuals in a state of war. These, he observed, must depend on the previous rights and duties of mankind, in a state of peace: this led him to the preliminary inquiry into their rights and duties in a state of nature.

Thus, an ample field was opened to him. He brought to it, a vigorous discerning mind, and stupendous erudition. From antient and modern history, philosophy, oratory, and poetry, he collected facts and sayings, which appeared to him to establish a general agreement of all civilized nations upon certain principles. From these, he formed his system; applying them, as he proceeded in his work, to a vast multitude of circumstances. These are so numerous, that some persons have not scrupled to say, that no case or international law, either in war or in peace, can be stated, to which the work of Grotius does not contain an applicable rule.

Three important objections have been made to this celebrated work, one, that the author defers in it, too little, to principle, too much, to authority; another, that the work is written in a very desultory manner, with small attention to order, or classification; a third, that his authorities are often feeble, and sometimes whimsical. “Grotius,” says Condillac, “was able to think for himself; but he constantly labours to support his conclusions by the authority of others. Upon many occasions; even in support of the most obvious and indisputable propositions, he introduces a long string of quotations from the Mosaic law, from the Gospels, from the fathers of the church, from the casuists, and not unfrequently, even in the very same paragraph, from Ovid, and Aristophanes.” This strange mixture is subject of many witticisms of Voltaire. But let us hear what is urged in the defence of Grotius, by a gentleman, of whose praise the ablest of writers may be proud:

“Few writers,” says Sir James Mackintosh, in his Discourse on the Study of the Law of Nature and Nations, “were more celebrated than Grotius in his own days, and in the age which succeeded. It has, however, been the fashion of the last half century to depreciate his work, as a shapeless compilation, in which reason lies buried under a mass of authorities and quotations. This fashion originated among French wits and declaimers, and it has been, I know not for what reason, adopted, though with far greater moderation and decency, by some respectable writers among ourselves. As to those, who first used this language, the most candid supposition that we can make with respect to them is, that they never read the work; for, if they had not been deterred from the perusal of it by such a formidable display of Greek characters, they must soon have discovered that Grotius never quotes, on any subject, till he has first appealed to some principles; and often, in my humble opinion, though, not always, to the soundest and most rational principles.

“But another sort of answer is due to some of those, who have criticised Grotius; and that answer might be given in the words of Grotius himself. He was not of such a stupid and servile cast of mind as to quote the opinions of poets or orators, of historians and philosophers, as those of judges, from whose decision there was no appeal. He quotes them, as he tells us himself, as witnesses, whose conspiring testimony, mightily strengthened and confirmed by their discordance on almost every other subject, is a conclusive proof of the unanimity of the whole human race on the great rules of duty, and the fundamental principles of morals. Of such matters, poets and orators are the most unexceptionable of all witnesses; for they address themselves to the general feelings and sympathies of mankind; they are neither warped by system, nor perverted by sophistry; they can attain none of their objects; they can neither please nor persuade, if they dwell on moral sentiments not in unison with those of their readers. No system of moral philosophy can surely disregard the general feelings of human nature, and the according judgment of all ages and nations. But, where are these feelings and that judgment recorded and preserved? In those very writings which Grotius is gravely blamed for having quoted. The usages and law of nations, the events of history, the opinions of philosophers, the sentiments of orators and poets, as well as the observation of common life, are, in truth, the materials out of which the science of morality is formed; and those who neglect them, are justly chargeable with a vain attempt to philosophise without regard to fact and experience, the sole foundation of all true philosophy.

“If this were merely an objection of taste, I should be willing to allow, that Grotius has indeed poured forth his learning with a profusion, that sometimes rather encumbers than adorns his work, and which is not always necessary to the illustration of his subject. Yet, even in making, that concession, I should rather yield to the tastes of others, than speak from my own feelings. I own that such richness and splendour of literature have a powerful charm for me. They fill my mind with an endless variety of delightful recollections and associations. They relieve the understanding in its progress through a vast science, by calling up the memory of great men and of interesting events. By this means we see the truths of morality clothed with all the eloquence (not that could be produced by the powers of one man, but) that could be bestowed on them by the collective genius of the world. Even virtue and wisdom themselves acquire new majesty in my eyes, when I thus see all the great masters of thinking and writing called together, as it were, from all times and countries, to do them homage and to appear in their train.

“But this is no piece for discussions of taste, and I am very ready to own, that mine may be corrupted. The work of Grotius is liable to a more serious objection, though I do not recollect that it has ever been made. His method is inconvenient and unscientific. He has inverted the natural order. That natural order undoubtedly dictates, that we should first search for the original principles of the science, in human nature; then apply them to the regulation of the conduct of individuals; and lastly employ them for the decision of those difficult and complicated questions that arise with respect to the intercourse of nations. But Grotius has chosen the reverse of this method. He begins with the consideration of the states of peace and war, and he examines original principles, only occasionally and incidentally, as they grow out of the questions, which he is called upon to decide. It is a necessary consequence of this disorderly method, which exhibits the elements of the science in the form of scattered digressions, that he seldom employs sufficient discussion on those fundamental truths, and never in the place where such a discussion would be most instructive to the reader. This defect in the plan of Grotius was perceived, and supplied by Puffendorf, who restored natural law to that superiority which belonged to it, and with great propriety, treated the law of nations as only one main branch of the parent stock.”

Whatever may be the merit of the work of which we are speaking, it must be admitted, that few, on their first appearance, and during a long subsequent period after publication, have received greater or warmer applause. The stores of erudition displayed in it, recommended it to the classical scholar, while the happy application of the author’s reading to the affairs of human life, drew to it the attention of common readers. Among those, whose approbation of it, deserved to be recorded, Gustavus Adolphus, his prime minister the Chancellor Oxenstiern, and the Elector Palatine Charles Lewis, deserve particular mention. As the trophies of Miltiades are supposed to have kept Themistocles awake, it has been said that the trophies of Grotius drove sleep from Selden, till be produced his celebrated treatise, “De Jure naturali et gentium secundum leges Ebraeorim.” This important work equals that of Grotius in learning; but, from the partial and recondite nature of its subject, never equalled it in popularity.

The supposed want of general elementary principles in the work of Grotius gave occasion to Puffendorf’s treatise de Jure Naturae et Gentium; afterwards abridged by him into the small octavo volume De Officio hominis et civis: an edition of it in octavo was published by Professor Garschen Carmichael, of Glasgow, in 1724.

The best edition of Grotius’s treatise de Jure Belli et Pacis was published at Amsterdam in 1730, by John Barbeyrac.

Foreigners observe, that the study of the law of nature and nations is less cultivated in England than upon the continent. Is it not, because Englishmen are blessed with a free constitution; are admitted into a general participation of all its blessings; are thus personally interested in the national concerns; and have therefore a jurisprudence, which comes nearer to their bosoms? Is it not also, because the law of nature and nations, with all its merit, is so loose, that its principles seldom admit of that practical application, which renders them really useful; and which an English mind always requires?

X 3.

De Veritate Religionis Christianae.

Grotius, while a prisoner in the Castle of Louvestein, had written, in the Dutch language, “A treatise on the Truth of the Christian Religion.” He afterwards enlarged it, and translated it, so enlarged, into Latin. It was universally read and admired. French, German, English, modern Greek, Persic, and even Turkish versions of it have been made: it was equally approved by Catholics and Protestants.

It was invidiously objected, that he did not attempt to prove, or even mention, the Trinity, and some other gospel mysteries: he replied, satisfactorily in our opinion, that a discussion of any particular tenet of the Christian religion did not fall within the scope of his work. In this respect, he was afterwards imitated by Abadie and Houteville, two of the most eminent apologists of Christianity. The latter expresses himself of the work of Grotius in the following terms:

“Grotius’s work is the first, in which we find the characteristics of just reasoning, accuracy, and strength: he is extremely concise; but even this brevity will please us, when we find his work comprehends so many things, without confounding them or lessening their evidence or force. It is no wonder that the book should be translated into so many languages.”

The best edition of it is that published by Le Clerc, in 1709 at Amsterdam, in 8vo. To this edition, Le Clerc has added a curious dissertation on religious indifference. He presumes that the supposed indifference is persuaded of the authenticity of the New Testament: He then (says Le Clerc) must ascertain,

1. Which are the denominations of religionists which avow their belief of it:

2. Which of these are most worthy of the name of Christians:

3. And which profess the Christian religion in most purity and with least extraneous alloy:

4. He will find, that all Christians agree in the fundamental articles of faith:

5. That all these articles are clearly expressed in the New Testament:

6. That no tenet should be believed to be of faith, unless the New Testament contains it.

7. That the providence of God is admirable in the preservation of these tenets, amidst the confused multitude of religious opinions, which have prevailed in the world:

8. That this confusion was foreseen by God:

9. That he permitted it as a consequence of his gift of free-will to man:

10. That the inquirer should aggregate himself to that religious communion, which receives the New Testament as its only rule of faith, and does not persecute others:

11. That episcopacy without tyranny is the most antient form of ecclesiastical government, and most to be desired; but that it is not essential to a Christian church:

12. That these were the opinions of Grotius:

13. Finally, that it is greatly to be desired that a belief of no dogma, not explicitly propounded in the New Testament, should be required.

Such is the religious system propounded by Le Clerc. Does any religious communion really profess it? Many Protestant churches declare, that the Bible, and the Bible only, contains their creed: but, do they not all mean by this the Bible, as it is explained by the Articles, the Formulary, or the Confession received by their church?

X 4.

Grotius’s Treatise De Jure summarum potestatum circa sacra. And, Commentatio ad loca quaedam Novi Testamenti, quae de Antichristo agunt, aut agere putantur.

Nothing in the life of Grotius places him in a more amiable or respectable point of view, than his constant attempts to put Catholics and Protestants into good humour with each other, and to put both into good humour among themselves.

We have mentioned the pacific decree of the States of Holland, which ordered the contending communions to tolerate each other. Grotius is supposed to have framed this wise decree. The Contra-remonstrants attacked it: Grotius reprinted it, with a collection of proofs and authorities.

It gave rise to a controversy on the nice question, respecting the authority of the temporal power to interfere in the ecclesiastical concerns of the state. Grotius adopted, upon this point, the sentiments of what is termed in England the Low Church: he seems to have pushed them to their utmost bearings. With these sentiments, he published his treatise de Imperio summarum potestatum circa sacra. It was disliked by King James and his bishops: Grotius, in their opinion, gave too much authority, in sacred things, to the secular power.

On the work of Grotius, respecting Anti-christ, we prefer transcribing Burigni’s sentiments to delivering our own.

“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 re-union, 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.

“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 thus to his brother), 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 re-union, 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 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. ‘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, 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 Anti-christ made much noise among all the declared enemies of the Romish church. 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 inquiry 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 De, 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 Desmonets, minister of Bois le duc, who has written against him with much bitterness.’

“Grotius’s work was printed in 1640, with this title: Commentatio ad loca quaedam Novi Testamenti, quae de Antichristo agunt aut agere putantur: Expedenda eruditis."

X 5.

His Commentary on the Scriptures.

The theological works of Grotius are comprised in four volumes folio: the three first contain his Commentary, and Notes upon the Scriptures. On their merit, both Catholics and Protestants considerably differ. All allow that an abundance of sacred and profane learning is displayed in them; and that Grotius, by his references to the writings of the Rabbis, and his remarks upon the idiom of the sacred writings, has happily elucidated a multitude of passages in the text. He uniformly adopts the literal and obvious signification of the language used by the holy penmen. In explaining the predictions of the prophets, he maintains that they referred to events anterior to the coming of Christ, and were accomplished in these; so that the natural and obvious sense of the words and phrases, in which they were delivered, does not terminate in Christ; yet, that in some of the predictions, those particularly, which the writers of the New Testament apply to Christ, there is, besides the literal and obvious signification, a hidden and mysterious sense, which lies concealed under the external mark of certain persons, certain events, and certain actions, which are representative of the person, the ministry, the sufferings, and the merits of the Son of God.

It has been objected, that this system leads to Socinianism, and even beyond it. All Catholic, and several episcopalian Protestant divines object to it; they generally contend, that the sacred writings ought always to be understood in that sense only, which has been attributed to them, by the early fathers. Against this system, Dr. Whitby published his celebrated work “Concerning the Interpretation of Scripture after the manner of the Fathers."

The system of Grotius was defended, to a certain extent, by Father Simon, the oratorian, the father of the modern biblical school. Against both Simon and Grotius, Bossuet wielded his powerful lance, in his “Pastoral Instruction on the Works of Father Simon,” and his “Dissertations upon Grotius.” In these works he says that, during thirty years,

“Grotius searched for truth in good faith, and at last was so near it, that it is wonderful that he did not take the last step, to which God called him. Shocked at Calvin’s harsh doctrines, he embraced Arminianism; then, abandoned it. More a lawyer than a theologian, more a polite scholar than a philosopher, he throws the doctrine of the immortality of the soul into obscurity. He endeavours to weaken and steal from the church, her most powerful proofs of the divinity of the Son of God, and strives to darken the prophecies, which announce the arrival of the Messiah.”

Bossuet proceeds to particularize some of the principal errors of Grotius: Le Clerc replied to the prelate’s criticism, by his Sentimens de quelques Theologiens de la Hollande. Grotius had also an able advocate in Father Simon. His defence of Grotius against the charge of semi-Pelagianism, in the Bibliotheque de Sainjore, appears to be satisfactory. He cites the note of Grotius, on the Acts of the Apostles, (the celebrated ch. xiii. ver. 38), in which he says expressly that he does not exclude preventive grace: this the semi-Pelagians denied altogether. But in his defence of Grotius against the charge of Socinianism, he is not equally successful. Bossuet sent his Pastoral Instruction, and Dissertations upon Grotius, to the bishop of Frejus, afterward Cardinal de Fleury: he accompanied them by a letter, which closes with these remarkable words:

“The spirit of incredulity gains ground in the world every day: you have often heard me make this remark. It is now worse than ever, as the Gospel itself is used for the corruption of religion. I thank God that at my age he blesses me with sufficient strength to resist the torrent.”

Dom. Calmet calls Grotius,

“one of the most able and moderate Protestant writers: one who spreads throughout his notes a pleasing profusion of profane literature, which causes his works to be sought for and read by those, who have taste for that kind of literature. His high reputation, great erudition, and rare modesty,” says Dom. Calmet, “render it easy for him to insinuate his particular sentiments respecting the divinity of Christ, against which, his readers should be guarded.”

X 6.

Some other Works of Grotius.

1. The first which we shall mention is his history of the Goths, Vandals, and Lombards, written in the Latin language, and accompanied by learned dissertations. He composed it, as a testimony of his gratitude to the Swedes, by doing honour to their gothic ancestors. The preface has always been admired, for its erudition and sound criticism. But the Belgic friends of Grotius accused him of elevating the Swedes at their expense.

2. A more important work consists of his Annals, and History of the United Provinces. The Annals begin with the year 1588, when Prince Maurice had the greatest influence in the affairs of the United Provinces; and concludes with the truce of twelve years, signed between them and Spain. The impartiality, with which these works are written, has been praised by every writer.

It is to be lamented that Grotius professed to imitate, both in his Annals and History, the style of Tacitus. Expressed by his own pen, the style of Tacitus is energetic, picturesque, and pleasing; but it is impossible to deny its frequent abruptness and obscurity. Generally speaking, an imitation of what is defective, contains a larger share, than the original, of its distinctive defect. It should however be added, that Grotius’s own style is short, sententious and broken; and possesses nothing of the meliflous ease of the ultramontane Latinists; or of our Milton or Buchanan. None of the works of Grotius, which we have mentioned in this Article, were published till after his decease.

3. It remains to notice the Letters of Grotius, published at Amsterdam in one volume folio, in 1687. A multitude of his unpublished letters is said to exist in different public and private libraries.

His published letters are an invaluable treasure: they abound with wise maxims of sound policy, and curious discussions on points arising on Roman or Belgic jurisprudence. Many points of sacred and profane learning, and particularly of the civil and canon law, are treated in them with equal learning and taste. For the perfect understanding of them, the letters of the correspondents of Grotius should be perused: they are principally to be found, in the Praestantium et Eruditorum Virorum Epistolae Ecclesiasticae et Theologicae, published at Amsterdam in 1684. A critical account of the Letters of Grotius, executed with great taste and judgment, is inserted in the first volume of the Bibliotheque Universelle et Historique.

It is acknowledged that the letters of Grotius, are written in the finest latinity, and contain much valuable information; but the point, the sprightliness, the genius, the vivid descriptions of men and things, which are so profusely scattered over the letters of Erasmus, are seldom discoverable in those of Grotius. A man of learning would have been gratified beyond measure, by the profound conversations of Grotius and Father Petau: but what a treat must it have been, to have assisted with one, two, or three good listeners, at the conversations between Erasmus and Sir Thomas More!