Duncomius wrote to Gerard Vossius, February 2, 1646[718], "It is certain and beyond dispute that Grotius was a very ill.u.s.trious hero, _usque ad stuporem fere 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 ill.u.s.trious 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 ent.i.tled _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 ill.u.s.trious 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 t.i.tle 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 t.i.tle 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, a.s.sures 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 Barlaeus; 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 Martia.n.u.s 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 emba.s.sy 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. Praes. 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.