1
HUGO GROTIUS (1583–1645):
The Making of A Founding Father of International Law*
Martine Julia van Ittersum
The Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius (1583–1645) became known as the ‘father of international
law’ in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. It is hard to avoid this origins myth in a
town like The Hague, with its various international courts and centres for the study of
international law.1 The Peace Palace in The Hague and its library were conceived right
from the start as a temple of international law and a shrine for its alleged founding father.
P C Molhuysen (1870–1944) and Jacob ter Meulen (1884–1962), the two most important
Directors of the Peace Palace Library (PPL) in the first fifty years of its existence, created
the Library’s famous Grotiana collection, the biggest collection of Grotius’ printed works
in the world.2 Molhuysen also initiated the monumental, 17-volume edition of Grotius’
correspondence, while Ter Meulen compiled a bibliography of all of Grotius’ printed
works, still considered authoritative.3 The tradition remains unbroken until today: in
2011, the PPL acquired a first edition of Grotius’ magnum opus, De Jure Belli ac Pacis
* This essay chapter was first given as a public lecture at Harvard University in November 2011, when I
served as Erasmus Lecturer on the History and Civilization of The Netherlands and Flanders. The
Leverhulme Trust, the Netherland-America Foundation, the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland,
the Caledonian Research Fund and the Royal Society of Edinburgh have financially supported my research
and writing. I have also benefited from various visiting fellowships at Huygens ING in The Hague, in
2009-10, and the summers of 2011 and 2013. I should like to thank both Ms. Ingrid Kost, Head of Special
Collections at the Peace Palace Library, and Mr. Jeroen Vervliet, PPL Director, for supporting my research
on Grotius for many years now. They are not afraid of critical appraisals of the patron saint of the Peace
Palace.
1
Arthur Eyffinger, The Hague: International Centre of Justice and Peace (The Hague: Jongbloed Law
Booksellers, 2003) and Dreaming the Ideal, Living the Attainable: T M C Asser [1838-1913], Founder of
The Hague Tradition (The Hague: T M C Asser Press, 2011).
2
Briefwisseling van Hugo Grotius ed. P.C. Molhuysen, B.L. Meulenbroek, Paula Witkam, C. Ridderikhof
and H.J.M. Nellen, 17 vols. (The Hague, 1928-2001), now available electronically at
http://grotius.huygens.knaw.nl/years; Arthur Eyffinger, The Grotius collection at the Peace Palace: A
Concise Catalogue (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1983); The World of Hugo Grotius (1583-1645): Proceedings of
the International Colloquium Organized by the Grotius Committee of the Royal Netherlands Academy of
Arts and Sciences, Rotterdam, 6-9 April 1983 (Amsterdam & Maarssen: APA – Holland University Press,
1984).
3
Jacob ter Meulen, Concise Bibliography of Hugo Grotius (Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff Publishers, 1925);
Grotius-tentoonstelling te 's-Gravenhage, 13-28 juni 1925 ed. E.A. van Beresteyn (Leiden: Sijthoff
Publishers, 1925); Jacob ter Meulen and P.J.J. Diermanse, Bibliographie des écrits imprimés de Hugo
Grotius (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1950) and Bibliographie des écrits sur Hugo Grotius imprimés au
XVIIe siècle (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1961).
2
(1625), for the sizeable sum of €100,000.4 Nor is there any sign of the International Court
of Justice losing interest in Grotius. His work was cited most recently in a dispute
between Singapore and Malaysia over the island of Pedra Branca (verdict of 23 May
2008).5 ICJ judges routinely receive presentation copies of new editions of Grotius’ work.
The late Robert Feenstra, the greatest Dutch legal historian of the second half of the
twentieth century, offered the ICJ President copies of his1993 edition of De Jure Belli ac
Pacis and 2009 edition of Mare Liberum, for example.6 Moreover, Grotius is lionized in
countless publications of international lawyers, philosophers, IR specialists and legal
historians, who invariably present him as a great humanitarian, a prince of peace and
secularizer of international law.7
I take issue with what I call the ‘Grotius Delusion’. My aim is to explain how the origins
myth came into being and whose interests have been served by it. It was a combination
of Dutch nationalism and the rise of modern international law that turned Grotius into a
‘founding father’, with a little help, it should be said, from the American delegates at the
1899 Hague Peace Conference. It is based on a highly selective reading of De Jure Belli
ac Pacis and completely ignores the larger historical context of Grotius’ work,
Henk Nellen, Grotius's memory honoured: on the acquisition of the first edition of ‘De iure belli ac pacis’
by the Peace Palace Library (The Hague: Peace Palace Library, 2012).
4
5
Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge, Malaysia v Singapore,
Judgment, ICJ Rep 2008, p 12, 23 May 2008.
6
Arthur Eyffinger, The International Court of Justice, 1946–1996 (The Hague: Kluwer Law International,
1995); Hugo Grotius, De iure belli ac pacis libri tres in quibus ius naturae & gentium: item iuris publici
praecipua explicantur, ed. B. J. A. de Kanter-van Hettinga Tromp (Leiden: E.J. Brill Publishers, 1939;
second, expanded edition with notes by Robert Feenstra and C.A. Persenaire, Aalen, Scientia Verlag,
1993); Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, 1609-2009: Original Latin Text and Modern English Translation, ed.
Robert Feenstra, with a general introduction by Jeroen Vervliet (Leiden and Boston: Brill Academic
Publishers, 2009).
A report on the ‘Mare Liberum 1609-2009’ conference at the PPL on 11 Dec. 2009, including
pictures of Prof. Feenstra presenting his Mare Liberum edition to the ICJ President, can be found on the
website of ‘The Hague Academic Coalition’: http://www.haguecoalition.org/mare-liberum-the-freedom-oft/
7
John Dunn and Ian Harris (eds.), Grotius, vols. 1–2 (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 1997) is
an anthology of classic 20th century publications on Grotius as ‘secularizer’, ‘humanitarian’, ‘father of
international law’, etc. See also Hedly Bull et al. (eds.) Hugo Grotius and International Relations (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1990) and Philip Allott, ‘Language, method and the nature of international law,’ British
Yearbook of International Law (1971), 79-135, republished in M. Koskenniemi, ed., The International
Library of Essays in Law and Legal Theory – International Law (1992).
3
particularly his hands-on involvement in Western imperialism and colonialism. I start
with a short overview of Grotius’ life, briefly discuss his public image in The Netherlands
in the early modern period, and then examine how it changed as a consequence of the rise
of international law in the nineteenth century. I end with a discussion of recent historical
research on Grotius, which aims to properly contextualize his life and work, rather than to
focus on just one aspect of it and use that to justify modern-day arrangements for conflict
resolutions between states.
Grotius’ Life and Times
Hugo de Groot, known to the English-speaking world by the Latinised name of Grotius,
was born into a prominent regent (i.e. patrician) family in Delft on Easter Day 1583. Just
two years earlier, the Dutch States General had abjured Philip II of Spain and Portugal as
the ruler of the Low Countries and de facto created a new state, the Dutch Republic.
Grotius started his professional life as a private solicitor, at the tender age of sixteen. In
1604, the directors of the Dutch East India Company or VOC asked him to write a
defence of the Company’s privateering campaign in Asian waters, aggressively attacking
the Portuguese Estado da India. Grotius was happy to oblige, and completed his De
Indiis in 1607-08. This treatise of 163 folios remained in manuscript, only to appear in
print in the nineteenth century, as De Jure Praedae/On the Law of Prize and Booty. At
the Directors’ request, Grotius did publish chapter twelve of De Indiis separately in 1609
as Mare Liberum/The Free Sea “or …the Right Which the Hollanders Ought to Have to
the Indian Trade.” He continued to support the VOC in word and deed for the rest of his
life, negotiating on the Company’s behalf with the English East India Company in 1613
and 1615, for example.8
Thanks to the patronage of Johan van Oldenbarnevelt, de facto political leader of the
Dutch Republic and a friend of Grotius’ father, he was quickly appointed to a number of
Martine Julia van Ittersum, Profit and Principle: Hugo Grotius, Natural Rights Theories and the Rise of
Dutch Power in the East Indies, 1595-1615 (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2006); Hugo Grotius,
Commentary on the Law of Prize and Booty, trans. Gwladys L. Williams and ed. Martine Julia van Ittersum
(Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2006); The Free Sea trans. Richard Hakluyt and ed. David Armitage
(Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2004).
8
4
high-level political positions at the provincial and federal level. He became AdvocateFiscal (i.e. public prosecutor) of Holland in December 1607 and Pensionary (i.e. chief
legal adviser) of the town of Rotterdam in June 1613. In the latter capacity, Grotius
joined the Rotterdam delegation in the States of Holland. In May 1617, he became a
member of the Holland delegation in the Dutch States General, the federal government of
the Dutch Republic. By all accounts, it was a meteoric political career. Grotius would
undoubtedly have succeeded Oldenbarnevelt as political leader of the Dutch Republic,
had it not been for religious troubles that brought the rebel state to the brink of collapse
during the Twelve Years Truce (1609–21). Orthodox Calvinists squared off against the
so-called ‘Remonstrants’, followers of the Leiden theologian Arminius. Although
Arminius’ followers were a minority in the Dutch Reformed Church, they enjoyed the
support of the States of Holland, in particular of Oldenbarnevelt and Grotius. The
theological bickering developed into a major political crisis that endangered the existence
of the Dutch Republic. Prince Maurice of Orange, commander-in-chief of the country’s
naval and military forces and Stadtholder (i.e. governor) of six of its seven provinces,
could not stand idly by. In August 1618, he sought to break the political deadlock by
means of a regime change, which landed Grotius in prison for almost three years. In view
of his close association with Oldenbarnevelt—executed in May 1619—he was lucky to
escape with his life.9
Yet Grotius’ political career was far from over. In March 1621, he escaped from
Loevestein Castle in a book trunk. He headed south to Paris, where he lived as an exile
for many years and received a pension from the French Crown. As a quid pro quo, he
dedicated De Jure Belli ac Pacis (1625) to Louis XIII of France. Cardinal De Richelieu
was eager to tap Grotius’ in-depth knowledge of Dutch overseas expansion and
commercial governance, and sought to involve him in the establishment of a French East
India Company. Yet Grotius was unwilling to burn his bridges behind him. For a long
time he believed that he would be reinstated as Pensionary of Rotterdam once Prince
9
H.J.M. Nellen, Hugo de Groot:Een leven in strijd om de vrede, 1583-1645 (Uitgeverij Balans, 2007) 25225; De Hollandse jaren van Hugo de Groot (1583-1621) ed. H.J.M. Nellen and J. Trapman (Hilversum:
Verloren Publishers, 1996); Jan den Tex, Oldenbarnevelt trans. R.B. Powell 2 vols. (Cambridge: CUP,
1973).
5
Maurice’s younger brother and heir, Prince Frederic Henry, had established himself in
power. Grotius returned to Holland in October 1631 in order to force a breakthrough in
the negotiations about his possible rehabilitation. His ostentatious visits to Rotterdam and
Amsterdam badly backfired, however. In April 1632, the States of Holland exiled him
once more and put a price of 2,000 guilders on his head. The definitive breach with his
homeland came after two unhappy years in Hamburg. Grotius accepted the offer of the
Swedish chancellor Axel Oxenstierna to become the resident Swedish ambassador in
Paris. In the context of the Thirty Years War, this was an important and sensitive
position: after the death of king Gustavus Adolphus, the Swedish armies in Germany
were essentially kept afloat with French subsidies. It was Grotius’ job to maintain good
relations with the French ally, particularly Cardinal de Richelieu. He discharged this task
for nearly ten years, albeit with uneven success, due to French opposition to his
appointment. He was finally recalled by the Swedish government in January 1645 and
arrived in Stockholm five months later. He refused to become one of Queen Christina’s
privy councillors, however, and took the first ship back to France. After a storm-ridden
voyage across the Baltic, his ship was wrecked off the Pomeranian coast in August 1645.
Although Grotius safely reached the shore, he died at an inn in Rostock, aged 62. He was
buried in the family crypt in the New Church in Delft.10
Grotius’ Nachleben in the Low Countries
Grotius’ star waxed and waned in the Dutch Republic and its successor state, the
Kingdom of The Netherlands, for over four centuries. The Remonstrants, who remain a
religious minority in The Netherlands, have claimed Grotius as a ‘martyr for toleration’.
Grotius’ descendants sympathized with their cause. At the turn of the eighteenth century,
two Remonstrant divines gained unprecedented access to Grotius’ papers and wrote a
300-page biography of their hero, still considered authoritative today. They focused on
Grotius’ attempts to resolve the religious crises of his age, at the expense of other aspects
of his life and work, such as his advocacy of VOC interests. In the later eighteenth
10
Nellen, Hugo de Groot 226-262, 271-277, 317-331, 364-405, 470-475, 532-550, 580-592; Martine Julia
van Ittersum, 'The Long Goodbye: Hugo Grotius and the Justification of Dutch Expansion Overseas (16041645)', History of European Ideas 36 (2010) pp. 386-411.
6
century, Grotius became the darling of the Dutch Patriots, the political opponents of
William V of Orange. The Dutch Patriots sought to reform the government of the Dutch
Republic along democratic lines and reduce the power of the Stadtholder or abolish the
office entirely. For them, Grotius was a noble defender of republican government and
freedom, who had fallen victim to the power hungry Princes of Orange. The only
complicating factor was that Grotius’ descendants in Rotterdam had meanwhile become
clients of the Stadtholder! As a result of Prussian intervention, the Patriot Revolution was
crushed in 1787. However, exiled Patriots would return to positions of power in The
Netherlands in 1795, in the wake of the French Revolutionary Armies. They brought their
idealized image of Grotius with them. As a ‘martyr for freedom’, he became part of the
ideological pedigree of the Batavian Republic, a sister republic of the French Republic.
Grotius’ newfound popularity did not survive Napoleon’s fall in 1813. The establishment
of the new Kingdom of The Netherlands discouraged any talk of the republican heroes of
yore. The political elite of The Netherlands, both former Orangists and Patriots, wished
to portray itself as being united in the service of King William I, the eldest son of the last
Stadtholder. The disestablishment of the Dutch Reformed Church in 1851 also ended the
Remonstrant crusade for equal rights. Consequently, there was less need to appeal to
Grotius’ alleged legacy of toleration. At the same time, Grotius’ descendants lost control
of his material legacy: 30-odd volumes of manuscripts—family heirlooms for over two
centuries—were auctioned in The Hague in November 1864. The main buyers were the
Swedish Government, the Remonstrant Church in Rotterdam, the Municipal Archives of
Rotterdam, the Dutch National Archives, Leiden University Library and Johan Pieter
Cornets de Groot van Kraayenburg (1808–78), a scion of the cadet branch of the family.
The Dutch government made no attempt to buy or preserve this unique collection of
manuscripts. This lack of interest in Grotius and his material legacy would change
dramatically as a result of the rise of international law in the late nineteenth century,
which turned Grotius into a Dutch national hero as well as a father of international law.11
11
Hugo Grotius, Meletius, sive, De iis quae inter Christianos conveniunt epistola, ed. with transl.,
commentary and introd. by Guillaume H.M. Posthumus Meyjes pp. 6-7; Henk Nellen, ‘Confidentiality and
Indiscretion: The Intricacies of Publishing Grotius’ Correspondence Posthumously’, Produktion und
Kontext: Beiträge der Internationalen Fachtagung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft für germanistische Edition im
Constantijn Huygens Instituut, Den Haag, 4. bis 7. März 1998 ed. H.T.M van Vliet (Tübingen: Max
Niemeyer Verlag, 1998) pp. 135-144, Caspar Brandt and Adriaan van Cattenburgh, Historie van het Leven
7
A reburial of sorts took place in the vestry of the New Church in Delft on 18 October
1889. The gentlemen present, all wearing full dress, were the Keeper of the Royal Crypt,
the burgomaster and aldermen of Delft, and J A W L Cornets de Groot van Kraayenburg
(1862–1923), grandson and heir of J P Cornets de Groot van Kraayenburg.12 In a short
ceremony, Grotius’ remains were transferred into a new leaden casket, which, in turn,
was put into a ‘beautifully carved’ oak coffin, sealed with a ribbon of yellow, black and
red—the armorial colours of the Cornets de Groot lineage. Grotius’ coffin had also been
opened a century earlier, at the time of the burial of his great-great grandson, the
Rotterdam burgomaster Hugo Cornets de Groot. At that point, a small copper plaque had
been affixed to Grotius’ coffin, bearing the inscription: ‘het gebeente van H.d.G.’ (‘the
remains of H[ugo] d[e] G[root]’). The ceremony in May 1777 had been a private family
affair. By contrast, the reburial in October 1889 was a minor media event, reported in
several local and national newspapers. It followed hard upon the heels of the unveiling of
the Grotius statue in the Delft market square three years earlier, and a commemoration in
the New Church in April 1883 of the tercentenary of Grotius’ birth. The man and the
myth were fast becoming public property. Dutch nationalism, American enthusiasm and
the rise of modern international law were the three most important factors in the making
of Grotius’ modern image.13
The 1899 Hague Peace Conference
The 1899 peace conference in The Hague sealed Grotius’ twentieth-century reputation as
‘father of international law’. In August 1898, the Russian Tsar invited other European
governments to join him in what he called ‘the maintenance of general peace and a
des Heeren Huig de Groot 2 vols. (Dordrecht, 1727).
12
Martine Julia van Ittersum, ‘Confronting Grotius’ Legacy in an Age of Revolution: The Cornets de Groot
Family in Rotterdam, 1748-1798’, English Historical Review CXXVII no. 529 (Dec. 2012) 1367-1403;
Catalogue de Manuscrits Autographes de Hugo Grotius, second edition, ed. W.J.M. van Eysinga and L.J.
Noordhoff (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1952); L.J. Noordhoff, Beschrijving van het zich in Nederland
bevindende en nog onbeschreven gedeelte der papieren afkomstig van Huig de Groot, welke in 1864 te 'sGravenhage zijn geveild (Groningen: Noordhoff, 1953) pp. 7-14. On J.P. Cornets de Groot van
Kraaijenburg, see http://www.parlementairdocumentatiecentrum.nl/id/vg09llj55bt3
13
Royal Library, The Hague, Cornets de Groot Archive, CdG 17 f. 60-61, 122-125, 130-131.
8
possible reduction of the excessive armaments which weigh upon all nations’.14 The
Russian government’s deteriorating financial position and the growth of German military
and naval power were important considerations for the young ruler. Initially, his
diplomatic initiative met with strong reservations in Western Europe. The one exception
was the Dutch government, which responded enthusiastically to the tsar’s proposals. In
January 1899, the Russian Foreign Secretary asked his Dutch counterpart to host the
proposed peace conference in The Hague. Four months later, the delegates of 25
countries, including China, Japan, Thailand, Persia, Turkey, Mexico and the US met at
the conference venue, the royal palace Huis Ten Bosch (House in the Woods).
Expectations were low. The head of the American delegation, Andrew Dickson White—
American ambassador in Berlin and founding president of Cornell University—noted:
‘probably, since the world began, never has so large a body come together in a spirit of
more hopeless scepticism as to any good result’. Yet a strong sense of historical mission
and a spirit of teamwork and collegiality resulted in an unexpected breakthrough in late
July: the establishment of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), which still exists
today. White was convinced that the Grotius commemoration in Delft on 4 July 1899,
organized by the American delegation, had materially contributed to this success.15
That is probably too simplistic an explanation for the establishment of the PCA.
According to Arthur Eyffinger, the conference delegates were aided in their deliberations
by a busy social schedule, which allowed to exchange ideas and opinions ‘off the
record’.16 Dutch government authorities and foreign embassies in The Hague organized a
seemingly endless round of lunches, teas, receptions, dinners, concerts, balls and
excursions—on average one social event every other day. White came up with the
brilliant idea to organize a Grotius commemoration, a real propaganda coup for the young
American republic. It became an iconic event—not least because of American selfpublicity—which firmly tied Grotius’s legacy to modern international law and confirmed
14
As cited by Barbara Tuchman, The Proud Tower: A Portrait of the World Before the War, 1890-1914
(Macmillan, 1966) p. 239.
15
Eyffinger, The 1899 Hague Peace Conference pp. 15-40, 70-202; Calvin De Armond Davis, The United
States and the First Hague Peace Conference (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1962) p. 90
16
Eyffinger, The 1899 Hague Peace Conference pp. 318-333.
9
Dutch-American friendship, embedding the history of both countries in the seductive
narrative of the progress of Western civilization.17
What made the celebration of Dutch history and culture so attractive to White? In her
book Holland Mania (1998), Annette Stott examines the fetishism for all things Dutch
among the urban elites of the United States during the Gilded Age. Americans who
claimed pre-Revolutionary Dutch descent organized themselves in exclusive ethnic
associations, such as the Holland Society of New York, founded in 1885.18 Wealthy
industrialists became serious collectors of the artwork of the Dutch Golden Age. The
fishing villages of Volendam and Marken, just north of Amsterdam, became open-air
museums, largely thanks to American tourism. Houses, furniture and clothing were
adapted to what foreign visitors, fresh from a visit to the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam,
imagined the Dutch Golden Age to have been like. Yet Americans were not just attracted
to the aesthetics of seventeenth-century Dutch paintings. There was an ideological
component as well. John Lothrop Motley (1814–77), a Boston Brahmin and Harvard
graduate, became the first American historian to do archival research on Dutch history.19
It resulted in two very influential publications: The Rise of the Dutch Republic (1855) and
History of the United Netherlands (1867). Thanks to Motley, Americans could celebrate
the Dutch as a kindred people. The Dutch had thrown off the yoke of royal government in
1581, established a highly successful Protestant republic—but one tolerant of other
religions—and, not coincidentally, created a global trading empire. In October 1903, the
Dutch-born Edward Bok (1863–1930) confidently announced to the millions of readers of
Ladies’ Home Journal that Holland, not England, was ‘the mother of America’. The
notion that all truly American characteristics and ideals originated in Holland was an
important incentive for White to organize the Grotius commemoration in Delft on
17
Eyffinger, The 1899 Hague Peace Conference pp. 313-316, 415-419.
Annette Stott, Holland Mania: The Unknown Dutch Period in American Art & Culture (Woodstock, NY:
The Overlook Press, 1998) passim (Edward Bok quoted on p. 9).
19
Mark A. Peterson, ‘A Brahmin Goes Dutch: John Lothrop Motley and the Lessons of Dutch History in
Nineteenth-Century Boston’ in: Going Dutch: The Dutch Presence in America, 1609-2009 ed. Joyce D.
Goodfriend, Benjamin Schmidt and Annette Stott (Leiden: Brill Publishers, 2008) pp. 109-134.
18
10
Independence Day 1899.20
A Dutch-American Party
We can follow the preparations for the Grotius commemoration in White’s
Autobiography (1905). Following a tourist trip to Delft in late May 1899, he confided to
his journal: ‘of all books ever written—not claiming divine inspiration—the great work
of Grotius on ‘War and Peace’ has been of most benefit to mankind’. He wrote privately
to John Hay (1838–1905), the American Secretary of State, asking permission for the
American delegation to ‘lay a wreath of silver and gold upon the tomb of Grotius at
Delft’. When he received a positive reply from Washington DC on 19 June, he
immediately telegraphed his specifications for the wreath to the American embassy in
Berlin. The next day, he approached the head of the Dutch delegation at the peace
conference, A P C van Karnebeek (1836–1925), who responded enthusiastically to the
American plans. He suggested that the Dutch Foreign Secretary (and Honorary President
of the peace conference) be involved as well. W H de Beaufort (1845–1918) was
‘devoted to the memory of Grotius’. He had delivered a long panegyric on the occasion
of the unveiling of the Grotius statue in Delft in September 1886, for example. The
American delegation duly visited De Beaufort to hammer out the logistics of the 1899
Grotius commemoration: a solemn ceremony in the New Church at 11 AM, followed by a
luncheon for invited guests in the Delft City Hall. On 2 July, the military attaché of the
American embassy in Berlin arrived in The Hague with the ‘Grotius wreath’, made by
Court jeweler Eugene Marcus. It displayed the arms of the Netherlands and the United
States, along with the following inscription:
To the Memory of Hugo Grotius;
20
Nancy T. Minty, ‘Great Expectations: The Golden Age Redeems The Gilded Era’ in Going Dutch: The
Dutch Presence in America, 1609-2009 ed. Goodfriend, Schmidt and Stott pp. 215-235; Dennis P. Weller, ‘
Old Masters in the New World: The Hudson-Fulton Exhibition of 1909 and its Legacy’ in: Going Dutch:
The Dutch Presence in America, 1609-2009 ed. Goodfriend, Schmidt and Stott pp. 237-268; Laura
Voorkles, ‘Return in Glory: The Holland Society Visits ‘The Fatherland’’ in: Dutch New York: The Roots
of Hudson Valley Culture ed. Roger Panetta (Fordham University Press, 2009) pp. 257-297; Roger Panetta,
‘The Hudson-Fulton Celebration of 1909’ in: Dutch New York: The Roots of Hudson Valley Culture ed.
Panetta pp. 301-338
11
In Reverence and Gratitude,
From the United States of America;
On the Occasion of the International Peace Conference
of The Hague.
July 4th, 1899.
White noted in his journal that the wreath was ‘a superb piece of work’, attracting ‘most
favorable attention’. Everything was ready for the grand finale two days later.21
The Grotius commemoration was widely reported by Dutch newspapers. It featured in
three New York Times articles as well. At 10.15 AM, the organist of the New Church
started playing a series of national songs, including ‘Yankee Doodle Dandy’. According
to New York Times reporter Mrs Hanken-Parker, carriage after carriage rolled up to the
door of the church, dislodging ‘gayly dressed ladies and profusely decorated men’. The
entire Dutch government arrived to participate in the ceremony, as did most of the peace
conference delegates, and nearly all ambassadors resident in The Hague. In addition, the
pews filled with faculty members from Dutch universities, Leiden in particular, and a
large crowd of American tourists. At 11 AM, an occasional choir of approximately 150
singers performed Mendelssohn’s ‘How lovely are the messengers that bring us good
tidings of peace’. At the request of the American delegation, Van Karnebeek opened the
proceedings. Following a second musical interlude, White rose to deliver his laudation.22
21
Andrew Dickson White, Autobiography (London: Macmillan, 1905) Vol. II pp. 274, 291, 316, 317-318,
320, 322-26; Eyffinger, The 1899 Hague Peace Conference pp. 165-169, 196-202, 324-331; J. Woltring,
'Karnebeek, jhr. Abraham Pieter Cornelis van (1836-1925)' and H. van der Hoeven, 'Beaufort, Willem
Hendrik de (1845-1918)' in Biografisch Woordenboek van Nederland
URL:http://www.historici.nl/Onderzoek/Projecten/BWN/lemmata/bwn1/karnebeekapc [10-02-2012] and
URL:http://www.historici.nl/Onderzoek/Projecten/BWN/lemmata/bwn1/beaufort [10-02-2012] For Dutch
newspaper reports on the unveiling of the Grotius statue in Delft on 25 Sept. 1886, see Royal Library, The
Hague, Cornets de Groot Archive CdG 17 fol. 64-66, 69-70, 77.
22
Royal Library, The Hague, Cornets de Groot Archive, CdG 17 folios 50, 51-52, 97, 99, 100, 109-110;
Mrs. Hanken-Parker, ‘A TRIBUTE TO HUGO DE GROOT’, New York Times, Jul. 30, 1899; Eyffinger,
The 1899 Hague Peace Conference pp. 326-327.
12
By honoring the writer of De Jure Belli ac Pacis, so White informed his audience, the US
did not just express her own gratitude, but also spoke on behalf of ‘every part of Europe,
of all the great powers of Asia, [and] of the sister republics of North and South America’.
Significantly, White failed to mention Africa. According to the prominent international
lawyers of the day, a certain degree of ‘civilization’ was required for statehood. It
explains White’s assertion that ‘the sisterhood of nations’ included countries ‘yet unborn’
in Grotius’ time (the US!) and countries ‘now civilized…which Grotius knew only as
barbarous’—probably a reference to the peace conference delegates from the Ottoman
Empire, Russia, Persia, China and Japan. What was on full display in White’s speech
was, of course, the Whig interpretation of history --a story of ‘continuous progress’,
underpinned by Protestantism, tolerance, freedom and democracy. When the Pilgrim
Fathers sailed from Delftshaven in 1620, they had allegedly taken Dutch notions of
religious toleration to the New World —Grotius’ notions, of course. In no other country,
so White noted, had his teachings penetrated more deeply than in the US. Its inhabitants
had been thoroughly imbued with ‘those feelings of mercy and humanity which Grotius,
more than any other, brought into the modern world’. Indeed, the concept of arbitration
between states could be found in a single sentence in De Jure Belli ac Pacis (book 2, ch.
23): ‘But especially are Christian kings and states bound to try this way of avoiding
war’.23 In White’s view, Grotius’ reasoning informed the Geneva Arbitration of 1872 that
had settled the Alabama Claims, ensuring friendly relations between the US and UK. (For
the assistance given to the Confederate cause, the UK paid the US $15.5 million in
damages.) White concluded his laudation with Grotius’ supposed words of
encouragement to the peace conference delegates:
From this tomb of Grotius I seem to hear a voice which says to us as the delegates
of the Nations: ‘Go on with your mighty work. . . . Go on with the work of
strengthening peace and humanizing war: give greater scope and strength to
provisions which will make war less cruel: perfect those laws of war which
23
Herbert Butterfield, The Whig Interpretation of History (1931); Hugo Grotius, The Jure Belli ac Pacis
Libri Tres, 2 vols., Classics of International Law, no. 3 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925) Vol. II: A
Translation of the Text, by Francis W. Kelsey p. 563 (DJBP, Lib. II, cap XXIII, ‘De Causis Dubiis’)
13
diminish the unmerited sufferings of populations: and, above all, give the world at
least a beginning of an effective, practicable scheme of arbitration.24
He then affixed the wreath to Grotius’ tomb. It is still there today.25
De Beaufort was entrusted with the pleasurable task of thanking the American delegation
and government. In his speech, he emphasized the historical links between the US and
The Netherlands. The Dutch had been the first European settlers in the Hudson Valley,
and the first to recognize American independence, thanks to a salute fired from Fort
Orange at St. Eustatius –a Dutch possession in the Caribbean-- in November 1776. De
Beaufort expressed the hope that the wreath affixed to Grotius’ tomb would be ‘an
everlasting emblem’ of the friendly relations between the two countries. Tobias M C
Asser (1838–1913), professor of private international law at the University of
Amsterdam, spoke in his capacity as president of the Institut de Droit International/
Institute of International Law. Asser congratulated the American delegation with the
tribute paid to ‘the father of our science’. The American delegate Seth Low (1850–
1916), President of Columbia University, concluded the proceedings. He also emphasized
the historical links between the US and The Netherlands. In his view, the Dutch had
taught Americans ‘to separate Church and State’, and continued to inspire ‘devotion to
learning, to religious liberty, and to individual and national freedom’. High praise
indeed, but was it true? We will return to that question later on in this essay chapter.26
24
Royal Library, The Hague, Cornets de Groot archives, CdG 17 folios 50-52; Hanken-Parker, ‘Homage to
Hugo Grotius’, New York Times, 5 July 1899 and ‘The Hugo Grotius Celebration. New York Times, 2 Sep.
1899; Eyffinger, The 1899 Hague Peace Conference pp. 328-329; Martti Koskenniemi, The Gentle
Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law, 1870-1960 (CUP, 2001).
25
On July 4, 2012, the tenth anniversary of the International Criminal Court was celebrated in the New
Church in Delft by the International Criminal Court Student Network and the Department of Philosophy
and Religion at Central Michigan University. Prof. Hope Elizabeth May of Central Michigan University
arranged for a special cleaning of the 1899 sterling silver wreath, which had oxidized quite badly. It is now
back at Grotius’ tomb in all its splendour. More details can be found on
http://www.agrotianmoment.com. I would like to thank Prof. May and Prof. Andrew Blom for sharing this
information with me.
26
Royal Library, The Hague, Cornets de Groot Archive, CdG 17 folios 50-52; Hanken-Parker, ‘A
TRIBUTE TO HUGO DE GROOT’; White, Autobiography Vol. II, pp. 327-328; Eyffinger, The 1899
Hague Peace Conference pp. 199-200, 327, 330.
14
The audience left the New Church to the tunes of ‘Star Spangled Banner’. Three hundred
and fifty invited guests walked across the market square to the Delft City Hall, where
they enjoyed a historically themed luncheon, including ‘filets de soie à la Grotius’ and
‘poulardes à la Washington’. The American delegates and Dutch authorities raised many
a glass to each other. In her New York Times article, Hanken-Parker accentuated the
connections between the Dutch past and American present. The Delft city councilor who
toasted White in garbled English was considered a perfect resemblance of Peter
Stuyvesant (1592–1672), the last director-general of Dutch New York. Still, it remained
an Independence Day celebration. Hanken-Parker noted that the US ambassador in The
Netherlands, Stanford Nevell, had gone from table to table in the Delft City Hall in order
to touch the glass of every American visitor, saying quietly: ‘we are all over here to-day,
but in our hearts we are with the rest of them in our own land; so here’s “to home”’.27
How to Interpret the Grotius Commemoration of 4 July 1899
I have elaborated on the events in Delft in July 1899 in order to highlight the three factors
at play in the creation of Grotius as ‘father of international law’:
1) the conceptualization of the Dutch past by American historians and government
officials
2) the importance of the Dutch Golden Age for Dutch nation-building in the
nineteenth and twentieth centuries
3) the role played by the Institut de Droit International and the rise of modern
international law more generally
Let me explain this at greater length. It was back to the future for White and HankenParker. The Dutch Golden Age was the precursor of the nineteenth-century American
present. Allegedly, the Dutch had exported to Colonial New York religious toleration, a
27
Idem
Stanford Newell was a member of the Republican Party and practiced law in St. Paul (MN) for
many years. In 1897, he was appointed Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the
Netherlands. In 1899 he was part of the U.S. Delegation to the Hague Peace Conference. He resigned as US
ambassador in The Netherlands in 1905.
15
thirst for liberty, republicanism, democracy, etc.— everything that was quintessential
American according to Gilded Age politicians and intellectuals. In 1872, Motley had
joined King William III of The Netherlands in celebrating the third centennial of the Sea
Beggar’s capture of Brill. Arguably, it was this intense American interest in the Dutch
Golden Age that contributed to a new taxonomy of historical figures and events. The
sixteenth-century Dutch Revolt became a ‘War of Independence’, for example. Grotius
the alleged champion of freedom and toleration fitted right in with this story of historical
progress, culminating, of course, in the birth of the United States of America.28
Grotius was part of other, equally powerfully historical narratives as well. He became a
Dutch national hero at the end of the nineteenth century. The Grotius commemorations of
April 1883 and September 1886 had been presented in Dutch newspapers as important
manifestations of national unity. The Kingdom of The Netherlands had moved beyond
the religious and political infighting characteristic of the Dutch Republic –or so the story
went. Dutchmen of all faiths could now come together in Delft to celebrate Grotius’
alleged legacy of religious toleration. There were no more Republicans and Orangists:
descendants of the regent families loyally served the new monarchy. The House of
Orange was above party politics, and actively sought to nurture national unity and
reconciliation. When, in 1878, the Dutch branch of the Association for the Reform and
Codification of International Law first broached the idea of rendering ‘national homage’
to Grotius, it found an enthusiastic supporter in Prince Alexander (1851–84), the third son
of King William III of The Netherlands. The ruling elite of the Kingdom of the
Netherlands was determined, then, to incorporate all the great statesmen of the Dutch
Golden Age into the national canon—Oldenbarnevelt, Grotius and the De Witt brothers
as well as the Stadtholders.29
28
David Armitage, The Declaration of Independence: A Global History (Harvard University Press, 2007);
Remco Ensel, ‘Baudrillard in Brielle. De historische cultuur van de Tachtigjarige Oorlog’, Tijdschrift voor
geschiedenis Vol. 121, 1 (2008) 40-55.
29
Royal Library, The Hague, Cornets de Groot Archive, CdG 17 fol. 144-147, 150-152; N.C.F. Van Sas,
De metamorfose van Nederland: Van oude orde naar moderniteit, 1750-1900 (Amsterdam University
Press, 2005); Wim Vroom, Het wonderlid van Jan de Wit en andere vaderlandse relieken (Nijmegen, Sun
Publishers, 1997); J.Th.M. Bank, Het roemrijk vaderland: Cultureel nationalisme in de negentiende eeuw
(The Hague: SDU publishers, 1990).
16
In the 1890s, it suited Dutch politicians very well that Grotius was not just a Dutch
national hero, but also fast becoming a ‘father of international law’. They have paid
homage to Grotius as a symbol of the country’s civilizing ever since. In the first half of
the nineteenth century, the ruling elite of the Kingdom of The Netherlands faced the
awkward question whether a small, truncated country stood any chance of survival in a
continent dominated by big nation-states. The Liberal ascendancy in the second half of
the nineteenth century brought a solution of sorts: even as second- or third-rank power in
Europe, Dutch politicians told themselves, the Kingdom did have a manifest destiny in
international politics. Its overarching moral purpose was to reduce armed conflict in
Europe and, to a lesser extent, around the world. This particular brand of Dutch
nationalism has been inextricably intertwined with the rise of modern international law
and the establishment of international courts in The Hague. Peaceful conflict resolution is
in the interest of small powers. The Dutch could not compete in the European arms races
that preceded World War I and World War II, for instance. But it is always nice to tell
yourself that you occupy the moral high ground. Grotius has proven an ideal mascot for
the Dutch government and legal profession. To give just one example, the Dutch Prime
Minister Jan Peter Balkenende could not resist referencing him at the inaugural session of
the International Criminal Court in The Hague on 11 March 2003. In Balkende’s view,
the ICC was a realization of Grotian ideals. Allegedly, the author of De Jure Belli ac
Pacis had sought to create
a system of international law, with clear agreements and procedures for countries to
comply with. He believed that a system of this kind was necessary for international
justice and stability. Today, ladies and gentlemen, nearly four centuries later, we
move a step closer to that ideal.30
The Dutch government, then, continues to affirm Grotius’ alleged importance as ‘father
30
Balkende’s speech is available on the website of the Coalition for the ICC, see
http://www.iccnow.org/documents/NetherlandsPM11March03.pdf; on Dutch foreign policy in the
Interbellum period, particularly with regarding the League of Nations, see Remco van Diepen, Voor
Volkenbond en vrede : Nederland en het streven naar een nieuwe wereldorde 1919-1946 (Amsterdam: Bert
Bakker Publishers, 1999); on Jan Peter Balkenende, see
http://www.parlement.com/id/vg09lljrp5z5/j_p_jan_peter_balkenende
17
of international law’. Two myths are feeding off each other: Dutch
nationalism/internationalism and the self-understanding of modern international law as a
narrative of historical progress—allegedly, we are moving closer to the ideal of
‘international justice and stability’.31
Why did international lawyers select Grotius as their ‘founding father’ in the late
nineteenth century? As noted earlier, Asser spoke at the Grotius commemoration in July
1899 in his capacity as President of the Institut de Droit International. As Martti
Koskenniemi shows, international lawyers at the time aspired to be the legal conscience
of the civilized world. The history of international law was conceived of as a morality
tale, played out in European history:
….a story of individual lawyers acting like so many chivalrous knights,
defending the oppressed against the oppressors, peace against war,
carrying the torch of civilization (from Greece and Rome) through dark
ages to the present. It was not kings or diplomats, but writers and scientists
who finally woke up ‘das schlummerende Rechtsbewusstsein der
civilisierten Welt’.32
It explains what made Grotius such an attractive historical figure. He was a burgher of
Delft and a properly married man, who had sired eight children with his wife of thirtyseven years, Maria van Reigersberch. His private life conformed to the ideals of the upper
bourgeoisie in nineteenth-century Western Europe, the class into which most
international lawyers were born. But there was more. Grotius was a Protestant who
appeared to have embraced religious toleration –not exactly common in seventeenthcentury Europe. Had he not defended the Remonstrants, victims of religious hatred, from
the nasty orthodox Calvinists? Surely, it was his moral and intellectual superiority that
31
Koskenniemi, The Gentle Civilizer of Nations, passim
Idem p. 78
In this passage, Koskenniemi cites Johan Caspar Bluntschli, Das moderne Völkerrecht der
civilisierten Staaten als Rechtsbuch dargestellt (third edition, Nördlingen, Beck, 1878) p. 18. On the same
page, Bluntschli calls Grotius the spiritual father (geistige Vater) of modern international law.
32
18
allowed him to prevail over adversity —three years of captivity at Loevestein Castle,
followed by twenty-four years of exile. Had he not sought to humanize war and further
the cause of peace in De Jure Belli ac Pacis? If true, this added up to a perfect ‘founding
father’, from the perspective of international lawyers in the late nineteenth century, of
course. Recent research portrays Grotius in a rather different light, however.
In 2007, Henk Nellen published the most authoritative biography of Grotius to date:
Hugo de Groot: Een leven in strijd om de vrede, 1583–1645/Hugo Grotius: A Lifelong
Struggle for Peace, 1583–1645. Nellen has also completed the modern, 17-volume
edition of Grotius’ correspondence, comprising nearly 7,500 documents.33 What do these
letters tell us? We are confronted with a man who apparently cared more for the unity of
the Christian churches than anything remotely resembling ‘a system of international law’.
Grotius considered it his God-given task to heal the religious divisions of Christendom.
He tried to apply sophisticated philological techniques to Biblical exegesis, in a vain
attempt to arrive at a set of core doctrines, shared by all Christians. Grotius attached far
less importance to issuing new and improved editions of De Jure Belli ac Pacis (1631,
1642, and 1646) than to publishing his Annotations on the Old and New Testament
(1641, 1644 and 1646). These massive Biblical commentaries, running into thousands of
pages, were a lifelong project for Grotius, undertaken out of gratitude for the divine
assistance that he thought he had received in escaping from Loevestein Castle.34
Grotius’ doomed efforts to unite the Christian churches have little in common with
modern notions of religious toleration and non-discrimination. Separation of church and
state was inconceivable to Grotius. He admired the Anglican Church precisely because it
was a state church, run by bishops appointed by a monarch, rather than by unruly
Calvinist ministers. As a dyed-in-the-wool Erastian, he believed that the secular
authorities should have the final say in the appointment of clergymen, in church
government, and even in matters of doctrine. The Remonstrants said amen to all of this.
They had little choice during the Twelve Years Truce: a minority in the Dutch Reformed
33
34
See footnotes 2 and 9.
Nellen, Hugo de Groot pp. 348-354, 251-262, 429-438, 487-498, 506-531.
19
Church, they were totally dependent on the secular authorities for protection against the
majority of orthodox Calvinists. Initially, Grotius presented himself as an impartial
mediator between the two camps. Yet his claims rang increasingly hollow as the
religious and political crisis deepened, resulting in the Stadtholder’s coup d’état of
August 1618. None of this has anything to do with the separation of church and state that
is the norm in the Western World today, let alone with a principled toleration of a
diversity of beliefs, religious or otherwise.35
On the basis of his dramatic life story, could it not be argued, however, that Grotius
triumphed over adversity thanks to his moral and intellectual superiority? Modern
research paints a rather different picture. Grotius was no hapless victim of the political
calamity of August 1618, but made choices of his own, which ultimately proved to be the
wrong ones. By claiming the moral high ground and refusing to contemplate
compromises of any sort, he did not just cause problems for himself, but also for his
direct relatives. Grotius’ political record is the subject of his Verantwoordingh van de
Wettelijkcke Regieringh van Holland ende West-Vrieslandt/Justification of the Rightful
Government of Holland and West-Friesland (1622). If we may believe this pamphlet,
Grotius had simply followed the orders of Oldenbarnevelt and the Rotterdam town
government, and been an honest broker between factions. These claims were half-truths
at best. In reality, Grotius had been a party man: he had coordinated the political
activities of Remonstrant-dominated town governments in Holland. As Pensionary of
Rotterdam, he had belonged to Oldenbarnevelt’s inner circle of political advisers. One of
the most powerful men in the Dutch Republic during the Twelve Years Truce, he had
played for high stakes and lost. That does not make him a martyr. Moreover, when Prince
Frederic Henry of Orange became Stadtholder in 1625, there was a real chance of
political rehabilitation. If Grotius had asked for a pardon, he would have been allowed to
return home. That was the sticking point, of course. Grotius’ sense of honour deterred
him from requesting one. Exile was a choice of sorts on his part. That, together with his
endless polemics with orthodox Calvinists, served to damage the career prospects of his
35
Nellen, Hugo de Groot pp. 109-251, 339-353, 419-438, 451-454; see also Hugo Grotius, Theologian:
Essays in Honour of G.H.M. Posthumus Meyjes ed. H.J.M Nellen and Edwin Rabbie (Leiden: Brill, 1994).
20
family members in Holland. It cost his younger brother Willem de Groot a prestigious
appointment as Pensionary of Delft, for example. Grotius’ direct relatives were the real
victims of the high drama of his life.36
Then there is the little issue, often overlooked, of Grotius’ commitment to Dutch
imperialism. Supposedly, the manuscript of De Jure Praedae –written at the behest of
the VOC directors-- is only important in so far as it prepares the way for the true magnum
opus, De Jure Belli ac Pacis. Moreover, international lawyers in the late nineteenth
century believed that European colonial empires brought much-needed civilization to
benighted natives. Even when evidence became available of ethnic cleansing in, for
example, Africa, members of the Institut de Droit International persisted in defending the
colonial policies of their own national governments. The evils of Western imperialism
and colonialism remained a blind spot in modern international law until the Second
World War at least. No wonder that its practitioners could not see the darker sides of
Grotius either. Recently, a lot of work has been done on the interrelationship between the
rise of international law and European overseas expansion. I only need to point to Antony
Anghie’s ground-breaking Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International
Law.37 The work of David Armitage at Harvard University,38 Lauren Benton at NYU,39
Peter Borschberg at the National University of Singapore,40 and John Cairns at the
University of Edinburgh,41 to name a few, is aimed at recovering the imperial contexts of
early modern natural law and natural rights theories. My own research shows that
Grotius was at the beck and call of the VOC directors in the period 1604–-1615, and that,
even as an exile in Paris, he continued to support Dutch expansion overseas. Both
36
Nellen, Hugo de Groot pp. 109-262, 317-323, 360-361,364-379, 457-470, 474-475, 480-483.
Antony Anghie, Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law, Cambridge Studies in
International and Comparative Law (CUP, 2005); Koskenniemi, Gentle Civilizer of Nations ch. 2.
38
David Armitage, Foundations of Modern International Thought (CUP, 2013).
39
Lauren Benton, Law and Colonial Cultures: Legal Regimes in World History, 1400-1900 (CUP, 2002)
and A Search for Sovereignty: Law and Geography in European Empires, 1400-1900 (CUP, 2010).
40
Peter Borschberg, The Singapore and Melaka Straits: Violence, Security and Diplomacy in the 17th
Century (NUS Press, 2010) and Hugo Grotius, the Portuguese, and Free Trade in the East Indies (NUS
Press, 2011).
41
John Cairns, ‘After Somerset: The Scottish Experience’, Journal of Legal History 33, issue 3, Dec. 2012,
291-312, and ‘Stoicism, Slavery, and Law: Grotian Jurisprudence and Its Reception’, Grotiana (New
Series) vol. 22/23 (2001-02) 197-232.
37
21
Richelieu and Oxenstierna valued his expertise in commercial governance. In December
1626, the States of Holland met to discuss the very real danger of Grotius divulging to
foreign governments his vast knowledge of ‘the fisheries and navigation of these
provinces, and particularly of VOC policy’. In the end, Grotius decided against sellingout to Richelieu. As Swedish Ambassador in Paris, he had no qualms about sending
Oxenstierna regular updates on Dutch exploits in the East and West Indies, however. He
obtained his information from his relatives in Holland. Both Willem de Groot and
Grotius’ second son, Pieter de Groot, served as VOC lawyers, for example. As a quid pro
quo, he continued to offer policy suggestions and legal advice to the VOC. All through
his life and career, Dutch imperialism and colonialism remained a cause close to his
heart.42
Grotius the anti-hero
To conclude, Grotius as a founding father of international law is a historical construct,
now well past its sell-by date. It would be far more appropriate to call him the godfather
of Dutch imperialism, for example. The commemoration of 1899 was an American
initiative that tied in beautifully with a) the creation of a national canon for the Kingdom
of The Netherlands and b) the self-understanding of international lawyers of the time.
Grotius became the proverbial knight on a white horse, who assisted the oppressed (the
Remonstrants), triumphed over adversity (imprisonment at Loevestein Castle), and
supposedly sought to humanize war in De Jure Belli ac Pacis. The establishment of
international courts in The Hague has been a great boon for the Dutch government in the
twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Internationalism is a wonderful raison d’être for
small countries unable or unwilling to compete militarily in a big, bad world of oversized
nation-states. No wonder that the Dutch government keeps propping up Grotius as the
patron saint of the Peace Palace. It is surprising, however, that the judges of the various
international courts have mounted so few challenges to the Grotius Delusion. An
increasing number of them have not been born and raised in the West. Perhaps they are
42
Van Ittersum, 'The Long Goodbye' passim (quote from the States of Holland minutes, 21 Dec. 1626, on
p. 395) and footnotes 8, 39.
22
too polite to speak out against their hosts?
Recent research has shown Grotius’ legacy to the modern world to be far more complex,
and far more interesting, than imagined by many international lawyers, both then and
now. Nellen rightly emphasizes Grotius’ abiding interest in the reconciliation of the
Christian churches and in applying sophisticated philological techniques to Biblical
exegesis. Thanks to the modern edition of Grotius’ correspondence, we have a much
better sense of Grotius’ political responsibilities during the Twelve Years Truce and his
central role in the Republic of Letters. His letters also reveal the options open to him after
his escape from Loevestein Castle in March 1621. He could have become involved in
Richelieu’s colonial projects, for example. Or he could have made the concessions
necessary for obtaining a pardon from Prince Frederic Henry. If he was a martyr for the
cause, he made that choice himself. Finally, his extant working papers in the Dutch
National Archives and Leiden University Library are proof that his natural rights and
natural law theories were conceived for the sole purpose of justifying Dutch expansion
overseas. We can now fit Grotius into the recent critique of modern international law as
an ideology that at best ignored, or at worst fully supported, the dirty business of Western
imperialism and colonialism.