Hugo Grotius Mare liberum 1609-2009

Hugo Grotius Mare Liberum 1609-2009

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages

  Feenstra, Robert ^a   Vervliet, Jeroen ^b  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b Peace Palace Library   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84868036327     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1163/ej.9789004177017.i-178     Document Type: Book

References (327)

1. More precisely the so-called 'third issue' of the 1614 Dutch edition.
2. 'Mare Liberum is essentially a propagandistic treatise and argues for Holland's merchants to freely access emporia in Asia by unimpeded navigation across the high seas. The freedom of navigation forms a subset to the overarching arguments on the freedom of access and trade'.
3. Peter Borschberg, Hugo Grotius' Theory of Trans-Oceanic Trade Regulation, Revisiting Mare Liberum (1609), International Law and Justice Working Papers, (Rev. Aug. 2006), p. 3. (Cited as 'Borschberg, Hugo Grotius' Theory'). Eric Wilson calls Mare liberum a propaganda instrument, investing the Dutch East India Company (VOC ) with international legal personality and justifying private warfare
4. 'Simply put, the Text 'translates' the operational requirements of the World Economy into the terms of Naturalist jurisprudence'
5. See Eric Wilson, Erasing the Corporate Sovereign, Inter-Textuality and an Alternative Explanation for the Publication of Hugo Grotius' Mare Liberum (1609), Itinerario, vol. 30/2 (2006), p. 78-103, at p. 78, p. 81, p. 83.
6. Martine Julia van Ittersum, Hugo Grotius in Context: Van Heemskerck's Capture of the Santa Catarina and its Justification in De Jure Praedae (1604-1606), Asian Journal of Social Science, vol. 31/3 (2003), p. 511-548, at p. 512: '. . . the natural law and natural rights theories that Grotius formulated in De Jure Praedae cannot be divorced from Dutch imperialism and colonialism in the early modern period'. (Cited as 'Van Ittersum, Hugo Grotius in Context').
7. W. J. M. van Eysinga, Huigh de Groot, een schets, Haarlem 1945, p. 44-45. (Cited as 'Van Eysinga, Huigh de Groot').
8. Hedley Bull, The Importance of Hugo Grotius in the Study of International Relations, in: Hugo Grotius and International Relations, ed. by Hedley Bull, Benedict Kingsbury, Adam Roberts, Oxford 1990, p. 65-94, at p. 71.
9. 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-Boston 2006, p. xxxvii. (Cited as 'Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle').
10. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. xxii-xxiii, see above, note 5.
11. Peter Borschberg has identified the correct geographical location as the Singapore Straits, whereas in the past various places have been mentioned, of which the Straits of Malacca have been the most frequently cited. See Peter Borschberg, Grotius, Maritime Intra-Asian Trade and the Portuguese Estado da India: Problems, Perspectives and Insights from De iure praedae, in: Grotiana 26-28 (2005-2007), p. 31-60, at p. 35.
12. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. liv-lv, see above, note 5. Martine Julia van Ittersum has produced evidence that 'Grotius' conceptualisation of natural rights and natural law in De jure praedae is based to a large extent on Van Heemskerck's own justification of privateering. A key notion of Grotius' rights theories - the individual's right to punish transgressors of the natural law in the absence of an independent and effective judge - follows logically from Van Heemskerck's reasoned decision to assault the Santa Catarina in revenge for Portuguese mistreatment of Dutch merchants in the East Indies'. See Van Ittersum, Hugo Grotius in Context, p. 511, see above, note 2.
13. Jonathan I. Israel, The Dutch Republic, Its Rise, Greatness, and Fall 1477-1806, Oxford 1995, p. 322.
14. Henk Nellen, Hugo de Groot, Een leven in strijd om de vrede, 1583-1645, Amsterdam 2007, p. 83-84. (Cited as 'Nellen').
15. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. 151-166, see above, note 5.
16. Jules Basdevant, Hugo Grotius, in: Les Fondateurs du droit international, avec une introduction de A. Pillet, Paris 1904, p. 125-267, at p. 224.
17. Van Eysinga, Huigh de Groot, p. 23-24, see above, note 3. 'Authorities generally assign to wars three justifiable causes, defence, recovery of property, and punishment'
18. see Hugo Grotius, De Jure Belli ac Pacis Libri Tres, Volume Two, the Translation, by Francis W. Kelsey, with the collaboration of Arthur E. R. Boak, Henry A. Sanders, Jesse S. Reeves and Herbert F. Wright, and an introduction by James Brown Scott, Oxford 1925, Book II (Chapter I, Paragraph II ), p. 171. (Cited as 'Kelsey, Hugo Grotius').
19. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. xi, see above, note 5.
20. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. 118-122, see above, note 5.
21. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. lvi-lvii, p. 187-188, see above, note 5.
22. Hugonis Grotii De jure praedae commentarius, ex auctoris codice descripsit et vulgavit H. G. Hamaker, The Hague 1868.
23. W. J. M. van Eysinga, Quelques observations au sujet du Mare Liberum et du De Iure Praedae de Grotius, in: Grotiana, vol. 9 (1941-1942), p. 61-75, at p. 63 (reprinted in: Sparsa Collecta, een aantal der verspreide geschriften van Jonkheer Mr. W.J.M. van Eysinga, ed. by F. M. van Asbeck e.a., Leiden 1958), [ 325-326].
24. Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Caput II: The Portuguese do not effectively possess any part of the East Indies because the peoples have their own princes, kings, government and law systems; the Portuguese do not have any title to sovereignty because only discovery of a 'res nullius' yields rights.
25. Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Caput III: The Pope does not have any right of a secular leader entitling him to donate, still more convincingly the Pope cannot donate lands of a third person.
26. Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Caput IV: No just cause existed for the Portuguese to start a war and therefore no just title for possession was acquired.
27. R. Feenstra, Hugo de Groot's eerste beschouwingen over dominium en over de oorsprong van de private eigendom: Mare liberum en zijn bronnen, Acta Juridica, vol. 25 (1976), p. 269-282, at p. 270-271.
28. Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Caput II , p. 6. Cf. Frans De Pauw, Grotius and the Law of the Sea, Brussels 1965, p. 33-34. (Cited as 'De Pauw').
29. Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Caput V.
30. Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Caput VI.
31. Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, 'Dedicatio', 'Ad principes populosque liberos orbis Christiani' (To the Rulers and to the Free Nations of the Christian World); here the following general natural law concepts are mentioned: 'res communes', common goods for the use of mankind, and free navigation and free trade.
32. W. E. Butler, Grotius and the Law of the Sea, in: Hugo Grotius and International Relations, ed. by Hedley Bull, Benedict Kingsbury, Adam Roberts, Oxford 1990, p. 209-220, at p. 211, p. 213. (Cited as 'Butler').
33. Borschberg, Hugo Grotius' Theory, p. 15, see above, note 2: 'The Dutch humanist understood unimpeded and peaceful maritime navigation as an extension of the ius communicandi and ius commerciandi, two natural rights that he adopts from the Spanish theologian Vitoria'.
34. Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Caput VIII .
35. Benjamin Straumann, Hugo Grotius und die Antike, Romisches Recht und romische Ethik im fruhneuzeitlichen Naturrecht, Studien zur Geschichte des Volkerrechts 14, Baden-Baden 2007, p. 127-157, at p. 19. (Cited as 'Straumann').
36. Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Caput I.
37. Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Caput VII . Cf. Wilhelm G. Grewe, translated and revised by Michael Byers, The Epochs of International Law, Berlin-New York 2000, p. 267. (Cited as 'Grewe'). And Martine Julia van Ittersum, Mare Liberum versus the Propriety of the Seas? The Debate between Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) and William Welwood (1552-1624) and its Impact on Anglo-Scotto-Dutch Fishery Disputes in the Second Decade of the Seventeenth Century, Edinburgh Law Review, vol. 10 (2006), p. 239-276, at p. 255. (Cited as 'Van Ittersum, Mare Liberum').
38. Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Caput VI. See also Grewe, p. 267, see above, note 31.
39. Straumann, p. 24, p. 26-28, see above, note 29.
40. W. J. M. van Eysinga, Grotius (1625-1925), Revue de droit international et de legislation comparee, vol. 6 - Troisieme serie (1925), p. 271.
41. (reprinted in: Sparsa Collecta, een aantal der verspreide geschriften van Jonkheer Mr. W.J.M. van Eysinga, ed. by F. M. van Asbeck e.a., Leiden 1958, p. 124). ('Si Grotius n'avait fait autre chose qu'ecrire le Mare Liberum, sa place dans l'evolution du droit des gens serait deja tout a fait indiquee. Mais il a fait beaucoup plus.') (Cited as 'Van Eysinga, Grotius (1625-1925)').
42. Juridical Review (1891, vol. 3), Part I, p. 1-11, Part II , p. 131-137.
43. Other authors: Walter Raleigh, Observations Touching Trade and Commerce (1610), A. Gentilis, Hispanicae Advocationis libri duo (1613), Julius Pacius, De dominio Maris Hadriatici disceptatio pro Venetis (1619), J. I. Pontanus, Discussionum Historicarum libri duo (1637), Jac. Gothofredus, De imperio maris deque jure naufragii colligendi ?p?μ??μa (1637), Petrus Baptista Burgus, De dominio Serenissimae Genuensis Reipublicae in Mari Ligustico libri II (1641).
44. C.-B. Morisot, Orbis maritimi historia (1643), J. Loccenius, De jure maritimo et navali libri tres (1650).
45. Dirk Graswinkel, Maris liberi vindiciae adversus Petrum Baptistam Burgum, Ligustici maritimi dominii assertorem (1652).
46. Dirk Graswinkel, Maris liberi vindiciae adversus Gulielmum Welwodum Britannici maritimi dominii assertorem (1653).
47. John Burroughs, The Sovereignty of the British Seas Proved by Records, History, and the Municipal Laws of this Kingdom (1653).
48. M. Schoock, Imperium maritimum, ita explicatum, ut non solum ejus ostendatur praerogativae, verum etiam cuique genti, maxime Belgis foederatis, suus vindicatur honos (1654).
49. Paolo Sarpi, Del dominio mare Adriatico (1676), etc.
50. L. Oppenheim, International Law, a Treatise, Vol. I: Peace, London 1912 (2nd ed.), p. 320 (Part II, the Objects of the Law of Nations, Chapter II, the Open Sea, I, the Rise of the Freedom of the Open Sea, § 251).
51. Jeroen Vervliet, The Peace Palace Library Centennial, the Collection as a Mirror of the Historical Development of International Law, 1904-2004, The Hague 2004, p. 41.
52. Peter Borschberg in Hugo Grotius' Theory of Trans-Oceanic Trade Regulation, Revisiting Mare Liberum (1609).
53. II LJ Working Paper, 2005/14, p. 2, calls Grotius 'surprisingly consistent in his thinking on the wider issues of maritime trade and navigation, including the two colonial conferences of 1613 and 1615 and even beyond'.
54. Van Eysinga, Huigh de Groot, p. 47-50, see above, note 3.
55. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. 379, see above, note 5. Henk Nellen argues that as early as 1606 Hugo Grotius (in De jure praedae) aimed to counteract the English in this way. See Nellen, p. 84, see above, note 10.
56. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. 430, see above, note 5.
57. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. 375, see above, note 5.
58. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. 490, see above, note 5. J. K. Oudendijk, Status and Extent of Adjacent Waters, A Historical Orientation, Leiden 1970, p. 38-39. (Cited as 'Oudendijk').
59. see above, note 5. J. K. Oudendijk, Status and Extent of Adjacent Waters, A Historical Orientation, Leiden 1970, p. 38-39. (Cited as 'Oudendijk').
60. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. 366, see above, note 5.
61. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. 390-394, see above, note 5.
62. Van Eysinga, Grotius (1625-1925), p. 124, see above, note 34.
63. Van Ittersum, Mare Liberum, p. 242, see above, note 31.
64. Grewe, p. 265, see above, note 31.
65. Oudendijk, p. 68-69, see above, note 44.
66. Borschberg, Hugo Grotius' Theory, p. 39, see above, note 2.
67. Van Ittersum, Mare Liberum, p. 257, see above, note 31.
68. Van Ittersum, Mare Liberum, p. 247, see above, note 31.
69. Van Ittersum, Mare Liberum, p. 248, see above, note 31.
70. 'mare vastum liberrimum' or 'that part of the main sea or great ocean which is far removed from the just and due bounds [. . .] pertaining to the nearest lands of every nation'.
71. see The Free Sea, Hugo Grotius, Translated by Richard Hakluyt, with William Welwod's Critique and Grotius's Reply, edited and with an introduction by david armitage, indianapolis 2004, p. 74. (cited as 'armitage'). The translation of Hugo grotius, Defense of Chapter V of the Mare Liberum, in 'armitage', p. 77-130.
72. is based on: Herbert F. Wright, Some Less Known Works of Hugo Grotius, in: bibliotheca Visseriana, vol. 7 (1928), p. 133-238, at p. 154-205.
73. armitage, p. 31-32, see above, note 55.
74. Oudendijk, p. 19, 20, 28, 30, 68, 69, see above, note 44.
75. Van Ittersum, Mare Liberum, p. 251, see above, note 31.
76. Van Ittersum, Mare Liberum, p. 253-254, see above, note 31.
77. or in full, Defensio capitis quinti maris liberi oppugnati a Guilielmo Welwodo juris civilis professore capite XXVII ejus libri scripti Anglia sermone cui titulum fecit Compendium legum maritimarum (defence of the Fifth chapter of Mare Liberum opposed by William Welwood, Professor of civil Law, in chapter 27 of his book, written in english, for which he made as a book title an abridgement of all sea-Lawes).
78. oudendijk, p. 16, see above, note 44. Defensio remained a manuscript (as De jure praedae) until it was discovered at the 1864 auction of the Hugo grotius legacy. s. Muller Fzn. published the Latin manuscript of the Defensio in Mare Clausum. Bijdrage tot de geschiedenis der rivaliteit van Engeland en Nederland in de zeventiende eeuw (amsterdam 1872).
79. Oudendijk, p. 16, see above, note 44.
80. Armitage, p. 80, p. 94, p. 95 (and p. 94-99, p. 114-115), see above, note 55.
81. Butler, p. 214, see above, note 27.
82. Monica Brito Vieira, Mare Liberum vs. Mare Clausum: Grotius, Freitas and Selden's Debate on Dominion over the Seas, Journal of the History of Ideas (2003), p. 361-377, at p. 362. (Cited as 'Vieira').
83. C.H. Alexandrowicz, Freitas versus Grotius, British Yearbook of International Law, vol. 35 (1959), p. 162-182, at p. 162. (Cited as 'Alexandrowicz').
84. Vieira, p. 364, see above, note 65.
85. Alexandrowicz, p. 168-169, see above, note 66.
86. Alexandrowicz, p. 172-178, see above, note 66.
87. Borschberg, Hugo Grotius' Theory, p. 39, see above, note 2.
88. Grewe, p. 259-260, see above, note 31.
89. In: Verzamelde geschriften, Vol. II, Den Haag 1948, p. 109 et seq. See Oudendijk, p. 26, p. 40, see above, note 44.
90. Oudendijk, p. 41-44, see above, note 44.
91. Kelsey, Hugo Grotius, p. 208-209, p. 211, see above, note 13; Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. 418-419, see above, note 5. Oudendijk, p. 41-44, see above, note 44.
92. Van Ittersum, Profit and Principle, p. 418-419, see above, note 5. Oudendijk, p. 41-44, see above, note 44.
93. Oudendijk, p. 50, see above, note 44.
94. Oudendijk, p. 47, see above, note 44.
95. Oudendijk, p. 48, see above, note 44.
96. Selden explains that originally the sea - as did everything - belonged to all, but by law and custom it later became the property of princes and of individuals. See De Pauw, p. 13, see above, note 23.
97. Cf. Alberico Gentili in Hispanicae advocationis libri duo (1613), in which it is defined that England not only has 'imperium' and 'dominium' over the sea but 'jurisdictio' as well; hence England's jurisdiction extends indefinitively. See De Pauw, p. 12, see above, note 23.
98. G. J. Toomer, John Selden: A Life in Scholarship, Vol. I, Oxford 2009, p. 388-389. (Cited as 'Toomer, John Selden').
99. Toomer, John Selden, p. 391, see above, note 80.
100. Toomer, John Selden, p. 395-437, see above, note 80.
101. Butler, p. 211.
102. see above, note 27. De Pauw, p. 9-13, see above, note 23.
103. Grewe, p. 267.
104. see above, note 31. R. P. Anand, Origin and Development of the Law of the Sea, History of International Law Revisited, The Hague, Boston, London 1983, p. 106.
105. Paul Christianson, Discourse on History, Law and Governance in the Public Career of John Selden, 1610-1635, Toronto 1996, p. 9, p. 250, p. 279.
106. Nellen, p. 402-405, see above, note 10.
107. L. Oppenheim, International Law, a Treatise, Vol. I: Peace, London 1912 (2nd ed.), p. 318 (Part II, the Objects of the Law of Nations, Chapter II, the Open Sea, I, the Rise of the Freedom of the Open Sea, § 250, § 254, § 259).
108. Butler, p. 216-219, see above, note 27.
109. R. Feenstra, Hugo de Groot's eerste beschouwingen over dominium en over de oorsprong van de private eigendom: Mare liberum en zijn bronnen, Acta Juridica 1976 [published in 1978 = Essays in honour of Ben Beinart, I], p. 269-282. (Cited as 'Feenstra 1978').
110. R. Feenstra, Grocio, Vitoria y el ' dominium' en el nuevo mundo, Anuario Juridico [Mexico], 3-4 (1976-1977) [published in 1978 or early 1979], p. 57-67 (many printing errors, no proofs seen).
111. R. Feenstra, Les origines du ' dominium' d'apres Grotius et notamment dans son 'Mare liberum', in: Homenaje al profesor Alfonso Garcia Gallo, I, Madrid 1996, p. 179-190; reprinted in R. Feenstra, Histoire du droit savant (13e-18e siecle), Doctrines et vulgarisation par incunables, [Variorum Collected Studies Series, CS 842], Aldershot 2005, as no. III . (Cited as 'Feenstra 1996-2005').
112. Hugo Grotius, De iure belli ac pacis libri tres, curavit B. J. A. de Kanter - van Hettinga Tromp, Editionis anni 1939 ... exemplar photomechanice iteratum, Annotationes novas addiderunt R. Feenstra et C. Persenaire adiuvante E. Arps - de Wilde, Aalen 1993 (now available at Kloof Booksellers & Scientia Verlag, Amsterdam, www.kloof.nl). (Cited as 'Djbap 1993' or 'Feenstra, Djbap').
113. Available as reprints or on microfiche, see below at notes 31 ff.
114. The Freedom of the Seas or the Right Which Belongs to the Dutch to Take Part in the East Indian Trade, a Dissertation by Hugo Grotius, translated with a revision of the Latin text of 1633 by Ralph Van Deman Magoffin, edited with an introductory note by James Brown Scott, [Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Division of International Law], New York [etc.] 1916. (Cited as 'Magoffin'). Two issues exist, see below, notes 84 and 85; I use the second issue.
115. The formula on the title page is somewhat ambiguous and has indeed been misinterpreted by some later authors on Mare liberum, who consider Brown Scott as responsible for the statements in the notes added to the text and the translation; see e.g. Peter Borschberg, Hugo Grotius' Theory of Trans-Oceanic Trade Regulation, Revisiting Mare Liberum (1609), Itinerario, vol. 29 (2005), number 3, p. 31-53 (cited as 'Borschberg (2005)'), at p. 51 (note 39 to p. 37). On Scott's 'Introductory Note' and Magoffin's 'Translator's Preface' cf. below, note 62. For the two different issues of Magoffin's edition and translation see below, notes
116. and 85; the second example given in note 85 shows that Borschberg, in the note cited above, refers to the first - deficient - issue of Magoffin's work.
117. On the title page he is mentioned as Ph.D., Associate Professor of Greek and Roman History, The Johns Hopkins University. In 1923 he published an English translation of Cornelis van Bijnkershoek, De dominio maris dissertatio (Classics of International Law, vol. 11); at the time he was Head of the Department of Classics, New York University
118. On p. xi.
119. See below, at notes 46 ff.
120. This choice is not explained. Perhaps it was simply the oldest edition available to Magoffin, but he may also have been inspired by the fact that one of the two Leiden 1633 editions was used by the author of the translation into French, Alfred Guichon de Grandpont, published in 1845 (see below note 74), a translation which Magoffin claims to have consulted (Translator's Preface, p. xi). In any case, neither Magoffin nor Guichon uses the argument that these editions were revised by Grotius himself, an argument put forward in the Italian edition/translation of 2007 (see below, note 27) but without any evidence (see below, note 29).
121. For a third 1633 edition, published by Blaeuw in Amsterdam, see below, at note 43.
122. See below, at note 135.
123. For examples, see edition, p. 3 note g, p. 9 note 2, p. 20 note c, p. 28 note 1, p. 35 note a and p. 58 notes a and b.
124. For examples, see edition, p. 36 note d, p. 58 notes d and f, p. 64 note b, and p. 66 note c. There are, however, also cases where he adds useful references, see, e.g., p. 62 note 1 and p. 63 note 2.
125. After having written this judgment my attention was drawn to a review of the Magoffin edition published in The English Historical Review, vol. 33, no. 229 (January 1918), p. 115-118, by Edward Bensly (cf. below, note 92). The long list of critical remarks (for his conclusions, see below, note 22) does not only concern the marginal references and the Latin text but also the translation into English. In my notes to the text and in my revisions of the translation I could still fully take into account Bensly's critics. (Cited as 'Bensly').
126. See for this and the following details George A. Finch in his Preface to the 1950 edition of the English translation of De jure praedae (for the full title, see below, note 63), p. x-xi.
127. Not in the series 'Classics of International Law', see below.
128. Finch, Preface, p. xi. On p. x Finch says that this has been part of Scott's original proposal of 1906 for the 'Classics' series. However, in the full text of this proposal, which was edited as Appendix C to the same 1950 edition (p. 388-393), Scott only speaks of 'a new and authoritative edition [of De jure praedae] ... which should contain the brief on the law of prize, with footnotes calling attention to the few and unimportant modifications of chapter 12 when published separately as the 'Mare Liberum' ...' It is clear that Finch gives a wrong interpretation of the words 'when published separately as the 'Mare Liberum''; no doubt they refer to the 1609 edition, not to a new edition in the 'Classics' series.
129. Finch, Preface, p. xi-xii. For a small remainder of this plan see below, at notes 37 and 65.
130. Finch, Preface, p. xii.
131. In any case, not by those who might have read the review by Edward Bensly, cited above, note 16 (apparently this review was not present in the files of the Division of International Law of the Carnegie Endowment); cf. Bensly, p. 115 ('it cannot be regarded in any way as a definitive edition') and p. 118 ('it must be acknowledged that, before there is a second edition, translation and notes alike ought to be submitted to a searching revision').
132. Arno Press, New York 1972.
133. Union, N. J. Lawbook Exchange 2001.
134. http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/grotius/Seas.pdf. It was published by Batoche Books Limited, Kitchener (Ontario) 2000. The text of the translation is reproduced with a new pagination and a new numbering of the notes (continuous for the whole work); the text of the notes is put at the end of the translation. The revised issue of the 1916 edition has been used, cf. below, at note 85.
135. http://oll.libertyfund.org/Texts/Grotius0110/FreedomOfSeas/0049_Bk.pdf. It was published by Liberty Fund, Inc., Indianapolis (no date), and available in different formats; one of these is 'a facsimile or imagebased PDF made from scans of the original book'. The first (not revised) issue of the 1916 edition has been used, cf. below, at note 85.
136. Ugo Grozio, Mare liberum, a cura di Francesca Izzo, [Quaderni del Dipartimento di Filosofia e Politica, Universita di Napoli "L'Orientale"], [Napoli 2007].
137. To be found on p. 32-34. The name of the translator is not mentioned there, nor on the title page; it only appears on the verso of the latter: Fabio Longobardi.
138. See p. 32; in footnote 2 this is argued with the following words: 'l'opera di Grozio e inserita in una raccolta, da lui stesso curata come si evince dall' indice che riporta la firma di Hugo ...'. Indeed at the bottom of the page listing the contents of the 'raccolta' (see below, at notes 45 ff.) one finds 'Hugo'; that is, however, not a 'signature' but simply the indication by the printer that the next page begins with 'Hugo'!
139. See below, at n. 97.
140. In the 19 th century and in the beginning of the 20 th (i.e., before Magoffin) no edition of Mare liberum was published.
141. La Haye 1950, (reprint Zutphen 1995), p. 210-216, nos. 541-550. In 'remarque 12' under no. 541 (on p. 212-213) the authors refer to 27 editions of De jure belli ac pacis which add as an appendix an edition of Mare liberum (specified by giving the TMD numbers, cf. below, note 35). This has been overlooked in the Italian edition of 2007 (see above, note 27) where, on p. 32 n. 1, only those publishing the text separately or combined with works from other authors on related subjects are summed up as editions mentioned by TMD; as to the editions which do appear in the Italian translator's footnote, for 'Francoforte, 1683' read 'Francoforte, 1663'.
142. TMD 541-544 and 547; for no. 544 it is not certain that it was a separate edition, see below, note 42.
143. TMD 545, 546, 548-550
144. TMD 544, 579-586, 588, 592-594, 596, 597, 599-603, 605-611 (cf. above, note 32).
145. TMD 541. For further details see the 'remarques' (nos. 1-12) of Ter Meulen and Diermanse. The TMD information can be completed by consulting the on-line Short-title Catalogue, Netherlands (STCN), where, inter alia, typographical details and a list of copies available in the Netherlands can be found. The facsimile in the present volume is from the copy in the Royal Library in The Hague (KB).
146. See below, note 65.
147. TMD 542; cf. STCN. According to TMD the Errata of the editio princeps have been corrected. I have seen a copy in the Peace Palace Library (VP).
148. Information kindly provided by Mr. Erik Geleyns (Royal Library, The Hague, STCN).
149. TMD 543; cf. STCN. Copies inter alia at the Peace Palace Library (VP) and Leiden University Library (UBL).
150. A few new printer's errors, however, were made; some of them have never been corrected in later editions, see edition, p. 28 note 1 and p. 39 note e; cf. also p. 28 note 2.
151. TMD 544; cf. STCN. The only copies known to TMD and STCN (inter alia at the Peace Palace Library) are bound together with an edition of De jure belli ac pacis, published also by Ianssonius, Amsterdam 1632 (TMD 570), which has on its title page 'Tractatu de Mari libero adaucta'. Ter Meulen and Diermanse do not exclude, however, that Ianssonius also issued separate copies.
152. TMD 547; cf. STCN . Copies inter alia in Peace Palace Library (VP) and Leiden University Library (UB L).
153. This was not the case in the editions I mentioned above; for the problems of linking, see below, at note 135. The Blaeuw edition probably followed the example of the two editions under the title Grotius de Mari libero et P. Merula de maribus (see below, notes 46-48).
154. Two other treatises which follow after the one by Merula are not mentioned on the title page; for details, see TMD 545.
155. TMD 545; cf. STCN . This edition was probably used for the French translation of 1845 (see below, note 74), by Magoffin (above, note 10 ff.) and for the Italian edition and translation (above, notes 27 ff.). Copy inter alia in the Peace Palace Library (VP).
156. In order to distinguish it from the next edition it is easiest to add the number of pages. Mare liberum can be found on p. 1-106 (p. 101 incorrectly numbered as 201); on p. 65 'cap. III ' is a printer's error for 'cap. VII '.
157. TMD 546; cf. STCN . For the differences between TMD 546 and 545 - apart from what is mentioned below - see the 'remarques' under TMD 546. Mare liberum can be found on p. 1-83; on p. 46 'cap. III ' is a printer's error for 'cap. VII '(just as in TMD 545). In the part not concerning Mare liberum a number of errors occur in the pagination. According to A. Willems (Les Elsevier, Bruxelles 1880, no. 385), TMD 546 is of a later date than TMD 545. Copies available inter alia at Peace Palace Library (VP) and Leiden University Library (UB L).
158. See above, note 44.
159. Both published at Frankfurt/Main in 1663 and 1669 respectively; see for details TMD 548 and 549.
160. Without a separate title page; this is different from the Amsterdam 1632 edition (TMD 544), mentioned above at note 42.
161. TMD 579; copy inter alia at the Peace Palace Library (VP)
162. TMD 611; microfiches available from Inter Documentation Company (IDC ) in Leiden (Grotius Collection International Law, GRI -12/1).
163. It contains a number of improvements of the text and the marginal references, which already occur in earlier editions, in particular in those of 1689 (TMD 585-586), of 1712 (TMD 596-597), of 1720 (TMD 601-603) and of 1735 (TMD 605-606). I have cited some of these editions in my notes to the text; the 1712 edition seems to have supplied most improvements.
164. The first 'modern' edition of Djbap appeared only in 1919, cf. my additional notes in Djbap 1993, p. 926 ff.
165. Hagae Comitum 1868 (cited as 'Hamaker'). Since 2009 the text is also available at http://easy.dans.knaw.nl/dmsorhttp://textlaboratorium.com/document/DeIurePraedae
166. Published in 1872 as Defensio capitis quinti Maris liber by S. Muller in his Mare clausum, Bijdrage tot de geschiedenis der rivaliteit van Engeland en Nederland in de zeventiende eeuw, Amsterdam 1872, p. 331-361 (cited as 'Defensio').
167. Hamaker, p. ix.
168. He does not exactly indicate in the Latin text of De jure praedae, cap. XII , p. 204-267, the beginning and the end of the section of this text which corresponds to that of Mare liberum: these can be found on p. 205 and
169. respectively (for cap. I-XII of Mare liberum; elements of cap. XIII on p. 249-252). For a special case see edition, p. 18 note 1.
170. See above, note 19.
171. See below, at notes 63 ff. In the meantime a translation of De jure praedae into Dutch - without the marginal references - had appeared: Huigh de Groot, Verhandeling over het recht op buit, vertaald door Dr. Onno Damste, [Vereeniging voor de uitgave van Grotius], Leiden 1934. Oddly enough, nowhere in this edition is Mare liberum mentioned, of which three Dutch translations had been published in the 17 th century, see below, at notes 66 ff.
172. Introductory Note, p. v n. 2 and p. vii-viii n. 1 (where, for an analysis of De jure praedae, he refers to a well-known study on Grotius by Jules Basdevant). Magoffin himself, in his Translator's Preface, does not mention the existence of De jure praedae at all.
173. The Collotype Reproduction of the Original Manuscript in the Handwriting of Grotius [belonging to the State University of Leyden], Oxford-London 1950. Reprints appeared in New York 1964 and 1995. The text of the ms. is now also available at the sites mentioned above, note 56; a new edition is planned, see J. Waszink, Using the Work, Remarks on the Text of De iure praedae, in: Grotiana, 26-28 (2005-2007), p. 215-245.
174. De iure praedae commentarius, Commentary on the Law of Prize and Booty by Hugo Grotius, a Translation of the Original Manuscript of 1604, by Gwladys L. Williams with the collaboration of Walter H. Zeydel, Oxford-London 1950. Reprints appeared in New York 1964 and 1995. A new edition was published under the somewhat cryptic title Commentary on the Law of Prize and Booty, Hugo Grotius, Edited and with an Introduction by Martine Julia van Ittersum, [Natural law and Enlightment Classics - Major Legal and Political Works of Hugo Grotius], Liberty Fund, Indianapolis [2006]; only on the verso of the title page, in the middle of many other technical details, does it say: 'The text of this edition is a reprint of the translation of De jure praedae by Gwladys L. Williams published in 1950 [etc.]'. In a 'Note on the text' (on p. xxiii-xxvii) one can find which 'technical' changes and corrections were - tacitly - made in the original text and in the Index of authors cited by Walter H. Zeydel (for an example of an erroneous correction see below, note 173). All in all, the volume is more than a simple 'reprint'; the numbering of the pages is completely different. I have not referred to it in my notes on Mare liberum; there, citing 'Williams' means the original edition (or the 1964 and 1995 reprints); when a reference is cited, this implies the research of Walter H. Zeydel (on Zeydel, cf. below, note 151). In translating the manuscript Williams has, in principle, not taken into account what Brown Scott called 'the few and unimportant modifications of Chapter 12, when published as the Mare liberum'. However, in the preface by George A. Finch, at p. xxiv, mention is made of Williams' efforts 'to decipher ... deleted material', i.e. 'deleted by Grotius himself in his revision [of chapter XII] for a separate publication'. Some remarks on this aspect appear in Williams' footnotes on p. 216, 244 and 261-262.
175. At note 37; cf. the preface by George A. Finch to the 1950 translation, p. xi. In the Leiden copy of this volume an original letter from the Carnegie Endowment to the librarian, dated September 11, 1951, is found; the text was delivered in approximately one hundred unbound collotype sheets. Apparently, the collotype reproduction was made from a copy of the edition in the British Museum
176. TMD 552, 553 and 554; cf. STCN .
177. 'Ten tweede mael oversien ende verbetert door den Auteur selffs. tot vorderinghe des Vaderlants'.
178. The title of the first issue (TMD 552) has 'Vrye zeevaert ofte Bewys Van 't recht dat den Hollanders toecompt over de Indische coophandel'; in the second and third issues 'Hollanders' has been changed into 'de Ingesetenen deser geunieerde Landen'. The Latin title has 'Batavi' and at the beginning of the text the explanation is 'Batavis, hoc est Ordinum Federatorum Belgicogermaniae subditis': cf. my note 1 to p. 1 of the edition.
179. On the role of Bertius see H. Nellen, Hugo de Groot, Een strijd om de vrede, 1583-1645, Amsterdam 2007, p. 167 and note 101 on p. 649. On the close relations between Grotius and Bertius in general see L. J. M. Bosch, Petrus Bertius 1565-1629, PhD. thesis Nijmegen 1979, p. 117-127 (and passim, see Index).
180. See my note 1 on p. 61 of the edition.
181. TMD 555; cf. STCN . The marginal references are incorporated in the text; some have been omitted.
182. TMD 556 and 557 (1639 and 1641); TMD 558 (1681).
183. TMD 559 and 559 A.
184. TMD 560; Dissertation de Grotius sur la liberte des mers, traduite du latin, avec une preface et des notes, par A. Guichon de Grandpont, avocat, in Annales maritimes et coloniales, 30e Annee, 3e Serie, tome I, 1e section, Sciences et arts, tome 90 de la Collection, Paris 1845, p. 653-717.
185. Hugo Grotius, Mare liberum, La liberte des mers, 1609, Traduction d'Antoine de Courtin, [Bibliotheque de philosophie politique et juridique, Textes et documents], Caen 1990.
186. In the preface by Simone Goyard-Fabre the error on the title page is confirmed: 'La traduction que nous reeditons ici est celle donnee par Antoine de Courtin en 1703'.
187. His choice can be explained by the presence of other treatises on the seas in the 1633 editions: he was writing for 'Annales maritimes' and mentions also the treatise by Merula De maribus (he apologizes for not dealing with it because it has passages in Hebrew, see p. 660).
188. Mentioned shortly as TMD 561, with a reference to the full description of the Magoffin edition in TMD 551. As a 'remarque' under TMD 561 the authors refer to an English translation of chapter V of Mare liberum by Herbert F. Wright in his study Some Less Known Works of Hugo Grotius, [first part: 'The works of Hugo Grotius on fisheries in his controversy with William Welwood', no. 1: 'Chapter V of the Mare liberum'], in: Bibliotheca Visseriana Dissertationum ius internationale illustrantium, tom. VII (Lugduni Batavorum 1928), p. 131-238, at p. 137-153. Wright does not refer to the Magoffin edition and translation; although his translation is different he seems to have used Magoffin's - unreliable - version of the Latin text.
189. See above, at notes 14 and 15: the changes in the Latin version of the references has led him, in some cases, to a completely false interpretation in the notes to the translation. Cf. also Bensly's review (above, note 16).
190. For which we only have the Latin version as it appears in the edition, no manuscript version.
191. Although for this chapter a manuscript version is available.
192. See edition, p. 62 note a, p. 64 note b and p. 66 note d.
193. For this purpose, I have also compared the old translation by Hakluyt (see below, section 4) as well as, in a few cases, the Wright translation (cf. above, note 78).
194. There is, however, a handwritten notice about it in the author's copy of TMD (at no. 551) in the Peace Palace Library. My attention was drawn to this notice by C. G. Roelofsen at the occasion of the publication of the Grotius Reader, ed. by L. E. van Holk and C. G. Roelofsen, The Hague 1983, where a reprint of the Magoffin translation of chapters I, II , V and VIII of Mare liberum can be found on p. 59-93. This reprint proved to have been made from another copy than the one in my possession. In the Peace Palace Library (VP) a copy of the first issue has the shelf mark S 95 d 6, a copy of the second issue has 196 A 7.
195. The first issue reads: 'So far is that from being the case, that any one nation may justly oppose in any way, any other two nations that desire to enter into a mutual and exclusive contractual relation'; the second issue has: 'For surely no one nation may justly oppose in any way two nations that desire to enter into a contract with each other'. Another example can be found on p. 44 note 3, where the first issue identifies Rodericus Zuarius with 'Philippus Zuerius (? - 1606) of Antwerp' and the second issue simply refers to 'Rodericus Zuarius, Consilia published in 1621'. Apart from that, in both issues the reference is completely mutilated, cf. my edition, p. 36 notes 2, c and d. For Zuarius cf. below, at note 174.
196. The version mentioned above, note 25 (Batoche).
197. The version mentioned above, note 26 (Liberty Fund).
198. Hugo Grotius, Von der Freiheit des Meeres, ubersetzt und mit einer Einleitung, erklarenden Anmerkungen und Register versehen von Richard Boschan, [Der Philosophischen Bibliothek Band 97], Leipzig 1919.
199. TMD 562. According to K.-H. Ziegler, Volkerrechtliche Aspekte der Eroberung Lateinamerikas, Zeitschrift fur neuere Rechtsgeschichte, 23 (2001), p. 1-29, at p. 19 n. 141, is this 'seinerzeit verdienstvolle Ubersetzung ... in manchen Teilen nicht juristisch prazise genug'. His translation is not mentioned by Williams but it does figure in Armitage's edition of Hakluyt's translation (see below, note 98), p. xxi n. 2
200. 'nur insoweit, als durch sie seine Arbeitsweise in ein bezeichnendes Licht geruckt wird' (p. 10).
201. See edition, fol. 5 r note 2, p. 3 note i, p. 4 note b, p. 9 note 2 and note a, p. 20 note f and p. 42 note d.
202. For further details see TMD 563 and 564; the full title of the edition as a book is given in the list of Abbreviations (below, p. 163). The translator in the 2007 edition (see below, note 164) says not to have been able to find a copy of the 1933 book (but heavily criticizes the text as it appeared in L'Alfieri); I have seen, however, a copy in the Peace Palace Library (VP) and made some use of it. The translation seems to be partly based on the Magoffin edition, which, however, is not mentioned; only in L'Alfieri II -3 (1931), p. 17, Carf i calls his translation 'dall'edizione elzeviriana dell'anno 1663 [sic]'. (1633 is meant).
203. A translation into Norwegian, accompanied by an edited version of the text from 1609, has been published in November 2009: Mare liberum: Det frie hav, En avhandling om retten Nederlenderne har til a drive handel i Ostindia, redigert og oversatt av Andreas Harald Aure, Oslo 2009. I am much indebted to Mr. Aure, who put a question to me which led to an improvement of my edition and who drew my attention to the review of the Magoffin edition by Edward Bensly (see above, note 16).
204. As to the Polish and the Korean translations (both available at the Peace Palace Library) it may suffice to give the (short) titles: Hugo Grotius, Wolnosc Morz ... [ed. by] Remigiusz Bierzanek, Warszava 1955; Hugonis Grotii Mare liberum ... translated by Seok Hyun Kim, Seoul 1984. Both translations seem to be based on the Magoffin edition, the Polish one looks more independent and avoiding some of Magoffin's errors but at one point the Korean translation takes over a useful comment of Magoffin not figuring elsewhere, see edition, p. 62 note 1.
205. Hugo Grocio, De la libertad de los mares, Prologo de Luis Garcia Arias, Traduccion de V. Blanco Garcia y L. Garcia Arias, Madrid 1979 (the 1956 edition has - after the main title - only 'Estudio preliminar por Luis Garcia Arias').
206. See p. 48 n. 66, where the editors wrongly qualify the Amsterdam Blaeuw edition as the 'edicion elzeviriana', published by Magoffin.
207. See p. 99 n. 49 (Johannes Faber), and p. 115 n. 70 (Rodericus Zuarius); on the other hand they added details on Estius (see edition, p. 3 note g) and maintained (on p. 105) 'Alvarez' (cf. below, at note 198).
208. See p. 136 n. 48 (Johannes Faber), and p. 145 n. 68 (Rodericus Zuarius).
209. The Free Sea, Hugo Grotius, Translated by Richard Hakluyt with William Welwod's Critique and Grotius's Reply, edited and with an introduction by David Armitage, [Natural law and Enlightenment Classics - Major Legal and Political Works of Hugo Grotius], Liberty Fund, Indianapolis [2004] (cited as 'Armitage').
210. Armitage, p. xxi ff. (also for what follows in the next lines).
211. Armitage, p. xxiii.
212. For examples I refer to the following pages of the Hakluyt translation: p. 8 l. 11-12 'notwithstanding necessity was driven from equal judges of extreme servitude' (criticized also by Armitage in his note 3 but amended by him in a wrong way: the text of 1609 has 'extremae servitutis', not 'extrema'; cf. my translation on fol. 5 recto, inspired by the German translation); p. 29 l. 11-12 'Paulus thought they were to be forbidden' (it should be: 'Paulus thought [the owner of the preserve] would have been entitled to avail himself of the interdict [Uti possidetis]'
213. see the Williams translation (slightly improved by me) on p. 24 of the present edition). p. 30 l. 16-17
214. 'Johannes Faber, "When the sea shall depart ..."'(it should be: 'Johannes Faber ... when he asserted'); Hakluyt had not corrected the printer's error 'cesserit' (instead of 'asserit'), mentioned in the Errata of the 1609 edition, cf. p. 24 note 3 of the present edition. For similar cases where Hakluyt neglects the errata, see p. 11 note 1 and p. 27 note 1 of this edition. p. 51 l. 1-4 (passage in which 'navium exercitio' is opposed to 'institorum usus'): Hakluyt has not understood the Roman Law terminology and the contradistinction between both; for a correct translation see p. 54 of the present edition. p. 60 l. 16 'these multitudes' (it should be 'those to go unpunished'). Hakluyt has not corrected the printer's error 'multos' (instead of 'inultos'), mentioned in the Errata of the 1609 edition, cf. p. 66 note 2, of the present edition.
215. See the present edition, p. 6 note i, p. 39 note e, 42 note c and 50 note a.
216. P. 14 n. 6 (in the text the reference mark should figure after 'so famous many ages since', not after 'Horace').
217. See ms. fol. 98 r and edition p. 6, with my note 1.
218. The most important article is M. J. van Ittersum, Preparing Mare Liberum for the Press: Hugo Grotius' Rewriting of Chapter 12 of De Jure Praedae in November-December 1608, in: Grotiana 26-28 (2005-2007) [published in one volume in 2008], p. 246-280 (cited as Van Ittersum, Preparing Mare Liberum). Before this article she had already mentioned a detail in her Mare Liberum in the West Indies? Hugo Grotius and the case of the Swimming Lion, a Dutch Pirate in the Caribbean at the turn of the Seventeenth Century, Itinerario, 31 (2007), no. 3, p. 59-94, at p. 79-80 (cited as 'Van Ittersum, Mare Liberum in West Indies'). Later followed her Dating the Manuscript of De Jure Praedae (1604-1608): What Watermarks, Foliation and Quire Divisions Can Tell Us about Hugo Grotius' Development as a Natural Rights and Natural Law Theorist, History of European Ideas,
219. (2009), p. 125-193 (cited as 'Van Ittersum, Dating the Manuscript'). Still forthcoming (?) is her The Wise Man is Never Merely a Private Citizen: the Roman Stoa in Hugo Grotius' De Jure Praedae (1604-1608) (contribution to a conference 'Cosmopolitan Politics: on the History of a Controversial Ideal' (Frankfurt am Main, December 2006); the author kindly provided me with a copy of her text, cited by me as 'Van Ittersum, The Wise Man' ).
220. See particularly Van Ittersum, Preparing Mare Liberum, p. 261-265.
221. Some of these revisions described by van Ittersum are mentioned in my notes to the edition, but not all.
222. See Van Ittersum, Preparing Mare Liberum, p. 256-258.
223. For details on the history of the publication see Nellen, Hugo de Groot (above, note 69), p. 94-97, mainly based on letters of Grotius to Heinsius, published in Briefwisseling van Hugo Grotius, ed. by P. C. Molhuysen et al., vol. I, [Rijks Geschiedkundige Publicatien, Grote Serie, vol. 64], 's Gravenhage 1928, Nos. 148, 149, 151-156, 159, 161, 164, 165 (the relevant texts of these letters have also been published by C. van Vollenhoven, in a study reprinted in his Verspreide Geschriften, I, Haarlem - 's Gravenhage 1934, p. 503-507.
224. A part from the interesting allusions to the possibility of a French translation of Mare liberum (a plan that did not succeed; cf. Briefwisseling, I, nos. 148, 151, and 152) I would like to draw attention to some passages referring to the correction of the proofs. Apparently Heinsius himself was, at first, not in the picture for this task: Grotius makes suggestions that either Gerard Tuning or Dominicus Baudius (both Leiden professors) could be asked (Briefwisseling, I, nos. 153 and 154). It is not clear whether this had any result; maybe Heinsius did some of the work after all. Finally, in a letter of 7 March 1609 (Briefwisseling, I, no. 161), Grotius says, after thanking Heinsius for all his help: 'Errata annotavi et gaudeo me tam paucis defunctum, ut nunc est Typographorum genus'. May we conclude that the small list on fol. 6 v of the edition was composed by Grotius himself?
225. For details see Van Ittersum, Preparing Mare Liberum, p. 258; the suggestion about the line count was made to her by Dr. Nellen.
226. One copyist or two? Van Ittersum speaks of one, Nellen thinks of two. I am inclined to follow Van Ittersum.
227. Cf. above, at the end of section 5; for an example see p. 4 note b. Not all differences between the edition and the manuscript need to be printer's errors or copyist's errors: for a special problem see p. 18 note f.
228. They are attached to the Latin text (in the margin) as well as to the English translation.
229. They are only attached to the English translation; the link with the Latin text can easily be established because of the repetition of the marginal references in bold type.
230. See e.g. p. 26 note 2 and p. 42 note 1.
231. See above, at note 64. I took over the indication, in the margin, of the pages of the manuscript.
232. See above, at notes 80ff. The translations sometimes have a different approach of some technical details, e.g. in the case of passages in Greek. As a rule I let the differences exist; the only thing I unified (in the sense of Williams) is that when Grotius puts some words or passages in capitals (in the manuscript and in the printed text), I changed this everywhere into lower case italics. B oth translations have introduced paragraphs. These do not occur in the Latin text of the manuscript nor in the editions of the 17 th and 18 th centuries. Magoffin has introduced them also in the Latin text (this was followed in the Italian edition of 2007). The French translation of 1845 already has paragraphs; this is also the case for the German translation of 1919. In the translation of the present edition I have copied the paragraphs of Williams and Magoffin respectively.
233. Sometimes I have also compared the English translation of chapter V by Herbert F. Wright, mentioned above, note 78.
234. Williams was not very familiar with Roman law terminology, e.g. accessio, iniuria and occupatio.
235. See Djbap (1993), p. 933-934 (in my introduction to the 'Additional Notes').
236. The ancient legal texts outside the Corpus iuris civilis mentioned in Djbap (1993), p. 939, do not occur in Mare liberum. In the latter there is, however, one ancient legal text not mentioned in Djbap: constitutions of Theodoric, King of the Ostrogoths (died 526), transmitted by Cassiodorus (died c. 575) in his Variae (published in the 16 th century); see the present edition, p. 66 note c. - The excluded texts can be found in the 'Index of Sources not Mentioned in the List' (below, p. 171-174)
237. Cf. inter alia, p. 63 note 3.
238. Cf. above, note 64, at the end, and the text at notes 104 and 106.
239. Djbap (1993), p. 934 ff.
240. Williams' method has, grosso modo, been followed by Armitage in his edition of Hakluyt's translation.
241. Not in the case of texts of the Corpus iuris civilis and the Corpus iuris canonici.
242. This is the most important difference compared to the method of Williams and Armitage.
243. See e.g. edition, p. 28 note 1.
244. See e.g. edition, p. 58 note e.
245. See e.g. edition, p. 3 notes d, g and i, p. 4 note b, p. 6 note g, p. 9 notes a and d, p. 11 note a, and p. 20 note c.
246. See e.g. edition, p. 9 note b.
247. See below, at the end of section 9.
248. See e.g. edition, p. 3 note i and p. 62 note a.
249. See above, at the beginning of this Introduction; cf. e.g. p. 14 notes a, b and c, as well as p. 16 note b.
250. An example of incorrect links can be found in the case of the references on p. 5 of the ed. 1609, mentioned in my notes a, b, c and d: in the ed. 1633, p. 22 and 23, these four references have been put together in two notes whereby my note c is split into two sections. In later editions (including Magoffin's) my note a has become the first note and notes b, c and d are put together as the second note. In fact, all four references should appear in separate notes with different links as they are presented by Hamaker on the basis of the ms.; this division and linking is also clearly meant in the 1609 edition. For another example see edition, p. 36 note 3.
251. Of course I had to make links in the English text because it was difficult to do so in the facsimile of the 1609 edition.
252. In the following pages many passages are an adapted version of §§ 8 and 9 (p. 937-944) of my Introduction to the Annotationes novae in the 1993 edition of De jure belli ac pacis.
253. In one case there is a special difficulty, caused by the fact that Grotius cites a text in two different ways: as 'l. ult.' [lex ultima] and as 'l. Praescriptio' [being the first word of the text]. See my comments p. 20 note d, p. 25 note a, p. 39 note d, p. 40 note b, p. 41 note b and p. 44 note c.
254. In a number of cases Grotius, when he is citing texts of the Digest, adds the name of the Roman jurist who is mentioned as author of the work from which Justinian's compilers of the Digest took over the text. Again, for the benefit of non-specialist readers I included these names in my List of Sources with reference to the pages where Grotius mentions them (in the main text). For biographical details see W. Kunkel, Herkunft und soziale Stellung der romischen Juristen (2nd ed.), Graz-Wien-Koln 1967 (reprint Koln-Weimar-Wien 2001).
255. In addition, the Novellae Leonis, the novels of the Byzantine emperor Leo VI (886-912), can be mentioned; they have been added to most editions of the Corpus iuris civilis without the Gloss since 1571.
256. Sometimes this edition can also be used to identify references to Doctores on the Civil law.
257. This would, e.g., seem to be the case for Albericus Gentilis, De iure belli; see the List of Sources, below p. 165-169
258. The most recent general study on this subject is E. Rabbie, The History and Reconstruction of Hugo Grotius' Library, a Survey of the Results of Former Studies with an Indication of New Lines of Approach, in: Bibliothecae selectae da Cusano a Leopardi, ed. E. Canone, Firenze 1993, p. 119-137. For the books cited in his juridical works see R. Feenstra, Ius commune et droit compare chez Grotius, Nouvelles remarques sur les sources citees dans ses ouvrages juridiques, a propos d'une reimpression du De iure belli ac pacis, Rivista internazionale di diritto comune, 3 (1992), p. 7-36)
259. reprinted in R. Feenstra, Legal Scholarship and Doctrines of Private Law, 13th-18th centuries, [Variorum Collected Studies Series, CS 556], Aldershot 1996, as no. VI (cited as Feenstra 1992-1996).
260. cf. also P. Borschberg, Hugo Grotius "Commentarius in Theses XI", an Early Treatise on Sovereignty, the Just War and the Legitimacy of the Dutch Revolt, Berne etc. [1994], p. 47-101 ('Considerations relating to the principle sources utilized by Grotius for the 'Commentarius in Theses XI ').
261. See P. C. Molhuysen, De bibliotheek van Hugo de Groot in 1618, Mededeelingen der Nederlandsche Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letterkunde, Nieuwe reeks, 6 (1943), p. 45-63 (in our List of Sources cited as 'Inv.').
262. See F. Dovring, Une partie de l' heritage litteraire de Grotius retrouvee en Suede, Mededelingen der Koninklijke Nederlandsche Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letterkunde, Nieuwe reeks, 12 (1949), p. 237-250, and Nouvelles recherches sur la bibliotheque de Grotius en Suede et en Italie, ibidem 14 (1951), p. 331-340 (hereafter cited as 'Dovring I and II ').
263. See E. M. Meijers, Boeken uit de bibliotheek van De Groot in de Universiteitsbibliotheek te Leiden, Mededelingen der Nederlandsche Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letterkunde, Nieuwe reeks, 12 (1949), p. 251-279 (hereafter cited as 'Meijers')
264. cf. also F. F. Blok, Contributions to the History of Isaac Vossius' Library [= Verhandelingen der Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letterkunde, Nieuwe reeks, 83], Amsterdam-London 1974 (hereafter cited as 'Blok'), in particular p. 34-43 (The Grotiana in the 'Gerardus Johannes Vossius' auction catalogue; these books are not to be found in Leiden University Library).
265. Among the authors mentioned in the List of Sources this is the case for Ayala (Blok, p. 40 no. 22), Jason de Maino in Cod. and in Dig. (Dovring II , no. 11) and Thomas Aquinas, Summa (Dovring I, no. 16).
266. For some orientation, see my Introduction to the Annotationes novae in the 1993 edition of De jure belli ac pacis, p. 941 n. 86.
267. See my 1993 Introduction, p. 940 n. 77.
268. In Djbap there is one reference to chapter 5 of his Mare liberum, see p. 189 n. 1. and p. 958 in the 1993 edition.
269. Made by Walter H. Zeydel, research assistant on the Classics of International Law, who has also located most of the passages cited; cf. Preface to the translation, p. xxv.
270. It is more difficult to trace these passages in the edition of the Latin text by Hamaker, which has no index and does not give the folio numbers in his text.
271. For some details on Florum sparsio, see my 1993 Introduction, p. 943.
272. For some details, see also my 1993 Introduction, p. 943.
273. Cf. the list given in my 1993 Introduction, p. 942 n. 90.
274. Text edited by W. J. M. van Eysinga, Eene onuitgegeven nota van De Groot, Mededelingen der Nederlandsche Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letterkunde, Nieuwe reeks, 18 (1955), p. 235-252, reprinted in his Sparsa collecta, Leiden 1958, p. 488-504.
275. The references in the long quotations from Vasquius on p. 44-49 begin with 'all.' [= 'allegans']. Apart from Vasquius I found the following examples: p. 53 note h ('Castr. ex Cyno et aliis'), p. 58 note a ('Doctores in l. qui iure familiaritatis, ff. de acq. poss. et alleg. per Covar.'), and p. 65 note f ('Silv. in verbo restitutio ... alleg. Gerar., Oldradum et Archid.').
276. See p. 2 note d, p. 3 notes g and i, p. 4 note b and p. 43 note b.
277. See p. 6 note g and p. 9 notes b (also an error is taken over), g, h and i.
278. See p. 26 note e, p. 27 note a (also specification of a column), p. 28 note e, p. 35 note a and p. 36 notes c and d; cf. also p. 26 note 2.
279. See p. 44 note 1; at the same time this case presents an example that the figuring of a book in the inventory of 1618 does not mean that he used it when writing Djp and Ml.
280. The mere mention of the name of an author is, in principle, not considered as a reference.
281. For a first orientation, mainly as to dates, see W. H. Bryson, Dictionary of Sigla and Abbreviations to and in Law Books before 1607, Charlottesville 1975 (reprint Buffalo (N.Y.) 1996).
282. I will - inter alia - deal with several names which have caused confusion in the notes of Magoffin. Some others have already been dealt with in my notes to the text, see p. 9 note 2 and p. 20 note c; cf. also his mentioning of the name Estius as a source in a passage which has only the word 'est', see p. 3 note 9. I may add that even for Antiquity Magoffin has succeeded to make a gaffe - still repeated in the Italian translation 2007 - by interpreting 'Gordiani epistola' on p. 5 (Magoffin, p. 11-12) as a letter of a Benedictine monk (468-533) instead of a letter (constitution) of the emperor Gordianus (238-244), mentioned in the inscription of C. 8, 40, 13 cited by Grotius; cf. already Bensly, p. 118.
283. See A. Gouron, La date de la mort de Placentin; une fausse certitude, Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis, (1993), p. 481-492.
284. In his Index to De jure praedae (see above, note 64) he mentions him as 'Placentinus, Petrus (1135-1192)'; Magoffin does not give an identification. The quotation is indirect, see edition, p. 26 note 2. In the printed edition of 'Placentinus' Summa Institutionum (Mainz 1535) ad Inst. 2, 1, 5 (on p. 18) he expresses himself in different terms.
285. Edition, p. 40 note 2.
286. See his Index s.v. Andrea. Magoffin does not give an identification.
287. Edition, p. 36 note 2 and note d and p. 41 note c.
288. Edition, fol. 5 r note 1.
289. See A. Wolf in Handbuch der Quellen und Literatur der neueren europaischen Privatrechtsgeschichte (ed. by H. Coing), I, Munchen 1973, p. 672-673.
290. See Nic. Antonio, Bibliotheca Hispana nova, II , Matriti 1788, p. 271-272.
291. Born in Salamanca, he became professor in Valladolid, where, somewhat later, he was appointed as 'oidor' (auditor) in the Audiencia y Chancilleria, a high royal court, see Antonio, Bibliotheca, p. 272, as well as A. Perez Martin and J. M. Scholz, Legislacion y jurisprudencia en la Espana del Antiguo Regimen, Valencia 1978, p. 334. I could use the edition Allegationes et consilia quaedam, Lugduni 1559, where I found the text meant by Grotius as Allegatio XVII . The collection was later also published in his Opera omnia, Francofurti 1594, Duaci 1614, Antverpiae 1618 and 1661. Magoffin, p. 44 n. 3, mentions an edition of 1621 (see above, note 85), which I could not find. Williams and Zeydel (Index) used the ed. Douai 1614; it is not clear why Van Ittersum in her edition of the Index (see above, note 64) changed the name 'Suarez' into 'Juarez'.
292. Full title in the List of Sources at Zuarius. Consilium I gives the text that was published as 'Allegatio XVII ' in the edition Lugduni 1559, mentioned above, note 173. Grotius refers to Consilium I, so he will not have used the 1559 edition or the 1594 edition of Suarez' Opera omnia. It is of course possible that he consulted another edition of Straccha's Tractatus de mercatura.
293. Cf. above, note 173.
294. The two references mentioned in Mare liberum, p. 36 note d, use a different numbering; the reference at p. 40 note c, however, has the same numbering.
295. See K. Weidenfeld in Dictionnaire historique des juristes francais (XIIe-XIIIe siecles, ed. by P. Arabeyre, J.-L. Halperin and J. Krynen, Paris 2007, p. 321-322. He was born circa 1275 and died 1340; he is also cited as Johannes Fabri or Johannes de Runcinis (de Roussines).
296. Magoffin, p. 34 n. 2: 'Johannes Faber (c. 1570- c. 1640) was Bishop of Vienna and Court preacher to Emperor Ferdinand. He was popularly known as 'Malleus Haereticorum'. The confusion between the French jurist and the German bishop, who wrote a Malleus in haeresim Lutheranam is also found elsewhere, but Magoffin makes it worse by adding wrong dates. It was already criticized by Bensly, p. 118.
297. Edition, p. 36 note 2.
298. See Magoffin, p. 35, 48, 49, 50, 52 and 55, corresponding to p. 27, 39, 40, 41, 44 and 47 of the 1609 edition of Mare liberum.
299. Edition, p. 42 and note c: the mention of 'ff.' instead of 'Inst.' is an error taken over from Balbus. Magoffin, p. 51 (not mentioned in his Index), refers wrongly to 'rubr. Digest I, 8 (De divisione rerum)'. Williams, p. 248, corrects the error, but Armitage, p. 42 n. 17, puts again 'Angelus on Digest. I, 8' (in his bibliography he mentions only the commentary of Angelus de Ubaldis on the Digest and no work of Angelus Aretinus).
300. Williams, p. 253; cf. edition, p. 50 note 1. Armitage, p. 47 n. 42, simply puts 'Angelus on Inst. 2, 1, 5' (a work which he does not mention in his bibliography, where Angelus Aretinus is missing; see above, note 181).
301. See edition, p. 50 note a; this error was also adopted by Armitage. Both errors were already mentioned in Feenstra (1992-1996), p. 28 n. 119. A commentary of Angelus de Ubaldis on the Institutes was also invented in the English translation of De jure belli ac pacis; see Djbap 1993, p. 1030, and Feenstra (1992-1996), p. 15.
302. On this lecture and an early German translation of its summaries see R. Feenstra, Kaiserliche Lehnrechte, Die Libri Feudorum in deutscher Fassung nach Alvarotus und andere Inkunabeldrucke zum Lehnrecht, Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis, 63 (1995), p. 337-354 at p. 340 ff.
303. A Neapolitan jurist, who died c. 1316 (and not 1553 as Magoffin p. 36 n. *, says).
304. Edition, p. 28 note e.
305. Edition, p. 28 note 1.
306. Magoffin, p. 36 note *.
307. Boschan, p. 53, and the Polish translation (above, note 93), p. 48 n. 62.
308. Not in the text but only in the Index.
309. E. Staedler, Hugo Grotius uber die " donatio Alexandri" von 1493 und der Metellus-Bericht, Zeitschrift fur Volkerrecht, 25 (1941), p. 257-274.
310. See List of Sources.
311. Staedler calls him a Spanish jurist, but on the title page he is mentioned as Sequanus, i.e. from the Franche Comte (Burgundy); cf. the Index of Zeydel, who calls him Jean Matal.
312. Hamaker, p. 329 and 332; Williams, p. 353 and 356.
313. Edition, p. 10 note 1 and p. 56 note 1.
314. Edition, p. 56 note 1.
315. As is explained in the edition, p. 4 note 3, Andreas Alciatus should not figure among the authors cited in Mare liberum; the List of Sources in Djbap 1993, p. 1029 (at 'Alciatus, Responsa') should be corrected: instead of 'Djp (2)' read 'Djp (1)'.
316. He copies an error of Balbus on p. 42 (see note c).
317. Magoffin, p. 47 n. 3, copied inter alia by the Italian translation 2007, but already criticized by Bensly, p. 118, who shows the origin of the erroneous statement.
318. See P. Craveri, in Dizionario biografico degli Italiani, V (1963), p. 407-409.
319. After the Turin edition 1511 I found reliable mentions of editions Trino 1523, Lyon 1532, 1542 and 1544, Cologne 1565 and 1573, Venice 1582 and Cologne 1590 (which I used).
320. Edition, p. 42 notes a and b.
321. Magoffin, p. 50 n. 3, copied inter alia by the Polish, the Spanish and the 2007 Italian translation.
322. See V. Ventura, in Dizionario biografico degli Italiani, XLIV (1994), p. 94-95.
323. Edition, p. 42 note 1.
324. See Feenstra (1992-1996), p. 20, for references,
325. Alberico Gentili, Il diritto di guerra (De iure belli, libri III, 1598), Introduzione di Diego Quaglioni, Traduzione di Pietro Nencini, Apparato critico a cura di Guiliano Machetto e Christian Zendri, Milano 2008.
326. Magoffin, Williams and Armitage translate Grotius' references to 'Gl[osa]' into 'Glossators' which seems very unfortunate.
327. For the [Accursian] Gloss on the Corpus iuris civilis a reprint of the edition Lyon 1627 can be used, see above at note 141. For the Glossa ordinaria on the parts of the Corpus iuris canonici old editions are to be used; for the authors of the different parts and for further details see E. J. H. Schrage, Utrumque Ius, Eine Einfuhrung in das Studium der Quellen des mittelalterlichen gelehrten Rechts, [Schriften zur Europaischen Rechts- und Verfassungsgeschichte, 8], Berlin 1992, p. 90 ff.