SOURCE B

2.5 Grotius: an international lawyer

50

Hugo Grotius was born in Delft in 1583. His father taught Hugo at home and he was only eleven when he went to Leiden

University to study law. Hugo graduated in 1598 and went with Johan van Oldenbarnevelt to negotiate with the French king. The French were amazed by his ability to think clearly, deeply and quickly at such a young age.

Grotius and the lawIn 1604, Grotius was involved in his first international law trial about a Portuguese ship captured by a Dutch ship in the East Indies, even though the Portuguese and the Dutch were not at war. Grotius advised the trial judges. It set him thinking about how complicated it was to make legal decisions in cases about events at sea. At the time, most nations believed they controlled the sea around any lands they ruled. The English and the Portuguese, for example, wanted to extend control as far out to sea as possible. Whatever happened on the sea they controlled was covered by their laws, just as if it had happened on land.

In 1609, Grotius published The Freedom of the Seas, which argued that no nation could control the sea – all people were free to sail anywhere on it. This was a new, shocking, argument and caused much international argument – it was one of the causes of the Anglo-Dutch wars. It was also the first time that the idea of a set of international laws that all nations should obey was introduced. By the end of the eighteenth century, most nations accepted the ‘three mile rule’. This said they controlled the sea for 3 miles (4.8 km) from their coast – this was the distance a cannon could be fired.

SOURCE AMy intention is to show, briefly and clearly, that the Dutch – that is to say, the people of the United Netherlands – have the right to sail to the East Indies, as they are now doing, and to trade with the people there.I will base my argument on the following most specific and indisputable axiom of the Law of Nations. It is a primary rule or a first principle – something that is self-evident and unchanging. The axiom is: Every nation is free to travel to every other nation, and to trade with it.

From The Freedom of the Seas, written by Grotius. It was first printed in 1609 and was addressed to ‘the Rulers and the Free and Independent Nations of Christendom’.

In English, adverbs are used to tell

you more about the action of the

verb. For example: ‘he spoke’ could

have the adverbs ‘clearly’, ‘briefly’,

‘loudly’ or ‘softly’ added. Each ‘-ly’

adverb gives you a different idea

of the way the person spoke.

Adverbs

SOURCE BA book chest in which Grotius is said to have escaped from Loevestein Castle. It is in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.

PHOTO 41 CHEST FROM REIJKSMUSEEN, 18 LINES AT 3/5 <I327842_PH2_05_

040>

PHOTO 41 CHEST FROM REIJKSMUSEEN, 18 LINES AT 3/5 <I327842_PH2_05_

040>

42-63DutchHistory2Unit2.indd 50 25/3/08 12:14:01

SOURCE CSOURCE CAnother book chest in which Grotius is said to have escaped from Loevestein Castle. This one is in the Stedelijk Museum Het Prinsenhof, Delft.

Political lifeGrotius was not just a lawyer and thinker. He also became involved in the politics of the Republic. He became Advocate of The Hague in 1599; Advocate General of Holland, Zeeland and Friesland in 1609 and Pensionary of Rotterdam in 1613. As well as this, Grotius wrote many books and pamphlets about government and the law. For example, he argued that Holland had an ideal government system, one that other countries should copy.

In 1613, Grotius became involved in the Arminian religious dispute (see page 44). He suggested, as a compromise, that everyone obeyed the basic rules of the Dutch Reformed Church, but that small differences were tolerated. Both sides hated it. In 1618, Grotius was arrested with Johan van Oldenbarnevelt. He was imprisoned in Loevestein Castle, but escaped in a book chest in 1621 and spent the rest of his life in exile. In 1625, he was offered a pardon but refused it, saying taking it meant accepting he had done something wrong to begin with. Grotius died in a shipwreck, in 1645.

51

Grotius’ ideas about law and government all developed out of his belief in ‘Natural Law’. He argued that:• people live in groups• they need to live together peacefully• there are rules of behaviour that all people in

all places should follow at all times• groups of people and governments should all

obey these rules• the laws of different countries should be

based on these rules.

The fact that Grotius saw Natural Law as applying to all people, in all countries, regardless of their faith or nationality, was unacceptable to many people. He was unusual in taking such an international view of government and justice. As he developed these ideas, he found it more and more difficult to be a Calvinist and accept beliefs such as predestination.

Natural law and Calvinism

In English, noun and verb

forms are often regular and

recognisable. A ‘reader’ ‘reads’

a book. A ‘singer’ ‘sings’ a song.

‘Prisoner’ is not regular. A

prisoner who is locked up is

not ‘prisoned’. The locking

up is done to him, he does

not choose to do it. So he is

‘imprisoned’ – that is put into

prison by someone else.

Noun to verb

42-63DutchHistory2Unit2.indd 51 25/3/08 12:14:06

2.6 England kills its king

52

In England, a king and a parliament shared power and struggled over how much power Parliament should have. In 1642, this turned

into a civil war between the Royalists (who supported the king) and the Parliamentarians (who supported Parliament). By the end of 1644, the Royalists seemed to be winning, so Parliament reformed its army. This new army, called the New Model Army, had officers who were chosen for their ability, not because they were MPs (members of Parliament) or nobles. It was very successful and, during 1645, it crushed Charles I’s armies and won the war.

By 1647, Charles was a prisoner of Parliament. But Parliament was split into several different factions, so Charles tried to do a deal with each of them at the same time. He also tried to do a deal with the Scots, who had sided with Parliament in the civil war, hoping to get them to change sides and set off a new civil war. In 1648, the Scottish army invaded England to fight for Charles and English Royalists also started fighting.

The New Model Army was too strong for both the Scots and the English Royalists. The New Model Army blamed Charles for all the death and injury in the Second Civil War and felt he could not be trusted. He had started a second war, so he might try to start a third. The only way to be safe was to get rid of Charles.

The trial of Charles IThe largest faction in Parliament could not imagine England without a king. So, at the end of the Second Civil War, they made a deal with Charles, called the Treaty of Newport, to give him many of his old powers back, almost as if the civil wars had not happened. This shocked the New Model Army. They sent soldiers to Parliament with orders to let in only the MPs who agreed with the army. These MPs, called the Rump Parliament, and the Army agreed to put Charles I on trial. They set up a special court, the High Court of Justice, because no ordinary court had the power to try the king. This court accused Charles of being, ‘a tyrant, traitor and murderer, and an enemy to the people of England.’ Charles did not accept the court had the right to try him, but the trial went ahead. Charles was found guilty, and sentenced to death by beheading.

The execution was on 30 January 1649. Charles was brave, asking the executioner to wait while he finished his prayers. Then his head was cut off with one blow. England was now a republic, like the Netherlands.

SOURCE BOn the day of his execution, which was Tuesday 30 January, I stood among the crowd in the street where the scaffold was, and saw what was done. I saw the blow given.There was such a groan by the thousands watching, as I never heard before, and wish never to hear again.Troops were sent to control the people, and to disperse and scatter them, so that I had much ado among the rest to escape home without hurt.

From the diary of a young Royalist who saw the execution.

SOURCE ASOURCE AJohn Bradshaw was the judge in the trial of Charles I. He had this special hat made to wear during the trial. The metal frame was hidden by the outside of the hat.

42-63DutchHistory2Unit2.indd 52 25/3/08 12:14:38

SOURCE CSOURCE CA painting of the execution of Charles I by John Weesop, who said he watched the execution.

A shocking actMany people were shocked by Charles I’s execution. Kings were killed in battle, or gave their power to others, but this was the first time a European country had taken power from a ruler, tried that ruler and executed him. Many of the rulers of Europe believed, as had Charles I, that God gave them their power. They assumed their people would accept God’s choice. If the English rebels were not quickly punished by God, who would be next?

The English Republic had many enemies. The Scots were angry that the English Parliament had killed Charles (who was their king too) and Ireland was Royalist. English Royalists wanted a revolt to make Charles I’s son king. In three years, the New Model Army had to defend itself against the Irish, the Scots, and a rising by English royalists. It beat them all.

53

SOURCE A

England and the Dutch Republic were both Protestant, both republics and both surrounded by Catholic kingdoms. The two republics discussed making a treaty – the English even proposed uniting the two countries into one republic. However, the English and Dutch were soon at war with each other. There had been conflict between the two countries over trade and fishing rights for years. Public opinion was anti-Dutch in England and anti-English in the Dutch Republic. The Orangists wanted to help Charles’ son to take the English throne. The final trigger was the English claim to control the seas. This led to a fight between the English and Dutch navies in the Channel in 1652 – which led to war.

War with the Dutch Republic

42-63DutchHistory2Unit2.indd 53 25/3/08 12:15:17

SOURCE ASOURCE AThe Great Hall of the Binnehof, The Hague, during the Great Assembly in 1651, painted by Dirck van Delen in 1651.

2.7 The de Witts

54

Although William II was Stadholder for only three years (1647–50), he managed to make

the existing religious and political problems of the Republic even worse. He opposed the Treaty of Münster (see page 45), and carried out secret negotiations with other countries without consulting the States General. When the Treaty was signed anyway, he refused to reduce the army, despite not being at war any more. William II controlled the army – so cutting it meant reducing his power. He imprisoned members of the States General who opposed him and even sent an army to stop demonstrations against him in Amsterdam. Then, in 1650, William caught smallpox and died. His son, William III, was born a week later.

Government without a StadholderWilliam III was not old enough to be a Stadholder. The States General decided to do without a Stadholder until William III was old enough to do the job. They now only had one really powerful official: the Grand Pensionary of Holland.

Johan de WittIn 1653, Holland chose Johan de Witt as Grand Pensionary. He and his brother, Cornelis, were anti-Orange. Johan’s appointment made the Orangist faction angry. It was difficult, however, for them to act against the de Witts; Johan was a successful politician, and William III was too young for power.

In 1667, de Witt persuaded the States General to abolish the post of Stadholder completely. However, many anti-Orangists just wanted the Stadholder controlled – they did not want to remove the family of William of Orange. Then, in 1672 – ‘the year of disaster’ – France and England both declared war on the Republic; France to get the Spanish Netherlands, England over trade. The French invaded and the States General decided to put the 21-year-old William III in change of the army. De Witt opposed this but William was appointed, so de Witt resigned. The Orangists then had both de Witts arrested for supposedly plotting against William III. During rioting in The Hague, on 20 August 1672, both brothers were killed by rioters.

The language people use to describe

an event can often give a clue to any

bias they have. So if someone is ‘killed’

this is a neutral description. Emotive

words, that suggest support for the

dead person, could be: ‘murdered’,

‘slaughtered’ or ‘butchered’. The

action of someone in a battle could

be described as ‘heroic’ or ‘taking

needless risks’ – depending on

the point of view of the person

describing the event.

Emotive language

42-63DutchHistory2Unit2.indd 54 25/3/08 12:15:25

55

SOURCE BIn rioting at The Hague, on 20 August, De Witt and his brother, Cornelis, were caught by an angry crowd (which included some of the militia) outside the prison that was opposite the Binnehof. They were beaten, stabbed, and shot to death. The corpses were dragged to a nearby scaffold and pulled up by the feet to be displayed to the people. They were then mutilated. Parts were roasted and eaten in a frenzy of cannibalistic hatred. But, one observer pointed out, order was ‘maintained amid disorder’. No one else appears to have been killed.

From The Dutch Republic, written by the historian Jonathan Israel in 1995.

SOURCE C‘My brother!’ cried Johan de Witt, trying to see (through blood which blinded him) what had happened to Cornelis.‘Go run after him!’ bellowed a murderer, putting his musket to Johan’s head and pulling the trigger. But the gun did not go off. The fellow then turned his musket round, and, taking it by the barrel with both hands, struck Johan de Witt down with the butt-end. Johan staggered and fell.A third murderer fired a pistol to Johan’s face, blowing out his brains. Johan de Witt fell, to rise no more.At this, every one of the mob, made brave by his fall, wanted to fire a gun at him, or strike him with the hammer, or stab him with a knife or with swords. Everyone wanted to draw blood from the fallen hero, and tear a shred from his clothes. After having mangled, and torn, and stripped the two brothers, the mob dragged their naked and bloody bodies to a gibbet, where amateur executioners hung them up by the feet. Then came the most dastardly scoundrels of all, who not having dared to strike the living flesh, cut the dead in pieces, and then went about the town selling small slices of the bodies of Johan and Cornelis at ten sous a piece.

Part of The Black Tulip, a historical novel written by Alexandre Dumas in 1850.

55

Dumas (1802-70) was an author who wrote many plays, but is more famous for his historical novels. The most famous of these are The Three Musketeers and The Count of Monte Cristo, both written in 1844-45.

Dumas wrote over 250 books. He had 73 assistants to help him. Some of these assistants were historians. The novels were based on historical incidents. However, Dumas saw his novels as stories rather than historical accounts. He was perfectly happy to change events to make the story more exciting.

Alexandre Dumas

SOURCE DSOURCE DThe Bodies of the De Witt brothers, Hanged at Groene Zoodje, on Vijverberg, in The Hague, painted by Jan de Baen in the 1670s.

42-63DutchHistory2Unit2.indd 55 25/3/08 12:15:31