Hugo Grotius’s De iure belli ac pacis: A Report on the Worldwide Census of the Fourth Edition (1632, Janssonius)

In: Grotiana
Edward Jones Corredera Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, Heidelberg, Germanyand University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by Edward Jones Corredera in
Current site
Google Scholar
Pablo Nicolas Dufour Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, Heidelberg, Germany

Search for other papers by Pablo Nicolas Dufour in
Current site
Google Scholar
Lara Muschel Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, Heidelberg, Germany

Search for other papers by Lara Muschel in
Current site
Google Scholar
Emanuele Salerno Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, Heidelberg, Germany

Search for other papers by Emanuele Salerno in
Current site
Google Scholar
Timothy Twining KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Search for other papers by Timothy Twining in
Current site
Google Scholar
, and
Mark Somos Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, Heidelberg, Germany

Search for other papers by Mark Somos in
Current site
Google Scholar
Open Access


This is the fourth instalment of our census and study of the reception of the first nine editions of De iure belli ac pacis. Here we focus on the two versions that Johannes Janssonius issued in 1632, one with a copy of Mare liberum attached to it. This report outlines the place of the 1632 Janssonius edition in the context of his long-running rivalry with the printer Willem Blaeu and his firm. It then explores the typographical differences between the two issues, their causes, and their significance for our understanding of the reception of the text. Finally, it provides the preliminary results of the census concerning the circulation and provenance of the fifty-three copies of this edition that we have found. We hope that this research note on the preliminary results will attract interest in this edition and that readers will kindly inform us of further copies.

1 Introduction

Once ibp was published in 1625, Grotius immediately set about encouraging the work’s international sales. Notable, in this respect, was his decision to send seventy-two presentation copies to the Dutch Republic to be sold on the Dutch market.1 While the well-known firm run by the Elzeviers ordered copies directly from Nicolas Buon, Grotius was keen to make his work available for purchase in a wide range of Dutch bookstores.2 Writing to his brother Willem in July 1625, Grotius indicated that, while he had readied the copies to be sent to Jean Maire’s shop in Leiden, he was also willing to send them to other sellers who might be interested in taking them, such as the Amsterdam printer and bookseller Johannes Janssonius.3 Other booksellers who received copies for distribution might have included Willem Blaeu, Janssonius’s next-door neighbour on Het Water (the modern Damrak), who was already familiar to Grotius, especially for having acted as a printer of an edition of Lucan’s Pharsalia (1619) based on a text edited by Grotius.4

If Janssonius and Blaeu were indeed rival sellers of the first edition of ibp, this would only add to what had already been a defining aspect of the relationship between the two men, which was marked by sustained competition. Their rivalry had its roots in Janssonius’s arrival in Amsterdam in 1613, which spurred the then Willem Janszoon to alter his surname to ‘Blaeu’ in order to avoid any confusion between them.5 The half-century that followed would witness a prolonged contest between the two firms, with Janssonius, in particular, proving himself readily willing to copy and plagiarise Blaeu’s publications at the first opportunity.6 One area in which this was especially acute was cartographic works, where Janssonius’s endeavours were supported, following his marriage to Elizabeth Hondius in 1612, by the resources of the Hondius firm.7 In the years following 1618, Janssonius published pirated editions of Blaeu’s version of Willem Corneliszoon Schouten’s Iournael ofte beschrijvinghe van de wonderlijcke reyse (1618) and of Blaeu’s pilot book, Het Licht der Zee-vaert (1619).8 The period after 1630 would see the intensification of the so-called ‘atlas wars’ between the two firms.9 Janssonius’s opportunism also extended to other fields, among them editions of the classics.10

Janssonius, moreover, had a keen predilection for Grotius’s publications. Among these numbered, in 1635, a pirated copy of Blaeu’s edition of Grotius’s biblical drama, Sophompaneas (1635).11 The Blaeu firm would long be alert to the dangers of Janssonius: when Johann Blaeu, Willem’s son, was approached with the chance to publish Grotius’s Anthologia Graeca, he hesitated in accepting the work partly due to the potential threat of Janssonius pirating it.12

The decades-long rivalry between Blaeu and Janssonius was encapsulated by the struggle between their two firms over the production of ibp. In printing the work in 1625, Buon had been granted a six-year privilege by Louis xiii.13 As soon as this expired, Willem Blaeu – who had recently published Grotius’s Grollae obsidio – seized the opportunity to publish a new, revised edition of ibp in 1631. Blaeu, much like Grotius’s brother Willem in the 1630s, could not secure his own privilege for the work.14 In the eyes of the Dutch authorities Grotius was a political criminal. He was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1619 and would be thrown out of the country in 1632. The States of Holland would not have been willing to grant Grotius such a privilege. This left Blaeu exposed to open competition.15 Janssonius was willing and eager to exploit this opportunity, and in 1632 brought out his own, cheaper edition, described on its title page as the ‘Third edition corrected and enlarged in many places’ (tmd 568).16 Janssonius’s plagiarism launched a period of strike and counterstrike between the two firms. Blaeu hastily printed a smaller, cheaper edition of his 1631 text, including an additional note by Grotius on the verso of the title page that condemned Janssonius’s pirated version, along with a renewed French royal privilege, and a new privilege by the Holy Roman Emperor (tmd 569).17 To attract buyers and outcompete Blaeu’s 1632 ibp, Janssonius then expanded his own edition, incorporated a copy of Grotius’s Mare liberum into the volume, and printed a new title page that described it as the ‘latest edition, after G. Blaeu’s edition’ (tmd 570). In hopes of catching up, Blaeu published what he claimed was a revised and expanded free-standing Mare liberum the next year (tmd 547).18

Our earlier study showed how Richard Tuck and other scholars drew on Grotius’s decision to reissue Mare liberum to argue that his thoughts on the rights to navigation and trade after his exile from the United Provinces remained largely unchanged.19 Yet, seen from the vantage point of the Dutch publishing disputes of the 1620s and early 1630s, Grotius’s role in adding Mare liberum to ibp is less clear. Janssonius’s creation of a joint edition of ibp and Mare liberum, and Blaeu’s publication of Mare liberum, corresponded to a desire to produce a more reputable and substantive version of ibp, one that featured a second influential work, and was equally motivated by the combination of casual collaboration and cut-throat competition that characterised the world of seventeenth-century printing in Europe.

2 Preliminary Results of the Census

We have located fifty-three copies of this edition and examined twenty in person, fifteen of which were annotated (Table 1). On the basis of this sample, we were able to formulate provisional conjectures concerning the printing and reception history of this edition, which we intend to develop by continuing to inspect surviving copies and benefiting from readers’ response to this note.


The title pages of the two Janssonius issues differ in several ways. First, and as already indicated, they contain different subtitles. The two variant forms of the first issue printed by Janssonius included the phrase, ‘Editio tertia emendatior, & multis locis auctior’. The copies of the second issue, by contrast, featured the phrase, ‘Editio ultima, post editionem G. BLAEU, in 8°, Tractatu de Mari Libero adaucta’, thereby underlining the value added to the work by the inclusion of Mare liberum. Of all the techniques that printers had to master, slotting in a short, forty-two-page-long, or twenty-one-leaf-long text after a lengthy work was an economical and simple way of improving the commercial appeal of a typescript. The two title pages also differ in their use of ‘v’s and ‘u’s, capitalisation, and choice of ‘i’s versus ‘j’s (figs. 1 and 2).

Figure 1
Figure 1

1632 Janssonius ibp, issue 1 (Ghent, iv/2)

Citation: Grotiana 43, 2 (2022) ; 10.1163/18760759-43020002

Figure 2
Figure 2

1632 Janssonius ibp, issue 2 (Lausanne, iv/34).

Citation: Grotiana 43, 2 (2022) ; 10.1163/18760759-43020002

Historians have long remarked that Janssonius’s edition, akin to much of his output, was printed on poor-quality paper.20 This report contributes new evidence that the printing process of both issues was rushed, for the errors in mispagination are the same across both issues: p. 27 only appears with number 7, p. 214 is misnumbered as 114, p. 316 as 116, and p. 330 as 230. This would indicate that Janssonius did not revise the text of the first issue before attaching Mare liberum (with its own pagination) to it, even though he had the title page completely re-set. An alternative but non-rivalrous hypothesis would be that Blaeu and Janssonius cooperated to an extent, jobbing or swapping sheets, while perhaps exaggerating news of their rivalry to generate interest.21 Regarding Blaeu’s motivation to work with Janssonius, Darnton documents the practice of ‘self-pirating’ as a common trick of the trade in the eighteenth century, and it is not too outlandish to suspect that the busy publishing world of seventeenth-century Amsterdam might claim precedence.22 A systematic comparison of the quality of these particular sheets of the 1631 and 1632 Blaeu and the 1632 Janssonius editions, which we aim to undertake, might be instructive in this regard.23 In any case, some extant copies indicate the lack of care taken with Janssonius’s editions, whether at the printshop or the bindery. One particular copy of the first issue, now at the National Library of France (iv/7), presents distinct characteristics that speak to a faulty printing and binding process.24

A second set of findings suggest that among the Janssonius copies that feature Mare liberum, there are significant differences in the collation and position of the second text within the book. Where some copies feature a separate frontispiece, others include the text without one (e.g., iv/21). A distinct tract with its own pagination, the incorporation of Mare liberum (tmd 544) offered booksellers and readers the scope to decide where to place it in their bound copies of ibp. While the work is most commonly bound after ibp itself, the sequencing is different in some copies. A copy now at Jesus College in Oxford (iv/40), with a provenance inscription by the Welsh poet, Henry Vaughan (1621–1695), claiming that he bought the copy in London on 28 July 1637, has Mare liberum bound first, followed by ibp. The copy in the Dutch Church in London (iv/38) has it bound towards the front of the work, inserted between the unpaginated prefatory materials of ibp and the start of ibp’s paginated pages.

Finally, we identified three additional typographical variations which, to our knowledge, have not been noticed before in the scant literature on the 1632 Janssonius edition, including the tmd.

On p. 503, the positions of the signature and the catchword show variation (figs. 3 and 4).

Figure 3
Figure 3

1632 Janssonius ibp, issue 2, signature and catchword (Amsterdam, iv/21)

Citation: Grotiana 43, 2 (2022) ; 10.1163/18760759-43020002

Figure 4
Figure 4

1632 Janssonius ibp, issue 1, signature and catchword (Ghent, iv/2)

Citation: Grotiana 43, 2 (2022) ; 10.1163/18760759-43020002

On p. 519, we noted the partial lack of a reference (figs. 5 and 6).

Figure 5
Figure 5

1632 Janssonius ibp, issue 2, marginal reference (Amsterdam, iv/21)

Citation: Grotiana 43, 2 (2022) ; 10.1163/18760759-43020002

Figure 6
Figure 6

1632 Janssonius ibp, issue 1, marginal reference (Ghent, iv/2)

Citation: Grotiana 43, 2 (2022) ; 10.1163/18760759-43020002

On p. 520, there is a variation in the format of ‘xl.’ in the lower right corner (figs. 7 and 8).

Our inspection of surviving copies suggests that Janssonius’s combination of ibp and Mare liberum paralleled the practice of some buyers and readers who purchased stand-alone copies of ibp and Mare liberum, then bound them together for easier access or consultation. This, intriguingly, mirrors a point made by Grotius himself, who in a letter to his brother in February 1625 reflected on the possibility of combining ibp and Mare liberum into one edition.25 That said, at least on the basis of our preliminary survey, Blaeu’s copies seem to have reached more influential figures of his age, a sign that his bet on reputation over quantity and speed paid off. Many of the readers, as shown in our next report on Blaeu’s 1632 ibp, also bound his 1633 self-standing publication of Mare liberum with his 1632 reputable edition of ibp, instead of buying Janssonius’s version, effectively producing a Blaeu equivalent of the second Janssonius issue.26 This did not exhaust the full range of creative engagements with ibp by binding various texts to it: a 1633 Blaeu Mare liberum, for instance, is bound with John Selden’s Mare clausum.27

Figure 7
Figure 7

1632 Janssonius ibp, issue 2 (Amsterdam iv/21)

Citation: Grotiana 43, 2 (2022) ; 10.1163/18760759-43020002

Figure 8
Figure 8

Janssonius ibp, issue 1 (Ghent iv/2)

Citation: Grotiana 43, 2 (2022) ; 10.1163/18760759-43020002

Our account of the printing history of Janssonius’s edition and its two variant issues confirms, and extends with new details and information, some claims made by earlier scholars regarding the sequence of these publications. The interrelation between the issues, and their relationship to Blaeu’s publications, have marked the material and reception history of the volumes themselves. A reader of the second-issue copy that belonged to the extensive collection of Professor Alphonse Rivier (iv/34) cited a remark by Dietrich Heinrich Ludwig von Omptéda, in his Litteratur des gesammten sowohl natürlichen als positiven Völkerrechts, on the verso, according to which Grotius condemned Janssonius’s edition as incorrect, and encouraged Blaeu to publish another edition.28 This was ‘an incorrect observation’, according to a second reader, as the Janssonius edition that incorporated Mare liberum was published after Blaeu’s own 1632 edition, and Grotius’s declaration was a reference to an earlier edition published by Janssonius (fig. 9).

Figure 9
Figure 9

Lausanne (iv/34), annotations on the front pastedown of the copy

Citation: Grotiana 43, 2 (2022) ; 10.1163/18760759-43020002

Some readers may have owned, studied, and compared copies of the 1632 Blaeu and Janssonius editions. Readers’ interest in the intricate printing history of ibp both complicates and enriches our study of the book’s reception. A copy at the Boston College of Law (iv/42), with a binding that featured an old antiphonal leaf, once belonged to the collection of Guido Kisch (1889–1985), the Prague judge, then Leipzig professor of legal history, Königsberg professor of legal history and political theory and eventually law professor at Basel. His dozens of annotations in his 1632 Janssonius ibp were nearly obliterated by a book dealer who thought that a clean-looking copy might fetch a higher price. Kisch, who migrated to the United States to escape the Nazi persecution of Jews, went on to write about legal humanism and the forerunners of Grotius, and relied extensively on the Italian professor of legal philosophy Giorgio del Vecchio, who owned a 1632 Blaeu edition of ibp, discussed in our adjacent note.29

Considered in conjunction, the printing history and typographical features of the 1631 Blaeu, 1632 Janssonius and 1632 Blaeu editions raise the question of cooperation between the two publishers, and even Grotius’s involvement. Paul Hoftijzer portrayed the relationship between Willem Blaeu and Janssonius as a ‘long-drawn-out feud’ probably based on ‘personal animosity’.30 This, it might be conjectured, was heightened further by their proximity to one another. Book piracy in the Northern Netherlands was often shaped by the polity’s division into separate provinces, with those in one locality paying much less heed to those based in others.31 Blaeu and Janssonius, however, were neighbours, and consequently their rivalry was based on keen awareness of one another’s activities. In this, it might be suggested that in some cases, such as Grotius’s work, the two men benefited by playing up their rivalry to capture the non-competitive market segments they specialised in, namely expensive print runs by Blaeu and cheaper editions by Janssonius, with probably a larger proportion of the Blaeu edition aimed for foreign markets. Historical parallels are suggestive. To make money by producing rival editions and creating a public controversy, Voltaire habitually amended his texts for self-pirated editions, pretended that he had no knowledge of the source of the new versions, condemned them with maximum publicity, and issued another lucrative edition with his seal of approval.32 Erasmus played off publishers of his works against each other in similar ways, nearly bankrupting a few as he issued new editions with minuscule emendations in order to profit.33 We do not put such practices past the Miracle of Holland.

3 Other Copies with Notable Provenances

It is clear from the preliminary results of our census that the reception of Janssonius’s 1632 edition truly spans countries and centuries. Among early readers, a copy at Brasenose College, Oxford (iv/39) once belonged to the collection of Samuel Radcliffe (1580–1648), Principal of the College, and rector of Steeple Aston, Oxfordshire, and Boxford, Bedfordshire. The eighteenth-century British natural scientist Thomas Gisborne (1758–1846), who served as a physician for George iii and was elected President of the Royal College of Physicians, left behind his collection of non-medical books to St. John’s College, Cambridge, and a copy of the Janssonius edition is featured in his collection (iv/35). Previously it was in the possession of Thomas Robinson of Queen’s College, Cambridge, whose ownership is detailed in his hand in ink on a front endpaper, ‘Tho: Robinson, 1667/8’. He is most probably identified as the Thomas Robinson who subsequently became Vicar of Enderby (1671–1678) and Tugby (1678–1719).

The presence of a copy at the Vatican Library (iv/17), which originally belonged to the vast collection (ca. 100,000 volumes) of Giuseppe de Luca (1898–1962), priest, scholar and founder of the Italian publishing house Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura and the scholarly journal Archivio italiano per la storia della pietà, speaks to a running theme in our census regarding the continued interest in ibp in the Catholic world.35

Among notable twentieth-century owners, the copy now at Boston College (iv/41) belonged to the Reverend John Creagh, a professor of law at the Catholic University of America, in Washington DC, who was asked in 1904 to organise a law course ‘in the study of Roman Law, its history, general principles, and nature, its relation to the Canon Law and its general influence on Christian legislation’.36 He offered a course titled ‘The Institutes of Roman Law’ before leaving Washington for Boston to become a pastor.37

Charles Lee Smith (1865–1941), in turn, studied at Wake Forest College, and served as the President of Mercer University, Baptist College of Georgia, as the president of Edwards and Broughton, a printing and publishing house, and as a trustee of the University of North Carolina. In 1922 he began to travel the world in search of old books, and in 1941 he donated his collection to his alma mater. He owned a copy of this edition, which was part of the collection he donated to the college (iv/52).

A closely trimmed copy survives at the Dutch Church at Austin Friars (iv/38), where the Hugo Grotius Society convened a meeting in early 1939 in a last-ditch effort to save world peace, and where the remarkable Jan van Dorp (1929–1989) served as a preacher.38

4 Conclusion

The printing and reception history of the 1632 Janssonius edition of ibp provides a striking illustration of the dramatic production and afterlife of Grotius’s seminal work on international law. Janssonius’s scandalous pirating of Blaeu, his inventive incorporation of Mare liberum in the second issue, and the extraordinary range of owners and annotators suggest that our census, when complete, will open new perspectives on both printing and reading strategies that account for the book’s enduring influence. We hope that readers will assist us in locating other copies of this edition so that we can comprehensively reconstruct the history of its genesis, circulation and reception.


We are grateful to Matthew Cleary, Francesca Iurlaro, Dániel Margócsy, Jonathan Nathan, and our colleagues at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Law and Public International Law for their help, and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft for generous financial support (grants so 1807/1 and so 1807/2).


Briefwisseling van Hugo Grotius (henceforth BW), ed. by Philipp Christiaan Molhuysen et al., 17 vols. in the series Rijks Geschiedkundige Publicatiën (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1928–2001), ii, no. 1008, Hugo Grotius to Willem de Groot, 5 September 1625. See further, Henk Nellen, Hugo Grotius: A Lifelong Struggle for Peace in Church and State, 1583–1645 (Leiden: Brill, 2015), pp. 375–7.


Nellen, Grotius, p. 376.


BW ii, no. 989, Hugo Grotius to Willem de Groot, 4 July 1625.


Nellen, Grotius, p. 588.


Cornelis Koeman, ‘Life and works of Willem Janszoon Blaeu. New contributions to the Study of Blaeu, made during the last hundred years’, Imago Mundi 26 (1972), 9–16, at p. 10.


On the general issue of book privileges and book piracy in the seventeenth-century Dutch Republic, see Paul G. Hoftijzer, ‘“A Sickle unto thy Neighbour’s Corn”: Book Piracy in the Dutch Republic’, Quaerendo 27 (1997), 3–18.


David Smith, ‘Jansson versus Blaeu’, The Cartographic Journal 23 (1986), 106–14, at p. 107.


Herman de la Fontaine Verwey, ‘Willem Jansz Blaeu and the voyage of Le Maire and Schouten’, Quaerendo 3 (1973), 85–105, at p. 98; Smith, ‘Jansson versus Blaeu’, p. 107; Hoftijzer, ‘“A Sickle unto thy Neighbour’s Corn”’, p. 12, n. 29. Andrew Pettegree and Arthur der Weduwen, The Bookshop of the World: Making and Trading Books in the Dutch Golden Age (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2019), p. 98.


Smith, ‘Jansson versus Blaeu’; Pettegree and der Weduwen, The Bookshop, p. 114.


Hoftijzer, ‘“A Sickle unto thy Neighbour’s Corn”, p. 12, n. 29.


Nellen, Grotius, pp. 481–2. See further, Cornelis van Vollenhoven, ‘De Groots Sophompaneas’, Mededeelingen Der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen 53, Serie B (1923), 1–84.


Frans Felix Blok, ‘Isaac Vossius and the Blaeus: Part ii’, Quaerendo 26 (1996), 87–93, at p. 89.


Hugo Grotius, De iure belli ac pacis (Paris: Nicolas Buon, 1625), sig. a4r.


Willem was unable to obtain a privilege to publish the Inleidinghe tot de Hollandsche rechts-geleertheyd, see Nellen, Grotius, pp. 429–31.


On privileges in the early modern Dutch Republic, see Paul G. Hoftijzer, ‘Privilèges de librarie dans les anciens Pays-Bas’, in Privilèges de librairie en France et en Europe, ed. by Edwige Keller-Rahbé (Paris: Classiques Garnier, 2017), pp. 425–41.


According to tmd 568, Janssonius’s pirated edition rectified the errata indicated in the 1631 Blaeu edition.


On the strengths and weaknesses of royal privileges and their extension (continuation) in the early and mid-seventeenth century, see Lucien Febvre and Henri-Jean Martin, The Coming of the Book: The Impact of Printing, 1450–1800 (French original 1958, tr. David Gerard, 1976, repr. London: Verso Books, 2010), chapter 7, section 5, and Robert Darnton, Pirating and Publishing: The Book Trade in the Age of Enlightenment (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021), pp. 15–16.


For similar entertaining stories of exaggerated claims of new editions in the context of cut-throat rivalry and piracy, see Darnton, Pirating, esp. chapter 7.


E.g. Richard Tuck, ‘Introduction’, Hugo Grotius, The Rights of War and Peace (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2005), I.xvii.


For comments on the quality of materials Janssonius employed, especially in contrast to Blaeu, see, for instance, Smith, ‘Jansson versus Blaeu’, p. 112; Johannes Keuning, Willem Jansz. Blaeu: A Biography and History of his Work as a Cartographer and Publisher (Amsterdam: Theatrum Orbis Terrarum, 1973), pp. 29–30.


On swapping sheets as one of the most common forms of interaction among printers, see Darnton, Pirating, pp. 213–4.


Ibid., pp. 176, 235, 256, 294.


It may not settle the question of the relationship between the 1631 and 1632 Blaeu and 1632 Janssonius editions definitively, since some of the shared typographical errors could be due to industrial espionage, particularly easy given the proximity of the two printers in Amsterdam. Stealing technologies, sheet and manuscripts, especially for pirated editions, is as old as printing itself. Febvre and Martin, The Coming of the Book, pp. 53, 55, 140–1.


Paris, bnf, 8-J-129. See pp. 55, 97–8, 193–4, 208–9, 386.


TMD 570, remark 4.


E.g. Boineburg’s copy at the University of Erfurt Library (V/18); also Grotius, Mare liberum (Amsterdam: Blaeu, 1633), Harvard Law School, rare (P 90 26).


Grotius, Mare liberum (Amsterdam: Blaeu, 1633), Harvard Law School, gen (90 24).


Dietrich Heinrich Ludwig von Omptéda, Litteratur des gesammten sowohl natürlichen als positiven Völkerrechts, Zweiter Teil (Regensburg: Montag, 1785), p. 393. We are grateful to Henk Nellen for this reference.


Guido Kisch, ‘Humanistic Jurisprudence’, Studies in the Renaissance 8 (1961), 71–87, at p. 85, n. 34; on professor del Vecchio’s collection see the following ‘Hugo Grotius’s De iure belli ac pacis: A Report on the Worldwide Census of the Fifth Edition (1632, Blaeu)’.


Hoftijzer, ‘“A sickle unto thy neighbour’s corn”’, p. 12.


Ibid, p. 11.


Darnton, Pirating, pp. 178–9 and passim.


Percy Stafford Allen, Erasmus: Lectures and Wayfaring Sketches (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1934), pp. 109–37.


Fritz Sturm, ‘Philippe Meylan (1893–1972)’, Revue Historique de Droit Français et Étranger 51:2 (1973), 369–71.


Guida ai fondi manoscritti, numismatici, a stampa della Biblioteca Vaticana, ed. by Francesco D’Aiuto and Paolo Vian (Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 2011), ii, pp. 815–6.


John E. Lynch, ‘The Fulfillment of the Law’, The Catholic Historical Review 75:4 (1989), 592–627.


Ibid., p. 598, n. 23.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 73 0 0
Full Text Views 859 757 94
PDF Views & Downloads 298 230 18