Ittersum, The Working Papers of Hugo Grotius

The first questions any historian asks of a document are: who produced it? why? what was its purpose? has it been altered? is it an original? and so on. Answers to such questions determine the faith to put on it and how to approach its interpretation. They can often be rather difficult questions to answer. Closely related or even implicit in these questions isthat of the transmission of documents. Where has this document come from? Who has used it? Does the answer to such questions affect our interpretation?

One interesting issue connected with this is that of archives. Most historians come to love archives (though some individual archives can deservedly be cursed). There are few who  work in archives who do not come away with stories about them. But most who work in archives would recognise the wonder and insight conveyed by Arlette Farge’s  Le Goût de l’archive of 1989, published in English translation in 2013.

These unremarkable musings are prompted by Martine van Ittersum’s brilliant book, the Working Papers of Hugo Grotius: Transmission, Dispersal, and Loss, 1604-1864, in which she traces the history of Grotius’ working papers and manuscripts across three centuries. 1604 is the date when he started the work that became De jure praedae; 1864 is that of a major auction of his papers. She shows how the history of these papers, their preservation, use, and disposal affected understanding of Grotius and his oeuvre through the centuries, and how they were used to construct different Grotii.

This is not the place for a review of this outstanding work; but it is important to mention it, not just because of what it tells us about a major figure of intellectual history, but also because it shows what can be done, and perhaps needs to be done for other figures, and what can be gleaned from such an approach.

See here.