, a learned and eminent Civilian, was born in Aberdeenshire, in
, a learned and eminent Civilian,
was born in Aberdeenshire, in 1541, and descended from
one of the best families in Scotland. He was in favour
with Mary queen of Scots but, after that princess was
dethroned, and detained in captivity in England, finding
that he had no prospect of making his fortune in the court
of her son James, he resolved to retire into France, which.
he did about 1573. He was then more than thirty years
of age, and went to Bourges, in order to study law. He
there took his doctor’s degree in that faculty, and had
applied himself so closely to his books, that he was qualified
to fill a chair. Edmund Hay, the Jesuit, who was his
countryman, and is said to have been related to him, procured him accordingly a professorship in civil law in the
university of Pontamousson, by his interest with the duke
of Lorrain, who had lately founded that seminary. And
the duke not only conferred upon Barclay the first professorship, but also appointed him counsellor of state, and
master of requests. In 1581, Barclay married Anne de
Malleville, a young lady of Lorrain, by whom he had his
son John, who afterwards became a writer of considerable
note, and whom the Jesuits endeavoured to prevail on to
enter into their society. But Barclay opposing their
scheme, the Jesuits resented it so highly, and did him so
many ill offices with the duke, that he was obliged to leave
Lorrain. He then went to London, where king James I.
is said to have offered him a place in his council, with a
considerable pension but he declined these offers, because
it was made a necessary condition of his accepting them,
that he should embrace the protestant religion. In 1604,
he returned into France, and accepted the professorship
of the civil law, which was offered him by the university
of Angers. He taught there with reputation, and is said
to have been fond of making a splendid appearance in his
character of professor. But he did not hold this office
long, dying in 1606. He was buried in the church of the
Franciscans. He appears to have been much prejudiced
against the Protestants and was a zealous advocate for
passive obedience, and the divine right of kings, as appears from his writings, of which the following are “the
principal, 1.
” De Reguo et llegali Potestate ad versus
Buchananum, Brutum, Boucherium, et reliquos Monarchoniachos,“Paris, 1600, dedicated to Henry IV. 2.
” De
Potestate Papse, quatenus in Reges et Principes seculares
Jus et Imperium habeat,“Franco!'. 1609, 1613, 1621, Hannovias, 1612, in 8vo, and Lond. in English, 1611, in 4to,
Mussiponti, 1610, 8vo, and Parisiis, 1600, 4to. In this
he proves that the pope has no power, direct or indirect,
over sovereigns in temporals, and that they who allow him,
any such power, whatever they may intend, do very great
prejudice to the Roman catholic religion. 3.
” A commentary
upon the Title of the Pandects de Rebus creditis et de Jure] urando,“Paris, 1605, 8vo. 4.
” Prcemetia in vitam
Agricolse," Paris, 1599, 2 vols. 8vo. This last is said to
be an excellent commentary on Tacitus. There are two
letters from him to Lipsius in Burman’s Sylloges Epistolarum, and four from Lipsius to him.
, a learned and eminent civilian, was born at Ernsborough, in Devonshire,
, a learned and eminent civilian,
was born at Ernsborough, in Devonshire, about 1554;
educated at Eton school; and elected a scholar of King’s
college in Cambridge, in 1570. He was afterwards chosen
fellow of that college; and, by the advice of Bancroft
bishop of London, applied himself particularly to the study
of ci-vil law. He was regularly admitted to the degree of
LL.D. in his own university; and, in 1600, was incorporated into the same degree at Oxford. Soon after he was
made the king’s professor of civil law in Cambridge, and
about the same time master of Trinity-hall. His patron,
Bancroft, being advanced to the see of Canterbury in
1604, and beginning to project many things for the service of the church and state, put him upon that laborious,
work the “Interpreter,
” or an explanation of law-terms,
which he published at Cambridge in 1607, 4to. It was
reprinted in 1609, and several times since, particularly in
1638, for which archbishop Laud was reflected upon; and
it was made an article against him at his trial, as if the impression of that book had been done by his authority, or at
least with his connivance, in order to countenance king
Charles’s arbitrary measures. In 1677 and 1684 it was
published with large additions by Thomas Manley of the
Middle Temple, esq. and again in 1708, with very considerable improvements, by another hand: in all which later
editions the exceptionable passages have been corrected or
omitted.