Barbeyrac

I never properly read Barbeyrac's preface to his translation of Pufendorf on the 'science of morality.'  It is an excellent essay, which makes useful connections to the source literatures, and could even serve as the basis for a new curriculum on the history of moral philosophy and jurisprudence.  I can see why commentators have found this a valuable source.  I might consider revising my own jurisprudence class to follow some of Barbeyrac's suggestions.  

The essay is perhaps most famous for the following line:

Grotius was the first to 'break the ice' of confusion created by centuries of Scholastic moral theology.  What he accomplished, according to Barbeyrac, was achieve a goal that numerous moral philosophers and jurists (Barbeyrac lists Cicero and Francis Bacon) had hoped for over the centuries:

'un Systême du Droit Naturel' - a system of natural law.  

But it is when Barbeyrac begins to compare Grotius with Pufendorf that the essay gets spicy.  Grotius is apparently too demanding for the average student of law and ethics.  Pufendorf is a more accessible and more systematic theorist (Barbeyrac claims - and I think I agree).  And so, he approves Locke's suggestion that it is best to begin with Cicero and Pufendorf before turning to Grotius.

There's one line that made me chuckle.

'This outstanding work [i.e., Grotius] is so badly translated into our language' (referring to the Courtin translation into French).