, Breestraat 113, in 2010. in 1606:
[Leiden is situated in] a marsh in the midst of marshes, Here is the great convenience of a library so that students can study. Scaligerana Ou Bons Mots, etc., 1695. When
Justus Lipsius retired from the
University of Leiden in 1590, the university and its protectors, the
States-General of the
Netherlands and the
Prince of Orange, resolved to appoint Scaliger as his successor. He declined; he hated lecturing, and there were those among his friends who erroneously believed that with the success of
Henry IV learning would flourish, and Protestantism would be no barrier to his advancement. The invitation was renewed in the most flattering manner a year later; the invitation stated Scaliger would not be required to lecture, and that the university wished only for his presence, while he would be able to dispose of his own time in all respects. This offer, Scaliger accepted provisionally. Midway through 1593, he set out for the Netherlands, where he would pass the remaining sixteen years of his life, never returning to France. His reception in Leiden was all that he could have wished for. He received a handsome income; he was treated with the highest consideration. His supposed rank as a prince of
Verona, a sensitive issue for the
Scaligeri, was recognized.
Leiden lying between
The Hague and
Amsterdam, Scaliger was able to enjoy, besides the learned circle of Leiden, the advantages of the best society of both these capitals. For Scaliger was no hermit buried among his books; he was fond of social intercourse and was himself a good talker. During the first seven years of his residence in Leiden, his reputation was at its highest point. His literary judgment was unquestioned. From his throne in Leiden, he ruled the learned world; a word from him could make or mar a rising reputation, and he was surrounded by young men eager to listen to and profit from his conversation. He encouraged
Grotius when only a youth of sixteen to edit
Martianus Capella. At the early death of the younger
Douza, he wept as at that of a beloved son.
Daniel Heinsius, at first his favourite pupil, became his most intimate friend. At the same time, Scaliger had made numerous enemies. He hated ignorance, but he hated still more half-learning, and most of all dishonesty in argument or quotation. He had no tolerance for the disingenuous argument and the misstatements of facts of those who wrote to support a theory or to defend an unsound cause. His pungent sarcasm soon reached the ears of the persons who were its object, and his pen was not less bitter than his tongue. He was conscious of his power, and not always sufficiently cautious or sufficiently gentle in its exercise. Nor was he always right. He trusted much to his memory, which was occasionally treacherous. His emendations, if often valuable, were sometimes absurd. In laying the foundations of a science of ancient chronology, he relied sometimes on groundless or even absurd hypotheses, often based on an
imperfect induction of facts. Sometimes he misunderstood the astronomical science of the ancients, sometimes that of
Copernicus and
Tycho Brahe. And he was no mathematician. ==Disagreements with the Jesuits==