151 state that “the very contents of the Russian instruktsiia show . . . that the loans were not very close in this case. What Miliukov demonstrated, then, was that there were few concrete points of verbal agreement between the Swedish and the Russian instructions, and that the Swedish instructions cannot, therefore, have served as the sole model for the instruktsiia for the kamer-kollegiia. The method he used did not, however, reveal whether the structure of the Russian college was actually planned with the Swedish kammarkollegium as a model or whether the instruktsiia mirrored the actual activities of the kammarkollegium. In order to answer these questions, it is necessary to employ methods different from those applied by Miliukov. With a good knowledge of the organization of the Swedish kammarkollegium as background, it is immediately apparent beyond all doubt that the instruktsiia for the Russian college provides a portrait of its Swedish counterpart. At the same time, however, it is also clear that the instruktsiia for the kamer-kollegiia was not shaped solely on the basis of the Swedish instructions for the kammarkollegium. Since the instruktsiia contains information about the kammarkollegium that could only have been obtained through direct contact either with that college or with one of its employees, it is necessary to test the hypothesis that the instruktsiia constitutes a summary of the operational procedures of the kammarkollegium written by a person who had observed that college at close hand. Aleksei Makarov, Peter’s private secretary and later president of the kamer-kollegiia., indicated that Heinrich Pick wrote the instructions for that college,'**’ and Stefan Kochius, the secretary of the kamer-kollegiia, informs us that Pick delivered “a description of the kammarkollegium in Stockholm” to the Senate in November 1717.^^ Prom what has been said here, it is clear that any comparative analysis of the contents of the Russian instruktsiia for the kamer-kollegiia must take a much more extensive body of Swedish sources into consideration than merely the texts published by Styffe. At the time of the Russian collegial reforms, the Swedish kammarkollegiumhad no instruktion which governed its current organization and functions, and indeed the question of a new instruktion for that college was not solved until 1734.*^* In order to determine whether the instruktsiia for the kamer-kollegiia mirrored the operating procedures of the kammarkollegium, it is necessary to gather together adequate materials for a comparison ’on the basis of which to analyze the Russian text. One important source for such a com- ” 48 Miliukov, 443 note 1, 537. TsGADA, f. 19 dcio 8 1. 1; Cederberg, 33. TsGADA, f. 248 delo 58 1. 78. Gunnar Wirsell, Om kronans jordcböcker 1541—1936 (Stockholm, 1968), 35.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=