184 text shows that the contours of the Swedish college are to be found in the various stipulations of this document. As was the case with the kamerkollegiia, the following presentation is based on an analysis of the Russian instruktsiia and the relevant Swedish materials with which it may be compared. Pavel Miliukov made an attempt to trace the influence of Swedish prototypes in the instruktsiia for the shtats-kontor-kollcgiia, just as he had done with the instructions for the kamer-kollegiia. In addition to Styffe’s collection of Swedish instructions, Miliukov also had access to the report submitted by the statskontoret to Charles XII on the occasion of his accession in 1697. As stated earlier, Miliukov worked on the premise that one had to establish verbal agreement between a Swedish model and a Russian imitation in order to prove any connection between the two Russian and Swedish colleges. But, for reasons discussed below, he was unable to establish any verbal similarities on the basis of the materials available to him. In spite of this fact, Miliukov did not deny the possibility that there had been Swedish influence in the formulation of the Russian instruktsiia. He left the questioned unanswered, referring to information he had that a new' instruktion for the statskontoret had been drawn up in 1695, but stating that he had not had access to that text. Miliukov pointed out that it may have been this text that had been used by the Russian legislators as a model for their own instruktsiia. The statskontoret did not, however, receive any new' instruktion in 1695. A look at Miliukov’s source of information, the report of the statskontoret for 1697, reveals that the year 1685 was mentioned, but that it referred to an explanation of the instruktion from 1680 issued by the government in that year rather than to a new set of instructions, as he had concluded.-”’ Miliukov’s conclusion was based on a misreading, or perhaps on a printing error. In fact, it may be pointed out that this explanation from 1685 was published in the volume of Swedish instructions to which Miliukov had access. As will be demonstrated below, he also had access to source materials which in themselves were sufficient to establish the great similarities between the shtats-kontor-kollegiia and its prototype at Stockholm. That which Miliukov failed to note w^as the possibility that the Sw^edish statskontoret, as was the case with the kammarkollegium, did not, at the 204 204 Miliukov, 442. Samuel Loenbom, ed., Handlinger till Konung Carl XI:s historia (15 v., Stockholm, 1763—1774), V, 50 (hereafter this source will be referred to as “Statskontorets skrivelse 1697,” Loenbom, V). Miliukov did, however, discover the mistake while working on the second edition of his book, and in an addition to that second edition he modified his account; see Miliukov, 548, which is a comment on ibid., 442 note 2. 205
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=