390 instruktsiia was independent of the kansliordningen both in terms of its organization and its formulations. Nonetheless, the four draft versions of the instruktsiia that Voskresenskii was able to identify reveal that this regulation was written with the Swedish kanslikollegium as its model. For example, Chancellery Councillor Vasilii Stepanov, who wrote the first draft, noted the following concerning the two chancellery councillor positions listed in the instruktsiia: In Sweden, four persons deal with these affairs, just as there are, with His Tsarist Majesty’s gracious consent, to be four councillors in each of the colleges. As for what concerns the duties, I have written that myself, for in the Swedish description {shvedskoe vedenie) it is only explained that they help the chiefs (verkhovnye). The “Swedish description” Stepanov was referring to cannot have been the kansliordningen of 1661, since that document described the responsibilities of the various chancellery councillors {kansliråd) in great detail. Instead, it was in all probability Pick’s report on the Swedish kanslikollegium that Stepanov was referring to, for Pick had written of the chancellery councillors that, “when foreign matters of state are dealt with or decided together with the king, the chancellery councillors, or first secretaries, participate, of whom only one or two are present, and in this they help the state minister and often the king himself.” Pick did not provide any further information about the responsibilities of the Swedish chancellery councillors. In addition to this, there is yet another trace of this part of Pick’s report in the instruktsiia for the kollegiia inostrannykh del. The instruktsiia stipulated that “when such secret matters of state come about that His Tsarist Majesty in his own high person deigns to be present in the kollegiia inostrannykh del, or for which ■** TsGADA, f. 370 delo 12 1. 3v; cf. the personnel budget for the Swedish kanslikollegium for the first quarter of 1714, RA, Kanslikollegium, serie F: IX 3, Stater 1700—1719. ■*" Instruktioner II, 335—338. It is possible that the Swedish kansliordningen was unavailable to the authors of the Russian instruktsiia, since it is not mentioned anywhere in the Russian sources and is not included in the list of Swedish legislative acts Pick brought back with him from Sweden; see A. R. Cederberg, Heinrich Tick. Ein Beitrag zur russischen Geschichte des XVIII. Jahrhunderts (Dorpat/Tartu, 1930), Beilage 1, 1—64. In ZA, 529, Voskresenskii stated that “the Swedish law mentioned (l.e., the kansliordningen of 1661, author’s note) was specially translated for the present collection of ‘Peter the Great’s legislative acts’ but has not been included here for reasons outside of the control of the compiler.” No mention is made of which text, some eighteenthcentury manuscript or the text published by Styffe in the 1850s, Voskresenskii used for his translation. However, it is possible on the basis of what has been said here to draw one significant conclusion, namely that Voskresenskii did not find any Russian translation of this document in his extensive archival researches. ZA (no. 414), 544.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=