KAZAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW, 2017, том 2, № 2

KAZAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW

Volume 2, Summer 2017, Number 2

Journal President:  

Ildar Tarkhanov (Kazan Federal University, Russia)

Journal Editor-in-Chief:  

Damir Valeev (Kazan Federal University, Russia)

International Editorial Council:

Sima Avramović 
 (University of Belgrade, Serbia)
Susan W. Brenner 
 (University of Dayton School of Law, USA)
William E. Butler 
(The Pennsylvania State University, USA)
Michele Caianiello 
(University of Bologna, Italy)
Peter C.H. Chan 
 (City University of Hong Kong, China)
Hisashi Harata 
 (University of Tokio, Japan)
Tomasz Giaro 
 (University of Warsaw, Poland)
Haluk Kabaalioğlu 
 (Yeditepe University, Turkey)
Gong Pixiang 
 (Nanjing Normal University, China)
William E. Pomeranz 
 (Kennan Institute, USA)
Ezra Rosser 
 (American University Washington College of Law, USA)
George Rutherglen 
 (University of Virginia, USA)
Franz Jürgen Säcker 
 (Free University of Berlin, Germany)
Paul Schoukens 
 (KU Leuven, Belgium)
Carlos Henrique Soares 
 (Pontifical Catholic University of Minas Gerais, Brazil)
Jean-Marc Thouvenin 
 (Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense University, France)

Russian Editorial Board:

Aslan Abashidze  
(Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia,  
Russia)
Adel Abdullin  
(Kazan Federal University, Russia)
Lilia Bakulina  
(Kazan Federal University, Russia)
Igor Bartsits  
(The Russian Presidental Academy  
of National Economy and Public  
Administration, Russia)
Ruslan Garipov  
(Kazan Federal University, Russia)
Vladimir Gureev  
(Russian State University of Justice  
(RLA Russian Justice Ministry), Russia)
Pavel Krasheninnikov  
(State Duma of the Russian Federation,  
Russia)
Valery Lazarev  
(The Institute of Legislation  
and Comparative Law under the Government  
of the Russian Federation, Russia)
Ilsur Metshin  
(Kazan Federal University, Russia)
Anatoly Naumov  
(Academy of the Prosecutor's Office  
of the Russian Federation, Russia)
Zavdat Safin  
(Kazan Federal University, Russia)
Evgeniy Vavilin  
(Saratov State Academy of Law, Russia)

KAZAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW      Volume 2, Summer 2017, Number 2

«KAZAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW» 
(registered by The Federal Service  
for Supervision of Communications,  
Information Technology  
and Mass Communications in Russia 
on 17 November 2016  
(certificate number PI № FS 77-67763  
(ПИ № ФС 77-67763)) 

Publication:  
four issues per year (one issue per quarter)

Editorial office: 
room 326, 18 Kremlyovskaya St.,  
KAZAN, 420008 Russia

ISSN 2541-8823

The reprint of materials of the journal  
“Kazan University Law Review” is allowed  
only with the consent of the Publisher.  
Link to the source publication is obligatory.  
The Publisher or the Editor’s office does not render 
information and consultations and does not enter 
into correspondence. Manuscripts can not be 
returned. The Founder and the Publisher  
are not responsible for the content of 
advertisements and announcements. 

Opinions expressed in the contributions are those 
of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the 
official view of the organizations they are affiliated 
with or this publication. 

KAZAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW

Volume 2, Summer 2017, Number 2

Journal executive secretaries: 

Marat Zagidullin  
(Kazan Federal University, Russia)
Jarosław Turłukowski  
(University of Warsaw, Poland)

Editor of English texts:  
Randolph W. Davidson (USA, Italy)

Assistant of Editor-in-Chief:  
Elena Bazilevskikh (Kazan Federal University, Russia)

Journal team: 

Ruslan Sitdikov, Rustem Davletgildeev, Ivan Korolev, Maxim Voronin, 
Marat Shamsutdinov, Ramil Gayfutdinov, Ivan Novikov, Iskander Asatullin, 
Durmishkhan Afkhazava, Nikita Makolkin, Azalia Gubaydullina, Lilia 
Sharipova, Abdulbosit Muzaffar ugli Makhkamov, Murat Kamarov, Ekaterina Avvakumova, Anastasia Kiryushchenko, Viktoriia Chernova, Kamilla 
Khabipova, Alina Astafyeva, Anastasiia Bychkova, Veronika Novikova.

KAZAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW      Volume 2, Summer 2017, Number 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Damir Valeev (Kazan, Russia)
Welcoming remark of the Editor-in-Chief ............................................................4

ARTICLES:

William E. Butler (Carlisle, Pennsylvania, USA)
The 300
th anniversary of the first original Russian work  
on public international law ......................................................................................6

Adel Abdullin (Kazan, Russia)
The formation and development of Russian science  
of Private International Law at the beginning of XX century .......................... 50

Franz Jürgen Säcker (Berlin, Germany)
Principles and perspectives of Energy Law in Europe ...................................... 73

COMMENTS:

Arzu Abbasova (Moscow, Russia)
Legal regulation of superficies in European countries ...................................... 89

Marat Suleymanov (Kazan, Russia)
Transnational corporations in Private International Law: history,  
features and classifications .................................................................................... 97

CONFERENCE REVIEWS:

Roza Salieva (Kazan, Russia)
Review of materials of the International roundtable on the topic  
“State regulation of social relations in the sphere of power engineering  
in Russia, Germany and the EU” ....................................................................... 110

Yuriy Lukin (Kazan, Russia)
Nikita Makolkin (Kazan, Russia)
XII Annual Student Moot Court Competitions:  
the Russian national debates – 2017 .................................................................. 115

KAZAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW      Volume 2, Summer 2017, Number 2

Dear Readers,

I would like to present for your attention the second regular issue of the Kazan 
University Law Review 2017. 
The topics in this issue cover current questions of interest relating to the theory and 
practice of Russian law. 
The opening article by William E. Butler, John Edward Fowler Distinguished 
Professor of Law, Pennsylvania State University, is dedicated to the tercentenary of 
the first Russian-language publication of Public International Law by P. Shafirov  
(St. Petersburg, 1717) on just cause for war between Russia and Sweden, and considered 
an important development both for international law and for Russian law. Professor 
Butler provides readers access into the diplomatic framework and legal basis of Russia’s 
participation in the Northern War. His article has particular importance for measuring 
the extent to which European ideas and the practice of international law have been 
assimilated into Russian law, and at the same time one can see Russia’s contribution to 
the development of the ‘Western’ system of international law.
The article by Adel Abdullin, Professor and Head of the Department of International 
and European Law at the Law Faculty of Kazan Federal University, continues the 
international legal focus of this issue. Quite naturally, his article is devoted to the 
development of Russian legal science in the field of private international law. He describes 
the characteristics of private international law in Russia and provides a scientific analysis 
of the views and writings of outstanding legal scientists in this field, noting that in Russia 
the twentieth century is recognized as a golden age and a period of enormous growth 
in the national legal science of private international law, when Russia entered into 
capitalist economic relations and experienced the development of international trade 
and the introduction of foreign capital into the domestic economy. All of these events 
had to be properly secured by law. As a result, terminology, the conceptual basis and 
methodology of Russian legal science of private international law were formed during 
this period, which also saw Russian legal science on private international law marked 
out as an independent branch of law.
It is important for Russian and foreign legal science to turn to the experience of 
sectorial studies of certain issues of economic activity. In this regard, the article by 
Professor Jürgen Säcker of the Free University of Berlin is devoted to the problems and 
prospects for the development of energy law in Europe. This is more important than ever, 
and especially for Russia, because vast energy resources and energy production remain 
the backbone of the Russia economy and the reason it is a great energy power. In his 

KAZAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW      Volume 2, Summer 2017, Number 2

article Professor Säcker rightly notes that the regulatory authorities have implemented 
special rules in the EU Directives and the domestic legislation of European countries, 
in accordance with agreed standards, to ensure effective competition in this vital 
field. Therefore, a correct understanding of the legal basis of this process is extremely 
important.
Traditionally in each issue of our journal we try to publish articles by young legal 
scientists. I am very pleased to introduce our new authors Arzu Abbasova, from the 
Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, and 
Marat Suleymanov, from Kazan Federal University, who contribute practical-oriented 
articles on the legal nature of the right of superficies and the distinguishing features of 
transnational corporations, respectively.
‘Conference Reviews’ completes the practical section of this issue with the contributions by our colleagues from Kazan on the events that were held at Kazan Federal 
University in April 2017.
With the help of Professor Rosa Salieva of the Tatarstan Republic Academy of Sciences 
we get acquainted with the review of the international roundtable on power engineering 
issues. The roundtable was attended by legal scientists and representatives of the business 
communities of Russia and Germany, who discussed issues of state regulation of relations 
in the sphere of energetics in the present socio-economic circumstances and the future 
development of legal science in the field of power engineering.
The work of another important and traditional annual student event ‘Student Moot 
Court Competitions: The Russian National Debates’ is described in material prepared 
by Yuriy Lukin and Nikita Makolkin of Kazan Federal University. The review describes 
the history of the competition, presents the results of academic discussions held during 
the moot court debates and details the legal scientific, practical and educational benefits 
from this kind of student event.
I extend a warm welcome to each of you and wish you a stimulating and rewarding 
reading experience of this second issue of our journal.

With best regards,
Editor-in-Chief
Damir Valeev

KAZAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW      Volume 2, Summer 2017, Number 2

A R T I C L E S

William E. Butler
John Edward Fowler Distinguished 
Professor of Law, Pennsylvania State 
University

THE 300
TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FIRST ORIGINAL RUSSIAN WORK  
ON PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

DOI: 10.24031/2541-8823-2017-2-2-6-49

Abstract: The year 2017 marks the 300
th anniversary of the publication of the first 
original Russian work on public international law, P. P. Shafirov’s (1673–1739) Discourse 
on the Just Causes of the War between Russia and Sweden (St. Petersburg, 1717). This 
article addresses the diplomatic context of this work, the legal grounds in the Russian 
view for the Northern War against Sweden, the violations of international law allegedly 
committed by Sweden, the importance of the work for measuring the extent to which 
European ideas and practices of international law had been assimilated into the Russian 
language, the contributions of Russia to the development of “western” international law, 
the role of Shafirov as an international lawyer, and the importance of contemporary 
German and English language translations of Shafirov’s work.

Keywords: P.P. Shafirov, Peter the Great, Northern War, international law, terminology of international law, F.C. Weber, J.J. Moser.

The year 2017 marks the three hundredth anniversary of the publication of the first 
original work on public international law published in Russia. In the absence of an 
indigenous community of “legists” to build upon the growing corpus of seventeenthcentury international legal scholarship in Europe, it fell to diplomatic practitioners to 
produce early Russian literature on international law in the course of, or in supplementation of, their official duties. The first original work of an unofficial nature on 

WILLIAm E. BUTLER
7

international law in the Russian language was P.P. Shafirov’s A Discourse Concerning 
the Just Causes of the War Between Russia and Sweden, published at St. Petersburg in 
1717. Writing at a critical moment in Russia’s long, debilitating, but ultimately successful 
struggle for a permanent outlet on the Baltic Sea and a reduction of Swedish hegemony, 
Shafirov reviewed the diplomatic history of Russo-Swedish relations (still the best 
contemporary account and an invaluable original source on the Northern War) and 
set forth the Russian view as to the legal grounds for that War and the violations of 
the law of nations allegedly committed by Sweden. Peter the Great himself wrote the 
conclusion and contributed other passages.
Shafirov’s book provides one of the earliest and best indicators of the extent to which 
Russia had assimilated, linguistically and conceptually, the principles and practices 
of international law generally accepted in western Europe of that day, an appraisal of 
which has been facilitated by the identification of a contemporary anonymous English 
translation published in London whose existence had been overlooked by western and 
Russian scholars alike for 250 years.
For modern international legal scholarship, however, Shafirov’s work is much more 
than merely a comparatively unknown landmark in the history of international law. The 
book was one of the first examples of Russian pamphleteering, a practice indulged in 
extensively by European governments and political figures of the time. One historian 
described the book as “the first independent, completely original historico-publicist 
work published typographically in the new civil script”.
1 Another said that the Tsar’s 
methods of historical research suggested that he and his aides (including Shafirov) 
are the beginning of “the history of Russian archaeography”.
2 The English translation 
may well be the first Russian literary work to have been published in the English 
language. And, as in the case of so many early eighteenth-century Russian imprints, 
bibliographical investigation has confirmed the existence of editions and printings 
previously unknown.
Our understanding of the origins and early development of modern international 
law leaves much to be desired, especially our knowledge of when and how patterns 
of international intercourse were transferred or communicated from one civilization, 
country, tribe, or people to another. Our ethnocentric preoccupation with the undeniably 
potent impact of nineteenth century European imperial expansion in bringing “European 

1  S.L. PeShtich, Русская историография XVIII века [Russian Historiography of the XVIII Century] (1961–
71), I, p. 138. A facsimile of the 1718 Moscow version and the 1722 English translation of the Discourse 
were published together with an introduction by the present writer. See P.P. Shafirov, A Discourse 
Concerning the Just Causes of the War Between Sweden and Russia: 1700–1721 (1973). The present 
article is an expansion of the article introducing the 1973 facsimile edition and takes into account the 
Russian edition containing both the Russian and English texts issued by Zertsalo Publishing House 
(2007) and the remarkable facsimile edition published at Moscow in 2016 by the Pepelyaev Group in 
collaboration with The Kremlin Museums.

2  t.S. Maikova, «Петр I и ‘Гистория Свейской войны’» [Peter I and the “History of the Swedish War”], in 
Россия в период реформ Петра I [Russia in the Period of Reforms of Peter I] (1973), p. 116.

KAZAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW      Volume 2, Summer 2017, Number 2 
8

international law” to other regions of the world has begun to be redressed by comparative 
inquiries into the practices of China, India, Japan, the East Indies, and Central Asia. The 
contribution of Russia to this process remains to be investigated in much greater depth. 
The work of Russian international lawyers who in the late nineteenth and early twentieth 
centuries wrote on aspects of international legal history remains virtually unknown to 
western scholarship, and, until comparatively recently, Russian jurists have not been greatly 
interested in the subject. It would seem, though, that Russia’s early and, in comparison 
with western Europe, prolonged contacts with Byzantium, Central Asia, Mongolia, China, 
Persia, and eastern and central Europe, not to mention western Europe itself, made Russia 
an important recipient of and conduit for a wide variety of customs and usages of interest 
to the history of the law of nations. And, of course, there is the question of Russia’s own 
contribution to the development of so-called “western” international law.

THE DIPLOMATIC CONTEXT

Admiration for Peter the Great’s herculean efforts to modernize Russia should not 
obscure the importance of Russia’s international intercourse during the preceding eight 
centuries. Kievan Rus, a group of principalities covering much of what is now Ukraine 
and southern Russia, by the tenth century had a rich and distinctive culture of its own. 
It was known to medieval Europe. Kievan princesses married into the royal houses of 
Poland, Norway, France, and Hungary.
1 Kiev and Novgorod developed into commercial 
centers of some importance, trading with Germany, Scandinavia,
2 Byzantium, and other 
regions. In their inter-princely and commercial relationships Russian principalities 
observed customs and usages deemed obligatory in intercourse with other sovereigns. 
They contracted and ratified treaties, extradited criminals, granted privileges and 
protection to aliens, recognized the special status of ambassadors and envoys, and 
observed laws of warfare.
With the fall of Kievan Rus to the Golden Horde, much of Russia was cut off 
from contact with European international practice for more than two centuries. 
The after-effects of this dark period on the style of Russian diplomacy were said to 
be by some still visible in the early eighteenth century.
3 Novgorod, however, retained 
its independence, though tribute was paid to the Great Khan and its commercial 

1  See v.t. PaShuto, Внешняя политика древней Руси [Foreign Policy of Ancient Rus] (1968); a. eck, Le 
moyen age russe (1933).

2  The earliest surviving trade treaty between Novgorod and Gotland is dated from 1191-92, but 
Scandinavian sagas speak of an earlier treaty, dating perhaps sixty years before. See G.v. GLazyrina, 
t.n. DzhakSon, anD e.a. MeL’nikova, in e.a. MeL’nikova (ed.), Древняя Русь в свете зарубежных источников 
[Ancient Rus in the Light of Foreign Sources] (2001), p. 537.

3  See n.i. veSeLovSkii, «Татарское влияние на посольской цпремониал в московском периоде русской 
истории» [Tatar Influence on Ambassadorial Ceremonial in the Muscovy Period of Russian History], 
in i.a. ivanovSkii (ed.), Отчет о состоянии и деятельности императорского С.-Петербургского 
университета за 1910 года (1911), pp. 1–19.

WILLIAm E. BUTLER
9

relationships with Germany, Scandinavia, and the Baltic even expanded somewhat in 
the form of trade agreements.
1

As Tatar influence receded, the Grand Duchy of Muscovy asserted its independence 
and commenced the lengthy process of consolidating its authority over adjacent 
principalities. European craftsmen, artisans, and soldiers gradually returned to Russian 
service, importing some western ideas and practices. Embassies found their way to the 
Russian court to bargain for commercial privileges and to seek sundry political and 
military alliances against common foes. Even the Church of Rome cherished the hope of 
a reunion with Orthodox Christianity and despatched missions to promote that end. In 
1493 the Grand Duke of Muscovy ventured to propose an alliance with Denmark. By the 
early sixteenth century Russia was modestly embroiled in the activities and calculations 
of European diplomats. The rapid and substantial development of Russian commerce 
with Holland and England during the late sixteenth century opened up another area 
of western contact and had immediate repercussions upon the balance of power in the 
Baltic regions that lasted, as Shafirov’s Discourse testifies, through the reign of Peter the 
Great. Russian embassies also were sent to Europe. Though fewer in number than their 
European counterparts traveling to Muscovy, they returned with valuable information 
on western diplomatic practices.
By 1549, Muscovy’s broadening diplomatic contacts required the formation of a special 
governmental department, the Посольский приказ (Ambassadorial Department), to deal 
with the reception and sending of embassies. The ambassadorial secretaries (дьяки), or 
diplomats, were, as Grabar points out, the first Russian “spokesmen for international 
legal views”.
2 It was they who were charged with defending the sovereign’s prerogatives 
in relations with other sovereigns and ensuring that established customs were not abused 
to the disadvantage of Russian interests. The documents recording Muscovy’s diplomatic 
intercourse with States of East and West, the instructions issued to Russian envoys sent 
abroad, and the reports submitted by ambassadors upon their return await systematic 
investigation of their international legal content. Brief glimpses into the wealth of material 
reposing there are given by Leshkov’s and Kapustin’s works on Russian diplomacy
3 and 
by the various collections of early documents on Russian foreign affairs.
4

1  See L.k. Goetz, Deutsch-Russische Handelsvertrage des Mittelalters (1916).

2  v.e. Grabar, The History of International Law in Russia, 1647–1917. A Bio-Bibliographical Study, ed. & transl. 
W.E. Butler (1990), p. 5.

3  See v.n. LeShkov, О древней русской дипломатии [On Ancient Russian Diplomacy] (1847); M.n. kaPuStin, 
Дипломатические сношения России с Западною Европою во второй половине XVII века [Diplomatic 
Relations of Russia with Western Europe in the Second Half of the XVII Century] (1852).

4  A useful bibliography was prepared by a. narochnitSkii, «Русские документальные публикации по вопросам внешней политике России и международных отношений нового времени, изданные до 1917 г.»  
[Russian Documentary Publications on Questions of the Foreign Policy of Russia and International Relations 
of the New Era Issued Before 1917], Исторический журнал, no. 1–2 (1945), pp. 62–73. Also see W.e. butLer 
(ed. & comp.), Russia and the International Legal System: A Bibliography of Writings by Russian Jurists on Public 
and Private International Law to 1917 with References to Publications in Emigration (2006).

KAZAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW      Volume 2, Summer 2017, Number 2 
10

Muscovite diplomats also were responsible for what can be regarded as the first 
attempts in the direction of developing an international legal literature. Russian interest 
in western military technology prompted the Muscovy Government to commission 
translations of manuals on the art of warfare. Fronsperger’s Kriegsbuch inspired Tsar 
Mikhail Fedorovich to entrust the preparation of a “Military Statute” to an employee 
of the Ambassadorial Department.
1 The draft Statute, completed in 1621, contained 
a number of strictures on the conduct of war; it was not published, however, until 1777–
81, when the manuscript was rediscovered in Petersburg.
2

Works of a theological-philosophical character by Maxim Grek and Iu.K. Krizhanich 
touched upon questions of moral conduct relevant to foreign affairs. Both were clerics 
of foreign origin who had some knowledge of the terminology of the Civil Law. Grek  
(ca. 1480–1556) cautioned the sovereign against “useless” foreign conquests and pointed 
to the desirability of protecting aliens against infringements. Krizhanich (1618–83), 
who devoted his 15-year exile in Siberia to literary endeavor, was deeply suspicious of 
foreign influences in Russia, especially German. He urged the Tsar to restrict the rights 
of foreign merchants, to bar aliens from becoming Russian subjects or entering State 
service, to eliminate foreign consulates, and to reduce diplomatic contacts to an absolute 
minimum. His application of the concept of sovereignty to the Russian situation was an 
important contribution to Russian political theory; he was the first to use the expression 
jus gentium (народная правда) in Russian literature. A number of his opinions, such as 
the special affinity of the Slavic peoples and the desirability of reducing foreign influence, 
found a warm reception amongst some quarters of Muscovite society.
3

Russian envoys sent abroad were specifically instructed to gather data on the culture, 
economy, and political life of their hosts. Information of this nature also was solicited 
from foreigners who visited Muscovy. Everything was carefully written down and 
stored away for future use together with copies of printed materials acquired from 
European sources. In 1672 A.S. Matveev (1625–82) was given the task of compiling 
a manual utilizing the data gathered over the years for the benefit of the Ambassadorial 

1  L. fronSPerGer, Von Kaiserlichem Kriegszrechten, Malefitz und Schuldhandlen, Ordnung und Regiment 
(Frankfurt a. M., 1565). J.J. De WaLLhauSen’S Kriegskunst zu Fusz, darinnen gelehrt und gewiesen werden, 
I: Die Handgriff der Musquet und des Spiessens; II: Das Exercitum oder Trillen mit einem Fahnlein nach 
praxi des Prinzen oder schlachtordnungen; III: Der Ungarischen Regimenter Disciplin zu Fuss, etc. (1615–
17), issued in three volumes, was published in Russian translation in 1647 and is regarded as the 
first printed Russian treatise on international law by reason of Wallhausen’s treatment of the law of 
warfare in his opus.

2  o.M. raDiShevSkii, Устав ратных, пушкарских и иных дел, касающихся до военной науки, состоящи 
в 663 указах, или статьях, в государствование царей и великих князей, Василия Иоанновича 
Шуйскаго и Михайла Феодоровича, всея Руси и самодержцев, в 1607 и 1621 годах выбран из 
иностранных военных книг Онисимом Михайловым [Statute of Infantry, Artillery, and Other Matters 
Affecting Military Science, Consisting of 663 Prescriptions, or Articles, in the Rule of Tsars and Grand 
Princes Vasilii Ioannovich Suiskii and Mikhail Fedorovich, Autocrats of All the Russias, in 1607 and 1621 
Selected from Foreign Military Books by Onism Mikhailov] (1777–81). 2 vols.

3  Grabar, note 7 above, pp. 19–26.

WILLIAm E. BUTLER
11

Department. A veritable diplomatic history of Russia, Matveev’s manuscript was 
rediscovered and published in the late eighteenth century.
1 One of the best accounts of 
seventeenth-century ambassadorial ceremonial in Muscovy was written by G.K. Ko- 
toshikhin (ca. 1630–67), an employee of the Ambassadorial Department who later 
sought political asylum in Sweden. He was executed for murder shortly after his account 
was completed. His manuscript lay unknown in Uppsala until 1838, when a Russian 
historian happened upon it.
2

Peter the Great’s reign sharply accelerated what theretofore had been a gradual 
reception of European ideas. His keen interest in tapping Russia’s natural resources, 
securing its frontiers, strengthening its military power, and reforming its antiquated 
institutions meant that western technology and learning were sought actively rather 
than tolerated passively. Agents were despatched abroad to purchase libraries and recruit 
personnel. Facilitated by the introduction of a new civil script in 1708, the translation 
of European books into the Russian language increased, and young Russians were sent 
to study in European centers of learning.
Among the works on international law translated into Russian were Grotius’ De jure 
belli ac pacis, Pufendorf’s Juris naturae et gentium, and Wicquefort’s The Ambassador and 
his Functions; all, however, were available only to diplomats and other State officials in 
manuscript form. The impact of European legal conceptions became more pronounced 
in Russian legislation and diplomatic correspondence. Peter’s military and naval 
regulations, for example, drew heavily from European models, as did his establishment 
of consular agents. The assumption by Peter of the title “Emperor” caused endless 
acrimonious disputes with foreign courts. The diplomacy of the Northern War and the 
establishment of permanent embassies abroad involved Russia to an unprecedented 
degree in the intricacies of diplomatic rank and protocol.
It is against this background that Shafirov’s Discourse must be viewed. Russia was 
evolving from a State that was gradually absorbing the terminology and conceptual 
framework of the law of nations in the form of an official, unpublished body of 
documentation to a State anxious to assume its place among the first ranks of European 
powers, concerned to justify Russia’s policies to a foreign audience in the same manner 
as European monarchs defended their actions. Shafirov’s undertaking was a logical 
further step in this direction.

1  Excerpts were published by t.S. MaL’Gin, Чиновник российских государей с разными в Европе и Азии 
христианских и махометанскими владельными и прочими высокими лицами о взаимных чрез 
грамоты сношениях издревле по 1672 год, как обоюдныя между собою титла употребляли и знаки 
дружества, почненния преимущества, и величия изъявляли [Official of Russian Sovereigns on 
Mutual Treaty Relations with Various Christian and Mohammaden Possessions in Europe and Asia 
and Other High Personages] (1792). A fuller text appeared in Древне российской вивлиофики (2d ed.; 
1791), XVI, pp. 86–251. On Matveev generally, see G.a. novitSkii, Русско-польские культурные связи во  
2-й половине XVII в. [Russo-Polish Cultural Links in the Second Half of the XVII Century] (1973), p. 11.

2  A definitive text was prepared by ann PenninGton (ed.), G. kotoShikhin, O Rossii v carstvovanie Alekseja 
Mixajlovica (1980).