Abstract

The Russian diplomacy of the 17th century had some specific features in comparison with the Western European diplomacy of the same time. The purpose of this article is to identify these features and analyze the perception of Russian ambassadors by European diplomats. The research is based on both Russian and Spanish documentation of the embassy of Piotr Potemkin (1667–1668), the first Russian embassy in Spain. Since there were no instances of diplomatic contacts between the two countries in the past, the diplomatic ceremonial was of crucial importance for P. Potemkin’s mission. Since no contact between the diplomats and the Ambassadorial Chancellery in Moscow was not possible due to the long distance between Russia and Spain, the detailed instructions (nakaz) given to P. Potemkin in Moscow acquired a special significance. Therefore the article aims to determine the extent and nature of the dependence of the diplomats’ actions on their instructions. A comparative analysis of the nakaz and the final report (stateinyi spisok) in the part related to the stay of the embassy in Madrid and the negotiation process shows that the ambassadors scrupulously observed the nakaz, taking initiative only in those cases that were not covered by it. All of its requirements had a logical explanation: not to harm the interests of Russia, not to lower the honour of the envoys of a great power, not to create a bad precedent in the diplomatic ceremonial. The Spanish side, not sufficiently aware of the specifics of the nakaz, sometimes did not understand the behaviour of the ambassadors, attributing it to their vanity, pettiness, and bad temper. At the same time, although the Russian embassy took Spanish diplomats wholly by surprise, the latter managed, within a limited time, to collect a variety of information about the Russians and take it into account, showing flexibility in organizing audiences and during negotiations. Although there were differences between Spanish and Russian diplomats, both sides adhered to European diplomatic practice. The absence of contradictions between the two states and their interest in establishing diplomatic relations and developing bilateral trade determined the success of P. Potemkin’s embassy.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call