Reviews 489 RUSSIA U N D E R C A T H E R I N E T H E GREAT, vol. 2: C A T H E R I N E T H E G R E A T ' S I N S T R U C T I O N ( N A K A Z ) T O T H E L E G I S L A T I V E C O M M I S - SION, 1767. Edited by Paul Dukes. Newtonville, Mass.: Oriental Research Partners, 1977. 129 pp. $12.00, cloth. $5.50, paper. This volume presents a recently discovered English translation of Catherine's Instruc- tion to the Legislative Commission of 1767-68. On the basis of information provided by Robert Allen of the Library of Congress, Professor Dukes introduces it as a trans- lation which was "almost certainly" commissioned by Sir George Macartney—then British ambassador to St. Petersburg—probably early in 1767. W h o did the trans- lating is unknown. But Dukes finds the "Macartney" translation superior to the 1768 version ascribed to "Michael Tatischeff" and familiar to English-reading students through W. F. Reddaway's collection of documents. Following the example of N. D. Chechulin, Dukes has appended to the Macartney text the pair of supplemental chapters promulgated in 1768 and the Instruction to the procurator general of the Legislative Commission, which Dukes himself translated. He has also supplied an introduction, a bibliography, and some notes correcting the Macartney text. Of the two English translations, this one appears superior. It is more succinct and its language is chosen more carefully. But in several respects the editorial information included is less helpful than one would wish. Instead of accompanying the text, Dukes's notes follow it. His introduction does not present the apparent strengths of the Macartney text—for example, the choice of "absolute government" over "mon- archy" for samoderzhavnoe praVlenie (article 13)—nor does he discuss the inherently subjective nature of all translations (Catherine's original French for the same phrase is Souverainete). Finally, for the most part, the introduction merely reports what others have said about the Instruction, its intellectual antecedents, or its merits. The resulting potpourri resembles a Heath pamphlet, with the utility and limitations that this implies. There is no room for attention to the contexts within which ideas were received and opinions given. Near the end of his introduction Dukes writes that to understand the Instruction, "the economic resurgence of the 1760's must be examined as well as the political situa- tion of the Russian empire and of Catherine and her entourage." These issues are already receiving serious attention, however. It is unfortunate that Dukes chose not to include the results of such attention in this book. KAREN RASMUSSEN Indiana University, South Bend T H E C O L L A B O R A T I O N O F NECAEV, O G A R E V A N D B A K U N I N IN 1869, NECAEV'S E A R L Y Y E A R S . By Stephen T. Cochrane. Osteuropastudien der Hochschulen des Landes Hessen, series 2. Marburger Abhandlungen zur Geschichte und Kultur Osteuropas, vol. 18. Giessen: Wilhelm Schmitz Verlag, 1977. x, 365 pp. DM 70, paper. Dr. Cochrane has surely earned his degree with this well-researched dissertation. It is one of the few scholarly examinations of Nechaev's career and, by any measure, the most generous of the recent ones. Though Cochrane evidently did not have direct access to Soviet archives, he has made excellent use of the materials made available by B. P. Koz'min (the most assiduous Soviet historian who studied the 1860s), newer documentary collections published by Arthur Lehning and Michael Confino, and other materials provided by helpful scholars. Furthermore, he has painstakingly tracked down the Nechaev materials available in the West. To his credit, Cochrane does not simply go over earlier ground. He has sifted the evidence meticulously and rejected errors made by previous students of Nechaev, who often perpetuated each others' mistakes.