Temptations of the mind: a Russian Minerva in the “dark era”

The image of Minerva appeared in Russian emblematics to-gether with cultural reforms of Peter the Great, marking the early stage of Russian enlightenment. In the period of women's rule, this image was identified with a symbol of a virtuous empress, patron-ess of arts and sciences, giving hope for reasonable rule. The name of "Russian Minerva" was traditionally applied to both Catherines, Anna Ioannovna, and Elizaveta Petrovna. Yet another one, and worthier of its mythological prototype, remains forgotten — the one that contemporaries called the mother of Russia. Princess Na-talya Alekseevna, granddaughter of Peter I, inherited many positive qualities of her great grandfather. One of the most educated women of the epoch of palace upheavals, the patroness of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, she was a muse and mentor of her young imperial brother. Reason came to the Russian court as a temptation little-known earlier, thus creating an attractive model of Russia's future. However, the later move of Peter II's court to Moscow radically changed the Princess's social and psychological status. Mind gave way to feelings, which led to the rapid and untimely death of Princess — a unique and premature phenomenon of the Russian “dark era”.

Contract Law in Contemporary International Commerce

According to the Rome I Regulation, ‘the proper functioning of the internal market creates a need, in order to improve the predictability of the outcomes of litigation, certainty as to the law applicable […] therefore legal certainty should be highly foreseeable and as a consequence […] the courts should retain a degree of discretion’. To illustrate this reasoning, it is necessary to conduct an analysis that focuses critically on the complex relationship between legal processes and market processes. Therefore, this book focuses on a modern economic analysis of contract law as well as on the battle between legal certainty and legal congruence. In its conclusion, the book points out the urgent need for a new contract law theory that enhances the real economic intentions of the parties involved, and for a new reasonable rule of PiL that does not harm the contractual parties that represent the principal players in the market.