Nicholas’ attitude to the Third Section appears to be repressive because it censored and suppressed subversive ideas. During the early years, the Third Section won respect because it dealt with public welfare, but that was overshadowed by its more repressive role of monitoring and regulating the activities of all ‘suspicious and harmful people’. The Third Section developed an atmosphere of dishonesty, false accusation, suspicion, bribery, adulterated evidence and fear. However, it only suppressed two groups, the Ukrainian Society and Petrashevsky, but neither posed a real threat to Nicholas. Nevertheless, the role of the Third Section shows the repressive nature of Nicholas’ reign.
Nicholas’ censorship policies appear to be repressive because they did not allow any freedom of expression. The Censorship Law in 1826 allowed the authorities to ban almost anything if they wanted to. However, it was not applied strictly and in 1828, more lenient laws were introduced, but after 1830, censorship once again became ‘strict, unfair and often absurd’. Writers could be shadowed, imprisoned or exiled and articles on poverty and serfdom were forbidden. The censorship laws show that Nicholas’ reign was repressive.
The number of people exiled in Nicholas’ reign could be seen to be repressive because 150,000 people were exiled to Siberia during his reign. During his reign, Nicholas used the force of exiling as a means of punishment as he exiled 10000 people a year for undetermined periods of time. Intellectuals such as Dostoievsky were exiled to forced labour camps. The number of people exiled shows how repressive the reign of Nicholas was.
Nicholas’ attitude towards foreign travel appears to be repressive because it was forbidden. Even wealthy people could only travel under rigid conditions through a passport system. Therefore Nicholas’ policies for foreign travel showed the repressive nature of Nicholas’ reign.
Nicholas’ attitude to autocracy seems to be repressive because he was a firm believer in ‘an orderly chain of command’ and that his position as Tsar was a ‘God given duty’. Nicholas believed that his duty towards Russia was to prevent the spread of western and 1789 ideas. Nicholas’s attitude to autocracy was repressive because it prevented advances in Russia.
Nicholas’ policy of ‘Orthodoxy, Autocracy and Nationality’ appears to be gloomy and stagnant because Nicholas was in favour of concentrating on Russia’s traditions and this meant a lack of reform and progress. The reactionary policy led to the idea of Russification and the Russian culture being different to the west. Nicholas chose to block forces of change and promote Russian tradition. Everything was subordinated to the Tsar, even the Church, because he was place on the throne by ‘God’s special grace’ and could not be challenged. The policy of Russification was also applied to Poland as the Third Section was established, Russian officials replaced Polish ones, censorship of the press was instituted and in1828 Sejm was not summoned. The reactionary and stagnant policy of ‘Orthodoxy, Autocracy and Nationality’ shows the gloomy nature in which Nicholas ruled.
However, there were more positive aspects to Nicholas’ reign which suggest his reign may not have been a long period of gloom. He wished to continue the traditional paternalistic conception of the Russian Monarchy so, as well punishing his people, he introduced reforms which made moderate improvements in government and in the lives of state peasants. Nicholas dismissed Arakcheyev and Magnitsky and recalled Speransky. The military colonies were made less fearful and the Second Section of the Imperial Chancery, under Speransky between 1829-33 reorganised Russian Law. Nicholas tried to abolish serfdom by establishing a secret committee of leading reformers such as Speransky and Kiselev to examine the feasibility of gradual liberation. The committee introduced reforms such as prohibiting the sale of serfs as a means of settling private debt, and the auctions ended. Literature and the arts flourished and Russian was transformed into one of the worlds greatest languages be Pushkin. Currency reforms established confidence and stability in the monetary system and Nicholas was concerned about corruption so appointed a committee which reorganised the courts. Nicholas therefore, did introduce some reforms which imply that his reign was not completely one of repression and gloom.
Although Nicholas’ reign is notable for intellectual and creative achievement, economic and technical advances and attempts to introduce moderate reforms in government and the lives of state peasants, it is still characterised as a period of repression and gloom. Nicholas used force to repress the Decembrist Rising, education was brought under government control, the Third Section surpressed any liberal ideas, censorship laws restricted freedom of expression and the policy of ‘Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality’ promoted Russian traditions and blocked change. Nicholas’ lack of change and reform suggest his reign was a period of repression and gloom.
