Talk:Nicholas I of Russia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


There was a quote from a Russian poet about Nicholas I containing the phrase "black frost." Anyone know the source of this quote or what it referred to? -j1000

This article covers the period of Russian History following the wars and revolutionary movements of the three decades prior to 1825. The Russian state became reactionary and repressive in response.

This is rather unacceptable as the beginning of a biography article. And this article is, indeed, not a biography article - it's a history of Russia from 1825-1855, including some information about Nicholas himself. Who thought it would be a good idea to import a country study as a biography article? An article on Nicholas I of Russia should not "cover" any "period of Russian history" at all - it should describe the life of Nicholas I of Russia. Notably, it should cover his life before he ascended the throne, and it should not cover Russian history, except insofar as it serves to illuminate an explanation of his own life. john k 21:34, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I agree entirely John K... the article should focus on Nicholas I's life, personal and political. It should be a detailed article on his life with reference to the history and politics of the era when and as appropiate. TG312274 TG312274

King of Poland?[edit]

Articles November Uprising and Congress Poland mention that Nicholas was never crowned king of Poland. So, was he or wasn't he a king of Poland? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 20:40, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nicholas ruled Poland, Nicholas called himself 'Царь Польский' (Tsar of Poland). On the other hand, he was not a 'King of Poland' after 1830, when the Constitution of 1815 was abolished and the personal union ended with incorporation of the separate Tsardom of Poland into the Russian Empire. Then again, the title of 'Tsar of Poland' remained... Mapple 18:40, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
My understanding was that Congress Poland wasn't fully incorporated into Russia until following the 1863 rebellion. john k 06:40, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
As far as I know, 1863 brought no changes in the legal status of Poland. Mapple 07:12, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Westernizers and Slavophiles[edit]

This article says that the "westernizers" were eurocentric, but doesn't closely identify this with liberalism and the enlightenment. Meanwhile it doesn't indicate that the Slavophiles idealized the institution of serfdom, proclaiming it to be mutually beneficial to peasant and landowner--this seems pretty important, since it somewhat conflicts with their idealization of peasant life. I'll add to it shortly, but discuss if you disagree. Fearwig 19:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

These issues (cultural allegiance vs. attitude to slavery, not to mention personal interests) were independent, there's no clear-cut link. To make things very simple, the landlords wanted to emancipate serfs, keep the land and enjoy the rents. Government, in fear of proletarians flooding the cities, cut this ambitions short (Alexander's 1807 decree and subsequent). Serfdom was taken not as 'idealization', but as a lid on a boiler ready to blow. Sort of a deadlock.NVO 23:17, 27 January 2007 (UTC)


Does anyone with a decent knowledge know anything about the circumstances/place/means of death? When talking about Russian monarchs, death is usually an interesting topic. :-) The article is virtually silent. Ocon 05:51, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

There isn't much to say. Just a flu evolving to right-side phneumonia. Jan.31, 1855 (OS) - working as usual, coughing. Feb.1 - all day in bed. Feb.2 and 3 - despite doctor's plea - rides out, returns with pains in right side of chest, doesnt' leave home since then. Jan.17, feeling the end, calls family and last rites. Dies Jan.18. Source: memoirs of Pavel_Kiselev. Anything else is just guesswork NVO 23:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
According to an officially sanctioned souvenir book I bought at the Hermitage in St. Petersburg, He killed himself by taking poison. I listed it as a rumor.Ericl (talk) 13:20, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna[edit]

In the Issue table in the Issue section, his eldest daughter Maria Nikolaevna is linked to the wrong Maria Nikolaevna. It is linked to the 3rd daughter of the last Tsar, Tsar Nikolai II. I do not think there is a page about Nicholas I's eldest daughter... Perhaps the link should be removed?

--SaraFL 14:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Autocracy, Orthodoxy, and National Character[edit]

I think this phrase is worth a least a mention in the See also section, since the article seems to suggest that Nicholas I initiated its use!

EvocativeIntrigue TALK | EMAIL 00:48, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

W B Lincoln's Book On Nicholas I > Northern Illinois University[edit]

Titled NICHOLAS I - EMPEROR AND AUTOCRAT OF ALL THE RUSSIANS and which I believe is the only serious literary work to mention aspects of his personal life, especially his relations with his mother and brothers and the rest of his immediate family. The last pages do mention the circumstances under which he died. Should material from this book be added to the article? 17:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


what is meant by "issue" in the last paragraph? the paragraph seems meaningless, if its not explained. --or should it be "children", which was vandalized? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 20:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC).PS: same holds true for Alexander III and Nicholas II

As far as I am aware, issue is just another name for offspring or children, sometimes used when talking about royalty or nobility. I don't think there is any vandalism involved. (talk) 02:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect cause of death for Alexander I[edit]

In reading the article concerning Nicholas I of Russia, I noted that it was claimed that his brother, Alexander I "died suddenly of haemophilia". According to Wikipedia's own article on Alexander I, he reportedly died of typhus; even though there was apparently a lot of mystery surrounding his death and burial, in all that I have ever read concerning the history of Russia, I have never come across any suggestion that there was ever a hint of haemophilia in the Russia Romanov dynasty until the birth of Alexis, Nicholas II son, and certainly no suggestion that Alexander I was a sufferer. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Enaidyram (talkcontribs) 02:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

Start of Reign[edit]

Is it needed to name both dates - official and factual - in the infobox? RamBow 10:49, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Crimean War and The Protector of the Holy Sepulchre[edit]

Russia saw itself as the protector of the Orthodox christians living in the Ottoman Empire, and evidently of also of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem and the Church of the Nativity. Was this status of "Protector" somehow related to the title of Protector of the Holy Sepulchre? Did Nicholas I claim such a royal title? If so, how did he inherit it? I have started the discussion at Talk:Crimean War. --Petri Krohn (talk) 16:55, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Foreign Policy[edit]

The last two sentences are unclear. Does anyone know what they're trying to say?Everything Else Is Taken (talk) 18:11, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Did he commite suicide?[edit]

In many chinese documents it refers that Nicolas I committed suicide due to the Crimean War, was it true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:04, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

According to a number of books sold at souvenir shops in St.Petersburg, he did.Ericl (talk) 13:25, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

No it's not true. He was a religious person and suicide is a great sin. Actually he had phneumonia. And these books from st. Peterburg's shop are hollow and stupid. You all should read serious historical literature/documents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:11, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Request Edit Protection 7th Feb 2012[edit]

This article has been vandalised twice in the course of 24 hours, by two anonymous users (for unknown reasons). Request edit protection. Indisciplined (talk) 22:54, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Not done: requests for changes to the page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection.--Ankit Maity TalkFace-smile.svgContribs 15:34, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


The coronation of Nicholas I took place on September 3, 1826 (OS Aug. 22). The "crowning" mentioned with regard to the Dec. 14th events is obviously a misunderstanding. What took place on Dec. 14th was the obligatory swearing of a loyalty oath to the new monarch by all military units and civilian servitors. This is very different from an full fledged coronation which was carefully scripted and stage managed. A detailed description of Nicholas's coronation can be found in Richard Wortman's "Scenarios of Power" v. I. See also N. K. Shil'der, Imperator Nikolai Pervyi: ego zhizn i tsarstvovanie, (Spb, 1903) V. II, pp. 6-12. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:28, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Nicholas I and the Jewish population[edit]

It is interesting to note that neither the main article, nor this section of "Talk", mention one of the main issues of Nicholas' reign, namely his relations with the Jewish population. While the main article refers to the abolition of the Jewish autonomy (the Qahal), it does not touch farther implications. The Jews were a separate entity, neither noble, nor bourgeois but they were free people (i.e. not serfs.) By decreeing forced conscription on the Jews, the Czar at once declared the Jews to be on the same level as the serfs and made it clear that he would like to eliminate them as an entity (conscription was heavily associated with coerced conversion to the Russian Orthodox Christianity religion). No normal person would accept such a decree without fighting back, so the Jews did fight back by bribing their way out of forced conscription (elevating the corruption of the administration,) immigrating out of Russia and actively sabotaging conscription activities, but the main effect was that they joined revolutionary groups en droves and thus contributed to the fall of the Czarist regime some 90 years later. The enmity of Nicholas to the Jews was clear and apparent, by this major decree that was amounted to declaration of war against the Jews. The Czarist regime of Nicholas I and many (not all) of his successors had that clear genocidal behavior against the Jews and thus committed one of the worst possible mistake that any regime could commit - declaring war on your own subjects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zatlas1 (talkcontribs) 04:31, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Timing of extramarital affairs[edit]

This article (without listing sources) disagrees with the assertion that Nicholas had no mistresses until his wife's illness after twenty five years of marriage. The article on his wife agrees with that assertion and gives a source. Lincoln, The Romanovs, p. 418. So which is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marfinan (talkcontribs) 12:51, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


As he died in 1855, there may be photographs of him in existence. maybe someone could find out?Ericl (talk) 20:09, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

No there's no photographs of Nicholas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

the nickname[edit]

why his nickname was removed? everybody in Russia knows his as Nikolay Palkin, where "palka" means stick,batton,clab, etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:52, 10 March 2016 (UTC)