This period explores Catherine the Great’s domestic challenges and expansive foreign policies, highlighting internal unrest, strategic warfare, and Russia’s emergence as a dominant European power.
Internal Plots Against Catherine
Catherine II faced numerous threats to her authority from factions discontented with her rise to power, her reforms, or her foreign background.
Threats from the Nobility and Royal Claimants
Peter III's Supporters: After Catherine overthrew her husband Peter III in 1762, rumours of his survival and restoration persisted. Some conspirators claimed to have found him alive, while others used impostors to rally support. These threats underscored the fragility of Catherine’s legitimacy early in her reign.
Ivan VI’s Revival: Ivan VI had been imprisoned since infancy, and several plots emerged to restore him. The most serious occurred in 1764 when Vasily Mirovich, an officer at Shlisselburg Fortress, attempted to free Ivan. The guards killed Ivan on secret orders to prevent any possibility of restoration.
Noble Discontent: Some nobles felt alienated by Catherine’s reforms or her perceived favouritism. While most conspiracies were swiftly crushed, they indicate persistent unease within the aristocracy.
Use of Surveillance and Suppression
Catherine employed a wide-reaching system of surveillance and censorship:
Secret Police: The Third Section, an early form of secret police, monitored dissent and subversion. Suspected revolutionaries, critics, or overly zealous reformists were investigated and often exiled or executed.
Censorship: Following the French Revolution (1789), Catherine became more conservative. She restricted the spread of revolutionary ideas, banning foreign publications and increasing surveillance of Russian intellectuals.
Public Examples: Harsh punishments were made public to deter dissent. For example, individuals implicated in plots were often executed or subjected to public floggings, exile to Siberia, or loss of status.
The Pugachev Revolt (1773–1775)
The largest and most dangerous internal challenge to Catherine’s authority was the Pugachev Rebellion, led by Emelyan Pugachev, a Don Cossack and former soldier who claimed to be Peter III.
Causes of the Revolt
Oppressive Serfdom: Serfs endured increasing exploitation under a legal system that heavily favoured nobles. Catherine’s reforms consolidated noble landownership and judicial authority, deepening peasant grievances.
Religious Dissent: The Old Believers, persecuted under state religious policy, joined Pugachev’s forces seeking religious freedom.
Cossack Discontent: The Cossacks, semi-independent frontier warriors, resisted centralised control and resented the loss of privileges.
Military Service Pressures: Recruits and veterans alike were frustrated by long service terms, poor treatment, and low pay.
Key Events of the Revolt
Initial Successes: Pugachev gathered support across the Volga region, attracting peasants, serfs, Cossacks, and minorities. His army captured Orenburg, spread chaos across the southern provinces, and enacted brutal reprisals against nobles.
Pugachev’s Pretence: By claiming to be Peter III, Pugachev exploited monarchist sympathies, promising the abolition of serfdom and the redistribution of land.
Government Response: Catherine initially underestimated the revolt, but dispatched General Alexander Suvorov, whose disciplined forces crushed the rebels.
Capture and Execution: Pugachev was betrayed by his followers, captured in 1774, and executed publicly in Moscow in 1775.
Consequences
Harsh Repression: The revolt led to a crackdown on peasant rights. Catherine withdrew from further liberal reform and prioritised security and noble interests.
Increased Censorship: The government intensified surveillance, especially among groups suspected of dissent.
Legislative Change: The revolt prompted Catherine to restructure provincial administration to better enforce state control, culminating in the 1775 Statute for the Administration of the Provinces.
Catherine’s Foreign Policy (1762–1796)
Catherine the Great’s foreign policy was characterised by aggressive expansionism and military success, aimed at projecting Russia’s power on the international stage.
War with Sweden (1788–1790)
Causes: The conflict began when King Gustav III of Sweden, influenced by Enlightenment ideals and seeking to strengthen his monarchy, declared war on Russia. Sweden hoped to exploit Russia’s preoccupation with Ottoman conflicts.
Military Campaign: Russian forces, commanded by generals like Suvorov, were successful on land, but the naval Battle of Svensksund (1790) was a Swedish victory.
Outcome: The war ended inconclusively with the Treaty of Värälä (1790), restoring pre-war boundaries. However, it distracted Russian resources from southern campaigns.
Wars with the Ottoman Empire
Catherine’s most ambitious military campaigns were directed against the Ottoman Empire, seeking to gain access to warm-water ports and expand Russian influence in the Black Sea.
First Russo-Turkish War (1768–1774)
Cause: Tensions over Poland and trade routes erupted into war.
Key Victories: Russian forces, including Admiral Alexei Orlov at the Battle of Chesme (1770), achieved major victories. Russian troops also pushed deep into Ottoman territory.
Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca (1774):
Gave Russia access to the Black Sea.
Recognised Russia as the protector of Orthodox Christians in Ottoman lands.
Allowed Russian ships to navigate freely through Ottoman waters.
Second Russo-Turkish War (1787–1792)
Cause: Renewed Ottoman opposition to Russian expansion, particularly the annexation of the Crimea.
Military Success: Commanders such as Suvorov led decisive campaigns, including victories at Focsani and Rymnik.
Treaty of Jassy (1792): Confirmed Russian control over the Crimea and expanded territory to the Dniester River.
Acquisition of the Crimea
Annexed in 1783, the Crimea was of immense strategic value for controlling the Black Sea.
This move signified a major shift in balance, ending the influence of the Crimean Khanate, a vassal of the Ottomans.
It allowed Russia to project naval power southward and solidified its position as a Black Sea hegemon.
The Partitions of Poland
Catherine played a leading role in the three partitions of Poland (1772, 1793, and 1795), alongside Prussia and Austria, effectively erasing the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth from the map.
Motives Behind Partition
Geopolitical Security: A weak, decentralised Poland was seen as a security threat and a temptation for French or Ottoman influence.
Expansionism: Russia sought to dominate Eastern Europe and secure its western borders.
Suppressing Reform: Polish attempts at constitutional reform in the Constitution of 3 May 1791 alarmed Catherine, who saw them as dangerous precedents.
Key Events
First Partition (1772): Russia, Prussia, and Austria divided Polish territory under the pretence of restoring order. Russia gained eastern territories including Belarus.
Second Partition (1793): After suppressing Polish reform, Russia and Prussia seized more land. Russia took Lithuania and western Ukraine.
Kościuszko Uprising (1794): A Polish nationalist revolt led by Tadeusz Kościuszko was crushed by Russian forces.
Third Partition (1795): All remaining Polish territory was absorbed. Poland ceased to exist as an independent state.
Consequences
Russian Expansion: By 1796, Russia’s territory had expanded significantly westwards.
International Prestige: Russia was now regarded as a dominant power in European diplomacy.
Polish Nationalism: The partitions sowed deep resentment and would inspire 19th-century nationalist movements.
Russia’s Status as a Great Power by 1796
By the end of Catherine’s reign, Russia had indisputably joined the ranks of Europe’s leading powers.
Indicators of Great Power Status
Territorial Gains: Russia’s borders expanded in all directions – southwards with the Crimea, westwards with Polish lands, and to the Black Sea coast.
Military Reputation: Russian commanders like Suvorov were internationally respected, and Russia maintained one of Europe’s largest armies.
Diplomatic Clout: Russia became an essential player in balance-of-power politics, often mediating or coercing its neighbours.
Contradictions Between Reform and Autocracy
Catherine’s reign was marked by the paradox of Enlightened absolutism:
Enlightenment Ideals: She corresponded with thinkers like Voltaire and Diderot, and initially supported legal reform and education.
Autocratic Reality:
Suppression of Dissent: Revolts like Pugachev’s hardened her autocratic instincts.
Repression of Reform: After the French Revolution, Catherine distanced herself from Enlightenment liberalism.
Serfdom: Far from being abolished, serfdom expanded under her rule, contradicting Enlightenment values of liberty and reason.
Despite these contradictions, Catherine's foreign victories and internal consolidation ensured that Russia stood poised as a mighty empire, respected and feared by her European rivals.
FAQ
The Russian Orthodox Church played a significant supportive role in reinforcing Catherine the Great’s authority and discouraging rebellion. Although Catherine pursued secularisation policies, such as the confiscation of church lands in the 1760s and the subordination of church administration to state control, the Church remained a crucial ideological tool. It promoted obedience to the monarch as divinely ordained and condemned uprisings like the Pugachev Revolt as sacrilegious acts. Clergy were expected to deliver sermons reinforcing loyalty to the crown and denouncing impostors, especially when Pugachev claimed to be Peter III. The Church’s influence over the largely illiterate rural population meant its messages had significant impact in shaping peasant attitudes. Moreover, monasteries were occasionally used as places of confinement for dissenters, blending religious authority with political repression. Although Catherine limited ecclesiastical independence, the Church still actively collaborated with the state in quelling resistance, reinforcing the autocratic system under the guise of divine legitimacy.
Catherine’s administrative reforms of 1775, encapsulated in the “Statute for the Administration of the Provinces,” were a direct response to the weaknesses exposed by the Pugachev Revolt. The rebellion highlighted the poor reach of central government across Russia’s vast territory and the inadequate response capacity of local officials. The 1775 statute divided the empire into more manageable provinces and districts, each governed by officials accountable to the central government. Governors were tasked with overseeing law enforcement, taxation, and social order, and were given greater autonomy and resources to pre-empt unrest. The reforms established local courts, police forces, and health boards to improve control and public services. Additionally, Catherine hoped to bolster loyalty among the nobility by integrating them into provincial administration. These changes made the state more resilient to internal unrest and extended autocratic power more efficiently into rural areas, ensuring a quicker and more coordinated response to any future revolts or resistance.
While Catherine the Great publicly embraced Enlightenment ideals, her application of them in foreign policy was selective and strategic. Enlightenment thinkers like Voltaire and Diderot praised her as a modernising monarch, and Catherine portrayed her imperial expansion as a civilising mission. For instance, she justified intervention in the Ottoman Empire and annexation of Crimea by framing Russia as the protector of Orthodox Christians and bearer of Enlightened governance. Similarly, in Poland, Catherine initially supported limited reform, allowing the establishment of the Polish Commission of National Education, Europe’s first education ministry. However, when Polish reformers adopted Enlightenment-influenced constitutional changes that threatened Russian influence, Catherine reacted harshly, suppressing reform and orchestrating Poland’s partitions. This contradiction revealed that Enlightenment ideals were subordinated to imperial ambition and control. Catherine used the language of Enlightenment to legitimise territorial expansion and diplomacy but prioritised realpolitik and state power over liberal principles when they conflicted with Russian dominance.
The partitions of Poland brought significant territorial expansion but also complex long-term consequences for Russia’s internal stability. The newly acquired Polish-Lithuanian lands contained a large population of non-Russians, including Poles, Lithuanians, Ukrainians, Jews, and Catholics, many of whom were resistant to Russian rule. This cultural and religious diversity created governance challenges and required the imposition of tight administrative and military control. Russia’s repression of Polish nationalism, particularly after the Kościuszko Uprising of 1794, generated enduring resentment and laid the foundations for future revolts in the 19th century. Moreover, the presence of a discontented educated elite in the annexed territories posed an ideological threat to autocratic control, especially as Enlightenment and revolutionary ideas circulated. Internally, governing these areas stretched the imperial bureaucracy and diverted resources from domestic reform. Although the partitions demonstrated Russian power, they sowed seeds of unrest that would persist into the Romanov dynasty’s later years, undermining long-term cohesion.
Catherine the Great’s military reforms significantly enhanced Russia’s capacity to wage successful foreign wars. She invested heavily in professionalising the army and navy, continuing the legacy of Peter the Great but adapting it to new strategic contexts. Under her reign, the officer corps became more meritocratic, with an emphasis on education and training, especially in engineering and artillery. Catherine also improved recruitment and discipline among rank-and-file soldiers, while maintaining a massive standing army. The use of military colonies and better logistics supported long-distance campaigns. Importantly, she promoted gifted commanders like Alexander Suvorov, whose innovative tactics and emphasis on mobility and morale led to decisive victories in both Ottoman wars and the suppression of the Polish uprisings. The navy, bolstered by new shipbuilding and port facilities in the south, secured key victories such as the Battle of Chesme. These reforms ensured that Russia could project power across multiple fronts and emerge as a dominant force in Europe by the end of Catherine’s reign.
Practice Questions
To what extent was the Pugachev Revolt the most serious threat to Catherine the Great’s authority between 1762 and 1796?
The Pugachev Revolt posed the most serious threat to Catherine’s rule due to its scale, duration, and mobilisation of diverse social groups. Unlike isolated noble plots, it united serfs, Cossacks, and Old Believers under Pugachev’s charismatic leadership. It exposed deep-rooted grievances, especially over serfdom and centralisation. Although ultimately crushed, the revolt prompted significant shifts in Catherine’s governance, including harsher repression and retreat from reform. While palace conspiracies were swiftly suppressed and lacked mass support, Pugachev’s rebellion threatened imperial stability at its core. Thus, it was the most significant internal challenge of her reign.
How important were Catherine the Great’s foreign policy successes in establishing Russia as a great power by 1796?
Catherine’s foreign policy successes were vital in establishing Russia as a European great power. Victory over the Ottoman Empire secured access to the Black Sea, enhancing naval power and trade. The annexation of Crimea marked strategic expansion, while involvement in the partitions of Poland demonstrated diplomatic dominance and territorial growth. These achievements strengthened Russia’s geopolitical standing and military reputation. However, internal factors, such as administrative reforms and suppression of rebellion, also consolidated power. Despite contradictions in her Enlightenment rhetoric, Catherine’s foreign conquests were central to projecting Russian strength internationally by 1796.
