In Russia, since the reign of Peter the Great, the ruling circles recognized the need to create their own class of educated people. However, the situation was very controversial. The fact is that in Russia “educated people” most often became “demolitionists” of the foundations - opponents of absolutism. In this regard, subsequently Nikolai the First was rather ambiguous about education. After all, the question of the development of education in Russia was closely interconnected with another question, more important - with the preservation of the existing system.
The ideologist of the "protective", conservative domestic political trend was Uvarov (Minister of Education). He considered it paramount to identify the beginnings that make up the distinctive features of Russia, belong only to her. It was he who in 1832 formulated the well-known triad of "nationality, autocracy, Orthodoxy." This triad became the basis. The theory of the official Uvarov nationality was based on it.
Given the fundamental differences in the historical development of Russia and Europe, the Minister of Education set out to combine the formation of culture and enlightenment and the idea of the need for autocracy as a form of political system that has long been inherent in the Russian state. It should be noted that Western European education engendered revolutionary conflicts. In Russia, however, the "order" stood, as it relied on incomprehensible and unknown beginnings for Europe. The theory of official nationality combined enlightening ideas and thoughts about unity, a voluntary union of the people and the sovereign. This provided for the absence of opposing classes. At the same time the author of the theory of official nationality recognized autocracy as the only possible form of government in Russia. Orthodoxy was understood to mean inherent exclusively Russian people extremely deep religiosity. In accordance with centuries of experience, the theory of official nationality claimed that autocracy was the only form that contributed to the maintenance of the existence of Eastern Christianity, which, in turn, reflected the internal moral and religious position of state power.
Submitting to the task of maintaining the existing system in the country, Uvarov put forward his concept. It consisted in the creation of such educational institutions and disciplines that would not only not harm the state system, but at the same time would become one of the most reliable supports for the autocracy. It remains to solve only the issue of the content of the proposed education. However, the Minister of Education could not deny that the development of new disciplines in Russia without involving the ideas of modern European science was not possible. It should be noted that until this time, the foundations on which the theory of official nationality was based appeared spontaneously in some way. With the development of the concept, the minister set himself the task of subordinating the entire system of "primordially Russian" education. Thus, education, forming and developing within the framework established by the concept, could not undermine the existing order.
The theory of official nationality recognized serfdom as a blessing to the state and people. This system provided for the personal dependence of one person on another, submission to a superior, based on law-abiding peasant masses. Order and discipline, love for the king, civil obedience, submission to government power were considered the best human qualities. Thus, in the theory of official nationality the spirit of the era of Nicholas the First was perfectly reflected.