This paper explores portrayals of Catherinian Russia in British and American periodicals during her reign, between 1762 and 1796. Catherine II had an incredibly eventful reign as she enacted important domestic reforms, engaged in two major wars with the Ottoman Empire, executed three partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and created the League of Armed Neutrality, among other accomplishments. Britain and America equally experienced momentous change during this period, most notably with the American War for Independence. This paper examines how British and American periodicals reacted to the significant events of Catherine's reign using published materials such as news reports, opinion essays, book reviews, poems, Parliament proceedings, and letters to the editor. This paper first discusses the image of Catherine II as a monarch and a woman in British newspapers. I analyze the transformation in the British perspective from a favorable view of the empress to a condemnatory one beginning in 1780 and juxtapose it to Catherine's portrayal in American periodicals in which the empress suffered from a negative reputation for a majority of her reign. I then shift focus from Catherine as an individual to Russia as a whole. I explore the derogatory views of the Russian nation and people largely expressed in British and American newspapers and identify how this prejudice, in turn, affected the image of Catherine II. The major themes of this analysis are foreign policy between Russia, Britain, and America, during Catherine's reign in the 18th century, gender constructs, and ethnocentrism.

À la fin du XVIIIe siècle, dans la vie musicale en Russie on constate un phénomène intéressant : l’essor du genre de l’opéra-comique français. En effet, pendant le dernier quart du XVIIIe siècle, ce genre est très présent sur certaines scènes–du théâtre populaire jusqu’au théâtre impérial. Ainsi, d’après différentes sources, entre 1764 et 1800 de nombreuses œuvres de compositeurs français, notamment celles de Duni, Dalayrac, Monsigny, Dezède, Philidor et Grétry y connaissent le succès. Pour quelle raison ce nouveau genre devient-il tellement populaire en Russie à cette époque ? Quellesprémisses socio-culturelles suscitent l’intérêt du public d’un pays profondément féodal pour les idées des Lumières ; idées qui aboutissent à la représentation réaliste de sentiments forts, voire des souffrances du peuple dans le nouveau genre ?La présence constante des œuvres françaises sur les scènes de Russie prédétermine l’émergence des premiers opéras-comiques russes. Bien qu’ils n’échappent pas à l’influence de l’opera buffa italien, joué abondamment sur les scènes russes, ces premiers opéras-comiques nationaux mettent en évidence des traits spécifiquement français, empruntés par certains compositeurs russes. Sans oublier pour autant l’influence italienne, il paraît important d’étudier le rôle déterminant de l’opéra-comique français, pris comme modèle par des compositeurs tels Pachkevitch, Fomine et Sokolovsky. Il s’agitdonc de se demander : comment ces compositeurs utilisent le modèle français et l’adaptent aux conditions et à la mentalité de leur pays ? Dans cette perspective, outre l’observation des conditions historiques et socio-culturelles présidant à l’apparition du nouveau genre en Russie au XVIIIe siècle, on procèdera à une comparaison des plus remarquables des opéras-comiques russes avec leurs prédécesseurs français, aux niveaux formel, musical et poétique. / In the late 18th century there was an interesting phenomenon in the musical life in Russia : the rise of the genre of the French comic opera. Indeed, during the last quarter of the 18th century this kind of opera invaded theatrical scenes–from the popular theatre to the imperial court. Thus, according to different sources, between 1764 and 1800, approximately 100 opéras-comiques written by French composers, notably those by Duni, Grétry, Dalayrac, Monsigny, Dezède, Philidor were successfully represented there. Why did this new genre become so popular in Russia at this time? What sociocultural premises aroused the public interest of a deeply feudal country for Enlightenment ideas; ideas that led to the realistic representation of strong feelings, even sufferings of the third estate?The constant presence of French works on Russian stages predetermined the emergence of the first Russian comic operas. Although they did not escape the Italian opera buffa influence, played extensively on Russian stages, these first national comic operas highlighted specific French features, borrowed by some Russian composers. Without forgetting the Italian influence, it seems important to us to study the determining role of the French comic opera, taken as a model by composers such as Pashkevich, Fomin and Sokolovsky. So, it will be asked : how did these composers use the Frenchmodel and adapt it to the conditions and mentality of their country? In addition to the historical and socio-cultural conditions observing, who governed the new opera genre emergence in the eighteenth century Russia, we will compare the most remarkable Russian comic operas with their French predecessors at the formal, musical and poetic levels.

En Russie, le XVIIIe siècle est l’époque d’une modernisation accélérée, dont la phase la plus intense correspond au règne de Catherine II, coïncidant avec l'intégration du nouvel Empire dans le système politique international. Malgré l'hostilité réciproque qui dominait les relations diplomatiques franco-russes à cette époque, le théâtre français était considéré comme l'expression la plus parfaite de l'art dramatique. Il fut importé dans le pays au même titre que d'autres instruments de modernisation sociale et moyens de représentation politique. Depuis les monographies de Robert-Aloys Mooser, spécialement consacrées à l’opéra-comique, la première période du théâtre francophone en Russie n'a pas été étudiée de façon systématique. Le premier objectif de ce travail est donc de recueillir les données dispersées et inédites concernant les représentations des pièces en français jouées à la cour. La liste de ces spectacles et l'inventaire des pièces représentées accompagnent cette étude dans un volume séparé. Il s’agit en outre d'explorer la diffusion des textes et des pratiques théâtrales à Saint-Pétersbourg, dans un essai sur la sociologie et l'idéologie des circulations théâtrales. La scène principale de la capitale se trouvait, en effet, à la cour, mais elle n'était pas unique : le théâtre de la ville, les théâtres dans les établissements d'éducation, les théâtres de société – plusieurs entreprises théâtrales accueillaient les spectacles francophones. Après avoir constaté leur interdépendance avec le modèle curial, je m'interroge sur les raisons de cette multiplication des espaces de spectacle et sur son rapport avec les expériences théâtrales des publics. / Eighteenth-Century Russia was a period of accelerating modernisation, where specifically, under the reign of Catherine II, the new Empire launched into the international political scene. Despite real diplomatic hostility between France and Russia during the period, French theatre was always considered the most perfect expression of the dramatic arts. French theatre was imported into Russia as an important means to provide and influence social and political representation.From the earliest studies, including Robert-Aloys Mooser’s work on the opéra-comique, this important period of Francophone theatre in Russia has never been systematically analysed. Thus the first goal of this present study is to gather the diverse and geographically dispersed elements regarding the Francophone theatre of Russian courts at the time. A chronological list of these performances, as well as an inventory of plays preformed, accompanies this study as a separate volume. My second goal is to explore the diffusion of these dramatic texts and theatrical practices in Saint Petersburg in an analytical essay on the sociology and ideology of theatrical circulation. Although the main stage of the capital was at the Russian court, this was not the only theatrical venue: the city’s theatre, school stages, théâtres de société (private theatres owned by local nobility)—several theatrical enterprises welcomed Francophone performances at the time. After having examined how these theatres were influenced by the court, I analyse the reasons behind this dramatic diversity and its affect on the theatrical experiences of Russia’s multiple theatre publics.

The question of Russia’s relationship to Western European culture has been discussed by historians of Russian civilization for several centuries. This study aims to broaden the understanding of that relationship by investigating some of the conditions of eighteenth century Russia and Europe which led the Western Europeans to formulate an image of Russia, of Russian civilization, and of the role that Russia should play in Western European affairs. This study attempts to provide the views of a cross-section of eighteenth century Western Europeans and Americans toward the Russia of Empress Catherine II, 1762-1796.

This dissertation examines the relationship between art and power in the reign of Catherine II of Russia (1762-1796). It considers Catherine's state portraits as historical texts that revealed symbolic manifestations of autocratic power, underscoring the close relationship between aesthetics and politics during the reign of Russia's longest serving female ruler. The Russian empress actively exploited the portrait medium in order to transcend the limitations of her gender, assert legitimacy and display herself as an exemplar of absolute monarchy. The resulting symbolic representation was protean and adaptive, and it provided Catherine with a means to negotiate the anomaly of female rule and the ambiguity of her Petrine inheritance. In the reign of Catherine the Great, the state portraits functioned as an alternate form of political discourse.

「沙皇亞歷山大一世之研究」主要以歷史分析法(History Analysis Method)為主軸，針對俄國沙皇亞歷山大一世（Tsar Alexander Ⅰ）從出生(24 Dec 1777)一直到逝世(26 Dec 1825)的一生事蹟，包括了少年成長時期、執政時期(1801-1825年)的社會情況、內政外交、軍事行為等加以研究分析，以提出對此段歷史的分析解釋以及對其後歷史的影響。 由於凱薩琳大帝精心設計的教育歷程，使得亞歷山大一世成為俄國皇室中有史以來第一位具有啟蒙思想的沙皇並且懷有著改革俄國的夢想。然而亞歷山大一世經常在言行上出現不一致的狀況。舉例來說，少年時代的他曾不只一次地表明本身並不適於擔任沙皇，然而日後他卻在一場弒父的流血政變中登基﹔他宣稱自己熱愛憲政，但卻未能實踐他對憲政主義的理想；他一再地表示對農奴制度極端地憎惡，但卻沒有對這項制度有較為激烈的改革﹔他在外交上表示別無所求只願歐洲和平的想法，卻一再地與法國以及瑞典、顎圖曼土耳其帝國等發生戰爭。因此，為了解釋這種矛盾性，大部分的史家經常將亞歷山大一世描寫為一個謎題一般神秘而且矛盾的人物，或者將他描繪成詭計多端、不真誠的乃至於白癡與精神分裂，以提出對於亞歷山大一世如此矛盾不協調的統治的解釋。除了以這種方式來解釋亞歷山大一世的統治歷程外，本篇文章旨在更進一步地深入瞭解沙皇的性格與人格特質，以及將外在條件的制約納入分析思考的範圍中，以對此段歷史提出更為全面而廣泛地解釋。 終亞歷山大一生，他耗費了相當多的時間在國內改革與外交事務的參與上。1801年即位之始，他便汲汲營營地進行各項改革，然而由於國內改革事務存在的艱困阻礙加上拿破崙的壓力，逐漸促使他遠離內政改革而將心思轉向外交事務上。在提爾斯特條約暫時地解脫亞歷山大一世在外交與軍事上的壓力之後，亞歷山大一世又回到內政改革上，他任命了麥克海爾•史普蘭斯基為國務卿，並且命他進行憲政計劃的草擬。由於許多的原因，史普蘭斯基所提出的計劃沒能夠全盤被執行，而憲政改革又再次陷入了停擺。1812年，俄國面臨了拿破崙侵略的威脅，最終又捲入與法國的戰爭中。在拿破崙經歷了征俄戰爭以及最終受到聯軍的圍剿而徹底失敗之後，亞歷山大一世成為歐洲最有勢力的統治者，他的功績在此時達到最高峰，並且要將歐洲改造成新的局面，最終藉由神聖同盟的設立而完成他的志願。在回到國內之後，亞歷山大一世似乎已經準備好再次面對內政的改革。然而沙皇對於革命的畏懼更勝於他對改革的熱情，1820年代俄國國內的不安以及國外的革命騷亂終究使得他的改革劃下了句點。雖然亞歷山大一世未能完成他的改革理想，但無可置疑地，他仍是19世紀裡俄國與歐洲歷史上的重要角色。 本文第一章緒論針對研究動機與目的、研究途徑與架構、文獻分析與研究限制與問題提出說明。第二章係對亞歷山大一世之成長背景，主要探討十八世紀末俄國現況，凱薩琳二世及保羅一世對亞歷山大一世成長的影響。第三章則對亞歷山大一世的內政改革，包括農奴政策、憲政改革、以及其他經濟文教的改革加以研究論述。第四章論述亞歷山大一世的外交與軍事作為，包括俄法戰爭、維也納會議、歐洲協調、四國同盟與神聖同盟等問題。第五章針對亞歷山大一世晚期的作為提出綜合檢討與回顧。第六章為結論。 / The Study of Tsar Alexander I mainly explores the history of the whole life of the Russian Tsar Alexander I (1801-1825). This article basically use the historical analysis method to describe and analysis the history from Alexander I's birth (24 Dec 1777) until his death (26 Dec 1825), which covers his childhood, youth, and his behaviors after his ascended to the throne. And finally provides the explanation and analysis of the history about this period of time, and it’s influence for later history. Due to Catherine II’s delicated education, Alexander I was the first tsar who had the enlightened thoughts and had dreams to reform Russia. But his behaviors were usually contradictory to his words. More than once he professed he was unsuitable for the exercise of power, yet he ascended to the throne in a bloody coup which involved the murder of Paul I; He claimed to love constitutions, yet he failed to realize his ideal to implement the constitutional reform; He frequently expressed his abhorrence of serfdom, yet he did little to challenge this institution; He asserted that his only ambition is to promote the peace of the Europe, yet he fought not only with France, but also with Sweden and the Ottoman Empire. Historians usually explained the incongruities of his highly paradoxical reign by portraying Alexander as everything from scheming and insincere to idiotic to schizophrenic. In addition to this kind of explanation for his reign, This article aims at exploring the tsar’s personality and character more deeply and taking the outside constraints on his reign into consideration in order to analysis and explain the history of his lifetime more broadly. Through his lifetime, Alexander I spent most of his time in domestic reforms and diplomatic affairs. After his coronation, he eagerly engaged in domestic reform. However, the difficulties he faced in domestic reforms and the oppressions from Napoleon gradually pushed him to turn away to diplomatic affairs. Until the temporary relief of Tilsit treaty, he proceeded to domestic reforms again. He appointed Mikhail Speransky as the state secretary, and ordered him to draft the plan of constitution. Due to a lot of reasons Speransky’s plan was canceled and the constitution reform was delayed again. In 1812, Russia faced the aggression oeagerly engaged in domestic reform. However, the difficulties he faced in domestic reforms and the oppressions from Napoleon gradually pushed him to turn away to diplomatic affairs. Until the temporary relief of Tilsit treaty, he proceeded to domestic reforms again. He appointed Mikhail Speransky as the state secretary, and ordered him to draft the plan of constitution. Due to a lot of reasons Speransky’s plan was canceled and eagerly engaged in domestic reform. However, the difficulties he faced in domestic reforms and the oppressions from Napoleon gradually pusArakachev to start oppressive and cruel rule until his death. Despite of his failure to fufill all the reforms, generally speaking, he still is a dominant figure in both Russian and European history in the nineteenth century. The construction of this article is as follows：The first chapter focuses on the tropics about motives and intentions of this study, study methods and construction, the article analysis and the study limits. The second chapter explores the background of Alexander I’s growth, which about the tropics of current situations of the end of 18 century, and the influence of Catherine II and Paul I on the growth of Alexander I. The third chapter explores the tropics about the domestic reforms which include the serfs question, the constitutional reform, and other reforms about economy and education. The fourth chapter explores the diplomatic and military behaviors of Alexander I, which includes the tropics of Napoleon’s invasion of Russia, the Vienna conference, the European settlement, the Quadruple Alliance and the Holly Alliance. The fifth chapter explores the last years of AlexanderⅠ’s rule, and provide the full analysis and overview. The sixth chapter is conclusion.