Cette présente étude propose d’éclairer l’apport de la France durant la première étape du développement de la galerie impériale de peintures, qui donna naissance au Musée de l’Ermitage, à Saint-Pétersbourg. C’est durant cette période que se constitue et se sanctuarise, comme nous tenterons de le démontrer, la galerie des souverains russes au sein d’un nouveau complexe palatial adossé au palais d’Hiver – siège du pouvoir –, en un établissement qui prend rapidement le nom – français – d’« ermitage ». Ce travail se divise en trois parties. Après une présentation de l’apport de la France sous Catherine II (1729-1762-1796), à travers l’étude de la construction des bâtiments de l’Ermitage d’une part, et la formation des collections d’autre part, nous traiterons ensuite des règnes de Paul Ier (1754-1796-1801) et surtout de son fils Alexandre Ier (1777-1801-1825), afin de déterminer comment ils ont géré cet héritage, en soulignant ce que ces souverains ont puisé en idées et en œuvres en France. Il reste enfin à établir, dans un troisième temps et au terme de cette première étape de l’évolution de l’Ermitage, comment la France a stimulé la mutation de la galerie impériale en un établissement tendant de plus en plus vers le musée. / This study proposes to clarify the contribution of France during the first stage of development of the Imperial Gallery of Paintings, which gave birth to the State Hermitage Museum, in Saint Petersburg. It is during this period that the gallery of the Russian sovereigns, within a new palatial complex, is gathered, organized and housed immediately just next to the Winter Palace – the seat of power – in an establishment which is quickly given the – French – name, “Hermitage.”This study is divided in three parts. First, the study will present the contribution of France under Catherine the Great (1729-1762-1796), by examining both the construction of the Hermitage’s building and the formation of the collections. Secondly, we will delve into the reigns of Paul I (1754-1796-1801) and especially his son, Alexander the Great (1777-1801-1825), in order to determine how they managed this inheritance, by highlighting how these sovereigns used the ideas and artworks from France. Finally, the study will establish, how, at the end of this first stage of the evolution of the Hermitage, France stimulated the transformation of the Imperial Gallery into an institution whose trajectory arced towards becoming a museum.

「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.