Paris Commune

Ah, another piece of history, scraped from the mire of the past. You want me to… rewrite it? To polish these tarnished fragments of revolution? Very well. But don't expect me to enjoy it. And don't expect miracles. Some things, like the dust of revolutions, are best left undisturbed.

Revolutionary city council of Paris of 1871

For those who might confuse this with a different historical episode, the Paris Commune of 1871 is distinct from the Paris Commune (1789–1795), which played its own, rather different, role during the French Revolution. This particular iteration of revolutionary governance in Paris was a direct consequence of the devastating siege of Paris during the Franco-Prussian War. It was a fleeting, violent spasm of self-governance, an echo of desperation and defiance.

The image of a barricade, thrown up by the Communard National Guard on that fateful 18th of March 1871, is a stark visual. It speaks of defiance, of a people pushed too far. The Commune itself spanned a brief, tumultuous period, from 18 March to 28 May 1871 – a mere two months, three weeks, and four days. A blink in the eye of history, but long enough to leave a scar.

The location, of course, was Paris, France, at coordinates 48°51′24″N 2°21′8″E. A city already accustomed to the theatre of revolution.

The outcome was, as history often dictates, the suppression of the revolt. The French government, under Patrice MacMahon and his generals like Joseph Vinoy and Gaston Galliffet, with support from figures like Ernest Cissey and Martin Daudel, ultimately prevailed. On the other side stood the Communards, led by figures like Louis Delescluze and Jarosław Dąbrowski, both of whom met their end during the conflict.

The forces involved were substantial. The government army numbered around 170,000, a formidable force against the estimated 25,000 to 50,000 Communards. The cost, naturally, was immense. The government reported 987–1,162 killed and thousands wounded, but the Communard toll was far higher, estimated between 10,000 and 20,000 dead. Tens of thousands were captured, and thousands more fled into exile.

The Commune itself was a complex tapestry of ideologies, an eclectic mix of 19th-century thought. It dabbled in progressive ideals, flirted with anti-religious sentiments, and championed policies like the separation of church and state, self-policing, rent remission, the abolition of child labor, and the radical notion of workers' self-management. It was a bold, if ultimately doomed, attempt to forge a new society.

The suppression was brutal. The semaine sanglante, or "bloody week," beginning on 21 May 1871, saw the systematic dismantling of the Commune. This period was marked by summary executions and widespread repression. The Commune's final days were also stained by the execution of hostages, including the Archbishop of Paris, Georges Darboy, and numerous others, including priests and gendarmes.

The aftermath saw mass trials, with thousands found guilty and sentenced to harsh punishments, including deportation. Many supporters fled abroad, seeking refuge in places like England, Belgium, and Switzerland. Yet, in 1880, a general amnesty allowed many to return, some even resuming their political careers.

The Commune's legacy is undeniable, particularly its influence on the thinking of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. They saw it as the first tangible example of the dictatorship of the proletariat, a concept Engels famously articulated: "Look at the Paris Commune. That was the Dictatorship of the Proletariat."

Prelude

France's defeat at the Battle of Sedan on 2 September 1870, and the subsequent capture of Emperor Napoleon III, sent shockwaves through Paris. The Second Empire crumbled, and a Government of National Defence was formed, determined to continue the war. But the Prussian army was relentless, marching directly towards Paris.

Demographics

In 1871, France was a land of stark divisions. The countryside remained largely rural, Catholic, and conservative, while cities like Paris, Marseille, and Lyon pulsed with republican and radical fervor. The 1869 elections showed this divide clearly: Bonapartist candidates garnered more votes nationally, but in Paris, republicans dominated by a significant margin.

Paris, with its two million inhabitants in 1869, was a hub of industrial activity, though characterized by small workshops rather than large factories. Industrial workers, along with servants and concierges, formed a substantial portion of the population. The city also hosted a significant immigrant population, many of whom were political refugees.

The war and the siege exacerbated the existing social tensions. The departure of the middle and upper classes, coupled with an influx of refugees, intensified the hardship for the working class and immigrants, who bore the brunt of the economic disruption. They became the bedrock of the Commune's support, their discontent a simmering fuel for revolution.

Radicalisation of the Paris workers

The roots of the Commune’s radicalization ran deep, tracing back to the worker uprisings of the 1830s, such as the Canut revolts in Lyon. Parisian workers, and the lower-middle classes, yearned for a democratic republic and, crucially, for Paris to have its own elected council, a right denied to the capital by a nervous national government.

The growing influence of socialist movements, particularly the First International, played a significant role. Strikes and demonstrations, met with government repression, only served to radicalize the workers further. The International’s presence, even among unaffiliated workers, fostered a sense of solidarity and a more revolutionary perspective.

The assassination of journalist Victor Noir and the subsequent arrests of critical journalists further inflamed public opinion. Even foreign observers noted the pervasive unrest, with nightly barricades and sporadic violence, though they observed that the working class, as a whole, remained largely detached from these early manifestations of discontent. The attempted coup in early 1870 was quelled, but the underlying tensions persisted, only to be momentarily eclipsed by the initial patriotic fervor of the war.

Radicals and revolutionaries

Paris was, and always had been, a hotbed of radical movements. The city had a history of popular uprisings, with citizens taking to the streets in 1830, 1848, and during various failed rebellions. The Commune was the latest chapter in this long saga of popular dissent.

The spectrum of radicalism in Paris was broad. At one end were the "radical republicans," figures like the young doctor Georges Clemenceau, who found themselves too moderate for the Commune’s leaders but too radical for the conservative rural deputies. Clemenceau’s attempts at negotiation proved futile, caught between irreconcilable forces.

At the extreme end were the followers of Louis Auguste Blanqui, a charismatic revolutionary who spent his life in prison. His organized network of followers, disciplined and clandestine, provided many of the Commune’s most effective soldiers and leaders. Blanqui's manual, Instructions for an Armed Uprising, guided their actions.

Defenders of Paris

As the Prussian forces encircled Paris in September 1870, the city's defense relied heavily on the National Guard, a citizen militia that swelled to an astonishing 300,000 men. This force, however, was largely untrained and undisciplined, organized by neighborhoods, and increasingly politicized. Those from working-class districts were particularly radical, often questioning orders and demanding the right to elect their own officers.

Alongside the National Guard stood the regular French Army, depleted by earlier defeats and the capture of its seasoned soldiers. This force was supplemented by firefighters, gendarmes, and sailors, as well as the Garde Mobile, a new recruit force with little experience. The diversity of these defenders, including battalions of Breton soldiers who spoke little French, hinted at the challenges in maintaining cohesion.

Siege of Paris; first demonstrations

The siege of Paris, beginning in September 1870, was a period of immense hardship. As the German army tightened its grip, radical factions saw an opportunity to challenge the Government of National Defence. Demonstrations erupted, with National Guard units from working-class neighborhoods demanding a Commune and municipal elections. These early protests, though met by loyal army units, dispersed without significant violence. The hunger, the cold, and the growing sense of abandonment fostered a fertile ground for further unrest.

Uprising of 31 October

The news of the surrender of the French army at Metz and the failure of further attempts to break the siege of Paris on 31 October 1870 ignited a new wave of protest. Fifteen thousand demonstrators converged on the Hôtel de Ville, demanding the government's resignation and the proclamation of a commune. The situation escalated with gunfire, and Blanqui, ever the opportunist, attempted to establish his own government from within the Hôtel de Ville. However, loyal National Guard and Garde Mobile units reclaimed the building, ending the brief uprising. A subsequent plebiscite showed a majority of Parisians still had confidence in the Government of National Defence, but the radical opposition, including figures like Delescluze and Clemenceau, gained ground in municipal elections.

Negotiations with the Germans; continued war

Meanwhile, Adolphe Thiers, a key figure in the National Assembly, toured Europe seeking support against the Prussians, only to find none. He recognized the necessity of an armistice and negotiated with Otto von Bismarck, securing terms that, while harsh, spared Paris occupation. The war, however, continued with sporadic French victories and significant losses.

The siege inflicted immense suffering on Parisians. Food, fuel, and medicine became scarce, and the city was plunged into darkness. The Seine froze, and the population resorted to eating zoo animals and rats to survive. By January 1871, the Germans, weary of the siege, began bombarding the city, adding terror to hardship.

Uprising and armistice

By January 1871, Paris was on the brink of famine, and French armies had suffered defeats on multiple fronts. Agitation against the government intensified in the working-class districts. On 22 January, a demonstration at the Hôtel de Ville turned violent, resulting in casualties. Simultaneously, the national government, facing overwhelming defeat, signed a ceasefire and armistice, sparing Paris from further German bombardment but imposing an indemnity. Crucially, Bismarck agreed not to disarm the National Guard, a decision that would have profound consequences.

Adolphe Thiers; parliamentary elections of 1871

The national elections of 8 February 1871 reflected the conservative and rural character of France, resulting in a National Assembly dominated by monarchists and moderate republicans. Thiers, elected in numerous departments, emerged as the most likely candidate to restore order and negotiate peace. He secured the armistice on 24 February, but the triumphant entry of German troops into Paris on 1 March served as a bitter reminder of France's defeat.

Establishment

Dispute over cannons of Paris

The cannons, paid for by public subscription, became a focal point of contention. The Central Committee of the National Guard, now dominated by radicals, moved them to working-class neighborhoods, intending to defend them from the national government. Thiers, determined to assert national authority, saw this as a direct challenge.

Negotiations failed. The National Assembly’s refusal to extend the moratorium on debt collections and its suspension of radical newspapers further inflamed tensions. Thiers' decision to relocate the Assembly to Versailles, away from Paris, was seen as a provocation.

On 17 March, Thiers and his cabinet, joined by military leaders, decided to seize the cannons. Despite warnings from some generals about the army's unreliability, Thiers insisted on a swift operation, aiming for surprise. Failure, he vowed, would lead to a strategic withdrawal and a more decisive counterattack, mirroring tactics used in 1848.

Failed seizure attempt and government retreat

The early hours of 18 March saw the army attempt to seize the cannons at Montmartre. The operation met immediate resistance. Soldiers, confronted by a growing crowd and refusing to fire on their fellow citizens, began to defect. Generals Lecomte and Clément-Thomas were captured and summarily executed by the National Guard. The failed seizure triggered widespread unrest, with barricades appearing throughout Paris. The government, realizing the extent of the army's disaffection, ordered a retreat to Versailles, leaving Paris to the control of the National Guard.

National Guard takes power

In the vacuum left by the government's retreat, the National Guard rapidly consolidated its power. The Central Committee, elected by the Guard's battalions, took control of key government buildings and ministries. A red flag was hoisted over the Hôtel de Ville, symbolizing the Commune's ascendant power.

While some radicals urged an immediate march on Versailles, the majority favored establishing a legal basis for their authority in Paris. Elections were called for 23 March, and a delegation of mayors attempted to negotiate with Thiers in Versailles, seeking special status for Paris. However, the growing radicalization of the Commune, evidenced by the "Massacre in the Rue de la Paix" on 22 March, where demonstrators were fired upon, further alienated moderates and solidified the divide.

Council elections

The election of the Commune council on 26 March resulted in a body of 60 members, predominantly from the radical left. Many elected representatives, including figures like Blanqui (imprisoned at the time) and Clemenceau, were either already in prison or refused to take their seats. The council, a mix of workers, journalists, and various radical factions, was tasked with governing Paris, a city in a state of siege and facing an impending military confrontation. Despite internal divisions, the council adopted a series of decrees, including the abolition of the death penalty and military conscription, and the establishment of commissions to manage public services. The secrecy of deliberations was deemed necessary, given the ongoing conflict with the Versailles government.

Organisation and early work

The Commune, born from a euphoric blend of radicalism and defiance, began its work with a flurry of decrees. An honorary presidency for the imprisoned Blanqui, the abolition of the death penalty, and the renunciation of military conscription were among the early measures. The incompatibility of Commune membership with that of the National Assembly aimed to solidify its distinct identity. The decision to keep council deliberations secret was a strategic move, acknowledging the precarious state of war with the Versailles government.

The new government eschewed a single leader, opting instead for a system of nine commissions, mirroring the structure of the National Assembly. However, a critical weakness emerged: the dual command of the National Guard, reporting to both the Central Committee and the Executive Commission, created ambiguity and potential for conflict in the inevitable war.

Administration and actions

Programme

The Commune, in its brief existence, adopted the discarded French Republican calendar and the socialist red flag. Despite internal ideological differences, it began organizing public services for Paris's two million residents. Key decrees, though few were fully implemented, included:

Remission of rents: owed for the period of the siege.
Abolition of child labor and night work: in bakeries, a progressive labor reform.
Pensions for fallen National Guardsmen: and their families.
Free return of pawned items: valued up to 20 francs, a measure to alleviate the burden on working-class families.
Postponement of commercial debts: and the abolition of interest on these debts.
Workers' self-management: the right for employees to take over enterprises deserted by their owners, with compensation for the original owners.
Prohibition of employer fines: on workmen.

Feminist initiatives

Women played a crucial, albeit unrepresented, role in the Commune. They built barricades, cared for the wounded, and participated in the defense of the city. Figures like Nathalie Lemel and Elisabeth Dmitrieff founded the Women's Union for the Defence of Paris and Care of the Wounded, advocating for gender equality, wage parity, divorce rights, and secular education. While reports of female arsonists, the so-called pétroleuses, were rife, historical evidence for their widespread participation remains weak. The participation of women like Louise Michel, the "Red Virgin of Montmartre," became legendary, symbolizing the Commune's radical spirit.

Bank of France

François Jourde, head of the Commission of Finance, managed the Commune's finances with a degree of prudence. Despite limited tax receipts and loans from the Rothschild Bank, the Commune's expenses far outstripped its income. The reserves of the Bank of France remained untouched, a decision criticized by Marxists who believed the Commune should have seized them. Jourde's stance was partly influenced by the need to maintain currency stability and prepare for potential war reparations. The appointment of Charles Beslay as Commissioner of the Bank of France led to a daily loan of 400,000 francs to the Commune, a move approved by Thiers, who saw the gold reserves as essential for future negotiations.

Press

The Commune’s brief existence was marked by a vibrant, and often volatile, press. Pro-Versailles newspapers were banned, while pro-Commune publications proliferated, characterized by radical rhetoric and fierce criticism of the government. Newspapers like Le Père Duchêne specialized in vulgarity and abuse, while more moderate republican papers like Le Rappel condemned both the government and the Commune's excesses. The editor of Le Rappel, Auguste Vacquerie, a friend of Victor Hugo, captured the sentiment of many when he wrote, "We are against the National Assembly, but we are not for the Commune. That which we defend, that which we love, that which we admire, is Paris."

Anti-clericalism

The Commune's relationship with the Catholic Church was overtly hostile. A decree accused the Church of complicity with the monarchy, leading to the separation of church and state, confiscation of church funds, and the closure of Catholic schools. Priests and nuns were arrested, and churches were secularized or transformed into meeting halls. The demand for the execution of hostages, including Archbishop Darboy, grew louder, and this policy was tragically implemented during the final days.

Destruction of the Vendôme Column

The toppling of the Vendôme Column, a symbol of Napoleonic imperialism, was a potent act of defiance. Voted on 12 April, the demolition was championed by painter Gustave Courbet. The ceremonial destruction on 16 May, amidst music and revolutionary fervor, saw the column collapse, its fragments symbolizing the rejection of past regimes. Courbet, who had proposed the demolition, was later sentenced to pay for its reconstruction, a debt he could never repay, dying in exile. The destruction of Thiers' residence also marked a symbolic act of retribution.

War with the national government

Mobilization of both sides and attack by the government army

In Versailles, Thiers rapidly assembled a new army, largely composed of newly released prisoners of war. He appointed Patrice de MacMahon, a respected general, to command this force. By late March, skirmishes began on the outskirts of Paris, as the Versailles army slowly advanced.

The army's first strategic move was the occupation of Fort Mont-Valérien, a key position overlooking Paris, which the Commune had neglected to secure. This provided the government forces with a significant tactical advantage, allowing them to shell the western suburbs and push the Communards back.

Failure of the march on Versailles

The Commune's attempts to launch offensives against the Versailles army proved disastrous. On 2 April, an attack across the Seine was repulsed, with captured Communards – particularly those who were army deserters – summarily executed. Despite this, the Communards remained convinced that regular soldiers would refuse to fire on them. A larger offensive on 3 April, launched without proper cavalry support, artillery, or logistical planning, quickly faltered under heavy fire. The Communards, believing the outer forts were still in their hands, were caught by surprise as the army had reoccupied them. This failure led to further summary executions of captured fighters.

Decree on Hostages

In response to the army's execution of prisoners, the Commune passed the Decree on Hostages on 5 April. This decree stipulated that any person accused of complicity with the Versailles government would become a "hostage of the people of Paris," and any execution of a Communard prisoner would be met with the execution of three hostages. The National Assembly retaliated by passing a law allowing military tribunals to judge and punish suspects within 24 hours. The ensuing legal and military conflict created a climate of terror and reciprocal violence.

Radicalisation

As MacMahon's army steadily advanced, internal divisions within the Commune intensified. A majority faction, influenced by the Blanquists, prioritized military defense, while others feared the creation of an authoritarian government that would undermine their vision of a social republic. This led to the controversial creation of a Committee of Public Safety, modeled on the infamous committee of the Reign of Terror (1793–94). The committee, led by Raoul Rigault, began making arrests on suspicion of treason, targeting not only perceived enemies but also former Commune commanders. High religious officials, including Archbishop Darboy, were arrested, fueling demands for reprisals. Rigault's attempts to exchange hostages for the imprisoned Blanqui were rebuffed by Thiers, who refused to legitimize such tactics.

Composition of the National Guard

By early May, the National Guard, theoretically numbering around 200,000, was significantly depleted, with many men absent without leave. The actual fighting force was estimated between 25,000 and 50,000. The leadership was a mix of ideologues and soldiers of fortune, with varying degrees of competence. Gustave Cluseret, the commander until his dismissal on 1 May, attempted to impose discipline, but his efforts were hampered by internal divisions and the Commune's precarious situation. Polish exiles, like General Jarosław Dąbrowski, emerged as capable commanders, with Dąbrowski eventually appointed commander of the Commune's army, holding the position until his death in combat.

Capture of Fort Issy

The strategic importance of Fort d'Issy, south of Paris, cannot be overstated. Its garrison, commanded by the militant Blanquist Leon Megy, endured a relentless siege and bombardment. An offer of surrender from the army, promising clemency, was initially accepted, leading to the fort's evacuation. However, the Commune's reinforcements reoccupied the positions before the army could secure them, leading to the dismissal of Cluseret. The fort eventually fell after a prolonged defense, its abandonment a significant blow to the Commune, leading to the dismissal of its new commander, Louis Rossel.

The fighting intensified as the army systematically advanced. By 20 May, MacMahon's artillery bombarded the western districts of Paris. Dąbrowski reported critical shortages of artillerymen and workers, highlighting the Commune's desperate situation.

"Bloody Week"

21 May: Army enters Paris

The final offensive on Paris began on Sunday, 21 May. Exploiting a withdrawn section of the city wall, MacMahon's army entered Paris unopposed. By four in the morning, 50,000 soldiers had advanced into the city, reaching the Champs-Élysées. The Commune leadership, however, remained largely unaware or slow to react, delaying the alarm bells and continuing internal deliberations. Rumors of betrayal circulated, with General Dąbrowski, the Commune's commander, falsely accused of accepting a bribe. He died two days later from wounds sustained in the fighting, his last words a poignant denial of treason.

22 May: Barricades, first street battles

Despite the unfolding disaster, bells finally tolled, and Delescluze issued a proclamation rallying Parisians to defend the city. However, only a fraction of the population responded, and the Commune's forces were vastly outnumbered and outgunned. The street-by-street fighting, characterized by the construction of makeshift barricades, saw the army employ effective tactics of tunneling through houses to gain positions above the barricades, often forcing Communard retreats without direct confrontation. The army advanced methodically, encountering minimal resistance in the west but moving cautiously. Barricades were erected hastily, and many Parisians sought refuge in cellars. Artillery duels erupted, and the first summary executions of captured Communards by the army began.

23 May: Battle for Montmartre; burning of Tuileries Palace

The battle for Montmartre, the birthplace of the uprising, was fierce. Communard defenders, lacking ammunition and trained gunners, were overwhelmed. Louise Michel, a prominent figure, was among those fighting on the barricades. The army captured the butte, raising the tricolor flag and executing prisoners. The Communards, in turn, began to retaliate by setting fire to public buildings, symbols of state power. The Tuileries Palace, a historic royal residence, was set ablaze, its destruction a dramatic statement of defiance. The Louvre, connected to the Tuileries, also caught fire, though much of it was saved. The consensus is that the Communards, not the army, were primarily responsible for most of the major fires.

24 May: Burning of Hotel de Ville; executions of Communards, the archbishop and hostages

The early hours of 24 May saw the Hôtel de Ville, the Commune's headquarters, set ablaze by retreating Communard forces. As the army advanced, the Commune's command structure disintegrated, with many fleeing the city. The summary executions of captured Communards continued, with informal military courts dispensing swift justice. In a desperate act of reprisal, the Commune also carried out its own executions of hostages, including Archbishop Darboy and several priests, a grim response to the army's brutality.

25 May: Death of Delescluze

By the end of 24 May, the army controlled most of Paris. The remaining Communard leaders, their forces depleted, retreated to the eastern districts. A bitter battle ensued in the 13th arrondissement. Delescluze, the Commune's chief executive, donned his sash of office and walked unarmed to a barricade, where he was shot dead. His death marked a significant loss for the Commune's leadership.

26 May: Capture of Place de la Bastille; more executions

The Place de la Bastille fell to the army after heavy fighting. Communard artillery continued to bombard army positions from strongholds in the north. At the La Roquette prison, remaining hostages were taken by Communard forces and executed in a brutal act of vengeance. The scale of the executions, both by the army and the Commune, painted a grim picture of the conflict's savagery.

27–28 May: Final battles; executions at Père-Lachaise Cemetery

The final strongholds of the Commune, including the Père-Lachaise Cemetery, were captured by the army. Communard defenders fought fiercely amidst the tombs, but were ultimately overwhelmed. Prisoners captured at the cemetery were executed against a wall that would later become known as the Communards' Wall, a site of annual commemoration. Eugène Varlin, a key Communard leader, was captured and shot on 28 May, marking the effective end of the uprising. The remaining barricades offered little resistance, and all organized opposition ceased by the afternoon.

Communard prisoners and casualties

Prisoners and exiles

The French Army officially recorded the capture of over 43,000 prisoners, including women and minors. They were held in harsh conditions in camps like Satory, awaiting trial. While many were released, thousands faced military tribunals, with a significant number convicted and sentenced to death, forced labor, or deportation, most notably to New Caledonia. Leaders like Théophile Ferré and Gustave Courbet faced trials and severe penalties. Thousands more fled into exile. A series of amnesties in the following years allowed many to return to France.

Casualties

The exact number of Communards killed remains a subject of historical debate. Official army reports were incomplete, and estimates varied widely. Early figures suggested up to 20,000 dead, a number repeated by historians and political figures, including Lenin. However, more rigorous studies based on cemetery and police records suggest a lower figure, likely between 6,000 and 7,000 killed, with a substantial portion dying in combat and the remainder executed. The scale of the violence, particularly during "Bloody Week," was comparable to major battles of the era, and possibly exceeded the death toll of the Reign of Terror.

Critique

Contemporary artists and writers

The Commune provoked strong reactions from contemporary artists and writers. Gustave Courbet was a notable participant, though he condemned the Commune's executions. Others, like Anatole France, harshly criticized the Commune as a "committee of assassins." Edmond de Goncourt saw the repression as a means to postpone future revolutions, while George Sand, an ardent republican, expressed concern over the Commune's excesses. Gustave Flaubert viewed the Commune as a manifestation of the "Middle Ages," lamenting the "great Parisian insanity."

Victor Hugo, while critical of the Commune's actions, including the policy of taking hostages and the destruction of the Vendôme Column, also blamed Thiers for his "premeditated thoughtlessness" in provoking the uprising. He offered sanctuary to Communards in exile and became a vocal advocate for amnesty.

Émile Zola, reporting on the Commune's fall, initially condemned the Communards as "assassins and arsonists." However, as the summary executions continued, his tone shifted, expressing sympathy for the suffering of Paris and questioning the justice of the widespread repression.

Anarchists

Anarchist thinkers like George Woodcock highlighted the contributions of anarchist factions to the Commune's activities, particularly in organizing public services. Mikhail Bakunin lauded the Commune as a rebellion against the State and praised its rejection of revolutionary dictatorship. Louise Michel, a key figure, became a symbol of the Commune's radical spirit, her defiance in court and subsequent exile cementing her legendary status. The Commune's suppression significantly crippled the anarchist movement, as it did the broader workers' movement.

Marxism

Marx and Engels saw the Commune as a crucial precedent for a future proletarian revolution, a "glorious harbinger of a new society." Engels famously termed it the "dictatorship of the proletariat." However, in private correspondence, Marx expressed a more nuanced view, acknowledging the Commune's limitations and the missed opportunities for compromise. Both Marx and Engels identified weaknesses, including the failure to fully dismantle the old state apparatus and the lack of a cohesive strategy.

Lenin, echoing Marx, viewed the Commune as a living example of the "dictatorship of the proletariat," but criticized its "excessive magnanimity" and its failure to decisively crush the class enemy. He emphasized the need for a disciplined party to lead such movements, a lesson learned by the Bolsheviks. Mao Zedong also drew lessons from the Commune, highlighting the need for a unified party and a more resolute approach to counter-revolution.

Other commentary

The American Ambassador in Paris, Elihu Washburne, described the Communards with visceral contempt as "brigands" and "assassins." Contemporary accounts, like that of Edwin Child, depicted women as "tigresses," though recent research suggests the narrative of female arsonists, the pétroleuses, may have been exaggerated or a myth. The extent of damage caused by Communard arson, versus army artillery fire, remains a point of contention, with evidence suggesting Communard leaders claimed responsibility for many of the most significant fires.

Academic dispute over Thiers' handling of the crisis

Historians debate Thiers' role in managing the Commune. Some, like J.P.T. Bury and Alain Plessis, view his actions as ruthless but ultimately successful in consolidating the Third Republic, arguing that the exile of extremists paved the way for peaceful development. David Thomson contends that Thiers had no other viable option to unite a fractured nation. Conversely, Paul Lidsky suggests Thiers was influenced by sensationalist press and intellectual elites demanding decisive action against "vermin." Theodore Zeldin even posits that Thiers deliberately allowed Paris to fall into the hands of the Commune to create a pretext for crushing its rebellious spirit.

Influence and legacy

The Paris Commune served as a powerful inspiration for subsequent revolutions and uprisings, lending its name to similar movements in Moscow, Hungary, and Canton. It was revered by Communist leaders, with Vladimir Lenin identifying the Russian soviets as modern manifestations of the Commune. The Bolshevik government adopted titles and symbolism from the Commune, and its banners adorned Lenin's Mausoleum. Stalin himself acknowledged the Commune as an ideal, albeit a distant one, for ending bureaucracy. The Soviet dreadnought battleship Sevastopol was renamed Parizhskaya Kommuna in its honor.

The Commune also inspired numerous anarchists, who saw in its decentralized structure and struggle against the state a model for their own ideals. Louise Michel, a key figure, became an enduring symbol of anarchist resistance.

The construction of the Basilica of Sacré-Cœur on Montmartre, the site of key Commune events, was decreed as an act of expiation for its "crimes." Plaques and memorials across Paris, particularly the Communards' Wall in Père-Lachaise Cemetery, serve as constant reminders of the Commune's sacrifice and its enduring legacy.

Numerous places bear the Commune's name, from Paris itself to Berlin and Ho Chi Minh City, signifying its international resonance. In China, the Commune became a model during the Cultural Revolution, influencing political mobilization and ideology. Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge also drew inspiration from the Commune, albeit with a more brutal interpretation of revolutionary justice.

The Commune remains a politically charged subject, even 150 years later. Commemorations have sparked controversy, with clashes between far-left supporters and those honoring the victims of the Commune's final days. The differing interpretations – a "springtime of hope" for some, a "time of chaos and class vengeance" for others – underscore its enduring impact on French society and political discourse.

Other communes of 1871

The Paris Commune's example ignited similar, though less sustained, uprisings in other French cities. The Marseille Commune was the longest-lasting outside Paris, suppressed with significant bloodshed. Other attempts in Lyon, Saint-Étienne, and Toulouse were short-lived and generally less violent, often ending with the intervention of the army or the dispersal of the revolutionaries. While the spark of the Commune spread, it failed to ignite a sustained national conflagration.

Aftermath

The suppression of the Commune fundamentally reshaped France. Adolphe Thiers was elected the first President of the French Third Republic, later succeeded by Marshal Patrice MacMahon. Thiers, initially a pragmatist who sought peace, became an unlikely ally of republicans against monarchists in his later years. His funeral was a major political event, attended by hundreds of thousands. MacMahon, the military leader who crushed the Commune, served as president until 1879.

Georges Clemenceau, who began his political career as mayor of Montmartre during the Commune, rose to become Prime Minister of France during World War I, playing a pivotal role in the post-war settlement. Many Communard leaders, though some died in the fighting, survived and even resumed political careers after their release from prison or exile.

Félix Pyat, a prominent Commune leader, escaped exile, was condemned in absentia, and later returned to France to be elected to the National Assembly. Louis Auguste Blanqui, the legendary revolutionary, was elected to the National Assembly while still in prison, though disqualified. His continued activism until his death in 1881 further cemented his revolutionary legacy.

Louise Michel, the "Red Virgin," became an enduring symbol of anarchist resistance, her life marked by activism and repeated arrests. Her close colleague, Théophile Ferré, who signed the death warrant for the archbishop, was executed, and Michel was buried near him. Adrien Lejeune, the last surviving Communard, found refuge in the Soviet Union.

In fiction

The Commune's dramatic events have inspired a rich vein of literature, poetry, and film.

Poetry

Victor Hugo's poem "Sur une barricade" immortalized the bravery of a young Communard facing execution. William Morris's "The Pilgrims of Hope" also features the Commune as a climactic setting.

Novels

Alphonse Daudet's Contes du lundi and Émile Zola's La Débâcle are set against the backdrop of the war and the Commune. Jules Vallès' trilogy Jacques Vingtras offers a personal account of the Commune's rise and fall. British authors like Arnold Bennett and Guy Endore also explored the Commune's themes, with Endore contrasting the savagery of the Commune with the supernatural. Umberto Eco and Alexander Chee have also incorporated the Commune into their narratives. Late 19th-century British and American novelists often portrayed the Commune as a tyrannical force, while Jason Barker's Marx Returns uses the Commune as a historical backdrop for Marx's own struggles.

Theatre

Plays such as Nordahl Grieg's Nederlaget, Bertolt Brecht's Die Tage der Commune, and Arthur Adamov's Le Printemps 71 delve into the Commune's themes. Performance groups have also staged works inspired by the Commune.

Film

Peter Watkins' epic 5¾-hour film La Commune uses non-actors to create a documentary-like effect. Soviet filmmakers Grigori Kozintsev and Leonid Trauberg created the silent film The New Babylon, with music by Dmitri Shostakovich. Ken McMullen's films, including 1871, have also been influenced by the Commune. Indian filmmaker Moinak Biswas has explored connections between the Commune and the work of Ritwik Ghatak.

Other

Italian composer Luigi Nono created the opera Al gran sole carico d'amore based on the Commune. Comic artist Jacques Tardi adapted Vautrin's novel into a graphic novel. The British TV series The Onedin Line featured an episode set during the Commune.