Vive la Commune!

I thought it was obvious :(.

To be extremly honest, there's a lot of things not making much sense in this context (not because they happen specifically, but because they happen without real explanation but rather by sheer convenience*), so it wasn't much I'm afraid.

* An exemple having the Legions d'arrondissement attacking Versailles. I can buy it, but giving the extremly chaotic chain of command (or rather, its de facto absence), it would ask for more than "and thus it happened". Suspension of disbelief have to be helped from time to time.
 
Chapter III: Bloody Saturday


Versailles was in utter chaos. By now most of the city knew the National Guard (enlarged by Blanqui) was marching on Versailles, and the government looked for every way to get out of Versailles. Most of them tried to follow Thiers and his ministers to Bordeaux. Patrice de MacMahon stayed to organize the soldiers that remained. Rumors, secretly spread by infiltrating communards dressed as high- class bourgeoisie fleeing from the commune, talked about between 100,000 and 150,000 armed men approaching Versailles.



But an hour after Thiers fled in a train to Bordeaux; MacMahon received a credible report that the real size of the army marching to Versailles was around 30,000. There were about 20,000 soldiers in Versailles, with another 18,000, freed from German prisoner-of-war camps, expected to reach Versailles that day.. Moreover, the soldiers at Versailles, unlike the National Guardsmen, were professionals.


The National Guardsmen marching on Versailles were divided into three armies each composed of about 10,000 men. The Central Army was led Blanqui himself, the Southern Army led by the polish revolutionary and émigré Jaroslav Dombrowski, and the Northern Army led by Eugène Varlin, one of the leaders of the International Workingmen Association and a member of the Central Committee of the National Guard.


While the National Guard marched, around 37,000[FONT=&quot][1][/FONT] of the citizens of Paris, many of them radicalized by the mass speeches held by Blanqui, armed themselves with whatever firearm they could find and prepared to march to Versailles to serve as reinforcements.


At 11:30[FONT=&quot][2][/FONT] the first shoots were exchanged between the soldiers guarding Versailles and the National Guardsmen. The Southern Army attacked Versailles from the east on the main road from Paris, where the streets were widest but also where the most barricades and forces were located. The Central Army attacked from the north of the town, where the streets were narrow, but also contained a minimal amount of barricades and soldiers. The Northern Army attacked from the west, entering the gardens of the Versailles Palace, where barricading was almost impossible, and forcing MacMahon to divert forces from the other fronts to prevent the Versailles Palace from falling to the National Guard, which would badly hit the morale of his forces. The southern route to the city was intentionally left open to allow an escape route.

MacMahon divided his forces into eight forces of around 2,500 each. Positioning his forces in response to the National Guard, one of the forces guarded the 'Boulevard de Roi' from the Central Army; two guarded the 'Avenue de St. Cloud' from the Southern Army; one force was positioned on the 'Avenue de Paris'; Three forces were on the gardens of the Versailles Palace and one force was on the 'Place d'Armes' as reserve.
versailles Map.png
Initial Deployment in the Battle of Versailles
Yellow- Southern Army
Green- Central Army
Red- Northern Army
Blue Squares- Government Forces of around 2,500 soldiers, ignore difference in size.


Forty- five minutes after the Southern Army made contact with the forces on the 'Avenue de St. Cloud', the soldiers 'Avenue de Paris' attacked at the left flank of the Southern Army, while the initial attack managed to surprise the communards, they managed to repulse the attack.


About an hour and a half later, the soldiers fighting against the Central Army slowly began to rout. In response to that the reserves moved to reinforce them, but once the soldiers on the east of the town heard the forces on the north were routing, they began to retreat to the center, to prevent themselves from being encircled. However, what began as an orderly retreat turned into a full rout, since the Southern Army used the abandonment of the barricades to push forward with all their strength.


In response to that the reserve forces turned back to the center, and the soldiers on 'Boulevard de Roi', seeing they won't get reinforcements, routed. The reserve forces, seeing two armies coming their way, routed too. Not long after that the Northern Army took over the Versailles Palace.


By 16:00 the Communards had control over Versailles. However they could not rest, since at 17:30 the 18,000 soldiers freed from the German POW camp, bolstered by 7,000 soldiers who ran from Versailles, attacked the National Guard from the south. The fighting between them went on for four hours, until the 37,000 armed Parisians came and encircled the government forces. Seeing that they were between the hammer and the anvil, the 23,000 remaining soldiers surrendered.


The soldiers of the Thiers Government were more professional and had more combat experience, but they could not compete with the revolutionary zeal of the National Guardsmen. In addition, the evacuation of Thiers and his ministers hurt the morale of his soldiers.


In the Battle of Versailles, about 4,000 communards died, and about 7,000 were injured. About 6,500 anti- communards died, and about 12,000 were injured. The 25th of March 1871 would be called from now on, both by communards and anti- communards, as 'The Bloody Saturday'.

----------------------------------------------------

[FONT=&quot][1][/FONT]A later estimate

[FONT=&quot][2][/FONT]The distance between Paris and Versailles is about 20 km. Considering that they started to walk on 7:00, arrival at 11:30 means they walked at about 4.4 kph. They had to carry artillery with them (even with horses carrying the heavy stuff it will delay them) and walk as a cohesive group; on the other hand they didn’t had to carry supplies since they could rely on Paris for that.

versailles Map.png
 
To be extremly honest, there's a lot of things not making much sense in this context (not because they happen specifically, but because they happen without real explanation but rather by sheer convenience*), so it wasn't much I'm afraid.

* An exemple having the Legions d'arrondissement attacking Versailles. I can buy it, but giving the extremly chaotic chain of command (or rather, its de facto absence), it would ask for more than "and thus it happened". Suspension of disbelief have to be helped from time to time.

Ya, I know. This is my first TL, so i didn't expect myself to do a good job (not that it is an excuse). Anyway, I hope I'm getting better, tell me what you think of the new chapter. At some point I'll probably go back and edit this TL.
 
I have three words for you: "Land Redistribution" "Bakunin" and "Black Terror". Well that's five words.

None of which were major topics in France at the time. Sure, Bakounine is accessible to the public and had an interest, but mostly among the workers. His anti-authoritarian positions wouldn't take hold in a rural environment as there is less opression by large capitalists.

Which brings us to the next point. Land redistribution is not an issue in France at the time, nor had it been for centuries. When Proudhon wrote about it he was most likely referring to the Irish situation which is a textbook example of the situation described in "Qu'est-ce que la propriété?" or to Russian serfs. Not to French peasants who had quite a good life for themselves.
Beyond the fact that Proudhon and Bakounine are antinomic (one advocates complete communal control, the other one is a complete anarchist who wants to give more power to the individual to think for himself as described in "God and the State"), they wouldn't be heard in the countryside, only in the growing but still small population of factory workers.

At the time, France wasn't socialist. It wasn't even Republican. France was mostly royalist, the only reason a republic was proclaimed is because the pretendant to the throne was a shithead who wouldn't accept the tricolore.

What you're proposing is a complete turning around of all the values held by the large majority of the French population of the time. As I said, not impossible to gather support, but not on these topics, it just would not work. You might try for a first an alliance between Gambetta and the Commune as he tries to gather an army. Let's say he achieves that and comes to "liberate" Paris and use them as a support point for a larger campaign against the Prussians. There you go, you have your civil war with a huge flavouring of communards.

I'll admit not knowing what you mean by Black terror, the Prussians?
 
My basic plan is that propagnda by Bakunin and his disciples will manage to spread their ideas among the peasents, mainly on a program of taking away land land from the higher class. If it fits their intrest i.e. having more land, people can change their opinions pretty fast. I know this is a very diffrent situation, but you can see that in 1917 Russia, many peasents changed pretty fast from ultra-conservatism to leftism (not bolshevism) because the the SRs and the Bolsheviks promised them land.

The 'Black Terror' will be anarchist peasents murdering landowners for "their" land.
 
Ya, I know. This is my first TL, so i didn't expect myself to do a good job (not that it is an excuse). Anyway, I hope I'm getting better, tell me what you think of the new chapter. At some point I'll probably go back and edit this TL.
Well, my main concern regarding the last chapter are the totally unrealistic numbers involved.
- 37, 000 armed Communards in Versailles (meaning you'd have even more in Paris) is definitely and fantastically inflated.
More plausible approach involve between 20 000 and at very best 30 000 gardes nationaux effectively armed. Keeping in mind that the arrondissement structure prevented to not only persuade them all to come, but to logistically take more than only a part of it.

- The description of gouvernementaux is as well unrealistic. We're talking of a better equipped and better commanded*. That's mean most likely fortified or at least entranched positions, artillery, etc.

* Which brings me to Blanqui. While certainly a respected and influential man among socialists (that, allow me to repeat myself, were the minority in Commune Council), there's hardly any indication of his military skills (actually, seeing his long history of failed insurrections, he may have sucked at it).
Would it be only becoming the actual leader of the Commune may be problematic, but turning him into some walking PoD definitely makes the chapter hard to swallow.

I could point other issues, such as the really weird stratégie of gouvernementaux, but basically the main problems are above.

None of which were major topics in France at the time. Sure, Bakounine is accessible to the public and had an interest, but mostly among the workers.
That said, it can be safely said he did have an important influence in Lyon. It's just the insurrections and the proclamations he edicted comically failed.

Which brings us to the next point. Land redistribution is not an issue in France at the time, nor had it been for centuries
Well, it was, admittedly, in northern France before the Revolution. But it clearly stopped to be so at least since the clerical properties being sold and the redistribution made during the Directoire. At this point (and even today), Northern France countryside was a little property farmland.

Not to French peasants who had quite a good life for themselves.
Let's not get hasty, there. Metayage (admittedly reduced overall, but dominant in many SW départements) and maitre-valet structured exploitations were still current.

At the time, France wasn't socialist. It wasn't even Republican. France was mostly royalist, the only reason a republic was proclaimed is because the pretendant to the throne was a shithead who wouldn't accept the tricolore.
That's far more of a historical legend than a act.
I tried to answer the point there if you're interested.
Long story short, monarchism itself had a very reduced audiance, and republicanism was overall more popular. The central question was about war or peace, less than royalism vs. republicanism.

You might try for a first an alliance between Gambetta and the Commune as he tries to gather an army.
The main problem is that Gambetta was very wary of the first leagues that appeared in southern France in 1870. These leagues were often left-republican or even socializing, more or less anticipating some aspects of the communalist movement.

You'd need a more open Gambetta for that.

The 'Black Terror' will be anarchist peasents murdering landowners for "their" land.
Well, that would mean peasants killing themselves eventually, and quite litteraly so.

It must be really important to understand : peasant did, in their crushing majority, owned their land since decades, if not centuries in many regions.
 
The government forces didn't prepare defensive positions since they didn't expect an attack, and they had about 4 hours to barricade.
The communards didn't win because of superior tactics, they used only brute force, but because of superior morale, which they had because of revolutionary zeal and the running away of Thiers which hurt the soldiers morale.
Plus, the commumards had superior organization, the early days of the Thiers government in Versailles were chaotic.
If I reduce the number of armed citizens from 37,000 to 15,000- 20,000, will it be more realistic?
 
The government forces didn't prepare defensive positions since they didn't expect an attack, and they had about 4 hours to barricade.

It simply implies Communards became somewhat stealth commandos, and gouvernementaux turning all moronic failures.

Giving the presence of exchanges with Paris (would it be only trough different peoples and groups trying to prevent the things turning into a civil war), a city that is extremly close and under scrutiny (and intelligence), I've an hard time believing that they witnessed call to offensive, necessary preparations, the unavoidable political clash within Commune (which you didn't adressed but still existed) and simply fail to notice.

The communards didn't win because of superior tactics, they used only brute force, but because of superior morale, which they had because of revolutionary zeal and the running away of Thiers which hurt the soldiers morale.
So, people without any military skill, with at best disparate equipment, poorly organised at best, simply rush into a far better organised and equipped army and not only win in spite of this, but thanks to?
I'm not sure that's a really rational explanation, to say the least.

Plus, the commumards had superior organization, the early days of the Thiers government in Versailles were chaotic.
No, they didn't. The military organisation of the Commune was a joke, with each legion d'arrondissement acting on its own meaning their own forces were at best decentralized, with no reserves or management (usually more issued from political movement than selected on skill. But then again, few were skilled AND were listened by the population) worth of mention.

I already mentioned the offensive on Courbevoie as an exemple on Commune's issue with military concerns. It was more or less a jumping point to engage three lines against Versailles (which I suppose inspired you for the chapter).
They made no recensment of their forces or equipment, no reckon, no reserve, no rear or vanguard, and the whole thing was a failure.

I strongly suggest you to read Cluseret*'s Memoires to have a better view on what was Commune's military forces.

Thiers may had issues, granted, but the chaos was more on Commune's side.

*The first Délégué à la guerre of the Commune, fired because he tried to raise a conscription and political differences**

** Which bring me again to the political life of the Commune, that was really far from homogenic, but that you don't adress to so far.

If I reduce the number of armed citizens from 37,000 to 15,000- 20,000, will it be more realistic?
It wouldn't. I point you again Cluseret's failure to convince the need of an armed citizen force outside the Garde Nationale.
Admitting Blanqi's charisma would be enough to rise a sufficient force, more than 5,000 in addition of the GN would already seem enormous.
 
Well, that would mean peasants killing themselves eventually, and quite litteraly so.

It must be really important to understand : peasant did, in their crushing majority, owned their land since decades, if not centuries in many regions.

Ya, that was pretty stupid of me, I had three hours of sleep in the past 36 hours. I think that the republican areas will support the commumards, and the conservative areas will be suppresed. The commumards won't try to collectivize land, so they wont alienate the peasents.

Blanqui was OTL elected as 'President of the Council', so he was popular amongst all the commumards. I think that the division between socialists and radical republicans is overstated.
 
Ya, that was pretty stupid of me, I had three hours of sleep in the past 36 hours.
If you don't mind a friendly advice : go to sleep. Really, not sleeping can hurt badly, physically and psychologically, and nobody wants that to happen.

Now, and that's for when you'll be rested, it's not stupidity. It's just that you should look more on the context and plan more carefully your TL.
If you don't read french, it would be a bit problematic for reading up contemporary accounts or many studies that weren't translated, but I'm sure that you can find something in English (or even in your native language, if you don't mind me asking you which it is)

I think that the republican areas will support the commumards, and the conservative areas will be suppresed.
Problem is that republicans were divided, not only between moderate republicans that tought Commune was putting in jeopardy the perenitty of the 1870 Republic, but as well left-republicans that either felt the same way than moderate as Louis Blanc, or tried to preserve the possibility of a later reconciliation as Raspail.

You simply didn't have one republicanism, as you didn't have one monarchism.
It's notable that the regions that opposed much to 1851 Napoleonic coup weren't the more heated in 1871.

An earlier PoD would be necessary for that as a more victorious republican side in 1870 and/or Vinoy not managing to get out of Paris (something that would make Thiers in even more trouble politically), etc. but difficultly reachable with your PoD.

Blanqui was OTL elected as 'President of the Council', so he was popular amongst all the commumards.
Which raise many questions, as there was no such thing as "Président du Conseil de la Commune" that I heard of.

I would point furthermore, that popularity isn't the issue, but capacity to simply shut down all the divisions and huge differences between the different parts of the Commune.
It's not because they managed to work togethers (not entierly as pointed out in my precedent post) that it didn't existed, far from it.

I think that the division between socialists and radical republicans is overstated.
It's a constant among every, and I meant it, every insider account of the Commune.
Now, maybe every member of the Commune got it wrong, but then you should tell us why it was overstated by Communards themselves.
 
Top