This blog post examines how Les Misérables shows the 19th-century French Revolution was not merely a political event, but a history condensed with the lives, suffering, frustration, and hope of the people.

Victor Hugo, Confronting the Revolution

The film Les Misérables, which gained immense popularity in Korea several years ago, was a musical adaptation of the novel of the same name. Audiences were captivated not only by the film’s grand scale and beautiful songs, featuring famous Hollywood actors, but also by the story of Les Misérables itself—a tale singing of infinite compassion for humanity, love, and hope, despite the revolution’s failure. The original author, Victor Hugo, released the first edition of Les Misérables to the world in 1862. Victor Hugo began writing this novel, which translates to ‘The Miserable Ones’ in Korean, in 1845. Originally a Romantic poet, he initially held conservative views but gradually transformed into a liberal. By the time he wrote Les Misérables, he was writing the novel from a fully liberal perspective. During the writing process, he was elected to the National Assembly in 1848. He later opposed Napoleon III’s regime, was branded an anti-government figure, and went into exile in Belgium in 1851. After these trials and tribulations, Victor Hugo completed the manuscript in 1861 on the island of Guernsey, his place of exile in England. The first edition was published the following year. Spending lonely hours in exile, Victor Hugo wondered how well his book was selling and wrote to his publisher. The letter contained no words, only a ‘question mark’. The publisher, instantly grasping Victor Hugo’s intent, reportedly replied with a letter containing no words either, only an ‘exclamation mark’. It meant the book was selling astonishingly well.
In any case, through Les Misérables, Victor Hugo expressed boundless sympathy for the masses living miserable lives in ignorance and poverty. Simultaneously, using the June Rebellion of 1832 in France as his subject, he sought to demonstrate the social reformist will of an author who believed in liberalism. Thus, the June Rebellion that Victor Hugo used as his subject, along with the 19th-century France in which Victor Hugo lived, could be defined in a word as the ‘Age of Revolution’. From the distant French Revolution that led to the tragic end of Louis XVI’s monarchy, all the way to the February Revolution of 1848, France saw countless people fighting and destroying each other for their ideals—between monarchy and republic, between conservatives, liberals, and socialists. The modern French Republic was forged through this period of intense revolution. And in that process, the seeds of crucial ideas shaping the modern nation-state—nationalism, democracy, liberalism—were conceived and spread across Europe and then the entire world. So let’s examine how 19th-century France transformed amidst countless revolutions and how its people resisted oppression. In doing so, we might begin to grasp the intent of Victor Hugo, author of Les Misérables.

The Battle of Waterloo and Napoleon’s Downfall

The French Revolution, sparked by the Tennis Court Oath of 1789 and the storming of the Bastille in 1792, beheaded Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette and proclaimed a republic, ushering in the era of the First French Republic. However, European nations did not tolerate the French republican government that had shattered the existing order. France found itself embroiled in both external conflict with the Coalition against France, which sought to halt the French Revolution, and internal strife with royalist factions aiming to restore the monarchy. Yet this period of turmoil heralded the emergence of a new hero: Napoleon. Napoleon rapidly rose to prominence as a war hero through his victories in the wars against the First and Second Coalitions. Capitalizing on his popular support, he staged a coup and became First Consul in 1799. Napoleon expanded France’s power abroad through a series of successful military campaigns, while at home, his strong reform policies earned him the people’s backing.
Building on this support, he became Napoleon I, the first Emperor of France, in 1804, backed by overwhelming popular endorsement through a national referendum. Just ten years after rejecting monarchy and establishing a republic, France had reverted from a republic to a system where one man ruled over all. However, Napoleon’s imperial coronation sparked significant backlash. Immediately, Britain, which had entered a state of peace after signing the Treaty of Amiens in 1802, renounced the treaty and declared war. In 1805, Napoleon assembled a large army at Brest, facing the English Channel, preparing for an invasion of Britain. Upon entering war with Britain, Austria, Russia, and others who had previously submitted to Napoleon formed the Third Coalition against him. Napoleon immediately attacked the Austrian-Russian allied forces, occupying Vienna and achieving a decisive victory over them at the Battle of Austerlitz. However, at the same time at sea, he was defeated by Admiral Nelson at the Battle of Trafalgar, failing to subdue Britain.
Meanwhile, in the early stages of the war, Napoleon’s French army, composed of volunteer citizens as the ‘National Army’, was welcomed by the populations of occupied territories as a liberating force freeing them from the rule of the privileged aristocracy. These people welcomed the French army as revolutionary forces. However, as time passed, the French army behaved not as revolutionaries but as an ‘occupying force,’ and their various abuses of power served to heighten the national consciousness of the peoples of various countries. Spain was the first to rise up. In 1808, Napoleon, having occupied Spain, placed his brother Joseph on the throne against the will of the Spanish people. When the Spanish people resisted through guerrilla warfare, Napoleon responded by massacring them, spiraling the situation into chaos. After witnessing the French army’s massacres, the people no longer cheered for France. They chose the path of resistance against France. This marked the beginning of the cracks in Napoleon’s empire. Napoleon’s First French Empire, already shaken by resistance from the peoples of the occupied nations, embarked on the path to ruin with the Continental Blockade against Britain. Having lost naval supremacy and thus the military means to subdue Britain, Napoleon conceived a plan to starve Britain by blocking all trade between the European continent and Britain. However, Russia, whose economy depended on trade with Britain, violated the Continental Blockade. To punish Russia, Napoleon embarked on the 1812 Moscow campaign.
Ultimately, the 1812 Moscow campaign led to Napoleon’s downfall. Napoleon’s ‘Grand Army’, which departed Paris with 600,000 troops, easily captured its target, Moscow, but failed to secure Russia’s surrender. Instead, Napoleon’s troops were worn down by starvation due to Russia’s scorched earth policy. As winter approached, they had no choice but to retreat. The Russian army, waiting for this moment, attacked the retreating French forces and annihilated them. Witnessing France’s crushing defeat, European nations immediately formed the Coalition against France, raising the banner of anti-Napoleon. Napoleon, who had overcome initial disadvantages to achieve victory, ultimately suffered a decisive defeat at the Battle of Leipzig under the encircling attack of the Coalition forces. He abdicated the imperial throne and was exiled to the island of Elba. Napoleon’s exile eliminated the French republican faction he represented, and the allies sought to restore France to its pre-Revolutionary monarchy. European nations convened in Vienna, Austria, to discuss the post-war reorganization of Europe, but the meeting made little progress due to the complex web of conflicting national interests. Amid this situation, Louis XVIII, who had returned from exile after Napoleon’s fall and ascended the throne, provoked discontent among the French populace with his anachronistic style of governance. Seizing this opportunity, Napoleon successfully escaped from Elba and returned to Paris. It was only natural that Louis XVIII was forced into exile once more. Having reclaimed the imperial throne, Napoleon attempted to compromise with his critics by promulgating a liberal constitution. Simultaneously, he sought to build coexistence with his allies. However, European nations—already neurotically reacting to the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars—displayed a unified front, unlike their sluggish performance at the Congress of Vienna. This was because the formidable ‘public enemy’ Napoleon had reappeared before them. Britain’s General Wellington led an army of 107,000 men from Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Hanover, and Brunswick from Brussels, Belgium, while Prussia led an army of 128,000 men from Liège, Belgium, both heading towards Waterloo. Napoleon mobilized a force of 128,000 men, comparable to the Prussian army. This was Napoleon’s final battle, the Battle of Waterloo. This battle is also depicted in detail in Les Misérables. At Waterloo, the French army under Napoleon was clearly outnumbered. However, since the British and Prussian forces had limited troops available for fortress defense, victory was possible if Napoleon could defeat them separately before they could unite. Ultimately, Napoleon failed to defeat them individually, and his army suffered a crushing defeat. The defeated Napoleon was completely deposed and exiled to the island of Saint Helena, where he spent the rest of his life. With Napoleon’s downfall, monarchists across Europe, including Louis XVIII of France, believed they could restore the pre-French Revolution order. Yet the revolutionary spirit of liberty, equality, and fraternity that Napoleon had sown throughout Europe and France itself signaled that a return to the past was impossible.

The Restoration and the Vienna System

With Napoleon’s fall in 1814, the monarchy was restored in France. Louis XVIII, the younger brother of Louis XVI who had perished under the guillotine, ascended the throne as the sixth monarch of the restored Bourbon dynasty. When the French Revolution erupted, he fled to England, saving his life. Upon his accession, Louis XVIII famously declared, “I have learned nothing from the Revolution and forgotten nothing from before it.” This declared France’s intent to return to the pre-Revolution era. Yet despite Louis XVIII’s fervent desire for such a ‘return to the past,’ he could not restore the absolute monarchy of Louis XVI or earlier times. It was impossible to demand unconditional obedience from a people who had already tasted freedom.
Upon his accession, Louis XVIII promised the people a constitutional monarchy and upheld this promise. He also pursued a moderate path, tolerating the liberal ideas of the Revolutionary era, albeit within limits. This was partly due to his indecisive and moderate character, but it was also a kind of domestic policy aimed at preventing a repeat of the tragedies of the French Revolution. While France, through Louis XVIII’s restoration of the monarchy, appeared to be returning to the ‘pre-Revolution’ era, Europe was beginning to establish a new international order known as the ‘Vienna System’. Also called the Metternich System after the Austrian Chancellor Metternich, the Vienna System was the product of the Congress of Vienna. Convened to discuss the post-war European order after Napoleon’s downfall, the Congress of Vienna was initially a forum for settling the legacy and spoils of the Napoleonic Wars. The European nations attending the Congress of Vienna were wary of the liberal ideas Napoleon had spread across Europe and aimed to restore the pre-Napoleonic War status quo. In other words, their goal was to conserve and maintain the monarchical systems that had existed in Europe before the French Revolution. To achieve this, their foremost priority was to prevent France from becoming a great power again, as a measure to avert the outbreak of a second Napoleonic War. At the Congress of Vienna, the four major victorious powers of the Napoleonic Wars—Britain, Prussia, Austria, and Russia—held the strongest influence. However, subtle rifts emerged among these four nations over the partition of Poland and the Saxon question, becoming a key factor in shaping the Vienna System. Russia, with interests in Poland, and Prussia, with interests in Saxony, sought mutual benefit by mutually recognizing each other’s territorial claims. However, Austria, which was in competition with Prussia, did not tolerate this and, together with Britain, sought to prevent it. Ultimately, the Congress of Vienna took on the form of confrontation between the Prussia-Russia and Austria-Britain camps. Talleyrand, the Foreign Minister of defeated France, did not miss this opportunity and exploited it for his country’s benefit. Talleyrand joined the Austrian-British camp and agreed that if the Russian-Prussian side continued its unreasonable demands regarding the Polish and Saxon issues, the three nations would each mobilize 150,000 troops to counter them. As a result of this agreement, Russia and Prussia had no choice but to withdraw their initial demands. France, as a defeated nation that had previously been subject to the victors’ discretion, was elevated to an equal footing with the other four great powers. Post-war Europe thus restored a balance of power system, as it had been in the past, where Britain, France, Austria, Prussia, and Russia mutually checked each other. The Vienna System thus formed set out to suppress the liberal and nationalist ideologies that had spread across Europe through the French Revolution and Napoleon. The five great powers agreed to prevent the collapse of their mutual balance of power through mutual checks and balances. Furthermore, they resolved to cooperate and jointly intervene to suppress any situation resembling the French Revolution, whether it arose in a great power or a lesser state. This order of mutual restraint and balance among the five powers remained the system sustaining 19th-century Europe. However, its original purpose—suppressing liberal and nationalist movements and fostering a return to conservatism and reactionary politics—began to falter within less than a decade. France, in particular, demonstrated how anachronistic the European ruling classes’ vision of ‘returning to the past’ was. This was proven through the July Revolution of 1830 and the February Revolution of 1848, which reestablished republican governments. The currents of liberalism and nationalism were already becoming an unstoppable historical force.

Charles X and the July Revolution

In 1824, the moderate Louis XVIII died, and his younger brother Charles X ascended the throne. Charles X had been a staunch opponent of the revolution during Napoleon’s era. While in exile in Britain, he became a standard-bearer against Napoleon, providing funds and assassins to bring about Napoleon’s downfall. During Louis XVIII’s reign, he had also perpetrated the White Terror against the republicans, known as the Bonapartists in Les Misérables, alongside Marie Thérèse, the daughter of Louis XVI. Moreover, Charles X suffered the tragedy of his beloved second son, the Duke of Berry, being assassinated by a citizen during the final years of Louis XVIII’s reign. It was self-evident that his policies upon ascending the throne would be radically different from his predecessor’s. Indeed, Charles X immediately implemented policies starkly contrasting with those of his brother, Louis XVIII. Unlike Louis XVIII, who had tolerated liberal ideas to a limited extent during the French Revolution, Charles X pursued markedly conservative and reactionary policies, such as restoring privileges to the pre-revolutionary nobility. He even sought to abolish the constitutional monarchy then in effect and revive absolute monarchy. Charles X’s radical royalist policies and anachronistic attempts to revive absolute monarchy were more than enough to provoke the French people’s opposition. He banned the publication of periodicals, dissolved the parliament, and imposed a property qualification for the right to vote, granting it only to those who paid a certain amount of money. He pushed forward with an autocratic regime that the French people, still vividly remembering the revolution, could never accept. As a result, the French economy began to destabilize in the late 1820s. Just as the French Revolution had shown, political instability inevitably brings economic instability, and economic instability becomes the fuse for revolution. Movements to spark another revolution were detectable among the discontented French populace.
In 1829, the royalist Polignac cabinet, supporting Charles X, was formed. In 1830, Charles X ordered the dispatch of troops to Algeria. This was intended both to demonstrate military strength and to strengthen the monarchy. Charles X hoped that the Algerian expedition would lead to the defeat of his opponents in the parliamentary elections held in May, creating a parliament composed of royalists. However, the election results were the opposite, with the opposition winning an overwhelming majority. Consequently, Charles X immediately dissolved the parliament to eliminate the opposition and sought to hold new elections under a new electoral law that further restricted the electorate. Furthermore, to prevent the spread of ideas opposing him, he suspended freedom of the press and halted the publication of periodicals. However, French media defied Charles X’s decree and continued publishing, while in Paris, crowds erected barricades and staged protests. Seeing the situation rapidly deteriorate, Charles X appointed Louis Philippe as commander of the Royal Guard to suppress the citizen protests. However, Louis Philippe instead gained the support of the financial aristocracy and was proclaimed “King of the French” by the Chamber of Deputies. Furthermore, Charles X’s decision to deploy troops to Algeria to strengthen his monarchy backfired. With his main forces deployed to Algeria, the remaining weak military could not contain the citizens’ resistance. Furthermore, as the revolution progressed and even royalist troops began defecting to the revolutionary side, Charles X grasped the gravity of the situation. He revoked the edicts suppressing liberty, dismissed his ministers, and abdicated, declaring his intention to cede the throne to his grandson. The revolutionary forces recognized only Charles X’s abdication and formally acknowledged Louis Philippe as king. Louis Philippe was elected by popular vote, earning him the titles ‘King of the People’ or ‘Citizen King’. However, the memory of the French Revolution was still vivid among other European royal houses, and the recurrence of revolution in France came as a great shock. Royal houses across Europe expressed deep hostility toward Louis-Philippe’s reign, earning him the nicknames “King of Riots” or “King of the Citizens.” Louis-Philippe, who aspired to a moderate constitutional monarchy, was enthusiastic about the British political system as his model of governance. He liked being called the ‘Citizen King’ and, in the early years of his reign, was popular among the French people for his moderate and frugal governing style. However, from the perspective of republicans, Louis-Philippe’s monarchy was difficult to see as anything more than ‘just another’ monarchy. Instead, the fact that the revolution, despite being the greatest driving force, failed to establish the desired republic was a major source of dissatisfaction for republicans. And this became the spark for the June Rebellion that soon followed.

The Death of Lamarque

On June 1, 1832, Jean-Maximilien Lamarque, a famous general from Napoleon’s era, died of cholera. His death stirred the liberalism that had been sown in France during Napoleon’s time, providing the pretext for the June Rebellion, a crucial backdrop to Les Misérables. Born in Landes in 1770, Lamarque was 18 when the French Revolution erupted. His father, Joseph Lamarque, a former lawyer at the Court of Cassation, had participated in the ‘Oath of the Scots’ and served in the Constituent Assembly. After joining the military, he distinguished himself in the Revolutionary Wars, rapidly rising through the ranks. He fought at Engen, Mescher, Hochstadt, and Hohenlinden, earning significant honors. For his service at Hohenlinden, Napoleon awarded him the epaulettes of a brigadier general in 1801. Later, during the Napoleonic Empire, he served as Chief of Staff to Napoleon’s brother Joseph, achieving victory in numerous battles and earning further distinction. A staunchly loyal soldier to Napoleon, he was exiled under the restored monarchy after Napoleon’s complete downfall. He was only able to return to France in October 1818 by royal decree. While on military leave, Lamarque was dismissed by Charles X on June 30, 1830. However, following the July Revolution and the subsequent establishment of Louis-Philippe’s reign, Lamarque was honored with the Grand Cross of the Legion of Honor on August 21, 1830. Meanwhile, having distinguished himself as a soldier, he also served as an author and deputy in the Chamber of Deputies. During the Restoration, he belonged to the opposition Liberal Party, which opposed the government—a natural position given his career as one of Napoleon’s generals during the French Revolution.
During the July Monarchy, when Louis-Philippe ascended the throne, Lamarque devoted himself to agriculture. As a physiocrat, he focused on transforming the barren Landes region, his homeland, into a more humane place through farming. He expressed his stance on these efforts and experiments when he joined the Landes Agricultural Society on July 8, 1827. Meanwhile, considering the logistical problems he had experienced during the Spanish War in which he had participated, he raised issues concerning the development of the Pyrenees region bordering Spain and free trade. As a politician, Lamarck could do nothing as a soldier under the restored monarchy since 1815. For him, returning from exile, politics was the sole outlet for his passion and energy. Consistently opposing the Bourbon dynasty, whose eldest branch he had long denounced as unworthy pacifists, he ran for election in his home region of Landes starting in 1820, driven by his loyalty to the Napoleonic Empire he had served. However, Lamarque suffered defeat in successive elections. It was only in the by-election held after the death of the former mayor of Mont-de-Marsan, the Marquis du Lyon, in July 1828, that he finally became a deputy, defeating the Baron de Poirefaux de Serres. On May 16, 1830, Charles X dissolved the parliament. Lamartine was re-elected in the Mont-de-Marsan constituency on June 23, defeating the Baron d’Ossé. Lamarque joined the July Monarchy established by the July Revolution. Though he lamented that the grandeur of the Napoleonic era could never be realized through the current pacifism, he believed the July Monarchy could establish a true liberal regime. Thus Lamarque was renowned both as a veteran who had forged the glory of Napoleon’s empire and as a politician of principle from the era of the Great Revolution and Napoleon. At the same time, his liberal tendencies, espousing republicanism, made him a symbolic figure for the populace dreaming of a republic. His death became a crucial pretext for republicans to rise in revolt.

Les Misérables and the June Uprising

Most of the major characters in Les Misérables meet their deaths during this June Uprising. Thus, within Victor Hugo’s novel, the June Uprising stands as one of the most dramatic events. Though ultimately unsuccessful, the June Uprising of 1832, occurring amidst the unresolved issues and anxieties leading up to the July Revolution and the July Monarchy, seemed to foreshadow the February Revolution that would erupt sixteen years later. The July Revolution of 1830 drove Charles X from power, and Louis-Philippe was elected the new King of France through a vote of the Chamber of Deputies. While the July Monarchy thus established was an achievement of the July Revolution, from the perspective of the republicans who had played a central role in it, the July Revolution was difficult to see as anything more than one king being replaced by another. About two years later, discontent with the reign of Louis-Philippe had grown widespread. Republicans felt the revolution had been ‘usurped’ by the opportunists who had installed Louis Philippe, despite the blood they had shed. Bonapartists, lamenting Napoleon I’s defeat and dreaming of past glory, were also discontented. Legitimists, supporting the Bourbon dynasty and seeking to place the Count of Chambord—grandson of Charles X—on the throne, shared this dissatisfaction.
Thus, Louis Philippe’s monarchy found itself under attack from both republicans and royalists. Compounding this, France’s economy was in dire straits between 1827 and 1832, before the uprising. Persistent crop failures led to food shortages and rising prices, plunging the lives of France’s lower classes into ruin. Amidst this, in the spring of 1832, the cholera epidemic sweeping across Europe engulfed France. This claimed 18,402 lives, and rumors circulated among the poor that the government had poisoned the wells. In such circumstances, the impact of the death of Lamartine, a symbolic figure of the Republicans, was clearly immense.
In fact, Prime Minister Casimir Perier had died about a month before Lamarque, on May 16. Perier, a conservative, received a state funeral, but Lamarque’s funeral, supported by the lower classes, appeared highly likely to become a venue for protests against the government. On June 5th, the day of Lamarck’s funeral following his death on June 1st, a group of staunchly republican secret societies prepared for an uprising. They sought to recreate the July Revolution that had overthrown the Bourbon monarchy two years prior. The “Society of the Rights of Man” was the most prominent among these secret societies. They organized meticulously, establishing a structure resembling a military force and dividing into smaller units of 20 members to circumvent the ban on gatherings of more than 20 people. On the day of the funeral, the republicans led General Lamarque’s civic funeral procession to the Place de la Bastille, launching their uprising. The funeral procession included foreigners—Polish, Italian, German, and others—who had fled persecution in their homelands due to the spread of liberalism and nationalism across Europe, as well as children. They gathered around the place where the body was laid out. A speech was read to them, emphasizing that Lamarque had always strongly supported and defended the freedom of Poles and Italians. After the speech, some in the crowd waved red flags and chanted “Liberty or Death!” The funeral procession instantly transformed into an anti-government demonstration. Soldiers immediately opened fire on the protesters.
As some of the troops suppressing the demonstration sided with the protesters, the atmosphere on the day of the uprising was too close to call. The uprising’s leaders dreamed of recreating the July Revolution, but it ended in failure as the demonstrators scattered. Overnight, 25,000 regular troops joined the fray, turning the tide against the demonstrators. The demonstrators gathered one last time at the intersection of Rue Saint-Martin and Rue Saint-Denis in the Saint-Martin district, the heart of Paris. On the morning of June 6, King Louis-Philippe personally the troops on the Champs-Élysées and Place de la Concorde before visiting soldiers in northern Paris. Louis-Philippe received an enthusiastic welcome on the scene. Citizens cheered in support of the king, shouting “Long live the King!” “Exterminate the Republicans!” and “Down with the Royalists!” The final suppression began immediately. The suppression forces suffered 73 dead and 344 wounded, while the protesters had 93 dead and 291 wounded. Thus, contrary to the republicans’ hopes, the June Uprising ended in failure within a single day. The June Uprising failed to gain widespread popular support among the citizens and consequently ended in defeat. Ironically, however, the July Monarchy of Louis-Philippe began distancing itself from the people following the June Uprising. Louis-Philippe also began distancing himself from the July Revolution that had brought him to power, most notably by banning the viewing of Delacroix’s painting ‘Liberty Leading the People,’ which depicted the July Revolution. The government, alarmed by the June uprising, feared that seeing this painting might inspire new revolts and thus took such measures.
During the failed June uprising, Victor Hugo was writing a play in the Tuileries Garden. Hearing gunfire, instead of heading home, he crossed the empty streets following the sound. There, trapped behind a barricade with no way forward or back, he narrowly escaped through a gap between pillars and witnessed the gunfire of the June Rebellion. The depiction of the June Rebellion in Les Misérables reveals how sympathetic Victor Hugo was to revolution, liberalism, and the republic. The fictional secret society “The Friends of ABC” in the novel depicted a subgroup of the real-life “Society for the Defense of Human Rights.” Furthermore, the barricades piled up in Paris’s narrow streets and the climactic battle scene where the main characters gather to meet a heroic end were only possible because Victor Hugo had witnessed the June Uprising firsthand.

The February Revolution and the Second Republic

After successfully suppressing the June Rebellion, the Louis-Philippe monarchy began losing popularity as his cabinet shifted toward conservatism and monarchism. The decline of the lower classes and economic instability that began in the late 1820s worsened the quality of life for ordinary citizens, with income disparities widening daily and polarization deepening. This was, in fact, inevitable given the nature of Louis-Philippe’s regime. While his constitutional monarchy was more liberal and had expanded suffrage compared to the earlier Restoration period, the benefits were largely confined to bankers, industrialists, and a select few wealthy farmers. For the majority of workers and the lower classes, these freedoms remained a distant dream. In this context, the Industrial Revolution, which swept through the 19th century in full force, was more than sufficient to heighten discontent with the July Monarchy. Until then, France had been an agrarian-based nation, possessing an industrial structure dominated by handicrafts rather than the factory-based industry seen in neighboring Britain. However, the Industrial Revolution that engulfed France brought about a concentration of factories centered around major cities, naturally increasing the number of factory workers. Although workers’ solidarity was prohibited by the Charlière Law enacted during the Great Revolution, they sought unity through mutual aid societies established for the purpose of supporting one another. Furthermore, the various strands of socialist thought emerging during this period fostered the growth of workers into a distinct political force.
Amidst these dramatic changes in social structure and class dynamics, the July Monarchy remained conservative, focusing solely on suppressing workers’ activities. This regime was even criticized as being “like a joint-stock company run solely for the benefit of a minority of shareholders.” Furthermore, the July Monarchy’s passive stance in foreign affairs failed to win the support of the people. The July government’s foreign policy merely followed in the footsteps of Britain and Russia. It failed to gain the support of the emerging industrial capitalists, who were enthusiastic about the imperialism dominating the 19th century and hoped for active overseas market expansion. The people’s dissatisfaction with the July Monarchy, which failed to gain the support of these newly emerging industrial capitalists and workers, grew. This dissatisfaction culminated in demands for expanded suffrage. The crop failures of 1846 and 1847 reverberated through industry, plunging the entire French economy into recession and crisis, with mass unemployment and bankruptcies following in quick succession. Amidst this situation, political banquets demanding the resignation of the then-conservative Guizot Cabinet and the expansion of suffrage were held nationwide. On February 22, 1848, a massive banquet was held in Paris. The conservative Guizot Cabinet refused to tolerate this and banned the rally. Instead of the rally, protests erupted, primarily led by workers and students. The next day, small shopkeepers, artisans, and other members of the petty bourgeoisie joined in. Barricades were erected in Paris for the first time in 16 years since the June 1832 uprising. The Giscard residence was stormed by demonstrators. When troops defending it opened fire, causing casualties, revolutionary fervor intensified. By February 24, City Hall was occupied, and the king’s residence was attacked. Louis-Philippe, who had styled himself the “citizen king,” had no choice but to abdicate at the age of 74.
The February Revolution that forced Louis-Philippe’s abdication brought about greater change in its nature and repercussions than the July Revolution or the June Uprising. The newly organized provisional government was dominated by moderate bourgeois elements, but socialists representing the working class also participated. Consequently, in response to workers’ demands, labor rights were guaranteed, freedom of association for workers was permitted, and national workplaces were established to aid the unemployed. However, these radical reforms met with resistance from peasants and the urban bourgeoisie, who preferred moderate reforms. This led to the election of a National Assembly where moderate republicans secured an absolute majority of 800 out of 900 seats. Radicals, including Parisian workers and socialists, refused to accept this outcome. They stormed the parliament building and instigated a riot, which was suppressed by troops commanded by General Cabannes. The newly enacted republican constitution, though stripped of labor rights, was a democratic one: it established a unicameral parliament elected by universal suffrage and a president with a four-year term as head of the executive branch. The Second Republic thus launched held presidential elections in December 1848, with an outcome no one had anticipated: the rise of Napoleon III.

The Emergence of Napoleon III

In the presidential election to choose the first president of the Second Republic, the most prominent candidate was General Cavaignac, who had swiftly suppressed the June uprising instigated by the working class and maintained military control over Paris. However, in the election involving a total of 8 million votes, General Cavaignac secured only 1.5 million votes. The three genuine Republican candidates combined failed to reach 500,000 votes. Overwhelmingly exceeding the majority, 5.5 million votes went to Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, Napoleon’s nephew. He defeated his rivals, including Cavaignac, by a large margin and was elected president. That this near-unknown figure could win the presidency by such an overwhelming margin was purely due to nostalgia for his uncle, Napoleon I. Peasants cast their votes en masse, expecting him, as Napoleon’s nephew, to restore France to its former glory as a European superpower. The bourgeoisie also supported him, drawn by his strong anti-socialist stance.
Even the working class, furious at the republican government following the failure of the June Uprising, supported Napoleon as a counterbalance. However, the election of Napoleon, who held anti-republican views, signaled a bleak future for the republic. Shortly after the presidential election, in January 1849, Napoleon dissolved the legislature and held elections in May. As a result, the new legislature was dominated by the Order Party, centered around royalists. The conservative-majority legislature immediately amended the electoral law, stripping the voting rights of some three million workers and lower-class citizens.
Meanwhile, as his four-year term neared its end, Napoleon hoped to amend the constitution to allow his re-election as president. When the parliament refused, he staged a coup d’état in December 1851, dissolved the parliament, and proposed a new constitution. Street battles erupted in Paris in opposition, and peasant uprisings broke out in the central and southern regions, but these were quickly suppressed. Having successfully suppressed opposition forces, Napoleon reinstated universal suffrage and put his proposal to a national referendum. Securing an overwhelming victory of 7.5 million votes to 640,000, he gained dictatorial authority with near-total power. His term was also extended to ten years. Under the new constitution, the President was accountable only to the people, not to Parliament, and held the power to appoint key officials, including members of the Senate (Corps des Anciens), ministers of state, and provincial prefects. Despite possessing such immense authority, Napoleon was not satisfied. He held a referendum, ostensibly proposed by the Senate, asking whether he should be crowned Emperor. Receiving even more votes in favor than before, Napoleon proclaimed the Empire on December 2, 1852, and was crowned Emperor. He became Napoleon III. Thus, France experienced its second Empire, following Napoleon I, now under his nephew. Riding the coattails of his uncle Napoleon I to become president, Napoleon III was able to ascend to the imperial throne using the same methods his uncle had employed: a palace coup and a referendum. Karl Marx assessed this in his work The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte: “Somewhere, Hegel wrote that world-historically important events and figures appear twice. But he should have added: the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.” Considering Napoleon III’s future, it was a chillingly accurate assessment.

The Second Empire and the Franco-Prussian War

With the establishment of the Second Empire and Napoleon III’s ascension to the throne, French liberalism, which had seemed poised to flourish, was stifled. Amid this suppression of freedom, many intellectuals, including university professors, went into hiding or fled into exile. Was it to compensate for this repression of liberty? Napoleon III promoted public works, railway construction, banking, and the development of industry and agriculture, believing he would “lead all matters for France’s greatness and prosperity.” He also spurred technological advancement through active support for large-scale technological development. Thanks to his efforts, France, previously primarily agricultural, was able to transform into an industrial-focused economy. Napoleon III also focused on transforming Paris into a modern city. With the help of Baron Haussmann, Prefect of the Seine, Paris shed its maze of narrow alleys. Radiating avenues centered around the Arc de Triomphe were opened, transforming Paris into a beautiful modern city. He pursued policies that satisfied the industrial bourgeoisie.
Meanwhile, Napoleon III, who proclaimed himself an imperial socialist, also implemented policies for the workers. Public works, including civil engineering projects, and industrial development provided new jobs for laborers and kept bread prices low, a sensitive issue for the common people. Furthermore, by promoting the construction of workers’ housing equipped with sanitation facilities, he ensured that the working class, albeit to a limited extent, could also benefit from economic development and government policies.
However, unlike his relatively successful domestic policies, Napoleon III’s foreign policy was a series of disasters. Although France succeeded in halting Russia’s southward advance by joining Britain in the Crimean War of 1854, the only gain for France was hosting the peace conference in Paris. Napoleon III also supported Sardinia in its war for Italian unification, gaining Nice and part of Savoy as a result. However, when Sardinia invaded the Papal States, it provoked backlash from Catholic forces within France. Subsequently, his foreign policy became inconsistent and erratic, such as when he concluded a peace treaty with Austria, Italy’s adversary, provoking backlash from Italian patriots and domestic republicans. The Mexican expedition, in particular, was his most emblematic diplomatic failure. In 1861, Napoleon III used the Mexican Civil War as a pretext to dispatch troops, abolishing the republic and installing Archduke Maximilian of Austria, who enjoyed some support among the upper classes, as emperor. However, this immediately met with Mexican resistance. Facing intense pressure from the United States, which had just concluded its Civil War, France was ultimately forced to withdraw from Mexico. Archduke Maximilian, whom Napoleon III had installed, was captured by republicans and executed by firing squad. This was a moment of severe damage to Napoleon III’s prestige. Yet, while the Mexican expedition damaged his prestige, it did not bring about Napoleon III’s downfall. However, defeat in the war against Prussia was effectively a political death sentence. In the 1869 elections, Napoleon III narrowly secured victory. Realizing the need for change, he attempted to transition to a system closer to a constitutional monarchy and gained overwhelming public support.
Meanwhile, in 1868, a revolution erupted in Spain, overthrowing the Spanish Bourbon dynasty and sparking a succession crisis for the Spanish throne. The Spanish revolutionary leaders offered the throne to Prince Leopold, cousin of Prussia’s Wilhelm I. Chancellor Bismarck, believing this would provide a good pretext for war, announced the acceptance of the throne despite Wilhelm I’s opposition. When France reacted strongly, Wilhelm I withdrew the acceptance, seemingly resolving the matter. However, France demanded written assurance of Wilhelm I’s ‘withdrawal,’ and soon the issue shifted from the Spanish succession to the ‘guarantee of withdrawal’ by Wilhelm I. Bismarck then skillfully exploited this, deliberately distorting the content of a meeting between Wilhelm I and the French ambassador and publishing it in British newspapers. Bismarck’s manipulation made the Prussians feel their emperor had been insulted, while the French felt the Prussian king had insulted their country. Falling for Bismarck’s scheme, Napoleon III declared war on Prussia on July 14, 1870. At the war’s outset, both French and Prussian citizens were filled with high morale for battle. However, unlike Prussia, which had meticulously prepared for war beforehand, France was utterly unprepared. As a result of its vacillating diplomacy, Napoleon III’s France found itself diplomatically isolated. Major powers either maintained neutrality or sided with Prussia. Even the southern German states, which Napoleon had hoped to rely on, defied his expectations and aligned with Prussia.
The French army suffered crushing defeats at the hands of the Prussians at the Battles of Mars-la-Tour and Gravelotte, leading to its near annihilation. Then, in early September, less than six weeks after the war began, the French army, personally led by Napoleon III, suffered a decisive defeat against the Prussians at Sedan, located on the banks of the Meuse River. Napoleon III himself was captured as a prisoner of war. When news of the defeat at Sedan reached Paris on September 4th, the Parisian populace rose up, compelling the Legislative Assembly to declare the fall of the Empire. The provisional government established at the Paris City Hall then proclaimed the Third Republic. Napoleon III’s Second Empire, which had resembled a black comedy, collapsed in this manner, and France never returned to a monarchy again.

The Paris Commune and the Third Republic

Following the collapse of Napoleon III’s Second Empire, the provisional government established the Third Republic of France. However, one crucial event in the establishment of the Third Republic must be mentioned: the Paris Commune. The Paris Commune was the fourth French revolution, following the Great Revolution, the July Revolution, and the February Revolution. It was the first socialist autonomous government established by the people of Paris immediately after the Franco-Prussian War ended. Though the Paris Commune ended in failure after about two months, its historical significance lies in being the world’s first government established with the active participation of the working class and the first in world history to implement socialist policies. After Napoleon III’s defeat at Sedan in 1870, the provisional government that was established initially showed a will to continue the war against Prussia. However, with its main army annihilated, there was no way to resist Prussia. Ultimately, on January 28, 1871, the French provisional government signed a humiliating armistice treaty with Prussia, despite the siege by Parisian citizens. Following the armistice, a National Assembly was convened in Bordeaux on February 13 to discuss the peace treaty, and Thiers was appointed provisional administrator. Upon learning that the National Assembly had ratified the humiliating peace treaty, the citizens of Paris, far from relenting in their resolve to fight, grew dissatisfied with the treaty. On March 1, Prussian troops entered Paris. They passed triumphantly through the Arc de Triomphe amid the silent hostility and passive resistance of the citizens, but withdrew just three days later. Then, on March 3, the Central Committee of the National Guard was formed in Paris, opposing Thiers’ provisional government. The National Assembly took up residence in Versailles, a symbol of the old regime. On March 18, the provisional government ordered the regular army to seize the cannons used by the besieged volunteer troops. When the soldiers refused this order, showing insubordination, the general was shot dead, and the National Assembly joined forces with the insurgents. This marked the beginning of the Paris Commune.
On March 19, representatives of the regular army and the volunteer troops occupied City Hall and formed the ‘Central Committee’. The Central Committee issued a proclamation stating that elections for the Commune (People’s Council) would be held, clarifying that the Central Committee was a provisional body until then. Elections were held on March 26, electing 85 councilors. On March 28, 1871, the establishment of the Commune was proclaimed, and it autonomously governed Paris until May 20. This Paris Commune, effectively the first government led by the proletariat, or working class, influenced not only Paris but also major French cities like Marseille, Lyon, and Saint-Étienne, leading to the formation of communes in those cities as well. The Paris Commune advocated for social reforms that were highly progressive for the time: a 10-hour workday, the abolition of night work for bakers that violated workers’ health rights, and the separation of religion and politics. For the 70-odd days the Paris Commune existed, founded on anarchist and socialist ideals, order in Paris was maintained by the people themselves. The disorder, chaos, and destruction seen during the French Revolution appeared to have been largely overcome by the time of the Paris Commune. However, from the perspective of the Thiers Provisional Government, dominated by industrial capitalists and conservatives, the Paris Commune was viewed as an extremely radical entity whose very existence was intolerable. On May 21, 1871, government troops under General MacMahon entered Paris to suppress the Commune. The German Empire, Austria-Hungary, Belgium, and Britain, which also disapproved of the radical socialist nature of the Paris Commune, supported the French provisional government. At the time, Parisian citizens were attending a large-scale concert in the Tuileries Garden to support the families of fallen Communards (Commune supporters). Government forces exploited this opportunity to successfully enter Paris.
Upon news that government troops had breached Paris’s defenses and entered the city, the members of the Commune Council hurriedly adjourned and scattered in all directions to prepare defensive positions. Charles Delecloze, representative of the Commune’s Military Committee, issued the following appeal urging citizens to resist: “Enough of militarism! We reject the gold-braided staff officers with their gold-trimmed uniforms. Yield your seats to the people. The bells heralding the revolution have tolled…(omitted)…Citizens, we will fight alongside you, and if necessary, die alongside you.” As night fell, government troops storming the city shot unarmed citizens on sight wherever they were found. Fierce street battles erupted across Paris, with barricades lining every street. This week of intense fighting became known as the “Bloody Week,” literally marked by the sacrifice of countless Parisian citizens. Casualties are estimated at a minimum of 10,000 and up to 50,000. The Commune was crushed, and over 100,000 individuals implicated in the Paris Commune were arrested. Of these, 40,000 were indicted in military tribunals. Furthermore, 7,500 figures who participated in the Commune were exiled for life to the French colony of New Caledonia. Thus, the Paris Commune, which lasted about two months, ended in failure. However, despite its brief and ultimately unsuccessful existence, the Paris Commune had a significant impact on European and world history thereafter. European nations became deeply concerned about the possibility of socialist and communist movements like the Paris Commune emerging within their own borders. In response, various welfare policies targeting vulnerable groups began to emerge. Moreover, the Paris Commune served as a major inspiration for communists and socialists. Later, Lenin, the founder of the Soviet Union, highly praised the Paris Commune as “the first rehearsal of the socialist revolution by the working class in world history.” In France, the Paris Commune also sparked the emergence of a full-fledged socialist party movement, leading to the formation of the French Socialist Workers’ League in 1879. About 60 years later, in 1936, the socialist party coalition, the ‘Popular Front’, achieved a parliamentary majority. At its beginning lay the failed revolutionary Paris Commune.

Yet history marches on

Thus, we have examined the story of the French Revolution, which raced relentlessly through the 19th century from the Napoleonic era to the Paris Commune. After the Commune ended, Victor Hugo wrote: “The bodies lay on the ground, but their ideas rose.” This passage clearly reflects the perspective of a liberal who felt boundless compassion for the wretched masses and the underprivileged through the June Uprising. The 19th century in France, marked by revolutions, dictatorships, and alternating monarchies and revolutions, precisely coincided with Victor Hugo’s lifetime. Amidst this whirlwind of revolution, he transformed from a Romantic into a liberal. His support for revolution and opposition to dictatorship forced him into a long exile lasting 19 years. Victor Hugo, who had gone into exile opposing Napoleon III’s dictatorship, was able to return to Paris in 1870 amid the citizens’ enthusiastic cheers following Napoleon III’s downfall. However, he was again exiled abroad for two years on the charge of having supported the Paris Commune mentioned earlier. After returning once more, Victor Hugo was elected to the Senate in 1876, continuing his political activities while also publishing several poetry collections, demonstrating his enduring vitality as a literary figure. Victor Hugo died on May 22, 1885, at the age of 83, leaving behind an immense body of work: twenty volumes of poetry, ten plays, ten novels, and five volumes of essays. To honor both Victor Hugo’s great literary achievements and his contributions as an intellectual who led the people against dictatorship, his funeral was held as a state ceremony. For two days, his body lay in state beneath the Arc de Triomphe for mourners. It is said that the number of people who came to pay their respects, filling twelve avenues including the Champs-Élysées, reached a staggering two million.
The 19th century in France, marked by revolutions, dictatorships, and alternating monarchies and revolutions, coincided precisely with Victor Hugo’s lifetime. Amidst this whirlwind of revolution, he evolved from a Romantic to a liberal. His support for revolution and opposition to dictatorship led him into a long exile lasting 19 years. Victor Hugo, who had gone into exile opposing Napoleon III’s dictatorship, was able to return to Paris in 1870 amid the citizens’ enthusiastic cheers after Napoleon III’s downfall. However, he was again exiled abroad for two years on the charge of having supported the Paris Commune mentioned earlier. After returning once more, Victor Hugo was elected to the Senate in 1876, continuing his political activities while also publishing several poetry collections, demonstrating his enduring vitality as a literary figure. Victor Hugo died on May 22, 1885, at the age of 83, leaving behind an immense body of work: twenty volumes of poetry, ten plays, ten novels, and five volumes of essays.
His funeral was held as a state ceremony to honor both his great literary achievements and his contributions as a thinker who led the people against tyranny. For two days, his body lay in state beneath the Arc de Triomphe for mourners. It is said that the number of people who came to pay their respects, filling twelve avenues including the Champs-Élysées, reached a staggering two million. Indeed, examining 19th-century French history reveals periods of brilliant glory under Napoleon, but it was largely an era of turmoil, oscillating between revolution and reaction. The French rose in revolution against the contradictions of the ancien régime, yet they also plunged into greater chaos and committed the folly of electing a dictator with their own hands. They even repeated the same mistakes. Yet despite this, France managed to progress incrementally through its successive revolutions. Could this be because, alongside great intellectuals like Victor Hugo, the proposition that history progresses was at work? And is that why, when we witness the failed June Rebellion in Les Misérables, a part of our hearts still burns? Perhaps it is such hope that has guided human history to today’s civilized society.