The Paris Commune and Karl Marx's Le capital

Few books on political economy have become as influential as Capital, volume 1. This central piece in Karl Marx's published scholarly work has become crucial to understanding not only Marx's intellectual activities, but also how these related to his political endeavors and private life. In addition to an analysis and interpretation of the content of this work, studies have reconstructed the history of its publication, which includes four different editions in Marx's lifetime. After Marx, in 1867, published the first volume of Capital on the capitalist mode of production, the book was published again in Russian in 1872, in a second German edition in 1872–3 and in French—as Le capital—in 1872–5. The other volumes (i.e. 2 and 3), the third and fourth editions, and the English edition were released posthumously.Footnote ¹

The French edition of this work has been, for the most part, unnoticed, and its history underexplored. However, Le capital, published in forty-four instalments arranged in series, has an important place in the academic work of Marx.Footnote ² In the “Avis au lecteur,” or reader's notice, of Le capital, dated 28 April 1875, Marx wrote, “Whatever the literary imperfections of this French edition, it has a scientific value independent of the original and should be consulted even by readers familiar with the German language.”Footnote ³ Moreover, Marx highlighted there that he had changed parts of the text (simplifications and additions) compared to the second German edition, and, in a title page of the French edition published in the first instalment on 17–18 September 1872, he states that this edition is a complete reworking of volume 1.Footnote ⁴

Le capital, in fact, contains differences compared to the two German editions that Marx published. In the “Nachwort” or afterword to the second German edition, dated 24 January 1873 and published in May 1873, Marx thus communicated the importance of the French edition to the German reader: “Nevertheless, in revising the French translation published in Paris, I now find that some parts of the German original would have required more thorough reworking here, greater stylistic correction there, or even more careful elimination of occasional oversights.”Footnote ⁵

Through an examination of the (political) context of the publishing process of Le capital (i.e. the writing, translating, editing, and printing of the work) and how this aligned with Marx's network of contacts, this article aims to investigate the conditions that led to the initiation of this process. We specifically argue that by looking at the Paris Commune and its aftermath, we are in a better position to understand the new possibilities it created for publishing Marx's work in French, the connections it facilitated, and the way it shaped the publishing process of Le capital. Although studies have concentrated on the extent to which the Paris Commune influenced the content of Marx's work and on the existence of a “French Marx” who adapted his work to French audiences, less research has focused on understanding the circumstances connected to the Paris Commune under which this French edition came to exist.Footnote ⁶

The French edition of Capital involved many people in the publishing process, which required a coordinated effort across national borders.Footnote ⁷ After the contract between Maurice La Châtre's company and Marx dated 13 February 1872 was signed, work was further divided between geographically separated individuals in Western Europe, with the aim of publishing a French translation of Capital. The nature of this endeavor required the involvement of various people, such as Marx (the author, residing in London), Joseph Roy (the translator, living in Bordeaux), La Châtre (the refugee editor, living consecutively in Spain, Belgium, and Switzerland), and Just Vernouillet (working for the editor's company in Paris). Additionally, relatives and friends of Marx (e.g. Friedrich Engels, Paul Lafargue, Laura Marx, and Charles Longuet) participated to some extent in the publishing of this edition.

This article focuses on reconstructing the start of the publishing process of Le capital. It specifically describes events that were foundational to the French edition of Capital in the period from the end of November 1871 until the signing of the publishing contract in February 1872. Although Marx had the intention of publishing a French edition of Capital before the events of the Paris Commune in 1871, we show in section I that the revolutionary context of the Commune helped to enable the publication of a second German and a French edition of volume 1 of the work. After the Paris Commune, the context favoured the author's intention to publish a French edition of his work on political economy. In section II, we show that, in the wake of the Paris Commune, the initial stage of the process of publishing Le capital ended with the preparation and signing of a contract between Marx and La Châtre's company in February 1872. The contents of this contract were vague, however, given the changed political context in France, an editor in exile and thus unable to be present at his company, and other geographical obstacles. In section III, we further discuss the implications of the Paris Commune for the publishing process of Le capital. We argue that the circumstances helped Marx to publish his work but also created obstacles. Although the focus of this article is on the starting phase of the publishing process, we argue that this phase has implications for understanding how the process would further unfold and the involvement of Marx's networks of contacts in publishing this edition. It also serves as an illustration of Marx's working process.

The historiography on the publication of the French edition is mainly made up of French and German works by Émile Bottigelli, the Marx–Engels-Gesamtausgabe (MEGA²), Jean-Pierre Lefebvre, François Gaudin, and Laurent Baronian and Nicolas Rieucau.Footnote ⁸ The history of Le capital was mostly written in the twentieth century and was limited to the available sources that allowed a partial reconstruction of the publishing process. In 2019 and 2020, additional and hitherto unknown primary sources directly related to the publication of the French edition were disclosed.Footnote ⁹ These additions, and other primary sources that tend to be underutilized in (historical) studies of Marx's work, such as correspondence with relatives (e.g. from August Philips on the publishing contract) and other contacts (e.g. from the German editor Otto Meissner), open up new possibilities to investigate Marx's and other people's involvement in Le capital.

We will build on these works to further reconstruct the history of the starting phase of this edition, making use of (un)published German, French, and English letters, biographical testimonies and other documents of the period, including primary sources in the International Institute of Social History in Amsterdam (IISH, e.g. the Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels Papers), the Russian State Archive of Sociopolitical History in Moscow (RGASPI), the Public Library in New York, the Paul Lafargue archive in Paris and the British Library in London.

I

In the context of the 1871 Commune, when revolutionaries took over Paris, Marx gained international prominence as “the best calumniated and the most menaced man of London.”Footnote ¹⁰ He was described, for example, in the Chicago Tribune of 3 June 1871 as one of “the real leaders of the Commune.”Footnote ¹¹ The International, too, attracted public attention. During the meetings of the General Council of the International Workingmen's Association (IWMA), Marx declared that in the French, Swiss, and German press “the International was made the general scapegoat for all untoward events.”Footnote ¹² “Slanders against the Commune and against the International” became a discussion topic of these meetings of the IWMA, which also discussed responses to counteract claims (see the meetings of 21 March, 13 June, and 20 June 1871).Footnote ¹³

The publication of The Civil War in France (hereafter Civil War) in mid-June 1871 as an “address of the general council of the international working-men's association” concerning the events of the Paris Commune was well received, with a third English edition and translations already in 1871 (e.g. in German).Footnote ¹⁴ Already near the end of June and July 1871 there was a need for more editions of the text.Footnote ¹⁵ It was a document that Marx wanted “to circulate … as widely as possible among the Working Class.”Footnote ¹⁶

Marx was not named as the author on the front page of the three English editions of the Civil War. However, in the Daily News of 23 June 1871, a text from the IWMA assigned the authorship of the Civil War to Marx: “The address, like many previous publications of the Council [i.e. of the IWMA], was drawn up by the corresponding secretary for Germany, Dr. Karl Marx, was adopted unanimously, and revised by nobody.”Footnote ¹⁷ Before this address came out, Marx was identified as “the grand chef of the International,” and authorship of the Civil War could therefore also be assumed by readers.Footnote ¹⁸

In the year of the Commune, before any contact was made with La Châtre as editor of a French edition of Capital, a second German edition of the book became necessary. As we will show, this version would be important for the French edition, as it would be used for the French translation.

On 28 November 1871, Marx heard from the editor of Das Kapital, Meissner, that a new edition of the book—i.e. the second edition—was needed since few copies of the first German edition were still available.Footnote ¹⁹ The sales of the first German edition in 1871, the year of the Commune, were remarkable. They were four times higher than in 1870 or in 1872, as reported by his German editor.Footnote ²⁰ Most copies of the first German edition of Capital sold after 1869 were sold in 1871. Meissner wrote that after 1869 there were “in total still 308 copies to be accounted for, of which 50 for 1870, about 200 for 1871 and 50 for 1872.”Footnote ²¹ On 28 November 1871, Meissner also wrote that sales in 1871 had been particularly strong in Russia.

The events in Paris, the attention that Marx and the IWMA received, and the success of the Civil War are fundamental to understanding why there was a need for a new German edition of Capital. People were able to make a link between the Civil War and Marx's other publications, as seen in a letter from the publisher of the Civil War, Edward Truelove, dated 12 September 1871, where he informed Marx that he had been contacted to provide more information on Capital, including its price, “with a view to purchase.”Footnote ²² More international attention could lead to more sales of the first German edition of Capital, making a second edition possible.

Before the necessity arose for a second German edition, Marx had already planned to rework the beginning of the book (i.e. the first chapter in the first German edition) and now took the opportunity to do so, starting near the end of 1871.Footnote ²³

Correspondence from Marx, his relatives, and friends documents that he was working on the second German edition at this time. In the winter of 1871, Jenny Marx (his daughter) wrote in a letter to the Kugelmann family (dated 21/22 December 1871), “What with interruptions of every kind Mohr [Karl Marx] has had the greatest difficulty to find time to arrange the first chapter of his book for the second edition. By hook and crook he now hopes to be enabled to send it to his publisher before the end of the next week. He has much simplified parts of it.”Footnote ²⁴ Engels also wrote to Lafargue in a letter dated 30 December 1871, “I have not seen Mohr today, he is working hard on his second German edition,” and he repeated in a letter to Lafargue, on 19 January 1872, that Marx was working on the second German edition.Footnote ²⁵ Marx wrote to the editor of Le capital, in a letter dated 30 January 1872, that after the news that Meissner was to produce a second German edition, “I had to immediately start revising the text of the first edition, where I introduced some very important changes.”Footnote ²⁶

The process of publishing the second German edition thus started at the end of 1871, and would—from December 1871 onwards—overlap with the start of the publishing process of the French edition. There was an overlap in content (e.g. the translation of the French edition would be based on the second German edition) and form (both were published in instalments over time).Footnote ²⁷ The publication of the French edition should therefore be understood with reference to this second German edition.

The Commune helped create the need for a second German edition, and Marx had already intended to rework the first edition even before this need. Similarly, Marx intended to publish Capital in French but had not found a suitable publisher (see below). It is not surprising that Marx was interested in bringing out his work in French. After all, in the nineteenth century, the political landscape in France was particularly eventful, which occupied Marx in works such as the Civil War.

According to Julia Nicholls, Marx preferred not to produce a rendition that just mimicked the German edition.Footnote ²⁸ Such a “literal” translation was described by Marx as something that was not inherently undesirable but did not fit its purpose “to make it more accessible to the reader.”Footnote ²⁹ The French audience was given a version of Capital that the author would recognize not as a mere translation of its German counterpart, but as a version tailored to the French public, and more specifically to French workers. Efforts to make the book still more accessible continued in 1883, when Gabriel Deville published a shortened version which further increased dissemination of the French edition of Capital among French audiences.Footnote ³⁰

The Commune was directly responsible for Marx finally finding an editor, thus making the publishing process of the French edition as we know it possible. On 12 December 1871, Lafargue (Karl Marx's son-in-law) wrote to Engels (a collaborator and friend of Marx) that he had an offer for Marx to publish a French edition of his book. Laura Marx (Marx's daughter) and Lafargue (Laura's husband) had met La Châtre in San Sebastian, Spain, after all had fled France due to the events of the Paris Commune.Footnote ³¹ Although she had not met the editor, another of Marx's daughters, Jenny, described La Châtre as “a first-rate French publisher, who is very anxious to publish ‘Das Kapital’.”Footnote ³²

Previous attempts had been made to translate the work, with Marx intending to publish the book in French, but none were ultimately fruitful. Charles Keller had been working on a French translation of the first German edition for Marx but without an available publisher; at the time of the news from La Châtre, Keller was doing other work.Footnote ³³ The meeting between Laura Marx, Lafargue, and La Châtre would eventually offer Marx an opportunity to finally publish a French translation of Capital.

Without the events of the Commune, Laura Marx, Lafargue, and La Châtre would perhaps not have met each other, and perhaps the possibility of publishing Le capital would not have arisen. Furthermore, Marx, who was seen as an instigator of the Commune, would now be able, perhaps because of this status, to finally publish his first volume on the capitalist mode of production in French. Later, in 1895, Engels noted that the years 1870, 1871, and 1872 were crucial years for Marx. He wrote to Karl Kautsky that these years were “at one and the same time the most important episode in Marx's public life and that least amenable to accurate portrayal from printed sources.”Footnote ³⁴

The author's intentions of publishing volume 1 of Capital in a French version accessible to French workers aligned with the editor's commitment to a socialist project. This was clear from the start of Marx's interaction with the editor, in which Laura Marx and Lafargue served as intermediaries. Laura Marx wrote to Marx in December 1871 and discussed the offer made by La Châtre, who claimed “that it would be a good work to popularize this book by the great philosopher; it would be a marked service to the cause of socialism.”Footnote ³⁵ The French editor also offered two options for the publication: a more expensive or a cheaper edition of the work. “From the point of view of principles and propaganda, the popular edition will have to be produced; later on, the library edition can be produced.”Footnote ³⁶ The editor offered to pay two thousand francs but asked the author for two thousand francs which, according to Laura Marx, Lafargue was willing to pay: “It appears that no more than 4000 frs. are required for the beginning.” Laura Marx also wrote that the translator would be paid around 1,500 francs. The editor wished also to publish a portrait and biography of Marx (Lafargue was mentioned as a possible author) and his own foreword.

There were, however, geographical and political obstacles that needed to be overcome to set the publishing process in motion. The changed political situation in France, the persecution related to the Commune, and the geographical distances between the actors involved in creating the French edition made the production of Le capital burdensome. Marx would also revise the translation and change the text.Footnote ³⁷ Moreover, due to unrelated circumstances, both the editor and Marx were persecuted and living as refugees in a foreign country.Footnote ³⁸ On the one hand, the persecuted editor, La Châtre, could not travel to his company in Paris as he was living in exile outside France in various locations (consecutively in Spain, Belgium, and Switzerland) during the whole publishing period of the work. He had narrowly avoided being killed in Paris in events related to the Commune, and—in the name of caution—he wrote to Marx that he wanted to avoid announcing the forthcoming French edition until it was published.Footnote ³⁹ On the other hand, Marx was at risk of persecution and therefore could not travel to France to, for example, physically deliver material. Marx, who was born in Germany, had been living in London since 1849 after being exiled due to political activities.Footnote ⁴⁰ In the wake of the Paris Commune, and although none of them were or could be physically present in Paris, they would nevertheless start the publishing process in France relying on the support of people in Paris working for La Châtre.

The extent of relatives’ and friends’ involvement at the start of the publishing process of Le capital is also noteworthy. Lafargue and Laura Marx not only played a significant role in securing an editor, but also were closely involved in the negotiations on the publishing stipulations. Indeed, Marx responded to La Châtre's offer in a letter to Laura Marx dated 18 December 1871, in which he wrote that he would accept the offer if certain financial and publication conditions were met:

Marx also emphasized that the French edition must be easily available—“I prefer in every respect a cheap popular edition”—and that he was working on the second German edition.Footnote ⁴¹ Marx wrote, “It is a fortunate combination that a second German edition has become necessary just now. I am fully occupied (and can therefore write only a few lines) in arranging it, and the French translator will of course have to translate the amended German edition. (I shall forward him the old one with the changes inserted)” (original emphasis).Footnote ⁴²

The events of the Paris Commune also contributed indirectly to the publication of Le capital. As a result, refugees moved from France to England, and particularly to London.Footnote ⁴³ As Marx was a figure in the (inter)national scene in London, he received and supported such Kommuneflüchtlinge (“refugees of the Commune”) in his house. In a later report in Die neue Zeit, Friedrich A. Sorge noted, “When the commune refugees appeared in London, Marx and his family made extraordinary efforts to render help and services. Besides the refugees who came and went from his house, workers from the provinces, Manchester, Liverpool, London, the Continent, America, and other distant parts of the world were frequently met there. Marx had an open house and an open hand.”Footnote ⁴⁴ The General Council of the IWMA also discussed aid to the refugees in their meetings, taking note of Marx's own financial aid to them.Footnote ⁴⁵

One aspect of the publishing process that is relatively underexamined is that these refugees also contributed to the publishing process of Le capital.Footnote ⁴⁶ Besides Lafargue's involvement in securing the editor and his later help with paying for Le capital (see below), other exiles contributed to the project. One example is the Frenchman Longuet, who also fled the Commune and later married Marx's daughter Jenny. He was instrumental in arranging a translator for Le capital (Édouard Vaillant, also a communard, was also mentioned as someone helping to choose the translator) and was later also involved in reviewing the translation.Footnote ⁴⁷ For instance, according to Engels in a letter dated 16 November 1872, Marx went to Oxford for several days at the end of 1872, where he checked the French translation with the Longuet family.Footnote ⁴⁸ A focus on the publishing process of Le capital shows that Marx's intellectual work, political activities, and private life were all intertwined, and that the Commune figured prominently in all realms.Footnote ⁴⁹

II

In the wake of the Paris Commune, the meeting of Lafargue and Laura Marx with the editor La Châtre gave Marx the opportunity to discuss and sign a publishing contract for Le capital. This contract would formalize how the French edition would appear. The contract for the French edition was created and signed by two parties: Marx and La Châtre's company. The contract stipulates that both will publish a French version of the book.Footnote ⁵⁰ This contract marked the official start of the publishing process: its stipulations, which were discussed in advance, set out the fundamental features of the French edition and the further steps in the publishing process. However, as we will see, this basis was rather vague.

In December, Lafargue would write to Engels, “These terms are not extravagant nor out of the way, even less are they unpleasant.”Footnote ⁵¹ Marx received a draft of the contract and, at the beginning of January, Lafargue asked Engels whether Marx had made progress with the contract.Footnote ⁵² Engels wrote to Lafargue on 19 January 1872 that it was being discussed but “there were one or two absolutely unacceptable things in the contract.”Footnote ⁵³ Marx did not write to the editor immediately and, close to the end of January, Lafargue informed Engels that he had received a letter claiming that Marx had not yet contacted La Châtre.Footnote ⁵⁴ Both Engels and Lafargue received news of the French edition and were up to date on how the publishing process was unfolding. This is also true for other family members.Footnote ⁵⁵

Before sending a letter to the editor concerning the contract, Marx first gave a draft contract to Philips, one of his family members knowledgeable in law.Footnote ⁵⁶ In a letter dated 26 January 1872, Philips gave his opinion and legal advice on the contract. He wrote to Marx that he should not sign the draft contract, which stipulated that two thousand francs should be invested by the author, and that Marx risked losing the money.

Marx probably also asked Philips to participate in the financing, a proposal which he rejected, giving two reasons, one ideological and one financial: “Mainly because I do not want to support propaganda for the International; but also because I see no advantage for you in this publication … I will not do this for your political or revolutionary goals.” Philips also suggested that Marx add another stipulation to the contract: “that the present agreement shall not prevent Mr K. M. from publishing in France or elsewhere translations of his above-mentioned work in any language other than French.” In the final contract, this stipulation was not inserted.Footnote ⁵⁷

Marx took his time to respond to the editor about the contract and sent him a letter dated near the end of January in which he discussed the offer, including the changes he wanted made to the contract.Footnote ⁵⁸ Marx found the contract as he received it “the most unfavourable I have ever been offered by a publisher, I accept it with the following modifications.”Footnote ⁵⁹ The change that Marx asked for was the deletion of the following stipulation: “At that time, if Mr. Karl Marx prefers, M.rs Maurice La Châtre et Cie will remit the two thousand francs which will have been charged and will be exonerated from all royalties for all print runs made subsequently.” This moment was from “the eleven thousandth.”Footnote ⁶⁰ Marx clearly did not want to include an option that would enable the editor to print more editions after paying one single financial compensation to him.Footnote ⁶¹ Marx also wanted forty free dissemination copies of the instalments. From the correspondence, we see how much Marx prioritized the publication of a French version of his book, even after the negative evaluation of the draft contract by Philips and himself. This commitment to bringing out a French edition is remarkable and is related to his effort to disseminate his work to a wider public beyond the German-speaking world, appealing to French workers.

Marx would eventually sign a one-page version of the contract dated 13 February 1872, which contained the following five stipulations.

1. 1 Marx would deliver a publication that would be inexpensive to buy and would follow the publication format and instalment price of l'histoire des papes (History of the Popes) by La Châtre. More specifically, it would use a format of two columns per page, in instalments of eight pages each.Footnote ⁶² In his letter of 30 January to the editor, Marx expressed doubts about this publication format but went along with it: “The form of these instalments is not the most advantageous for a scientific work; nevertheless, in the given circumstances, I believe with you that it is better to use it.”Footnote ⁶³ Marx also offered more thoughts on the format of the published work, more specifically on its publication in instalments, in a printed facsimile of a letter dated 18 March 1872 (one year after what can be seen as the start of the Commune) from Marx to La Châtre in the first instalment of Le capital.Footnote ⁶⁴ This letter was requested by the editor and repeated the stipulation in the contract that the publication would be in instalments and that publishing in this format would make it easier for workers to get hold of the publication.Footnote ⁶⁵ Although he clearly found this fact important, he also identified possible problems. A first possible problem is that the opening pages can be difficult and that this should not be underestimated. Marx also thought that publication in a serial format might put off readers. It does not seem to be a coincidence that Marx chose to give this facsimiled letter in the French edition the date of 18 March 1872. It seems to be intended to serve as a reminder of the Commune.

2. 2 Marx would be allowed to choose the translator of the book. He eventually chose Roy, a resident of Bordeaux, instead of Keller, a translator with whom Marx had worked previously.Footnote ⁶⁶ After Marx had received news that La Châtre wanted to publish a French translation of Das Kapital, he contacted Keller, who had been working on a French translation of the first German edition. Near the end of 1871, Jenny Marx (mother) had tried to locate Keller.Footnote ⁶⁷ However, Keller was occupied with other work and since Marx felt that the editor wanted to publish fast, he chose Roy, who, unlike the others, was available.Footnote ⁶⁸ It is, however, likely that Keller had an influence on Marx and on this French edition, as there is evidence of discussions on the translation of words.Footnote ⁶⁹

3. 3 The translator and other publication costs would be paid by the editor's company: the translator would receive a maximum of 1,500 francs and Marx would pay two thousand francs:

   “The author reserves the right to choose the translator, giving him a remuneration of five to four centimes per line, and a maximum of fifteen hundred francs for the entire translation of the work, which will be paid by the publishers. Mrs Maurice La Châtre et Cie will pay all the costs of the publication in return for: 1^o A cash contribution of two thousand francs which will be handed over to them in Paris by Mr Karl Marx fifteen days after the request.”Footnote ⁷⁰

   A letter from Lafargue to Engels tells us that Lafargue paid. This probably refers to the payment for Le capital and shows how important Marx's close networks were for organizing the French edition.Footnote ⁷¹

4. 4 Marx would receive 100 free copies per instalment or in softcover to give “to the French or foreign press or to workers’ groups.”Footnote ⁷² These were dissemination copies. There is evidence that Marx sent instalments of the French edition to individuals and to the British Library (e.g. to Hector Denis, Sorge and Prosper-Olivier Lissagaray, with handwritten changes made by Marx).Footnote ⁷³

5. 5 The two parties agreed on how many copies the editor could freely print.Footnote ⁷⁴

Vernouillet—who was in charge of the publishing house in Paris—sent Marx a clean copy of the contract. This followed a letter from Marx dated 9 February 1872, requesting a copy of the contract with La Châtre's signature, as well as a clean copy of the contract. There is also talk about the translator who will start translating Capital into French.Footnote ⁷⁵ According to Vernouillet, the contract copy with Marx's signature was received on the fifteenth of the same month, while La Châtre's copy was sent one day later to Marx.Footnote ⁷⁶ The signing of the contract by Marx and publication in instalments are confirmed by Engels in a letter to Wilhelm Liebknecht dated 15 February 1872.Footnote ⁷⁷ This specific legal side of the publishing process was now finalized, but the actual work to make the French edition a reality had just begun.

After this overview of the contract signed between the two parties involved in Le capital, several points for further discussion can be derived. The contract, beyond its symbolic function, is relatively limited in its stipulations; this was perhaps not uncommon at the time, but would give the next steps in the publishing process, including the solutions to problems that might arise, an improvisatory nature. The contract is relevant not only because of what was written there, but also because of what was not written.Footnote ⁷⁸

The contract, for example, did not set out any further work steps, i.e. how the writing, translating, editing, and printing would be organized; the timing of instalments; or how many instalments were planned. It did not specify how long the publishing process would take, nor did it include any deadlines. No mention was made of possible ways to mitigate any problems during the publishing process between the editor and the author.

It was still necessary to devise a way to organize the process between the author and the editor that was workable for all parties, since other parties were also involved. The other parties besides Marx and the editor were the translator, the printer, and the people working in the editor's company. These parties were barely mentioned, if at all, but they too were an important aspect of how the work would be arranged between the editor and the author in the coming months. Marx and La Châtre were geographically separated and, as they were in exile, had to work through intermediaries (e.g. the postal system and other people in La Châtre's company). A flow of (translated) manuscripts and proofs back and forth to the involved parties had to be organized and enacted. This process had to be put in place post-contract and could therefore be open to change.

How does the contract relate to the context of the Paris Commune? As we have seen, the publishing process was not fully defined in the contract, and fundamental steps in the process still had to be determined. The changed political context in France in the wake of the Paris Commune perhaps made a more detailed contract necessary. In a subsequent phase of the publishing process, Marx and La Châtre were confronted with the task of finding ways to organize the next steps. This is seen in the correspondence between the author and the editor, who further discuss the organization of the work process. For example, in a letter from La Châtre to Marx dated 12 March 1872, details of the next steps were set out informally.Footnote ⁷⁹ The process of publishing Le capital would require fine-tuning after the signing of the contract, which signified completion of the first step towards the last translation of volume 1 of Capital brought out in Marx's lifetime.

III

There are different interpretations of the political legacy and importance of the Paris Commune. Nevertheless, the importance of the Commune and its role in the production of an intellectual work such as Le capital tends to go unnoticed. In this article, we have documented the importance of the Paris Commune for the existence of the French edition of 1872–5. We have shown that the Commune contributed directly by enabling contact with the editor who would ultimately publish the book; it also contributed indirectly by giving Marx access to people who could help with the language editing of the French text. Although Marx was proficient in French, there is also evidence that Marx received some help from French-speakers (including refugees from the Commune) to produce Le capital.Footnote ⁸⁰

The political context in which the book came into being also threw up obstacles. Geographical distance, connected to the risk of persecution, did not make it easier to organize the publishing process. The impact of the geographical distance would, however, be lessened by the nineteenth-century postal network, which was able to distribute letters relatively quickly.Footnote ⁸¹ For example, the letter sent by Vernouillet to London containing the contract was dated 13 February 1872; but in another letter, Vernouillet claims that the contract with Marx's signature was received back in Paris on 15 February 1872.Footnote ⁸² Members of the editor's company, such as Vernouillet and the printer in Paris, were close geographically, so not everyone was abroad. Moreover, people close to Marx, family members such as his daughters, and friends were informed of Marx's work steps and knew the status of the French edition.

The historical account in this article of the initial phase of the publishing process of Le capital shows that it was produced in circumstances that, on the one hand, facilitated the coming into being of this edition and, on the other hand, enabled relatives and friends of Marx to play an active role in its production.

With respect to the first element, the fact that the first steps in the publication of Le capital took place in the wake of the Paris Commune was not necessarily problem-free. The collapse of this experiment and the persecution and the hostility towards its fundamental ideas and assumed leaders seemed to encourage censorship of intellectual work that could potentially nourish new revolutionary attempts. Nonetheless, as we have documented, the Paris Commune proved to be the turning point for the publication of the French edition of Capital; it seems to have precipitated rather than prevented its production by helping with the finding of an editor.

Analyzing the publishing process of Le capital demonstrates by example that critical literature continued to be published in France. It shows how this kind of literature was published in a context of political change, although the revolutionaries were “defeated, depleted, and scattered across the globe,” and amidst censorship and open persecution towards revolutionaries and revolutionary ideas in the years that followed the Commune.Footnote ⁸³

Regarding the second element, as set out in this text, Marx's family and friends made substantial contributions to the initial phase of this French edition: finding a publisher, translator, and contract, and revising the translation in French. Intellectual production and family life were combined in the publishing process. Thus, instead of giving a biographical account that aims to depict a broader view of Marx's life, the account in this article reveals something about the life of the author and his relationship with his network of family and friends, seen through the lens of the history of the work on Le capital.

As we have shown, the relatively underexplored starting phase of the publishing process of Le capital, moreover, had repercussions on the further steps in this process and on the published form of the French edition. This phase represents the beginning of what Marx would later call das schmerzliche Experiment or “the painful experiment,” referring to the process of publishing Le capital that extended until November 1875.Footnote ⁸⁴

In 1877, after completion of the publication of the French edition, which had cost him much work and time, Marx did not want to be further involved with other translations of volume 1, as can be seen in correspondence concerning a possible American translation of this volume.Footnote ⁸⁵ Regarding this translation, Marx wrote to Sorge that the translator should “compare the 2nd German edition with the French edition in which I have included a good deal of new matter and greatly improved my presentation of much else.”Footnote ⁸⁶ Marx also stressed here the importance of the French edition and promised to give Sorge a French copy and a Verzeichnis or “list” to show “where the French edition shouldn't be compared with the German, but the French text be used as the only basis.”Footnote ⁸⁷

Although, in 1878, Marx wrote to Nikolaj F. Daniel′son that he felt “sometimes obliged—principally in the first chapter—to ‘aplatir’ [flatten] the matter,” we argue that the French edition can be used to interpret terminology in the two German editions that Marx published.Footnote ⁸⁸ Marx made this comment in a letter addressing the content of a second Russian edition, where he added that the second German and French edition have to be compared because “the latter contains many important changes and additions” and that the text divisions of the French edition need to be used.Footnote ⁸⁹ In a letter dated 28 November 1878, Marx came back to Daniel′son and again stressed the comparison between the French and second German edition of Capital, volume 1: “save the changes which the translator must make by comparing the second German edition with the French one—only a very few alterations are necessary, the which you will find later on in this letter.”Footnote ⁹⁰

The second German and French editions of Capital, volume 1, consist of text that partially overlaps and diverges and can provide interpretive nuances when the two editions are compared. A case in point is the use of the verb bedingen in German (“determine”) versus the verb dominer in French (“dominate”) in the following passage in Chapter 1, on the relationship between the mode of production and other areas of life: “the mode of production of material life determines the social, political, and intellectual process of life in general” versus “the mode of production of material life generally dominates the development of social, political, and intellectual life.”Footnote ⁹¹ The verb bedingen implies a stronger relationship between the mode of production and other life domains than dominer. Another example can be found in Part Three, Chapter 7, of the French edition: “The use or employment of labour power is labour,” versus the corresponding passage in Part Three, Chapter 5 in the second German edition: “The use of labour power is labour itself.”Footnote ⁹² The sentence is more detailed in the French edition. Given these differences, it is important to understand how the French edition came about and it turns out that the Paris Commune was an important context.

This article contributes to the broader literature on Marx by describing why and how the seemingly individual creative output of Le capital came into existence at that specific historical juncture. Considering the content of the French (or second German) edition without fully acknowledging the publishing process might give the false impression that a work is produced in a social vacuum or solely based on voluntaristic explanations. Besides a textual comparison, a contextualization of the publishing process of the French edition is necessary to understand to what extent and why this edition was different from the other volume 1 editions of Capital. Moreover, its context sheds light on topics in Marx's historiography that have been touched upon only in a fragmentary way. First, there is the significance of the French edition for the author, especially on the verge of publication of a second German edition. The start of the publishing process shows clearly that Marx was committed to bringing out a French translation of Capital at a time when a new German edition was being prepared, and it highlights his determination to oversee the process. Second, it illustrates how Marx found ways to publish his work in a hostile (international) environment. Third, it highlights the active contribution of Marx's family and friends to this initial phase of the published French edition, emphasizing that Le capital was a family endeavor.