Lenin in Munich

 

It was in Munich that Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov first went by the name 'Lenin,' in January 1901, in place of Tulin and Ilyin which he had used most frequently hitherto whilst living on the same street on which Hitler would later reside.

 

 Munich was a critical hub for Lenin’s revolutionary career from 1900 to 1902, shaping his ideology and strategies that defined the Bolshevik movement. Residing in Schwabing under the alias Meyer, Lenin launched Iskra, a Marxist newspaper vital for uniting Russia’s fragmented socialist factions. Munich’s political stability, printing facilities, and exile networks enabled Lenin to produce and smuggle Iskra into Russia, evading Tsarist censorship. The newspaper promoted a disciplined, centralised revolutionary party, forming the basis of Lenin’s vanguard party theory. In Munich, Lenin collaborated with Julius Martov, a key Marxist ally, on Iskra’s editorial content, but their differing views—Lenin’s insistence on strict discipline versus Martov’s democratic approach—sowed seeds for the 1903 Bolshevik-Menshevik split. Lenin also engaged with Rosa Luxemburg, whose radical ideas influenced his revolutionary thought, and Georgy Plekhanov, a founder of Russian Marxism, though Lenin diverged from Plekhanov’s cautious approach. Munich’s intellectual environment, bolstered by these figures and the German Social Democratic Party (SPD), refined Lenin’s concepts of class struggle and revolutionary leadership, rejecting the SPD’s reformism. The logistical skills Lenin developed, including clandestine distribution and exile coordination, were crucial for the Bolsheviks’ 1917 success.

Munich’s significance extends to its role in both Lenin’s and Hitler’s ideological formation. Both lived in Schwabing—Lenin in 1900–1902, Hitler a decade later—leveraging the district’s vibrant atmosphere to develop their radical visions. Lenin’s claim that controlling Munich’s Mariensäule meant controlling Europe highlights the city’s strategic importance, a notion later reflected in Hitler’s Munich-based rise. Thus, Munich was a crucible for Lenin’s ideological and practical foundations, with lasting parallels to Hitler’s early political development.

 

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin resided here at Kaiserstrasse 53 (now 46) from late 1900 to July 1901. His correspondence during this period provides precise details of his address and postal arrangements. In a letter dated December 7, 1900, Lenin instructed: “Herrn Georg Rittmeyer. Kaiserstraße 53. o. München (inside: for Meyer).” By January 1901, he confirmed that letters in Russian would reach him directly, and in March, he reiterated: “I am still living at the same place, and you need to write to me at the same address.” This address, belonging to Georg Rittmeyer, proprietor of the tavern “Zum goldenen Onkel,” served as Lenin’s primary mail collection point through the winter and spring of 1901.
Initially, Lenin used alternative addresses for security. Upon arriving in Munich, he received mail from Russia under the name Philipp Rögener in Nuremberg and from abroad under Dr. Karl Lehmann in Munich. A letter from Georgi Plekhanov on December 8, 1900 references an earlier address, 50 Kaiserstrasse, which was deemed incorrect, confirming Rittmeyer’s address as the stable option. Krupskaya noted that Rittmeyer, a social democrat and tavern owner, provided Lenin with a flat, where he lived unregistered, exercising caution. Lenin’s letters frequently included requests to avoid initials and confirm receipt, reflecting his concerns about postal reliability. For instance, he wrote: “Are you receiving my letters regularly? Please, check the postmarks and write to me.” On November 8, responding to Pavel Axelrod’s suggestion to abandon secrecy, Lenin insisted on maintaining concealment, stating: “I shall in any case continue to hide.”
Lenin also used a Stuttgart address for correspondence: “Herrn J. H. W. Dietz Verlag. Furthbachstr. 12. Stuttgart. On the inner envelope: An die Redaktion der Morgenröte—für Herrn Petroff.” This was used for communication with figures like A. Yu. Finn-Enotaevsky and V. D. Bonch-Bruyevich. The Rittmeyer and Lehmann addresses remained his most consistent points of contact in Munich.

On the right is the residence from a 1988 Soviet postcard and how it appears today; the quality and perspectives of the pictures in the series so poor as to be almost unusable for proper comparisons. The Kaiserstrasse 53 address is verified by the Munich address book, which lists Rittmeyer at “Kaiserstraße, 53o and 53I.” The four-storey grey building, with a red facade and thick walls, survives today, though its number changed to 46 between 1906 and 1907. Lenin’s room, arranged by social democrat doctor P. Schollenbrugh, was on the first floor, left of the staircase, overlooking a narrow courtyard. The house was home to workers from the “Maffei Maschinenbau” factory, students, and pensioners. Nearby, social democrats operated the “Rote Fahne” and “Zum solidaritet,” and Rittmeyer’s tavern was a gathering place.
Krupskaya’s account of her arrival in April 1901 describes finding Rittmeyer’s tavern at Kaiserstrasse 53, mistaking the publican for her contact, and being led by Rittmeyer’s wife to Lenin’s modest flat in the back courtyard. Lenin’s letters to his family reveal little about his domestic life, focusing instead on weather and health. He described Munich’s climate as damp and mild, with rare snow: “It's slush here, an autumn rain—if the whole ‘winter’ is like this, it’s much worse than snow and frosts” (December 26, 1900). He noted the lack of proper insulation in his room, writing: “In their houses, it is, so to speak, actually terribly cold even at -3º outside.” In November 1900, he mentioned recovering from influenza, and in February 1901, he reported heavy snow, unprecedented in 13 years, causing train delays.
Lenin’s lifestyle was frugal and active, driven by necessity rather than leisure. He traversed Munich for postal services, printing arrangements, and meetings with the Iskra editorial board. His letters reflect a demanding schedule: “Please forgive the brevity of the letter, I am swamped with a pile of petty things” (to V. P. Nogin). Despite hardships, he maintained an optimistic tone in family correspondence to ease his mother’s worries, writing: “I am completely healthy—it must be because I run about a lot and sit little.”

It was from here that Lenin and fellow exiled Russian Marxists first published the journal Iskra ("the Spark") which was then smuggled into Russia. From this address where Lenin wrote his famous revolutionary book "What is to be Done?" in which he proposed that a wholly new type of party should be established. This proved highly divisive at the Party Congress in 1903, and brought about a split, with the Bolsheviks now effectively operating as a separate party even before the final break in 1912.

When it first appeared, in March 1902, Lenin's pamphlet seemed to voice the general viewpoint of the Iskra-ites. They all wanted a centralized party: it seemed essential in a police state like Russia. The dictatorial implications of What Is To Be Done? – that the party's rank and file would be forced to obey, in military fashion, the commands of the leadership – were as yet not fully realized. 'None of us could imagine', Lydia Dan recalled, 'that there could be a party that might arrest its own members. There was the thought or the certainty that if a party was truly centralized, each member would submit naturally to the instructions or directives.'' 

Figes (122) A People's Tragedy

The plaque commemorating this key site in history was erected in 1970 on the occasion of Lenin's 100th birthday before being ripped down in 2006 and never replaced. As Iskra’s primary editor, Lenin managed its production under challenging conditions. He negotiated with Stuttgart publisher I. Dietz, secured typefaces, and ensured compliance with German publishing laws. He edited articles, formatted columns, and organised distribution, determining print runs (1,000 copies of Zarya for Russia, 500 abroad). Lenin corresponded with workers, edited their submissions, and prepared exposés of Tsarist policies. Tensions within the editorial board, particularly with Plekhanov, complicated matters. A note from December 29, 1900, likely written at Kaiserstrasse, records fraught negotiations with P. B. Struve, highlighting the editorial board’s strained dynamics.
Lenin’s time at Kaiserstrasse was marked by intense work, precarious living conditions, and persistent caution, all documented through his meticulous correspondence and Krupskaya’s recollections. 

On the right Soviet ambassador to West Germany, Semjon Zarapkin (Tsarapkin) at the unveiling ceremony. The memorial plaque made by the sculptor Karl Oppenrieder is a portrait of Lenin and carries the inscription, in both German and Russian, "Vladimir Lenin, founder of the Soviet Union, lived in this house from September 1900 to April 1901." Seventy members of the Balalaika Orchestra from Moscow and the Roaga Buam from Ismaning performed at the unveiling on April 12, 1968 with violent protests all around, with shouts of  "Lenin's work rests on the bones of 48 million slaughtered victims" and "Kaliningrad becomes Koenigsberg again". By August that year unknown persons tried to blow away the plaque, and it would continually be smeared. Finally on December 7, 1970, the stone slab fell victim to a bomb attack claimed by the NPD although investigators assumed a single perpetrator. The homeowner keeps the severely damaged plate in the basement.

In April 1901, Krupskaya arrived in Munich. Lenin had been informed by Maria Alexandrovna Ulyanova on February 28, 1901, that Krupskaya’s exile term would end on March 24 (old style), equivalent to March 11 by Lenin’s calendar. Ulyanova travelled to Prague and Vienna to certify Krupskaya’s foreign passport application, as Prague had no Russian consul.
Lenin, expecting Krupskaya’s arrival, noted she might not arrive before mid-April due to remaining obligations. Lacking her exact travel details, he visited Munich’s train station three times daily. The address sent to Krupskaya in Ufa, concealed in a book, was lost. She travelled to Prague to contact F. Modrachek, who handled correspondence with Russia, and learned Lenin’s alias and Munich address at Rittmeyer’s flat. Krupskaya spent several days with a Czech family before reuniting with Lenin in Munich.

The couple found Rittmeyer’s flat unsuitable for cohabitation. Lenin had been seeking a new residence and instructed correspondents to use Rittmeyer’s address temporarily, as noted on April 25, 1901. By May 5, Pavel Borisovich Akselrod was informed of a new address, reflecting changes in the editorial board’s communication system. Reorganising postal arrangements was challenging, with letters still sent to Rittmeyer’s address in May and June. On June 11, Krupskaya requested Ulyanova to send Lenin’s papers, including three copies of “The Development of Capitalism,” to a Munich doctor’s address. On July 13, Lenin instructed Plekhanov to direct all correspondence to Dr. Lehmann’s address by July 21, stating that Rittmeyer’s address was no longer viable. The relocation, recommended on October 10, 1900, was necessitated by difficulties in managing correspondence after leaving Rittmeyer’s flat. A letter from Akselrod on May 28, 1901, indicated heightened surveillance during Plekhanov’s Munich visit, prompting additional security measures. These included using Bulgarian passports, with Lenin and Krupskaya registered as Dr. Iordanov and Maria Iordanova, respectively. Krupskaya noted her passport was amended with Bulgarian details upon arrival. The use of forged Bulgarian passports had been discussed since January 24, 1901, when Lenin corresponded with Viktor Pavlovich Nogin about obtaining such documents. By April 1901, connections were established to secure them. Archival records from Munich’s police files, displayed in December 1965, confirm Lenin’s registration as a Bulgarian, Dmitry Iordanov, born October 3, 1878, in Silistria, Bulgaria. He resided at Arcisstrasse 58 shown here on the right from October 31, 1900, to April 3, 1901, before moving with Krupskaya from Rittmeyer’s flat in early April 1901.

Lenin lived here at Schleissheimer Strasse  106 seen from a Soviet biography and as it appears today. This is claimed to be the site where 'Lenin' was born- with Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov adopting the pseudonym "Lenin"to conceal his identity while operating underground against the Tsarist regime. He he first used "Lenin" as a byline for contributions to  Iskra, which he edited from the apartment. f in Siberia where he'd been imprisoned earlier, whilst others propose it derived from a local Munich figure or symbolic meaning, but its initial appearance in print under that byline coincided with his time at that address. Remarkably, on the same street at #34 would be Hitler's first address in Munich just before the outbreak of the Great War. "Lenin had lived at 106 Schleissheimer Strasse, and at number 34 on the same street, only a few blocks away, Adolf Hitler now took a room as a tenant in the apartment of a tailor named Popp." (Fest, 20, Hitler). 
On the right is Hitler's former residence a few blocks away as it appears today and when it was distinguished by the Nazis with a plaque reading:

Adolf Hitler lived in this house from spring 1913 to the day he volunteered for the German army in August 1914.

Hitler's room was the third from the left on the top floor according to Williams (20):

Shortly after their arrival, he and Häusler found a third-floor room in the house of master-tailor Popp, the main occupant of a terrace at 34 Schleissheimerstrasse. Popp’s wife immediately made this ‘Austrian charmer’ welcome. Her husband, who had worked in Paris and regarded himself as a man of the world, quickly saw in Hitler ‘a personality whose abilities entitled him to the highest hopes’. Hitler was not the first twentieth-century dictator to live in Schleissheimerstrasse. A few years earlier Lenin had lodged about a block away. Today the area appears much as it did in Hitler’s (or Lenin’s) time. A small playground, which Hitler sketched from his window, still lies opposite. While its 1930s’ Nazi-era plaque was pulled down in 1945 along with its ornate stucco façade, 34 Schleissheimerstrasse is still identifiable as Hitler’s first Munich home.

Waite in The Psychopathic God (199) describes the accommodation:

The room, which he rented from a tailor, Josef Popp, cost him only 20 marks a month. It was pleasant, well furnished, and had a private entrance from the street. Hitler could easily have entertained, since the Popps had no objections. Yet as they both recalled with some sur­prise, Hitler never once invited either a male or female guest to his room. Popp had been trained in Paris and prided himself on being a master tailor of modish fashions. Since he was also a kindly man, he saw to it that his tenants’ clothes did not cast adverse reflections on his business. Hitler was supplied with well-cut suits and an overcoat. The Popp children, Josef Jr. and Elisabeth, liked the nice man who lived upstairs. But he always remained a little aloof and never wanted to talk about his family background. “We never knew,” they said in an interview in 1967, “what he was really like.” The younger Popp later recalled especially that their tenant “spent a lot of time in keeping his body clean.” 

Standing in front. Certainly in the annals of history, few individuals have cast as long and potent a shadow as Lenin and Hitler, making this street truly remarkable. The respective leaders of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the Nazi regime in Germany, they have left indelible marks on human society and have shaped the modern world in profound ways. In his book Lenin, Stalin and Hitler: The Age of Social Catastrophe, Gellately argues that Lenin’s establishment of a one-party dictatorship in Russia directly shaped Hitler’s model of totalitarian rule in Nazi Germany, asserting a causal link between the two regimes, writing (7)

My book deviates from the standard approach by giving significant attention to Lenin and by putting the story in proper chronological sequence. It also corrects for the tendency of most studies of Stalinism to ignore Lenin or relegate him to a background role. Too often Lenincomes across as a prudent and wise, or at least well-intentioned, founding father whose vision was polluted by the murderous Stalin. Yet Lenin is central not just to the foundation of Soviet Communism but also to its subsequent development. It was precisely his will to power that drove onthe doubters among fellow Bolsheviks in 1917. Without a hint of moral scruple or sense of national loyalty, Lenin desperately hoped for Russia’s defeat in the First World War and ridiculed fellow Bolsheviks who thought they should defend their country. 

Central to his argument is Lenin’s institutionalisation of state terror through the Cheka (secret police), censorship, and the cult of personality, which Hitler studied and adapted. Gellately posits that Hitler explicitly recognised Lenin’s success in consolidating power through violence and ideological purges, notably in Mein Kampf, where he praised the Bolshevik elimination of political opponents as a blueprint for his own Führerprinzip. Both regimes prioritised absolute control over society via propaganda, surveillance, and the suppression of dissent, with Lenin’s Soviet Union serving as a prototype for Nazi Germany’s Gleichschaltung policies. Gellately emphasises structural parallels: the centralisation of power under a vanguard party, the use of show trials to eliminate rivals, and the fusion of party and state apparatus. He contends that Hitler’s regime mirrored Lenin’s tactics of scapegoating minorities (Jews under Nazis, kulaks under Bolsheviks) to unify public sentiment behind the state. Whilst critics challenge this direct lineage, noting ideological differences (class struggle vs. racial hierarchy),Gellately maintains that the operational frameworks of both dictatorships- rooted in preemptive repression and ideological absolutism- reveal a deliberate emulation.

Whilst both leaders were single-minded in their pursuit of their respective visions, Lenin's policies were driven more by socio-economic considerations, whereas Hitler's were driven by racial ideology. Yet, both caused immense suffering and loss, albeit on different scales and for different reasons.

It could be argued that the 20th century began in Schwabing. In the years just preceding the World War I, Kandinsky painted Western art’s first abstract painting there, Hitler was hanging out in coffeehouses on the Schellingstrasse, and Lenin, midway through his long exile, was writing his most influential political pamphlets in an apartment off the Leopoldstrasse. 

J. S. Marcus, The Bohemian Side of Munich

 The residence as depicted in a 1988 Soviet postcard and as it appears today where in April 1901, Lenin and Krupskaya settled in a room rented from Gans Kaiser, a retired member of the Social Democratic Party of Germany from the Norden district. Konstantinovna described the arrangement: “We settled in with a working-class German family. They had a large family—six people. They all lived in the kitchen and a small room. But the cleanliness was terrifying; the children walked about dirty.” The flat was modest, and a special pipe was installed to heat the room, as the weather in late April and early May was cold and rainy. New flats were being constructed opposite, and a path laid by Kaiser was visible from the workers’ windows. Lenin began writing What is to be Done? in a small storeroom, whilst Konstantinovna took on domestic tasks, stating, “I decided that I had to move Vladimir Ilyich to domestic correspondence, and I took on the job. I cooked in the landlady’s kitchen, but I tried to make as little noise as possible in the room. I tried to do everything as quietly as possible.” Kaiser, interviewed in a Munich newspaper in 1960, described the flat and storeroom, noting the Ulyanovs’ character: “despite the fact that the tenants were supporters of godlessness,” they were serious, neat, and sociable, showing affection towards his children and those of neighbours who played there.

The first use of the nom de guerre Lenin.

The Ulyanovs occasionally dined at Zur Frankenburgg, a snack bar at the corner of Schleissheimerstrasse and Georgenstrasse. In mid-April, Lenin contracted influenza, writing, “I have had the flu for a week here,” likely prompting the installation of the heating pipe. Nadezhda Konstantinovna supported him, taking on editorial work for Iskra. She recalled, “A huge amount of work suddenly fell on you.” On April 22, they jointly wrote to M. G. Vecheslov in Berlin, and on April 27, Konstantinovna wrote to Iskra agent L. N. Radchenko in Poltava, conducting correspondence under Vladimir Ilyich’s close supervision. The former Iskra secretary, I. G. Smidovich (Dimka), had stepped back due to family circumstances, and A. I. Ulyanova-Elizarova, Lenin’s sister, assisted with correspondence from Berlin.

A Soviet postage stamp issued on the centenary of Lenin's birth commemorates the site. Anna Ilyinichna arrived in Munich from Paris in March 1901, having been there since February. She worked at Vladimir Ilyich’s flat, which served as Iskra’s editorial office, and visited the Bavarian library to carry out tasks for him. A surviving letter from the Iskra groups against the Struggle faction was written in her hand. In the evenings, she and Vladimir Ilyich strolled Munich’s streets, discussing his plans. After staying briefly at Schleissheimerstrasse, Anna Ilyinichna left for Berlin in early May, as noted in Vladimir Ilyich’s letter to his mother on May 19. In late June, she wrote to him about cities to visit for Iskra business. A registration card from the Bavarian state library, dated January 10, 1902, lists “Fräulein Blank, a philosophy student, Amalienstrasse, 24III,” possibly Anna Ilyinichna. A letter dated December 28, 1901, was sent to Frau Elisaroff at Scharnhorststrasse 34aIII, Hof, bei Teige, Berlin. Anna Ilyinichna’s letters were sometimes forwarded through Lenin.
On the day Nadezhda Konstantinovna arrived at Rittmeyer’s flat, she saw Lenin, Martov, and Anna Ilyinichna working at a table. With her arrival, Iskra’s secretarial work became fully organised. Letters to Russia and abroad were sent daily, composed, encoded, checked, and rewritten for censors. Incoming letters from Iskra agents required decoding. Kaiser noted the Ulyanovs’ occasional attendance at social-democratic meetings, typically in the evenings. Vladimir Ilyich focused on editorial tasks, compiling Iskra, proofreading, and writing articles. During the autumn and winter of 1900, he wrote several articles, but by spring 1901, he began What is to be Done?, subtitled “On the most urgent questions of our movement.” The work addressed economism, a trend in the Russian workers’ movement that belittled revolutionary theory and the proletarian party’s role, advocating spontaneity. It analysed ideological and organisational issues, critiqued opportunism, and emphasised the party’s role in uniting socialism with the workers’ movement.
Anna Ilyinichna recalled Lenin discussing the book’s plan during spring 1901 walks, often retreating from conversations to focus on writing, sometimes visiting taverns for beer. Konstantinovna described his work process: “When he was writing, he would usually walk quickly from corner to corner and speak in a whisper about what he was going to write. By this time, I had already adapted myself to his manner of working. When he was writing, I neither spoke to him nor asked him anything. Then, on a walk, he would talk about what he was thinking.” The work, completed in 1902, became one of the most important and influential pieces of writing in history.

Having lunch at the Schelling Salon where I'm apparently sitting at Lenin's former table. Located at Schellingstraße 54 in Munich’s Maxvorstadt district provides another physical link between Lenin and Hitler, serving as a critical venue for both during their respective periods in Munich. For Lenin, between 1900 and 1902, the Schelling-Salon was a key meeting point for Russian émigrés and social democrats. Lenin would frequent the salon in the late morning, typically between ten o'clock and noon, when the venue was quieter. Meetings lasted two to three hours, allowing for extended discussions. Attendance was small, usually six to eight individuals, including Lenin, Alexander Parvus, and occasionally German socialists like Clara Zetkin. Krupskaya’s memoirs specify the focus: “In Munich, at the Schelling-Salon, Vladimir Ilyich would sit with comrades, debating how to get Iskra across the border. He said, ‘We must ensure every issue reaches the workers in Petersburg and Moscow, no matter the cost’”. Activities included drafting Iskra articles and planning distribution networks. Lenin instructed, “Use coded letters for Petersburg; the police are intercepting at Vilna”, highlighting efforts to evade Russian Okhrana surveillance. Discussions centred on Marxist theory, particularly the role of the proletariat, with Lenin noting in 1901, “The party must lead, not follow, the masses”. The salon’s back room, with its billiard table, provided a discreet setting for these exchanges, blending into the regular crowd of students and artists.

For Hitler, the Schelling-Salon was significant in 1913–1914, during his early Munich years. Hitler would visit in the early evening, around 18.30 to 20.30 when the salon was bustling with bohemians and intellectuals. His visits tended to last one to one-and-a-half hours, constrained by his limited funds. He typically sat alone or with one companion, such as Rudolf Häusler, with no evidence of larger groups. Activities included sketching, reading Vorwärts or  the Münchner Post, and engaging in heated debates. A 1950 German memoir by a Schelling-Salon waiter, Hans Baur, recalls Hitler’s outbursts: “He’d shout, ‘The Jews and Marxists betrayed Germany at Versailles; we need a strong leader to crush them!’” . The focus was on nationalist and anti-Semitic themes, with Hitler railing against “the cowardice of the November 1918 surrender”. These rants, though unstructured, honed his oratorical style. The salon’s open atmosphere allowed him to test ideas among a mixed crowd of about 20–30 patrons, but his disruptive behaviour led to a ban after unpaid bills, as noted in a 1914 police report.

Claimed to have been used by Lenin, Hitler and Franz Josef Strauss and now by me.

Lenin and his associates established a residence at Siegfriedstrasse 14, again shown in the 1988 Soviet postcard series and hidden behind trees today at Erich-Mühsam-Platz. Mühsam was a Jewish anarchist, poet, playwright, essayist, and cabaret performer who moved to Munich in 1908. After his release from prison in November 1918, he returned to Munich during the Red Bavaria Revolution. He declined a ministerial position offered by Kurt Eisner, leader of the Independent Socialist Party, choosing instead to advocate for workers’ councils and communes alongside anarchists like Gustav Landauer and Ernst Toller. In 1919, he helped establish the short-lived Bayerische Räterepublik, a socialist experiment that lasted six days before being overthrown by communist forces led by Eugen Levine. His involvement led to a five-year prison sentence. As an outspoken critic of Nazism, Mühsam was targeted when the Nazis came to power in 1933. He was arrested and interned in Sachsenhausen, where he was tortured and murdered on July 10, 1934.

 Here from May 1901 to April 1902 Lenin organised the publication of the newspaper Iskra and the journal Zarya. The printing operations for Iskra were based in Munich and Leipzig, whilst Zarya was produced in Stuttgart. The printing house, operated by G. Rau at Prostbachstrasse 48 in Leipzig, served as the primary facility for Iskra’s production but this apartment doubled as its editorial office. The move to this address is documented in Krupskaya’s memoirs which describe it as a three-room apartment where they lived under assumed identities to evade Bavarian police surveillance. E.H. Carr described it as Lenin’s "last address in Munich" before he moved to London in April 1902. By now Lenin avoided public cafés to minimize surveillance risks, making the apartment the central hub.

Currently a restaurant, when I visited it the first time it was Das Zimmer Esszimmer at which time at the far end of the dining room stood a bust of Lenin shown right. Today it's occupied by 'Burger House' where there's no reference to Lenin at all.  

Regular attendees included Krupskaya, who handled typesetting and correspondence, and key collaborators like Martov and Vladimir Potresov, who visited Munich periodically. German socialists, including members of the SPD such as August Bebel, attended roughly once a month. Lenin and Krupskaya prepared Iskra issues 6–20 at Siegfriedstraße. Lenin wrote articles, translated texts, and edited contributions, focusing on Marxist theory, critiques of tsarist policies, and strategies for Russian revolutionary organisation whilst Krupskaya managed printing logistics, coordinating with German printers like Georg Decker.
Among specific events held at this location that can be identified was a heated meeting in August 1901, that took place around 15.00 and lasted for four hours with Martov and Potresov in which they debated the Iskra editorial board’s structure, with Lenin advocating for a smaller, centralised board. In December 1901, Lenin ma (likely Bebel) to discuss printing subsidies, held in the evening with six attendees. And in March 1902 at a late-night session lasting until midnight Lenin and Krupskaya finalised Iskra issue 18 in order to meet a printing deadline.





In spring 1901, a letter signed by Lenin arrived at Schwabtalerstrasse 44, stating that an article would be sent soon. This was the residence of Dietrich-Herman Buchbinder. Adjacent to the flat was the printing office of Iskra, managed by I. S. Blumenfeld, who had relocated from Leipzig to Munich following the establishment of the party’s publishing operations. The location was chosen for its proximity to M. Ernst’s printing facilities and the central railway station. However, the Iskra editorial office was situated far across the city at Siegfriedstrasse, necessitating postal communication for urgent administrative and technical matters. Lenin noted that Blumenfeld lived separately and was rarely seen, serving as a key link for communications with Iskra’s operations in Russia.
Blumenfeld, a typesetter by profession, was an active member of the Liberation of Labour group and the Iskra organisation. He used pseudonyms such as Raznotsvetov, Tsvetov, and Obshchy drug. Krupskaya described him as a skilled typesetter who managed tasks efficiently. Beyond typesetting, Blumenfeld handled passport arrangements for operatives and facilitated the editorial board’s work in Russia. He also played a significant role in transporting illegal literature across borders. In March 1902, Lenin wrote to Zurich that Blumenfeld faced significant challenges, limiting Iskra to a single issue that month. Around this time, Blumenfeld was arrested at the Radzivilov border while transporting Iskra materials and was imprisoned in Kiev before being exiled. Months later, he reappeared abroad, though Lenin, in a letter to Plekhanov in April, expressed concern after not hearing from him for three weeks, fearing his loss.

In October 1900, Vera Zasulich settled in Munich, renting a third-floor flat at Schraudolphstrasse 29 from Frau Tauger. She had previously lived in Switzerland with other members of the Emancipation of Labour group. To secure a foreign passport, she applied to the St Petersburg police under the name V. M. Kirov and used the pseudonym Vera Dmitrievna in correspondence with the Iskra editorial board, as noted by A. N. Potresov’s secretary. This pseudonym was adopted by Plekhanov’s circle for secure communication. After moving to Munich, Zasulich became a central figure in the operations of Iskra and Zarya, particularly after Plekhanov’s arrival.
Zasulich was a member of the Iskra editorial board, contributing to its technical and organisational tasks. She occasionally served as secretary alongside I. G. Smidovich-Leman. Lenin described her role as “very close to the ‘Emancipation of Labour’ group, and in Munich, she was a member of the Iskra editorial board, took part in the technical work, and at times was secretary of the editorial board with I. G. Smidovich-Leman, and was a close friend of Vladimir Ilyich.” Krupskaya recalled Lenin’s affection, noting his comment on the evening before Zasulich’s arrival that “she is a wonderful, sincere person. Yes, that was true love.” The Emancipation of Labour group maintained its connection with the Iskra editorial board primarily through Zasulich, with most correspondence directed to her Schraudolphstrasse 29 address. Lenin specified this address for communications, noting, “The address for letters is Frau—Vera Ivanovna Dmitrievna,” underscoring her role as the main contact for the group’s activities in Munich.

In December 1900, preparations for the initial issues of Iskra and Zarya were underway in Munich, requiring constant communication between the editorial board and Russia. Lenin wrote to A. N. Potresov, expressing the need for a suitable location for this purpose.
P. B. Axelrod arrived in Munich at the end of January 1901, shortly after Plekhanov. Lenin wrote to Axelrod, expressing satisfaction with his arrival and hoping he would find Munich comfortable. He noted Axelrod’s Swiss passport and provided the address: Schwabing, Hohenzollernstrasse, 81a, where Axelrod resided until February. This address was near the Gasthaus Neue-München, adjacent to the residence of the Munich-based Iskra editorial board members.
Negotiations between the Iskra editorial board and liberals, represented by Struve, began on December 29, 1900, and continued through January 1901. These discussions followed a conference in Pskov in April 1900 with the legal Marxists, who represented the interests of the Russian bourgeoisie. The liberals expressed discontent with the monarchy, viewing its restrictions as an obstacle to capitalism, and sought bourgeois-democratic freedoms while opposing liberal Narodism. They acknowledged the proletariat and social democracy as significant political forces and sought to align with Marxism. Lenin aimed to leverage their connections and resources to pass his and Plekhanov’s works through censorship. This collaboration had previously facilitated the spread of Marxist ideas, though often in a simplified form, and resulted in a rapid defeat of Narodism. A notable outcome was the publication in St. Petersburg of the collection Materials for the Characterisation of Our Economic Development, which included Lenin’s article, The Economic Content of Narodism and the Criticism of it in Mr Struve’s Book.
During a prior meeting in Switzerland, Plekhanov expressed caution about Struve’s views but didn't openly oppose them, believing Struve might eventually align fully with Marxism. The question of an agreement with the legal Marxists was deferred. In Munich, negotiations resumed, focusing on joint publishing activities abroad, including a proposed appendix, Sovremennoe Obozrenie, to Zarya. Participants included Lenin, V. I. Zasulich, A. N. Potresov, Struve, and later Axelrod and Plekhanov. Struve sought to use social-democratic publications to advance liberal bourgeois interests and proposed a competing publication. He rejected a clause proposed by the Iskra group granting the editorial board full freedom to use political material submitted to Sovremennoe Obozrenie. The agreement collapsed after a conference on January 30, 1901, attended by Axelrod and Zasulich, with Plekhanov already in Geneva. Lenin wrote to Plekhanov, expressing frustration, noting that the liberals’ focus on political material and journalistic style threatened to overshadow Iskra and Zarya. He warned that Struve, with his financial resources and control over content, would dominate the proposed publication, reducing the Iskra group’s role to administrative tasks.

On March 23, 1901, Lenin wrote from London about organisational matters, noting that Alekseev, the pseudonym for Martov, would arrive in Munich soon. Martov, involved in the Social Democratic movement since the 1890s and a member of the St. Petersburg Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class, had last met Lenin in Pskov in May 1900 to discuss revolutionary work, Iskra’s publication, and organisational contacts. Martov, delayed by circumstances, had been organising an Iskra support group in Poltava. He arrived in Munich at the end of March 1901 and settled in Schwabing, on Ockhamstrasse, in Frau Kraft’s flat at house number 1a, third floor. This flat served as a safe house for the Iskra editorial board to receive visitors on party business, with prior notification required due to the resident’s frequent absences. Martov travelled to Zurich, Paris, Berlin, and other cities on Iskra-related organisational tasks. 

Former site of Noris cafe in which, according to Konstantinovna's memoirs, "... long conversations, the exchange of opinions between Plekhanov and Lenin about what topics for Iskra to choose from... " at Leopoldstrasse 41 is long gone, today now the site of a Tengelmann grocery shop (and Deutsche Bank!). The café, owned by Karl Scharff, was housed in a building constructed within the previous decade, near the editorial flat on Ockhamstrasse. Meetings also took place at the flats of Lenin, Krupskaya, and Nabokov, who was involved in the organisational work of the Iskra group. Krupskaya recalled that evening discussions at these meetings covered every article, with correspondence, including letters between Lenin and Plekhanov, read aloud and debated by the board. Lenin’s replies were sometimes dictated to Krupskaya and reviewed collectively. The board prioritised the security of their correspondence and the confidentiality of addresses, with Lenin often urging prompt responses, particularly to contacts in Russia and St Petersburg, where circumstances shifted rapidly. The Munich-based members of the editorial board regularly met at Lenin’s flat for negotiations and to receive visitors or travelling associates. Larger gatherings, including the final meeting in May 1901 before Martov’s departure for Russia, also occurred there. Editorial work involved managing a steady flow of letters, manuscripts, and administrative tasks, with Lenin emphasising the need for timely replies. Disagreements within the board arose over matters of principle, including the content of Lenin’s articles, notably What Is To Be Done?, and the tactical approach of the Marxist party toward the liberal bourgeoisie. Discussions, often intense, extended into correspondence. The board also debated the theoretical direction of Iskra and the drafting of the party programme, initiated in the summer of 1901. These discussions addressed the long-term prospects of the revolutionary movement in Russia, the role of the working class, the balance between theoretical and practical elements of the programme, and the development of class struggle.The revolutionary movement and the growth of the working-class movement in Russia were central concerns. Disagreements led Vpered, in its issue of September 25, to propose delaying discussions. A commission, incorporating Plekhanov’s ideas and Lenin’s revisions, produced a draft programme, which Lenin further refined. The final programme, published in Iskra No. 21, aligned with Marxist principles and connected the Russian social-democratic movement to international socialism. It analysed Russian capitalism and outlined the working class’s role in the revolutionary struggle, adapting international socialist principles to Russia’s specific conditions. In 1901 and 1902, rising peasant unrest in Russia, particularly among the poor and landless peasantry, drew significant attention from the editorial board, reflecting its broader relevance to the revolutionary movement. 

Gabelsbergerstraße 46 (then 20a), directly across from the Technical University of Munich, is where the mail Lenin received was addressed to Dr. Carl Lehmann, a physician and member of the Munich Social-Democratic Party organisation, who resided here with his Russian-born wife, Adams. Lehmann himself had been a reformer and an idealist, dreaming of the liberation of the working class, having worked in Zurich, London, Hamburg and Munich in the production and dissemination of socialist literature. He was repeatedly in conflict with the police and judiciary, once he was in Freiburg in court, but was acquitted. Later he decided to take a civilian job and studied medicine in Strasbourg and Munich, where he received his doctorate. Lehmann's wife Hope had studied medicine, specialising in gynæcology. Their salon was the meeting place of the social democratic intellectuals in Munich; SPD party leader August Bebel stayed here whenever he was in Munich, and Mrs. Lehmann translated Bebel's book "The Woman and Socialism" into English.

In his March 22, 1901 letter to F.I. Dan, Lenin wrote:

The money can be sent through a bank by cheque, in a registered letter addressed to Carl Lehmann (the third letter is a German h), M.D., Gabelsbergerstrasse 20a. Keep this address in mind: it is good for cash, and for letters and books.—Lenin

Lemann’s second-floor flat served as a hub for Iskra activities.- the first issue of the newspaper was printed there, and it hosted numerous Russian political émigrés. Lenin, a frequent visitor, was familiar with the German domestic staff. In 1901, Lenin entrusted Lemann with the manuscript of The Development of Capitalism in Russia, published in 1902. Lemann also provided financial support, sending 300 marks to Plekhanov in 1901 and 500 marks in 1902. In a letter dated September 25, 1901, Krupskaya recorded Lenin’s account of his week in Munich, where he worked on printing the first issue of Iskra with Lemann’s assistance, describing the process as progressing well despite challenges. 

Security was a constant concern for the Munich group. Lenin stressed the need for vigilance due to the risk of police surveillance, advising intermediaries to use pseudonyms and conceal sender and recipient identities. In one instance, he wrote, “Please let us know under whose name you are sending the English book. If it is under the name of Ivanov, I shall collect it myself.” Correspondence was often routed through trusted intermediaries, such as a typographer named Akim, who relayed letters through a chain of contacts. Despite precautions, some letters were lost or intercepted, with the board learning of these failures only later, often when a comrade noted a letter’s non-delivery despite correct addressing.Lemann’s Gabelsbergerstrasse address was critical for communication with Russia, particularly with the St Petersburg group supporting Iskra. In March 1901, Martov provided this address to the editorial board before departing for St Petersburg, enabling its use for sending instructions, technical literature, and materials for the underground press, as well as receiving factory reports on social-democratic agitation. Adams’s flat was also used for meetings with Russian group representatives, alongside Café Noris. A trusted intermediary, Miss Nitske, facilitated the forwarding of correspondence and parcels. Lenin advised caution, instructing that parcels be sent to Lemann’s address in Friedensheim, near Munich, under the pseudonym Shakhar, with collection details prearranged. Alternative pseudonyms like Medvedev or Poyarkov were also used, supported by a special communication code. The Munich group primarily sent correspondence through Lemann or the Iskra address in Zurich, where Krupskaya was based. The board also maintained contacts with social-democrats in German cities such as Bremen, Hamburg, Chemnitz, Stuttgart, and Munich, forwarding mail to Gabelsbergerstrasse for sorting and onward transmission to Russia.

 

 

In spring 1901, the St Petersburg “Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class” was instructed to send requests to the address of the dentist Blei, at Arcisstrasse 19, specifying the contents of shipments to identify senders. Leman in Munich provided another address for communication with Iskra groups in Russia. The editorial board adopted a policy of promptly acknowledging receipt of all communications from Russian correspondents. Every letter and parcel was meticulously recorded in a register called the “Delo,” and if no response was received from Russia, a follow-up request was sent, noting the recipient and destination. Blei’s flat at Arcisstrasse, alongside another at Gabelsbergerstrasse 9, served as a safe address for the “Union of Struggle,” forwarding correspondence to Lenin. Telegrams, including those from St Petersburg and Moscow, were sent to these addresses under strict rules. Lenin instructed that telegrams should contain only the code word and be signed with a code name to ensure sender identification. For instance, a telegram sent from St Petersburg to Arcisstrasse 19 in early April 1901, for the duplicated leaflet “Pervoe Maya” prepared for a conference of Russian committees, used the code word “Izdatelstvo.” The telegram stated: “The manuscript has been received, everything is in order, we ask you to send the proofs to the same address.” Both the telegram and its reply were recorded in the minutes of the St Petersburg and Iskra committees. If needed, telegrams were repeated to alternate addresses, with senders notified by letter. Blei responded to telegrams with messages such as “The answer has been received, everything is in order” or “The answer has not yet arrived, please repeat the telegram.” In April 1901, a telegram from Samara confirmed: “The answer has been received, everything is in order.”
A letter from Samara, dated February 12, sent to the Gabelsbergerstrasse address under the name “Besen,” reported: “We are sending you a list of all the addresses of our comrades in Moscow, as well as in Voronezh, Kiev, Odessa, Baku, Vilno, and other cities. The workload is heavy. There is a shortage of Russian literature. In this situation, the Samara committee is taking on the responsibility of distributing literature to the provinces and is asking for more material. We have not received the last issue of Iskra! Please send it as soon as possible! And do not forget to send the supplement.” The editorial board replied on the same day, confirming receipt of the address list and sending the requested literature, often disguised as commercial samples, while insisting on secure couriers and strict confidentiality.

Here in the Bavarian State Library at Ludwigstrasse 23, shown after the war and today he wrote his most famous work and arguably most influential work What is to be Done?. In December 1900, Lenin wrote to his mother about his routine, stating, “I am now following the German socialists’ example, and after my experience with the sea of book work in Russia and in Geneva, I am not at all afraid of the prospect of being buried in books.” After moving to Siegfriedstrasse on March 19, 1901, he began working regularly at the Bavarian Royal Library, noting, “I am now working regularly in the library.” Krupskaya, recalled that he sought to maximise his time there, valuing the library’s conducive environment. Lenin’s sister, Maria Ilyinichna Ulyanova, also noted his extensive library work in Russia and abroad, where strict rules often limited his access but allowed focused study. Its collection, rich in scholarly works, particularly in economics and politics, suited Lenin’s research needs. He required a special permit to use the reading room, which he obtained, writing to his mother, “I have received a permit, and now I am working in the library every day. I am very pleased with the conditions, and I am living close by, so it is convenient.” However, library regulations, including the need to sign for books and provide a residence address, along with the requirement for embassy approval, made regular visits challenging. In May 1901, Lenin expressed frustration, writing, “here, the library is not very convenient, and I am sorry that ‘there is no library here’.”
Despite these constraints, Lenin used the library extensively, shown here bedecked with Nazi flags and today. In June 1901, he borrowed books, including Engels’s work and Bebel’s Sozialdemokratie in Frankreich, as he noted in a letter to his sister in November 1901, mistakenly referring to the library as “Pater.” Krupskaya’s memoirs indicate that Lenin compiled lists of literature and studied materials on peasant movements in Germany, France, England, the United States, and other countries, focusing on documents like “Commissions of 13 July” and “Orders of 11 July” for use in his articles and speeches. Lenin’s papers reveal meticulous engagement with the library's resources even though its extensive collection posed challenges, as its catalogue was often outdated, and Russian books were scarce. Lenin’s library card survives, documenting his access.
During the winter of 1900–1901, Lenin shouldered editorial responsibilities for Iskra and Zarya, managing correspondence, finances, and the preparation of initial issues. The library provided a calm environment for this work, which he undertook daily, except Sundays, when libraries were closed. Krupskaya occasionally assisted, though Lenin noted her absence from the library when other tasks arose.

Lenin also utilised the Munich University Library, located at Ludwigstrasse 22 (later renumbered to 15), in addition to the Bavarian Royal Library. Here Hitler is seen visiting the university in 1935 on the occasion of the Annual Meeting of the “Academy of German Law”. Access to the lending library was restricted to students and lecturers, but the Russian student community in Munich could occasionally borrow books through personal connections or use the reading rooms, which were open to non-students. In a letter from early 1901, Lenin noted, “I am now using the university library: the Grund- und Bodenfrage, which I could not find in Paris, is here in abundance.” He also wrote to his sister Maria, “I have found the university library, which is like the one in Paris.” Russian books were of course scarce. Lenin remarked, “It is easier to get gold coins here than Russian books (and even less so in Russia if you do not have the right connections).” When Russian books were unavailable, he relied on statistical yearbooks, which he frequently consulted. In correspondence with Bonch-Bruyevich, he wrote, “I sometimes see Russian newspapers here, but only by chance, and not regularly. If you have any new Russian books, especially the ‘Manichesky’ calendar, send them to me at the university address.”

In Munich, Lenin established connections with prominent figures of the German and European social-democratic movement, including Luxemburg, Liebknecht, Zetkin, Marxlevsky, and Parvus. These meetings were conducted cautiously due to strict secrecy, as noted by Krupskaya: “Since we observed strict secrecy, we did not meet with German comrades at all.” Despite these constraints, personal contacts were formed, particularly during the Munich period in 1901.
Lenin met Luxemburg at Parvus’s flat on Ungererstrasse 80, a respectable house opposite the Ungererbad summer pool, set in a garden with tennis courts. Parvus, a key figure in the German social-democratic movement, hosted many associates, including Liebknecht, Zetkin, Marxlevsky, and Luxemburg. Correspondence for the Iskra editorial board was occasionally sent to Parvus’s address, as Axelrod wrote on 14 May 1901: “I am sending my letter with enclosures to his address, as I am not sure of the reliability of the old ones.” In spring 1901, Lenin visited Parvus’s flat to discuss matters with Luxemburg. In a letter dated April 1901, Lenin mentioned that Luxemburg had promised an article for the second issue of Zarya, a new introduction to her articles “Die sozialistische Krise in Frankreich.” Axelrod’s letter of May 14, 1901 confirmed Luxemburg’s commitment to contribute to the next issue of Milera. By 9 July 1901, Lenin noted, “Luxemburg and Danevi will give (perhaps have already given) it in France.” These interactions marked the beginning of Lenin’s direct engagement with European socialist leaders, fostering international social-democratic cooperation.

The Old Pinakothek located at Barerstrasse 27 after the war when the mid-section had been destroyed and today. In a letter dated June 11, 1901, Krupskaya wrote, “I have not yet been to the Pinakothek, but I am planning to go soon, as I have heard so much about it.” Lenin visited the Pinakothek during his stay in Munich, possibly as a respite from his revolutionary activities. The museum, not far from his editorial flat on Gabelsbergerstrasse, offered a space for reflection. Krupskaya notes that in 1901, Lenin visited the museum’s collection, initially perhaps to escape the rain, but later returned with her to view the works of Rubens, Rembrandt, and Murillo, appreciating the calm atmosphere of the galleries.
Lenin’s interest in art was further influenced by discussions with Anatoly Lunacharsky, who was knowledgeable about painting. In a conversation with Clara Zetkin, Lenin remarked, “We must especially preserve our interest in art. Beautiful things must be preserved, for this is what gives us strength, helps us to endure, as it did the old revolutionaries who had to endure so much before us, as it does now for those who are forced to live only by their work, without rest, without the possibility of escape.” He expressed a particular appreciation for the works of Rubens, Rembrandt, and Murillo, stating, “I am not able to call myself an art lover, but I am always drawn to the works of Rubens, Rembrandt, and the calm joy of Murillo.”

From November 2012 to February 2013 the Alte Pinakothek held the exhibition Revolution auf Papier: Lenin, die Bolschewiki und die Macht der Druckerpressen, examining how printed materials fuelled revolutionary movements in early 20th-century Russia, with Lenin’s activities in Munich as a focal point. It centred on the clandestine production and distribution of radical literature—newspapers, pamphlets, manifestos—used to mobilise dissent against the Tsarist regime, highlighting Munich’s role as a hub for exiled revolutionaries during Lenin’s time there. Key exhibits included original copies of Iskra, alongside other banned publications like Pravda and revolutionary leaflets smuggled across borders. The display featured Lenin’s handwritten notes, correspondence with fellow exiles, and early drafts of ideological texts composed in Munich, illustrating how printing presses became weapons for ideological warfare. It underscored his adoption of the pseudonym "Lenin" during this period, directly linking the Munich address to his crafted revolutionary identity through documents bearing the alias for the first time in print. The exhibition traced the Bolsheviks’ strategic use of propaganda—posters, caricatures, and typewritten directives—to infiltrate Russia, dismantle institutions, and consolidate power after 1917, positioning print media as foundational to totalitarian control. It juxtaposed Lenin’s Munich operations with later Soviet censorship mechanisms, revealing continuities in state-driven information manipulation. Rare artefacts, such as confiscated printing plates and underground distribution networks, demonstrated the material risks revolutionaries faced, while multimedia displays decoded symbols and messaging tactics targeting peasants, workers, and soldiers.Contextualising Lenin’s exile within broader European radicalism, the show explored how Munich’s relative tolerance for dissenters allowed pivotal organising work, though it avoided romanticising his presence, noting the city’s later entanglement with Nazism. The narrative arc spanned from pre-revolutionary agitation to post-1917 state propaganda, arguing that control over the printed word was inseparable from Lenin’s path to power—and a blueprint for subsequent regimes. 

Lenin attended the Bavarian Royal Theatre, now known as the National Theatre, located at Max-Joseph-Platz 2, seen here in Hitler's paintings a decade later and today. By the early 1900s, the Bavarian Royal Theatre was a focal point for music lovers, particularly during the “festival weeks” when Wagner’s operas drew audiences from across Europe. The theatre’s repertoire, featuring works by Wagner and Strauss, was celebrated for its artistic excellence. On February 7, 1901, Lenin wrote to his mother, “I have been to the opera, listened with great pleasure to ‘Chovanshchina’; I last saw it in Kazan (when Zakrevsky was still singing), probably thirteen years ago.” His attendance at performances such as Wagner’s “Meistersinger” and “Valkyrie” in 1901 reflected his engagement with Munich’s musical life, recalling earlier experiences from his youth in Kazan.

Nadezhda Konstantinovna recalled how, in the summer of 1901, Lenin would swim almost every day in the Isar or at the Ungererbad, a popular Munich swimming pool located at Ungererstrasse 51. The Ungererbad was built on Ungererstraße around 1900 as a natural pool with the water coming from the Nymphenburg-Biedersteiner Canal. The outdoor pool was designed like a park and today offers large lawns and mature trees, providing space for many visitors. Only on peak summer days can it get crowded on weekends, with up to 10,000 bathers. Apparently even in the coldest weather, he would not miss his daily swim. Swimming was a favourite pastime for the Ulyanovs with Lenin often writing home about the great Russian rivers, comparing them to the Isar and the lakes of Munich. Maria Ilyinichna wrote that, in the summer, the family would often go for walks along the river, and sometimes they would swim together. Konstantinovna, though not as fond of swimming, would still join him for walks along the Isar, and she would always encourage his love of physical activity.  

Lenin and his wife frequently visited the English Garden, a large park established in 1789, known for its winding paths and artificial streams. The couple found the park a tranquil retreat from the demands of revolutionary work and city life. Konstantinovna noted in her memoirs that these walks were a vital part of their routine, offering opportunities to discuss plans, share news, and appreciate the natural surroundings, which evoked memories of the Russian countryside.
Before her arrival in Munich, Lenin often explored the park alone. After she joined him, they walked together, sometimes accompanied by friends, other times just the two of them. Konstantinovna’s letter to Maria Alexandrovna describes their enjoyment of the park’s features: “Vladimir Ilyich is delighted that the chestnut trees are already in bloom, and the lilacs are opening. We walk along the Chinese Tower and the famous Monopteros with its Greek colonnade shown here in a Nazi-era postcard and today.” Their walks often extended to the Isar riverbank or nearby fields, where the fresh air and natural beauty contrasted with the urban setting. Konstantinovna continued: “We often walk in the evenings, sometimes as far as the Isar, sometimes along the riverbank, sometimes through the fields. The air is fresh, and the city seems far away. But here, too, there is a sense of the city’s presence, with its electric trams and the conveniences of a large city—benches, footpaths, and so on. It is a marvellous road, lined with blossoming chestnuts, a perfect circle for a walk.” The couple likely favoured the central avenue, Leopoldstrasse, which led from the city to Schwabing. Despite changes over time, the park’s core features, including its poplar trees, remain largely intact. For Lenin, these walks were not only a way to rest, but also a time to reflect on the life of one of the most advanced capitalist countries. On these walks, he would observe the people, the organisation of society, and the relationship with nature, always drawing lessons for revolutionary work. “He loved and understood nature,” wrote Konstantinovna. “I am not talking about Siberia, but about Munich, where he would return home with a sense of satisfaction, having filled his lungs with air, movement, and impressions.” After such walks, Lenin was especially productive—he would sit down at his desk and write page after page, filling the notebooks that would later become the pages of revolutionary works.

On May 1, 1901, a May Day demonstration occurred here at Theresienwiese, shown after the destruction of the Second World War and today. Located near the main railway station, it's been the site used since 1810 for Oktoberfest. Munich workers gathered there for annual May Day rallies, sometimes sheltering under tents during rain. Unlike other local festivals like Oktoberfest held each September, May Day was significant for socialists. Krupskaya noted the contrast with Russian demonstrations, writing, “the celebration was always very honourable, but it was difficult to compare it to the Russian one, where the police would break up the crowd and the demonstrators would scatter in all directions, hiding their leaflets and placards in their pockets, or even their beer mugs and under their coats.” The Munich police restricted large gatherings, making the event more subdued. Lenin’s correspondence doesn't mention attending Oktoberfest, and after May 1, the Iskra editorial board moved to London.

 We looked back on this Munich period afterwards as a bright memory. Our later years of life in emigration were a much more distressing experience. During the Munich days the rift in the personal relations between Vladimir Ilyich, Martov, Potresov and Zasulich had not been so deep. All energies had been concentrated upon a single object – the building up of an all-Russian newspaper. There had been an intensive rallying of forces around Iskra. All had had the feel of the organisation's growth, a sense that the path for creating the Party had been rightly chosen. That explains the genuine spirit of jollification with which we had enjoyed the carnivals, the universal good humour that had prevailed during our trip to Zurich, and so on. Local life held no great attraction for us. We observed it merely as bystanders. We went to meetings sometimes, but on the whole they were of little interest. I remember the May Day celebrations. For the first time that year the German Social-Democrats had been permitted to organise a procession, on condition that the celebrations were held outside the town and no crowds collected within the town.

Krupskaya

 

 

As depicted in October, the 1928 Soviet silent historical film by Sergei Eisenstein and Grigori Aleksandrov. It is a celebratory dramatisation of the 1917 October Revolution commissioned for the tenth anniversary of the event. Originally released as October in the Soviet Union, the film was re-edited and released internationally as Ten Days That Shook The World after John Reed's popular book on the revolution. 

Following the standard Soviet version from Nicholas and Alexandra, a 1971 biographical film which partly tells the story of the last ruling Russian monarch, Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, and his wife, Tsarina Alexandra.  The film was adapted by James Goldman from the book by Robert K. Massie.

From episode 12 ("The Secret War") of the 13-part British television drama Fall of Eagles aired by the BBC in 1974. Lenin (Patrick Stewart) and his comrades are stuck in Switzerland but find  Germany an unexpected ally in ending their exile with the help of Dr Helphand.

From the beginning of Stalin (1992), a television film produced for HBO starring Robert Duvall portraying Soviet leader Joseph Stalin. The film astonishingly won three Golden Globe Awards including best actor for Duvall.

From episode 8 (Revolutions) of the 10-part 2003 Channel 4 TV series The First World War based on the book of the same name by Oxford Professor Hew Strachan.

From the two-part documentary Russian Revolution in Colour, originally broadcast on Channel 5 in 2005, featuring professors Steve Smith (University of Essex) and Chris Read (University of Warwick).