==================== HES POSTING ===================== 
 
I'm by no means an authority on the French Revolution, but I think Romain 
Kroes's explanation can be improved on.  There were divisions in the 
Legislative Assembly that were reflected in the voluntary seating 
arrangements of the members, but my understanding is that the terms left 
and right gained currency in the Convention, the 3rd Revolutionary 
"parliament," where the Mountain, the more radical Jacobin faction headed 
by Robespierre, sat high up against the wall on the president's left, 
while their rivals the Girondists seated themselves on his right 
(reluctantly--the seats had recently been occupied by Feuillants, 
constitutional monarchists).  Both the Mountain and the Girondists, and 
most of the "Plain," seated between them--were republicans (with a small 
r), who wanted to depose the King.  Where they bitterly divided in the 
late fall of 1792 was whether or not he should be executed.  Economic 
issues did not divide them at this time.  Eventually, the Mountain would 
support price-controls, in deference to their armed allies in the streets, 
the "sans-culottes."  Few Anglo-American historians today would claim the 
Revolution was "driven by capitalist bourgeoisie."  The leading lights of 
the Revolution at the beginning were artistocrats like Lafayette and 
Mirabeau.  By the time of the Convention they were mostly provincial 
lawyers, journalists, and civil servants.  They were classical liberals, 
by and large, influenced by Turgot and Du Pont de Nemours, as Romain 
indicates.  But by no means did they oppose "Big Government"--their goal 
was equal accesss:  the "career open to talent."  A final note:  according 
to Simon Schama, sometime late in 1792 the President's seat moved across 
the hall, and the Mountain wound up on his right.  But the original labels 
stuck nonetheless.     
 
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]