Marxists, Revisionists and the Meaning of 1789

For much of the twentieth century, the dominant interpretation of the French Revolution was Marxist. Historians such as Georges Lefebvre and Albert Soboul argued that a rising bourgeoisie overthrew a feudal aristocracy, clearing the way for capitalism. In the 1950s and 1960s the British historian Alfred Cobban challenged this, arguing that the revolutionaries were mostly lawyers and officials rather than capitalists and that 'feudalism' was largely gone by 1789.

François Furet then argued that the Revolution should be understood through its political ideas and language, especially claims to speak for the people. Later historians, including Lynn Hunt, studied political culture: symbols, festivals and rhetoric. Each school drew on different evidence, from property records to speeches. Students can use these debates as a model: interpretations change when historians ask new questions and use new sources, not simply when they discover new facts.