In A Tale of Two Cities, is Charles Dickens more sympathetic towards the aristocracy or the revolutionaries?

I think if you read this excellent historical novel
carefully, you can clearly see that Dickens, whilst he feels sympathy for the French
peasants that bore so much oppression and injustice for so long, never condones the
violent steps they took. He clearly portrays the aristocracy of France as being
ruthless, greedy and unsympathetic characters, but he likewise portrays the violence of
the Revolution in all of its horror, condoning
neither.

Note the way that Monseigneur in Book II Chapter
Seven is described in all of his luxury and wealth:

readability="11">

Monseigneur was in his inner room, his sanctuary
of sanctuaries, the Holiest of Holiests to the crowd of worshippers in teh suite of
rooms without. Monseigneur was about to take his chocolate. Monseigneur could swalllow a
great many things with ease, and was by some few sullen minds supposed to be rather
rapidly swallowing
France...

Note the irony in
this passage, where the aristocracy are presented as "swallowing France" and using all
the wealth for foolish, frivolous purposes whilst the peasants starve and struggle with
hardship. Clearly the aristocracy are not presented in a sympathetic
light.

However, note the description of the peasants of the
Revolution in Book III Chapter 2, where the violence of the Revolution is described in
its full gore at the grindstone:

readability="14">

As these ruffians turned and turned, their
matted locks now flung forward over their eyes, now flung backward over their necks,
some women held wine to their mouths that they might drink; and what with dropping
blood, and what with dropping wine, and what with teh stream of sparks struck out of the
stone, all their wicked atmosphere seemed gore and fire. The eye could not detect one
creature in teh group free from the smear of
blood.

The use of words such
as "wicked" and "gore" clearly show the abhorrence that Dickens feels towards the
revolutionary force that took such extreme measures against their
injustice.

So I think that if you look at the novel,
Dickens definitely does not support the cruelty and luxurious waste of the aristocracy,
but neither does he support the violent measures taken by the peasants to overthrow the
aristocracy.