Louis XV fell ill with smallpox at the end of April 1774. His deathbed attracted crowds to Versailles and was followed through public announcements and rituals in Paris. This chapter compares the king's conduct on two previous occasions when he had thought he would die, at Metz in 1744 and after the Damiens attack in 1757, and concludes that Louis XV – not ill-defined factions – controlled the conduct of his deathbed in 1774.

The coronation of Louis XVI, which took place on 11 June 1775, is described in detail in this chapter where it is considered as an amalgam of several smaller rituals each with its own provenance and meaning. Apparently transgressive gestures are granted positive meaning. The role of the queen in the coronation is considered, as is the meaning of tales of the king walking among the people after the ceremony.

The first of three chapters dealing with the coronation of Louis XVI, this chapter considers the preparations required at Versailles and in Reims, and the currents at work in imagining the monarch at this juncture in French history. Sentimentalism and ideas of virtue are central themes. Louis XVI's ceremonial entry into Reims prompted grand decorations offering a commentary on contemporary political events, crowned by an arch of bienfaisance.

The image of Louis XIV and his court overshadow our understanding of eighteenth-century France. Rethinking the court society is a vital part of revising our interpretations of absolutist government in this period: a new understanding of royal ceremony is one part of this. This chapter challenges the neo-ceremonialist understanding of French royal ritual in the light of French scholarship questioning the relevance of the 'two bodies' model to the French monarchy and highlighting Marc Bloch's idea of 'marvellous royalty'. The relationship between ceremony and power lies at the heart of these questions.

This chapter provides brief conclusions drawing together the threads of the story and its wider analysis, the political and religious context, its transnational significance and the insights a single document and event have provided. Returning to some of the themes raised in the introduction, reflects on the role of truth and secrecy amid the practicalities for ministers of upholding an ideological cause.

Chapter 2 explores the regional context and significance of Tivinat’s capture and imprisonment in the strategic port of Dieppe in the province of Normandy. Establishes the importance of Normandy’s connections with the Huguenot diaspora in England and cross-Channel connections and conflicts. Focuses on the development of the Reformation in Dieppe and its connections with Beauvais, the Huguenot leadership and local nobility, its progress during the first religious war (1562–63) and ongoing conflict with local Catholics. In particular, relations with regional and town governors were fraught, resulting in heated confessional clashes during the second and third wars of 1567–1570. The link between these events and the role of the governors in enabling Tivinat’s interrogation is established, too, as Norman connections with the cardinal of Châtillon’s exile in England. Examines the career of Tivinat’s interrogator, Michel Vialar, president of the parlement of Rouen, and his contribution to confessional tensions in the region through prosecution and fiscal exactions as well as interpersonal clashes with fellow judges. Discussion through detailed examples of the contemporary challenges of crossing the Channel by boat provides further context for the experience of Tivinat and other couriers.

This chapter sets out the ‘lateral censorship process’ that shaped plays’ paths from composition to reception. It is grounded in archival evidence from the Ancien Régime to the Restoration and builds on modern theoretical approaches, including ‘New Censorship Theory’. In this model, lateral censorship occurs in four main ‘sites’: the composition process, theatres (including staff on and off the stage), audiences, and critics. Each of these sites is home to a variety of agents; the sites are related; and more than one site could exert lateral censorship on a play. However, whilst such actions could halt a play in its steps, the focus here is not wholly negative: lateral censorship recognizes that censorship can be a positive force in production too (for example, critical feedback to improve a play), echoing the dual definition of ‘censure’ at the time.

This chapter explores the Spanish Inquisition’s interest in and attempts at censorship of printed texts with an eye to the steps and nuances of that process. It might appear as if the Spanish Inquisition was a formidable and relentless means of ideological control. Yet inquisitors’ implementation of censorship mandates was inevitably piecemeal because the institution’s personnel and authority were limited. Despite inquisitorial efforts, prohibited texts circulated through the Spanish empire, and bans did not apply equally to all the residents of Spanish territories. Some readers were licensed to consume prohibited texts; some banned texts escaped the libraries of those authorized to own them and circulated among the general reading public; the degree to which Spaniards were affected by the Inquisition’s textual regulations depended on their status. Scholars do not agree on the effects of inquisitorial censorship on Spanish intellectual and cultural life, and it remains a fruitful topic for investigation.

The final three chapters are dedicated to the censors’ third major concern: the representation of government. Chapter 5 focuses on representing monarchies, at home and abroad, through periods when kings were in power in France (until 1792 and from 1814 and 1815) and when they were declared enemies of the state. It examines not only monarchies in major new tragedies, high comedies, or drames for the principal Parisian theatres like the Comédie-Française or the Odéon, but also the afterlives of pre-existing plays like Tartuffe and the opéra-comique Richard, Cœur de Lion, and new propagandistic productions to celebrate the restored monarchy. Such plays encountered bureaucratic censorship, certainly, but also performances despite their bans in places like Caen, Bordeaux, and the Roer and Cantal departments. Additionally, thanks to dynamic lateral censorship from audiences and theatres alike, royal figures could become a thorn in the sides of monarchical and republican or imperial governments alike.