[Illustration: [_Facsimile of the entry in the Registers of the Church
of Saint-Paul at Paris, recording the death of the Man with the Iron
Mask._]]
THE
MAN WITH THE IRON MASK.
BY MARIUS TOPIN.
TRANSLATED AND EDITED
BY HENRY VIZETELLY,
AUTHOR OF
“THE STORY OF THE DIAMOND NECKLACE.”
“No one must know what has become of this man.”
_Order of Louis XIV._
_LONDON:
SMITH, ELDER AND CO., 15, WATERLOO PLACE.
1870._
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE.
M. Topin’s _L’Homme au Masque de Fer_, of which the present volume is a
translation, has met with considerable attention in France, on the part
both of historical students and the reading public; several editions of
it having been called for in the course of a few months.
That a work which professes to give an authentic account of this almost
legendary character, after having discussed in an exhaustive fashion
the various theories that have been broached during a century and a
quarter respecting his mysterious identity, should have been received
with so large an amount of favour, is not surprising, for the story
forms perhaps the most romantic episode of a reign more than ordinarily
rich in dramatic incidents. But the extent of M. Topin’s historical
knowledge, the painstaking nature of his researches, the subtlety of
his reasoning, the skill which he has displayed in the grouping of
his materials, combined with his life-like pictures of events far from
commonly familiar, not only render his work highly amusing reading,
but entitle it to take its place in the library, both as an historical
study which has resolved beyond all doubt a problem that had long
perplexed some of the acutest minds, and as a valuable contribution
towards the history of Europe during the latter part of the seventeenth
century.
During the progress of the translation M. Topin’s text has been
carefully revised, and a few errors have been corrected. Additional
notes, too, have been given whenever the subject-matter seemed to
require elucidation, or where individuals little known to English
readers make their appearance on the scene.
H. V.
_Paris, April, 1870._
AUTHOR’S PREFACE.
If this book had been intended merely to satisfy a vulgar and
commonplace curiosity, it would only have consisted of a few pages.
My aim has been a loftier one. I have endeavoured, while concerning
myself with the most famous and romantic of State-prisoners, to write
the history of the principal individuals in whom people have beheld the
Man with the Iron Mask. As regards some of these I have been compelled
to lay bare the private life of Louis XIII. and Anne of Austria, and in
order to refute the accusations with which the memory of this princess
has been sullied, I have not hesitated to touch upon certain delicate
points, and to follow her accusers on to the ground on which they have
carried the discussion. But I have imposed upon myself the obligation
of always respecting my readers, and of influencing their judgment
without offending their taste. I have traced the others throughout
their adventurous careers and agitated existences, and some of them
even through their captivity, spent, sometimes in the monotonous
inaction of solitude, sometimes with the resignation of the sage, or
animated more frequently still by daring attempts at flight which the
incessant vigilance of the most scrupulous of gaolers always foiled.
Thus there will be found grouped together in this work Louis XIII. and
Anne of Austria, the seductive Buckingham and the affecting Vermandois,
the versatile Monmouth and the adventurous Beaufort, Lauzun the rash,
and Fouquet, rendered admirable by his resignation and Christian
virtues, the unfortunate Matthioly, and Saint-Mars, whose memory, and
even existence, is inseparable from that of his prisoners.
The sole and firm ground-work of this book are the materials, for the
most part unpublished, to be found in our Archives. For the space of
two years I have been collecting them in the different depositories of
manuscripts; and at the Ministries as at the Archives of the Empire,
at the Imperial Library as well as at the Arsenal, at the Institute
as at the Hôtel de Ville, I have everywhere met with the most cordial
reception, the most unreserved liberality, and the most invaluable
courtesy. It is my duty, and at the same time my pleasure, to testify
my gratitude to MM. Camille Rousset, Gallet de Kulture, Margry, de
Beauchesne, Lacroix, Ravaisson, Sage, Aude, and Read. The treasures of
our Archives are not only rendered accessible by the goodwill of their
Keepers, but are also made easy of consultation by the order which
these gentlemen have introduced among the profusion of documents by
means of classifications as clear as they are ingenious.
I have given in the text the more important documents of which I
have made use, and in the notes those which are of less consequence,
whilst I have contented myself with indicating the collections where
those materials are to be found which are altogether of a secondary
character. By this means the reader will have a complete check upon
me. Without sacrificing anything of the strictest exactitude I have
endeavoured to introduce into my account the spirit and the action
proper to the individuals brought on to the scene, and, in a subject
at once legendary and historical, to represent the faithful drawing of
history under the seductive colouring of fiction.
_Paris, November 8, 1869._
CONTENTS.
INTRODUCTION.
Page
Arrival of the Man with the Iron Mask at the Bastille--His
Death--General Reflections on this celebrated Prisoner--Motives
which determined the present Writer to make fresh Researches
concerning him--Plan and Object of the Work 1
CHAPTER I.
Theory which supposes the Man with the Iron Mask to have
been a Brother of Louis XIV.--Voltaire the first to support
this Theory in his _Siècle de Louis XIV._, and in the _Dictionnaire
Philosophique_--Certain Improbabilities in his Story--Account
of the Man with the Iron Mask introduced by Soulavie
into the _Mémoires Apocryphes du Maréchal de Richelieu_--The
three different Hypotheses of the Theory which makes the Man
with the Iron Mask a Brother of Louis XIV. 9
CHAPTER II.
First Hypothesis--Portrait of Buckingham--Causes of his Visit
to France--Ardour with which he was received--His Passion
for Anne of Austria--Character of this Princess--Journey to
Amiens--Scene in the Garden--The Remembrance that Anne
of Austria preserved of it 20
CHAPTER III.
Second Hypothesis--First Feelings of Anne of Austria towards
Louis XIII.--Joy which she experienced on arriving in France--First
Impressions of Louis XIII.--His Aversion to Spain--His
Dislike to Marriage--Austerity of his Manners--His
persistent Coldness--Means adopted to induce him to consummate
the Marriage--Political Position of Anne of Austria--Louis
XIII. and Richelieu--Watch kept by the Minister over
the Queen--The King’s Illness at Lyons 31
CHAPTER IV.
Third Hypothesis--Reconciliation of Louis XIII. and Anne of
Austria--The Queen _enceinte_ for the Fourth Time--Suspicions
with which Royal Births have sometimes been received--Precautions
adopted in France for the Purpose of avoiding these
Suspicions--Story of Louis XIV.’s Birth--Impossibility of admitting
the Birth of a Twin-brother--Richelieu’s Absence--Uselessness
of abducting and concealing this pretended
Twin-brother 50
CHAPTER V.
Motives which hinder one from admitting the Existence, the Arrest,
and the Imprisonment of a mysterious Son of Anne of Austria--The
Period at which he is said to have been handed over to
Saint-Mars, according to the Authors of this Theory, cannot
be reconciled with any of the Dates at which Prisoners were
sent to this Gaoler--Other Considerations which formally
oppose even the Probability of the Theory that makes the Man
with the Iron Mask a Brother of Louis XIV. 58
CHAPTER VI.
The Count de Vermandois--His Portrait--Mademoiselle de la Vallière,
his Mother--Anecdote from the _Mémoires Secrets pour servir à
l’Histoire de Perse_--Father Griffet adopts its Conclusions--Arguments
that he advances--Motives which render certain of Mademoiselle de
Montpensier’s Appreciations suspicious--Improbability
of the Story in the _Mémoires de Perse_--Illness
of the Count de Vermandois--Reality of his Death
attested by the most authentic Despatches--Magnificence of
his Obsequies--Pious Endowments at Arras 65
CHAPTER VII.
Causes which render the Theory probable that makes Monmouth
the Man with the Iron Mask--Political Position of Monmouth--His
Portrait--He is persuaded to revolt against his Uncle
James II.--He lands near Lyme Regis--His first Successes--Enthusiasm
with which he is received--His premature
Discouragement--His Defeat at Sedgemoor--His shameful
Flight--He is captured and taken to London--Cowardly
Terrors of the Prisoner--His Interview with James II. 85
CHAPTER VIII.
Bases on which Saint-Foix has founded his Theory--Disputes of
Saint-Foix and Father Griffet--The Recollection of Monmouth
becomes Legendary in England--Ballads announcing his
Return--Indisputable Proofs of Monmouth’s Death in 1685--Interview
of Monmouth with his Wife and Children--He
is conducted to the Scaffold--His Firmness--The Last Words
which he utters--Awkwardness of the Executioner 92
CHAPTER IX.
François de Vendôme, Duke de Beaufort--His Portrait--His
Conduct during the War of the Fronde--Unimportance of this
Individual--Motives cited by Lagrange-Chancel in support
of his Theory--Their Improbability--Reasons which determined
the Search for Proofs that leave no doubt of Beaufort’s
Death at Candia 103
CHAPTER X.
Causes of the Expedition to Candia--Court Intrigue--Turenne and
the Duke d’Albret--Preparations for the Expedition--Beaufort
Commands it--Departure of the Fleet--Its Arrival before
Candia--State of this Island--Description of the Place
besieged--Last Council of War--Plan of Attack, which is
fixed for the Middle of the Night of June 24, 1669--The First
Movements are successful--Terrible Explosion of the Magazine
of a Battery--Fearful Panic--Rout of the French--Re-embarkation
of the Troops--Certainty of Beaufort’s Death 113
CHAPTER XI.
General Considerations on the Abduction of the Armenian
Patriarch Avedick--Despatch of the Marquis de Ferriol to
Constantinople as Ambassador--Difficulties peculiar to this
Post--Incautious Conduct of some of Ferriol’s Predecessors--Quiclet’s
Adventures--Portrait of Ferriol--His Pretensions
at Constantinople--His Eccentricity of Manner--His Behaviour
in Religious Matters--The Armenian Church--Short
Account of its History--Ardent Desire of the Catholic Missionaries
to make Converts--Their Imprudence--Ferriol at
first attempts to repair it--Obstinate Resistance of Father
Braconnier, a Jesuit--Encroachments and Requirements of
the Jesuits 128
CHAPTER XII.
Avedick--His Origin--His Protector, the Grand Mufti, Feizoulah
Effendi--The two Churches, schismatic and catholic, exist in
perfect concord--Fall of Mustapha II.--Death of the Mufti--Avedick
is deposed and imprisoned--The Armenians
ransom him--Ferriol’s persistent Hatred--His stubborn Animosity
against Avedick--He succeeds in getting him deposed
a second Time--Avedick’s Abduction at Chio--He is imprisoned
on board a French Vessel--Incidents of the Voyage--Avedick
endeavours to give Tidings of his Fate to the World--Insuccess
of his Attempt--His Arrival at Marseilles 147
CHAPTER XIII.
The Chevalier de Taulès--How he was led to believe that Avedick
was the Man with the Iron Mask--A clear Proof furnished
him of the impossibility of his Theory--Taulès persists and
accuses the Jesuit Fathers of Forgery--Examination of
Dujonca’s Journal--Its complete Authenticity and the unaffected
Sincerity of the Writer cannot be doubted--New
Proofs of this Authenticity and of Dujonca’s Exactitude 158
CHAPTER XIV.
Avedick is at first confined in the Prisons of the Arsenal--From
Marseilles he is conducted to Mount Saint-Michel--Description
of Mount Saint-Michel--Treatment to which Avedick is exposed--His
useless Protestations against this Abuse of Force--Universal
Emotion excited throughout the East--Complaints
of the Divan--Ferriol’s Impudence--Terrible Reprisals
practised on the Catholics--False Avedicks--Expedients to
which Ferriol is reduced--Inquietude of the Roman Court--Duplicity
of Louis XIV.’s Government--Avedick is transferred
to the Bastille--Suggestions of which he is the Object--He
abjures, and is set at Liberty--He dies at Paris in the Rue
Férou--Delusive Document drawn up with Reference to this
Death--Share of Responsibility which attaches to each of the
Authors of the Abduction 171
CHAPTER XV.
Description of Pignerol--Its Past, its Situation--Portrait of
Saint-Mars--His Scruples and his Integrity--Fouquet’s Arrival at
Pignerol--Brief Account of the Surintendant’s Career--His
Error with regard to Louis XIV., whom he betrays--Causes
of Fouquet’s Fall--His Arrest--His Trial--His Condemnation--No
kind of Obscurity in this Affair 189
CHAPTER XVI.
Remark of Fouquet’s Mother--The Prisoner’s Piety--Danger which he
escapes at Pignerol--Incessant Supervision over him at La Pérouse,
near Pignerol--Excessive Scruples of Saint-Mars--Precautions
prescribed by Louvois--Espionage exercised
over Fouquet by his Servants and his Confessor--Illnesses of
the Prisoner--He devotes himself entirely to Study and to
religious Meditations--Works to which he gives himself up--His
new Motto--Interest which he continues to take in all his
Relations and in Louis XIV.--Saint-Mars’ laconic Answers 208
CHAPTER XVII.
Sudden and singular Arrival of Lauzun in Fouquet’s Room--The
latter had known him formerly under the Name of the Marquis
de Puyguilhem--Lauzun enumerates his Dignities and calls
himself the King’s Cousin--Fouquet believes his Visitor mad--Portrait
of Lauzun--His Adventures--His Arrival at
Pignerol--He continues his Visits to Fouquet--The Stories
he tells him--Noble Conduct of Louis XIV. towards Lauzun--Audacious
Method employed by the latter to overhear a Conversation
between Louis XIV. and Madame de Montespan--Difference
between the Conduct of Lauzun and that of Fouquet--Lauzun’s
Outbursts against Saint-Mars--Perplexity of the latter--Singular
Mode of Surveillance to which he has recourse--Progressive
amelioration of the Lot of the two Prisoners--They
receive Permission to see each other--Arrival of
Fouquet’s Daughter at Pignerol--Misunderstanding between
Fouquet and Lauzun--Cause of this Misunderstanding 219
CHAPTER XVIII.
Theory which makes Fouquet the Man with the Iron Mask--Arguments
advanced by M. Lacroix--Some to be absolutely
rejected and some discussed--Fouquet not in possession of a
dangerous State Secret--Madame de Maintenon--Her Character--Her
Youth--Her Relations with Monsieur and Madame
Fouquet--Her honourable Reserve--The Affair of the Poisons--How
Fouquet’s Name became mixed up in it--Probability
of his Death being caused by an Attack of Apoplexy--Weakness
of the other Arguments advanced by M. Lacroix--Oblivion
into which the Surintendant had fallen--Two
mysterious Arrests 232
CHAPTER XIX.
Intervention of the Kings of France in Italy--Policy of Henri II.,
Henri IV., and Louis XIII.--Judicious Conduct of Richelieu--Treaty
of Cherasco--Menacing Ambition of Louis XIV.--Situation
of the Court of Savoy on the Death of Charles-Emmanuel--Portrait
of Charles IV., Duke of Mantua--The
Marquisate of Montferrat and Casale--The Count Matthioly--His
political Career--His Character--The Abbé d’Estrades
and Giuliani--Proposal to cede Casale to Louis XIV.--Interview
at Venice between Charles IV. and the Abbé d’Estrades--Journey
of Matthioly to Versailles--He communicates the
Project formed to the Enemies of France--How is his Conduct
to be estimated? 251
CHAPTER XX.
The Regent of Savoy’s Perplexity--She discloses Matthioly’s Conduct
to Louis XIV.--Arrival of Catinat at Pignerol--Arrest of
the Baron d’Asfeld and his Imprisonment at Milan--The Abbé
d’Estrades the first to conceive the Project of Matthioly’s
Abduction--Despatches of the Abbé d’Estrades detailing the
Abduction and the Incarceration of Matthioly--Means adopted
in order to recover the official Documents connected with the
Negotiation--Mystery surrounding Matthioly’s Disappearance--His
family dispersed, and remaining silent and powerless 267
CHAPTER XXI.
Period from which the Theory that makes Matthioly the Man with
the Iron Mask dates--Numerous Writers who have concerned
themselves with the Abduction of this Individual--Arguments
of Reth, Roux-Fazillac, and Delort--M. Jules Loiseleur--His
Labours--The Supposition that an obscure Spy was
arrested in 1681 by Catinat--It cannot be admitted--Grounds
on which M. Loiseleur rejects the Theory that makes Matthioly
the Man with the Iron Mask--Soundness of his Reasoning
and Justness of his Conclusions 293
CHAPTER XXII.
The Isles Sainte-Marguerite--Their Appearance--Their Past--Various
Causes of their Celebrity--How I was led to suppose
that Matthioly was not taken to Exiles by Saint-Mars--Documents
which prove him to have been left at Pignerol--Obscurity
of the two Prisoners transferred to Exiles by
Saint-Mars--Neither of them could have been the Man with
the Iron Mask--Removal of the Prisoners of Pignerol to the
Isles Sainte-Marguerite 313
CHAPTER XXIII.
Behaviour of Charles IV., Duke of Mantua, towards his ex-Minister--His
true Sentiments with reference to him--Precautions prescribed to
Villebois and Lagrade for the Prisoners left by Saint-Mars at
Pignerol--Change in Louis XIV.’s Position in Italy--Transfer of the
Pignerol Prisoners to the Isles Sainte-Marguerite--Instructions
given to Marshal de Tessé--Increase
of Saint-Mars’ Watchfulness--Mystery surrounding the three
Prisoners--Great Importance of one of them compared with the
others--It is he who was the Man with the Iron Mask 332
CHAPTER XXIV.
The Use of a Mask formerly very general--Frequently adopted for
Prisoners in Italy--Its Employment not difficult in the Case
of Matthioly--Origin of the Legend of the Man with the
Iron Mask--As to the Transmission of the Secret from
King to King--Louis XV. and Louis XVIII.--How it is
that the Despatches which we have quoted have remained
unpublished--Concerning the Silence of Saint-Simon--Dujonca--Taulès’
Objection--Louvois’ harsh Language--Matthioly’s
Age--Concerning the name of Marchialy--Order
for Matthioly’s Arrest--Arrival of the Duke of Mantua in
Paris--Conclusion 350
THE
MAN WITH THE IRON MASK.
INTRODUCTION.
Arrival of the Man with the Iron Mask at the Bastille--His
Death--General Reflections on this celebrated Prisoner--Motives which
determined the present Writer to make fresh Researches concerning
him--Plan and Object of the Work.
About three o’clock in the afternoon of September 18, 1698, the Sieur
de Saint-Mars, coming from the Isles Sainte-Marguerite, made his entry
into the château of the Bastille, of which fortress he had just been
appointed governor. Accompanying him, and borne along in his litter,
was a prisoner, whose face was covered with a black velvet mask, and
of whom Saint-Mars, with an escort of several mounted men-at-arms, had
been the inseparable and vigilant gaoler, throughout the long journey
from Provence. Saint-Mars had halted at Palteau, an estate situated
between Joigny and Villeneuve-le-Roi, which belonged to him, and for a
long time the old inhabitants of Villeneuve used to recall having seen
the mysterious litter traversing in the evening the principal street of
their town. The remembrance of this apparition has been perpetuated
in the district, and the singular incidents characterizing it, related
by the former to each new generation, have been handed down to our own
days. The care taken by Saint-Mars at meal-times to keep his prisoner
with his back to the windows, the pistols which were always to be seen
within reach, of the suspicious gaoler, the two beds which he caused to
be placed side by side, so many precautions, so much mystery, excited
the lively curiosity of the assembled peasants, and formed an incessant
subject of conversation among them. At the Bastille, the prisoner was
placed in the third room south of the Tower of La Bertaudière, prepared
for him by the turnkey Dujonca, who, some days previous to his arrival,
had received a written order to that effect from Saint-Mars.[1]
Five years afterwards, on Tuesday, November 20, 1703, at four o’clock
in the afternoon, the drawbridge of the formidable fortress was lowered
and gave passage to a sad and mournful train. A few men, bearing a dead
body, having for sole escort two subordinate employés of the Bastille,
silently issued forth and directed their steps towards the cemetery
of the Church of Saint-Paul. Nothing could be more thrilling than the
sight of this group gliding along furtively under shadow of the falling
night. Nothing could be more utterly abandoned, and, in appearance,
more obscure, than these unknown remains followed by two strangers,
in a hurry to fulfil their task. Around the grave as, the evening
before, around the bed of the dying man, there were no signs of sorrow
or of regret. The prisoner of Provence had fallen ill on the Sunday.
His illness having suddenly increased during the following day, the
chaplain of the Bastille had been sent for; too late, however, to allow
him time to go in quest of the last sacraments, yet still sufficiently
early to enable him to address some rapid and common-place exhortations
to the dying man. On the register of the Church of Saint-Paul he was
inscribed under the name of Marchialy. At the Bastille he had always
been known as the Prisoner of Provence.[2]
Such is the mysterious personage who, unknown and abandoned to the
obscurity of a prison during the latter part of his existence, became,
a few years after his death, celebrated throughout the entire world,
and the romantic and piquant remembrance of whom has, for more than a
century, charmed the imagination of all, attracted universal attention,
and exercised uselessly the patience and sagacity of so many minds.
Become the hero of the most famous of legends, he has had the rare
privilege of everywhere exciting the curiosity of the public, without
ever either wearying or satiating it. At all epochs and among all
classes, in England, Germany, Italy, as well as France, in our own
days, as in the time of Voltaire, people have manifested the utmost
anxiety to penetrate the secret of this long imprisonment. Napoleon
I. greatly regretted not being able to satisfy this desire.[3] Louis
Philippe, too, discussed this problem, the solution of which he
acknowledged himself ignorant of;[4] and, if other sovereigns[5] have
pretended they were acquainted with it, their contradictory statements
lead us to believe that they were no better informed, but that in their
eyes the knowledge and transmission of the dark secret ought to be
counted among the prerogatives of the crown.
In the long list of writers whom the Man with the Iron Mask, the sphinx
of our history, has attracted and tempted, are many illustrious names,
as well as some less known now-a-days. During thirty years, Voltaire,
Fréron, Saint-Foix, Lagrange-Chancel, and Father Griffet took part in
a brilliant joust, in which each of the adversaries succeeded a great
deal better in overthrowing his opponent’s opinions than in securing
the triumph of his own.
Many times, and in our own days even, has the debate been resumed,
then momentarily abandoned, then recommenced again. Far and near new
theories have been broached, invariably supported by vague and weak
proofs, and soon overthrown by strong and valid objections. Fifty-two
writers[6] have by turns endeavoured to throw light upon this
question, but without success; and it can be affirmed that a century of
controversy and of exertion has not yet dissipated the mysterious gloom
in which Saint-Mars’ celebrated prisoner is enveloped.
So many successive checks, by still further stimulating curiosity,
have caused it to be believed that it was impossible to arrive at an
incontestable and definitive result. Every new explanation having been
victoriously repelled almost as soon as started, people have despaired
of ever attaining the truth, and some have even gone so far as to
proclaim it as being beyond human reach. “The story of the Iron Mask,”
says M. Michelet,[7] “will probably for ever remain obscure,” “The Man
with the Iron Mask will very likely always be an insoluble problem,”
has been said elsewhere;[8] and M. Henri Martin declares that “history
has not the right of pronouncing an opinion on what will never emerge
from the domain of conjecture.”[9]
If different methods of procedure had been adopted by the numerous
writers who have attempted the solution of this problem, I should not
have had the temerity to have added to their number; but an attentive
study of their writings shows that they have all taken the same
point of departure, and that they have all given themselves up to
a single idea. All have kept fixed in their minds this observation
of Voltaire’s:--“What redoubles one’s astonishment is, that at the
time when this prisoner was sent to the Isles Sainte-Marguerite, no
important personage had disappeared from Europe.”[10]
All have asked themselves if there really did not disappear from Europe
some important personage, and they have immediately set themselves
to discover some person of consideration, no matter who, that had
disappeared during the period extending from 1662 to 1703. When by
the aid of the very faintest resemblance they have fancied they have
found their hero, they have forthwith adapted the mask of black velvet
to him, and have seen in him the famous dead of November 20, 1703.
Erecting their conjecture into a theory, they have become ardent
propagators of it, and have adopted all that told in its favour with
the same readiness with which they have energetically denied all that
happened to be opposed to it. When the list of missing illustrious men
belonging to this period was exhausted, certain writers, sooner than
renounce seeing the Man with the Iron Mask in some person still alive
in 1706, have had no other expedient than to delay for several years
the death of Saint-Mars’ prisoner, in order not to abandon so dear a
discovery.[11]
But many of these ingenious and inventive writers acted in good faith.
Not perceiving the defects in their pleading, they only considered its
feeblest parts, and in default of making a great number of converts,
they invariably ended, as is easy enough, by convincing themselves.
Persuaded of the unsatisfactory nature of a method of procedure which
had always produced such ephemeral results, I have thought that,
extraordinary means having proved so inefficacious, more simple ones
might perhaps lead to a new solution, (yet one hardly dared hope for
it, when twenty-five hypotheses had already been put forward)--to a
solution at once decisive, to an absolute conviction, to the certainty
of not having to apprehend from the reader either doubt or objection.
Commencing the study of this question without any fixed opinion,
and with the firm resolution of seeking only the truth, I set about
collecting from the whole of our archives authentic despatches relating
to the State prisoners under Louis XIV. from the year 1660 to 1710.
Without pre-occupying myself with the Ministers who signed them, or
the prisoners whom they concerned; without limiting my researches to
Saint-Mars, Pignerol, the Isles Sainte-Marguerite, or the Bastille,
I arranged these despatches, of which more than three hundred are
unpublished, in order of their dates. They then lent a material
assistance; some explained others, and from this long and minute
inquiry, slowly pursued through heaps of documents, has resulted, I
hope, a definitive solution.
It was expedient this solution should be obtained.[12] In this
century, when the historian’s resources are increased by the progress
in certain sciences, by so many spectacles offered as an instruction to
his fruitful meditations, by a more complete knowledge of institutions
and facts, by the facility afforded of penetrating into collections
which it had been believed would remain for ever inaccessible to
investigators--in this century, which is literally the century of
history, it behoved us not to leave in our annals, without solving
it, a problem which had so frequently attracted the attention of
foreigners. It is this which determined me to undertake a task which
some may consider more curious than important. But to the interest
peculiar to this subject has to be added that which is attached to
the principal persons in whom by turns people have seen the prisoner
of Saint-Mars. Before bringing on the scene the true Man with the
Iron Mask, I shall examine rapidly, and with the aid of unpublished
documents, the illustrious usurpers of this romantic title, so that
this work may serve, not only to satisfy a trivial curiosity, but also
to throw a new light upon some of the most singular points of the inner
history of our country.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] _Estat de Prisonnies qui sont envoies par l’Ordre du Roy à la
Bastille, à commenser du mescredy honsiesme du mois d’Octobre que
je suis entré en possession de la charge de Lieutenant du Roy, en
l’année 1690_, by Dujonca, fol. 37, verso:--Archives of the Arsenal.
Letter from Barbézieux, Minister of War, to Saint-Mars, dated July
19, 1698:--“You can write in advance to His Majesty’s lieutenant of
this château to have a chamber ready to receive this prisoner on your
arrival.”--Unpublished despatch from the Archives of the Ministry
of War. Traditions collected at Villeneuve-le-Roi. Registers of the
Secretary’s Office of the King’s Household.
[2] _Estat de Prisonnies qui sortet de la Bastille à commenser de
honsiesme du mois d’Octobre que je suis entré en possession, en l’année
1690_, by Dujonca, fol. 80, verso:--Archives of the Arsenal. _Registre
des Baptêmes, Mariages, et Sépultures de la Paroisse de Saint-Paul_, s.
1703-1705, vol. ii. No. 166:--Archives of the Hôtel de Ville. Registers
of the Secretary’s Office of the King’s Household. Imperial Archives.
[3] _Souvenirs de la Duchesse d’Abrantès_, recueillis par M. Paul
Lacroix (Bibliophile Jacob).
[4] I am indebted for this information to the kindness of M. Guizot.
[5] Especially Louis XVIII., whose language is in complete disaccord
with that of Louis XV. But I shall refer to this point of debate
hereafter.
[6] Voltaire, Prosper Marchand, Baron de Crunyngen, Armand de la
Chapelle, Chevalier de Mouhy, Duke de Nivernais, La Beaumelle,
Lenglet-Dufresnoy, Lagrange-Chancel, Fréron, Saint-Foix, Father
Griffet, Hume, De Palteau, Sandraz de Courtilz, Constantin de
Renneville, Baron d’Heiss, Sénac de Meilhan, De la Borde, Soulavie,
Linguet, Marquis de Luchet, Anquetil, Father Papon, Malesherbes,
Dulaure, Chevalier de Taulès, Chevalier de Cubières, Carra, Louis
Dutens, Abbé Barthélemy, Quintin Craufurd, De Saint Mihiel, Bouche,
Champfort, Millin, Spittler, Roux-Fazillac, Regnault-Warin, Weiss,
Delort, George Agar Ellis, Gibbon, Auguste Billiard, Dufay, Bibliophile
Jacob, Paul Lecointre, Letoumeur, Jules Loiseleur, De Bellecombe,
Mérimée, Sardou; without counting the writers of general history, such
as S. Sismondi, Henri Martin, Michelet, Camille Rousset, Depping, and
all who have written articles on this question in cyclopædias.
[7] _Histoire de France_, vol. xii. p. 435.
[8] _Art de Vérifier les Dates_, vol. vi. p. 292.
[9] _Histoire de France_, vol. xiv. p. 564.
[10] Voltaire, _Siècle de Louis XIV._, p. 289.
[11] M. de Taulès, for instance, a partisan of the theory which makes
Avedick, the patriarch of Constantinople, the Man with the Iron Mask,
and to which I shall refer in the after-part of this book.
[12] About a year ago (_Moniteur_ of September 30, 1868) _àpropos_
of the fine collection of unpublished documents given to the world
by M. Ravaisson, under the title of _Archives de la Bastille_, M. de
Lescure expressed a wish to see this question definitively settled. I
had been occupying myself with it for a considerable period, though
not without having satisfied myself that the learned conservator of
the Arsenal Archives contemplated no work on the Man with the Iron
Mask, in continuation of his publication, not yet brought down to the
epoch of the entry into the Bastille of this famous prisoner. Among
contemporary authors, besides M. Paul Lacroix (Bibliophile Jacob), who
in 1840 supported the theory that made Fouquet the celebrated prisoner,
M. Jules Loiseleur, in the _Revue Contemporaine_ of July 31, 1867, and
M. de Bellecombe, in the _Investigateur_ of May, 1868, have maintained,
as the result of their labours, that the Man with the Iron Mask was
an unknown and obscure spy, whose name would never be ascertained. We
shall recur to the two studies of MM. Lacroix and Loiseleur, of which
one is very ingenious, and the other exhibits a penetrating sagacity,
while both display a varied and trustworthy erudition.
CHAPTER I.
Theory which supposes the Man with the Iron Mask to have been
a Brother of Louis XIV.--Voltaire the first to support this
Theory in his _Siècle de Louis XIV._, and in the _Dictionnaire
Philosophique_--Certain Improbabilities in his Story--Account of the
Man with the Iron Mask introduced by Soulavie into the _Mémoires
Apocryphes du Maréchal de Richelieu_--The three different Hypotheses
of the Theory which makes the Man with the Iron Mask a Brother of
Louis XIV.
Among the numerous theories which attempt to explain the existence of
the Man with the Iron Mask,[13] some have been imagined so carelessly,
conceived with so much haste, and supported in so loose a manner, that
they are not worthy of a serious examination, and simply to mention
them will suffice to do them justice. But there are others, due to an
ingenious inspiration, and sustained with incontestable talent, which,
without being true, have at least many appearances of being so. Among
others, the most devoid of proofs, but also the most romantic, is that
which makes the Man with the Iron Mask a brother of Louis XIV. “There
are many things which everybody says because they have been said once,”
remarks Montesquieu.[14] This is especially true of things which border
on the extraordinary and the marvellous. So, there are few persons who,
on hearing the Man with the Iron Mask mentioned, do not immediately
evoke a brother of Louis XIV. Whether the result of an intrigue between
Anne of Austria and the Duke of Buckingham,[15] or a legitimate son
of Louis XIII. and twin brother of Louis XIV., matters little to
popular imagination. These are but different branches of a system which
is profoundly engrafted in the public mind, and which it will not be
unprofitable to overthrow separately, since it has still innumerable
partisans, and touches upon the rights, moreover, the Bourbons have had
to the throne of France.
By whom was this widely-spread opinion first put forward? And by whom
has it been revived in our own days? What proofs, or, at least, what
probabilities are invoked in its support? On what recollections, on
what writings, is such a supposition based? Does it agree with official
documents? Is it in accord with the character of Anne of Austria or
with that of Louis XIII.? Is it founded on reason?
First Voltaire,[16] in his _Siècle de Louis XIV._, published in 1751,
wrote the following lines, destined to excite a lively attention
and to start a theory which he only completed in his _Dictionnaire
Philosophique_:--
“Some months after the death of Mazarin,” he says, “an event occurred
which has no parallel, and what is no less strange, all the historians
have ignored it. There was sent with the greatest secresy to the
château of the Isle Sainte-Marguerite, in the Sea of Provence, an
unknown prisoner, above the average height, and of a most handsome and
noble countenance. This prisoner, on the journey, wore a mask, the
chin-piece of which was furnished with steel springs, which left him
free to eat with the mask covering his face. Orders had been given
to kill him if he should remove it. He remained in the island till a
confidential officer, named Saint-Mars, governor of Pignerol, having
been appointed governor of the Bastille in 1690, went to fetch him in
the Isle Sainte-Marguerite and conducted him to the Bastille, always
masked. The Marquis de Louvois went to see him in this island before
his removal, and spoke to him standing, and with a consideration which
betokened respect. This unknown individual was taken to the Bastille,
where he was lodged as well as he could be in the château. Nothing
that he asked for was refused him. His greatest liking was for linen
of an extraordinary fineness and for lace; he played on the guitar. He
had the very best of everything, and the governor rarely sat down in
his presence. An old doctor of the Bastille, who had often attended
this singular man in his illnesses, has stated that he never saw his
face, although he had examined his tongue and the rest of his body. He
was admirably made, said this doctor; his skin was rather brown: he
interested one by the mere tone of his voice, never complaining of his
state, and not letting it be understood who he could be. This stranger
died in 1703, and was interred during the night in the parish church
of Saint-Paul. What redoubles one’s astonishment is that at the period
when he was sent to the Isle Sainte-Marguerite, there had disappeared
from Europe no important personage. This prisoner was without doubt
one, since this is what occurred shortly after his arrival in the
island:--The governor himself used to place the dishes on the table,
and then to withdraw after having locked him in. One day, the prisoner
wrote with a knife on a silver plate, and threw the plate out of the
window towards a boat which was on the shore, almost at the foot of the
tower. A fisherman, to whom the boat belonged, picked up the plate and
carried it to the governor. He, astonished, asked the fisherman: ‘Have
you read what is written on this plate, and has any one seen it in your
possession?’ ‘I do not know how to read,’ answered the fisherman; ‘I
have just found it, and nobody has seen it.’ The peasant was detained
until the governor had ascertained that he could not read, and that the
plate had been seen by nobody. ‘Go,’ he then said to him, ‘you are very
lucky not to know how to read!’”[17]
The following is the explanation by which, in his _Dictionnaire
Philosophique_, Voltaire, under his editor’s name, afterwards completed
this first story: “The Man with the Iron Mask was doubtless a brother,
and an elder brother of Louis XIV., whose mother had that taste for
fine linen on which M. de Voltaire relies. It was from reading the
_Mémoires_ of the period which relate this anecdote concerning the
Queen, that, recollecting this very taste of the Man with the Iron
Mask, I no longer doubted that he was her son, of which all the other
circumstances had already convinced me. It is known that Louis XIII.
had not lived with the Queen for a considerable time, and that the
birth of Louis XIV. was only due to a lucky chance.” Voltaire proceeds
to relate that previous to the birth of Louis XIV., Anne of Austria
had been delivered of a son of whom Louis XIII. was not the father,
and that she had confided the secret of his birth to Richelieu:
he then goes on to say,--“But the Queen and the Cardinal, equally
penetrated with the necessity of hiding the existence of the Man with
the Iron Mask from Louis XIII., had him brought up in secresy. This
was unknown to Louis XIV. until the death of the Cardinal de Mazarin.
But this monarch, learning then that he had a brother, and an elder
brother, whom his mother could not disavow, who, moreover, perhaps had
characteristic features which betokened his origin, and reflecting
that this child, born during marriage, could not, without great
inconvenience and a horrible scandal, be declared illegitimate after
Louis XIII.’s death, may have considered that he could not make use of
wiser and better means to assure his own security and the tranquillity
of the State than those which he employed, means which dispensed with
his committing a cruelty which policy would have represented as being
necessary to a monarch less conscientious and less magnanimous than
Louis XIV.”[18]
What improbabilities, what contradictions, what errors accumulated
in a few pages! This unknown, whom no one, not even his doctor, has
ever seen unmasked, has his face described as “handsome and noble;”
Saint-Mars, named governor of the Bastille in 1690, and traversing
the whole of France in order to fetch a prisoner, for whom during
eight-and-twenty years another gaoler had sufficed; this mask with
steel springs covering day and night the face of the unknown without
affecting his health; this resignation which prevented his complaining
of his position and which did not allow him to give any one a
glimmering as to who he was, and this eagerness to throw out of his
window silver plates on which he had written his name; this peculiar
taste for fine linen, which Anne of Austria also possessed, and which
revealed his origin; this haste on her part to confess her adultery to
her enemy, the Cardinal de Richelieu; the Queen of France making only
the Prime Minister the confidant of her confinement; and these two
events, the birth and the abduction of a royal child, so well concealed
that no contemporary memoir makes mention of them: such are the
reflections which immediately suggest themselves on reading this story.
No less improbable, and more romantic still, is the fictitious account
given by the governor himself of the Man with the Iron Mask, and which
Soulavie has introduced into the apocryphal memoirs of the Marshal
de Richelieu.[19] “The unfortunate prince whom I have brought up and
guarded to the end of my days,” says the governor,[20] “was born 5th
September, 1638, at half-past eight in the evening, while the King was
at supper. His brother, now reigning (Louis XIV.), was born at twelve
in the morning, during his father’s dinner. But while the birth of
the King was splendid and brilliant, that of his brother was sad and
carefully concealed. Louis XIII. was warned by the midwife that the
Queen would have a second delivery, and this double birth had been
announced to him a long time previously by two herdsmen, who asserted
in Paris that if the Queen was brought to bed of two Dauphins, it
would be the consummation of the State’s misfortune. The Cardinal de
Richelieu, consulted by the King, replied that, if the Queen should
bring twin sons into the world it would be necessary to carefully hide
the second, because he might one day wish to be King. Louis XIII. was
consequently patient in his uncertainty. When the pains of the second
labour commenced, he was overwhelmed with emotion.” The Queen is
delivered of a second child “more delicate and more handsome than the
first.” The midwife is charged with him, “and the Cardinal afterwards
took upon himself the education of this Prince who was destined to
replace the Dauphin if the latter should die. As for the shepherds
who prophesied on the subject of Anne of Austria’s confinement, the
governor did not hear them spoken of any more, whence he concludes that
the Cardinal found a means of sending them away.”
“Dame Péronnette, the midwife, brought the Prince up as her own son,
and he passed for being the bastard of some great lord of the time.
The Cardinal confided him later to the governor to educate him as
a King’s son, and this governor took him into Burgundy to his own
house. The Queen-mother seemed to fear that if the birth of this young
Dauphin should be discovered, the malcontents would revolt, because
many doctors think that the last-born of twin brothers is really the
elder, and therefore King by right. Nevertheless, Anne of Austria could
not prevail upon herself to destroy the documents which established
this birth. The Prince, at the age of nineteen, became acquainted with
this State secret by searching in a casket belonging to his governor,
in which he discovered letters from the Queen and the Cardinals de
Richelieu and Mazarin. But, in order better to assure himself of his
true condition, he asked for portraits of the late and present Kings.
The governor replied that what he had were so bad that he was waiting
for better ones to be painted, in order to place them in his apartment.
The young man proposed to go to Saint-Jean de Luz, where the court was
staying, on account of the King’s marriage with the Spanish Infanta,
and compare himself with his brother. His governor detained him, and no
longer quitted his side.
“The young Prince was then handsome as Cupid, and Cupid was very
useful to him in getting him a portrait of his brother, for a servant
with whom he had an intrigue procured him one. The Prince recognized
himself, and rushed to his governor, exclaiming, ‘This is my brother,
and here is what I am!’ The governor despatched a messenger to court
to ask for fresh instructions. The order came to imprison them both
together.”[21]
“It is at last known, this secret which has excited so lively and so
general a curiosity!”[22] says Champfort, in noticing these fictitious
_Mémoires du Maréchal de Richelieu_. This implacable and sceptic railer
allowed himself to be really seduced by this interpretation. Many
others were convinced with him, which exonerates them; and the version
given by Voltaire was rather neglected for that of Soulavie.
In our own days, the theory which makes the Man with the Iron Mask a
brother of Louis XIV. has been supported by four writers, who have
powerfully contributed to revive it, and render it more popular still.
The first two, by transferring to the stage,[23] and the third, by
weaving into the plot of one of his most ingenious romances[24] the
pathetic fate of the mysterious prisoner, have sought less to instruct
than to interest their readers, and have completely succeeded in the
purpose they had in view. The fourth writer, who, with MM. Fournier,
Arnould, and Alexandre Dumas, has adopted the romantic theory, is an
historian, M. Michelet.[25]
Before showing that this pretended brother of Louis XIV. could not be
the unknown prisoner brought by Saint-Mars to the Bastille in 1698, let
us seek when and how this theory could have been started, and, to the
end that the refutation may be complete and definitive, let us see if
his birth is not as imaginary as his adventures. There are three dates
assigned for this birth--in 1625, after the visit to France of the Duke
of Buckingham, who has been considered as the father of the Man with
the Iron Mask; in 1631, a few months after the grave illness of Louis
XIII., which caused the accession to the throne of his brother, Gaston
of Orléans, to be feared; and lastly, September 5, 1638, a few hours
after Louis XIV. came into the world.[26]
If, in this searching examination, we touch upon delicate points--if,
in order to destroy the unjust accusations with which the memory of
Anne of Austria has been defaced, we penetrate deeply into the details
of her private life and that of her royal husband--we are drawn thither
by those who, by carrying the debate on to this ground, compel us to
follow them. We shall unhesitatingly touch upon each of the memories
which they have not feared to recall, and nothing will be omitted that
can throw light upon our proof. We shall, nevertheless, strive not to
forget what is due to our readers, and the necessity of convincing them
will not make us negligent of the obligation we are under of respecting
them.
FOOTNOTES:
[13] We shall speak of these briefly further on. We believe it useless
to mention, otherwise than in a short note, the opinion of those who,
despairing of finding the solution of the Man with the Iron Mask, have
taken upon themselves to deny his existence. All the documents which we
have just cited (official despatches of the Ministry of War, Dujonca’s
_Journal_, &c. &c.) clearly establish the fact that a prisoner was
sent with Saint-Mars to the Bastille in 1698, and that he died there
in 1703, without any one ever having known his name. The silence of
the _Mémoires de Saint-Simon_, which is very thoughtlessly evoked in
support of the theory in question, will be explained very naturally
in the course of this work. Neither is there any need to enlarge upon
an opinion put forward a short time since in certain journals, which
makes the Man with the Iron Mask a son of Louis XIV. and the Duchess
of Orléans. This opinion, which there is nothing whatever to prove,
which rests upon no document, nor even upon any historical fact, is,
moreover, set forth in an article filled with errors. The only cause
of the disgrace of the Marquis de Vardes, exiled to his government
of Aigues-Mortes, was an intrigue in which he played an important
part, and which had for its object the overthrow of Mademoiselle de
la Vallière and the substitution of another mistress for her. As to
the death of the Duchess of Orléans, it is now demonstrated that it
was not due to poison. M. Mignet, in his _Négociations Relatives, à
la Succession d’ Espagne_ (vol. iii. p. 206), was the first to deny
this poisoning, relying principally on a very conclusive despatch
from Lionne to Colbert, of the 1st July, 1670. Since then, M. Littré,
in the second number of _La Philosophie Positive_, has incontestably
established by the examination of the _procès-verbaux_, and of all
the circumstances relating to the death of Henrietta of England,
that it must be attributed to an internal disease, unknown to the
physicians of that period. [The Duchess of Orléans here referred to
is Henrietta-Maria, youngest daughter of Charles I. of England, who
married Philip, younger brother of Louis XIV., and first Duke of the
existing branch of the House of Orléans.--_Trans._]
[14] _Grandeur et Décadence des Romains_, chap. iv.
[15] The grave English historian, David Hume, has re-echoed this
theory, supported also by the Marquis de Luchet, in his _Remarques sur
le Masque de Fer_, 1783.
[16] The _Mémoires Secrets pour servir à l’ Histoire de Perse_,
Amsterdam, 1745, had already revealed the existence of Saint-Mars’
prisoner, and maintained that he was the Duke de Vermandois, a natural
son of Louis XIV. and Mademoiselle de la Vallière. We shall recur to
them when considering this theory, in the same way as we shall speak,
with reference to the principal theories put forward, of the works
which have discussed them, without regard to the period at which they
have appeared.
[17] _Siècle de Louis XIV._, chap. xxv.
[18] Voltaire, _Dictionnaire Philosophique_, vol. i. p. 375, 376.
Edition of 1771.
[19] London, 1790. It is known that Soulavie used the notes and papers
of the Marshal de Richelieu with such bad faith, that the Duke de
Fronsac launched an energetic protest against his father’s ex-secretary.
[20] “Account of the birth and education of the unfortunate prince
removed by the Cardinals Richelieu and Mazarin from society, and
imprisoned by order of Louis XIV., composed by the governor of the
prince on his deathbed.” (_Mémoires du Maréchal de Richelieu_, vol.
iii. chap. 4.)
[21] This story is closely reproduced in Grimm’s Correspondence, on the
assumed authority of an original letter from the Duchess de Modena,
daughter of the Regent d’Orléans, said to have been found by M. de la
Borde, a former valet-de-chambre of Louis XV., among the papers of
Marshal Richelieu, who was the Duchess’s lover.--See _Corespondence
Littéraire, Philosophique, &c., de Grunen et de Diderot_, vol. xiv.,
pp. 419-23. Paris, 1831.--_Trans._
[22] _Mercure de France._
[23] _Le Masque de Fer_ of MM. Arnould and Fournier, played with great
success at the Odéon Theatre in 1831.
[24] _Le Vicomte de Bragelonne_, by Alexander Dumas.
[25] _Histoire de France_, vol. xii. p. 435. “If Louis XVI. told
Marie-Antoinette that nothing was any longer known about him, it is
because, understanding her well, he had little desire of this secret
being sent to Vienna. Very probably the child was an _elder_ brother of
Louis XIV., and his birth obscured the question (important to them) of
knowing if their ancestor, Louis XIV., had reigned legitimately.”
[26] I shall not examine in detail the hypothesis which makes him a
child of Anne of Austria and Mazarin, since it is abandoned even by
those who are the most eager to see a brother of Louis XIV. in the
prisoner. “It is doubtful,” says M. Michelet, “if the prisoner had
been a younger brother of Louis XIV., a son of the Queen and Mazarin,
whether the succeeding kings would have kept the secret so well.”
Moreover, the general arguments which I shall advance in Chapter V.
will apply equally to a son of Mazarin, of Buckingham, or of Louis
XIII.