Did Louis 14th have a twin brother? "Iron Mask" and the castle of Sainte-Marguerite Island

The events of November 20, 1703 still attract historians today. On this day, a prisoner was secretly buried in the cemetery near St. Paul's Church, who went by the name Iron Mask in the prison registry. Until now, researchers are speculating about what kind of personality was hidden behind the mask.

Charlotte Elisabeth of Bavaria d'Orléans

Rumors about the mysterious Iron Mask began to spread during the reign of Louis XIV, and they were spread by the widow of the Duke of Orleans, Charlotte Elizabeth of Bavaria. She claimed that for a number of years a strange prisoner in an iron mask was held in the Bastille and died.

Bastille

These rumors gave rise to many speculations about the identity of the prisoner, some suggested that he was an English lord who was involved in a conspiracy against the English king William III.

Louise de La Valliere

In 1745, the book “Secret Notes on the History of Persia” by an unknown author was published, which further concentrated rumors around the identity of the mysterious prisoner. The book tells the story of the tragic fate of the hero Giafer, who was the illegitimate son of Shah Abas, in whom the image of Louis XIV was recognizable. Giafer slapped his half-brother Sefi Mirza (Grand Dauphin) and was imprisoned for life in the Bastille as punishment.

Louise de La Vallière and her children from Louis XIV Mademoiselle de Blois and Count of Vermandois

If you believe the book, then the prisoner was the Count of Vermandois - the great French admiral - the illegitimate son of Louis XIV and his favorite Louise de La Vallière.

Anne of Austria, Maria Theresa and Dauphin Louis

The image of the Iron Mask troubled the minds of the great French. Thus, in 1751, Voltaire wrote the book “The Age of Louis XIV,” in which he reveals the story of a mysterious prisoner who was forced to wear an iron mask for the rest of his life. The book immediately became a bestseller. And only twenty years later Voltaire revealed the secret of the iron mask to readers. It turned out that under the mask was hidden the elder brother of Louis XIV, the son of Anne of Austria and her favorite. The Iron Mask became the main character in the works of J. Chancel de Lagrange, Seneca de Millan, A. Griffe, Abbot Papon, S. Lenge and others.

Voltaire

Voltaire, by revealing the secret of the Iron Mask, dealt a strong blow to the prestige of the royal family. And in 1775, by order of the Parisian minister Amelo, in order to conceal the secret, a special 120th sheet, which described the history of the prisoner’s admission to prison, was removed and destroyed from the Bastille. This fact further removed the mystery from being solved.

Cardinal Mazarin

At the end of the 18th century, a new version of the Iron Mask was born. According to her, there were twin brothers - the children of the Queen of France. The real son of Louis XIII was allegedly imprisoned in the fortress, and the throne was taken by the son of Anne of Austria and Cardinal Mazarin.

Napoleon Bonaparte

This assumption refuted the right of the Bourbon throne, starting with Louis XIV. This hypothesis suited the supporters of Napoleon Bonaparte, who claimed in 1801 that Napoleon was a descendant of the Iron Mask.

Storming of the Bastille

In 1789, the famous Taking of the Bastille took place, and then the archives of the prison were made public. It turned out that the man in the Iron Mask was brought to the Bastille by the governor of Saint-Mars from the island of Sainte-Marguerite, where he was in the company of eight other political criminals in the fortress of Pignerol. Saint-Mars at that time was the commandant of the Pignerol fortress and served under the command of Charles de Bas Castelmore (we recognize d'Artagnan).

Louis XIV

It turned out that the Iron Mask was one of these eight. The research process was further complicated by the fact that each of the prisoners was named not by name, but by a conventional nickname. It turned out that one of the eight was Count Lozen, who was later released.

Queen Maria Theresa of Austria

Throughout the 19th century, the question of establishing the identity of the Iron Mask was studied by a whole team of scientists and historians, and interest in this topic did not wane in the 20th century. New works by A. Lang, M. Duvivier, J. Mongredien, playwright M. Pagnol. In 1970, books by P.-J. were published. Arreza "Iron Mask" Finally a solved riddle” and J.-C. Ptifis "Iron Mask - the most mysterious prisoner in history." The book by P.-M. became sensational. Dijols Nabo or the Iron Mask" in 1978. The author is convinced that the servant of Queen Maria Theresa, the Moor Nabo, was hiding under the mask.

The mystery of the Iron Mask has worried various writers for centuries: N. Karamzin, A. de Vigny, A.S. Pushkin, V. Hugo, A. Dumas the father, P. Moreau, A. Decaux, J. Bordoneva.
At different times, based on the same facts, writers and historians, librarians and scientists tried to defend completely different hypotheses, which confirmed that the mystery of the Iron Mask has not yet been solved.

On November 19, 1703, a man who spent the last four decades of his life in various prisons in France was buried in the Saint-Paul cemetery at the infamous Bastille prison. He is without a doubt the most famous prisoner in French history, although no one knows why he had to spend half his life in a cell, and, as history claims, in almost perfect isolation and with his face shackled in an iron mask.

The first known record of this unfortunate man dates back to July 1669, when the Marquis de Louvois, in a letter to Benigny d'Auvergne de Saint-Mars, the governor of the Pinerol prison, mentioned a certain Eustache Doge, who should be arrested for his actions against the crown. An excellent contender for the title of "Iron Mask".

But was this his real name? This cannot be confirmed or refuted, since analysis of the letter showed that the name of the criminal was signed by another person, perhaps even after the letter was written by the author himself. And this is another mystery that shrouds the already insoluble mystery of history.

We also have numerous references to this person in the works of writers of that time, which inspire more confidence. For example, Voltaire mentions him in his work Le siècle de Louis XIV ("The Age of Louis XIV"). As you know, Voltaire was imprisoned in the Bastille in 1717, where he spent about a year. Naturally, he met with many prisoners, and some of them stated in a conversation with the enlightenment thinker that they allegedly came into contact with the mysterious prisoner while he was alive.

The existence of the man in the iron mask has also been noted in other historical references, such as Le mémoire secret pour servir à l'histoire de la Percy ("The Mysterious Memory") by an unknown author, the writings of one of the most famous journalists of the French Revolution, Baron Friedrich Melchior von Grimm and personal diary of Etienne de Junc, one of the Bastille employees who witnessed the death of a prisoner.

However, the source that made this prisoner famous among the masses was Alexandre Dumas's The Man in the Iron Mask, which was the third and last in a series of stories that began with the adventures of the Three Musketeers. The book, although believed to be completely fictitious, appears to contain some reliable information, as the author has conducted a fairly detailed investigation into the case. French classic literature was often inspired by real stories of people, around which additional details were created and colorful action took place (this also applies to The Count of Monte Cristo, which was based on biographical accounts of a real person).

In any case, as already mentioned, the order for Doge's imprisonment was given by the Marquis de Louvois, Louis XIV's secretary for military affairs. Among other things, it was stipulated that Dauger was to be kept in high-security prisons, where he would have the right to communicate only with a very narrow circle of people (in particular, jailers and other high-ranking officials). And if he ever dared to talk to anyone about something that did not relate to his natural needs and wants, he should have been executed immediately. To achieve this goal, Dauger was placed under the supervision of Benigny d’Auvergne de Saint-Mars himself, who was supposed to ensure that all orders “from above” were carried out until the end of the prisoner’s life.

But as early accounts of Dauger's life behind bars say, these strict rules began to be forgotten over time. For example, he received permission to become a prison servant for former finance minister Nicolas Fouquet when his servant was ill. The only condition was that he should not meet anyone else except Fouquet. If there were strangers in the cell, Doge was not supposed to go there. But why were Fouquet given such amenities? It has been suggested that, although he was to remain in prison for the rest of his life, he was not prohibited from receiving guests or corresponding with the most influential people of the time.

The fact that Dauger became someone's servant and then served as a laborer in the same prison is also significant. Given the rules of the era, if he had been a royal, or even just a high-ranking relative, or related to earls, marquises, and viscounts, he would not have been allowed to serve. Has someone of royal blood been jailed for life on dubious charges? Perfect! (such prisoners were entitled to a whole staff of servants and other benefits of the nobility). To be “on the premises”, having noble roots? Unthinkable.

In any case, the main reason we still remember this poor fellow, and not a hundred other prisoners, is his mask. Why was his face hidden from the public? Some historians argue that this is nothing more than a trick by the ambitious Bénigny d'Auvergne de Saint-Mars, who came up with it during the transfer of a prisoner to Saint-Marguerite in 1687 to impress the crowd by pointing out the importance of the criminal he himself the king entrusted him with guarding. It was after this “transfer” that a rumor appeared among the people that the prisoner was forced to always wear an iron mask.

On September 18, 1698, Saint-Mars received another promotion and this time became the manager of the Bastille. It was at this point that Dauger was again transferred to a Paris prison. According to Voltaire and other prisoners who saw a man in an iron mask within the walls of the old fortress, this man never took off the mask. However, it should be noted that the aforementioned Lieutenant de Junca, who served there, repeatedly claimed that the mask was, in fact, made of black velvet.

Dauger died in prison on November 19, 1703. San Mars described him as "disposed to the will of God and to the king" in contrast to most of the prisoners. If it is true that he was forced to hide his face under a mask and serve Fouquet, then perhaps this prisoner was recognizable or had an obvious resemblance to another person, most likely from high society (whether by direct relationship or pure coincidence).

But the question remains, was he just a humble servant or had the misfortune of witnessing something that the king kept secret, or was he like one of the representatives of the ruling elite? Why didn't the disgruntled king and the French authorities simply kill him? People from the peasant class could easily be executed due to the slightest accusations (not always fair), for example, for communication with the devil or theft of ears of corn from the royal fields. Why did they take the risk of letting him live even though they took steps to preserve his anonymity? And if he was of royal blood, why was he allowed to work as a servant? And for that matter, why was he allowed to regularly communicate with Fouquet, to whom he could tell his secret, and he, in turn, would let it slip in one of his letters to the outside? So it wasn't that big of a secret that was kept behind this mask.

It goes without saying that a minor historical fact would not ultimately lead to numerous speculations, theories and searches for evidence in support of any of them. According to Voltaire, the man in the iron mask was the elder illegitimate brother of Louis XIV (from Anne of Austria's relationship with Cardinal Mazarin), while according to Dumas, the mysterious prisoner was none other than Louis XIV's twin, who was born a minute later before and thus should have become the rightful king of France.

Another theory is that he was the real father of King Louis XIV. Everyone knows that Louis XIII was quite old at the time of the “miraculous” birth of Louis XIV. But an heir was needed so that Louis XIII's brother Gaston d'Orléans would not receive the throne. Cardinal Richelieu and the queen herself were against him for various political reasons. Therefore, according to the defenders of this assumption, the cardinal and Anna found another man, who became the biological father of the Dauphin. Like other theories, there is no actual proof of this, but at least it explains why the prisoner loved the king so much, despite the fact that the same king imprisoned him for life. Of course, it would be cruel to force one's own father to live in prison as a slave, assuming that Louis knew that it was his father. And if he didn’t know, then why keep him alive or put him in prison at all? There were no DNA tests back then, and people wouldn’t have believed it if any man had talked about having a relationship with the queen.

One of the most compelling theories to date in terms of history and plausibility comes from a coded letter from King Louis XIV about General Vivien de Bulonde, who incurred the ruler's wrath when he fled from approaching Austrian troops, abandoning wounded soldiers and provisions to the enemy. After the encryption was solved, scientists were able to read the following:

“His Majesty knows better than any other man the consequences of this act, and he also knows how deeply our defeat has damaged our cause, a failure which we must make up for during the winter. His Majesty wishes you to immediately arrest General Bulond and convey him to the fortress of Pinerol, where he will be locked in a cage under guard, and measures 330 and 390 should be taken against him.”

What are “measures 330 and 309”?
According to scientists, “330” meant wearing a mask, and “309” meant life imprisonment, but, again, these are only the conclusions of historians. Perhaps the king simply had a penchant for shackling prisoners he didn’t particularly like in masks as punishment. But the main inconsistency in this theory is that General Vivien de Bulonde died in 1709, while the “Iron Mask” died six years earlier (according to records found in the archives).

What then to do with Eustache Doget? Does this mean that this mystery of the great Bastille is not connected with his name? It is known for certain that Estache Dauger de Cavoy, the son of the captain of the guard of Cardinal Richelieu, really existed and was born in 1637. In his youth he joined the army, but was forced to resign in disgrace after killing a young man in a drunken brawl. Later, he was imprisoned. Due to endless complaints about his imprisonment to his sister and letters to the king asking for better conditions, in 1678 Louis ordered a ban on his correspondence and ordered him to be protected from all visitors, except when a priest was present at the “date”.

The problem with Kavoy's story is that he was kept in Saint-Lazare and the man in the iron mask was in Pinerol. In addition, Cavoy does not fit into the description of San Mars as “disposed to the will of God and to the king,” and among documents from that time there is evidence that he died in the 1680s, long before another famous one went to the next world us Eustache Doge.

We know very little about the man in the iron mask and are not sure whether he was actually guilty of a terrible crime against the king or was forced to hide his face so that no one would recognize him as another person. Or maybe he really was an ordinary guy named Eustache Doget and a simple servant who “annoyed” the king, but not so much as to kill him. Although, what must a servant be guilty of in order to be locked in a damp cell infested with rats, without the opportunity to communicate with people and with the humiliating duty of wearing an ugly mask? Who knows, perhaps the king's favorite favorite is involved? But on the other hand, this is such an intriguing story that scientists will struggle for centuries to unravel the identity and fate of the “Iron Mask.”

It’s very good that there are so many caring people on VO, and they very often suggest what to write about. For example, after the material about the IF castle, many wanted to learn more about the mythical Iron Mask and the castle on the island of Sainte-Marguerite, where he was kept based on Dumas’ novel “The Vicomte de Bragelonne or Ten Years Later.” And it turns out that it is possible (and should be told) about all this! Through various ingenious calculations, it seems that it was possible to establish that this same prisoner was born around 1640, and died on November 19, 1703. Under number 64389000, he was kept in various prisons, including (from 1698) the Bastille, and he was kept there wearing a velvet mask (and only in later legends did it turn into an iron one).

The best version of the “iron mask” from the 1962 film of the same name with Jean Marais in the role of D’Artagnan.

This mysterious man was first written about in the book “Secret Notes on the History of the Persian Court,” published in Amsterdam in 1745–1746, and it was there that it was reported that the “Iron Mask” was the Duke of Vermandois, the son of King Louis XIV and his mistress Louise de La Vallière, who was imprisoned for slapping the Dauphin. However, this story is completely implausible, since the real Louis of Bourbon died in 1683, when he was 16 years old.

Then the great Voltaire had a hand in the drama of The Iron Mask. In his essay “The Age of Louis XIV” (1751), he was the first to write that the “Iron Mask” was none other than the twin brother of Louis XIV, absolutely similar to him, and therefore very dangerous as a possible usurper.

Dutch writers, who had no love for France and tried to cast a shadow on its kings at every opportunity, declared that the “Iron Mask” was... the chamberlain and lover of Queen Anne of Austria and therefore the real Pope of Louis XIV. Then the Jesuit Griffe, who served as confessor in the Bastille fortress for nine years, spoke about the “Iron Mask”, and in 1769 published an essay in which he cited the diary of the royal lieutenant of the Bastille, according to which on September 19, 1698, a prisoner was brought here from the island of St. Margaret in a sedan chair, whose the name was unknown, and the face was covered with a black velvet (but not iron) mask.

He died on November 19, 1703. Well, as for Voltaire, in his “Philosophical Dictionary” in an article about Anne of Austria, he wrote that he knew more than Griffe knew, but since he was French, he was forced to remain silent.

That is, he was the eldest, but illegitimate son of Anna of Austria, and that, supposedly, the confidence in her infertility by the birth of this child was refuted; but then she gave birth to Louis XIV from her legal husband, and Louis XIV, having reached adulthood, found out about all this and ordered his brother to be imprisoned in a fortress. Immediately there appeared insinuations worthy of Dumas himself: “The Iron Mask” is the son of the Duke of Buckingham, the “Iron Mask” is the fruit of the marriage of Anne of Austria with Cardinal Mazarin, the “child of love” from the captain of the cardinal’s guard Doge de Cavoye, Prince of Condé, and so on, and everything like that.

From film to film the mask became more and more terrible...

Abbot Suliavi also claimed in 1790 that the “Iron Mask” was the twin brother of Louis XIV, whom Louis XIII ordered to be raised in secret so that the misfortunes predicted for him associated with the birth of twins would not come true. Well, after the death of Cardinal Mazarin, Louis XIV found out everything, but ordered his brother to be imprisoned, and besides, because of their striking similarity, he ordered him to wear a mask. During the years of the Great French Revolution, this point of view was generally accepted and it was on its basis that A. Dumas wrote his novel.

There is information that the prisoner in the black velvet mask was listed under the name Mattioli in the Bastille lists. And it seems that it was the adventurer Antonio Mattioli, who in 1678 promised Louis XIV to surrender the Casale fortress with the help of treachery. For this dark matter, he supposedly received 100,000 crowns, but then revealed this secret to Savoy, Spain and Austria simultaneously. For this he was caught and first kept on the island of Sainte-Marguerite, and then transferred to the Bastille. This assumption was supported by most historians of the late 19th century.

Then the cryptanalyst Etienne Bazery deciphered a certain document, on the basis of which he concluded that the unfortunate prisoner in the mask was General Vivien de Bulonde, but there was also such a point of view that the “Iron Mask” was the nobleman Armoise, who in 1672 in the Spanish Netherlands plotted against Louis XIV, but was captured in 1673 and imprisoned in the Bastille.

But there were also such versions, well, simply of a clearly fantastic nature. For example, the “Iron Mask” was identified with the disgraced superintendent Nicolas Fouquet, the guilty minister of Louis XIV, who actually died in Pignerol, or the English Duke of Monmouth, who rebelled against King James II and was then executed in 1685.

There is also a version, quite worthy of the pen of Bushkov and some authors here at VO, that this is how the enemies of Russia hid the real Tsar Peter I, who went to Europe with the “Grand Embassy”, and was replaced, and in his place came to Russia someone sent by the Jesuits or Freemasons an impostor hostile to everything Russian.

In 1963, Charles Benecroute, a French historian, “gave birth” to another version: in his opinion, the “Iron Mask” was none other than Cardinal Mazarin himself. They say it was like this: in 1614, a 12-year-old albino native was taken from Polynesia to France, who resembled Cardinal Mazarin like two peas in a pod. This similarity was noticed by the Duke de Gaulle in 1655. He decided to replace Mazarin with a native, and he did it just fine. The native took the place of the first minister (that’s how he “takes away” some!) under Louis XIV, and the “iron mask” was put on Mazarin himself.

In 1976, the Soviet researcher Yu. Tatarinov expressed his assumption that there were several “iron masks”: first it was the ex-minister Fouquet, then the loser Mattioli and the same Estache Doget. In any case, all these people were then taken to the island of Sainte-Marguerite - the largest of the Lérins Islands, which is located just a kilometer from the famous city of Cannes on the French Riviera. This island itself stretches from east to west for 3 km, and its width is only 900 m. It is on this piece of land that the main tourist site of the island stands - Fort Royal, a fort and at the same time a prison, where the famous “Iron Mask” and where he threw plates out the window calling for help.

At first, that is, back in the days of Ancient Rome, the island was called Lero. Then the crusaders, setting off for the Holy Land, built a chapel on it in honor of St. Margaret of Antioch. In the 14th century, a certain Raymond Feraud invented that Saint Margaret lived on this island, leading a community of virgin nuns on it.

But already in 1612, Claude de Laurent, Duke of Chevreuse, began to own the island. And soon Fort Royal was built on it. In 1635 the Spaniards captured the island, but two years later the French drove them away. Then, just like the Château d'If, Fort Royal became a royal prison, but during the 18th century, the local settlement of Sainte-Margaret grew and grew, as it had to serve the garrison located on the island.

Today, the entire island of Sainte-Marguerite is overgrown with a dense forest of eucalyptus and pine trees. In the village on the island there are about twenty buildings, designed primarily to serve tourists. Well, in the fort itself there is a Maritime Museum, where you can see finds discovered on sunken Roman and Arab ships, and where former chambers are open to tourists, and, of course, the Iron Mask chamber and Roman tanks in which the Romans kept freshly caught fish fish. For lovers of war memorials, there is a small cemetery for French soldiers who took part in the Crimean War, and also a cemetery for North African soldiers who fought for France during World War II. There is also a small estate there that belongs to Vijaya Mallya, an Indian millionaire and owner of the Formula 1 Force India team. Well, he’s such an eccentric fellow that he wanted to have a villa there for himself, but that’s all the attractions there are.

The legend of the Iron Mask, the most mysterious of all prisoners, has existed for more than two centuries. Voltaire first told the world about him, and his research formed the basis for stories about the Iron Mask.

“A few months after the death of Mazarin,” writes Voltaire, “an unprecedented event occurred... An unknown prisoner, young and of the noblest bearing, was sent to the castle on the island of St. Margaret (near Provence). On the way, he wore a mask with steel latches on it. lower part of it, which allowed him to eat without removing the mask. An order was given to kill him if he took off the mask. He remained on the island until the trusted officer of Saint-Mars, the governor of Pinerol, took command of the Bastille in 1690. Mr. did not go to the island of St. Margaret and did not take the prisoner to the Bastille, where he was accommodated as well as possible in such a place. He was not refused anything that he asked for.

The prisoner had a passion for extremely fine linen and lace - and received it. Played the guitar for hours. The most exquisite dishes were prepared for him, and the old doctor of the Bastille, who treated this man, who had peculiar illnesses, said that he had never seen his face, although he often examined his body and tongue. According to the doctor, the prisoner was remarkably built, his skin was slightly dark; The voice was striking just with its intonations alone. This man never complained about his condition, and never once betrayed his origins. The unknown died in 1703. What is doubly surprising is that when he was brought to the island of St. Margaret, not a single disappearance of famous people was recorded in Europe.”

The prisoner was, without a doubt, a noble man. The governor himself set the table for him and then left, having previously locked the cell. One day a prisoner scratched something on a silver plate with a knife and threw it out the window to a boat that was off the shore, right at the foot of the tower. The fisherman in the boat picked up the plate and brought it to the governor. The latter, extremely concerned, asked the fisherman if he had read what was scribbled here, and if anyone had seen it in his hands? The fisherman replied that he could not read and no one had seen the plate.

Voltaire found alive the last person who knew the secret of the Iron Mask - the former minister de Chamillard. His son-in-law, Marshal de La Feuillade, begged his dying father-in-law on his knees to reveal to him who the man in the iron mask really was. Chamilar replied that this was a state secret and he took an oath never to disclose it.

Naturally, Voltaire did not fail to express a number of hypotheses about the mysterious prisoner. Going through the names of nobles who died or disappeared under mysterious circumstances, he concluded that it was certainly neither the Comte de Vermandois nor the Duke de Beaufort, who disappeared only during the siege of Kandy and who could not be identified in the body beheaded by the Turks.

But this is a legend. The only thing that can be said with certainty is that after 1665, a prisoner entered the Pinerol castle under the jurisdiction of the governor of Saint-Mars, and this prisoner was the Man in the Iron Mask. The date of his arrival in Pinerol is unknown. Otherwise, it would be possible to immediately establish who was hiding under the mask. The fact is that archival documents relating to the prison, of which Saint-Mars was the head, have been preserved, and they are very accurate: they inform us in detail about the events that took place in Pinerol - the arrival of prisoners, their names, the reasons for their imprisonment, illnesses, deaths, release, if it happened occasionally.

It is indisputably established that the masked man followed Saint-Mars all the way to the Bastille. However, the mask appeared on his face only many years later, when he moved to the Bastille. In 1687 Saint-Mars became governor of the island of St. Margaret; the prisoner was also transferred there. 11 years have passed. The jailer and the prisoner grew old together. Finally, at the age of 72, Saint-Mars was appointed commander of the Bastille. The old order nevertheless remained in force: no one should see the prisoner or speak to him.

Minister Barbezou wrote to Saint-Mars: “The King finds it possible for you to leave the island of St. Margaret and go to the Bastille with your old prisoner, taking all precautions to ensure that no one sees him or knows about him.”

But how to keep a secret? Saint-Mars had an idea: instead of hiding his prisoner, why not hide only his face? It was thanks to this “find” that the Man in the Iron Mask was born. Let us note again - never before this moment had the mysterious prisoner worn a mask. Saint-Mars managed to keep his secret for a long time. The first time the prisoner put on a mask was during a trip to Paris. In this guise he went down in history...

Four years later M. du Junca was forced to open the Bastille register once again. A sad event happened: Monsieur Saint-Mars lost his oldest prisoner. Du Junca recorded the following: “On the same day, 1703, November 19th, this unknown prisoner in a black velvet mask, brought by M. de Saint-Mars from the island of St. Margaret and guarded by him for a long time, died around ten o'clock in the evening after feeling a little unwell the day before after Mass, but at the same time he was not seriously ill. Mr. Giraud, our priest, confessed him due to the suddenness of his death, our confessor performed the sacrament of confession literally at the last moment of his life; this prisoner, guarded for so long, was buried in the parish cemetery of Saint-Paul; when registering his death, Monsieur Rosarge, a doctor, and Monsieur Rey, a surgeon, designated him by a certain name, also unknown."

After some time, du Junca managed to find out under what name the prisoner was reported. He then entered this name in the journal, and here we give the uncorrected text: “I learned that since M. de Marchiel was registered, 40 l. have been paid for the burial.”

When the Man in the Iron Mask died, the deceased was recorded under the name Marsciali or Marscioli. A hint of Mattioli's distortion can be seen here. Marie Antoinette's maid reported that Louis XVI once told Marie Antoinette that the Man in the Mask was "a mere prisoner of a disconcerting character, a subject of the Duke of Mantua." From the intercepted correspondence it is also known that Louis XVI told Madame Pompadour the same thing: “This was one of the ministers of the Italian prince.”

But Mattioli’s story was not a secret to anyone. His betrayal, arrest, imprisonment - newspapers spread this story throughout Europe. Moreover, the enemies of France - the Spaniards and the Savoyards - published a story about his activities and arrest in order to sway public opinion in favor of Mattioli. Additionally, Mattioli died in April 1694 and the Iron Mask in 1703.

Who was he? It is very likely that the Iron Mask was a certain Eustache Doge. In 1703 he died in the Bastille, having spent 34 years in prison. What crime Doge committed is unknown. But it must have been serious to entail harsh treatment and painful isolation for so many years.

What crime entailed such punishment? This man was "only a servant," but no doubt he was involved in some serious matter. He had to know some secrets that were so important that no one, not even Saint-Mars, knew the true guilt of this man.

Researcher Maurice Duvivier identifies Eustache Dauger with a certain Eustache d'Auger de Cavoye, who as a child played with Louis XIV. It was the latter circumstance that became the reason that the king did not bring him to justice and personally sentenced him to life imprisonment. The reason for his imprisonment it still remains a mystery. Was there another person hiding under this name? In any case, he was not the brother of Louis XIV.

S. TSVETKOV.

Science and life // Illustrations

A color etching by Paul Jacob Lamini (19th century) depicts the storming of the Bastille, where a prisoner under the name “Iron Mask” once languished.

Louis XIV. Many associated the fate of the unfortunate secret prisoner of the Bastille with his name.

The Palace of Versailles, built at the behest of the “Sun King,” became the residence of Louis XIV, displacing the Louvre.

Madame de Montespan, favorite of Louis XIV.

François Marie Arouet Voltaire (1736 lithograph from a portrait of Latour) was the “father” of the hypothesis according to which the Iron Mask was considered the brother of Louis XIV.

English King Charles II. Miniature from 1665.

King Louis XIV opens the French Academy in Paris.

The mystery of the prisoner who went down in history under the name “Iron Mask” has worried people for centuries. Very little reliable information has been preserved about the most unusual prisoner of the Bastille. It is known, for example, that at the beginning of 1679 in the Pignerol prison there was a prisoner from whom a black velvet mask of the Venetian type with iron clasps (then turned by legend into an iron one) was never removed. The respectful treatment of him makes one think about the noble origin of the prisoner. In prison, he maintained the habits of an aristocrat, wore fine linen, loved an elegant table, and played music, playing the guitar quite well.

A few years later, the commandant of the Pignerol Saint-Mars fortress, having received an appointment to the islands of Saint Margaret, brought with him a secret prisoner. And on September 18, 1698, again together with Saint-Mars, who became the commandant of the Bastille, the unknown person found himself within its walls, which he did not leave until his death in 1703. In the Bastille, he was first given a separate room, but on March 6, 1701, he found himself in the same room with Domenic François Tirmont, accused of witchcraft and molestation of young girls; On April 30 of the same year, Jean Alexandre de Rocorville, guilty of “pronouncing anti-government speeches,” was placed with them - and all this was on the orders of the king. Apparently, from the words of these people, the legend of the Iron Mask then spread. It is noteworthy that the mysterious prisoner himself did not say a word to his cellmates about who he was and for what crime he was doomed to eternal incognito.

After the death of the Iron Mask, the room in which he lived was thoroughly searched, the walls were scraped and re-whitened, the furniture was burned, and the gold and silver dishes were melted down. Apparently, the authorities were afraid that the prisoner might have hidden some piece of paper somewhere or scrawled a few words in a secluded place about the secret of his imprisonment.

The famous prisoner was seen as a variety of people. In fact, any noble person who lived in the 17th century and about whose death no reliable information was preserved was immediately nominated by some historian as a candidate for the role of the Iron Mask. Let us briefly consider the most popular versions, which at different times seemed to be the final solution to this historical riddle.

The first place, of course, belongs to the hypothesis that tries to prove (or, rather, believes) in the existence of a brother of Louis XIV, hidden under a mask for reasons of state. Its father can be considered Voltaire, who in his work “The Age of Louis XIV” (1751) wrote: “The Iron Mask was the brother and, without a doubt, the elder brother of Louis XIV...” The hypothesis owes its popularity to the brilliant pen of Dumas the Father - that’s it “ hanging on a nail” is the plot of “The Vicomte de Bragelonne”. Among professional historians, this legend has long lost all credibility - in the 19th century it was shared only by Jules Michelet, a French historian, and after him - no one else. Its disadvantages include, first of all, the lack of reliable written evidence: all existing ones, as it turned out, are apocryphal. (For example, the once famous story of the “Governor of the Iron Mask”: “The unfortunate prince, whom I raised and cherished until the end of my days, was born on September 5, 1638 at eight and a half o’clock in the evening, during the king’s dinner. His brother, now reigning (Louis XIV. - Note ed.), was born in the morning at noon, during his father’s lunch”, etc.). This story is contained in the so-called notes of Marshal Richelieu, published by a certain Sulavi, but to which, however, the marshal himself had nothing to do.

The system of evidence given in favor of this version is flawed, since it violates the principle of the English philosopher William of Ockham: “Entities should not be multiplied beyond what is necessary.” In other words, no one will ever explain the mystery of the Iron Mask by the existence of the brother of Louis XIV until it is proven that the latter actually had a brother. In general, the words of Montesquieu apply to this version: “There are things that everyone talks about because they were once said.”

During the period of the First Empire, a variation of this version arose, according to which Louis XIII, in addition to the legal heir - the future Louis XIV - had an illegitimate son, who was eliminated after the death of his father by his half-brother. On the islands of St. Margaret, where he was exiled, he allegedly became friends with the jailer’s daughter, who bore him a son. When the masked prisoner was later transported to the Bastille, his young son was sent to Corsica, giving him the surname Buonaparte, which means “from the good side,” “from good parents.” This story was supposed to prove that imperial crowns do not fall of their own accord on the heads of artillery lieutenants.

Let's move on to the next contender - the Count of Vermandois, the natural son of Louis XIV and Mademoiselle de La Vallière.

In 1745, “Secret Notes on the History of Persia” was published in Amsterdam, in which the anecdotal history of the French court was told under fictitious (“Persian”) names. By the way, they said that the padishah Sha-Abbas (Louis XIV) had two sons: the legitimate Sedzh-Mirza (Louis, Dauphin) and the illegitimate Giafer (Count of Vermandois). And so “Jiafer once forgot himself to such an extent that he slapped Sedzh-Mirza.” The Council of State spoke in favor of the death penalty for Giafer, who had inflicted a grave insult on the prince of the blood. Then Sha-Abbas, who dearly loved Jiafer, listened to the advice of one minister: he sent his offending son into the army and announced his sudden death on the road, but in fact hid him in his castle. Subsequently, Giafer, keeping the secret of his disappearance, moved from fortress to fortress, and when he needed to see people, he put on a mask.

The book by the anonymous author immediately became popular in Paris, temporarily eclipsing other hypotheses about the Iron Mask. However, painstaking research has shown that not a single memoirist of the era of Louis XIV said a word about the insult inflicted on the Dauphin by the Count of Vermandois. In addition, the official date of the count's death (which, according to this version, should correspond to the date of his disappearance) - November 18, 1683 - does not allow him to be in Pignerol in 1679 as the Iron Mask.

The writer Saint-Foy saw in the Iron Mask Duke James of Monmouth, the son of the English king Charles II (he ascended the throne after the death of Cromwell in 1658) and the courtesan Lucy Walters. The king loved this son dearly. The illegitimate prince, raised Protestant, lived in the palace, had pages and servants, and during his travels he was accepted as a member of the royal family. As an adult, he received the title Duke of Monmouth and became the first man at court.

Charles II had no legitimate children, and therefore the Duke of York, who was extremely unpopular among the people for his adherence to Catholicism, was considered the heir to the throne. Rumors spread throughout the country that the Duke of Monmouth was no less a legitimate heir than the Duke of York, since Charles II allegedly had a secret marriage with Lucy Walters, etc. The Duke of York began to look at Monmouth as a dangerous rival, and he had to leave for Holland. Here he met the news of the death of Charles II and the accession of the Duke of York under the name of James II.

On July 11, 1685, Monmouth, accompanied by 80 people, landed near the small port of Lima, on the Dorsetshire coast. Unfurling the blue banner, he boldly entered the city. He was greeted with delight. From all sides, those dissatisfied with the new king flocked to the place of his landing to greet the “good duke, the Protestant duke, the rightful heir to the throne.” A few days later, at least six thousand people gathered under his leadership. The army was followed by a huge crowd of people who had no weapons.

However, after the first successes, a streak of failures followed. London did not support the applicant. The expedition to Scotland failed. The aristocracy did not side with the former idol. But parliament did not proclaim him king.

Monmouth fell into complete despair. In the battle with the royal army at Sedgemoor, he fled, abandoning his soldiers, who shouted after him: “Shells, for God’s sake, shells!” A few days later, the Portman police detained him near Ringwood: Monmouth, dressed in rags, surrendered without a word, trembling all over.

During the investigation and trial of him, Monmouth showed undignified cowardice: having asked the king for an audience, he lay at his feet and kissed his hands and knees, begging for mercy... James II behaved no better. By agreeing to meet with the prisoner, he thereby gave him hope for pardon and, according to tradition, had to save his life. But the king demanded the death sentence, and on July 16, 1685, Monmouth was executed in London in front of thousands of people. The executioner cut off his head only with the fourth blow, for which he was almost torn to pieces by the crowd who idolized the “good Protestant Duke.”

Saint-Foy tried to argue that Monmouth's royal birth alone should have protected him from the death penalty, and therefore the Duke was in fact sent to France, and another man was executed in his place. But no matter how hard the writer tried, his version remained the most unconvincing of all that existed. This, of course, does not mean that it is not suitable as the basis for an action-packed novel...

The mysterious disappearance of the Duke de Beaufort gave Lagrange-Chancel and Langlais-Dufres the occasion to create a system of evidence in favor of his candidacy for the role of the Iron Mask.

The Duke de Beaufort was the grandson of Henry IV and Gabriela d'Estre. His athletic build, expressive facial features, immoderate gestures, the habit of akimbo, always curled mustache - all this gave him a very defiant appearance. Without receiving any education, he remained a complete ignoramus in everything sciences, including the science of secular life - the court laughed at the rudeness of his manners and language, but the army idolized him for his desperate courage.

With the beginning of the Fronde (a movement in France against absolutism represented by the government of Cardinal Mazarin), he rushed headlong into it. But he played a rather pitiful role in its events, because he himself did not really know what cause he actually stood for. But with his swaggering behavior and rude soldierly speech, he was extremely popular with the common people, for which he earned the nickname “king of the markets.”

As soon as Louis XIV reigned, Beaufort became the most obedient of his subjects. In 1669, he was appointed commander-in-chief of an expeditionary force sent to the shores of Candia to clear the island of the Turks. Twenty-two military battleships and three galleys carried seven thousand troops - the flower of the French nobility (in some ways, the Candia expedition was a new crusade). Candia was once ruled by the Venetians. By the time of the events described, only the largest city of the island remained in their hands, which they defended against a numerically superior enemy at the cost of incredible efforts. One bastion had already been taken by the Turks, and the townspeople expected the fall of the city and inevitable massacre any day now.

On the night of June 25, the French squadron that had arrived the day before landed troops on the island. Beaufort personally commanded one of the detachments. The Turks could not withstand the onslaught and fled. But at a moment when Beaufort's soldiers were already anticipating complete victory, a powder magazine with 25 thousand pounds of gunpowder exploded - it destroyed an entire battalion of French on the spot. The monstrous explosion caused panic in their ranks - the soldiers felt that the entire Turkish camp had been mined. In one minute the roles changed: now the French were rushing headlong to the shore, to their boats, and the perked-up Turks were pressing on them, not allowing them to come to their senses.

During the flight, everyone somehow forgot about Beaufort. Some of the fugitives later vaguely recalled that the duke, riding a wounded horse, seemed to be trying to gather brave men around him to repel the Turkish onslaught. When the panic subsided, they missed Beaufort, but he was not among the survivors, nor among the killed, nor among the wounded, nor among the prisoners... The commander-in-chief disappeared without a trace.

The above-mentioned authors - supporters of identifying the Duke de Beaufort with the Iron Mask - insisted that he was kidnapped during a general panic by Maulevrier, the brother of Colbert, who was at enmity with the Duke. But the later published correspondence between Maulevrier and his brother refuted this argument. In the very first letter sent to Versailles after the unsuccessful landing, Maulevrier writes: “Nothing can be more pitiable than the unfortunate fate of the admiral (Beaufort. - Note ed.). Being obliged to rush in different directions during the entire attack in order to collect everything that remained of our troops, I positively asked everyone about Beaufort, and no one could tell me anything.” And Beaufort’s age (he was born in 1616) does not correspond well with the age of the Iron Mask (Voltaire said that he heard “from Marsolan, the son-in-law of the Bastille apothecary, that the latter, some time before the death of the disguised prisoner, heard from him that he was about sixty years").

It is impossible even briefly to dwell on all the versions explaining the identity and crimes of the Iron Mask. Let me just say that they saw him as an illegitimate son: Cromwell; Marie Louise of Orléans, first wife of the Spanish King Charles II; Maria Anna of Neuburg, second wife of the same king; Henrietta of Orleans and Louis XIV; her and the Comte de Guiche; Maria Theresa, wife of Louis XIV, and a black servant she brought with her from Spain; Christina, Queen of Sweden, and her great equerry, Monaldesque. They said that a woman could be hiding under the mask.

These legends occupied secular society so much that even Louis XIV, Louis XV and Louis XVI were rumored to be interested in the Iron Mask and allegedly revealed an extraordinary secret to each other on their deathbeds - the historian Michelet insisted on this. The Duke of Choiseul said that when he asked who was hiding under the iron mask, Louis XV replied: “If you knew his real name, you would be very disappointed, it is not at all interesting.” And Madame Pompadour assured that in response to a similar question, the king said: “This is the minister of the Italian prince.”

Finally, Louis XVI ordered Minister Maurepas to clarify this mystery. After conducting an investigation, Maurepas reported to the king that the Iron Mask was a dangerous intriguer, a subject of the Duke of Mantua.

Fundamental research by French and Italian historians of the late 19th and early 20th centuries (Tapena, F. Brentano, A. Sorel) confirms that Maurepas most likely told the truth: the famous prisoner was Count Ercole Antonio Matteoli, minister of Charles IV, Duke of Mantua.

Charles IV was distinguished by his riotous behavior and complete indifference to the affairs of the state. He spent most of the year in Venice, and his favorites ruled in Mantua. The Duke very quickly exhausted his treasury and his health, but retained an insatiable thirst for pleasure. In search of money, he was ready to sell anything.

Abbé Estrad, then Louis XIV's ambassador to Venice, took advantage of Charles's chronic lack of money to perform an important service for his government. He set out to force the Duke to sell Louis the city of Casale, which was the key to Upper Italy. The enterprising abbot's plan promised the king the opportunity to intervene in Italian affairs at any time and counteract the similar desire of Spain and Austria. However, the scandalous purchase, contrary to international law and affecting the interests of many powers, had to be made in the strictest secrecy. Looking for an intermediary for this transaction among the duke's favorites, Estrad settled on Matteoli, as the person with the greatest influence on Charles.

Matteoli was born into a noble and wealthy family of Bologna on December 1, 1640. Already as a student, he gained some fame, receiving the highest award in civil law, and after graduation, the title of professor at the University of Bologna. Having become related to a venerable senatorial family in Bologna, he moved to Mantua, where he gained the favor of Charles IV, who made him a supernumerary senator, a title that conferred the dignity of count. The extremely ambitious Matteoli was aiming for the position of first minister. But for this, he was looking for an opportunity to provide the Duke with some extraordinary service and happily seized on Estrada’s offer.

It was decided to arrange a secret meeting between Estrada and Karl in Venice, during the carnival - the holiday made it possible to wear a mask without attracting attention. At midnight on March 13, 1678, upon leaving the Doge's Palace, Estrad and Charles met, as if by chance, in the square and discussed the terms of the treaty for an hour. The Duke agreed to cede Casale for 100 thousand crowns, so that this amount would be paid to him upon the exchange of ratified treaties in two terms, after three months each. So this shameful deal took place in the very center of Venice - a city that has long been famous for its spies and whose government did its best to prevent French penetration into Northern Italy!

A few months later, Matteoli, who secretly arrived at Versailles, received a copy of the treaty signed by the king. Immediately after this, he had a secret audience with Louis and was received in the most favorable manner: the king presented him with a valuable diamond and ordered him to give 400 double louis, promising an even larger sum after the ratification of the treaty by the duke.

It seemed that nothing could prevent the successful conclusion of the negotiations. However, less than two months after Matteoli’s visit to Versailles, the courts of Turin, Madrid, Vienna, Milan, the Venetian Republic, that is, everyone who benefited from preventing the deal, learned in the smallest detail about the terms of the agreement. Estrade notified Louis that he had undeniable evidence of Matteoli's betrayal.

Now it is no longer possible to say with certainty what was the reason for Matteoli’s act: self-interest or belated patriotism. It seems that the successful outcome of the negotiations promised him, if not more benefits, then at least less trouble.

Louis had to call it quits at the moment when a detachment of French troops led by the new commandant was ready to enter Casale. In addition to understandable annoyance, the king was tormented by the thought of a possible international scandal, since Matteoli still had ratification documents with Louis’ personal signature in his hands. To get them back, Estrad proposed capturing Matteoli. The king replied in a dispatch dated April 28, 1679: “His Majesty would like you to carry out your idea and order him to be taken secretly to Pignerol. An order is sent there to receive and maintain him so that no one knows about it... There is no need to notify the Duchess of Savoy about this order of His Majesty, but it is necessary that no one knows what will happen to this man.” These words, full of cold hatred for the one who almost made the “Sun King” the laughing stock of the whole world, contain the entire future fate of Matteoli - the Iron Mask. On May 2, he was captured “without noise” during a meeting with Estrada in a village near Turin and transported to Pignerol.

There were no papers incriminating the French government with him, but under threat of torture Matteoli admitted that he had given them to his father. He was forced to write a letter in his own hand, according to which agent Estrada freely received from Matteoli Sr. these important documents, which were immediately forwarded to Versailles.

Even earlier, Louis secretly withdrew his troops from the Italian border, and thus all traces of the scandalous deal with the Duke of Mantua disappeared. Matteoli remained, but, as we have seen, the king made sure that he too disappeared.

Estrada spread the rumor that Matteoli was the victim of a traffic accident. Charles IV pretended to believe this explanation, because he himself wanted to quickly hush up the shameful story. The Matteoli family remained silent: his wife went to a monastery, his father soon died. None of them made the slightest attempt to find out more about his fate, as if feeling the danger of such searches.

All concerns about maintaining Matteoli's incognito were entrusted to the commandant of the Pignerol Saint-Mars prison: from that time on, they became, as it were, prisoners of each other.

As the historian Tapin aptly notes, prisoners have no history. We only know that Matteoli, after two unsuccessful attempts to make himself known, completely resigned himself to his fate. Tapin in his book did not ignore the question of where the notorious mask came from and why the prisoner Saint-Mars was hidden under it.

In the 16th-17th centuries, the custom of wearing masks was widespread among the nobility, of which there are many historical examples. Gerard's memoirs describe how Louis XIII, who came on a date with Maria Mancini, “kissed her through the mask.” The Duchess of Montespan allowed her ladies-in-waiting to wear masks - she writes about this in her memoirs. Saint-Simon testifies that Marshal Clerambault “always wore a black velvet mask on the roads and in the galleries.” Police reports from the Parisian police chief Rainey indicate that in 1683, the wives of bankers and merchants dared to wear masks even to church, despite the strict prohibition of the authorities.

Thus, the uniqueness of the Iron Mask case lies only in the fact that the mask was put on a prisoner, of which there is really no example in the history of French prisons. However, says Tapin, for the Italian Matteoli, using a mask was completely natural. In Italy, masks were often worn on prisoners. Thus, in Venice, persons arrested by the Inquisition were transported to prison wearing masks. Matteoli, a partner in the Duke of Mantua's amusements, undoubtedly had a mask with him, under which he hid during negotiations with Estrada. “Of course,” writes Tapin, “she was among his things captured in 1678...”

The question of why Matteoli was put on a mask when he was transported to the Bastille is resolved quite simply: Matteoli lived in Paris for several months during his secret visit to France in 1678 and, therefore, could have been recognized. In addition, in 1698, that is, when Saint-Mars brought him with him to the Bastille, an Italian, Count Baselli, was sitting in the fortress, familiar with many noble families of Mantua and Bologna and, no doubt, knew Matteoli by sight. To keep the secret of the abduction of the Mantuan senator, Saint-Mars used a means exclusive to everyone except the Italian Matteoli. That is why the latter calmly wore a mask, while everyone who saw him was burning with excitement and curiosity.

There are two entries in the Bastille garrison log relating to the Iron Mask. The first reads: “The Governor of the Islands of Saint-Marguerite Saint-Mars, on September 18, 1698, took office as commandant of the Bastille and brought with him an unknown prisoner in a black velvet mask, who, even before arriving on the islands, was kept under surveillance in the fortress of Pignerol.” The second entry, dated November 19, 1703, says that on this day “an unknown prisoner in a velvet mask, whom Saint-Mars always carried with him, died unexpectedly.”

Saint-Mars included the deceased in the lists of the Church of St. Paul under the name Marteoli (as, by the way, Matteoli was often called by Louvois in his dispatches to Saint-Mars). It is likely that over the years the commandant forgot the name of his prisoner or made a typo - at that time names were often spelled incorrectly, especially foreign ones.

Literature

Ladoucette E. The Iron Mask (novel). - M., 1992.

Ptifis J.-C. Iron mask. - M., 2006.

Topin M. The Man in the Iron Mask. - Paris, 1870 (there is a pre-revolutionary translation into Russian).