The hidden truth about the prisoner in the iron mask. Iron Mask - a mysterious prisoner of the bastille

In 1751 Voltaire published his book The Age of Louis XIV. Chapter XXV contained the following story: “A few months after the death of this minister (Mazarin - Author), an unprecedented event occurred, and what is very strange is that it was ignored by historians. An unknown prisoner, taller than average, young, and possessing the noblest bearing, was sent to a castle on the island of Saint Margaret, located near Provence. While traveling, he wore a mask with steel latches on the bottom, which allowed him to eat without removing the mask. The order was given to kill him if he removed his mask.

He remained on the island until a trusted officer named Saint-Mars, governor of Pinerol, having taken command of the Bastille, went to the island of St. Margaret and - this was in 1690 - took the masked prisoner to the Bastille. Before this move, the Marquis de Louvois came to the island. The unknown was taken to the Bastille, where he was accommodated as well as was possible in such a place. He was not refused anything, no matter what he asked. The prisoner had a taste 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 and was buried near the parish church of Saint-Paul. 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 following year, republishing his big book, Voltaire returned to this plot again. This indicates that the first story aroused the curiosity of readers... Here are the new “clarifications”:

“The prisoner was, without a doubt, noble, this follows from what happened in the first days on the island. 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 towards the boat, which was located near the shore, right at the foot of the tower. The fisherman who owned this boat picked up the plate and brought it to the governor. The latter, extremely concerned, asked the fisherman: “Have you read what is scratched on this plate, and has anyone seen it in your hands?” “I can’t read,” answered the fisherman. “I just found her, and no one except me saw her.” This man was kept locked up until the governor finally found out that the fisherman really couldn’t read, and no one saw the plate.” “You can go,” he told the fisherman. “You’re lucky that you can’t read.”

One of those who knew these facts, a person worthy of trust, is still alive today. Monsieur de Chamillard was the last minister who knew this secret. His son-in-law, Second Marshal de La Feuillade, told me that he begged his father-in-law on his knees, when he was on his deathbed, to reveal to him who the man known as the Man in the Iron Mask really was. Chamilar answered him that this was a state secret and he swore an oath never to disclose it. Finally, there are still many of our contemporaries who know the truth, but I do not know a fact that is neither more unusual nor better established.”

A year later, Voltaire, in his “Appendix to the Age of Louis XIV,” addressed the man in the Mask for the third time. In response to doubts expressed about the story of the plate, Voltaire argued that the story was often told by Monsieur Riusse, the old military commissar from Cannes. However, “the story of the misadventures of this state prisoner was spread through all the newspapers throughout the country, and the Marquis d'Arzhap, whose honesty is known, learned about it long ago from Riusse and other people known in his province.”

After which Voltaire turns to the curious facts that he discovered earlier: “Many people ask me who was this unknown and at the same time so famous captive? I am just a historian and in no way a sorcerer. It was certainly not the Comte de Vermandois; it was also not 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. Mr. de. Chamillard once threw out, in order to get rid of the persistent questions of the last Marshal de La Feuillade and M. de Comartin, the phrase that this was the man who owned all the secrets of M. Fouquet.

He admitted, however, that the prisoner was taken to the Bastille after the death of Mazarin. However, why such precautions in relation to only Fouquet's trusted representative - a person, in this case, of secondary importance?

First of all, we must reflect on the fact that not a single significant person disappeared during this time. At the same time, it is clear that the prisoner was an extremely important person, and everything that was connected with him was always kept secret. That's all we can guess."

Seventeen years have passed since the first publication about the Iron Mask. The surviving correspondence from that time reveals attempts to find out the truth. Princess Victoria begged her father, Louis XV, to tell her the secret of Alas.

In 1770, Voltaire decided to once again return to the Iron Mask. In his “Questions for the Encyclopedia” there is a phrase that contains suspicions previously expressed only in the form of hints: “It is clear that if he was not allowed into the courtyard of the Bastille and was allowed to speak even with his doctor only with his face covered with a mask, then this was done out of fear that some amazing resemblance to someone else might be noticed in his features.” The interest in this book was so great that a reprint was required in 1771. The exciting passage about the “amazing resemblance” was, of course, reprinted and, moreover, continued by the “Publisher’s Supplement,” which is extremely innocent in form. You can guess from whose pen this “explanation” came!

“The Iron Mask was, without a doubt, the brother - the elder brother - of Louis XIV, whose mother had that particularly delicate taste that Voltaire speaks of in relation to fine linen. After I read about this in the memoirs of that era, the queen’s predilection reminded me of the same tendency in the Iron Mask, after which I finally ceased to doubt that it was her son, of which all other circumstances had long convinced me... »

The “publisher” then explains how this sensational similarity can prove him right. He recalls that by the time the future Louis XIV was born, Louis XIII had not lived with the queen for a long time. Ta for a long time was barren, and this worried the royal family. Sometimes she allowed herself some deviation from the rules of strict morality, as a result of which a child was born. She trusted Richelieu, who took all necessary measures to hide the birth of the child. The Queen and the Cardinal raised the child in secret. It is possible that Louis XIV only learned of the existence of his older brother after Mazarin's death. “Then the monarch learned of the existence of a brother, an elder brother, whom his mother could not disown, and who possessed characteristic features, revealing its origin; the monarch reasoned that this child, born in wedlock, could not now, after the death of Louis XIII, be declared illegitimate without this causing complications fraught with political consequences and loud scandal. Louis XIV used the only prudent and most just method of strengthening his personal peace and the peace of the state, and this saved him from having to resort to cruelty, which would have seemed politically necessary to another, less conscientious and magnanimous monarch than Louis XIV.

“It seems to me that the more you study the history of that time, the more you are amazed at the combination of circumstances that testify in favor of this assumption,” wrote Voltaire.

Finita la comedy. Curtain. Over the course of twenty years, Voltaire developed his most remarkable script that ever existed. It has everything: a mysterious birth, the elder brother of the “greatest king in the world,” state interests, the imprisonment of an innocent man. Finally, the mask that the unfortunate prince had to wear all his life - the iron mask!

So says the legend, whose father is Voltaire.

But what does History say?

The Treaty of Cherak granted Louis XII the territory of Pinerol in 1631 - Pinero in Italian. This small town, located on the Italian side of the Alps, between Briançon and Turin, was the headquarters of the command of the raid in Perusa, one of the ports of Italy.

Richelieu, of course, fortified this area. Flat roofs and small turrets contrasted with steep bastions, earthen barriers and ditches. Not far from the city, the traveler could see a fortress and a huge Donjon. This menacing colossus must have seemed somewhat out of place under the Italian sky. It looked like the Bastille, the Temple Tower or the Donjon of Vincennes: the same medieval architecture. Three large towers stood on the sides of the massive rectangular structure, in addition, there were two more small corner towers. The donjon was completely separated from the fortress by a high round wall. The fortress was under the command of the royal lieutenant; It is curious that at the same time the donjon was not subject to the authority of the lieutenant, but this fact finds the following explanation - since 1665, the Pinerol donjon was, by order of Lovois, under the command of Monsieur Saint-Mars.

Monsieur de Saint-Map will forever remain in history as an exemplary jailer.

In 1650 he became a musketeer. His superiors valued him as serious, reliable, “prudent and accurate in his service.” In 1660 he became a corporal, and a year later - a sergeant. Unexpectedly, fate smiled at him: d'Artagnan instructed him to arrest Pelisson, while he himself was detained in Nantes Fouquet. In this case, Saint-Mars showed himself with the best side. When they began to look for a person to manage the Pinerol donjon, who was suitable for supervising Fouquet, the choice of the sovereign - and this is quite natural - fell on Saint-Mars.

He was not an evil man. Only very ambitious. And greedy for money. He was somewhat upset that his fellow musketeers had covered themselves with glory while he was forced to guard prisoners. During every military campaign, he begged Louvois to send him to the front line. Louvois refused, but increased his salary. Saint-Mars' career as a jailer lasted forty years. Continuous promotions led him - from one prison to another - to command of the Bastille.

It was in Pinerol that one fine day Saint-Mars received a new prisoner, accompanied by special instructions. He had no doubt that the man he had been tasked with guarding so carefully would later cause a great stir throughout the world. This prisoner was - no more, no less - the one who would later go down in history as 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 run by Saint-Mars have been preserved, and they are very accurate. They inform us in detail about the events that took place in Pinerola: the arrival of the prisoners, their names, the reasons for their imprisonment, the deplorable episodes of their imprisonment, their illnesses, deaths, releases, if such happened occasionally.

The only thing that can be said with certainty is that after 1665 a prisoner came into the custody of Saint-Mars, and this prisoner was the Man in the Iron Mask. In order to determine the identity of the mysterious person, it is necessary to resort to the method of exclusion and select from the list of prisoners those who meet the necessary characteristics that allow them to bear such a “title”.

It is indisputably established that the masked man will follow Saint-Mars all the way to the Bastille. In 1687 Saint-Mars became governor of the island of Sainte-Marguerite; the prisoner was also transferred there. Eleven years have passed. The jailer and the prisoner grew old together. Finally, at the age of seventy-two, Saint-Mars was appointed commandant of the Bastille. Minister Barbezou, son and successor of Louvois, wrote to Saint-Mar: “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 so that no one sees him or knows about him.” . You may write in advance to His Majesty's lieutenant at the Bastille to keep a room ready to accommodate the prisoner immediately upon his arrival."

Saint-Mars had no choice but to obey. He always obeyed.

But how to do this? Finally he had an idea: instead of hiding his prisoner, why not just hide his face? Without a doubt, it was thanks to this idea that the Man in the Iron Mask was born. Let us note once again - never before this moment had the mysterious prisoner worn a mask. SenMar succeeded - for a long time! - keep his secret. The first time the prisoner put on a mask was during a trip to Paris. In this guise he went down in history...

Actually, the mask was made of black velvet. Voltaire supplied it with steel latches. The authors who took up this topic after him wrote about it as being made “entirely of steel.” It got to the point that historians debated the question of whether the unfortunate prisoner could shave; they mentioned small tweezers, “also made of steel,” for removing hair. (Moreover, in 1885 in Langres, among old scrap iron, they found a mask that perfectly matched Voltaire’s description. There is no doubt: an inscription in Latin confirmed its authenticity...) In August 1698, Saint-Mars and his captive went to path. Participating in the journey were Formanua, nephew and lieutenant Saint-Mars, priest Giraud, “Major” Rosarge, Sergeant Lecue and prison guard Antoine Larue, simply Rue. They had to spend a whole month on the road. Without a doubt, this journey played a big role in creating the legend of the Mask. It can be said that the masked prisoner caused a great stir with his trip. Evidence of this has survived to this day.

Saint-Mars was rich. Very rich. His income, according to Lovoy, "was as great as the income of the governors governing large territories in France." And prison is not conducive to expenses... After his death, Mask’s guard, who received noble title, left, in addition to the lands of Dimon, Palto and Irimon, luxurious furnishings, also six hundred thousand francs in cash. But the trouble was that poor Saint-Mars, inseparable from his prisoners, especially from one of them, had never even visited the lands he had acquired. He wanted to take advantage of a trip to Paris to stay at Coats, near Villeneuve-le-Roi, “a beautiful structure and style of Henry IV, standing in the middle of a forest and a vineyard.” Seventy years later, Saint-Mars's great-nephew Formanois de Coat wrote, at the request of Freron, Voltaire's enemy, a story about a memorable visit: “The Masked Man arrived on a stretcher, followed by Saint-Mars's litter: they were accompanied by several horsemen. The peasants moved towards their master. Saint-Mars shared the meal with his prisoner, who sat with his back to the dining room windows overlooking the courtyard. The peasants whom I asked did not see whether he ate with a mask on or not; but they clearly saw that on the sides of the plate of Saint-Mars, who was sitting facing them, lay two pistols. They were served by only one footman, who went out to get the dishes, which were brought to him in the hallway; The door behind him was closed every time with the utmost care. When the prisoner passed through the yard, the black mask was always on his face. The peasants noticed that his lips and teeth were visible from under the mask and that he was tall and fair-haired... Saint-Mars slept on the bed that was prepared for him near the bed of the man in the mask. I have not heard any rumors regarding this person's foreign accent."

How nice it was to live in Palto! But poor Saint-Mars had to leave his palace and accompany the masked man to Paris. On September 18, at about three o'clock in the afternoon, a small motorcade arrived at the Bastille.

In the journal for registering prisoners, M. de Junca, the royal lieutenant, made the following entry:

“On the eighteenth of September, on Thursday, at three o’clock in the afternoon, M. de Saint-Map, commandant of the Bastille fortress, arrived to take office from the island of St. Margaret, bringing with him his long-time prisoner, held under his supervision back in Pinerol, who must wear a mask at all times and must not be named; he was placed, immediately upon arrival, in the first cell of the Basinier Tower until nightfall, and at nine o'clock in the evening I myself, together with M. de Rosarge, one of the sergeants brought with him by the commandant, transferred the prisoner to the third cell of the Bertollier Tower, prepared by me by order of M. de Saint-Mars, a few days before the arrival of the prisoner, who was entrusted to the care of M. de Rosarge, who was in the pay of M. Commandant.”

Each tower of the Bastille, in particular the Bertollier tower, consisted of six floors. On each floor there was an octagonal chamber with a fireplace, twelve paces wide, long and high, with a plaster ceiling and a cement floor. Each chamber had stones with an exhaust hood and a small niche in the thickness of the wall for “personal use.”

Four years later M. du Junca was forced to open the Bastille register once more. A sad event happened: M. Saint-Mars lost his oldest prisoner.

M. du Junca recorded the following: “On the same day, 1703, November 19th, Monday, this unknown prisoner in a mask of black velvet, brought by M. de Saint-Mars from the island of St. Margaret and guarded by him for a long time, died at about ten o'clock in the evening after feeling a little unwell after mass the day before, but at the same time he was not seriously ill. M. 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 long-guarded prisoner was buried in the parish cemetery of Saint-Paul; when registering the death, Mr. Rosarz, a doctor, and Mr. Rey, a surgeon, designated him by a certain name, also unknown.”

After some time, M. du Junca managed to find out under what name the prisoner was reported. Then he entered this name in the journal: “I learned that since Mr. de Marchiel was registered, 40 l have been paid. for burial."

The Saint-Paul registry actually listed Marchiali's name.

Obviously, it was just a pseudonym, an alien name intended to confuse those too curious.

So, it is known that the masked man was a prisoner of Saint-Mars during the latter’s “reign” in Pinerol. When Saint-Mars left Pinerol in 1681, he had only five prisoners under his command, not counting Lauzun.

Therefore, one must look for the Mask among these five people. Here we are talking, as Maurice Duvivier said, “of arithmetic reasoning based on indisputable documents.”

Who were these prisoners? First of all, we must note the famous Lozun, bound by certain obligations with the princess and released in 1681, whom no one thought to consider the Iron Mask. Here are the remaining five: Estache Dauger, arrested in 1669; Jacobin monk, imprisoned April 7, 1674; a certain La Riviere; a spy named Dubruy, imprisoned in June 1676; Count Mattioli, envoy of the Duke of Mantua, arrested on May 2, 1679.

The Masked Man appeared on this list under one of these names.

Let's take a closer look at these prisoners. On July 19, 1669, Lovois informed Saint-Mars about the arrival of a prisoner in Pinerol: “Monsieur Saint-Mars! The Emperor ordered me to send a certain Eustache Dauger to Pinerol; when maintaining it, it seems extremely important to ensure careful security and, in addition, to ensure that the prisoner cannot transmit information about himself to anyone. I will notify you about this prisoner so that you prepare for him a reliably guarded solitary cell in such a way that no one can enter the place where he will be and that the doors of this cell are securely closed so that your sentries cannot do anything. hear. It is necessary that you yourself bring the prisoner everything he needs once a day and under no circumstances listen to him if he wants to say anything, threatening him with death if he opens his mouth to say anything, if only this will not apply to the expression of his requests. I inform M. Poupard that he is obliged to do everything you require; You will furnish the cell for the one they bring to you with everything necessary, taking into account that he is just a servant and he does not need any significant benefits ... "

What crime entailed such punishment? Louvois says nothing on this matter. So this man was "just a servant," but no doubt he was involved in some serious business. He must have known some secrets that seemed so important to Louvois that no one, not even Saint-Mars, knew the true guilt of this man.

Doge was constantly in complete silence and absolute solitude. It was said of Pinerola that it was “the hell of all state prisons.” Fouquet and Lauzun were exceptions, which, however, confirm the rule. They had servants, they could read and write. Those who were imprisoned “in the darkness of the towers” ​​had nothing similar.

Four years after the arrest, Doge Saint-Mars reported to Louvois: “As for the prisoner in the tower brought by M. de Voroy, he says nothing, looks quite happy, like a man who has completely surrendered to the will of the Lord and Sovereign.”

Meanwhile, Saint-Mars found himself faced with a delicate problem: M. Fouquet, the longest-serving and famous prisoner, could not get along without a servant. Meanwhile, the commandant could not find lackeys who would agree to become voluntary prisoners. Only two devoted people decided on this feat of asceticism: Champagne, but he died in 1674, and a certain La Riviere, but he was often sick. Saint-Mars found a way out: since Doget, according to Louvois, was a lackey, why shouldn’t he serve M. Fouquet? Louvois agreed. Fouquet was sentenced to life imprisonment. But in sending his consent, Louvois insisted that all measures be taken to ensure that Dauger never met Lauzun, since Lauzun would one day be released.

But fearing that Dauger would speak, the minister one day wrote personally to M. Fouquet, inquiring whether Dauger had betrayed his secret? The act is quite naive: could Fouquet answer such a question in the affirmative?

It is easy to imagine the confusion and anger of the commandant and minister when, after Fouquet’s death in 1680, a “hole” was discovered in his cell through which he communicated with Lauzun. Saint-Map was sure of the complicity in this of Doge and his comrade La Riviere, the old lackey of M. Fouquet.

Louvois ordered both. Doge and La Riviere were "confined into the same cell, so that you could answer before His Majesty for the fact that they could not communicate with anyone, either verbally or in writing."

So La Riviere - the lackey who selflessly joined Fouquet in Pinerol - became a state criminal.

Everything concerning the Doge was still kept in the strictest confidence. Meanwhile, he indulged in rather strange activities. In the correspondence between Saint-Mars and Louvois, the question of the “drugs” used by Doge was raised. Louvois wrote:

“Tell me how Estache Dauger did what you wrote about, and where he got the necessary drugs for this, assuming, of course, to take it on faith that it was not you who provided them to him.”

What “drugs” are we talking about? Unknown. The expressions in which Louvois speaks about Doge and La Riviera are worthy of attention: “The Emperor learned from your letter addressed to me, dated the 23rd of last month, about the death of M. Fouquet and about your judgment regarding the fact that M. Lauzun learned most of the important information that M. Fouquet had and which was known to La Riviere: in this regard, His Majesty ordered me to inform you that after you close the hole through which Mr. on Fouquet and M. Lauzun, moreover, in such a way that there is nothing else of the kind in this place, in this way you will eliminate the connection between the cell of the late Fouquet and the cell that you adapted for his daughter, after which you must, according to His Majesty’s plan, place Mr. -on Lauzun in the cell of the late M. Fouquet... It is also necessary that you convince M. Lauzun that Estache Doget and La Riviere have been released, and also that you answer this way to everyone who asks you about this; while you imprison both of them in one cell, and then you will be able to answer in the face of His Majesty for the fact that they will not be able to communicate with anyone, either verbally or in writing, and for the fact that Mr. Lozun will not be able to find out that they are kept there.”

In Louvois's mind, Lauzun, Dauger, La Riviere and the Fouquet mystery were closely linked. It was necessary to “convince” Lauzun that those who shared with him the knowledge of these secrets, Doge and La Riviere, were released.

Now let's turn to the stories of other prisoners. In April 1674, a Jacobin monk was brought to Pinerol. Louvois wrote about him to Saint-Mars as “a prisoner, although unknown, but important.” He had to be kept in “harsh conditions, no fire should be given to his cell unless severe cold or illness required it, he should not be given any other food except bread, wine and water, for he is a complete scoundrel who has not suffered deserved punishment. At that time, you can allow him to listen to the masses, making sure, however, that no one sees him and that he cannot tell anyone about himself. His Majesty also finds it quite possible to provide him with several prayer books.”

What did this monk do to be treated so harshly? In all likelihood, he abused the trust of Madame d'Armagnac and Madame de Württemberg, “significant persons,” by defrauding them of a tidy sum under the pretext of practicing alchemy. This was the same “Dominican, the likes of whom in France are called Jacobins.” Primi spoke about him Visconti, adding that he "claimed to discover philosopher's stone, and therefore all the ladies revolved around him... They said something about his long stay with Madame d'Armagnac, and he ended up being sent to prison as a deceiver.

Madame de Montespan's hatred added fuel to the fire. Princess Marie of Württemberg was an important person at court. She was distinguished by rare beauty.

They said it was quite possible that the king had his eye on her. Madame de Montespan, overcome with envy, told the king that the princess was in an affair with a Dominican, i.e. with our Jacobin monk.

All these intrigues brought the unfortunate man to Pinerol. Louvois tried to forget him. In his correspondence there is not even a mention of a monk, while there is a lot of talk about the Doge. They started talking about the monk again only two years later, in 1676, when he went crazy.

Saint-Mars thought to cure him by ending his painful loneliness. Shortly before this, a certain Dubreuil was placed at his disposal, whom he placed with the monk.

Of the “five” we already know Doge, La Riviera, a Jacobin monk. Let us now turn to Dubreuil. Historian Jung has recreated his story: he was a French officer used as a spy and caught in treason. He has already been imprisoned in Bordeaux. After escaping from there in 1675, he settled in Bale under the name Samson. He offered the Comte de Montclar, commander of the Army of the Rhine, information regarding the strength and movements of the German troops of Montecuculli. Louvois agreed and even promised a “good reward.” Unfortunately for him, Dubreuil did not stop there: at the same time he offered the same services to Montecuculli. Quartermaster General Lagrange quickly exposed Dubreuil. Lagrange told Louvois: “I see no other way to arrest him than to keep an observer in Bale who would watch him until he is within reach, and then capture him.”

At the first opportunity, on April 28, the spy was detained and imprisoned in the Brizash fortress. A little later, Louvois gave the order to transfer him to Besançon, then to Lyon, from where the archbishop was to “send him to Pinerol, where he will be handed over to Saint-Mars for confinement in the donjon of the fortress.”

The minister notified Saint-Mars: “You can place him with the prisoner who was sent to you last (with the Jacobin monk). From time to time you should send me messages regarding him.”

Every time Louvois spoke to Dubreuil, his words carried a hint of contempt. The spy, he said, was “one of the biggest swindlers in the whole world”, “a man of destructive behavior”, “not a single word of whom cannot be trusted”, “who did not deserve to be treated attentively”. However, he can “listen to Mass with M. Fouquet or M. Lauzun” without taking special precautions.

In Pinerol, Dubreuil had no luck. Being placed in the same cell with a half-crazed Jacobin, it’s not surprising to go crazy yourself. He was delivered from this unpleasant neighborhood; the Jacobin monk was placed with Lauzun's footman. The monk tolerated this change so poorly that he was soon considered “mad.” He had to be tied up and “taken care of”: i.e. apply to him an extremely specific prison effective psychotherapeutic method - caning. He calmed down, but continued to be in some stupor.

In 1680, Saint-Mars called him “fallen into childhood and melancholy”; he was now placed with the prisoner who had arrived the year before - along with Mattioli - the last of the "five".

Why did this Italian end up in Pinerola? For a long time, Louis XIV wanted to acquire the fortified Italian area around Casal, under the rule of the Duke of Mantua. The intermediary in these difficult trades was Count Hercule-Antoine Mattioli. An intriguer, a man with a tarnished reputation, primarily concerned with his own enrichment. In this matter, playing a double game, he betrayed both the Duke of Mantua and the King of France.

An unfortunate double play. You cannot deceive the Sun King with impunity. Mattioli had an appointment near Turin. Without suspecting anything, he arrived there and voluntarily boarded the carriage of the Abbé d'Estrada, the French ambassador to Venice. Not far from the French border, near a small hotel, a stop was made. Suddenly a platoon of cavalrymen surrounded the carriage.

Mattioli, no matter how he shouted and was indignant, was captured and taken to Pinerol.

The arrest of an Italian minister on Italian soil is, as any historian would agree, a clear violation of human rights. Louvois, who authorized the arrest, and Katina, the executor, well understood their task: to carefully conceal this reprehensible fact. Katina wrote to Louvois:

“There was no cruelty involved; The name of this swindler is not known to anyone, not even to the officers who participated in his arrest...” And again: “I informed the Emperor about everything that I did with Mattioli, who is now listed under the name Lestan; no one here knows who he really is.”

The instructions received by Saint-Mars reflect the king's anger towards the Italian. Louvois wrote that de Lestan must be treated with all severity. Several months of detention in Pinerola had the usual effect on Mattioli.

Saint-Mars - Louvois, January 6, 1680: “I will inform the Sovereign that M. de Lestan, following the example of the monk I keep, has gone crazy and is behaving inappropriately.”

Lunois - Saint-Mars, July 10, 1680: “Regarding M. de Lestand, I admire your patience and the fact that you are waiting for a special order in order to deal with a swindler who does not show you the respect he deserves.” deserves it."

Saint-Mars - Louvois, September 7, 1680: “Since I was allowed to place Mattioli with the Jacobin monk, the said Mattioli was for four or five days in the complete conviction that the monk was assigned to him to keep an eye on him. Mattioli, almost as crazy as the monk, walked around the cell with long strides, saying at the same time that I could not deceive him and that he understood everything perfectly. The Jacobin, always sitting on his wretched bed, leaning his elbows on his knees, looked at him, without listening. Senor Mattioli, convinced that he was a spy, sobered up only when one fine day the monk, completely naked, finally got up from his bed and began to preach something, as always, without any sense. my lieutenants watched this through the hole above the door.”

At this time, Saint-Mars was appointed commandant of the Exile fortress, where a vacancy had arisen after the death of the Duke de Lediguières. “His Majesty,” wrote Louvois, “wants that the two prisoners at the disposal of Saint-Mars be transported to the place of his new assignment with the same vigilance that took place in Pinerol.”

Which of the “five” took advantage of the privilege, so to speak, of following M. de Saint-Mars? In another letter, Louvois notes that the prisoners who will accompany Saint-Mars are “sufficiently significant personalities not to be transferred to other hands.” However, he clarifies that these two are from the lower tower. In the lower tower there are, on one side, Mattioli and the mad Jacobin, and on the other side, Doge and La Riviere.

Which one is Iron Mask? Saint-Mars sheds light on this issue in his letter to Abbe d'Estrade dated June 25, 1681: “Only yesterday I received provisions and two million livres in salary from the governor of Exile. They are leaving me two of my lieutenants; I will also take two types from here, who are referred to only as “the gentlemen from the lower tower.” Mattioli will remain here with two other prisoners, Villebois, one of my lieutenants, will guard them.”

Important information: Mattioli was not considered "significant enough" to accompany Saint-Mars." Subsequent letters from Louvois make it clear that Dubreuil, like Mattioli, remained in Pinerola. Therefore, the two "types" taken away by Saint-Mars are Dauger and La Rivière, the remaining "inhabitants of the lower tower".

The formidable Exile fortress was located not far from Pinerol, only some 12 leagues away. It overlooked the Dorian Valley, on a steep hill. As at Pinerol, a four-sided donjon with corner towers. One of the walls was called “Caesar's Tower”. There Saint-Mars decided to place La Riviera and Doge.

Louvois reminded Saint-Mars that "it was necessary to ensure that there was no communication between the prisoners at Exile, who were called in Pinerol the prisoners of the lower tower." It was necessary to “take all precautions so that you can guarantee His Majesty that they will not speak not only to any outsiders, but also to anyone from the garrison of Exil.” Saint-Mars reassured the minister: “No one speaks to them except me, my officer, the priest M. Vignon and the doctor from Pragelas (six hours’ drive from here), who communicates with them only in my presence.”

The required precautions became excessive when, in 1683, Louvois prohibited confession except in cases of “danger of imminent death.” This danger for one of the prisoners arose in 1686 as a result of dropsy. Saint-Mars reported his death to Louvois on January 5, 1687.

Who was this deceased - Doge or La Riviere? Saint-Mars doesn't say that.

As soon as the body was buried, Saint-Mars received the good news: the king entrusted him with the management of the islands of Saint Margaret. What joy after Exile, where the commandant was languishing in melancholy! Naturally, he was invariably accompanied by his, as he said, personal prisoners, as before - “significant”: “I gave such strict orders regarding the protection of my prisoner that I can answer for him with my own head, I even forbade my lieutenant to talk to the prisoner , which is strictly followed. I think that when moving to the St. Margaret's Islands it is better for the prisoner to sit on a chair with a dark cloth wrapped around it, so that he can have enough air, but he cannot talk to anyone during the journey, not even to the soldiers, whom I will choose to accompany him, and so that no one can see him; This method seems to me more reliable than a stretcher, which can tear.” On April 30, 1687, Saint-Map arrived in the Sainte-Marguerite Islands with his prisoner. Everything went well until the prisoner began to choke. He arrived on the island half dead. But the result was achieved: “I can assure you, Your Highness, that no one saw him, and the way in which I transported him to the islands led to everyone trying to guess who my prisoner could be...”

Here you can see the origins of the legend. Excessive precaution, in the eyes of the public, emphasized the importance of the prisoner. It is likely that this importance may have been exaggerated. Saint-Mars emphasized this fact in his communications after Eustache-Dauger's arrival in Pinerol. He wrote: “Many here believe that this is the Marshal of France ...” In April 1670 from Pinerol about the same Doge: “There are too curious people who ask me about my prisoner as to why I take such strict measures to ensure security , in response to this I have to invent all sorts of fables, partly in order to laugh at the curious.”

After only nine months on the islands of St. Margaret, Saint-Mars could tell Louvois: “In this whole province they say that my prisoner is M. de Beaufort, the rest consider him the son of the late Cromwell.”

Until 1690, the long-time prisoner of Exile was the only prisoner on the island.

Then Protestant priests, victims of the repeal of the Edict of Nantes, became his neighbors. One of them was constantly writing something on everything possible: walls, linen, dishes. Thanks to this, no doubt, the anecdote was born about a silver dish found by a fisherman, on which the Iron Mask revealed the secret of his origin.

Louvois died in 1691. His son, Barbezier, took his place. And already a month after the death of his father, Barbezier wrote to Saint-Mars, and his first instructions concerned the same prisoner... Moreover, this message contains one clarification that allows us to establish the identity of this prisoner: “When will you have something to tell me regarding the prisoner whom You have been guarding for more than twenty years, I ask you to take the same precautions that you took under M. Louvois.”

“The prisoner you have been guarding for more than twenty years”: this phrase can in no way be attributed to La Riviere. And Dauger, arrested in July 1669, had already been in prison for twenty-two years.

The only possible conclusion is that the man who died in Exile was La Riviere. And the man brought to the islands of St. Margaret under a dark veil was Doge. Doge is the only prisoner whom Saint-Mars has not left since Pinerol. The only one who was considered “significant enough” not to be released even for a moment from the supervision of the royal jailers.

The only one that Barbezier took up immediately after coming to power.

In 1694, the peace of the island was disturbed by the arrival of persons without whom Saint-Mars could no longer live: the jailer often becomes attached to his prisoners. Barbézier decided that the prisoners remaining in Pinerol should be transported to the islands. In January of the same year, one of the oldest prisoners of Pinerol - a monk - died. The two survivors, Dubreuil and Mattioli (the latter accompanied by a servant) joined the Venerable M. de Saint-Mars.

Barbezier, as was his custom, provided the jailer with detailed instructions. The transfer was entrusted to M. de Laprade: since “it is undesirable to leave Pinerol before the guards arrive there and, in addition, the prisoners must be transported one by one, it is necessary that you ensure the rapid dispatch of the guards and prepare a suitable place where you place the prisoners on arrival; for you know that these are more important prisoners, at least one of them, than those already on the island. You must place them in the most secure places of detention."

So the circle narrows. There remain only three candidates for the “title” of “Iron Mask”: Doge, Mattioli and Dubreuil. All three ended up together on the island of St. Margaret in April 1694. Which of them was the Man in the Iron Mask?

At the end of April 1694, an unexpected event occurred on the island: one of the prisoners died. And we don't know which one.

In addition to the designated trinity, under the protection of Saint-Mars were:

1. Chevalier de Tezu (or Chezu), about whom we know nothing.

2. Other prisoners, the number of which remains unknown, among them were three or four Protestant priests.

Did any of them die? Or were they the “old ones” from Pinerol? How to find out?

Barbezier, in a letter dated May 10, provides important information on this matter: “I received,” he writes to Saint-Mars, “your letter dated the 29th of last month; You may carry out your proposal and place in the vaulted prison the footman of the deceased prisoner, ensuring that he is guarded as well as others, preventing him from communicating, oral or written, with anyone.”

Mr. Georges Mongredien, author of a remarkable book on the Iron Mask, one of the latest and most objective, emphasizes that the presence of a footman is an exclusive privilege, which was enjoyed only by high-born prisoners. In Pinerol it was Fouquet and Losun. Count Mattioli, minister of the Duke of Mantua, also enjoyed this privilege, the only one of the three survivors of Pinerola. Saint-Mars, conveying to Barbézier the daily routine of his prisoners, wrote, in particular, about his “long-time prisoner” Doge; he did not face the problem of a servant; his life was described in frightening detail.

“The first of my lieutenants takes the keys to my old prisoner’s cell and, opening three doors, enters the prisoner’s cell, he hands over to him with due respect the dishes and plates, which he himself first places on top of each other, after passing through two doors, he gives them to my sergeant , and he, in turn, takes them to a table standing two steps away, where the second lieutenant, who checks everything that is brought in and taken out of the prison, looks to see if anything is written on the dishes; after he had been given everything he needed, his cell was searched under the bed and on the bed, then near the window bars and throughout the cell, after which he was asked if he needed anything else, after which the door was locked, and the same procedure was carried out with “all other prisoners.”

It is clear that with such a statement of affairs there is no place left for the servant. And anyway, could it have been with Doge, who himself used to be Fouquet’s servant? Obviously, Dubreuil, a petty spy despised by Louvois, also did not enjoy such a privilege.

If only Dauger, Dubreuil and Mattioli were on the island of St. Margaret at that time, it would be possible to say with confidence that the prisoner who died in April 1694 was an Italian - the only one of the three who was allowed to use the services of a footman.

But there were other prisoners on the island. Is it possible that one of them has a servant at his disposal? Unlikely. But the historian cannot be satisfied with probabilities. So, it is impossible to categorically say that Mattioli died in April 1694...

When Saint-Mars went to the Bastille in 1698, he was accompanied, as we remember, by his “old prisoner,” whom “no one should have seen!” We also remember that it was then that Saint-Mars came up with a delightful idea for a mask - an idea with such an enviable future.

After which the Masked Man, entering the Bastille, went down in history. Who? Mattioli, Doge or Dubreuil?

Dubreuil is nothing more than a petty spy. Having arrested him, Louvois did not deign to deal with him anymore, nor did Barbezier. The ministers constantly asked Saint-Mars about Fouquet, Lauzun, Mattioli or Doge. Dubreuil's name never appeared in their letters. Only once, after Lieutenant Villebois complained about his behavior, Louvois answered him with the following, rather cheeky lines:

“I received your letter dated the 10th of this month, from which I learned what this Dubreuil is worth to you. If he continues to rage, treat him like a madman, in other words, shake him properly, and you will see that this will restore him to common sense.

It seems that even with all the impartiality of the approach, Dubreuil’s candidacy cannot be claimed as suitable. Doge and Mattioli remain. Mattioli's candidacy has ardent and zealous supporters. The most eloquent of them is Franz Funk-Brentano. What are the arguments of the “Matthiolists”?

First of all, they take into account that their “challenger” was a figure of quite significant magnitude. While Dauger was merely a "lackey" and Dubreuil a "petty spy", Mattioli's imprisonment was "an act which, in the interests of state, had to be kept secret".

Then, Mattioli's supporters recall a detail from Barbezier's letter regarding the transfer in 1694 of the last Pinerol prisoners to the island of St. Margaret: "These are more important prisoners, at least some of them, than those already on the island." This “more important” prisoner could only be Mattioli.

In addition, it was after Mattioli’s arrival on the island of St. Margaret that the wording appears in the correspondence: “my long-time prisoner,” “your given prisoner.” According to the “Mattiolists”, these formulations allow us to assert that they are talking about a prisoner who was once held by Saint-Mars in Pinerola and was subsequently again transferred under his vigilant control - Mattioli.

When the Masked Man died, the deceased was recorded under the name Marziali or Marscioli. Here you can see a hint of the somewhat distorted name Mattioli.

Finally, Madame Campan, Marie Antoinette's maid, reported that Louis XIV told the queen in the presence of Madame Campan that the Masked Man was “simply a prisoner of a disconcerting character for his tendency to intrigue; subject of the Duke of Mantua." It is also known from intercepted correspondence that Louis XIV told Madame Pompadour the same thing; the king, under the onslaught of endless questions, replied that “it was one of the ministers of the Italian prince.”

These are the arguments of the “Mattiolists”. At first glance, they seem quite reasonable. But if you study them objectively, you will be surprised how so many people could accept such unconvincing evidence on faith.

In order to reject Mattioli’s candidacy, it would be enough just that Mattioli’s story at one time was not a secret to anyone.

Betrayal, arrest, imprisonment - Dutch 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.

However, Mr. de Poppon, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, after the arrest of the Italian, wrote to Abbot d'Estrada: “It is necessary that no one finds out what happened to this man.” From this phrase, the “Mattiolists” made far-reaching conclusions. But we note that this wording does not contain anything exceptional. Jung, looking through Louvois’ correspondence, discovered that similar expressions were used quite often regarding other state prisoners: “... make sure that no one knows what happened to him...”, “no one knows about this man.” should know" and the like.

When Barbézier took his father's place in 1691, the first thing he did was inquire about a prisoner who had been kept under the guard of Saint-Mars "for more than twenty years."

It could not have been Mattioli, for he was imprisoned in 1679, i.e. twelve years earlier. The difference is too great to be considered an oversight by Barbezier.

After 1693, the name Mattioli disappeared from correspondence. Ten years later he was again mentioned in correspondence under his own name, and this is proof that his name was no longer kept secret. It is not clear why it was necessary to call him a “long-time prisoner” in some cases. It seems likely that Mattioli died in April 1694. The fact that he had a servant confirms this assumption.

The name Marziali, indicated in the death certificate, can hardly serve as an argument in favor of Mattioli; rather, on the contrary, this fact confirms the opposite assumption. Why keep the identity of a prisoner secret for so long and so carefully in order to reveal his name to the curate for entering in the death register? There was a rule to bury important state prisoners under false names. Saint-Mars named the prisoner Marciali precisely because he was not Mattioli. It is likely that the name of his former prisoner who died on the island of St. Margaret came to his mind.

Let's return to our “arithmetic reasoning”. We have excluded five from the number: La Riviera, who died in 1687 at Exile; Jacobin monk who died in Pinerola in 1694; Mattioli, in all likelihood, died on the island of St. Margaret in the same 1694; Dubreuil, a spy, an insignificant figure, whom Saint-Mars no doubt left at Pierre-en-Cize, in Lyon, in 1697.

The conclusion suggests itself: the Iron Mask was Estache Doge.

Everything fits together. Extraordinary precautions, exceptional measures taken by order of Louvois during the arrest of a prisoner. The intensification of these measures coincided with the news that Dauger had learned some of Fouquet's secrets, as well as the fact that Dauger never left Saint-Mars. Louvois was so busy with Doge that it seemed necessary to him that a prisoner of such importance and La Rivière, who was following his fate willy-nilly, should be transferred to Saint-Mars' new destination - to Exile.

Mattioli could have stayed in Pinerola.

Before leaving for Exile, Louvois asked Saint-Mars to give a detailed account of his prisoners, indicating "what you know regarding the reasons for their detention." But this order did not apply to two prisoners from the “lower tower” - Doge and La Riviera. Their case was so well known to Louvois that he did not need any information: “As for the two from the lower tower, you write only their names, without adding anything else.”

Let us also recall that Louvois expressed himself quite clearly: only Lauzun and La Rivière, as he wrote to Saint-Mars, were “sufficiently significant figures not to transfer them into other hands.”

The measures taken during the transport to Exile and on the way from Exile to the island of St. Margaret for Doge are a logical continuation of those taken in Pinerol. Thus, it was forbidden for everyone except Saint-Mars to talk to the prisoners, and therefore Doge was mistaken for a marshal or “the one above”, and the governor was forced to invent “fables” regarding Doge. In Exile, Saint-Mars was careful not to change anything. Even his lieutenant did not have the right to speak with the prisoner, “which was carried out strictly.”

The chair covered with dark matter on the journey from Exile to St. Margaret's Island was intended to prevent "anyone from seeing or speaking to him on the road."

When Barbézier first wrote to Saint-Mars, his letter concerned “a prisoner who has been under your supervision for more than twenty years.” Undoubtedly, it was about the Doge. It was the Doge that was the first thought of the new minister.

This easily explains the phrase “your old prisoner.” The old prisoner is exactly the man whom Saint-Mars guarded for more than twenty years.

The legend of the Man in the Mask could acquire new details only in connection with Doge. Let us also not forget the remarkable phrase of Saint-Mars, dated early 1688, when Dauger was the only one of the “five” who was on the island of St. Margaret, when there were still six years left before Mattioli moved to the island: “Throughout the whole province they say that my the prisoner is M. de Beaufort, the others consider him the son of the late Cromwell.”

Since we know that Dauger could not have been the prisoner who died in 1694 - he did not have a servant - there is no doubt that it was he who accompanied Saint-Mars to his new destination - the Bastille.

And once again Saint-Mars was given the same instructions as had always been done in relation to Doge - only Doge: “... in order to transport our old prisoner to the Bastille, you will take all measures to ensure that no one sees or recognizes him.”

When Dauger died in the Bastille in 1703, he had already been imprisoned for thirty-four years.

It is not known what crime Doge committed. Of course, it must have been serious in order to entail harsh treatment and painful isolation for so many years... This unknown crime made Dauger a significant person. It made him the Masked Man.

It must also be emphasized that Dauger's guilt increased during his imprisonment, when he accidentally became privy to the secrets of Fouquet. Let us also recall the confession of Chamillard, about whom Voltaire spoke: “He was a man who owned all the secrets of Fouquet.”

Mr. Mongredien established that during the transport of the prisoner to the Bastille, Lauzun, Madame Fouquet and her children were still alive. This may well explain the “need” that did not leave the minister alone, “despite the fact that a lot of time had passed, to hide the identity of Doge, whom Lozun considered to have long disappeared.”

Maurice Duvivier identifies Eustache Doget in his book with a certain Eustache d'Auger de Cavoye, a dubious personality. After participating in the famous Roissy brawl, he was involved in a case involving poisons. Since he played as a child with Louis XIV, the king did not bring him to justice and personally sentenced him to life imprisonment. The “drugs” that so amazed Saint-Mars, according to Duvivier, prove that he could have poisoned Fouquet, perhaps at the instigation of Colbert. It was necessary that he take the secret of his new crime with him to the grave. Hence the need to not let him out from under vigilant supervision until death, hence the mask.

Duvivier's version is quite solid, but from a historian's point of view, it is just a version.

The reason for the imprisonment of the Man in the Iron Mask - even if it was Estache Doger - still remains a mystery. Was there another person hiding under this name? We don't know this. In any case, he was not the brother of Louis XIV. The Sun King would never have allowed a man of the same blood to be made Fouquet's lackey!

Iron Mask - the most mysterious prisoner of the era of Louis XIV remained in history under this name. All that is reliably known about this man is the number under which he was registered in the Bastille (64489001). Presumably, he was born in the 40s of the 17th century. He was kept in different prisons. In 1698 he was finally placed in the Bastille, where he died.

Historical information

In fact, prisoner No. 64489001 did not wear an iron mask, but only a velvet mask. It was supposed to hide his identity from outsiders, but in no way serve as a means of torture (like an iron one). Even the guards themselves did not know what kind of criminal was wearing this mask. Its mystery gradually became the reason for the emergence of numerous legends and speculations.

The prisoner in the iron mask was first mentioned in the Secret Notes of the Persian Court, published in Amsterdam in 1745. The author of the notes indicates that number 64489001 was kept in the casemate illegitimate son the royal Louis XIV and his beloved, the Duchess de La Vallière. He bore the title of Count of Vermandois. In conclusion, he was caught for slapping his brother, the Grand Dauphin.

This version is absolutely untenable, since the real Count of Vermandois died at the age of 16 in 1683. Before that, he managed to take part in the war with Spain, so he simply did not have time for such a long imprisonment. Jesuit Griffe, who served as a confessor at the Bastille, recorded that the mysterious prisoner was first brought to the Bastille in 1698, and he died in 1703.

Elder brother or twin of Louis XIV

Later, Francois Voltaire suggested that the gentleman in the iron mask could be the half-brother of Louis XIV himself. The king did not need rivals, so he imprisoned his brother in the Bastille, having previously obliged him to wear a mask on his face. Obviously, all the mystery that surrounded this prisoner could be connected with this. Voltaire expressed this conjecture in his 1751 work “The Age of Louis XIV.”

Anne of Austria was considered infertile for a long time. Then she gave birth to an illegitimate son, after which the legitimate heir to the throne, Louis XIV, was born. The latter, having learned about the presence of an older brother, decided to end his life. In addition, there were rumors that Louis himself was not the king’s own son. This called into question his right to the crown.

Louis XIV could not execute the son of the French queen and his own brother, so he chose to imprison the unfortunate young man forever. Wearing a mask is a way to hide a secret that could cause a coup. History has not preserved the name of this supposed older brother.

There have also been speculations that the Iron Mask is actually the twin brother of Louis XIV. The appearance of male twins among the royal couple spontaneously gave rise to a lot of problems with the succession to the throne. One of the queen's sons had to be sacrificed in order to maintain stability in the country. The boy was raised secretly. Having matured, Louis XIV learned about his twin brother, who looked like him like a reflection in a mirror. Fearing for his crown, Louis ordered the elimination of his rival.

Ercole Mattioli

The fourth version was the assumption that the famous Italian adventurer Ercole Antonio Mattioli was hiding under the mask. In 1678, an agreement was concluded between him and Louis XIV: Mattioli undertook to persuade his overlord to give the king the fortress of Casale. The Italian successfully sold this state secret to several countries for a substantial reward. For this he was sentenced to life imprisonment by the French government.

General Bulond

The reason for the emergence of another version was the secret notes of Louis XIV. The French king kept encrypted diaries, which were deciphered several centuries later by the famous cryptographer Etienne Bazerie. It turned out that the masked prisoner could also be the French general Vivien de Bulonde, who covered himself and France with indelible shame in one of the battles of the Nine Years' War. This version, like all others, has not been proven 100%.

The real Peter I

Various historians and researchers, intrigued by the great mystery, continued to put forward all sorts of versions regarding the identity of the prisoner in the iron mask. Most historians came to the conclusion that it could have been one of the conspirators who dared to take aim at royal power. Among them: the Lorraine Armoise, the royal minister Fouquet, Cardinal Mazarin, etc.

Another version even concerned Russia. According to it, Peter I himself, and the true tsar, was imprisoned in the Bastille. In 1698 - precisely when prisoner No. 64489001 appeared in the Bastille - the Russian Tsar was allegedly replaced. Peter I was then carrying out a diplomatic mission (“Grand Embassy”) in Europe.

The true, Orthodox Russian Tsar, who sacredly revered traditions, went abroad. The European returned, dressed in a “basurman dress” and with a whole bunch of innovations wild for patriarchal Rus'. After this, they began to say that Peter the Great had been replaced abroad with an impostor. This substitution was later associated with the Iron Mask. It is still not known who actually wore it.

In the late autumn of 1703 in Paris, the body of a mysterious prisoner was buried in a cemetery. The name of the deceased was hidden by a pseudonym Iron mask. Since the second half of the eighteenth century, scientists and researchers have been arguing about who the masked prisoner was, whose last refuge was the Bastille. The legend became the basis for gossip and the search for candidates for the role of the prisoner. The information is still kept secret, and the work “The Iron Mask” fuels readers’ interest in the events of that era.

Origin story

The real name of the Bastille prisoner, who became the reason for speculation and legends, is unknown. His second pseudonym turned out to be prison number: 64489001. Researchers suggest that the date of birth young man is close to the forties of the seventeenth century, and throughout his life the man managed to visit several prisons. It is curious that the iron mask worn by the prisoner turned out to be a fiction. In reality, the prisoner wore a velvet mask, which helped to remain unrecognized and did not cause inconvenience. His identity was unknown even to the guards.

For the first time they started talking about the prisoner of the Bastille during the reign. The widow of the king's brother, Charlotte Elizabeth of Bavaria, in letters to a relative sent in 1711, shared the gossip that was circulating at court. The woman wrote that they were talking at court about a mysterious prisoner, whose identity remains unknown, since his face is constantly covered with an iron mask. Charlotte insisted that Mr. X, hiding under the metal, was an English lord who participated in a conspiracy against King William of Orange III of England.

Then information about the unknown person in custody was announced in the “Secret Notes on the History of Persia,” published in 1745. In imitation of Montesquieu, the anonymous author created a research work in artistic style. An unknown writer described the story of Giaffer, the illegitimate son of Louis XIV, who was imprisoned for slapping his half-brother, the Dauphin. The illegitimate son of the king and Louise de La Vallière was allegedly placed under prison supervision at the age of 16.

Engraving "Iron Mask"

In 1751 he published a book entitled “The Age of Louis XIV.” Having been imprisoned in the Bastille twice, the writer knew first-hand what was happening in prison. Voltaire saw those who served the Iron Mask. Even though real facts he did not have it, the writer assumed that the brother of the French king was hiding under the veil of secrecy. Voltaire believed that the son and her favorite was hiding from the public eye in the Bastille.

Legends and versions

Ideas about the origin of the mysterious person were put forward by Chancel de Langrange, Cenac de Melyan, Griffet, Abbot Papon, Lenguet, Charpentier and Soulavi. Some claimed that the Bourbon secret, which consisted in the queen’s dishonesty, was to blame. While preserving the name of the prisoner, by order of the royal family, the sheet with his data was excluded from the Bastille register. It is reliably known that the information was on sheet 120 and was certified in 1698, at the time of the prisoner’s arrival.

Gossips of the eighteenth century said that there had been a palace coup, as a result of which the king's twin brother was sitting on the throne, and the true ruler was under lock and key. This assumption left a mark on the reputation of the Bourbons and the authenticity of the pedigree. At the beginning of the 19th century, this theory was propagated by supporters who claimed that Napoleon was a descendant of the true king.

Ercole Mattioli was named among the contenders for the role of the Iron Mask. The Italian adventurer was famous for the agreement concluded with the king in 1678. Mattioli sold state secrets, for which he was transported to the Bastille.

This is not the only version about a prisoner not of blue blood. General Bulond could also be hiding behind a mask. Information from the secret diaries of Louis XIV suggests that the general was imprisoned after an offense committed during the Nine Years' War.

It is known from reliable sources that the Iron Mask was kept in the company of eight other criminals in the fortress of Pignerol. The story of the fellow sufferers is not impressive. Some were transferred to other prisons and died, some were released. The debate about who the mysterious man hiding behind the iron mask could be continues to this day.

Film adaptations

In the legend of the Iron Mask, there are discrepancies and inconsistencies that give rise to interesting plots that directors use in film adaptations. The legend of the mysterious prisoner of the Bastille became the basis for several full-length films. They starred recognized actors, thanks to whom you want to watch the films again and again.

The story of the mysterious prisoner was first presented on the big screen in 1962. The film was directed by Henri Decoin. Main actor became incarnate, sent to rescue the prisoner. The Musketeer does not make it in time and finds the cell empty, since the daughter of the head of the Bastille, who is in love with him, helped the Iron Mask escape.

Still from the film "Iron Mask"

In 1976, the public was offered a new interpretation, in which the main character was portrayed. The plot described the twin brother of the king, who fell in love with the daughter of a cellmate. Louis transferred the prisoner to the island of Saint-Margaret, having learned about his feelings, and shackled his face in a mask. At this time, D'Artagnan helped the head of government replace his brothers in order to carry out a palace coup.

In 1998, he played the roles of Louis XIV and his twin Philip, shackled in an iron mask, in the film of the same name. The film was remembered for its scale and big names of artists, because it starred, and. Today the film is considered the largest film adaptation of the story of the prisoner of the Bastille.

Prisoner in the Iron Mask

The mysterious story of the prisoner in the iron mask has haunted novelists, playwrights and historians for several centuries. Who was this unfortunate person doomed to wear a mask for the rest of his life? Is he really the brother of Louis XIV? So far, no documents or evidence have been discovered that could shed light on this historical mystery.

TO mysterious story The prisoner in the iron mask was first attracted by the brilliant Voltaire. In his work “The Age of Louis XIV” he wrote: “An unknown prisoner, taller than average, young, with the noblest bearing, was sent to a castle on the island of Sainte-Margarita, off the coast of Provence. While traveling, he wore a mask with steel latches on the bottom, which allowed him to eat without removing the mask. The order was given to kill him if he took off his mask."

Over the course of twenty years, Voltaire periodically returned to the story of the mysterious prisoner, supplementing it with new facts. Finally, in 1771, in the next re-edition of his work, allegedly from the publisher, he wrote: “The Iron Mask, without a doubt, was the elder brother of Louis XIV...” How did he come to this conclusion? The fact is that the mother of the monarch, Anna of Austria, had a delicate taste, in particular in relation to exquisite linen. The Iron Mask had the same passion. In addition, as Voltaire pointed out, at the time of the appearance of the mysterious prisoner on the historical scene in Europe, the disappearance of any influential and famous person was not noted, so the mask most likely hid the prisoner’s resemblance to some important and well-known person.

"Iron Mask"

Voltaire believed that the Iron Mask was the elder brother of Louis XIV, whom the queen gave birth to from an extramarital affair and raised in secret from everyone, confiding only in Cardinal Richelieu. An even more curious version of the origin of the Iron Mask emerged from the notes of Cardinal Richelieu, in which he reported the birth of twin sons to Anna of Austria on September 5, 1638. Interestingly, the boys were born within a few hours of each other. When the first of them had already been declared the legal heir, the second was born, who, according to the law, was the eldest. The Queen was informed of the death of her second child. As a teenager, the unrecognized prince was sent to England, where he received an upbringing appropriate to his origin. In 1669, the brother of Louis XIV learned the truth about his origins and became part of a conspiracy to regain the throne. The conspiracy was discovered, and the main conspirator, the Huguenot Roux de Marcilli, was captured. Before dying under torture, he admitted that his servant Eustache Dauger was the real king of France. Doge was arrested when he arrived in Dunkirk, and from then on the man had to wear a mask and live in captivity.

However, serious historians consider such a development of events unlikely. Their doubts are based on records and documents related to the identity of Saint-Mars, the chief jailer of the Iron Mask.

Bénigne de Saint-Mars enjoyed the special confidence of Louis XIV and kept the king's especially important prisoners under his supervision. In 1665, this man was the commandant of the Pinerol fortress in the Alps. Here, for the first time, the historical trace of the Iron Mask appears, because it was from this fortress that the mysterious prisoner was transferred in 1681, together with Saint-Mars, to the Egzil fortress. From the registers it is known that in Pinerol Saint-Mars had five prisoners, two of them very famous people: former minister Fouquet and Marshal de Lauzun. Of these two, neither could be the Iron Mask: there was absolutely no need to hide their faces, moreover, Fouquet died in 1680, and Lauzen was released before Saint-Mars moved to Egzille. True, the places in the prison were not empty, and there were still five prisoners. Of these five, Saint-Mars took two with him to his new duty station.

Who were the five prisoners? One of the prisoners was a monk-swindler caught in deceiving the ladies of the court, the other was officer Dubreuil, imprisoned for treason. The third prisoner was the Italian Count Mattioli, who paid with his freedom for deceiving Louis XIV himself - it was to him that many researchers assigned the role of a mysterious prisoner. The fourth is Fouquet's servant, who was only guilty of serving his master, who knew many state secrets. Finally, the fifth prisoner was Estache Dauger, who was serving a sentence in a poisoning case.

Of these five, Mattioli was perhaps the best suited for the role of the Iron Mask. Mattioli was a minister at the court of Charles IV, Duke of Mantua, and this courtier was in charge of the fortress of Casale Monferrato, which Louis XIV intended to buy. The French king not only agreed with Mattioli on the sale of the fortress, but also gave him very valuable gifts. It is unknown why Mattioli broke the agreement with the king. In general, the Italian courtier informed many European courts about Louis's plans for the Italian fortress. For the French king, this was a political embarrassment, for which he decided to take revenge on Mattioli. He was kidnapped and imprisoned in Pinerol.

However, it is known that this whole story with the capture of the Italian was not a secret at that time, so there was no point in hiding the face of this prisoner. Additionally, Mattioli would have been 63 years old at the time of Iron Mask's death in the Bastille, while the mysterious prisoner was only about 45 years old. After leaving Pinerol, Saint-Mars noted in correspondence that Mattioli and Dubreuil remained in the fortress, and the monk-swindler died. Thus, it becomes clear that Fouquet’s servant and Eustache Doger went to Egzille with Saint-Mars. Fouquet's servant should not have been hidden under a mask, so the mysterious prisoner was clearly Eustache Doget. It is known that in 1694, when Saint-Mars was already the governor of the island of St. Margaret, Mattioli and Dubreuil again joined him and Dauger. Mattioli soon died, and Saint-Mars again goes to the Bastille, to a new place of service, with two prisoners - one of them in a mask, the other Dubreuil. And this fact confirms that the Iron Mask was Doge.

Why was Doge such an important prisoner? It is believed that he knew some important state secret. In addition, at one time Dauger replaced Fouquet’s sick servant, serving the former minister, and from him he too could have learned some secrets. Or maybe Doge was actually Louis’s brother? The famous French historian Alain Decaux categorically rejects this version. In his book, he writes: “The Sun King would never have allowed a person of the same blood to be made Fouquet’s lackey!”

What if the Doge was the illegitimate son of some important courtier and looked very much like him? Maybe he tried to blackmail him and ended up in prison for it? Then the respectful attitude towards the prisoner and the reluctance to take his life could be explained.

From the book Following the Book Heroes author Brodsky Boris Ionovich

In Iron Armor Quentin's journey from the castle of Plessis le Tours to Liege began with a dangerous adventure. Important circumstances forced Isabella de Croix to leave the French city of Tours and head to the Belgian city of Liege. Accompany the young countess and her elderly

From the book Mystic of Ancient Rome. Secrets, legends, traditions author Burlak Vadim Nikolaevich

Someone in a mask with a violet But every carnival was not only a holiday. In the Middle Ages, and in the 18th–19th centuries, it carried away a lot human lives. Under the cover of a mask during the holiday, they dealt with unwanted people, committed bloody revenge, destroyed rivals, and

From the book Stalin's Slandered Victory. Assault on the Mannerheim Line author Irincheev Bair Klimentievich

Loimola: stalemate on the railway After the capture of Suo-järvi, the 56th Division separated from the neighboring 139th Rifle Division and continued its advance to the west, along the highway and railway Suo-jarvi - Loimola - Vyartsilya - Joensuu. 34th Finnish Army Regiment after the loss of Suo-järvi 3

From the book Hidden Pages of Soviet History. author Bondarenko Alexander Yulievich

Allen Dulles: the man in the mask The press has more than once quoted from the speech of CIA Director Allen Dulles regarding the priorities of the American post-war doctrine against the USSR. But there is, however, a version that the so-called “Dulles speech in 1945” is a fake,

From the book Stalin against the “degenerates of the Arbat” author Sever Alexander

Emergency on the railway One of the popular myths is that in the twenties and thirties, most accidents occurred due to the low level of training of Soviet railway workers and the fact that almost all the tsarist “specialists” were fired from this industry. Now, if the “ex” continued

author Ionina Nadezhda

Mysterious prisoner No. 6 In the early 1860s, a prisoner appeared in one of the casemates of the Alekseevsky ravelin, whose identity and the reasons for his imprisonment for a long time remained a secret even to the prison administration itself. The press of that time did not even dare to mention it

From the book 100 Great Prisoners [with illustrations] author Ionina Nadezhda

Prisoner No. 30664 The whole world knows the American writer Williams Sidney Porter under the pseudonym O'Henry. From a few photographs, the face of a typical “average American” looks at us, who had no special features, except for one - literary talent. At the age of 20

From the book Youth and the GPU (The Life and Struggle of Soviet Youth) author Solonevich Boris Lukyanovich

Centenary Prisoner “The pain of life is stronger than the interest in life. That’s why religion will always win over philosophy.” V. Rozanov In our prison cell there are 18 “regular” places: 18 iron beds screwed to the walls. Now these bunks stand upright, like rusty, bent wrecks.

From the book Study of History. Volume II [Civilizations in Time and Space] author Toynbee Arnold Joseph

4. Philosopher in the Mask of a King Another means of salvation, without recourse to either a “time machine” or a sword, was proposed in the first generation of the Hellenic “time of troubles” by the earliest and greatest Hellenic adepts of the art of detachment. “While in the states.”

From the book Hunting the Emperor author Balandin Rudolf Konstantinovich

ATTEMPTS ON THE RAILROAD The secret brotherhood “Black Redistribution” called on the peasants to gather assemblies and send walkers to the capital with demands to divide all the land and forests between everyone equally without ransoms and urgent payments, to reduce all taxes and duties, to allow

From the book Golgotha ​​of the 20th century. Volume 1 author Sopelnyak Boris Nikolaevich

Prisoner No. 7 “Written a few minutes before my death. I thank you all, my dears, for all the good things you have done for me. Tell Freiburg that it has caused me boundless pain that, since the Nuremberg trials, I have had to act as if I did not know her. To me

From the book Prisoners of the Bastille author Tsvetkov Sergey Eduardovich

The First Prisoner In 1380, Charles V died. With his death, the horrors of internal civil strife were added to the disasters of the Hundred Years' War. The heir to the throne, Charles VI, had not yet reached adulthood. The kingdom ended up in the hands of rival houses: the Dukes of Anjou, Berry,

From the book History of Russian Investigation author Koshel Pyotr Ageevich

The mysterious prisoner Conspiracies were dangerous for Catherine’s government, in particular, the conspiracy of Lieutenant Mirovich of the Smolensk Infantry Regiment, who made an attempt in July 1764 to free Ivan Antonovich and elevate him to the throne. Vasily Mirovich’s grandfather was

From the book Strategies of Genius Women author Badrak Valentin Vladimirovich

Secrets of the Iron Lady Skeptics of women's political careers can rightly object: Margaret Thatcher burst into history so clearly because it is easier for both the common man and the scrupulous researcher to identify her than any other politician. Especially since

From the book Russian Explorers - the Glory and Pride of Rus' author Glazyrin Maxim Yurievich

Iron ore processing Tsibakin Yaroslav Fedorovich (Ekaterinoslav, 1911–1989, Hamilton, Ontario), Russian metallurgical engineer. In Canada since 1949. Lead inventor of The Steel Company of Canada Ltd. "Stelco". In 1962, Ya. F. Tsibakin invents a new economical method

From the book Creators and Monuments author Yarov Roman Efremovich

With an iron hand, the crane barely noticeably moved against the flow from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. At this moment, his movement slowed down: another danger threatened. It was necessary to pass the shoal on the left bank. Here the barge was scuttled in advance; the crane stood above it. The pumps started working

In 1698, a prisoner was brought to the Bastille, whose face was hidden by a terrible iron mask. His name was unknown, and in prison he was numbered 64489001. The created aura of mystery gave rise to many versions of who this masked man could be.

The authorities knew absolutely nothing about the prisoner transferred from another prison. They were ordered to place the masked man in the most remote cell and not talk to him. After 5 years the prisoner died. He was buried under the name Marcialli. All the deceased’s belongings were burned, and the walls were torn apart so that no notes remained.

When in late XVII I century under the onslaught of the Great french revolution The Bastille fell, the new government released documents that shed light on the fate of the prisoners. But there was not a single word about the masked man.

The Jesuit Griffe, who was a confessor in the Bastille at the end of the 17th century, wrote that a prisoner was brought to prison wearing a velvet (not iron) mask. In addition, the prisoner only put it on when someone appeared in the cell. From a medical point of view, if the prisoner actually wore a mask made of metal, it would invariably disfigure his face. The iron mask was “made” by writers who shared their assumptions about who this mysterious prisoner really could be.

The masked prisoner was first mentioned in the Secret Notes of the Persian Court, published in 1745 in Amsterdam. According to the Notes, prisoner No. 64489001 was none other than the illegitimate son of Louis XIV and his mistress Louise Françoise de La Vallière. He bore the title of Duke of Vermandois, allegedly slapped his brother the Grand Dauphin, for which he ended up in jail. In fact, this version is implausible, because the illegitimate son of the French king died at the age of 16 in 1683. And according to the records of the confessor of the Bastille, Jesuit Griffe, the unknown was imprisoned in 1698, and he died in 1703.

François Voltaire, in his work "The Age of Louis XIV", written in 1751, first pointed out that the Iron Mask could well be the twin brother of the Sun King. To avoid problems with the succession to the throne, one of the boys was raised secretly. When Louis XIV learned of his brother’s existence, he doomed him to eternal imprisonment. This hypothesis explained the presence of the prisoner’s mask so logically that it became the most popular among other versions and was subsequently filmed more than once by directors.

There is an opinion that the famous Italian adventurer Ercole Antonio Mattioli was forced to wear the mask. The Italian in 1678 entered into an agreement with Louis XIV, according to which he undertook to force his duke to surrender the fortress of Casale to the king in exchange for a reward of 10,000 crowns. The adventurer took the money, but did not fulfill the contract. Moreover, Mattioli gave out this state secret to several other countries for a separate reward. For this treason, the French government sent him to the Bastille, forcing him to wear a mask.

Some researchers have put forward completely implausible versions about the man in the iron mask. According to one of them, this prisoner could be Russian Emperor Peter I. It was during that period that Peter I was in Europe with his diplomatic mission (“Grand Embassy”). The autocrat was allegedly imprisoned in the Bastille, and a figurehead was sent home instead. Like, how else can we explain the fact that the tsar left Russia as a Christian who revered traditions, and returned back as a typical European who wanted to break the patriarchal foundations of Rus'.

In past centuries, masks were used not only to hide people’s faces, but also to turn them into real instruments of torture. One of these was

We also recommend

• Temple of the Tikhvin Icon of the Mother of God on Ave.
• The miraculous icon of St. Nicholas of Zaraisk St. Nicholas of Zaraisk with life
• How to smoke cheek meat at home
• Receiving a property deduction through an employer
• Interpretation of sleep to treat in dream books
• Buckwheat in a frying pan with onions and carrots Cook buckwheat with carrots and onions