Prisoner in a velvet mask Peter 1. Man in an iron mask: a prisoner from the Bastille who became a legend

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. Orders were given to kill him if he removed the mask. He remained on the island until a 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 could be possible in such a place, and nothing was refused to him, whatever he asked.

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 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 during 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.

"The Iron Mask was, without a doubt, the elder brother of Louis XIV, whose mother had that special taste in fine linen. After I read about it in the memoirs of the 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... It seems to me: the more you study the history of that time, the more amazed you are at the coincidence of circumstances that testify in favor of this assumption,” - wrote Voltaire.

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 once 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...

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: the inscription in Latin confirmed its authenticity...)

In August 1698, Saint-Mars and his prisoner set off. In the journal for registering prisoners of the Bastille, M. du Junca, the royal lieutenant, made the following entry: “On the 18th of September, on Thursday, at 3 o’clock in the afternoon, M. de Saint-Mars, commandant of the Bastille fortress, arrived to take office from the island of St. Margherita, bringing with him his long-time prisoner, kept under his supervision back in Pinerola, who must wear a mask at all times, and his name must not be mentioned; he was placed, immediately upon arrival, in the first cell of the Basinier Tower until nightfall, and at 9 o'clock evening I myself... transferred the prisoner to the third cell of the Bertollier Tower."

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. Monsieur 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 his death, Monsieur Rosarge, physician, and Monsieur Rey, 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.”

Monsieur de Marchiel... Isn't this the name of the mysterious prisoner? The fact is that among the prisoners in Pinerola was Count Mattioli, minister and envoy of the Duke of Mantua, arrested on May 2, 1679. Mattioli’s candidacy has ardent and zealous supporters. What are the arguments of the “Matthiolists”?

When the Man in the Iron Mask died, the deceased was recorded under the name Marsciali or Marscioli. You can see a hint of Mattioli's distortion 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 shake 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.

On July 19, 1669, Saint-Mars received an order from Paris for the arrival of a prisoner in Pinerol: “Monsieur Saint-Mars! The Sovereign ordered a certain Eustache Doget to be sent to Pinerol; with his maintenance, it seems extremely important to ensure careful security and, in addition, to ensure the impossibility of transfer prisoner 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 securely closed so that your sentries cannot hear anything. 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 will open his mouth to say anything, unless it relates to the expression of his requests. You will furnish the cell for the one who is brought 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? 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.

Doge was constantly in complete silence and absolute solitude. The fear that Doge would speak became an obsession of the jailers and ministers. From Paris, Saint-Mars was repeatedly asked in fear: had Doget betrayed his secret?

Researcher Maurice Duvivier identifies Eustache Doget 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 still remains a mystery. Was there another person hiding under this name? We don’t know. 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.

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 thin underwear, loved exquisite table, 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 moved in with them, all 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. Obviously, 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 the most different persons. In fact, any noble person who lived in the 17th century and about whose death there was no reliable information was immediately nominated by some historian as a candidate for the role of the Iron Mask. Let us briefly consider the most popular versions, in different time 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 the 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 by themselves 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. Besides, official date the death of the count (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 of Saint-Foy saw in the Iron Mask Duke James of Monmouth, son English king Charles II (he came to the throne after Cromwell's death 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 of 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 across the country that the Duke of Monmouth was no less a legitimate heir than the Duke of York, since Charles II was allegedly married 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 prove that Monmouth's royal birth alone should have protected him from death penalty and so the Duke was actually 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, habit of akimbo, always curled mustache - all this gave him a very defiant look. Having received no education, he remained a complete ignoramus in all sciences, including science social life- the court laughed at the rudeness of his manners and language. But the army idolized him for his desperate bravery.

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 a landing force of seven thousand - the flower of the French nobility (in some ways, the Candidate expedition represented a new crusade). Candia was once ruled by the Venetians. By the time of the events described, only The largest city the island, 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. I'll just say what they saw in him 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 the 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 - 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 the norms international law and affecting the interests of many powers, had to be carried out in the strictest secrecy. Looking for an intermediary for this transaction among the duke's favorites, Estrad settled on Matteoli, as a person with greatest influence on Karl.

Matteoli was born into a well-born and rich family Bologna 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 joyfully 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, while 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 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 give the news about himself, he 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 captive 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 Rainy 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 quite likely that long 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).

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 aura of mystery created gave rise to many versions of who this masked man could be.

Prisoner in an iron mask in an anonymous engraving from the French Revolution (1789).
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 In the 1st century, under the onslaught of the Great French Revolution, the Bastille fell, the new government published documents that shed light on the fate of the prisoners. But there was not a single word about the man in the mask.


Bastille is a French prison.
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 Man in the Iron Mask.
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.

Still from the film “The Man in the Iron Mask” (1998).
Francois Voltaire, in his work "The Age of Louis XIV", written in 1751, first indicated 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.

The Italian adventurer Ercole Antonio Mattioli could be hiding under the mask.
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.


Russian Emperor Peter I.
Some researchers have put forward completely implausible versions about the man in the iron mask. According to one of them, this prisoner could be the 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'.

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 under number 64489001 the illegitimate son of the royal Louis XIV and his beloved, the Duchess de La Vallière, was kept in the casemate. 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 for a long time was considered infertile. Then she gave birth 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.

Execute the son of the French queen and sibling Louis XIV could not, so he chose to imprison the unfortunate young man forever. Wearing a mask is a way to hide a secret that could cause coup d'etat. 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.

A true, Orthodox Christian has gone abroad Russian Tsar, who revered traditions sacredly. 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.