:

The authenticated particulars concerning the iron mark are as follow:-A few months after the death of CardinalMazarine,there arrived at the ifle of Sainte Marguerite, in the fea of Provence, a young prifoner whofe appearance was peculiarly attracting his perfon was above the middle fize, and elegantly formed; his mein and deportment were noble, and his manners graceful; and even the found of his voice, it is faid, had in it fomething uncommonly interefting. On the road he conftantly wore a mask made with iron fprings, to enable him to eat without taking it off. It was at first believed that this mask was made entirely with iron; whence he acquired the name of "the man with the iron mask." His attendants had received orders to dispatch him if he attempted to take off his mafk or discover himself.-He had been first confined at Pignerol, under the care of the governor M. de St. Mars; and, upon being fent from thence to Sainte Marguerite, he was accompanied thither by the fame perfon, who continued to have the charge of him. He was always treated with VOL. I. No. 13.

3

the moft marked refpect; he was

governor himself placed his dishes on the table, retiring immediately after, and locking the door behind him. He tu-to'yoit (thee'd and thou'd) the governor; who, on the other hand, behaved to him in the most respectful manner, and never wore his hat before him, nor fat down in his prefence unless he was defired. The Marquis de Louvoifis, who went to fee him at St. Marguerite, fpoke to him ftanding, and with that kind of attention which denotes high respect.

During his refidence here, he attempted twice, in an indirect manner, to make himself known. One day he wrote fomething with his knife on a plate, and threw it out of his window towards a boat that was drawn on-fhore near the foot of the tower. A fisherman picked it up and carried it to the governor. M. de St. Mars was alarmed at the fight; and afked the man, with great anxiety, whether he could read, and whether any one else had feen the plate? The man answered, that he could not read, that he had but juft found the plate, and that no one else had feen it. He was, however, confined till the governor was well affured of the truth of his affertions.-Another attempt to discover himself proved equally unfuccefsful. A young man, who lived in the ifle, one day perceived fomething floating under the prifoner's window; and, on picking it up, he difcovered it to be a very fine fhirt written all over. He carried it immediately to the governor; who, having looked at fome parts of the writing, afked the lad, with fome ap pearance of anxiety, if he had not had the curiofity to read it? He protefted repeatedly that he had not: but two days afterwards he was found dead in his bed.

The Mafque de Fer remained in this ifle till the year 1698, when M. St. Mars, being promoted to the government of the Baftile, conducted

C

his

his prifoner to that fortrefs. In his way thither, he ftopt with him at his eftate near Palteau. The mask arrived there in a litter, furrounded by a numerous guard on horfeback., M. de St. Mars-áte at the fame table with him all the time they refided at Palteau; but the latter was always placed with his back towards the windows; and the peafants, who came to pay their compliments to their mafter, and whom curiofity kept conftantly on the watch, obferved that M. de St. Mars always fat oppofite to him with two piftols by the fide of his plate. They were waited on by one fervant only, who brought in and carried out the dishes, always carefully shutting the door both in going out and in returning. The prifoner was always masked, even when he passed through the court; but the people faw his teeth and lips, and also observed that his hair was grey.-The governor flept in the fame room with him, in a fecond bed that was placed in it on that occafion. In the courfe of their journey, the iron-mafk was, one day, heard to afk his keeper whether the king had any defign on his life? "No, prince," he replied; "provided that you quietly allow yourself to be conducted, your life is perfectly fecure.”

The ftranger was accommodated as well as it was poffible to be in the Baftile. An apartment had been prepared for him by order of the governor before his arrival, fitted up in the moft convenient ftyle; and every thing he expreffed a defire for was inftantly procured him. His table was the best that could be provided; and he was ordered to be fupplied with as rich clothes as he defired: but his chief taste in this last particular was for lace, and for linen remarkably fine. It appears that he was allowed the ufe of fuch books as he defired, and that he spent much of his time in reading. He also amufed himfelf with playing upon the guitar. He had the liberty of going to mafs; but was then strictly forbid to speak or uncover his face: orders were even given to the foldiers to fire upon him if he attempted either; and their pieces were always pointed towards him as

he paffed through the court. When he had occafion to fee a furgeon or a phyfician, he was obliged, under pain of death, conftantly to wear his mask. An old physician of the Bastile, who had often attended him when he was indifpofed, faid, that he never faw his face, though he had frequently examined his tongue, and different parts of his body; that there was fomething uncommonly interesting in the found of his voice; and that he never complained of his confinement, nor let fall from him any hint by which it might be gueffed who he was. It is faid that he often paffed the night in walking up and down his

room.

This unfortunate prince died on the 19th of November 1703, after a fhort illness; and was interred next day in the burying-place of the parish of St. Paul. The expence of his funeral amounted only to forty livres. The name given him was Marchiali : and even his age, as well as real name, it feemed of importance to conceal; for in the register made of his funeral, it was mentioned that he was about forty years old; though he had told his apothecary, fome time before his death, that he thought he must be fixty.It is a well-known fact, that, immediately after the prifoner's death, his apparel, linen, clothes, matraffes, and in fhort every thing that had been used by him, were burnt; that the walls of his room were fcraped, the floor taken up, evidently from the apprehenfion that he might have found means of writing any thing that would have difcovered who he was. fuch was the fear of his having left a letter or any mark which might lead to a difcovery, that his plate was melted down; the glafs was taken out of the window of his room and pounded to duft; the window-frame and doors burnt; and the ceiling of the room, and the plaster of the infide of the chimney, taken down. Several perfons have affirmed, that the body was buried without a head; and Monfieur de St. Foix informs us,. that "a gentleman, having bribed the fexton, had the body taken up in the night, and found a stone instead of

the head."

Nay,

The

The refult of these extraordinary accounts is, that the iron mask was not only a perfon of high birth, but must have been of great confequence; and that his being concealed was of the utmost importance to the king and miniftry.

Among the opinions and conjectures that have been formed concerning the real name and condition of this remarkable perfonage; fome have pretended that he was the duke of Beaufort; others, that he was the Count de Vermandois, natural fon to Louis XIV. by the duchefs de la Valliere. Some maintain him to have been the duke of Monmonth, natural fon of Charles II. of England by Lucy Walters; and others fay, that he was Gerolami Magni, minifter to the duke of Modena.

Befides thefe conjectures, none of which poffeffes fufficient probability to entitle them to confideration, a fifth has been advanced; namely, That the Iron Mafk was a fon of Anne of Austria, queen to Louis XIII. and confequently that he was a brother of Louis XIV. but whether a bastard brother, a brother-german, or a half brother, is a question that has given rife to three feveral opinions, which we fhall ftate in the order of time in which the respective tranfactions to which they allude happened.

The first opinion is, that the queen proved with child at a time when it was evident it could not have been by her husband, who, for fome months before, had never been with her in private. The fuppofed father of this child is faid by fome to have been the duke of Buckingham who came to France in May 1625, to conduct the princefs Henrietta, wife of Charles I. to England. The private letters and memoirs of thofe times fpeak very fufpiciously of the queen and Buckingham his behaviour at A. miens, whither the queen and queenmother accompanied the princefs in her way to Boulogne, occafioned much whispering: notwithstanding the pains that have been taken by La Porte in his Memoires to excufe his mistress, it appears that the king, on this occafion, was extremely offended

3

་

at her, and that it required all the influence and addrefs of the queenmother to effect a reconciliation. It is faid, that this child was privately brought up in the country; that when Mazarine became a favourite, he was entrusted with the care of him; and that Louis XIV. having difcovered the fecret on the death of the cardinal,thought it neceffary to confine him in the manner that has been related.

But it may be observed, that this fecret could fcarcely have efcaped the vigilance of the cardinal de Richlieu; and it is not improbable, that a minifter fo little fcrupulous, if inclined to fave the honour of a queen, would have removed a child, who, if he lived, might have been made use of to disturb the tranquillity of the kingdom. After this fuppofed birth, the queen had frequent quarrels with the king, and, what was more dan-gerous, with the cardinal; who even ufed every means in his power to enquire into her most private tranfactions. It was on a memorable occafion of this kind, that her fervant La Porte was thrown into the Baftile; and it can fcarely be imagined the would have had the firmness she then difplayed, while confcious of fo much guilt, and under the risk of having it difcovered. The prifoner with the mafk appears, by feveral accounts, to have been a youth of a handfome figure in the year 1661; and in 1703, when he died, to have been above fixty; but, had he been a fon of Buck. ingham, he would have been about thirty-fix in 1661, when he could not be said to have been a youth; and, in November 1703, above feventy-eight,

The fecond opinion is, that he was the twin-brother of Louis XIV. born fome hours after him. This first appeared in a fhort anonymous work published without date, and without the name of place or printer. It is therein said, "Louis XIV. was born at St. Germains en Laye, on the 5th of September 1638, about noon; and the illuftrious prifoner, known by the appellation of the Iron_mask, waş born the fame day, while Louis XIII. was at fupper. The king and the cardinal, fearing that the pretenfions of a twin-brother might one day be employed

employed to renew thofe civil wars with which France had been so often afflicted, cautiously concealed his birth, and fent him away to be brought up privately. Having but an imperfect knowledge of the circumftances that followed, I fhall fay nothing more, for fear of committing errors; but I firmly believe the fact I have mentioned; and time will probably prove to my reader, that I have ground for what I have advanced."

This opinion has been more noticed fince the publication of a work called Memoires du Marechal Duc de Richlieu, written by the Abbé Soulavie; concerning which it may be proper to premife, that the prefent duke of Richlieu, fon of the marechal, difavows this work; while the Abbé Soulavie, who had been employed by the marechal, infifts on the authenticity of his papers. He informs us, that the duke of Richlieu was the lover of Mademoiselle de Valois, daughter of the regent duke of Orleans, and afterwards duchefs of Modena, who in return was paffionately fond of him that the regent had fomething more than a paternal affection for his daughter; and that, though the held his fentiments in abhorrence, the duke of Richlieu made ufe of her influence with her father to discover the fecret of the prifoner with the mask that the regent, who had always obferved the moft profound filence on this fubject, was at laft perfuaded to entrust her with a manufcript, which the immediately fent to her lover, who took a copy of it. This manuscript is supposed to have been written by a gentleman on his death-bed, who had been the governor of the prifoner. The following is an extract of it, from what the Abbé Soulavie has told us :

:

"The birth of the prifoner happened in the evening of the 5th of September 1638, in prefence of the chancellor, the bishop of Meaux, the author of the manufcript, a midwife named Peronéte, and a fieur Honorat. This circumftance greatly difturbed the king's mind; he obferved, that the Salique law had made no provifion for fuch a cafe; and, that it was even the opinion of fome, that the

last born was the first conceived, and therefore had a prior right to the other. By the advice of cardinal de Richlieu, it was therefore refolved. to conceal his birth, but to preserve his life, in cafe by the death of his brother it fhould be neceffary to avow him. A declaration was drawn up, and figned and fworn to by all prefent, in which every circumstance was mentioned, and several marks on his body defcribed. This document, being fealed by the chancellor with the royal feal, was delivered to the king; and all were commanded and took an oath never to fpeak on the fubject, not even in private and among themselves. The child was delivered to the care of Madame Peronéte the midwife, to be under the direction of cardinal de Richlieu, at whofe death the charge devolved to cardinal de Mazarine. Mazarine appointed the author of the manuscript his governor, and entrusted to him the care of his education. But as the prifoner was extremely attached to Madame Peronéte, and the equally fo to him, the remained with him till her death. His governor.

carried him to his houfe in Burgundy, where he paid the greatest attention to his education. As the prifoner grew up, be became impatient to difcover his birth, and often importuned his governor on that fubject. His curiofity had been roused, by obferving that meffengers from the court frequently arrived at the house; and a box, containing letters from the queen and the cardinal, having one day been inadvertently left out, he opened it, and faw enough to guess at the fecret. From that time he became thoughtful and melancholy,

which (fays the author) I could not then account for. He fhortly after asked me to get him a portrait of the late and prefent king, but I put him off by saying that I could not procure any that were good. He then defired me to let him go to Dijon; which I have known fince was with an intention of feeing a portrait of the king there, and of going fecretly to St. John de Lus, where the court then was on occafion of the marriage, with the infanta. He was beautiful; and love

helped

helped him to accomplish his wifhes. He had captivated the affections of a young housekeeper, who procured him a portrait of the king. It might have ferved for either of the brothers; and the difcovery put him into fo violent a paffion, that he immmediately came to me with the portrait in his hand, faying, Voila mon frere, et voila qui je fuis, fhewing me at the fame time a letter of the cardinal de Mazarine that he had taken out of the box.' Upon this discovery his governor immediately sent an exprefs to court to communicate what had happened, and to defire new inftructions; the confequence of which was, that the governor and the young prince under his care were arrested and confined."

This memoir, real or fictitious, concludes with saying, “I have suffered with him in our common prifon: I am now fummoned to appear before my Judge on high; and, for the peace of my foul, I cannot but make this declaration, which may point out to him the means of freeing himfelf from his prefent ignominious fituation, in cafe the king his brother fhould die without children. Can an extorted oath compel me to obferve fecrecy on a thing fo incredible, but which ought to be left on record to pofterity."

The third opinion is, that he was a fon of the queen by the cardinal de Mazarine, born about a year after the death of her husband Louis XIII. that he was brought up fecretly; and that foon after the death of the cardinal, which happened on the 9th of March 1661, he was fent to Pignerol. To this account Father Griffet objects, "that it was needlefs to mask a face that was unknown; and there fore that this opinion does not merit difcuffion." But in answer it has been obferved, That the prifoner might strongly refemble Louis XIV. which would be a fufficient reafon to have him masked. This opinion is supposed to have been that entertained by Voltaire, who afferts his thorough knowledge of the fecret, tho' he declined being altogether explicit. The Abbé Soulavie, author of Memoirs of the Marechal de Rich

:

Hieu, fpeaking on this fubject, says "That he once obferved to the marechal, that he certainly had the means of being informed who the prifoner was; that it even feemed that he had told Voltaire, who durft not venture to publifh the fecret; and that he at last asked him, whether he was not the elder brother of Louis XIV. born without the knowledge of Louis the XIII? That the marechal feemed embarrassed, but afterwards faid, that he was neither the baftard brother of Louis the XIV. nor the duke of Monmouth, nor the count of Vermandois, nor the duke of Beaufort, as different authors had advanced; that their conjectures were nothing but reveries but added, that they however had related many circumftances that were true; that in fact the order was given to put the prifoner to death if he difcovered himself; and that he finished the converfation by saying, All I can tell you on the fubject is, that the prisoner was not of such confequence when he died, at the begin ning of the prefent century, as he had been at the beginning of the reign of Louis XIV. and that he was fhut up for important reafons of state." The Abbé Soulavie tells us, that he wrote down what had been faid, and gave it to the marechal to read, who corrected fome expreffions. The abbé having propofed fome further quel. tions, he answered, "Read what Voltaire published laft on the subject of the prisoner with the mask, efpecially at the end, and reflect on it." -The paffage of Voltaire alluded to is as follows:

"The man with the mask (says he) is an enigma of which every one would guess the meaning. Some have faid that it was the duke of Beaufort; but the duke of Beaufort was killed by the Turks in the defence of Candy in 1669, and the prifoner with the mask was at Pignerol in 1661. Befides, how could the duke of Beaufort have been arrested in the midst of his army, and brought to France, without any one knowing it? and why confine him? and why that mask?-Others have dreamed that he was the count de Vermandois,

natural