It was probably, during this journey, that St. Mars first made use of a mask to hide the features of Matthioli.129Not as has been erroneously supposed a mask made of iron, which it will be evident, upon the slightest reflection, could not have been borne upon the face for any long continuance of time, but one of black velvet,130strengthened with whalebone, and fastened behind the head with a padlock, which did not prevent theprisoner from eating and drinking, or impede his respiration.131
The identity of Matthioli with the prisoner known by the name of “the Iron Mask,” is here very satisfactorily confirmed by circumstantial evidence. We have seen that Matthioli and the Jacobin were placed together at Pignerol; we have seen that they were designated as “the two prisoners in the lower part of the tower;” we have seen that “the two prisoners in the lower part of the tower” were the only ones who accompanied St. Mars when his government was transferred to Exiles; we have seen the death of the Jacobin at the latter place; and now we find St. Mars conveying a single prisoner, designated as “the prisoner,” with him to St. Margaret, with a repetition of the same precautions and of the same secrecy as on former occasions, to which are added the celebrated Mask. Who could this prisoner be but Matthioli? It is alsoobservable, that in all the various accounts of the Iron Mask, though the dates are made to vary, he is always said to have been originally confined at Pignerol, subsequently at the island of St. Margaret, and finally to have accompanied St. Mars to the Bastille.
The prison of Matthioli, at the Island of St. Margaret, was a room lighted by a single window to the north, pierced in a very thick wall, guarded by bars of iron, and looking upon the sea.132During his residence in this place, his valet, who, as may be remembered, had been arrested by Estrades, and who had served his master ever since his confinement, died, and was buried at midnight, and with great secrecy. To supply his place, a woman of the neighbourhood was asked if she would undertake to wait upon the prisoner. At first she consented to accept of the place, imaginingit might be a means of benefiting her family; but afterwards declined it, upon learning that she was to be cut off from all further intercourse with the world, and never even to see her family again.133Whether any one was eventually found to undertake the office, does not appear.
Among the erroneous anecdotes that have obtained credence with regard to the Iron Mask, there are two, or rather apparently two versions of one event, which is said to have taken place while he was at the island of St. Margaret, but which is proved to be incorrect, by a letter published by M. Roux (Fazillac).
One version of the story states, that the mysterious prisoner wrote his name and qualities with the point of a knife upon a silver plate, and threw it out of his window; that it was picked up by a fisherman, who could not read, but brought it to St. Mars; and that the latter, having ascertained thatthe man could not read, released him.134The other version is, that the prisoner covered one of his shirts with writing, and then threw it out of window; a Monk found it, brought it to the Governor, and assured him he had not read it; but was himself found dead in his bed two days afterwards, and was supposed to have been assassinated.135The origin of these stories, is evidently to be found in a letter from St. Mars to the Minister,136dated June 4th, 1692; in which he informs him that he has been obliged to inflict corporal punishment upon a Protestant minister, named Salves, who was a prisoner under his care, becausehe would write things upon his pewtervessels, and on his linen, in order to make known that he was imprisoned unjustly, on account of the purity of his faith.137Thus we see that this anecdote, which has been twisted into the history of the Iron Mask, had, in fact, no relation to him. And this circumstance should put us on our guard with respect to the many other marvellous stories, which have probably been pressed in the same way into the service. It is also worthy of remark that the public having determined that the Iron Mask was a great Prince, every thing was related in a manner to favour this opinion—and thus the pewter of the obscure Salves was turned, in the anecdote, into silver plate.
After eleven years’ tedious confinement at the Island of St. Margaret, Matthioli accompanied St. Mars to the Bastille, to the government of which the latter was appointed, upon the death of M. de Bezemaux, which occurred in the last days of 1697.138
Before his departure from St. Margaret, St.Mars wrote to the Minister to request that secure lodgings might be provided for him and his prisoner during the journey; to which he received for answer, “It will be sufficient that you should lodge as conveniently and securely as you can, by means of payment.”139
St. Mars accordingly set forth on his journey to the Bastille, early in the autumn of 1698, and in the course of it lodged at his own estate of Palteau, which he probably considered a securer resting place for his prisoner than any inn could have been. An account of his visit to Palteau has been given by one of his descendants, of whose accuracy no reasonable doubt can be entertained.
It is there stated, that the masked prisoner arrived at Palteau in a litter, which preceded theone in which St. Mars himself travelled. They were accompanied by many men on horseback, and by the peasants who had gone to meet their landlord. St. Mars always ate with his prisoner, and the latter sat with his back to the windows of the dining-room, so that the peasants, who were in the court, could not see whether he kept his mask on while at meals; but they observed that St. Mars, who sat opposite to him, had two pistols placed by the side of his plate. They were served by a single servant, who brought all the dishes from the anti-room, where they were placed, and always when he came in or went out shut the door very carefully after him. When the prisoner crossed the court, he always had his black mask over his face. The peasants also observed, that his teeth and lips were seen, that he was tall of stature, and had grey hair. St. Mars slept in a bed, which had been put up close to that of his prisoner.140
St. Mars and Matthioli arrived at the Bastille on the 18th of September, 1698, and the former immediately went to the Minister to apprize him of their arrival.141This event is thus commemorated in the journal of M. Dujonca,142who was for many years the Lieutenant of the King, at the Bastille:—“Thursday, 18th September, 1698, at three o’clock in the afternoon, M. de St. Mars, Governor of the Bastille, arrived to take possession of his office, coming from the Islands of St. Margaret and St. Honorat, bringing with him in his litter an old prisoner, whom he had under his care at Pignerol, of whom the name is not mentioned; who is always kept masked, and who was first placed, till night, in the tower of the Basiniere,143and whom I conducted afterwards myself, at nine o’clock at night, to the third chamber of the tower of the Bertaudière;143which chamber I had taken care to furnish with all things necessary before his arrival, having received orders to that effect from M. de St. Mars. When I conducted him to the before-mentioned chamber, I was accompanied by the Sieur Rosarges,144whom M. de St. Mars also brought with him, and who is charged to wait upon and take care of the aforesaid prisoner, who is fed by the Governor.”145
Dujonca’s account is confirmed by the extracts of the Register of the Bastille, published in the work entitled “La Bastille dévoilée.”146
The placing of the prisoner, on his first arrival, temporarily in one part of the Bastille, and afterwards removing him by night to another, appears to have been done for the sake of greater secrecy; and we see by this, as well as by the account of his visit to Palteau, that the precautions against the possibility of discovery of his name and character were in no way diminished.
He certainly continued, from all accounts, to wear his mask from the time of his arrival at the Bastille till his death. We learn from the persons who saw him at Palteau that he was tall of stature; and an old physician, who had attended him at the Bastille when he was ill, described him (if we may credit Voltaire) as well made, of a brown complexion, and possessing an agreeable voice.He attended mass occasionally, and was forbid in his way there to speak to any one. The invalids were ordered to fire upon him if he disobeyed.147He is also said to have occupied himself a good deal during his confinement with playing on the guitar.148
These are all the particulars, worthy of credit, to be collected respecting Matthioli during his confinement at the Bastille, which lasted rather more than five years. He died there after a few hours’ illness, November 19th, 1703. Dujonca’s journal gives the following account of his decease and interment.
“Monday, 19th November, 1708. The unknown prisoner, who was always masked with a mask of black velvet, whom M. de St. Mars brought with him, when he came from the Islands of St Margaret, and whom he had had the care of for a long time, having found himself rather more unwell when he came out from mass, diedto-day, about ten o’clock in the evening, without having had any considerable illness. M. Girault, our chaplain, confessed him yesterday. Death having come suddenly on, he was not able to receive his sacraments, and our chaplain only had time to exhort him for a moment before he died. He was interred on Tuesday the 20th November, at four in the afternoon, in the church-yard of St. Paul, which is our parish. His interment cost forty livres.”
This extract is confirmed in its facts by the register of the Bastille,149as well as by the register of burials of the church of St. Paul, at Paris. The former document also informs us that he was wrapped in “a winding-sheet of new linen,”150—and the latter, that he was buried in the presence of Rosarges, Major of the Bastille, and of Reilh, Surgeon-Major of the same prison.
In the register of the church he is designated by the name of Marchialy, and his age is entered asforty-five; assertions which are both of them evidently incorrect, and probably only made in order to mislead the curious. At the time of his death, Matthioli was sixty-three years of age, as appears from the date of his birth before given. Shortly before he died, he told the Apothecary of the Bastille that he believed he was sixty years151old—a degree of inaccuracy as to his own age, which is easily to be conceived in a man who had been so long and so rigorously imprisoned. His confinement had lasted above twenty-four years.
After the decease of Matthioli, every thing was done to endeavour to destroy all trace even of his former existence. His clothes were burnt, as was all the furniture of his room; the silver plate, the copper, and the pewter, which had been used by him, were melted down; the walls of his chamber were first scraped, and then fresh white-washed; the floor was new paved; the old ceiling was taken away and renewed; the doors and windows wereburnt; and every corner was searched in which it was thought any paper, linen, or other memorial of him might be concealed.152
Thus were continued, to the very last, the same extraordinary precautions against discovery, which marked the whole imprisonment of the mysterious prisoner: a circumstance, which of itself certainly affords a strong confirmation of the fact, that theIron Mask of the Bastille, was one and the same person with theCount Matthioli, who had been so secretly introduced into Pignerol, and so mysteriously conveyed from place to place by St. Mars. But the actual proof of this is only to be found in the documents which form the groundwork of the preceding narrative; and which, undoubtedly, do present a most convincing and satisfactory chain of evidence upon the subject.
An important corroboration of this evidence is also derived from the well-attested fact, that Lewisthe Fifteenth, who is allowed, on all hands, to have known the history of the Iron Mask, affirmed, more than once, thathe was the minister of an Italian sovereign. He told the Duke de Choiseul,153on one occasion, that he knew who the Iron Mask was; and, upon the Duke’s questioning him further, would only add,that all the conjectures hitherto made upon the subject were erroneous.154The Dukethen begged Madame de Pompadour156to ask the King who it was; she did so, and his reply was, “The minister of an Italian prince!”157The Dukede Choiseul, unsatisfied by this reply, which he considered to be only an evasion, took another opportunity of again applying to the King upon the subject, who again answered, “He believed that the prisoner was a minister of one of the courts of Italy!”158
Thus has the ill-fated Matthioli been identified with the Iron Mask, and traced through his long and dreary prison to his grave. It is probable that much of the illusion and interest, which accompanied the mysterious appellation ofthe Iron Mask, will be destroyed by the certainty of who he really was; as well as by the comparative insignificance of the personage who has successfully laid claim to the title. Still it is surely satisfactory that truth, after being so long overwhelmed by error, should be at length triumphant.
The lovers of romance, who still wish to know more of the magnificent conjectures of former days; or who desire to be made acquainted with the reasons that induced a belief, that the Iron Mask was either the Duke de Beaufort; or the Count de Vermandois; or the Duke of Monmouth; or an elder or a twin-brother of Lewis the Fourteenth; or a son of Oliver Cromwell; or Arwediks, the Armenian Patriarch; are referred to Voltaire, Dutens, St. Foix, La Grange Chancel, Gibbon, the Père Papon, the Père Griffet, the Chevalier de Taulés, and Mr. Quintin Craufurd. Of these accounts, perhaps Voltaire’s is the least curious, find Mr. Craufurd’s the most so; because the first did not seek for truth, but only wished to invent a moving tale; while the latter was most anxious to arrive at the truth, and had all the advantage in his researches of the former writers upon the same subject.1“L’homme au masque de fer.”
The lovers of romance, who still wish to know more of the magnificent conjectures of former days; or who desire to be made acquainted with the reasons that induced a belief, that the Iron Mask was either the Duke de Beaufort; or the Count de Vermandois; or the Duke of Monmouth; or an elder or a twin-brother of Lewis the Fourteenth; or a son of Oliver Cromwell; or Arwediks, the Armenian Patriarch; are referred to Voltaire, Dutens, St. Foix, La Grange Chancel, Gibbon, the Père Papon, the Père Griffet, the Chevalier de Taulés, and Mr. Quintin Craufurd. Of these accounts, perhaps Voltaire’s is the least curious, find Mr. Craufurd’s the most so; because the first did not seek for truth, but only wished to invent a moving tale; while the latter was most anxious to arrive at the truth, and had all the advantage in his researches of the former writers upon the same subject.
1“L’homme au masque de fer.”
2M. Roux (Fazillac) published several of the documents, since republished by M. Delort, but he does not appear to have seen the whole series; and therefore his reasoning upon the subject is inconclusive. M. Delort has, however, copied a great deal from him in his narrative—whole sentences sometimes, word for word, without any acknowledgment of the plagiarism.
3Delort.
4The Abbé d’Estrades, Ambassador for a considerable time from Lewis the Fourteenth, to the Republic of Venice, was son of Godfrey, Count d’Estrades, so long employed in negociations and embassies in Holland, and who was one of the eight Marshals of France made upon the death of Turenne. Madame Cornuel called them, “La Monnoie de M. de Turenne.”
5Ferdinand Charles IV., Duke of Mantua, a weak and unfortunate Prince. Died July the 5th, 1708, as it is said of poison, administered by a lady he was in love with.
6Casale did not come into the possession of the French till 1681. In 1695, it was taken by the Allies, and its fortifications demolished. It was, however, retaken by the French, and fortified again. The King of Sardinia, (Victor Amadeus,) made himself master of it in 1706. His successor, Charles Emmanuel, lost it again to the French in 1745, but regained it the following year.
7The strong fort of Pignerol, acquired to the Crown of France by the negociations of Richelieu, continued in their possession for 68 years. In 1696, it was restored by treaty to Victor Amadeus II., Duke of Savoy; its fortifications having been previously dismantled.
8Victor Amadeus I., Duke of Savoy, a prince of great bravery and considerable talent. He married Christina, daughter of Henry IV., King of France, by whom he had two sons, Francis Hyacinth and Charles Emmanuel II., successively Dukes of Savoy. Died October 7th, 1637. He was the first Duke of Savoy, who appropriated to himself the title ofRoyal Highness.
9Isabella Clara, of Austria, daughter of the Archduke Leopold, who was grandson of the Emperor Ferdinand III. Married June 13th, 1649, to Charles III., Duke of Mantua.
10Appendix,No. 1.
11Appendix,No. 1.
12The Empress Eleanor was daughter of Charles, Duke of Rhetelois, who died in the life-time of his father, Charles I. Duke of Mantua, in spite of which he is generally denominated by historians, Charles II., Duke of Mantua. She became, on the 30th of April, 1651, the third wife of Ferdinand III., Emperor of Germany, whom she survived many years, and died December 5th, 1686. She was the aunt of Ferdinand Charles IV., Duke of Mantua.
13Thomas de la Cerda, Marquis of Laguna, in Spain, married April 22, 1672, to Maria Louisa, only daughter of Vespasian Gonzaga, only brother of Ferdinand III., the reigning Duke of Guastalla.
14The Monk Bulgarini appears to have been the confessor and favourite of the Duchess-mother of Mantua; and to have been entirely devoted to the Spanish interests.
15The profession of Giuliani was, that of an editor of newspapers, in which capacity he was in the habit of travelling from town to town, to collect and convey news. See Appendix,No. 98.
16Alphonso IV., Duke of Modena, succeeded his father Francis I. in his territories, and in the command in chief of the French army in Italy, in 1658. Died in the 29th year of his age, July 16, 1662, having married, May 27, 1655, Laura Martinozzi, niece of Cardinal Mazarin.
17Charles III., Duke of Mantua, father of Ferdinand Charles IV., the reigning Duke, had the command of the Imperial Army in Italy, and took upon himself the office of Vicar General of the Empire in Italy, during the interregnum which followed the death of the Emperor Ferdinand III. in 1657, in virtue of a diploma, lately granted to him by that Prince. His right was contested by the Duke of Savoy, who, upon the ground of old usage, claimed the office for himself. The Electors of the Empire annulled the appointment of the Duke of Mantua.
18Appendix,No. 1.
19Appendix,No. 1.
20Appendix,No. 1.
21Cæsar Bishop of Laon and Cardinal d’Estrées, son of the first Marshal of France of that name, was employed in various negociations with the Princes of Italy; but is now more remembered for his courtier-like reply to Lewis XIV. That Monarch one day at dinner complained of having lost all his teeth. “And who is there, Sire, that has any teeth?” said the Cardinal (Sire, et qui est-ce qui a des dents?) What made the flattery the more ludicrously gross was, that the Cardinal, though an old man, had remarkably fine teeth, and showed them very much whenever he opened his mouth.
22Appendix,No. 2.
23Appendix,No. 8.
241677.
25Simon Arnaud de Pomponne, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs from 1671 to 1679, when he was dismissed from his office, but retained the title of Minister of State, with permission to attend the Council. A man, like so many of his race, who united considerable talents to great excellence of character. Madame de Sévigné says, in speaking of the eminent station he had filled, that “Fortune had wished to make use of his virtues for the happiness of others.”
26Ferdinand III., Duke of Guastalla, descended from a younger branch of the House of Gonzaga; and the heir to the Duchy of Mantua, if he survived Ferdinand Charles; which however was not the case. He died of dropsy, January 11th, 1678.
27Anne Isabella, eldest daughter of Ferdinand III., Duke of Guastalla, married August 13th, 1671, to Ferdinand Charles IV., Duke of Mantua, by whom she had no offspring.
28This is evidently a mistake, and should be readnieceinstead ofsecond daughter. It alludes to Maria Louisa, only daughter of Vespasian Gonzaga, only brother of Ferdinand III., Duke of Guastalla, married to a Spanish nobleman, Thomas de la Cerda, Marquis of Laguna. At this time neither of the daughters of Ferdinand had children, andshe, consequently, after them, was the heiress of their claims upon the Duchies of Guastalla and Mantua. The second daughter of Ferdinand III., Maria Victoria, married June 30th, 1769, Vincent Gonzaga Count of St. Paul—the person who is here erroneously described as having been the means of marrying her to another person.
29Vincent Gonzaga, Count of St. Paul, afterwards Duke of Guastalla, was descended from a younger son of Ferrant II., first Duke of Guastalla. After contesting for many years his right to that Duchy with Ferdinand Charles IV., Duke of Mantua; during which they were both merely made use of, by turns, as the instruments of the French and Austrian domination; he was finally successful in establishing himself at Guastalla in 1706, where he died April 28th, 1714. By his wife, Maria Victoria, second daughter of Ferdinand III., Duke of Guastalla, he left two sons, who successively succeeded him in the sovereignty of that Duchy.
30Appendix,No. 9.
31Appendix,No. 10.
32Appendix,No. 17.
33Appendix,No. 18.
34Appendix,Nos. 24,28,29,31,33,34,35,36,39,40.
35Appendix,No. 47.
36Delort, quoting from an Italian manuscript, in the records of the office of the French Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, which appears to have been written by Giuliani.
37Delort, quoting from the same authority.
38M. Delort says the sum actually given to Matthioli, was 400 Doubles, and the sum promised him 400,000 Doubles, which, from its largeness, he conceives must be a mistake; but he adds that it is so written in the Italian manuscripts before referred to.
39Delort.
40Francis Michael Le Tellier, Marquis de Louvois, son of the Chancellor Le Tellier, Secretary of State for the War department, from 1666, to the time of his death, in 1691, which occurring suddenly, and just as he was on the point of being disgraced, gave occasion to a report that he was poisoned: for which, however, it appears there was no foundation. He was of a haughty and cruel disposition, and was the minister who planned and ordered the inhuman ravages of the Palatinate, which have so indelibly disgraced the reign of his master.
41Delort.
42Lewis Francis, Marquis and afterwards Duc de Boufflers, Marshal of France in 1693. Died in 1711. One of the best of Lewis the Fourteenth’s generals.
43Nicholas de Catinat, Marshal of France in 1698. “He united,” says Voltaire, “philosophy to great military talents. The last day he commanded in Italy, he gave for the watch-word, ‘Paris and St. Gratien,’ the name of his country house. He died there in the retirement of a real sage, (having refused the blue ribbon) in 1712.”
44Upon reference to the Mémoires de Catinat, published in 1819, this event is found to be thus adverted to:—“In 1679, Catinat was charged with some negociations with the Duke of Mantua; but the affair failed of success, in consequence of the treachery of the Secretary of that prince. Catinat, according to the King’s orders, was anxious to punish the traitor. He remained at Pignerol some days, and having engaged him in a hunting party, had him arrested.” It also appears from these Memoirs, that both Catinat and Boufflers were again despatched to Italy on the same errand, in 1681, when Casale was really given up to Lewis; and on this occasion, Louvois, in his instruction to Boufflers, mentions Matthioli by name, as the person whose treachery had prevented the success of the former negociation.
45Appendix,Nos. 52,62,64,73,76,77,78.
46I am not sure whether I am correct in imagining that this was the Marshal d’Asfeld, who distinguished himself at the battle of Almanza, and died at great old age, in 1743.
47Appendix,Nos. 52,54,55.
48Victor Amadeus II., at this time a minor, and under the Regency of his mother, Mary Jane de Nemours. In 1713, he became King of Sicily, which kingdom he was compelled to exchange for that of Sardinia, in 1720; abdicated the throne in favour of his son, in 1730; and died in 1732. This prince possessed in an eminent degree, the attributes of his race—valour and skill in military matters, and faithlessness in his treaties and engagements with his brother sovereigns.
49Leopold I. succeeded Ferdinand III. in 1657, died in 1705.
50Charles II. the last King of Spain of the House of Austria.—Died in 1700.
51Appendix,Nos. 68,69,89.
52See ante, note,page 18.
53Appendix,No. 66.
54Appendix,No. 68.
55Appendix,No. 67.
56Namely, of the delivery of Casale.