On November 19, 1703, a prisoner died in the Bastille, who went down in history as “a man in iron mask" The mask was actually made of velvet; legends made it iron. But they are still arguing about the personality hiding underneath it. Here are seven of the most unusual versions
This legend is the most popular and most often used in films. It was first voiced by Voltaire in his essay “The Age of Louis XIV”, and Dumas made it popular by addressing this topic in the novel “The Vicomte de Bragelonne”, which was filmed several times. According to legend, this double birth promised misfortune for the royal house, so Louis XIII ordered the twin prince to be raised secretly. And Louis XIV imprisoned his brother when he learned of his existence. The prisoner's amazing resemblance to the king was hidden by a mask that the prisoner had to wear without taking it off. Some historians agree on another version: the “Iron Mask” was not the twin of Louis XIV, but an illegitimate brother, the illegitimate son of Anne of Austria. Among the fathers it is suggested that Cardinal Mazarin, Duke of Buckingham.
When the Russian Tsar returned from the Grand Embassy to Amsterdam, rumors spread that he had been replaced there. Perhaps these suspicions were caused by Peter’s unexpected passion for Western culture, which he was so inflamed with upon returning from his trip. He forbade beards, ordered them to dress and dance in a foreign style, ordered everyone to drink coffee in the morning, and garlic and sauerkraut refuse... The legend says that he returned from Amsterdam greatly changed in appearance, spoke Russian poorly and did not recognize his acquaintances. Allegedly, this is why Sophia raised the archers against the impostor. But the real king was captured by the Jesuits, who hid his well-known face with a mask and placed him in the Bastille. At this time, the false Peter was destroying Russia from the inside, eradicating its originality and previous orders and hooking it on alcohol and tobacco... This version is considered the most fantastic - if only because it is refuted by documents with dates.
He is also Louis de Bourbon, son of Louis XIV and Louise Lavalliere. He ended up in prison allegedly for slapping his half-brother, the Grand Dauphin. However, this version is implausible, since the Comte de Vermandois died at the age of 16 while the Iron Mask's imprisonment continued. Another “related” version: the mysterious prisoner was a foreigner, a young nobleman, chamberlain to Queen Anne of Austria and the real father of Louis XIV. Also, supporters of this theory mention among the probable fathers of Louis XIV the captain of the cardinal's guard Francois Doget de Cavoye, the Prince of Condé and Cardinal Mazarin.
The cardinal himself was also a candidate for the title of “Iron Mask.” There is a version that a 12-year-old albino native was brought from the island of Polynesia to France, who, by a strange coincidence, looked exactly like Mazarin. The Duke de Gaulle noticed this similarity and replaced the minister. The impostor remained at court, and a mask was put on the real Mazarin and sent to prison... True, if you believe the documents, then at the time of his death Mazarin was 101 years old - it is unlikely that he could have lived such a long life in prison...
According to the documents, the masked man was allegedly buried under the name Marscioli, which is similar to the name of the minister Charles-Ferdinand of Mantua. He promised Louis XIV that he would convince his duke to give France the fortress of Casale - he just needed funds, and this deal could be useful to both. For this, Matiolli received 100,000 crowns and expensive gifts, but betrayed this secret deal to Savoy, Spain and Austria. Then the French government lured him to its territory, seized incriminating documents, and imprisoned the traitor in the Bastille.
WITH youth he took part in the wars, but fell into disgrace: Anna of Austria, who had tender feelings for the duke, nevertheless preferred Mazarin, and Beaufort began to be jealous. He entered into one of the most notorious conspiracies against Mazarin, was imprisoned in the Vincennes castle, but fled from there. However, later he reconciled with royal power, began to command the French fleet, and carried out several important military expeditions on behalf of the king. He died in one of the naval battles, but since the Duke’s body was not found, he was considered missing and became another candidate for the role of the “Iron Mask.” True, this version is completely refuted.
Over time, a kind of rivalry has emerged among historians: who can come up with the most original candidate for the role of the “Iron Mask”. This is how the assumption about Moliere appeared - not documented by anything, but covered with a tinge of sensation. According to one version, the playwright went to jail for an incestuous marriage with his daughter. And some interpreted the story with Nicolas Fouquet in their own way, making Moliere the main character. As this story with Fouquet says, he tried to compete with the king, for which he ended up in prison, but Louis was afraid of powerful friends, so he hid the superintendent in prisons. Fouquet was also suspected of being a mysterious prisoner, but historians have proven that this assumption is wrong, although Fouquet's imprisonment actually took place.
* The staged tragedy called “Streltsy Riot” was fatally inevitable. Its cause was not only the actions of the conspirators, who were preparing the return of Princess Sophia, announcing, almost immediately after the departure of Tsar Peter, that he had been replaced with a non-Mech. Romodanovsky, who acted as Prince Caesar, understood that the return of the Streltsy army to Moscow would lead to a rebellion, and therefore, as best he could, he prevented their return, which also strengthened the existing disturbances.
** The relationship with Anna Mons, who in fact has always been Lefort's mistress, was invented (intentionally?) by rumor. Although the king gave royal gifts to her family for some services. The proof of this is that upon returning from abroad and sending her wife into exile, Anna Mons does not enjoy his attention, and after the sudden death of young Lefort, Anna Mons is completely under house arrest. Since 1703, Catherine has been living with the “tsar”.
***There is an assumption that the death of P. Gordon and Peter’s “friend” young Lefort, upon returning from the Great Embassy, which occurred almost simultaneously in 1699, happened because “Peter the Great” or his secret patrons wanted to get rid of the guardianship of those , who contributed to his penetration into the Moscow throne.
On September 18, 1698, a mysterious prisoner, known in world history under the code name “Iron Mask,” was transferred to the Bastille. Who this unknown but famous prisoner was, we can only guess and rely on the long-worn phrase that the secret, sooner or later, nevertheless becomes apparent. However, 316 years have passed since that time, but the mystery of the “Iron Mask” remains a mystery for us, covered in the darkness of the unknown. And yet, there are still people in the world who are trying to look behind the historical screen of the past and tear off the mask from the mysterious prisoner in order to find out not only his name, but also possible reasons imprisonment of a prisoner in the Bastille, infamous for all centuries. Let us try to make a small contribution to this more than three centuries-old “investigation” and silence and at least speculate about those historical events, which then took place not only in “civilized” Europe, but also in “godlessly backward” Russia.
From history we know about the Great Embassy of 1697-1698. This period is famous for the fact that from Russia, where drunkenness was considered a sin and was subject to punishment, leaving his beloved wife, Queen Evdokia, but corresponding with her and remaining on excellent terms with his mentor Gordon and friend Lefort, Peter the Great went abroad “incognito”. He travels under the name Mikhailov. And he is going to Europe, it should be noted, at the suggestion of Gordon and Lefort.
When reading this preamble, an inquisitive reader may immediately have at least one rhetorical question: “Why was the trip of Peter the Great, which happened in the period from 1697 to 1698, called the Great Embassy, if he went to Europe incognito under the name Mikhailov?” In addition, we know that Peter the Great was young - at that time he was 26 years old, and he was quite healthy, there was a mole on his cheek. The courtier amazed his interlocutors with his education; he knew mathematics, astronomy, and military engineering. The young Tsar was surrounded by a team consisting exclusively of Russians...
Two years later (in 1698), Peter the Great returned to Russia taller, looked at least 10 years older than his age, without a mole, suffered from chronic tropical fever, spoke terribly poorly in Russian and wrote in Latin. Unlike Peter, who left, he amazed those around him with his lack of education and ignorance. Moreover, he returned with an embassy team consisting of only foreigners (except Menshikov). Meanwhile, in the Bastille in 1698, the “Iron Mask” appears, under the name Marchiel. In the French film of the same name, a version was shown about one of the illegitimate sons of Louis IV.
After returning home, Peter never put on the royal clothes and crown, since the king who left was shorter and denser than the king who arrived. Upon arrival, Peter did not allow his wife, who bore him 3 sons, to approach him (the third of them, presumably, Pavel). He also did not allow all members of the household who knew the tsar well before his “Great Embassy” to Europe. He immediately sent his wife Evdokia to a monastery.
What happened next? And then the following happened: friend Lefort and mentor Gordon suddenly died, children Alexander, (Natalia and Lavrenty - information is contradictory) - were killed, Alexey was later sentenced to execution. Next, we should remind readers of the famous film by director Leonid Gaidai in the 1970s, “Ivan Vasilyevich Changes His Profession,” based on the work of Mikhail Bulgakov. Remember how the heroes of the film Bunsha (Yu. Yakovlev) and George Miloslavsky (L. Kuravlev) were chased by the archers, recognizing the king as an impostor and a demon? This scene, albeit distantly, is reminiscent of the mutiny of the Streltsy (the king is not real) and the hanging of Queen Sophia. Let us briefly recall these distant events. In March 1698, 175 archers from 4 archery regiments that participated in the Azov campaigns of Peter I of 1695-1696 appeared in Moscow, urgently summoned by Princess Sofia Alekseevna. Sofya Alekseevna claimed that Peter I was not her brother, which means that during his 2-year departure to Europe a substitution occurred. They arrived to protect the princess. An attempt by the Moscow authorities to arrest their petitioners for conspiracy in Moscow failed. The Sagittarius took refuge in the settlements and established contact with Princess Sofia Alekseevna, who was imprisoned in Novodevichy Convent; On April 4, 1698, soldiers of the Semenovsky regiment were sent against the Streltsy, who, with the assistance of the townspeople, “knocked out” the rebellious Streltsy from the capital. The archers returned to their regiments, in which fermentation then began. On June 6, the archers removed their commanders, elected 4 electors in each regiment and headed towards Moscow. The rebels (2,200 people) intended to enthrone Princess Sophia or, in case of her refusal, V.V. Golitsyn, who was in exile. The government sent the Preobrazhensky, Semenovsky, Lefortovo and Butyrsky regiments (about 4,000 people), as well as noble cavalry under the command of A.S., against the archers. Shein, General P. Gordon and Lieutenant General Prince I.M. Koltsov-Mosalsky. It is noteworthy that in the battle at the Resurrection Monastery, the government participated in the troops commanded by foreigners General P. Gordon, Major Nikolai von Salm, Colonel I.I. Angler, Colonel Yu.S. Lim, Colonel de Grage. The Streltsy were defeated and then executed. Peter the Great personally cut off the heads of five of them.
Then there was a “circumcision” of the All-Light Reading to the level of the ABC of 1700, the genocide of the peoples of Siberia and Far East, the imposition of serfdom, and vodka, tobacco and... debauchery appeared in Russia. Under pain of execution, all written documents and books were collected, and no one else saw them. Many elders were killed, almost all Spiritual places were destroyed Western Siberia, along with the walls, China and part of Turkestan were irretrievably lost, the Great Silk Roads stopped working. Greedy foreigners flooded our land, an abundance of Masonic lodges and the Jesuit Order appeared in the country. In connection with all this, some researchers view the uprising of Emelyan Pugachev not as a rebellion, but as a civil war for the succession to the throne of the true king against the heirs of the emperor, who received the nickname “Antichrist” from the people.
The reader may have a question addressed directly to the author of these lines: why was this article written? In order to disrupt some dividends? No, I assure you. The best dividends for me are if the implausible, but true truth, having passed through the labyrinths of forbidden Russian people archives of the special services, will come out one day, and then we will understand why all these years they have been “drilling into us” the idea of the “backwardness” of Russia and the civilization of the “enlightened” West. We will also understand why people in Russia still live, if not below the poverty line, then at least much worse (materially) than people in developed countries. Western countries the so-called golden billion. There is no smoke without fire, says the Russian proverb, and therefore we can assume that the version that during the so-called Great Embassy, the real Russian Tsar was replaced by a fake one, has the right to live. In any case, until all the circumstances directly related to this are revealed. History keeps many secrets.
Vasily Veikki
Reviews
Reasoning of an amateur. During the great embassy, a truce was concluded with Ottoman Empire for 2 years, a 40,000-strong army was sent to the Polish borders and Augustus II was placed on the Polish throne instead of the “pro-French” de Conti. Moreover, France advocated war with Turkey. Another consequence of the embassy is the war for the Baltic. This is just what I remember offhand. Direct Russian interference in European politics. Europe, judging by this article, is its own enemy. The majority of the embassy returned completely. Because of the Streltsy revolt, Peter hastily returned to Russia in a separate group. The second part of the embassy returned later. I note that the mutiny of the archers began earlier than Peter’s return, and not as indicated in the article. One gets the feeling that the article has an ordered tone or that the author is uneducated.
Not alone. Agree. But this is not an argument. Currently, history is filtered through the prism of alternative versions. And there are thousands of great historians who are far from science. There are even more versions. Only knowledge - zero. It is much easier to come up with a fairy tale than to collect information and conduct analysis.
Summer 1669 François-Michel Letellier, Marquis de Louvois, King's Minister of War Louis XIV, sent a letter to Benin Dauvern de Saint-Mars, the head of the Pignerol prison. The letter informed him of the prisoner's imminent arrival. The head of the prison was instructed to prepare a cell for the prisoner's arrival that had several doors that closed one after another - this was supposed to separate the prisoner from the jailers and other prisoners, even at the sound level. The minister ordered that Saint-Mars visit the new prisoner once a day to fulfill his requests related to various everyday issues, but not to discuss other topics with him.
According to the letter, the prisoner's name was "Estan Doge". However, researchers note that this name was entered into the document in a different handwriting. It seems very likely that “Estan Doge” is nothing more than a fictitious name for the mysterious prisoner.
The Pignerol prison at that time was a place where state criminals were kept. For example, by the time Estan Doge arrived, the former superintendent of finance of France had already been in Pignerol for five years Nicolas Fouquet, sentenced to life imprisonment for embezzlement of public funds.
The difference between “Doge” and other prisoners was that he wore a velvet mask, which was supposed to ensure his complete anonymity. And so it happened - no one managed to find out who exactly was hiding under the mask.
Bénigne Dauvern de Saint-Mars remained the jailer of the Doge until the death of the prisoner. Saint-Mars was transferred from one duty station to another, and the mysterious prisoner followed him.
In 1698, Saint-Mars became warden of the Bastille, and the prisoner was placed in the third cell of the Berthaudiere Tower.
The prisoner died on November 19, 1703 and was buried under the name "Marchioly". All his belongings and, in general, everything connected with him were destroyed after his death.
Seven decades later, a philosopher fueled interest in the prisoner Francois-Marie Arouet, better known as Voltaire. In his opinion, the unfortunate man wore an iron mask, which immediately added additional drama and mystery to this story.
Finally turned "Iron Mask" into a cult character Alexandre Dumas the father, who made the prisoner’s story one of the central lines of the novel “The Vicomte de Bragelonne, or Ten Years After.”
Subsequent novels and then film adaptations led many to believe that Iron Mask was a fictional character. But, as already mentioned, its existence is documented.
The second half of the 17th century was a time not distinguished by particular humanism. Two decades before the appearance of the mysterious prisoner in Pignerol in England, the king lost his head on the scaffold Charles I. And the heads of persons of lesser rank, convicted of crimes or simply falling out of favor, flew from under the executioner’s ax throughout Europe.
The French authorities undoubtedly considered the “Iron Mask” extremely dangerous. But, despite this, they did not execute him, preferring to keep him in prison for many years, hiding his face. Who could the prisoner be?
In December 1741, daughter Petra I Elizaveta Petrovna dethroned the emperor John VI. The monarch was not even one and a half years old at that time.
Elizaveta Petrovna did not take the sin of murdering a royal person into her soul. Young John was taken into custody, and in the country it was forbidden to even mention the name of the little king.
Since 1756, John VI was kept in solitary confinement in the Shlisselburg fortress. His name was not mentioned; in the documents he appeared as an “unnamed prisoner” or “a well-known prisoner.”
A secret order ordered the jailers assigned to John to kill him if he attempted to be released. This is what happened in 1764, during the reign of Catherine II during a failed coup attempt by Second Lieutenant Vasily Mirovich.
If we put a virtual mask on John VI for a second, we will get almost one hundred percent similarity with the French events.
This is probably why the most common version is the one according to which the “Iron Mask” belonged to the royal family.
Of course, she did not give birth to her husband’s children during the first 23 years of marriage! The future Louis XIV was born when Anne of Austria was 37 years old. By the standards of that era, this is not just late, but very late.
Voltaire assumed that before Louis XIV, Anne became pregnant and did not give birth to the king. The child was secretly raised by trusted persons. When Louis XIV became an adult, he considered his brother a threat to the throne and ordered him to be imprisoned in a fortress, keeping his identity a secret.
The starting point of this hypothesis is again the fact of the late birth of a child from Queen Anne of Austria. But supporters of this version believe that the “Sun King” Louis XIV himself was the illegitimate child.
Researchers believe that King Louis XIII suffered from infertility. The absence of an heir threatened the stability of France. As a result, with the knowledge of Louis XIII, someone was found, possibly having distant family ties with a royal surname. From this “donor” Anna of Austria conceived an heir.
Later, they decided to imprison the real father of the new king in order to ensure that the secret was not revealed.
A favorite plot of writers and filmmakers, starting with Alexandre Dumas. So, the queen gives birth to her legitimate husband, but not one, but two boys are born. The twin princes immediately turn into big problem, in the future threatening turmoil and civil war. It was decided to get rid of the extra contender for the throne, but no one dares to kill a person of royal blood. The unfortunate boy faces life imprisonment and a mask that hides his striking resemblance to his brother, who is destined to be king.
This hypothesis takes us to the youth of the “Sun King”, when in his inner circle there was Henrietta of England, youngest daughter of the executed English King Charles I.
Henrietta was Louis XIV's cousin, which did not prevent her from being considered as a bride for the king at one time.
The marriage did not take place, but at court they claimed that an affair between the young people took place. Henrietta became the wife of Louis's younger brother, Philippe d'Orléans, however, the daughter she gave birth to was considered the child of the king.
According to supporters of this hypothesis, Henrietta also had a son from Louis XIV. Despite the fact that he was illegitimate, his origin made it possible to lay claim to both the English and French crowns. Therefore, in order to avoid political complications, when the young men reached adulthood, he was imprisoned in a fortress, forever covering his face with a mask.
Oddly enough, the Russian reformer Tsar was also among those who were included in the list of candidates for the role of the “Iron Mask”.
In 1697, Peter I went to Europe as part of the “Great Embassy”. At the same time, the tsar followed incognito, under the name of a sergeant of the Preobrazhensky regiment Petra Mikhailov.
Soon rumors began to circulate in Russia that the tsar was killed or kidnapped abroad, and his place was taken by a double sent by the Europeans. Opponents of Peter I, spreading these rumors, argued that the reforms begun by the tsar were in fact the machinations of foreign enemies.
Supporters of the version point out that the period of the end of the “Great Embassy” (1698) coincides with the time of the appearance of the “Iron Mask” in the Bastille.
But this hypothesis is absolutely untenable, since, as is known from documents, a masked prisoner appeared in Pignerol back in 1669 - three years before the birth of Pyotr Alekseevich.
In total, there are at least fifty characters that are proposed for the role of the “Iron Mask” - from the rather banal, such as a certain criminal who committed a particularly serious crime, to the completely exotic, like the black son of the Empress of the Holy Roman Empire Maria Theresa, born by her from a black page.
It is possible that it will never be possible to reliably establish the identity of the mysterious prisoner. But people will not stop guessing and guessing. As well as making more and more films about the “Iron Mask”.
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, at the end of the 18th 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 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 illegitimate son 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 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 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'.
