The Valets Tragedy | Page 8

and punishment were perfectly well
known to students of politics. He has been regarded as the mysterious
Man in the Iron Mask, but, for years after his arrest, he was the least
mysterious of State prisoners.
*Brentano, op. cit. p. 117.
Here, then, is Mattioli in Pignerol in May 1679. While Fouquet then
enjoyed relative freedom, while Lauzun schemed escapes or made
insulting love to Mademoiselle Fouquet, Mattioli lived on the bread
and water of affliction. He was threatened with torture to make him
deliver up some papers compromising to Louis XIV. It was expressly
commanded that he should have nothing beyond the barest necessaries
of life. He was to be kept dans la dure prison. In brief, he was used no
better than the meanest of prisoners. The awful life of isolation, without
employment, without books, without writing materials, without sight or
sound of man save when Saint-Mars or his lieutenant brought food for
the day, drove captives mad.
In January 1680 two prisoners, a monk* and one Dubreuil, had become
insane. By February 14, 1680, Mattioli was daily conversing with God
and his angels. 'I believe his brain is turned,' says Saint- Mars. In March
1680, as we saw, Fouquet died. The prisoners, not counting Lauzun

(released soon after), were now five: (1) Mattioli (mad); (2) Dubreuil
(mad); (3) The monk (mad); (4) Dauger, and (5) La Riviere. These two,
being employed as valets, kept their wits. On the death of Fouquet,
Louvois wrote to Saint-Mars about the two valets. Lauzun must be
made to believe that they had been set at liberty, but, in fact, they must
be most carefully guarded IN A SINGLE CHAMBER. They were shut
up in one of the dungeons of the 'Tour d'en bas.' Dauger had recently
done something as to which Louvois writes: 'Let me know how Dauger
can possibly have done what you tell me, and how he got the necessary
drugs, as I cannot suppose that you supplied him with them' (July 10,
1680).**
*A monk, who may have been this monk, appears in the following
essay.
**Lair, Nicholas Foucquet, ii. pp. 476, 477.
Here, then, by July 1680, are the two valets locked in one dungeon of
the 'Tour d'en bas.' By September Saint-Mars had placed Mattioli, with
the mad monk, in another chamber of the same tower. He writes:
'Mattioli is almost as mad as the monk,' who arose from bed and
preached naked. Mattioli behaved so rudely and violently that the
lieutenant of Saint-Mars had to show him a whip, and threaten him
with a flogging. This had its effect. Mattioli, to make his peace, offered
a valuable ring to Blainvilliers. The ring was kept to be restored to him,
if ever Louis let him go free--a contingency mentioned more than once
in the correspondence.
Apparently Mattioli now sobered down, and probably was given a
separate chamber and a valet; he certainly had a valet at Pignerol later.
By May 1681 Dauger and La Riviere still occupied their common
chamber in the 'Tour d'en bas.' They were regarded by Louvois as the
most important of the five prisoners then at Pignerol. They, not Mattioli,
were the captives about whose safe and secret keeping Louis and
Louvois were most anxious. This appears from a letter of Louvois to
Saint-Mars, of May 12, 1681. The gaoler, Saint-Mars, is to be
promoted from Pignerol to Exiles. 'Thither,' says Louvois, 'the king
desires to transport SUCH OF YOUR PRISONERS AS HE THINKS

TOO IMPORTANT TO HAVE IN OTHER HANDS THAN YOURS.'
These prisoners are 'THE TWO IN THE LOW CHAMBER OF THE
TOWER,' the two valets, Dauger and La Riviere.
From a letter of Saint-Mars (June 1681) we know that Mattioli was not
one of these. He says: 'I shall keep at Exiles two birds (merles) whom I
have here: they are only known as THE GENTRY OF THE LOW
ROOM IN THE TOWER; MATTIOLI MAY STAY ON HERE AT
PIGNEROL WITH THE OTHER PRISONERS' (Dubreuil and the mad
monk). It is at this point that Le Citoyen Roux (Fazaillac), writing in
the Year IX. of the Republic (1801), loses touch with the secret.* Roux
finds, in the State Papers, the arrival of Eustache Dauger at Pignerol in
1669, but does not know who he is, or what is his quality. He sees that
the Mask must be either Mattioli, Dauger, the monk, one Dubreuil, or
one Calazio. But, overlooking or not having access to the letter of
Saint-Mars of June 1681, Roux holds that the prisoners taken to Les
Exiles were the monk and Mattioli. One of these must be the Mask, and
Roux votes for Mattioli. He is wrong. Mattioli beyond all doubt
remained at Pignerol.
*Recherches Historiques, sur l'Homme au Masque de Fer, Paris. An IX.
Mountains of argument