# E. 1669: the arrest of "Eustache Dauger" and the question of his identity

Research dossier. Compiled from the OCR editions in
`sources/` (cited below by short name and page)
and from the web sources listed at each point. Conventions: **[DOC]** = wording of a
seventeenth-century document as printed in a named edition; **[CLAIM]** = a scholar's
assertion; **[ASSESSMENT]** = my own judgement. Page numbers are those printed in the
editions; where the OCR did not preserve them the position in the text file is given
instead. Section 6 lists what I could not find or read.

Editions used most (all in the sources folder):

- Roux-Fazillac, *Recherches historiques et critiques sur l'homme au masque de fer*
  (Paris, Valade, an IX = 1801): `rouxfazillac1801_recherches_masque_de_fer_numelyo_epub.txt`
  (Numelyo EPUB text; page markers mostly lost in OCR).
- Delort, *Histoire de la détention des philosophes et des gens de lettres à la
  Bastille et à Vincennes*, t. I (Paris, 1829): `delort1829_detention_philosophes_vol1.txt`
  (archive.org `histoiredeladte05delogoog`, https://archive.org/details/histoiredeladte05delogoog).
- Delort, *Histoire de l'homme au masque de fer* (1825): `delort1825_histoire_homme_masque_de_fer.txt`.
- Iung, *La Vérité sur le Masque de fer (les Empoisonneurs)* (1873): `iung1873_verite_masque_de_fer.txt`.
- Topin, *L'Homme au masque de fer* (1883 ed.): `topin1883_homme_au_masque_de_fer.txt`.
- Lair, *Nicolas Foucquet*, t. II (1890): `lair1890_nicolas_foucquet_vol2.txt`.
- Ravaisson, *Archives de la Bastille*, t. VII (1665–1674): `ravaisson_archives_bastille_vol07_1681_1665-1674.txt`.
- Lang, *The Valet's Tragedy* (1903): `lang1903_valets_tragedy_gutenberg2073.txt`
  (Project Gutenberg #2073, https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2073).
- Barnes, *The Man of the Mask* (1908): `barnes1908_man_of_the_mask.txt`.
- Laloy, *Le Masque de fer: Jacques de La Cloche, l'abbé Prignani, Roux de Marsilly*
  (1913): `laloy1913_masque_de_fer_lacloche_prignani_marsilly.txt`.
- Cartwright, *Madame: a life of Henrietta, daughter of Charles I* (1894):
  `cartwright1894_madame_life_of_henrietta.txt` (archive.org `cu31924074445564`).
- Mignet, *Négociations relatives à la succession d'Espagne*, t. III–IV:
  `mignet_negociations_succession_espagne_vol3-4.txt` (archive.org `ngociationsrel03mignuoft`).
- Mongrédien, "Deux documents inédits sur le Masque de fer", *XVIIe siècle* nos 17–18
  (1953): `mongredien1953_xviie_siecle_17-18.txt`.
- Noone, *The Man behind the Iron Mask* (1988), chapters 2, 8, 9, 11–14 as HTML copies from
  erenow.org (e.g. https://erenow.org/biographies/the-man-behind-the-iron-mask/8.php and
  `.../13.php`); working copies are not included in this folder. Page numbers of the printed
  book are not recoverable from these copies; chapter numbers are cited instead.
- Madry, "The Valet: The Marquis de Louvois's Invited Guest", *Cahiers du dix-septième*
  17 (2016) 1–27: `madry2016_valet_cahiers17.pdf` (text extracted to `madry2016_valet_cahiers17.txt`).

---

## Part 1. The name and the arrest record

### 1.1 Which documents carry the name, and in what form

| Date | Document | Archive reference as printed | Name form | Printed in |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19 July 1669 | Louvois to Saint-Mars, Saint-Germain-en-Laye | Arch. nat. K 120, no. 67 (Lair 1890 t. II p. 453 n.); "K 120 A" (Laloy 1913 p. 102 n.) | "le nommé Eustache d'Auger" | Delort 1829 t. I pp. 155–157 (OCR lines 6103–6150); Laloy 1913 pp. 102–103; Lair prints "Dauger"; Iung 1873 prints "le nommé X..." |
| 28 July 1669 | King to Vauroy (order to arrest and conduct) | Dépôt de la guerre, vol. 234, p. 272 (Iung 1873 p. 187 n.); folios 271/272/274 of vol. 234 (Laloy p. 103) | blank ("le nommé ....") | Iung 1873 pp. 187–188 (OCR lines 9127–9150); Laloy p. 103 |
| 28 July 1669 | King to Saint-Mars (and to the governor, Piennes) | vol. 234, p. 274 (Iung) | blank | Iung 1873 p. 188 |
| 21 August 1669 | Saint-Mars to Louvois (acknowledgement) | not given by Roux-Fazillac; Laloy p. 104 dates it 21 August | "le nommé Eustache d'Auger" | Roux-Fazillac 1801, pièces (OCR lines 3380–3392, c. pp. 103–104); Laloy p. 104 |
| 31 August 1669 | Saint-Mars to Louvois ("du dernier août") | — | no name ("ce prisonnier") | Roux-Fazillac, pièces; Laloy p. 104 |
| 10 September 1669 | Louvois to Saint-Mars | K 120, 68 (Lair) | "vostre nouveau prisonnier" | Delort 1829 t. I p. 157 |
| 25 September 1669 | Louvois to Saint-Mars | K 120, 69 (Lair) | "le prisonnier" | Delort 1829 t. I p. 158 |
| 26 March 1670 | Louvois to Saint-Mars | — | "le prisonnier qui vous a été amené par le major de Dunkerque" | Laloy p. 105; Roux-Fazillac marginal note |
| 12 April 1670 | Saint-Mars to Louvois | — | "le prisonnier amené par le major de Dunkerque" ("contes jaunes") | Roux-Fazillac p. 24; Lair t. II p. 455 |
| 30 Jan and 2 March 1675 | Louvois to Saint-Mars | — | "le prisonnier que le sieur de Vauroy vous a conduit / amené" | Delort 1829 t. I pp. 233–234 |
| 1679 instruction (Fouquet–Lauzun visits) | Louvois to Saint-Mars | — | "le nommé Eustache", "le dit Eustache" | Delort 1829 t. I pp. 284–285 |
| 15 Feb 1679 | Louvois to Saint-Mars | vol. 618, p. 265 (Iung) | "le nommé Eustache Danger" | Iung 1873; Delort 1829 t. I c. p. 287 ("Eu stache Danger", OCR line 11327) |
| 8 April 1680 | Louvois to Saint-Mars | AN K 120 no. 302 (masque-de-fer.com transcription) | "le nommé Eustache Dauger et ledit La Rivière" (Iung); "les nommés Eustache d'Angers (sic), et ledit la Rivière" (Dabos's transcription from the original, http://www.masque-de-fer.com/ressources/lettre-du-8-avril-1680/) | Iung 1873; Dabos |
| 10 July 1680 | Louvois to Saint-Mars | — | "le nommé Eustache" (the "drogues" letter) | Delort 1825 p. 261 (OCR line 9615) |

**[DOC]** The letter of 19 July 1669 as printed by Delort 1829, t. I, pp. 155–156
(spelling of the edition; OCR corrected only for obvious breaks):

> A Saint-Germain en Laye, ce 19 juillet 1669. Monsieur, Le Roy m'ayant comandé de faire
> conduire à Pignerol le nommé Eustache d'Auger, il est de la dernière importance à son
> service qu'il soit gardé avec une grande seureté, et qu'il ne puisse donner de ses
> nouvelles en nulle manière, ni par lettres à qui que ce soit. Je vous en donne advis par
> advance, afin que vous puissiez faire accomoder un cachot où vous le mettrez seurement,
> observant de faire en sorte que les jours qu'aura le lieu où il sera, ne donnent point
> sur des lieux qui puissent estre abordez de personne, et qu'il y ayt assez de portes
> fermées, les unes sur les autres, pour que vos sentinelles ne puissent rien entendre. Il
> faudra que vous portiez vous mesme à ce misérable, une fois le jour, de quoy vivre toute
> la journée, et que vous n'escoutiez jamais, soubs quelque prétexte que ce puisse estre,
> ce qu'il voudra vous dire, le menaçant tousjours de le faire mourir s'il vous ouvre
> jamais la bouche pour vous parler d'autre chose que de ses nécessités. Je mande au sieur
> Poupart de faire incessamment travailler à ce que vous désirerez, et vous ferez préparer
> les meubles qui sont nécessaires pour la vie de celui que l'on vous amènera, observant
> que, comme ce n'est qu'un valet, il ne luy en faut pas de bien considérables, et je vous
> feray rembourser tant de la déspense des meubles, que de ce que vous désirerez pour sa
> nourriture. Je suis, monsieur, Vostre très affectionné serviteur, De Louvois.

Translation of the key sentences: "The King having commanded me to have the man named
Eustache d'Auger conducted to Pignerol, it is of the last importance to his service that
he be guarded with great security and that he be unable to give news of himself in any
manner, nor by letters to anyone... have a dungeon fitted up in which you will put him
securely, taking care that the windows of the place where he is do not give on to places
that can be approached by anyone, and that there be enough doors closing one upon
another that your sentries can hear nothing... threatening him always with death if he
ever opens his mouth to speak to you of anything but his needs... as he is only a valet,
he does not need very considerable [furniture]."

**[DOC]** The name "Eustache" appears in later letters with the surname spelt Danger
(15 Feb 1679; Delort 1829 c. p. 287), Dauger (Iung's reading of 8 April 1680), d'Angers
(Dabos's reading of the same 8 April 1680 original, AN K 120 no. 302), and alone
("le nommé Eustache", 1679 instruction and 10 July 1680).

### 1.2 Spelling in the successive editions

- **Roux-Fazillac 1801** (first printing, from the war-office papers): "il se nommoit
  Eustache d'Auger" (p. 23–24, OCR line 1118) and, in the pièces, "M. de Vauroy a remis
  entre mes mains le nommé Eustache d'Auger" (OCR lines 3383–3384). Ellis 1826 states his
  documents are "Extracted from the work of M. Roux (Fazillac)" (`ellis1826_true_history_state_prisoner.txt`).
- **Delort 1829**, t. I p. 155: "le nommé Eustache d'Auger" (19 July 1669). Delort 1825
  had printed only the later "le nommé Eustache" letters (p. 261). The claim in the
  parent brief that Delort 1825 printed "Eustache Dauger" is not supported by the 1825
  OCR: the 1669 letters were first printed by Roux-Fazillac (1801) and re-edited from
  AN K 120 by Delort in 1829. Lair 1890 t. II p. 453 n. cites "Delort, Détention, t. I,
  p. 155" as the printed source of the 19 July letter.
- **Topin 1870 / 1883**: "Eustache d'Auger", "amené le 20 août 1669" (1883 ed. p. 307,
  OCR lines 12258–12259; also pp. 64–65, OCR lines 2794–2795: "Le 20 août 1669 arrive à
  Pignerol un second prisonnier, Eustache d'Auger").
- **Iung 1873**, chapter title (p. 187): "IV. Eustache Dauger, Danger ou d'Angers. Ordre
  d'entrée, 28 juillet 1669. — Mort à Pignerol en janvier 1694." Iung prints the 19 July
  letter with "le nommé X..." because he worked from the war-office minutes in which
  the name was left blank (Laloy's correction below). Iung's erratum quotes Topin:
  "Eustache Dauger, amené le 20 août 1669".
- **Lair 1890**, t. II pp. 453–455: "le nommé Eustache Dauger", with the note: « Le nom
  se lit de manières différentes: Danger, Dauger, d'Anger, d'Auger, d'Angers » and the
  judgement « Tout porte à croire qu'il s'appelait réellement Eustache Danger »
  ("Everything suggests that his real name was Eustache Danger").
- **Laloy 1913**, pp. 102–103: "le nommé Eustache d'Auger", with the footnote that the
  original is in AN K 120 A (the "cartons des Rois", a collection formed from
  Saint-Mars's papers, incomplete after 1681); that Iung and Barnes were wrong to say a
  copy is in Archives de la guerre vol. 234 p. 272 (that folio is the minute of the order
  to Piennes); and: « ils impriment le nommé...; l'ordre porte: le nommé Eustache
  d'Auger ». Laloy p. 103: « Le nom du prisonnier, laissé en blanc dans les minutes des
  trois documents du 28 juillet, est écrit Eustache d'Auger dans ceux du 19 juillet et du
  21 août » ("The prisoner's name, left blank in the minutes of the three documents of 28
  July, is written Eustache d'Auger in those of 19 July and 21 August"). Laloy p. 104:
  « C'est évidemment un surnom qui lui fut donné à son entrée en prison » ("It is
  evidently a nickname given to him on his entry into prison").
- **Petitfils 1970 / 2004**: reads "Danger" and holds that the "u" of "Dauger" is a
  misreading of "n" (en.wikipedia, "Man in the Iron Mask", citing Petitfils 2004 pp. 47,
  151; Noone ch. 13: "His name was Danger or d'Angers, as Petitfils maintained back in
  1970"; Noone ch. 12 quotes Petitfils: "It is because of a reading error made by the
  first investigators that the majority of historians... have called him Eustache
  Dauger"). I did not read Petitfils's own pages (see Section 6).
- **Caire 1987/1989**: Bernard Caire, "Eustache et son secret", in *Il y a trois siècles,
  le Masque de fer. Actes du Colloque international, Cannes, 12–13 septembre 1987*
  (Cannes, 1989), pp. 1–6 — the reference as given by en.wikipedia (`{{sfn|Caire|1989|pp=1–6}}`)
  and Wilkinson 2021 pp. 238–239. Caire's thesis as reported by Noone ch. 13 n. 1 and
  Wikipedia: "Eustache" is the surname and "Danger" / "d'Angers" a place-suffix
  (Angers). Noone ch. 13: "at the International Symposium on the Iron Mask held in
  Cannes in 1987, Bernard Caire removed all remaining doubt on the matter with an
  analysis of the handwriting of the original warrants and dispatches." I could not
  obtain the Actes (see Section 6).
- **Dabos (masque-de-fer.com)** reads "Eustache Danger" in Saint-Mars's letter and
  "Eustache d'Angers" in the 8 April 1680 original, and treats the name as a pseudonym
  « probablement inventé par Louvois » (http://www.masque-de-fer.com/enquete/les-protagonistes-de-laffaire/).
- **Sonnino 2016** and **Madry 2016** write "Dauger"; Madry (pp. 7, 15–16) treats
  "Dauger" as the name the man had been using and reads Louvois's "ce n'est qu'un valet"
  as a pun (Dauger ~ Hogier, the "Valet de Pique" of French playing cards, and Louvois's
  rival Louis d'Auger de Cavoye); she concludes that the arrest authority "believed that
  Eustache Dauger was the name the man had used for himself until then" (p. 19–20).

### 1.3 The claim that the name was written afterwards, in a blank, in another hand

**[CLAIM]** en.wikipedia, "Man in the Iron Mask" (wikitext read 14 Sept 2026): "Historians
have noted that the name 'Eustache Dauger' was written in a handwriting different from
that used in the rest of the letter's text, suggesting that a clerk wrote the letter
under Louvois' dictation, while someone else, very likely Louvois, added the name
afterward." The citation is `{{sfn|Lincoln ''Timewatch'', 1988}}`, i.e. the BBC
*Timewatch* programme presented by Henry Lincoln (1988). No printed source is given.

**[DOC]** Laloy 1913 p. 103 records the documented fact behind the claim: the name is
blank in the three war-office minutes of 28 July 1669 and written out in the originals
of 19 July and 21 August (AN K 120).

**[CLAIM]** Noone ch. 13 attributes to Caire (Cannes, 1987) a handwriting analysis "of
the original warrants and dispatches" establishing the reading "Danger".

**[ASSESSMENT]** Two things are documented: (a) blanks in the minutes of 28 July, and (b) a
name written out on the 19 July original that palaeographers read differently
(d'Auger / Dauger / Danger). The further statement that the name on the 19 July letter
is in a hand different from the body of the letter rests, so far as I can trace it, on
the 1988 television programme and on Caire's 1987 paper, neither of which I could read.
No image of AN K 120 no. 67 was obtained. The claim should be reported as "attributed to
Caire 1987 and to the BBC Timewatch programme (1988); not verified here".

### 1.4 The King's order and the covering letters (French text)

**[DOC]** King to Vauroy, 28 July 1669 (Iung 1873 pp. 187–188, n. "28 juillet 1669. P. 272,
v. 234. Mss. Dépôt de la guerre"; Laloy p. 103 gives the end of the text):

> Capitaine de Vauroy, étant mal satisfait de la conduite du nommé...., et voulant
> m'assurer de sa personne, je vous écris cette lettre pour vous dire qu'aussitôt que
> vous l'aurez vue vous ayez à le saisir et arrêter, et à le conduire vous-même en toute
> sûreté dans la citadelle de Pignerol, pour y être gardé par les soins du capitaine de
> Saint-Mars [...] Après quoi, vous reviendrez par deçà rendre compte...

"Captain de Vauroy, being ill satisfied with the conduct of the man named ...., and
wishing to make sure of his person, I write you this letter to tell you that as soon as
you have seen it you are to seize and arrest him, and conduct him yourself in all safety
to the citadel of Pignerol, to be kept there by the care of Captain de Saint-Mars...
After which you will come back here to give an account."

**[DOC]** King to Saint-Mars (and a parallel order to the governor, the marquis de
Piennes), 28 July 1669 (Iung p. 188, "P. 274, v. 234"):

> Envoyant à ma citadelle de Pignerol, sous la conduite du capitaine de Vauroy,
> sergent-major de ma ville et citadelle de Dunkerque, le nommé ..., ... vous ayez à le
> recevoir de ses mains et à le tenir sous bonne et sûre garde, empêchant qu'il n'ait
> communication avec qui que ce soit, de vive voix ou par écrit.

"Sending to my citadel of Pignerol, under the conduct of Captain de Vauroy,
sergeant-major of my town and citadel of Dunkirk, the man named ..., you are to receive
him from his hands and keep him under good and sure guard, preventing him from having
communication with anyone, by word of mouth or in writing."

Date of the order: 28 July 1669 in Iung and Laloy (three minutes, vol. 234 fols
271, 272, 274); Noone ch. 8 ("Nine days after" 19 July, i.e. 28 July). The date "26
juillet 1669" given by fr.wikipedia's article on Pagnol's *Le Secret du Masque de fer*
derives from Pagnol and is not supported by the archival editions.

**[DOC]** Louvois's own letter to Vauroy of 8 July 1669, printed by Iung (p. 189, "P. 73,
v. 234"), concerns a deserter of Balvilliers's company and is unrelated to the prisoner;
Iung prints it only to show that Vauroy corresponded with the ministry. I found no
printed text of a Louvois letter to Vauroy of 26–28 July 1669 accompanying the King's
order.

### 1.5 The pretext given for Vauroy's absence

**[CLAIM]** Noone ch. 8: "Dauger's arrest was top secret: even the governor of Dunkirk was
not allowed to know about it. To explain Vauroy's absence from Dunkirk, the governor was
shown a cover-up dispatch from Louvois ordering Vauroy to hunt down officers of the
Spanish army who supposedly had crossed the border from the Spanish Netherlands in
pursuit of deserters." (Cited by en.wikipedia as Noone 1988 p. 151.)

**[CLAIM]** fr.wikipedia, "Le Secret du Masque de fer" (wikitext, summarising Pagnol
1973): « Le contenu du courrier (et les « feuilles volantes » explicatives qui l'auraient
accompagné...), laisse croire que Louvois ordonne également à Vauroy de ne pas informer
son supérieur militaire le comte d'Estrades de l'objet de sa mission, en prétextant
faussement la reconduite de déserteurs espagnols. Le ministre Louvois s'adresse lui-même
à d'Estrades, lui demandant de donner congé à Vauroy sans préciser l'objet des
« affaires » en question. » The same article states that Vauroy received the letter on 3
August 1669 and that the prisoner reached Pignerol on 24 August.

**[DOC]** Iung 1873 pp. 145–146 confirms the chain of command: Saint-Léon was "lieutenant
de Roi à Dunkerque avec le sieur de Vauroy, major, sous les ordres du comte d'Estrades,
gouverneur". Iung p. 189 (unsourced): « Le 1er août 1669, un courrier extraordinaire
apportait au gouverneur de Dunkerque, M. le comte d'Estrades, des dépêches urgentes ».

**[ASSESSMENT]** The pretext letter (Louvois to d'Estrades) is asserted by Pagnol and by
Noone; neither text I could reach prints it or gives a folio. Iung's "1er août"
dispatch to d'Estrades is the closest thing in the nineteenth-century editions and is
unsourced. Until the Archives de la guerre (SHD, A1 vol. 234) letter is located, the
"Spanish deserters" pretext should be labelled "reported by Noone (1988) after Pagnol
(1973); text not seen".

### 1.6 Place of arrest: Dunkirk or Calais

**[DOC]** No printed 1669 document names the place of arrest. Vauroy's title is
"sergent-major de ma ville et citadelle de Dunkerque"; Louvois on 26 March 1670 and
Saint-Mars on 12 April 1670 speak of "le prisonnier amené par le major de Dunkerque".

**[CLAIM]** Iung p. 189: "Cet Eustache Dauger, arrêté à Dunkerque, venait-il d'Angleterre,
servait-il de valet à ce Roux?" Lair t. II p. 454: arrested at Dunkirk during the
half-political voyage that prepared the English alliance, in which Lauzun took part
(Laloy p. 195 objects that that voyage, Madame's journey to Dover, was in May 1670).
Laloy pp. 104–105 infers that the man lived in Paris or at court and was to be seized on
arrival at or departure from Dunkirk, with an embarkation passport.

**[CLAIM]** Noone ch. 9 n. 6: "in 1987, at the International Symposium on the Iron Mask
held in Cannes, Stanislas Brugnon revealed the existence of a document establishing with
near certainty that Dauger was indeed arrested in Calais. This document is an order for
the reimbursement of expenses which was issued to Vauroy for his journey with Dauger in
August 1669, and it specifies that Vauroy went from Dunkirk to Calais and from there to
Pignerol." Noone ch. 13: the same document "makes it clear that he had with him only
three constables to serve as escort and that the group travelled on horseback by regular
roads, stopping to eat and sleep and change horses at the ordinary post-houses."
Petitfils (as reported by Genet, H-Net 2003, and by press summaries of his 2003 book):
arrest at Calais, escort of three archers (en.wikipedia cites Petitfils 2004 pp. 111–112
for the three-soldier escort). Brugnon, "Identité de l'Homme au Masque de fer", in the
same Cannes Actes (1989).

**[ASSESSMENT]** "Dunkirk" in the older literature is an inference from Vauroy's post.
"Calais" rests on one document (Vauroy's reimbursement order) reported by Brugnon in 1987
and accepted by Noone and Petitfils; I have not seen the document or its reference.

### 1.7 Journey and arrival date

**[DOC]** Saint-Mars to Louvois, dated 21 August 1669 in Roux-Fazillac 1801 (pièces, OCR
lines 3380–3392) and in Laloy p. 104:

> M. de Vauroy a remis entre mes mains le nommé Eustache d'Auger. Aussitôt que je l'eus
> mis dans un lieu fort sûr, en attendant que le cachot que je lui fais préparer soit
> parachevé.... Je lui dis en présence de M. de Vauroy, que s'il me parloit à moi ou à
> quelqu'autre, d'autre chose que pour ses nécessités, je lui mettrois mon épée dans le
> ventre... Je ne manquerai pas de ma vie, d'observer fort ponctuellement vos
> commandemens.

"M. de Vauroy has delivered into my hands the man named Eustache d'Auger. As soon as I
had put him in a very secure place, while the dungeon I am having prepared for him is
finished... I told him in M. de Vauroy's presence that if he spoke to me or to anyone
else of anything but his needs, I would put my sword through his belly."

**[DOC]** Saint-Mars, "du dernier août 1669" (31 August): « Il n'y a rien de plus vrai
que je n'ai jamais parlé de ce prisonnier à qui que ce soit... » (Roux-Fazillac); Laloy
p. 104 quotes from the same letter: « bien du monde croit que c'est un maréchal de
France, et d'autres disent un président » ("many people believe he is a Marshal of
France, and others say a Président").

**[DOC]** Louvois to Saint-Mars, 10 September 1669 (Delort 1829 t. I p. 157): « J'ay
reçeu vos lettres des 24 et dernier du mois passé. Vous pouvez donner à vostre nouveau
prisonnier un livre de prières... vous pourrez mesme le faire confesser trois ou quatre
fois l'année, s'il le désire, et non point d'avantage... L'on m'avoit mandé que vous
aviez dit à monsieur de la Bretonnière que l'on vous debvoit envoyer un prisonnier, mais
je suis bien ayse que cela ne se soit point trouvé véritable. » ("I have received your
letters of the 24th and the last of last month. You may give your new prisoner a prayer
book... you may even have him confessed three or four times a year, if he wishes, and not
more... I had been told that you had said to M. de La Bretonnière that a prisoner was
to be sent to you, but I am very glad that this turned out not to be true.")

Dates of arrival in the literature: Roux-Fazillac p. 23 « il arriva le 20 août, à
Pignerol » (marginal citation: letters of Louvois to Saint-Mars of 19 July and August
1669); Topin 1883 p. 307 "amené le 20 août 1669"; Mongrédien 1961 p. 185, Noone ch. 8
("Dauger arrived in Pignerol on 24 August") and en.wikipedia: 24 August. Laloy and
Roux-Fazillac date Saint-Mars's acknowledgement 21 August; Louvois's reply acknowledges
letters "des 24 et dernier". Delort 1829 t. I prints only Louvois's side (K 120 is the
file of letters Saint-Mars received) and therefore not the acknowledgement.

**[ASSESSMENT]** The acknowledgement is either of 21 August (arrival 20 or 21 August) or of
24 August (arrival 24 August, the "21" being a misreading); the printed editions do not
allow a decision, and neither Roux-Fazillac nor Laloy gives a folio for it. Reconstructed
journey (my computation from the documented points; distances are modern road
distances): Dunkirk–Calais c. 45 km; Calais–Paris c. 300 km; Paris–Lyon c. 465 km;
Lyon–Chambéry–Mont-Cenis–Susa–Pignerol c. 260 km; total c. 1,050–1,100 km. If Vauroy
received the order on 3 August (Pagnol/fr.wikipedia; not documented in the editions) and
delivered the prisoner on 20–24 August, the party covered c. 1,000 km in 17–21 days, i.e.
50–65 km a day, which fits Brugnon's document as reported (post-horses, three
constables, ordinary post-houses). The King's order required Vauroy to return afterwards
to report ("vous reviendrez par deçà rendre compte").

---

## Part 2. Roux de Marsilly and his valet Martin

### 2.1 Documented chronology (1668–1669)

- 1 Dec 1668: Marsilly to Williamson (Arlington's secretary), asking him to give "à Martin
  les deux lettres"; Ravaisson t. VII p. 306 n.: « Ce Martin était le valet de chambre de
  Marsilly » **[DOC]**.
- 6 March 1669: Lionne to Croissy (ambassador in London): Roux is « un des plus méchants
  hommes du monde qui va et vient d'Angleterre en Suisse... il a proposé des entreprises
  sur la sacrée personne de Sa Majesté » (Laloy pp. 250–251) **[DOC]**.
- 18 March, 1 and 18 April 1669: Croissy's reports on Roux (Laloy pp. 252–256; BN fr.
  10665 f° 131 v°).
- 12 May 1669: Roux seized near Saint-Cergues (Swiss territory) by Mazel and Briquemaut,
  betrayed by the abbé de Ragny, a companion killed, taken to the Fort de l'Écluse; Louis
  XIV: « Mon scélérat est pris » (Laloy pp. 262–264). Lang 1903 gives 14 April, which
  Laloy corrects. Petit to Williamson: Ragny received a pension of 3,000 livres
  (Ravaisson VII).
- 19/29 May 1669: du Moulin to Arlington on the affair (Lang, appendix, State Papers
  France vol. 125 f. 106); Arlington's paper: Roux "was another man's spy" (Lang
  appendix). Charles II to Madame, 24 May 1669: on "Marsillac" (Cartwright p. 264).
- 3 June 1669: Croissy to Lionne (Ravaisson VII p. 314; Lang p. 1 July section; BN fr.
  10665) **[DOC]**:
  > il y a ici un nommé Martin, qui a servi de valet à ce scélérat et qui l'a quitté mal
  > satisfait; si vous le trouvez à propos, je tâcherai de pénétrer sous main s'il sait
  > quelque chose de la conduite de ce méchant homme, afin que s'il pouvait faire quelque
  > preuve contre lui et qu'il voulût passer en France pour cela, je lui en donne les
  > moyens; j'attendrai là-dessus vos ordres.
  ("there is here one Martin, who served as valet to that villain and who left him
  discontented; if you think fit, I will try to find out under hand whether he knows
  anything of that wicked man's conduct, so that if he could give some proof against him
  and wished to go over to France for that, I might give him the means.")
- 22 June 1669: judgment by the lieutenant criminel d'Efita, « roué vif », executed the
  same afternoon at the carrefour de l'Apport de Paris after an attempt at
  self-mutilation (Laloy pp. 275–280; Vernon's dispatch of 19/29 June in Lang's appendix:
  "eleven blows with a barre... two houres dying"); Louis XIV: « nous voilà défaits d'un
  méchant homme » (d'Ormesson, *Journal*, II p. 567, cited by Laloy). Montague, 26 June:
  Roux "did not know why he was put to death" (Lang appendix). Barnes 1908 p. 249 gives
  "June 26", which is wrong.
- 24 June 1669: Croissy to Lionne (Laloy p. 285): « J'ai disposé le valet dont je vous
  avais écrit à vous aller trouver, en lui payant la dépense et en lui faisant espérer
  quelque récompense... » **[DOC]**.
- 25 June 1669: Lionne to Croissy (Arch. étr., corr. Angleterre 96, ff. 27–28; Ravaisson
  VII).
- 1 July 1669: Croissy to Lionne (Ravaisson VII pp. 328–329; Lang quotes the English
  version from "Transcripts from Paris MSS. Vol. xxxiii., Record Office") **[DOC]**:
  > M. Joly a parlé à Martin et l'a véritablement persuadé qu'en allant en France déposer
  > tout ce qu'il sait contre Roux, il ferait ce qu'un garçon d'honneur et bon sujet doit
  > faire; mais Martin lui a dit qu'il ne savait rien, et que quand il serait en France,
  > on s'imaginerait qu'il a connaissance des déportements de Roux, et qu'on le mettrait
  > prisonnier pour lui faire dire tout ce qu'il ne sait pas, et qu'après tout, quand
  > même il serait bien traité, qu'il ne pourrait plus revenir ici gagner sa vie avec sa
  > famille... à cela Martin a fait un signe de tête comme avouant la chose... mais il ne
  > peut plus le résoudre de faire le voyage de Paris, quoiqu'il lui ait promis que je lui
  > donnerais assurance pour la sûreté de sa personne et pour son retour, que je paierais
  > sa dépense, et que s'il disait les vérités qu'il sait, il en aurait même une honnête
  > récompense. Ainsi, je crains bien que je ne le puisse pas obliger par la douceur à
  > aller en France.
  ("M. Joly has spoken to Martin and has really persuaded him that by going to France to
  depose all he knows against Roux he would do what a lad of honour and a good subject
  ought to do; but Martin told him that he knew nothing, and that once in France people
  would imagine he knew of Roux's doings, and that he would be put in prison to make him
  say all he does not know, and that after all, even if well treated, he could no longer
  come back here to earn his living with his family... So I much fear I cannot induce him
  by gentle means to go to France.") Croissy goes on to propose asking Charles II to have
  Martin and the other suspect, Veyras, arrested and sent to Calais (Noone ch. 9; Ravaisson
  VII p. 329).
- 13 July 1669: Lionne to Croissy (Laloy pp. 286–287, "Arch. étr., corr. Angl., vol. 96,
  f° 39") **[DOC]**:
  > Il ne sera plus nécessaire après le supplice de Roux de faire venir ici Martin, et le
  > roi ne veut pas non plus que vous fassiez aucune instance au roi d'Angleterre de
  > quelque nature qu'elle soit sur le sujet de Veras (sic), abandonnant cet homme à sa
  > mauvaise conduite dont Dieu pourra fournir quelque jour les moyens de ne pas la
  > laisser impunie.
  ("After Roux's execution it will no longer be necessary to bring Martin here, and the
  King also does not wish you to make any request of any kind to the King of England on
  the subject of Veyras, leaving that man to his evil conduct, which God may one day
  furnish the means of not leaving unpunished.")

### 2.2 Lang's thesis (1903) in his words

**[CLAIM]** Lang, *The Valet's Tragedy*, ch. I: "Marsilly left in London a valet, called
by him 'Martin,' who had quitted his service and was living with his own family. This
man is the 'Eustache Dauger' of our mystery. The name is his prison pseudonym." On the 1
July dispatch: "'Monsieur Joly has spoken to the man Martin' (Dauger), 'and has really
persuaded him that, by going to France and telling all that he knows against Roux, he
will play the part of a lad of honour and a good subject.' ... But Martin, after all, was
NOT persuaded! Martin replied to Joly that HE KNEW NOTHING AT ALL, and that, once in
France, people would think he was well acquainted with the traffickings of Roux, 'AND SO
HE WOULD BE KEPT IN PRISON TO MAKE HIM DIVULGE WHAT HE DID NOT KNOW.'" Lang's inference:
"'I might ask the King to give up Martin, the valet of Marsilly, to me,' Colbert
concludes, and, by hook or by crook, he secured the person of the wretched man" and
"Martin must be Dauger". The sentence quoted in the parent brief ("Martin ... had refused
to go to France and was left alone") does not occur in Lang 1903; the only "left alone" in
the book is du Moulin's remark about Marsilly ("this man had much better been left alone
than taken").

### 2.3 Counter-evidence and later scholarship

- **[DOC]** Lionne's letter of 13 July 1669 (above) ends the attempt to bring Martin over
  six days before Louvois's letter of 19 July. Laloy p. 287: « elle enlève toute base à
  l'hypothèse de Mr. A. Lang » ("it removes every basis from Mr A. Lang's hypothesis").
- **[CLAIM]** Laloy pp. 195–197: Lang was misled by "ce n'est qu'un valet"; Martin, the
  valet of a Huguenot conspirator, would have been a Protestant, whereas the Pignerol
  prisoner was "indubitablement catholique" (mass, confession three or four times a year:
  Louvois 10 Sept 1669).
- **[CLAIM]** Barnes 1908 pp. 248–250: Martin "utterly denied all knowledge"; Croissy
  suggested compelling him; "This... is the particular blind alley into which Mr. Lang
  has strayed."
- **[CLAIM]** Noone ch. 9 accepts Lionne's 13 July letter as decisive. en.wikipedia: "the
  real valet Martin... could not have become 'Eustache Dauger' because he had fled to
  London when the Roux conspiracy failed".
- **[CLAIM]** Petitfils (2003/2004) and Sonnino (2016) both reject the Marsilly link:
  Petitfils by identifying the prisoner as a servant of Madame arrested at Calais (Part
  3); Sonnino by placing the secret in Mazarin's finances (Part 4; Parrott 2017: Sonnino
  "dismisses traditional arguments that the secret... related to Anglo-French relations
  in the late 1660's"). Wilkinson 2021 (per en.wikipedia, pp. 247–253) supports the
  Madame's-valet reading, not Lang's.
- The English State Papers Domestic for 1668–69 (Green's Calendar, archive.org
  `calendarofstatep0009mary`, saved as `cspd_charles2_1668_1669_green1894.txt`) contain no
  Marsilly or Martin entries; the relevant papers are in SP 78 (France), which Lang
  printed in his appendix and which are calendared only in the paywalled British History
  Online series.

**[ASSESSMENT]** The Marsilly–Martin identification is refuted by the documents Lang did
not see: Croissy's own report that Martin refused, and Lionne's order of 13 July that the
matter be dropped. Nothing connects the "Eustache" of 19 July with London, and the
prisoner's Catholic observance is a further difficulty. The episode remains useful as
evidence of what Louis XIV's government was worried about in June–July 1669 (Roux's
alleged plot and his English contacts), which is the background against which Barnes,
Lang and Petitfils all read the arrest.

---

## Part 3. The secret diplomacy of 1669

### 3.1 Timeline with documents

- 27 Dec 1668, Charles II to Madame (Cartwright p. 275) **[DOC]**: "you know how much
  secrecy is necessary for the carrying on of the businesse, and I assure you that nobody
  does, nor shall, know anything of it heere, but my selfe and that one person more, till
  it be fitt to be publique". 20 Jan 1669 (Cartwright): the business "must be caried on
  with all secrecy imaginable".
- 25 Jan 1669: the Whitehall meeting at which Charles declared his Catholic intentions
  (Cartwright 1894, c. p. 277, OCR line 13015; the meeting is known from James II's
  memoirs).
- 26 Feb 1669: the abbé Pregnani, a Theatine astrologer sent by Louis XIV at the
  suggestion of the Electress of Bavaria, arrives in London (Barnes pp. 236–244; Mignet
  t. III pp. 72–76: Lionne to Croissy, « Vous savez sans doute qui était le père Pregnani,
  théatin, que le roi a tiré du cloître pour en faire un abbé, à la recommandation de
  madame l'électrice de Bavière... »). Charles to Madame, 7 and 22 March 1669
  (Cartwright): Pregnani at Newmarket, who "foretold three times wrong" at the races.
- 14 May 1669: Lionne orders Pregnani's recall (Mignet t. III p. 76 n.; Barnes: three
  recall letters); Mignet: « L'abbé Pregnani resta encore deux mois à Londres, mais il ne
  reparaît plus dans la suite de la négociation » (Corr. d'Angleterre vol. LXXXIV).
  Barnes pp. 240–244: departure fixed for 25 June, then 5 July 1669 (OS); Lionne, 27 July,
  complains that the dispatch of 4 July was delayed by "the careless negligence of its
  bearer, the Abbé Pregnani"; Barnes: "From this moment the Abbe Pregnani disappears".
- 7 June 1669, Charles to Madame (Cartwright p. 291) **[DOC]**: "I see no kinde of
  necessity of telling 112 (Colbert de Croissy) of the secrett now": the French
  ambassador himself was excluded from the Catholicity clause.
- 12 May–22 June 1669: the Marsilly affair (Part 2).
- 19–28 July 1669: Louvois's warning to Saint-Mars and the King's order to Vauroy.
- 22 May / 1 June 1670: Treaty of Dover signed during Madame's visit (Mignet t. III;
  Cartwright ch. XIV). Lair (t. II p. 454) linked the arrest to Madame's Dover journey,
  which Laloy (p. 195) shows to be a year later than the arrest.

### 3.2 Petitfils's formulation (as reported; his own pages not read)

**[CLAIM]** Jean-Pierre Genet's review of Petitfils, *Le Masque de fer: entre histoire et
légende* (Perrin, 2003), H-Net (H-Francais), October 2003,
http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=8218: « L'homme au masque serait Eustache
Danger, humble valet affecté au service de Madame, Henriette d'Angleterre. Ayant eu dans
les mains des documents secrets en vue de la conversion de Charles II Stuart au
catholicisme et à la signature d'une alliance franco-anglaise contre les Provinces Unies,
Danger aurait été trop bavard (auprès des Hollandais ?). Sa légèreté entraîna son
arrestation à Calais et son emprisonnement rapide. » ("The masked man would be Eustache
Danger, a humble valet assigned to the service of Madame, Henrietta of England. Having
had in his hands secret documents concerning Charles II's conversion and the signing of a
Franco-English alliance against the United Provinces, Danger is supposed to have been too
talkative (to the Dutch?). His indiscretion led to his arrest at Calais and his rapid
imprisonment.") Genet adds that in Petitfils's account the mask was « une mystification
montée de toute pièce par le geôlier » and « ne fut d'ailleurs jamais demandé par les
ministres », and raises three objections: why forbid the name; why keep the man once the
secret had lost its value (after 1670–72); why he was so docile.

**[CLAIM]** Venturino, *Dix-huitième siècle* 37 (2005) pp. 645–646 (Persée), summarising the
same book: « le prisonnier s'appelait Eustache Danger, valet de Henriette d'Angleterre,
Madame, active au moment des négociations secrètes entre Louis XIV et Charles II ».

**[CLAIM]** Noone ch. 12 records the earlier Petitfils version (1970): a valet of Colbert
hired by Louvois to poison Colbert (27 Dec 1668), who fled to England and returned in
July 1669; Petitfils later replaced this by the Madame's-messenger thesis. masque-de-fer.com
quotes Petitfils on the prisoner's insignificance: « Sa vie en prison... nous prouve que
son affaire, pour gênante qu'elle ait pu être, n'était pas vraiment de la plus haute
importance » and on the mask: « À quoi donc servait le Masque ?... Précisément à cacher
le vide, le néant du personnage. Une farce en somme, habilement jouée, qui a dupé et dupe
encore son monde. » Press summaries of the 2003 book (Europe 1, Historia) give:
"domestique du roi ou de Madame, arrêté à Calais fin juillet 1669 par Alexandre de
Vauroy, escorte légère (trois archers)".

The site jcpetitfils.com/interviews has no snapshot in the Wayback Machine (direct
snapshot request returned "The Wayback Machine has not archived that URL"); Google Books
was quota-blocked. The archive.org lending copies (`lemasquedeferent0000peti`,
`lemasquedeferent0000peti_h1r0`) are covered in dossier F.

### 3.3 Barnes's Pregnani hypothesis and its refutation

**[CLAIM]** Barnes 1908 pp. 236–250: Pregnani, having failed in London and possessing
dangerous knowledge, was arrested on landing in France in July 1669 and became the
prisoner of 19 July. **[DOC]** Laloy p. 101: Prignani « mourut à Rome à la fin de 1678 ou
au commencement de 1679 (arch. Seine-Inf., G. 6139, f° 85) »; Noone ch. 10 cites Primi
Visconti's memoirs: Pregnani reached Rome and "died, putrified by shameful diseases".
Barnes's candidate is therefore excluded.

### 3.4 What the 1669 documents do and do not support

**[ASSESSMENT]** (1) The Dunkirk–Calais–Dover route was the channel for Madame's
correspondence and for Pregnani's mission, and the arrest of a "valet" at Calais by the
major of Dunkirk in the very weeks after the Marsilly execution and Pregnani's recall
makes a diplomatic reading natural; every modern author from Lair to Wilkinson has taken
it. (2) Nothing in the King's order or in Louvois's letters names England, Madame,
Charles II or Croissy; the file is a war-office file, and the foreign secretary (Lionne)
does not appear in it. (3) The King's phrase "mal satisfait de la conduite du nommé..."
and Louvois's "ce misérable... ce n'est qu'un valet" are the only characterisations. (4)
Petitfils's Madame's-valet thesis and Sonnino's Picon's-valet thesis are both inferences
from this same silence; neither has produced a document naming the man's master.

---

## Part 4. Sonnino, *The Search for the Man in the Iron Mask* (2016)

### 4.1 Whom he identifies, and why

**[CLAIM]** Sonnino's own summary (UCSB news release, 2016,
https://news.ucsb.edu/2016/016743/mystery-unmasked; repeated on history.ucsb.edu, 29 April
2016, and Noozhawk): Dauger "was the valet of the treasurer of the late Cardinal
Mazarin"; "Mazarin had ripped off some of his huge fortune from the previous king and
queen of England, and that Eustache was arrested years later just as Louis XIV was
trying to con their son, the present king of England, into joining him in a war. Dauger
must have blabbed at the wrong time. He was informed when arrested that if he revealed
his identity to anyone he would immediately be killed."

**[CLAIM]** David Parrott, *French History* 31:1 (2017) p. 122 (doi 10.1093/fh/crw073):
Dauger was "the employee of one of Colbert's closest associates, Antoine-Hercule Picon";
Sonnino "dismisses traditional arguments that the secret... related to Anglo-French
relations in the late 1660's"; Colbert and Picon redrafted Mazarin's will; Dauger was
"bundled into lifetime confinement orchestrated by Colbert's erstwhile political rival,
Louvois"; "Dauger's status as one of Picon's valets rests on a balance of probabilities
rather than written evidence"; verdict: "highly plausible hypothesis", "an imposing
challenge to historians seeking to advance different candidates".

**[CLAIM]** Julius R. Ruff, *H-France Review* 16 (Nov 2016) no. 258,
https://h-france.net/vol16reviews/vol16no258Ruff.pdf: "it was to the most trusted of those
men, Eustace Dauger, that Picon entrusted some of the most sensitive details of Mazarin's
peculations"; "Sonnino suggests that Picon had employed Dauger in work of increasing
importance since about 1643"; the cause of the arrest was "incautious remarks by Dauger,
perhaps under the influence of drink"; Mazarin held "even the crown jewels of England,
which Queen Henriette Marie carried with her"; Sonnino doubts the mask ("no mask at all"
during the 1687 transfer); verdict: "a fascinating book of great erudition... may prove to
be the definitive statement on the identity of that mysterious prisoner".

**[CLAIM]** *Publishers Weekly*, 30 Nov 2015, https://www.publishersweekly.com/978-1-4422-5363-6:
"settling on the figure of Eustache Dauger, a loose-tongued valet who was privy to
substantial secrets... sheds light on the desperation of ousted English Queen Henrietta
Maria... to conceal Mazarin's corruption".

**[CLAIM]** en.wikipedia's summary of Sonnino pp. 155–156: Picon, a native of Languedoc,
may have picked up a valet at Senlis "where the name 'Dauger' abounds"; Mazarin led two
lives, "one as a statesman, the other as a loan shark"; he embezzled from Henrietta
Maria; Louis XIV was complicit; the arrest coincided with the 1669 negotiations for the
Dutch war.

Book structure (Bloomsbury Collections DOI 10.5040/9798216457824): Introduction 1–10; The
Sex Life of Anne of Austria 11–26; The Candidacy of Claude Imbert 27–36; The Fouquet
Connection 37–52; Calais 53–68; Follow the Money 69–86; A Tale of Two Families 87–104; The
Testament of Cardinal Mazarin 105–120; The Cover-Up 121–140; Was Eustache Dauger Gay?
141–154; Conclusion 155–156; Notes 163–210; Bibliography 211–240.

Earlier articles: "On the Trail of the Iron Mask: The Candidacy of Claude Imbert",
*Proceedings of the Western Society for French History* 19 (1992) — pages given as 89–98
by Madry's bibliography, 99–108 by fr.wikipedia, and 261–272 by one search summary; Madry
cites "Sonnino 'Imbert' 104" in text, which is inconsistent with her own 89–98
(unresolved); "The Three Testaments of Cardinal Mazarin", *French Historical Studies* 37:3
(2014) 421–436. Madry 2016 p. 4: Sonnino "admits that the archives produced an échec for
his suspect [Imbert]" and "said in 2014 that... changes made in the different versions of
Mazarin's will written by Jean-Baptiste Colbert... after Mazarin's death, indicate the
identity of the prisoner".

### 4.2 Reviews

Read in full or in part (verdicts quoted above): Parrott (French History), Ruff
(H-France), Publishers Weekly. Located by DOI but paywalled or blocked: Katherine
Crawford, *Journal of Modern History* 89:4 (Dec 2017) 950–951 (10.1086/694363); Caroline
R. Sherman, *Catholic Historical Review* 103:3 (2017) 591–592 (10.1353/cat.2017.0136);
Elizabeth Hyde, *American Historical Review* 123:2 (Apr 2018) 643–645
(10.1093/ahr/123.2.643; search snippet: the book brings "rigor and seriousness" and tells
"dueling stories of embezzlement, money laundering, cover-ups"); Ronald G. Asch,
*Historische Zeitschrift* 305:2 (2017) 557–558 (10.1515/hzhz-2017-1424); Jeremy Black,
*European Review of History* 27:4 (2020) 571–572 (10.1080/13507486.2020.1715040; snippet:
"determined engagement with sources"; "Notes and Bibliography make up over 80 pages").
Not found: reviews in *Sixteenth Century Journal*, *The Historian*, *Choice*,
*Renaissance Quarterly*, *Journal of Early Modern History*, *Kirkus*.

**[ASSESSMENT]** Sonnino's identification is a chain of probabilities: a Picon valet
(undocumented by name), a motive in Mazarin's testament and the Henrietta Maria loans
(documented by Sonnino's earlier archival work on the testaments), and a trigger in the
1669 English negotiation (a coincidence of dates). His reviewers accept the erudition and
call the thesis plausible; Parrott's sentence that the valet status "rests on a balance
of probabilities rather than written evidence" is the fair summary.

---

## Part 5. Other identifications, the name, and the mask

### 5.1 Eustache Dauger de Cavoye (Duvivier 1932) and the Saint-Lazare refutation

**[CLAIM]** Maurice Duvivier, *Le Masque de fer* (Paris, Armand Colin, 1932): the prisoner
was Eustache Dauger de Cavoye, elder brother of Louis de Cavoye, the King's favourite;
Louvois's "ce n'est qu'un valet" was « un trait de cette astuce diabolique dont Louvois
était seul capable » (Mongrédien 1953 p. 55, quoting Duvivier).

**[DOC]** Georges Mongrédien, "Deux documents inédits sur le Masque de fer", *XVIIe siècle*
nos 17–18 (1953) pp. 55–58, publishing from the Sarret de Coussergues family archives:
(a) letter of Eustache de Cavoye to his sister the marquise de Fabrègues, 20 June 1678:
« Si vous scaviez ce que ie souffre, ie ne doute nullement que vous ne fissiez vos
derniés efforts pour me tirer de la cruelle persécution et captivittée où ie suis détenu
depuis plus de dix ans par la tirannie de M. de Cavoy mon frère sous de feaux prétextes
... » signed « d'Eustache de Cavoy, ce vingtieme de juing mil six cens soissante et dix
huit », addressed « À Madame la marquise de Fabrègues à Paris »; (b) an undated petition
« Au Roy »: « Cavoy qui est destenu dans les prisons de St Lazare par une lettre de cachet
de Vostre Majesté depuis unze ans et demy la supplie très humblement... ». Mongrédien's
conclusion (p. 58): « J'ignore si Eustache Dauger de Cavoye sortit de la prison de
Saint-Lazare où, entré en 1668, il était encore en 1680. Ce qui est certain, c'est qu'il
ne pouvait être en même temps à Pignerol où était incarcéré depuis 1669 le valet
Eustache Dauger ». ("I do not know whether Eustache Dauger de Cavoye ever left the prison
of Saint-Lazare, which he entered in 1668 and where he still was in 1680. What is certain
is that he could not at the same time be at Pignerol, where the valet Eustache Dauger
had been imprisoned since 1669.") Mongrédien had already set Duvivier aside in *Le Masque
de fer* (Hachette, 1952 [the article says 1951], pp. 211–219). Further documents: Louis
XIV to the superior of Saint-Lazare, 17 August 1678 (AN O1 22 f. 156; brought to light by
Brugnon, per Noone ch. 11; Petitfils 2004 p. 246 per en.wikipedia); Brienne's funeral ode
(1689); Cavoye died at Saint-Lazare between 1680 and 1689 (Noone ch. 11). Madry 2016
uses Cavoye only as the target of Louvois's supposed pun.

### 5.2 Iung's "Eustache" of the Poisons

**[CLAIM]** Iung 1873 pp. 186–192 and 345: the prisoner was one of the agents of a
poisoning conspiracy; "On arrêtait en même temps de nombreux agents dans les provinces, et
particulièrement Eustache Dauger, qui fut conduit à Pignerol" (p. 345). Iung also
canvasses (pp. 189–192) the Marsilly affair, a "dame de La Douze Las Tourre" affair and
the supposed 1669 poisoning attempt on Colbert (citing P. Clément on Colbert's fled
valet). **[ASSESSMENT]** The Chambre ardente sat 1679–1682; nothing in the 1669 papers
mentions poison, and Iung's link rests on the name "Eustache" alone. Petitfils's 1970
"Colbert's poisoning valet" version (Noone ch. 12) is a descendant of Iung's reading.

### 5.3 Brugnon and Caire (Cannes, 1987)

Brugnon, "Identité de l'Homme au Masque de fer", and Caire, "Eustache et son secret", both
in *Il y a trois siècles, le Masque de fer. Actes du Colloque international, Cannes, 12–13
septembre 1987* (Cannes, 1989). As reported by Noone (ch. 9 n. 6, ch. 13 and n. 1):
Brugnon produced Vauroy's reimbursement order (Dunkirk–Calais–Pignerol, three
constables), the 17 Aug 1678 Saint-Lazare letter, and held that the name was
"Eustache" with "Danger" from "d'Angers"; Caire confirmed "Danger" by handwriting and
found that Louvois's draft to Fouquet changed "of what he had seen" to "of how he was
employed". A search summary attributed to Brugnon the view that the prisoner died at
Sainte-Marguerite in 1693; I could not verify this. The Actes were not obtainable online.

### 5.4 Real name or pseudonym; Danger/Dauger families

Pseudonym: Laloy 1913 p. 104 (« évidemment un surnom »); Lang 1903 ("prison pseudonym");
Dabos (« pseudonyme probablement inventé par Louvois »). Real name: Lair 1890 ("Eustache
Danger"); Madry 2016 (the name the man used). Families: the Dauger de Cavoye of Picardy
(Duvivier, Mongrédien); Sonnino's remark on Senlis; Caire's "d'Angers" reading turns the
surname into an origin. No archival Danger/Dauger family search of my own was possible.

### 5.5 The mask: what the 1669 orders say

**[DOC]** The letter of 19 July 1669 contains neither "masque" nor "visage". Its physical
prescriptions are: a dungeon whose windows ("les jours") do not give on to places anyone
can approach; several doors closing one on another so the sentries hear nothing; food
brought once a day by Saint-Mars himself; death threatened if he speaks of anything but
his needs. The King's order of 28 July: "sous bonne et sûre garde, empêchant qu'il n'ait
communication avec qui que ce soit, de vive voix ou par écrit". Louvois, 26 March 1670
(Laloy p. 105): the prisoner "ne puisse voir, ni être vu de personne". Louvois, 10 Sept
1669: mass on Sundays and feasts "sans pourtant estre dans le même lieu", confession
three or four times a year at most.

**[DOC]** First mention of a mask: *Nouvelles ecclésiastiques*, 4 September 1687 (Bibl.
Sainte-Geneviève, Réserve, Mss vol. 1477 f° 396 v°, as transcribed at
http://www.masque-de-fer.com/ressources/gazette-du-4-septembre-1687/): « M. de cinq mars a
transporté par ordre du Roy un prisonnier d'état de pignerol aux iles de Ste marguerite
personne ne sait qui il est il y a défense de dire son nom et ordre de le (tuer) s'il
l'avoit prononcé... celuy cy etoit enfermé dans une chaise à porteurs ayant un masque
d'acier sur le visage... et que tous les gens que le public croit morts ne le sont pas ».
Saint-Mars, 20 January 1687: a « chaise couverte de toile cirée ». Du Junca's register,
18 Sept 1698 ("whom he always keeps masked") and 19 Nov 1703 ("mask of black velvet")
(Noone ch. 2).

**[CLAIM]** Petitfils: the mask was never ordered by the ministers and was Saint-Mars's own
mystification (Genet 2003). Noone ch. 13: the steel mask of 1687 was "Saint-Mars's own
device". Sonnino (Ruff's review): "no mask at all" during the 1687 transfer.
**[ASSESSMENT]** The 1669 orders isolate the prisoner acoustically and visually by
architecture and by the jailer's personal service; they contain no disguise of the face.
The mask is first attested eighteen years later in a Jansenist newsletter reporting
rumour, and then in the Bastille register of 1698/1703. Any account that puts a mask in
1669 is importing the 1687–1703 evidence backwards.

---

## Part 6. Not found, not read, blocked

- Louvois's covering letter to Vauroy (26–28 July 1669) and the pretext letter to
  d'Estrades: no printed text or folio found (Pagnol 1973 and Noone 1988 assert them).
- The "mémoire" or instructions for Vauroy's journey: not found in print.
- Brugnon's reimbursement order for Vauroy and the Cannes 1987 Actes (Brugnon, Caire): not
  obtainable online; known only through Noone, Wilkinson (via Wikipedia) and search
  summaries.
- Petitfils's own wording (1970; 2003/2004): not read; reported through Genet, Venturino,
  Noone, masque-de-fer.com and press summaries. jcpetitfils.com/interviews: no Wayback
  snapshot exists; Google Books API quota exhausted (HTTP 429) and books.google.com
  returned its automated-query block.
- Sonnino 2016: read only through his press statements and the reviews; the JMH, CHR,
  AHR, HZ and ERH reviews are paywalled (journals.uchicago.edu, MUSE, OUP, De Gruyter,
  Taylor & Francis returned 403 or paywall pages).
- Bazeries 1893 (*Le Masque de fer: révélation de la correspondance chiffrée de Louis
  XIV*): not located on archive.org by search; not downloaded.
- Gallica: every request (SRU, texteBrut, even with a browser User-Agent) returned the
  "Vérification de sécurité" page; a file saved from it was deleted as bogus.
- web.archive.org: page fetches were refused; curl CDX/availability calls were reset or
  returned 429.
- British History Online (CSPD/SP France calendars): "premium content" paywall.
- HathiTrust catalog, Bloomsbury Collections, lejdd.fr, atlasobscura.com, europe1.fr,
  expos-historiques.cannes.com: 403 or empty responses.
- Roux-Fazillac 1801 was available only as a Numelyo EPUB text without reliable page
  numbers; page citations to it above are approximate.
- The blocks were application-level (403/429/paywall/security page).

---

## Part 7. Files added for this dossier

- `notes/E_1669_context_and_dauger_identity.md` (this dossier)
- `sources/lang1903_valets_tragedy_gutenberg2073.txt`
- `sources/cartwright1894_madame_life_of_henrietta.txt`
- `sources/cspd_charles2_1668_1669_green1894.txt`
- `sources/mignet_negociations_succession_espagne_vol3-4.txt`