Alexandre Dumas's portrayal of the man in the iron mask

Man in the Iron Mask

Plot Summary

When author Alexandre Dumas wrote Man in the Iron Mask in 1850, he no doubt had a sense of the curiosity he had sparked amongst readers in his own time, but whether or not he suspected that more than 150 years later readers, researchers, scholars and historians would still be attempting to solve the mystery of the Man in the Iron Mask, will never be known. What is certain, is that Dumas' book forefronts one of the most strange and unusual and intriguing mysteries in the history of France's King Louis XIV. Dumas weaves fact and fiction - the man in the iron mask in fact existed, as did Athos, Aramis, Porthos, and d' Artangnan - into a tale of intrigue and mystery (Macdonald, Roger, 2005). Since the publication of Dumas' Man in the Iron Mask, others have offered theories as to the identity of the man who was, according to some accounts, locked away, his identity locked by key within an iron mask, concealing his face from the limited world of his prison island of St. Marguerite, escorted there by the Muskateer d' Artangnan, who was also a real person and one who remained loyal to the king throughout his entire life. It is this man, who remains to date unidentified, but is the subject of much speculation as to his identity. The exploration of the subject is limited here to that as fictionalized by Alexandre Dumas in his Man in the Iron Mask.

Dumas' storyline follows the theory that the man in the iron mask is the identical twin to Louis XIV, and in a power struggle for the crown, one twin has succumbed to the greater guile and strength in forces behind the one who then reigned as Louis XIV. The idea, according to Dumas' storyline, is that the possibility of a second and perhaps equally entitled heir to the throne of France would give the French citizenry more choices than they needed, and serve to cause the future monarchy unnecessary problems and instabilities. Aramis, having been called to hear the prisoner's confession, gives insight as to this concern on pages 18-19 in Chapter 1 of the book. In speaking to the prisoner, Aramis says, "Now you understand," pursued Aramis, "that the king (Louis XIII), who with so much pleasure saw himself repeated in one, was in despair about two; fearing that the second might dispute the claim of the first to seniority, which had been recognized only two hours before, and so the second son, relying on party interests and caprices, might one day sow discord and engender civil war in the kingdom, by these means destroying the very dynasty he should have strengthened." Here, Dumas has clarified for the reader the motive behind maintaining secrecy as to the identity of the man in the iron mask.

That the prisoner was afforded certain comforts and privileges that extended beyond those of the ordinary prisoner was also indicative of the prisoner's higher level on the social ladder (p. 1). The privileges afforded the prisoner allow Dumas to make King Louis XIV complicit in the plot to conceal the man's identity; because only the King could have caused a man to be imprisoned in such a fashion and then afford him the luxuries of extended lantern light, and other personal amenities of comfort. Dumas helps the reader to gain a sense of the feeling that King Louis XIV might be suffering some measurable amount of guilt as to the plight of his twin. "According to custom, the prisoner was without a light. At the hour of curfew he was bound to extinguish his lamp; it may be seen how much he was favored in being allowed to keep it burning until that hour. Near the bed a large leather arm chair, with twisted legs, held his clothes (p. 1)." Thus, we know that this was a very special prisoner whose imprisonment and care was a concern of King Louis XIV him self, otherwise the prisoner would not have been afforded such amenities.

As the story unfolds, the three Muskateers, who are loyal to King Louis XIV, are charged with responsibilities and duties that demonstrate the King's trust in them, and as such is indicative of the fact that the Muskateers have proven their loyalty to the king in a way that would be unchallenged. This is essential to Dumas' telling, because it is the Muskateers who use their position of trust to pull off the scheme that becomes central to the story and gives rise to a never ending conspiracy theory surrounding the life and reign of Louis XIV. The Muskateers, having been convinced by Fouquet that Louis was bent on a course of destruction to France and the monarchy; become conspirators in the plot to switch the man in the iron mask from Louis' twin, Philippe, to Louis.

In Dumas' story, Philippe is originally the man in the iron mask, Louis' twin. "The musketeer had no longer any doubt as to the reason which had urged the unfortunate Philippe to reveal his character and his birth. Philippe, hidden forever beneath a mask of iron, exiled to a country where the men seemed little more than slaves of the elements; Philippe, deprived even of the society of d'Artagnan, who had loaded him with honors and delicate attentions,- had nothing more to look forward to than spectres and griefs in this world; and despair beginning to devour him, he poured himself forth in complaints, in the belief that his revelations would raise an avenger for him (Chapter 34, p. 1 of 8)."

Fouquet has come to be suspect in Louis' mind for all kinds of treachery. It is in Fouquet's best interest, self-interest, to overthrow Louis. It is not in Fouquet's best interest to topple the monarchy. Thus, the plot to switch Louis with Philippe becomes tangential to Fouquet's best interest, and, as is demonstrated by Dumas' story, the best interest of France.

Reality v Fiction

There are many ways in which Dumas stretches the reality of not just the characters involved, but of the history of France itself to accommodate his telling of conspiracy and suspense. There was, as records of the Bastille corroborate, a masked prisoner whose identity was kept secret (MacDonald, 2005). However, it is unlikely that the prisoner was in fact a relative to the King, and especially not a twin, since "The arrival of an unexpected second child, allegedly nine hours after the first, could surely not have remained undetected in the goldfish bowl of the French court, and infant mortality rate was so high that the birth of a second son to Anne of Austria would have been more welcomed than feared (MacDonald, 2005, p. 30)."

Also, another important way in which Dumas stretched the truth was as concerns the life of the Three Muskaeteers (MacDonald, 2005). Dumas places the Muskateers in the service of Anne of Austria, in retrieving the diamond studs that she inappropriately gifted (MacDonald, 2005). "Only in Dumas' imagination were the Muskateers involved in this episode (which had actually occurred in 1625), saving the Queen's honor by replacing the missing diamonds; the real Athos, Aramis, and Porthos would have been children, d' Artangnan still a babe in arms (MacDonald, 2005, p. 30)." This is significant in understanding the relationship between reality and fiction, and that as a creative writer, a fiction writer, Dumas drew on fact for his fiction.

The final "reality" of the story and era in which it unfolds is that there is an air of elegance, royalty, and romance inferred in the telling. In fact, given the historical time, the modern day reader might find his or herself very uncomfortable - even at court. There were no modern conveniences of communication, sanitation, and there was considerable disregard for the health and well being of any person who was of less than wealthy social status. This exemplified by Pelisson's plea on behalf Fouquet's wife, which served as the comparison for the extreme demarcations of wealth and poverty. That the impoverished would succumb to disease, hunger, or other societal ills would be of little social or political interest to the monarchy, except to the extent that there existed a plague that might spread to the royal house and its serving aristocracy and lesser servants.

The book, especially when considering the contrast of reality vs. fiction used by Dumas, gives rise to curiosity that might be satisfied by further investigation of the period, the events, and the people who served as the inspiration for the telling - and stretching of the truth. Also, the fact that the intrigue and research about the man in the mask continues to baffle scholars, historians and others remains a puzzle to be solved. This makes investigation of the period and people even more interesting.

Reference List

Dumas, Alexandre. The Vicomte de Bragelonne. Ed. David Coward. Oxford: Oxford University, 1998. Questia. 3 Aug. 2007 http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=22933050.

Macdonald, Roger. "Behind the Iron Mask." History Today Nov. 2005: 30+. Questia. 3 Aug. 2007 http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5012048049.