The resemblance, I think, is not a whit closer than that which Fluellin so ingeniously discovers between Macedon and Monmouth, and is a sorry basis on which to build an argument. Another supposition gives the mask to Don John de Gonzaga, a natural brother of the Duke of Mantua, who is imagined to have accompanied Matthioli in disguise to the conference at which he was seized. This supposition is rendered untenable, by irrefragable proof that Matthioli was alone. We have now arrived at the only remaining name which has been mentioned as that of the mysterious prisoner. Voltaire, as we have seen, affirms that he was a son of Anne of Austria. This assertion seems to receive support from the language which is said to have been held by Louis XV. Laborde, the head valet-de-chambre of that monarch, who enjoyed much of his confidence, once endeavoured to obtain from him the long-concealed secret. He did not succeed. “I pity him,” replied the king, “but his detention was injurious only to himself, and _averted great misfortunes_. Thou must not know the secret.” It is manifest that such a speech could not be made with reference to any of the persons who have been enumerated. It is equally manifest that, as Voltaire has intimated, the mask could have been worn for no other purpose than to prevent a striking likeness from being recognised. Various conjectures have been made as to the paternity of the unknown child, to which Anne of Austria is thought to have given birth. By some the Duke of Buckingham has been assigned as its father, others have attributed it to a French nobleman; some have imagined that it was the fruit of a legitimate union with Cardinal Mazarin, a kind of union which, however, could not take place; and others, with more tenderness for the character of the queen, have represented it to be a twin brother of Louis XIV. The theory of his royal birth may, perhaps, be as erroneous as all the rest; but it appears to me to be the only one by which we can account for the close and perpetual imprisonment, the pains taken to confine the secret to as few persons as possible, the carefully concealed features, and the respect and indulgence which are asserted to have been uniformly shown to the unfortunate captive[8]. We must now turn our attention from the victim of state policy to some of the victims of religious persecution.