Philosophical Dictionary (Vol. 2)

Fourthly, this action, so tyrannical, so unworthy of a king and even of any honest man, and so punishable by the laws in any country, would have been as imprudent as it was ridiculous and criminal; it would have made Henry IV detestable to the entire bourgeoisie of Paris, whom it was in his best interest to treat with care.

There was, therefore, no need to soil history with such a flat tale; there was no need to dishonor Henry IV with such an impertinent anecdote.

In a book titled Literary Anecdotes original: "Anecdotes littéraires", printed by Durand in 1752, with privilege, here is what one finds in volume III, page 183: "The loves of Louis XIV having been performed in England, this prince also wished to have those of King William performed. Abbé Brueys was commissioned by M. de Torcy to write the play: but although applauded, it was not performed, because the one who was its subject died in the meantime."

There are as many absurd lies as there are words in these few lines. The loves of Louis XIV were never performed on the London stage. Louis XIV was never petty enough to order that a comedy be made about the loves of King William. King William never had a mistress; it was not such a weakness that he was accused of. The Marquis de Torcy never spoke to Abbé Brueys. He could never have made, to him or to anyone, such an indiscreet and childish proposal. Abbé Brueys never wrote the comedy in question. Trust anecdotes after that.

It is said in the same book that "Louis XIV was so pleased with the opera of Isis that he had an