The Three Musketeers · Chapter
Endnotes explained
The endnotes provide clarifications on terminology, translations, and historical details referenced in the main text, including notes on the use of 'milady', a type of watered liquor, a haberdasher, Planchet's unexplained return, the renami
What happens
The endnotes provide clarifications on terminology, translations, and historical details referenced in the main text, including notes on the use of 'milady', a type of watered liquor, a haberdasher, Planchet's unexplained return, the renaming of the Palais-Cardinal, the term 'attorney', and the anachronistic mention of Fort La Pointe.
Characters to notice
- Planchet
Referenced in a note questioning his return from London after being left 'stiff as a rush'.
- Duke of Buckingham
Mentioned as possibly sending Planchet back to Paris.
- Cardinal Richelieu
His former palace, the Palais-Cardinal, is noted as having been given to the king.
Key passages
“We are well aware that this term, milady, is only properly used when followed by a family name. But we find it thus in the manuscript, and we do not choose to take upon ourselves to alter it.”
The authors acknowledge that 'milady' should technically be used with a surname, but they have kept it as found in the original manuscript.
Clarification on the usage of the term 'milady'.
“The reader may ask, “How came Planchet here?” when he was left “stiff as a rush” in London. In the intervening time Buckingham perhaps sent him to Paris, as he did the horses.”
The note addresses the apparent inconsistency of Planchet's reappearance after being left incapacitated in London, suggesting Buckingham may have sent him back.
Explains a potential plot inconsistency regarding Planchet's return.
“It was called the Palais-Cardinal before Richelieu gave it to the king.”
The building was originally known as the Palais-Cardinal until Cardinal Richelieu donated it to the king.
Historical note on the renaming of the palace.
“Fort La Pointe, or Fort Vasou, was not built until 1672, nearly 50 years later.”
The fort mentioned in the story was actually constructed about fifty years after the events described.
Points out an anachronism in the novel.