Dr. Cora Dietl, Tübingen

In 1498, while the Imperial Diet took place in Freiburg, King Maximilian I. wrote to the city council of Freiburg and demanded the Corpus Christi procession to be postponed. It was bound for 14^th June; he wanted it to take place a week later since he wished to attend it and he couldn’t arrive in Freiburg on time. The council, however, decided not to wait but rather to continue according the original plans and to welcome the king with a separate procession a week later. The major point of the following discussion, as it is documented in the city archives, was the appropriate order of procession among the representatives of the city, the university and the nobility. Except for the sacrament itself, there is no evidence for any difference between the Corpus Christi procession and the royal entry which was held a week later. If, however, there was no major difference, why would Maximilian have wanted to have the Corpus Christi procession postponed instead of having a procession set up for himself?

In 1439 Freiburg had been turned into a royal seat and into a base for the Habsburg expansionism against Switzerland and Burgundy by duke Albrecht IV. He held his residence in a separate wing of the Dominican monastery in Freiburg, where he is known to have organised a large number of festivals. He also founded the university in 1457, which was supposed to spread the duke’s and his family’s glory and to educate clerks for the court’s needs. Albrecht tried to support both the nobility and the university against the civic bodies; in 1454 he dissolved the guilds. His successor Sigismund, however, had to re-establish them in 1464 in order to safe the city’s economy. When Maximilian came to power in 1490, he tried to make use of both the strategic position of Freiburg and of the potential of the strong civic body and the university. He gave several privileges to the city while demanding it to host his soldiers when they assembled for any of his various military campaigns. He carefully elected local dignitaries and university professors for diplomatic missions and key positions at his court, among them for example Peter Sprung, the highest guild master, who also set up a Meistersinger union (which finally received its official recognition in 1513, after Sprung’s death). He acted as Maximilian’s agent in town. Konrad Stürzel, who had been rector of the University of Freiburg at several times, became chancellor of the Habsburg court. His position enabled him to promote several young academics to become poetae laureati, court poets.

A poetic genre Maximilian showed great interested in was the drama. A remarkable number of Maximilian’s court poets wrote Latin dramas, either for their promotion ceremony itself, or for similar university and court events. As the most important examples I’d like to name Conrad Celtis, Jacob Locher, Joseph Grünpeck and Heinrich Bebel. Jacob Locher, docent for poetics in Freiburg, who (supported by Konrad Stürzel) became a poeta laureatus in 1497, wrote and staged two dramas in Freiburg, the »Historia de Rege Frantie« (1495) and the »Tragoedia de Thurcis et Suldano« (1497). Both of them are not only dedicated to the Roman King, but clearly express Maximilian’s political intentions. The first of his plays interprets the 1494/95 war in Italy as a great success of the Roman King and as a sign of France’s ceasing force (which, however, wasn’t true). The latter, which was written for the celebration of the poet’s coronation, depicts a successful crusade against the Turks done by all European kings under the lead of Maximilian and Pope Alexander. The crusade never took place, it rather had been Maximilian’s unfulfilled hope for the whole of his rule. The play’ prologue claims the presence of the King during the performance in Freiburg; he most probably was not present, but the performance is supposed to have taken place in front of his throne, i.e. in his residence. The final scene, however, is a triumph, which could as well have been staged in the street. The city of Freiburg thus did not only experience processions at various religious feast days and at carnival, but also performances of Latin drama.

Maximilian’s interest in drama as well as in any kind of festivals and ceremonies, might explain his wish to participate in the Corpus Christi procession in 1498. We still, however, don’t know whether it was a mere procession or a processional play. There is an undated order of the Freiburg Corpus Christi procession which has come down to us in a late 15^th century manuscript in the archiepiscopal archive in Freiburg. It has been printed several times. For the purpose of further discussion I repeat it here. I quote Bernd Neumann:

The cited processional order does not give any indication whether there were any dialogues: It only indicates that members of the guilds represented the mentioned figures (it is said that two people slipped into the dragon’s costume) and that they showed some actions. Voices were obviously used in the Maries’ laments; whether the lament was verbal or nonverbal cannot be decided. The first dialogue from the Freiburg Corpus Christi cycle that have come down to us is part of an extended version of the procession. It belongs to a Christmas scene, which must have been inserted between the numbers 2 and 3. It was organised by a parish priest. The manuscript has been dated early 16^th century, possibly 1508.

If a play or pantomimic performance as it is suggested through the late 15^th century processional order was performed on Corpus Christi Day, 1498 it is well understandable why Maximilian would have been interested in it: It is not only an extraordinary presentation in itself, it also presents the world history in a way which should extremely please Maximilian and the Habsburg family: St. George, one of only two saints whose legends were inserted into the biblical history, representing the time of Christianity and the Church between Whitsun and the Last Judgement, was Maximilian’s favourite saint.

In 1468 Emperor Frederick III, Maximilian’s father, had founded the order of St. George, a knightly order which was supposed to protect the Western world against the Turks and to foster the memory of the Habsburg family. The foundation act was the fulfilment of a vow that Frederick had done earlier. This might be the reason why the Emperor was not very enthusiastic about the Order. His son, however, was – both about the order and its patron. From the very beginning until the end of his rule, Maximilian claimed the fight against the Turks as his major duty. His ambitious vision (which was far from being fulfilled) was to become the emperor who finally defeated Christianity’s worst enemy, the Ottoman Empire. During the Imperial Diet of Frankfurt, 1489, Maximilian promoted the Order’s Grand Master into the high nobility. Five years later he himself became a member of the Order and proclaimed the knights of St. George as the most important weapon that Christianity had against the Turks.

The fact that St. George appears in the Corpus Christi procession of Freiburg, which was a royal seat, at the end of the 15^th century is thus most probably a reflection of Maximilian’s frequently articulated ideas, if it is not directly due to his influence. The second saint in the cycle, St. Christopher, well forms a unity with St. George: They are the two protectors against the major threats at that time, the Turks and the plague, and they are the patrons of the two parties dealing with the Islam, the crusaders and the pilgrims.

The second extant complete order of the Freiburg Corpus Christi procession play dates from 1516. It is widely extended in comparison with the first processional order. The extensions, however, could have already existed at the beginning of the 16^th century, like that of the above mentioned Christmas scene. The 1516 processional order comprises 24 plays:

I would like to point at the two new non-biblical scenes performed by two new non-guild groups: The Brotherhood of St. Sebastian, a religious lay union formed around the end of the 15^th century, presents the legends of its patron – a topic which might not surprise. It is more surprising to see some non-defined group of citizens’ sons (possibly the second religious lay group that was formed in Freiburg at that time, the "Rosenkranzgesellschaft") staging the legend of Saint Ursula. Ursula is the patron of Cologne, where she is said to have been killed by Huns, together with 11,000 maidens, Pope Cyriacus and a large number of noblemen and priests who followed her.

In 1520 and in all later documents referring to the cycle the apprentices of the scissors grinders are mentioned as the group who staged the play of St. Ursula. It is the only play in the cycle that changed its providers. The play is often mentioned in the city’s account books since the ship which was used as a stage for Ursula and her maidens had to be repaired every other year. Only the goldsmiths’ crucifixion play seems to have come close to the costs of the St. Ursula play. It is therefore worth enquiring about a special interest that the city of Freiburg might have had in St. Ursula. Why otherwise should the city bear the high costs of the play and care for it being taken over by some other group when the "citizens’ sons" stopped staging it?

The text of the play has not come down to us any earlier than in the 1599 manuscript of the complete cycle, Ms A. As opposed to most of the other parts of the Freiburg Corpus Christi cycle, the St. Ursula play does not depend upon the Bolzano Passion play; a direct source has not yet been detected.

The first part of the play very briefly presents the King of England’s wooing for Ursula, the princess of Brittany. She demands the company of 11,000 maidens for a three year’s journey and she also demands the conversion of her bridegroom. Ursula is granted both. The second part of the plot starts with a Turkish messenger addressing Ursula:

He immediately does so and asks the Turkish Emperor to act quickly against the dangerous woman: Herr kayser, thundt zur sach geschwindt,/ Dieweill man sie im landt noch findt. (Sir Emperor, act quickly in this matter, as long as she is still in the country). The Emperor quickly orders his servants to start the massacre right away. Ursula’s death is not portrayed; we only hear the last monologues of three victims: the pope, St. Cordula and St. Apollonia. All three of them demonstrate in nearly the same words an extreme firmness in faith. The exemplary function for the audience is obvious.

The Huns mentioned in the legend – Vincence of Beauvais had identified their king with Attila – have here been changed into Turks. Though for geographical reasons an identification of the Huns and the Turks seems to suggest itself, strangely enough as to my knowledge it has not been made in any German play or any widespread legendary older than the Freiburg cycle. The Freiburg play of St. Sebastian also identifies the Romans with the Turks, which is a modernising correction against the source from Bolzano. Thus, all three, the St. George play and the younger additions, the St. Ursula and the St. Sebastian play are plays against the Turks.

As already mentioned, the text of the St. Ursula play has only come down to us in a late 16^th century version. Theoretically the Turks could have been exchanged against the Huns very late. All that we know about the play’s contents in 1516 is that it ended with St. Apollonia. The two female martyrs Ursula (who is said to have been killed by Huns in Cologne) and Apollonia (who was killed by Romans in Alexandria) have sometimes been depicted together. They could form a pair parallel to St. George and St. Christopher. The grammatical construction in the 1516 order, however, suggests that Apollonia is not only a second saint presented in the play, but a companion of Ursula’s: Sant Ursel mit der zuogehordt, sant Appolonia und andern. The Dative ending of andern links it to mit, i.e. Apollonia and the others are part of the zuogehordt. This detail could count as a hint for the fact that certain unsusual features of the 1599 St. Ursula play had already been there in the 1516 version.

Looking at the text more closely, some further unusual features become visible: In the legend the pope who followed Ursula is called Cyriacus. There is no historical pope with this name. When excavations were made on the so-called ager Ursulanus next to Cologne in the 12^th century, among the huge number of graves with name-plates there was one which said Cyriacus papa. (Most probably it is a confusion with the martyr St. Cyriacus who died in Rome in 305). All versions of the legend used the "documented" name, some even tried to explain why Cyriacus had been erased from the papal records in the Vatican. Only the Freiburg version changes the name of the pope: He is called "Robin", and he is accused of having been a good heathen, even though at the end he excels as an example of perfect faith. The bad or slandered pope is a rather popular topic in late medieval literature. The author of the Freiburg play, however, seems to have found it necessary to change the name of the pope before depicting him as one of these typical late medieval popes. A Pope Robin/Robert certainly never existed. Among the late 15^th and 16^th century popes there is only one whose civil name has some faint similarity to Robert: Rodrigo de Borgia, i.e. Pope Alexander VI (1492–1502). He was the pope in rule when Jacob Locher wrote his dramas in Freiburg, and he plays a central role in both dramas. As already mentioned, in the »Tragoedia de Thurcis et Suldano« he is (together with Maximilian) the initiator and leader of the crusade against the Turks. In the »Historia de Rege Frantie« he is the victim of the French attack. The French and especially their advisor Ludovico Moro, however, claim that Alexander is a friend of the Turks and heathens (Act II). The historical background of this slandering assumption is that during Alexander’s rule an Ottoman prince was a well cared for hostage at the papal court. The features of Pope Robin thus fit for Pope Alexander (Rodrigo) – though it cannot be denied that other popes might be found for whom the features suited as well.

There is a second figure mentioned by the Turkish messenger in the Freiburg St. Ursula play: the King of Meran. Meran neither had a king nor a duke. A scribe could easily have confused Meran with Milan. Milan didn’t have a king either, but a very important duke. Ludovico Moro, the uncle of Maximilian’s wife Bianca Maria Sforza is not only one of the major characters in Locher’s »Historia de Rege Frantie«, the advisor who made Charles VIII attack Italy and then quickly changed to Maximilian’s party. He was in fact a very important but not very reliable political partner of the Roman King, who depended on the Sforza money for his campaigns in Italy and his planned crusade. Fronts in Italy changed quickly, and sometimes the one or other party was said to co-operate with the Turks. Ein guetter heidnisch man, who, however suddenly turns against the Turks, could thus be a good description for the Duke of Milan.

The present relevance of the plot and the need for the audience to look out for contemporary parallels as an explanation for the unusual features of the St. Ursula play is supported by the phrase dieweill man sie im landt noch findt spoken by the messanger. It expresses an immediate and very close confrontation of the Christians with the Turks. They are both in one country, and it is clearly suggested to the audience that something has to be done right away to protect the Christians against the heathen attack. The present threat of the Turks was obvious, especially in the Habsburg territory.

Nothing could justify the introduction of St. Ursula into the Freiburg play as well as the interpretation of the heathen persecutors as Turks. If we assume that the Turks had been mentioned in it from the time when the Ursula play was introduced into the cycle, it would mean that the stronger stress against the Turks came into the Freiburg procession during the rule of Maximilian. A Corpus Christi play presenting the time of the Christian church as a time of struggle against heathens, namely the Turks would ideally suit Maximilian’s world view and his crusade propaganda. It is known that the legend of St. Ursula had already been used for the purpose of crusading propaganda in the 12^th century. The political situation had meanwhile changed, and the literary tradition, too. The vernacular play organised by the guilds in the Habsburg town, which had a head guild master who worked for the court, certainly had to be influenced by the much more explicit Latin drama written and staged by the poeta laureatus in the same town at roughly the same time. Such a close co-existence of University drama and vernacular religious plays is rare. It was made possible by Maximilian’s politics of binding both the university and the city authorities to his court.