Gone Medieval - Legend of William Tell

Episode Date: August 12, 2025

What happened when tyranny came face to face with an imperturbable crossbow sharp-shooter?Dr. Eleanor Janega explores the myth of Switzerland’s most iconic medieval folk hero with Dr. Marc Lerner. They revisit Altdorf in 1307 where William Tell - allegedly - defied a tyrant with a single, legendary shot and launched a legacy of freedom, resistance, and revolution. But was Tell real or a myth built from folklore? And how did his story echo across the French and American Revolutions, becoming a powerful symbol of liberty far beyond the Swiss Alps?MOREJoan of Archttps://open.spotify.com/episode/4hBFIbXaKdchf8eTKVrgNfGerman Peasants Warhttps://open.spotify.com/episode/57KnTNLmI2LAua6742ompDGone Medieval is presented by Dr.Eleanor Janega. It was edited by Amy Haddow, the producer is Rob Weinberg. The senior producer is Anne-Marie Luff.All music used is courtesy of Epidemic Sounds.Gone Medieval is a History Hit podcast.Sign up to History Hit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries, with a new release every week and ad-free podcasts. Sign up at https://www.historyhit.com/subscribe. You can take part in our listener survey here: https://uk.surveymonkey.com/r/6FFT7MK Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From long-loss Viking ships and kings buried in unexpected places to tales of murder, power, faith, and the lives of ordinary people across medieval Europe and beyond. Join me, Matt Lewis, Dr. Eleanor Jarniger, and some of the world's leading historians as we bring history's most fascinating stories to life, only on history hit. With your subscription, you'll unlock hundreds of hours of exclusive documentaries

with a brand-new release every week exploring everything from the ancient world, to World War II. Just visit historyhit.com forward slash subscribe. Hello, I'm Dr. Eleanorianica and welcome to Gone Medieval from History Hit, the podcast that delves into the greatest millennium in human history. We uncover the greatest mysteries, the gobsmacking details, and the latest groundbreaking research from the Vikings to the Normans, from kings to popes, to the Crusades.

We delve into the rebellions, plots, and murders that tell us who we really were. And how we got here. Altdorf, 1307. The shadow of tyranny falls heavy on the land. The Habsburgs rule with an iron fist, and the people of Uri bow their heads. All that is, except one. William Tell, Hunter, father, Marksman. Today he stands in the town square, his young son Walter by his side.

Before them a cruel decree. Bow before the hat of the tyrannical Habsburg oppressor Gessler or face the consequences. Tell refuses. He will not bend. For this, Gessler demands the unthinkable. You are famed for your aim, Tell. Prove it. Place an abel on your son's head.

One shot. Fail, and both of you die. Tell raises his crossbow. His heart pounds. His hands are steady, but his soul is torn. He takes aim. Every eye in the square is fixed. fixed on him. His son stands still, trusting and brave. Tell's fingers squeezes the trigger.

Tell's done it. The apple falls in two and Walter stands unharmed, wide-eyed, alive. The crowd surges their hope rekindled. But Gessler's eyes are cold. He spies a second arrow in Tell's belt. What was the second arrow for? If the first arrow had struck my son, the second was for you. This is more than a tale of marksmanship. It's the spark that will ignite a revolution. A father's courage, a tyrant's downfall, and the birth of a nation's spirit. I suspect you were waiting for that tune.

William Tell stands as Switzerland's most iconic folk hero. a symbol of resistance against tyranny and a champion of liberty, whose legend has transcended national boundaries to inspire revolutionary movements worldwide. The story has captivated imaginations for centuries, becoming deeply embedded in Swiss national identity, while serving as a universal symbol of defiance against oppression. Though historians debate his historical existence, Tell's cultural impact remains undeniable, spanning literature, music, art, and political discourse across continents and centuries.

And gone medieval listener Tara Bell has written in specifically requesting an episode about William Tell. So here we go. William Tell for Tara Bell. Then, you know, the rest of you. My guest today is Dr. Mark H. Lerner, Associate History Professor at the University of Mississippi, whose work takes the legend of William Tell and how it's used by contemporaries, as a thread to connect various revolutionary experiences and examine civic discourse, the Republican tradition, popular culture, and the jagged transformation of political culture in the age of revolution.

Mark, welcome to gone medieval. Thank you very much. I'm happy to be here. I am absolutely delighted to talk about William Tell today, but I'm going to come out with like the question, which probably plagues you in your dreams. Do we know anything about the big air quotes, real William Tell? Is there a real William Tell that we can talk about at all? Or is this just a legend? In my mind, it's just a legend. Other historians who have written about it more recently have not been willing to say absolutely not. I don't see how this is real. One person's good point is all the other names in the story still exist in Switzerland.

There aren't tells. And all the research that shows where the original story came from, shooting the Apple Shot and how it's glommed on to the Swiss foundational myths also suggest a later addition to me. And certainly, right, people in the 18th century and. And into the 19th century, believed it was true. And that colors how it was used because they could use it as real history. But I don't see how we in 2025 can accept he existed. It's the year of our Lord 2025. We have to let it go.

It should be. But I think that's a really good point because, you know, it will come up again and again when you get these big national myths. As fun as they are and as sexy as they are, we all love a national myth. the 19th century, ooh, they're a bugger for them, aren't they? You know? Yes, they are. That's where we get a lot of them. And so I don't think that there's anything wrong with that, provided we relate to them as though they are a myth, right? Right. Right. Right. And I also think it shows us something about nationalism, right? That very fact leads me to reject the school of nationalism thought that says nationalism is everlasting, right? It's,

To me, it's a 19th century invention. And fine, we can start with the French Revolution, late 18th century, and they're all British national identity starts a little bit earlier. And there's all these things. But fundamentally, this seems like a 19th century invention, which is why all these myths explode in the 19th century, it seems to me. We can't let a good story rest, you know, but speaking of myths and exploding, well, I guess probably exploding is a little too far. You know, when people know the myth of William Tell, especially in the anglosphere, I think that most of us have it end with Tell shooting the apple off his son's head and his son is released. But that's not actually where the myth ends, right? The very first versions that are recorded are very bare bones.

But pretty soon after, in the 16th century and the early 17th century, they expand. it and they expand the story. And I have, when thinking about it, struggled with, is this just for entertainment purposes? Like trying to draw people in? You got to give names to the tyrant. Tell becomes not just tell, but he gets a first name William eventually. You got to give names to his friends who are helping him, all that. And backstories. And you got to make it interesting and exciting, right? Like, as you said, like, if the story is going to be sexy, we got to know details. And after the Apple shot, in most of the stories of the 18th century and later, he's discovered he falls to his knees, he's crying, he's so grateful his son is saved, and an arrow falls out of his clothing. And the tyrant Gessler sees the arrow and confronts him about it.

And, of course, William Tellis is this perfect, virtuous hero, and he's honest about it. He says, if I had harmed my son, I was going to shoot you. And not surprisingly, the tyrant being a tyrant, reacts negatively to that and imprisons them, right? They chain them up. Fine. I promised you your life that you would live, but you're going to this prison surrounded by water on an island in the middle of a fear of Altaire. What do we call in English? I've lost it.

Lake Lutern, yes. Like you're just like me. I love this all the time. I'll have like a German or a check place and I'm like, uh, yes, it's hard. I can't do it. I can't. Yeah.

So he's going to this, you know, this island prison and in chains. And what I can only interpret as a divinely inspired storm comes out of nowhere. Because they don't take the long way around on the land. They take the short path to the boat. And for whatever reason, Gessler himself is on the boat with Tell, and the storm comes out of nowhere, and they're all going to die. And the only person who can save them is the best sailor as well as marksmen in the area. So they released Tell to guide the boat to safety. And he tricks them and gets close to shore and leaps off the boat.

And at that point, they have a little monument on the rock, on the border of the river. of the lake now and a little chapel there, and he escapes. And somehow the others, maybe because Tell got them to shallow water, they survived the storm. And then in the most famous versions of the story, Tell shoots Gessler as Gessler gets off the boat, shoots him with the arrow through the heart, and assassinations the tyrant. Other versions, he kills him later in the pitched battle when they destroyed the castle. other versions he is killed by somebody else, depending on what they want to do with Tell.

But to me, the main version of the story is he's caught with the second arrow. They try to imprison him. The divinely inspired storm sort of lets him free, and he justifiably kills the tyrant. Right? I think that's the key, that the tyrant asked him to do unnatural things like shoot at his son, and therefore he is a justifiable killing rather than a murder. What can I say, but that team william tell? That's where I'm at with this.

But it's two things about this version really strike me. The first is that it reminds me rather a lot of kind of original 19th century and 18th century fairy tales where they're all actually quite grisly and grim. There's rather a lot of Cinderella's sisters' toes being cut off and that sort of a thing. And then we sort of sanitize it as it comes closer to us in time because we're not comfortable with all of that. And, you know, we've got this killing of Gessler that's like that. But fundamentally, I mean, wouldn't the killing of Gessler kind of be a real inspirational act for revolutionaries, which is where we really see the story of William Tell come into its own? Yes, it is an inspirational act for revolutionaries, which is exactly why the elites of Switzerland,

didn't like that version of the story. So it's actually older. The sanitized version is very possibly the first recorded version. So around 1470, the scribe of Untervalden writes the white book of Sarnan, a handwritten document may or may not have been the first version of the story. He may have based it on another elite chronicle, humanist chronicle of the time. but he's given a history of the region and trying to tie his area, his canton to the other cantones, and he's writing in the late 15th century. I think there are popular tell songs, ballads being sung in part of the oral tradition, oral culture, at the same time. The first ones written down and published are 1477, so a little bit after the white book, but in the same time frame. And what I think is going on is there are two competing versions

of the story. One written by the elites meant to control the population and one written and sung about, and then later in 1512, is a festival play that's very popularized.

And they have very different views of the revolution and of the uprising. And so the elitist version is, this guy's a fun. and Tell is protecting his son and his family, but it's really the elites, the natural-born elites of the Canton who are trying to kick out the foreign tyrant, and they are

destroying the castles and leading the rebellion and organizing it all. And in that case, they often tie Tell to one of those elite families, and he's Walter First son-in-law. But he doesn't take the oath at the Rootley Meadow, another foundational myth, which they merge together. This is the mythological founding of the Swiss Federation that has now been dated to 1291 because they found a document in the 19th century. And, I mean, again, it's three cantons made an agreement that's happening in early modern medieval Europe all the time. And they often say, this is everlasting and it lasts three years. Right, but this one, there is a recognizable Switzerland now, so it's a convenient thing. But the popular version is not necessarily that this guy's a foreigner.

It's he's labeled in the first version of the song, he's labeled as a noble or the landfacht or the bailiff of the area. So he's kind of a local aristocrat. And then they're really scared of people taking shots at local aristocrats. And that only increases in the Swiss Peasants War of 1653, where three people dressed as Tell and his confederates of the oath, take a shot at a local aristocrat. They wound him, but they get the guy next to him. And so, and they go to church the next day with the murder weapons, and nobody complains. Like everybody, the priest, the community, oh, yes, this was a justifiable killing. They're in costume still the next day, justifiable killing, approved by God.

And so those very different versions, I think, are the core of why this legend is contested. And so they fear those revolutionary aspects, which, of course, is exactly what the French revolutionaries are embracing when they co-opt the tale for their own purposes. Yeah, so speaking of the co-opting of the tale, there are plenty of Marxman stories out in folklore in general around in this area, right? So it's not just William Tell. Obviously, the obvious kind of correlation in the Anglo sphere is Robin Hood. But, you know, is William Tell one of these things where he's sort of a composite? What is it about marksman or archers? that very specifically gets them this folkloric background?

I don't know if I can answer it fully, but so the one that's been assumed to be the key component foretell is Saxo-Gramaticus, a Danish chronicler, writing around 1,200, has a story about Tocco and the arrows. I think it's King Harold, forces the marksman to shoot the apple off his sons, head. And one of the claims that I find convincing by historians is Worry, the canton in which this supposedly takes place, Altdorf is the capital, I don't want to say capital city, capital village. It's pretty small. But they control the path, the trade paths through the Alps to Italy. And their theory is the Scandinavian traders brought the story with them. And those right in Altdorf, in Ori, saw this as, oh, this fits perfectly with our story. So why Marksman?

I mean, it's a virtue of the time, I guess. Like, this is, the leaders are great warriors and they're honest and virtuous and tell being the great sailor, too, right? Because they're right on the sea, and they need that. So I think there's something there. But there are far-flung ones. There's apparently a Persian tale that's probably a Persian tale that's pretty similar, where the king makes the soldier shoot the arrow off his head. I actually think to me, and this hasn't really been developed much, it reminds me of the binding of Isaac,

the biblical story. So there's old resonances there, I think, is why it keeps coming back, especially with the sun. That makes perfect sense. I mean, there is this kind of, especially within Christianized cultures, we already, not that we really need a way to think about the fact that it's bad when so it tells you to kill their son. I mean, like, I'm not sure we need a whole lot more than that. But there is something that we do like, which is the virtue of going along with being told to do this, you know, like by our betters, which is kind of like the story of Isaac, right? And it's, oh, it's good. Don't worry about it. But as this is a tyrant, you don't get off at the end. but, you know, his inherent marksmanship qualities allow him to rise above. So it sort of does everything. Not only is he a rebel, but he's also obedient a bit, you know, enough. It's kind of like you can use this story as a way to talk about usurping power, but you can also use it as a way of saying, oh, but look, he still is kind of a good guy, right?

Yeah. And I think there's like a humility thing. like the kings, the tyrants, the authority figures who force the shooters to do it is, oh, you're rising above your station. So let me put you back in your place. And then I also wonder if there's this element of, it's not so much that Tell and his inherent marksmanship does it. It's almost as if the arrow is guided by the divine. And so emphasizing that even more and then that divine storm fits even double. better to the story. And so he like praise before he does it, right? Please help this arrow. Yeah.

I love that I love a European kamikaze. What can I say? Yes. This is fantastic, you know. Yeah. Okay. Can I just take you sort of right back? Because you've mentioned already that we've got these various versions of William Tell. And I think sort of looking at them, we can track a little bit about how the medieval period thinks about it and moves on and how this sort of grows into the fabric of Swiss identity. So what is our very first surviving record? That's the Saxo-Gramaticus, or is there something earlier? Well, Saxo-Gramaticus, I wouldn't call a record of tell, but of the arrow shooting. I think that 1470, maybe 1474 or 1470s, a white book of Sarnan. but that's weird to say that's the first surviving record.

They didn't find it until the mid-19th century. So those who really work on the early documents, and I'm more of an 18th, 19th century, so I'm reliant on other people here, they think that the manuscript version circulated, and some of these other humanist chroniclers were aware of it. And then 1477 is the first writing down of the popular song, but I think it existed earlier. So we sort of say, oh, the first recorded version of the elite version of the tale is earlier than the song, but I think it's flipped.

I think the song scared the elites into writing down their version, but we don't have records of it. So the late 15th century, it's first written down. and it's not particularly tied to Hapsburgs yet, because 1477, they just finished a war with the Burgundian, with Charles the Bold. Another song about that war is attached to the original song or some of the versions, and it's not until 1499 when they're fighting the Hapsburgs

and declaring their independence from the Reich, from the Holy Roman Empire, that the Hapsburgs become the enemy. And so the story shifts to fit the needs of the needs of the generations who are writing it. And those chronicles, like Peterman, Ederline and Brenwald and then Simlars, those get published. And then there's another one, Chudy, also written in the 17th century, but not published to the mid-18th century. And that one seems to really establish the elite version of the story. His version is the source for Johannes von

Mueller, who is then the main source for Schiller. And I think in the, the end, Schiller's version has won out in most of our minds, accompanied by Rossini's soundtrack, but I actually think those are more different than people give credit for. Can I posit a theory to you? You know, when we have the sort of elite ideals put out there, are these the ones that are being rediscovered in the 19th century? Or are they leaning more heavily into the William Tell Great Revolutionary because, you know, so for example,

I am automatically comparing and contrasting with like the Czech lands because you can't stop me and I won't be stopped. And in the 19th century, what they go looking for really hard are any instances

where Czechs are mad at the Holy Roman Empire. And then it gets like really, it gets really tricky when you get to like Charles the 4th because they're like, oh, we kind of like him. we don't like that.

But then you get like Jan Hus and then everyone goes, yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay, we're going to go with this. That's who we're going with. And you can really see them lean into that. So they sort of want a statesman who is like the St. Ventiuslaus, right? Like they want someone like that who they can say there is a kind of independent kingship that is Czech. So is the sort of William Tell version, are we finding a William Tell who is a great revolution? Or are we finding a William Tell that is like actually constructs the I wouldn't worry about it.

Trust the Swiss nobility. They're actually really good. It's not it's the Swiss thing is fine. I think it depends on who's telling the story that different groups or different individuals with different political and social agendas are looking for different versions of tell. And in the end, why does tell matter for the Swiss? Something resonates. Right? I don't have a better answer than the people at the time thought this was useful.

And one of the reasons I suspect so many people could find it useful is it's vague and there's no vortex. There's no official original story that you can go back to and disprove the other one. So it's used all the time for multiple purposes. After that Lucerne guy is shot in 1653, the elites tried to crack down on the story. They stopped using it as much. One historian says the William Tell story is half forgotten in 18th century Switzerland. I think that's too far. The radicals are using it.

The song continues to be sung. I don't think you can say it's half forgotten, brought into France, and then re-bought to Switzerland in the luggage of the French army in 1798, as Bergerais writes. It's a great line, but I don't think that's plausible. The radicals kept using it. And there's some funny versions, this 18th century Enlightenment playwright, Ambul. There's a crisis and a scandal in 1760 as two Enlightenment thinkers publish a pamphlet, William Tell, a Danish fable.

So write to the fairy tale thing. had a Danish fable. And they, in publication in 1760, basically say, this is made up story. And you can link it to Saxo Gramaticus. And he wasn't real. And people lose their minds. And so much so that these guys retract what they wrote. And, oh, oh, that's the worst as a historian. Yes. Oh, no. He gets so scared. Like one guy said, oh, this was private. ideas, it was never meant to be published, and the guy who published it's like, yeah, I'm sorry, it's real. But the cat's out of the back, right? Like, they know, but the radicals keep using it, right? That this is a truly popular revolution, and it's the elites who are nervous about it.

And one guy I find really funny, this umbool, his version of the play is Gessler knows the story, knows the inner Swiss claim that they're descendant from Scandinavian migrants and says, well, if you think you're so great, why don't you do what the older Scandinavians did? And that he's merging it too. And that's the way they justify the shot actually happened, which it's pretty hysterical to me. That's incredibly clever as far as I'm so transparent. Like, who are you fooling with that? Which I love.

though. Okay, so for me, one of the things that I tend to say about NITS is I don't think that a useful way of approaching a myth historically is that it's a lie. You know, what I think that myths do for us really well is they're telling us a story that clarifies beliefs or ideas. So, you know, for me, I'd be like, yeah, okay, yeah, whatever, it's made up, but these are the things that we're doing with it. But what I think is quite funny is that, The average person here is like, no, it's not made up. It's like, for me, I suppose the kernel of truth is not so much necessary as the use of it being important. Right. But I suppose that's a common social historian for Freight, right? Yeah, I think that's the historian in us. I agree with that. The kernel of truth is there are a whole series of rebellions and battles.

the ugly side of that truth is, right, the national mythology of Switzerland is there are these three inner Swiss cantons, Uri, Schweitz, and Untervalde. And they make an agreement, which we can now date to 1291, since we found an agreement. We, they found in the 19th century. I had nothing to do with it. They went looking very hard and they found one. And just in time for the 600-year celebration of the document, coincidentally or not. But I'm giving some side-eye. Yes, yeah, fair enough.

Just a little, a normal amount, that's all. Anyway. But there is this agreement. And then the national mythology is, okay, these three formed a union, a confederation, the Igonosensch, and then other cantons started to join it. The problem with that is in 20 years, Zurich switched sides three times. And how can they be an early key member of the Swiss Confederation if in one of these battles, they're siding with the Habsburgs? And so they don't want to- Typical Zurich, can I just say?

They don't want to get too. into the details of the battles, and that's why the tell story can be kind of safe, but if they're aware of those who are recognizably Swiss are on the other side, and this is, I think, another reason why the Habsburgs take over as the key, the one and only enemy. And so that part of it goes back and forth, and there certainly are battles, and one of these versions tries to give an epilogue to Tell's life, and he fights in the Battle of Garten, and of course he's a hero, and then he dies as an old man rescuing a child from a flood.

And, like, he's, you know, he's the perfect person always. And, like, he's not the leader of the Battle of Morgarten. He's just the soldier. He's one of the common people. And that story obviously doesn't have that much traction since this is probably the first, most of the listeners are hearing of it, right? Yeah. Right?

The traction is him as the individual. But is he organizing the contemporaneous revolt against the tyrant, or is he just protecting his family and fighting alongside his comrades? And that seems to me the key difference is, is this revolutionary or is this a justified reestablishment of the Swiss natural elite? But, yeah, I think that's your understanding. of how myths are used, I don't care if it's true or not. Like, that's not what it's, what's important. What's important is how are people using it? And that reflects the period in which they're using it, it seems to me. And what I find super interesting is that it changes over time. The same story can be so flexible. And that's why I got excited about this when I first sort of

came across two people from completely different sides, both shocked that the other person is claiming to be the heir to William Tell. Well, can we talk about one of the particular versions of this? The one I'm most familiar with is the Chronicon Helveticum one. And this is kind of like around 16th century, mid-16th century. And the reason that I know about it the most is that this usually gets kind of trotted out as this is this specific turning point when we're really going

anti-Habsberg. And what's interesting to me about it is it does this very early modern thing of being like, oh, and I've got a date. I have a date. You know, it's the 18th of November, 1307. Yes, yes.

You know, and unfortunately the hated Habsburgs are taking over Switzerland, but we're beginning to fight back. But is this an oversimplification on my part saying that this version is that linked to the ascendant Habsburgs?

Because, I mean, really 16th century, that's when they've got it off the ground, baby. Like, it is, it's Habsburg Central in Europe. Or, you know, am I just kind of looking at this as a modern person seeing what I want? No, I think that's correct. I mean, I think this is the version written by Chudy that I think spreads it

further than any other version had. And I also think it's read in Europe and not just in Switzerland. But I also think Chudy is taking off what some of the others had already done. Right. My understanding is it's written in the mid, mid to late 16th century. And there's some written at the very beginning of the 16th century right after that 1499 war with Maximilian of Habsburg. And so the Habsburgs start as the enemy because they're trying to, in that war, they're saying, what we're doing is justified and natural. The Habsburgs were the unnatural. They so clearly tyrannical if their appointee is making him shoot at his child, right? What could be more unnatural than that and justified rebellion?

And in early modern resistance theory, the only way you're allowed to rebel is if proper authorities are doing it. So that leads back into the natural leaders than the Swiss oligarchs. And then Chudy just does it bigger and he comes up with a date. But there are a whole bunch of dates, right? It's 17th century versions. I've seen 1307, 1308, 1315, 1315, 13. 1303, 1291, 1296, 129, it's all over the place. But in the same 20 years, right? So they do put it there. And yeah, right, November 18th, 1307 sounds better than in the vague recesses of our history.

Yeah, I mean, that, it just makes me smile a bit because, I mean, you're so right. In this period of time, in the, in the, this period of time, in the, 16th century, we are facing rather a lot of uprisings. You know, you have the peasants wars in and around, you know, the German lands. You have a lot of kind of back and forth about that because, you know, very famously, Martin Luther is like, oh, I didn't mean. Wait a minute. Oh, no, the peasants think they're people. Who told them that? You know, so you. Not at all what I was saying. How would you think that? No, not you, them. You know, so just Frederick the wise. He can, can do whatever he wants it. But this really kind of

helps to cement these these ideas. Yes, you can rebel against extant powers, but the right sort of people, again, the biggest air quotes of all time. They're the ones who need to be doing it. Not, you know, just some upstarts

who have dressed up as William Tell. And Switzerland is one of these really interesting societies like this because you've got a lot of people who are making money off the fact that it's a trade route, but it is also really a peasant culture, right? And so trying to really police the boundaries of acceptable rebellion is going to be a huge thing, right? You know? Right. Yeah. No, I think I think that's a really good point. And I think that's what he's addressing. And the fact, right, so in this version, Chudis Chronicum, Hevedicum, Tell does not lead the revolt. He does not lead the oath. He's just protecting his family. And there are other atrocities.

Methel's father's eyes are put out. And, right, it's not just him. But that's, I think that's exactly. I like how you phrase that. It's policing the boundaries between acceptable peasant participation and unacceptable peasant participation. I think that's a great phrase. I'm going to write that down for future use.

Go for it. So I suppose moving on to the way that we think about William Tell today, you know, here we've got a folk hero may or may not existed. I mean, didn't exist. But hey, look, you know, I don't want to be a spoils for it. When does he become this big iconic figure household name that we still talk about today? Because here we have a lot of Swiss versions, but we're talking about him in English right now. So I think it's the 18th century, and I think again you're right about the chronicled Hevetican is key. It's a handwritten chronicle when it's written, but it's published in the 1730s. And then it's read out of Switzerland as well. And then a Swiss guy, Johannes von Mueller, uses that to make his own version that's even more detailed. I don't think it's just Schiller, though I think I refer to Schiller's version as the canonized version, because eventually it becomes that. But Schiller's working off of something that's already expanded

out of Switzerland in the 18th century. The first version that really makes an impact in France is 1749 Samuel Hensie, who's a burn aristocrat, but doesn't agree with the patrician regime. so maybe 1748, he starts talking with his friend, Johann Yaakov Bodmer, who's a big Enlightenment figure in Zurich, about the William Tell story. And they see a way to use and use the William Tell to redefine the Confederation, the Swiss Confederation. And this fits with Bodmer's other work. If we look to history, And we could say this fits with natural law theory, right? If we think about the origins of society and the origins of society are democratic, then we can reframe what's going on now in this mostly oligarchic patrician confederations. Yeah, Schfitte still has the Lanzgamind and the peasant citizens are able to vote, but they usually follow along with the elites.

But they're looking for historical precedent. And so they're challenging the elite chronicle version of it. He is killed, executed by the city and Republic of Bern in 1749 for participating in a revolt against the patrician class. But that's republished in 1762 in France. Bodmer then takes that and republishes his own plays. Bodmer was very against performing plays, but it was allowed to be read. And then in 1766, LaMere, a French playwright, produces a play that makes an impact in the Parisian cultural world. It's not hugely successful, but I would say moderately successful.

And then it's reworked and republished. And it becomes quite popular with a reading public. And then the revolutionaries change the play a little bit. And during the Radical Republic, the National Convention declares we need to, we need propaganda. We need to teach the population how to be Republican. And they named three plays that are going to be performed free for the population. And this Le Maire play is one of them. William Tell, Guillaume Tell is one of these three chosen plays by the French government to teach the French population about Republicans.

which is sort of crazy in and of itself. So I think this play in 1766 really inserts it into the French cultural consciousness, and then as it's rewritten and edited, sometimes without the playwright's permission, including the last scene during the terror, where it becomes retitled Le Sincolot-Suis, and the Sankulat show up in the Alps to sort of chat with Tess, and they all sing the Marseillaise together. I love it.

Because why wouldn't they? Obviously. Obviously, yes, exactly. So that gets it into France, but it also is clear that everybody knows the story. And it's picked up like there's a painting in Amsterdam where they had these shooting clubs in Amsterdam. And they're the, you got these Dutch burgers in their white collars watching tell. perform the shooting and the guild that does it, like they paid to get their own faces in that in the painting. And it just, you know, there's a link to classical republicanism, right? The citizens

are the defenders of the state and patriotic and whoever is willing to pick up arms is a true citizen. So these shooting clubs spread because of that, not just in Switzerland. And what's crazy to me and why, you know, I found this one story that I told you about and then, oh, look, here's an article that I can use to further my professional career. And then I, you know, spoke to a musicologist who then told me what he knew about Rossini. And I'm like, oh, this is much bigger. And it's an accepted story. And everybody knows it. And it's like one of these classical stories like how David can paint the Oath of the Haratai, and everybody knows the story. He doesn't need to give the background. And so they just jump into it. But again,

it's also vague enough where every place can use it to their own purposes. So for my purposes, I want to write a book. I'm trying to write a book about the age of revolutions, right? And here's something that exists across a transnational age of revolutions that has a framework, but in each specific locale, it's based on local contingency. So that gets at what I'm trying to tell my story about the age of revolutions, that it's both local and international at the same time. And I think the tell story sort of demonstrates that because it's being used in that way. But yeah, during the French Revolution, the radical version is super popular. In 18, There's a popular British version that makes the Anglo circuit, right?

It's into Scotland, into Ireland, to New York, Philadelphia, New Orleans. There's one performance in New Orleans that is used for a patriotic night, which will support the Texas cause and the Texas battle against Mexico. And it's like, here's this English play about a Swiss hero performed in New Orleans by. American actors about the Texas independence from Mexico. And how does that happen? And then, and then that same play is performed in Paris by a Shakespearean troop on July 4th, 1828. And, you know, they decide Hamlet on July 14th, right? So you've got these stories about illegitimate kings being overturned legitimately as Charles X is sitting there. And I don't understand how it got through the censors, right? The censors aren't idiots. They know. It's like

the censors in Milan and Venice, when Austria still controlled them, Rossini's opera, well, you can't have the Austrians as the enemies, right? That might give these Italians ideas. So they change it to William Wallace in the highlands of Scotland. And the music stays the same, the story stays the same. But every audience member knows exactly what's going on. And the censors had to also, they're just covering their own butts, right? And so what I find fascinating is how well-known it is and how widespread it is. American revolutionaries, you know, like Brutus is very famous and the opponent to the federalist and the U.S. Constitution and a different version of republicanism. But William Tell is used as a pen name to write in about the issues of the

time portraying a certain kind of republicanism. Tell and Washington are linked together. Medals are it as defenders of liberty. There's a stone in the Washington monument from the Tell Chapel in Switzerland, right? They collected all these international things. And so it stays linked. And back to our question of whether it's true or not, this is why I think it's key that they thought it was true. If so much of censorship at the time, you're not allowed to talk about our political events, but you are allowed to bring in news from outside. You can talk about other country's problems, right? Under the old regime in France, or in the constitutional monarchy, you can discuss events elsewhere. You just can't really comment on political events

in France. Here's something that they say, well, this is history. This is true. You can't censor this. And the comparisons are so obvious that it's their way of promoting revolution or reform or some version of that. Here's a true story. Isn't this similar to our situation? Can't we say let's not allow tyranny? And because it's true in their minds, right, the big scare quotes, it gets through. I take it back. I believe that this is stark.

As long as everyone gets to use it against tyranny, then, oh, yeah, William Till was a real guy, 18th of November 1307. You heard it here. I mean, because, yeah, that is the thing. I suppose it's kind of easy for us at the remove of the modern or indeed the postmodern, if that's what you want to call it, to say, oh, well, it doesn't really matter because the thing that matters is the use of stories, the propaganda of it. right, which, you know, if you are the revolutionary government, you can just come out and say, yeah, we're doing propaganda now, great. You know, and of course, almost anything that gets written down in the medieval period or indeed the early modern period, a lot of the time is just propaganda because who has the money to write things to out the rich and powerful, right? And we can critique that

all we want and say, well, the historical data shows us this guy didn't really exist. He enters the record at this point, the story is expanded here. But that's because we have the luxury of discussing these things in a relatively free society, right? When you're under the gun of a particularly oppressive regime, which, you know, let's face it, the Habsbergs were, you know, I'm not here to sugarcoat that. Then suddenly that plausible deniability is incredibly important. Yeah. I think, I think that's exactly right. And if they can point to it, yeah, the Habsburgs can make them change the story. That story isn't one we told.

There is one, another funny one. I like the funny stories. Performed in Vienna, and then it turns out that they changed the ending. And Gessler is Tells Long Loss father and he sees the errors of his ways and they embrace. And so that's allowed in the Habsburg realm. but also changing it to William Wallace and that version of Rossini's opera. And yeah, they are, right? I mean, all medieval early modern regimes are oppressive.

Like, there's no other way to think about it. It's, as you said for Luther, yes, for us, not for you. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, I suppose if you're Rossini and you're trying to get an opera put on in Vienna, you're just going to have to bend to that because the empire has incredible power generally, let alone in bloody Vienna.

I mean, come on. Right. What are you going to do? But it's, I mean, and then I find that kind of interesting, right? Like, he's invited and paid outrageous sums for the time to come to Paris. And he's there to sort of establish a French operatic tradition. And he succeeds. But he retires 1829.

Guillaume Tell is his last opera. He retires relatively young, probably since the done. of Beethoven. He's the single most famous composer in Europe. And this is his culmination, but for a French audience, but it spreads, right? And it's clearly, it clearly resonates in his native Italy against the Austrian rule. And as I like to joke about the uncultured of my generation, which includes me, it's the, you know, rugged frontier individualism of the Lone Ranger. Right? And it is super catchy music, right? My kid's piano teacher has my son playing it in the recital tomorrow, right? And he had no idea. It's great. He had no idea I was working on it.

And he's playing that snippet of the overture, which is just fantastic. How can you, how can you not get caught up in that? Oh, you know, Americans look. We love this. You know, we we've long for a European reason to do something very American. It brings everything together for us. You know, I'm enjoying an opera, but through the lens of the lone ranger. Thank you very much. That's great for us. Fundamentally, if we're thinking about William Tell, I think that he's kind of a lot like, I don't know, George Washington is for Americans, where there's this fundamental mythological historical figure that,

is supposed to tell a story about Swiss identity, right? So it's like, this is about the birth of their nation. This is about what it means to be Swiss. And I think that that's even true in the 21st century. Now, I think that probably the average Swedish citizen would tell you, yeah, we know it's a myth, but they still kind of like it, right? So, I mean... The 2012 Olympics, the Arrow and the Apple were part of the Swiss national team uniforms. They like it, right?

Another winter Olympics, they had Swiss cheese on the uniforms, right? They lean into their stereotypes. It's great. Like, this is ours and we're going to embrace it. I love the Swiss. Some of my cousins are Swiss. And so, you know, God bless them. You know, they're doing a great line in cheese and chocolate.

Right. And what could be better than that? those two. But I was accused multiple times of that's where I chose to do my research because of my love of chocolate. So true. Hard to deny it. But it's, but it is. I think there are elements of, right, the Swiss, part of their national mythology is we are egalitarian to an extent, not hierarchical society, building community and communes. And so even if, you're, If, you know, I'm willing to call the inner Swiss canton's democratic in an older sense. It's not modern universal democracy, but they're democratic elements of it.

And if you don't like it, well, but heavy popular sovereignty, heavy republicanism, right? There, they stay a republic. And is it one republic or multiple Swiss republics in the medieval early modern? That's fine. But it is a Republican form led by elites, no doubt. But I think part of the reason why it stays front and center in their own self-mythology merged with this rootly oath story where at the Meadow, the three representatives of the three cantons swear an oath to never tolerate tyrants or kings and the communities stay together. That tell story fits so perfectly with that, even if the rootly meadow story is older than the tell story.

It embraces some of their own conceptions about who they are as a people, right? He steps forward when needed, but doesn't remain a leader, right? He retracts. That's where that Morgarton, where he's just a common soldier, is sort of a nice one, right? He comes back into the common people. And I'm just the father. We're protecting them. And, you know, super skilled as a sailor and a marksman.

and, you know, the Swiss virtue element and what's true Swiss liberty and true Swiss virtue, and all of that is part of it. But I think it continues to play into it. And, you know, maybe about 10 years ago, there was a graphic novel published where I think Zombie Gessler comes back to fight Cyborg Tell. Yes. And it's like, it can keep being updated. And it's kind of fantastic again. Would you know what? We absolutely love a flexible hero. We love the ability to recreate a story over and over again. And I guess it just goes to show you how fruitful the medieval period can still be for our modern mind. Yeah. Yeah, that's great. Mark, thank you so much for coming on. This has been an absolute delight. Well, thank you, Eleanor. Thank you for inviting me. It's a pleasure to be here. Thanks. or pure legend, William Tell's impact on culture, politics, and national identity is undeniable.

From the earliest chronicles of the 15th century to Schiller's influential drama, from Rucini's famous overture to contemporary political discourse, Tell's story has demonstrated remarkable adaptability and enduring appeal. For the Swiss, Tell represents the birth of their nation and the core values of independent, and liberty that continue to define Swiss identity. For revolutionaries and freedom fighters across continents and centuries, he has served as an inspirational symbol of resistance against tyranny and the triumph of ordinary people against oppressive regimes.

Dr. Mark H. Lerner's research illuminates H. Lerner's research transcended his Swiss origins to become a truly international figure, whose story was adapted and reinterpreted across national boundaries to address local political concerns. As learner shows, the flexibility of the tell narrative allowed it to function as a powerful symbolic resource during the Age of Revolution and beyond. Though historians may continue to debate

whether William Tell ever actually shot an apple from his son's head, his legend has undoubtedly hit its mark in the collective imagination, inspiring generations to value freedom and resist oppression. As noted by the House of Switzerland, ultimately, the legend can be interpreted however you like, which is probably what's made it such a success for the last 700 years. Thanks to Dr. Mark Lerner and to you for listening to Gone Medieval from History Hit. Remember, you can enjoy unlimited access to award-winning original TV documentaries, including my recent film Medieval Apocalypse,

and add-free podcasts by signing up at History Hit.com. com forward slash subscription. You can follow Gone Medieval on Spotify, where you can leave us comments and suggestions or wherever you get your podcasts, and tell all your friends and family that you've Gone Medieval. Until next time.