Search — Rudolf Steiner Archive

Search results 4961 through 4970 of 6282

˂ 1 ... 495 496 497 498 499 ... 629 ˃

year

city

author

translator

volume

title

clear

help

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 228 25 Feb 1925, Marie Steiner
But that is the nicest thing about the book, the honey that you have scooped out of it. I understood that someone who emphasized the type of the “Jüngerin” ⁴ has emphasized the type of the “disciple” so strongly, has nothing left for a motif like that struck in “Gyges and his Ring” and even forgets the artistic perfection of the work, — I could also hold it against this disciple that her creator only sees the wife and the harlot in addition to her. But while reading this book, I wanted to hold another tripartite division up to him: ⁵ The Virgin, the Mother, the Queen. I try to understand why a man like Steffen does not know the Virgin, who is also a necessity within the whole and in and of herself, - and I cannot do so.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 228 25 Feb 1925,

Marie Steiner

But that is the nicest thing about the book, the honey that you have scooped out of it. I understood that someone who emphasized the type of the “Jüngerin” ⁴ has emphasized the type of the “disciple” so strongly, has nothing left for a motif like that struck in “Gyges and his Ring” and even forgets the artistic perfection of the work, — I could also hold it against this disciple that her creator only sees the wife and the harlot in addition to her. But while reading this book, I wanted to hold another tripartite division up to him: ⁵ The Virgin, the Mother, the Queen. I try to understand why a man like Steffen does not know the Virgin, who is also a necessity within the whole and in and of herself, - and I cannot do so.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 228 25 Feb 1925, Marie Steiner
228 To Rudolf Steiner in Dornach Wednesday, February 25, 1925 Berlin, February 25, 1925, evening. Dear E., I have just managed to pull myself together after spending the day in bed. Yesterday was a bit too much for me to still let myself be talked into going to the opening at 5 p.m. at the Singakademie after the very solemn and impressive ceremony in the morning. The priests were so accommodating, picking me up at the train station, taking me home in the car, and then picking me up again; they even wanted to do it every day, but my strength is not enough for that. There was a terrible tumult at the Singakademie until one was inside, a great crush and pushing and shouting of the servants who kept order. But the opening was solemn – with the lighting of the seven-armed candelabrum in complete silence, the dignified march of the white-clad priests and a very strong speech by Rittelmeyer. In the evening I was at home, but I let myself be tempted to read ³.I read it yesterday and today, and I was really moved by it. I struggled through it with difficulty and was amazed at the wonderfully beautiful thing you have brought out of it. But that is the nicest thing about the book, the honey that you have scooped out of it. I understood that someone who emphasized the type of the “Jüngerin” ⁴ has emphasized the type of the “disciple” so strongly, has nothing left for a motif like that struck in “Gyges and his Ring” and even forgets the artistic perfection of the work, — I could also hold it against this disciple that her creator only sees the wife and the harlot in addition to her. But while reading this book, I wanted to hold another tripartite division up to him: ⁵ The Virgin, the Mother, the Queen. I try to understand why a man like Steffen does not know the Virgin, who is also a necessity within the whole and in and of herself, - and I cannot do so. At any rate, I do not find her with him, and I see in this the reason for his dislike of Rhodope,⁶ who, despite her husband, is a virgin. I felt somewhat unwell, mentally, from the dissection of the emotional experiences of those ladies, but at least I knew from what depths he drew the strength that was transformed into his poems. Such are the prices we must pay. Dear heart, sending you a telegram on Friday^{7, ^{To mark Rudolf Steiner's birthday on February 27th.} seems too banal to me. Hopefully this letter will arrive in time and convey all my love and reverence and gratitude for me and for humanity.} Sincerely, Marie. 3. novel by Albert Steffen, reviewed by Rudolf Steiner in no. 9 of the 4th year of the journal “Das Goetheanum” of March 1, 1925. Marie Steiner had read Rudolf Steiner's article before it was published and before she left for Berlin on February 23, 1925, to which Rudolf Steiner refers in his letter to her of February 27, 1925 (No. 229). — Rudolf Steiner's discussions of Albert Steffen's works can be found in the volume 'The Goetheanum Idea in the Midst of the Present Cultural Crisis', GA 36. 4. Refers to Albert Steffen's poem “Die Jüngerin” from the collection “Wegzehrung”. 5. The Virgin, the Mother, the Queen: Goethe's “Faust,” Part Two, Act Five: Ascension. 6. the main female figure in Hebbel's “Gyges and his Ring”.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 228 25 Feb 1925,

Marie Steiner

228

To Rudolf Steiner in Dornach
Wednesday, February 25, 1925

Berlin, February 25, 1925, evening.

Dear E., I have just managed to pull myself together after spending the day in bed. Yesterday was a bit too much for me to still let myself be talked into going to the opening at 5 p.m. at the Singakademie after the very solemn and impressive ceremony in the morning. The priests were so accommodating, picking me up at the train station, taking me home in the car, and then picking me up again; they even wanted to do it every day, but my strength is not enough for that. There was a terrible tumult at the Singakademie until one was inside, a great crush and pushing and shouting of the servants who kept order. But the opening was solemn – with the lighting of the seven-armed candelabrum in complete silence, the dignified march of the white-clad priests and a very strong speech by Rittelmeyer. In the evening I was at home, but I let myself be tempted to read ³.I read it yesterday and today, and I was really moved by it. I struggled through it with difficulty and was amazed at the wonderfully beautiful thing you have brought out of it. But that is the nicest thing about the book, the honey that you have scooped out of it. I understood that someone who emphasized the type of the “Jüngerin” ⁴ has emphasized the type of the “disciple” so strongly, has nothing left for a motif like that struck in “Gyges and his Ring” and even forgets the artistic perfection of the work, — I could also hold it against this disciple that her creator only sees the wife and the harlot in addition to her. But while reading this book, I wanted to hold another tripartite division up to him: ⁵ The Virgin, the Mother, the Queen. I try to understand why a man like Steffen does not know the Virgin, who is also a necessity within the whole and in and of herself, - and I cannot do so. At any rate, I do not find her with him, and I see in this the reason for his dislike of Rhodope,⁶ who, despite her husband, is a virgin.

I felt somewhat unwell, mentally, from the dissection of the emotional experiences of those ladies, but at least I knew from what depths he drew the strength that was transformed into his poems. Such are the prices we must pay.

Dear heart, sending you a telegram on Friday^{7, ^{To mark Rudolf Steiner's birthday on February 27th.} seems too banal to me. Hopefully this letter will arrive in time and convey all my love and reverence and gratitude for me and for humanity.}

Sincerely, Marie.

3. novel by Albert Steffen, reviewed by Rudolf Steiner in no. 9 of the 4th year of the journal “Das Goetheanum” of March 1, 1925. Marie Steiner had read Rudolf Steiner's article before it was published and before she left for Berlin on February 23, 1925, to which Rudolf Steiner refers in his letter to her of February 27, 1925 (No. 229). — Rudolf Steiner's discussions of Albert Steffen's works can be found in the volume 'The Goetheanum Idea in the Midst of the Present Cultural Crisis', GA 36.
4. Refers to Albert Steffen's poem “Die Jüngerin” from the collection “Wegzehrung”.
5. The Virgin, the Mother, the Queen: Goethe's “Faust,” Part Two, Act Five: Ascension.
6. the main female figure in Hebbel's “Gyges and his Ring”.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 229 27 Feb 1925, Rudolf Steiner
Your kind letter was delivered to me an hour ago. I am so sorry that you were under such attack again. People mean well when they want you to be around for their things. But it does make one weak. I understand that the “roughness of the work” has upset you so much. And of course you are absolutely right when you speak of the woman's lack of understanding as you do.
And the fact that Steffen is with us: I see a significant karma in that too. That he doesn't understand Gyges is not surprising, because he has a hard time empathizing with foreign art in general. And Rhodope is so very different from what Steffen can see in the nature of a woman.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 229 27 Feb 1925, Rudolf Steiner
229 To Marie Steiner in Berlin Friday, February 27, 1925 Goetheanum, February 27, 1925 M.l.M. I am writing these lines at about the time when you would otherwise be sitting by my side. I can only think with the deepest inner emotion how wonderful it is when I can listen to a report of your work and we can discuss one or other aspect of it. And when you [I of you] occasionally read in my “life” the description of our joint activity, then I feel deeply how connected we are. That karma also brings other people close to me is just karma. And the illness has now shown how this karma is incisive. But you have struggled to understand; that is a blessing for me. I can only feel and think together with you. And it was already a deprivation for me that I could not present the last pages of the Steffen essay to you before they went to press (yesterday). Because I only allow you to judge my inner competence. But be assured, as much as I love having you here, I couldn't bear it if you cut your stay short by even an hour. Your kind letter was delivered to me an hour ago. I am so sorry that you were under such attack again. People mean well when they want you to be around for their things. But it does make one weak. I understand that the “roughness of the work” has upset you so much. And of course you are absolutely right when you speak of the woman's lack of understanding as you do. I had to bear in mind his spiritual treatment of poetic problems when writing about Steffen. Steffen must be understood by looking back at him as Giotto. The entire turn from Cimabue to Giotto is the turn from bright spiritualism, from spirituality in color, conception and form to naturalism; and only in Raphael and the great ones remains something of what was lost and only in Cimabue is something preserved. All this is expressed in Steffen's psyche. He works with the forces that arise from the turn of the century, and approaches reality in a way that is almost unique in the twentieth century. G. had beauty before him, but he had outgrown it. That idealizes his naturalism. Steffen had artlessness all around him; that materializes the spiritualism that slumbered in him from the beginning. And the fact that Steffen is with us: I see a significant karma in that too. That he doesn't understand Gyges is not surprising, because he has a hard time empathizing with foreign art in general. And Rhodope is so very different from what Steffen can see in the nature of a woman. Stay healthy and receive my warmest greetings; I am with you in thought. Rudolf Dr. Rudolf Steiner Dornach near Basel, Switzerland, Canton Solothurn Goetheanum.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 229 27 Feb 1925,

Rudolf Steiner

229

To Marie Steiner in Berlin
Friday, February 27, 1925

Goetheanum, February 27, 1925

M.l.M.

I am writing these lines at about the time when you would otherwise be sitting by my side. I can only think with the deepest inner emotion how wonderful it is when I can listen to a report of your work and we can discuss one or other aspect of it. And when you [I of you] occasionally read in my “life” the description of our joint activity, then I feel deeply how connected we are. That karma also brings other people close to me is just karma. And the illness has now shown how this karma is incisive. But you have struggled to understand; that is a blessing for me. I can only feel and think together with you. And it was already a deprivation for me that I could not present the last pages of the Steffen essay to you before they went to press (yesterday). Because I only allow you to judge my inner competence. But be assured, as much as I love having you here, I couldn't bear it if you cut your stay short by even an hour.

Your kind letter was delivered to me an hour ago. I am so sorry that you were under such attack again. People mean well when they want you to be around for their things. But it does make one weak.

I understand that the “roughness of the work” has upset you so much. And of course you are absolutely right when you speak of the woman's lack of understanding as you do. I had to bear in mind his spiritual treatment of poetic problems when writing about Steffen.

Steffen must be understood by looking back at him as Giotto. The entire turn from Cimabue to Giotto is the turn from bright spiritualism, from spirituality in color, conception and form to naturalism; and only in Raphael and the great ones remains something of what was lost and only in Cimabue is something preserved. All this is expressed in Steffen's psyche. He works with the forces that arise from the turn of the century, and approaches reality in a way that is almost unique in the twentieth century. G. had beauty before him, but he had outgrown it. That idealizes his naturalism. Steffen had artlessness all around him; that materializes the spiritualism that slumbered in him from the beginning.

And the fact that Steffen is with us: I see a significant karma in that too.

That he doesn't understand Gyges is not surprising, because he has a hard time empathizing with foreign art in general. And Rhodope is so very different from what Steffen can see in the nature of a woman.

Stay healthy and receive my warmest greetings; I am with you in thought.

Rudolf

Dr. Rudolf Steiner
Dornach near Basel, Switzerland, Canton Solothurn
Goetheanum.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 233 13 Mar 1925, Rudolf Steiner
Just to avoid any misunderstanding. It was only too understandable that my appetite was not in order due to the often elevated temperatures, etc., and that I could hardly eat for a while.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 233 13 Mar 1925, Rudolf Steiner
233 To Marie Steiner in Stuttgart Friday, March 13, 1925 Goetheanum, March 13, 1925 M.l.M. I send you my warmest birthday wishes. I will think a lot on this day of all the beauty that has been and is in our joint work and that now always comes so beautifully before the eye of my soul when I describe it.¹³ I can assure you that I describe this with love. You telegraphed that you do not need the car until the 16th. It will be there then. But telephone if it is necessary before then. And thank you for your telegrams and letters. I am glad that everything has gone so well. The ranting in the newspapers is certainly unbearable. But the main thing is that our organizers do not let themselves be intimidated by this ranting, as has unfortunately happened in Christiania. Your work is so beneficial now. Hopefully it won't affect you too much. In Stuttgart, something seems to be happening again against Unger. They will approach you. But you will find the right position. It is self-evident that during my illness, circles such as the Waldorf School must try independent work. It is already happening in the organization of the conference. But now a lecture should be given by Unger during the conference. The administrative board of the Waldorf School is making that impossible. Unger is not to give a lecture during the conference of the Waldorf School - for the Anthroposophical Society, not for the conference. At this stage, the Stuttgart board writes to the Dornach board about what should be done. However, it is quite impossible for us here in Dornach to intervene at such a late stage in a matter that is so disastrous for Stuttgart. I can therefore only write to the Stuttgart board to say that we cannot intervene. Of course, this does not prevent you from doing what you think is right in Stuttgart if you are approached about the matter. My dear, I do not want to bother you with trivialities, and I have avoided doing so until now. But just to let you know, in case the matter comes up from the other side, I am writing this. Just to avoid any misunderstanding. It was only too understandable that my appetite was not in order due to the often elevated temperatures, etc., and that I could hardly eat for a while. Now Dr. Wegman, in her kindness, in which she wants to do everything possible for me, was thinking of a solution. And unfortunately she came up with the idea of having ¹⁴ When Dr. Wegman suggested this to me, I said that it was 'madness' and that she must not do it. Mrs. Walther cooks for me, as you know, and there is no reason to change that. Well, after a while I was told that Mrs. Breitenstein was coming after all. I forbade her from cooking. I don't want anything cooked by her, and everything stays the same. It's also insane to think that it would do me any good to be “cooked for in Viennese style”. I don't want to write the whole story here, but I just wanted to touch on it so that you are not confronted with something incomprehensible when someone in Stuttgart tells you that Mrs. Breitenstein came to cook for me. It's just nonsense, and they will get a few recipes from Mrs. Breitenstein as a token. But she won't cook. Once again, my warmest thoughts from your loving Rudolf Abs: Dr. Rudolf Steiner Goetheanum, Dornach near Basel, Canton Solothurn, Switzerland. Dr. I. Wegman sends warmest birthday greetings. She is deeply pleased about your great successes and would like to express this in particular. 13. In the Goetheanum essays on “My Life”. 14. Amalie Breitenstein (1860-1942), wife of Julius Breitenstein, member in Vienna since May 1910.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 233 13 Mar 1925,

Rudolf Steiner

233

To Marie Steiner in Stuttgart
Friday, March 13, 1925

Goetheanum, March 13, 1925

M.l.M.

I send you my warmest birthday wishes. I will think a lot on this day of all the beauty that has been and is in our joint work and that now always comes so beautifully before the eye of my soul when I describe it.¹³ I can assure you that I describe this with love.

You telegraphed that you do not need the car until the 16th. It will be there then. But telephone if it is necessary before then.

And thank you for your telegrams and letters. I am glad that everything has gone so well. The ranting in the newspapers is certainly unbearable. But the main thing is that our organizers do not let themselves be intimidated by this ranting, as has unfortunately happened in Christiania. Your work is so beneficial now. Hopefully it won't affect you too much.

In Stuttgart, something seems to be happening again against Unger. They will approach you. But you will find the right position. It is self-evident that during my illness, circles such as the Waldorf School must try independent work. It is already happening in the organization of the conference. But now a lecture should be given by Unger during the conference. The administrative board of the Waldorf School is making that impossible. Unger is not to give a lecture during the conference of the Waldorf School - for the Anthroposophical Society, not for the conference. At this stage, the Stuttgart board writes to the Dornach board about what should be done. However, it is quite impossible for us here in Dornach to intervene at such a late stage in a matter that is so disastrous for Stuttgart. I can therefore only write to the Stuttgart board to say that we cannot intervene. Of course, this does not prevent you from doing what you think is right in Stuttgart if you are approached about the matter.

My dear, I do not want to bother you with trivialities, and I have avoided doing so until now. But just to let you know, in case the matter comes up from the other side, I am writing this. Just to avoid any misunderstanding. It was only too understandable that my appetite was not in order due to the often elevated temperatures, etc., and that I could hardly eat for a while. Now Dr. Wegman, in her kindness, in which she wants to do everything possible for me, was thinking of a solution. And unfortunately she came up with the idea of having ¹⁴ When Dr. Wegman suggested this to me, I said that it was 'madness' and that she must not do it. Mrs. Walther cooks for me, as you know, and there is no reason to change that. Well, after a while I was told that Mrs. Breitenstein was coming after all. I forbade her from cooking. I don't want anything cooked by her, and everything stays the same. It's also insane to think that it would do me any good to be “cooked for in Viennese style”. I don't want to write the whole story here, but I just wanted to touch on it so that you are not confronted with something incomprehensible when someone in Stuttgart tells you that Mrs. Breitenstein came to cook for me. It's just nonsense, and they will get a few recipes from Mrs. Breitenstein as a token. But she won't cook. Once again, my warmest thoughts

from your loving Rudolf

Abs: Dr. Rudolf Steiner
Goetheanum, Dornach near Basel,
Canton Solothurn, Switzerland.

Dr. I. Wegman sends warmest birthday greetings. She is deeply pleased about your great successes and would like to express this in particular.

13. In the Goetheanum essays on “My Life”.
14. Amalie Breitenstein (1860-1942), wife of Julius Breitenstein, member in Vienna since May 1910.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 3 20 Aug 1902, Rudolf Steiner
And it makes me unspeakably sad that he, in the case of the previous “leaders” of the German Theosophical movement (Bresch ¹⁹ and Hubo ²⁰ and their appendix) finds so little understanding. In Hübbe-Schleiden there lives a real potency in terms of the history of the development of the spirit; in Mr.
There will be things in which they will probably put insurmountable obstacles in the way of an understanding when forming sections. It is most disastrous when those who want to set the tone are rigidly dogmatic in everything and lack fundamental convictions almost entirely.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 3 20 Aug 1902, Rudolf Steiner
3 To Marie von Sivers, in Russia (probably St. Petersburg) Wednesday, August 20, 1902 Friedenau-Berlin, August 20, 1902 Dear Madam: Thank you for your letter, which gave me great pleasure. ¹⁰ has been correctly delivered and is on my desk, where it is of great service to me now that I have to refer to it constantly in my relevant studies. I was unable to make the journey ¹¹ for various reasons. In Paris ¹² During my stay, M. Schuré ¹³ no more. I would have liked so much to have spoken with him. It seems to me that there are matters on which I would have valued his judgment. A visit in September will, of course, be impossible for that reason, among all the others, since we shall have our hands full. Our founding of a German Section is, it seems, more difficult than I had imagined in England. The bad experiences I have had since my return are now compounded by the fact that I have just received a letter from Miss Hooper in which she writes to me that Olcott ¹⁴ does not know his way around when it comes to the two applications he has received. It is therefore likely that we will have to wait for the charter. ¹⁵ Now I will have to wait another eight weeks, because that is how long it will take for Olcott to receive my letter and for the charter to arrive. But I would like to ask you to write to your friend in Kurland ¹⁶ may wait until our section is founded. Right now, in the period immediately before the founding of the Section, it seems better to me if we wait with everything until we have the Section. When you come, my writing “Christianity as Mystical Fact” will be available; and a writing by Hübbe-Schleiden ¹⁷ (But I would ask you not to reveal the anonymity in which H.S. wishes to shroud himself.) “Serve the Eternal”. I hope that these two writings in particular will help us to make progress in Germany. I had a great deal to do with both of them. But now it is one of my most precious hours, to see ¹⁸ It is a source of the greatest satisfaction for me to be able to work in harmony with Hübbe-Schleiden. I find complete agreement with him on the most important points of the inner shaping of the German movement. And it makes me unspeakably sad that he, in the case of the previous “leaders” of the German Theosophical movement (Bresch ¹⁹ and Hubo ²⁰ and their appendix) finds so little understanding. In Hübbe-Schleiden there lives a real potency in terms of the history of the development of the spirit; in Mr. Hubo and Mr. Bresch there is none at all. They lack certain indispensable prerequisites for leadership. And it is bad that, given the German way of thinking, it will be difficult to keep these personalities within their limits. There will be things in which they will probably put insurmountable obstacles in the way of an understanding when forming sections. It is most disastrous when those who want to set the tone are rigidly dogmatic in everything and lack fundamental convictions almost entirely. Everything that has happened to me recently indicates that Bresch and Hubo's behavior is repelling to people in Germany who have a latent theosophical attitude and whom we necessarily have to draw in. When you come to Berlin, we will have a lot to talk about. We hope we may expect you in Berlin on September 15.²¹ My wife sends her best regards, as do I. Dr. Rudolf Steiner Friedenau-Berlin, Kaiserallee 95 10. by H.P. Blavatsky, together with her “Isis unveiled” are fundamental works of Theosophy. Obviously, as preparation for his work in the T.G., Rudolf Steiner informed himself in detail about the then-current teachings. 11. to Barr in Alsace, where Edouard Schuré, who otherwise lived in Paris, had his summer residence. 12. Rudolf Steiner was in Paris from July 13 to 19, returning from London. 13. Edouard (1841-1929), French writer, member of the T.G. in France. He was introduced to the German-speaking world through translations by Marie v. Sivers, with whom he was in correspondence from 1899. His “Sacred Drama of Eleusis” and his play “The Children of Lucifer” were performed at the Munich Festival in 1907, 1909-1912. In 1913 he joined the Anthroposophical Society. Rudolf Steiner spoke about him as a writer in his lecture of March 1, 1906 (in GA 54). For more on his personal connection to Marie and Rudolf Steiner, see H. Wiesberger, “Marie Steiner, a Life for Anthroposophy.” 14. Henry Steel Olcott (1832-1907), American, co-founder and first president of the T.G. until his death. 15. In May 1902, Richard Bresch in Leipzig had collected the signatures of the chairmen of the ten branches of the European Section in Germany on the application for a charter for the German Section to be founded, with Rudolf Steiner as General Secretary. In the process, Bresch had the application signed in two copies. When Wilhelm Hübbe-Schleiden caused difficulties, Bresch simply sent the one copy without the signatures of Hübbe-Schleiden (Hannover), his cousin Günther Wagner (Lugano), and his friend Ludwig Deinhard (Munich) to the General Secretary of the European Section, Bertram Keightley in London. Keightley forwarded this application to the president H. S. Olcott in Adyar (India), with a letter in which he announced that Hübbe-Schleiden would write to Olcott. Olcott did not like the absence of the signatures of Hannover, Lugano and Munich. On July 9, he wrote to Hübbe-Schleiden that the promised letter had not arrived, but that he would wait for the next week's mail boat and then send a blank certificate to Keightley with the authority to give it to the persons whom Keightley thought should have it. He must have done this, and this letter to Keightley, dated around July 16, arrived in London around August 3. In Germany, the situation soon cleared up after Bresh's approach became known, and on June 30, Hübbe-Schleiden and Deinhard in Hanover were the last to sign the second copy, which Rudolf Steiner took to London and from there sent to Adyar on July 4. On July 22, Olcott immediately issued the definitive charter and sent a letter to Hübbe-Schleiden and a letter to Rudolf Steiner with the request to constitute the section. The letter to Hübbe-Schleiden arrived in Hannover on August 10. He sent the letter to Rudolf Steiner and the certificate to Keightley in London, from where it did not arrive in Berlin until August 28, a delay of 18 days. Keightley had left London for India after the annual meeting and had handed over the management of the section to Mrs. Ivy Hooper, who seems to have been very indolent in dealing with business: On August 15, when the letter from Olcott to Rudolf Steiner dated July 22 must have already been in her stack of correspondence, she wrote: “Dear Dr. Steiner, Colonel Olcott wrote to Mr. Keightley about the charter for the German Section [...] Apparently a formal difficulty has arisen for the execution of the charter in that Col. Olcott received two different applications for it. He has asked Mr. Keightley to consult with his colleagues in Germany and act as Col. Olcott's agent. ... I took the matter to Mrs. Besant and she felt that it would be best to refer the matter to you [...] Would you therefore please be so kind as to clarify which of the two groups of applicants should receive the charter and then communicate your decision to the President.” So she only processed the letter from Olcott to Keightley dated July 16, did not take into account the almost three-week mailing time, did not notice that it was already outdated, and also constructed reasons for the letter that Olcott could not have known when he wrote it. 16. Presumably Maria v. Strauch-Spettini (1847-1904), who became a member in January 1903. She was one of Marie v. Sivers' teachers in acting and speech art, see: Hella Wiesberger, “Marie Steiner-v. Sivers. A Life for Anthroposophy”, Dornach 1989. 17. Wilhelm Hübbe-Schleiden (1846-1916), co-founder in 1885 of the first Theosophical Society in Germany, editor of the occult monthly “Sphinx”, 1897-1901 chairman of the “German Theosophical Society” in Berlin, founded in 1894. In 1911 he became Annie Besant's instrument when she wanted to get rid of the German section. 18. The letters from Rudolf Steiner to Hübbe-Schleiden, from which his collaboration on this writing emerges, are printed in Rudolf Steiner “Letters II”, 1st edition, Dornach 1953; intended for GA 250. 19. Richard Bresch, member since 1898, editor of the journal Vähan from 1899 to 1906, head of a branch in Leipzig belonging to the German Section until he left the Society in 1905. Rudolf Steiner mentions him in the lecture Berlin, December 14, 1911 (in GA 264) as “a personality who has since left the Society, who was also a mediator of karma - in what way, much could be said about this in an occult context - it so happened that Mr. Richard Bresch, the then chairman of the Leipzig branch, after conferring with various personalities, one day came to Count Brockdorff and said: 'Now that Dr. Steiner is already chairman of the Berlin lodge, he can also be general secretary of the German section. “All kinds of necessities arose for this request to become chairman of the German section to be accepted.“ 20. Bernhard Hubo (1851-1934), merchant, founder and chairman of the Pythagoras branch in Hamburg from 1898. A complicated character, he initially caused some difficulties, but then became a dedicated advocate of the cause of anthroposophy. 21. Marie v. Sivers arrived in Berlin on September 17, 1902 and officially took over the management of the Berlin branch and the Theosophical Library on September 20.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 3 20 Aug 1902,

Rudolf Steiner

3

To Marie von Sivers, in Russia (probably St. Petersburg) Wednesday, August 20, 1902

Friedenau-Berlin, August 20, 1902

Dear Madam:

Thank you for your letter, which gave me great pleasure. ¹⁰ has been correctly delivered and is on my desk, where it is of great service to me now that I have to refer to it constantly in my relevant studies. I was unable to make the journey ¹¹ for various reasons. In Paris ¹² During my stay, M. Schuré ¹³ no more. I would have liked so much to have spoken with him. It seems to me that there are matters on which I would have valued his judgment. A visit in September will, of course, be impossible for that reason, among all the others, since we shall have our hands full.

Our founding of a German Section is, it seems, more difficult than I had imagined in England. The bad experiences I have had since my return are now compounded by the fact that I have just received a letter from Miss Hooper in which she writes to me that Olcott ¹⁴ does not know his way around when it comes to the two applications he has received. It is therefore likely that we will have to wait for the charter. ¹⁵ Now I will have to wait another eight weeks, because that is how long it will take for Olcott to receive my letter and for the charter to arrive. But I would like to ask you to write to your friend in Kurland ¹⁶ may wait until our section is founded. Right now, in the period immediately before the founding of the Section, it seems better to me if we wait with everything until we have the Section.

When you come, my writing “Christianity as Mystical Fact” will be available; and a writing by Hübbe-Schleiden ¹⁷ (But I would ask you not to reveal the anonymity in which H.S. wishes to shroud himself.) “Serve the Eternal”. I hope that these two writings in particular will help us to make progress in Germany. I had a great deal to do with both of them. But now it is one of my most precious hours, to see ¹⁸ It is a source of the greatest satisfaction for me to be able to work in harmony with Hübbe-Schleiden. I find complete agreement with him on the most important points of the inner shaping of the German movement. And it makes me unspeakably sad that he, in the case of the previous “leaders” of the German Theosophical movement (Bresch ¹⁹ and Hubo ²⁰ and their appendix) finds so little understanding. In Hübbe-Schleiden there lives a real potency in terms of the history of the development of the spirit; in Mr. Hubo and Mr. Bresch there is none at all. They lack certain indispensable prerequisites for leadership. And it is bad that, given the German way of thinking, it will be difficult to keep these personalities within their limits. There will be things in which they will probably put insurmountable obstacles in the way of an understanding when forming sections. It is most disastrous when those who want to set the tone are rigidly dogmatic in everything and lack fundamental convictions almost entirely. Everything that has happened to me recently indicates that Bresch and Hubo's behavior is repelling to people in Germany who have a latent theosophical attitude and whom we necessarily have to draw in. When you come to Berlin, we will have a lot to talk about. We hope we may expect you in Berlin on September 15.²¹ My wife sends her best regards, as do I.

Dr. Rudolf Steiner
Friedenau-Berlin, Kaiserallee 95

10. by H.P. Blavatsky, together with her “Isis unveiled” are fundamental works of Theosophy. Obviously, as preparation for his work in the T.G., Rudolf Steiner informed himself in detail about the then-current teachings.
11. to Barr in Alsace, where Edouard Schuré, who otherwise lived in Paris, had his summer residence.
12. Rudolf Steiner was in Paris from July 13 to 19, returning from London.
13. Edouard (1841-1929), French writer, member of the T.G. in France. He was introduced to the German-speaking world through translations by Marie v. Sivers, with whom he was in correspondence from 1899. His “Sacred Drama of Eleusis” and his play “The Children of Lucifer” were performed at the Munich Festival in 1907, 1909-1912. In 1913 he joined the Anthroposophical Society. Rudolf Steiner spoke about him as a writer in his lecture of March 1, 1906 (in GA 54). For more on his personal connection to Marie and Rudolf Steiner, see H. Wiesberger, “Marie Steiner, a Life for Anthroposophy.”
14. Henry Steel Olcott (1832-1907), American, co-founder and first president of the T.G. until his death.
15. In May 1902, Richard Bresch in Leipzig had collected the signatures of the chairmen of the ten branches of the European Section in Germany on the application for a charter for the German Section to be founded, with Rudolf Steiner as General Secretary. In the process, Bresch had the application signed in two copies. When Wilhelm Hübbe-Schleiden caused difficulties, Bresch simply sent the one copy without the signatures of Hübbe-Schleiden (Hannover), his cousin Günther Wagner (Lugano), and his friend Ludwig Deinhard (Munich) to the General Secretary of the European Section, Bertram Keightley in London. Keightley forwarded this application to the president H. S. Olcott in Adyar (India), with a letter in which he announced that Hübbe-Schleiden would write to Olcott. Olcott did not like the absence of the signatures of Hannover, Lugano and Munich. On July 9, he wrote to Hübbe-Schleiden that the promised letter had not arrived, but that he would wait for the next week's mail boat and then send a blank certificate to Keightley with the authority to give it to the persons whom Keightley thought should have it. He must have done this, and this letter to Keightley, dated around July 16, arrived in London around August 3.
In Germany, the situation soon cleared up after Bresh's approach became known, and on June 30, Hübbe-Schleiden and Deinhard in Hanover were the last to sign the second copy, which Rudolf Steiner took to London and from there sent to Adyar on July 4. On July 22, Olcott immediately issued the definitive charter and sent a letter to Hübbe-Schleiden and a letter to Rudolf Steiner with the request to constitute the section. The letter to Hübbe-Schleiden arrived in Hannover on August 10. He sent the letter to Rudolf Steiner and the certificate to Keightley in London, from where it did not arrive in Berlin until August 28, a delay of 18 days.

Keightley had left London for India after the annual meeting and had handed over the management of the section to Mrs. Ivy Hooper, who seems to have been very indolent in dealing with business: On August 15, when the letter from Olcott to Rudolf Steiner dated July 22 must have already been in her stack of correspondence, she wrote: “Dear Dr. Steiner, Colonel Olcott wrote to Mr. Keightley about the charter for the German Section [...] Apparently a formal difficulty has arisen for the execution of the charter in that Col. Olcott received two different applications for it. He has asked Mr. Keightley to consult with his colleagues in Germany and act as Col. Olcott's agent. ... I took the matter to Mrs. Besant and she felt that it would be best to refer the matter to you [...] Would you therefore please be so kind as to clarify which of the two groups of applicants should receive the charter and then communicate your decision to the President.” So she only processed the letter from Olcott to Keightley dated July 16, did not take into account the almost three-week mailing time, did not notice that it was already outdated, and also constructed reasons for the letter that Olcott could not have known when he wrote it.
16. Presumably Maria v. Strauch-Spettini (1847-1904), who became a member in January 1903. She was one of Marie v. Sivers' teachers in acting and speech art, see: Hella Wiesberger, “Marie Steiner-v. Sivers. A Life for Anthroposophy”, Dornach 1989.
17. Wilhelm Hübbe-Schleiden (1846-1916), co-founder in 1885 of the first Theosophical Society in Germany, editor of the occult monthly “Sphinx”, 1897-1901 chairman of the “German Theosophical Society” in Berlin, founded in 1894. In 1911 he became Annie Besant's instrument when she wanted to get rid of the German section.
18. The letters from Rudolf Steiner to Hübbe-Schleiden, from which his collaboration on this writing emerges, are printed in Rudolf Steiner “Letters II”, 1st edition, Dornach 1953; intended for GA 250.
19. Richard Bresch, member since 1898, editor of the journal Vähan from 1899 to 1906, head of a branch in Leipzig belonging to the German Section until he left the Society in 1905. Rudolf Steiner mentions him in the lecture Berlin, December 14, 1911 (in GA 264) as “a personality who has since left the Society, who was also a mediator of karma - in what way, much could be said about this in an occult context - it so happened that Mr. Richard Bresch, the then chairman of the Leipzig branch, after conferring with various personalities, one day came to Count Brockdorff and said: 'Now that Dr. Steiner is already chairman of the Berlin lodge, he can also be general secretary of the German section. “All kinds of necessities arose for this request to become chairman of the German section to be accepted.“
20. Bernhard Hubo (1851-1934), merchant, founder and chairman of the Pythagoras branch in Hamburg from 1898. A complicated character, he initially caused some difficulties, but then became a dedicated advocate of the cause of anthroposophy.
21. Marie v. Sivers arrived in Berlin on September 17, 1902 and officially took over the management of the Berlin branch and the Theosophical Library on September 20.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 5 16 Apr 1903, Rudolf Steiner
It seems that even in little Weimar, too little understanding of evolution and science has taken hold, despite Haeckel's work at the university in the neighboring city of Jena.
In such places a multitude of forces gather that are opposed to Theosophy. There they play their game under the strangest masks. One gets to know them particularly in the form of flatterers who slowly and surely creep into the soul.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 5 16 Apr 1903, Rudolf Steiner
5 To Marie von Sivers in Schlachtensee near Berlin Thursday, April 16, 1903 Letterhead: Kaiser - Kaffee - Konditorei Weimar, April 16, 1903 Dear Sister, Dear Confidante! So the first lecture is over. It was quite well attended. I often felt as if I had to look for you in the auditorium. Incidentally, I immediately saw that I had to say some things differently for Weimar than I did in Berlin. There is enough resistance here too. Mrs. Lübke ¹ works with devotion. Everything was arranged in the nicest and best way. She has a truly theosophical attitude. — Of course, especially in foreign cities, I always have new important experiences for myself regarding the way of working. I hope that if I diligently utilize all such experiences, we will make progress. We, working together, can hope to achieve something in Germany. We are together even when we are not physically next to each other. I will make the second lecture more popular than it was in Berlin. It seems that even in little Weimar, too little understanding of evolution and science has taken hold, despite Haeckel's work at the university in the neighboring city of Jena. After the lecture, Mr. von Henning ² took me to the Schlaraffia, of which he is a member. It was a sacrifice, but I wanted to make it because the editor of the Weimar newspaper “Deutschland” asked me to; and I would not want the newspapers here to be hostile to the Theosophical movement from the outset. In small towns, newspapers have a much greater influence than in larger ones. But I was able to gain experience sub specie humanitatis again. I had never been to a meeting of Schlaraffia before.³ It is something that was originally founded as a parody of certain excesses of social life. It is now instructive to see how such things insinuate themselves into the spirits of people. This Schlaraffia has many thousands of members in all parts of Germany and Austria and branches in most German cities. Now its original parodistic character can hardly be seen as such anymore; because the game has a serious effect on the mind. One must see something like this to know what aspirations live in human minds that detract from where we want to lead. Otherwise, one often does not know where the source of certain astral vibrations lies, which come at one with great power and whose origin is to be sought in places below the surface of our social existence. In such places a multitude of forces gather that are opposed to Theosophy. There they play their game under the strangest masks. One gets to know them particularly in the form of flatterers who slowly and surely creep into the soul. Many of the things that work against our movement lead, when one follows their sphere of activity, to such and similar places. The people who sit before us are often not with us because they are directed by forces that lead them here and there into the trivialities of life, into a triviality that gradually becomes the nerve of life. Such things can only be counteracted by the real Theosophists, who are completely so and who therefore become accumulators of astral forces, in order to bring about an improvement in thinking and feeling. I know that every thought, even if it remains unspoken, but if it only moves in the theosophical line, is a force that means a great deal at the present time. Without a tribe of true theosophists who, through diligent meditation, improve the present karma, the theosophical teaching would only be preached to half-deaf ears. It is likely that I will be in Schlachtensee ⁴ on Saturday morning, so letters that arrive later will no longer reach me. Tonight there is a Theosophical Circle at Mrs. Lübke's. In loyalty and brotherhood, yours, R. St. 1. Helene Lübke, née v. Bleszynska (1859-1916), wife of the art historian Wilhelm Lübke (died 1893), member of the T.G. in London, and from 1902/03 also of the German Section. In 1903/04 she lived in Weimar, where she organized Rudolf Steiner's three public lectures in April and founded the Weimar branch. In April 1906 she returned to England. 2. Horst v. Henning (d. 1943), general agent, friend of Rudolf Steiner from the Weimar period, member of the T.G. since 1895, later chairman of the Weimar branch. 3. A German association that has spread across the globe since the mid-19th century. Lit.: O. R. Zimmer, Schlaraffia, 1926. 4. In January 1903, the leadership of the German section was moved from Kaiser-Friedrich-Straße 54a in Charlottenburg to Schlachtensee, Seestraße 40, and in October 1903 to Motzstraße 17, Berlin W.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 5 16 Apr 1903,

Rudolf Steiner

5

To Marie von Sivers in Schlachtensee near Berlin
Thursday, April 16, 1903
Letterhead: Kaiser - Kaffee - Konditorei

Weimar, April 16, 1903

After the lecture, Mr. von Henning ² took me to the Schlaraffia, of which he is a member. It was a sacrifice, but I wanted to make it because the editor of the Weimar newspaper “Deutschland” asked me to; and I would not want the newspapers here to be hostile to the Theosophical movement from the outset. In small towns, newspapers have a much greater influence than in larger ones. But I was able to gain experience sub specie humanitatis again. I had never been to a meeting of Schlaraffia before.³ It is something that was originally founded as a parody of certain excesses of social life. It is now instructive to see how such things insinuate themselves into the spirits of people. This Schlaraffia has many thousands of members in all parts of Germany and Austria and branches in most German cities. Now its original parodistic character can hardly be seen as such anymore; because the game has a serious effect on the mind. One must see something like this to know what aspirations live in human minds that detract from where we want to lead. Otherwise, one often does not know where the source of certain astral vibrations lies, which come at one with great power and whose origin is to be sought in places below the surface of our social existence. In such places a multitude of forces gather that are opposed to Theosophy. There they play their game under the strangest masks. One gets to know them particularly in the form of flatterers who slowly and surely creep into the soul. Many of the things that work against our movement lead, when one follows their sphere of activity, to such and similar places. The people who sit before us are often not with us because they are directed by forces that lead them here and there into the trivialities of life, into a triviality that gradually becomes the nerve of life. Such things can only be counteracted by the real Theosophists, who are completely so and who therefore become accumulators of astral forces, in order to bring about an improvement in thinking and feeling. I know that every thought, even if it remains unspoken, but if it only moves in the theosophical line, is a force that means a great deal at the present time. Without a tribe of true theosophists who, through diligent meditation, improve the present karma, the theosophical teaching would only be preached to half-deaf ears.

It is likely that I will be in Schlachtensee ⁴ on Saturday morning, so letters that arrive later will no longer reach me. Tonight there is a Theosophical Circle at Mrs. Lübke's.

In loyalty and brotherhood, yours, R. St.

1. Helene Lübke, née v. Bleszynska (1859-1916), wife of the art historian Wilhelm Lübke (died 1893), member of the T.G. in London, and from 1902/03 also of the German Section. In 1903/04 she lived in Weimar, where she organized Rudolf Steiner's three public lectures in April and founded the Weimar branch. In April 1906 she returned to England.
2. Horst v. Henning (d. 1943), general agent, friend of Rudolf Steiner from the Weimar period, member of the T.G. since 1895, later chairman of the Weimar branch.
3. A German association that has spread across the globe since the mid-19th century. Lit.: O. R. Zimmer, Schlaraffia, 1926.
4. In January 1903, the leadership of the German section was moved from Kaiser-Friedrich-Straße 54a in Charlottenburg to Schlachtensee, Seestraße 40, and in October 1903 to Motzstraße 17, Berlin W.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 6 16 Apr 1903, Rudolf Steiner
In such places, the forces that oppose Theosophy gather; they play their game there under the most curious masks. One gets to know them particularly as flatterers, who sneak into people's souls with a very special language of the heart.
The entire “sitting” (German: “Sippung”) is conducted in a ceremonial manner. It is necessary to understand the magic of any ceremony if one wants to see through the determining power of these “sittings” on people.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 6 16 Apr 1903, Rudolf Steiner
6 To Marie von Sivers in Schlachtensee near Berlin Thursday, April 16, 1903, different version Weimar, April 16, 1903 Dear Sister, Dear Confidante! So the first lecture is over. It was quite well attended. I often felt as if I had to look for you in the auditorium. Incidentally, I immediately saw that I would have to say some things differently in the lecture for Weimar. There is enough resistance here too. Mrs. Lübke works with dedication. Everything here was arranged in the most beautiful and best way. It is clear from the way Mrs. Lübke handles things that she has been at the source in England for five years. Her arrangements have a touch of distinction. Of course, especially in foreign cities, I always have new experiences regarding the way I work. I hope that if I diligently process and utilize all of them, we will make progress. We, working together, can hope to achieve something in Germany. We are together even when we are not physically next to each other. I will make the second lecture more popular than it was in Berlin. Even in little Weimar, too few ideas about development and science seem to have taken hold, despite Haeckel working at the university in the neighboring city. After the lecture, Mr. v. Henning took me to the Schlaraffia, of which he is a member. It was a sacrifice, but I wanted to make it because the editor of the local newspaper “Deutschland” asked for it, and I would not want the newspapers here, where they have more influence than in Berlin, to be hostile to Theosophy from the outset. But I was able to gain further experience sub specie universi. I had never been to a meeting of Schlaraffia before. It is something that its members hold dear. Yesterday the “Chancellor” gave a speech in which he said that anyone who had once been a Schlaraffe and had to stop being one would feel cut off from the source of life. This Schlaraffia is spread all over Central Europe and has members everywhere, who are divided into degrees of rank, from “pilgrims” to “junkers”, “knights” and “glories”. Whether there are even higher degrees is a mystery that I have not yet penetrated. But the basis of the whole society is triviality. It was painful to hear the speeches delivered in a special Schlaraffia dialect. My experience is that it exists and that thousands of people in Germany and Austria see something in Schlaraffia where they seek their best. One must see something like this to know what aspirations live in human minds that pull away from the direction towards the higher, towards the spiritual. Otherwise, one often does not know where the source of certain astral vibrations lies that confront one with power and whose origin is to be sought in the places below the surface of our social existence. In such places, the forces that oppose Theosophy gather; they play their game there under the most curious masks. One gets to know them particularly as flatterers, who sneak into people's souls with a very special language of the heart. It is a very solemn occasion. “Herrlichkeit” sits on a “'throne”, surrounded on one side by the “chancellor” and on the other by the “marshal”. They have headgear that symbolically expresses their dignity. They have names that completely separate them from all that is “profane”. The entire “sitting” (German: “Sippung”) is conducted in a ceremonial manner. It is necessary to understand the magic of any ceremony if one wants to see through the determining power of these “sittings” on people. Many of the things that work against us in our quest lead, if you follow their threads, to such and similar places that elude the ordinary observer. The people sitting in front of us are often not really with us because they are directed by forces that steer them here and there. Such things can only be counteracted by true Theosophists, who are whole and therefore represent accumulators of astral forces that work to improve perception and feeling. I know that every thought, even if it remains unspoken, and only has its direction in the theosophical line, is a force that currently means a lot. Without a core of true theosophists who, through the most diligent meditation work, improve the present karma, the theosophical teaching would only be preached to half-deaf ears. In loyalty and brotherhood, R. St.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 6 16 Apr 1903,

Rudolf Steiner

6

To Marie von Sivers in Schlachtensee near Berlin
Thursday, April 16, 1903, different version

Weimar, April 16, 1903

Dear Sister, Dear Confidante! So the first lecture is over. It was quite well attended. I often felt as if I had to look for you in the auditorium. Incidentally, I immediately saw that I would have to say some things differently in the lecture for Weimar. There is enough resistance here too. Mrs. Lübke works with dedication. Everything here was arranged in the most beautiful and best way. It is clear from the way Mrs. Lübke handles things that she has been at the source in England for five years. Her arrangements have a touch of distinction. Of course, especially in foreign cities, I always have new experiences regarding the way I work. I hope that if I diligently process and utilize all of them, we will make progress. We, working together, can hope to achieve something in Germany. We are together even when we are not physically next to each other. I will make the second lecture more popular than it was in Berlin. Even in little Weimar, too few ideas about development and science seem to have taken hold, despite Haeckel working at the university in the neighboring city. After the lecture, Mr. v. Henning took me to the Schlaraffia, of which he is a member. It was a sacrifice, but I wanted to make it because the editor of the local newspaper “Deutschland” asked for it, and I would not want the newspapers here, where they have more influence than in Berlin, to be hostile to Theosophy from the outset. But I was able to gain further experience sub specie universi. I had never been to a meeting of Schlaraffia before. It is something that its members hold dear. Yesterday the “Chancellor” gave a speech in which he said that anyone who had once been a Schlaraffe and had to stop being one would feel cut off from the source of life. This Schlaraffia is spread all over Central Europe and has members everywhere, who are divided into degrees of rank, from “pilgrims” to “junkers”, “knights” and “glories”. Whether there are even higher degrees is a mystery that I have not yet penetrated. But the basis of the whole society is triviality. It was painful to hear the speeches delivered in a special Schlaraffia dialect. My experience is that it exists and that thousands of people in Germany and Austria see something in Schlaraffia where they seek their best. One must see something like this to know what aspirations live in human minds that pull away from the direction towards the higher, towards the spiritual. Otherwise, one often does not know where the source of certain astral vibrations lies that confront one with power and whose origin is to be sought in the places below the surface of our social existence. In such places, the forces that oppose Theosophy gather; they play their game there under the most curious masks. One gets to know them particularly as flatterers, who sneak into people's souls with a very special language of the heart. It is a very solemn occasion. “Herrlichkeit” sits on a “'throne”, surrounded on one side by the “chancellor” and on the other by the “marshal”. They have

headgear that symbolically expresses their dignity. They have names that completely separate them from all that is “profane”. The entire “sitting” (German: “Sippung”) is conducted in a ceremonial manner. It is necessary to understand the magic of any ceremony if one wants to see through the determining power of these “sittings” on people. Many of the things that work against us in our quest lead, if you follow their threads, to such and similar places that elude the ordinary observer. The people sitting in front of us are often not really with us because they are directed by forces that steer them here and there. Such things can only be counteracted by true Theosophists, who are whole and therefore represent accumulators of astral forces that work to improve perception and feeling. I know that every thought, even if it remains unspoken, and only has its direction in the theosophical line, is a force that currently means a lot. Without a core of true theosophists who, through the most diligent meditation work, improve the present karma, the theosophical teaching would only be preached to half-deaf ears.

In loyalty and brotherhood, R. St.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 7 18 Apr 1903, Rudolf Steiner
We will now have to do everything firmly, even at the risk of these old theosophists leaving us. — You understand me; and that gives me strength, it clears my wings. In loyalty and brotherhood, R. St. 5.
Not benefit and not advantage, but necessary fulfillment of a clearly understood karma!!! For me, the difference was clear when I saw that my allusions to this effect, intended for the initiate, fell on no fertile soil in Berlin and were only understood by Fräulein v.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 7 18 Apr 1903, Rudolf Steiner
7 To Marie von Sivers in Schlachtensee near Berlin Saturday, April 18, 1903 Weimar, April 18, 1903 Dear Sister, dear Confidant! The second lecture is also over. It was even better attended than the first. From everything I experience here in relation to our cause, I may hope that we will prevail if we have persistence and strength of purpose. And we must have endurance, we will have energy, if only we follow the dictates of inner necessity. Thank you very much for your letter. I am very sorry that you are so troubled by external matters and that you are not quite well. The difficulties that the old pages have caused you will completely disappear in the not too distant future. They have to be overcome. Because they lie on the path if the science of the brain is to change into the wisdom of the heart and the mind is to become more and more alive. You have to remember that not only diagrams and drawings, but also ideas and concepts are only symbols. All of this is only a gateway to the mind. You will find the passage because you are predestined to do so. However, this also gives you the necessity to seek this passage. In which sense Deinhard ⁵ wants to work here, gives a taste of what Hübbe-Schleiden writes in a just arrived letter.⁶ It is the same thing again: not Theosophy and not the Theosophical Society. Again the admonition: I should do nothing but publish a journal without reference to either. That we do anything at all is completely against the opinion of these gentlemen. Now, if we were to act in their interest, the founding of the German Section would be a farce; we would act treacherously against all our promises and Theosophy would be completely without prospects among Germans. It is strange that these stumbling blocks should arise at a time when one needs strength to continue one's work; that this quite insubstantial talk of the gentlemen's should get in the way, when, apart from it, everything justifies hopes. Here Mrs. Lübke is working with devotion, and at the same time the old German theosophists are advising inactivity. I wonder if it will take much longer! We will now have to do everything firmly, even at the risk of these old theosophists leaving us. — You understand me; and that gives me strength, it clears my wings. In loyalty and brotherhood, R. St. 5. Ludwig Deinhard (1847-1917), industrialist, friend and patron of Hübbe-Schleiden, founded the Munich branch of the European section of the TG in March 1894, but it soon fell asleep again. In 1902, the branch was reactivated with only 7 members for the founding of the German section, only to fall asleep again almost immediately in the wake of Hübbe-Schleiden. 6. “... I only differ from you with regard to the intention and purpose of the theosophical movement. You and all the other present-day representatives want to derive spiritual advantage and benefit from this movement for themselves and as many other individuals as possible. ... In order to fulfill this purpose, it seems to me that the first prerequisite is that we give only the spiritual content of our knowledge and our striving to our culture, but that we avoid the buzzwords Theosophy and Theosophical Society for the time being.” (Letter dated April 17, 1903). Rudolf Steiner wrote in the margin: “This is precisely the fundamentally false premise that gives rise to all misunderstandings. Not benefit and not advantage, but necessary fulfillment of a clearly understood karma!!! For me, the difference was clear when I saw that my allusions to this effect, intended for the initiate, fell on no fertile soil in Berlin and were only understood by Fräulein v. Sivers.”

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 7 18 Apr 1903,

Rudolf Steiner

7

To Marie von Sivers in Schlachtensee near Berlin
Saturday, April 18, 1903

Weimar, April 18, 1903

Dear Sister, dear Confidant! The second lecture is also over. It was even better attended than the first. From everything I experience here in relation to our cause, I may hope that we will prevail if we have persistence and strength of purpose. And we must have endurance, we will have energy, if only we follow the dictates of inner necessity. Thank you very much for your letter. I am very sorry that you are so troubled by external matters and that you are not quite well. The difficulties that the old pages have caused you will completely disappear in the not too distant future. They have to be overcome. Because they lie on the path if the science of the brain is to change into the wisdom of the heart and the mind is to become more and more alive. You have to remember that not only diagrams and drawings, but also ideas and concepts are only symbols. All of this is only a gateway to the mind. You will find the passage because you are predestined to do so. However, this also gives you the necessity to seek this passage.

In which sense Deinhard ⁵ wants to work here, gives a taste of what Hübbe-Schleiden writes in a just arrived letter.⁶ It is the same thing again: not Theosophy and not the Theosophical Society. Again the admonition: I should do nothing but publish a journal without reference to either. That we do anything at all is completely against the opinion of these gentlemen. Now, if we were to act in their interest, the founding of the German Section would be a farce; we would act treacherously against all our promises and Theosophy would be completely without prospects among Germans. It is strange that these stumbling blocks should arise at a time when one needs strength to continue one's work; that this quite insubstantial talk of the gentlemen's should get in the way, when, apart from it, everything justifies hopes. Here Mrs. Lübke is working with devotion, and at the same time the old German theosophists are advising inactivity. I wonder if it will take much longer!

We will now have to do everything firmly, even at the risk of these old theosophists leaving us. — You understand me; and that gives me strength, it clears my wings.

In loyalty and brotherhood, R. St.

5. Ludwig Deinhard (1847-1917), industrialist, friend and patron of Hübbe-Schleiden, founded the Munich branch of the European section of the TG in March 1894, but it soon fell asleep again. In 1902, the branch was reactivated with only 7 members for the founding of the German section, only to fall asleep again almost immediately in the wake of Hübbe-Schleiden.
6. “... I only differ from you with regard to the intention and purpose of the theosophical movement. You and all the other present-day representatives want to derive spiritual advantage and benefit from this movement for themselves and as many other individuals as possible. ... In order to fulfill this purpose, it seems to me that the first prerequisite is that we give only the spiritual content of our knowledge and our striving to our culture, but that we avoid the buzzwords Theosophy and Theosophical Society for the time being.” (Letter dated April 17, 1903). Rudolf Steiner wrote in the margin: “This is precisely the fundamentally false premise that gives rise to all misunderstandings. Not benefit and not advantage, but necessary fulfillment of a clearly understood karma!!! For me, the difference was clear when I saw that my allusions to this effect, intended for the initiate, fell on no fertile soil in Berlin and were only understood by Fräulein v. Sivers.”

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 9 19 Apr 1903, Rudolf Steiner
I was in Weimar for seven years,¹³ and it is understandable that even today the “ghosts” of those “untruths” are creeping out of all corners again. There is too much that is personal about my relationships in Weimar.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 9 19 Apr 1903, Rudolf Steiner
9 To Marie von Sivers in Schlachtensee near Berlin Sunday, April 19, 1903 Weimar, 19 April 1903 Dear Sister, Deinhard has not yet reported in. So he will probably not come until today. Yesterday the Weimar branch lodge was constituted here. In addition to the two lectures, I also gave two more intimate circles with those who will join. I have long felt that our presence in London will be necessary in the near future. Now that Olcott is in Europe, it is unavoidable. But, my dear sister, we must weigh everything up carefully and determine the right time for this end. Because I believe I can tell you that this next period will not bring us any unimportant matters. We must not follow our immediate impulses in any matter. What you just sent me – in Vâhan – is just a symptom. Many things are working against us. And Bresch currently has the right feeler. What he says himself is perhaps more important right now than the writer is aware of. Incidentally, I will most likely travel to Berlin via Leipzig on Tuesday. It seems to me for the time being that I must speak with Bresch. When I am back with you, we will calmly discuss everything regarding Olcott's presence. Mrs. Lübke, who, through her three years of working with the Theosophists in London, has learned to see things quite differently from the old members in Germany, agreed with me the day before yesterday when I pointed out the importance of personally approaching Olcott now. I now feel here that what we have begun to do is right. What matters is not how much we achieve here or there in the first rush, but whether we are doing the right thing – the thing determined by the time karma. As soon as I arrive in Berlin, my three lectures have to be printed.¹¹ And for the “Lucifer” ¹² there is no better time than the one in which it will appear. You will readily admit that Deinhards discussion with me must be meaningless if we want to make progress. What he says will not be important to me, but rather what he does not say. In Hübbe-Schleidens last letter, too, the most important thing is not in it at all. I will talk to you about various things in the next few days, which will make some things clearer to you. For today, just a guiding principle: we will stand together faithfully; and we will both, even in the face of any misunderstandings that may arise in the near future, do everything in the fullest loyalty and devotion to Mrs. Besant's intentions. What you tell me about your meditation makes me happy. I know you will continue to make progress. And I also know that you are guided by the best forces. So continue. It was so sweet of you to write to me yesterday as well, so that I received your letter this morning. For me, Weimar now has a real two-faced quality. You know that I have often spoken to you about my feeling of certain “untruths”. I was in Weimar for seven years,¹³ and it is understandable that even today the “ghosts” of those “untruths” are creeping out of all corners again. There is too much that is personal about my relationships in Weimar. In loyalty and brotherhood, R. St. 11. NoteText 12. NoteText 13. many of Rudolf Steiner's letters from this time can be found in the volume 'Letters II', CW 39.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 9 19 Apr 1903,

Rudolf Steiner

9

To Marie von Sivers in Schlachtensee near Berlin
Sunday, April 19, 1903

Weimar, 19 April 1903

Dear Sister, Deinhard has not yet reported in. So he will probably not come until today. Yesterday the Weimar branch lodge was constituted here. In addition to the two lectures, I also gave two more intimate circles with those who will join. I have long felt that our presence in London will be necessary in the near future. Now that Olcott is in Europe, it is unavoidable. But, my dear sister, we must weigh everything up carefully and determine the right time for this end. Because I believe I can tell you that this next period will not bring us any unimportant matters. We must not follow our immediate impulses in any matter. What you just sent me – in Vâhan – is just a symptom. Many things are working against us. And Bresch currently has the right feeler. What he says himself is perhaps more important right now than the writer is aware of. Incidentally, I will most likely travel to Berlin via Leipzig on Tuesday. It seems to me for the time being that I must speak with Bresch. When I am back with you, we will calmly discuss everything regarding Olcott's presence. Mrs. Lübke, who, through her three years of working with the Theosophists in London, has learned to see things quite differently from the old members in Germany, agreed with me the day before yesterday when I pointed out the importance of personally approaching Olcott now. I now feel here that what we have begun to do is right. What matters is not how much we achieve here or there in the first rush, but whether we are doing the right thing – the thing determined by the time karma. As soon as I arrive in Berlin, my three lectures have to be printed.¹¹ And for the “Lucifer” ¹² there is no better time than the one in which it will appear. You will readily admit that Deinhards discussion with me must be meaningless if we want to make progress. What he says will not be important to me, but rather what he does not say. In Hübbe-Schleidens last letter, too, the most important thing is not in it at all. I will talk to you about various things in the next few days, which will make some things clearer to you. For today, just a guiding principle: we will stand together faithfully; and we will both, even in the face of any misunderstandings that may arise in the near future, do everything in the fullest loyalty and devotion to Mrs. Besant's intentions.

What you tell me about your meditation makes me happy. I know you will continue to make progress. And I also know that you are guided by the best forces. So continue. It was so sweet of you to write to me yesterday as well, so that I received your letter this morning. For me, Weimar now has a real two-faced quality. You know that I have often spoken to you about my feeling of certain “untruths”. I was in Weimar for seven years,¹³ and it is understandable that even today the “ghosts” of those “untruths” are creeping out of all corners again. There is too much that is personal about my relationships in Weimar.

In loyalty and brotherhood, R. St.

11. NoteText
12. NoteText
13. many of Rudolf Steiner's letters from this time can be found in the volume 'Letters II', CW 39.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 10 21 Nov 1903, Rudolf Steiner
But you should not think that I in the least underestimate the pull that brought us together. For us, the common goal is one of the master powers,¹⁴ in the face of which we both have to be “manageable” in loyal, firm brotherhood of arms. The co-Glanube is a positive force that acts magnetically for us, and you have brought this co-faith power to me through your understanding; and we have to give it to each other. Yesterday's lecture is over. Before that, I was with Mrs.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 10 21 Nov 1903,

Rudolf Steiner

But you should not think that I in the least underestimate the pull that brought us together. For us, the common goal is one of the master powers,¹⁴ in the face of which we both have to be “manageable” in loyal, firm brotherhood of arms. The co-Glanube is a positive force that acts magnetically for us, and you have brought this co-faith power to me through your understanding; and we have to give it to each other. Yesterday's lecture is over. Before that, I was with Mrs.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 10 21 Nov 1903, Rudolf Steiner
10 To Marie von Sivers in Berlin Saturday, November 21, 1903 Weimar, November 21, 1903 Dear Sister, I would have liked to send you a short greeting yesterday, but my time before the lecture was fully booked. Today I received your kind lines. They are very much you. But you should not think that I in the least underestimate the pull that brought us together. For us, the common goal is one of the master powers,¹⁴ in the face of which we both have to be “manageable” in loyal, firm brotherhood of arms. The co-Glanube is a positive force that acts magnetically for us, and you have brought this co-faith power to me through your understanding; and we have to give it to each other. Yesterday's lecture is over. Before that, I was with Mrs. Lübke at Prozor's house.¹⁵ In the evening, I also saw the young son briefly. Yesterday's lecture was about the “pilgrimage of the soul”. The first part dealt with the threefold human becoming: the lunar-kamic epoch: the formation of the manasic-kamic psyche (1st-2nd race) and the epoch of the embodiments of the actual human spirit (from the 3rd race onwards). Then in the second part, the paths through the physical, kamic and Devachan worlds followed. I tried to characterize the earthly human condition as passing through various stages of life (reincarnations), the “houses” and then emphasized that at the beginning and at the end there is a temple; on the first the riddle of human life, on the last the “word of the solution” and at the “houses” in between the individual letters that ultimately compose the “word of the solution”. Tonight a small circle will gather. And then I leave for Cologne, where I want to be at 9 o'clock tomorrow. You write of a doorman you want to turn on at my door. I don't think you should do this now. I will tell you verbally why I don't think it's a good idea to add fuel to the fire right now. Believe, my darling, as I believe that we will get over the difficulties, even if we do not even appear to be provoking. Do not misunderstand me and do not see this as timidity or a lack of will to create clarity. But clarity will come all the sooner if we ourselves “unlearn the struggle” in this case as well. There is a New Testament saying worth taking to heart: “Do not resist by causing pain.” (Of course, the English translation also has nonsense here: “Do not resist evil.”) And even if the “pain” is not caused by us, it can still be effected by us. We must do what is necessary in such a direction, and rather a step less than one too many (in this direction, mind you). So we leave the door-woman, who can't do much good by keeping out the physical kitchen noise and increasing the mental noise by one degree. Be fresh, my dear Confidante, occasionally check your papers and keep up your meditation as we have discussed. Ever yours, Rudolf. 14. see note on no. 20. 15. Count Maurice Prozor (1849-1928), known as the translator of Ibsen's plays into French, a diplomat in Russian service, at that time at the court of Weimar, his wife Marthe, his daughter Elsa and his son Maurice Edouard, were or became all members of the Theosophical Society.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 10 21 Nov 1903,

Rudolf Steiner

10

To Marie von Sivers in Berlin
Saturday, November 21, 1903

Weimar, November 21, 1903

Dear Sister,

I would have liked to send you a short greeting yesterday, but my time before the lecture was fully booked. Today I received your kind lines. They are very much you. But you should not think that I in the least underestimate the pull that brought us together. For us, the common goal is one of the master powers,¹⁴ in the face of which we both have to be “manageable” in loyal, firm brotherhood of arms. The co-Glanube is a positive force that acts magnetically for us, and you have brought this co-faith power to me through your understanding; and we have to give it to each other.

Yesterday's lecture is over. Before that, I was with Mrs. Lübke at Prozor's house.¹⁵ In the evening, I also saw the young son briefly. Yesterday's lecture was about the “pilgrimage of the soul”. The first part dealt with the threefold human becoming: the lunar-kamic epoch: the formation of the manasic-kamic psyche (1st-2nd race) and the epoch of the embodiments of the actual human spirit (from the 3rd race onwards). Then in the second part, the paths through the physical, kamic and Devachan worlds followed. I tried to characterize the earthly human condition as passing through various stages of life (reincarnations), the “houses” and then emphasized that at the beginning and at the end there is a temple; on the first the riddle of human life, on the last the “word of the solution” and at the “houses” in between the individual letters that ultimately compose the “word of the solution”.

Tonight a small circle will gather. And then I leave for Cologne, where I want to be at 9 o'clock tomorrow. You write of a doorman you want to turn on at my door. I don't think you should do this now. I will tell you verbally why I don't think it's a good idea to add fuel to the fire right now. Believe, my darling, as I believe that we will get over the difficulties, even if we do not even appear to be provoking. Do not misunderstand me and do not see this as timidity or a lack of will to create clarity. But clarity will come all the sooner if we ourselves “unlearn the struggle” in this case as well. There is a New Testament saying worth taking to heart: “Do not resist by causing pain.” (Of course, the English translation also has nonsense here: “Do not resist evil.”) And even if the “pain” is not caused by us, it can still be effected by us. We must do what is necessary in such a direction, and rather a step less than one too many (in this direction, mind you). So we leave the door-woman, who can't do much good by keeping out the physical kitchen noise and increasing the mental noise by one degree.

Be fresh, my dear Confidante, occasionally check your papers and keep up your meditation as we have discussed.

Ever yours, Rudolf.

14. see note on no. 20.
15. Count Maurice Prozor (1849-1928), known as the translator of Ibsen's plays into French, a diplomat in Russian service, at that time at the court of Weimar, his wife Marthe, his daughter Elsa and his son Maurice Edouard, were or became all members of the Theosophical Society.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 13 11 Apr 1904, Rudolf Steiner
Wangenheim (1863-1958), after Rudolf Steiner's visit, undertook to unite the various Theosophical groups in Munich into a branch of the German Section. This new branch, which also incorporated Ludwig Deinhard's old branch, was given a new foundation charter dated June 6, 1904, with Rosa v.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 13 11 Apr 1904, Rudolf Steiner
13 To Marie von Sivers in Berlin Monday, April 11, 1904 Munich, April 11, 1904 Dear Marie! It is really only now possible to write to you. You already know that everything went well in Stuttgart. The Stuttgart members were beaming when they saw the packed hall; and I was naturally delighted to be able to speak to 500 people about Theosophy. Yesterday, immediately after my arrival, was the evening at Baroness Wangenheim's.¹⁴ I was supposed to speak about the development of Christian mysticism. I did so. After the lecture, the audience immediately wanted me to speak in public. And - Deinhard now wants it too. So everything points to me staying for Wednesday and then giving a public lecture. But I have my doubts now. Baroness Wangenheim made sacrifices earlier than Böhme ¹⁵ there was, and therefore she doubted whether we could not make such a fiasco with a public lecture with such a deterred audience that nobody would come at all. Now everything would be rushed until Wednesday; and such a hastily organized lecture does not seem to me to be the right thing. It could be poorly attended precisely because of the haste, and then the organizers could become even more suspicious. So when I go to Deinhard's for lunch later, I'll suggest that I have my card rewritten on my return journey via Augsburg and perhaps give a public lecture here. That might be a better idea in any case. In any case, a telegram will be sent to you in the afternoon. In the meantime, the “discussions with Theosophy enthusiasts” scheduled by Deinhard have increased by one for tomorrow morning. You see, such things are also growing. But I'm not going away; and it seems to me that you won't find me very dejected when we meet. The more your dear strength is at my side, the less I will dissolve. The moment I read your letters is a moment of celebration; and I know that is how it should be. So now we shall continue. We shall see. This afternoon there is a “discussion in a small circle” at Deinhard's. In the evening, lecture at Countess Kalckreuth's. ¹⁶ Thank you very much, my dear, and come back to Zurich in good health.¹⁷ Your Rudolf Schirmensee on Lake Zurich, April 1904 On their first trip together to Switzerland In front of Wilhelm von Megerle's house 14. Baroness Gertrud Alexandrine v. Wangenheim (1863-1958), after Rudolf Steiner's visit, undertook to unite the various Theosophical groups in Munich into a branch of the German Section. This new branch, which also incorporated Ludwig Deinhard's old branch, was given a new foundation charter dated June 6, 1904, with Rosa v. Hofstetten as chairwoman. Sophie Stinde and Countess Kalckreuth also became members of the German section in May 1904. 15. Edwin Böhme (1877-1906), General Secretary of the Leipzig “Theosophical Society in Germany”. The reason for its foundation was the following event: in 1894, three years after the death of H. P. Blavatsky, H. S. Olcott and A. Besant made an attempt to remove W.Q. Judge from the Theosophical Society. Judge out of the Theosophical Society. William Quan Judge (1851-1896), was co-founder and Vice-President of the Society, as well as General Secretary of the American Section of the T.S. In protest, this section broke away from the Adyar Society in 1895 and constituted itself as an independent “Theosophical Society in America”. Groups outside America also joined this protest, thus the “Theosophical Society in England” and the German Society of Franz Hartmann came into being. For more details see: Chapter VII in H. Wiesberger, “Rudolf Steiners esoterische Lehrtätigkeit”, Dornach 1997. 16. Pauline v. Kalckreuth (1856-1929), painter, member since May 1904, later chairwoman of the Munich I branch, also on the Section's board since 1911. In 1911, as co-founder of the Bauverein, on its board until 1925. Together with her friend Sophie Stinde, she was responsible for the organization of the Munich Festival in 1907 and 1909-1913. Sophie Stinde (1853-1915), painter, May 1904, together with her friend, involved in the re-founding of the Munich branch, which became one of the main centers of Rudolf Steiner's activity alongside Berlin. She was on the board of the German section from 1904. In 1911, she co-founded and became the first chairwoman of the Bauverein. 17. to travel on together to Lugano. The return journey together was again via Munich.

262. Correspondence with Marie Steiner 1901–1925: Correspondence 13 11 Apr 1904,

Rudolf Steiner

13

To Marie von Sivers in Berlin
Monday, April 11, 1904

Munich, April 11, 1904

Dear Marie!

It is really only now possible to write to you. You already know that everything went well in Stuttgart. The Stuttgart members were beaming when they saw the packed hall; and I was naturally delighted to be able to speak to 500 people about Theosophy. Yesterday, immediately after my arrival, was the evening at Baroness Wangenheim's.¹⁴ I was supposed to speak about the development of Christian mysticism. I did so. After the lecture, the audience immediately wanted me to speak in public. And - Deinhard now wants it too. So everything points to me staying for Wednesday and then giving a public lecture. But I have my doubts now. Baroness Wangenheim made sacrifices earlier than Böhme ¹⁵ there was, and therefore she doubted whether we could not make such a fiasco with a public lecture with such a deterred audience that nobody would come at all. Now everything would be rushed until Wednesday; and such a hastily organized lecture does not seem to me to be the right thing. It could be poorly attended precisely because of the haste, and then the organizers could become even more suspicious. So when I go to Deinhard's for lunch later, I'll suggest that I have my card rewritten on my return journey via Augsburg and perhaps give a public lecture here. That might be a better idea in any case. In any case, a telegram will be sent to you in the afternoon.

In the meantime, the “discussions with Theosophy enthusiasts” scheduled by Deinhard have increased by one for tomorrow morning. You see, such things are also growing. But I'm not going away; and it seems to me that you won't find me very dejected when we meet.

The more your dear strength is at my side, the less I will dissolve. The moment I read your letters is a moment of celebration; and I know that is how it should be.

So now we shall continue. We shall see. This afternoon there is a “discussion in a small circle” at Deinhard's. In the evening, lecture at Countess Kalckreuth's. ¹⁶

Thank you very much, my dear, and come back to Zurich in good health.¹⁷

Your Rudolf

Rudolf Steiner and Marie v. Sivers — Schirmensee on Lake Zurich, April 1904
On their first trip together to Switzerland
In front of Wilhelm von Megerle's house

14. Baroness Gertrud Alexandrine v. Wangenheim (1863-1958), after Rudolf Steiner's visit, undertook to unite the various Theosophical groups in Munich into a branch of the German Section. This new branch, which also incorporated Ludwig Deinhard's old branch, was given a new foundation charter dated June 6, 1904, with Rosa v. Hofstetten as chairwoman. Sophie Stinde and Countess Kalckreuth also became members of the German section in May 1904.
15. Edwin Böhme (1877-1906), General Secretary of the Leipzig “Theosophical Society in Germany”. The reason for its foundation was the following event: in 1894, three years after the death of H. P. Blavatsky, H. S. Olcott and A. Besant made an attempt to remove W.Q. Judge from the Theosophical Society. Judge out of the Theosophical Society. William Quan Judge (1851-1896), was co-founder and Vice-President of the Society, as well as General Secretary of the American Section of the T.S. In protest, this section broke away from the Adyar Society in 1895 and constituted itself as an independent “Theosophical Society in America”. Groups outside America also joined this protest, thus the “Theosophical Society in England” and the German Society of Franz Hartmann came into being. For more details see: Chapter VII in H. Wiesberger, “Rudolf Steiners esoterische Lehrtätigkeit”, Dornach 1997.
16. Pauline v. Kalckreuth (1856-1929), painter, member since May 1904, later chairwoman of the Munich I branch, also on the Section's board since 1911. In 1911, as co-founder of the Bauverein, on its board until 1925. Together with her friend Sophie Stinde, she was responsible for the organization of the Munich Festival in 1907 and 1909-1913.
Sophie Stinde (1853-1915), painter, May 1904, together with her friend, involved in the re-founding of the Munich branch, which became one of the main centers of Rudolf Steiner's activity alongside Berlin. She was on the board of the German section from 1904. In 1911, she co-founded and became the first chairwoman of the Bauverein.
17. to travel on together to Lugano. The return journey together was again via Munich.

Results 4961 through 4970 of 6282

˂ 1 ... 495 496 497 498 499 ... 629 ˃

The Rudolf Steiner Archive

228

229

233

3

5

6

7

9

10

13