The Fateful Year of 1923

GA 259

Preliminary Remarks by the Editor

On the Negotiations for the Reorganization of German Corporate Relations

The first general meeting to be held since the outbreak of the First World War in the summer of 1914 took place in Stuttgart on September 4, 1921. A new executive council was formed (Dr. Carl Unger, Emil Leinhas, Ernst Uehli) and the Society's headquarters officially transferred from Berlin to Stuttgart. Shortly thereafter a group was formed that was named the “Thirty Circle” after its membership and was intended to be a link between the executive council and the membership (for the participants in the Thirty Circle, see S. 832). When they wanted to negotiate with Rudolf Steiner about the question of the consolidation of the Society after the fire at the Goetheanum, Ernst Uehli, a member of the central council and a teacher at the Waldorf School, set up a smaller committee for this purpose, the so-called “Circle of Seven”. At the first meeting with Rudolf Steiner, this circle consisted of Ernst Uehli and six other teachers from the Waldorf School: Caroline von Heydebrandt, Eugen Kolisko, Maria Röschl, Karl Schubert, Erich Schwebsch and Walter Johannes Stein.

Marie Steiner describes the circumstances at the time in the preface to the private reproduction “Study Material from the Meetings of the Thirty Circle”, published by her in 1947, as follows:

“Due to Michael Bauer's serious illness and the resignation of Marie Steiner-von Sivers,¹ Since 1921 the executive council of the Anthroposophical Society was represented by Dr. Carl Unger, Emil Leinhas and Ernst Uehli, who lived in Stuttgart. Germany was a seething cauldron. The endless difficulties associated with the various machinations of political and social groups and the ever-increasing inflation undermined all efforts at reform. The collapse of economic life threatened to suffocate spiritual life. The grinding nature of this struggle was reflected in the souls and paralyzed the energies. This bleak picture was constantly being presented to those who were striving in the anthroposophical way. Anti-Semitism had already begun to dig deep into the souls. As an outward sign of the declaration of war by Pan-German circles, one could already see a painted swastika on many doors. Assaults and murders in the various political camps were the order of the day; they were systematically used; the assassination of Walther Rathenau is just one example. Rudolf Steiner's public lectures were also abruptly terminated by such activities at the moment of their most effective development. The rush to attend the lectures had been enormous, and so the enemies deployed the strongest counterforce on all fronts to destroy this effect. Dr. Steiner was horrified to see how some of the energies of even the formerly enthusiastic anthroposophists weakened in the face of this turmoil, and how the driving forces in the souls of inexperienced young people gained ground and overthrew. He saw the danger of disintegration through individual efforts, the neglect of the nourishing and cohesive mother soil of anthroposophy. He urgently warned the leading members in Stuttgart. In December 1922, he had given a commission to Mr. Uehli, who had traveled to Dornach on company business, in 1916 at Rudolf Steiner's instigation. See the biographical documentation Marie Steiner-von Sivers, A Life for Anthroposophy, Dornach 1988 and 1989.² He considered it to be of crucial importance: he was to discuss it with his colleagues on the board in Germany, so that the joint response to it would be given to him on his next arrival in Stuttgart. There, a “Thirty Circle” had formed, which wanted to take a stand on the problems of the time and society in serious deliberations. In between, there were still smaller circles that were even more urgently concerned with the problems close to their hearts and wished to bring them to Rudolf Steiner in more intimate sessions. The disputes of the “Thirty Circle”, which we now want to announce, concern such sessions. An attempt has been made to transcribe in shorthand what was said by Rudolf Steiner himself. It was not possible to record the many questions and opinions that the members expressed in rapid succession. But the most important parts were saved: Rudolf Steiner's answer to the question at hand: What are the tasks of the Anthroposophical Society? Here we experience the guidelines Rudolf Steiner gave for the leadership of a society, his methodology, which is always based on respect for the freedom of others, on non-interference in the individual core of the soul, but on unyielding strictness in all questions concerning the truth, so that self-deception cannot gain ground and become systematic. He relentlessly tackled the complacency that could easily arise on this ground in order to avoid difficulties, and personal attitudes. And so these messages reflect Rudolf Steiner's method in matters of social leadership, which is so necessary for us today.

While the “Thirty Circle” in Stuttgart was dealing with the catastrophic situation that had arisen there and the feared disintegration of society, the Goetheanum in Dornach burnt down on New Year's Eve 1922.

In Stuttgart, too, the meetings of the “Thirty Circle” were marked by the tragedy of the devastating event; they tried to become aware of their own inadequacies, which karmically could have made such an event possible. Was it to be sought in the fact that the enthusiasm of the early years had been paralyzed by the difficulties that had arisen, both external and internal, so that the spiritual connection with each other and with the anthroposophical branches had been lost? — The 'institutions' existed as the endeavors of individual differentiated groups; but within this social union, the human connecting spiritual bond was missing. Rudolf Steiner was again approached with a request for advice and help, but he in turn expected a moral response to the task he had set the Stuttgart board in early December. He was always willing to help, so he decided to travel there and divide his time between Dornach and Stuttgart in the following weeks. In Stuttgart, in addition to the meetings of the Siebenerausschuß, there were endless discussions in the Dreißigerkreis, lasting well into the night.

For these discussions, Rudolf Steiner and Marie Steiner traveled from Dornach to Stuttgart every week from mid-January to the end of February. During these weeks, he also gave four lectures to the Stuttgart branch on the developmental phases of the Anthroposophical Society, the necessity of its reorganization and the conditions for forming an Anthroposophical community. See the volume “Anthroposophische Gemeinschaftsbildung” (Forming an Anthroposophical Community), GA 257.

Necessary remarks on the quality and reproduction of the protocols of the Stuttgart negotiations

The following discussions between Rudolf Steiner and the Stuttgart leadership committees “Siebenerkreis” and “Dreißigerkreis” are not based on a literal stenographic transcript by a professional stenographer, but on stenographic notes that are sometimes detailed and sometimes more or less incomplete. We have Dr. Karl Schubert, a teacher at the first Waldorf School in Stuttgart, to thank for the transcripts. However, it was only many years later that he undertook the task of transcribing them into plain text with the help of Dr. Erich Gabert. In his preliminary remarks, dated “Stuttgart, April 10, 1935,” Gabert writes:

"Because the shorthand was partly difficult to read after such a long time, the text sometimes remains uncertain. When it was not possible to guess and complete the meaning with certainty, the words have been left unchanged, even if they appear incomprehensible at first. At the time, it was not always noted who said the written words. Therefore, the separation of the speakers sometimes had to be described as questionable; unfortunately, it cannot be said with certainty whether Dr. Steiner really said all the words that are under his name or whether they are the words of a participant in the conversation. There are no transcripts of all the meetings that took place in the Thirties Circle. The available ones are all reproduced here. What the other participants said at the meetings has only been included to the extent that it was deemed necessary for an understanding of Dr. Steiner's words. Dr. Steiner's words themselves are given as completely as they appeared in the shorthand."

In order to evaluate the abridgements made by Schubert-Gabert to the contributions of the other participants, a comparison was made with the original stenographic notes of Karl Schubert available in the archives of the Rudolf Steiner estate administration. The comparison showed that by summarizing and partially omitting these votes, the transferred volume of the protocols in relation to the total volume of the stenographic notes was reduced by about 3/4 to 2/3, in some cases to less than half. This must be taken into account if one wants to get a picture of the duration of the meetings and of Rudolf Steiner's real contribution to the discussions. In this regard, however, it is even more significant that the original stenographic notes also show a very different degree of incompleteness. They range from almost complete protocols to only a few notes in the form of keywords. However, to make a complete transcription of the original stenographic notes today would require years of extremely laborious work and the result would probably still be very unsatisfactory. The essential parts for the Rudolf Steiner Complete Works are, after all, primarily Rudolf Steiner's remarks.

The dots that frequently appear in the reproduction published by Marie Steiner in 1947 (...) do not mark omissions she made, as might be mistakenly assumed, but rather her need to make it visually perceptible that the protocols are incomplete in numerous places. However, since no dots appear in Karl Schubert's plain text transcriptions, and these generally indicate omissions, they have been omitted from the present edition. This is mainly to avoid the misunderstanding that any omissions have been made.

Some textual corrections in comparison with Marie Steiner's edition of 1947 are based on a new comparison with Karl Schubert's manuscripts; furthermore, on brief notes by Dr. Karl Heyer, who was also a participant in the meetings of the “Thirty Circle”. Insertions in square brackets [] are by the editor.

H.W.