# A Spiritual Scientific View of Nature and Man

## GA 352 — 13 February 1924, Dornach

### IV. About Clothing

Good morning, gentlemen! Have you thought about what you would like today?

Mr. Burle: If one might ask the doctor about human clothing, about the clothing that people wear. In some countries people have just one rag and throw it around them; others are buttoned up. One has dazzling colors, the other has simple colors. Then again, we could ask about the national costumes, what the peoples or the people in question wear. Then also what the waving flags are and - this is perhaps also connected with that - what ecstasy they exert?

Dr. Steiner: Much thought has been given to the question of human clothing because, as you can imagine, there are few external documents and little historical evidence about these things.

You see the clothing of the simpler peoples and tribes, and you also see the clothing of the people in the city to which you yourself belong. And finally, one sees what one puts on oneself, but actually pays the least attention to what one puts on oneself. In this matter, one simply goes along with what has become the custom. Yes, after all, one must do it to a certain extent simply for the reason that otherwise one is considered at least half a fool, if not a complete fool.

Now, the first question is that which is perhaps the most difficult for an external science to answer, because, as I said, external written records are only available in very few cases, about the reasons why people originally clothed themselves. If we really take into account everything that can be seen in this direction, we have to say to ourselves: Certainly, much of what is in clothing has already emerged from the human need for protection, from the need to protect oneself as a human being against the influences of the environment. You must remember that animals have their own protection. To a large extent, animals have protection against external influences that cannot penetrate their hair, skin and so on into the more delicate, softer parts of the organism.

Now you may ask yourself: Why doesn't man have this protection by nature? — I don't want to emphasize this question, which always asks why, because in nature it is actually not entirely justified to ask why. Nature simply puts the beings in place, and one must simply examine how they present themselves. The why is never entirely justified. But we shall understand each other if I nevertheless say: How is it that man, unclothed by nature, must go through the world like this?

We must then ask ourselves the other question, whether this covering that the animal has from nature is not clearly connected with the less highly developed spiritual organization that the animal has? And it is. You see, gentlemen, it is really the case that sometimes those parts of a living being, that is, of an animal and also of a human being, that are most important, do not appear to be the most important in external life. We can cite some very small organs in the human organism. If these are not as they should be, then the whole human organism breaks down. For example, here in the thyroid glands on both sides, there are very small organs – I have mentioned them to you before in a different context – that are hardly the size of a pinhead. One might think that these are not so important. But if it should happen that a person needs an operation on the thyroid gland, and the surgeon is inept and removes these tiny, pinhead-sized organs as well, then the whole organism becomes ill. The person becomes dull and gradually perishes from exhaustion. So small, tiny, pinhead-sized organs are of the greatest possible importance for the whole human being! They have them because these organs secrete a very fine substance that must flow into the blood. And the blood is useless if these organs are not there and their secretions do not flow into the blood. So you can see that even organs that we do not pay much attention to have the greatest possible significance for the being in which these organs are found.

Take, for example, those animals in the animal kingdom that have hairy skin. Well, you can imagine that the hairy skin is good for keeping the animals from freezing in winter and so on. Certainly, that is one of its uses. But if these hairs are to arise in the skin, the animal must be accessible to a particularly strong effect of the sun. The hairs arise only when the animal is accessible to a strong effect of the sun.

You might say: Yes, but hair does not develop everywhere only where the sun's rays have access! - And yet it is so. It even goes so far that the human germ, in the first periods, while it is carried in the mother's womb, is hairy. You may say: It is not exposed to the sun. It loses these hairs later. And every human being who is born was actually quite hairy during the first weeks of the mother's pregnancy. He loses this hair. Why is that? It is because the mother absorbs the power of the sun, which works internally. The hair is very closely related to the effect of the sun.

Take the lion, for example. The lion, whose male has this mighty mane, is an animal that is extraordinarily exposed to the effects of the sun. As a result, the lion also has well-developed chest organs, which become particularly strong under the influence of the sun, a short intestine and powerfully developed lungs. This distinguishes him from our ruminants, which have more developed organs of the abdomen, intestines, stomach and so on. The way an animal is hairy, feathered and so on is therefore mainly related to the effect of the sun.

But again, when the effect of the sun on a being is very great, then it is the case that this being lets the sun think within itself, lets the sun will within itself: it does not become independent. Man has his independence from the fact that he does not have this outer protection, but that he is more or less exposed to the influences of the earthly environment. It is even interesting to note how the animal is less dependent on the earth than man. The animal is largely formed from outside the earth. I have, of course, provided you with evidence for these things everywhere. But man is emancipating himself from these external natural influences. And that comes from the fact that he has, so to speak, an unprotected skin on all sides and therefore has to seek his own protection.

You can see from our ordinary clothing that it is actually composed of two parts. One part is revealed to us when we put on a winter coat in winter and protect ourselves from the cold. That is the part of clothing through which we seek protection. But that is not the only one. You can see, for example, especially with women, that they don't just seek protection through clothing, but they arrange it so that it should be beautiful; sometimes it is indeed horrible, but it should be beautiful. It depends on taste or bad taste, but in any case it should be beautiful, it should adorn. These are the two functions of clothing: to provide protection against the outside world and to adorn.

One part of this task for clothing originated more in the north, where protection was needed. Therefore, there the clothing has more the character of protection. In terms of protection, people do not go to extraordinary lengths. But in warmer areas, in areas where entire nations actually walk quite naked, decoration forms the little that you see, or, when they put on more, the main part of the clothing.

But you will now know that it was precisely from the warmer regions that higher civilization came, that more of the spiritual life came from the warmer regions. Therefore, when we look at clothing, we can always see that, in a sense, the type of clothing designed to protect the human being from external influences has remained incomplete. On the other hand, clothing that is intended to adorn has undergone all possible development. Of course, what a person's taste is comes into play here, doesn't it? The whole spiritual direction of people comes into play. So let us assume more primitive peoples, simpler, more original ones. Such peoples have a strong sense of color. We in our regions, who are so far advanced in terms of reason – or at least we believe we are – do not have the sense of color that the more original peoples have.

But these more primitive peoples yet still have a completely different sense. They have the sense that there are spiritual-supernatural parts to the human being. In the so-called civilized areas, people no longer believe that there are people who are not as clever as civilized people want to be, but who have a sense that the human being has a supernatural side. And they perceive this supernatural side as colored. This is the case with primitive peoples: they perceive the supersensible part that they carry within them – what I have called the astral body – as colored, and they want to make visible that which is invisible to us. So they adorn themselves in red or blue, or the like, depending on how they see themselves in the astral realm. This comes from the view that these people have of the spiritual world.

The Greeks, for example, saw how the etheric head of the human being is much larger than the physical head, how it protrudes, and so they endowed Pallas Athena, this goddess, with a kind of helmet. But you can see for yourself if you take this Pallas Athena and examine the helmet she is wearing, the helmet has something like eyes at the top. You can see that everywhere; just look at Pallas Athena, even in a bad statue, there are eyes at the top of the helmet. This proves to you that it was meant to be part of the body. That is something else you can see; they put it on Athena.

And the type of clothing that people made in those areas where they had a sense of the supersensible human being was adapted to how they imagined this astral body of the human being.

Now, in our regions — as you gentlemen know — only the ritual clothing in the truest sense is still made in colors. If you look at what the ritual clothing is, you will see that it is modeled entirely on how the astral body is imagined. So the colors and also the shape and form of the clothing are basically derived from the supersensible. And only when one understands this, does one understand how clothing is designed as an adornment. This is also very important. If you look at pictures painted by the old masters, you will see: Mary, for example, always has a very specific dress and a very specific wrap, because this is intended to suggest how she is in her astral body, in her heart, in her mind. This is to be indicated by the clothing. Compare pictures where Mary is with Magdalene at the same time, and you will always find that the old painters looked at Mary and Magdalene differently, just as differently as they are portrayed, because it is said to be based on their astral body and the clothing is made in the way the astral body is now supposed to be in terms of color.

We civilized people have simply moved into materialism, so we no longer have any sense of this transcendental side of man. We think with the mind of the earth and think that the mind of the earth is master of everything. Yes, gentlemen, that is why we no longer have any sense of dressing in such a way that what we wear looks halfway human! We put our legs, if we are men, into tubes. That is probably the most unadorned of all the clothes that have appeared in the world, the trouser tube! But we do a lot more; if we want to be particularly noble, we also put a stovepipe top hat on our heads. Just imagine what an ancient Greek would make of a face if he could stand up and meet a person who has his two legs inside tubes and also has a tall stovepipe top hat up there, and what's more, it's black! The Greek would not think that this is a human, but that he would have an incredible ghost in front of him! You just have to imagine that. And it even comes to such things that, in a completely abstract way, people still cut off such rags from the coat, which is already ugly enough; then they call it a tailcoat. Yes, that is something that shows much more than anything how thoughtless humanity has actually become. Just because one is accustomed to it and because, as I said, one is regarded as a half-fool or a complete fool if one does not go along with things, one goes along with them. But one must be aware that the whole way men dress today is actually somewhat reminiscent of an insane asylum, especially when it is supposed to be quite normal. This just goes to show that little by little one has become completely divorced from any reality,

Women, of whom many men believed that they are less civilized than men, have remained somewhat closer to the original way of dressing. Today, however, there is also a tendency to make women's clothing more like men's, but it has not yet been fully successful.

What does decorating actually mean? To shape oneself outwardly in such a way that one thereby gives expression to what man is spiritually! In this respect, in order to understand how everything related to clothing comes about in more primitive peoples, one must realize that in primitive peoples people do not consider themselves to be as independent as people today consider themselves to be independent. Today, every person considers himself, and with a certain right, to be an independent personality. Well, he says to himself: I have my own mind, through which I think out everything I can do. - If he is particularly conceited, he considers himself a reformer, and so today we have almost as many reformers as people in the world. So today, people consider themselves to be something absolutely independent. Now, that was not the case at all with earlier people and tribes. These tribes considered themselves a unit in their group and regarded a spiritual being as their group soul; they regarded themselves as belonging together like the members of a body and regarded the group soul as that which held them together. In this group-like way, they imagined themselves to have a very specific form. Then they expressed this in their clothing. So, for example, if they thought of the group soul in Greece as having a kind of helmet-like extension on its head, they would put on a helmet. And the helmet was not created out of a need for protection, but because they believed that it would make them more similar to the group soul.

Likewise, some group souls have been thought of as eagles, vultures, other animals, owls, and so on. They then arranged their clothing accordingly, so that it was adorned in some way with feathers and the like, in order to become similar to the group soul. And so clothing has mostly arisen out of spiritual needs.

In the case of primitive peoples and tribes, something emerges through clothing about how they have imagined their group soul. And if you find an original tribe and ask: How did they dress, especially how did they adorn themselves? Did they adorn themselves with feathers or with fur? then you can say: If you find a tribe that adorns itself mainly with feathers, then you know that the common group soul, which was in a sense their protective spirit, was imagined to be bird-like. If you find that a people adorns itself mainly with animal skins, then you can be sure that the group soul, which was in a sense their protective spirit, was imagined by them as either a lion-like or a tiger-like creature. So you can also see something in this for the design of the original clothing, if you ask yourself: How did these people imagine their group soul? And Mr. Burle was quite right when he said: One loves flowing clothing, the other tight-fitting. — Flowing clothing developed from the fact that they wanted to make themselves some kind of bird's dress, wanted to make dresses with wings; they liked it when the thing was wing-like. And it even had a great influence on people's skill when they acquired such flowing clothes. And when they turned, they also made pleasing movements with their arms. This made them skillful and so on. One can say: Adorning is the will to express the spiritual in temporal garments. And mere protection, which of course is not to be criticized, is the expression of the philistine in man. The more one wants to arrange clothing merely to protect oneself, the more one is a philistine. The more one wants to adorn oneself, the less one is a philistine and actually wants to express in clothing the spiritual that lies in human dignity.

It is natural that later in civilization these things have shifted completely. For example, one must be clear about the following. Imagine that such earlier peoples come to the conclusion that the sun has a special influence on the human heart, on the human breast in general, and they say to themselves: I am only a hearty person if the sun has the right influence. Not externally on the skin, where I would become quite hairy, but internally processed, the sun's rays act on the heart. The heart is rightly associated with the effect of the sun. What do people do who still know something about this connection with the sun? Yes, you see, they tie a kind of medallion around their necks, a medal that represents the sun. And so they have something hanging down around their necks that represents the sun (see drawing). These peoples go around with it, saying, as it were: I acknowledge that the sun has an influence on my heart.

Later, of course, this was forgotten. The civilized people have forgotten that originally it was a sign that the sun had an influence on the heart. But what once made sense has become habit, really become habit. And out of habit, people then adopt something like that, no longer have any concept of why it was originally worn. These habits develop first; later, the states or governments take possession of such habits, they occupy them. Most of the so-called progress of states and governments consists in taking possession of what has become a habit. Someone finds — it can only ever be one person — let us say a cure. That comes from his mind. The government sets about claiming this remedy for itself and says: Only if I allow it, may it be sold here and there. — So in the end it comes from the government.

The same thing happened with the sun medallion. People originally made it out of their own knowledge, and later they made and wore it out of old habit; and then the governments said: No, you are not allowed to do that voluntarily, but we must first give permission for you to make and wear it. - And so the medals were created! And so the governments decorated their members with the medals. Of course, the medal no longer has the slightest meaning. But those who scold the medals should also know that they originally had their good sense and that they emerged from something that made sense.

You see, that's what happened to many original garments. The ancient Romans and Greeks still knew that when they go around showing their naked bodies, it is not the whole human being, but there is a supersensible body. They imitated this supersensible body in their toga, and so they formed the toga. In this way, the Romans wanted to recreate the supersensible body. The toga is nothing other than the astral body. And in the artful folds of the toga, the powers of the astral body came to light. And in more recent times, because they no longer knew anything about the real spiritual human being, they knew of nothing better to do than to take the old garments and, in order to make them new, to cut off some piece here, there, or everywhere cut, first making the one that went down close to the ground shorter, and then making it so that it could be slipped on, and gradually transforming it into the modern man's skirt. The modern man's skirt is nothing more than the redesigned toga, only it is no longer recognizable.

Take the belt, for example. Yes, the belt came about because man knows: I am divided in the middle, unlike any animal. No animal has a diaphragm like the one humans have. For no animal does this division in the middle have such significance as it does for humans. Just compare the two. Today, people forget this in the most incredible ways. For example, the length of a human being is often compared with the length of an animal in order to find out something, such as how much food an animal needs and how much a human being needs. But just think about it: there is an animal, and there is a human being. Now someone measures the length of the animal and measures the length of the human being. Yes, gentlemen, can you compare the two things? That is nonsense. What you measure in the animal is only that in humans; so you can only compare it with the animal world if you measure the length of the human being from the crown of the head to here, the loin measurement. Or if you want to compare the human being with the animal, you can compare it with what the two hind limbs are in the animal. It is really the case that thoughtlessness sometimes goes terribly far.

Now, when primitive peoples realized the significance of the fact that man has a division in the middle, they indicated this with the belt. So that a human characteristic has also been indicated by the belt.

And you see, when a person is properly recognized, it is known, for example, that a special power even for thinking lies in the knee bend. And that is why the knee-bend - which we can no longer particularly adorn today because we have our trouser tubes over it - was adorned. From this something like the English Order of the Garter arose, in the way I have described. All these things have developed out of a real observation, not out of such terribly abstract, theoretical thinking as we have today.

And, you see, modern clothing has lost all its colors too. Yes, why has it lost its colors? Because the sense of the supersensible is expressed best through color. And the more a person enjoys color, the more inclined they are to somehow grasp the supersensible. But our time loves gray on gray, preferably undyed colors. The reason for this can be hinted at by the saying: 'All cats are gray at night' — because modern man no longer sees into the light at all, I mean into the spiritual light. Everything has become gray for him. He expresses this best in his clothing. He no longer knows which color to adorn himself with, so he adorns himself with no color at all. It has been completely forgotten that everything to do with clothing is connected with what was still known in ancient times, what was known by supersensible man. Now the general civilization has become grey. But for certain purposes in life the original colorfulness has remained, without anyone knowing where it actually came from.

The uniforms worn by our military in the modern state originated at a time when people had to rely more and more on defense. And all the individual parts of military clothing can be examined to see if they are somehow related to means of defense or attack; and basically, it can be said that all military clothing is actually outdated today and cannot be understood anymore. You see, the modern private's tunic is understood because it developed from the Roman toga. The military tunic is only understood if it is explained not from the Roman toga, from this drapery, which has been distorted into caricature, but if it is explained from the knighthood of the Middle Ages, where the whole was a kind of armor. There the armor was redesigned.

The flag was also mentioned (in the question). You see, the flag has the following background: originally, the so-called heraldic animal was on the flag – it didn't have to be an animal – but what was the heraldic animal? It was precisely the group soul, this soul that held the people together. And when they were together in groups, they wanted to have this soul before them in the picture. That is why they made the flag out of it. The flag is proof that the common thoughts that people have are summarized in this flag.

So it is particularly important to be clear about this: ancient painters were actually much more real in their painting than today's painters. Today, one usually paints so-called easel pictures, that is, one paints pictures that are then put into frames and hung somewhere, because one has been accustomed to it. Basically, there is no sense in this. For why should one hang a picture on a wall? One must ask. In ancient times it was like this: there were altars; there one painted the picture on the altars that one should remember when standing before the altar. There were churches where one walked around. One painted on the wall that which should come to mind in succession when one walked around. There it had a meaning, a relationship to what was going on inside in people.

And, let's say, in old knight castles --- well, what was knighthood based on? Chivalry was based on the fact that the people who belonged to it always looked up to their so-called ancestors. The ancestors were much more important than one was. If you had a large number of ancestors, you were worth more. Well, that's where the ancestor pictures were hung. So that made sense again.

But when that meaning was lost, that was when landscape painting first came about. And landscape painting – having a landscape on the wall, yes, you can have a thing for that. I don't want to be horrible about this and criticize all landscape painting, but after all, a painted landscape can never be the same as going out into the countryside! And so, basically, landscape painting only came about at a time when people no longer had a real sense of nature.

If you look at pictures from a few centuries ago – yes, even at those by Raphael or Leonardo – you will see that what is painted are the people, and the landscape, only hinted at, is actually done childishly, because people agreed that the landscape should be viewed outside in nature. But in the human being, one can express different things; the human being is not just nature, one can express different things there! And so Raphael was able to express a lot in Mary. You may know the picture that hangs in Dresden: Mary with the child Jesus on her left arm, clouds above; then below are two figures: Saint Sixtus and Saint Barbara, this picture that is called the “Sistine Madonna”. Yes, gentlemen, Raphael did not paint this picture to be hung on a wall, but he painted Mary with the baby Jesus so that a banner could be made to carry in processions. Now there are these processions where you go out into the field to the altar. They always had a banner that was carried in front. They stopped at the altar, where the people then knelt. Then someone later added those who knelt, St. Sixtus and St. Barbara. They don't even belong in the picture, and they are terrible in comparison to what Raphael himself painted at the time. But people don't notice that. Many admire the rather repulsive figure of Barbara in this picture just as much as they admire what Mary and the Christ Child themselves are!

All these are things that show you: one has also strayed from what still had meaning in painting. Why was this picture painted by Raphael for a church banner? The reason was so that people should have this common thought when they were in their procession, which corresponded to the purpose for which flags were made in the first place.

Well, then the desire arises to still associate a certain meaning with that which has been preserved from the old days, when things really had a meaning. Today you can go to areas, for example to Finland, where you will again encounter people in traditional clothing. Those who particularly want to be national wear the old clothing that was forgotten and is being rediscovered.

But all these people no longer live in the time when ancient instincts were present, when clothing was associated with meaning. Today, we would have to find clothing from what is in the spiritual life today, just as these ancient peoples found clothing from their meaning, from what they considered to be right in the world and humanity. But today, people no longer have this ability because they know nothing of the real, that is, of the spiritual human being. And so it has come about that today we have garments that are actually quite meaningless and that are based only on the fact that one drives meaninglessness to excess.

Originally, people wore belts. The belt emphasized that there was something special here in the human body. The belt was there to express this. Later, people saw the belt and saw that the human body was divided up; now they themselves made this division with the belt. Instead of the belt expressing something, in women's clothing it often led to women's clothing being made in such a way that it expresses nothing, but here only the liver and stomach and all sorts of things are squeezed together. You can say that a large part of what has emerged in the materialistic age has actually emerged out of senselessness, out of real senselessness. Even things that we today must consider nonsense had a certain significance for primitive peoples. Take, for example, the peculiarity of wild peoples not to clothe themselves by putting on garments, but to clothe themselves in a different way. No, the garment is actually that which adorns, which adds something to what the person is. The significance of clothing is actually suggestion, revelation. Thus, the invisible is to be revealed through clothing. So, you don't need fabric to dress, the wild tribes thought – they still think so today, and others think so too – but you can also dress by making all kinds of drawings on the body itself. They adorn themselves with so-called tattoos. People make all kinds of marks on their bodies.

Yes, gentlemen, these signs that people make on their bodies originally had a very great significance. Suppose, for example, a person carves a heart on his body. Now, if he walks around during the day, it has no great significance in the waking state. But when he sleeps, then what he has carved into his skin makes a very meaningful impression on his sleeping soul, and then it becomes a thought in his sleeping soul, which he naturally forgets again in the morning when he comes to consciousness. But this tattooing originally arose from the intention of having an effect on the person even in their sleep. Later on, however, it lost its significance even among savage tribes, at least to the extent that people only do it out of habit, continue it out of habit, but it has just lost its significance.

Now, you have to take all these things into consideration. Then you will see that clothing arose partly out of the need for protection, but for the most part, the greater part, it arose out of the need to adorn oneself. And adorning oneself is connected with making the supersensible visible on the outside. And then, precisely with regard to clothing, people came to know nothing else but that the human being wears it. And so the national costumes came into being. Of course, a tribe that is more obliged to protect itself will have close-fitting clothes, thick clothes, the whole body more or less laden with clothes, or at least those parts that are more exposed to the cold. A person in a milder climate will develop the adornment much more, will have thinner clothes, flowing clothes and so on. So it will depend somewhat on the whole environment, on the climate, how man protects himself in part, adorns himself in part. Then people forget this. When the migrations of nations then come about, it can happen that a nation from the area where the clothing was suitable for the area moves into another area where it is no longer understood why the clothing should be suitable for these nations; but they have just kept it out of habit. And in this way it is often very difficult today to find out from the immediate surroundings why these people have precisely this clothing. You can see then, can't you, people just stop thinking. They are like the polar bear that gets its white coat because it stands out a little against the northern snow and it then means protection for him against all kinds of persecution and so on – yes, if he were to wear it in a warm climate, it just wouldn't be protective, would it!

So it is in general: Man retains what he is used to without being fully aware of the reason for it. That is why it is not so easy today to answer the question of why one or the other tribe dresses in a certain way, just by looking at how people dress. As I said, you have to go back to earlier times.

For example, you will find that the Magyar costume of the Hungarians is quite special. The Hungarians wear somewhat high boots with tight tubes, tight-fitting leggings that are tucked into the tubes, and a tight-fitting skirt. It is all modernized, has lost its original meaning, but it points to what the Hungarian language also points to; namely, it mostly has hunting expressions in what is original! It is very strange: if you come to Pest and go, for example, across a street, you will find something like an inscription like: Kave Häz. That is nothing more than coffee house! Of course, this is not Hungarian or Magyar, but a bit changed from German. Kave Häz is what they say; so you do not realize that it is actually a German word. But if you ignore the numerous words that come from Latin or German in the Magyar, then you come to the conclusion that these are mostly hunter expressions, and you come to the conclusion that the Magyars are originally a hunting people. And if you look at their clothing, it is the one that was originally the most comfortable for hunters. But then it was modernized and changed. You can still understand that at least. But when you look at today's clothing, you can't understand much anymore.

Well, Mr. Burle, did some of what I said

Mr. Burle: Pretty much!

Well, then we will continue the lectures next Saturday. Perhaps one or the other of you will think of something else you would like to ask.