The Rudolf Steiner Archive

History of the Middle Ages Up to the Great Inventions and Discoveries II

[ 1 ] The landscape of Central Europe underwent a profound transformation from around the 1st to the 6th century AD. This transformation entailed the complete replacement of the peoples who lived along the Vistula, Oder, and Elbe rivers by others, and therefore it is very difficult to form a picture of these peoples or to learn anything about their customs and way of life. One must resort to a unique method to gain an understanding of those peoples. Tacitus’s descriptions in Germania provide us with a picture of the region at that time. No other documents from that period have survived, and we must draw upon the legends of the northern Germanic peoples to supplement our understanding. What Tacitus says about these peoples is highly revealing of the Roman view of the conditions of that time. He believes they were the original inhabitants of that land, for he cannot imagine that other peoples could have settled in these inhospitable regions. He names the tribes living along the Rhine, the Lippe, the Weser, the Danube, and in Brandenburg; these are the only ones known to him. He describes their distinctive characteristics and, because of their similarities, groups them under the name “Germans.” They themselves regarded themselves as many different tribes and were referred to by a wide variety of names during their battles with the Romans, only a few of which have survived to later times, such as the Suevi, Lombards, Chatti, Frisians, and so on.

[ 2 ] They trace their origins to a figure named Tuisto, whom they revere as a deity, a reverence they express through war chants. Tuisto’s son was Mannus, after whose three sons they name their principal tribes: the Ingwäons, the Istwäons, and the Herminons. If we compare this account by Tacitus with the myths of another Aryan people, we find here as well, in the sacred language of the Indians—Sanskrit—the same term, Manu, for superhuman leaders. This points to a kinship among the tribes; indeed, we can trace the same deities among all the Indo-European peoples. Thus, Tacitus recounts that the hero of Greek legend, Hercules, was also revered by the Germanic peoples and bore the name Irmin among them. We know that a legend existed among the southern Indo-European tribes which found artistic expression in Greece: the legend of Odysseus. Tacitus discovered a place of worship near the Rhine that was dedicated to Odysseus and his father, Laertes. We can thus see that the culture of the Germanic peoples at that time was related to the culture we find in Greece during the 8th and 9th centuries BCE. Thus, we later see in Greece the development of a culture that had remained at a lower stage in Germany.

[ 3 ] All of this points to an original kinship. Those peoples who later settled in Germany, Greece, and Russia likely had their original homeland north of the Black Sea. From there, one tribe migrated to Greece, one to Rome, and a third to the west. The original culture of all these peoples has been preserved in this form among the Germanic peoples; it was further developed among the Celts. Tacitus tells us nothing about the customs and traditions of this remarkable people. We must rely on the sagas and songs that were later compiled in Iceland in the Elder and Younger Eddas; there we find the legacy of what that people produced. Tacitus goes on to describe the customs of the Germans at their popular assemblies, which we must, however, imagine as deliberations of very small communities. All the men of the district would gather for these assemblies; the deliberations took place over beer and mead, and it is said that the ancient Germans, while intoxicated in the evening, would pass their resolutions, but these would be revised the next morning, once they were sober again, and only then would they take effect. As we learn from the Scholia on the Iliad, the Persians observed the same custom. We must therefore conclude that there was a common ancestral tribe of the Aryans, and that all these peoples were related.

[ 4 ] A particularly strong resemblance is evident among the Germanic peoples living in the north in their distinctive religious practices, which, while similar in their basic character to those of the southern peoples, nevertheless show a far greater similarity to those of the Persians. According to the beliefs of the northern Germanic peoples, there were originally two realms separated by an abyss: a realm of fire, Muspelheim, and a realm of ice, Niflheim. From the sparks that flew over from Muspelheim, the first race of giants arose in the abyss, of whom Ymir was the most prominent. Then a cow, Audhumbla, came into being; she licks the ice, and from it a strong human figure emerges. From this figure descend the gods Wotan, Wili, and We, whose names mean reason, will, and spirit. This second generation of gods was called the Aesir. Their origin was traced back to the elder of the giants.

[ 5 ] Here, too, an important linguistic connection emerges, for the gods of the Persians were called Asuras—a term that is almost identical in sound—which likewise points to a kinship extending across all these peoples. Another important clue is found in an ancient Persian incantation or incantatory poem that has been handed down to us. It points to shifts in the collective mindset of the people, to ancient gods who were deposed and supplanted by others. The service of the Devas is renounced, while the service of the Asuras is invoked. Here, the similarity between the Devas and the giants who were vanquished by the Aesir becomes apparent.

[ 6 ] Furthermore, the North Germanic legend tells how the three gods found an ash tree and an alder on the seashore and used them to create the human race. The Persian myth, too, has the human race emerging from a tree. Among the Jews, we find echoes of this myth in the story of the Tree of Life in the Garden of Paradise. Thus, from Persia through Palestine to Scandinavia, we see traces of the same mythical concepts.

[ 7 ] We have thus demonstrated a common fundamental character among certain peoples. In doing so, differences emerge between a southern and a northern branch of the common main lineage. The southern branch includes the Greeks, Latins, and Indians, while the northern branch includes the Persians and Germanic peoples. Let us now consider the peoples we are dealing with in Germany. They present themselves to us in such a way that we must conclude they have preserved traits that the Greeks and Italians had long since shed—the Greeks afterward, and the Romans during the conquest of their empire—while these northern peoples had developed their essential traits and characteristics prior to that conquest. These were innate qualities that these peoples had preserved. They had not passed through that intermediate stage that the more southerly peoples had since undergone. We are thus dealing here with a clash between a people that has remained conservative and a related people that has attained a high level of civilization.

[ 8 ] At the time of the emergence of Christianity—which was to become so significant for them—the Germanic peoples were at the same stage of cultural development as that described by the Greeks in Homer. They had not experienced the cultural and social progress that had taken place in the intervening period. In the first century C.E., Tacitus describes the Germanic peoples of the borderlands along the Danube, the Rhine, and the Lippe. These peoples were characterized by a love of travel, a love of freedom, and a passion for hunting and warfare. Domestic affairs were in the hands of the women. Here we encounter a way of life and a social structure that had long since disappeared among the Greeks, one that could only survive where the individual members of a tribe were still bound together by blood ties. Hence the many tribes. Among them—who were conscious of their descent from the same family, for they were organized families, not hordes—tribal kinship developed from the individual families. Hence, too, the wars they waged were almost always wars against those of a different bloodline.

[ 9 ] Toward the end of the 4th century and during the 5th century, we see all these peoples forced to leave their homes and seek new ones.

[ 10 ] The era of the Migration Period had begun. The Huns were invading. With this, awareness began to dawn of the peoples living further to the east—the Alans, the Gepids, and so on—and above all, the Goths. This people, which was divided into the Visigoths and the Ostrogoths, had already adopted Christianity. This people is of particular importance to us because of their approach to Christianity. While the people who later spread Christianity from west to east—the Franks—imposed it by force on other peoples, the Goths were full of tolerance. The high level of culture they had already attained is evidenced by the fact that we owe the first Bible translation—the so-called Silver Codex, which is preserved in Uppsala—to a Gothic bishop named Ulfilas or Wulfila.

[ 11 ] These Goths, whose Christianization had come from the East, were not Christians like those whose conversion later came from the West; nor were they like the Franks, who, during the time of Charlemagne, imposed Christianity on the Saxons by force of arms. They were not Athanasian Christians, but Arian Christians. All these Eastern Germanic tribes professed the Arian faith, a belief that had been declared heretical and persecuted by the followers of Athanasius at the Council of Nicaea.

[ 12 ] The Arian Christians believed that God dwelled within every human heart. Therefore, the Goths believed in the deification of man, just as Christ, who had gone before them, had shown them. This view was linked to a profound refinement of the mind. The Goths were extremely tolerant of every other religious view. Between two Christian denominations that were so different from one another, no understanding was possible. While absolute tolerance was a characteristic of these Goths—it never occurred to them to impose a faith on others—we can already see here the difference from the way in which, for example, Charlemagne and Clovis, adherents of the Athanasian Creed, exploited Christianity for political purposes.

[ 13 ] The Arians viewed Christ as a human being—admittedly far more highly developed than all other humans, but still a human among humans. Their Christ belonged to humanity and dwelt in the human heart. The Christ of the Athanasian Christians is God Himself, enthroned high above humanity.

[ 14 ] Athanasius prevailed, and this had a significant impact on cultural development.

[ 15 ] The Germanic peoples were hemmed in on all sides by foreign peoples: in the south and west by the Romans and Gauls—Celtic-Germanic peoples—while new waves of peoples continually arrived from the east. The first Christian Germanic tribes had known nothing but absolute tolerance; the Frankish Christians, however, imposed Christianity upon them. This led to a change in their entire mindset. The further development of their culture now depends essentially on the development of this segment of the Germanic peoples.

[ 16 ] A profound change in legal relations had gradually taken place. A degree of calm and stability set in by the end of the 5th century. As a result of the continuous influx of people from the east, the previously mentioned tribes—which had been in constant conflict with one another and of which only a few retained their original names (such as the Chatti and the Frisii)—had coalesced into larger ethnic communities. The dissolution of the old kinship ties created a different basis for a sense of belonging. In place of blood ties came the bond that links people to the land they cultivate.

[ 17 ] Tribal solidarity became synonymous with local solidarity. The village community emerged. It was no longer a sense of kinship, but rather a bond with the land that united the individual members of the community. This led to a transformation of property relations.

[ 18 ] Originally, everything had been communal property. Now the distinction between communal property and private property is becoming apparent. For the time being, however, everything that can be communal property—forests, pastures, water, and so on—remains communal property. An intermediate stage then developed between communal and private property, known as the “Hufe.” The use of this half-private, half-communal property was subject to the decision of all the free inhabitants of a so-called “Hufe,” a community, and in those earlier times, almost all inhabitants of the district were free.

[ 19 ] This stands in stark contrast to actual private property: weapons, tools, clothing, gardens, livestock, and so on—everything that the individual had personally acquired. This limited nature was expressed in the fact that private property was closely tied to the person of the owner. Therefore, the deceased was buried with his weapons, horses, dogs, and so on. An echo of this ancient custom can still be seen today when, at the funeral of a prince, his medals, crown, and so on are carried behind him, and his horse is led along behind him.

[ 20 ] Even among a people that bears some resemblance to the ancient Germanic tribes—the Chinese—the deceased are buried with objects that belonged to them personally, although today people make do with paper models.

[ 21 ] So we see what had emerged from certain conditions: the transition from the tribal to the village community. This helps us understand further transformations. We understand why Tacitus does not speak of the Aesir, but rather of Tuisto and his son Mannus. He speaks of peoples who had not yet reached the stage of village communities. The Aesir gods belong to a higher cultural level. Other peoples came from the north and brought with them ideas that had developed there. These ideas were now suited to the higher cultural stage that had since been attained. How far does humanity go with concepts such as those presented to us in Tuisto and Mannus? It remains within the realm of humanity; it does not transcend itself. It would have been futile to introduce the worship of Wotan among these tribes. The worship of Wotan extends into the universe; humanity seeks its origin in the bosom of nature. It was only at this later stage of culture that humanity was able to rise to these religious concepts. Having become sedentary, humanity thus understands its connection with nature. Thus we have seen how the primitive culture of the more southerly Germanic peoples was influenced from the north, and how, in the meantime, advanced cultures had developed in the south among related peoples.

[ 22 ] We will continue to see under what conditions the southern cultures will spread among the Germanic peoples. An interesting overview presents itself to us: a deep, primordial kinship among the various peoples, an inner connection that defines their essence. We then observe external influences that alter their character. Thus, cause and effect are revealed to us.

[ 23 ] In this way, we can learn to understand the present through the past. Constant change governs not only nature but also history. How could we look to the future with confidence if we did not know that the present, too, is changing, that we can shape it according to our own will, and that here, too, the poet’s words come true:

The old is crumbling, times are changing,
and new life is blossoming from the ruins.