The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Fourteenth Lecture

[ 1 ] I have already expressed this morning my gratitude to the committee, to Miss Beverley, and to all of you who have shown such interest in our cause over the past fourteen days, and you can rest assured that this feeling of gratitude will remain with me as a fond memory.

[ 2 ] I would just like to add a few words to what I have already said over the past few days from a wide variety of perspectives. Most of you are, of course, well aware of the connection between the educational principles that permeate the Waldorf school movement and the principles of anthroposophy that run through the anthroposophical movement; and perhaps it is precisely this connection that I may say a few more words about at the conclusion of this event.

[ 3 ] Even today, the world still has, in essence, a misunderstanding of the anthroposophical movement; and this may stem from the fact that a wish—which, as paradoxical as it may sound, I truly hold as a heartfelt desire—cannot actually be fulfilled. For just as it is true that the Waldorf school movement grew out of the anthroposophical movement, so it is true that I would most like it if we could give the anthroposophical movement a different name every week. I know there would be terrible confusion, but still, that is what I would love most of all. For names do a great deal of harm, especially in our time. Well, admittedly, if one considers that the letterhead would have to be reprinted every week, and that someone might receive a letter bearing the name of the Anthroposophical Society from the previous week—a society that no longer even exists—one can form a mental image of the confusion this would cause in people’s minds! But it would nevertheless be something extraordinarily good for the anthroposophical movement if it had no permanent name at all; for this name actually leads to a large part of humanity today still merely preoccupying itself with the name and not engaging with the matter at all.

[ 4 ] So one finds that people first look up a Greek dictionary and, in some way, form an expression in their native language for “anthroposophy.” And then they create their own “anthroposophy,” and it is according to this “anthroposophy” of their own that we are actually discussed in the world. That is the opinion people form of us based on what they have just constructed for themselves from the name alone. So they think: they can spare themselves the trouble of getting to know what anthroposophy really is. — Now, of course, the book table at the entrance to the hall is already gone, but it’s true, I myself shuddered every day when I came in and saw the flood of literature—I’d be glad if there were less of it—but in any case, one must get to know anthroposophy by approaching the subject itself. You can’t just approach it based on the name. That’s why it would be so good if we didn’t need a name at all.

[ 5 ] Well, that’s just not possible! But I think that when a course like this one—which focuses on a practical field, on a practical application of anthroposophy—takes place, one can clearly see how little anthroposophy strives to be sectarian, how little it seeks to impose dogmas on people or anything of the sort; rather, anthroposophy is really only about coming to know the realities of the world according to their true nature. And if one wants to participate in any way in the further development of the world, then it is indeed a matter of truly looking into the course of events.

[ 6 ] In a certain sense, it is so disheartening that there is very little inclination today to look into the course of world events, and anthroposophy is actually the movement that has made this its very mission. Therefore, even when discussing a specific branch—as was the case here with education—one can always speak about these matters without starting from specific program points or the like.

[ 7 ] And when establishing the Waldorf School, this was actually our guiding principle—as I’ve already mentioned—not to impose anything on the school with the rigid dogmatism that people believe is characteristic of anthroposophy, but rather, as much as possible, to avoid bringing into the school anything that is presented to adults as anthroposophy; but simply to have anthroposophy in such a way that it becomes within us the power to perceive human beings completely impartially, to view everything in the world impartially, so that we may then also be able to approach everything impartially through action.

[ 8 ] Just a short while ago, I read a strange, reproachful review; there are an awful lot of them, and I don’t want to talk about the reviews we receive. It states that I strive to be impartial, and this seemed to be a bitter reproach leveled against me—that I always strive to be impartial in all things. I thought that, especially in our time, this was a universal human duty, particularly in the intellectual realm; but it is something that can be held against one as a very bitter reproach today.

[ 9 ] Well, I do believe, however, that it is precisely the field of education that can foster mutual understanding between the continent and England, and when I consider how receptively you, my esteemed audience, have responded to these lectures, I regard this as an exceptionally favorable sign in that regard. When people want to characterize their era, they are so fond of using the abstract, superficial phrase: “We are living in a time of transition.” Every era is a time of transition—namely, always from the preceding one to the next; it all depends on what is changing. But now, in the present, a wide variety of signs show us that we are indeed in the midst of a significant transition.

[ 10 ] Perhaps the best way to characterize this transition here is to look back for a moment at how intellectual development unfolded here in England during the 12th and 13th centuries—and even into the early 14th century. At the beginning of the 14th century, anyone here who wished to acquire an education still spoke French. The English language consisted of dialects that did not find their way into general public education. And scholarship was conducted in Latin.

[ 11 ] If, for example, one wishes to gain a good understanding of the state of education in this country in the 14th century, around 1364, one can do so by consulting Higden’s *Polychronicon*, which was published at that time; but it is written in Latin, and it is made clear that, in fact, a true education in this country could only be found in the Latin language.

[ 12 ] But while this book was being written—and while Latin was thus the language of education here—schools gradually began to emerge in which the vernacular, as in other parts of Europe, found its way into the educational system, into upbringing, and into classroom instruction. And we see how, in Winchester and Oxford, schools were established that were already using the vernacular. It is precisely here, in the second half of the 14th century, that we witness that extraordinarily important transition from Latin—which is an international language—to the vernacular.

[ 13 ] Sooner or later, similar transitions will also occur in other parts of the civilized world. We are facing a very important phenomenon here.

[ 14 ] But here in England, one can trace its emergence in the second half of the 14th century. For when Higden wrote his book in 1364, he was still able to report that Latin was the universal language of communication for education and instruction. When a certain Trevisa translated the book into English in 1387, he was already able to note that the English language had made its way into schools; so that here we see precisely that transition from the international language of Latin—in which people throughout the educated world communicated regarding education and instruction—to the time when the vernacular rose above the level of a dialect to become the means of communication for education and instruction within a single nation. And with that, an important transition was established.

[ 15 ] In the anthroposophical worldview, we can describe it as the transition from the intellectual or emotional soul to the conscious soul; for this is the distinctive feature of modern civilization: the transition from the intellectual or emotional soul—in which human beings still feel themselves to be members of the world—to the soul of consciousness, where they are to become truly aware of their freedom, their inner capacity for decision-making, and their inner activity. This alone has set in motion a process in world history in which we still find ourselves in the midst.

[ 16 ] What came about with the emergence of the vernacular languages did not immediately find its way into people’s souls and hearts; rather, here in England, too, the Renaissance movement—the so-called humanist movement—first spread from the south up to the north. We see that this humanist movement, while initially aiming at what might be called the human soul of consciousness, does not at all penetrate into an understanding of the human soul of consciousness; therefore, it asserts that, in order to be human at all, one must first and foremost acquire a humanist-classical education.

[ 17 ] This struggle for human freedom and for inner human activity has continued through the centuries right up to the present day. But more and more, it is becoming clear what humanity—civilized humanity—needs. If we go back to the era that preceded the urge toward the conscious soul, it was language itself that brought about international understanding, enabling educated people from all countries to communicate with one another. Language was the force of internationalism.

[ 18 ] This language—and here in England, one can actually trace the transition in the second half of the 14th century—could no longer serve as a means of international communication. People sought to unfold their inner activity from a deeper source within themselves. They turned to the vernacular languages. This made it increasingly necessary for communication to take place at a higher level than that provided by language.

[ 19 ] We need something that, as a spiritual reality, no longer comes merely from languages, but arises from the soul in a much more direct way. If, in a historical context and for the present historical moment, we wish to grasp anthroposophy in its true sense, it consists in finding, across the entire world, something like an international means of communication—a means of communication through which people find one another, a means of communication that, as it were, lies one level higher than language.

[ 20 ] Language captures what takes place between people through sounds transmitted through the air. Essentially, we move through the sensory world with language. If we understand one another through deeper elements of the soul—if we understand one another through thoughts carried by emotion and warmed by the heart, beyond the bounds of language—then we have, once again, a means of international understanding. But we must also have a heart for this means of international understanding. We must find the path to the human spirit beyond language.

[ 21 ] But at the same time, alongside all other ideological, pedagogical, religious, and artistic aspects, this means for the anthroposophical movement at this present historical moment: to seek, so to speak, a language of thought.

[ 22 ] Ordinary spoken language moves through the air; it still exists within the sensory realm. The language toward which anthroposophy strives will move—and this is meant in more than just a figurative sense—within the pure realm of light, passing from soul to soul, from heart to heart.

[ 23 ] And modern civilization will need such a means of communication. It will need it not only for matters of higher education, but also for the affairs of daily life.

[ 24 ] Admittedly, before this is recognized, many more conferences will be held that do not take this standpoint. Yet in recent times, one has not exactly seen much evidence of the fruitfulness of such conferences for the general welfare of humanity. But it is precisely the anthroposophical movement that wishes to advocate for the true general welfare of humanity, which can arise only from mutual understanding. For this very reason, we are once again attempting to grasp this historic moment in this way, so that we may once again become one humanity—but a humanity with a fully conscious soul, as it once existed at a different stage of human development, when Latin was the international language of communication.

[ 25 ] Back then, it was the Latin language; now, it is universal human ideas through which people can truly connect with one another across the entire globe.

[ 26 ] In the external, practical realm, the body has already been created through the global economy. But this body still lacks soul and spirit. Yet whatever wishes to live in the world needs not only a body, but also soul and spirit. Anthroposophy seeks to be, in a true and authentic way, the soul and spirit of this body—a body that has taken shape throughout the entire civilized world within the global economy and in other practical activities. It does not shy away from engaging with the most practical aspects of life, but it also seeks to infuse these very practical aspects with the mysteries that alone can serve the true progress and further development of humanity.

[ 27 ] For this, my esteemed audience, that in a specific field—the field of education—one has sought to understand how, in this way, an educational endeavor is rooted in the anthroposophical movement as a grasp of precisely this present historical moment of humanity —for the fact that you have sought to understand this, that you have taken an interest in the nuance I have tried to bring into these lectures on this particular occasion—the historical characterization of what this pedagogy aims to achieve—for this I am infinitely grateful. And I would like to express my special thanks for the warm sentiments shown toward this particular course, which sought to highlight what Waldorf school pedagogy aims to achieve in the present moment of human history, within the progress of human civilization. I have sought to present Waldorf school pedagogy as that which freely points to the deepest needs of humanity in the present. The fact that you have been willing to meet this with understanding is something I will cherish very, very deeply in my heart and soul as a fond memory of this course in particular.