{"id":60824,"date":"2024-10-30T15:53:57","date_gmt":"2024-10-30T14:53:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/?p=60824"},"modified":"2024-10-31T09:53:05","modified_gmt":"2024-10-31T08:53:05","slug":"what-the-press-is-capable-of","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/what-the-press-is-capable-of\/","title":{"rendered":"What the Press Is Capable of"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Harden-Eulenburg affair caused quite a stir at the beginning of the twentieth century. Rudolf Steiner was acquainted with the protagonists, both of whom ended their lives in sorrow.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

In the years 1906 to 1908, the German Empire was shocked by a scandal known as the Harden-Eulenburg affair. The original cause was that, in the view of Bismarck’s admirer Maximilian Harden (1861\u20131927), publicist and editor of the influential weekly journal Zukunft<\/em> [Future], Kaiser Wilhelm II was acting too compliantly in international politics. For example, he criticized Wilhelm II for a diplomatic defeat in the so-called Morocco crisis of 1905\/06, which concerned whether France should continue to maintain the protectorate over Morocco. In this context, Harden had advocated a \u201cpreventive war\u201d against France. That it didn\u2019t come to this, the journalist attributed to the \u201cexaggerated love of peace\u201d<\/span>1<\/sup><\/a><\/span> of the \u201cLiebenberg Circle,\u201d which had formed around the sensitive and musically talented diplomat, Philipp, Prince of Eulenburg, and which the Kaiser sometimes also joined. This circle of high-ranking men occasionally met at Prince Eulenburg\u2019s estate, Liebenberg Castle, in northern Brandenburg. Since Harden could not go after the monarch directly, he accused the circle of friends of negatively influencing German foreign policy in a series of articles in the journal Zukunft,<\/em> following the Kaiser\u2019s visit to Liebenberg in November 1906,<\/span>2<\/sup><\/a><\/span> and accused them of homosexual and spiritualist tendencies.<\/span>3<\/sup><\/a><\/span> When Wilhelm II found out about this in May 1907, he reacted immediately: He cast off his long-standing friends and demanded legal clarification of the allegations. A series of lawsuits began,<\/span>4<\/sup><\/a><\/span> and the matter became a huge topic in the press, which outdid itself in rumor-mongering. Thus, the \u201cLiebenberg Round Table\u201d was \u201csaid to have certainly influenced politics and all sorts of mystical, spiritualist nonsense, as well as other compromising things.\u201d<\/span>5<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The downfall of Philipp von Eulenburg and his friends, as well as the lawsuits that dragged on for years, had a colossal impact on society and politics. Among other things, the military gained influence with the Kaiser, and the monarchy\u2019s reputation faded. Livelihoods were destroyed\u2014above all, that of the Prince of Eulenburg. Not only was he alleged to be homosexual (which was still considered a social stigma at the time), not only was he cast off by the Kaiser and many of his peers, but he was also accused of perjury. For, in November 1907, he swore in court under oath that he had never engaged in homosexual behavior\u2014and was later confronted with two witnesses who claimed to have had such contacts with him. After a breakdown of health, the lawsuit was suspended against Prince Eulenburg\u2019s will<\/span>6<\/sup><\/a><\/span> and brought to a conclusion. On April 30, 1908, he noted in his diary: \u201cWhat a fate! I am slowly inuring myself to the idea that I am completely done for. How could it possibly be otherwise? I am being done down by false witnesses, Press, Government, Jewish gold. I see no hope of rescue. God!\u201d And on May 5, 1908: \u201cMy reputation has been destroyed by the current attacks in the Press, and my family irretrievably and terribly injured. What can be done to improve the situation in any degree for them?\u201d<\/span>7<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In his memoirs, the anthroposophical doctor Wilhelm zur Linden reported that Friedrich-Wend, Count of Eulenburg, came to see him in his practice in 1937 and asked him for advice \u201cdue to the still-unresolved consequences of the severe shocks he had suffered in the years 1905 to 1909 when they had tried to destroy his father\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a0. politically and personally, in order to hit the Kaiser and the monarchist idea.\u201d<\/span>8<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Zur Linden said that, after many years, Friedrich-Wend von Eulenburg had met the sailor Jakob Ernst, who had made incriminating statements about Philipp von Eulenburg, and had greeted him: \u201cThe man had now rushed up to him and exclaimed: \u2018What, you still greet me, when I acted like that towards your father? But, indeed, I couldn\u2019t help it; the lawyer had said I\u2019d go to jail if I didn\u2019t!\u2019\u201d<\/span>9<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
\u201cDie Aff\u00e4re Eulenburg\u201d [The Eulenburg Affair], contemporary caricature by Carl Josef Pollak, Die Muskete<\/em> [The Musket], no. 18 (June 1908); Caption: \u201cHerr Count, have you also been questioned about Eulenburg?\u201d \/ \u201cYes. They asked me how the German nobility actually reproduces itself\u201d; Source: Wikimedia<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

The \u2018I\u2019 that I would like to be<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

As it turns out, Rudolf Steiner, in different periods of his life, had personal relationships with both of the main protagonists of the affair\u2014Prince Philipp von Eulenburg and Maximilian Harden.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Maximilian Harden\u2014a former actor turned journalist\u2014had met him through their collaborative friend Hans Olden shortly before the founding of the journal Zukunft<\/em>. In July 1892, Rudolf Steiner published a detailed review of a collection of essays by Harden, which the latter had published under the pseudonym \u201cApostata.\u201d At the time, he valued Harden as a \u201ctype of distinguished writer\u201d who had respect for the reader and did not \u201c[lack] that high sense of truth that is the characteristic of a distinguished human being. Whoever is true always speaks more or less paradoxically.\u201d He was also\u2014and this was especially appealing to Rudolf Steiner at the time\u2014a \u201cdeifier of the individual\u201d instead of worshiping the \u201cprinciple.\u201d<\/span>10<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Harden was deeply touched by the review and wrote to Rudolf Steiner on September 10, 1892: \u201cHighly revered Sir, my dear friend Hans Olden was so kind as to send to me some essays of yours. One of them not only afforded me kindness but also spoke about the \u2018I\u2019 that I would like to be in an almost exhaustive and remarkably clear-sighted way. Both of these don\u2019t happen to me often, and I can only sincerely thank you.\u201d Enclosed with the letter was an invitation to collaborate on his journal project Zukunft<\/em>, which he, as Harden says in his letter, is offering not on account of the positive review: \u201cBut, should I miss out on a fine thinker just because he happens to discover good sides in me? I heartily ask you for your kind collaboration.\u201d<\/span>11<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In fact, Rudolf Steiner wrote the article, \u201cEine \u2018Gesellschaft f\u00fcr ethische Kultur\u2019\u201d [A \u201cSociety for Ethical Culture\u201d] for one of the first numbers of Zukunft<\/em>, dated October 29, 1892, in which he opposed the \u201cindulgence in the buttery ideals\u201d<\/span>12<\/sup><\/a><\/span> of this newly founded association\u2014ideals that lacked any basis in reality. The article brought Harden \u201ca whole tidal wave of frank indignation.\u201d<\/span>13<\/sup><\/a><\/span> It came to a fierce back and forth with articles and counter-articles, letters, and brochures, in which even Ernst Haeckel intervened, supporting Rudolf Steiner. Even though Maximilian Harden occasionally asked Rudolf Steiner for favors afterward\u2014among other things, he used his literary knowledge for an article against the anti-Semitic agitator Hermann Ahlwardt\u2014the relationship seemed to have cooled somewhat, and, after 1893, no further articles by the young Goethe scholar appeared in Zukunft<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 1898, Rudolf Steiner, who had meanwhile become the editor of a magazine himself, wrote a scathing article against the editor of Zukunft<\/em> in his Magazin f\u00fcr Litteratur<\/em> [Magazine for Literature]: \u201cHerr Harden als Kritiker: Eine Abrechnung\u201d [Herr Harden as Critic: A Reckoning]. He had become an \u201coffensive attacker,\u201d a \u201cpamphleteer.\u201d The specific occasion for the article was Harden\u2019s roasting of Hermann Sudermann\u2019s play Johannes<\/em>, which had deeply moved Rudolf Steiner. Harden, who was \u201cexcessively sensitive to the slightest criticism,\u201d<\/span>14<\/sup><\/a><\/span> certainly took offense to this article. In early 1899, in a report on one of Harden\u2019s conferences\u2014a kind of literary chat before a recitation from Maeterlinck\u2019s play Pell\u00e9as and M\u00e9lisande<\/em>\u2014Rudolf Steiner\u2019s judgment was milder: \u201cHe has spoken many a good word. In many moments today, he reminded me of the time when I expected the very best from his great abilities for his future as a writer.\u201d Journalism had \u201cbrought him down,\u201d but he did not have to \u201cstrike a pose\u201d because he was \u201cstrong enough to present himself.\u201d<\/span>15<\/sup><\/a><\/span> The paths of the two crossed again when Harden published Elisabeth F\u00f6rster-Nietzsche\u2019s reply to Rudolf Steiner\u2019s article, \u201cDas Nietzsche-Archiv und seine Anklagen gegen den bisherigen Herausgeber\u201d [The Nietzsche Archive and its accusations against the previous editor] in Zukunft<\/em> on April 21, 1900. Rudolf Steiner asked for a corrigendum, which Harden promised since he held himself \u201cobligated, not only legally,\u201d to take this up.<\/span>16<\/sup><\/a><\/span> That was presumably the last direct contact between the two.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Zukunft<\/em> was becoming increasingly widespread and influential. Harden wrote tirelessly against the Kaiser\u2014always trying to uncover scandals\u2014and he didn\u2019t spare his friends in the process.<\/span>17<\/sup><\/a><\/span> During the First World War, he was initially an enthusiastic supporter of the war but gradually \u201cbecame a supporter of a policy of rapprochement.\u201d<\/span>18<\/sup><\/a><\/span> He strongly expected to receive a leading political position after the war and was deeply disappointed when this did not occur. Maximilian Harden had enjoyed a long and intimate friendship with Walter Rathenau, who became foreign minister of Germany in February 1922, but this turned into a burning hatred. A few days after Rathenau\u2019s assassination in June 1922, Harden was also the target of an attack by Freikorps members, in which he was seriously injured. A broken and embittered man, he solemnly renounced his Germanness due to the mild sentences given to the assassins and henceforth lived in Switzerland, where he died in 1927.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The extent to which Rudolf Steiner was involved with Harden is shown by the stately number of writings by and about the publicist in his library and occasional mentions in lectures.<\/span>19<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Also available are numerous copies, some with underlinings and annotations in his hand, from almost all volumes of the Zukunft<\/em>, to which he subscribed.<\/span>20<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Lieutenant General Kuno von Moltke; Source: Wikimedia<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

They Are Doing a True Labor of Love<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

By 1904 at the latest, Rudolf Steiner was also personally acquainted with Philipp von Eulenburg and some of his children.<\/span>21<\/sup><\/a><\/span> This acquaintance may have come about through the Moltke family, who were friends with both. Philipp, Prince of Eulenburg and Hertefeld (1847\u20131921) had studied law and obtained a doctorate after a short time in the military. In 1875, he married the Swedish Countess Augusta Sandels, with whom he had eight children, two of whom died in infancy. In 1886, he got to know Crown Prince Wilhelm II at a hunting party. A friendship soon developed between the two; Wilhelm admired the educated and urbane count. Von Eulenburg served as a diplomat at various courts and as ambassador in Vienna. It is said that he used his influence with the Kaiser in some important political decisions but never pushed for a leading position. In 1900, he was elevated to the rank of prince [F\u00fcrst<\/em>]. He retired in 1902 for health reasons but remained an influential adviser to the Kaiser.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On September 10, 1905, Prince Eulenburg invited Rudolf Steiner to Liebenberg: \u201cDear Doctor, it is not only my own great wish but also the wish of all my family members to see you here among us! Would it be possible for you to make a short trip here?\u201d Apparently, Rudolf Steiner accepted this invitation on December 26, 1905.<\/span>22<\/sup><\/a><\/span> At the end of 1906, the Eulenburg family experienced a severe crisis: On the one hand, Harden began the above-mentioned attacks on the Prince and his friends in November 1906. But along with this, the family was worried because their daughter Augusta (Lycki) was expecting a child by her father\u2019s secretary, Edmund Jaroljmek,<\/span>23<\/sup><\/a><\/span> and wanted to marry him. The Prince strongly opposed the relationship. He turned to Rudolf Steiner for help in this situation and, after the latter agreed to meet him in his Berlin apartment for a conversation, the Prince wrote: \u201cI am deeply touched by your kindness! You are doing a true work of love.\u201d On December 30, 1906, he thanked him again: \u201cBe assured that I will never forget the sacrifice with which you came to my aid in difficult hours!\u201d<\/span>24<\/sup><\/a><\/span> The meeting probably took place on December 16, 1906, and shortly thereafter, there was a conversation between Rudolf Steiner and Augusta zu Eulenburg. She promised to go on a vacation to Switzerland with her family and to reconsider the marriage. But, on December 28, she had to \u201cconfess\u201d to him in a letter from Baden near Vienna that she had not gone with the family after all: \u201cYou were so good and so understanding with me that I have to write to you about how it turned out.\u201d<\/span>25<\/sup><\/a><\/span> She married Jaroljmek in London in February 1907 and initially lived with him in Florence.<\/span>26<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

With the Kaiser distancing himself from Prince Eulenburg in May 1907, the Harden-Eulenburg affair gathered momentum, and the trials began. As the Liebenberg Circle was accused of having spiritualistic tendencies, Rudolf Steiner probably feared that the atmosphere in society could also turn against Theosophy. It is likely that this is what he was writing about to Marie von Sivers from Vienna on November 6, 1907\u2014the same day that von Eulenburg testified under oath that the accusations against him were not true: \u201cFor it seems necessary to me, for reasons I have yet to tell you, that I could have a talk with Moltke right now. Recent events are creating a ghastly atmosphere against Theosophy . . . .\u201d<\/span>27<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Philipp von Eulenburg withdrew into private life as a broken and sick man and died at Liebenberg Castle in 1921. There is no further evidence of contact with Rudolf Steiner. However, when Botho Sigwart von Eulenburg died of a bullet to the lung while serving at the front in 1915, he soon afterward established an after-death contact with his siblings.<\/span>28<\/sup><\/a><\/span> The sisters then turned to Rudolf Steiner. At first, they were not sure how to assess the communications they had received. Therefore, Marie von Eulenburg, Friedrich Wend\u2019s wife, asked Steiner to meet for a conversation. They met in Berlin at the beginning of December 1915. She wrote about it to her siblings: \u201cI was thus with Dr. Steiner for a full hour and a half\u2014and the result made me deeply happy, for even though I know and no longer doubt; still I always feel as if I have to give thanks anew\u2014it is proof, even if one needs no more proof in order to believe, and one can be happy about it. . . . It\u2019s all true! and Steiner said that even many of the things he has dealt with in his various lectures were almost verbatim.\u201d<\/span>29<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is a tragic destiny that links the very different individualities of Philipp von Eulenburg and Maximilian Harden\u2014but also quite remarkable that, at least in one moment in their lives, they both felt \u201cseen\u201d or understood by Rudolf Steiner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Translation <\/strong>Joshua Kelberman
Title image <\/strong>Maximilian Harden, Philipp, Prince of Eulenburg-Hertefeld (around 1905), Source: Wikimedia<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Harden-Eulenburg affair caused quite a stir at the beginning of the twentieth century. Rudolf Steiner was acquainted with the protagonists, both of whom ended their lives in sorrow. In the years 1906 to 1908, the German Empire was shocked by a scandal known as the Harden-Eulenburg affair. The original cause was that, in the view of Bismarck’s admirer Maximilian Harden (1861\u20131927), publicist and editor of the influential weekly journal Zukunft [Future], Kaiser Wilhelm II was acting too compliantly in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9190,"featured_media":60158,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11473,8846],"tags":[11562,11572,8814],"class_list":["post-60824","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-about-rudolf-steiner","category-history","tag-ausgabe-38-39-2024","tag-english-issue-44-2024","tag-musings"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60824","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9190"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=60824"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60824\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/60158"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=60824"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=60824"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dasgoetheanum.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=60824"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}