The Present Age Volume 2 / No. 04 July 2016



Mt. Sainte Odile, Brexit, Skull & Bones


Fred Poeppig

Britain’s EU Referendum

Terry Boardman

Obama In Hiroshima

Andreas Bracher

Media Review: Rolf Hochhuth
Franz-Jürgen Römmeler

Memories of Rudolf Steiner

Ludwig Polzer-Hoditz

“My dear Knight of Friendship”
Esther Bright

Bernhard Kuhn

July Calendar

The Grand Master and His Financiers
Franz-Jürgen Römmeler

A Soul’s Legacy

Herbert Ludwig

Where Did the Anthroposophical Movement Fail?
Johannes Mosmann

The Function of the Liver
Olaf Koob, M.D.

Tommaso Campanella’s “City of the Sun”
Dr. Christin Schaub


Personalities around the Goetheanum
Interview with Alexander von Glenck



Buy this issue as a pdf download:

Price: 14 CHF
Payment: Paypal (with a Paypal account) and creditcard

After the payment you will receive an email with a download link, which is available for two days. Please download the pdf within this time. Thereafter a download is not possible anymore.

Please check your spam filter, if the email doesn’t appear in your inbox

Kategorie: TPA archives

Mt. Sainte Odile, Brexit, Skull & Bones


Church policy as world policy
On 19 June a small group of people found themselves on Mont Sainte Odile in Alsace, France. They commemorated the great individualities Helmuth and Eliza von Moltke, who in the 7th and 8th centuries were incarnated in that place – Eliza von Moltke as St. Odile and Helmuth von Moltke as her brother Hugo. Their father Eticho was later reincarnated as the German Emperor Wilhelm II (r.1888-1918); Wilhelm was presented by the town of Sélestat with a castle not far from Mont Sainte Odile; it was as though a reminder of his incarnation as Eticho. In the 9th century Pope Nicholas I and his adviser, in whom Odile and her brother were incarnate in Rome soon after the time of Odile, made the world-historical decisions which were to separate the West from the East.1
On 19 June – the day of our visit – in 1911, Helmuth von Moltke paid a visit to Mont Sainte Odile. He would have seen the sarcophagi of Odile and Eticho, and also the Chapel of Tears with its image of Pope Leo IX, who was of the family line of Odile and who drew the consequences of the ecclesiastical policy of Pope Nicholas I: the ultimate separation of the Eastern Church from the Western, the Great Schism of 1054.
On the same 19 June this year (2016) – it was Whitsun in the Greek Orthodox Church – the first Orthodox Council for over a thousand years took place on the island of Crete.2
Pope Francis called on the Holy Spirit to protect the Council. Are we now at the beginning of an attempted resolution of the Great Schism by the Catholic Church? Its spirit is alert and pays attention to significant places around the world in terms of etheric geography: in the Odile Chapel there has been a relic of the blood of Pope John Paul II for a few years. Relics, however, belong to the soul constitution of the Middle Ages. The spiritual unification of East and West should not remain in the hands of the Church. It can only be realised by people who want to foster the spirit of the new age.

The British Brexit
A few days later, another event of at least European political dimensions took place: the vote by the British people for Brexit. It is a positive sign that the majority of the British population have turned their backs on an institution which has become the epitome of an anti-national, Kafkaesque form of government by elites. The hollowness of the EU was impressively documented in a video which went the rounds in the weeks and months prior to the referendum in Britain and recorded far higher viewing figures than Prime Minster David Cameron’s propaganda speeches: “Brexit – the Movie” (
But here too, the British departure from the EU will not solve Britain’s or the EU’s problems. At most, it will create a free space for a new, really comprehensive economic and social politics, which will not be conducted in closed venues behind the scenes by the “Bilderbergers” and similar anti-democratic bodies. Where are those who will carry forward such a new politics?

Clear-sightedness in Germany
In Germany, happily, critical voices have been raised against NATO’s warmongering on the western borders of Russia. Is NATO seeking to invade, not Poland like Hitler, but Russia, on pretexts at which it is constantly working? The consequences would obviously be catastrophic. Those who perceive these things with clarity include the German Foreign Minister Steinmeier, the writer Rolf Hochhuth, the former Ministers Andreas von Bülow and Willi Wimmer; their comments and points of view on the subject can all be found on the Internet. In October Der Europäer will be carrying an interview with Daniele Ganser, an expert on NATO.

Hillary Clinton and Skull & Bonesh-clinton
A particularly symptomatic, current political spectacle recently occurred in the USA. Hillary Clinton, on whose public appearances  a great deal of money and attention has been spent, was awarded an honorary membership of Skull & Bones during a ceremony at the elite  Yale University. We have often discussed the dubious machinations of this elite Order which has been in existence since the year of Goethe’s death (1832). Its main concern is to control completely contradictory political directions, by supporting both left-wing as well as right-wing administrations. Those who set up polarities can be the masters of what results from them! For Skull & Bones, Left and Right are only two wings of  one large party, as Gore Vidal once remarked. Mrs Clinton is therefore playing her theatrical role on the puppet stage of the political party spectacle and at the same time fostering more intimate relationships with the actual string-pullers behind the curtain.3


T.H. Meyer


1    See Helmuth von Moltke, ed. A. Bracher and T. Meyer, Basel, 1993. 

2   albeit without the participation of Russia and Bulgaria.

3   See:

Kategorie: TPA Editorial

LETTER FROM STOURBRIDGE Britain’s EU Referendum – The Courage of One’s Convictions


keep-calm-and-brexit_NETThere are certain periods, even certain years, in a human life which are of special significance, and the same is true of the history of nations. I wrote in the February issue of TPA (Vol. 1 no.11) that “this year [2016] promises to be a memorable one for Britain” and that the result of the EU referendum “will determine Britain’s future for decades and perhaps centuries.” In that same issue I also pointed to the significance of the number 23 in British history. The intense, frustrating, and sometimes banal national debate on Britain’s membership of the EU came to a dramatic climax last month against a background of massive summer storms and the murder of a member of parliament only a week before the referendum vote. Presented with the binary choice of whether to remain in the EU or to leave it, 48.1% of the population opted to remain and 51.9% opted to leave. 46.5 million people were registered to vote and 33.5 million valid votes were cast – a 72% turnout. Voting in the referendum was held on 23 June, Midsummer’s Eve, or St. John’s Eve, and closed at 22:00. The ‘midsummer night’s dreaming’ then immediately began as to which side was going to win. The financial markets had for some time been convinced that it was the Remain camp, and soon after the polling stations closed, the value of the pound sterling shot up to US$1.50. When the earliest results became known at about midnight the £ began to drop like a stone, finally reaching $1.3777, its lowest level since 1985. It recovered somewhat within three days. On the stock market, after opening on 24 June, the US Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped nearly 450 points (2.5%) in under 30 minutes.

The ‘experts’ and ‘Project Fear’
For months, day after day, a continuous succession of economic so-called ‘experts’ such as George Soros, Jacob Rothschild, Jamie Dimon of J.P. Morgan Chase, Christine Lagarde of the IMF, Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of England, numerous foreign politicians, from Angela Merkel to Barack Obama and Shinzo Abe, senior British military figures, groups of businessmen and multinational corporations, both British and foreign, large groups of scientists and academics, including such as Stephen Hawking, various figures in the arts and sports, such as footballer David Beckham, and a host of media pundits – all urged the British people to stay in the EU and outlined the terrible disasters that would follow if their ‘advice’ was not heeded. Day in, day out, especially in the last three months before the vote, this parade of doom-mongers, wagging their admonishing fingers, passed before the media gaze of the British public. All this ‘advice’ was regarded by supporters of the ‘Leave’ campaign as ‘Project Fear’, the attempt to intimidate the voters into remaining in the EU. “Don’t take a leap in the dark”, these Jeremiahs told the British public, “don’t take a risk; don’t risk the uncertainty! Stay with what you know”. This, despite the fact that for decades the media had continually emphasised the importance in economic and artistic life, indeed, the importance in life in general, of taking risks, and jumping into the unknown. How many times had we been told that the modern age was “an age of uncertainty” which we had to get used to. Even Tony Blair had frequently lectured the British people and others on the fact that change was the norm in modern life and that they had to accept it 1.
But when it came to the EU referendum, suddenly all talk of risk was forgotten as the British were told from all sides that under no circumstances should they dare to contemplate leaving the comfortable and prosperity-enhancing safety of the EU, or the sky would fall on them, the economic ground under their feet would collapse. They would revert to a state of barbarism dominated by nationalists and the Far Right and would become an isolated, inward-looking, puny little nonentity in the world, adrift in the great tides of the times, unable to meet the challenges of China, India, and America.
On 23 June over half the British population showed that they had the nerve and the imagination, or else the sheer stubborn bloody-mindedness, to reject all this ‘advice’, whether well-meant or fear-mongering. They voted, albeit by a minority of just under 4%, to leave the EU. Certainly, many did not take kindly to all the foreigners trying to interfere, as they saw it, trying to influence a British democratic decision. They also did not take kindly to being branded as uneducated and ignorant, retrogressive racists by many in the Remain camp and by sections of the media who tried to make out that the young, the educated and the well-informed all wanted to stay in the EU. In fact, it was clear from numerous interviews and articles in the media that many of ‘the young, the educated and the well-informed’ did not have a clue about the origins and motivations of the EU. The young, primarily, if understandably, concerned for themselves rather than the country, and mostly lacking any sense of the country’s historical development, saw the EU predominantly in terms of what they believed it would give them personally, in the way of educational grants and subsidies, travel and job opportunities etc. The so-called ‘educated and well-informed’, especially in the media and the political world, often turned out to have no more idea of what the EU was really about, where it came from or what it was intending to become than did some in the Leave camp.

EU origins and aims – hidden again
As a result, this referendum focused mainly on two issues – economics and immigration, especially the former, rather than on issues of democracy, sovereignty, war and peace, which took very much a back seat. There was endless bickering over how much money ‘the average family’ would lose a week or a year if Britain were to leave; endless imagined statistics were bandied about regarding the negative effects on Britain’s economy. Many tried to point out in vain that all this was speculation, not fact. Those on the Remain side taunted the Leavers with the fact that so many British and foreign ‘experts’ had lined up on the side of Remain; they did not seem to know that many of these ‘experts’, especially the international ones, are linked by a complex web of contacts in the global elite, regularly meeting and keeping in touch with ‘received views’ at numerous conferences, seminars, congresses and the like, from Davos and Bilderberg to the Trilateral Commission and NATO meetings, to name but four and that this complex network of global elitists has a common interest in supporting and advancing an American agenda and a NATO agenda with regard to Europe.
Just as in the referendum of 1975, in which the British voted to decide whether to stay in the EEC, which they had joined two years earlier, the fact that the ‘European project’ had always been, from its beginnings in the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1950, a political project aimed at the creation of a centralised, federal United States of Europe, and that the economic focus of debate about the EEC/EU was merely used to mask that fact, was again hidden from the people, this time by the mainstream media. The difference from 1975, however, was that in 2016 the EU doubters and Eurosceptics had access to the Internet and could find out or confirm these things for themselves. The mainstream media debate nevertheless still sought to keep the EU origins hidden and especially to keep the British and above all the American instigation of and constant contribution to the European project hidden. Just as in 1975, no mention was made in the mainstream debate of the millions of CIA dollars that went to fund the European movement in the 1950s, all in the service not of peace or European harmony but of American Cold War aims and will to hegemony over both Europe and the USSR. A so-called expert and veteran commentator on constitutional history, politics and the intelligence services such as the academic Sir Peter Hennessy – ennobled in 2010 – could appear on the BBC (24.6.2016) and misleadingly claim that the Schuman Plan of 1950, which launched the ECSC, was the brainchild of French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman, adding, almost as an afterthought, “with some help from Jean Monnet”. In fact, of course, the Plan was the brainchild of Jean Monnet, and Schuman was simply used to introduce and ‘front’ the Plan.2
Once again, as in 1975, the media sought to distract and divert the people from the reality of the EU’s origin and aims into fruitless bickering over statistics on economics and immigration. In 1975, the people were almost totally bamboozled by the tactics of the media and the pro-EEC supporters in the political class and allowed themselves to be convinced the EEC was just an economic club that would make Britain more prosperous. They voted to stay in the EEC by 67.23% to 32.77%. This time, however, despite the media distraction tactics and fearmongering, many more people had become wise to what the EU was and is really about. They judged that its anti-democratic, centralist and overly bureaucratic aims are not the way of the future for Britain or for Europe and voted to reject them.

EU unreality
As numerous spokesmen and supporters of the Leave campaign pointed out, the British decision to leave could inspire other European countries to leave the EU as well, leading to the end of the EU itself. This would indeed clear the decks, so to speak, for new thinking about the future for Europe, and 100 years on from the emergence of Rudolf Steiner’s threefolding initiatives (1917-1922), this new thinking could and should focus on ideas and solutions influenced and informed by threefolding. In 1930, the Soviet Union seemed to many so-called ‘progressives’ and ‘idealists’ in western and central Europe to be a fully-functioning reality, a focus of hope for the future of the continent and the world. We now see that what once seemed so solid was actually built on a foundation of sand, and in just two short years (1989-91) it collapsed and was washed away. This writer feels confident that a similar lack of historical ‘legitimacy’ and fundamental reality in relation to the real needs of our modern epoch has always afflicted the EU, and that when sufficient people realise this and see that the would-be Emperor has no real clothes, the EU too will swiftly wither and fade away, as did the USSR and also the ‘Holy Roman Empire’ of the Carolingians after less than 100 years of existence in the 9th century (800-888). Top-down, elite-driven, one-pattern systemic solutions are not the way forward for Europe or anywhere else in this 5th post-Atlantean epoch (since 1413) and this Age of Michael (since 1879) – the epoch and age of increasing individual autonomy and diversity. In this epoch of the Consciousness Soul new communities have to be built by free, self-realised individuals and not from above, by elites working in accordance with intellectual constructs and abstract plans, no matter how ‘idealistically’ such constructs and plans may be presented.

Historic turning point for England
The phenomena of the tremendous storms over Britain in the week before the referendum and of the extremely rare and horrific murder, in very suspicious circumstances, of the 41 year-old Member of Parliament Jo Cox, a mother of two small children (the last time an English politician had been assassinated by an Englishman was in 1812!) exactly one week before the referendum vote and the fact that the referendum was being held between the anniversaries of those two great battles, so significant for Britain during the First World War, the battles of Jutland (31 May 1916) and the Somme (began 1 July 1916), were all evidence of the remarkable historical moment that this vote represented in British history.3 Exactly 1000 years after the conquest of England by the Danish Vikings in 1016 and 950 years after the invasion of England by the French-speaking (but originally Danish Viking) Normans in 1066 – conquests which began England’s long process of aggressive expansion, first to the Celtic periphery, then to the European continent and finally throughout the world – this whole historical process has now come to a close. The Scots, who cling to the illusory dream of the EU, will now refuse to be taken out of the EU by the English and it is expected they will press for a second independence referendum (the Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon already intimated this on 24 June), in which they will most likely vote to leave the UK; in N. Ireland nationalist leaders have reacted to the referendum result by saying that N. Ireland, which voted largely to remain in the EU, also deserves not to be taken out of the EU and that a democratic vote to unite with the Republic of Ireland should be held.
We may now therefore be facing the imminent break-up of the United Kingdom, which actually only dates to 1801. This is not like the break-up of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1918-1920; it is a totally different historical phenomenon. England’s expansionary world role is over; the English need to realise this and accept it. The referendum campaign showed that there were still too few people – in both the Remain and Leave camps – who do understand this, again because of the short-sighted focus on economic and immigration statistics. The English still have a substantial problem with national vanity and pride, the product of 300 years of world empire and almost 1000 years of expansionism. This vanity and pride has become a drug; too many Britons are addicted to this drug, but it is a drug that will have to be kicked, in one individual soul at a time, if the country is to become free of it. The bombastic conservative and idealiser of the Roman and British Empires, Boris Johnson, former mayor of London, a leader of the Vote Leave campaign and now a prospective candidate to replace David Cameron as Prime Minister, is not the man to help the English kick this habit. His instincts are to stay close to the USA, to remain in NATO, to retain as much global power as possible, and approve the TTIP trade agreement deal with the USA. As Prime Minister, he would be the English counterpart to a US President Donald Trump. But perhaps the imperial nations, the UK and the US, will have to experience this double absurdity of the two blond buffoons with bizarre hairstyles as leaders before their peoples can see through the vainglorious illusions, and ultimately socially destructive consequences, of the habit of world domination.
The British have played a significant part over the past centuries, for both good or ill, in helping to create global consciousness. Perhaps it is now time for them to realise that they should ‘return’ to their mother continent and help her to play her part in the threefold world that consists of the Americas, Europe and Africa, and Asia-Pacific. The EU, however, was the wrong way to do this. Like the USSR, and like many other abstract intellectual designs that emerged in the 20th century, the EU – secretive, elitist, bureaucratic – goes against the real striving of human development in the modern age. When the EU has gone, Europe, and the English – if only they can kick their ‘habit’ – will be able to play the role on the world stage together with the other European peoples, that the 21st century is truly awaiting: an associative, mercurial role of mediation between East and West, North and South.
It is wonderful to behold when an individual (or a nation) stands up against all the odds and resists external pressures to conform and deny his own being, resists attempts to hector and bully him into submission, refuses to enter, or remain in, a conformist sheep-pen, no matter how attractively packaged and decorated the sheep-pen may be, and instead, asserts his individuality. For all their faults and problems, and they are many, over half the people of England and Wales at least, have shown the courage of their convictions and a faith in themselves. I hope that it may be an inspiration to other European peoples to do likewise – and that the result will be an alternative, real Europe, a threefold Europe.

Terry Boardman, Stourbridge (England)


1    E.g. Blair’s Flora Cameron Lecture on Politics and Public Affairs, Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas, USA in March 2008:

2   See, for example, R. C. Mowat, Creating the European Community (1973), and C. Booker and R. North, The Great Deception – Can the European Union Survive? Paperback ed. (2005) ch. 4..

3   There are also suspicious similarities to the assassination of the Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh who died on 11 Sept. 2003, following a fatal attack the day before. She died three days before Sweden’s referendum on joining the Euro. Just as Jo Cox supported remaining in the EU, Anna Lindh had supported joining the Euro. They were both murdered by individuals with mental problems who had been on drugs. Before Jo Cox’s murder, the Leave campaign momentum had been mounting and was 6-10 points head of Remain. Although the media tried to present her as a secular saint in the days after her death, and her murder did reduce the Leave lead, in the end it did not do so sufficiently to affect the final vote. The same had been true in the Swedish referendum in 2003; the Swedes voted to reject the Euro. On 16 June, the day of Jo Cox’s death, and after her murder, reporting restrictions were lifted on the case of 13 Muslim men who were convicted of sexual abuse of a 13 year old white girl over a 2 year period in Halifax, not far from Cox’s constituency, and sentenced to 150 years in prison. If she had not been killed, the Halifax case would have been a big news story and might well have had an effect on the immigration aspect of the referendum debate. The case was in effect ‘buried’ by Jo Cox’s murder.


Kategorie: TPA Editorial

Der Odilienberg, Brexit und «Skull&Bones»


Kirchenpolitik als Weltpolitik

Am 19. Juni befand sich eine kleine Menschengruppe auf dem Odilienberg. Gedenkend der großen Individualitäten von Helmuth und Eliza von Moltke, welche im 8. Jahrhundert an diesem Ort verkörpert waren, Eliza von Moltke als Odilie, Helmuth von Moltke als deren Bruder Hugo. Der Vater Eticho ist später als Wilhelm II. erschienen; ihm wurde unweit des Odilienberges von der Stadt Sélestat eine Burg geschenkt, wie zur Erinnerung an seine Eticho-Verkörperung. Im 9. Jahrhundert wurden dann von Papst Nikolaus I. und seinem Ratgeber, als welche sich Odilies Bruder und sie selbst bald nach der Odilienzeit in Rom verkörperten, die weltgeschichtlichen Entschlüsse gefasst, die den Westen vom Osten trennen sollten.*

Am 19. Juni – dem Tag unseres Besuches – 1911 stattete Helmuth von Moltke dem Odilienberg einen Besuch ab. Er wird den Sarkophag Odilias und Etichos besichtigt haben, auch wohl die Tränenkapelle mit dem Bildnis von Papst Leo IX., der aus dem Odiliengeschlecht stammte und der die Konsequenz aus der Kirchenpolitik von Papst Nikolaus I. zog: die endgültige Trennung der Ost- von der Westkirche, das Schisma von 1054.

Am gleichen 19. Juni – in der griechisch orthodoxen Kirche der Pfingsttag – fand auf Kreta das erste orthodoxe Konzil seit über tausend Jahren statt.**

Papst Franziskus rief in Rom den Schutz des Heiligen Geistes für das Konzil an. Stehen wir am Beginn der versuchten Auflösung des Schismas durch die katholische Kirche? Deren Geist ist wachsam und pflegt weltweit die äthergeographisch bedeutenden Orte: in der Odilienkapelle befindet sich seit ein paar Jahren eine Blutsreliquie von Papst Johannes Paul II. – Reliquien gehören aber in die Seelenverfassung des Mittelalters. Die spirituelle West-Ost-Vereinigung darf nicht in den Händen der Kirche bleiben. Sie kann nur von Menschen verwirklicht werden, die den Geist des neuen Zeitalters pflegen wollen.

Der britische Brexit

Wenige Tage darauf fand ein weiteres Ereignis von zumindest europa-politischer Tragweite statt: die Abstimmung der Briten für den Brexit. Es ist ein positives Zeichen, dass die Mehrheit der britischen Bevölkerung einer Institution den Rücken kehrt, die geradezu zum Inbegriff einer volks-fernen kafkaesken Regierungsform der Eliten geworden ist. Die Hohlheit der EU ist eindrücklich dokumentiert auf einem Video, welches im Vorfeld der Abstimmung in England die Runde machte und weit höhere Einschaltquoten erreichte als die Propagandareden Camerons: «Brexit – the Movie» (

Doch auch hier: der britische Abschied von der EU löst nicht deren und auch nicht die eigenen Probleme. Er schafft höchstens einen Freiraum für eine neue, wirklich weltumspannende Wirtschafts- und Sozialpolitik, die nicht in den geschlossenen Hinterzimmern von «Bilderbergern» und ähnlich anti-demokratischen Gremien beschlossen wird. Wo sind die Träger solcher Bestrebungen?

Deutsche Klarsicht

In Deutschland gibt es erfreulich kritische Stimmen zum Kriegstreiben der NATO an der Westgrenze von Russland. Will die NATO, nicht wie Hitler in Polen, sondern in Russland einfallen, mit Vorwänden, an deren Konstruktion sie stetig arbeitet? Die Folgen wären absehbar katastrophal. Zu den in dieser Beziehung klar Sehenden gehören der deutsche Außenminister Steinmeier, der Schriftsteller Rolf Hochhuth, der ehemalige Minister Andreas von Bülow oder Willi Wimmer, alle auch in Internet-Auftritten zu finden. Im Oktober  bringt Der Europäer ein Interview mit dem NATO-Kenner Daniele Ganser.

Hillary Clinton und Skull & Bones

Ein besonders symptomatisches Stück gegenwärtigen Polit-Spektakels wurde kürzlich in den USA geboten. Hillary Clinton, durch deren Auftritte viel Geld und Aufmerksamkeh-clintonit verschwendet wird, wurde während einer Zeremonie der Elite-Universität von Yale zum Ehrenmitglied von Skull & Bones ernannt. Wir haben die dubiosen Machenschaften dieses seit dem Tod Goethes existierenden Eliteordens oft beschrieben. Seine Hauptlinie besteht darin, ganz widersprüchliche politische Richtungen zu beherrschen, indem sowohl Links- wie Rechtsregimes unterstützt werden. Wer die Gegensätze aufbaut, kann Herr der Resultante werden! Für Skull & Bones sind links und rechts nur zwei «Flügel» einer großen Partei, wie sich Gore Vidal einmal ausdrückte. Frau Clinton spielt also auf der Marionetten-Bühne des Parteien-Spektakels ihre theatralische Rolle und pflegt zugleich innige Beziehungen zu den eigentlichen Drahtziehern hinter den Kulissen.***

Thomas Meyer

 *  Siehe Helmuth von Moltke, hg. von A. Bracher und T. Meyer, Basel, 1993.

**  allerdings ohne Teilnahme von Russland und Bulgarien.


Kategorie: Editorial

Europäer Juli/August 2016 (Jg 20 / Nr. 09/10)


Der Odilienberg, Brexit und «Skull&Bones»

Samuel Pisar – eine Lebenseinweihung
Thomas Meyer

Monatsbetrachtungen Juli/August
Fred Poeppig

Franz-Jürgen Römmeler

Edward VII. – Architekt des Ersten Weltkrieges
Franz-Jürgen Römmeler

Keine Mondlandung
Douglas Gibson

Brief aus Boston
«Liberal» einst und heute
Andreas Bracher

Brief aus Stourbridge
H. von Moltke, Krieg gegen Russland und «Neues römisches Reich» 

Waldorf-Impulse in China
Martin Barkhoff

Über Leber, Milz und Herz
Dr. Olaf Koob

Zur Beton-Entwicklung
Markus Sieber

Esther Bright – eine treue Theosophin
Bernhard Kuhn

Wer war Ella Hruschka?
Andrea Hitsch

Tommaso Campanella
Dr. Christin Schaub

Ruedi Bind

Persönlichkeiten im Umkreis des Goetheanum (Teil 3)
Alexander von Glenck

Nero in Trier
Damian Mallepree



Rat zu Shakespeare und Bowie
Terry Boardman

Rätsel / Impressum


Heft als PDF kaufen:

Preis: 19 EUR
Bezahlmethoden: Paypal (mit Paypal-Konto) und Kreditkarte (ohne Paypal-Konto)

Nach dem Bezahlen bekommen Sie eine E-Mail mit dem Download-Link, welcher für 2 Tage gültig ist. Bitte laden Sie die PDF innerhalb dieser Zeit herunter, danach ist ein Download nicht mehr möglich.
Falls die Mail nicht in Ihrem Posteingang erscheint, schauen Sie bitte auch in Ihrem Spam-Filter nach.


Kategorie: Europäer-Archiv