Hi Daniel, you wrote:
"Have you figured out the difference between a "Hauptrasse" (main race) and a "Wurzelrasse" (root race)?"

Peter Staudenmaier:
Methinks you are having some trouble paying attention on this one. Steiner used the two terms interchangeably. If you mean to dispute that, go right ahead and say so.

Daniel:
Ok, so Steiner used two words interchangeably for one concept ("Hauptrasse" and "Wurzelrasse" for Theosophical Root Race). He also used one of those words for another, different concept, namely "Hauptrasse" for "principle biological race", in some places.

Or do you deny that these two concepts are distinct? If you believe that "Hauptrasse" has a 100% correspondence with "Wurzelrasse" in all contexts, it would spare us a lot of confusion if you said so.
----------------------------------------------------

Daniel wrote:
"Are you clear about the number of "Hauptrassen" (main races) when the term refers exclusively to a biological context?"

Peter Staudenmaier:
Steiner didn't use racial terminology to refer exclusively to biological contexts. He linked race to spirituality. His numbering was not consistent.

Daniel:
So there was never a single instance in 300 plus books where he said "the biological races are..." and meant just that and only that?
--------------------------------------------------

Peter Staudenmaier:
"Are you clear on the number of "Wurzelrassen" (root races) in the current Round"

Peter Staudenmaier:
Yep. So far there are five, not seven. The other two don't exist yet.

Daniel:
By "in the current Round" I mean the entire, whole, complete and indivisible round. I didn't ask how many had passed or how many were to come. I am trying to be as direct as possible with my questions. I merely wanted to establish how many root races in a round.
--------------------------------

Daniel wrote:
"Have you found the Polarian, Hyperborian, Lemurian and Atlantean biological races?"

Peter Staudenmaier:
The Polarians and Hyperboreans didn't have material form in the sense of biological races. The Lemurians did. Both Steiner and Blavatsky taught that there are still remnants of Lemurians and Atlanteans populating the earth today.

Daniel:
You are really confusing me here, Peter. I thought I asked a simple question. I'm not sure what this answer has to do with my question. But since you seem to want to hold forth on the relationship between biological race and root race in the "theosophical-anthroposophical" worldview, it would help if it were complete with examples. How, in your understanding of the "theosophical-anthroposophical" worldview, do root race and biological race correspond, and how do they differ?
------------------------------------

Daniel wrote:
"Do you think German Jews in Steiner's day were identifyable as Jews in the course of ordinary social interaction?"

Peter Staudenmaier:
Not from sitting in cafes, no. Eastern Jews were frequently easy to identify on sight, German Jews much less so.

Daniel:
I didn't ask about just in sitting, I asked "...in the course of ordinary social interaction." To me, "in the course of ordinary social interaction" involves speaking as well as just looking. So I'll ask again:
Do you think German Jews in Steiner's day were identifyable as Jews in the course of ordinary social interaction?
----------------------------------------

Daniel wrote:
"Or do you think they blended so well as to be unidentifyable?"

Peter Staudenmaier:
Yes, as far as passing on the street or sitting in a cafe goes. Some German Jews were convinced that they could actually tell Jews from non-Jews just by paying attention to things like posture, gait, and so forth. They did not generally attribute such abilities to gentiles.

Daniel:
Interesting. So Jews could tell other Jews, but gentiles were generally incapable of this. Out of curiousity, do you have a source for this? I'd like to read up on the subject.

Daniel Hindes