I
IfinwhatfollowsIbringanycontributiontothehistoryofthepsychoanalyticmovementnobodymustbesurprisedatthesubjectivenatureofthispaper，norattherô；lewhichfallstometherein。Forpsychoanalysisismycreation；fortenyearsIwastheonlyoneoccupiedwithit，andalltheannoyancewhichthisnewsubjectcausedamongmycontemporarieshasbeenhurleduponmyheadintheformofcriticism。Eventoday，whenIamnolongertheonlypsychoanalyst，Ifeelmyselfjustifiedinassumingthatnonecanknowbetterthanmyselfwhatpsychoanalysisis，whereinitdiffersfromothermethodsofinvestigatingthepsychiclife，whatitsnameshouldcover，orwhatmightbetterbedesignatedassomethingelse。
Intheyear1909，whenIwasfirstprivilegedtospeakpubliclyonpsychoanalysisinanAmericanUniversity，firedbythismomentousoccasionformyendeavors，Ideclaredthatitwasnotmyselfwhobroughtpsychoanalysisintoexistence。
IsaidthatitwasJosefBreuer，whohadmeritedthishonoratatimewhenIwasastudentandbusyworkingformyexaminations（1880—1882）。[1]
Sincethen，well—intentionedfriendshavefrequentlyrepeatedthatIthenexpressedmygratitudeoutofalldueproportion。Theyconsideredthat，asonpreviousoccasions，IshouldhavedignifiedBreuer’s\"catharticprocedure\"
asmerelypreliminarytopsychoanalysis，andshouldhaveclaimedthatpsychoanalysisitselfonlybeganwithmyrejectionofthehypnotictechniqueandmyintroductionoffreeassociation。Nowitisreallyamatterofindifferencewhetherthehistoryofpsychoanalysisbeconsideredtohavestartedwiththecatharticmethodoronlywithmymodificationof[p。2]thesame。Ionlyenterintothisuninterestingquestionbecausesomeopponentsofpsychoanalysisarewonttorecall，nowandthen，thattheartofpsychoanalysisdidnotoriginatewithmeatall，butwithBreuer。Naturally，thisonlyhappenstobethecasewhentheirattitudepermitsthemtofindinpsychoanalysissomethingthatisnoteworthy；iontheotherhandwhentheirrepudiationofpsychoanalysisisunlimited，thenpsychoanalysisisalwaysindisputablymycreation。I
haveneveryetheardthatBreuer’sgreatpartinpsychoanalysishasbroughthimanequalmeasureofinsultandreproach。AsIhaverecognizedlongsincethatitistheinevitablefateofpsychoanalysistoarouseoppositionandtoembitterpeople，IhavecometotheconclusionthatImustsurelybetheoriginatorofallthatcharacterizespsychoanalysis。Iadd，withsatisfaction，thatnoneoftheattemptstobelittlemyshareinthismuchdisdainedpsychoanalysishasevercomefromBreuerhimself，orcouldboastofhissupport。
ThecontentofBreuer’sdiscoveryhasbeensooftenpresentedthatadetaileddiscussionofitheremaybeomitted。Itsfundamentalfactisthatthesymptomsofhystericalpatientsdependuponimpressivebutforgottenscenesintheirlives（traumata）。Thetherapyfoundedthereonwastocausethepatientstorecallandreproducetheseexperiencesunderhypnosis（catharsis），andthefragmentarytheory，deducedfromitwasthatthesesymptomscorrespondedtoanabnormaluseofundischargedsumsofexcitement（conversion）。Inhistheoreticalcontributiontothe\"StudiesofHysteria\"Breuer，whereverobligedtomentionconversion，hasalwaysaddedmynameinparenthesis，asthoughthisfirstattemptatatheoreticalformulationwasmymentalproperty。Ithinkthisallotmentrefersonlytothenomenclature，whilsttheconceptionitselfoccurredtousbothatthesametime。
ItisalsowellknownthatBreuer，afterhisfirstexperiencewithit，allowedthecathartictreatmenttorestforanumberofyearsandonlyresumeditafterIcausedhimtodoso，onmyreturnfromCharcot。Hewasthenaninternistandtakenupwitharatherbusymedicalpractice。Ihadbecomeaphysicianquitereluctantly[p。3]buthad，atthattime，receivedastrongmotivefordesiringtohelpnervouspatientsor，atleast，tolearntounderstandsomethingoftheirconditions。IhadplacedrelianceonphysicaltherapyandfoundmyselfhelplessinthefaceofdisappointmentsthatcametomewithW。Erb’s\"Electrotherapy，\"sorichinadviceandindications。
IfIdidnot，atthattime，pilotmyselfindependentlytotheopinionlaterannouncedbyMoebius，thatthesuccessesofelectrotherapyinnervousdisordersaretheresultsofsuggestion，itwassurelyonlytheabsenceofthesesuccessesthatwastoblame。Thetreatmentbysuggestionindeephypnosisseemedtooffermeatthattimesufficientcompensationforthelostelectricaltherapy。IlearnedthistreatmentthroughtheextremelyimpressivedemonstrationsofLié；baultandBernheim。ButtheinvestigationunderhypnosiswithwhichIbecameacquaintedthroughBreuer，Ifound，owingtoitsautomaticmannerofworkingandthesimultaneousgratificationofone’seagernessforknowledge，muchmoreattractivethanthemonotonousandviolentsuggestivecommandwhichwasdevoidofeverypossibilityofinquiry。
Asoneofthelatestachievementsofpsychoanalysis，wehavelatelybeenadmonishedtoputtheactualconflictandthecauseoftheillnessintotheforegroundofanalysis。ThisisexactlywhatBreuerandIdidinthebeginningofourworkwiththecatharticmethod。Weguidedthepatient’sattentiondirectlytothetraumaticsceneduringwhichthesymptomhadarisen，triedtofindthereinthepsychicconflictandtofreetherepressedaffect。WethusdiscoveredtheprocedurecharacteristicofthepsychicprocessesoftheneuroseswhichIlaternamedregression。Theassociationsofthepatientswentbackfromthescenetobeexplained，toearlierexperiences，andthisforcedtheanalysiswhichwastocorrectthepresenttooccupyitselfwiththepast。Thisregressionledevenfurtherbackwards：Atfirstitwentquiteregularlytothetimeofpuberty。Later，however，suchfailuresasgapsintheunderstandingtemptedtheanalyticworkfurtherbackintotheyearsofchildhoodwhich；had，hitherto，beeninaccessibletoeverysortofinvestigation。Thisregressivedirectionbecameanimportantcharacteristicofthe[p。4]analysis。Itwasprovedthatpsychoanalysiscouldnotclearupanythingactual，exceptbygoingbacktosomethinginthepast。Itevenprovedthateverypathologicalexperiencepresupposesanearlieronewhich，thoughnotinitselfpathological，lentapathologicalqualitytothelateroccurrence。ButthetemptationtostopshortattheknownactualcausewassogreatthateveninlateranalysesIyieldedtoit。Inthecaseofthepatientcalled\"Dora，\"carriedoutin1899，thescenewhichcausedtheoutbreakoftheactualillnesswasknowntome。Itrieduncountedtimestoanalysethisexperience，butallthatIcouldreceivetomydirectdemandswasthesamescantyandbrokendescription。Onlyafteralongdetour，whichledthroughtheearliestchildhoodofthepatient，adreamappearedintheanalysisofwhichthehithertoforgottendetailsofthescenewereremembered，andthismadepossibletheunderstandingandsolutionoftheactualconflict。Fromthisoneexampleitmaybeseenhowmisleadingistheabovementionedadmonitionandhowmuchofascientificregressionitistofollowtheadviceofneglectingtheregressionintheanalytictechnique。
ThefirstdifferenceofopinionbetweenBreuerandmyselfcametolightonaquestionofthemoreintimatepsychicmechanismofhysteria。Hestillfavoredaphysiologicaltheory，sotospeak，andwishedtoexplainthepsychicsplittingofconsciousnessofhystericalsubjectsbymeansofthenon—communicationofvariouspsychicstates（orstatesofconsciousness，aswethencalledthem）。Hethuscreatedthetheoryofthe\"hypnoidstates，\"
theresultsofwhichweresupposedtobringtheunassimilatedforeignbodyintothe\"wakingconsciousness。\"Ihadformulatedthistomyselflessscientifically。
Isuspectedeverywheretendenciesandstrivingsanalogoustothoseofeverydaylifeandconceivedthepsychicsplittingitselfasaresultofarepellingprocess，whichIthencalled\"defense\"andlater\"regression。\"Imadeashort—livedattempttoreconcilebothmechanisms，butasexperienceshowedmealwaysthesameandonlyonething，mydefensetheory，IsoonbecameopposedtoBreuer’stheoryofhypnoidstates。[p。5]
Iam，however，quitecertainthatthisdifferenceofopinionhadnothingtodowiththepartingofthewayswhichoccurredsoonafterwardbetweenus。Thelatterhadadeeperreason，butithappenedinsuchamannerthatatfirstIdidnotunderstandit，andonlylaterdidIlearntointerpretit，followingmanygoodindexes。ItwillberecalledthatBreuerhadstated，concerninghisfirstfamouspatient，thatthesexualelementhadbeenastonishinglyundevelopedinherandhadnevercontributedanythingtoherverymarkedmorbidpicture。[2]IhavealwayswonderedwhythecriticsofmytheoryofthesexualetiologyoftheneuroseshavenotoftenopposeditwiththisassertionofBreuer，anduptothisdayIdonotknowwhetherinthisreticenceIamtoseeaproofoftheirdiscretion，oroftheirlackofobservation。WhoeverwillrereadthehistoryofBreuer’spatientinthelightoftheexperiencegainedinthelasttwentyyears，willhavenodifficultyinunderstandingthesymbolismofthesnakesandofthearm。
Bytakingintoaccountalsothesituationatthesick—bedofthefather，hewilleasilyguesstheactualmeaningofthatsymptom—formation，Hisopinionastothepartsexualityplayedinthepsychiclifeofthatgirlwillthendiffergreatlyfromthatofherphysician。TocurethepatientBreuerutilizedthemostintensivesuggestiverapportwhichmayserveusasprototypeofthatwhichwecall\"transference。\"NowIhavestronggroundstosupposethatBreuer，afterthedisposalofthesymptoms，musthavediscoveredthesexualmotivityofthistransferencebynewsigns，butthatthegeneralnatureofthisunexpectedphenomenonescapedhim，sothathere，asthoughhitby\"anuntowardevent，\"hebrokeofftheinvestigation。Ididnotobtainfromhimanydirectinformationofthis，butatdifferenttimeshehasgivenmesufficientconnectinglinkstojustifymeinmakingthiscombination。
Andthen，asIstoodmoreandmoredecidedlyforthesignificanceofsexualityinthecausationoftheneuroses，Breuerwasthefirsttoshowmethosereactionsofunwillingrejection，withwhichitwasmylottobecomesofamiliarlateron，butwhichIhadthennotyetrecognizedasmyunavoidabledestiny。[p。6]
Thefactthatagrosslysexual，tenderorinimical，transferenceoccursineverytreatmentofaneurosis，althoughthiswasneitherdesirednorinducedbyeitherparty，has，forme，alwaysseemedtobethemostunshakableproofthattheforcesoftheneurosesoriginateinthesexuallife。Thisargumenthassurelynotbeenseriouslyenoughconsidered，forifitwere，therewouldbenoquestionastowheretheinvestigationwouldtend。Formyownconviction，ithasremaineddecisiveoverandabovethespecialresultsoftheworkoftheanalysis。
Somecomfortforthebadreceptionwhichmytheoryofthesexualetiologyoftheneurosesmetwith，evenintheclosercircleofmyfriends——anegativespacewassoonformedaboutmyperson——IfoundinthethoughtthatI
hadtakenupthefightforanewandoriginalidea。Oneday，however，mymemoriesgroupedthemselvesinsuchawaythatthissatisfactionwasdisturbed，butinreturnIobtainedanexcellentinsightintotheoriginofouractivitiesandintothenatureofourknowledge。TheideaforwhichIwasheldresponsiblehadnotatalloriginatedwithme。Ithadcometomefromthreepersons，whoseopinionscouldcountuponmydeepestrespect；fromBreuerhimself，fromCharcot，andfromChrobak，thegynecologistofouruniversity，probablythemostprominentofourViennaphysicians。Allthreemenhadimpartedtomeaninsightwhich，strictlyspeaking，theyhadnotthemselvespossessed。
TwoofthemdeniedtheircommunicationtomewhenlaterIremindedthemofthis：thethird（MasterCharcot）mightalsohavedoneso，haditbeengrantedmetoseehimagain。Buttheseidenticalcommunications，receivedwithoutmygraspingthem，hadlaindormantwithinme，untilonedaytheyawokeasanapparentlyoriginaldiscovery。
Oneday，whileIwasayounghospitaldoctor，IwasaccompanyingBreueronawalkthroughthetownwhenamancameuptohimurgentlydesiringtospeakwithhim。Ifellbackand，whenBreuerwasfreeagain，hetoldme，inhiskindly，teacher—likemanner，thatthiswasthehusbandofapatient，whohadbroughthimsomenewsabouther。Thewife，headded，behavedinsoconspicuousamanner[p。7]whenincompany，thatshehadbeenturnedovertohimfortreatmentasanervouscase。Heendedwiththeremark——
\"thosearealwayssecretsofthealcove。\"Astonished，Iaskedhismeaningandheexplainedtheexpressiontome（\"secretsoftheconjugalbed\"），withoutrealizinghowpreposterousthematterappearedtome。
Afewyearslater，atoneofCharcot’seveningreceptions，IfoundmyselfneartheveneratedteacherwhowasjustrelatingtoBrouardelaveryinterestinghistoryfromtheday’spractice。Ididnothearthebeginningclearlybutgraduallythestoryobtainedmyattention。ItwasthecaseofayoungmarriedcouplefromthefarEast。Thewifewasagreatsuffererandthehusbandwasimpotent，orexceedinglyawkward。IheardCharcotrepeat：\"Tâ；chezdonc，jevousassurevousyarriverez。\"Brouardel，whospokelessdistinctly，musthaveexpressedhisastonishmentthatsymptomsasthoseoftheyoungwifeshouldhaveappearedasaresultofsuchcircumstances，forCharcotsaidsuddenlyandwithgreatvivacity：\"Mais，dansdescaspareilsc’esttoujourslachosegé；nital，toujours——toujours——toujours。\"Andwhilesayingthathecrossedhishandsinhislapandjumpedupanddownseveraltimes，withthevivacitypeculiartohim。IknowthatforamomentIwasalmostparalyzedwithastonishment，andIsaidtomyself：\"Yes，butifheknowsthiswhydoesheneversayso\"Buttheimpressionwassoonforgotten；brain—anatomyandtheexperimentalproductionofhystericalparalysisabsorbedallmyinterests。
AyearlaterwhenIhadbegunmymedicalactivitiesinViennaasaprivatedozentinnervousdiseasesIwasasinnocentandignorantinallthatconcernedtheetiologyoftheneurosesasanypromisingacademiciancouldbeexpectedtobe。OnedayIreceivedafriendlycallfromChrobak，whoaskedmetotakeapatienttowhomhecouldnotgivesufficienttimeinhisnewcapacityaslecturerattheuniversity。Ireachedthepatientbeforehedidandlearnedthatshesufferedfromsenselessattacksofanxiety，whichcouldonlybealleviatedbythemostexactinformationastothewhereaboutsofherphysicianatanytimeintheday。WhenChrobak[p。8]
appeared，hetookmeasideanddisclosedtomethatthepatient’sanxietywasduetothefactthatthoughshehadbeenmarriedeighteenyears，shewasstillavirgointacta，thatherhusbandwasutterlyimpotent。
Insuchcasesthephysiciancanonlycoverthedomesticmishapwithhisreputationandmustbearitifpeopleshrugtheirshouldersandsayofhim：\"Heisnotagooddoctorifinalltheseyears，hehasnotbeenabletocureher。\"Headded：\"Theonlyprescriptionforsuchtroublesistheonewell—knowntous，butwhichwecannotprescribe。Itis：PenisnormalisdosimRepetatur!Ihadneverheardofsuchaprescriptionandwouldliketohaveshakenmyheadatmyinformant’scynicism。
IcertainlyhavenotuncoveredtheillustriousoriginsofthisviciousideabecauseIwouldliketoshovetheresponsibilityforitonothers。
Iknowwellthatitisonethingtoexpressanideaonceorseveraltimesintheformofarapidaperç；u，andquiteanothertotakeitseriouslyandliterallytoleaditthroughallopposingdetailsandconquerforitaplaceamongacceptedtruths。Itisthedifferencebetweenalightflirtationandarighteousmarriagewithallitsdutiesanddifficulties。
Epouserlesidé；esde——（tomarrysoandso’sideas，）is，atleastinFrench，aquiteusualformofspeech。
Otherdoctrineswhichwerecontributedtothecatharticmethodthroughmyeffortsthustransformingitintopsychoanalysis，arethefollowing：
Thetheoriesofrepressionandresistance，theadditionoftheinfantilesexuality，andtheusageandinterpretationofdreamsfortheunderstandingoftheunconscious。
Concerningthetheoryofrepression，IwascertainthatIworkedindependently。
Iknewofnoinfluencethatdirectedmeinanywaytoit，andIlongconsideredthisideatobeoriginal，tillO。RankshowedustheplaceinSchopenhauer’s\"TheWorldasWillandIdea，\"wherethephilosopherisstrugglingforanexplanationforinsanity。[3][p。9]Whatistheresaidconcerningthestrivingagainsttheacceptanceofapainfulpieceofrealityagreessocompletelywiththecontentofmytheoryofrepressionthat，onceagain，Imustbeindebtedtomynotbeingwell—readforthepossibilityofmakingadiscovery。Tobesure，othershavereadthispassageandoverlookedit，withoutmakingthisdiscoveryandperhapsthesamewouldhavehappenedtome，if，informeryears，Ihadtakenmorepleasureinreadingphilosophicalauthors。InlateryearsIdeniedmyselfthegreatpleasureofNietzsche’sworks，withtheconsciousmotiveofnotwishingtobehinderedintheworkingoutofmypsychoanalyticimpressionsbyanypreconceivedideas。Therefore，Ihadtoheprepared——andamsogladly——torenounceallclaimtopriorityinthosemanycasesinwhichthelaboriouspsychoanalyticinvestigationcanonlyconfirmtheinsightsintuitivelywonbythephilosophers。
Thetheoryofrepressionisthemainpillaruponwhichreststheedificeofpsychoanalysis。Itisreallythemostessentialpartofit，andisitselfnothingotherthanthetheoreticalexpressionofanexperiencewhichcanberepeatedatpleasurewheneveroneanalyzesaneuroticpatientwithouttheaidofhypnosis。Oneisthenconfrontedwitharesistancewhichopposestheanalyticworkbycausingafailureofmemoryinordertoblockit。
Thisresistancehadtobecoveredbytheuseofhypnosis；hencethehistoryofpsychoanalysisproperonlystartstechnicallywiththerejectionofhypnosis。Thetheoreticalvalueofthefactthatthisresistanceisconnectedwithanamnesialeadsunavoidablytothatconceptionoftheunconsciouspsychicactivitieswhichispeculiartopsychoanalysis，anddistinguishesitmarkedlyfromthephilosophicalspeculationsabouttheunconscious。
Itmay，therefore，besaidthatthepsychoanalytictheoryendeavorstoexplaintwoexperiences，whichresultinastrikingandunexpectedmannerduringtheattempttotracebackthemorbidsymptomsofaneurotictotheirsourceinhislife—history；viz。，thefactsoftransferenceandofresistance。
Everyinvestigationwhichrecognizesthesetwofactsandmakesthemthestartingpointsofitsworkmaycallitselfpsychoanalysis，evenifitleadto[p。10]otherresultsthanmyown。Butwhoevertakesupothersidesoftheproblemanddeviatesfromthesetwoassumptionswillhardlyescapethechargeofinterferingwiththerightsofownershipthroughattemptedimitation，ifheinsistuponcallinghimselfapsychoanalyst。
Iwouldveryenergeticallyopposeanyattempttocounttheprinciplesofrepressionandresistanceasmereassumptionsinsteadofresultsofpsychoanalysis。Suchassumptionsofageneralpsychologicalandbiologicalnatureexist，anditwouldbequitetothepointtodealwiththeminanotherplace。Theprincipleofrepression，however，isanacquisitionofthepsychoanalyticwork，wonbylegitimatemeans，asatheoreticalextractfromverynumerousexperiences。Justsuchanacquisition，butofmuchlaterdays，isthetheoryoftheinfantilesexuality，ofwhichnocountwastakenduringthefirstyearsoftentativeanalyticinvestigation。Atfirstitwasonlynoticedthattheeffectofactualimpressionshadtobetracedbacktothepast。
However，\"theseekeroftenfoundmorethanhebargainedfor。\"Hewastemptedalwaysfurtherbackintothispastandfinallyhopedtobepermittedtotarryintheperiodofpuberty，theepochofthetraditionalawakeningofthesexualimpulses。Hishopeswereinvain。Thetracksledstillfurtherbackintochildhoodandintoitsearliestyears。Intheprocessofthisworkitbecamealmostfatalforthisyoungscience。Undertheinfluenceofthetraumatictheoryofhysteria，followingCharcot，onewaseasilyinclinedtoregardasrealandasofetiologicalimportancetheaccountsofpatientswhotracedbacktheirsymptomstopassivesexualoccurrencesinthefirstyearsofchildhood，thatistosay，speakingplainly，toseductions。
Whenthisetiologybrokedownthroughitsownunlikelihood，andthroughthecontradictionofwell—establishedcircumstances，therefollowedaperiodofabsolutehelplessness。Theanalysishadledbythecorrectpathtosuchinfantilesexualtraumas，andyetthesewerenottrue。Thusthebasisofrealityhadbeenlost。AtthattimeIwouldgladlyhaveletthewholethingslide，asdidmyrespectedforerunnerBreuer，whenhemadehisunwished—fordiscovery。PerhapsIperseveredonlybecauseIhadnolongeranychoiceofbeginningsomethingelse。FinallyIreflectedthat，after[p。11]all，noonehasarighttodespairifhehasbeendisappointedonlyinhisexpectations。
Hemerelyneedstoreviewthem。Ifhystericsrefertheirsymptomstoimaginarytraumas，thenthisnewfactsignifiesthattheycreatesuchscenesintheirphantasies，andhencepsychicrealitydeservestobegivenaplacenexttoactualreality。Thiswassoonfollowedbytheconvictionthatthesephantasiesservetohidetheautoeroticactivitiesoftheearlyyearsofchildhood，toidealizethemandplacethemonahigherlevel，andnowthewholesexuallifeofthechildmadeitsappearancebehindthesephantasies。
Inthissexualactivityofthefirstyearsofchildhood，theconcomitantconstitutioncouldfinallyattainitsrights。Dispositionandexperienceherebecameassociatedintoaninseparableetiologicalunity，inthatthedispositionraisedcertainimpressionstoincitingandfixedtraumas，whichotherwisewouldhaveremainedaltogetherbanalandineffectual，whilsttheexperiencesevokedfactorsfromthedispositionwhich，withoutthem，wouldhavecontinuedtoremaindormant，and，perhaps，undeveloped。ThelastwordinthequestionoftraumaticetiologywaslateronsaidbyAbraham，whenhedrewattentiontothefactthatjustthepeculiarnatureofthechild’ssexualconstitutionenablesittoprovokesexualexperiencesofapeculiarkind，thatistosay，traumas。
Myformulationsconcerningthesexualityofthechildwerefoundedatfirstalmostexclusivelyontheresultsoftheanalysesofadults，whichledbackintothepast。Iwaslackinginopportunityfordirectobservationofthechild。Itwas，therefore，anextraordinarytriumphwhen，yearslater，mydiscoveriesweresuccessfullyconfirmedforthegreaterpartbydirectobservationandanalysesofchildrenofveryearlyyears，atriumphthatappearedlessandlessonreflectingthatthediscoverywasofsuchanaturethatonereallyoughttobeashamedofhavingmadeit。Thedeeperonepenetratedintotheobservationofthechild，themoreself—evidentthisfactseemed，andthemorestrange，too，becamethecircumstancesthatsuchpainshadbeentakentooverlookit。
Tobesure，socertainaconvictionoftheexistenceandsignificance[p。12]oftheinfantilesexualitycanbeobtainedonly，ifonefollowsthepathofanalysis，ifonegoesbackfromthesymptomsandpeculiaritiesofneuroticstotheiruttermostsources，thediscoveryofwhichexplainswhatisexplainableinthem，andpermitsofmodifyingwhatcanbechanged。
Iunderstandthatonecanarriveatdifferentconclusionsif，aswasrecentlydonebyC。G。Jung，onefirstformsforone’sselfatheoreticalconceptionofthenatureofthesexualimpulseandtherebytriestounderstandthelifeofthechild。Suchaconceptioncanonlybechosenarbitrarilyorwithregardtosecondaryconsiderations，andisindangerofbecominginadequatetothesphereinwhichitwastobeutilized。Doubtless，theanalyticwayalsoleadstocertainfinaldifficultiesandobscuritiesinregardtosexualityanditsrelationtothewholelifeoftheindividual；butthesecannotbesetasidebyspeculations，andmustwaittillsolutionswillbefoundbymeansofotherobservationsorofobservationsinotherspheres。
Ishallbrieflydiscussthehistoryofdream—interpretation。Thiscametomeasthefirst—fruitsofthetechnicalinnovation，after，followingadimpresentiment，Ihaddecidedtoreplacehypnosiswithfreeassociations。
Itwasnottheunderstandingofdreamstowardswhichmycuriositywasoriginallydirected。Idonotknowofanyinfluenceswhichhadguidedmyinteresttothisorinspiredmewithanyhelpfulexpectations。BeforethecessationofmyintercoursewithBreuerIhardlyhadtimetotellhim，insomanywords，thatInowknewhowtotranslatedreams。Duringthedevelopmentofthesediscoveriesthesymbolismofthelanguageofdreamswasaboutthelastthingwhichbecameknowntome，since，fortheunderstandingofsymbols，theassociationsofthedreamerofferbutlittlehelp。AsIhaveheldfasttothehabitoffirststudyingthingsthemselves，beforelookingthemupinbooks，IwasabletoascertainformyselfthesymbolismofdreamsbeforeIwasdirectedtoitbytheworkofSherner。OnlylaterIcametovaluefullythismeansofexpressionofdreams。ThiswaspartlyduetotheinfluenceoftheworksofSteckel，whowasatfirstverymeritoriousbutwholaterbecamemostperfunctory。Thecloseconnectionbetweenthepsychoanalytic[p。13]interpretationofdreamsandtheoncesohighlyesteemedartofdreaminterpretationoftheancientsonlybecamecleartomemanyyearsafterwards。Themostcharacteristicandsignificantportionofmydreamtheory，namely，thereductionofthedreamdistortiontoaninnerconflict，toasortofinnerdishonesty，Ifoundlaterinanauthortowhommedicinebutnotphilosophyisunknown。IrefertotheengineerJ。Popper，whohadpublished\"PhantasiesofaRealist\"underthenameofLynkeus。
Theinterpretationofdreamsbecameformeasolaceandsupportinthosedifficultfirstyearsofanalysis，whenIhadtomasteratthesametimethetechnique，theclinicandthetherapyoftheneuroses，whenIstoodentirelyalone，andintheconfusionofproblemsandtheaccumulationofdifficultiesIoftenfearedtolosemyorientationandmyconfidence。Itoftentookalongtimebeforetheproofofmyassumption，thataneurosismustbecomecomprehensiblethroughanalysis，wasseenbytheperplexedpatient，butthedreams，whichmightberegardedasanalogoustothesymptoms，almostregularlyconfirmedthisassumption。
OnlybecauseofthesesuccesseswasIinconditiontopersevere。Ihave，therefore，acquiredthehabitofmeasuringthegraspofapsychologicalworkerbyhisattitudetotheproblemofdreaminterpretation，andIhavenoticed，withsatisfaction，thatmostoftheopponentsofpsychoanalysisavoidedthisfieldaltogether，oriftheyventuredintoit，theybehavedmostawkwardly。Theanalysisofmyself，theneedofwhichsoonbecameapparenttome，Icarriedoutbytheaidofaseriesofmyowndreamswhichledmethroughallthehappeningsofmychildhoodyears。EventodayIamoftheopinionthatinthecaseofaprolificdreamerandapersonnottooabnormal，thissortofanalysismaybesufficient。
Byunfurlingthisdevelopmentalhistory，IbelieveIhaveshownwhatpsychoanalysisis，betterthanIcouldhavedonebyasystematicpresentationofthesubject。ThespecialnatureofmyfindingsIdidnotthenrecognize。
Isacrificed，unhesitatingly，mybuddingpopularityasaphysicianandanextensivepracticeamongnervouspatients，becauseIsearcheddirectlyforthesexualoriginoftheir[p。14]neuroses。InthiswayIgainedanumberofexperienceswhichdefinitelyconfirmedmyconvictionofthepracticalsignificanceofthesexualfactor。Withoutanyapprehension，IappearedasspeakerattheViennaNeurologicalSociety，thenunderthepresidencyofKrafft—Ebing，expectingtobecompensated，bytheinterestandrecognitionofmycolleagues，formyownvoluntarysacrifices。Itreatedmydiscoveriesasindifferentcontributionstoscienceandhopedthatotherswouldtreattheminthesameway。Onlythesilencethatfollowedmylectures，thespacethatformedaboutmyperson，andtheinsinuationsdirectedtowardsmecausedmetorealize，gradually，thatstatementsaboutthepartplayedbysexualityintheetiologyoftheneurosescannothopetobetreatedlikeothercommunications。
IrealizedthatfromthenonIwouldbelongtothosewho，accordingtoHebbel’sexpression，\"havedisturbedtheworld’ssleep，\"andthatIcouldnotcountuponbeingtreatedobjectivelyandwithtoleration。Butasmyconvictionoftheaveragecorrectnessofmyobservationsandtheconclusionsgrewgreaterandgreater，andasmyfaithinmyownjudgmentwasnotsmall，anymorethanwasmymoralcourage，therecouldbenodoubtastotheissueofthissituation。Idecidedtobelievethatitfelltomylottodiscoverparticularlysignificantassociations，andfeltpreparedtobearthefatewhichsometimesaccompaniessuchdiscoveries。
ThisfateIpicturedtomyselfinthefollowingmanner。Iwouldprobablysucceedinsustainingmyselfthroughthetherapeuticsuccessesofthenewtreatment，butsciencewouldtakenonoticeofmeinmylifetime。Somedecadeslater，anotherwouldsurelystumbleuponthesame，nowuntimelythings，compeltheirrecognitionandthusbringmetohonorasanecessarilyunfortunateforerunner。MeantimeIarrayedmyselfascomfortablyaspossibleà；laRobinsonCrusoeuponmylonelyisland。WhenIlookbacktothoselonelyyears，fromtheperplexitiesandvexatiousnessofthepresent，itseemstomeitwasabeautifulandheroictime。The\"splendidisolation\"
didnotlackitsprivilegesandcharms。Ididnotneedtoreadanyliteraturenortolistentobadlyinformedopponents。Iwassubjecttonoinfluences，andnopressurewasbroughttobear[p。15]onme。Ilearnedtorestrainspeculativetendenciesand，followingtheunforgottenadviceofmymaster，Charcot，Ilookedatthesamethingsagainandoftenuntiltheybeganofthemselvestotellmesomething。Mypublications，forwhichIfoundshelterdespitesomedifficulty，couldsafelyremainfarbehindmystateofknowledge。
TheycouldbedelayedaslongasIpleased，astherewasnodoubtful\"priority\"
tobedefended。\"TheInterpretationofDreams，\"forexample，wascompletedinallessentialsinthebeginningof1896，butwaswrittendownonlyin1899。Thetreatmentof\"Dora\"wasfinishedattheendof1899。Thehistoryofherillnesswascompletedinthenexttwoweeks，butwasonlypublishedin1905。Meantimemywritingswerenotinthereviewedprofessionalliteratureoftheday。Ifanexceptionwasmadetheywerealwaystreatedwithscornfulorpityingcondescension。Sometimesacolleaguewouldrefertomeinoneofhispublicationsinveryshortandunflatteringterms，suchas\"unbalanced，\"
\"extreme，\"or\"veryodd。\"IthappenedoncethatanassistantattheclinicinViennaaskedmeforpermissiontoattendoneofmylecturecourses。
Helisteneddevoutlyandsaidnothing，butafterthelastlectureheofferedtoaccompanyme。Duringthiswalkhedisclosedtomethat，withtheknowledgeofhischief，hehadwrittenabookagainstmyteachings，butheexpressedmuchregretthathehadonlycometoknowtheseteachingsbetterthroughmylectures。Hadheknownthesebefore，hewouldhavewrittenverydifferently。
Indeed，hehadinquiredattheclinicifhehadnotbetterfirstread\"TheInterpretationofDreams，\"buthadbeenadvisedagainstdoingso，asitwasnotworththetrouble。Ashenowunderstoodit，hecomparedmysystemofinstructionwiththeCatholicChurch。Intheinterestsofhissoul’ssalvationIwillassumethatthisremarkcontainedabitofsincererecognition。
Butheendedbysayingthatitwastoolatetoalteranythinginhisbookasitwasalreadyprinted。Thisparticularcolleaguedidnotconsideritnecessarylaterontotelltheworldsomethingofthechangeinhisopinionsconcerningmypsychoanalysis。Onthecontrary，aspermanentreviewerofamedicaljournal，heshowedapreferencetofollowitsdevelopmentwithhishardlyseriouscomments。[p。16]
WhateverIpossessedofpersonalsensitivenesswasbluntedthoseyears，tomyadvantage。ButIwassavedfrombecomingembitteredbyacircumstancethatdoesnotcometotheassistanceofalllonelydiscoverers。Suchaoneusuallyfretshimselftofindoutthecauseofthelackofsympathyoroftherejectionhereceivesfromhiscontemporaries，andperceivesthemasapainfulcontradictionagainstthecertaintyofhisownconviction。
Thatdidnottroubleme，forthepsychoanalyticfundamentalprinciplesenabledmetounderstandthisattitudeofmyenvironmentasanecessarysequence。Ifitwastruethattheassociationsdiscoveredbymewerekeptfromtheknowledgeofthepatientbyinneraffectiveresistances，thenthisresistancemustmanifestitselfalsoinnormalpersonsassoonastherepressedmaterialisconveyedtothemfromtheoutside。Itwasnotstrangethattheselatterknewhowtogiveintellectualreasonsfortheiraffectiverejectionsofmyideas。Thishappenedjustasoftenwiththepatients，andtheargumentsadvanced——argumentsareascommonasblackberries，toborrowfromFalstaff’sspeech——werethesameandnotexactlybrilliant。
Theonlydifferencewasthatinthecaseofpatientsonehadthemeansofbringingpressuretobear，inordertohelpthemrecognizeandovercometheirresistances，butinthecaseofthoseseeminglynormal，suchhelphadtobeomitted。Toforcethesenormalpeopletoacoolandscientificallyobjectiveexaminationofthesubjectwasanunsolvedproblem，thesolutionofwhichwasbestlefttotime。Inthehistoryofscienceithasoftenbeenpossibletoverifythattheveryassertionwhich，atfirst，calledforthonlyopposition，receivedrecognitionalittlelaterwithoutnecessityofbringingforwardanynewproofs。
ThatIhavenotdevelopedanyparticularrespectfortheopinionoftheworldoranydesireforintellectualdeferenceduringthoseyears，whenIalonerepresentedpsychoanalysis，willsurprisenoone。[p。17]II
Beginningwiththeyear1902anumberofyoungdoctorscrowdedaboutmewiththeexpressedintentiontolearnpsychoanalysis，topracticeitandtospreadit。Theimpetusforthiscamefromacolleaguewhohadhimselfexperiencedthebeneficialeffectsoftheanalytictherapy。Wemetoncertaineveningsatmyresidence，anddiscussedsubjectsaccordingtocertainrules。
Thevisitorsendeavoredtoorientthemselvesinthisstrangeandnewrealmofinvestigation，andtointerestothersinthematter。OnedayayounggraduateIofthetechnicalschoolfoundadmissiontoourcirclebymeansofamanuscriptwhichshowedextraordinarysense。Weinducedhimtogothroughcollegeandentertheuniversity，andthendevotehimselftothenon—medicalapplicationofpsychoanalysis。Thusthelittlesocietygainedazealousandreliablesecretary，andIacquiredinOttoRankamostfaithfulhelperandcollaborator。
Soonthelittlecircleexpanded，andinthecourseofthenextfewyearschangedagooddealinitscomposition。Onthewhole，Icouldflattermyselfthatinthewealthandvarietyoftalentourcirclewashardlyinferiortothestaffofanyclinicalteacher。Fromtheverybeginningitincludedthosemenwholaterweretoplayaconsiderable，ifnotalwaysadelectable，partinthehistoryofthepsychoanalyticmovement。Butthesedevelopmentscouldnothavebeenguessedatthattime。Iwassatisfied，andIbelieveIdidallIcould，toconveytotheotherswhatIknewandhadexperienced。
Therewereonlytwoinauspiciouscircumstanceswhichatleastmentallyestrangedmefromthiscircle。Icouldnotsucceedinestablishingamongthemembersthatfriendlyrelationwhichshouldobtainamongmendoingthesamedifficultwork，norcouldIcrushoutthequarrelsaboutthepriorityofdiscoveries，forwhichtherewereampleopportunitiesinthoseconditionsofworkingtogether。Thedifficultiesofteachingthepractiseofpsychoanalysis，whichareparticularlygreat，andareoftentoblameforthepresentrejectionofpsychoanalysis，[p。18]alreadymadethemselvesfeltinthisVienneseprivatepsychoanalyticsociety。Imyselfdidnotdaretopresentanasyetincompletetechnique，andatheorystillinthemaking，withthatauthoritywhichmighthavesparedtheothersmanyablindalleyandmanyafinaltrippingup。Theself—dependenceofmentalworkers，theirearlyindependenceoftheteacher，isalwaysgratifyingpsychologically，butitcanonlyresultinascientificgainwhenduringtheselaborscertain，nottoofre9uentlyoccurring，personalrelationsarealsofulfilled。Psychoanalysisparticularlyshouldhaverequiredalongandseveredisciplineandtrainingofself—control。
Onaccountofthecouragedisplayedindevotiontosoridiculedandfruitlessasubject，IwasinclinedtotolerateamongthemembersmuchtowhichotherwiseIwouldhaveobjected。Besides，thecircleincludednotonlyphysicians，butotherculturedmenwhohadrecognizedsomethingsignificantinpsychoanalysis。
Therewereauthors，artists，andsoforth。The\"InterpretationOfDreams，\"
thebookon\"Wit，\"andotherwritings，hadalreadyshownthattheprinciplesofpsychoanalysiscannotremainlimitedtothemedicalfield，butarecapableofapplicationtovariousothermentalsciences。
In1907thesituationsuddenlyalteredandquitecontrarytoallexpectations；
itbecameevidentthatpsychoanalysishadunobtrusivelyawakenedsomeinterestandgainedsomefriends，thattherewereevensomescientificworkerswhowerepreparedtoadmittheirallegiance。AcommunicationfromBleulerhadalreadyacquaintedmewiththefactthatmyworkswerestudiedandappliedinBurghö；lzli。[4]InJanuary，1907，thefirstmanattachedtotheZü；richClinic，Dr。Eitingon，visitedmeatVienna。
Othervisitorssoonfollowed，thuscausingalivelyexchangeofideas。
Finally，byinvitationofC。G。Jung，thenstillanassistantphysicianatBurghö；lzli，thefirstmeetingtookplaceatSalzburg，inthespringof1908，wherethefriendsofpsychoanalysisfromVienna，Zü；rich，andotherplacesmettogether。Theresultofthisfirstpsychoanalyticcongress，wasthefoundingofaperiodical，whichbegantoappearin1909，underthenameof\"Jahrbuchfü；rPsychoanalytischeundPsychopathologische[p。19]Forschungen，\"publishedbyBleulerandFreud，andeditedbyJung。
AnintimatecomradeshipintheworkdoneatViennaandZü；richfounditsexpressioninthispublication。
IhaverepeatedlyandgratefullyacknowledgedtheeffortsoftheZü；richPsychiatricSchoolinthespreadingofpsychoanalysis，especiallythoseofBleulerandJung，andIdonothesitatetodothesametoday，evenundersuchchangedcircumstances。ItwascertainlynotthepartisanshipoftheZü；richSchoolwhichatthattimefirstdirectedtheattentionofthescientificworldtothesubjectofpsychoanalysis。Thislatencyperiodhadjustcometoanend，andpsychoanalysiseverywherebecametheobjectofconstantlyincreasinginterest。Butwhilstinalltheotherplacesthismanifestationofinterestresultedfirstinnothingbutaviolentandemphaticrepudiationofthesubject，inZü；rich，onthecontrary，themainfeelingofthesituationwasthatofagreement。Innootherplacewassocompactalittlegatheringofadherentstobefound，nowherealsowasitpossibletoplaceapublicclinicattheserviceofpsychoanalyticinvestigation，ortofindaclinicalteacherwhoregardedtheprinciplesofpsychoanalysisasanintegralpartoftheteachingofpsychiatry。TheZü；richdoctorsbecame，asitwere，thenucleusofthelittlebandwhichwasfightingfortherecognitionofpsychoanalysis。OnlyinZü；richwasthereapossibleopportunitytolearnthenewartandtoapplyitinpractice。Mostofmypresent—dayfollowersandco—workerscametomeviaZü；rich，eventhosewhomighthavefound，geographicallyspeaking，ashorterroadtoViennathantoSwitzerland。ViennaliesinaneccentricpositionfromwesternEurope，whichhousesthegreatcentersofourculture。Formanyyearsithasbeenmuchaffectedbyweightyprejudices。TherepresentativesofthemostprominentnationsstreamintoSwitzerland，whichissomentallyactive，andaninfectivelesioninthisplacewassuretobecomeveryimportantforthedisseminationofthe\"psychicepidemic，\"asHocheofFreiburgcalledit。
AccordingtothetestimonyofacolleaguewhowasaneyewitnessofthedevelopmentsatBurghö；lzli，itmaybeassertedthatpsychoanalysisawakenedaninterestthereveryearly。AlreadyinJung’s[p。20]workonoccultphenomena，publishedin1902，therewasanallusiontodream—interpretation。
Eversince1903or1904accordingtomyinformer，psychoanalysiscameintoprominence。AftertheestablishmentofpersonalrelationsbetweenViennaandZü；rich，asocietywasalsofoundedinBurghö；lzliin1907
whichdiscussedtheproblemsofpsychoanalysisatregularmeetings。InthebondthatunitedtheViennaandZü；richschools，theSwisswerebynomeansthemerelyrecipientpart。Theyhadthemselvesalreadyperformedrespectablescientificwork，theresultsofwhichwereofmuchusetopsychoanalysis。
Theassociation—experiment，startedbytheWundtSchool，hadbeeninterpretedbytheminthepsychoanalyticsenseandhadproveditselfofunexpectedusefulness。Thusithadbecomepossibletogetrapidexperimentalconfirmationofpsychoanalyticfacts，andtodemonstrateexperimentallytobeginnerscertainrelationshipswhichtheanalystcouldonlyhavetalkedaboutotherwise。
Thefirstbridgeleadingfromexperimentalpsychologytopsychoanalysishadthusbeenconstructed。