Главная

Frank William Abagnale Jr. (/ˈæbəɡneɪl/; born April 27, 1948) is an American author and convicted felon. He gained notoriety in the late 1970s with biographical claims that included working as an assistant state attorney general in Louisiana, a hospital physician in Georgia, a professor in Utah, and a Pan American World Airways pilot who logged over two million air miles.^[1] According to Abagnale, he began to con people and pass bad checks when he was 15 years old. During his teens and early twenties he was arrested multiple times and was convicted and imprisoned in the United States and Europe. In 1980, Abagnale co-wrote a book on his life, Catch Me If You Can, that inspired the film of the same name directed by Steven Spielberg, in which Abagnale was portrayed by actor Leonardo DiCaprio. He has also written four other books. Abagnale runs Abagnale and Associates, a consultancy firm.^[2]

The veracity of most of Abagnale’s claims has been questioned and in many cases outright refuted.^[3][4][5] In 2002, Abagnale admitted on his website that some facts had been over-dramatized or exaggerated, though he was not specific about what was exaggerated or omitted about his life.^[6] In 2020, journalist Alan C. Logan provided documentary evidence that the majority of Abagnale’s claims had been at best wildly exaggerated and at worst completely invented.^[7][8][9]

Contents

• 1Early life
  • 1.1Airline pilot
• 2Europe
• 3United States
• 4Veracity of claims
• 5Personal life
• 6Books
• 7See also
• 8References
• 9External links

Early life[edit source]

External video
Catch Me If You Can: Frank Abagnale’s Story, Frank Abagnale, 1:02:27, WGBH Educational Foundation[10]

Frank William Abagnale Jr. was born in the Bronx, New York City, on April 27, 1948, to a French-Algerian mother and an Italian-American father.^[11][12] He spent his early life in Bronxville, New York. His parents separated when he was 12 and divorced when he was 15 years old.^[7] After the divorce, Abagnale moved with his father, and his new stepmother, to Mount Vernon, New York.^[7]

According to Abagnale, his first victim was his father, who gave Abagnale a gasoline credit card and a truck and was ultimately liable for a bill amounting to $3,400. Abagnale was only 15 at the time.^[13][14] In his autobiography, Abagnale says, because of this crime, he was sent to a reform school in Westchester County, New York (fitting the description of the Lincolndale Agricultural School) run by Catholic Charities USA.^[13]

In December 1964, he enlisted in the United States Navy at the age of 16. He was discharged after less than three months and was arrested for forgery shortly thereafter.^[15][16]

In 1965, the Federal Bureau of Investigation arrested Abagnale in Eureka, California for car theft after he stole a Ford Mustang from one of his father’s neighbors. Abagnale was pictured in the local newspaper, seated in a car, being questioned by special agent Richard Miller of the FBI.^[17] He had financed his cross-country trip from New York to California with blank checks stolen from a family business located on the Bronx River Parkway.^[15][16] Abagnale was also charged with impersonating a US customs official, although this charge was dropped. On June 2, 1965, this stolen car case was transferred to the Southern District of New York.^[7]

Airline pilot[edit source]

After being released into the custody of his father to face the stolen car charges, 17-year-old Abagnale decided to impersonate a pilot. He obtained a uniform at a Manhattan uniform company, but was arrested in Tuckahoe, New York days later.^[15][16] Abagnale was sentenced to three years at the Great Meadow Prison in Comstock, New York. After serving only two years of his sentence, he was released into the custody of his mother. However, he broke the terms of his parole with a stolen car conviction in Boston, Massachusetts, and was returned to Great Meadow for one year.^[7]

After his release on December 24, 1968, he disguised himself as a TWA pilot and moved to Baton Rouge, Louisiana, where he talked his way into the house of a local music teacher, the father of a Delta Air Lines stewardess he had met in New York. He was arrested on February 14, 1969, initially on vagrancy charges. Upon his arrest he was found to have illegally driven his Florida rental car out of state and to possess falsified airline employee identification.^[18] The following day detectives determined that Abagnale had stolen blank checks from his host family and a local business in Baton Rouge, and he was subsequently charged with theft and forgery.^[19][20] Unable to make bail, he was convicted on June 2, 1969, and was sentenced to 12 years of supervised probation, but he soon fled Louisiana for Europe.^[7][21]

Europe[edit source]

Two weeks after the Louisiana bench warrant was issued, Abagnale was arrested in Montpellier, France, in September 1969. He had stolen an automobile and defrauded two local families in Klippan, Sweden. He was sentenced to four months for theft in France, but only served three months in Perpignan‘s prison.^[22]

He was then extradited to Sweden where he was convicted of gross fraud by forgery. He served two months in a Malmö prison and was banned from returning to Sweden for eight years and required to recompense his Swedish victims (which, they say, he never did^[7]). Abagnale was deported back to the United States in June 1970 when his appeal failed.^[7]

United States[edit source]

After returning to the United States, 22-year-old Abagnale dressed in a pilot’s uniform and travelled around college campuses, passing bad checks and claiming he was there to recruit stewardesses for Pan Am. At the University of Arizona, he stated that he was a pilot and a doctor, and according to Paul Holsen, a student at the time, Abagnale conducted physical examinations on several female college students who wanted to be part of flight crews.^[23] None of the women were ever enrolled in Abagnale’s fictional program.^[24]

After Abagnale cashed a personal check dressed up as a Pan Am paycheck, on July 30, 1970, in Durham, North Carolina, he again came to the attention of the FBI. He was arrested in Cobb County, Georgia, 3 months later, on November 2, 1970, after cashing 10 fake Pan Am payroll checks in different towns. Abagnale escaped from the Cobb County jail and was picked up 4 days later in New York City. He was sentenced to ten years in 1971 for forging checks that totaled $1,448.60 and he received an additional two years for escaping from jail.^[7][24]

In 1974, Abagnale was released on parole after he had served around two years of his 12-year sentence at Federal Correctional Institution in Petersburg, Virginia.^[25] Unwilling to return to his family in New York, he left the choice of parole location up to the court, which decided that he would be paroled in Houston, Texas.^[26]

After his release, Abagnale stated that he performed numerous jobs, including cook, grocer, and movie projectionist, but he was fired from most of these after it was discovered he had been hired without revealing his criminal past. He again posed as a pilot in 1974 to obtain a job at Camp Manison, a summer children’s camp in Texas where he was arrested for stealing cameras from his co-workers.^[27] After he received only a fine, he obtained a position at a Houston-area orphanage by pretending to be a pilot with a master’s degree. This job had him finding foster homes for the children living at the orphanage. This ruse was eventually discovered by his parole officer, who swiftly removed him from his orphanage work and moved him into living quarters above his own garage so that he “could keep an eye on him”.^[28] His next position was at Aetna, where he was fired and sued for check fraud.^[7]

According to Abagnale, he approached a bank with an offer in 1975. He explained to the bank what he had done and offered to speak to the bank’s staff and show them various tricks that “paperhangers” use to defraud banks. His offer included the condition that if they did not find his speech helpful, they would owe him nothing; otherwise, they would owe him only $50, with an agreement that they would provide his name to other banks.^[29] With that, he began a new career as a speaker and a security consultant.^[2] During this time, he falsified his resume to show he had worked with the Los Angeles Police Department and Scotland Yard.^[7]

In 1977, Abagnale gave public talks wherein he claimed that between the ages of 16 and 21 years old, he was a doctor in a Georgia hospital for one year, an assistant state attorney general for one year, a sociology professor for two semesters, and a Pan American airlines pilot for two years. In addition, Abagnale claimed that he recruited university coeds as Pan American stewardesses travelling with them for three months throughout Europe. He also claimed he eluded the FBI with a daring escape from a commercial airline toilet bowl, while the plane was taxiing at the John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York.^[30][31] In 1978 Abagnale told a Honolulu Advertiser reporter that he was familiar with the toilet apparatus, squeezed himself through the opening, swung down through the lower hatch, landed on the pavement, ran across the runway and hailed a cab.^[32] Abagnale claimed he moved the sewage container aside and that no one heard a thing: “I took off running. I thought they were right behind me. What I didn’t know was that the door was spring loaded and when it slammed shut the whole assembly fell back into place. Nobody heard anything because of the engines’ roar.”^[33]

He moved his wife, Kelly, and their three sons to Tulsa, Oklahoma. He and his family lived in the same house for the next 25 years. After the sons left home for college and careers elsewhere, Kelly suggested that she and Frank should leave Tulsa. They agreed to move to Charleston, South Carolina.^[26]

In 1976, he founded Abagnale & Associates,^[2] which advises companies on secure documents. In 2015, Abagnale was named the AARP Fraud Watch Ambassador, where he helps “to provide online programs and community forums to educate consumers about ways to protect themselves from identity theft and cybercrime.” In 2018, he began co-hosting the AARP podcast The Perfect Scam about scammers and how they operate.^[34]

He has appeared in the media a variety of times. This includes three times as guest on The Tonight Show, an appearance on To Tell the Truth in 1977 ^[35][36][37] and a regular slot on the British network TV series The Secret Cabaret in the 1990s.^[38] The book about Abagnale, Catch Me If You Can, was turned into a movie of the same name by Steven Spielberg in 2002, featuring actor Leonardo DiCaprio as Abagnale. The real Abagnale made a cameo appearance in this film as a French police officer taking DiCaprio into custody.^[39]

Veracity of claims[edit source]

During his appearances on television and in his speeches, Abagnale has often embellished his criminal exploits, stating that he was wanted in 12 countries, has worked extensively for the FBI and escaped several times from FBI custody. He also claimed that he cashed $2.5 million in bad checks and worked as an assistant attorney general and a hospital physician. In addition, he stated that he started a fake stewardess trainee program and logged over 2 million air miles disguised as a pilot.^[7]

In public lectures describing his life story, Abagnale has consistently maintained that he was “arrested just once”, and that was in Montpellier, France.^[40][41] However, public records show Abagnale was arrested in New York (multiple times), California, Massachusetts, Louisiana, Georgia, and Texas.^{[15][17][21][22][27][42]}

Despite public records showing Abagnale targeted individuals and small family businesses,^{[15][17][20][21][22][27][43]} Abagnale has long claimed publicly that he “never, ever ripped off any individuals”.^[44] He made the same claim of never targetting individuals and small businesses to BBC journalist Sarah Montague and the Associated Press.^[45][46] In 2002, Abagnale told the Star Tribune, “As long as I didn’t hurt anyone, people never considered me a real criminal, my victims were big corporations. I was a kid ripping off the establishment.”^[47]

However, individuals criminally targeted by Abagnale have described the long-term consequences of victimization:^[20]

He had a key to our front door, it was never recovered. We changed the lock. I fed him. I cooked. I don’t trust people as much anymore.— Charolette Parks, Abagnale victim interviewed April 27, 1981, The Advocate

Journalist Ira Perry was unable to find any evidence that Abagnale worked with the FBI; according to one retired FBI special agent in charge, Abagnale was caught trying to pass personal checks in 1978 several years after he claimed that he began working with the FBI.^[24] Dating back to the 1980s Abagnale claimed that Joseph Shea, an FBI agent, had pursued him for 5 years (between 1965 and 1970).^[48] Abagnale claimed that Shea befriended and supervised him during his parole.^[7] However, when Catch Me If You Can was released in theatres, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that Abagnale and Shea only reunited in the late 1980s, almost 20 years after Shea arrested him. Abagnale spotted Shea at an anticrime seminar in Kansas City and sought out Shea to shake his hand.^[49]

His claim that he passed the Louisiana bar exam, worked for Attorney General Jack P. F. Gremillion, and closed 33 cases, was debunked by several journalists in 1978.^[24][50] There is no record of Abagnale ever being a member of the Louisiana Bar^[51] and no evidence he ever worked as an assistant attorney general in Louisiana’s Attorney General Office. In 1978, the Louisiana State Bar Association reconciled all those who took the bar exam and concluded that Abagnale never took the exam using his own name or an alias; the State Attorney General‘s Office examined payments to all employees during the time Abagnale claimed he worked there and concluded that he never worked in the office using his name or an alias.^[24] After Abagnale appeared on The Tonight Show, then-First Assistant Attorney General Ken DeJean gave a reporter a series of questions to ask Abagnale about the description of then-Attorney General Jack P. F. Gremillion. Abagnale failed to answer the questions correctly.^[52]

Abagnale has publicly claimed an intelligence quotient (IQ) of 140: “I have an I.Q. of 140 and retain 90 percent of what I read. So by studying and memorizing the bar exam I was able to get the needed score.”^[31] In 2021 Abagnale gave the keynote at the American Mensa Conference in Houston, Texas. The organizers claimed he was the subject of an FBI manhunt and cashed millions of dollars’ worth of checks while impersonating a pilot and doctor.^[53]

One of Abagnale’s most notable claims was an alleged escape from the United States Penitentiary, Atlanta in 1971. In 1982 Abagnale told the press, “I was and still am the only and youngest man to escape from that prison.”^[54] However, the Federal Bureau of Prisons confirmed that Abagnale was never housed in the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary: “he was never admitted, so I don’t really see how he could have escaped” said acting warden Dwight Amstutz.^[24]

In 1978, after Abagnale had been a featured speaker at an anti-crime seminar, a San Francisco Chronicle reporter looked into his assertions. Telephone calls to banks, schools, hospitals and other institutions Abagnale mentioned turned up no evidence of his cons under the aliases he used. Abagnale’s response was, “Due to the embarrassment involved, I doubt if anyone would confirm the information.” He later said he had changed the names.^[55]

Further doubts were raised about Abagnale’s story after an October 1978 appearance on The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson, with a news article saying:

Abagnale is indeed a convicted confidence artist. But he is finding willing believers as he promotes and invents a more varied criminal past.— Stephen Hall, San Francisco Chronicle, “Johnny Is Conned”, October 6, 1978^[56]

In December 1978, Abagnale’s claims were again investigated after he visited Oklahoma City for a talk.^[24] As part of his investigation into the story, Perry spoke with Pan Am spokesman Bruce Haxthausen, who responded to the journalists’ enquiry saying:

This is the first we’ve heard of this, and we would have heard of or at least remember[ed] it if it had happened. You don’t forget $2.5 million in bad checks. I’d say this guy is as phony as a $3 bill.— Ira Perry, The Daily Oklahoman, “Inquiry Shows ‘Reformed’ Con Man Hasn’t Quit Yet”, December 10, 1978

In 2002, Abagnale addressed the issue of his story’s lack of truthfulness with a statement posted on his company’s website, which said in part: “I was interviewed by the co-writer only about four times. I believe he did a great job of telling the story, but he also over-dramatized and exaggerated some of the story. That was his style and what the editor wanted. He always reminded me that he was just telling a story and not writing my biography.”^[57] However, Abagnale made the primary claims of working as a doctor for a year, an attorney for a year, a PhD professor, and his several escapes on national television in 1977 on the show To Tell the Truth.^[37] He also made these claims in print media, namely the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, three years before the publication of his co-written autobiography, effectively nullifying the claim his aforementioned co-author, Stan Redding, exaggerated the story.^[31]

In 2006, KSL journalist Scott Haws challenged Abagnale with his claim that he worked as a Ph.D-holding sociology professor at Brigham Young University (BYU) for two semesters. Abagnale claimed that he could not recall the details, and that his co-author Redding had exaggerated some things. Haws “refreshed Frank’s memory” and showed him his own words, including the Catch Me If You Can Moviebook and the credits that rolled at the end of the film Catch Me If You Can, where Abagnale, not Redding, made the BYU professor claim.^[58] Abagnale conceded to Haws that he might have been a guest lecturer.^[59]

So despite claiming to be a sociology professor in at least three books, two solely written by Abagnale himself, and an on-camera claim following the movie, it appears Abagnale as a BYU professor is mostly or entirely just another real fake.— Scott Haws, Did Frank Abignale [sic] Really Teach at BYU?, April 27, 2006, KSL-TV

Leading up to 2020, journalist Alan C. Logan conducted an in-depth investigation, as part of publishing a book, on Abagnale’s life story. Logan’s exhaustive search of earlier newspaper articles, and other public records, cast reasonable doubt on Abagnale’s story. Logan also discovered numerous administrative documents that contradicted many of Abagnale’s claims.^[9] Logan’s investigation found that Abagnale’s claims were, for the most part, fabrications. Documents show that Abagnale was in Great Meadow Prison in Comstock, New York, between the ages of 17 and 20 (July 26, 1965, and December 24, 1968) as inmate #25367, the time frame during which Abagnale claims to have committed his most significant scams. Logan’s investigation uncovered numerous petty crimes that Abagnale has never acknowledged, and with Logan giving evidence to argue that many of Abagnale’s most famous scams in fact never occurred.^[8][9]

Abagnale has told the press, “I was convicted on 2.5 million dollars’ worth of bad checks” and that he later hired a law firm to get all the money back to hotels and other companies.^[60] However, federal court records show that Abagnale was convicted of forging 10 Pan American Airlines checks in five states (Texas, Arizona, Utah, California and North Carolina), totalling less than US$1,500.^[7] Following parole, he claimed he went to work for the FBI. Logan found no evidence to support Abagnale’s claims, including the assertion that he was included in a coffee table book celebrating the 100th anniversary of the FBI.^[9]

In many interviews and speeches Abagnale has claimed that he has earned millions of dollars from his patents.^[40][61] However, the United States Patent and Trademark Office website shows that Abagnale as a person, and Abagnale and Associates as a business, hold no patents and they are not listed as an inventor on any patent.^[62] In his cheque design patents, Canadian inventor Calin A. Sandru merely mentions in the Background section of the invention that KPMG and Abagnale and Associates are groups that affirm that cheque fraud is a significant problem.^[63][64][65]

In 2020 Abagnale was confronted by one of his victims in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. When asked why he talks about being an attorney general and passing the bar exams, and yet failing to acknowledge his arrest and conviction in Baton Rouge, Abagnale said, “That’s because I work for the FBI.”^[21] Abagnale claimed to the Star Tribune that he is an ethics instructor at the FBI Academy, located in Quantico, Virginia: “I teach ethics at the FBI academy, which is ironic, but years ago, someone at the Bureau said, ‘who better than you to do this?’—I try to teach young agents the importance of doing the right thing.”^[66]

Logan, girded with public records, shared his findings in detail on the NPR program Watching America, August 13, 2021, broadcast on WHRO.^[67]

Personal life[edit source]

Abagnale lives on Daniel Island, near Charleston, South Carolina, with his wife Kelly. They have three sons, Scott, Chris, and Sean.^[68] Abagnale cites meeting his wife as the motivation for changing his life. He told author Paul Stenning that he met her while working undercover for the FBI when she was a cashier at a grocery store.^[7][69]

Books[edit source]

• Catch Me If You Can, 1980. ISBN 978-0-7679-0538-1.
• The Art of the Steal, Broadway Books, 2001. ISBN 978-0-7679-0683-8.
• Real U Guide to Identity Theft, 2004. ISBN 978-1-932999-01-3.
• Stealing Your Life, Random House/Broadway Books, April 2007. ISBN 978-0-7679-2586-0.
• Scam Me If You Can, 2019. ISBN 978-0525538967.

See also[edit source]

• The Great Impostor, 1961 movie about Ferdinand Waldo Demara
• Elliot Castro, Scottish former fraudster

References[edit source]

1. ^ “Abagnale’s First Lecture With New Biography”. The Galveston Daily News. January 25, 1977. p. 1. Retrieved December 12, 2021.
2. ^ Jump up to:^a b c “Abagnale & Associates”. Abagnale & Associates. Retrieved May 20, 2007.
3. ^ Stringfellow, Jonathan. “Infamous American Fraudster Frank Abagnale to speak at upcoming CSU event”. The Uproar. Retrieved July 25, 2021.
4. ^ “New book claims Catch Me If You Can Frank Abagnale’s cons are fake”. www.msn.com. Retrieved July 25, 2021.
5. ^ “Northern Ireland man exposes ‘Catch Me If You Can’ as work of fiction”. belfasttelegraph. ISSN 0307-1235. Retrieved July 25, 2021.
6. ^ Baker, Bob (December 28, 2002). “The truth? Just try to catch it if you can”. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved July 25, 2021.
7. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o} Alan C. Logan (December 2020). The Greatest Hoax on Earth: Catching Truth, While We Can. Indiana Landmarks. ISBN 978-1-73555-722-9.
8. ^ Jump up to:^a b Well, Thomas (2021). “New book further debunks myth of scam artist Frank Abagnale, Jr. of ‘Catch Me if You Can’ book and movie”. Louisiana voice.
9. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Lopez, Zavier (April 23, 2021). “Could this famous con man be lying about his story? A new book suggests he is”. WHYY-TV. Retrieved May 9, 2021.
10. ^ “Catch Me If You Can: Frank Abagnale’s Story”. WGBH Educational Foundation. Retrieved April 8, 2016.
11. ^ “FamilySearch.org”. ancestors.familysearch.org. Retrieved September 2, 2021.
12. ^ “Paulette Noel Anton Abagnale (1926–2014) – Find A…” www.findagrave.com. Retrieved September 2, 2021.
13. ^ Jump up to:^a b Abagnale, Frank (2000). Catch Me If You Can. New York City: Broadway Paperbacks. p. 6. ISBN 978-0-7679-0538-1.
14. ^ Bell, Rachael. “Skywayman: The Story of Frank W. Abagnale Jr”. TruTV Crime Library. Atlanta, Georgia: Turner Broadcasting Systems. Archived from the original on August 31, 2009.
15. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e} “Clipped From The Herald Statesman”. The Herald Statesman. July 16, 1965. p. 26. Retrieved July 25, 2021.
16. ^ Jump up to:^a b c “Clipped From The Daily Times”. The Daily Times. July 16, 1965. p. 2. Retrieved July 25, 2021.
17. ^ Jump up to:^a b c “Abagnale Arrested for Auto Theft”. Eureka Humboldt Standard. June 22, 1965. p. 11. Retrieved October 5, 2021.
18. ^ “Vagrancy Charged Filed in City Against “Pilot””. The Advocate. February 15, 1969. Retrieved October 9, 2021.
19. ^ “N.Y. Man Faces 2 Counts Here”. The State Times Advocate. February 15, 1969. Retrieved October 9, 2021.
20. ^ Jump up to:^a b c “BR Family Says Renowned Imposter Took Its Money”. The State Times Advocate. April 27, 1981. Retrieved October 10, 2021.
21. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d “Did LABI pay a five-figure fee to get flim-flammed by self-proclaimed flim-flam artist at its annual luncheon Tuesday?”. Louisiana Voice. February 13, 2020. Retrieved September 8, 2021.
22. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Logan, Alan (2020). The Greatest Hoax on Earth Catching Truth, While We Can. pp. 147–155. ISBN 9781736197400.
23. ^ Holsen, Paul; II, Paul J. Holsen (July 11, 2014). Born in a Bottle of Beer. Createspace Independent Pub. ISBN 978-1-5003-8278-0.
24. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e f g} “Clipped From The Daily Oklahoman”. The Daily Oklahoman. December 14, 1978. p. 1. Retrieved July 25, 2021.
25. ^ Conway, Allan (2004). Analyze This: What Handwriting Reveals (1st ed.). PRC Publishing. p. 64. ISBN 978-1-85648-707-8.
26. ^ Jump up to:^a b Eaton, Kristi; Holton Dean, Anna (March 2019). “The Road to Fame: Frank Abagnale”. Tulsa People. Retrieved March 23, 2019.
27. ^ Jump up to:^a b c “Clipped From The News”. The News. September 5, 1974. p. 1. Retrieved July 25, 2021.
28. ^ “Uncovering the Con Man’s Biggest Lie”.
29. ^ Abagnale, Frank W. (2001). The Art of the Steal. Broadway Books. ISBN 9780767910910.^{[page needed]}
30. ^ “Abagnale Makes Biographical Claims”. Plano Daily Star-Courier. February 11, 1977. p. 8. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
31. ^ Jump up to:^a b c “Clipped From Fort Worth Star-Telegram”. Fort Worth Star-Telegram. November 9, 1977. p. 20. Retrieved July 25, 2021.
32. ^ “Abagnale Claims Toilet Bowl Escape – Newspapers.com”. Newspapers.com. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
33. ^ “The Great Imposter Biographical Claims”. The Times. February 21, 1982. p. 95. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
34. ^ “Fraud Watch Ambassador Named”. August 27, 2015.
35. ^ List of The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson episodes (1978)
36. ^ “The Tonight Show”. December 3, 2013.
37. ^ Jump up to:^a b Archived at Ghostarchive and the Wayback Machine: To Tell The Truth (Joe Garagiola) (Imposter Frank Abagnale) (1977), retrieved July 25, 2021
38. ^ Production company website, accessed April 19, 2021.
39. ^ Van Luling, Todd (October 17, 2014). “11 Easter Eggs You Never Noticed in Your Favorite Movies”. HuffPost. TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc. Retrieved January 29, 2015.
40. ^ Jump up to:^a b “American Rhetoric: Frank Abagnale – National Automobile Dealers Association Convention Address”. www.americanrhetoric.com. Retrieved September 22, 2021.
41. ^ “Talks at Google: Ep1 – Frank Abagnale | Catch Me If You Can”. talksatgoogle.libsyn.com. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
42. ^ “Abagnale interacts with coeds using deception”. Arizona Daily Star. November 21, 1970. p. 34. Retrieved September 22, 2021.
43. ^ “BR Family Says Renowned Imposter Took Its Money”. State Times Advocate. April 27, 1981. Retrieved October 9, 2021.
44. ^ “Frank Abagnale claimed he never ripped off any individuals”. The Item. September 29, 1982. p. 5. Retrieved September 17, 2021.
45. ^ Archived at Ghostarchive and the Wayback Machine: BBC HardTalk Interview with Frank Abagnale, retrieved September 17, 2021
46. ^ “Frank Abagnale claimed he never targeted ‘mom and pop’ stores”. The Ithaca Journal. November 20, 1980. p. 29. Retrieved September 17, 2021.
47. ^ “Abagnale Claims Never Considered Real Criminal”. Star Tribune. December 22, 2002. pp. F7. Retrieved October 15, 2021.
48. ^ “Clipped From Kenosha News”. Kenosha News. February 26, 1982. p. 7. Retrieved August 29, 2021.
49. ^ “Clipped From The Atlanta Constitution”. The Atlanta Constitution. January 13, 2003. pp. C2. Retrieved August 29, 2021.
50. ^ Hall, Stephen (October 6, 1978). “Johnny Is Conned”. No. 114th Year, No. 221. San Francisco Chronicle.
51. ^ “Attorney Status Search”. ladb.org. Retrieved July 25, 2021.
52. ^ Well, Thomas (April 27, 2021). “New book further debunks myth of scam artist Frank Abagnale, Jr. of ‘Catch Me if You Can’ book and movie”. Louisanavoice.com. Louisiana Voice.
53. ^ “American Mensa’s World Gathering | Aug. 24–29, 2021”. ag.us.mensa.org. Retrieved September 21, 2021.
54. ^ “Abagnale Claims Escape From Atlanta Federal Penitentiary”. Arizona Daily Sun. February 24, 1982. p. 6. Retrieved September 21, 2021.
55. ^ Baker, Bob (December 6, 2002). “Portrait of the con artist as a young man”. newsthinking.com. Archived from the original on October 12, 2007. Retrieved February 14, 2011.
56. ^ Hall, Stephen (October 6, 1978). “Johnny Is Conned”. No. 114th Year, No. 221. San Francisco Chronicle.
57. ^ “Abagnale & Associates, Comments”. Retrieved July 7, 2009.
58. ^ Steven Spielberg; Frank W. Abagnale; Andrew Cooper; Jeff Nathanson; Timothy Shaner (2002). Linda Sunshine (ed.). Catch me if you can : a Steven Spielberg film. New York: Newmarket Press. ISBN 1-55704-553-4. OCLC 51995375.
59. ^ April 27, Posted-; A.m, 2006 at 11:54. “Did Frank Abignale Really Teach at BYU?”. www.ksl.com. Retrieved August 29, 2021.
60. ^ 1393354. “Charleston Home + Design Magazine – Spring 2014”. Issuu. Retrieved September 22, 2021.
61. ^ Writer, NewsNet Staff (March 11, 2005). “The art of the steal”. The Daily Universe. Retrieved October 31, 2021.
62. ^ “Patent Database Search Results: abagnale in US Patent Collection”. patft.uspto.gov. Retrieved October 31, 2021.
63. ^ Sandru, Calin A. (February 28, 1997). “Apparatus and method for enhancing the security of negotiable documents”. United States Patent and Trademark Office. Retrieved October 31, 2021.
64. ^ Sandru, Calin A. (May 4, 2000). “Apparatus and method for enhancing the security of negotiable documents”. United States Patent and Trademark Office. Retrieved October 31, 2021.
65. ^ Sandru, Calin A. (July 1, 2002). “Apparatus and method for enhancing the security of negotiable instruments”. United States Patent and Trademark Office. Retrieved October 31, 2021.
66. ^ “Abagnale Claims to be Ethics Instructor at FBI Academy”. Star Tribune. May 13, 2015. pp. D2. Retrieved October 1, 2021.
67. ^ “WHRO Radio & TV Programs, Podcasts, Episodes”. mediaplayer.whro.org. Retrieved August 21, 2021.
68. ^ Hunt, Stephanie (September 2010). “Charleston Profile: Bona Fide”. Charleston Mag via abagnale.com. Archived from the original on October 6, 2010. Retrieved April 1, 2011.
69. ^ Stenning, Paul (November 24, 2013). Success – By Those Who’ve Made It. In Flight Books. p. 102. ISBN 978-1628475869.

External links[edit source]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Frank Abagnale.

Wikiquote has quotations related to: Frank Abagnale

• Official Abagnale & Associates site
• Article questioning Abagnale’s claims.
• Frank Abagnale at IMDb
• Interview of Frank Abagnale with BBC News
• Official Website for Catch Me If You Can the musical
• Frank Abagnale: “Catch Me If You Can” | Talks at Google

Kevin David Mitnick (born August 6, 1963) is an American computer security consultant, author, and convicted hacker. He is best known for his high-profile 1995 arrest and five years in prison for various computer and communications-related crimes.^[6]

Mitnick’s pursuit, arrest, trial, and sentence along with the associated journalism, books, and films were all controversial.^[7][8]

He now runs the security firm Mitnick Security Consulting, LLC. He is also the Chief Hacking Officer and part owner^[9] of the security awareness training company KnowBe4, as well as an active advisory board member at Zimperium,^[10] a firm that develops a mobile intrusion prevention system.^[11]

Contents

• 1Early life and education
• 2Career
  • 2.1Computer hacking
    • 2.1.1Arrest, conviction, and incarceration
    • 2.1.2Controversy
  • 2.2Consulting
• 3Media
• 4Books
  • 4.1Written by Mitnick
  • 4.2Authorized by Mitnick
• 5See also
• 6References
• 7Bibliography
  • 7.1Movies
  • 7.2Books
  • 7.3Articles
• 8External links

Early life and education[edit source]

Mitnick was born in Van Nuys, California, on August 6, 1963.^{[12][self-published source?]} He grew up in Los Angeles and attended James Monroe High School in Los Angeles, California,^[13] during which time he became an amateur radio operator.^[14] He was later enrolled at Los Angeles Pierce College and USC.^[13] For a time, he worked as a receptionist for Stephen S. Wise Temple.^[13]

Career[edit source]

Computer hacking[edit source]

At age 12, Mitnick got a bus driver to tell him where he could buy his own ticket punch for “a school project”, and was then able to ride any bus in the greater LA area using unused transfer slips he found in a dumpster next to the bus company garage.^[15]

Mitnick first gained unauthorized access to a computer network in 1979, at 16, when a friend gave him the phone number for the Ark, the computer system that Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) used for developing its RSTS/E operating system software.^[16] He broke into DEC’s computer network and copied the company’s software, a crime for which he was charged and convicted in 1988. He was sentenced to 12 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release. Near the end of his supervised release, Mitnick hacked into Pacific Bell voicemail computers. After a warrant was issued for his arrest, Mitnick fled, becoming a fugitive for two-and-a-half years.^{[citation needed]}

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Mitnick gained unauthorized access to dozens of computer networks while he was a fugitive. He used cloned cellular phones to hide his location and, among other things, copied valuable proprietary software from some of the country’s largest cellular telephone and computer companies. Mitnick also intercepted and stole computer passwords, altered computer networks, and broke into and read private e-mails.^{[citation needed]}

Arrest, conviction, and incarceration[edit source]

Supporters from 2600 Magazine distributed “Free Kevin” bumper stickers.^[17]

After a well-publicized pursuit, the FBI arrested Mitnick on February 15, 1995, at his apartment in Raleigh, North Carolina, on federal offenses related to a two-and-a-half-year period of computer hacking which included computer and wire fraud.^[18][19] He was found with cloned cellular phones, more than 100 cloned cellular phone codes, and multiple pieces of false identification.^[20]

In December 1997, the Yahoo! website was hacked, displaying a message calling for Mitnick’s release. According to the message, all recent visitors of Yahoo!’s website had been infected with a computer worm that would wreak havoc on Christmas Day unless Mitnick was released. Yahoo! dismissed the claims as a hoax and said that the worm was nonexistent.^[21][22]

Mitnick was charged with wire fraud (14 counts), possession of unauthorized access devices (8 counts), interception of wire or electronic communications, unauthorized access to a federal computer, and causing damage to a computer.^[4]

In 1999, Mitnick pleaded guilty to four counts of wire fraud, two counts of computer fraud, and one count of illegally intercepting a wire communication, as part of a plea agreement before the United States District Court for the Central District of California in Los Angeles. He was sentenced to 46 months in prison plus 22 months for violating the terms of his 1989 supervised release sentence for computer fraud. He admitted to violating the terms of supervised release by hacking into Pacific Bell voicemail and other systems and to associating with known computer hackers, in this case co-defendant Lewis De Payne.^[1][23]

Mitnick served five years in prison—four-and-a-half years’ pre-trial and eight months in solitary confinement—because, according to Mitnick, law enforcement officials convinced a judge that he had the ability to “start a nuclear war by whistling into a pay phone”,^[24] implying that law enforcement told the judge that he could somehow dial into the NORAD modem via a payphone from prison and communicate with the modem by whistling to launch nuclear missiles.^[25] In addition, a number of media outlets reported on the unavailability of kosher meals at the prison where he was incarcerated.^[26]

He was released on January 21, 2000. During his supervised release, which ended on January 21, 2003, he was initially forbidden to use any communications technology other than a landline telephone.^[27] Mitnick fought this decision in court, eventually winning a ruling in his favor, allowing him to access the Internet. Under the plea deal, Mitnick was also prohibited from profiting from films or books based on his criminal activity for seven years, under a special judicial Son of Sam law variation.

In December 2001, an FCC judge ruled that Mitnick was sufficiently rehabilitated to possess a federally issued amateur radio license.^[28] Mitnick now runs Mitnick Security Consulting LLC, a computer security consultancy and is part owner of KnowBe4, provider of an integrated platform for security awareness training and simulated phishing testing.^[29]

Controversy[edit source]

Mitnick’s criminal activities, arrest, and trial, along with the associated journalism, were all controversial.^[7] Though Mitnick has been convicted of copying software unlawfully,^[30] his supporters argue that his punishment was excessive and that many of the charges against him were fraudulent^[31] and not based on actual losses.^[32]

In his 2002 book, The Art of Deception, Mitnick states that he compromised computers solely by using passwords and codes that he gained by social engineering. He claims he did not use software programs or hacking tools for cracking passwords or otherwise exploiting computer or phone security.^{[citation needed]}

John Markoff and Tsutomu Shimomura, who had both been part of the pursuit of Mitnick, wrote the book Takedown about Mitnick’s capture.^{[citation needed]}

The case against Mitnick tested the new laws that had been enacted for dealing with computer crime, and it raised public awareness of security involving networked computers. The controversy remains, however, and the Mitnick story is often cited today as an example of the influence that newspapers and other media outlets can have on law enforcement personnel.^[33]

Consulting[edit source]

Since 2000, Mitnick has been a paid security consultant, public speaker, and author. He does security consulting for, performs penetration testing services, and teaches Social Engineering classes to companies and government agencies. His company Mitnick Security Consulting is based in Las Vegas, Nevada^[34] where he currently resides.

Media[edit source]

Adrian Lamo, Kevin Mitnick, and Kevin Poulsen (photo c. 2001)

In 2000, Skeet Ulrich and Russell Wong portrayed Kevin Mitnick and Tsutomu Shimomura, respectively, in the movie Track Down (known as Takedown outside the US), which was based on the book Takedown by John Markoff and Tsutomu Shimomura. The DVD was released in September 2004.^[35] A 2001 documentary named Freedom Downtime was produced by 2600: The Hacker Quarterly in response to Takedown.^{[citation needed]}

Mitnick’s story was a partial inspiration for Wizzywig, Ed Piskor‘s graphic novel about hackers.^{[citation needed]}

Mitnick also appeared in Werner Herzog‘s documentary Lo and Behold, Reveries of the Connected World (2016).

Books[edit source]

Written by Mitnick[edit source]

Mitnick is the co-author, with William L. Simon and Robert Vamosi, of four books, three on computer security and his autobiography:

• (2003) The Art of Deception: Controlling the Human Element of Security^[36]
• (2005) The Art of Intrusion: The Real Stories Behind the Exploits of Hackers, Intruders & Deceivers^[37]
• (2011) Ghost in the Wires: My Adventures as the World’s Most Wanted Hacker^[38]
• (2017) The Art of Invisibility^[39]

Authorized by Mitnick[edit source]

• (1996) The Fugitive Game: Online with Kevin Mitnick. In this book author Jonathan Littman presented Mitnick’s account of his story,^[40] as John Markoff’s book Takedown (1996) and Jeff Goodell’s Cyberthief and the Samurai (1996) presented Shimomura’s side (when Mitnick was legally unable to publish and profit from his own story).

See also[edit source]

• Kevin Poulsen
• “My kung fu is stronger than yours“
• List of computer criminals
• The Secret History of Hacking

References[edit source]

1. ^ Jump up to:^a b Gengler, Barbara (1999). “Super-hacker Kevin Mitnick takes a plea”. Computer Fraud & Security. 1999 (5): 6. doi:10.1016/S1361-3723(99)90141-0.
2. ^ “Kevin Mitnick’s Federal Indictment”. Archived from the original on May 18, 2014. Retrieved September 13, 2014.
3. ^ “#089 Fugitive Computer Hacker Arrested in North Carolina”. justice.gov. Archived from the original on June 13, 2013.
4. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Kevin Mitnick Case: 1999 – No Bail, No Computer, Hacker Pleads Guilty”. jrank.org.
5. ^ “HEARING DESIGNATION ORDER (FCC 01-359)” (PDF). Federal Communications Commission. December 21, 2001. Retrieved December 3, 2015.
6. ^ “Kevin Mitnick sentenced to nearly four years in prison; computer hacker ordered to pay restitution to victim companies whose systems were compromised” (Press release). United States Attorney’s Office, Central District of California. August 9, 1999. Archived from the original on June 13, 2013.
7. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Free Kevin, Kevin Freed”, Jan 21, 2000, Jason Kroll, Linux Journal
8. ^ “Ex-hacker reveals tricks of the trade”. AsiaOne Digital. Archived from the original on July 23, 2015.
9. ^ KnowBe4. “Kevin Mitnick Partners With KnowBe4”. www.prnewswire.com. Retrieved April 18, 2020.
10. ^ Darlene Storm (July 19, 2012). “Interview: World’s most famous hacker, Kevin Mitnick, on mobile security & Zimperium”. Computerworld. Archived from the original on December 26, 2013.
11. ^ Alex Williams. “Zimperium Raises $8M For Mobile Security That Turns The Tables On Attackers”. TechCrunch. AOL.
12. ^ Merritt, Tom (2012). Chronology of Tech History. Lulu.com. p. 87. ISBN 978-1-300-25307-5.^{[self-published source]}
13. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Mitnick, Kevin (2011). Ghost in the Wires: My Adventures as the World’s Most Wanted Hacker. Little, Brown and Company. ISBN 978-0-316-03770-9.
14. ^ Mills, Elinor. “Q&A: Kevin Mitnick, from ham operator to fugitive to consultant”. cnet.com. CNET. Retrieved December 18, 2017.
15. ^ Greene, Thomas C. (January 13, 2003). “Chapter One: Kevin Mitnick’s story”. The Register. Archived from the original on September 12, 2012.
16. ^ “The Missing Chapter from The Art of Deception by Kevin Mitnick”. thememoryhole.org. Archived from the original on March 17, 2009. Retrieved February 16, 2020.
17. ^ “Freedom Downtime – The Story of Kevin Mitnick : 2600 Films : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive”. Internet Archive. October 23, 2016. Retrieved May 14, 2019.
18. ^ “Fugitive computer hacker arrested in North Carolina” (Press release). United States Department of Justice. February 15, 1995. Archived from the original on June 29, 2012.
19. ^ Colbert Report
20. ^ Pnter, Christopher M.E. (March 2001). “Supervised Release and Probation Restrictions in Hacker Cases” (PDF). United States Attorneys’ USA Bulletin. Executive Office for United States Attorneys. 49 (2).
21. ^ “Yahoo Hack: Heck of a Hoax”. Wired. December 9, 1997.
22. ^ Original text posted to Yahoo’s website.
23. ^ “Computer Hacker Kevin Mitnick Sentenced to Prison”. fas.org. June 27, 1997. Retrieved February 16, 2020.
24. ^ Mills, Elinor (July 20, 2008). “Social Engineering 101: Mitnick and other hackers show how it’s done”. CNET News. Archived from the original on July 13, 2012.
25. ^ “Famed hacker to Snowden: Watch out”. CNN.
26. ^ “Life Not Kosher for Mitnick”. Wired. August 18, 1999. Archived from the original on September 18, 2012.
27. ^ Bowker, Art. “Hackers, Sex Offenders, and All the Rest”. Retrieved September 14, 2018.
28. ^ “F.C.C. Lets Convicted Hacker Go Back on Net”. The New York Times (Press release). December 27, 2002.
29. ^ Noory, George (January 7, 2019). “Cybercrime & Security”. Coast to Coast AM. Retrieved January 8, 2019.
30. ^ Miller, Greg (March 27, 1999). “Judge Accepts Mitnick’s Guilty Plea on 7 Counts”. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved February 16, 2020.
31. ^ Randolph, Donald C. “About Kevin’s Case”. Free Kevin Mitnick. Archived from the original on April 24, 2006.
32. ^ “Defense consolidated motion for sanctions and for reconsideration of motion for discovery and application for expert fees based upon new facts”. Free Kevin Mitnick. June 7, 1999. Archived from the original on December 22, 2005.
33. ^ John Christensen (March 18, 1999). “The trials of Kevin Mitnick”. Retrieved December 11, 2018.
34. ^ “Kevin Mitnick’s Security Advice”. Wired.
35. ^ Skeet Ulrich, Russell Wong (2004). Track Down (DVD). Dimension Studios.
36. ^ Mitnick, Kevin; Simon, William L. (October 2003). The Art of Deception: Controlling the Human Element of Security. Wiley Books. ISBN 978-0-7645-4280-0.
37. ^ Mitnick, Kevin; Simon, William L. (December 27, 2005). The Art of Intrusion: The Real Stories Behind the Exploits of Hackers, Intruders & Deceivers. Wiley Books. ISBN 978-0-7645-6959-3.
38. ^ Mitnick, Kevin; Simon, William L. (2011). Ghost in the Wires: My Adventures as the World’s Most Wanted Hacker. Little, Brown and Company. ISBN 978-0-316-03770-9. Archived from the original on November 4, 2011. Retrieved August 27, 2019.
39. ^ Mitnick, Kevin; Vamosi, Robert (February 2017). The Art of Invisibility. Little, Brown and Company. ISBN 978-0-3163-8049-2.
40. ^ Hafner, Katie. “The Fugitive Game: Online with Kevin Mitnick: Jonathan Littman: Books”. Retrieved May 16, 2011.

Bibliography[edit source]

Movies[edit source]

• Freedom Downtime at IMDb

Books[edit source]

• Kevin Mitnick with Robert Vamosi, The Art of Invisibility, 2017, Hardback ISBN 978-0-316-38049-2
• Kevin Mitnick and William L. Simon, Ghost in the Wires: My Adventures as the World’s Most Wanted Hacker, 2011, Hardback ISBN 978-0-316-03770-9
• Kevin Mitnick and William L. Simon, The Art of Intrusion: The Real Stories Behind The Exploits Of Hackers, Intruders, And Deceivers, 2005, Hardback ISBN 0-471-78266-1
• Kevin Mitnick, The Art of Deception: Controlling the Human Element of Security, 2002, Paperback ISBN 0-471-23712-4
• Jeff Goodell, The Cyberthief and the Samurai: The True Story of Kevin Mitnick-And the Man Who Hunted Him Down, 1996, ISBN 978-0-440-22205-7
• Tsutomu Shimomura, Takedown: The Pursuit and Capture of Kevin Mitnick, America’s Most Wanted Computer Outlaw-By the Man Who Did It, 1996, ISBN 0-7868-8913-6
• Jonathan Littman, The Fugitive Game: Online with Kevin Mitnick, 1996, ISBN 0-316-52858-7
• Katie Hafner and John Markoff, CYBERPUNK – Outlaws and Hackers on the Computer Frontier, 1995, ISBN 1-872180-94-9

Articles[edit source]

• Littman, Jonathan (June 2007). “The Invisible Digital Man” (PDF). Playboy. Archived from the original (PDF) on March 4, 2016.
• Fost, Dan (May 4, 2000). “Movie About Notorious Hacker Inspires a Tangle of Suits and Subplots”. San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved April 24, 2007.
• Darell, Khin. “From Being Hunted By The FBI To Working Alongside Them- Kevin Mitnick”. Appknox. Retrieved May 27, 2016.
• Ehrlich, Thomas. “Renowned security expert Kevin Mitnick can steal your identity in 3 minutes”. Forbes. Retrieved July 17, 2015.

Sigmund Freud (/frɔɪd/ FROYD,^[3] German: [ˈziːkmʊnt ˈfʁɔʏ̯t]; born Sigismund Schlomo Freud; 6 May 1856 – 23 September 1939) was an Austrian neurologist and the founder of psychoanalysis, a clinical method for evaluating and treating pathologies in the psyche through dialogue between a patient and a psychoanalyst.^[4]

Freud was born to Galician Jewish parents in the Moravian town of Freiberg, in the Austrian Empire. He qualified as a doctor of medicine in 1881 at the University of Vienna.^[5][6] Upon completing his habilitation in 1885, he was appointed a docent in neuropathology and became an affiliated professor in 1902.^[7] Freud lived and worked in Vienna, having set up his clinical practice there in 1886. In 1938, Freud left Austria to escape Nazi persecution. He died in exile in the United Kingdom in 1939.

In founding psychoanalysis, Freud developed therapeutic techniques such as the use of free association and discovered transference, establishing its central role in the analytic process. Freud’s redefinition of sexuality to include its infantile forms led him to formulate the Oedipus complex as the central tenet of psychoanalytical theory.^[8] His analysis of dreams as wish-fulfillments provided him with models for the clinical analysis of symptom formation and the underlying mechanisms of repression. On this basis, Freud elaborated his theory of the unconscious and went on to develop a model of psychic structure comprising id, ego and super-ego.^[9] Freud postulated the existence of libido, sexualised energy with which mental processes and structures are invested and which generates erotic attachments, and a death drive, the source of compulsive repetition, hate, aggression, and neurotic guilt.^[10] In his later works, Freud developed a wide-ranging interpretation and critique of religion and culture.

Though in overall decline as a diagnostic and clinical practice, psychoanalysis remains influential within psychology, psychiatry, and psychotherapy, and across the humanities. It thus continues to generate extensive and highly contested debate concerning its therapeutic efficacy, its scientific status, and whether it advances or hinders the feminist cause.^[11] Nonetheless, Freud’s work has suffused contemporary Western thought and popular culture. W. H. Auden‘s 1940 poetic tribute to Freud describes him as having created “a whole climate of opinion / under whom we conduct our different lives”.^[12]

Contents

• 1Biography
  • 1.1Early life and education
  • 1.2Early career and marriage
  • 1.3Development of psychoanalysis
  • 1.4Relationship with Fliess
  • 1.5Early followers
    • 1.5.1Resignations from the IPA
  • 1.6Early psychoanalytic movement
  • 1.7Patients
  • 1.8Cancer
  • 1.9Escape from Nazism
  • 1.10Death
• 2Ideas
  • 2.1Early work
  • 2.2Seduction theory
  • 2.3Cocaine
  • 2.4The unconscious
  • 2.5Dreams
  • 2.6Psychosexual development
  • 2.7Id, ego, and super-ego
  • 2.8Life and death drives
  • 2.9Melancholia
  • 2.10Femininity and female sexuality
  • 2.11Religion
• 3Legacy
  • 3.1Psychotherapy
  • 3.2Science
  • 3.3Philosophy
  • 3.4Literature and literary criticism
  • 3.5Feminism
• 4In popular culture
• 5Works
  • 5.1Books
  • 5.2Case histories
  • 5.3Papers on sexuality
  • 5.4Autobiographical papers
  • 5.5The Standard Edition
• 6Correspondence
• 7See also
• 8Notes
• 9References
• 10Further reading
• 11External links

Biography[edit source]

Early life and education[edit source]

Freud’s birthplace, a rented room in a locksmith’s house, Freiberg, Austrian Empire (later Příbor, Czech Republic)Freud (aged 16) and his mother, Amalia, in 1872

Sigmund Freud was born to Ashkenazi Jewish parents in the Moravian town of Freiberg,^[13][14] in the Austrian Empire (now Příbor, Czech Republic), the first of eight children.^[15] Both of his parents were from Galicia, a historic province straddling modern-day West Ukraine and southeast Poland. His father, Jakob Freud (1815–1896), a wool merchant, had two sons, Emanuel (1833–1914) and Philipp (1836–1911), by his first marriage. Jakob’s family were Hasidic Jews and, although Jakob himself had moved away from the tradition, he came to be known for his Torah study. He and Freud’s mother, Amalia Nathansohn, who was 20 years younger and his third wife, were married by Rabbi Isaac Noah Mannheimer on 29 July 1855.^[16] They were struggling financially and living in a rented room, in a locksmith’s house at Schlossergasse 117 when their son Sigmund was born.^[17] He was born with a caul, which his mother saw as a positive omen for the boy’s future.^[18]

In 1859, the Freud family left Freiberg. Freud’s half-brothers immigrated to Manchester, England, parting him from the “inseparable” playmate of his early childhood, Emanuel’s son, John.^[19] Jakob Freud took his wife and two children (Freud’s sister, Anna, was born in 1858; a brother, Julius born in 1857, had died in infancy) firstly to Leipzig and then in 1860 to Vienna where four sisters and a brother were born: Rosa (b. 1860), Marie (b. 1861), Adolfine (b. 1862), Paula (b. 1864), Alexander (b. 1866). In 1865, the nine-year-old Freud entered the Leopoldstädter Kommunal-Realgymnasium, a prominent high school. He proved to be an outstanding pupil and graduated from the Matura in 1873 with honors. He loved literature and was proficient in German, French, Italian, Spanish, English, Hebrew, Latin and Greek.^[20]

Freud entered the University of Vienna at age 17. He had planned to study law, but joined the medical faculty at the university, where his studies included philosophy under Franz Brentano, physiology under Ernst Brücke, and zoology under Darwinist professor Carl Claus.^[21] In 1876, Freud spent four weeks at Claus’s zoological research station in Trieste, dissecting hundreds of eels in an inconclusive search for their male reproductive organs.^[22] In 1877, Freud moved to Ernst Brücke’s physiology laboratory where he spent six years comparing the brains of humans and other vertebrates with those of frogs and invertebrates such as crayfish and lampreys. His research work on the biology of nervous tissue proved seminal for the subsequent discovery of the neuron in the 1890s.^[23] Freud’s research work was interrupted in 1879 by the obligation to undertake a year’s compulsory military service. The lengthy downtimes enabled him to complete a commission to translate four essays from John Stuart Mill‘s collected works.^[24] He graduated with an MD in March 1881.^[25]

Early career and marriage[edit source]

In 1882, Freud began his medical career at Vienna General Hospital. His research work in cerebral anatomy led to the publication in 1884 of an influential paper on the palliative effects of cocaine, and his work on aphasia would form the basis of his first book On Aphasia: A Critical Study, published in 1891.^[26] Over a three-year period, Freud worked in various departments of the hospital. His time spent in Theodor Meynert‘s psychiatric clinic and as a locum in a local asylum led to an increased interest in clinical work. His substantial body of published research led to his appointment as a university lecturer or docent in neuropathology in 1885, a non-salaried post but one which entitled him to give lectures at the University of Vienna.^[27]

In 1886, Freud resigned his hospital post and entered private practice specializing in “nervous disorders”. The same year he married Martha Bernays, the granddaughter of Isaac Bernays, a chief rabbi in Hamburg. They had six children: Mathilde (b. 1887), Jean-Martin (b. 1889), Oliver (b. 1891), Ernst (b. 1892), Sophie (b. 1893), and Anna (b. 1895). From 1891 until they left Vienna in 1938, Freud and his family lived in an apartment at Berggasse 19, near Innere Stadt, a historical district of Vienna.Freud’s home at Berggasse 19, Vienna

In 1896, Minna Bernays, Martha Freud’s sister, became a permanent member of the Freud household after the death of her fiancé. The close relationship she formed with Freud led to rumours, started by Carl Jung, of an affair. The discovery of a Swiss hotel guest-book entry for 13 August 1898, signed by Freud whilst travelling with his sister-in-law, has been presented as evidence of the affair.^[28]

Freud began smoking tobacco at age 24; initially a cigarette smoker, he became a cigar smoker. He believed smoking enhanced his capacity to work and that he could exercise self-control in moderating it. Despite health warnings from colleague Wilhelm Fliess, he remained a smoker, eventually suffering a buccal cancer.^[29] Freud suggested to Fliess in 1897 that addictions, including that to tobacco, were substitutes for masturbation, “the one great habit.”^[30]

Freud had greatly admired his philosophy tutor, Brentano, who was known for his theories of perception and introspection. Brentano discussed the possible existence of the unconscious mind in his Psychology from an Empirical Standpoint (1874). Although Brentano denied its existence, his discussion of the unconscious probably helped introduce Freud to the concept.^[31] Freud owned and made use of Charles Darwin‘s major evolutionary writings, and was also influenced by Eduard von Hartmann‘s The Philosophy of the Unconscious (1869). Other texts of importance to Freud were by Fechner and Herbart,^[32] with the latter’s Psychology as Science arguably considered to be of underrated significance in this respect.^[33] Freud also drew on the work of Theodor Lipps, who was one of the main contemporary theorists of the concepts of the unconscious and empathy.^[34]

Though Freud was reluctant to associate his psychoanalytic insights with prior philosophical theories, attention has been drawn to analogies between his work and that of both Schopenhauer^[35] and Nietzsche. In 1908, Freud said that he occasionally read Nietzsche, and had a strong fascination for his writings, but did not study him, because he found Nietzsche’s “intuitive insights” resembled too much his own work at the time, and also because he was overwhelmed by the “wealth of ideas” he encountered when he read Nietzsche. Freud sometimes would deny the influence of Nietzsche’s ideas. One historian quotes Peter L. Rudnytsky, who says that based on Freud’s correspondence with his adolescent friend Eduard Silberstein, Freud read Nietzsche’s The Birth of Tragedy and probably the first two of the Untimely Meditations when he was seventeen.^[36][37] In 1900, the year of Nietzsche’s death, Freud bought his collected works; he told his friend, Fliess, that he hoped to find in Nietzsche’s works “the words for much that remains mute in me.” Later, he said he had not yet opened them.^[38] Freud came to treat Nietzsche’s writings “as texts to be resisted far more than to be studied.” His interest in philosophy declined after he had decided on a career in neurology.^[39]

Freud read William Shakespeare in English throughout his life, and it has been suggested that his understanding of human psychology may have been partially derived from Shakespeare’s plays.^[40]

Freud’s Jewish origins and his allegiance to his secular Jewish identity were of significant influence in the formation of his intellectual and moral outlook, especially concerning his intellectual non-conformism, as he was the first to point out in his Autobiographical Study.^[41] They would also have a substantial effect on the content of psychoanalytic ideas, particularly in respect of their common concerns with depth interpretation and “the bounding of desire by law”.^[42]

Development of psychoanalysis[edit source]

André Brouillet‘s A Clinical Lesson at the Salpêtrière (1887) depicting a Charcot demonstration. Freud had a lithograph of this painting placed over the couch in his consulting rooms.^[43]

In October 1885, Freud went to Paris on a three-month fellowship to study with Jean-Martin Charcot, a renowned neurologist who was conducting scientific research into hypnosis. He was later to recall the experience of this stay as catalytic in turning him toward the practice of medical psychopathology and away from a less financially promising career in neurology research.^[44] Charcot specialized in the study of hysteria and susceptibility to hypnosis, which he frequently demonstrated with patients on stage in front of an audience.

Once he had set up in private practice back in Vienna in 1886, Freud began using hypnosis in his clinical work. He adopted the approach of his friend and collaborator, Josef Breuer, in a type of hypnosis that was different from the French methods he had studied, in that it did not use suggestion. The treatment of one particular patient of Breuer’s proved to be transformative for Freud’s clinical practice. Described as Anna O., she was invited to talk about her symptoms while under hypnosis (she would coin the phrase “talking cure” for her treatment). In the course of talking in this way, her symptoms became reduced in severity as she retrieved memories of traumatic incidents associated with their onset.

The inconsistent results of Freud’s early clinical work eventually led him to abandon hypnosis, having concluded that more consistent and effective symptom relief could be achieved by encouraging patients to talk freely, without censorship or inhibition, about whatever ideas or memories occurred to them. In conjunction with this procedure, which he called “free association“, Freud found that patients’ dreams could be fruitfully analyzed to reveal the complex structuring of unconscious material and to demonstrate the psychic action of repression which, he had concluded, underlay symptom formation. By 1896 he was using the term “psychoanalysis” to refer to his new clinical method and the theories on which it was based.^[45]Approach to Freud’s consulting rooms at Berggasse 19

Freud’s development of these new theories took place during a period in which he experienced heart irregularities, disturbing dreams and periods of depression, a “neurasthenia” which he linked to the death of his father in 1896^[46] and which prompted a “self-analysis” of his own dreams and memories of childhood. His explorations of his feelings of hostility to his father and rivalrous jealousy over his mother’s affections led him to fundamentally revise his theory of the origin of the neuroses.

Based on his early clinical work, Freud had postulated that unconscious memories of sexual molestation in early childhood were a necessary precondition for the psychoneuroses (hysteria and obsessional neurosis), a formulation now known as Freud’s seduction theory.^[47] In the light of his self-analysis, Freud abandoned the theory that every neurosis can be traced back to the effects of infantile sexual abuse, now arguing that infantile sexual scenarios still had a causative function, but it did not matter whether they were real or imagined and that in either case, they became pathogenic only when acting as repressed memories.^[48]

This transition from the theory of infantile sexual trauma as a general explanation of how all neuroses originate to one that presupposes autonomous infantile sexuality provided the basis for Freud’s subsequent formulation of the theory of the Oedipus complex.^[49]

Freud described the evolution of his clinical method and set out his theory of the psychogenetic origins of hysteria, demonstrated in several case histories, in Studies on Hysteria published in 1895 (co-authored with Josef Breuer). In 1899, he published The Interpretation of Dreams in which, following a critical review of existing theory, Freud gives detailed interpretations of his own and his patients’ dreams in terms of wish-fulfillments made subject to the repression and censorship of the “dream-work”. He then sets out the theoretical model of mental structure (the unconscious, pre-conscious and conscious) on which this account is based. An abridged version, On Dreams, was published in 1901. In works that would win him a more general readership, Freud applied his theories outside the clinical setting in The Psychopathology of Everyday Life (1901) and Jokes and their Relation to the Unconscious (1905).^[50] In Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality, published in 1905, Freud elaborates his theory of infantile sexuality, describing its “polymorphous perverse” forms and the functioning of the “drives”, to which it gives rise, in the formation of sexual identity.^[51] The same year he published Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria, which became one of his more famous and controversial case studies.^[52]

Relationship with Fliess[edit source]

During this formative period of his work, Freud valued and came to rely on the intellectual and emotional support of his friend Wilhelm Fliess, a Berlin-based ear, nose, and throat specialist whom he had first met in 1887. Both men saw themselves as isolated from the prevailing clinical and theoretical mainstream because of their ambitions to develop radical new theories of sexuality. Fliess developed highly eccentric theories of human biorhythms and a nasogenital connection which are today considered pseudoscientific. He shared Freud’s views on the importance of certain aspects of sexuality – masturbation, coitus interruptus, and the use of condoms – in the etiology of what was then called the “actual neuroses,” primarily neurasthenia and certain physically manifested anxiety symptoms.^[53] They maintained an extensive correspondence from which Freud drew on Fliess’s speculations on infantile sexuality and bisexuality to elaborate and revise his own ideas. His first attempt at a systematic theory of the mind, his Project for a Scientific Psychology was developed as a metapsychology with Fliess as interlocutor.^[54] However, Freud’s efforts to build a bridge between neurology and psychology were eventually abandoned after they had reached an impasse, as his letters to Fliess reveal,^[55] though some ideas of the Project were to be taken up again in the concluding chapter of The Interpretation of Dreams.^[56]

Freud had Fliess repeatedly operate on his nose and sinuses to treat “nasal reflex neurosis”,^[57] and subsequently referred his patient Emma Eckstein to him. According to Freud, her history of symptoms included severe leg pains with consequent restricted mobility, as well as stomach and menstrual pains. These pains were, according to Fliess’s theories, caused by habitual masturbation which, as the tissue of the nose and genitalia were linked, was curable by removal of part of the middle turbinate.^[58][59] Fliess’s surgery proved disastrous, resulting in profuse, recurrent nasal bleeding; he had left a half-metre of gauze in Eckstein’s nasal cavity whose subsequent removal left her permanently disfigured. At first, though aware of Fliess’s culpability and regarding the remedial surgery in horror, Freud could bring himself only to intimate delicately in his correspondence with Fliess the nature of his disastrous role, and in subsequent letters maintained a tactful silence on the matter or else returned to the face-saving topic of Eckstein’s hysteria. Freud ultimately, in light of Eckstein’s history of adolescent self-cutting and irregular nasal (and menstrual) bleeding, concluded that Fliess was “completely without blame”, as Eckstein’s post-operative haemorrhages were hysterical “wish-bleedings” linked to “an old wish to be loved in her illness” and triggered as a means of “rearousing [Freud’s] affection”. Eckstein nonetheless continued her analysis with Freud. She was restored to full mobility and went on to practice psychoanalysis herself.^[60][61][58]

Freud, who had called Fliess “the Kepler of biology”, later concluded that a combination of a homoerotic attachment and the residue of his “specifically Jewish mysticism” lay behind his loyalty to his Jewish friend and his consequent over-estimation of both his theoretical and clinical work. Their friendship came to an acrimonious end with Fliess angry at Freud’s unwillingness to endorse his general theory of sexual periodicity and accusing him of collusion in the plagiarism of his work. After Fliess failed to respond to Freud’s offer of collaboration over the publication of his Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality in 1906, their relationship came to an end.^[62]

Early followers[edit source]

Group photo 1909 in front of Clark University. Front row: Sigmund Freud, G. Stanley Hall, Carl Jung; back row: Abraham Brill, Ernest Jones, Sándor Ferenczi

In 1902, Freud, at last, realised his long-standing ambition to be made a university professor. The title “professor extraordinarius”^[63] was important to Freud for the recognition and prestige it conferred, there being no salary or teaching duties attached to the post (he would be granted the enhanced status of “professor ordinarius” in 1920).^[64] Despite support from the university, his appointment had been blocked in successive years by the political authorities and it was secured only with the intervention of one of his more influential ex-patients, a Baroness Marie Ferstel, who (supposedly) had to bribe the minister of education with a valuable painting.^[65]

With his prestige thus enhanced, Freud continued with the regular series of lectures on his work which, since the mid-1880s as a docent of Vienna University, he had been delivering to small audiences every Saturday evening at the lecture hall of the university’s psychiatric clinic.^[66]

From the autumn of 1902, a number of Viennese physicians who had expressed interest in Freud’s work were invited to meet at his apartment every Wednesday afternoon to discuss issues relating to psychology and neuropathology.^[67] This group was called the Wednesday Psychological Society (Psychologische Mittwochs-Gesellschaft) and it marked the beginnings of the worldwide psychoanalytic movement.^[68]

Freud founded this discussion group at the suggestion of the physician Wilhelm Stekel. Stekel had studied medicine at the University of Vienna under Richard von Krafft-Ebing. His conversion to psychoanalysis is variously attributed to his successful treatment by Freud for a sexual problem or as a result of his reading The Interpretation of Dreams, to which he subsequently gave a positive review in the Viennese daily newspaper Neues Wiener Tagblatt.^[69]

The other three original members whom Freud invited to attend, Alfred Adler, Max Kahane, and Rudolf Reitler, were also physicians^[70] and all five were Jewish by birth.^[71] Both Kahane and Reitler were childhood friends of Freud. Kahane had attended the same secondary school and both he and Reitler went to university with Freud. They had kept abreast of Freud’s developing ideas through their attendance at his Saturday evening lectures.^[72] In 1901, Kahane, who first introduced Stekel to Freud’s work,^[66] had opened an out-patient psychotherapy institute of which he was the director in Bauernmarkt, in Vienna.^[67] In the same year, his medical textbook, Outline of Internal Medicine for Students and Practicing Physicians, was published. In it, he provided an outline of Freud’s psychoanalytic method.^[66] Kahane broke with Freud and left the Wednesday Psychological Society in 1907 for unknown reasons and in 1923 committed suicide.^[73] Reitler was the director of an establishment providing thermal cures in Dorotheergasse which had been founded in 1901.^[67] He died prematurely in 1917. Adler, regarded as the most formidable intellect among the early Freud circle, was a socialist who in 1898 had written a health manual for the tailoring trade. He was particularly interested in the potential social impact of psychiatry.^[74]

Max Graf, a Viennese musicologist and father of “Little Hans“, who had first encountered Freud in 1900 and joined the Wednesday group soon after its initial inception,^[75] described the ritual and atmosphere of the early meetings of the society:

The gatherings followed a definite ritual. First one of the members would present a paper. Then, black coffee and cakes were served; cigars and cigarettes were on the table and were consumed in great quantities. After a social quarter of an hour, the discussion would begin. The last and decisive word was always spoken by Freud himself. There was the atmosphere of the foundation of a religion in that room. Freud himself was its new prophet who made the heretofore prevailing methods of psychological investigation appear superficial.^[74]

Carl Jung in 1910

By 1906, the group had grown to sixteen members, including Otto Rank, who was employed as the group’s paid secretary.^[74] In the same year, Freud began a correspondence with Carl Gustav Jung who was by then already an academically acclaimed researcher into word-association and the Galvanic Skin Response, and a lecturer at Zurich University, although still only an assistant to Eugen Bleuler at the Burghölzli Mental Hospital in Zürich.^[76][77] In March 1907, Jung and Ludwig Binswanger, also a Swiss psychiatrist, travelled to Vienna to visit Freud and attend the discussion group. Thereafter, they established a small psychoanalytic group in Zürich. In 1908, reflecting its growing institutional status, the Wednesday group was reconstituted as the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society^[78] with Freud as president, a position he relinquished in 1910 in favor of Adler in the hope of neutralizing his increasingly critical standpoint.^[79]

The first woman member, Margarete Hilferding, joined the Society in 1910^[80] and the following year she was joined by Tatiana Rosenthal and Sabina Spielrein who were both Russian psychiatrists and graduates of the Zürich University medical school. Before the completion of her studies, Spielrein had been a patient of Jung at the Burghölzli and the clinical and personal details of their relationship became the subject of an extensive correspondence between Freud and Jung. Both women would go on to make important contributions to the work of the Russian Psychoanalytic Society founded in 1910.^[81]

Freud’s early followers met together formally for the first time at the Hotel Bristol, Salzburg on 27 April 1908. This meeting, which was retrospectively deemed to be the first International Psychoanalytic Congress,^[82] was convened at the suggestion of Ernest Jones, then a London-based neurologist who had discovered Freud’s writings and begun applying psychoanalytic methods in his clinical work. Jones had met Jung at a conference the previous year and they met up again in Zürich to organize the Congress. There were, as Jones records, “forty-two present, half of whom were or became practicing analysts.”^[83] In addition to Jones and the Viennese and Zürich contingents accompanying Freud and Jung, also present and notable for their subsequent importance in the psychoanalytic movement were Karl Abraham and Max Eitingon from Berlin, Sándor Ferenczi from Budapest and the New York-based Abraham Brill.

Important decisions were taken at the Congress to advance the impact of Freud’s work. A journal, the Jahrbuch für psychoanalytische und psychopathologishe Forschungen, was launched in 1909 under the editorship of Jung. This was followed in 1910 by the monthly Zentralblatt für Psychoanalyse edited by Adler and Stekel, in 1911 by Imago, a journal devoted to the application of psychoanalysis to the field of cultural and literary studies edited by Rank and in 1913 by the Internationale Zeitschrift für Psychoanalyse, also edited by Rank.^[84] Plans for an international association of psychoanalysts were put in place and these were implemented at the Nuremberg Congress of 1910 where Jung was elected, with Freud’s support, as its first president.

Freud turned to Brill and Jones to further his ambition to spread the psychoanalytic cause in the English-speaking world. Both were invited to Vienna following the Salzburg Congress and a division of labour was agreed with Brill given the translation rights for Freud’s works, and Jones, who was to take up a post at the University of Toronto later in the year, tasked with establishing a platform for Freudian ideas in North American academic and medical life.^[85] Jones’s advocacy prepared the way for Freud’s visit to the United States, accompanied by Jung and Ferenczi, in September 1909 at the invitation of Stanley Hall, president of Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts, where he gave five lectures on psychoanalysis.^[86]

The event, at which Freud was awarded an Honorary Doctorate, marked the first public recognition of Freud’s work and attracted widespread media interest. Freud’s audience included the distinguished neurologist and psychiatrist James Jackson Putnam, Professor of Diseases of the Nervous System at Harvard, who invited Freud to his country retreat where they held extensive discussions over a period of four days. Putnam’s subsequent public endorsement of Freud’s work represented a significant breakthrough for the psychoanalytic cause in the United States.^[86] When Putnam and Jones organised the founding of the American Psychoanalytic Association in May 1911 they were elected president and secretary respectively. Brill founded the New York Psychoanalytic Society the same year. His English translations of Freud’s work began to appear from 1909.

Resignations from the IPA[edit source]

Some of Freud’s followers subsequently withdrew from the International Psychoanalytical Association (IPA) and founded their own schools.

From 1909, Adler’s views on topics such as neurosis began to differ markedly from those held by Freud. As Adler’s position appeared increasingly incompatible with Freudianism, a series of confrontations between their respective viewpoints took place at the meetings of the Viennese Psychoanalytic Society in January and February 1911. In February 1911, Adler, then the president of the society, resigned his position. At this time, Stekel also resigned from his position as vice president of the society. Adler finally left the Freudian group altogether in June 1911 to found his own organization with nine other members who had also resigned from the group.^[87] This new formation was initially called Society for Free Psychoanalysis but it was soon renamed the Society for Individual Psychology. In the period after World War I, Adler became increasingly associated with a psychological position he devised called individual psychology.^[88]The committee in 1922 (from left to right): Otto Rank, Sigmund Freud, Karl Abraham, Max Eitingon, Sándor Ferenczi, Ernest Jones, and Hanns Sachs

In 1912, Jung published Wandlungen und Symbole der Libido (published in English in 1916 as Psychology of the Unconscious) making it clear that his views were taking a direction quite different from those of Freud. To distinguish his system from psychoanalysis, Jung called it analytical psychology.^[89] Anticipating the final breakdown of the relationship between Freud and Jung, Ernest Jones initiated the formation of a Secret Committee of loyalists charged with safeguarding the theoretical coherence and institutional legacy of the psychoanalytic movement. Formed in the autumn of 1912, the Committee comprised Freud, Jones, Abraham, Ferenczi, Rank, and Hanns Sachs. Max Eitingon joined the committee in 1919. Each member pledged himself not to make any public departure from the fundamental tenets of psychoanalytic theory before he had discussed his views with the others. After this development, Jung recognised that his position was untenable and resigned as editor of the Jarhbuch and then as president of the IPA in April 1914. The Zürich Society withdrew from the IPA the following July.^[90]

Later the same year, Freud published a paper entitled “The History of the Psychoanalytic Movement“, the German original being first published in the Jahrbuch, giving his view on the birth and evolution of the psychoanalytic movement and the withdrawal of Adler and Jung from it.

The final defection from Freud’s inner circle occurred following the publication in 1924 of Rank’s The Trauma of Birth which other members of the committee read as, in effect, abandoning the Oedipus Complex as the central tenet of psychoanalytic theory. Abraham and Jones became increasingly forceful critics of Rank and though he and Freud were reluctant to end their close and long-standing relationship the break finally came in 1926 when Rank resigned from his official posts in the IPA and left Vienna for Paris. His place on the Committee was taken by Anna Freud.^[91] Rank eventually settled in the United States where his revisions of Freudian theory were to influence a new generation of therapists uncomfortable with the orthodoxies of the IPA.

Early psychoanalytic movement[edit source]

Part of a series of articles on
Psychoanalysis
showConcepts
showImportant figures
showImportant works
showSchools of thought
showTraining
showSee also
Psychology portal
vte

After the founding of the IPA in 1910, an international network of psychoanalytical societies, training institutes, and clinics became well established and a regular schedule of biannual Congresses commenced after the end of World War I to coordinate their activities.^[92]

Abraham and Eitingon founded the Berlin Psychoanalytic Society in 1910 and then the Berlin Psychoanalytic Institute and the Poliklinik in 1920. The Poliklinik’s innovations of free treatment, and child analysis, and the Berlin Institute’s standardisation of psychoanalytic training had a major influence on the wider psychoanalytic movement. In 1927, Ernst Simmel founded the Schloss Tegel Sanatorium on the outskirts of Berlin, the first such establishment to provide psychoanalytic treatment in an institutional framework. Freud organised a fund to help finance its activities and his architect son, Ernst, was commissioned to refurbish the building. It was forced to close in 1931 for economic reasons.^[93]

The 1910 Moscow Psychoanalytic Society became the Russian Psychoanalytic Society and Institute in 1922. Freud’s Russian followers were the first to benefit from translations of his work, the 1904 Russian translation of The Interpretation of Dreams appearing nine years before Brill’s English edition. The Russian Institute was unique in receiving state support for its activities, including publication of translations of Freud’s works.^[94] Support was abruptly annulled in 1924, when Joseph Stalin came to power, after which psychoanalysis was denounced on ideological grounds.^[95]

After helping found the American Psychoanalytic Association in 1911, Ernest Jones returned to Britain from Canada in 1913 and founded the London Psychoanalytic Society the same year. In 1919, he dissolved this organisation and, with its core membership purged of Jungian adherents, founded the British Psychoanalytical Society, serving as its president until 1944. The Institute of Psychoanalysis was established in 1924 and the London Clinic of Psychoanalysis was established in 1926, both under Jones’s directorship.^[96]

The Vienna Ambulatorium (Clinic) was established in 1922 and the Vienna Psychoanalytic Institute was founded in 1924 under the directorship of Helene Deutsch.^[97] Ferenczi founded the Budapest Psychoanalytic Institute in 1913 and a clinic in 1929.

Psychoanalytic societies and institutes were established in Switzerland (1919), France (1926), Italy (1932), the Netherlands (1933), Norway (1933), and in Palestine (Jerusalem, 1933) by Eitingon, who had fled Berlin after Adolf Hitler came to power.^[98] The New York Psychoanalytic Institute was founded in 1931.

The 1922 Berlin Congress was the last Freud attended.^[99] By this time his speech had become seriously impaired by the prosthetic device he needed as a result of a series of operations on his cancerous jaw. He kept abreast of developments through regular correspondence with his principal followers and via the circular letters and meetings of the Secret Committee which he continued to attend.

The Committee continued to function until 1927 by which time institutional developments within the IPA, such as the establishment of the International Training Commission, had addressed concerns about the transmission of psychoanalytic theory and practice. There remained, however, significant differences over the issue of lay analysis – i.e. the acceptance of non-medically qualified candidates for psychoanalytic training. Freud set out his case in favour in 1926 in his The Question of Lay Analysis. He was resolutely opposed by the American societies who expressed concerns over professional standards and the risk of litigation (though child analysts were made exempt). These concerns were also shared by some of his European colleagues. Eventually, an agreement was reached allowing societies autonomy in setting criteria for candidature.^[100]

In 1930, Freud received the Goethe Prize in recognition of his contributions to psychology and German literary culture.^[101]

Patients[edit source]

Freud used pseudonyms in his case histories. Some patients known by pseudonyms were Cäcilie M. (Anna von Lieben); Dora (Ida Bauer, 1882–1945); Frau Emmy von N. (Fanny Moser); Fräulein Elisabeth von R. (Ilona Weiss);^[102] Fräulein Katharina (Aurelia Kronich); Fräulein Lucy R.; Little Hans (Herbert Graf, 1903–1973); Rat Man (Ernst Lanzer, 1878–1914); Enos Fingy (Joshua Wild, 1878–1920);^[103] and Wolf Man (Sergei Pankejeff, 1887–1979). Other famous patients included Prince Pedro Augusto of Brazil (1866–1934); H.D. (1886–1961); Emma Eckstein (1865–1924); Gustav Mahler (1860–1911), with whom Freud had only a single, extended consultation; Princess Marie Bonaparte; Edith Banfield Jackson (1895–1977);^[104] Arthur Tansley (1871-1955), and Albert Hirst (1887–1974).^[105]

Cancer[edit source]

In February 1923, Freud detected a leukoplakia, a benign growth associated with heavy smoking, on his mouth. He initially kept this secret, but in April 1923 he informed Ernest Jones, telling him that the growth had been removed. Freud consulted the dermatologist Maximilian Steiner, who advised him to quit smoking but lied about the growth’s seriousness, minimizing its importance. Freud later saw Felix Deutsch, who saw that the growth was cancerous; he identified it to Freud using the euphemism “a bad leukoplakia” instead of the technical diagnosis epithelioma. Deutsch advised Freud to stop smoking and have the growth excised. Freud was treated by Marcus Hajek, a rhinologist whose competence he had previously questioned. Hajek performed an unnecessary cosmetic surgery in his clinic’s outpatient department. Freud bled during and after the operation, and may narrowly have escaped death. Freud subsequently saw Deutsch again. Deutsch saw that further surgery would be required, but did not tell Freud he had cancer because he was worried that Freud might wish to commit suicide.^[106]

Escape from Nazism[edit source]

In January 1933, the Nazi Party took control of Germany, and Freud’s books were prominent among those they burned and destroyed. Freud remarked to Ernest Jones: “What progress we are making. In the Middle Ages they would have burned me. Now, they are content with burning my books.”^[107] Freud continued to underestimate the growing Nazi threat and remained determined to stay in Vienna, even following the Anschluss of 13 March 1938, in which Nazi Germany annexed Austria, and the outbreaks of violent antisemitism that ensued.^[108] Jones, the then president of the International Psychoanalytical Association (IPA), flew into Vienna from London via Prague on 15 March determined to get Freud to change his mind and seek exile in Britain. This prospect and the shock of the arrest and interrogation of Anna Freud by the Gestapo finally convinced Freud it was time to leave Austria.^[108] Jones left for London the following week with a list provided by Freud of the party of émigrés for whom immigration permits would be required. Back in London, Jones used his personal acquaintance with the Home Secretary, Sir Samuel Hoare, to expedite the granting of permits. There were seventeen in all and work permits were provided where relevant. Jones also used his influence in scientific circles, persuading the president of the Royal Society, Sir William Bragg, to write to the Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax, requesting to good effect that diplomatic pressure be applied in Berlin and Vienna on Freud’s behalf. Freud also had support from American diplomats, notably his ex-patient and American ambassador to France, William Bullitt. Bullitt alerted U.S. President Roosevelt to the increased dangers facing the Freuds, resulting in the American consul-general in Vienna, John Cooper Wiley, arranging regular monitoring of Berggasse 19. He also intervened by phone call during the Gestapo interrogation of Anna Freud.^[109]

The departure from Vienna began in stages throughout April and May 1938. Freud’s grandson, Ernst Halberstadt, and Freud’s son Martin’s wife and children left for Paris in April. Freud’s sister-in-law, Minna Bernays, left for London on 5 May, Martin Freud the following week and Freud’s daughter Mathilde and her husband, Robert Hollitscher, on 24 May.^[110]

By the end of the month, arrangements for Freud’s own departure for London had become stalled, mired in a legally tortuous and financially extortionate process of negotiation with the Nazi authorities. Under regulations imposed on its Jewish population by the new Nazi regime, a Kommissar was appointed to manage Freud’s assets and those of the IPA whose headquarters were near Freud’s home. Freud was allocated to Dr. Anton Sauerwald, who had studied chemistry at Vienna University under Professor Josef Herzig, an old friend of Freud’s. Sauerwald read Freud’s books to further learn about him and became sympathetic towards his situation. Though required to disclose details of all Freud’s bank accounts to his superiors and to arrange the destruction of the historic library of books housed in the offices of the IPA, Sauerwald did neither. Instead, he removed evidence of Freud’s foreign bank accounts to his own safe-keeping and arranged the storage of the IPA library in the Austrian National Library, where it remained until the end of the war.^[111]

Though Sauerwald’s intervention lessened the financial burden of the “flight” tax on Freud’s declared assets, other substantial charges were levied concerning the debts of the IPA and the valuable collection of antiquities Freud possessed. Unable to access his own accounts, Freud turned to Princess Marie Bonaparte, the most eminent and wealthy of his French followers, who had travelled to Vienna to offer her support, and it was she who made the necessary funds available.^[112] This allowed Sauerwald to sign the necessary exit visas for Freud, his wife Martha, and daughter Anna. They left Vienna on the Orient Express on 4 June, accompanied by their housekeeper and a doctor, arriving in Paris the following day, where they stayed as guests of Marie Bonaparte, before travelling overnight to London, arriving at London Victoria station on 6 June.

Among those soon to call on Freud to pay their respects were Salvador Dalí, Stefan Zweig, Leonard Woolf, Virginia Woolf, and H. G. Wells. Representatives of the Royal Society called with the Society’s Charter for Freud, who had been elected a Foreign Member in 1936, to sign himself into membership. Marie Bonaparte arrived near the end of June to discuss the fate of Freud’s four elderly sisters left behind in Vienna. Her subsequent attempts to get them exit visas failed, and they would all die in Nazi concentration camps.^[113]Freud’s last home, now dedicated to his life and work as the Freud Museum, 20 Maresfield Gardens, Hampstead, London NW3, England.

In early 1939, Sauerwald arrived in London in mysterious circumstances, where he met Freud’s brother Alexander.^[114] He was tried and imprisoned in 1945 by an Austrian court for his activities as a Nazi Party official. Responding to a plea from his wife, Anna Freud wrote to confirm that Sauerwald “used his office as our appointed commissar in such a manner as to protect my father”. Her intervention helped secure his release from jail in 1947.^[115]

In the Freuds’ new home, 20 Maresfield Gardens, Hampstead, North London, Freud’s Vienna consulting room was recreated in faithful detail. He continued to see patients there until the terminal stages of his illness. He also worked on his last books, Moses and Monotheism, published in German in 1938 and in English the following year^[116] and the uncompleted An Outline of Psychoanalysis, which was published posthumously.

Death[edit source]

Freud’s ashes in the “Freud Corner” at the Golders Green Crematorium

By mid-September 1939, Freud’s cancer of the jaw was causing him increasingly severe pain and had been declared inoperable. The last book he read, Balzac‘s La Peau de chagrin, prompted reflections on his own increasing frailty, and a few days later he turned to his doctor, friend, and fellow refugee, Max Schur, reminding him that they had previously discussed the terminal stages of his illness: “Schur, you remember our ‘contract’ not to leave me in the lurch when the time had come. Now it is nothing but torture and makes no sense.” When Schur replied that he had not forgotten, Freud said, “I thank you,” and then, “Talk it over with Anna, and if she thinks it’s right, then make an end of it.” Anna Freud wanted to postpone her father’s death, but Schur convinced her it was pointless to keep him alive; on 21 and 22 September, he administered doses of morphine that resulted in Freud’s death at around 3 am on 23 September 1939.^[117][118] However, discrepancies in the various accounts Schur gave of his role in Freud’s final hours, which have in turn led to inconsistencies between Freud’s main biographers, has led to further research and a revised account. This proposes that Schur was absent from Freud’s deathbed when a third and final dose of morphine was administered by Dr. Josephine Stross, a colleague of Anna Freud, leading to Freud’s death at around midnight on 23 September 1939.^[119]

Three days after his death, Freud’s body was cremated at Golders Green Crematorium in North London, with Harrods acting as funeral directors, on the instructions of his son, Ernst.^[120] Funeral orations were given by Ernest Jones and the Austrian author Stefan Zweig. Freud’s ashes were later placed in the crematorium’s Ernest George Columbarium (see “Freud Corner”). They rest on a plinth designed by his son, Ernst,^[121] in a sealed^[120] ancient Greek bell krater painted with Dionysian scenes that Freud had received as a gift from Marie Bonaparte, and which he had kept in his study in Vienna for many years. After his wife, Martha, died in 1951, her ashes were also placed in the urn.^[122]

Ideas[edit source]

Early work[edit source]

Freud began his study of medicine at the University of Vienna in 1873.^[123] He took almost nine years to complete his studies, due to his interest in neurophysiological research, specifically investigation of the sexual anatomy of eels and the physiology of the fish nervous system, and because of his interest in studying philosophy with Franz Brentano. He entered private practice in neurology for financial reasons, receiving his M.D. degree in 1881 at the age of 25.^[124] Amongst his principal concerns in the 1880s was the anatomy of the brain, specifically the medulla oblongata. He intervened in the important debates about aphasia with his monograph of 1891, Zur Auffassung der Aphasien, in which he coined the term agnosia and counselled against a too locationist view of the explanation of neurological deficits. Like his contemporary Eugen Bleuler, he emphasized brain function rather than brain structure.

Freud was also an early researcher in the field of cerebral palsy, which was then known as “cerebral paralysis”. He published several medical papers on the topic and showed that the disease existed long before other researchers of the period began to notice and study it. He also suggested that William John Little, the man who first identified cerebral palsy, was wrong about lack of oxygen during birth being a cause. Instead, he suggested that complications in birth were only a symptom.

Freud hoped that his research would provide a solid scientific basis for his therapeutic technique. The goal of Freudian therapy, or psychoanalysis, was to bring repressed thoughts and feelings into consciousness to free the patient from suffering repetitive distorted emotions.

Classically, the bringing of unconscious thoughts and feelings to consciousness is brought about by encouraging a patient to talk about dreams and engage in free association, in which patients report their thoughts without reservation and make no attempt to concentrate while doing so.^[125] Another important element of psychoanalysis is transference, the process by which patients displace onto their analyst feelings and ideas which derive from previous figures in their lives. Transference was first seen as a regrettable phenomenon that interfered with the recovery of repressed memories and disturbed patients’ objectivity, but by 1912, Freud had come to see it as an essential part of the therapeutic process.^[126]

The origin of Freud’s early work with psychoanalysis can be linked to Josef Breuer. Freud credited Breuer with opening the way to the discovery of the psychoanalytical method by his treatment of the case of Anna O. In November 1880, Breuer was called in to treat a highly intelligent 21-year-old woman (Bertha Pappenheim) for a persistent cough that he diagnosed as hysterical. He found that while nursing her dying father, she had developed some transitory symptoms, including visual disorders and paralysis and contractures of limbs, which he also diagnosed as hysterical. Breuer began to see his patient almost every day as the symptoms increased and became more persistent, and observed that she entered states of absence. He found that when, with his encouragement, she told fantasy stories in her evening states of absence her condition improved, and most of her symptoms had disappeared by April 1881. Following the death of her father in that month her condition deteriorated again. Breuer recorded that some of the symptoms eventually remitted spontaneously and that full recovery was achieved by inducing her to recall events that had precipitated the occurrence of a specific symptom.^[127] In the years immediately following Breuer’s treatment, Anna O. spent three short periods in sanatoria with the diagnosis “hysteria” with “somatic symptoms”,^[128] and some authors have challenged Breuer’s published account of a cure.^{[129][130][131]} Richard Skues rejects this interpretation, which he sees as stemming from both Freudian and anti-psychoanalytical revisionism — revisionism that regards both Breuer’s narrative of the case as unreliable and his treatment of Anna O. as a failure.^[132] Psychologist Frank Sulloway contends that “Freud’s case histories are rampant with censorship, distortions, highly dubious ‘reconstructions,’ and exaggerated claims.”^[133]

Seduction theory[edit source]

In the early 1890s, Freud used a form of treatment based on the one that Breuer had described to him, modified by what he called his “pressure technique” and his newly developed analytic technique of interpretation and reconstruction. According to Freud’s later accounts of this period, as a result of his use of this procedure, most of his patients in the mid-1890s reported early childhood sexual abuse. He believed these accounts, which he used as the basis for his seduction theory, but then he came to believe that they were fantasies. He explained these at first as having the function of “fending off” memories of infantile masturbation, but in later years he wrote that they represented Oedipal fantasies, stemming from innate drives that are sexual and destructive in nature.^[134]

Another version of events focuses on Freud’s proposing that unconscious memories of infantile sexual abuse were at the root of the psychoneuroses in letters to Fliess in October 1895, before he reported that he had actually discovered such abuse among his patients.^[135] In the first half of 1896, Freud published three papers, which led to his seduction theory, stating that he had uncovered, in all of his current patients, deeply repressed memories of sexual abuse in early childhood.^[136] In these papers, Freud recorded that his patients were not consciously aware of these memories, and must therefore be present as unconscious memories if they were to result in hysterical symptoms or obsessional neurosis. The patients were subjected to considerable pressure to “reproduce” infantile sexual abuse “scenes” that Freud was convinced had been repressed into the unconscious.^[137] Patients were generally unconvinced that their experiences of Freud’s clinical procedure indicated actual sexual abuse. He reported that even after a supposed “reproduction” of sexual scenes the patients assured him emphatically of their disbelief.^[138]

As well as his pressure technique, Freud’s clinical procedures involved analytic inference and the symbolic interpretation of symptoms to trace back to memories of infantile sexual abuse.^[139] His claim of one hundred percent confirmation of his theory only served to reinforce previously expressed reservations from his colleagues about the validity of findings obtained through his suggestive techniques.^[140] Freud subsequently showed inconsistency as to whether his seduction theory was still compatible with his later findings.^[141] In an addendum to The Aetiology of Hysteria he stated: “All this is true [the sexual abuse of children], but it must be remembered that at the time I wrote it I had not yet freed myself from my overvaluation of reality and my low valuation of phantasy”.^[142] Some years later Freud explicitly rejected the claim of his colleague Ferenczi that his patients’ reports of sexual molestation were actual memories instead of fantasies, and he tried to dissuade Ferenczi from making his views public.^[141] Karin Ahbel-Rappe concludes in her study “‘I no longer believe’: did Freud abandon the seduction theory?”: “Freud marked out and started down a trail of investigation into the nature of the experience of infantile incest and its impact on the human psyche, and then abandoned this direction for the most part.”^[143]

Cocaine[edit source]

As a medical researcher, Freud was an early user and proponent of cocaine as a stimulant as well as analgesic. He believed that cocaine was a cure for many mental and physical problems, and in his 1884 paper “On Coca” he extolled its virtues. Between 1883 and 1887 he wrote several articles recommending medical applications, including its use as an antidepressant. He narrowly missed out on obtaining scientific priority for discovering its anesthetic properties of which he was aware but had mentioned only in passing.^[144] (Karl Koller, a colleague of Freud’s in Vienna, received that distinction in 1884 after reporting to a medical society the ways cocaine could be used in delicate eye surgery.) Freud also recommended cocaine as a cure for morphine addiction.^[145] He had introduced cocaine to his friend Ernst von Fleischl-Marxow, who had become addicted to morphine taken to relieve years of excruciating nerve pain resulting from an infection acquired after injuring himself while performing an autopsy. His claim that Fleischl-Marxow was cured of his addiction was premature, though he never acknowledged that he had been at fault. Fleischl-Marxow developed an acute case of “cocaine psychosis”, and soon returned to using morphine, dying a few years later still suffering from intolerable pain.^[146]

The application as an anesthetic turned out to be one of the few safe uses of cocaine, and as reports of addiction and overdose began to filter in from many places in the world, Freud’s medical reputation became somewhat tarnished.^[147] After the “Cocaine Episode”^[148] Freud ceased to publicly recommend the use of the drug, but continued to take it himself occasionally for depression, migraine and nasal inflammation during the early 1890s, before discontinuing its use in 1896.^[149]

The unconscious[edit source]

Main article: Unconscious mind

The concept of the unconscious was central to Freud’s account of the mind. Freud believed that while poets and thinkers had long known of the existence of the unconscious, he had ensured that it received scientific recognition in the field of psychology.^[150]

Freud states explicitly that his concept of the unconscious as he first formulated it was based on the theory of repression. He postulated a cycle in which ideas are repressed, but remain in the mind, removed from consciousness yet operative, then reappear in consciousness under certain circumstances. The postulate was based upon the investigation of cases of hysteria, which revealed instances of behaviour in patients that could not be explained without reference to ideas or thoughts of which they had no awareness and which analysis revealed were linked to the (real or imagined) repressed sexual scenarios of childhood. In his later re-formulations of the concept of repression in his 1915 paper ‘Repression’ (Standard Edition XIV) Freud introduced the distinction in the unconscious between primary repression linked to the universal taboo on incest (‘innately present originally’) and repression (‘after expulsion’) that was a product of an individual’s life history (‘acquired in the course of the ego’s development’) in which something that was at one point conscious is rejected or eliminated from consciousness.^[150]

In his account of the development and modification of his theory of unconscious mental processes he sets out in his 1915 paper ‘The Unconscious’ (Standard Edition XIV), Freud identifies the three perspectives he employs: the dynamic, the economic and the topographical.

The dynamic perspective concerns firstly the constitution of the unconscious by repression and secondly the process of “censorship” which maintains unwanted, anxiety-inducing thoughts as such. Here Freud is drawing on observations from his earliest clinical work in the treatment of hysteria.

In the economic perspective the focus is upon the trajectories of the repressed contents “the vicissitudes of sexual impulses” as they undergo complex transformations in the process of both symptom formation and normal unconscious thought such as dreams and slips of the tongue. These were topics Freud explored in detail in The Interpretation of Dreams and The Psychopathology of Everyday Life.

Whereas both these former perspectives focus on the unconscious as it is about to enter consciousness, the topographical perspective represents a shift in which the systemic properties of the unconscious, its characteristic processes, and modes of operation such as condensation and displacement, are placed in the foreground.

This “first topography” presents a model of psychic structure comprising three systems:

• The System Ucs – the unconscious: “primary process” mentation governed by the pleasure principle characterised by “exemption from mutual contradiction, … mobility of cathexes, timelessness, and replacement of external by psychical reality.” (‘The Unconscious’ (1915) Standard Edition XIV).
• The System Pcs – the preconscious in which the unconscious thing-presentations of the primary process are bound by the secondary processes of language (word presentations), a prerequisite for their becoming available to consciousness.
• The System Cns – conscious thought governed by the reality principle.

In his later work, notably in The Ego and the Id (1923), a second topography is introduced comprising id, ego and super-ego, which is superimposed on the first without replacing it.^[151] In this later formulation of the concept of the unconscious the id^[152] comprises a reservoir of instincts or drives a portion of them being hereditary or innate, a portion repressed or acquired. As such, from the economic perspective, the id is the prime source of psychical energy and from the dynamic perspective it conflicts with the ego^[153] and the super-ego^[154] which, genetically speaking, are diversifications of the id.

Dreams[edit source]

Main article: The Interpretation of Dreams

Freud believed the function of dreams is to preserve sleep by representing as fulfilled wishes that would otherwise awaken the dreamer.^[155]

In Freud’s theory dreams are instigated by the daily occurrences and thoughts of everyday life. In what Freud called the “dream-work”, these “secondary process” thoughts (“word presentations”), governed by the rules of language and the reality principle, become subject to the “primary process” of unconscious thought (“thing presentations”) governed by the pleasure principle, wish gratification and the repressed sexual scenarios of childhood. Because of the disturbing nature of the latter and other repressed thoughts and desires which may have become linked to them, the dream-work operates a censorship function, disguising by distortion, displacement, and condensation the repressed thoughts to preserve sleep.^[156]

In the clinical setting, Freud encouraged free association to the dream’s manifest content, as recounted in the dream narrative, to facilitate interpretative work on its latent content – the repressed thoughts and fantasies – and also on the underlying mechanisms and structures operative in the dream-work. As Freud developed his theoretical work on dreams he went beyond his theory of dreams as wish-fulfillments to arrive at an emphasis on dreams as “nothing other than a particular form of thinking. … It is the dream-work that creates that form, and it alone is the essence of dreaming”.^[157]

Psychosexual development[edit source]

Main article: Psychosexual development

Freud’s theory of psychosexual development proposes that following on from the initial polymorphous perversity of infantile sexuality, the sexual “drives” pass through the distinct developmental phases of the oral, the anal, and the phallic. Though these phases then give way to a latency stage of reduced sexual interest and activity (from the age of five to puberty, approximately), they leave, to a greater or lesser extent, a “perverse” and bisexual residue which persists during the formation of adult genital sexuality. Freud argued that neurosis and perversion could be explained in terms of fixation or regression to these phases whereas adult character and cultural creativity could achieve a sublimation of their perverse residue.^[158]

After Freud’s later development of the theory of the Oedipus complex this normative developmental trajectory becomes formulated in terms of the child’s renunciation of incestuous desires under the fantasised threat of (or fantasised fact of, in the case of the girl) castration.^[159] The “dissolution” of the Oedipus complex is then achieved when the child’s rivalrous identification with the parental figure is transformed into the pacifying identifications of the Ego ideal which assume both similarity and difference and acknowledge the separateness and autonomy of the other.^[160]

Freud hoped to prove that his model was universally valid and turned to ancient mythology and contemporary ethnography for comparative material arguing that totemism reflected a ritualized enactment of a tribal Oedipal conflict.^[161]

Id, ego, and super-ego[edit source]

Main article: Id, ego and super-egoThe iceberg metaphor is often used to explain the psyche’s parts in relation to one another

Freud proposed that the human psyche could be divided into three parts: Id, ego, and super-ego. Freud discussed this model in the 1920 essay Beyond the Pleasure Principle, and fully elaborated upon it in The Ego and the Id (1923), in which he developed it as an alternative to his previous topographic schema (i.e., conscious, unconscious and preconscious). The id is the completely unconscious, impulsive, childlike portion of the psyche that operates on the “pleasure principle” and is the source of basic impulses and drives; it seeks immediate pleasure and gratification.^[162]

Freud acknowledged that his use of the term Id (das Es, “the It”) derives from the writings of Georg Groddeck.^[152][163] The super-ego is the moral component of the psyche.^[154] The rational ego attempts to exact a balance between the impractical hedonism of the id and the equally impractical moralism of the super-ego;^[153] it is the part of the psyche that is usually reflected most directly in a person’s actions. When overburdened or threatened by its tasks, it may employ defence mechanisms including denial, repression, undoing, rationalization, and displacement. This concept is usually represented by the “Iceberg Model”.^[164] This model represents the roles the id, ego, and super- ego play in relation to conscious and unconscious thought.

Freud compared the relationship between the ego and the id to that between a charioteer and his horses: the horses provide the energy and drive, while the charioteer provides direction.^[162]

Life and death drives[edit source]

Main articles: Libido, Death drive, and Repetition compulsion

Freud believed that the human psyche is subject to two conflicting drives: the life drive or libido and the death drive. The life drive was also termed “Eros” and the death drive “Thanatos”, although Freud did not use the latter term; “Thanatos” was introduced in this context by Paul Federn.^[165][166] Freud hypothesized that libido is a form of mental energy with which processes, structures, and object-representations are invested.^[167]

In Beyond the Pleasure Principle (1920), Freud inferred the existence of a death drive. Its premise was a regulatory principle that has been described as “the principle of psychic inertia”, “the Nirvana principle”,^[168] and “the conservatism of instinct”. Its background was Freud’s earlier Project for a Scientific Psychology, where he had defined the principle governing the mental apparatus as its tendency to divest itself of quantity or to reduce tension to zero. Freud had been obliged to abandon that definition, since it proved adequate only to the most rudimentary kinds of mental functioning, and replaced the idea that the apparatus tends toward a level of zero tension with the idea that it tends toward a minimum level of tension.^[169]

Freud in effect readopted the original definition in Beyond the Pleasure Principle, this time applying it to a different principle. He asserted that on certain occasions the mind acts as though it could eliminate tension, or in effect to reduce itself to a state of extinction; his key evidence for this was the existence of the compulsion to repeat. Examples of such repetition included the dream life of traumatic neurotics and children’s play. In the phenomenon of repetition, Freud saw a psychic trend to work over earlier impressions, to master them and derive pleasure from them, a trend that was before the pleasure principle but not opposed to it. In addition to that trend, there was also a principle at work that was opposed to, and thus “beyond” the pleasure principle. If repetition is a necessary element in the binding of energy or adaptation, when carried to inordinate lengths it becomes a means of abandoning adaptations and reinstating earlier or less evolved psychic positions. By combining this idea with the hypothesis that all repetition is a form of discharge, Freud concluded that the compulsion to repeat is an effort to restore a state that is both historically primitive and marked by the total draining of energy: death.^[169] Such an explanation has been defined by some scholars as “metaphysical biology”.^[170]

Melancholia[edit source]

In his 1917 essay “Mourning and Melancholia”, Freud distinguished mourning, painful but an inevitable part of life, and “melancholia”, his term for pathological refusal of a mourner to “decathect” from the lost one. Freud claimed that, in normal mourning, the ego was responsible for narcissistically detaching the libido from the lost one as a means of self-preservation, but that in “melancholia”, prior ambivalence towards the lost one prevents this from occurring. Suicide, Freud hypothesized, could result in extreme cases, when unconscious feelings of conflict became directed against the mourner’s own ego.^[171][172]

Femininity and female sexuality[edit source]

Freud’s account of femininity is grounded in his theory of psychic development as it traces the uneven transition from the earliest stages of infantile and childhood sexuality characterised by polymorphous perversity and a bisexual disposition through to the fantasy scenarios and rivalrous identifications of the Oedipus complex on to the greater or lesser extent these are modified in adult sexuality. There are different trajectories for the boy and the girl which arise as effects of the castration complex. Anatomical difference, the possession of a penis, induces castration anxiety for the boy whereas the girl experiences a sense of deprivation. In the boy’s case the castration complex concludes the Oedipal phase whereas for the girl it precipitates it.^[173]

The constraint of the erotic feelings and fantasies of the girl and her turn away from the mother to the father is an uneven and precarious process entailing “waves of repression”. The normal outcome is, according to Freud, the vagina becoming “the new leading zone” of sexual sensitivity displacing the previously dominant clitoris the phallic properties of which made it indistinguishable in the child’s early sexual life from the penis. This leaves a legacy of penis envy and emotional ambivalence for the girl which was “intimately related the essence of femininity” and leads to “the greater proneness of women to neurosis and especially hysteria.”^[174] In his last paper on the topic Freud likewise concludes that “the development of femininity remains exposed to disturbance by the residual phenomena of the early masculine period… Some portion of what we men call the ‘enigma of women’ may perhaps be derived from this expression of bisexuality in women’s lives.”^[175]

Initiating what became the first debate within psychoanalysis on femininity, Karen Horney of the Berlin Psychoanalytic Institute set out to challenge Freud’s account of femininity. Rejecting Freud’s theories of the feminine castration complex and penis envy, Horney argued for a primary femininity and penis envy as a defensive formation rather than arising from the fact, or “injury”, of biological asymmetry as Freud held. Horney had the influential support of Melanie Klein and Ernest Jones who coined the term “phallocentrism” in his critique of Freud’s position.^[176]

In defending Freud against this critique, feminist scholar Jacqueline Rose has argued that it presupposes a more normative account of female sexual development than that given by Freud. She finds that Freud moved from a description of the little girl stuck with her ‘inferiority’ or ‘injury’ in the face of the anatomy of the little boy to an account in his later work which explicitly describes the process of becoming ‘feminine’ as an ‘injury’ or ‘catastrophe’ for the complexity of her earlier psychic and sexual life.^[177]

Throughout his deliberations on what he described as the “dark continent” of female sexuality and the “riddle” of femininity, Freud was careful to emphasise the “average validity” and provisional nature of his findings.^[178] He did, however, in response to his critics, maintain a steadfast objection “to all of you … to the extent that you do not distinguish more clearly between what is psychic and what is biological…”^[179]

Religion[edit source]

Main article: Freud and religion

Freud regarded the monotheistic God as an illusion based upon the infantile emotional need for a powerful, supernatural pater familias. He maintained that religion – once necessary to restrain man’s violent nature in the early stages of civilization – in modern times, can be set aside in favor of reason and science.^[180] “Obsessive Actions and Religious Practices” (1907) notes the likeness between faith (religious belief) and neurotic obsession.^[181] Totem and Taboo (1913) proposes that society and religion begin with the patricide and eating of the powerful paternal figure, who then becomes a revered collective memory.^[182] These arguments were further developed in The Future of an Illusion (1927) in which Freud argued that religious belief serves the function of psychological consolation. Freud argues the belief of a supernatural protector serves as a buffer from man’s “fear of nature” just as the belief in an afterlife serves as a buffer from man’s fear of death. The core idea of the work is that all of religious belief can be explained through its function to society, not for its relation to the truth. This is why, according to Freud, religious beliefs are “illusions”. In Civilization and Its Discontents (1930), he quotes his friend Romain Rolland, who described religion as an “oceanic sensation”, but says he never experienced this feeling.^[183] Moses and Monotheism (1937) proposes that Moses was the tribal pater familias, killed by the Jews, who psychologically coped with the patricide with a reaction formation conducive to their establishing monotheistic Judaism;^[184][185] analogously, he described the Roman Catholic rite of Holy Communion as cultural evidence of the killing and devouring of the sacred father.^[116][186]

Moreover, he perceived religion, with its suppression of violence, as mediator of the societal and personal, the public and the private, conflicts between Eros and Thanatos, the forces of life and death.^[187] Later works indicate Freud’s pessimism about the future of civilization, which he noted in the 1931 edition of Civilization and its Discontents.^[188]

In a footnote of his 1909 work, Analysis of a Phobia in a Five-year-old Boy, Freud theorized that the universal fear of castration was provoked in the uncircumcised when they perceived circumcision and that this was “the deepest unconscious root of anti-Semitism“.^[189]

Legacy[edit source]

The 1971 Sigmund Freud memorial in Hampstead, North London, by Oscar Nemon, is located near to where Sigmund and Anna Freud lived, now the Freud Museum. The building behind the statue is the Tavistock Clinic, a major psychological health care institution.

Freud’s legacy, though a highly contested area of controversy, has been assessed as “one of the strongest influences on twentieth-century thought, its impact comparable only to that of Darwinism and Marxism,”^[190] with its range of influence permeating “all the fields of culture … so far as to change our way of life and concept of man.”^[191]

Psychotherapy[edit source]

Though not the first methodology in the practice of individual verbal psychotherapy,^[192] Freud’s psychoanalytic system came to dominate the field from early in the twentieth century, forming the basis for many later variants. While these systems have adopted different theories and techniques, all have followed Freud by attempting to achieve psychic and behavioral change through having patients talk about their difficulties.^[4] Psychoanalysis is not as influential as it once was in Europe and the United States, though in some parts of the world, notably Latin America, its influence in the later 20th century expanded substantially. Psychoanalysis also remains influential within many contemporary schools of psychotherapy and has led to innovative therapeutic work in schools and with families and groups.^[193] There is a substantial body of research which demonstrates the efficacy of the clinical methods of psychoanalysis^[194] and of related psychodynamic therapies in treating a wide range of psychological disorders.^[195]

The neo-Freudians, a group including Alfred Adler, Otto Rank, Karen Horney, Harry Stack Sullivan and Erich Fromm, rejected Freud’s theory of instinctual drive, emphasized interpersonal relations and self-assertiveness, and made modifications to therapeutic practice that reflected these theoretical shifts. Adler originated the approach, although his influence was indirect due to his inability to systematically formulate his ideas. The neo-Freudian analysis places more emphasis on the patient’s relationship with the analyst and less on the exploration of the unconscious.^[196]

Carl Jung believed that the collective unconscious, which reflects the cosmic order and the history of the human species, is the most important part of the mind. It contains archetypes, which are manifested in symbols that appear in dreams, disturbed states of mind, and various products of culture. Jungians are less interested in infantile development and psychological conflict between wishes and the forces that frustrate them than in integration between different parts of the person. The object of Jungian therapy was to mend such splits. Jung focused in particular on problems of middle and later life. His objective was to allow people to experience the split-off aspects of themselves, such as the anima (a man’s suppressed female self), the animus (a woman’s suppressed male self), or the shadow (an inferior self-image), and thereby attain wisdom.^[196]

Jacques Lacan approached psychoanalysis through linguistics and literature. Lacan believed Freud’s essential work had been done before 1905 and concerned the interpretation of dreams, neurotic symptoms, and slips, which had been based on a revolutionary way of understanding language and its relation to experience and subjectivity, and that ego psychology and object relations theory were based upon misreadings of Freud’s work. For Lacan, the determinative dimension of human experience is neither the self (as in ego psychology) nor relations with others (as in object relations theory), but language. Lacan saw desire as more important than need and considered it necessarily ungratifiable.^[197]

Wilhelm Reich developed ideas that Freud had developed at the beginning of his psychoanalytic investigation but then superseded but never finally discarded. These were the concept of the Actualneurosis and a theory of anxiety based upon the idea of dammed-up libido. In Freud’s original view, what really happened to a person (the “actual”) determined the resulting neurotic disposition. Freud applied that idea both to infants and to adults. In the former case, seductions were sought as the causes of later neuroses and in the latter incomplete sexual release. Unlike Freud, Reich retained the idea that actual experience, especially sexual experience, was of key significance. By the 1920s, Reich had “taken Freud’s original ideas about sexual release to the point of specifying the orgasm as the criteria of healthy function.” Reich was also “developing his ideas about character into a form that would later take shape, first as “muscular armour”, and eventually as a transducer of universal biological energy, the “orgone”.”^[196]

Fritz Perls, who helped to develop Gestalt therapy, was influenced by Reich, Jung, and Freud. The key idea of gestalt therapy is that Freud overlooked the structure of awareness, “an active process that moves toward the construction of organized meaningful wholes … between an organism and its environment.” These wholes, called gestalts, are “patterns involving all the layers of organismic function – thought, feeling, and activity.” Neurosis is seen as splitting in the formation of gestalts, and anxiety as the organism sensing “the struggle towards its creative unification.” Gestalt therapy attempts to cure patients by placing them in contact with “immediate organismic needs.” Perls rejected the verbal approach of classical psychoanalysis; talking in gestalt therapy serves the purpose of self-expression rather than gaining self-knowledge. Gestalt therapy usually takes place in groups, and in concentrated “workshops” rather than being spread out over a long period of time; it has been extended into new forms of communal living.^[196]

Arthur Janov‘s primal therapy, which has been influential post-Freudian psychotherapy, resembles psychoanalytic therapy in its emphasis on early childhood experience but has also differences with it. While Janov’s theory is akin to Freud’s early idea of Actualneurosis, he does not have a dynamic psychology but a nature psychology like that of Reich or Perls, in which need is primary while wish is derivative and dispensable when need is met. Despite its surface similarity to Freud’s ideas, Janov’s theory lacks a strictly psychological account of the unconscious and belief in infantile sexuality. While for Freud there was a hierarchy of dangerous situations, for Janov the key event in the child’s life is an awareness that the parents do not love it.^[196] Janov writes in The Primal Scream (1970) that primal therapy has in some ways returned to Freud’s early ideas and techniques.^[198]

Ellen Bass and Laura Davis, co-authors of The Courage to Heal (1988), are described as “champions of survivorship” by Frederick Crews, who considers Freud the key influence upon them, although in his view they are indebted not to classic psychoanalysis but to “the pre-psychoanalytic Freud … who supposedly took pity on his hysterical patients, found that they were all harboring memories of early abuse … and cured them by unknotting their repression.” Crews sees Freud as having anticipated the recovered memory movement by emphasizing “mechanical cause-and-effect relations between symptomatology and the premature stimulation of one body zone or another”, and with pioneering its “technique of thematically matching a patient’s symptom with a sexually symmetrical ‘memory.’” Crews believes that Freud’s confidence in accurate recall of early memories anticipates the theories of recovered memory therapists such as Lenore Terr, which in his view have led to people being wrongfully imprisoned or involved in litigation.^[199]

Science[edit source]

Research projects designed to test Freud’s theories empirically have led to a vast literature on the topic.^[200] American psychologists began to attempt to study repression in the experimental laboratory around 1930. In 1934, when the psychologist Saul Rosenzweig sent Freud reprints of his attempts to study repression, Freud responded with a dismissive letter stating that “the wealth of reliable observations” on which psychoanalytic assertions were based made them “independent of experimental verification.”^[201] Seymour Fisher and Roger P. Greenberg concluded in 1977 that some of Freud’s concepts were supported by empirical evidence. Their analysis of research literature supported Freud’s concepts of oral and anal personality constellations, his account of the role of Oedipal factors in certain aspects of male personality functioning, his formulations about the relatively greater concern about the loss of love in women’s as compared to men’s personality economy, and his views about the instigating effects of homosexual anxieties on the formation of paranoid delusions. They also found limited and equivocal support for Freud’s theories about the development of homosexuality. They found that several of Freud’s other theories, including his portrayal of dreams as primarily containers of secret, unconscious wishes, as well as some of his views about the psychodynamics of women, were either not supported or contradicted by research. Reviewing the issues again in 1996, they concluded that much experimental data relevant to Freud’s work exists, and supports some of his major ideas and theories.^[202]

Other viewpoints include those of Hans Eysenck, who writes in Decline and Fall of the Freudian Empire (1985) that Freud set back the study of psychology and psychiatry “by something like fifty years or more”,^[203] and Malcolm Macmillan, who concludes in Freud Evaluated (1991) that “Freud’s method is not capable of yielding objective data about mental processes”.^[204] Morris Eagle states that it has been “demonstrated quite conclusively that because of the epistemologically contaminated status of clinical data derived from the clinical situation, such data have questionable probative value in the testing of psychoanalytic hypotheses”.^[205] Richard Webster, in Why Freud Was Wrong (1995), described psychoanalysis as perhaps the most complex and successful pseudoscience in history.^[206] Crews believes that psychoanalysis has no scientific or therapeutic merit.^[207] University of Chicago research associate Kurt Jacobsen takes these critics to task for their own supposedly dogmatic and historically naive views both about psychoanalysis and the nature of science.^[208]

I.B. Cohen regards Freud’s Interpretation of Dreams as a revolutionary work of science, the last such work to be published in book form.^[209] In contrast Allan Hobson believes that Freud, by rhetorically discrediting 19th century investigators of dreams such as Alfred Maury and the Marquis de Hervey de Saint-Denis at a time when study of the physiology of the brain was only beginning, interrupted the development of scientific dream theory for half a century.^[210] The dream researcher G. William Domhoff has disputed claims of Freudian dream theory being validated.^[211]Karl Popper argued that Freud’s psychoanalytic theories were unfalsifiable.

The philosopher Karl Popper, who argued that all proper scientific theories must be potentially falsifiable, claimed that Freud’s Psychoanalytic Theories were presented in unfalsifiable form, meaning that no experiment could ever disprove them.^[212] The philosopher Adolf Grünbaum argues in The Foundations of Psychoanalysis (1984) that Popper was mistaken and that many of Freud’s theories are empirically testable, a position with which others such as Eysenck agree.^[213][214] The philosopher Roger Scruton, writing in Sexual Desire (1986), also rejected Popper’s arguments, pointing to the theory of repression as an example of a Freudian theory that does have testable consequences. Scruton nevertheless concluded that psychoanalysis is not genuinely scientific, because it involves an unacceptable dependence on metaphor.^[215] The philosopher Donald Levy agrees with Grünbaum that Freud’s theories are falsifiable but disputes Grünbaum’s contention that therapeutic success is only the empirical basis on which they stand or fall, arguing that a much wider range of empirical evidence can be adduced if clinical case material is taken into consideration.^[216]

In a study of psychoanalysis in the United States, Nathan Hale reported on the “decline of psychoanalysis in psychiatry” during the years 1965–1985.^[217] The continuation of this trend was noted by Alan Stone: “As academic psychology becomes more ‘scientific’ and psychiatry more biological, psychoanalysis is being brushed aside.”^[218] Paul Stepansky, while noting that psychoanalysis remains influential in the humanities, records the “vanishingly small number of psychiatric residents who choose to pursue psychoanalytic training” and the “nonanalytic backgrounds of psychiatric chairpersons at major universities” among the evidence he cites for his conclusion that “Such historical trends attest to the marginalisation of psychoanalysis within American psychiatry.”^[219] Nonetheless Freud was ranked as the third most cited psychologist of the 20th century, according to a Review of General Psychology survey of American psychologists and psychology texts, published in 2002.^[220] It is also claimed that in moving beyond the “orthodoxy of the not so distant past … new ideas and new research has led to an intense reawakening of interest in psychoanalysis from neighbouring disciplines ranging from the humanities to neuroscience and including the non-analytic therapies”.^[221]

Research in the emerging field of neuropsychoanalysis, founded by neuroscientist and psychoanalyst Mark Solms,^[222] has proved controversial with some psychoanalysts criticising the very concept itself.^[223] Solms and his colleagues have argued for neuro-scientific findings being “broadly consistent” with Freudian theories pointing out brain structures relating to Freudian concepts such as libido, drives, the unconscious, and repression.^[224][225] Neuroscientists who have endorsed Freud’s work include David Eagleman who believes that Freud “transformed psychiatry” by providing ” the first exploration of the way in which hidden states of the brain participate in driving thought and behavior”^[226] and Nobel laureate Eric Kandel who argues that “psychoanalysis still represents the most coherent and intellectually satisfying view of the mind.”^[227]

Philosophy[edit source]

See also: Freudo-MarxismHerbert Marcuse saw similarities between psychoanalysis and Marxism.

Psychoanalysis has been interpreted as both radical and conservative. By the 1940s, it had come to be seen as conservative by the European and American intellectual community. Critics outside the psychoanalytic movement, whether on the political left or right, saw Freud as a conservative. Fromm had argued that several aspects of psychoanalytic theory served the interests of political reaction in his The Fear of Freedom (1942), an assessment confirmed by sympathetic writers on the right. In Freud: The Mind of the Moralist (1959), Philip Rieff portrayed Freud as a man who urged men to make the best of an inevitably unhappy fate, and admirable for that reason. In the 1950s, Herbert Marcuse challenged the then prevailing interpretation of Freud as a conservative in Eros and Civilization (1955), as did Lionel Trilling in Freud and the Crisis of Our Culture and Norman O. Brown in Life Against Death (1959).^[228] Eros and Civilization helped make the idea that Freud and Karl Marx were addressing similar questions from different perspectives credible to the left. Marcuse criticized neo-Freudian revisionism for discarding seemingly pessimistic theories such as the death instinct, arguing that they could be turned in a utopian direction. Freud’s theories also influenced the Frankfurt School and critical theory as a whole.^[229]

Freud has been compared to Marx by Reich, who saw Freud’s importance for psychiatry as parallel to that of Marx for economics,^[230] and by Paul Robinson, who sees Freud as a revolutionary whose contributions to twentieth-century thought are comparable in importance to Marx’s contributions to the nineteenth-century thought.^[231] Fromm calls Freud, Marx, and Einstein the “architects of the modern age”, but rejects the idea that Marx and Freud were equally significant, arguing that Marx was both far more historically important and a finer thinker. Fromm nevertheless credits Freud with permanently changing the way human nature is understood.^[232] Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari write in Anti-Oedipus (1972) that psychoanalysis resembles the Russian Revolution in that it became corrupted almost from the beginning. They believe this began with Freud’s development of the theory of the Oedipus complex, which they see as idealist.^[233]

Jean-Paul Sartre critiques Freud’s theory of the unconscious in Being and Nothingness (1943), claiming that consciousness is essentially self-conscious. Sartre also attempts to adapt some of Freud’s ideas to his own account of human life, and thereby develop an “existential psychoanalysis” in which causal categories are replaced by teleological categories.^[234] Maurice Merleau-Ponty considers Freud to be one of the anticipators of phenomenology,^[235] while Theodor W. Adorno considers Edmund Husserl, the founder of phenomenology, to be Freud’s philosophical opposite, writing that Husserl’s polemic against psychologism could have been directed against psychoanalysis.^[236] Paul Ricœur sees Freud as one of the three “masters of suspicion“, alongside Marx and Nietzsche,^[237] for their unmasking ‘the lies and illusions of consciousness‘.^[238] Ricœur and Jürgen Habermas have helped create a “hermeneutic version of Freud”, one which “claimed him as the most significant progenitor of the shift from an objectifying, empiricist understanding of the human realm to one stressing subjectivity and interpretation.”^[239] Louis Althusser drew on Freud’s concept of overdetermination for his reinterpretation of Marx’s Capital.^[240] Jean-François Lyotard developed a theory of the unconscious that reverses Freud’s account of the dream-work: for Lyotard, the unconscious is a force whose intensity is manifest via disfiguration rather than condensation.^[241] Jacques Derrida finds Freud to be both a late figure in the history of western metaphysics and, with Nietzsche and Heidegger, a precursor of his own brand of radicalism.^[242]

Several scholars see Freud as parallel to Plato, writing that they hold nearly the same theory of dreams and have similar theories of the tripartite structure of the human soul or personality, even if the hierarchy between the parts of the soul is almost reversed.^[243][244] Ernest Gellner argues that Freud’s theories are an inversion of Plato’s. Whereas Plato saw a hierarchy inherent in the nature of reality and relied upon it to validate norms, Freud was a naturalist who could not follow such an approach. Both men’s theories drew a parallel between the structure of the human mind and that of society, but while Plato wanted to strengthen the super-ego, which corresponded to the aristocracy, Freud wanted to strengthen the ego, which corresponded to the middle class.^[245] Paul Vitz compares Freudian psychoanalysis to Thomism, noting St. Thomas’s belief in the existence of an “unconscious consciousness” and his “frequent use of the word and concept ‘libido’ – sometimes in a more specific sense than Freud, but always in a manner in agreement with the Freudian use.” Vitz suggests that Freud may have been unaware his theory of the unconscious was reminiscent of Aquinas.^[31]

Literature and literary criticism[edit source]

The poem “In Memory of Sigmund Freud” was published by British poet W. H. Auden in his 1940 collection Another Time. Auden describes Freud as having created “a whole climate of opinion / under whom we conduct our different lives.”^[246] [247]

Literary critic Harold Bloom has been influenced by Freud.^[248] Camille Paglia has also been influenced by Freud, whom she calls “Nietzsche’s heir” and one of the greatest sexual psychologists in literature, but has rejected the scientific status of his work in her Sexual Personae (1990), writing, “Freud has no rivals among his successors because they think he wrote science, when in fact he wrote art.”^[249]

Feminism[edit source]

Betty Friedan criticizes Freud’s view of women in her 1963 book The Feminine Mystique.^[250]

The decline in Freud’s reputation has been attributed partly to the revival of feminism.^[251] Simone de Beauvoir criticizes psychoanalysis from an existentialist standpoint in The Second Sex (1949), arguing that Freud saw an “original superiority” in the male that is in reality socially induced.^[252] Betty Friedan criticizes Freud and what she considered his Victorian view of women in The Feminine Mystique (1963).^[250] Freud’s concept of penis envy was attacked by Kate Millett, who in Sexual Politics (1970) accused him of confusion and oversights.^[253] In 1968, the US-American feminist Anne Koedt wrote in her essay The Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm: “It was Freud’s feelings about women’s secondary and inferior relationship to men that formed the basis for his theories on female sexuality. Once having laid down the law about the nature of our sexuality, Freud not so strangely discovered a tremendous problem of frigidity in women. His recommended cure for a frigid woman was psychiatric care. She was suffering from failure to mentally adjust to her ‘natural’ role as a woman.”^[254] Naomi Weisstein writes that Freud and his followers erroneously thought his “years of intensive clinical experience” added up to scientific rigor.^[255]

Freud is also criticized by Shulamith Firestone and Eva Figes. In The Dialectic of Sex (1970), Firestone argues that Freud was a “poet” who produced metaphors rather than literal truths; in her view, Freud, like feminists, recognized that sexuality was the crucial problem of modern life, but ignored the social context and failed to question society itself. Firestone interprets Freud’s “metaphors” in terms of the facts of power within the family. Figes tries in Patriarchal Attitudes (1970) to place Freud within a “history of ideas“. Juliet Mitchell defends Freud against his feminist critics in Psychoanalysis and Feminism (1974), accusing them of misreading him and misunderstanding the implications of psychoanalytic theory for feminism. Mitchell helped introduce English-speaking feminists to Lacan.^[252] Mitchell is criticized by Jane Gallop in The Daughter’s Seduction (1982). Gallop compliments Mitchell for her criticism of feminist discussions of Freud but finds her treatment of Lacanian theory lacking.^[256]

Some French feminists, among them Julia Kristeva and Luce Irigaray, have been influenced by Freud as interpreted by Lacan.^[257] Irigaray has produced a theoretical challenge to Freud and Lacan, using their theories against them to put forward a “psychoanalytic explanation for theoretical bias”. Irigaray, who claims that “the cultural unconscious only recognizes the male sex”, describes how this affects “accounts of the psychology of women”.^[258]

Psychologist Carol Gilligan writes that “The penchant of developmental theorists to project a masculine image, and one that appears frightening to women, goes back at least to Freud.” She sees Freud’s criticism of women’s sense of justice reappearing in the work of Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg. Gilligan notes that Nancy Chodorow, in contrast to Freud, attributes sexual difference not to anatomy but to the fact that male and female children have different early social environments. Chodorow, writing against the masculine bias of psychoanalysis, “replaces Freud’s negative and derivative description of female psychology with a positive and direct account of her own.”^[259]

Toril Moi has developed a feminist perspective on psychoanalysis proposing that it is a discourse that “attempts to understand the psychic consequences of three universal traumas: the fact that there are others, the fact of sexual difference, and the fact of death”.^[260] She replaces Freud’s term of castration with Stanley Cavell’s concept of “victimization” which is a more universal term that applies equally to both sexes.^[261] Moi regards this concept of human finitude as a suitable replacement for both castration and sexual difference as the traumatic “discovery of our separate, sexed, mortal existence” and how both men and women come to terms with it.^[262]

In popular culture[edit source]

Sigmund Freud is the subject of three major films or TV series, the first of which was 1962’s Freud: The Secret Passion starring Montgomery Clift as Freud, directed by John Huston from a revision of a script by an uncredited Jean-Paul Sartre. The film is focused on Freud’s early life from 1885 to 1890 and combines multiple case studies of Freud into single ones, and multiple friends of his into single characters.^[263]

In 1984, the BBC produced the six-episode mini-series Freud: the Life of a Dream starring David Suchet in the lead role.^[264]

The stage play The Talking Cure and subsequent film A Dangerous Method focus on the conflict between Freud and Carl Jung. Both are written by Christopher Hampton and are partly based on the non-fiction book A Most Dangerous Method by John Kerr. Viggo Mortensen plays Freud and Michael Fassbender plays Jung. The play is a reworking of an earlier unfilmed screenplay.^[265]

More fanciful employments of Freud in fiction are The Seven-Per-Cent Solution by Nicholas Meyer, which centers on an encounter between Freud and the fictional detective Sherlock Holmes, with a main part of the plot seeing Freud helping Holmes overcome his cocaine addiction.^[266] Similarly, the 2020 Austrian-German series Freud involves a young Freud solving murder mysteries.^[267] The series has been criticized for having Freud be helped by a medium with real paranormal powers, when in reality Freud was quite skeptical of the paranormal.^[268][269]

Mark St. Germain‘s 2009 play Freud’s Last Session imagines a meeting between C. S. Lewis, aged 40, and Freud, aged 83, at Freud’s house in Hampstead, London, in 1939, as the Second World War is about to break out. The play is focused on the two men discussing religion and whether it should be seen as a sign of neurosis.^[270] The play is inspired by the 2003 non-fiction book The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life by Armand Nicholi which also inspired a four-part non-fiction PBS series.^[271][272] (Although, no such meeting took place, June Flewett, who as a teenager stayed with C.S. Lewis and his brother during the wartime London air-raids, later married Freud’s grandson Clement Freud.)^[273]

Freud is employed to more comic effect in the 1983 film Lovesick in which Alec Guinness plays Freud’s ghost who gives love advice to a modern psychiatrist played by Dudley Moore.^[274] Freud is also presented in a comedic light in the 1989 film, Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure. Portrayed by Rod Loomis, Freud is one of several historical figures recruited by the film’s time traveling lead characters to assist them in passing their high school history class presentation.^[275]

Canadian author Kim Morrissey‘s stage play about the Dora case, Dora: A Case of Hysteria, attempts to thoroughly debunk Freud’s approach to the case.^[276] French playwright Hélène Cixous‘ 1976 Portrait of Dora is also critical of Freud’s approach, though less acerbically.^[277]

The narrator of Bob Dylan‘s darkly humorous 2020 song “My Own Version of You” calls “Mr. Freud with his dreams” one of the “best-known enemies of mankind” and refers to him as burning in hell.^[278]

In the online, superhero-themed, animated series Super Science Friends, Freud appears as a main character alongside other famous historical science figures.^{[citation needed]}

Freud made an appearance in a 2019 episode of the online YouTube series Epic Rap Battles of History, rapping against Mother Teresa. He is portrayed by series co-creator Nice Peter.^{[citation needed]}

Works[edit source]

Main article: Sigmund Freud bibliography

Books[edit source]

• 1891 On Aphasia
• 1895 Studies on Hysteria (co-authored with Josef Breuer)
• 1899 The Interpretation of Dreams
• 1901 On Dreams (abridged version of The Interpretation of Dreams)
• 1904 The Psychopathology of Everyday Life
• 1905 Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious
• 1905 Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality
• 1907 Delusion and Dream in Jensen’s Gradiva
• 1910 Five Lectures on Psycho-Analysis
• 1910 Leonardo da Vinci, A Memory of His Childhood
• 1913 Totem and Taboo: Resemblances between the Psychic Lives of Savages and Neurotics
• 1915–17 Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis
• 1920 Beyond the Pleasure Principle
• 1921 Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego
• 1923 The Ego and the Id
• 1926 Inhibitions, Symptoms and Anxiety
• 1926 The Question of Lay Analysis
• 1927 The Future of an Illusion
• 1930 Civilization and Its Discontents
• 1933 New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis
• 1939 Moses and Monotheism
• 1940 An Outline of Psychoanalysis
• 1967 Thomas Woodrow Wilson: A Psychological Study, with William C. Bullit

Case histories[edit source]

• 1905 Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria (the Dora case history)
• 1909 Analysis of a Phobia in a Five-Year-Old Boy (the Little Hans case history)
• 1909 Notes upon a Case of Obsessional Neurosis (the Rat Man case history)
• 1911 Psycho-Analytic Notes on an Autobiographical Account of a Case of Paranoia (the Schreber case)
• 1918 From the History of an Infantile Neurosis (the Wolfman case history)
• 1920 The Psychogenesis of a Case of Homosexuality in a Woman^[279]
• 1923 A Seventeenth-Century Demonological Neurosis (the Haizmann case)

Papers on sexuality[edit source]

• 1906 My Views on the Part Played by Sexuality in the Aetiology of the Neuroses
• 1908 “Civilized” Sexual Morality and Modern Nervous Illness
• 1910 A Special Type of Choice of Object made by Men
• 1912 Types of Onset of Neurosis
• 1912 The Most Prevalent Form of Degradation in Erotic Life
• 1913 The Disposition to Obsessional Neurosis
• 1915 A Case of Paranoia Running Counter to the Psycho-Analytic Theory of the Disease
• 1919 A Child is Being Beaten: A Contribution to the Origin of Sexual Perversions
• 1922 Medusa’s Head
• 1922 Some Neurotic Mechanisms in Jealousy, Paranoia and Homosexuality
• 1923 Infantile Genital Organisation
• 1924 The Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex
• 1925 Some Psychical Consequences of the Anatomical Distinction between the Sexes
• 1927 Fetishism
• 1931 Female Sexuality
• 1933 Femininity
• 1938 The Splitting of the Ego in the Process of Defence

Autobiographical papers[edit source]

• 1899 An Autobiographical Note
• 1914 On the History of the Psychoanalytic Movement
• 1925 An Autobiographical Study (1935 Revised edition with Postscript).

The Standard Edition[edit source]

The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Translated from the German under the general editorship of James Strachey, in collaboration with Anna Freud, assisted by Alix Strachey, Alan Tyson, and Angela Richards. 24 volumes, London: Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1953–1974.

• Vol. I Pre-Psycho-Analytic Publications and Unpublished Drafts (1886–1899).
• Vol. II Studies in Hysteria (1893–1895). By Josef Breuer and S. Freud.
• Vol. III Early Psycho-Analytic Publications (1893–1899)
• Vol. IV The Interpretation of Dreams (I) (1900)
• Vol. V The Interpretation of Dreams (II) and On Dreams (1900–1901)
• Vol. VI The Psychopathology of Everyday Life (1901)
• Vol. VII A Case of Hysteria, Three Essays on Sexuality and Other Works (1901–1905)
• Vol. VIII Jokes and their Relation to the Unconscious (1905)
• Vol. IX Jensen’s ‘Gradiva,’ and Other Works (1906–1909)
• Vol. X The Cases of ‘Little Hans’ and the Rat Man’ (1909)
• Vol. XI Five Lectures on Psycho-Analysis, Leonardo and Other Works (1910)
• Vol. XII The Case of Schreber, Papers on Technique and Other Works (1911–1913)
• Vol. XIII Totem and Taboo and Other Works (1913–1914)
• Vol. XIV On the History of the Psycho-Analytic Movement, Papers on Meta-psychology and Other Works (1914–1916)
• Vol. XV Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis (Parts I and II) (1915–1916)
• Vol. XVI Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis (Part III) (1916–1917)
• Vol. XVII An Infantile Neurosis and Other Works (1917–1919)
• Vol. XVIII Beyond the Pleasure Principle, Group Psychology and Other Works (1920–1922)
• Vol. XIX The Ego and the Id and Other Works (1923–1925)
• Vol. XX An Autobiographical Study, Inhibitions, Symptoms and Anxiety, Lay Analysis and Other Works (1925–1926)
• Vol. XXI The Future of an Illusion, Civilization and its Discontents and Other Works (1927–1931)
• Vol. XXII New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis and Other Works (1932–1936)
• Vol. XXIII Moses and Monotheism, An Outline of Psycho-Analysis and Other Works (1937–1939)
• Vol. XXIV Indexes and Bibliographies (Compiled by Angela Richards,1974)

Correspondence[edit source]

• Selected Letters of Sigmund Freud to Martha Bernays, Ansh Mehta and Ankit Patel (eds), CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2015. ISBN 978-1-5151-3703-0
• Correspondence: Sigmund Freud, Anna Freud, Cambridge: Polity 2014. ISBN 978-0-7456-4149-2
• The Letters of Sigmund Freud and Otto Rank: Inside Psychoanalysis (eds. E.J. Lieberman and Robert Kramer). Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012.
• The Complete Letters of Sigmund Freud to Wilhelm Fliess, 1887–1904, (editor and translator Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson), 1985, ISBN 978-0-674-15420-9
• The Sigmund Freud Carl Gustav Jung Letters, Publisher: Princeton University Press; Abr edition, 1994, ISBN 978-0-691-03643-4
• The Complete Correspondence of Sigmund Freud and Karl Abraham, 1907–1925, Publisher: Karnac Books, 2002, ISBN 978-1-85575-051-7
• The Complete Correspondence of Sigmund Freud and Ernest Jones, 1908–1939., Belknap Press, Harvard University Press, 1995, ISBN 978-0-674-15424-7
• The Sigmund Freud – Ludwig Binswanger Correspondence 1908–1939, London: Other Press 2003, ISBN 1-892746-32-8
• The Correspondence of Sigmund Freud and Sándor Ferenczi, Volume 1, 1908–1914, Belknap Press, Harvard University Press, 1994, ISBN 978-0-674-17418-4
• The Correspondence of Sigmund Freud and Sándor Ferenczi, Volume 2, 1914–1919, Belknap Press, Harvard University Press, 1996, ISBN 978-0-674-17419-1
• The Correspondence of Sigmund Freud and Sándor Ferenczi, Volume 3, 1920–1933, Belknap Press, Harvard University Press, 2000, ISBN 978-0-674-00297-5
• The Letters of Sigmund Freud to Eduard Silberstein, 1871–1881, Belknap Press, Harvard University Press, ISBN 978-0-674-52828-4
• Psycho-Analysis and Faith: The Letters of Sigmund Freud and Oskar Pfister. Trans. Eric Mosbacher. Heinrich Meng and Ernst L. Freud. eds London: Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1963.
• Sigmund Freud and Lou Andreas-Salome; Letters, Publisher: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich; 1972, ISBN 978-0-15-133490-2
• The Letters of Sigmund Freud and Arnold Zweig, Publisher: New York University Press, 1987, ISBN 978-0-8147-2585-6
• Letters of Sigmund Freud – selected and edited by Ernst L. Freud, Publisher: New York: Basic Books, 1960, ISBN 978-0-486-27105-7

See also[edit source]

• Psychology portal

• The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud
• Sigmund Freud Archives
• Freud Museum (London)
• Sigmund Freud Museum (Vienna)
• A Clinical Lesson at the Salpêtrière
• Afterwardsness
• Freudian slip
• Freudo-Marxism
• School of Brentano
• Hedgehog’s dilemma
• Narcissism of small differences
• Hidden personality
• Histrionic personality disorder
• Psychoanalytic literary criticism
• Psychodynamics
• Saul Rosenzweig
• Signorelli parapraxis
• The Freudian Coverup
• The Passions of the Mind
• Uncanny

Notes[edit source]

1. ^ Halberstadt, Max (c. 1921). “Sigmund Freud, half-length portrait, facing left, holding cigar in right hand”. Library of Congress. Archived from the original on 28 December 2017. Retrieved 8 June 2017.
2. ^ Tansley, A.G. (1941). “Sigmund Freud. 1856–1939”. Obituary Notices of Fellows of the Royal Society. 3 (9): 246–75. doi:10.1098/rsbm.1941.0002. JSTOR 768889. S2CID 163056149.
3. ^ “Freud” Archived 23 December 2014 at the Wayback Machine. Random House Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary.
4. ^ Jump up to:^a b Ford & Urban 1965, p. 109
5. ^ Noel Sheehy; Alexandra Forsythe (2013). “Sigmund Freud”. Fifty Key Thinkers in Psychology. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-134-70493-4.
6. ^ Eric R. Kandel The Age of Insight: The Quest to Understand the Unconscious in Art, Mind and Brain, from Vienna 1900 to the Present. New York: Random House 2012, pp. 45–46.
7. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 136–37.
8. ^ Jones, Ernest (1949) What is Psychoanalysis ? London: Allen & Unwin. p. 47.
9. ^ Mannoni, Octave, Freud: The Theory of the Unconscious, London: Verso 2015 [1971], pp. 49–51, 152–54.
10. ^ Mannoni, Octave, Freud: The Theory of the Unconscious, London: Verso 2015 [1971], pp. 146–47.
11. ^ For its efficacy and the influence of psychoanalysis on psychiatry and psychotherapy, see The Challenge to Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy, Chapter 9, Psychoanalysis and Psychiatry: A Changing Relationship Archived 6 June 2009 at the Wayback Machine by Robert Michels, 1999 and Tom Burns Our Necessary Shadow: The Nature and Meaning of Psychiatry London: Allen Lane 2013 pp. 96–97.
    • For the influence on psychology, see The Psychologist, December 2000 Archived 31 December 2014 at the Wayback Machine
    • For the influence of psychoanalysis in the humanities, see J. Forrester The Seductions of Psychoanalysis Cambridge University Press 1990, pp. 2–3.
    • For the debate on efficacy, see Fisher, S. and Greenberg, R.P., Freud Scientifically Reappraised: Testing the Theories and Therapy, New York: John Wiley, 1996, pp. 193–217
    • For the debate on the scientific status of psychoanalysis see Stevens, Richard (1985). Freud and Psychoanalysis. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. pp. 91–116. ISBN 978-0-335-10180-1., Gay (2006) p. 745, and Solms, Mark (2018). “The scientific standing of psychoanalysis”. BJPsych International. 15 (1): 5–8. doi:10.1192/bji.2017.4. PMC 6020924. PMID 29953128.
    • For the debate on psychoanalysis and feminism, see Appignanesi, Lisa & Forrester, John. Freud’s Women. London: Penguin Books, 1992, pp. 455–74.
12. ^ Thurschwell, Pamela (2009). Sigmund Freud. London: Routledge. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-415-21520-6.
13. ^ “Digitized Birth Records of Freiberg (Zemský archiv v Opavě)”. digi.archives.cz. Retrieved 18 July 2021.
14. ^ “Sigmund Freud | Biography, Theories, Works, & Facts”. Encyclopedia Britannica.
15. ^ Gresser 1994, p. 225.
16. ^ Emanuel Rice (1990). Freud and Moses: The Long Journey Home. SUNY Press. p. 55. ISBN 978-0-7914-0453-9.
17. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 4–8; Clark 1980, p. 4.
    • For Jakob’s Torah study, see Meissner 1993, p. 233.
    • For the date of the marriage, see Rice 1990, p. 55.
18. ^ Deborah P. Margolis, M.A. (1989). “Margolis 1989”. Mod. Psychoanal: 37–56. Archived from the original on 23 February 2014. Retrieved 17 January 2014.
19. ^ Jones, Ernest (1964) Sigmund Freud: Life and Work. Edited and abridged by Lionel Trilling and Stephen Marcus. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books p. 37.
20. ^ Hothersall 2004, p. 276.
21. ^ Hothersall 1995
22. ^ See “past studies of eels” and references therein.
23. ^ Costandi, Mo (10 March 2014). “Freud was a pioneering neuroscientist”. The Guardian. Retrieved 16 May 2018.
    In this period he published three papers:
    • Freud, Sigmund (1877). Über den Ursprung der hinteren Nervenwurzeln im Rückenmark von Ammocoetes (Petromyzon Planeri) [On the Origin of the Posterior Nerve Roots in the Spinal Cord of Ammocoetes (Petromyzon Planeri)] (in German). na.
    • Freud, Sigmund (1878). Über Spinalganglien und Rückenmark des Petromyzon [On the Spinal Ganglia and Spinal Cord of Petromyzon] (in German).
    • Freud, Sigmund (April 1884). “A New Histological Method for the Study of Nerve-Tracts in the Brain and Spinal Cord”. Brain. 7 (1): 86–88. doi:10.1093/brain/7.1.86.
    For a more in-depth analysis: Gamwell, Lynn; Solms, Mark (2006). From Neurology to Psychoanalysis (PDF). State University of New York: Binghamton University Art Museum. pp. 29–33, 37–39. Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 August 2017.
24. ^ Gay 2006 p. 36.
25. ^ Sulloway 1992 [1979], p. 22.
26. ^ Wallesch, Claus (2004). “History of Aphasia Freud as an aphasiologist”. Aphasiology. 18 (April): 389–399. doi:10.1080/02687030344000599. S2CID 144976195.
27. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 42–47.
28. ^ Peter J. Swales, “Freud, Minna Bernays and the Conquest of Rome: New Light on the Origins of Psychoanalysis”, The New American Review, Spring/Summer 1982, pp. 1–23, which also includes speculation over an abortion.
    • see Gay 2006, pp. 76, 752–53 for a sceptical rejoinder to Swales.
    • for the discovery of the hotel log see Blumenthal, Ralph (24 December 2006). “Hotel log hints at desire that Freud didn’t repress – Europe – International Herald Tribune”. The New York Times. Archived from the original on 13 June 2017. Retrieved 4 November 2014.
    • see also ‘Minna Bernays as “Mrs. Freud”: What Sort of Relationship Did Sigmund Freud Have with His Sister-in-Law?’ by Franz Maciejewski and Jeremy Gaines, American Imago, Volume 65, Number 1, Spring 2008, pp. 5–21.
29. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 77, 169.
30. ^ Freud and Bonaparte 2009, pp. 238–39.
31. ^ Jump up to:^a b Vitz 1988, pp. 53–54.
32. ^ Sulloway 1992 [1979], pp. 66–67, 116.
33. ^ Darian Leader, Freud’s Footnotes, London, Faber, 2000, pp. 34–45.
34. ^ Pigman, G.W. (1995). “Freud and the history of empathy”. The International Journal of Psycho-Analysis. 76 (Pt 2): 237–56. PMID 7628894.
35. ^ Schopenhauer and Freud., Young C. – Brook A. (February 1994). “Schopenhauer and Freud”. Int J Psychoanal. A close study of Schopenhauer’s central work, ‘The World as Will and Representation’, reveals that certain of Freud’s most characteristic doctrines were first articulated by Schopenhauer. Schopenhauer’s concept of the will contains the foundations of what in Freud become the concepts of the unconscious and the id. Schopenhauer’s writings on madness anticipate Freud’s theory of repression and his first theory of the aetiology of neurosis. Schopenhauer’s work contains aspects of what becomes the theory of free association. And most importantly, Schopenhauer articulates major parts of the Freudian theory of sexuality. These correspondences raise some interesting questions about Freud’s denial that he even read Schopenhauer until late in life.
36. ^ Paul Roazen, in Dufresne, Todd (ed). Returns of the French Freud: Freud, Lacan, and Beyond. New York and London: Routledge Press, 1997, pp. 13–15.
37. ^ Rudnytsky, Peter L. Freud and Oedipus. Columbia University Press. (1987). p. 198. ISBN 978-0231063531
38. ^ Gay 2006, p. 45.
39. ^ Holt 1989, p. 242.
40. ^ Bloom 1994, p. 346.
41. ^ Robert, Marthe (1976) From Oedipus to Moses: Freud’s Jewish Identity New York: Anchor pp. 3–6.
42. ^ Frosh, Stephen (2006) “Psychoanalysis and Judaism” in Black, David M.(ed) Psychoanalysis and Religion in the 21st Century, Hove: Routledge. pp. 205–06.
43. ^ Freud had a small lithographic version of the painting, created by Eugène Pirodon (1824–1908), framed and hung on the wall of his Vienna rooms from 1886 to 1938. Once Freud reached England, it was immediately placed directly over the analytical couch in his London rooms.
44. ^ Joseph Aguayo (1986). “Joseph Aguayo Charcot and Freud: Some Implications of Late 19th-century French Psychiatry and Politics for the Origins of Psychoanalysis (1986). Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought”. Psychoanal. Contemp. Thought: 223–60. Archived from the original on 19 July 2011. Retrieved 6 February 2011.
45. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 64–71.
46. ^ “jewishvirtuallibrary Sigmund Freud (1856–1939)”. jewishvirtuallibrary.org. Archived from the original on 9 May 2013. Retrieved 20 May 2013.
47. ^ Freud 1896c, pp. 203, 211, 219; Eissler 2005, p. 96.
48. ^ J. Forrester The Seductions of Psychoanalysis Cambridge University Press 1990, pp. 75–76.
49. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 88–96.
50. ^ Mannoni, Octave, Freud: The Theory of the Unconscious, London: Verso 2015, pp. 55–81.
51. ^ Mannoni, Octave, Freud: The Theory of the Unconscious, London: Verso 2015, p. 91.
52. ^ Charles Bernheimer and Claire Kahane (eds) In Dora’s Case: Freud – Hysteria – Feminism, London: Virago 1985.
53. ^ Masson, Jeffrey Moussaieff (2012) [1984]. The Assault on Truth. Untreed Reads. p. 18. ISBN 978-1-61187-280-4.
54. ^ Kris, Ernst, Introduction to Sigmund Freud The Origins of Psychoanalysis. Letters to Wilhelm Fliess, Drafts and Notes 1887–1902. Eds. Marie Bonaparte, Anna Freud, Ernst Kris, E. London: Imago 1954.
55. ^ Reeder, Jurgen (2002). Reflecting Psychoanalysis. Narrative and Resolve in the Psychoanalytic Experience. London: Karnac Books. p. 10. ISBN 978-1-78049-710-5.
56. ^ Mannoni, Octave, Freud: The Theory of the Unconscious, London: Verso 2015, pp. 40–41.
57. ^ Sulloway 1992 [1979], pp. 142ff.
58. ^ Jump up to:^a b Masson, Jeffrey M. (1984) The Assault on Truth. Freud’s Suppression of the Seduction Theory. New York City: Farrar, Straus and Giroux,
59. ^ Bonomi, Carlos (2015) The Cut and the Building of Psychoanalysis, Volume I: Sigmund Freud and Emma Eckstein. London: Routledge, p. 80.
60. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 84–87, 154–56.
61. ^ Schur, Max. “Some Additional ‘Day Residues’ of the Specimen Dream of Psychoanalysis.” In Psychoanalysis, A General Psychology, ed. R.M. Loewenstein et al. New York: International Universities Press, 1966, pp. 45–95.
62. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 154–56.
63. ^ John Forrester, Introduction; Sigmund Freud (2006). Interpreting Dreams. Penguin Books Limited. p. 70. ISBN 978-0-14-191553-1. Affiliated Professor seems to me to be the best translation of professor extraordinarius, which position has the rank of Full Professor, but without payment by the University.
64. ^ Clark (1980), p. 424
65. ^ Phillips, Adam (2014) Becoming Freud Yale University Press. p. 139.
66. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Rose, Louis (1998). The Freudian Calling: Early Psychoanalysis and the Pursuit of Cultural Science. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. p. 52. ISBN 978-0-8143-2621-3.
67. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Schwartz, Joseph (2003). Cassandra’s daughter: a history of psychoanalysis. London: Karnac. p. 100. ISBN 978-1-85575-939-8.
68. ^ Ellenberger, Henri F. (1970). The Discovery of the Unconscious: the History and Evolution of Dynamic Psychiatry ([Repr.] ed.). New York: Basic Books. pp. 443, 454. ISBN 978-0-465-01673-0.
69. ^ Stekel’s review appeared in 1902. In it, he declared that Freud’s work heralded “a new era in psychology”.Rose, Louis (1998). The Freudian Calling: Early Psychoanalysis and the Pursuit of Cultural Science. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. p. 52. ISBN 978-0-8143-2621-3.
70. ^ Rose, Louis (1998). “Freud and fetishism: previously unpublished minutes of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society”. Psychoanalytic Quartery. 57 (2): 147. doi:10.1080/21674086.1988.11927209. Archived from the original on 9 March 2016.
71. ^ Reitler’s family had converted to Catholicism. Makari, George (2008). Revolution in Mind: The Creation of Psychoanalysis (Australian ed.). Carlton, Vic.: Melbourne University Publishing. p. 130. ISBN 978-0-522-85480-0.
72. ^ Makari, George (2008). Revolution in Mind: The Creation of Psychoanalysis (Australian ed.). Carlton, Vic.: Melbourne University Publishing. pp. 130–31. ISBN 978-0-522-85480-0.
73. ^ Stekel, Wilhelm (2007). ‘On the history of the psychoanalytic movement. Jap Bos (trans. and annot.). In Japp Boss and Leendert Groenendijk (eds). The Self-Marginalization of Wilhelm Stekel: Freudian Circles Inside and Out. New York. p. 131
74. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Gay 2006, pp. 174–75
75. ^ The real name of “Little Hans” was Herbert Graf. See Gay 2006, page. 156, 174.
76. ^ Wehr, Gerhard (1985). Jung – A Biography. Shambhala. pp. 83–85. ISBN 978-0-87773-455-0.
77. ^ Sulloway, Frank J. (1991). “Reassessing Freud’s case histories: the social construction of psychoanalysis”. Isis. 82 (2): 245–75. doi:10.1086/355727. PMID 1917435. S2CID 41485270.
78. ^ Ellenberger, Henri F. (1970). The Discovery of the Unconscious: the History and Evolution of Dynamic Psychiatry ([Repr.] ed.). New York: Basic Books. p. 455. ISBN 978-0-465-01673-0.
79. ^ Gay 2006, p. 219
80. ^ Gay 2006, p. 503
81. ^ Martin Miller(1998) Freud and the Bolsheviks, Yale University Press, pp. 24, 45
82. ^ Jones, E. 1955, pp. 44–45
83. ^ Jones, Ernest (1964) Sigmund Freud: Life and Work. Edited and abridged by Lionel Trilling and Stephen Marcus. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books p. 332
84. ^ Jones, Ernest (1964) Sigmund Freud: Life and Work. Edited and abridged by Lionel Trilling and Stephen Marcus. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books pp. 334, 352, 361
85. ^ Gay 2006, p. 186
86. ^ Jump up to:^a b Gay 2006, p. 212
87. ^ Three members of the Viennese Psychoanalytic Society resigned at the same time as Adler to establish the Society for Free Psychoanalysis. Six other members of the Viennese Psychoanalytic Society who attempted to retain links to both the Adlerian and Freudian camps were forced out after Freud insisted that they must choose one side or another. Makari, George (2008). Revolution in Mind: The Creation of Psychoanalysis (Australian ed.). Carlton, Vic.: Melbourne University Publishing. p. 262. ISBN 978-0-522-85480-0.
88. ^ Ellenberger, Henri F. (1970). The Discovery of the Unconscious: the History and Evolution of Dynamic Psychiatry ([Repr.] ed.). New York: Basic Books. pp. 456, 584–85. ISBN 978-0-465-01673-0.
89. ^ Ellenberger, Henri F. (1970). The Discovery of the Unconscious: the History and Evolution of Dynamic Psychiatry ([Repr.] ed.). New York: Basic Books. p. 456. ISBN 978-0-465-01673-0.
90. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 229–30, 241
91. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 474–81
92. ^ Gay 2006, p. 460
93. ^ Danto, Elizabeth Ann (2005). Freud’s Free Clinics: Psychoanalysis and Social Justice, 1918–1938. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 3, 104, 185–86.
94. ^ Miller, Martin (1998) Freud and the Bolsheviks, Yale University Press pp. 24, 59
95. ^ Miller (1998), p. 94.
96. ^ Maddox, Brenda (2006). Freud’s Wizard: The Enigma of Ernest Jones. London: John Murray. pp. 147–79
97. ^ Danto, Elizabeth Ann (2005). Freud’s Free Clinics: Psychoanalysis and Social Justice, 1918–1938. New York: Columbia University Press, p. 151
98. ^ Gay 2006, p. 406
99. ^ Gay 2006, p. 394
100. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 490–500
101. ^ Gay 2006, p. 571
102. ^ Appignanesi, Lisa & Forrester, John. Freud’s Women. London: Penguin Books, 1992, p. 108
103. ^ Breger, Louis. Freud: Darkness in the Midst of Vision. Wiley, 2011, p. 262
104. ^ Lynn, D.J. (2003). “Freud’s psychoanalysis of Edith Banfield Jackson, 1930–1936”. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis and Dynamic Psychiatry. 31 (4): 609–25. doi:10.1521/jaap.31.4.609.23009. PMID 14714630.
105. ^ Lynn, D.J. (1997). “Freud’s analysis of Albert Hirst, 1903–1910”. Bulletin of the History of Medicine. 71 (1): 69–93. doi:10.1353/bhm.1997.0045. PMID 9086627. S2CID 37708194.
106. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 419–20
107. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 592–93.
108. ^ Jump up to:^a b Gay 2006, pp. 618–20, 624–25.
109. ^ Cohen 2009, pp. 152–53.
110. ^ Cohen 2009, pp. 157–59.
111. ^ Cohen 2009, p. 160.
112. ^ Cohen 2009, p. 166
113. ^ Cohen 2009, pp. 178, 205–07.
114. ^ Schur, Max (1972) Freud: Living and Dying, London: Hogarth Press, pp. 498–99.
115. ^ Cohen 2009, p. 213.
116. ^ Jump up to:^a b Chaney, Edward (2006). ‘Egypt in England and America: The Cultural Memorials of Religion, Royalty and Religion’, Sites of Exchange: European Crossroads and Faultlines, eds. M. Ascari and A. Corrado. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi, Chaney’Freudian Egypt’, The London Magazine (April/May 2006), pp. 62–69, and Chaney, ‘Moses and Monotheism, by Sigmund Freud’, ‘The Canon’, THE (Times Higher Education), 3–9 June 2010, No. 1, 950, p. 53.
117. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 650–51
118. ^ “Index entry”. FreeBMD. ONS. Retrieved 2 September 2016.
119. ^ Lacoursiere, Roy B. (2008). “Freud’s Death: Historical Truth and Biographical Fictions”. American Imago. 65 (1): 107–28. doi:10.1353/aim.0.0003. S2CID 170247119.
120. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Sigmund Freud’s Collection: An Archaeology of the Mind” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 February 2014. Retrieved 8 February 2014.
121. ^ Welter, Volker M (1 October 2011). Ernst L. Freud, Architect. ISBN 978-0-85745-234-4.
122. ^ Burke, Janine The Sphinx at the Table: Sigmund Freud’s Art Collection and the Development of Psychoanalysis, New York: Walker and Co. 2006, p. 340.
123. ^ Strutzmann, Helmut (2008). “An overview of Freud’s life”. In Joseph P. Merlino; Marilyn S. Jacobs; Judy Ann Kaplan; K. Lynne Moritz (eds.). Freud at 150: 21st Century Essays on a Man of Genius. Plymouth. p. 33. ISBN 978-0-7657-0547-1.
124. ^ “The History of Psychiatry”. Retrieved 6 February 2011.
125. ^ Rycroft, Charles. A Critical Dictionary of Psychoanalysis. London: Penguin Books, 1995, p. 59
126. ^ Rycroft, Charles. A Critical Dictionary of Psychoanalysis. London: Penguin Books, 1995, pp. 185–86
127. ^ Hirschmuller, Albrecht. The Life and Work of Josef Breuer. New York: New York University Press, 1989, pp. 101–16, 276–307.
128. ^ Hirschmuller, Albrecht. The Life and Work of Josef Breuer. New York: New York University Press, 1989, p. 115.
129. ^ Ellenberger, E.H., “The Story of ‘Anna O.’: A Critical Account with New Data”, J. of the Hist. of the Behavioral Sciences, 8 (3), 1972, pp. 693–717.
130. ^ Borch-Jacobsen, Mikkel. Remembering Anna O.: A Century of Mystification. London: Routledge, 1996.
131. ^ Macmillan, Malcolm. Freud Evaluated: The Completed Arc. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1997, pp. 3–24.
132. ^ Miller, Gavin (25 November 2009). “Book Review: Richard A. Skues (2009) Sigmund Freud and the History of Anna O.: Reopening a Closed Case”. History of Psychiatry. 20 (4): 509–10. doi:10.1177/0957154X090200040205. S2CID 162260138. Skues, Richard A. Sigmund Freud and the History of Anna O.: Reopening a Closed Case. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.
133. ^ “Faults and Frauds of Sigmund Freud”. Sulloway.org. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 20 September 2015.
134. ^ Freud, Standard Edition, vol. 7, 1906, p. 274; S.E. 14, 1914, p. 18; S.E. 20, 1925, p. 34; S.E. 22, 1933, p. 120; Schimek, J.G. (1987), Fact and Fantasy in the Seduction Theory: a Historical Review. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, xxxv: 937–65; Esterson, Allen (1998). “Jeffrey Masson and Freud’s seduction theory: a new fable based on old myths”. History of the Human Sciences. 11 (1): 1–21. doi:10.1177/095269519801100101. S2CID 170827479. Archived from the original on 3 November 2008.
135. ^ Masson (ed), 1985, pp. 141, 144. Esterson, Allen (1998), Jeffrey Masson and Freud’s seduction theory: a new fable based on old myths. History of the Human Sciences, 11 (1), pp. 1–21 Archived 28 August 2008 at the Wayback Machine
136. ^ Freud, Standard Edition 3, (1896a), (1896b), (1896c); Israëls, H. & Schatzman, M. (1993), The Seduction Theory. History of Psychiatry, iv: 23–59; Esterson, Allen (1998).
137. ^ Freud, Sigmund (1896c). The Aetiology of Hysteria. Standard Edition, Vol. 3, p. 204; Schimek, J.G. (1987). Fact and Fantasy in the Seduction Theory: a Historical Review. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, xxxv: 937–65; Toews, J.E. (1991). Historicizing Psychoanalysis: Freud in His Time and for Our Time, Journal of Modern History, vol. 63 (pp. 504–45), p. 510, n. 12; McNally, R.J. Remembering Trauma, Harvard University Press, 1993, pp. 159–69.
138. ^ Freud, Standard Edition 3, 1896c, pp. 204, 211; Schimek, J.G. (1987); Esterson, Allen (1998); Eissler, 2001, pp. 114–15; McNally, R.J. (2003).
139. ^ Freud, Standard Edition 3, 1896c, pp. 191–93; Cioffi, Frank. (1998 [1973]). Was Freud a liar? Freud and the Question of Pseudoscience. Chicago: Open Court, pp. 199–204; Schimek, J.G. (1987); Esterson, Allen (1998); McNally, (2003), pp, 159–69.
140. ^ Borch-Jacobsen, Mikkel (1996). “Neurotica: Freud and the seduction theory. October, vol. 76, Spring 1996, MIT, pp. 15–43; Hergenhahn, B.R. (1997), An Introduction to the History of Psychology, Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole, pp. 484–485; Esterson, Allen (2002). The myth of Freud’s ostracism by the medical community in 1896–1905: Jeffrey Masson’s assault on truth”. History of Psychology. 5 (2): 115–34. doi:10.1037/1093-4510.5.2.115. PMID 12096757. Archived from the original on 28 August 2008.
141. ^ Jump up to:^a b Andrews, B., and Brewin, C. What did Freud get right?, The psychologist, December 2000, page 606 Archived 9 April 2015 at the Wayback Machine
142. ^ Freud, S. 1924/1961, p. 204 The aetiology of hysteria. In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 3, pp. 189–224). London: Hogarth Press. (Original work published 1896, addendum originally published 1924)
143. ^ Ahbel-Rappe, K (2006). “‘I no longer believe’: did Freud abandon the seduction theory?”. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. 54 (1): 171–99. doi:10.1177/00030651060540010101. PMID 16602351. S2CID 25379440.
144. ^ Jones, Ernest. Sigmund Freud: Life and Work, vol. 1. London: Hogarth Press, 1953, pp. 94–96.
145. ^ Byck, Robert. Cocaine Papers by Sigmund Freud. Edited with an Introduction by Robert Byck. New York, Stonehill, 1974.
146. ^ Borch-Jacobsen (2001) Archived 12 October 2007 at the Wayback Machine Review of Israëls, Han. Der Fall Freud: Die Geburt der Psychoanalyse aus der Lüge. Hamburg: Europäische Verlagsanstalt, 1999.
147. ^ Thornton, Elizabeth. Freud and Cocaine: The Freudian Fallacy. London: Blond and Briggs, 1983, pp. 45–46.
148. ^ Jones, E., 1953, pp. 86–108.
149. ^ Masson, Jeffrey M. (ed.) The Complete Letters of Sigmund Freud to Wilhelm Fliess, 1887–1904. Harvard University Press, 1985, pp. 49, 106, 126, 127, 132, 201.
150. ^ Jump up to:^a b Wollheim, Richard (1971). Freud. London, Fontana Press, pp. 157–76
151. ^ Mannoni, Octave, Freud: The Theory of the Unconscious, London: Verso 2015 [1971], pp. 137–140.
152. ^ Jump up to:^a b Laplanche, Jean; Pontalis, Jean-Bertrand (2018) [1973]. “Id”. The Language of Psychoanalysis. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-429-92124-7.
153. ^ Jump up to:^a b Laplanche, Jean; Pontalis, Jean-Bertrand (2018) [1973]. “Ego“.
154. ^ Jump up to:^a b Laplanche, Jean; Pontalis, Jean-Bertrand (2018) [1973]. “Super-Ego“.
155. ^ Rycroft, Charles. A Critical Dictionary of Psychoanalysis. London: Penguin Books, 1995, p. 41.
156. ^ Mannoni, Octave, Freud: The Theory of the Unconscious, London: Verso 2015 [1971], pp. 55–58.
157. ^ Freud, Sigmund The Interpretation of Dreams (1976 [1900]) Harmondsworth: Pelican Books, p. 650.
158. ^ Mannoni 2015 [1971], pp. 93–97.
159. ^ Gay 2006, pp. 515–18
160. ^ Cavell, Marcia The Psychoanalytic Mind, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press 1996, p. 225.
161. ^ Paul, Robert A. (1991). “Freud’s anthropology”. In James Neu (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Freud. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 274. ISBN 978-0-521-37779-9.
162. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hothersall, D. 2004. “History of Psychology”, 4th ed., Mcgraw-Hill: NY p. 290
163. ^ Freud, S. The Ego and the Id, Standard Edition 19, pp. 7, 23.
164. ^ Heffner, Christopher. “Freud’s Structural and Topographical Models of Personality”. Psychology 101. Archived from the original on 13 September 2011. Retrieved 5 September 2011.
165. ^ Jones, Ernest (1957) [1953]. The Life and Work of Sigmund Freud. Volume 3. New York City: Basic Books. p. 273. It is a little odd that Freud himself never, except in conversation, used for the death instinct the term Thanatos, one which has become so popular since. At first he used the terms “death instinct” and “destructive instinct” indiscriminately, alternating between them, but in his discussion with Einstein about war he made the distinction that the former is directed against the self and the latter, derived from it, is directed outward. Stekel had in 1909 used the word Thanatos to signify a death-wish, but it was Federn who introduced it in the present context.
166. ^ Laplanche, Jean; Pontalis, Jean-Bertrand (2018) [1973]. “Thanatos“.
167. ^ Rycroft, Charles. A Critical Dictionary of Psychoanalysis. London: Penguin Books, 1995, p. 95.
168. ^ Laplanche, Jean; Pontalis, Jean-Bertrand (2018) [1973]. “Nirvana Principle”.
169. ^ Jump up to:^a b Wollheim, Richard. Freud. London, Fontana Press, pp. 184–86.
170. ^ Schuster, Aaron (2016). The Trouble with Pleasure. Deleuze and Psychoanalysis. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. p. 32. ISBN 978-0-262-52859-7.
171. ^ Perelberg, Rosine Jozef (15 September 2008). Freud: A Modern Reader. John Wiley & Sons. p. 168. ISBN 978-0-470-71373-0.
172. ^ Howarth, Glennys; Leaman, Oliver (16 December 2003). Encyclopedia of Death and Dying. Routledge. p. 304. ISBN 978-1-136-91378-5.
173. ^ Grigg, Russell; Hecq, Dominique; Smith, Craig (1999). Feminine Sexuality: The Early Psychoanalytic Controversies. London: Rebus Press. pp. 7–17. ISBN 1900877139.
174. ^ Appignanesi, Lisa & Forrester, John. Freud’s Women. London: Penguin Books, 1992, pp.403-414 citing Three Essay on Sexuality (1908), SE VII
175. ^ Femininity (1933), SE XXII
176. ^ Appignanesi, Lisa & Forrester, John. Freud’s Women. London: Penguin Books, 1992, pp. 430–37
177. ^ Rose, J. Sexuality in the Field of Vision, London: Verso 1986 pp. 91–93
178. ^ Femininity (1933), SE XXII
179. ^ Appignanesi, Lisa & Forrester, John. Freud’s Women. London: Penguin Books, 1992, p.431 citing Freud’s letter to Carl Muller-Braunschwieg of 21 July 1935.
180. ^ Jones, James W., ‘Foreword’ in Charles Spezzano and Gerald J. Gargiulo (eds), Soul on the Couch: Spirituality, Religion and Morality in Contemporary Psychoanalysis (Hillsdale, 2003), p. xi. Kepnes, Steven D. (December 1986). “Bridging the gap between understanding and explanation approaches to the study of religion”. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 25 (4): 504–12. doi:10.2307/1385914. JSTOR 1385914.
181. ^ Gay 1995, p. 435.
182. ^ Chapman, Christopher N. (2007). Freud, Religion and Anxiety. Morrisville, NC. pp. 30–31. ISBN 978-1-4357-0571-5. Freud, Sigmund Totem and Taboo (New York: W.W. Norton & Co. 1950) pp. x, 142, ISBN 978-0-393-00143-3
183. ^ Rubin, Jeffrey B., ‘Psychoanalysis is self-centred’ in Charles Spezzano and Gerald J. Gargiulo (eds), Soul on the Couch: Spirituality, Religion and Morality in Contemporary Psychoanalysis (Hillsdale, 2003), p. 79. Freud, Sigmund, Civilization and its Discontents (New York: Norton 1962), pp. 11–12 ISBN 978-0-393-09623-1 Fuller, Andrew R. (2008). Psychology and religion: classical theorists and contemporary developments (4th ed.). Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p. 33. ISBN 978-0-7425-6022-2.
184. ^ Stratton, Kimberly B. (August 2017). Copp, Paul; Wedemeyer, Christian K. (eds.). “Narrating Violence, Narrating Self: Exodus and Collective Identity in Early Rabbinic Literature”. History of Religions. University of Chicago Press for the University of Chicago Divinity School. 57 (1): 68–92. doi:10.1086/692318. ISSN 0018-2710. JSTOR 00182710. LCCN 64001081. OCLC 299661763.
185. ^ Costello, Stephen (2010). Hermeneutics and the psychoanalysis of religion. Bern: Peter Lang. pp. 72–77. ISBN 978-3-0343-0124-4.
186. ^ Assoun, Paul-Laurent; translated by Richard L. Collier (2002). Freud and Nietzsche. London: Continuum. p. 166. ISBN 978-0-8264-6316-6. Friedman, R.Z. (May 1998). “Freud’s religion: Oedipus and Moses”. Religious Studies. 34 (2): 145. doi:10.1017/S0034412598004296. Roustang, Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen; translated by Catherine Porter (1989). The Freudian subject. Basingstoke: Macmillan. p. 271 n. 42. ISBN 978-0-333-48986-4. Freud, Sigmund, Moses and Monotheism (New York: Vintage Books, 1967). Freud, Sigmund, An Autobiographical Study (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1952) pp. 130–31 ISBN 0-393-00146-6
187. ^ Juergensmeyer 2004, p. 171; Juergensmeyer 2009, p. 895; Marlan, Leeming and Madden 2008, p. 439; Fuller 1994, pp. 42, 67; Palmer 1997, pp. 35–36
188. ^ Perry, Marvin (2010). Western Civilization A Brief History. Boston: Wadsworth Pub Co. p. 405. ISBN 978-0-495-90115-0. Acquaviva, Gary J. (2000). Values, Violence, and Our Future (2. ed.). Amsterdam [u.a.]: Rodopi. p. 26. ISBN 978-90-420-0559-4. Lehrer, Ronald (1995). Nietzsche’s Presence in Freud’s Life and Thought: on the Origins of a Psychology of Dynamic Unconscious Mental Functioning. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press. pp. 180–81. ISBN 978-0-7914-2145-1. Freud, Sigmund, Civilization and its Discontents (New York: Norton 1962), pp. 92 and editor’s footnote ISBN 978-0-393-09623-1) Hergenhahn, B.R. (2009). An Introduction to the History of Psychology (6th ed.). Australia: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. pp. 536–37. ISBN 978-0-495-50621-8. Anderson, James William; Anderson, James William (2001). “Sigmund Freud’s life and work: an unofficial guide to the Freud exhibit”. In Jerome A. Winer (ed.). Sigmund Freud and his impact on the modern world. Hillsdale, NJ; London: Analytical Press. p. 29. ISBN 978-0-88163-342-9. But cf., Drassinower, Abraham (2003). Freud’s theory of culture: Eros, loss and politics. Lanham (Md.): Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 11–15. ISBN 978-0-7425-2262-6.
189. ^ Avner Falk (2008). Anti-semitism: A History and Psychoanalysis of Contemporary Hatred. ISBN 978-0-313-35384-0.
190. ^ Frosh, Stephen (1987). The Politics of Psychoanalysis. London: Macmillan. p. 1. ISBN 0-333-39614-6.
191. ^ Ellenberger, Henri F. (1970). The Discovery of the Unconscious: the History and Evolution of Dynamic Psychiatry. New York: Basic Books. p. 546. ISBN 978-0-465-01673-0.
192. ^ H. Ellenberger, The Discovery of the Unconscious, 1970, pp. 301, 486, 536, 331–409.
193. ^ Pick, Daniel (2015). Psychoanalysis: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition. pp. 19, 121.
194. ^ Solms, Mark (2018). “The scientific standing of psychoanalysis”. BJPsych International. 15 (1): 5–8. doi:10.1192/bji.2017.4. PMC 6020924. PMID 29953128.
195. ^ Evidence in Support of Psychodynamic Therapy Archived 4 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine Jessica Yakeley and Peter Hobson (2013)
196. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e} Kovel, Joel (1991). A Complete Guide to Therapy. London: Penguin Books. pp. 96, 123–35, 165–98. ISBN 978-0-14-013631-9.
197. ^ Mitchell, Stephen A. & Black, Margaret J. Freud and Beyond: A History of Modern Psychoanalytic Thought. New York: Basic Books, 1995, pp. 193–203
198. ^ Janov, Arthur. The Primal Scream. Primal Therapy: The Cure for Neurosis. London: Sphere Books, 1977, p. 206
199. ^ Crews, Frederick, et al. The Memory Wars: Freud’s Legacy in Dispute. New York: The New York Review of Books, 1995, pp. 206–12
200. ^ Stevens, Richard (1985). Freud and Psychoanalysis. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. p. 96. ISBN 978-0-335-10180-1. the number of relevant studies runs into thousands”
201. ^ MacKinnon, Donald W.; Dukes, William F. (1962). Postman, Leo (ed.). Psychology in the Making: Histories of Selected Research Problems. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. pp. 663, 703. ISBN 978-0-19-866224-2.
202. ^ Fisher, Seymour & Greenberg, Roger P. Freud Scientifically Reappraised: Testing the Theories and Therapy. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1996, pp. 13–15, 284–85
203. ^ Eysenck, Hans (1986). Decline and Fall of the Freudian Empire. Harmondsworth: Pelican. p. 202.
204. ^ Malcolm Macmillan, Freud Evaluated: The Completed Arc, MIT Press, 1997, p. xxiii.
205. ^ p. 32, Morris N. Eagle, “The Epistemological Status of Recent Developments in Psychoanalytic Theory”, in ‘R.S. Cohen and L. Lauden (eds.), Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis, Reidel 1983, pp. 31–55.
206. ^ Webster, Richard (2005). Why Freud Was Wrong: Sin, Science and Psychoanalysis. Oxford: The Orwell Press. pp. 12, 437. ISBN 978-0-9515922-5-0.
207. ^ Frederick Crews (1 March 1996). “The Verdict on Freud”. Psychological Science. 7 (2): 63–68. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00331.x. S2CID 143453699.
208. ^ Jacobsen, Kurt (2009). Freud’s Foes: Psychoanalysis, Science and Resistance. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefiled. ISBN 978-0742522633.
209. ^ Cohen, I.B Revolution in Science Harvard University Press 1985, p. 356
210. ^ Hobson, Allan (1988). The Dreaming Brain. New York: Penguin Books. p. 42. ISBN 978-0-14-012498-9.
211. ^ “Domhoff: Beyond Freud and Jung”. Psych.ucsc.edu. 23 September 2000. Archived from the original on 25 August 2011. Retrieved 21 May 2012.
212. ^ Popper, Karl. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London: Routledge and Keagan Paul, 1963, pp. 33–39
213. ^ Eysenck, Hans, Decline and Fall of the Freudian Empire Harmondsworth: Pelican, 1986, p. 14.
214. ^ Grünbaum, A. The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique. University of California Press, 1984, pp. 97–126.
215. ^ Roger Scruton (1994). Sexual Desire: A Philosophical Investigation. Phoenix Books. p. 201. ISBN 978-1-85799-100-0.
216. ^ Levy, Donald Freud Among the Philosophers (1996), pp. 129–32.
217. ^ Nathan G. Hale, The Rise and Crisis of Psychoanalysis in the United States, 1917–1985, Oxford University Press, 1995 (pp. 300–21).
218. ^ Alan A. Stone, “Where Will Psychoanalysis Survive?” Keynote address to the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 9 December 1995. Alan A. Stone, M.D. “Original Address”. Archived from the original on 27 March 2013. Retrieved 22 November 2012.
219. ^ Paul E. Stepansky, Psychoanalysis at the Margins, 2009, New York: Other Press, pp. 11, 14.
220. ^ Haggbloom, Steven J.; Warnick, Renee; Warnick, Jason E.; Jones, Vinessa K.; Yarbrough, Gary L.; Russell, Tenea M.; Borecky, Chris M.; McGahhey, Reagan; Powell III, John L.; Beavers, Jamie; Monte, Emmanuelle (2002). “The 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th century”. Review of General Psychology. 6 (2): 139–152. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.586.1913. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.6.2.139. S2CID 145668721. Archived from the original on 29 January 2017.
221. ^ Cooper, Arnold M(ed) Editor’s Preface to Contemporary Psychoanalysis in America American Psychiatric Pub. 2008, pp. xiii–xiv
222. ^ Kaplan-Solms, K. & Solms, Mark. Clinical studies in neuro-psychoanalysis: Introduction to a depth neuropsychology. London: Karnac Books, 2000; Solms, Mark & Turbull, O. The brain and the inner world: An introduction to the neuroscience of subjective experience. New York: Other Press, 2002.
223. ^ Blass, R.Z. & Carmeli Z. “The case against neuropsychoanalysis: On fallacies underlying psychoanalysis’ latest scientific trend and its negative impact on psychoanalytic discourse.”, The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, Volume 88, Issue 1, pp. 19–40, February 2007.
224. ^ Lambert, AJ; Good, KS; Kirk, IJ (2009). “Testing the repression hypothesis: Effects of emotional valence on memory suppression in the think – No think task”. Conscious Cognition. 19 (1): 281–93. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2009.09.004. PMID 19804991. S2CID 32958143.
225. ^ Depue, BE; Curran, T; Banich, MT (2007). “Prefrontal regions orchestrate suppression of emotional memories via a two-phase process” (PDF). Science. 317 (5835): 215–19. Bibcode:2007Sci…317..215D. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.561.1627. doi:10.1126/science.1139560. PMID 17626877. S2CID 1616027. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 September 2017.
226. ^ Eagleman, David Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain Edinburgh: Canongate, 2011, p. 17
227. ^ Kandel, ER (1999). “Biology and the future of psychoanalysis: a new intellectual framework for psychiatry revisited” (PDF). American Journal of Psychiatry. 156 (4): 505–24. doi:10.1176/ajp.156.4.505 (inactive 31 October 2021). PMID 10200728. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 September 2006.
228. ^ Robinson, Paul (1990). The Freudian Left. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. pp. 147–49. ISBN 978-0-8014-9716-2.
229. ^ Jay, Martin. The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996, pp. 86–112.
230. ^ Reich, Wilhelm (1976). People in Trouble. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. p. 53. ISBN 978-0-374-51035-0.
231. ^ Robinson, Paul. The Freudian Left: Wilhelm Reich, Geza Roheim, Herbert Marcuse. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1990, p. 7
232. ^ Fromm, Erich. Beyond the Chains of Illusion: My Encounter with Marx & Freud. London: Sphere Books, 1980, p. 11
233. ^ Deleuze, Gilles & Guattari, Félix. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1992, p. 55.
234. ^ Thomas Baldwin (1995). Ted Honderich (ed.). The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 792. ISBN 978-0-19-866132-0.
235. ^ Priest, Stephen. Merleau-Ponty. New York: Routledge, 2003, p. 28
236. ^ Adorno, Theodor W. Against Epistemology: A Metacritique. Studies in Husserl and the Phenomenological Antinomies. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1985, p. 96
237. ^ Ricoeur, Paul (2008) [1970]. Freud and Philosophy. An Essay on Interpretation. Denis Savage (transl.). New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. p. 33. ISBN 978-81-208-3305-0.
238. ^ Felski, Rita (2012). “Critique and the Hermeneutics of Suspicion”. M/C Journal. 15 (1). doi:10.5204/mcj.431. Archived from the original on 23 March 2016.
239. ^ Robinson, Paul (1993). Freud and His Critics. Oakland, California: University of California Press. p. 14. ISBN 978-0-520-08029-4.
240. ^ Cleaver, Harry (2000). Reading Capital Politically. Leeds: Ak Press. p. 50. ISBN 978-1-902593-29-6.
241. ^ Tony Purvis (2011). Sim, Stuart (ed.). The Lyotard Dictionary. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. pp. 199–200. ISBN 978-0-7486-4006-5.
242. ^ Dufresne, Todd. Tales from the Freudian Crypt: The Death Drive in Text and Context. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2000, p. 130.
243. ^ Kahn, Charles H. (1987). “Plato’s Theory of Desire” (PDF). The Review of Metaphysics. 41 (1): 77–103. ISSN 0034-6632. JSTOR 20128559. Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 May 2019. … Plato is perhaps the only major philosopher to anticipate some of the central discoveries of twentieth-century depth psychology, which is, of Freud and his school; …
244. ^ ” for Freud the basic nature of our mind is the appetite-id part, which is the main source for agency, for Plato, it is the other way around: we are divine, and reason is the essential nature and the origin of our agencies which together with the emotions temper the extreme and disparate tendencies of our behavior.” Calian, Florian. Plato’s Psychology of Action and the Origin of Agency Archived 25 May 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Affectivity, Agency (2012), p. 21.
245. ^ Gellner, Ernest. The Psychoanalytic Movement: The Cunning of Unreason. London: Fontana Press, 1993, pp. 140–43.
246. ^ Poets, Academy of American. “In Memory of Sigmund Freud by W. H. Auden – Poems | Academy of American Poets”. poets.org. Archived from the original on 14 April 2016.
247. ^ Alexander, Sam “In Memory of Sigmund Freud” (undated) and Thurschwell, P. Sigmund Freud London: Routledge 2009, p. 1
248. ^ Bolla, Peter de. Harold Bloom: Towards Historical Rhetorics. London: Routledge, 1988, p. 19
249. ^ Paglia, Camille. Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson. London and New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990, pp. 2, 228
250. ^ Jump up to:^a b Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique. W.W. Norton, 1963, pp. 166–94
251. ^ P. Robinson, Freud and His Critics, 1993, pp. 1–2.
252. ^ Jump up to:^a b Mitchell, Juliet. Psychoanalysis and Feminism: A Radical Reassessment of Freudian Psychoanalysis. London: Penguin Books, 2000, pp. xxix, 303–56
253. ^ Millett, Kate. Sexual Politics. University of Chicago Press, 2000, pp. 176–203
254. ^ Koedt, Anne (1970). “The Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm by Anne Koedt”. Archived from the original on 6 January 2013. Retrieved 29 December 2020.
255. ^ Weisstein, Naomi (1994). “Kinder, Küche, Kirche as Scientific Law: Psychology Constructs the Female”. In Schneir, Miriam (ed.). Feminism in Our Time. Vintage. p. 217. ISBN 978-0-679-74508-2.
256. ^ Gallop, Jane. The Daughter’s Seduction: Feminism and Psychoanalysis. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1992
257. ^ Gallop, Jane & Burke, Carolyn, in Eisenstein, Hester & Jardine, Alice (eds.). The Future of Difference. New Brunswick and London: Rutgers University Press, 1987, pp. 106–08
258. ^ Whitford, Margaret. Luce Irigaray: Philosophy in the Feminine. London and New York: Routledge, 1991, pp. 31–32
259. ^ Gilligan, Carol. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England: Harvard University Press, 1982, pp. 6–8, 18
260. ^ Moi, Toril (2004). “From Femininity to Finitude: Freud, Lacan, and Feminism, again” (PDF). Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. 29 (3): 871. doi:10.1086/380630. S2CID 146342669. Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 June 2016.
261. ^ Cavell, Stanley (1999). The Claim of Reason: Wittgenstein, Skepticism, Morality and Tragedy. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 111 and 431. ISBN 978-0-19-513107-9.
262. ^ Cavell, Stanley (1999). The Claim of Reason: Wittgenstein, Skepticism, Morality, and Tragedy. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 431. ISBN 978-0-19-513107-9.
263. ^ Holland, Norman N. (1994). John Huston, Freud, 1962 (adapted essay from an earlier version published in How to See Huston’s Freud: Perspectives on John Huston, Ed. Stephen Cooper. Perspectives on Film Series. New York: G. K. Hall, 1994. 164-83.)
264. ^ Freud at IMDb
265. ^ Dee Jefferson: Jeremy Thomas: The Lone Ranger Archived 3 September 2012 at the Wayback Machine, interview with Jeremy Thomas on thebrag.com, 14 August 2012. Retrieved 23 December 2012.
266. ^ Bunson, Matthew (1997). Encyclopedia Sherlockiana. Simon & Schuster. p. 227. ISBN 0-02-861679-0.
267. ^ Schager, Nick (23 March 2020). “Netflix’s ‘Freud’ Depicts Sigmund Freud as a Horny, Coked-Out Demon Hunter”. Daily Beast.
268. ^ “Freud: Season 1”. Rotten Tomatoes. Retrieved 29 March 2020.
269. ^ Horton, Adrian (23 March 2020). “Freud review – Netflix revisionist drama is a ridiculous coked-up mess”. The Guardian.
270. ^ Germain, Mark St (2010). Freud’s Last Session. Dramatists Play Service, Inc. ISBN 978-0-8222-2493-8.
271. ^ Nicholi, Armand (7 August 2003). The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life. ISBN 978-0-7432-4785-6.
272. ^ “The Question of God | PBS”. www.pbs.org.
273. ^ Nigel Farndale, ‘I was sure that children would not want to be told that this old lady was Lucy’, Telegraph Co. UK, 11 December 2005
274. ^ Gabbard, Glen O.; Gabbard, Krin (1999). Psychiatry and the Cinema (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association. p. 107. ISBN 978-0-88048-964-5.
275. ^ Tilly, Chris (15 February 2019). “‘Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure’: What happened to the actors behind the historical figures?”. Yahoo. Yahoo Entertainment. Retrieved 9 December 2020.
276. ^ Morrissey, Kim (1994). Dora: A Case of Hysteria. ISBN 978-1-85459-295-8.
277. ^ “Portrait of Dora, feminist reconstruction of Freud case, to be performed over two weekends”. news.stanford.edu.
278. ^ “My Own Version of You | The Official Bob Dylan Site”. www.bobdylan.com. Retrieved 1 May 2021.
279. ^ “The Psychogenesis of a case of Homosexuality in a Woman: 1920: Sigmund Freud”. Lacanianworks.net. Archived from the original on 31 October 2014. Retrieved 20 August 2014.

References[edit source]

• Alexander, Sam. “In Memory of Sigmund Freud”, The Modernism Lab, Yale University. Retrieved 23 June 2012.
• Appignanesi, Lisa and Forrester, John. Freud’s Women. Penguin Books, 2000.
• Auden, W.H. “In Memory of Sigmund Freud”, 1940, poets.org. Retrieved 23 June 2012.
• Bloom, Harold. The Western Canon. Riverhead Books, 1994.
• Blumenthal, Ralph. “Hotel log hints at desire that Freud didn’t repress”, International Herald Tribune, 24 December 2006.
• Clark, Ronald W. (June 1980). Freud: The Man and the Cause (1st ed.). Random House Inc (T). ISBN 978-0-394-40983-2.
• Cohen, David. The Escape of Sigmund Freud. JR Books, 2009.
• Cohen, Patricia. “Freud Is Widely Taught at Universities, Except in the Psychology Department”, The New York Times, 25 November 2007.
• Eissler, K.R. Freud and the Seduction Theory: A Brief Love Affair. Int. Univ. Press, 2005.
• Eysenck, Hans. J. Decline and Fall of the Freudian Empire. Pelican Books, 1986.
• Ford, Donald H. & Urban, Hugh B. Systems of Psychotherapy: A Comparative Study. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1965.
• Freud, Sigmund (1896c). The Aetiology of Hysteria. Standard Edition 3.
• Freud, Sigmund and Bonaparte, Marie (ed.). The Origins of Psychoanalysis. Letters to Wilhelm Fliess: Drafts and Notes 1887–1902. Kessinger Publishing, 2009.
• Fuller, Andrew R. Psychology and Religion: Eight Points of View, Littlefield Adams, 1994.
• Gay, Peter. Freud: A Life for Our Time. W. W. Norton & Company, 2006 (first published 1988).
• Gay, Peter (ed.) The Freud Reader. W.W. Norton & Co., 1995.
• Gresser, Moshe. Dual Allegiance: Freud As a Modern Jew. SUNY Press, 1994.
• Holt, Robert. Freud Reappraised: A Fresh Look at Psychoanalytic Theory. The Guilford Press, 1989.
• Hothersall, D. History of Psychology. 3rd edition, Mcgraw-Hill, 1995.
• Jones, E. Sigmund Freud: Life and Work Vol 1: The Young Freud 1856–1900, Hogarth Press, 1953.
• Jones, E. Sigmund Freud: Life and Work Vol 2: The Years of Maturity 1901–1919, Hogarth Press, 1955
• Jones, E. Sigmund Freud: Life and Work Vol 3: The Final Years 1919–1939, Hogarth Press, 1957
• Juergensmeyer, Mark. Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. University of California Press, 2004.
• Juergensmeyer, Mark. “Religious Violence”, in Peter B. Clarke (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of the Sociology of Religion. Oxford University Press, 2009.
• Kovel, Joel. A Complete Guide to Therapy: From Psychoanalysis to Behaviour Modification. Penguin Books, 1991 (first published 1976).
• Leeming, D.A.; Madden, Kathryn; and Marlan, Stanton. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. Springer Verlag u. Co., 2004.
• Mannoni, Octave. Freud: The Theory of the Unconscious, London: Verso, 2015 [1971].
• Margolis, Deborah P. (1989). “Freud and his Mother”. Modern Psychoanalsys. 14: 37–56.
• Masson, Jeffrey M. (ed.). The Complete Letters of Sigmund Freud to Wilhelm Fless, 1887–1904. Harvard University Press, 1985.
• Meissner, William W. “Freud and the Bible” in Bruce M. Metzger and Michael David Coogan (eds.). The Oxford Companion to the Bible. Oxford University Press, 1993.
• Michels, Robert. “Psychoanalysis and Psychiatry: A Changing Relationship”, American Mental Health Foundation. Retrieved 23 June 2012.
• Mitchell, Juliet. Psychoanalysis and Feminism: A Radical Reassessment of Freudian Psychoanalysis. Penguin Books, 2000.
• Palmer, Michael. Freud and Jung on Religion. Routledge, 1997.
• Pigman, G.W. (1995). “Freud and the history of empathy”. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis. 76 (2): 237–56. PMID 7628894.
• Rice, Emmanuel. Freud and Moses: The Long Journey Home. SUNY Press, 1990.
• Roudinesco, Elisabeth. Jacques Lacan. Polity Press, 1997.
• Sadock, Benjamin J. and Sadock, Virginia A. Kaplan and Sadock’s Synopsis of Psychiatry. 10th ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2007.
• Sulloway, Frank J. (1992) [1979]. Freud, Biologist of the Mind. Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-32335-3.
• Vitz, Paul C. Sigmund Freud’s Christian Unconscious. The Guilford Press, 1988.
• Webster, Richard. Why Freud Was Wrong: Sin, Science and Psychoanalysis. HarperCollins, 1995.

Further reading[edit source]

• Brown, Norman O. Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytic Meaning of History. Hanover, NH: Wesleyan University Press, Second Edition 1985.
• Cioffi, Frank. Freud and the Question of Pseudoscience. Peru, IL: Open Court, 1999.
• Cole, J. Preston. The Problematic Self in Kierkegaard and Freud. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1971.
• Crews, Frederick. The Memory Wars: Freud’s Legacy in Dispute. New York: The New York Review of Books, 1995.
• Crews, Frederick. Unauthorized Freud: Doubters Confront a Legend. New York: Penguin Books, 1998.
• Crews, Frederick. Freud: The Making of an Illusion. New York: Metropolitan Books, 2017. ISBN 978-0742522633
• Dufresne, Todd. Killing Freud: Twentieth-Century Culture and the Death of Psychoanalysis. New York: Continuum, 2003.
• Dufresne, Todd, ed. Against Freud: Critics Talk Back. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2007.
• Ellenberger, Henri. Beyond the Unconscious: Essays of Henri F. Ellenberger in the History of Psychiatry. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.
• Ellenberger, Henri. The Discovery of the Unconscious: The History and Evolution of Dynamic Psychiatry. New York: Basic Books, 1970.
• Esterson, Allen. Seductive Mirage: An Exploration of the Work of Sigmund Freud. Chicago: Open Court, 1993.
• Gay, Peter. Freud: A Life for Our Time. London: Papermac, 1988; 2nd revised hardcover edition, Little Books (1 May 2006), 864 pages, ISBN 978-1-904435-53-2; Reprint hardcover edition, W.W. Norton & Company (1988); trade paperback, W.W. Norton & Company (17 May 2006), 864 pages, ISBN 978-0-393-32861-5
• Gellner, Ernest. The Psychoanalytic Movement: The Cunning of Unreason. London: Fontana Press, 1993.
• Grünbaum, Adolf. The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984.
• Grünbaum, Adolf. Validation in the Clinical Theory of Psychoanalysis: A Study in the Philosophy of Psychoanalysis. Madison, Connecticut: International Universities Press, 1993.
• Hale, Nathan G., Jr. Freud and the Americans: The Beginnings of Psychoanalysis in the United States, 1876–1917. New York: Oxford University Press, 1971.
• Hale, Nathan G., Jr. The Rise and Crisis of Psychoanalysis in the United States: Freud and the Americans, 1917–1985. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
• Hirschmüller, Albrecht. The Life and Work of Josef Breuer. New York University Press, 1989.
• Jones, Ernest. The Life and Work of Sigmund Freud. 3 vols. New York: Basic Books, 1953–1957
• Jung, Carl Gustav. The Collected Works of C. G. Jung Volume 4: Freud and Psychoanalysis. Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, 1961.
• Macmillan, Malcolm. Freud Evaluated: The Completed Arc. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1997.
• Marcuse, Herbert. Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud. Boston: Beacon Press, 1974
• Masson, Jeffrey Moussaieff. The Assault on Truth: Freud’s Suppression of the Seduction Theory. New York: Pocket Books, 1998
• Puner, Helen Walker. Freud: His Life and His Mind. New York: Dell Publishing Co., 1947
• Ricœur, Paul. Freud and Philosophy. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970.
• Rieff, Philip. Freud: The Mind of the Moralist. Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, 1961
• Roazen, Paul. Freud and His Followers. New York: Knopf, 1975, hardcover; trade paperback, Da Capo Press (22 March 1992) ISBN 978-0-306-80472-4
• Roazen, Paul. Freud: Political and Social Thought. London: Hogarth Press, 1969.
• Roth, Michael, ed. Freud: Conflict and Culture. New York: Vintage, 1998.
• Schur, Max. Freud: Living and Dying. New York: International Universities Press, 1972.
• Stannard, David E. Shrinking History: On Freud and the Failure of Psychohistory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982.
• Webster, Richard. Why Freud Was Wrong: Sin, Science and Psychoanalysis. Oxford: The Orwell Press, 2005.
• Wollheim, Richard. Freud. Fontana, 1971.
• Wollheim, Richard, and James Hopkins, eds. Philosophical essays on Freud. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

Valeriy Vasylyovych Lobanovskyi (Ukrainian: Вале́рій Васи́льович Лобано́вський [wɐˈlɛrɪj lobɐˈnɔu̯sʲkɪj]; Russian: Вале́рий Васи́льевич Лобано́вский; 6 January 1939 – 13 May 2002) was а Ukrainian football player and manager.^[1] He was Master of Sports of the USSR, Distinguished Coach of the USSR, and a laureate of the UEFA Order of Merit in Ruby (2002) and FIFA Order of Merit, the highest honour awarded by FIFA.^[2][3] In 2002 he was awarded the Hero of Ukraine award (posthumously), his nation’s highest honour, for his contribution to Ukrainian football. In 2008, Lobanovskyi was ranked 6th in Inter‘s list of the 100 Greatest Ukrainians following a nationwide poll that saw around 2.5 million people casting their votes.^[4][5][6][7]

Lobanovskyi is most famous for his spells managing FC Dynamo Kyiv and the USSR national football team. Lobanovskyi established Dynamo as the most dominant club in Soviet football in the 1970s and 1980s, winning the Soviet Top League eight times and the Soviet Cup six times in 16 years. In 1975 his Dynamo Kyiv team became the first side from the Soviet Union to win a major European trophy when they beat Hungarian side Ferencváros in the final of the Cup Winners’ Cup. During the tournament, Dynamo Kyiv won eight games out of nine, resulting in a winning percentage of 88.88% – a record that stood for 45 years encompassing all of the major European club football competitions.^[8] Lobanovskyi and his team repeated their Cup Winners’ Cup success in 1986, beating Atletico Madrid in the final. In both 1975 and 1986, two of Dynamo’s players (Oleg Blokhin and Igor Belanov respectively) were also awarded the Ballon d’Or under his tutelage. During Lobanovskyi’s first two stints, the team also reached the European Cup semi-finals in 1977 and 1987 and quarter-finals in 1976, 1982 and 1983. With the Soviet Union national team, Lobanovskyi reached the finals of Euro 1988, losing to eventual winners the Netherlands, and won the bronze medal at the 1976 Summer Olympic Games.

After returning to Dynamo Kyiv in 1997 for the third time, Lobanovskyi led the team to another successful run in European competition. In the first full season of his third spell, Dynamo reached the quarter-finals of the Champions League in 1998, topping a group that included FC Barcelona, Newcastle United and PSV Eindhoven, famously winning both games against Barcelona, 3–0 in Kyiv and 4–0 at Camp Nou.^[9][10][11] The following season season, Lobanovskyi and his team reached the semi-finals, where they were knocked out by Bayern Munich, with star striker Andriy Shevchenko finishing third in the 1999 Ballon d’Or poll.

Lobanovskyi is highly regarded due to his achievements as a coach and is widely considered one of the greatest managers of all time.^[12][13][14] Throughout his coaching career Lobanovskyi won 33 official trophies, becoming the second most decorated manager of all time (behind Alex Ferguson) and the most successful football manager of the 20th century.^{[15][16][17][18][19]} He also holds several managerial records in Soviet football, including most Soviet Top League titles, most Soviet Cup wins (shared with Viktor Maslov) and most USSR Super Cup wins. Lobanovskyi is the only manager to win a major European competition^[8] with an Eastern European club twice. He is one of four managers to win the Cup Winners’ Cup twice, and one of two (along with Nereo Rocco) to accomplish the feat with the same team. Lobanovskyi has also won the Ukrainian championship five times out of five – an accomplishment not matched by any other manager. Lobanovskyi has coached three Ballon d’Or winners — Oleg Blokhin, Igor Belanov and Andriy Shevchenko.^[20][21][22]

Contents

• 1Early life
• 2Playing career
• 3Coaching career
  • 3.1Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk (1968–1973)
  • 3.2Dynamo Kyiv (1973–1982), Soviet Union national team (1975–1976, 1982–1983)
  • 3.3Return to Dynamo Kyiv (1984–1986)
  • 3.4Co-managing Dynamo Kyiv and Soviet Union national team again (1986–1990)
  • 3.5Middle East (1990–1996)
  • 3.6Third stint at Dynamo Kyiv (1997–2002)
• 4Death
• 5Management style and influence
• 6Tactics
• 7Remembrance
• 8Personal life
• 9Career statistics
  • 9.1As a manager
• 10Honours
  • 10.1Player
  • 10.2Manager
  • 10.3Individual
  • 10.4Orders and further honours
• 11References
• 12External links

Early life[edit source]

Valeriy Lobanovskyi was born on 6 January 1939 in Kyiv. His father was a factory worker, while his mother was a housewife.^[23] He studied at the Kyiv school No.319 (now Valeriy Lobanovskyi Prospect, 146), where a plaque commemorating Lobanovskyi is installed and the school itself has been renamed in his honor.^[24] In 1956 he joined the Kyiv Polytechnic Institute but later transferred to the Odessa Polytechnic Institute, where he graduated.^[25]

Playing career[edit source]

When the goalkeeper was too far from the closest bar, Lobanovskyi scored a goal right from the cornerWhen the goalkeeper was too close to the closest bar, Lobanovskyi sent the ball to the further bar, where Oleh Bazylevych scored a goal

Lobanovskyi was a graduate of the Kyiv Football School No. 1 and the Football School of Youth in Kyiv (first coach — Mykola Chayka).

At the age of 18, Lobanovskyi was invited to the B-squad of Dynamo Kyiv, the most prominent Ukrainian football club at the time. His debut in the Soviet Top League came on 29 May 1959 against CSK MO Moscow.^[26] Lobanovskyi became famous for his ability to accurately deliver curled balls from corner and free kicks (so-called curl) — often Lobanovskyi was able to score the goal directly from the corner. He had regularly been working on these shots during training sessions, using Magnus effect and his own calculations. The Soviet press compared him to Brazilian forward Didi who regularly curved the ball in a similar way at the 1958 World Cup. Teammates often praised Lobanovskyi for his unorthodox mindset and ability to use dribbling, which was unusual for such tall (187 cm) players.^[27]

Since 1960, Lobanovskyi was a full-fledged member of the starting line-up. He was mostly used as a left winger, where he formed a duo with Valentyn Troyanovskyi.^[28] That same year he became the club’s top goalscorer with 13 goals. In 1961, Dynamo Kyiv became the first football team not from Moscow to win USSR title, with Lobanovskyi scoring 10 goals. He was regularly invited to the national team, but due to strong opposition (at the time there were many top-level left-wingers in Soviet Union like Mikheil Meskhi, Anatoli Ilyin and Galimzyan Khusainov) was able to play only two international games, against Austria and Poland.

Overall he spent seven years with the club before leaving in 1964 due to conflict with the coach Viktor Maslov. Lobanovskyi finished his career after brief spells at Chornomorets Odessa and Shakhtar Donetsk. Lobanovskyi ended his playing career at the age of 29 having scored 71 goals in 253 games in the Soviet Top League (42 goals in 144 matches with Dynamo Kyiv, 15 goals in 59 matches with Chornomorets and 14 goals in 50 matches with Shakhtar).^[1]

Coaching career[edit source]

Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk (1968–1973)[edit source]

A year after retiring as a player Lobanovskyi was named the manager of FC Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk on 16 October 1968.^[29] That year Dnipro ended up third in the Group 3 (Ukrainian SSR group) of the Class A, group 2. The team won its group next year and entered the league finals, finishing second. In 1970, the league system was reformed and Dnipro entered the newly created Class A, group 1 (later renamed to Soviet First League), which the team won the following year, moving to the Top League. In its first season at the highest level, the club ended up sixth, one point away from silver medals.

Dynamo Kyiv (1973–1982), Soviet Union national team (1975–1976, 1982–1983)[edit source]

Lobanovskyi moved to his former club, Dynamo Kyiv, who were impressed by his accomplishments with Dnipro, in October 1973. In January 1974 he was joined by his former teammate, Oleh Bazylevych. These two would work as a coaching duo until October 1976. Both managers had equal rights: Bazylevych was a theorist, and Lobanovskyi was in charge of the training process.^[30] During their first season, the Soviet press often criticized them for rationalism and unwillingness to play attacking football (the so-called away model — the team would play away games defensively to score a draw). In that season, the team won both the league and Soviet Cup.

Both Lobanovskyi and Bazylevych understood the importance of accurate calculation of the physical load on players. With cooperation from Anatoly Zelentsov, a scientist from the department of physical education theory of Kyiv State Institute of Physical Education, Lobanovskyi brought a system of calculation of the training process and mathematical modeling of physical load for the team. Zelentsov later headed Dynamo Kyiv’s scientific laboratory, which was popularly called the Zelentsov Center.^[31][32][33] Lobanovskyi was credited for inventing a style of play in which any outfield player can take over the role of any other player in a team, similarly to what was practiced by Rinus Michels at the same time in Netherlands. Unlike Michels, however, Lobanovskyi was developing his style of play scientifically, with a strong emphasis on pressing.^[34][35][36]

In 1975, Dynamo Kyiv won the European Cup Winners’ Cup and then-highly regarded European Super Cup. Dynamo Kyiv became the first Soviet club to win a major European trophy. In the first three rounds of Cup Winners’ Cup, the team defeated CSKA Sofia, Eintracht Frankfurt and Bursaspor, winning all home and away games. In semifinals, Dynamo faced the 1974–75 Eredivisie winner, PSV Eindhoven. The Dutch club was considered one of the most powerful in Europe, being sponsored by Philips. The first leg played in Kyiv ended up 3–0 in favor of Lobanovskyi’s team. After losing 1–2 in the second leg, Dynamo Kyiv moved to the final. On 14 May 1975, Dynamo Kyiv won Cup Winners’ Cup for the first time, defeating Ferencváros 3–0 in the final. During the tournament, the team won 88.88% of its matches (8 games out of 9), which remained the best winning record among all European main tournaments’ winning club sides until 2019–20 season when Bayern Munich won all its matches on its way to the Champions League trophy.Lobanovskyi (left) in Eindhoven in 1975 together with the manager of PSV Ben van Gelde

In the autumn of that year, Dynamo Kyiv faced the 1974–75 European Cup winner Bayern Munich for the second ever European Super Cup. Besides winning their second European Cup in a row, Bayern was also the base club for the 1974 World Cup winners. The build-up to the match had a political background, mainly in USSR. The Soviet Ukrainian club won both games, 1–0 in Munich and 2–0 in Kyiv in front of 100,000 fans.^[37][38][39] All goals were scored by Oleg Blokhin who would become Ballon d’Or winner that year. The Lobanovskyi—Bazylevych duo received the World Sports Coach of the Year award.^[40]

The Lobanovskyi–Bazylevych duo was appointed managers of the Soviet national team in 1975, after the team lost its first game in the Euro qualifying group to Ireland 3–0. Dynamo Kyiv became the base club of the national team. Despite Lobanovskyi’s demands to reorganize national league to autumn-spring format, the USSR Football Federation split 1976 into two seasons (spring and autumn).

Before 1976 season, Lobanovskyi and Bazylevych were pressured by the Moscow officials to accept the Moscow-based Mark Godik as the professional fitness coach to prepare the team for European Cup, Euro qualification and 1976 Summer Olympics. The duo was forced to move the training camp to the mountains where the atmospheric pressure was much higher and the oxygen levels were lower, all while maintaining the same indicators of the intensity of training. The training process was unbalanced, while basic correlation of aerobic and anaerobic exercises was also butchered. Many players struggled during the training process, some players’ measured pulses were above 200 beats per minute.^[41]

The club competed in the “spring” season mostly with B-squad, as the first team was able to concentrate on their preparation for the three international tournaments. Dynamo Kyiv left the European Cup after quarterfinals, losing to Saint-Étienne (2–0 in Kyiv and 0–3 in France). The national team won its qualifying group but lost to Czechoslovakia in play-offs, thus failing to qualify at the European championship. After winning bronze medal at the Summer Olympic Games, the coaching duo left the national team.

In the summer of 1976, after a conflict between Kyiv’s players and managerial stuff, Oleh Bazylevych left the team. In 1977 Dynamo Kyiv regained the USSR championship, losing once in 30 games, and reached semifinals of the European Cup. After winning all games on the road to quarterfinals, Lobanovskyi’s side faced Bayern Munich, the winner of the last three European Cups, for the second time in the last two years. After losing 1–0 in Munich, Kyiv’s team scored two unanswered goals in the last 10 minutes of the second leg, moving to semifinals and ending Bayern’s European dominance. In semifinals, however, Dynamo Kyiv was beaten by another German club, Borussia Mönchengladbach.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Dynamo was going through generational change. After finishing second and third in the following two years, the team won back-to-back USSR titles in 1980 and 1981. Lobanovskyi led Dynamo Kyiv to European Cup quarter-finals in 1981 and 1982, before leaving the team at the end of 1982 in order to return to managing Soviet national team, being in charge of it during Euro qualification. The team was leading its qualifying group before losing their last match against Portugal in Lisbon, conceding the only goal after an incorrectly ruled penalty (the foul happened outside of the penalty area). Lobanovskyi was sacked again.

Return to Dynamo Kyiv (1984–1986)[edit source]

After being sacked by Soviet national team, Lobanovskyi returned to Dynamo Kyiv after just one year of absence. The club, having been led by Yuriy Morozov in 1983, ended up seventh in the league, the lowest since the spring of 1976, when Kyiv was represented mostly by B-squad. The team was going through crisis, with many key players injured. Dynamo Kyiv finished the 1984 season on tenth place, failing to qualify at UEFA tournaments for the first time in 14 years.

Lobanovskyi saw the problems and knew how to solve them. The coach received team’s support. Lobanovskyi’s side started the 1985 season very strongly and in the end captured another Soviet double, defeating their biggest rival, Spartak Moscow, twice throughout the season.

In 1986, Dynamo Kyiv won their second Cup Winners’ Cup. The team lost the first game to Utrecht but then went on an impressive undefeated streak, winning six games and drawing two with a goal difference 25–6. Throughout the tournament, Lobanovskyi’s side won all home games (and final) with at least three goals difference. On the road to the final, the team defeated Rapid Wien, the runner-up of the previous Cup Winners’ Cup edition, 9–2 on aggregate in quarterfinals and Dukla Prague in semifinals. In the final, Dynamo beat Atletico Madrid, led by Luis Aragones, 3–0. The second goal, scored by Oleg Blokhin, was especially memorable, as it was scored after the so-called “fan attack”. Lobanovskyi’s side was widely praised by the Soviet and European media.^{[42][43][44][9][10]} Many observers, fascinated by the quality of football shown by Dynamo Kyiv, called their style of play “football of the 21st century”, and the side was labeled as “the team from another planet”.^{[43][44][9][10][45]}

Co-managing Dynamo Kyiv and Soviet Union national team again (1986–1990)[edit source]

Lobanovskyi’s signature

Following success with Dynamo Kyiv in Cup Winners’ Cup, Lobanovskyi was appointed manager of the national team for the third time. He was asked to manage the side on the eve of the 1986 World Cup. The main squad consisted almost exclusively of Dynamo Kyiv’s players.^[46][47] In the group stage, Soviet players destroyed Hungary, scoring six unanswered goals, and drew with European champions, France, 1–1. The team confirmed the first place in the group by defeating Canada 2–0 with a B-squad. After an impressive performance, Lobanovskyi’s side were predicted to be one of the favourites to win the tournament. In the first game of the knockout stage, however, Soviet team lost to Belgium in an extra-time, after Belgium scored two goals due to referee’s mistakes.^[46][47][48]

At the conclusion of 1986 season, Dynamo Kyiv won the Soviet Top League for the 12th time (7th time during Lobanovskyi’s time in charge of the club). Igor Belanov was rewarded with Ballon d’Or, becoming the second Kyiv’s player to receive the award, while Oleksandr Zavarov ended up 6th. Overall, Dynamo Kyiv’s players scored the most points during the award’s voting process, just as they did in 1975. Lobanovskyi himself was named both European Coach of the Season and Coach of the Year in 1986.^[49]

In 1987, after defeating Besiktas twice in European Cup quarterfinals, Dynamo Kyiv extended their unbeaten streak in main UEFA club tournaments to 14 games,^[8] the longest unbeaten streak at the time. In the league Dynamo finished sixth but won the Soviet Cup and prestigious Dynamo Games of the USSR.^[17] Meanwhile, the Soviet team won its Euro 1988 qualifying group which consisted of East Germany and defending champions, France, as sbornaja famously defeated them 0–2 in Paris.

The national team achieved great success at the 1988 European Championship, winning silver medals. In every game, at least seven players of the starting line-up represented Dynamo Kyiv and at least eight Kyiv’s players entered the field (substitutions including; only two were allowed at the time). Sbornaja won its group, defeating Netherlands and England and drawing with Ireland. In semifinals, Lobanovskyi’s side defeated Italy, after Hennadiy Lytovchenko and Oleg Protasov (both Dynamo Kyiv’s representatives) scored two unanswered goals. In the final, Soviet team met Netherlands again but was unable to repeat their previous victory from the group stage, losing 0–2. Van Basten’s goal, in which he volleyed right-footed over Rinat Dasayev from the tightest of angles on the right of the penalty area, would later be described as one of the greatest goals in the history of the European Championships.^{[50][51][52][53]}

Following perestroika, many of Lobanovskyi’s best players left the USSR to play in Western Europe. Going into the 1990 World Cup he could not call upon the best Soviet players. As a result, sbornaja finished on the bottom of their group. In the same year, which happened to be the final year of Lobanovskyi’s career in Soviet Union, Dynamo Kyiv, which was going through generational change, won their fourth Soviet double. The team cemented first place in the Top League weeks before the end, winning its 13th league title and establishing themselves as the most successful Soviet football club of all time. In the Cup final, Lobanovskyi’s team destroyed Lokomotiv Moscow 6–1. In the autumn of 1990, Lobanovskyi left Soviet Union in order to take a lucrative offer from United Arab Emirates.

Middle East (1990–1996)[edit source]

In September 1990, Lobanovskyi decided to leave Soviet Union and take up a lucrative offer of managing the United Arab Emirates national football team. Lobanovskyi is recognized as one of the great managers in the history of the national team.^[54] During his four year tenure, the team ended up fourth at the Asian Cup (losing bronze medal to South Korea in a penalty shootout), its best finish up to that date. He left Emirates due to a conflict with Emirates football federation and went on to spend the next two years managing the Kuwait national football team (winning a bronze medal at the Asian Games), before agreeing to return to Dynamo Kyiv in November 1996.^[55]

Third stint at Dynamo Kyiv (1997–2002)[edit source]

In January 1997, Lobanovskyi returned to manage Dynamo Kyiv for the third time. The club by this time had fallen somewhat from their former heights. The club had been facing little opposition in Ukraine but had little success in European competitions, having been able to enter the Champions League first round only twice in the last five years. During itd last European campaign before Lobanovsky’s return, the team failed to qualify at the group stage of Champions League and was beaten by Neuchâtel Xamax in the first round of the UEFA Cup.

Within a month after Lobanovskyi’s return, the team won the 1997 edition of the CIS Cup, defeating its biggest rival, Russian champion Spartak Moscow, in the final. The team won the 1996-97 Ukrainian league with 11 points gap against the second best team, Shakhtar Donetsk. At the start of the 1997–98 season, Dynamo Kyiv defeated Brøndby in the qualifying round of the Champions League and entered the group stage. Lobanovskyi’s team were seeded against FC Barcelona, Newcastle United and PSV Eindhoven. The group was often described as the death group of the tournament.^[56][57][58] In the first two games, however, the team defeated PSV 1–3 in Eindhoven and drew with Newcastle. After that, Lobanovskyi’s side defeated Barcelona, a generally recognized favourite, 3–0 in Kyiv in front of 100,000 fans.^[59][60] In the rematch two weeks later the Spanish team, which were coming off of an away victory against Real Madrid and were leading La Liga, lost the home game to Dynamo Kyiv 0–4, with Andriy Shevchenko scoring hat-trick in the first half.^{[61][60][9][10][11]} The Ukrainian team won their group after drawing with PSV 1–1. In quarterfinals, Dynamo faced Juventus. Lobanovskyi’s side were able to draw the first game in Italy but were outclassed 1–4 in Ukraine. On the domestic field, the team won the league and Ukrainian Cup.

At the start of the 1998–99 season, Dynamo struggled to get through qualification. After beating Barry Town with an aggregate score 9–1, the team moved to the Champions League group stage after defeating Sparta Prague in a penalty shootout when both games ended 1–0 in favor of the away team. Dynamo were seeded against Arsenal, Racing Lens and Panathinaikos. The team lost its first game to Panathinaikos in Greece and then drew the home match with Lens, 1–1. Lobanovskyi’s side then faced Arsenal at Wembley Stadium. In the second half, Andriy Shevchenko scored a goal that was cancelled due to offside. The replay, however, showed that the goal was valid.^[62][63] Instead, Dennis Bergkamp took Arsenal to the lead in the 72nd minute. In the 88th minute, Dynamo equalised after a strike from Serhii Rebrov to the left corner of the net, and the match finished as a 1–1 draw.^[62] In the rematch against Arsenal two weeks later, Lobanovskyi’s team won after Serhii Rebrov, Oleksandr Holovko and Andriy Shevchenko took the team to the 3–0 lead and Stephen Hughes scored the only goal for Arsenal in the 82nd minute of the match. Dynamo then defeated Panathinaikos in Kyiv thanks to an own goal from Angelos Basinas. Before the final match, Dynamo, Panathinaikos and Racing Lens had 8 points, while Arsenal earned only 6 points. Panathinaikos lost the home game to Arsenal while the Ukrainian team was able to earn a 3–1 victory against Lens in France, win their group and move to quarter-finals.

In the play-offs, Lobanovskyi’s team were seeded against the defending champions, Real Madrid. The first match at Santiago Bernabéu Stadium ended in a 1–1 draw. In the rematch in Kyiv, Dynamo won 2–0. All Kyiv’s goals were scored by Andriy Shevchenko. To this day, Dynamo Kyiv remains the only team not from The Big 5 Leagues,^[64][65] Portugal and Netherlands to enter the Champions League semi-finals since non-champions of the top European leagues were eligible to compete in the competition for the first time. In semi-finals, the team faced Bayern Munich. In the first match in Ukraine, Dynamo were leading 3–1 after fifty minutes of the playing time and missed at least two promising opportunities to score the fourth goal.^[66][67] Instead, Stefan Effenberg reduced Kyiv’s lead and Carsten Jancker equalised in the 88th minute. Bayern then won the second leg 1–0 and moved to the final. Andriy Shevchenko became Champions League’s top goalscorer and received the UEFA Club Forward Of The Year award. Shevchenko also ended up third in the 1999 Ballon d’Or voting process.

In the summer of 1999, Shevchenko was sold to AC Milan, while the team’s captain Oleh Luzhnyi was transferred to Arsenal. Dynamo won the domestic double for the third year in a row and ended their Champions League campaign in the second group stage. The team was able to finish second in the first group stage, in a group which consisted of S.S. Lazio, Bayer Leverkusen and Maribor, but ended up third behind Bayern Munich and Real Madrid in the next round, having earned 10 points.

Afterwards, Dynamo’s second forward, Serhii Rebrov, was sold to Tottenham Hotspur and Kakha Kaladze was bought by AC Milan. With many key players sold, Dynamo Kyiv, which were also going through generational change, was not able to go past the first group stage in the next two seasons. Lobanovskyi won his last trophy in January 2002, when the team won its fourth CIS Cup, having entered the A-squad for the tournament for the first time since 1998. The team won all matches in the competition, defeating Spartak Moscow 4–3 in the final.

Lobanovskyi was appointed manager of the Ukraine national side in March 2000. Once again he was co-managing Dynamo Kyiv and the national team. Lobanovskyi left Ukraine national team after the side failed to qualify for the 2002 World Cup, losing to Germany in the play-offs.

Under his predecessor Yozhef Sabo, the national squad consisted almost exclusively of Dynamo Kyiv players. Lobanovskyi, despite his own obvious connection with Dynamo, initiated into the national squad many players outside of Dynamo. Anatoliy Tymoshchuk and Andriy Vorobey (from Shakhtar Donetsk), Dmytro Parfenov and Maksym Kalynychenko (from Spartak Moscow), Oleksandr Spivak (from Zenit St. Petersburg), Volodymyr Yezerskiy (from Dnipro) and Andriy Voronin (from Mainz) were all either initiated or given their first starting spots in the national team during his tenure. Together with the Dynamo generation of the late 1990s (Shevchenko, Rebrov, Husin, Vashchuk, Shovkovskyi) these players were to form, after Lobanovskyi’s death, the core of the team that reached the 2006 World Cup quarter-finals – the first and only time Ukraine has ever qualified at the World Cup – managed by Oleg Blokhin who had worked under Lobanovskyi for 13 years as a Dynamo Kyiv and Soviet Union national team player.

Death[edit source]

Lobanovskyi’s burial location and monument at Baikove cemetery in Kyiv

Lobanovskyi had to deal with health issues since 1988, when he suffered his first heart attack. Having come back from the Middle East in 1996, Lobanovskyi looked in a visibly worse shape.^[68] He suffered a second heart attack in the autumn of 2001, which required surgery. In 2001, Lobanovskyi missed all away games of Dynamo Kyiv in Champions League due to hypertension and being banned from travelling by air.^[69]

On 7 May 2002 during Dynamo Kyiv’s game against FC Metalurh Zaporizhzhya, Lobanovskyi fainted and was hospitalized with a stroke. Lobanovskyi went through a brain surgery and his health was rated as critical. The press, which regularly monitored Lobanovsky’s state of health, wrote that there was hope, but Valeriy Lobanovskyi had not regained consciousness.^[70] His heart stopped on 13 May at 8:35 pm. At the Champions League final in Glasgow two days later, UEFA held a minute’s silence in his honour.

Lobanovskyi’s funeral on 14 May 2002 was attended by the President of Ukraine Leonid Kuchma, Ukraine’s Prime Minister Anatoliy Kinakh, other politicians, Lobanovskyi’s former players Andriy Shevchenko, Oleg Blokhin, Igor Belanov, Oleksandr Zavarov, Serhii Rebrov etc. In general, from 60.000 to 150.000 people attended the funeral.^[71]

Lobanovskyi was buried at Baikove Cemetery. The tombstone is adorned with a colonnade with the inscription in Russian We are alive as long as we are remembered (in original: Мы живы до тех пор, пока нас помнят).

Management style and influence[edit source]

Along with Rinus Michels, Lobanovskyi is recognized for being the inventor of the major football playing style known as “Total Football” in the 1970s.^[34][35] Lobanovskyi often referred to Total Football as “gold vein” that would be exploited for many years to come.^[72][73] According to Lobanovskyi, the “revolutionary process” in football ended in 1974 with the discovery of Total Football, and in modern football, all players must be able to play in offense and defense equally effectively. Per Lobanovskyi, “Now we are talking about the so-called ‘smart’ universalization. What do I mean? Well, for example, we would not want Andriy Shevchenko, the striker, to play the right defender. But if he gets into this zone, he must be able to perform there. And in the future, football will gradually move from ‘smart’ universalization to full universalization”.^[73][72]

Lobanovskyi viewed football game as a system of 22 elements, divided into two sub-systems consisted of 11 elements – if the two sub-systems are equal, the game ends in a draw. The nuance that Lobanovsky considered the most interesting and important was that the efficiency of the subsystem will always be higher than the sum of the efficiencies of its individual elements.^[74][75] Lobanovskyi insisted that the training process should be modeled, and fragments of future actions on the field should be practiced. According to Lobanovskyi, team coordination was an outdated concept – each player goes out and does what is needed at this time, and how he does this depends on his skill, training, and ability to express himself. But the structure of the game, tactics should not suffer from who acts as a performer in that particular moment.^[76]

Lobanovskyi is credited for bringing a scientific and analytical approach and strong emphasis on physical fitness and diet to the game.^[1][77] Many observers recognized Lobanovskyi as the first person to bring science into football, at the time when most managers used basic attributes in their training process. The media often referred to Lobanovskyi as “ahead of his time”.^[78][79] With the cooperation with Anatoly Zelentsov, a scientist from the department of physical education theory of Kyiv State Institute of Physical Education, Lobanovskyi brought an accurate system of calculation of the training process and mathematical modeling of physical load for players.^{[31][77][80][81]} Zelentsov, viewed by many as unmistakably meticulous in his analysis, insisted that the team would not lose the match if, during the game, the number of key moments, during which the team made mistakes, would not exceed 18%.^[74] Many observers, players and managers credited Lobanovskyi’s teams for being in great physical condition and being able to fulfill tactical ideas and perform certain operations almost on the level of automatism. Many observers described football played by Lobanovskyi’s teams as “football from the future”.^{[43][44][9][10][45][82]}

A lot of people that worked alongside Lobanovskyi described him as a great psychologist.^[83][84][85] “A coach should always remember that he works with people, people that largely make the coach what he is now. And people, unlike robots, have a soul that is quite often very vulnerable, and sometimes obstinate”, Lobanovskyi once said in an interview, “It’s really important to know each player’s personality and character. You can be more strict with one player and less strict with another, but for that you need to know their character. You must know which buttons to press to have each player bring as much benefit as possible”.^[86][87] Stefan Reshko, who played for Dynamo Kyiv in the 70s, said: “Lobanovskyi was a top-notch psychologist. He had the ability to get the absolute best out of the players he worked with.^[85] Anatoliy Demyanenko, trained by Lobanovskyi during the 80s, described him as “a great psychologist. He knew how to communicate with each player. He knew when and to whom he needs to raise his voice, or not to say anything”.^[88] Vasyl Kardash, who worked with Lobanovskyi during the late 90s and early 00s, said: “Lobanovskyi was a very good psychologist. His understanding of the psychology of a certain player – not just as a footballer, but as a human being – [is one of the things that] made him one of the great ones”.^[89] Andriy Shevchenko often referred to Lobanovskyi as “paternal figure” in his life,^[90] claiming that Lobanovskiy “handed him the key” to a successful life: “Lobanovskyi rarely raised his voice. He never yelled at us, nor he ever tried to ‘sort things out’ with anyone. He was respected and admired by everyone around him”.^[91]

Many observers, players and managers credited Lobanovskyi for being able to always improve as a manager. One of the famous Lobanovskyi quotes was, “A coach must learn all his life. If hardened, stopped learning – that means, stopped being a coach”.^[92][93] His ability to “stay in touch” with modern trends has been described as one of the reasons why he was able to build three great football teams in a span of three different decades – the 70s, 80s and 90s.^{[94][95][96][10]}

Tactics[edit source]

Lobanovskyi placed emphasis on the collective or “the system”. He said “A system does not guarantee success, but it gives a much better chance of success than making it up as you go along.”^[97] Everything was meticulously planned, with the team’s preparation divided into three levels. Players were to have individual technical coaching so as to equip them better to fulfil the tasks Lobanovskyi set them during a game; specific tactics and tasks for each player were drawn up according to the opponents; and a strategy was devised for a competition as a whole, placing each game in context by acknowledging that it is impossible for a side to maintain maximal levels over a protracted period.^[98] Lobanovskyi and Zelentsov wrote in their book, The Methodological Basis of the Development of Training Models, “the first thing we have in mind is to strive for new courses of action that will not allow the opponent to adapt to our style of play. If an opponent has adjusted himself to our style of play and found a counter-play, then we need to find a new strategy. That is the dialectic of the game. You have to go forward in such a way and with such a range of attacking options that it will force the opponent to make a mistake. In other words, it’s necessary to force the opponent into the condition you want them to be in. One of the most important means of doing that is to vary the size of the playing area.” One thing remained central: keep the preferred playing area as large as possible while in possession, and as small as possible while the opponent had the ball.^[98]

In Methodological Basis, Lobanovskyi and Zelentsov give as an example of their preparation for a specific game the European Cup semi-final against Bayern Munich in 1977. ‘The play,’ they wrote, ‘was constructed on attacking actions, with the obligatory neutralisation of the opponent’s players, the intention being to deprive him playing space and to defend against the attacks from wide at which Bayern were so strong. The objective was a draw, but we ended up losing 1–0. In the match in Kyiv, we chose a playing model based on squeezing the play and fighting for the ball in our opponents’ half of the pitch, trying to create a numerical advantage in various areas. Eventually we won 2–0.’^[98]In the 1975-76 European Cup games against Saint-Étienne, Dynamo’s formation featured no proper centre-forward, as strikers Blokhin and Onyshchenko constantly played on the flanks, with midfielders Leonid Buryak, Viktor Kolotov and Volodymyr Veremeyev exploiting the central space as deep-lying forwards, anticipating the false nine position.

Lobanovskyi’s preferable formation was the 4–1–3–2. All his teams utilized the talents of two strikers, in 1975 Oleg Blokhin and Volodymyr Onyshchenko, in 1986 Blokhin or Oleh Protasov and Igor Belanov, and in 1999 Andriy Shevchenko and Serhii Rebrov. Lobanovskyi’s forwards were highly versatile, being equally capable of shifting to the flanks, organizing attacks as playmakers, joining midfield in defensive formations and even dropping back to help the full-backs during spells of opponent pressure.^[99][100] This versatility of the forwards was key in disorganizing opponents’ defenses and creating space for players attacking from the back.

Pressing was always a key element of Lobanovskyi’s teams. The main goal of pressing was to create situations of numerical superiority for Dynamo players where the ball was, and deny opponents both space and time for the right decisions, thus forcing them to always play the game at Dynamo’s pace. The trademark Dynamo counter-attacks would start with a player dispossessing his opponent in midfield, then immediately playing a quick long ball either to the forwards or the advancing full-backs, so as to catch the opposition unorganized. Lobanovskyi always stressed the importance of the first seconds of an attack after winning the ball, as it is in these seconds that the opposition is less ready to defend in an organized manner. Pressing was a collective effort, and whenever a player moved up the pitch, a teammate covered his position. In this way Dynamo minimized the threat of having to face a counter-attack by the opponent in case the ball was lost.

Lobanovskyi put meticulous attention to set-pieces both in attack and in defense. In defense, Dynamo often used tactical fouling to prevent opponents from getting quality shots on goal, frequently conceding fouls just at the top of the penalty area. The logic behind this was that free kicks were much easier for the goalkeeper to defend that shots in open play. In addition, they also used tactical fouling to prevent counter attacks: by fouling around the halfway line Dynamo’s midfield could get behind the ball to defend. In attack, Lobanovskyi’s teams also were intelligent in their use of playing short from free kicks. During the 1990s, most teams would habitually play the ball long after a foul, using the opportunity to progress up the field as quick as possible. Dynamo recognized that opponents would prepare for this and retreat accordingly. Therefore when they played short, there was no pressure applied to the player with the ball for a long duration, allowing for runs to develop. Dynamo’s first two goals in the 3–0 victory against Barcelona in 1997 came from such situations. The high degree of responsiveness and fast reaction speeds were traits to marvel at of Lobanovskyi’s side, as they frequently looked to increase the tempo and take advantage of teams that used these moments in the game to slow down the match.^[101] When Dynamo had won a throw next to the opponents’ area, the tallest midfielder (Andriy Husin) would usually stand just inside the area to receive the ball from the throw and make a header-pass to one of the strikers to create a chance. In this way Dynamo scored the 2–0 against Bayern Munich in 2000, when Ramiz Mamedov launched a throw straight into Husin’s head, Husin flicked on a header-pass to Giorgi Demetradze in the penalty spot, who scored with an overhead kick.^[102]

Dynamo’s shape in the late 1990s was a front two of Rebrov and Shevchenko but as an offensive principle they always attacked three lanes: right, left and center. It didn’t matter what the shape was or who it was, there were always three players attacking the three lanes. This was split into two methods, the first being a player attacking one of the wide lanes as one of Rebrov or Shevchenko was central. That player was mostly Belkevich who not only operated behind the striker duo but also attacked the wide areas regularly. The second method was Rebrov and Shevchenko splitting, therefore allowing a runner in between.^[99]

In the “stretched diamond” formation, which differs from a typical diamond in that one player operates in a much wider position than the others, Lobanovskyi was able to fully make use of the talents of versatile midfielder Vitaliy Kosovskyi, who was effectively both a left midfielder in the “standard” 4–1–3–2 and a left winger next to Shevchenko and Rebrov when attacks unfolded, practically making the formation a 4–3–3. When defending, Kosovskyi’s speed made him useful also as a left back, enabling the actual left back Kakha Kaladze to drop inside as a third central defender, converting the formation into a 5–3–2. In the absence of Kosovskyi due to injury during the second half of the 1999–2000 season, Lobanovskyi used Giorgi Demetradze as a wide striker. Against Real Madrid at the Bernabeu, Demetradze was instructed to exploit the space in Madrid’s defense left open by full-back Roberto Carlos‘ forward runs. In this game, Demetradze won a penalty (that Rebrov missed),^[102] won the corner for Dynamo’s equalizer,^[103] and finally crossed for Dynamo’s second goal that made it 1–2.

Dynamo’s defending was usually organized as a mixed zonal-and-man-marking system; players would usually defend zonally yet the opposition’s best player was in most cases man-marked by a Dynamo player who tracked him back whenever he went. Perhaps the most significant application of the tracking back was against Real Madrid in the 1999 Champions League quarter-finals at the Santiago Bernabeu. Aleksandr Khatskevich‘s role was to defend the right channel and center area as Predrag Mijatović drifted inside to overload the center.^[104] He also had Oleksiy Mykhaylychenko man-mark Holland’s Ruud Gullit in the Euro 1988 final.^[105]

Lobanovskyi was tactically versatie and would make risky changes during matches to alter the course of the game. In December 1998, Dynamo was playing away at RC Lens needing a draw to qualify as first from their Champions League group. Lobanovskyi chose a defensive-minded deployment, with Rebrov posted on the left wing and the midfield consisting of defense-oriented players, being effectively a 4–5–1 with Shevchenko as the lone striker. However, after Lens captain Frédéric Déhu was sent off for a hard challenge on Shevchenko with the score at 0–0, Lobanovskyi quickly made two offensive-minded changes, bringing in Vitaliy Kosovskyi for defender Yuriy Dmytrulin and Valentin Belkevich for Vasyl Kardash and pairing Rebrov with Shevchenko up front, thus changing the system into a 3–2–3–2. Dynamo won the game 3–1, also winning the group to advance to the quarter-finals.^[106]

He insisted that a player should be able to play in more than one position. He converted Aleksei Gerasimenko, originally a striker who had scored 46 goals in 71 games with FC Kuban Krasnodar, into a right midfielder,^[107] a right full-back,^[108] and even into a sweeper.^[109] Likewise, central defender Oleksandr Holovko was also good when he joined midfield,^[99] and Kakha Kaladze was equally adept as left back, defensive midfielder and centre back.

Lobanovskyi’s emphasis on the system rather than the individuals meant that his teams continued to perform well even when their best players were lost to transfers, injuries or bookings. In the 1997–98 season Dynamo’s two most important midfielders were Yuriy Kalitvintsev and Yuriy Maksymov, who left the team in the end of the year. Lobanovskyi had already found their replacements in Aleksandr Khatskevich and Valentin Belkevich, and the team made an even more spectacular run next season. In the second half of the 1999–2000 season the team was plagued with injuries in key players Vladyslav Vashchuk, Yuriy Dmytrulin and Vitaliy Kosovskyi, and was forced to play important Champions League games against Real Madrid, Bayern Munich and Rosenborg BK with a defensive line consisting of youngsters Andriy Nesmachniy and Serhiy Fedorov and with Gerasimenko playing as a sweeper, way out of his natural position. Despite all this, Dynamo were able to collect 10 points in these 4 matches, beating Rosenborg twice, Bayern once and drawing 2–2 with Real at the Santiago Bernabeu Stadium.

Remembrance[edit source]

Following his death Lobanovskyi was awarded the Hero of Ukraine order, the nation’s highest honour, as well as the UEFA Order of Merit in Ruby.^[110] Dynamo Kyiv’s stadium was also renamed the Lobanovsky Stadium in his honour. In 2003, Lobanovskyi was awarded FIFA Order of Merit, the highest honour awarded by FIFA.^[2][3][110]

On 11 May 2003, before the first anniversary of the death of Lobanovskyi, a monument was opened near the Lobanovsky Dynamo Stadium.^[111]

After his death, A.C. Milan won the Champions League in 2003 with Andriy Shevchenko in the team. After the victory Shevchenko flew to Kyiv to put his medal by the grave of his former manager.^[112]

In 2003, the Valeriy Lobanovskyi Memorial Tournament was founded.

Personal life[edit source]

Lobanovskyi was born in Kyiv to Vasyl Mykhailovych Lobko-Lobanovsky and Oleksandra Maksymivna Boichenko. Lobanovskyi’s daughter Svitlana Lobanovska told Newspaper in Ukrainian that Vasyl Lobko-Lobanovsky had a double surname but double surnames were not welcome in the USSR, therefore his both sons, Valeriy and Yevhen, decided to use single surname Lobanovsky.^[113]

Lobanovskyi was married to Ada Lobanovska,^[114] the couple had a daughter named Svitlana. She is a philologist of the Russian language and owns a restaurant in Kyiv called “U metrá” (“At The Metr”; “Metr” (ukr. Метр) was one of Lobanovskyi’s many nicknames).^[115]

Career statistics[edit source]

As a manager[edit source]

Portrait of Valeriy Lobanovskyi on the banner of Dynamo Kyiv‘s fans, 2 March 2008

Team	From	To	Record[116]
G	W	D	L	Win %
Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk	1 January 1969	19 October 1973	213	108	54	51	50.7
Dynamo Kyiv	20 October 1973	30 September 1990	681	356	199	126	52.28
Soviet Union	1 April 1975	31 July 1976	19	11	4	4	57.89
Ukrainian SSR	1979	1979	7	5	1	1	71.43
Soviet Union	12 October 1982	14 November 1983	10	6	3	1	60
Soviet Union	1 June 1986	30 June 1990	48	25	12	11	52.08
United Arab Emirates	1 October 1990	31 December 1992	12	6	3	3	50
Kuwait	1 July 1994	31 December 1996	41	17	11	13	41.46
Dynamo Kyiv	1 January 1997	7 May 2002	268	191	46	31	71.27
Ukraine	1 January 2000	15 November 2001	18	6	7	5	33.33
Total	1968	2002	1317	731	340	246	55.5

Honours[edit source]

Lobanovskyi on a 2019 stamp of Ukraine

Player[edit source]

Dynamo Kyiv

• Soviet Top League (1): 1961
• Soviet Cup (1): 1964

Manager[edit source]

Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk

• Soviet First League (1): 1971

Dynamo Kyiv

• Soviet Top League (8): 1974, 1975, 1977, 1980, 1981, 1985, 1986, 1990
• Soviet Cup (6): 1974, 1978, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1990
• USSR Super Cup (3): 1980, 1985, 1986
• Dynamo Games of the USSR (1): 1987^[17]
• Ukrainian National League (5): 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001
• Ukrainian Cup (3): 1998, 1999, 2000
• European Cup Winners’ Cup (2): 1975, 1986
• European Super Cup (1): 1975; Runner-up: 1986
• European Cup/UEFA Champions League: Semifinalist 1977, 1987, 1999; Quarterfinalist 1976, 1982, 1983, 1998
• Commonwealth of Independent States Cup (3): 1997, 1998, 2002

Soviet Union

• UEFA European Championship: Runner-up 1988
• Summer Olympic Games Bronze Medal: 1976

Ukrainian SSR

• Spartakiad of Peoples Bronze Medal: 1979

United Arab Emirates

• AFC Asian Cup: 4th place 1992

Kuwait

• Asian Games Bronze Medal: 1994
• Gulf Cup of Nations (1): 1996

Individual[edit source]

• Ukrainian Manager of the Season (5 times): 1996–97, 1997–98, 1998–99, 1999–00, 2001–02 (posthumously)
• European Coach of the Year—Sepp Herberger/Tommaso Maestrelli Award (3 times, record): 1986, 1988, 1999
• European Coach of the Season: 1985–86
• Rubinkugel^[117] for Central and Eastern European Manager of the Year (7 times, record): 1975, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1997, 1999^[118][49]
• World Sports Manager of the Year: 1975
• Berlin-Britz Manager of the Decade (1980s)^{[49][119][120]}
• Greatest Manager of All Time – one of 5 managers^[121] ranked top 10 by France Football, World Soccer and ESPN^{[122][123][124][125][126]}
  • 6th place (France Football): 2019^{[13][127][128]}
  • 6th place (World Soccer): 2013^[14][129]
  • 8th place (ESPN): 2013^[36]
• France Football 8th Greatest Manager of the 20th Century^[49]
• Deutsche Presse-Agentur Greatest Eastern European Manager of the 20th Century: 1999^[49]
• Ukrainian Footballer of the Year: 1962, 1963, 1964

Orders and further honours[edit source]

•  Hero of Ukraine, Order of the State: 2002^[110]
•  Order of Merit (Ukraine), Class II: 1998^[130]
•  Order of Merit (Ukraine), Class III: 1998^[131]
•  Order of the Badge of Honour: 1971
•  Order of the Red Banner of Labour: 1987^[132]
•  Medal “In Commemoration of the 1500th Anniversary of Kyiv”: 1982
• FIFA Order of Merit: 2002^[110]
• UEFA Order of Merit in Ruby: 2002^[110]
• Euromaidan Honorary Participant: 2014^[133]

References[edit source]

1. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e f g} Valery Vasilevich Lobanovsky. Encyclopedia Britannica
2. ^ Jump up to:^a b FIFA Order of Merit holders
3. ^ Jump up to:^a b Lobanovskyi Tournament news: Russian Super Cup in Kyiv? (rus.)
4. ^ “Великі Українці – сто великих українців від 19 до 1”. youtube.com (in Ukrainian). Archived from the original on 12 December 2021. Retrieved 23 November 2020.
5. ^ “У проекті “Великі Українці” на телеканалі “Інтер” переміг князь Ярослав Мудрий”. radiosvoboda.org (in Ukrainian). Retrieved 23 November 2020.
6. ^ “Ярослав Мудрий, Микола Амосов, Степан Бандера – ВЕЛИКІ УКРАЇНЦІ”. zaxid.net (in Ukrainian). Retrieved 23 November 2020.
7. ^ “”Великі Українці”: Ярослав Мудрий обійшов Бандеру”. unian.ua (in Ukrainian). Retrieved 23 November 2020.
8. ^ Jump up to:^a b c UEFA Champions League, UEFA Cup Winners’ Cup and UEFA Europa League
9. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e} “Грозное ДИНАМО конца 90-х. Как это было… [ФУТБОЛЬНЫЕ ИСТОРИИ]”. GOALNET. 9 March 2018. Archived from the original on 2 June 2019. Retrieved 19 September 2019.
10. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e f} “Три ВЕЛИКИХ ДИНАМО Валерия Лобановского. 1975, 1986, 1999”. Portie Drogba. 13 May 2020. Archived from the original on 12 December 2021. Retrieved 17 June 2020.
11. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Динамо – Барселона – 3:0. 15 лет великой победы!”. sport.ua. 22 October 2012. Retrieved 19 September 2019.
12. ^ “Greatest Managers, No. 8: Lobanovsky”. ESPNFC.com.
13. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Top 50 des coaches de l’histoire”. France Football. 19 March 2019. Retrieved 19 March 2019.
14. ^ Jump up to:^a b Jamie Rainbow (4 July 2013). “The Greatest Manager of all time”. World Soccer.
15. ^ “Рівно 81 рік тому народився легендарний тренер київського Динамо – Валерій Васильович Лобановський”. ua-football.com (in Ukrainian). 6 January 2020. Retrieved 14 April 2021.
16. ^ “The 100 greatest football managers of all time”. FourFourTwo. 26 May 2020. Retrieved 21 September 2020.
17. ^ Jump up to:^a b c “Lobanovskyi or Lucescu: who has more trophies?”. Ukrainian Premier League. 22 March 2019. Retrieved 4 May 2019.
18. ^ “Lobanovskyi and 33 trophies (rus.)”. UA-Футбол. 22 March 2019. Retrieved 9 September 2019.
19. ^ “Рівно 81 рік тому народився легендарний тренер київського Динамо – Валерій Васильович Лобановський”. ua-football.com (in Ukrainian). 6 January 2020. Retrieved 29 January 2021.
20. ^ “In memory of Valeriy Lobanovskyi”. sports.ru. 13 May 2016. Retrieved 19 September 2019.
21. ^ “In profile: Valeriy Lobanovskyi”. sports.ru. 13 May 2016. Retrieved 19 September 2019.
22. ^ “Lucescu humbled after criticizing Lobanovskyi”. sports.ru. 20 March 2019. Retrieved 19 September 2019.
23. ^ “На сайті “Сборная России по футболу””. Archived from the original on 28 November 2012. Retrieved 4 November 2017.
24. ^ Именем Лобановского назвали школу (sport.com.ua, 7 вересня 2007)(in Russian)
25. ^ 69 years ago Valery Lobanovsky was born (Details, January 6, 2008) (in Russian)
26. ^ Лобановский жил футболом и футбол жил в нем! («Футбол в лицах», грудень 2005)(in Russian)
27. ^ “50 Greatest Players: Dynamo Kyiv (part 1)”. football.ua. 30 March 2010. Retrieved 28 December 2019.
28. ^ “Тренеры “Динамо” (Киев) — Лобановский Валерий Васильевич (Історичний сайт про “Динамо”)”. junik.lv. 30 March 2007. Retrieved 28 December 2019.(in Russian)
29. ^ Жовтень 1968-го: Лобановський — тренер
30. ^ Volodymyr Muntyan interview (FC Dynamo Kyiv official site, October 2005)(in Russian)
31. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Anatoly Zelentsov”. Newspaper in Ukrainian. 15 September 2006. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
32. ^ “The Zelentsov Center of modeling wins”. FC DK official website. 21 September 2006. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
33. ^ “Dynamo Kyiv were called ‘tactical World Champions’”. zbirna.com. 10 October 2017. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
34. ^ Jump up to:^a b “The road of football defined by Lobanovskyi”. Sports Daily in Russian. 24 March 2019. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
35. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Total football and Valeriy Lobanovskyi”. FC DK official website. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
36. ^ Jump up to:^a b Greatest Managers, No. 8: Lobanovsky
37. ^ “Bayern Munich vs. Dynamo Kyiv”. sports.ru. 18 November 2016. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
38. ^ “43 years ago, Dynamo Kyiv won European Super Cup”. sport.ua. 6 October 2018. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
39. ^ “How Dynamo Kyiv won European Super Cup in 1975”. football24.ua. 6 October 2016. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
40. ^ Newspaper Ukrainian football, 27 December 2016, № 91–92
41. ^ “43”Ми возили сюди тренерів з Росії – це ганьба”. Син Олега Базилевича про тост Лобановського і крах геніального тандему” (in Ukrainian). football24.ua. 23 October 2018. Retrieved 28 December 2020.
42. ^ “Ретро. Динамовская одиссея-1986. Финал”. footclub.com.ua. 2 May 2016. Retrieved 13 December 2019.
43. ^ Jump up to:^a b c “Они сделали это. “Динамо” (Киев) Валерия Лобановского. Сезон-1986″. soccer.ru. 8 January 2019. Retrieved 13 December 2019.
44. ^ Jump up to:^a b c “Що наше життя? Гра… Рудий соняшник (+ ВІДЕО)”. FC DK official website. 6 January 2019. Retrieved 13 December 2019.
45. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Как киевское “Динамо” ставило на уши всю Европу. 1986. Кубок обладателей кубков. Триумф на фоне Чернобыля”. tribuna. 5 October 2016. Retrieved 13 December 2019.
46. ^ Jump up to:^a b “СБОРНАЯ СССР’ 1986. РЕЕСТР МАТЧЕЙ ПЕРВОЙ (НАЦИОНАЛЬНОЙ) СБОРНОЙ РОССИИ (СНГ, СССР)”. rusteam.permian.ru. 6 January 2011. Retrieved 13 December 2019.
47. ^ Jump up to:^a b “1986. Последний чемпионат мира романтического футбола. Часть 5. Сногсшибательный старт сборной СССР”. sports.ru. 25 March 2016. Retrieved 13 December 2019.
48. ^ “Строки из истории: ЧМ-1986 и -1990. Сборная, которую боялись даже гранды…”. Sport Week-End. 25 June 2014. Retrieved 13 December 2019.
49. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e} “May 2002, Valeriy Lobanovskiy…” Dynamo Kyiv official website. 4 May 2017. Retrieved 7 June 2017.
50. ^ Humphrey, Jake. “Which is the best Euro Goal Ever?”. BBC Sport. Retrieved 23 October 2008.
51. ^ “10 Greatest Goals in the European Championships”. FourFourTwo. 8 May 2008. Retrieved 23 October 2008.
52. ^ “Holland 2 USSR 0”. Goal.com. Retrieved 27 June 2013.
53. ^ “Van Basten, a Dutch goal machine”. FIFA.com. Archived from the original on 18 November 2010. Retrieved 27 June 2013.
54. ^ “Lobanovskyi was able to change football in UAE”. dynamomania.com. Retrieved 15 December 2019.
55. ^ “Lobanovskyi is still recognized and respected in UAE”. zbirna.com. Retrieved 15 December 2019.
56. ^ “The road of life in the death group”. Sport-Express. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
57. ^ “Dynamo Kyiv in Champions League: history of wins and losses”. news.liga.net. 13 September 2016. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
58. ^ “Команды, которые мы не забудем. Киевское “Динамо” 1997-1999″. sports.ru. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
59. ^ “Dynamo Kyiv vs. FC Barcelona”. news.sportbox.ru. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
60. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Barcelona vs. Dynamo Kyiv – 0:7!”. aif.ua. 6 November 2017. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
61. ^ “Spanish press on the 4:0 victory of Lobanovskyi’s team at Camp Nou”. football24.ua. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
62. ^ Jump up to:^a b “КИЕВ ВЫЦАРАПЫВАЕТ НИЧЬЮ, НО ТРЕНЕР “АРСЕНАЛА” СЧИТАЕТ ЕГО ФАВОРИТОМ”. fcdynamo.ru. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
63. ^ “Арсенал – Динамо Киев. ЛЧ-1998/99 (1-1)”. Youtube. Archived from the original on 12 December 2021. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
64. ^ “European Clubs’ Association: Europe’s big five leagues warned about dominance”. BBC. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
65. ^ “Revenue of the biggest (Big Five*) European soccer leagues from 1996/97 to 2019/20”. statista.com. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
66. ^ “Dynamo could have won 4:0 or even 5:0”. football24.ua. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
67. ^ “20 years since Dynamo Kyiv faced Bayern Munich in semi-finals”. football24.ua. Retrieved 18 December 2019.
68. ^ ЛОБАНОВСКИЙ И В КУВЕЙТЕ ЛОБАНОВСКИЙ («Зеркало недели», 29 квітня 1995)^{[dead link]}(in Russian)
69. ^ Последний матч Валерия Лобановского («Коммерсантъ», 21 травня 2002)(in Russian)
70. ^ Навеки мой Лобановский
71. ^ Валерия Лобановского похоронили на Байковом кладбище (peoples.ru)(in Russian)
72. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Валерий Лобановский_интервью 1997 г.” youtube.com. Archived from the original on 7 January 2020. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
73. ^ Jump up to:^a b Е. Шаинский. Возвращение. «Спорт-Экспресс журнал», № 2 за 1997 р., стр.62
74. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Valeriy Lobanovskyi: The Scientist”. fcdynamo.com. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
75. ^ “How Valeriy Lobanovskyi’s appliance of science won hearts and trophies”. theguardian.com. 12 May 2011. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
76. ^ Е. Шаинский. Возвращение. «Спорт-Экспресс журнал», № 2 за 1997 р., стр.61
77. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Valeriy Lobanovskyi: The Scientist Who Dominated Football in the Soviet Union”. 90min.com. 17 July 2019. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
78. ^ “The Iron Curtained Billy Beane: Valeriy Lobanovskyi”. thefutebolist.wordpress.com. 22 June 2016. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
79. ^ “Greatest Managers, No. 8: Lobanovsky”. espn.com. 7 August 2013. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
80. ^ “Valeri Lobanovskiy: the soccer scientist”. 90min.com. 31 July 2016. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
81. ^ “Valeriy Lobanovskyi: The Soviet Scientist’s All-Time Best XI”. 90min.com. 17 July 2019. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
82. ^ Простая сложная игра глазами профессионала. Gadzhi Gadzhiev. 3 December 2019. ISBN 9785042145964. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
83. ^ “Шацких: Лобановский был сильным психологом и стратегом”. youtube.com. Archived from the original on 12 December 2021. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
84. ^ Украинский футбол: легенды, герои, скандалы в спорах “хохла” и “москаля”. Igor Rabiner, Artem Frankov. 12 March 2020. ISBN 9785457193895. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
85. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Стефан РЕШКО: “Лобановский был нереальным психологом””. sport.ua. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
86. ^ “Валерий Лобановский: бессмертные цитаты великого тренера. Сегодня День рождения легенды” (in Russian). sportarena.com. Retrieved 15 June 2020.
87. ^ “Lobanovskiy The Matematician” (in Russian). sport-express.ru. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
88. ^ “Демьяненко: “Лобановский был великим психологом””. soccer.ru. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
89. ^ “Василий Кардаш: “Лобановский был сильным психологом””. terrikon.com. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
90. ^ “Андрей Шевченко плакал, узнав о смерти Валерия Лобановского”. ria.ru. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
91. ^ “Андрей ШЕВЧЕНКО: “Лобановский помог, и меня отпустили в Милан””. sport.ua. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
92. ^ “”Тренер должен учиться всю жизнь” – 12 лет со дня смерти Валерия Лобановского”. gazeta.ua. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
93. ^ “Валерий Лобановский: бессмертные цитаты великого тренера. Сегодня День рождения легенды”. sportarena.com. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
94. ^ “Сергей Ребров: “Лобановский всегда шагал в ногу со временем, а иногда его даже опережал””. tribuna.com. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
95. ^ “Сергей Ребров: “Лобановский всегда шагал в ногу со временем, а иногда его даже опережал””. footballhd.ru. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
96. ^ “Сергій КОВАЛЕЦЬ: “За Лобановського механізм Динамо працював чітко””. sport.ua. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
97. ^ In profile: Valeriy Lobanovskiy – UEFA.com
98. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Jonathan Wilson: Inverting the Pyramid
99. ^ Jump up to:^a b c From The Vault: Lobanovskyi’s last Dynamo
100. ^ 1997/98 CL Group C: Lobanovskiy’s Dynamo trounce van Gaal’s Barcelona
101. ^ 1997/98 CL Group C: Lobanovskiy’s Dynamo trounce van Gaal’s Barcelona
102. ^ Jump up to:^a b http://soccer-europe.com/Archives/UCL/UCL9900/Reports/P2Groupc.html
103. ^ Dynamo united this country at Santiago Bernabeu
104. ^ From The Vault: Lobanovskyi’s first step towards the 1999 semi-final
105. ^ Lobanovsky’s Russian revolution goes full circle through the hands of Hiddink
106. ^ Lens-Dynamo 1998 stats, lineups and substitutions
107. ^ Dynamo-Bayer 1999 lineups
108. ^ Dynamo-Juventus 1998 lineups
109. ^ Rosenborg-Dynamo 2000 lineups
110. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e} Lobanovsky remembered («BBC Sport», 15 May 2003)
111. ^ Monument V. V. Lobanovsky. Description ((ref-ru))
112. ^ Events by themes: Persons. Valery Lobanovsky, Ukrainian Independent Information Agency photoservice (9 January 2009)
113. ^ Count’s blood flowed in Lobanovsky’s veins – Newspaper in Ukrainian (11 May 2012) (in Ukrainian)
114. ^ Events by themes: 70th anniversary from the day of birth of Valeriy Lobanovskiy, Ukrainian Independent Information Agency photoservice (6 January 2009)
115. ^ «Футбольний прес-клуб»: напередодні старту – Official website of the Football Federation of Ukraine. Retrieved 11 ??? 2008 (in Ukrainian)
116. ^ Banyas, V. Valeriy Lobanovskyi: 1317 games! (Валерій Лобановський: 1317 матчів!) Ukrainian Premier League. 7 May 2018
117. ^ The Ruby Ball, awarded by ADN
118. ^ “The history of success which lasted nine decades”. UPL. 13 May 2017. Retrieved 19 December 2019.
119. ^ “Messi and Ronaldo: Equal!”. UPL. 8 November 2017. Retrieved 25 December 2019.
120. ^ Banyas, Volodymyr (25 October 2013). “Berlin-Britz Greatest XI by Decade”. No. № 88. newspaper Ukrainskyi Futbol.
121. ^ Along with Alex Ferguson, Rinus Michels, Arrigo Sacchi and Helenio Herrera
122. ^ “”Здоровье Лобановского подорвала критика Москвы”: Какими были противостояния, предрассудки и победы легендарного футбольного тренера” (in Russian). 5 Kanal. Retrieved 17 June 2020.
123. ^ “Цифра дня. Вражаючі індивідуальні нагороди Валерія Лобановського” (in Ukrainian). champion.com.ua. Retrieved 17 June 2020.
124. ^ “Легендарний наставник “Динамо” увійшов у топ-10 тренерів світу” (in Ukrainian). sport.24tv.ua. Retrieved 17 June 2020.
125. ^ “Рекорды “Динамо”: самые титулованные тренеры” (in Russian). footboom.com. Retrieved 6 July 2020.
126. ^ “Рекорди “Динамо”. Найтитулованіші тренери” (in Ukrainian). fcdynamo.com. Retrieved 14 April 2021.
127. ^ “Los 50 mejores entrenadores de la historia”. FOX Sports. 19 March 2019. Retrieved 29 December 2019.
128. ^ “Los 50 mejores entrenadores de la historia del fútbol”. ABC. 19 March 2019. Retrieved 29 December 2019.
129. ^ Jamie Rainbow (2 July 2013). “The Greatest XI: how the panel voted”. World Soccer.
130. ^ Указ Президента України № 1423/98 від 31 грудня 1998 року «Про нагородження відзнакою Президента України — орденом „За заслуги“»
131. ^ Указ Президента України № 59/98 від 27 січня 1998 року
132. ^ Указ Президиума Верховного Совета СССР от 8 января 1987 года № 6345—XI «О награждении тов. Лобановского В.В. орденом Трудового Красного Знамени»
133. ^ “Найкращі факти про Валерія Лобановського”. 1927.kiev.ua. Retrieved 21 December 2020.

Otto Hahn (pronounced [ˈɔtoː ˈhaːn] (listen); 8 March 1879 – 28 July 1968) was a German chemist who was a pioneer in the fields of radioactivity and radiochemistry. He is referred to as the father of nuclear chemistry and godfather of nuclear fission. Hahn and Lise Meitner discovered radioactive isotopes of radium, thorium, protactinium and uranium. He also discovered the phenomena of radioactive recoil and nuclear isomerism, and pioneered rubidium–strontium dating. In 1938, Hahn, Lise Meitner and Fritz Strassmann discovered nuclear fission, for which Hahn received the 1944 Nobel Prize for Chemistry. Nuclear fission was the basis for nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons.

A graduate of the University of Marburg, Hahn studied under Sir William Ramsay at University College London and at McGill University in Montreal under Ernest Rutherford, where he discovered several new radioactive isotopes. He returned to Germany in 1906; Emil Fischer placed a former woodworking shop in the basement of the Chemical Institute at the University of Berlin at his disposal to use as a laboratory. Hahn completed his habilitation in the spring of 1907 and became a Privatdozent. In 1912, he became head of the Radioactivity Department of the newly founded Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry. Working with the Austrian physicist Lise Meitner in the building that now bears their names, he made a series of groundbreaking discoveries, culminating with her isolation of the longest-lived isotope of protactinium in 1918.

During World War I he served with a Landwehr regiment on the Western Front, and with the chemical warfare unit headed by Fritz Haber on the Western, Eastern and Italian fronts, earning the Iron Cross (2nd Class) for his part in the First Battle of Ypres. After the war he became the head of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry, while remaining in charge of his own department. Between 1934 and 1938, he worked with Strassmann and Meitner on the study of isotopes created through the neutron bombardment of uranium and thorium, which led to the discovery of nuclear fission. He was an opponent of national socialism and the persecution of Jews by the Nazi Party that caused the removal of many of his colleagues, including Meitner, who was forced to flee Germany in 1938. During World War II, he worked on the German nuclear weapons program, cataloguing the fission products of uranium. As a consequence, at the end of the war he was arrested by the Allied forces; he was incarcerated in Farm Hall with nine other German scientists, from July 1945 to January 1946.

Hahn served as the last president of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society for the Advancement of Science in 1946 and as the founding president of its successor, the Max Planck Society from 1948 to 1960. In 1959 he co-founded in Berlin the Federation of German Scientists, a non-governmental organization, which has been committed to the ideal of responsible science. As he worked to rebuild German science, he became one of the most influential and respected citizens of the post-war West Germany.

Contents

• 1Early life
• 2Discovery of radio thorium, and other “new elements”
• 3Discovery of mesothorium I
• 4Discovery of radioactive recoil
• 5Marriage to Edith Junghans
• 6World War I
• 7Discovery of protactinium
• 8Discovery of nuclear isomerism
• 9Applied Radiochemistry
• 10National socialism
• 11Rubidium–strontium dating
• 12Discovery of nuclear fission
• 13World War II
• 14Incarceration
• 15The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1944
• 16Founder and President of the Max Planck Society
• 17Spokesman for social responsibility
• 18Honors and awards
• 19Death
• 20See also
• 21Publications in English
• 22Notes
• 23References
• 24Further reading
• 25External links

Early life[edit source]

Otto Hahn was born in Frankfurt am Main on 8 March 1879, the youngest son of Heinrich Hahn (1845–1922), a prosperous glazier (and founder of the Glasbau Hahn company), and Charlotte Hahn née Giese (1845–1905). He had an older half-brother Karl, his mother’s son from her previous marriage, and two older brothers, Heiner and Julius. The family lived above his father’s workshop. The younger three boys were educated at Klinger Oberrealschule in Frankfurt. At the age of 15, he began to take a special interest in chemistry, and carried out simple experiments in the laundry room of the family home. His father wanted Otto to study architecture, as he had built or acquired several residential and business properties, but Otto persuaded him that his ambition was to become an industrial chemist.^[1]

In 1897, after taking his Abitur, Hahn began to study chemistry at the University of Marburg. His subsidiary subjects were mathematics, physics, mineralogy and philosophy. Hahn joined the Students’ Association of Natural Sciences and Medicine, a student fraternity and a forerunner of today’s Landsmannschaft Nibelungi (Coburger Convent der akademischen Landsmannschaften und Turnerschaften). He spent his third and fourth semesters at the University of Munich, studying organic chemistry under Adolf von Baeyer, physical chemistry under Friedrich Wilhelm Muthmann, and inorganic chemistry under Karl Andreas Hofmann. In 1901, Hahn received his doctorate in Marburg for a dissertation entitled “On Bromine Derivates of Isoeugenol”, a topic in classical organic chemistry. He completed his one-year military service (instead of the usual two because he had a doctorate) in the 81st Infantry Regiment, but unlike his brothers, did not apply for a commission. He then returned to the University of Marburg, where he worked for two years as assistant to his doctoral supervisor, Geheimrat Professor Theodor Zincke.^[2][3]

Discovery of radio thorium, and other “new elements”[edit source]

William Ramsay, London 1905

Hahn’s intention was still to work in industry. He received an offer of employment from Eugen Fischer, the director of Kalle & Co. [de] (and the father of organic chemist Hans Fischer), but a condition of employment was that Hahn had to have lived in another country and have a reasonable command of another language. With this in mind, and to improve his knowledge of English, Hahn took up a post at University College London in 1904, working under Sir William Ramsay, who was known for having discovered the inert gases. Here Hahn worked on radiochemistry, at that time a very new field. In early 1905, in the course of his work with salts of radium, Hahn discovered a new substance he called radiothorium (thorium-228), which at that time was believed to be a new radioactive element.^[2] (In fact, it was an isotope of the known element thorium; the concept of an isotope, along with the term, was only coined in 1913, by the British chemist Frederick Soddy).^[4]

Ramsay was enthusiastic when yet another new element was found in his institute, and he intended to announce the discovery in a correspondingly suitable way. In accordance with tradition this was done before the committee of the venerable Royal Society. At the session of the Royal Society on 16 March 1905 Ramsay communicated Hahn’s discovery of radiothorium.^[5] The Daily Telegraph informed its readers:

A new element – Very soon the scientific papers will be agog with a new discovery which has been added to the many brilliant triumphs of Gower Street. Dr. Otto Hahn, who is working at University College, has discovered a new radioactive element, extracted from a mineral from Ceylon, named Thorianite, and possibly, it is conjectured, the substance which renders thorium radioactive. Its activity is at least 250,000 times as great as that of thorium, weight for weight. It gives off a gas (generally called an emanation), identical with the radioactive emanation from thorium. Another theory of deep interest is that it is the possible source of a radioactive element possibly stronger in radioactivity than radium itself, and capable of producing all the curious effects which are known of radium up to the present. – The discoverer read a paper on the subject to the Royal Society last week, and this should rank, when published, among the most original of recent contributions to scientific literature.^[6]

Ernest Rutherford at McGill University, Montreal 1905

Hahn published his results in the Proceedings of the Royal Society on 24 March 1905.^[7] It was the first of over 250 scientific publications of Otto Hahn in the field of radiochemistry.^[8] At the end of his time in London, Ramsay asked Hahn about his plans for the future, and Hahn told him about the job offer from Kalle & Co. Ramsay told him radiochemistry had a bright future, and that someone who had discovered a new radioactive element should go to the University of Berlin. Ramsay wrote to Emil Fischer, the head of the chemistry institute there, who replied that Hahn could work in his laboratory, but could not be a Privatdozent because radiochemistry was not taught there. At this point, Hahn decided that he first needed to know more about the subject, so he wrote to the leading expert on the field, Ernest Rutherford. Rutherford agreed to take Hahn on as an assistant, and Hahn’s parents undertook to pay Hahn’s expenses.^[9]

From September 1905 until mid-1906, Hahn worked with Rutherford’s group in the basement of the Macdonald Physics Building at McGill University in Montreal. There was some scepticism about the existence of radiothorium, which Bertram Boltwood memorably described as a compound of thorium X and stupidity. Boltwood was soon convinced that it did exist, although he and Hahn differed on what its half life was. William Henry Bragg and Richard Kleeman had noted that the alpha particles emitted from radioactive substances always had the same energy, providing a second way of identifying them, so Hahn set about measuring the alpha particle emissions of radiothorium. In the process, he found that a precipitation of thorium A (polonium-216) and thorium B (lead-212) also contained a short-lived “element”, which he named thorium C (which was later identified as polonium-212). Hahn was unable to separate it, and concluded that it had a very short half life (it is about 300 ns). He also identified radioactinium (thorium-227) and radium D (later identified as lead-210).^[10][11] Rutherford remarked that: “Hahn has a special nose for discovering new elements.”^[12]

Discovery of mesothorium I[edit source]

Hahn and Meitner, 1913, in the chemical laboratory of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry. When a colleague she did not recognise said that they had met before, Meitner replied: “You probably mistake me for Professor Hahn.”^[13]

In 1906, Hahn returned to Germany, where Fischer placed at his disposal a former woodworking shop (Holzwerkstatt) in the basement of the Chemical Institute to use as a laboratory. Hahn equipped it with electroscopes to measure alpha and beta particles and gamma rays. In Montreal these had been made from discarded coffee tins; Hahn made the ones in Berlin from brass, with aluminium strips insulated with amber. These were charged with hard rubber sticks that he rubbed then against the sleeves of his suit.^[14] It was not possible to conduct research in the wood shop, but Alfred Stock, the head of the inorganic chemistry department, let Hahn use a space in one of his two private laboratories.^[15] Hahn purchased two milligrams of radium from Friedrich Oskar Giesel, the discoverer of emanium (radon), for 100 marks a milligram,^[14] and obtained thorium for free from Otto Knöfler, whose Berlin firm was a major producer of thorium products.^[16]

In the space of a few months Hahn discovered mesothorium I (radium-228), mesothorium II (actinium-228), and – independently from Boltwood – the mother substance of radium, ionium (later identified as thorium-230). In subsequent years, mesothorium I assumed great importance because, like radium-226 (discovered by Pierre and Marie Curie), it was ideally suited for use in medical radiation treatment, but cost only half as much to manufacture. Along the way, Hahn determined that just as he was unable to separate thorium from radiothorium, so he could not separate mesothorium from radium.^[17][18]

Hahn completed his habilitation in the spring of 1907, and became a Privatdozent. A thesis was not required; the Chemical Institute accepted one of his publications on radioactivity instead.^[19] Most of the organic chemists at the Chemical Institute did not regard Hahn’s work as real chemistry.^[20] Fischer objected to Hahn’s contention in his habilitation colloquium that many radioactive substances existed in such tiny amounts that they could only be detected by their radioactivity, venturing that he had always been able to detect substances with his keen sense of smell, but soon gave in.^[15] One department head remarked: “it is incredible what one gets to be a Privatdozent these days!”^[20]Physicists and chemists in Berlin in 1920. Front row, left to right: Hertha Sponer, Albert Einstein, Ingrid Franck, James Franck, Lise Meitner, Fritz Haber, and Otto Hahn. Back row, left to right: Walter Grotrian, Wilhelm Westphal, Otto von Baeyer [de], Peter Pringsheim [de] and Gustav Hertz

Physicists were more accepting of Hahn’s work, and he began attending a colloquium at the Physics Institute conducted by Heinrich Rubens. It was at one of these colloquia where, on 28 September 1907, he made the acquaintance of the Austrian physicist Lise Meitner. Almost the same age as himself, she was only the second woman to receive a doctorate from the University of Vienna, and had already published two papers on radioactivity. Rubens suggested her as a possible collaborator. So began the thirty-year collaboration and lifelong close friendship between the two scientists.^[20][21]

In Montreal, Hahn had worked with physicists including at least one woman, Harriet Brooks, but it was difficult for Meitner at first. Women were not yet admitted to universities in Prussia. Meitner was allowed to work in the wood shop, which had its own external entrance, but could not set foot in the rest of the institute, including Hahn’s laboratory space upstairs. If she wanted to go to the toilet, she had to use one at the restaurant down the street. The following year, women were admitted to universities, and Fischer lifted the restrictions, and had women’s toilets installed in the building.^[22] The Institute of Physics was more accepting than chemists, and she became friends with the physicists there, including Otto von Baeyer [de], James Franck, Gustav Hertz, Robert Pohl, Max Planck, Peter Pringsheim [de] and Wilhelm Westphal.^[21]

Discovery of radioactive recoil[edit source]

Former Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry building in Berlin. Heavily damaged by bombing during the Second World War, it was restored and became part of the Free University of Berlin. It was renamed the Otto Hahn Building in 1956, and the Hahn-Meitner Building in 2010.^[23][24]

Harriet Brooks observed a radioactive recoil in 1904, but interpreted it wrongly. Hahn and Meitner succeeded in demonstrating the radioactive recoil incident to alpha particle emission and interpreted it correctly. Hahn pursued a report by Stefan Meyer and Egon Schweidler of a decay product of actinium with a half-life of about 11.8 days. Hahn determined that it was actinium X (radium-223). Moreover, he discovered that at the moment when a radioactinium (thorium-227) atom emits an alpha particle, it does so with great force, and the actinium X experiences a recoil. This is enough to free it from chemical bonds, and it has a positive charge, and can be collected at a negative electrode.^[25] Hahn was thinking only of actinium, but on reading his paper, Meitner told him that he had found a new way of detecting radioactive substances. They set up some tests, and soon found actinium C” (thallium-207) and thorium C” (thallium-208).^[25] The physicist Walther Gerlach described radioactive recoil as “a profoundly significant discovery in physics with far-reaching consequences”.^[26]

In 1910, Hahn was appointed professor by the Prussian Minister of Culture and Education, August von Trott zu Solz. Two years later, Hahn became head of the Radioactivity Department of the newly founded Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry in Berlin-Dahlem (in what is today the Hahn-Meitner-Building of the Free University of Berlin). This came with an annual salary of 5,000 marks. In addition, he received 66,000 marks in 1914 (of which he gave 10 per cent to Meitner) from Knöfler for the mesothorium process. The new institute was inaugurated on 23 October 1912 in a ceremony presided over by Kaiser Wilhelm II.^[27] The Kaiser was shown glowing radioactive substances in a dark room.^[28]

The move to new accommodation was fortuitous, as the wood shop had become thoroughly contaminated by radioactive liquids that had been spilt, and radioactive gases that had vented and then decayed and settled as radioactive dust, making sensitive measurements impossible. To ensure that their clean new laboratories stayed that way, Hahn and Meitner instituted strict procedures. Chemical and physical measurements were conducted in different rooms, people handling radioactive substances had to follow protocols that included not shaking hands, and rolls of toilet paper were hung next to every telephone and door handle. Strongly radioactive substances were stored in the old wood shop, and later in a purpose-built radium house on the institute grounds.^[29]

Marriage to Edith Junghans[edit source]

Marble plaque in Latin by Professor Massimo Ragnolini, commemorating the honeymoon of Otto Hahn and his wife Edith at Punta San Vigilio, Lake Garda, Italy, in March and April 1913

With a regular income, Hahn was now able to contemplate marriage. In June 1911, while attending a conference in Stettin, Hahn met Edith Junghans [de] (1887–1968) , a student at the Royal School of Art in Berlin. They saw each other again in Berlin, and became engaged in November 1912. On 22 March 1913 the couple married in Edith’s native city of Stettin, where her father, Paul Ferdinand Junghans, was a high-ranking law officer and President of the City Parliament until his death in 1915. After a honeymoon at Punta San Vigilio on Lake Garda in Italy, they visited Vienna, and then Budapest, where they stayed with George de Hevesy.^[30]

Their only child, Hanno Hahn [de], was born on 9 April 1922. During World War II, he enlisted in the army in 1942, and served with distinction on the Eastern Front as a panzer commander. He lost an arm in combat. After the war he became a distinguished art historian and architectural researcher (at the Hertziana in Rome), known for his discoveries in the early Cistercian architecture of the 12th century. In August 1960, while on a study trip in France, Hanno died in a car accident, together with his wife and assistant Ilse Hahn née Pletz. They left a fourteen-year-old son, Dietrich Hahn.^[31]

In 1990, the Hanno and Ilse Hahn Prize [de] for outstanding contributions to Italian art history was established in memory of Hanno and Ilse Hahn to support young and talented art historians. It is awarded biennially by the Bibliotheca Hertziana – Max Planck Institute for Art History in Rome.^[32]

World War I[edit source]

Hahn in uniform in 1915.

In July 1914—shortly before the outbreak of World War I—Hahn was recalled to active duty with the army in a Landwehr regiment. They marched through Belgium, where the platoon he commanded was armed with captured machine guns. He was awarded the Iron Cross (2nd Class) for his part in the First Battle of Ypres. He was a joyful participant in the Christmas truce of 1914, and was commissioned as a lieutenant.^[33] In mid-January 1915, he was summoned to meet chemist Fritz Haber, who explained his plan to break the trench deadlock with chlorine gas. Hahn raised the issue that the Hague Convention banned the use of projectiles containing poison gases, but Haber explained that the French had already initiated chemical warfare with tear gas grenades, and he planned to get around the letter of the convention by releasing gas from cylinders instead of shells.^[34]

Haber’s new unit was called Pioneer Regiment 35. After brief training in Berlin, Hahn, together with physicists James Franck and Gustav Hertz, was sent to Flanders again to scout for a site for a first gas attack. He did not witness the attack because he and Franck were off selecting a position for the next attack. Transferred to Poland, at the Battle of Bolimów on 12 June 1915, they released a mixture of chlorine and phosgene gas. Some German troops were reluctant to advance when the gas started to blow back, so Hahn led them across No Man’s land. He witnessed the death agonies of Russians they had poisoned, and unsuccessfully attempted to revive some with gas masks. He was transferred to Berlin as a human Guinea-pig testing poisonous gases and gas masks. On their next attempt on 7 July, the gas again blew back on German lines, and Hertz was poisoned. This assignment was interrupted by a mission at the front in Flanders and again in 1916 by a mission to Verdun to introduce shells filled with phosgene to the Western Front. Then once again he was hunting along both fronts for sites for gas attacks. In December 1916 he joined the new gas command unit at Imperial Headquarters.^[34][35]

Between operations, Hahn returned to Berlin, where he was able to slip back to his old laboratory and assist Meitner with her research. In September 1917 he was one of three officers, disguised in Austrian uniforms, sent to the Isonzo front in Italy to find a suitable location for an attack, utilising newly developed rifled minenwerfers that simultaneously hurled hundreds of containers of poison gas onto enemy targets. They selected a site where the Italian trenches were sheltered in a deep valley so that a gas cloud would persist. The Battle of Caporetto broke through the Italian line and the Central Powers overran much of northern Italy. In 1918 the German offensive in the west smashed through the Allies‘ lines after a massive release of gas from their mortars. That summer Hahn was accidentally poisoned by phosgene while testing a new model gas mask. At the end of the war he was in the field in mufti on a secret mission to test a pot that heated and released a cloud of arsenicals.^[36][34]

Discovery of protactinium[edit source]

The decay chain of actinium. Alpha decay shifts two elements down; beta decay shifts one element up.

In 1913, chemists Frederick Soddy and Kasimir Fajans independently observed that alpha decay caused atoms to shift down two places on the periodic table, while the loss of two beta particles restored it to its original position. Under the resulting reorganisation of the periodic table, radium was placed in group II, actinium in group III, thorium in group IV and uranium in group VI. This left a gap between thorium and uranium. Soddy predicted that this unknown element, which he referred to (after Dmitri Mendeleev) as “ekatantalium”, would be an alpha emitter with chemical properties similar to tantalium. It was not long before Fajans and Oswald Helmuth Göhring discovered it as a decay product of a beta-emitting product of thorium. Based on the radioactive displacement law of Fajans and Soddy, this was an isotope of the missing element, which they named “brevium” after its short half life. However, it was a beta emitter, and therefore could not be the mother isotope of actinium. This had to be another isotope of the same element.^[37]

Hahn and Meitner set out to find the missing mother isotope. They developed a new technique for separating the tantalum group from pitchblende, which they hoped would speed the isolation of the new isotope. The work was interrupted by the First World War. Meitner became an X-ray nurse, working in Austrian Army hospitals, but she returned to the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in October 1916. Not only Hahn but most of the students, laboratory assistants and technicians had been called up, so she had to do everything herself, aided only briefly by Hahn when he came home on leave. By December 1917 she was able to isolate the substance, and after further work was able to prove that it was indeed the missing isotope. She submitted their findings for publication in March 1918.^[37]

Although Fajans and Göhring had been the first to discover the element, custom required that an element was represented by its longest-lived and most abundant isotope, and brevium did not seem appropriate. Fajans agreed to Meitner naming the element protoactinmium, and assigning it the chemical symbol Pa. In June 1918, Soddy and John Cranston announced that they had extracted a sample of the isotope, but unlike Meitner were unable to describe its characteristics. They acknowledged Meitner’s priority, and agreed to the name. The connection to uranium remained a mystery, as neither of the known isotopes of uranium decayed into protactinium. It remained unsolved until the mother isotope, uranium-235, was discovered in 1929.^[37][38]

For their discovery Hahn and Meitner were repeatedly nominated for the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in the 1920s by several scientists, among them Max Planck, Heinrich Goldschmidt, and Fajans himself.^[39][40] In 1949, the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) named the new element definitively protactinium, and confirmed Hahn and Meitner as discoverers.^[41]

Discovery of nuclear isomerism[edit source]

Decay chain of uranium-238

With the discovery of protactinium, most of the decay chains of uranium had been mapped. When Hahn returned to his work after the war, he looked back over his 1914 results, and considered some anomalies that had been dismissed or overlooked. He dissolved uranium salts in a hydrofluoric acid solution with tantalic acid. First the tantalum in the ore was precipitated, then the protactinium. In addition to the uranium X1 (thorium-234) and uranium X2 (protactinium-234), Hahn detected traces of a radioactive substance with a half life of between 6 and 7 hours. There was one isotope known to have a half life of 6.2 hours, mesothorium II (actinium-228). This was not in any probable decay chain, but it could have been contamination, as the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry had experimented with it. Hahn and Meitner demonstrated in 1919 that when actinium is treated with hydrofluoric acid, it remains in the insoluble residue. Since mesothorium II was an isotope of actinium, the substance was not mesothorium II; it was protactinium.^[42][43] Hahn was now confident enough that he had found something that he named his new isotope “uranium Z”, and in February 1921, he published the first report on his discovery.^[44]

Hahn determined that uranium Z had a half life of around 6.7 hours (with a two per cent margin of error) and that when uranium X1 decayed, it became uranium X2 about 99.75 per cent of the time, and uranium Z around 0.25 per cent of the time. He found that the proportion of uranium X to uranium Z extracted from several kilograms of uranyl nitrate remained constant over time, strongly indicating that uranium X was the mother of uranium Z. To prove this, Hahn obtained a hundred kilograms of uranyl nitrate; separating the uranium X from it took weeks. He found that the half life of the parent of uranium Z differed from the known 24 day half life of uranium X1 by no more than two or three days, but was unable to get a more accurate value. Hahn concluded that uranium Z and uranium X2 were both the same isotope of protactinium (protactinium-234), and they both decayed into uranium II (uranium-234), but with different half lives.^[42][43][45]

Uranium Z was the first example of nuclear isomerism. Walther Gerlach later remarked that this was “a discovery that was not understood at the time but later became highly significant for nuclear physics”.^[26] Not until 1936 was Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker able to provide a theoretical explanation of the phenomenon.^[46][47] For this discovery, whose full significance was recognised by very few, Hahn was again proposed for the Nobel Prize in Chemistry by Bernhard Naunyn, Goldschmidt and Planck.^[39]

Applied Radiochemistry[edit source]

In 1924, Hahn was elected to full membership of the Prussian Academy of Sciences in Berlin, by a vote of thirty white balls to two black.^[48] While still remaining the head of his own department, he hecame Deputy Director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry in 1924, and succeeded Alfred Stock as the director in 1928.^[49] Meitner became the director of the Physical Radioactivity Division, while Hahn headed the Chemical Radioactivity Division.^[50] In the early 1920s, he created a new line of research. Using the “emanation method”, which he had recently developed, and the “emanation ability”, he founded what became known as “applied radiochemistry” for the researching of general chemical and physical-chemical questions. In 1936 Cornell University Press published a book in English (and later in Russian) titled Applied Radiochemistry, which contained the lectures given by Hahn when he was a visiting professor at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, in 1933. This important publication had a major influence on almost all nuclear chemists and physicists in the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and the Soviet Union during the 1930s and 1940s.^[51]

In 1966, Glenn T. Seaborg, co-discoverer of many transuranium elements, wrote about this book as follows:

As a young graduate student at the University of California at Berkeley in the mid-1930s and in connection with our work with plutonium a few years later, I used his book Applied Radiochemistry as my bible. This book was based on a series of lectures which Professor Hahn had given at Cornell in 1933; it set forth the “laws” for the co-precipitation of minute quantities of radioactive materials when insoluble substances were precipitated from aqueous solutions. I recall reading and rereading every word in these laws of co-precipitation many times, attempting to derive every possible bit of guidance for our work, and perhaps in my zealousness reading into them more than the master himself had intended. I doubt that I have read sections in any other book more carefully or more frequently than those in Hahn’s Applied Radiochemistry. In fact, I read the entire volume repeatedly and I recall that my chief disappointment with it was its length. It was too short.^[51]

National socialism[edit source]

Fritz Strassmann had come to the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry to study under Hahn to improve his employment prospects. After the Nazi Party came to power in Germany in 1933, Strassmann declined a lucrative offer of employment because it required political training and Nazi Party membership, and he resigned from the Society of German Chemists when it became part of the Nazi German Labour Front rather than become a member of Nazi-controlled organisation. As a result, he could neither work in the chemical industry nor receive his habilitation, the prerequisite for an academic position. Meitner persuaded Hahn to hire Strassmann as an assistant. Soon he would be credited as a third collaborator on the papers they produced, and would sometimes even be listed first.^[52][53]

Hahn spent February to June 1933 in the United States and Canada as a visiting professor at Cornell University.^[54] He gave an interview to the Toronto Star Weekly in which he painted a flattering portrait of Adolf Hitler:

I am not a Nazi. But Hitler is the hope, the powerful hope, of German youth… At least 20 million people revere him. He began as a nobody, and you see what he has become in ten years.… In any case for the youth, for the nation of the future, Hitler is a hero, a Führer, a saint… In his daily life he is almost a saint. No alcohol, not even tobacco, no meat, no women. In a word: Hitler is an unequivocal Christ.^[55]

The April 1933 Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service banned Jews and communists from academia. Meitner was exempt from its impact because she was an Austrian rather than a German citizen.^[56] Haber was likewise exempt as a veteran of World War I, but chose to resign his directorship of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Physical Chemistry and Electrochemistry in protest on 30 April 1933, but the directors of the other Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes, even the Jewish ones, complied with the new law,^[57] which applied to the KWS as a whole and those Kaiser Wilhelm institutes with more than 50% state support, which exempted the KWI for Chemistry.^[58] Hahn therefore did not have to fire any of his own full-time staff, but as the interim director of Haber’s institute, he dismissed a quarter of its staff, including three department heads. Gerhart Jander was appointed the new director of Haber’s old institute, and, ironically, reoriented it towards chemical warfare research.^[59]

Like most KWS institute directors, Haber had accrued a large discretionary fund. It was his wish that it be distributed to the dismissed staff to facilitate their emigration, but the Rockefeller Foundation insisted that the funds either be used for scientific research or returned. Hahn brokered a deal whereby 10 per cent of the funds would be allocated to Haber’s people. In August 1933 the administrators of the KWS were alerted that several boxes of Rockefeller Foundation-funded equipment was about to be shipped to Herbert Freundlich, one of the department heads that Hahn had dismissed, in England. Hahn complied with an order to halt the shipment, but when Planck, the president of the KWS since 1930, returned from vacation, he ordered Hahn to expedite the shipment.^[59][60]

Haber died on 29 January 1934. A memorial service was held on the first anniversary of his death. University professors were forbidden to attend, so they sent their wives in their place. Hahn, Planck and Joseph Koeth attended, and gave speeches.^[59][61] The aging Planck did not seek re-election, and was succeeded in 1937 as president by Carl Bosch, a Nobel Prize winner in Chemistry and the Chairman of the Board of IG Farben, a company which had bankrolled the Nazi Party since 1932. Ernst Telschow became Secretary of the KWS. Telschow was an enthusiastic supporter of the Nazis, but was also loyal to Hahn, being one of his former students, and Hahn welcomed his appointment.^[62][59] Hahn’s chief assistant, Otto Erbacher, became the KWI for Chemistry’s party steward (Vertrauensmann).^[63]

Rubidium–strontium dating[edit source]

While Hahn was in North America, his attention was drawn to a mica-like mineral from Manitoba that contained rubidium. Some years before he had studied the radioactive decay of rubidium-87, and had estimated its half life at 2 x 10¹¹ years. It occurred to Hahn that by comparing the quantity of strontium in the mineral (which had once been rubidium) with that of the remaining rubidium, he could measure the age of the mineral, assuming that his original calculation of the half life was reasonably accurate. This would be a superior dating method to studying the decay of uranium, because some of the uranium turns into helium, which then escapes, resulting in rocks appearing to be younger than they really were. Jacob Papish helped Hahn obtain several kilograms of the mineral.^[64]

From 1,012 grams of the mineral, Strassmann and Ernst Walling extracted 253.4 milligrams of strontium carbonate, all of which was the strontium-87 isotope, indicating that it had all been produced from radioactive decay of rubidium-87. The age of the mineral had been estimated at 1,975 million years from uranium minerals in the same deposit, which implied that the half life of rubidium-87 was 2.3 x 10¹¹ years: quite close to Hahn’s original calculation.^[65][66] Rubidium–strontium dating became a widely used technique for dating rocks in the 1950s, when mass spectrometry became common.^[67]

Discovery of nuclear fission[edit source]

Main article: Discovery of nuclear fissionThis was touted for many years as the table and experimental apparatus with which Otto Hahn discovered nuclear fission in 1938. The table and instruments are representative of the ones used, but not necessarily the originals, and would not have been together on the one table in the same room. Pressure from historians, scientists and feminists caused the museum to alter the display in 1988 to acknowledge Lise Meitner, Otto Frisch and Fritz Strassmann.^[68]

After James Chadwick discovered the neutron in 1932,^[69] Irène Curie and Frédéric Joliot irradiated aluminium foil with alpha particles, they found that this results in a short-lived radioactive isotope of phosphorus. They noted that positron emission continued after the neutron emissions ceased. Not only had they discovered a new form of radioactive decay, they had transmuted an element into a hitherto unknown radioactive isotope of another, thereby inducing radioactivity where there had been none before. Radiochemistry was now no longer confined to certain heavy elements, but extended to the entire periodic table.^[70][71] Chadwick noted that being electrically neutral, neutrons could penetrate the atomic nucleus more easily than protons or alpha particles.^[72] Enrico Fermi and his colleagues in Rome picked up on this idea,^[73] and began irradiating elements with neutrons.^[74]

The radioactive displacement law of Fajans and Soddy said that beta decay causes isotopes to move one element up on the periodic table, and alpha decay causes them to move two down. When Fermi’s group bombarded uranium atoms with neutrons, they found a complex mix of half lives. Fermi therefore concluded that the new elements with atomic numbers greater than 92 (known as transuranium elements) had been created.^[74] Meitner and Hahn had not collaborated for many years, but Meitner was eager to investigate Fermi’s results. Hahn, initially, was not, but he changed his mind when Aristid von Grosse suggested that what Fermi had found was an isotope of protactinium.^[75] “The only question”, Hahn later wrote, “seemed to be whether Fermi had found isotopes of transuranian elements, or isotopes of the next-lower element, protactinium. At that time Lise Meitner and I decided to repeat Fermi’s experiments in order to find out whether the 13-minute isotope was a protactinium isotope or not. It was a logical decision, having been the discoverers of protactinium.”^[76]

Between 1934 and 1938, Hahn, Meitner and Strassmann found a great number of radioactive transmutation products, all of which they regarded as transuranic.^[77] At that time, the existence of actinides was not yet established, and uranium was wrongly believed to be a group 6 element similar to tungsten. It followed that first transuranic elements would be similar to group 7 to 10 elements, i.e. rhenium and platinoids. They established the presence of multiple isotopes of at least four such elements, and (mistakenly) identified them as elements with atomic numbers 93 through 96. They were the first scientists to measure the 23-minute half life of uranium-239 and to establish chemically that it was an isotope of uranium, but were unable to continue this work to its logical conclusion and identify the real element 93.^[78] They identified ten different half lives, with varying degrees of certainty. To account for them, Meitner had to hypothesise a new class of reaction and the alpha decay of uranium, neither of which had ever been reported before, and for which physical evidence was lacking. Hahn and Strassmann refined their chemical procedures, while Meitner devised new experiments to shine more light on the reaction processes.^[78]Otto Hahn’s notebook

In May 1937, they issued parallel reports, one in Zeitschrift für Physik with Meitner as the principal author, and one in Chemische Berichte with Hahn as the principal author.^[78][79][80] Hahn concluded his by stating emphatically: Vor allem steht ihre chemische Verschiedenheit von allen bisher bekannten Elementen außerhalb jeder Diskussion (“Above all, their chemical distinction from all previously known elements needs no further discussion”);^[80] Meitner was increasingly uncertain. She considered the possibility that the reactions were from different isotopes of uranium; three were known: uranium-238, uranium-235 and uranium-234. However, when she calculated the neutron cross section, it was too large to be anything other than the most abundant isotope, uranium-238. She concluded that it must be another case of the nuclear isomerism that Hahn had discovered in protactinium. She therefore ended her report on a very different note to Hahn, reporting that: “The process must be neutron capture by uranium-238, which leads to three isomeric nuclei of uranium-239. This result is very difficult to reconcile with current concepts of the nucleus.”^[79][81]

With the Anschluss, Germany’s unification with Austria on 12 March 1938, Meitner lost her Austrian citizenship,^[82] and fled to Sweden. She carried only a little money, but before she left, Hahn gave her a diamond ring he had inherited from his mother.^[83] Meitner continued to correspond with Hahn by mail. In late 1938 Hahn and Strassmann found evidence of isotopes of an alkaline earth metal in their sample. Finding a group 2 alkaline earth metal was problematic, because it did not logically fit with the other elements found thus far. Hahn initially suspected it to be radium, produced by splitting off two alpha-particles from the uranium nucleus, but chipping off two alpha particles via this process was unlikely. The idea of turning uranium into barium (by removing around 100 nucleons) was seen as preposterous.^[84]

During a visit to Copenhagen on 10 November, Hahn discussed these results with Niels Bohr, Lise Meitner, and Otto Robert Frisch.^[84] Further refinements of the technique, leading to the decisive experiment on 16–17 December 1938, produced puzzling results: the three isotopes consistently behaved not as radium, but as barium. Hahn, who did not inform the physicists in his Institute, described the results exclusively in a letter to Meitner on 19 December:

We are more and more coming to the awful conclusion that our Ra isotopes behave not like Ra, but like Ba… Perhaps you can come up with some fantastic explanation. We ourselves realize that it can’t actually burst apart into Ba. Now we want to test whether the Ac-isotopes derived from the “Ra” behave not like Ac but like La.^[85]

Plaque commemorating Hahn and Strassmann’s discovery of fission in Berlin (unveiled in 1956)

In her reply, Meitner concurred. “At the moment, the interpretation of such a thoroughgoing breakup seems very difficult to me, but in nuclear physics we have experienced so many surprises, that one cannot unconditionally say: ‘it is impossible’.” On 22 December 1938, Hahn sent a manuscript to Naturwissenschaften reporting their radiochemical results, which were published on 6 January 1939.^[86] On 27 December, Hahn telephoned the editor of Naturwissenschaften and requested an addition to the article, speculating that some platinum group elements previously observed in irradiated uranium, which were originally interpreted as transuranium elements, could in fact be technetium (then called “masurium”), mistakenly believing that the atomic masses had to add up rather than the atomic numbers. By January 1939, he was sufficiently convinced of the formation of light elements that he published a new revision of the article, retracting former claims of observing transuranic elements and neighbours of uranium.^[87]

As a chemist, Hahn was reluctant to propose a revolutionary discovery in physics, but Meitner and Frisch worked out a theoretical interpretation of nuclear fission, a term appropriated by Frisch from biology. In January and February they published two articles discussing and experimentally confirming their theory.^[88][89][90] In their second publication on nuclear fission, Hahn and Strassmann used the term Uranspaltung (uranium fission) for the first time, and predicted the existence and liberation of additional neutrons during the fission process, opening up the possibility of a nuclear chain reaction.^[91] This was proved to be the case by Frédéric Joliot and his team in March 1939.^[92] Edwin McMillan and Philip Abelson used the cyclotron at the Berkeley Radiation Laboratory to bombard uranium with neutrons, were able to identify an isotope with a 23-minute half life that was the daughter of uranium-239, and therefore the real element 93, which they named neptunium.^[93] “There goes a Nobel Prize”, Hahn remarked.^[94]

At the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry, Kurt Starke independently produced element 93, using only the weak neutron sources available there. Hahn and Strassmann then began researching its chemical properties.^[95] They knew that it should decay into the real element 94, which according to the latest version of the liquid drop model of the nucleus propounded by Bohr and John Archibald Wheeler, would be even more fissile than uranium-235, but were unable to detect its radioactive decay. They concluded that it must have an extremely long half life, perhaps millions of years.^[93] Part of the problem was that they still believed that element 94 was a platinoid, which confounded their attempts at chemical separation.^[95]

World War II[edit source]

Main article: German nuclear weapons program

On 24 April 1939, Paul Harteck and his assistant, Wilhelm Groth, had written to Reich Ministry of War, alerting it to the possibility of the development of an atomic bomb. In response, the Army Weapons Branch (HWA) had established a physics section under nuclear physicist Kurt Diebner. After World War II broke out on 1 September 1939, the HWA moved to control the German nuclear weapons program. From then on, Hahn participated in a ceaseless series of meetings related to the project. After the Director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Physics, Peter Debye, left for the United States in 1940 and never returned, Diebner was installed as its director.^[96] Hahn reported to the HWA on the progress of his research. Together with his assistants, Hans-Joachim Born, Siegfried Flügge, Hans Götte, Walter Seelmann-Eggebert and Strassmann, he catalogued about one hundred fission product isotopes. They also investigated means of isotope separation; the chemistry of element 93; and methods for purifying uranium oxides and salts.^[97]

On the night of 15 February 1944, the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry building was struck by a bomb.^[97] Hahn’s office was destroyed, along with his correspondence with Rutherford and other researchers, and many of his personal possessions.^[98][99] The office was the intended target of the raid, which had been ordered by Brigadier General Leslie Groves, the director of the Manhattan Project, in the hope of disrupting the German uranium project.^[100] Albert Speer, the Reich Minister of Armaments and War Production, arranged for the institute to move to Tailfingen in southern Germany. All work in Berlin ceased by July. Hahn and his family moved to the house of a textile manufacturer there.^[98][99]

Life became precarious for those married to Jewish women. One was Philipp Hoernes, a chemist working for Auergesellschaft, the firm that mined the uranium ore used by the project. After the firm let him go in 1944, Hoernes faced being conscripted for forced labour. At the age of 60, it was doubtful that he would survive. Hahn and Nikolaus Riehl arranged for Hoernes to work at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry, claiming that his work was essential to the uranium project and that uranium was highly toxic, making it hard to find people to work with it. Hahn was aware that uranium ore was fairly safe in the laboratory, although not so much for the 2,000 female slave labourers from Sachsenhausen concentration camp who mined it in Oranienburg. Another physicist with a Jewish wife was Heinrich Rausch von Traubenberg [de]. Hahn certified that his work was important to the war effort, and that his wife Maria, who had a doctorate in physics, was required as his assistant. After he died on 19 September 1944, Maria faced being sent to a concentration camp. Hahn mounted a lobbying campaign to get her released, but to no avail, and she was sent to the Theresienstadt Ghetto in January 1945. She survived the war, and was reunited with her daughters in England after the war.^[101][102]

Incarceration[edit source]

Main article: Operation Epsilon

On 25 April 1945, an armoured task force from the Alsos Mission arrived in Tailfingen, and surrounded the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry. Hahn was informed that he was under arrest. When asked about reports related to his secret work on uranium, Hahn replied: “I have them all here”, and handed over 150 reports. He was taken to Hechingen, where he joined Erich Bagge, Horst Korsching, Max von Laue, Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker and Karl Wirtz. They were then taken to a dilapidated château in Versailles, where they heard about the signing of the German Instrument of Surrender at Reims on 7 May. Over the following days they were joined by Kurt Diebner, Walther Gerlach, Paul Harteck and Werner Heisenberg.^{[103][104][105]} All were physicists except Hahn and Harteck, who were chemists, and all had worked on the German nuclear weapons program except von Laue, although he was well aware of it.^[106]Farm Hall (seen here in 2015)

They were relocated to the Château de Facqueval in Modave, Belgium, where Hahn used the time to work on his memoirs and then, on 3 July, were flown to England. They arrived at Farm Hall, Godmanchester, near Cambridge, on 3 July. Unbeknown to them, their every conversation, indoors and out, was recorded from hidden microphones. They were given British newspapers, which Hahn was able to read. He was greatly disturbed by their reports of the Potsdam Conference, where German territory was ceded to Poland and the USSR. In August 1945, the German scientists were informed of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. Up to this point the scientists, except Harteck, were completely certain that their project was further advanced than any in other countries, and the Alsos Mission’s chief scientist, Samuel Goudsmit, did nothing to correct this impression. Now the reason for their incarceration in Farm Hall suddenly became apparent.^{[106][107][108][109]}

As they recovered from the shock of the announcement, they began to rationalise what had happened. Hahn noted that he was glad that they had not succeeded, and von Weizsäcker suggested that they should claim that they had not wanted to. They drafted a memorandum on the project, noting that fission was discovered by Hahn and Strassmann. The revelation that Nagasaki had been destroyed by a plutonium bomb came as another shock, as it meant that the Allies had not only been able to successfully conduct uranium enrichment, but had mastered nuclear reactor technology as well. The memorandum became the first draft of a postwar apologia. The idea that Germany had lost the war because its scientists were morally superior was as outrageous as it was unbelievable, but struck a chord in postwar German academia.^[110] It infuriated Goudsmit, whose parents had been murdered in Auschwitz.^[111] On 3 January 1946, exactly six months after they had arrived at Farm Hall, the group was allowed to return to Germany.^[112] Hahn, Heisenberg, von Laue and von Weizsäcker were brought to Göttingen, which was controlled by the British occupation authorities.^[113]

The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1944[edit source]

On 16 November 1945 the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences announced that Hahn had been awarded the 1944 Nobel Prize in Chemistry “for his discovery of the fission of heavy atomic nuclei.”^[114][115] Hahn was still at Farm Hall when the announcement was made; thus, his whereabouts were a secret, and it was impossible for the Nobel committee to send him a congratulatory telegram. Instead, he learned about his award on 18 November through the Daily Telegraph.^[116] His fellow interned scientists celebrated his award by giving speeches, making jokes, and composing songs.^[117]

Hahn had been nominated for the chemistry and the physics Nobel prizes many times even before the discovery of nuclear fission. Several more followed for the discovery of fission.^[39] The Nobel prize nominations were vetted by committees of five, one for each award. Although Hahn and Meitner received nominations for physics, radioactivity and radioactive elements had traditionally been seen as the domain of chemistry, and so the Nobel Committee for Chemistry evaluated the nominations. The committee received reports from Theodor Svedberg and Arne Westgren [de; sv]. These chemists were impressed by Hahn’s work, but felt that of Meitner and Frisch was not extraordinary, and did not understand why the physics community regarded their work as seminal. As for Strassmann, although his name was on the papers, there was a long-standing policy of conferring awards on the most senior scientist in a collaboration. The committee therefore recommended that Hahn alone be given the chemistry prize.^[118]5 DM coin, Germany, honouring Hahn and his discovery of fission, 1979

Under Nazi rule, Germans had been forbidden to accept Nobel prizes after the Nobel Peace Prize had been awarded to Carl von Ossietzky in 1936.^[119] The Nobel Committee for Chemistry’s recommendation was therefore rejected by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences in 1944, which also decided to defer the award for one year. When the Academy reconsidered the award in September 1945, the war was over and thus the German boycott had ended. Also, the chemistry committee had now become more cautious, as it was apparent that much research had taken place in the United States in secret, and suggested deferring for another year, but the Academy was swayed by Göran Liljestrand, who argued that it was important for the Academy to assert its independence from the Allies of World War II, and award the prize to a German, as it had done after World War I when it had awarded it to Fritz Haber. Hahn therefore became the sole recipient of the 1944 Nobel Prize for Chemistry.^[118]

The invitation to attend the Nobel festivities was transmitted via the British Embassy in Stockholm.^[120] On 4 December, Hahn was persuaded by two of his Alsos captors, American Lieutenant Colonel Horace K. Calvert and British Lieutenant Commander Eric Welsh, to write a letter to the Nobel committee accepting the prize but stating that he would not be able to attend the award ceremony on 10 December since his captors would not allow him to leave Farm Hall. When Hahn protested, Welsh reminded him that Germany had lost the war.^[121] Under the Nobel Foundation statutes, Hahn had six months to deliver the Nobel Prize lecture, and until 1 October 1946 to cash the 150,000 Swedish krona cheque.^[122][123]

Hahn was repatriated from Farm Hall on 3 January 1946, but it soon became apparent that difficulties obtaining permission to travel from the British government meant that he would be unable to travel to Sweden before December 1946. Accordingly, the Academy of Sciences and the Nobel Foundation obtained an extension from the Swedish government.^[123] Hahn attended the year after he was awarded the prize. On 10 December 1946, the anniversary of the death of Alfred Nobel, King Gustav V of Sweden presented him with his Nobel Prize medal and diploma.^{[115][123][124]} Hahn gave 10,000 krona of his prize to Strassmann, who refused to use it.^[124][125]

Founder and President of the Max Planck Society[edit source]

Monument in Berlin-Dahlem, in front of the Otto-Hahn-Platz

The suicide of Albert Vögler on 14 April 1945 left the KWS without a president.^[49] The British chemist Bertie Blount was placed in charge of its affairs while the Allies decided what to do with it, and he decided to install Max Planck as an interim president. Now aged 87, Planck was in the small town of Rogätz, in an area that the Americans were preparing to hand over to the Soviet Union. The Dutch astronomer Gerard Kuiper from the Alsos Mission fetched Planck in a jeep and brought him to Göttingen on 16 May.^[126][127] Planck wrote to Hahn, who was still in captivity in England, on 25 July, and informed Hahn that the directors of the KWS had voted to make him the next president, and asked if he would accept the position.^[49] Hahn did not receive the letter until September, and did not think he was a good choice, as he regarded himself as a poor negotiator, but his colleagues persuaded him to accept. After his return to Germany, he assumed the office on 1 April 1946.^[128][129]

Allied Control Council Law No. 25 on the control of scientific research dated 29 April 1946 restricted German scientists to conducting basic research only,^[49] and on 11 July the Allied Control Council dissolved the KWS on the insistence of the Americans,^[130] who considered that it had been too close to the national socialist regime, and was a threat to world peace.^[131] However, the British, who had voted against the dissolution, were more sympathetic, and offered to let the Kaiser Wilhelm Society continue in the British Zone, on one condition: that the name be changed. Hahn and Heisenberg were distraught at this prospect. To them it was an international brand that represented political independence and scientific research of the highest order. Hahn noted that it had been suggested that the name be changed during the Weimar Republic, but the Social Democratic Party of Germany had been persuaded not to.^[132] To Hahn, the name represented the good old days of the German Empire, however authoritarian and undemocratic it was, before the hated Weimar Republic.^[133] Heisenberg asked Niels Bohr for support, but Bohr recommended that the name be changed.^[132] Lise Meitner wrote to Hahn, explaining that:

Outside of Germany it is considered so obvious that the tradition from the period of Kaiser Wilhelm has been disastrous and that changing the name of the KWS is desirable, that no one understands the resistance against it. For the idea, that the Germans are the chosen people and have the right to use any and all means to subordinate the “inferior” people, has been expressed over and over again by historians, philosophers, and politicians and finally the Nazis tried to translate it into fact… The best people among the English and Americans wish that the best Germans would understand that there should be a definitive break with this tradition, which has brought the entire world and Germany itself the greatest misfortune. And as a small sign of German understanding the name of the KWS should be changed. What’s in a name, if it is a matter of the existence of Germany and thereby Europe? ^[134]

In September 1946, a new Max Planck Society was established at Bad Driburg in the British Zone.^[131] On 26 February 1948, after the US and British zones were fused into Bizonia, it was dissolved to make way for the Max Planck Society, with Hahn as the founding president. It took over the 29 institutes of the former Kaiser Wilhelm Society that were located in the British and American zones. When the Federal Republic of Germany (or West-Germany) was formed in 1949, the five institutes located in the French zone joined them.^[135] The Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry, now under Strassmann, built and renovated new accommodation in Mainz, but work proceeded slowly, and it did not relocate from Tailfingen until 1949.^[136] Hahn’s insistence on retaining Ernst Telschow as the general secretary nearly caused a rebellion against his presidency.^[137] In his efforts to rebuild German science, Hahn was generous in issuing persilschein (whitewash certificates), writing one for Gottfried von Droste, who had joined the Sturmabteilung (SA) in 1933 and the NSDAP in 1937, and wore his SA uniform at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemistry,^[138] and for Heinrich Hörlein and Fritz ter Meer from IG Farben.^[139] Hahn served as president of the Max Planck Society until 1960, and succeeded in regaining the renown that had once been enjoyed by the Kaiser Wilhelm Society. New institutes were founded and old ones expanded, the budget rose from 12 million Deutsche Marks in 1949 to 47 million in 1960, and the workforce grew from 1,400 to nearly 3,000.^[49]

Spokesman for social responsibility[edit source]

After the Second World War, Hahn came out strongly against the use of nuclear energy for military purposes. He saw the application of his scientific discoveries to such ends as a misuse, or even a crime. Lawrence Badash wrote: “His wartime recognition of the perversion of science for the construction of weapons and his postwar activity in planning the direction of his country’s scientific endeavours now inclined him increasingly toward being a spokesman for social responsibility.”^[140]Otto Hahn with his wife Edith, 1959

In early 1954, he wrote the article “Cobalt 60 – Danger or Blessing for Mankind?”, about the misuse of atomic energy, which was widely reprinted and transmitted in the radio in Germany, Norway, Austria, and Denmark, and in an English version worldwide via the BBC. The international reaction was encouraging.^[141] The following year he initiated and organized the Mainau Declaration of 1955, in which he and a number of international Nobel Prize-winners called attention to the dangers of atomic weapons and warned the nations of the world urgently against the use of “force as a final resort”, and which was issued a week after the similar Russell-Einstein Manifesto. In 1956, Hahn repeated his appeal with the signature of 52 of his Nobel colleagues from all parts of the world.^[142]

Hahn was also instrumental in and one of the authors of the Göttingen Manifesto of 13 April 1957, in which, together with 17 leading German atomic scientists, he protested against a proposed nuclear arming of the West German armed forces (Bundeswehr).^[143] This resulted in Hahn receiving an invitation to meet with the Chancellor of Germany, Konrad Adenauer and other senior officials, including the Defense Minister, Franz Josef Strauss, and Generals Hans Speidel and Adolf Heusinger (who both had been a General in the Nazi era). The two generals argued that the Bundeswehr needed nuclear weapons, and Adenauer accepted their advice. A communique was drafted that said that the Federal Republic did not manufacture nuclear weapons, and would not ask its scientists to do so.^[144] Instead, the German forces were equipped with US nuclear weapons.^[145]Otto Hahn on a stamp of the German Democratic Republic, 1979

On 13 November 1957, in the Konzerthaus (Concert Hall) in Vienna, Hahn warned of the “dangers of A- and H-bomb-experiments”, and declared that “today war is no means of politics anymore – it will only destroy all countries in the world”. His highly acclaimed speech was transmitted internationally by the Austrian radio, Österreichischer Rundfunk (ÖR). On 28 December 1957, Hahn repeated his appeal in an English translation for the Bulgarian Radio in Sofia, which was broadcast in all Warsaw pact states.^[146][147]

In 1959 Hahn co-founded in Berlin the Federation of German Scientists (VDW), a non-governmental organization, which has been committed to the ideal of responsible science. The members of the Federation feel committed to taking into consideration the possible military, political, and economical implications and possibilities of atomic misuse when carrying out their scientific research and teaching. With the results of its interdisciplinary work the VDW not only addresses the general public, but also the decision-makers at all levels of politics and society.^[148] Right up to his death, Otto Hahn never tired of warning urgently of the dangers of the nuclear arms race between the great powers and of the radioactive contamination of the planet.^[149] The historian Lawrence Badash wrote:

The important thing is not that scientists may disagree on where their responsibility to society lies, but that they are conscious that a responsibility exists, are vocal about it, and when they speak out they expect to affect policy. Otto Hahn, it would seem, was even more than just an example of this twentieth-century conceptual evolution; he was a leader in the process.^[150]

Honors and awards[edit source]

During his lifetime Hahn was awarded orders, medals, scientific prizes, and fellowships of Academies, Societies, and Institutions from all over the world. At the end of 1999, the German news magazine Focus published an inquiry of 500 leading natural scientists, engineers, and physicians about the most important scientists of the 20th century. In this poll Hahn was elected third (with 81 points), after the theoretical physicists Albert Einstein and Max Planck, and thus the most significant chemist of his time.^[151]

As well as the Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1944), Hahn was awarded:

• the Emil Fischer Medal of the Society of German Chemists (1922),^[152]
• the Cannizaro Prize of the Royal Academy of Science in Rome (1938),^[152]
• the Copernicus Prize of the University of Konigsberg (1941),^[152]
• the Gothenius Medal of the Akademie der Naturforscher (1943),^[152]
• the Max Planck Medal of the German Physical Society, with Lise Meitner (1949),^[152]
• the Goethe Medal of the city of Frankfurt-on-the-Main (1949),^[152]
• the Golden Paracelsus Medal of the Swiss Chemical Society (1953),^[152]
• the Faraday Lectureship Prize with Medal from the Royal Society of Chemistry (1956),^[152]
• the Grotius Medal of the Hugo Grotius Foundation (1956),^[152]
• Wilhelm Exner Medal of the Austrian Industry Association (1958),^[153]
• the Helmholtz Medal of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities (1959),
• and the Harnack medal in Gold from the Max Planck Society (1959).^[154][155]

Bust by Knud Knudsen

Hahn became the honorary president of the Max Planck Society in 1962.^[156]

• He was elected a Foreign Member of the Royal Society (1957).^[157]
• His honorary memberships of foreign academies and scientific societies included:
  • the Romanian Physical Society in Bucharest,^[158]
  • the Royal Spanish Society for Chemistry and Physics and the Spanish National Research Council,^[158]
  • and the Academies in Allahabad, Bangalore, Berlin, Boston, Bucharest, Copenhagen, Göttingen, Halle, Helsinki, Lisbon, Madrid, Mainz, Munich, Rome, Stockholm, Vatican, and Vienna.^[158]

He was an honorary fellow of University College London,^[158]

• and an honorary citizen of the cities of Frankfurt am Main and Göttingen in 1959,
• and of Berlin (1968).^[152]
• Hahn was made an Officer of the Ordre National de la Légion d’Honneur of France (1959),^[152]
• and was awarded the Grand Cross First Class of the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany (1959).^[152]
• In 1966, US President Lyndon B. Johnson and the United States Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) awarded Hahn, Lise Meitner and Fritz Strassmann the Enrico Fermi Award. The diploma for Hahn bore the words: “For pioneering research in the naturally occurring radioactivities and extensive experimental studies culminating in the discovery of fission.”^[159]
• He received honorary doctorates from
  • the University of Gottingen,^[152]
  • the Technische Universität Darmstadt,^[152]
  • the University of Frankfurt in 1949,^[152]
  • and the University of Cambridge in 1957.^[152]

Objects named after Hahn include:

• NS Otto Hahn, the only European nuclear-powered civilian ship (1964),^[160]
• a crater on the Moon (shared with his namesake Friedrich von Hahn),^[161]
• and the asteroid 19126 Ottohahn,^[162]
• the Otto Hahn Prize of both the German Chemical and Physical Societies and the city of Frankfurt/Main,^[163]
• the Otto Hahn Medal and the Otto Hahn Award of the Max Planck Society,^[164][165]
• and the Otto Hahn Peace Medal in Gold of the United Nations Association of Germany (DGVN) in Berlin (1988).^[166]

Proposals were made at various times, first in 1971 by American chemists, that the newly synthesised element 105 should be named hahnium in Hahn’s honour, but in 1997 the IUPAC named it dubnium, after the Russian research centre in Dubna. In 1992 element 108 was discovered by a German research team, and they proposed the name hassium (after Hesse). In spite of the long-standing convention to give the discoverer the right to suggest a name, a 1994 IUPAC committee recommended that it be named hahnium.^[167] After protests from the German discoverers, the name hassium (Hs) was adopted internationally in 1997.^[168]

Death[edit source]

Hahn’s grave in Göttingen

Hahn was shot in the back by a disgruntled inventor in October 1951, injured in a motor vehicle accident in 1952, and had a minor heart attack in 1953. In 1962, he published a book, Vom Radiothor zur Uranspaltung. It was released in English in 1966 with the title Otto Hahn: A Scientific Autobiography, with an introduction by Glenn Seaborg. The success of this book may have prompted him to write another, fuller autobiography, Otto Hahn. Mein Leben, but before it could be published, he fractured one of the vertebrae in his neck while getting out of a car. He gradually became weaker and died in Göttingen on 28 July 1968. His wife Edith survived him by only a fortnight.^[169] He was buried in the Stadtfriedhof in Göttingen.^[170] The day after his death, the Max Planck Society published the following obituary notice in all the major newspapers in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland:

On 28 July, in his 90th year, our Honorary President Otto Hahn passed away. His name will be recorded in the history of humanity as the founder of the atomic age. In him Germany and the world have lost a scholar who was distinguished in equal measure by his integrity and personal humility. The Max Planck Society mourns its founder, who continued the tasks and traditions of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society after the war, and mourns also a good and much loved human being, who will live in the memories of all who had the chance to meet him. His work will continue. We remember him with deep gratitude and admiration.^[171]

Fritz Strassmann wrote:

The number of those who had been able to be near Otto Hahn is small. His behaviour was completely natural for him, but for the next generations he will serve as a model, regardless of whether one admires in the attitude of Otto Hahn his humane and scientific sense of responsibility or his personal courage.^[172]

Otto Robert Frisch recalled:

Hahn remained modest and informal all his life. His disarming frankness, unfailing kindness, good common sense, and impish humour will be remembered by his many friends all over the world.^[173]

The Royal Society in London wrote in an obituary:

It was remarkable, how, after the war, this rather unassuming scientist who had spent a lifetime in the laboratory, became an effective administrator and an important public figure in Germany. Hahn, famous as the discoverer of nuclear fission, was respected and trusted for his human qualities, simplicity of manner, transparent honesty, common sense and loyalty.^[174]

See also[edit source]

• List of peace activists

Publications in English[edit source]

• Hahn, Otto (1936). Applied Radiochemistry. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
• Hahn, Otto (1950). New Atoms: Progress and Some Memories. New York-Amsterdam-London-Brussels: Elsevier Inc.
• Hahn, Otto (1966). Otto Hahn: A Scientific Autobiography. Translated by Ley, Willy. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
• Hahn, Otto (1970). My Life. Translated by Kaiser, Ernst; Wilkins, Eithne. New York: Herder and Herder.

Notes[edit source]

1. ^ Hahn 1966, pp. 2–6.
2. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hahn 1966, pp. 7–11.
3. ^ Spence 1970, pp. 281–282.
4. ^ Hughes, Jeff (29 December 2008). “Making isotopes matter: Francis Aston and the mass-spectrograph”. Dynamis. 29: 131–165. doi:10.4321/S0211-95362009000100007. ISSN 0211-9536.
5. ^ Hoffmann 2001, p. 35.
6. ^ The Daily Telegraph, London, 18 March 1905.
7. ^ Hahn, Otto (24 May 1905). “A new radio-active element, which evolves thorium emanation. Preliminary communication”. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character. 76 (508): 115–117. Bibcode:1905RSPSA..76..115H. doi:10.1098/rspa.1905.0009.
8. ^ Spence 1970, pp. 303–313 for a full list
9. ^ Hahn 1966, pp. 15–18.
10. ^ Spence 1970, pp. 282–283.
11. ^ Hahn 1966, pp. 24–25.
12. ^ Hahn 1988, p. 59.
13. ^ Hahn 1966, p. 66.
14. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hahn 1966, pp. 37–38.
15. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hahn 1966, p. 52.
16. ^ Hahn 1966, pp. 39–40.
17. ^ Hahn 1966, pp. 40–50.
18. ^ “Nobel Prize for Chemistry for 1944: Prof. Otto Hahn”. Nature. 156 (3970): 657. December 1945. Bibcode:1945Natur.156R.657.. doi:10.1038/156657b0. ISSN 0028-0836.
19. ^ Stolz 1989, p. 20.
20. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Hahn 1966, p. 50.
21. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hahn 1966, p. 65.
22. ^ Sime 1996, pp. 28–29.
23. ^ Sime 1996, p. 368.
24. ^ “Ehrung der Physikerin Lise Meitner Aus dem Otto-Hahn-Bau wird der Hahn-Meitner-Bau” [Honouring physicist Lise Meitner as the Otto Hahn building becomes the Hahn-Meitner building] (in German). Free University of Berlin. 28 October 2010. Retrieved 10 June 2020.
25. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hahn 1966, pp. 58–64.
26. ^ Jump up to:^a b Gerlach & Hahn 1984, p. 39.
27. ^ Sime 1996, pp. 44–47.
28. ^ Hahn 1966, pp. 70–72.
29. ^ Sime 1996, p. 48.
30. ^ Spence 1970, p. 286.
31. ^ “Hahn, Hanno”. Dictionary of Art Historians. 21 February 2018. Retrieved 18 June 2020.
32. ^ “Hanno-und-Ilse-Hahn-Preis” (in German). Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. Archived from the original on 9 January 2011.
33. ^ Spence 1970, pp. 286–287.
34. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Van der Kloot, W. (2004). “April 1918: Five Future Nobel prize-winners inaugurate weapons of mass destruction and the academic-industrial-military complex”. Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London. 58 (2): 149–160. doi:10.1098/rsnr.2004.0053. S2CID 145243958.
35. ^ Sime 1996, pp. 57–61.
36. ^ Spence 1970, pp. 287–288.
37. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Sime, Ruth Lewin (August 1986). “The Discovery of Protactinium”. Journal of Chemical Education. 63 (8): 653–657. Bibcode:1986JChEd..63..653S. doi:10.1021/ed063p653. ISSN 0021-9584.
38. ^ Meitner, Lise (1 June 1918), Die Muttersubstanz des Actiniums, Ein Neues Radioaktives Element von Langer Lebensdauer, vol. 24, pp. 169–173, doi:10.1002/bbpc.19180241107 (inactive 31 October 2021)
39. ^ Jump up to:^a b c “Nomination Database: Otto Hahn”. Nobel Media AB. 9 June 2020.
40. ^ “Nomination Database: Lise Meitner”. Nobel Media AB. 9 June 2020.
41. ^ “Protactinium | Pa (Element)”. PubChem. Retrieved 18 June 2020.
42. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hahn 1966, pp. 95–103.
43. ^ Jump up to:^a b Berninger 1983, pp. 213–220.
44. ^ Hahn, O. (1921). “Über ein neues radioaktives Zerfallsprodukt im Uran”. Die Naturwissenschaften. 9 (5): 84. Bibcode:1921NW……9…84H. doi:10.1007/BF01491321. S2CID 28599831.
45. ^ Hahn O. Hahn, Otto (1923). “Uber das Uran Z und seine Muttersubstanz”. Zeitschrift für Physikalische Chemie. 103 (1): 461–480. doi:10.1515/zpch-1922-10325. ISSN 0942-9352. S2CID 99021215.
46. ^ Hoffmann 2001, p. 93.
47. ^ Feather, Norman; Bretscher, E.; Appleton, Edward Victor (1938). “Uranium Z and the problem of nuclear isomerism”. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. 165 (923): 530–551. Bibcode:1938RSPSA.165..530F. doi:10.1098/rspa.1938.0075. ISSN 1364-5021.
48. ^ Hoffmann 2001, p. 94.
49. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e} “Otto Hahn”. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. Retrieved 24 June 2020.
50. ^ Hoffmann 2001, p. 95.
51. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hahn 1966, pp. ix–x.
52. ^ Sime 1996, pp. 156–157, 169.
53. ^ Walker 2006, p. 122.
54. ^ Hahn 1966, p. 283.
55. ^ Sime 2006, p. 6.
56. ^ Sime 1996, pp. 138–139.
57. ^ Sime 1996, pp. 8–9.
58. ^ Sime 2006, p. 7.
59. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Sime 2006, p. 10.
60. ^ “Max Planck becomes President of the KWS”. Max-Planck Gesellschaft. Retrieved 23 June 2020.
61. ^ Walker 2006, pp. 122–123.
62. ^ “The KWS introduces the ‘Führerprinzip’”. Max-Planck Gesellschaft. Retrieved 23 June 2020.
63. ^ Sime 1996, p. 143.
64. ^ Hahn 1966, pp. 85–88.
65. ^ Hahn, O.; Strassman, F.; Walling, E. (19 March 1937). “Herstellung wägbaren Mengen des Strontiumisotops 87 als Umwandlungsprodukt des Rubidiums aus einem kanadischen Glimmer”. Naturwissenschaften (in German). 25 (12): 189. Bibcode:1937NW…..25..189H. doi:10.1007/BF01492269. ISSN 0028-1042.
66. ^ Hahn, O.; Walling, E. (12 March 1938). “Über die Möglichkeit geologischer Alterbestimmung rubidiumhaltiger Mineralen und Gesteine”. Zeitschrift für anorganische und allgemeine Chemie (in German). 236 (1): 78–82. doi:10.1002/zaac.19382360109. ISSN 0044-2313.
67. ^ Bowen 1994, pp. 162–163.
68. ^ Sime, Ruth Lewin (15 June 2010). “An Inconvenient History: the Nuclear-Fission Display in the Deutsches Museum”. Physics in Perspective. 12 (2): 190–218. Bibcode:2010PhP….12..190S. doi:10.1007/s00016-009-0013-x. ISSN 1422-6944. S2CID 120584702.
69. ^ Rhodes 1986, pp. 39, 160–167, 793.
70. ^ Rhodes 1986, pp. 200–201.
71. ^ Sime 1996, pp. 161–162.
72. ^ Fergusson, Jack E. (July 2011). “The History of the Discovery of Nuclear Fission”. Foundations of Chemistry. 13 (2): 145–166. doi:10.1007/s10698-011-9112-2. ISSN 1386-4238. S2CID 93361285.
73. ^ Rhodes 1986, pp. 210–211.
74. ^ Jump up to:^a b Segrè, Emilio G. (July 1989). “Discovery of Nuclear Fission”. Physics Today. 42 (7): 38–43. Bibcode:1989PhT….42g..38S. doi:10.1063/1.881174.
75. ^ Sime 1996, pp. 164–165.
76. ^ Hahn 1966, pp. 140–141.
77. ^ Hahn, O. (1958). “The Discovery of Fission”. Scientific American. 198 (2): 76–84. Bibcode:1958SciAm.198b..76H. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0258-76.
78. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Sime 1996, pp. 170–172.
79. ^ Jump up to:^a b L., Meitner; O., Hahn; Strassmann, F. (May 1937). “Über die Umwandlungsreihen des Urans, die durch Neutronenbestrahlung erzeugt werden” [On the series of transformations of uranium that are generated by neutron radiation]. Zeitschrift für Physik (in German). 106 (3–4): 249–270. Bibcode:1937ZPhy..106..249M. doi:10.1007/BF01340321. ISSN 0939-7922. S2CID 122830315.
80. ^ Jump up to:^a b O., Hahn; L., Meitner; Strassmann, F. (9 June 1937). “Über die Trans‐Urane und ihr chemisches Verhalten” [On the transuranes and their chemical behaviour]. Berichte der Deutschen Chemischen Gesellschaft. 70 (6): 1374–1392. doi:10.1002/cber.19370700634. ISSN 0365-9496.
81. ^ Sime 1996, p. 177.
82. ^ Sime 1996, pp. 184–185.
83. ^ Sime 1996, pp. 200–207.
84. ^ Jump up to:^a b Sime 1996, pp. 227–230.
85. ^ Sime 1996, p. 233.
86. ^ Hahn, O.; Strassmann, F. (1939). “Über den Nachweis und das Verhalten der bei der Bestrahlung des Urans mittels Neutronen entstehenden Erdalkalimetalle” [On the detection and characteristics of the alkaline earth metals formed by irradiation of uranium with neutrons]. Die Naturwissenschaften (in German). 27 (1): 11–15. Bibcode:1939NW…..27…11H. doi:10.1007/BF01488241. S2CID 5920336.
87. ^ Sime 1996, pp. 248–249.
88. ^ Frisch 1979, pp. 115–116.
89. ^ Meitner, L.; Frisch, O. R. (January 1939). “Disintegration of Uranium by Neutrons: A New Type of Nuclear Reaction”. Nature. 143 (3615): 239. Bibcode:1939Natur.143..239M. doi:10.1038/143239a0. S2CID 4113262.
90. ^ Frisch, O. R. (February 1939). “Physical Evidence for the Division of Heavy Nuclei under Neutron Bombardment”. Nature. 143 (3616): 276. Bibcode:1939Natur.143..276F. doi:10.1038/143276a0. S2CID 4076376.
91. ^ Hahn, O.; Strassmann, F. (February 1939). “Nachweis der Entstehung aktiver Bariumisotope aus Uran und Thorium durch Neutronenbestrahlung; Nachweis weiterer aktiver Bruchstücke bei der Uranspaltung”. Naturwissenschaften. 27 (6): 89–95. Bibcode:1939NW…..27…89H. doi:10.1007/BF01488988. S2CID 33512939.
92. ^ Von Halban, H.; Joliot, F.; Kowarski, L. (22 April 1939). “Number of Neutrons Liberated in the Nuclear Fission of Uranium”. Nature. 143 (3625): 680. Bibcode:1939Natur.143..680V. doi:10.1038/143680a0. ISSN 0028-0836. S2CID 4089039.
93. ^ Jump up to:^a b Walker 1993, pp. 22–23.
94. ^ Hoffmann 2001, p. 150.
95. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hahn 1966, pp. 175–177.
96. ^ Hoffmann 2001, pp. 156–161.
97. ^ Jump up to:^a b Walker 2006, p. 132.
98. ^ Jump up to:^a b Walker 2006, p. 137.
99. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hoffmann 2001, p. 188.
100. ^ Norris 2002, pp. 294–295.
101. ^ Walker 1993, pp. 132–133.
102. ^ Sime 2006, pp. 19–21.
103. ^ Hahn 1966, p. 179.
104. ^ Walker 1993, pp. 158–159.
105. ^ Hoffmann 2001, p. 195.
106. ^ Jump up to:^a b Sime 2006, pp. 24–25.
107. ^ Walker 1993, pp. 159–160.
108. ^ Hoffmann 2001, pp. 196–199.
109. ^ Walker 2006, p. 139.
110. ^ Sime 2006, pp. 26–28.
111. ^ Sime 1996, p. 319.
112. ^ Hoffmann 2001, p. 201.
113. ^ Hoffmann 2001, pp. 205–206.
114. ^ “The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1944”. Nobel Foundation. Retrieved 17 December 2007.
115. ^ Jump up to:^a b “The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1944: Presentation Speech”. Nobel Foundation. Retrieved 3 January 2008.
116. ^ Bernstein 2001, pp. 282–283.
117. ^ Bernstein 2001, pp. 286–288, 323–324.
118. ^ Jump up to:^a b Crawford, Sime & Walker 1997, pp. 27–31.
119. ^ Crawford 2000, pp. 38–40.
120. ^ Crawford 2000, p. 49.
121. ^ Bernstein 2001, pp. 311, 325.
122. ^ “Statutes of the Nobel Foundation”. NobelPrize.org. Retrieved 25 June 2020.
123. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Crawford 2000, pp. 49–50.
124. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hoffmann 2001, p. 209.
125. ^ Sime 1996, p. 343.
126. ^ Brown, Brandon R. (16 May 2015). “Gerard Kuiper’s Daring Rescue of Max Planck at the End of World War II”. Scientific American Blog Network. Retrieved 27 June 2020.
127. ^ “The end of the war and transition. Max Planck is Interim President of the KWS”. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. Retrieved 27 June 2020.
128. ^ Hoffmann 2001, p. 199.
129. ^ Macrakis 1993, pp. 189–189.
130. ^ Macrakis 1993, pp. 190–191.
131. ^ Jump up to:^a b “The birth of the Max Planck Society”. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. Retrieved 27 June 2020.
132. ^ Jump up to:^a b Walker 2006, pp. 145–147.
133. ^ Walker 2006, p. 152.
134. ^ Walker 2006, p. 147.
135. ^ “The founding of today’s Max Planck Society”. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. Retrieved 27 June 2020.
136. ^ “Overview”. Max Planck Institute for Chemistry. Retrieved 27 June 2020.
137. ^ Sime 2006, p. 12.
138. ^ Walker 2006, p. 124.
139. ^ Sime 2004, p. 48.
140. ^ Badash 1983, p. 176.
141. ^ Hoffmann 2001, pp. 218–221.
142. ^ Hoffmann 2001, pp. 221–222.
143. ^ Hoffmann 2001, pp. 231–232.
144. ^ Hoffmann 2001, pp. 235–238.
145. ^ Sprenger, Sebastian (11 May 2020). “NATO chief backs Germany’s vow to keep war-ready US nukes”. Defence News. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
146. ^ Hahn 1988, p. 288.
147. ^ Hoffmann 2001, p. 242.
148. ^ “FGS Brochure” (PDF). Convention on Biological Diversity. Federation of German Scientists. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
149. ^ Hoffmann 2001, p. 248.
150. ^ Badash 1983, p. 178.
151. ^ Fischer, Ernst Peter (27 December 1999). “Die Allmacht Der Unschärfe”. Focus (in German). No. 52. pp. 103–108. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
152. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p} Spence 1970, p. 302.
153. ^ “Alle Medaillenträger”. Wilhelm Exner Medaillen Stiftung. Archived from the original on 22 March 2019. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
154. ^ “Harnack Medal”. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
155. ^ Hoffmann 2001, pp. 243–244.
156. ^ Spence 1970, p. 300.
157. ^ Spence 1970, p. 279.
158. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Spence 1970, pp. 302–303.
159. ^ “Otto Hahn, 1966 Citation”. U. S. Department of Energy. 28 December 2010. Retrieved 14 December 2019.
160. ^ “NS Otto Hahn“. Germany’s Nuclear Powered Cargo Ship. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
161. ^ “Planetary Names: Crater, craters: Hahn on Moon”. planetarynames.wr.usgs.gov. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
162. ^ “IAU Minor Planet Center”. minorplanetcenter.net. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
163. ^ “GDCh-Preise”. Gesellschaft Deutscher Chemiker e.V. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
164. ^ “Otto Hahn Medal”. Max-Planck -Gesellschaft. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
165. ^ “Otto Hahn Award”. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
166. ^ “Verleihung der Otto-Hahn-Friedensmedaille”. Deutsche Gesellschaft für die Vereinten Nationen e.V. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
167. ^ “Names and Symbols of Transfermium Elements (IUPAC Recommendations 1994)” (PDF). IUPAC. Retrieved 23 June 2020.
168. ^ “Names and Symbols of Transfermium Elements (IUPAC Recommendations 1997)” (PDF). IUPAC. Retrieved 23 June 2020.
169. ^ Spence 1970, pp. 2300–301.
170. ^ “Grab von Otto Hahn aus Göttingen”. www.friedhofguide.de. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
171. ^ Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Frankfurt, Die Welt, Hamburg, Süddeutsche Zeitung, Munich, Die Presse, Vienna, Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Zürich, 29 July 1968.
172. ^ Strassmann, Fritz (29 July 1968) “Zum Tode von Otto Hahn”. Die Welt.
173. ^ Frisch, Otto R. (1968). “Otto Hahn”. Physics Bulletin. 19 (10): 354. doi:10.1088/0031-9112/19/10/010.
174. ^ Spence 1970, pp. 301–302.

References[edit source]

• Badash, Lawrence (1983). “Otto Hahn, Science, and Social Responsibility”. In Shea, William R. (ed.). Otto Hahn and the Rise of Nuclear Physics. The University of Western Ontario Series in the Philosophy of Science. Vol. 22. Dordrecht / Boston / Lancaster: D. Reidel Publishing Company. pp. 167–180. ISBN 90-277-1584-X. OCLC 797094010.
• Berninger, Ernst (1983). “The Discovery of Uranoium Z by Otto Hahn: The First Example of Nuclear Isomerism”. In Shea, William R. (ed.). Otto Hahn and the Rise of Nuclear Physics. The University of Western Ontario Series in the Philosophy of Science. Vol. 22. Dordrecht / Boston / Lancaster: D. Reidel Publishing Company. pp. 213–220. ISBN 90-277-1584-X. OCLC 797094010.
• Bernstein, Jeremy (2001). Hitler’s Uranium Club: The Secret recordings at Farm Hall (2nd ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 978-0-387-95089-1. OCLC 7324621011.
• Bowen, Robert (1994). Isotopes in the Earth Sciences. London: Chapman and Hall. ISBN 978-0-412-53710-3.
• Crawford, Elisabeth; Sime, Ruth Lewin; Walker, Mark (1997). “A Nobel Tale of Postwar Injustice”. Physics Today. 50 (9): 26–32. Bibcode:1997PhT….50i..26C. doi:10.1063/1.881933. ISSN 0031-9228.
• Crawford, Elisabeth (2000). “German Scientists and Hitler’s Vendetta against the Nobel Prizes”. Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences. 31 (1): 37–53. doi:10.2307/27757845. ISSN 0890-9997. JSTOR 27757845.
• Frisch, Otto (1979). What Little I Remember. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-40583-1. OCLC 861058137.
• Gerlach, Walther; Hahn, Dietrich (1984). Otto Hahn – Ein Forscherleben unserer Zeit (in German). Stuttgart: Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft (WVG). ISBN 978-3-8047-0757-3. OCLC 473315990.
• Hahn, Dietrich, ed. (1988). Otto Hahn – Leben und Werk in Texten und Bildern (in German). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp-Insel Publishers. ISBN 3-458-32789-4. OCLC 42847178.
• Hahn, Otto (1966). Otto Hahn: A Scientific Autobiography. Translated by Ley, Willy. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. OCLC 646422716.
• Hoffmann, Klaus (2001). Otto Hahn: Achievement and Responsibility. Translated by Cole, J. Michael. Springer. ISBN 0-387-95057-5. OCLC 468996162.
• Macrakis, Kristie (1993). Surviving the Swastika: Scientific Research in Nazi Germany. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-507010-1. OCLC 538154456.
• Norris, Robert S. (2002). Racing for the Bomb: General Leslie R. Groves, the Manhattan Project’s Indispensable Man. South Royalton, Vermont: Steerforth Press. ISBN 1-58642-039-9. OCLC 48544060.
• Rhodes, Richard (1986). The Making of the Atomic Bomb. New York: Simon and Schuster. ISBN 0-671-65719-4. OCLC 224864936.
• Sime, Ruth Lewin (1996). Lise Meitner: A Life in Physics. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-08906-8. OCLC 32893857.
• Sime, Ruth Lewin (2004). Otto Hahn und die Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Zwischen Vergangenheit und Erinnerung (PDF) (in German). Berlin: Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
• Sime, Ruth Lewin (March 2006). “The Politics of Memory: Otto Hahn and the Third Reich”. Physics in Perspective. 8 (1): 3–51. Bibcode:2006PhP…..8….3S. doi:10.1007/s00016-004-0248-5. ISSN 1422-6944. S2CID 119479637.
• Spence, Robert (1970). “Otto Hahn 1879–1968”. Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society. 16: 279–313. doi:10.1098/rsbm.1970.0010.
• Stolz, Werner (1989). Otto Hahn, Lise Meitner. Biographien hervorragender Naturwissenschaftler, Techniker und Mediziner (in German). Vieweg+Teubner Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-322-82223-9_3. ISBN 978-3-322-00685-1. OCLC 263971970.
• Walker, Mark (May 2006). “Otto Hahn: Responsibility and Repression”. Physics in Perspective. 8 (2): 116–163. Bibcode:2006PhP…..8..116W. doi:10.1007/s00016-006-0277-3. ISSN 1422-6944. S2CID 120992662.
• Walker, Mark (1993). German National Socialism and the Quest for Nuclear Power. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-36413-2. OCLC 722061969.
• Yruma, Jeris Stueland (November 2008). How Experiments Are Remembered: The Discovery of Nuclear Fission, 1938–1968 (PhD thesis). Princeton University.

Further reading[edit source]

• Berninger, Ernst H. (1970). Otto Hahn 1879–1968. Bonn: Inter Nationes. OCLC 168069.
• Beyerchen, Alan D. (1977). Scientists under Hitler. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300018301. OCLC 970896098.
• Feldman, Anthony; Ford, Peter (1979). Otto Hahn – in: Scientists and Inventors. London: Aldus Books.
• Graetzer, Hans D.; Anderson, David L. (1971). The Discovery of Nuclear Fission: A Documentary History. New York: Van Nostrand-Reinhold. OCLC 1130319295.
• Hahn, Otto (1970). My Life. Translated by Kaiser, Ernst; Wilkins, Eithne. New York: Herder and Herder. OCLC 317354004.
• Kant, Horst (2002). Werner Heisenberg and the German Uranium Project. Otto Hahn and the declarations of Mainau and Göttingen. Berlin: Max-Planck-Insitut für Wissenschaftsgeschichte.
• Reid, Robert William (1969). Tongues of Conscience: War and the Scientist’s Dilemma. London: Constable & Co. OCLC 638683343.
• Whiting, Jim (2004). Otto Hahn and the Discovery of Nuclear Fission. Unlocking the Secrets of Science. Bear, Delaware: Mitchell Lane. ISBN 978-1-58415-204-0. OCLC 52312062.

External links[edit source]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Otto Hahn.

Wikiquote has quotations related to: Otto Hahn

• Otto Hahn – winner of the Enrico Fermi Award 1966 U.S Government, Department of Energy
• Otto Hahn on Nobelprize.org  including the Nobel Lecture on 13 December 1946 From the Natural Transmutations of Uranium to Its Artificial Fission
• Award Ceremony Speech honoring Otto Hahn by Professor Arne Westgren, Stockholm.
• Otto Hahn and the Discovery of Nuclear Fission BR, 2008
• Otto Hahn – Discoverer of Nuclear Fission Author: Dr. Anne Hardy (Pro-Physik, 2004)
• Otto Hahn (1879–1968) – The discovery of fission Visit Berlin, 2011.
• Otto Hahn – Discoverer of nuclear fission
• Otto Hahn – Founder of the Atomic Age Author: Dr Edmund Neubauer (Translation: Brigitte Hippmann) – Website of the Otto Hahn Gymnasium (OHG), 2007.
• Otto Hahn Award
• Otto Hahn Peace Medal in Gold Website of the United Nations Association of Germany (DGVN) in Berlin
• Otto Hahn Medal
• The history of the Hahn Meitner Institute (HMI) Helmholtz-Zentrum, Berlin 2011.
• Otto Hahn heads a delegation to Israel 1959 Website of the Max Planck Society, 2011.
• Biography Otto Hahn 1879–1968
• Otto Hahn – A Life for Science, Humanity and Peace Hiroshima University Peace Lecture, held by Dietrich Hahn, 2 October 2013.
• Otto Hahn – Discoverer of nuclear fission, grandfather of the Atombomb GMX, Switzerland, 17 December 2013. Author: Marinus Brandl.
• Newspaper clippings about Otto Hahn in the 20th Century Press Archives of the ZBW 

showvteLaureates of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry

showvte1944 Nobel Prize laureates

showAuthority control