Freud’s Account: Reconstructions

Abstract

The reader who is familiar with the secondary literature on the Anna O. case and who is perhaps still sceptical of the general argument mounted so far will probably consider as valid grounds for objection the fact that Freud himself was one of the principal people to question the success of Breuer’s treatment of Anna O. Was it not Freud who circulated the stories about Bertha Pappenheim’s hysterical childbirth and who maintained that the patient was not in fact cured in the way the published case suggests? There is without doubt an issue of substance here, but it is necessary to look closely at the evidence to establish exactly what was said, under what circumstances and to whom. It is here that we begin to move beyond the published case history itself and begin to look at Anna O.’s fate in Freud’s subsequent publications, as well as the accounts that began to circulate informally among his close colleagues.

Was man mündlich ausspricht, muß der Gegenwart, dem Augenblick gewidmet sein; was man schreibt widme man der Ferne, der Folge.¹

J. W. von Goethe, Maximen und Reflexionen (Posth.)