32
ROBERT JAY LIFTON
our findings, toward making conceptual use of these very involve–
ments.
The developments I have so far discussed have for the most
part come from the psychological direction. This is not because his–
torians have been totally aloof from psychohistory: they have, in
fact, produced a number of important studies within it. But at this
phase, beginning with Erikson, the focus seems to be upon concepts
emerging from the psychoanalytic heritage, even if in great tension
with that heritage. No one knows what
will
happen in the future,
but one can be sure that things will change. Psychohistory could be
an avenue toward the revitalization of psychoanalysis itself, through
which the latter might rediscover its own history and thereby trans–
form itself. Or psychohistory could develop more autonomously and,
despite (partly because of) its profound debt to psychoanalysis,
separate itself decisively from the ahistorical bias of that tradition.
In the end psychohistory may tum out to be nothing more than
a minor intellectual curiousity. Or, as I confess to be my belief, it
could develop into a significant body of thought whose evolving
ideas will be as compelling as they are difficult to establish. How–
ever things tum out, psychohistory will benefit from the disciplined,
free spirits, who, whatever their origin, bring their critical imagina–
tions to bear upon it.
