This paper investigates the history of the eidetic image in psychology and philosophy and particularly examines its status in contemporary psychology in relation to the memory image. Part I looks at the tradition of philosophical and psychological phenomenology concerning the eidetic as presented in Husserl, and draws similarities and distinctions with the later development in Ahsen's structural eidetic theory. the pre-Socratic notion of Eidos, the parallel Eastern tradition of yoga and the Vedas, and the scientific research on eidetics inform the analysis. Part II explores contemporary literature on memory and imagery, including such key research as that of Hebb, Lashley, Anderson, Tulving, Baddeley, Neisser, Squire and Kosslyn. the structural eidetic is discussed as a reliving of experience toward neural and psychological growth in which the original genetic potential reasserts itself. Research discussed includes Penfield's "experiential memory"; Miller, Galanter and Pribram's TOTE model; Pribram's holographic hypothesis; and Damasio's "somatic marker" hypothesis. These theorists' views of consciousness, along with that of William James, are integrated with Ahsen's eidetic imagery model. In this light, discussion of Ahsen's model addresses the ISM (Image-Soma-Meaning) imagery unit, TOTEM (Test-Operate-Test-Exit-Mental), the Developmental Hologram, dynamic consciousness operations of magicality, bipolarity, and simultaneous contradiction, and the natural attention process. Part III examines the structural eidetic within the context of eidetic research and developmental psychology as a dynamic image which has attributes of the typographic eidetic and also serves the function of new perception in development, based on its ISM integration of lived experience (historical memory) in interaction with innate biological and primordial images or eides (genetic memory). the presentation articulates a structural eidetic developmental approach and an eidetic theory of personality based on Ahsen's Triple Code ISM Model of imagery, as well as a description of psychosomatic development, derived from an analysis of Ahsen's work. Through this threefold review and integration of the literature on memory and the eidetic, the au nor concludes that the eidetic is a biological function of the organism and an important aspect of normal development across modalities as well as cultures. It stores and retrieves memory, with relevant "alterations," based on the psychic needs of the organism and Nature. Eidetic bibliography and appendix of structural eidetic image instructions are included.