Within the depth-psychology corpus, ‘Alliance’ designates a structuring concept that bridges clinical technique and relational theory, appearing most prominently under the compound term ‘therapeutic alliance.’ The literature traces the concept from Zetzel’s psychoanalytic formulation — stressing the patient’s rational capacity to collaborate with the analyst — through Bordin’s influential generalization, which parsed alliance into agreed goals, agreed tasks, and affective bond. Subsequent scholarship, represented here by Wampold, Norcross, Flores, and the Greenson-derived tradition reviewed by Samuels, treats alliance not as a by-product of technique but as a primary curative variable, sometimes ‘the quintessential integrative variable’ (Wolfe and Goldfried, as cited by Yalom). Wampold’s contextual model subordinates specific ingredients to relational common factors, of which a strong alliance is the indispensable medium. Flores grounds the therapeutic alliance in attachment theory, arguing that addiction inversely tracks the capacity for intimate bonding, making the alliance both the instrument and the object of treatment. Norcross and the APA task force render alliance demonstrably effective across individual, youth, and family modalities. A persistent tension runs through this body of work: whether alliance is itself a mechanism of change or a prerequisite that enables other mechanisms to operate. The corpus also registers — in Samuels’s Jungian reading and in Abbass’s short-term psychodynamic work — that rupture and repair of the alliance constitute their own therapeutic process.