Within the depth-psychology corpus, ‘Army’ operates on at least three distinct registers. First, and most extensively, it appears as the seventh hexagram (Shi) of the I Ching, where it is glossed variously as ‘multitude,’ ‘troops,’ and the disciplined movement of collective force under a rectifying leader — a figure for inner psychological mobilization, the marshaling of psychic energies toward a purposive end. Wang Bi, Wilhelm, Anthony, Huang, and the Taoist commentators each bring this hexagram into contact with themes of discipline, orderly retreat, legitimate authority, and the danger of ego-usurpation when wrong elements seize command. Second, in Hillman’s archetypal psychology, the army and its presiding deity Mars become occasions for probing the Western — specifically American — repression of the martial imagination, and the pathological consequences of displacing Ares into nuclear abstraction. Third, in William James, the army’s explicit moral demands (contempt, ferocity, the suppression of reasoning) stand as the starkest challenge to humanistic ethical frameworks. Across all three registers a common tension persists: the army as necessary, ordered power capable of redemptive discipline, versus the army as site of savagery, ego-inflation, and collective shadow. The I Ching tradition consistently subordinates military force to moral rectitude; Hillman insists on its recovery as imagination; James holds the two in unresolved confrontation.