Bonding in the depth-psychology corpus is not a single phenomenon but a layered complex spanning neurochemical substrate, developmental sequence, relational reenactment, and initiatory passage. The dominant strand is neurobiological: oxytocin, endogenous opioids, and dopamine are treated across Panksepp, Damasio, Siegel, O’Connor, and Lench as the molecular architecture through which social bonds are formed, consolidated, and disrupted. Prairie-vole pair-bonding research serves repeatedly as the animal model through which attachment and grief are rendered scientifically tractable. A second strand, rooted in Bowlby and object-relations theory, situates bonding within the developmental arc of separation-individuation, arguing that secure early bonds are templates for all subsequent relational life and that their disruption produces characteristic psychopathologies. Dayton extends this into the domain of romantic love, reading pair-bonding as nature’s evolutionary strategy for reproduction. Bly approaches bonding mythopoeically, treating mother-bonding and father-bonding as sequential initiatory tasks whose incomplete resolution haunts male psychological development. Herman and Shapiro introduce the clinical complication: traumatic captivity can produce pathological bonding to perpetrators, while the therapeutic relationship requires deliberate bonding between clinician and client. The central tension across the corpus is between bonding as biological imperative — automatic, neurochemically driven, survival-oriented — and bonding as relational achievement demanding rupture, mourning, and renegotiation.