Within the depth-psychology corpus, Jung (Carl Gustav, 1875–1961) functions simultaneously as founding theorist, biographical subject, contested authority, and living mythic presence. The library does not treat him as a settled historical figure but as a generative problem: successive generations of analysts — von Franz, Samuels, Edinger, Hillman, Stein, Kalsched, and others — perpetually renegotiate his legacy, extending, revising, and occasionally repudiating it. Von Franz’s monumental C.G. Jung: His Myth in Our Time positions him as the carrier of a personal myth continuous with ancient shamanic and Gnostic lineages, tracing his biography as itself an individuation drama. Samuels, by contrast, submits that inheritance to critical scrutiny, mapping the post-Jungian divergences that Jung’s own aversion to systematisation made inevitable. Edinger’s Mysterium Lectures treat his late alchemical writings as virtually canonical scripture. Clarke situates his thought within an Oriental philosophical genealogy, arguing that Schelling and Schopenhauer — rather than Freud — are the primary conduits. The corpus’s central tension lies between hagiographic readings that inscribe Jung as culture-hero and revisionist readings that insist on the productive distance between his founding gestures and contemporary analytical practice. Both trajectories agree, however, that depth psychology’s operating concepts — individuation, the collective unconscious, archetype, synchronicity — remain intelligible only in relation to his work.