Elysium enters the depth-psychology corpus not as a mere topographical myth but as a structural problem: the nature of immortality, the psychology of election, and the relationship between heroic death and regeneration. The term’s most sustained treatment appears in classical scholarship that directly feeds depth-psychological theorizing—above all in Erwin Rohde’s Psyche and Gregory Nagy’s work on archaic Greek poetry, both of which establish Elysium as the positively valorized pole of Greek afterlife speculation, radically distinct from the general gloom of Hades. Rohde traces the Elysian Fields to a pre-Homeric tradition of miraculous translation, the individual hero bypassing common death entirely; Nagy extends this by linking Elysium to the theme of anapsūkhein, the Okeanos-driven reanimation of body and psyche together, thereby making it a figure for the wholeness that Hades, understood as dissociation, denies. Walter Burkert’s etymological note—that Elysium derives from enelysion, a site struck by lightning—introduces the paradox that election and destruction are inseparable, a tension resonant with Jungian notions of the numinous. Jung himself references the Elysian Fields only in passing, as an index entry, yet the concept saturates the wider library as an archetype of blessedness, integration, and the soul’s post-mortem condition. James’s phenomenological aside—treating Elysium as a ‘mythological shadow’ drained of affective content during spiritual crisis—inverts the archetype, rendering it psychologically diagnostic.