The Eniautos Daimon stands as one of the most generative and contested coinages in the history of comparative religion and, by extension, depth psychology’s engagement with myth. Jane Ellen Harrison introduced the term in Themis (1912), acknowledging with characteristic candor that ‘no such conjunction as Eniautos-Daimon exists in Greek’ and that it ‘simply grew on my hands from sheer necessity.’ Her argument was that neither Frazer’s ‘Vegetation Spirit’ nor the bare English ‘year’ sufficed to name what she perceived as the animating principle behind a vast range of Greek ritual: not a chronological unit but a cycle of waxing and waning, of decay, death, and renewal encoded in the figure of a daimon who lives, labors, and dies for his people. The Eniautos Daimon thus becomes for Harrison the prototype behind Herakles, Dionysos, Orestes, and the Kouros of the Kouretes’ Hymn — a functionary rather than a personality, a sacrament before he becomes a recipient of sacrifice. The Olympians, by contrast, represent the degradation of this principle: once freed from the year’s cycle, they substitute privilege for function. Burkert’s scholarship locates the daimon concept in a broader Greek religious anthropology, while depth psychology — through the Jungian tradition’s reading of Harrison — imports the Eniautos Daimon as an archetypal pattern of cyclical self-renewal, the ritual death-and-resurrection of the psyche’s generative ground.