Within the depth-psychology corpus, ‘Inheritance’ names a contested site where biological, psychological, cultural, and symbolic transmission intersect without resolution. The range of positions is wide: at one pole, Thompson and the developmental-systems theorists demonstrate that inheritance cannot be reduced to gene lineages alone — epigenetic, symbiotic, and environmental channels all participate — thereby dissolving the genocentric premise that underpins many reductionist accounts of psychic life. At another pole, Jung and his successors (Neumann, Hillman, Greene) redirect the question toward psychic inheritance: the ancestral heritage encoded in the germinal state, the archetypal patterns carried across generations, and the ‘inherited psychic substance’ legible in family horoscopes. Hillman adds a further complication by insisting that ‘ancestry’ in the modern biogenetic sense has colonised what older cultures understood as the spirit world of ancestors. Yehuda’s epigenetic research on Holocaust survivors offers empirical purchase on intergenerational transmission of trauma, bridging the biological and psychological registers. Benveniste, working from Indo-European lexicology, situates inheritance within the legal-kinship vocabulary of *sva-* and *heres*, showing that what a society calls inheritable — property, titles, even warrior ardour — reflects its deepest institutional logic. Neumann explicitly rejects the inheritance of acquired characteristics as a substrate for archetypal transmission, insisting instead on transpersonal psychic structure. The term thus functions as a diagnostic: how one conceptualises inheritance reveals one’s commitments on nature, culture, and the boundaries of the self.