Within the depth-psychology corpus, ‘Judgment’ occupies a complex conceptual territory that spans at least four distinct registers: eschatological, psychological, ethical-political, and linguistic-structural. The ascetic and patristic literature collected under Sinkewicz treats judgment primarily as a postmortem divine verdict whose vivid imaginative anticipation—the *memoria mortis* tradition—serves as a paraenetic and therapeutic instrument, anchoring monastic practice in fear of condemnation and hope of vindication. In the Tarot tradition (Pollack, Nichols, Hamaker-Zondag, Jodorowsky, Banzhaf), the Judgment card (Arcanum XX) becomes a depth-psychological archetype of awakening, rebirth, and the call to authentic selfhood, often interpreted through Jungian lenses of individuation and confrontation with unconscious depths. A third register emerges in political philosophy, particularly through Hannah Arendt’s faculty of judgment as reconstructed in the Hannah corpus: here judgment is irreducibly singular, resistant to rule-governed reduction, and constitutive of genuine moral responsibility—a faculty distinct from cognition and immune to the excuses of obedience to principle. The Stoic tradition (Graver) treats judgment as a cognitive assent constitutive of emotion, making it the hinge between reason and affect. Benveniste’s etymological analysis grounds all these usages in an Indo-European root denoting authoritative disclosure. Together, these strands reveal judgment as simultaneously cognitive act, eschatological event, individuating summons, and political-ethical capacity.