Landscape in the depth-psychology corpus is no simple scenic backdrop; it functions across at least four distinct registers, each illuminating a different facet of psyche’s relationship to world. First, landscape serves as visionary correlate: Huxley documents its recurrence as a stable feature of altered states, arguing that certain natural representations are intrinsically vision-inducing, while von Franz reads dream landscapes as symbolic terrain through which unconscious complexes—stagnant water, barren fields—declare themselves. Second, landscape operates as phenomenological structure: Merleau-Ponty insists that the shared landscape is not numerically identical between perceivers yet is nonetheless intersubjectively inhabited, making it a locus where perception, embodiment, and intersubjectivity converge. Third, landscape becomes metaphor for selfhood: Brazier’s direct formulation—‘a person is like a landscape’—captures the depth-psychological intuition that a life, like terrain, bears the marks of erosive histories yet retains something of eternity. Fourth, landscape carries therapeutic and cognitive significance: the empirical literature assembled by Bratman and Annerstedt demonstrates measurable attentional and affective restoration through nature exposure. McGilchrist crowns the edifice by linking the Romantic valorization of landscape art to right-hemisphere modes of knowing. Across these traditions, landscape is never neutral ground but always a relational field between psyche and world.