Megalomania occupies a significant, if variously inflected, position across the depth-psychological corpus. Its clinical anchoring is established by Bleuler, who documents the grandiose delusions of schizophrenic patients in precise phenomenological terms, and by Jung’s early structural notes locating megalomania among the inflations characteristic of schizophrenic psychology. Jung’s systematic development of the concept, most fully articulated in the Two Essays on Analytical Psychology, frames megalomania not as a simple symptom but as a structural consequence of identification with the collective psyche — the condition in which the ego, overwhelmed by archetypal content, assumes the posture of prophet, reformer, or martyr. Hillman extends and sharpens this reading by situating megalomania at the interface between daimon and ego: it arises when the personality, inadequate to the daimon’s demands, refuses the restraint of human limitation and concretizes visionary grandeur — most dramatically illustrated in his extended analysis of Hitler’s architectural obsessions. Kalsched traces a developmental root in Kleinian-inflected terms, linking megalomania to the infant’s primary omnipotence and its violent frustration. Jung’s more tolerant passage on Keyserling complicates the picture by reading megalomania as a defensive courage against existential groundlessness. The corpus thus holds megalomania in productive tension between pathology, archetypal inflation, and the existential predicament of souls in contact with transpersonal energies.