The Mother Goddess occupies a position of singular centrality in the depth-psychology corpus, functioning simultaneously as archaeological datum, archetypal structure, and psychological category. Erich Neumann’s magisterial treatment in The Great Mother establishes the archetype’s bi-valence — its elementary character (nourishing, sheltering, containing) set against its negative pole (devouring, dismembering, ensnaring) — and traces this polarity across Paleolithic figurines, Mesopotamian cylinder seals, Aztec codices, and Christian Mariology with equal systematic precision. Campbell approaches the figure as the primordial mythological constant, arguing that every subsequent goddess tradition, from the Anatolian Magna Mater through Mary Theotokos, inherits names and forms from this single archaic substrate. Jung himself supplies the psychodynamic grammar: the mother archetype polarizes between the loving and the terrible, reaches its philosophical apex in the Indian Kali and Sankhya’s prakrti, and haunts the modern psyche wherever matriarchal symbolism persists beneath patriarchal overlay. A productive tension runs through the corpus between those who read the figure universally — as a trans-cultural psychological constant (Neumann, Jung) — and those who historicize its displacement by sky-father religions (Campbell, Rank, Harvey and Baring). Otto Rank foregrounds the goddess’s flexibility as a vehicle for every religious impulse from orgies to astrology. Taken together, the texts make the Mother Goddess the indispensable hinge between cosmogony, fertility cult, and the depth-psychological analysis of the feminine principle.