Within the depth-psychology and history-of-religion corpus, ‘Mycenaean’ functions as a civilizational threshold concept — marking the palace-centred Bronze Age Greek culture destroyed circa 1200 BCE as the immediate prehistory against which classical Greek thought, religion, and social organisation must be measured. Vernant is the most systematic voice, treating Mycenaean royalty as a bureaucratic-theocratic complex whose collapse was the enabling condition for the emergence of the polis and its rational, egalitarian imagination. Burkert, approaching from the history of religion, deploys the Minoan-Mycenaean compound as an archaeological stratum that partially survives — through cult continuity, divine names attested in Linear B, and iconographic persistence — into classical Greek religion, yet is irrevocably fractured by the catastrophe of circa 1200. Havelock, by contrast, reads the Mycenaean collapse as an event in media history: the fall of the palace script culture forces Greek civilisation back upon oral tradition alone, and this enforced orality shapes the very structure of the Homeric and Hesiodic poetic-mnemonic systems. Campbell situates Mycenae in a broader diffusionist frame, tracing Minoan cultural influence upon emerging Indo-European warrior aristocracies. Across these positions a consistent tension runs: how much of what is distinctively Greek — psychologically, religiously, politically — is continuous with the Mycenaean substrate, and how much is precisely a rupture from it?