Old age in the depth-psychology corpus is not primarily a medical or demographic phenomenon but a psychological and archetypal condition demanding its own hermeneutics. Hillman’s The Force of Character stands as the central intervention, insisting that the gerontological reduction of aging to biological decline actively distorts experience; in his reading, old age is a structure of character intensification rather than a process of loss, and its apparent uselessness demands an aesthetic, even artistic, revaluation. Jung contributes a complementary teleological axis: the psyche in later years turns inward toward image and dream as preparation for whatever lies beyond, and failure to embrace this inward movement constitutes a pathology as real as any youthful neurosis. Harding extends Jung’s ‘second half of life’ framework to argue that old age has become a personal psychological task that no institution — religious, familial, or tribal — can discharge on the individual’s behalf. Hillman’s Senex and Puer essay theorizes oldness as an archetype (Saturn, the senex) structurally coupled with youth (puer), making old age not a biographical stage alone but an omnipresent psychic configuration with its own epistemology, pathologies, and compensatory gifts. Plato provides the classical anchor — Cephalus testifying to the pleasures of conversation once bodily appetite fades — while the Hebrew and Anglo-Saxon lexical archaeology Hillman undertakes reveals that the impoverishment of ‘old’ as a signifier is itself a modern, post-Renaissance wound. Across the corpus, the core tension is between cultural ageism (old age as affliction) and a counter-reading in which character, wisdom, interiority, and archetypal depth reach their fullest expression precisely in later life.