The depth-psychology and classical-studies corpus treats polis cult not as mere civic formality but as the constitutive ritual apparatus through which a Greek city-state produced, reproduced, and regulated its collective psychic and social identity. Walter Burkert, the dominant voice in this constellation, demonstrates that the polis progressively claimed a monopoly over cultic life—prohibiting private cults, subordinating family rites to civic festivals, and using the shared sacrifice as the primary technology of solidarity. The festival is not ornament but institution: it creates the circle of participants and excludes the polluted, murderers, and outlaws, while simultaneously constructing gender roles, generational identity, and political belonging. Jean-Pierre Vernant’s complementary approach shows how the polis cult underwent a structural democratization—knowledge and ritual, once reserved for priestly aristocracies, became subjected to public scrutiny and political debate, so that the law of the polis and the management of sacred precincts became jointly answerable to the same principle of euthunai, public accountability. Gregory Nagy sharpens the local-versus-Panhellenic tension: hero cult is precisely polis-bound, anchored to the tomb, while Homeric kleos aspires to escape that local gravity. The central scholarly tension remains whether polis cult functions primarily as social cohesion technology, as political theology, or as the institutional form through which archaic psychological structures—sacrifice, pollution, purification—were civilized into civic life.