The figure of the Prisoner occupies a remarkably wide semantic field in the depth-psychology corpus, operating simultaneously as literal social reality, clinical category, and archetypal symbol. At the literal-clinical pole, Judith Lewis Herman’s Trauma and Recovery provides the most sustained analysis: captivity produces a distinctive psychological syndrome in which temporal continuity is shattered, identity is eroded through coercive control, and the perpetrator’s presence persists as an inner object long after release. Herman documents how released prisoners remain psychologically bound in ‘the timelessness of the prison,’ suppressing memory at the cost of chronic dissociation. Viktor Frankl, writing from concentration-camp experience, foregrounds the existential dimension: the prisoner’s ‘provisional existence of unknown limit’ strips away ordinary time-sense, yet inner freedom of response remains the last inviolable resource. At the archetypal pole, Jung identifies the prisoner within the mandala as a symbol of the self — the deepest stratum of the personality protected and enclosed within the sacred temenos. Hillman’s dialogic imagery extends this: the soul itself protests its imprisonment within psychological systems. Neumann reads the sacrificial prisoner in Aztec ritual as the masculine principle captured by the Feminine archetype. McGilchrist’s Prisoner’s Dilemma represents game-theoretic and hemispheric dimensions of constraint. Across these registers, the corpus debates whether imprisonment is primarily a social wound, an existential test, or a symbol of the soul’s enclosure within structure.