Across the depth-psychology corpus, ‘underground’ operates simultaneously as topographic metaphor, mythological locale, and phenomenological description of psychic structure. The term draws on at least three overlapping registers. First, the cosmological-chthonic: from Padel’s reconstruction of Greek tragic consciousness — where the underworld is the space of covered darkness, dream, and unconscious fluid — to Eliade’s shamanic descents and the Orphic river-systems mapped by Plato and retold by Miller, the underground names the realm below waking consciousness that the soul must traverse. Second, the psychological-transformative: Bosnak’s dream-series tracks a constructive psychic process that ‘goes under the earth’ through gate-imagery and descent, while Bly reads the kitchen basement and Orwell’s ‘underground life’ as the necessary Drop Through the Floor that initiates masculine individuation. Hollis invokes Dostoevsky’s Notes from Underground as the literary archetype of shadow-confrontation, the descent into the inferior regions prerequisite to renewal. Third, the cultural-subversive: Hillman, as reported by Russell, consciously embraced an ‘underground’ readership — an echo rather than a success — as the proper mode of depth-psychological transmission. Tensions persist between underground as dangerous regression (the Mafia-underworld in Bosnak) and as generative matrix (earthenware emerging from earth), and between literal chthonic space and the unconscious as its modern psychological heir.