Moira occupies a privileged position in the depth-psychological corpus as the archaic Greek personification of fate, necessity, and allotted portion — a concept whose genealogy from Homeric impersonal force to Hesiodic triple goddess to Platonic cosmological principle has been traced with painstaking care by classical scholars (Otto, Keréнyi, Dodds, Adkins, Onians) and then re-appropriated by depth psychologists (Greene, Hillman, Neumann) as a living archetypal reality. The central tension in the literature runs between two poles: the classicists’ effort to recover what Moira originally meant within Greek religious thought — impersonal boundary, limit, death-necessity, cosmic apportionment — and the depth psychologists’ insistence that this ancient image retains psychic force precisely because it names something still operative in the unconscious, whether as instinct, body, family inheritance, or the autonomous patterning of the Self. Greene’s treatment is the most sustained within the depth-psychology strand, reading Moira as the ‘substance aspect’ of fate, the blind automatic force that sets irreversible limits while remaining distinct from the daimonic ‘energy aspect’ of individual destiny. Hillman positions Moira within his acorn theory as the finished shape of the soul’s calling. Otto’s phenomenological reading — that Homeric Moira is not a person but a primal impersonal force linked to Night, the Erinyes, and the nether-world — supplies the classical foundation upon which nearly all subsequent depth-psychological amplifications rest. The conjunction of Moira with weaving, spinning, death, the Great Mother, and chthonic necessity threads through Neumann and Greene alike.