Explore the vast range of titles available.

This study explicates the coconstitutive relationships between commercial mythmaking and popular memory that arise through myth market competitions for identity value. We develop a genealogical analysis of the representational strategies and ideological rationales that two prominent New South mythmakers use to shape popular memories in relation to their competitive goals and to efface countermemories that contradict their mythologized representations. We then derive a conceptual model that highlights competitive, historical, and ideological influences on commercial mythmaking and their transformative effects on popular memory, which have not been addressed by prior theorizations of the meaning transfer process.

Studies of early mythography have stressed the dependent relationship between the so-called logographers and epic archaic poetry. Better knowledge of archaic and classical mythography in recent years has provided more accurate details of the context of the production and purposes of the fragmentary works by Hecataeus, Acusilaus, Pherecydes and Hellanicus. Each of them has his own agenda and programme, which have to be explained within their context and not, from a purely historic-literary perspective, as an appendix, a continuation or an exegesis of the epic tradition. This article argues that conditions of preservation, and means of transmission, of fragmentary mythographers have shaped the way we approach them. In other words, the process of reception of epic poetry through the exegetic and grammarian tradition distorts our view and leads the modern reader to see mythography as being dependent on Homer or Hesiod.

The return voyage of the Argonauts described in the Library presents remarkable differences compared to the model provided by Apollonius of Rhodes. Here we focus specifically on two aspects of the trip in Apollodorus's version, with the aim of providing new insights on these elements of the story that deviate from Apollonius: the order of the stages in the Adriatic Sea and the absence of the Libyan episode. As a result, our analysis allows us to appreciate, beyond the canonical value acquired by Apollonius's text in the early imperial period, the important role played by other local myths, even glimpsing the influence of more ancient traditions about the journey of the Argonauts. Moreover, Apollodorus' authorial choices seem to reveal a general scepticism for the part of the mythographer regarding the possibility of adapting the landscape of the mythological traditions to the geographical knowledge of his time.

\"Collective memory\" is an umbrella term for different formats of memory. Interactive and social memory are both formats that are embodied, grounded in lived experience that vanish with their carriers. The manifestations of political and cultural memory, on the other hand, are grounded on the more durable carriers of external symbols and representations and can be re-embodied and transmitted from one generation to another. The relation between \"history\" and \"memory\" has itself a history that has evolved over time, passing through three stages: 1) the identity between history and memory, 2) the polarization between history and memory, and 3) the interaction between history and memory. Where history and memory are polarized, the historian assumes an intellectual and ethical function and concentrates on the lacunae of national memory thereby creating a countermemory. However, that there are certain contexts in which history and memory are also conflated in democratic nation states. If we look at the sector of public historical education we can observe a similar self-enforcing relationship between history, memory, identity, and power. In this context, history becomes the stuff of which political memory, identity, and myth is made of. Forms of participation in collective memory differ widely between informal social memory and the more organized format of political memory. Participation in social memory is always varied because it is based on lived experience and linked to autobiographical memory, while collective participation in national memory, in both totalitarian and democratic states, on effective symbols and rites that enhance emotions of empathy and identification. In the discourse of memory research. the term \"myth\" is used to distinguish between the object of historical knowledge on the one hand and collectively remembered events on the other. Myth in this sense of \"collectively remembered history\" is meant as a neutral description. Over the years, a change in style of history textbooks can be observed, which may be characterized by the move from monumental to selfcritical narratives and from isolationist narratives to those that connect to others in a transnational and global perspectives. Criteria are emerging for a critical evaluation of national narratives and political memory. Adapted from the source document.

This article introduces a new analytical framework, ‘mythographic topography’. This approach recognizes the materiality of mythographic writing as preserved by the manuscript tradition and the significance of the spatial dynamics it produces. Mythographic topography encompasses both the formal properties of textual organization and how these shape the reader’s imaginative experience of space and narrative. As an analytical framework, it involves interrogating a text according to three categories (each an ancient meaning of topos): its arrangement of textual passages, its use of space and its activation of narrative tropes. Using the Metamorphoses of Antoninus Liberalis as a case study, we demonstrate how this text requires the reader to consider issues of order, disorder and reordering within a culturally familiar narrative paradigm.

While the simplistic thesis of Greek progress from mythos to logos in the form stated by Wilhelm Nestle is rightly rejected, some aspects of the emerging new consensus are open to challenge. ‘Mythos’ corresponds in important ways to modern ‘myth’ and Greek logos, with which it is contrasted, stands at the beginning of an unbroken tradition of Western rationalism. The semantic history of the terms is freshly analyzed, with particular attention to the contribution of pre-Socratic philosophers, Herodotos and Sophists, but looking forward also to Hellenistic and Imperial writers. The ‘invention of mythology’ is dated to the middle of the fifth century, not the end. Plato's complicated stand on the issue is interpreted as a reaction to Sophistic views.

The tragedies of Euripides are composed of traditional mythological material, yet the characters in his tragedies question the validity of their own stories, including the involvement of gods and goddesses. Philosophy, historiography, and early mythography were rationalizing myths at the time when Euripides was composing tragedies. I present several scenes from his tragedies, which exemplify and parallel these other rational genres. My article maintains that Euripides used these approaches to innovate the art of tragedy and participate in the intellectual climate of his milieu.

This article analyzes the representational strategies Vergil uses in the description of the shield of Aeneas to shape the reception of his text. Three aspects of the ekphrasis highlight its ambiguous status as a literary representation figuring itself as a material presence that can become part of history as well as depicting it. First, descriptions of rivers frame narrative units within book 8 as though the text were a visual image, while failing to perform such a function in the case of the shield itself. Rivers also symbolize both the linear progression of the narrative and its static visual surface. Second, the presence of multiple levels of internal spectators simultaneously reminds Vergil's audience of the differences between poem and image and image and reality and provides focalizing perspectives from which each represented image can be perceived as real. Finally, intertextual references to defining features of historiography as a literary genre provide a model for how literary accounts of the past can influence events. But the comparison with historiography also draws attention to what Vergil does differently, particularly his direct representation of divine action and his refashioning of history's linear order into a circular, spatial image that can be viewed synchronically.