This book is a revised version of my doctoral thesis, which I wrote under the supervision of Mirko Canevaro and Douglas Cairns at the University of Edinburgh. It investigates the construction of Athenian democratic ideology through a study of the social memory of Athens’ mythical past. The debate on Athenian democratic ideology has long been polarised around two extremes. A Marxist tradition has propounded a negative view of ideology as a coverup for Athens’ internal divisions. Another tradition, sometimes referred to as culturalist, has provided a neutral interpretation of ideology as the fixed set of ideas shared by the members of the Athenian community. This book remedies this dichotomy by providing a unitary and comprehensive approach to Athenian democratic ideology. Through four case studies that compare different versions of selected myths in Athenian public discourse, it demonstrates that Athenian democratic ideology was a fluid set of ideas, values and beliefs shared by the Athenians as a result of a constant ideological practice influenced by the institutions of the democracy. This process entailed the active participation of both the mass and the elite, and enabled the Athenians to produce multiple and compatible ideas about their community and its mythical past.

This work originated as a study of the use and manipulation of myth in Athenian funeral speeches. It was the natural continuation of my MA dissertation, written at the University of Bologna and supervised by Simonetta Nannini. To her I am grateful for encouraging me to start a doctorate and advising me during the first stages of the application process. As I moved on to working on my PhD, my focus shifted from rhetoric to history. Under the patient and inspiring guidance of Mirko Canevaro, I started experimenting with social memory and Athenian public discourse at large and finally landed on ideology and the New Institutionalism. My gratitude to Mirko cannot be stressed enough. He believed in me even when I did not, encouraged me to explore new themes and methodologies, and supported me in all my academic endeavours. I am equally thankful to Douglas Cairns, whose insightful comments and thoughtful criticism have been fundamental to refining my methodology, strengthening my argument and broadening my perspective. I have been lucky to work with such excellent scholars, and this book would not have been possible without their precious input.