Introduction

The persistence of classical mythology in modern literature demonstrates the extraordinary adaptability of ancient narratives to changing cultural, philosophical, and psychological concerns. Among the many myths that have survived through literary reinterpretation, the story of Ulysses and Calypso occupies a particularly important place in Western imagination. In The Odyssey, traditionally attributed to Homer, Ulysses remains trapped on the island of Ogygia, where the nymph Calypso offers him immortality, sensual pleasure, and eternal comfort. Nevertheless, the hero longs to return to Ithaca, embracing mortality, suffering, and human imperfection instead of divine permanence. Centuries later, Portuguese writer, Eça de Queirós revisits this episode in A Perfeição, transforming the classical myth into a modern reflection on dissatisfaction, existential instability, and the impossibility of fulfillment.

Rather than merely reproducing the Homeric narrative, Queirós rewrites it through irony and psychological complexity. His Ulysses is no longer simply the heroic voyager yearning for home; instead, he becomes a deeply restless individual incapable of enduring even paradise itself. The island ceases to function merely as a place of temptation and instead becomes a symbol of oppressive perfection. Through this reinterpretation, Queirós dismantles the heroic ideal associated with classical epic and replaces it with a modern consciousness marked by anxiety, contradiction, and existential incompleteness; Ulysses feels trapped in a mouse trap.

This essay argues that A Perfeição operates as a modern dialogic reinterpretation of The Odyssey in which heroic transcendence is replaced by psychological dissatisfaction and existential instability. Through the theoretical lenses of intertextuality, myth criticism, dialogism, reception theory, modernity and decadence, and psychoanalytic desire, this paper examines how Queirós transforms Homeric epic into a critique of perfection and an exploration of modern subjectivity.

Homeric Foundations: Ulysses and the Desire for Return

In The Odyssey, the episode of Ulysses and Calypso constitutes one of the central symbolic moments of the epic tradition. Ulysses resides on Ogygia for several years, surrounded by divine beauty and eternal comfort. Calypso offers the Greek hero from Ithaca immortality and freedom from human suffering. Yet despite these gifts, the hero constantly longs for the island Ithaca and Penelope, her Spartan wife. His desire for return, or nostos, defines his heroic identity.

The Homeric hero is characterized not by the pursuit of pleasure but by fidelity to home, memory, and human destiny. Ulysses chooses mortality over divine eternity because his humanity depends on struggle, limitation, and belonging. Homer’s narrative therefore establishes a clear opposition between divine perfection and authentic human existence. Ogygia functions simultaneously as paradise and prison, for perfection ultimately alienates Ulysses from his human condition.

According to Northrop Frye (1947), myths establish archetypal structures that continue to reappear throughout literary history. The Homeric Ulysses represents the archetype of the wandering hero whose journey toward home symbolizes spiritual and existential completion. The epic structure of the narrative reinforces ideals of perseverance, identity, and heroic endurance. Consequently, the original Homeric framework provides the mythic foundation upon which Queirós later constructs his revisionary interpretation.

At the same time, Homer’s narrative already contains tensions that modern writers would later expand. Although Ulysses desires return, he also experiences moments of hesitation, temptation, and emotional fragmentation throughout the epic. These ambiguities allow later authors to reinterpret the hero according to the concerns of their own historical periods. In this sense, the Homeric myth remains open to continual reinterpretation.

Intertextuality and Literary Rewriting

The relationship between Homer and Queirós can be productively understood through the concept of intertextuality developed by Julia Kristeva. Kristeva (1980) argues that every literary text emerges from a network of previous texts. Literature does not exist in isolation; rather, texts constantly absorb, transform, and reinterpret earlier narratives.

Viewed through this perspective, A Perfeição is not simply inspired by The Odyssey but actively engages in a dialogue with it. Queirós assumes that readers recognize the Homeric myth and intentionally manipulates expectations associated with heroic tradition. The reader approaches Ulysses expecting grandeur, perseverance, and moral certainty, yet Queirós gradually destabilizes these expectations.

The intertextual relationship becomes especially evident in the transformation of Ogygia itself. In Homer, the island is undoubtedly seductive but remains external to Ulysses’ authentic identity. In Queirós, however, the island acquires a more psychologically complex dimension. Perfection itself becomes intolerable. The protagonist’s dissatisfaction no longer emerges merely from separation from home but from an internal incapacity to experience fulfillment.

Kristeva’s theory helps explain why Queirós’s rewriting possesses such critical power. Because the modern text constantly echoes Homeric structures, readers perceive the distance between classical heroism and modern psychological fragmentation. Meaning emerges precisely from this tension between continuity and transformation. Queirós preserves the mythic skeleton of the Homeric narrative while simultaneously subverting its ideological foundations.

This intertextual strategy also reflects broader nineteenth-century literary tendencies. Modern writers frequently revisited classical myths not to glorify antiquity but to question inherited ideals. Myth became a mechanism for exposing the instability of modern identity. Through intertextual rewriting, Queirós transforms epic certainty into existential ambiguity.

Dialogism and the Conflict of Worldviews

The reinterpretation of Homer in Queirós can also be examined through the dialogic theory of Mikhail Bakhtin. Bakhtin (1981) argues that literary works function through the interaction of multiple voices and ideological perspectives. Texts are never monological; instead, they exist in dialogue with other texts, traditions, and worldviews.

In A Perfeição, two distinct visions of humanity confront one another: a) the classical worldview represented by Homeric heroism and b) the modern worldview characterized by skepticism and psychological instability. Queirós does not completely reject Homer but rather enters into dialogue with him. The ancient ideal of heroic fulfillment becomes questioned from within modern consciousness.

This dialogic tension becomes especially visible in the portrayal of Ulysses. In Homer, the hero’s desire for return possesses moral clarity. His suffering confirms his nobility. In Queirós, however, Ulysses appears emotionally contradictory. His restlessness no longer signifies heroic virtue but existential dissatisfaction. The heroic journey loses its transcendental meaning and becomes psychologically ambiguous.

Bakhtin’s (1981) concept of dialogism also illuminates the treatment of Calypso. In the Homeric narrative, she largely functions as an obstacle or temptation within the hero’s journey. Her emotional interiority remains secondary. Queirós, however, grants her greater psychological presence and vulnerability. As a result, the moral structure of the myth changes significantly. Ulysses’ departure no longer appears unquestionably heroic; instead, it may suggest emotional cruelty or inability to sustain intimacy.

The dialogic relationship between the two texts therefore generates a reinterpretation of values themselves. Homeric certainty encounters modern irony. Epic transcendence encounters psychological fragmentation. Through this literary dialogue, Queirós exposes the incompatibility between classical ideals and modern existential consciousness.

Myth Criticism and the Demythologizing of the Hero

Myth criticism provides another valuable framework for understanding Queirós’s transformation of the Homeric narrative. According to Frye (1957), literature repeatedly employs archetypal patterns derived from mythological structures. However, modern literature often modifies or reverses these archetypes in response to changing historical conditions.

In Homer, Ulysses exemplifies the archetypal hero whose journey culminates in reintegration and restoration. His return to Ithaca symbolizes the triumph of order over chaos and identity over fragmentation. The mythic structure affirms the coherence of the world and the meaningfulness of human perseverance.

Queirós, however, dismantles this archetypal certainty. His Ulysses no longer embodies harmonious reintegration but perpetual dissatisfaction. Rather than progressing toward existential completion, he appears trapped within an endless cycle of desire and restlessness. The mythic hero becomes psychologically unstable and spiritually incomplete.

This demythologizing process reflects broader tendencies within modern literature. As religious and metaphysical certainties weakened during the nineteenth century, writers increasingly questioned traditional heroic models. Myth no longer functioned as unquestioned truth but as material for reinterpretation and critique. Queirós participates in this literary movement by exposing the fragility of epic ideals under modern conditions.

Importantly, the title A Perfeição itself contains profound irony. Perfection, traditionally associated with divine harmony and fulfillment, becomes oppressive and unbearable. Ogygia transforms into a symbolic representation of existential suffocation. Ulysses does not flee suffering toward happiness; instead, he flees perfection itself. This reversal fundamentally alters the meaning of the myth. In Homer, paradise threatens heroic identity because it distracts Ulysses from his human obligations. In Queirós, paradise becomes intolerable because human desire itself depends upon incompleteness and movement. The hero cannot remain within perfection because desire ceases to exist once fulfillment becomes permanent.

Modernity, Decadence, and Existential Restlessness

The transformation of the Homeric myth in Queirós also reflects broader anxieties associated with modernity and decadence. Thinkers such as Friedrich Nietzsche and Walter Benjamin explored the spiritual instability and fragmentation characteristics of modern life. To start with, Nietzsche (1968) frequently critiques the exhaustion of traditional values and the crisis of meaning in modern civilization. His philosophy emphasizes the instability of identity and the perpetual tension between desire and fulfillment. Queirós’s Ulysses can be interpreted through this Nietzschean lens as a figure incapable of achieving stable satisfaction because modern consciousness itself is marked by internal contradiction.

The decadent atmosphere surrounding Ogygia also reflects “fin-de-siècle” sensibilities. The island represents aesthetic perfection carried to excess. Beauty, pleasure, and abundance gradually become sterile and oppressive. This corresponds closely to decadent literature’s fascination with exhaustion, ennui, and artificiality. Ulysses experiences not heroic suffering but existential boredom. Within this line of thinking, Benjamin (1969) similarly describes modernity as an experience of fragmentation and disconnection. And for this reason, traditional narratives of coherence collapse under modern conditions, leaving individuals psychologically displaced. Queirós’s reinterpretation of Ulysses reflects precisely this displacement. The Ithacan hero no longer possesses a stable relationship with destiny, home, or identity. His dissatisfaction becomes internalized and perpetual.

Unlike the Homeric hero, whose journey moves toward restoration, Queirós’s Ulysses appears condemned to endless movement without definitive fulfillment. His departure from Ogygia no longer guarantees meaning or completion. Instead, the narrative emphasizes instability itself as a defining feature of human existence. This modern reinterpretation profoundly alters the symbolic function of travel. In epic tradition, the voyage leads toward knowledge and reintegration. In Queirós, movement becomes symptomatic of existential inability to remain satisfied. The hero travels not because fulfillment awaits elsewhere but because permanence itself becomes unbearable.

Lacanian Desire and the Impossibility of Fulfillment

The psychological dimension of Queirós’s Ulysses can be further illuminated through the psychoanalytic theories of Jacques Lacan. Lacan (1977) argues that human desire is fundamentally structured around absence and lack. Desire can never achieve complete fulfillment because it depends precisely upon what remains unattainable. This Lacanian perspective offers a compelling explanation for Ulysses’ dissatisfaction in A Perfeição. Ogygia provides everything traditionally associated with happiness: beauty, pleasure, comfort, and permanence. Yet these very conditions eliminate the tension necessary for desire to continue functioning. Once perfection becomes stable and complete, desire collapses into emptiness.

From a Lacanian perspective, Ulysses cannot remain in paradise because human subjectivity itself depends upon incompleteness. The unattainable object of desire constantly shifts, preventing definitive satisfaction. Consequently, Ulysses’ longing for departure reflects not rational decision-making but the structural impossibility of fulfillment itself. This interpretation radically transforms the Homeric narrative. In Homer, Ulysses chooses mortality because of loyalty to home and identity. In Queirós, however, his departure may reveal a deeper psychological impossibility: the inability of human beings to endure permanent satisfaction.

Calypso’s tragedy also acquires new dimensions within this psychoanalytic framework. She attempts to offer total fulfillment, but such fulfillment proves incompatible with human desire. Her paradise fails precisely because it eliminates lack, movement, and incompleteness. The relationship between Calypso and Ulysses therefore becomes structurally doomed. In this line of thinking, Lacan’s theories help explain why the title “Perfection” operates ironically in Queirós’s narrative. Perfection (Perfeição) destroys the very conditions that sustain emotional and existential vitality. Human beings remain attached not to complete satisfaction but to the endless movement of desire itself. Queirós transforms the Homeric myth into an exploration of this fundamental psychological contradiction.

Reception Theory and the Modern Reader

The reinterpretation of Homer by Queirós can also be understood through the reception theory of Hans Robert Jauss. Jauss (1982) argues that literary meaning changes according to the historical expectations of readers. Each era rereads earlier texts through its own cultural and philosophical concerns. From this perspective, A Perfeição reflects a specifically modern reception of the Homeric myth. Ancient audiences likely interpreted Ulysses primarily as a heroic exemplar of perseverance and intelligence. Modern readers, however, approach the character through psychological and existential frameworks unavailable in classical antiquity.

Queirós’s rewriting therefore reveals how the myth evolves across historical periods. The same narrative structure acquires radically different meanings depending on cultural context. Heroic return becomes existential dissatisfaction. Divine temptation becomes psychological suffocation. Epic grandeur becomes irony and ambiguity. Reception theory also explains why Queirós’s version resonates strongly with modern sensibilities. The modern reader recognizes Ulysses’ dissatisfaction as psychologically plausible. Unlike the morally stable hero of epic tradition, Queirós’s protagonist reflects the fragmentation and uncertainty associated with modern identity.

Furthermore, Jauss (1982) emphasizes that literary history depends upon continual reinterpretation rather than static preservation. Classical myths survive precisely because they can be rewritten according to changing intellectual conditions. Queirós participates in this dynamic process by transforming Homeric material into a critique of modern existential instability. The relationship between the two texts therefore should not be understood hierarchically. Homer provides the mythic foundation, but Queirós generates new meanings through reinterpretation. The value of the modern text lies not in “fidelity” to the original but in its capacity to reveal “previously unexplored dimensions” of the myth.

Conclusion

The relationship between The Odyssey and A Perfeição demonstrates the extraordinary capacity of classical mythology to undergo continual reinterpretation across historical periods. While Homer presents Ulysses as the archetypal hero who rejects divine perfection in favor of human authenticity, Queirós transforms the same narrative into a modern meditation on dissatisfaction, existential instability, and the impossibility of fulfillment.

Through intertextuality, Queirós enters into critical dialogue with the Homeric tradition, preserving its narrative foundations while simultaneously subverting its ideological assumptions. The heroic certainty of epic literature is replaced by psychological ambiguity and existential restlessness. Ulysses no longer appears as a stable moral exemplar but as a fragmented modern subject incapable of enduring even paradise itself.

Theoretical perspectives from Kristeva, Frye, Bakhtin, Jauss, Nietzsche, Benjamin, and Lacan illuminate different dimensions of this transformation. Intertextuality reveals the dynamic relationship between classical and modern texts. Myth criticism explains the demythologizing of heroic archetypes. Dialogism exposes the ideological tension between epic transcendence and modern skepticism. Reception theory demonstrates how myths acquire new meanings across historical contexts. Nietzsche and Benjamin help contextualize the narrative within modernity and decadence, while Lacan explains the psychological impossibility of permanent fulfillment.

Ultimately, Queirós’s reinterpretation of Ulysses reflects a profound shift in Western literary consciousness. In Homer, suffering results from separation from home and identity. In Queirós, suffering emerges from the impossibility of satisfaction itself. This transformation marks the movement from classical epic certainty toward modern existential ambiguity.

Rather than diminishing the Homeric myth, Queirós’s rewriting demonstrates its continuing vitality. The enduring power of mythology lies precisely in its ability to generate new meanings in response to changing philosophical and psychological realities. Through A Perfeição, the ancient voyage of Ulysses becomes not merely a journey toward home but an exploration of the modern human condition itself.

San José, Costa Rica

Friday, June 5, 2026

📚 References

Bakhtin, Mikhail. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (M. Holquist, Ed.; C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). University of Texas Press.

Benjamin, Walter. (1969). Illuminations (H. Arendt, Ed.; H. Zohn, Trans.). Schocken Books.

Frye, Northrop. (1957). Anatomy of criticism: Four essays. Princeton University Press.

Homer. (1996). The Odyssey (R. Fagles, Trans.). Penguin Books. (Original work published ca. 8th century BCE)

Jauss, Hans Robert. (1982). Toward an aesthetic of reception (T. Bahti, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press.

Kristeva, Julia. (1980). Desire in language: A semiotic approach to literature and art (L. S. Roudiez, Ed.; T. Gora, A. Jardine, & L. S. Roudiez, Trans.). Columbia University Press.

Lacan, Jacques. (1977). Écrits: A selection (A. Sheridan, Trans.). W. W. Norton.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. (1968). The will to power (W. Kaufmann & R. J. Hollingdale, Trans.). Vintage Books.

Queirós, Eça de. (2002). Contos. Livros do Brasil.

Click to enlarge the infographics

Introduction

From the earliest moments of our recorded history, we human beings have asked fundamental questions: Where do we come from? Who created us? How did the universe begin? These questions have frequently generated a vast diversity of mythological narratives across cultures. Mythology, far from being mere fantasy, constitutes a structured body of stories through which civilizations interpret origins, divine authority, morality, fate, and destiny.

The term myth derives from the Greek mythos, originally meaning “word” or “speech,” later evolving to signify “story” or “legend.” Although myths are often described as non-historical narratives, scholars argue that their function is not to provide empirical accounts but to convey symbolic truths (Eliade, 1963). Thus, mythology may be understood as the study and interpretation of these foundational narratives and their cultural meanings.

This paper presents a comparative exploration of several major mythological traditions, Judeo-Christian, Greco-Roman, Buddhist, Hindu, Egyptian, and Chinese, demonstrating how each constructs a distinct yet thematically interconnected vision of origins. Through literary and religious sources, mythology emerges as a universal human attempt to interpret human existence.

The Judeo-Christian Creation Narrative

Within the Christian tradition, the origin of the universe is articulated in the Book of Genesis, a term meaning “beginning.” According to Genesis 1–2 (New Revised Standard Version, 1989), creation unfolds in a structured, six-day sequence culminating in divine rest on the seventh day. Humanity is created “in the image of God,” emphasizing both dignity and relational identity.

This narrative establishes order emerging from primordial darkness. Symbolism plays a crucial role: light represents divine authority, and the Garden of Eden embodies harmony between humanity and creation. The serpent, later associated with evil, contrasts with other cultural traditions in which serpents symbolize wisdom or power. In many Asian traditions, for example, serpents and dragons represent knowledge and cosmic strength rather than deception.

Armstrong (2005) argues that biblical creation accounts were never intended as scientific explanations but as theological affirmations of divine sovereignty and moral order. Thus, the Genesis narrative functions symbolically, shaping ethical and spiritual frameworks rather than offering empirical cosmology.

Greco-Roman Cosmology and Divine Hierarchy

In contrast to monotheistic traditions, Greek and Roman mythologies present a polytheistic cosmos governed by anthropomorphic deities. Hesiod’s Theogony (trans. 2006) recounts the genealogical origins of the gods, while Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey (trans. 1996, 1997) depict divine intervention in human affairs.

Zeus (Greek) or Jupiter (Roman) reigns as supreme deity from Mount Olympus. Beneath him exists a complex hierarchy of gods, each governing a distinct domain: Apollo (sun), Ares/Mars (war), Athena/Minerva (wisdom), Poseidon/Neptune (sea), Aphrodite/Venus (love), and others. This distribution of divine roles mirrors political and social organization within ancient Mediterranean societies.

These myths were not merely religious accounts but also literary foundations of Western civilization. Virgil’s Aeneid (trans. 2006) integrates Roman political identity with mythic destiny, while tragedians such as Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides dramatized tensions between fate, free will, and divine justice.

Campbell (1949) observes that mythological systems often externalize psychological and social structures. The Greco-Roman pantheon reflects human virtues and flaws, projecting anthropological realities onto cosmic narratives. Thus, mythology becomes a mirror of civilization itself.

Buddhist Origins and Spiritual Awakening

Unlike cosmologies centered on divine creation, Buddhism shifts attention from cosmic beginnings to human suffering and enlightenment. Siddhartha Gautama, known as the Buddha (“the awakened one”), lived in the 6th century BCE in present-day Nepal and India. Shielded from suffering in his youth, he later encountered illness, old age, and death, experiences that led him to renounce royal life in search of truth.

Rather than offering a singular creation myth, Buddhism emphasizes the cyclical nature of existence (samsara) and the path toward liberation (nirvana). According to Gethin (1998), Buddhist cosmology operates symbolically, describing multiple realms of existence shaped by karma rather than a linear act of creation.

The narrative of Buddha’s enlightenment beneath the Bodhi tree serves as a transformative myth: it portrays the possibility of awakening accessible to all humanity. The spread of Buddhism across Asia, from India to China, Japan, and Southeast Asia, demonstrates the adaptability of its mythic and philosophical structures.

Hindu Cosmology and the Divine Trinity

Hinduism presents one of the most intricate mythological systems in world history. Central to many Hindu traditions is the concept of a divine trinity (Trimurti): Brahma (creator), Vishnu (preserver), and Shiva (destroyer and transformer). These functions symbolize cyclical processes of creation, maintenance, and dissolution.

Unlike strictly monotheistic or polytheistic systems, Hindu theology often integrates multiplicity within unity. Flood (1996) explains that the many deities of Hindu mythology represent diverse manifestations of an ultimate principle (Brahman). Goddesses such as Devi and Shakti embody divine energy, reinforcing the dynamic interplay between masculine and feminine cosmic forces.

Mythological narratives in texts such as the Mahabharata and the Ramayana further articulate moral and spiritual principles. These epics combine cosmology, ethics, and social identity, demonstrating how mythology functions pedagogically within culture.

Egyptian Myth and Cosmic Order

Ancient Egyptian mythology reflects a civilization deeply concerned with cosmic balance (ma’at). Ra, the sun god, occupies a central position as a life-giving force. The myth of Osiris, Isis, Seth, and Horus dramatizes themes of death, regeneration, and rightful kingship.

Osiris represents fertility and renewal, while Seth embodies chaos and destruction. The resurrection of Osiris symbolizes the cyclical flooding of the Nile and agricultural rebirth. According to Assmann (2001), Egyptian myths express a cosmic theology in which political authority and divine order are inseparable.

These narratives were preserved in papyri and inscribed within pyramids, underscoring the connection between mythology, funerary practice, and beliefs about the afterlife. Egyptian cosmology integrates earthly governance with divine structure, reflecting a worldview centered on stability and continuity.

Chinese Mythology and Celestial Administration

Chinese mythology portrays a structured celestial bureaucracy. Figures such as the Jade Emperor (Yu Huang) preside over a hierarchical divine administration. Subordinate deities govern earthly affairs and periodically report their performance, receiving promotions or reprimands.

This mythological system parallels imperial governance structures in Chinese history. Yang and An (2005) note that Chinese cosmology emphasizes harmony between Heaven, Earth, and humanity. Rather than chaotic divine conflict, order and administrative balance characterize this tradition. Such narratives demonstrate how mythology mirrors sociopolitical organization. Divine hierarchy reflects earthly governance, reinforcing moral accountability and systemic order.

Comparative Reflections on Myth and Meaning

Across these traditions, several thematic patterns emerge: the structuring of chaos into order, the establishment of moral frameworks, the anthropomorphizing of divine forces, and the integration of cosmology with social identity. While narratives differ dramatically in structure and theology, they share a common function: to interpret existence symbolically.

Eliade (1963) argues that myths recount sacred history, describing how reality came into being. Campbell (1949) further proposes that myths serve as “public dreams,” expressing collective psychological truths. From Genesis to the Theogony, from the enlightenment of Buddha to the cosmic cycles of Hinduism, myth becomes a medium through which humanity contemplates its place in the universe.

The diversity of myths raises a philosophical question: which account is “correct”? From an academic perspective, the issue shifts from empirical verification to interpretative significance. Myths reveal how cultures construct meaning rather than competing scientific hypotheses.

Conclusion

Mythology constitutes one of humanity’s most enduring intellectual and spiritual endeavors. Across continents and millennia, civilizations have narrated stories of divine creation, cosmic struggle, enlightenment, and transformation. Whether expressed through monotheistic revelation, polytheistic pantheons, spiritual awakening, or celestial administration, these narratives provide frameworks through which societies understand existence.

Rather than dismissing myths as fictional, contemporary scholarship recognizes their symbolic, literary, and anthropological depth. The comparative study of mythology reveals both cultural diversity and universal human longing for explanation. Ultimately, mythology does not merely answer where we come from; it reveals how we understand ourselves.

San José, Costa Rica

Friday, May 22, 2026

📚 References

Armstrong, K. (2005). A short history of myth. Canongate. https://ia801900.us.archive.org/22/items/KarenArmstrongAShortHistoryOfMyth/Karen%20Armstrong%20A%20Short%20History%20of%20Myth.pdf

Assmann, J. (2001). The search for God in ancient Egypt. Cornell University Press.

Campbell, J. (1949). The hero with a thousand faces. Princeton University Press.

Eliade, M. (1963). Myth and reality. Harper & Row.

Flood, G. (1996). An introduction to Hinduism. Cambridge University Press.

Gethin, R. (1998). The foundations of Buddhism. Oxford University Press.

Hesiod. (2006). Theogony (M. L. West, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published ca. 8th century BCE)

Homer. (1996). The Iliad (R. Fagles, Trans.). Penguin Classics. (Original work published ca. 8th century BCE)

Homer. (1997). The Odyssey (R. Fagles, Trans.). Penguin Classics. (Original work published ca. 8th century BCE)

New Revised Standard Version Bible. (1989). National Council of Churches. https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/New-Revised-Standard-Version-NRSV-Bible/

Virgil. (2006). The Aeneid (R. Fagles, Trans.). Penguin Classics. (Original work published ca. 19 BCE)

Yang, L., & An, D. (2005). Handbook of Chinese mythology. Oxford University Press.

Click to enlarge the infographic