This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Mnemosyne. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by papers published in Mnemosyne with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Mnemosyne more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Mnemosyne. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Mnemosyne.
About Mnemosyne
The 1.9k papers published in Mnemosyne in the last decades have received a total of 7.4k indexed citations . Papers published in Mnemosyne usually cover Anthropology (975 papers), Archeology (610 papers), Classics (156 papers), Philosophy (440 papers) and Religious studies (122 papers) specifically the topics of Classical Antiquity Studies (953 papers), Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies (410 papers), Classical Philosophy and Thought (394 papers), Organic Chemistry Synthesis Methods (215 papers), Linguistics and language evolution (174 papers), Byzantine Studies and History (121 papers), Biblical Studies and Interpretation (111 papers) and Archaeology and Historical Studies (94 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Mnemosyne are Jaap Mansfeld, Dirk M. Schenkeveld, W.J. Verdenius, Olga Spevak, Richard Evans, Cornelis Jord Ruijgh, W. Den Boer, Brent Donald Shaw, Jacqueline J.H. Klooster and Eleanor Dickey.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.