Column Chronicles: Myths versus Legends

Myths versus Legends

Frank Cotolo
July 9, 2026

Over the past few years historians have been at odds with two categories: myths and legends. Two schools of thought are battling over the definitions of each status and the qualifications to confirm them as myth or legend.

Historian Rupert Undercoat recently went public. He said, "Although both categories are defined as non-existent nouns - people, places and things - the legend status is being assigned to nouns that exist or existed at one time or another.

"Musicians, pro-sports figures, cities, automobiles of all kinds are being labeled legendary," he said, "and yet include myths, that is, non-existent nouns."

The battle has gone to the courts.

"My son," says Zeke O'Frenzy, "is a legendary high school gym teacher."

"No he is not," Undercoat says. "By definition, Mr. O'Frenzy's son is an ordinary gym teacher who has accomplished nothing and even if he did anything he is real and cannot be labeled a legend."

O'Frenzy sued Undercoat for defamation. After the hearing the judge favored Undercoat's traditional definition. Later that year O'Frenzy's son's high school gym teacher was sued for calling O'Frenzy's son a "legendary gymnist".

Later that year a local TV news woman described two recently deceased pop stars as legends. Undercoat sued and the family of the deceased pop stars counter sued. The case went to the Supreme Court.

A 6-3 Supreme Court vote favored the family of the deceased pop stars and a TV reporter called it a "legendary decision". Undercoat sued the TV reporter. The case was dismissed in an effort to be heard by the Supreme Court after the TV reporter referred to the dismissal as "a smart move by the legendary Supreme Court".

Overcoat retired to Alabama with a banjo on his knee and O'Frenzy's identification is undocumented.

Frank Cotolo can be found hosting the talk and interview programme Cotolo Chronicles. You can send him an e-mail at this address: frank@148.ca.