After reading his work "Medea", I'm left wondering how the immediate audience and subsequent generations thought about it. Namely, whether it was accepted straight away as part of this wider universe, the same literary world as the Argonautica -- or if Medea existed in a "silo", held apart from the Argonautica. The latter scenario, in other words, would mean the audience largely regarded Medea as Euripides' riffing on a foundational myth, and nothing much more than that (not canon).
But perhaps the audience's views changed over time, which is part of what I want to explore.
Some evidence to consider: There are the famed illustrated pottery seemingly depicting Medea in her chariot drawn by dragons. This is encouraging, but somewhat anecdotal.
Perhaps the notion that there was a canon in the first place underpins my question, and maybe "canon" is too strong a term. But to the best of our ability to take informed guesses, how readily was Medea "embraced" or was it seen as a fringe offshoot from something more culturally significant in the Argonautica?