In his scholarly article Sex Before Sexuality: Pederasty, Politics and Power in Classical Athens, David Halperin poses

a question that many other contemporary historians in the field of sexual histories are coming to consider: is it possible to reconcile our modern understanding of sexuality our literary terms and theory, in particular with those of past societies? Using the Ancient Greeks to illustrate his point, he contests both positivist and essentialist approaches, challenging the existence of any indigenous sexuality or cultural universals. Halperin, in a playful and sardonic manner, first examines the passages through which sexual discourses were channelled into scholarship: through shifts in cultural emphasis, medical thought and theory. Although his writing is very much in a historical locus of thought, the subject matter is one with much broader implications, and therefore is not confined just to a scholarly audience. His claim that homosexuality was invented in 1892 seems ludicrous to a reader who has no prior knowledge of how sexual terms and classifications have evolved: those with the misconception that such categories as homosexuality (and subsequently, heterosexuality) have long existed. Operating before the advent of 19th and 20th century revolutionists of sexual thought such as Michel Foucault, Halperin argues, societies like ancient Greece displayed an innocence of modern sexual categories 1, prone to modern misinterpretation. Halperin is not suggesting that same-sex acts and practices did not occur before 1892 of course, there is plenty of evidence to suggest they did but rather the word, and therefore the encompassing of these acts into a category of homosexuality is in fact relatively recent. His emphasis on semantics is strong throughout, as the terms would seem to not merely describe reality but, at least partly, constitute it 2. This issue is one he confronts particularly while considering two primary sources, one being the Platonic myth of ancestral bisection. Halperin tackles a document heavily laden with significance by historians, many with an agenda, who have used the myth to affirm the existence of an ancient category of homosexuals. It is particularly powerful as in modern eyes, it posits a taxonomic scheme to explain deviance and ascribes no identity of consequence to them further than the fact of genetic heritage. To Halperin, homosexuality as we understand it exists in a binary of homosexual/heterosexual, and the Platonic myth does not identify a binary. Instead there are three distinct sexualities; the two of these we could consider
1. David Halperin, Sex Before Sexuality,: Pederasty, Politics and Power in Classical Athens, in Martin Duberman, Martha Vicinus and George Chauncey Jr., ed. Hidden From History: Reclaiming the Gay and Lesbian Past, New York, 1990, p. 45 2. As cited above, p. 48

homosexual are carefully distinguished, and even within the category of malemale relations there are plenty of complications. The dissimilarities overpower the similarities for Halperin. The examination of this source in particular becomes a springboard of sorts for his theory of how Greek sexual understanding was entwined with, or inseparable from the political world. In a sense he tries to reconcile it with our binary decision making, while at the same time trying to prove its radical difference and irreconcilability. In stating homosexuality presupposes sexuality 3, Halperin essentially notes that in applying the term homosexual to ancient figures, we are presuming they too saw sexuality as a distinct concept - one that could be defined and divided, but that existed independently and universally across human experience. Free from this concept, the place of sex in ancient Greek life can be interpreted quite differently. For Halperin, sex in ancient Greek times was an action performed by one person upon another 4 far from being a mutual act, it functioned as an expression and assertion of power inducted by those of higher status. What occurred between participants was a manifestation of public life that both reflected the hierarchical structure of the polity as well as polarised the citizens and non-citizens. The role you took was then connotative of your character, made clear what social conventions were to be prescribed to you, and cemented the part you played in society. Halperin constructs his argument in a way that creates a sense of distinct separation between the dominant and the submissive - but this is stressed into a binary much the equivalent of the homo/hetero that functions today. It denies the possibility of any sexual relationship existing distinct from this pervasive political world. Whether he moves to assert this binary purely to compare it on a somewhat similar level to modern society, to make it easier for the reader to comprehend - or whether he is falling into what contemporary historians would see as a taxonomical tendency - is unclear. Yet it seems unfair to try and impose these boundaries, to say that power relations were clear-cut enough to warrant a group of powerful and a group of weak. The evidence selected by Halperin does suggest that virile citizen men were often indifferent towards the gender of their sexual objects. This is supplemented in the source documents on Ancient Sexualities - Martial is contemptuous of a tribad Philaenis, not because of her relations with both men and women, but because she
3. David Halperin, Sex Before Sexuality,: Pederasty, Politics and Power in Classical Athens, in Martin Duberman, Martha Vicinus and George Chauncey Jr., ed. Hidden From History: Reclaiming the Gay and Lesbian Past, New York, 1990, p. 41 4. As cited above, p. 48

usurps the traditional male phallic role in both situations. Theopompus comments with distaste on the barbarism of Philips companions who would mount each other although they had beards, the problem being that they were of equal status. But as Halperin found in his examination of Platos myth (which, interestingly, is never mentioned in this section), social identities in ancient Greece were infinitely complex, and less static than they would seem. Gender, occupation, education, and of crucial importance, age were changing factors that blurred the lines of an already complicated system. Age parameters and how they affected sexual relations are prevalent in the writings of Straton and Theocritus, who both illustrate pederastic lust for boys of a certain age; the problem not being same-sex desire, but its existence outside of tasteful social norms. The selection of personal, creative pieces work well in conjunction with Halperins overarching and generally political-based argument. Even alone, Halperins article is of importance for sexual histories. It could be considered radical, or unorthodox, but not a great field of work exists specifically behind it. It is encouraging that historians recognise the illegitimacy, even danger in some cases, of freely applying universals without considering their modern origin. The issue of whether sexuality, if such a concept did not exist for premodern societies and cannot be used in their interpretation, has any legitimacy as an area of historical study will no doubt continue to be debated. But Halperin sees the excitement and indeed the cultural importance of doing so, to call into question the very naturalness of what we currently take to be essential to our individual natures 5, and attempt to detangle ourselves from the only discourse we have ever known. Sexual histories, as a burgeoning field, would seem to work best free of classification and taxonomy: where patterns of association, strands of interconnectivity, and the cultural poetics of desire 6 can be truly appreciated.

5. David Halperin, Sex Before Sexuality,: Pederasty, Politics and Power in Classical Athens, in Martin Duberman, Martha Vicinus and George Chauncey Jr., ed. Hidden From History: Reclaiming the Gay and Lesbian Past, New York, 1990, p. 52 6. As cited above.

Bibliography: Halperin, David, Sex Before Sexuality,: Pederasty, Politics and Power in Classical Athens, in Martin Duberman, Martha Vicinus and George Chauncey Jr., ed. Hidden From History: Reclaiming the Gay and Lesbian Past, New York, 1990, pp. 37-53