This chapter presents an overview of, and insight into, the sexual lives of the inhabitants of Athens in the fifth and fourth centuries BCE. It examines both public attitudes and private behaviours by focusing on three key areas: marriage, prostitution, and male same-sex relationships. The discussion of marriage looks at the traditional ages at which men and girls traditionally wed, how marital partners were chosen, and the emotional and sexual life of married couples, as well as divorce, widow(er)hood, and remarriage. The section on prostitution considers the wide variety of sex workers operating in classical Athens, the conditions in which they worked, and the status they enjoyed. The discussion takes in streetwalkers and brothel workers whose services could be bought cheaply (pornai), trained musicians and dancers who provided entertainment at all-male drinking parties, and high-fee hetairai renowned for their looks, wit, and intelligence. The last section examines the practice of pederasty, a traditionally elite pursuit which saw adult men form relationships with pubescent boys. This discussion covers courtship and its power dynamics, the age of participants, and the ways in which pederasty is depicted in art, as well as shifting public attitudes towards pederasty throughout the classical era.

Chapter 1 sketches out the nature and scope of the evidence available for Greek housing during the first millennium BCE. Drawing on textual sources (including Demosthenes, Lysias, Xenophon and Plato) the significance of the house in ancient Greek (mainly Classical Athenian) culture is investigated. At the same time the chapter outlines some of the basic structural and decorative features as represented in the archaeological remains of the buildings themselves. Some processes (both human and natural) which shape the material remains of houses are outlined. These include the social context of construction (as far as it can be understood), archaeological formation processes and potential biases introduced during excavation. Emphasis is placed on the need to interpret the archaeology within its own cultural context, setting aside (as far as possible) the urge to draw comparisons with modern, western housing.

Chapter 3 investigates the physical characteristics and social significance of Classical houses from Athens and Attica, comparing structures from the city, outlying villages or deme centres, and rural farms. Houses with four to five rooms or more share some characteristic elements in their basic layout: a single entrance designed to screen the interior from the street; an open courtyard; a portico adjacent to that courtyard; and rooms opening individually from the central court-portico area. These point to a distinctive form of dwelling, the ‘single-entrance, courtyard house’. Underlying this form were social expectations which included: restricting and/or monitoring movement in and out of the house; separation of male visitors from the remainder of the household; and potential for the surveillance of individuals moving around the interior of the house. Together, these elements suggest a desire to regulate contact between members of the household and outsiders. This corresponds with Classical Athenian authors, who imply that the movement and social contacts of citizens’ wives were limited.

Athens represents a special case in the history of Greek public benefactions. It is probably the polis that most resisted the emergence of civic euergetism, that is, the establishment of an organized exchange of benefactions for honors between polis and citizens. At the same time, no other classical polis contributed so much to the development of the practice and to its transformation into a defining institution of the Hellenistic age. This chapter examines these two sides of the history of Athenian euergetism in order to explain the widespread integration of citizens into an institution born before the classical period to regulate the relationship between poleis and foreigners. It deals with the reasons for the opposition to donations and honors for citizens, the factors that contributed to overcoming resistance to euergetism, and the elitist content of classical civic euergetism. Finally, it discusses some developments that counterbalanced this elitist component: the ‘democratization’ of euergetism through grants of honors to non-wealthy citizens, the organization of epidoseis, and other measures that served to prevent the rise of a class of great financial benefactors, along with the relaxation of this policy in the time of Lycurgus.

The common perception of craftsmen in Classical Athens as banausoi who were looked down on by elite circles in society has become more nuanced over recent years. This chapter contributes to this discussion by investigating the range of social positions in evidence for ancient sculptors. Using theories of professionalism and the aspects of need, demand and reward for sculpture, it argues that in terms of economic rewards as well as social capital, sculptors in Classical Athens were rather well off. As such the negative connotations of banausoi are unlikely to match the realities of ancient Athenian life.