Nommer les femmes respectables, le cas de la “sphère religieuse” C. Sourvinou-Inwood (1996)
C. Sourvinou-Inwood, considèrant que la distinction public/privé fait sens à Athènes à l’époque classique, soutient que si les citoyennes d’Athènes étaient subordonnées dans la maison, ce que, dit-elle, les documents produits dans un contexte judiciaire font comprendre par la mention du kurios, ce n’était pas le cas dans la sphère publique : “If it is correct that respectable women were not named in public, such prohibition was not valid in the sphere of religion. Not only were priestesses named, but also, and more significantly, women named themselves in dedications and others named them as dedicators in inventories. Thus respectable women other than priestesses were named in the public sphre, even in their lifetime. This may suggest that women were named in the facet of the public in which they had a social persona not wholly correlative with that of their position in the oikos and on their relationships to males; they had such a persona in religion, both as priestesses and as individuals devotees, and so they were named in the religious sphere”. dans cette analyse, la sphère religieuse n’est pas une sphère à part mais bien un élément de la sphère publique, plus précidément “one particular public sphere”. C. Sourvinou-Inwood 1996, p. 111 et 118.