Response Paul Allen Miller (bio) In 1980, Foucault's work makes two decisive turns. These form the primary subject matter of my book. First, as announced at the start of his 1980 course at the Collège de France, his topic will be the modalities through which power constitutes itself in relation to "acts of truth" (Foucault 2012, 8–10) for which he coins the neologism aléthurgies, pronouncements or manifestations of truth that establish, reinforce, or legitimate specific forms of power and subjectivity. While truth had always been a central preoccupation, Foucault's later work focuses increasingly on the individual as a speaker of truth both to himself and others. Second, the texts and archives on which he concentrates are no longer those of the early modern period. He begins his 1980 course with a vignette from Dio Cassius and then proceeds to spend the next two sessions offering a reading of Oedipus, before closing with an extensive exploration of the problem of confession and the baptismal remission of sins in the primitive church. From that point forward, he concentrates on antiquity and early Christianity. The early 1980s are also the period when Foucault began work on volumes 2 and 3 of The History of Sexuality (1984) and was completing a draft of volume 4 (2018). Yet while there are clear overlaps between the work he was presenting in his courses and the last books he published, the seminars are anything but rough drafts for the published work. They are with one exception largely unconcerned with sexuality in either the broader or the more restricted sense defined by Foucault in volume 1. Instead, they offer a sustained encounter with the texts of the classical and early Christian era while seeking to trace a genealogy of the Western subject as a speaker of truth, focusing in large part on Socrates, Plato, and their Stoic heirs. The central questions in these courses become: What is the Western subject's relation to power when speaking the truth? How is this veridical subject formed? What constitutes these truths, and who is qualified to speak them? My book offers the first detailed account of these lectures that examines not only the development of their philosophical argument but also the ancient texts on which that argument is based. It aims to ask scholars in classics, comparative literature, and theory to rethink the late Foucault. [End Page 421] When volumes 2 and 3 of The History of Sexuality were published in English in 1986, classical scholarship was one of the last conservative redoubts in American humanities. The books set off an explosion. Foucault's texts were appropriated for a variety of polemics. They were, however, received largely in abstraction from his teaching and absent a sophisticated understanding of his previous work or its place within French philosophy. The History of Sexuality was taken by many for what it seemed to say it was, a history of sex. And if that's what it was, then many classicists considered it a failed experiment, typical of the hubris displayed by French theory and its disregard for traditional scholarship. Nonetheless, Foucault had his advocates. He was embraced by many LGBTQ classicists and others looking for more sophisticated ways of understanding ancient sexual practices than could be gleaned from traditional readings of canonical texts that often took refuge in politically loaded notions of nature, tradition, or normality. Indeed, Foucault's History of Sexuality did as much as any text to help denaturalize heteronormativity and make possible a richer, less binary discourse about sex, sexuality, about "bodies and pleasures" (Foucault 1976, 208) in the ancient world and beyond. His was not a philological commentary on the ancient texts, nor was it an attempt to write a history of sexual conduct. Sexuality for Foucault was not a thing. It was a discourse, a set of enunciations that provided definition and unity to a disparate group of behaviors, sensations, and functions, creating a singular entity (sex) that was not there before. The History of Sexuality is the history of how that discourse came about. It poses a philosophical question: What is our truth, and how did it come to us? This fact was...