1. I am indebted to Nancy Davis and Gail Malmgreen for assistance in writing this review.

2. See, for example, Eric Hobsbawm's comment, “Women have often pointed out that male historians in the past, including marxists, have grossly neglected the female half of the human race… Yet if this deficiency is to be remedied, it cannot be simply by developing a specialised branch of history which deals exclusively with women, for in human society the two sexes are inseparable.” (“Men and Women in Socialist Iconography,” History Workshop, 6 [1978], 121. But also see Alexander, Sally, Davin, Anna, Hostettler, Eve, “Labouring Women: A Reply to Eric Hobsbawm,” History Workshop. 8 (1979), 174–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. The best example of the effective application of sociological methods to women's history is Tilly, Louise A. and Scott, Joan W., Women, Work and Family (New York, 1978).Google Scholar

4. Quoted by AnneSummers, “A Home from Home—Women's Philanthropic Work in the Nineteenth Century,” Fit Work for Women, 60.

5. Prochaska, F.R., “Women in English Philanthropy, 1790–1830.” International Review of Social History. 19 (1974), 426–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. Benson, Susan Porter, “‘The Clerking Sisterhood’: Rationalization and the Work Culture of Saleswomen, 1890–1960,” Radical America, 12 (03–04 1978), 41–55.Google Scholar

7. Humphries, Jane, “Class Struggle and the Persistence of the Working-Class Family,” Cambridge Journal of Economics, 1 (1977), 241–258.Google Scholar