1 I believe that many scholars would name as the most important work of this kind Wallace-Hadrill, A., Houses and society in Pompeii and Herculaneum (Princeton 1994)Google Scholar.

2 The book revises DeFelice's doctoral dissertation, The women of Pompeian inns: a study of law, occupation, and status (Miami, OH 1998)Google Scholar.

3 The other examples of this tendency He in scholarship from an entirely different league than that of the work under review: see Jacobelli, L., Le pitture erotiche nelle Terme Suburbane di Pompei (Rome 1995) 65 n.119Google Scholar; Clarke, J. R., Looking at lovemaking: constructions of sexuality in Roman art, 100 B.C.-A.D. 250 (Berkeley 1998) 179 Google Scholar, with the comments of Anderson, W. S., BMCR 98.8.12 (1998)Google Scholar.

4 For a sense of this historiographical trend, see, for example, Walkowitz, J. R., Prostitution and Victorian society: women, class, and the state (Cambridge 1980) vii–viii CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Laurence, R., Roman Pompeii: space and society (London 1994) esp. 70–87, 143–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wallace-Hadrill, A., “Public honour and private shame: the urban texture of Pompeii,” in Cornell, T. and Lomas, K. (edd.), Urban society in Roman Italy (New York 1995) 39–62 Google Scholar. I have recently treated this topic in “Pompeian brothels and social history,” in Pompeian brothels, Pompeii's ancient history, Mirrors and mysteries, Art and nature at Oplontis, & the Herculaneum ‘Basilica’ (JRA Suppl. 47, 2002) 7–46 Google Scholar.

6 In place of the traditional quibbling over missing bibliography, I will simply cite one work that the author might have found useful: Savunen, L., Women in the urban texture of Pompeii (Pukkila 1997), esp. 102–18Google Scholar. It must be pointed out, however, that this work is difficult of access in North America.