1. Jeff Hearn, Men in the Public Eye: The Construction and Deconstruction of Public Men and Public Patriarchies (London: Routledge, 1992), pp. 29–32.
2. Although, as Vickery has noted, the form has more recently been revitalised by authors who are keen to emphasise the impact of familial and sexual considerations on the actions of political men: see Amanda Vickery (ed.), Women, Privilege and Power: British Politics, 1750 to the Present (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2001), p. 4.
3. For a comprehensive historiographical survey of British women’s history, see June Purvis, ‘From “Women’s Worthies” to Poststructuralism? Debate and Controversy in Women’s History in Britain’, in June Purvis (ed.), Women’s History: Britain, 1850–1945. An Introduction (London: Routledge, 1995), pp. 1–22.
4. On the uneasy relationship between women’s history and Marxist social history, see Sally Alexander, ‘Women, Class and Sexual Difference’, History Workshop Journal, XVII (1984) 125–49 (p. 127).
5. Amanda Vickery, ‘Golden Age to Separate Spheres? A Review of the Categories and Chronology of English Women’s History’, Historical Journal, XXXVI:2 (1993) 383–414.