While history is often presented in current American society as being centered around cishet WASP (white Anglo-Saxon Protestant) men, this is especially true in regards to the study of early American wars and the eras surrounding them. Note that for the purposes of this project, “early America” is defined as being between 1776 and 1865. This is not without cause, since armies often accepted people of that demographic and turned away or removed others. However, there has been increasing awareness of the fact that people of minority demographics contributed to their struggling societies in various ways. Espionage is a particularly interesting field because it involved as much danger and sacrifice as service in the army or navy and yet was often an open path for minorities. Of course, discussions of early American espionage can also fall into the same trap as general military studies of only acknowledging the contributions of people of the dominant group, but it is a good place to start in shedding light on the wartime histories of women, people of color, and other minorities. Thus, by exploring early American military engagements from the perspective of spies with minority backgrounds, the user will get the chance to broaden their perspective of American history.
One important theme this leads to is how to explore history that is not readily available. The history of minority groups often gets relegated to the sidelines and therefore may not be readily accessible, but there is a special challenge in studying contributions that were deliberately hidden, such as espionage. Despite being hidden, these roles were often crucial to strategizing and the overall behavior of the army and navy.
This leads one to wonder if its secretive nature was part of why it was an available outlet for people the military traditionally excluded, since an army would not officially recognize it. Does this tell us anything about the circumstances of minorities in a given era? It is also worth noting that there were less clandestine ways for someone who was not part of the dominant group to contribute. For example, women on both sides of the American Civil War were often used for recruiting soldiers or making supplies for the army. Why, then, would some contribute as a spy or saboteur, whether willingly or unwillingly?
Another, broader theme in this project is how this complicates the current narrative of early American warfare and the roles of minorities during these eras. In some ways, this reinforces the current narrative, since people not of the dominant group were left with the option of contributing in a way that was dangerous but uncelebrated, doing things that were often looked down upon. On the other hand, this challenges the current narrative, since this was an opportunity for these people to make themselves valuable to their governments and take part in work that did not fit societal stereotypes. I look forward to getting to explore these themes in greater depth.
