Video
General von Steuben: LGBTQ History and Interpretation
Transcript
Emma Silverman: I'm going to put the three of us on screen now for the discussion portion that will be the remainder of tonight's event. So, I...we're going to start with a prompt for Dave and Tom to kick us off. And while we're talking about that audience members, we've got the pre-submitted questions.
We've gotten some questions already through a Q&A button and the Chat. But I would ask you...we'd love to get some more. So, as we start off this conversation, please do use that Q&A button and send us a couple more. And again, we'll get to as many as we can. And then follow up later if we're not able to get to all the questions.
So my opening query for Dave and Tom, which I think follows really well from what you were saying, Tom, is so we've spoken kind of about the context and we've spoken about the statue
So what are the two of you what are your opinions?
Do you think that LGBTQ history should be part of the National Park Service, its formal interpretation of the General von Steuben statue?
What I mean here is it's not just when people come in kind of happened to mention it. But for a plaque in writing somewhere, somewhere integrated somewhere into that formal interpretation.
And in answering that question, I'd like to hear your thoughts on how we balance what we know about von Steuben's life. What we think about what he might have wanted with what the monuments creators intended.
And then also, again, what is important to contemporary marginalized communities seeking representation in the commemorative landscape?
Dave Lawrence: I'll begin. All right. It's a...it's a lot to try to cover.
I will say that I often find it very difficult, especially in the setting of Valley Forge, should be able to try to incorporate that in simply because so much of our programming interpretation is based more on act actions within the encampment. And there...and the impact on systemic and the institution of the army and the military that was going on here.
We very rarely get an opportunity to get into the social history and the personal history of some of the the key figures that are here. And also we have also been moving away from talking a lot about the officers and doing more of a, you know, rank and file view of the army, including talking about the demographics of the people who made up the army, the women and children and civilian...civilians who would travel with the army.
So now we have to focus our attention back to the personal lives of the officers again, as we as we do that. I think it should be incorporated in some way or another because there's an important part of understanding his identity. However, I think it has to be included with modifiers.
We can state why he...why he might be suspected of being gay, but again, to suggest that he might be out as you know, as blatant has to be he has to be couched properly.
We we can point out, I think the best thing that we could do is use primary sources and talk about the relationship. The lifelong relationship they had, especially with North, but also with Benjamin Walker and, you know, use quotes that they send to each other in their letters.
And I think that would allow that sort of relationship to kind be brought out, you know, basically holistically rather than...the...rather than making it an act of, hey, look, we're trying to appease to the LGBTQ. Instead making it integrate that as part of the natural, you know, expression of von Steuben and the life that he led.
Thomas Foster: I think I would agree with that. I definitely think it's important. But I'm an historian. And if I'm at the grocery store and you had a bag of carrots there. And there was some history that I wanted to talk about, I would.
Say, I just think any opportunity to talk about history is a great opportunity and why would you not want to? For me, it's a missed opportunity if you don't. So then the question is, how do you do it? And I really like the idea. The idea Dave is raising about the context that there's clearly personal lives being talked about for the other individuals related to Valley Forge. And people do want to know about loved ones for the individuals.
Are they writing to loved ones at home? What is that? How do they manage that whole aspect of their lives? Is there...especially if they're head of a household, or want to be head of a household name. It's such an important role for a man. Are their loved ones that could affect their performance basically there also.
So I just think it is relevant, intimate life, personal life, is relevant. And so then therefore, it makes sense to talk about what is known about student von Steuben.
I do think moving away from terms is important. In other words, we don't have enough of a enough of an accurate terminology to use or enough of a shared terminology for all of us as a group to get together, or for strangers to come together in front of a monument and just hear a term like he's a gay general.
You clearly have to talk I think, much more descriptively about what is known about an individual. My concern becomes about the modifiers because I think there's very little evidence about heterosexuality in so many cases. But we are not using modifiers there. So you won't see modifiers about love between George and Martha.
But what's missing there is that we have almost nothing about the love they expressed for each other in written letters and there are no children. They got married. That's pretty thin evidence for a lifelong love, right?
I mean, we know from our own personal relationships, relationships are complicated, really complicated. And I will also throw into this mix: We don't talk about bisexuality or fluidity or that a person's sexuality could change over time.
In other words, we sort of possibly...
Dave Lawrence: Hamilton.
Thomas Foster: Right. We sort of immediately move to terms that we can grasp that are going to be sort neat and nicely contained for us to just sort of get used to.
But I think, again, with those modifiers, I guess I'd like to see them more evenly applied or perhaps not used at all. Perhaps we really just talk about what we know.
Emma Silverman: David, you have a question? You wanted to...see raising your hand?
Dave Lawrence: Yeah. I also want to get into going back to the original sources. One of the issues, especially when parsing out the relationships between the people back then, is I'm and I'm saying this in part because I would like Dr. Foster's opinion on this one.
The one of the things that I often have trouble with when trying to figure out the relationship between folks back then was me trying to put my 21st century idea of both queer culture and normative culture into an 18th century context.
Perfect example would be the things, as you mentioned, the expressions of love that are expressed between various men with within this army are very effusive and there comes a question as to how much of...and was often very rarely question. And that does lead to the question of how, you know, how do you define the filial, maybe platonic love that is being expressed by those statements compared to ones that might be of a more romantic nature?
Because a lot of folks back then would write to one another to close friends with expressions that in modern day parlance would be seen as romantic overtures. If I were to write to a male friend of mine, or a friend of mine to whom I am not romantically connected, that I love until I absolutely adore and love them and cannot wait, wait with bated breath upon our next return. So that they may once again be in my arms. People would consider that to be romantic overtures today, but would not necessarily back in the 18th century.
And I'm wondering with Dr. Foster, as someone who has dove into this era a lot, lot more than I have, how that how he works with parsing that out.
Thomas Foster: It's a real challenge for historians. I will say. And it becomes a really central question like what is your burden of proof then to say someone is involved in a same sex sexual relationship, or an intimate relationship?
Historians for the most part, for heterosexual relationships, rely on birth records. If there's a child that happened, then we know the individuals had sex, or again, a marriage certificate. And that's really sort of the hard evidence that we rely on. But honestly, in the background with the hardest evidence is just the default that that historical individuals are presumed to be heterosexual. Unless we have clear evidence, clear evidence, to argue otherwise. For the most part, that it seems to be a problem of how we approach history.
So some of those expressions of love, I think, again, you have to really contextualize them with what you know about the individuals and maybe what all the other letters say. Perhaps it's very hard to know. And you end up in the realm of biography You end up in the realm of individuals in their heads. I mean, these are really complicated things. Motives are really hard for historians to get at.
And so I just think it's we don't have really neat answers here, unfortunately. I do think it's worth noting that some of those letters where they do talk about love also use references to physical intimacy. So long to hold you in my arms or curl up and sleep with you, miss you in my bed, those kinds of things.
There are even I think in Hamilton's letters with Lawrence, there are references to, I think, a bedpost which sort of in the way that it's written about it, it's clearly a phallic reference. I think that's what Hamilton...may be with others. But this is an example of the sort of like in other words, a range that's being expressed within this genre of expressing oneself, if you will. And so it ends up being where the historians find what they think is the truth about those individuals.
Emma Silverman: I have a question about sources that I wanted to bring into this conversation. She asks. "This conversation raises so many questions about the expansive suite of source material available to interpret the past written public documents folklore stories, past structures and landscapes, fashion, artistic renderings, etc. and the different frameworks we might use and questions we might ask to draw meaning from these? How might we rethink or reconsider source credibility, apply new types of questions, and/or draw satisfaction from open ended or unresolved findings, so as to bring under-voiced stories to the center?"
Do either of you have thoughts about...We've been talking about letters. You spoke about the newspaper articles a bit, Tom. But this question of sources is again, if we don't...it's often about all people's personal, intimate lives. We have the marriage and birth certificates as the hard evidence. And then we have this other range of sources. How important are sources? And can they help us maybe be more open ended in our findings? Not having to draw one-to-one parallels with contemporary identities. But maybe draw something more fluid or open ended?
Thomas Foster: I think we have to be more open ended ultimately. But was there a question about what sources are available for this type of study?
Emma Silverman: I think I think that would be helpful to hear. And then Lysa was also asking, you know...what, "Are their sources that aren't...don't seem as credible, maybe like oral traditions?"
Or something that's not like a state document that looking from that sometimes looking at sources that are not so official actually helps bring marginalized voices to the fore. So, I think her question was about that in relationship to this.
Thomas Foster: I think the...great. I mean, it's really almost a question of methodology. It's part of it is at least. And I do think there's been such great work about using even official records, to read, if you can, read against the grain to understand what is being said in there, that it is sometimes in opposition to the official.
In other words, the official record is produced for a reason to perpetuate the official in power. But there are also all sorts of ways to read about what is going on on the ground. What was this individual doing? What what are they expressing? Reading those sources against the grain, I think can be very helpful.
I, I often, at least in intro classes, hear from students that they're concerned about sources with bias. Look, for me, bias is often what's most interesting to an historian. So in terms of how you evaluate a source, it comes down to I think the audience is probably quite familiar with this, your claims.
And so you can make certain claims about a fiction fictional account that has the queer scene between two individuals could be written about in terms of spread of information and knowledge about this.
Thomas Foster: Right. So that could be the claim. That's a clear claim. You have this published circulates understanding and awareness of it. That's fine. And your claim there, once you start talking about that, this is evidence of individuals actually engaging in the activity, then you need a source that actually would talk about the individuals.
So I'm not sure I've gone off the question, but hopefully that speaks to it somewhat.
And I do want to say about sources I saw in the chat, also a reference to Jonathan Katsas. He has these great early volumes, I think they're from the seventies or nineteen eighty even really early on a pioneer in American history.
There are two massive volumes that are collections of documents. And so that's...a...and there are all sorts of documents. I mean, what's interesting about doing LGBTQ history in a time period that people think LGBTQ history didn't really exist is you do see it in just about every type of source, court records, newspaper personal letters, et cetera.
Emma Silverman: Dave, I know we have a we do actually have and we're talking about histories that where you have to sort of read between the lines. But we do actually have an official record of LGBTQ history at Valley Forge? Do you want to talk about that a little bit?
Dave Lawrence: But yeah, actually, it was...I know this it was brought up in the chat and at the looks, and it's a good reminder also of the consequences of being outed in that time period. Even if things might occasionally be suspected. It was always a wink and a nod and never outright stating.
There was actually a Court-Martial that occurred at Valley Forge. Lieutenant Frederick Enslin was was charged with sodomy, attempted sodomy of a soldier under his command, and was ordered to be discharged. As Washington said, "with infamy" from the Army. And if I can, I have a copy of the general orders that marched it.
"His Excellency, General Washington approves the sentence with abhorrence and detestation at such infamous crimes and orders Lieutenant Enslin to be drummed out of the camp tomorrow morning by all the drummers fifers in the army never to return."
That he made sure that ge included in his General Orders, his personal feelings on the matter. But it is also interesting to know that the guy was court martialed and drummed out of camp. Concerns that sometimes sodomy could be considered a capital crime. Clearly was not the case within this army, but that was occurring...that... that court martial occurred in March. Right at the same time that von Steuben is beginning to start training and drilling the men.
And there has been actually a running question about whether or not Benjamin Franklin and Silas Deane in Europe or in Washington and other senior officers in America knew anything about the scandals that von Steuben was leaving behind when he arrived here. I tend to think that maybe Franklin might have been keen to it because he was always up on the scuttlebutt about going on in French...in the...in the European courts.
But Washington very likely was not, or that the very least turned a blind, blind eye to any any suggestions. And I think that court martial is a perfect example of it. And a perfect example, again, of why someone like von Steuben would still need to be very circumspect and very coded in his language. You know, in that era, in that society.
Emma Silverman: You know, we got a question related to that from Robert, a pre-submitted question asking, "As a high status man, one striving sexuality, possibly was an open secret, understood or at least rumored about? Any information?"
And so I think that question speaks to the question of what was the flow of information about von Steuben? Even if we know. And also, how did class and other forms of identity affect how sexuality was read or policed in the time period?
Dave Lawrence: I would I cannot speak with authority on this. I'm going to probably punt this over to Dr. Foster.
I will say, though, that it, it is very similar to other ideas of class. When somebody is doing something that is considered away from what was considered social norms, if you are poor you are ostracized for it. If you are rich, you are considered eccentric.
And I'm willing...I'm thinking that it was probably similar in this day and age...for...for...for von Steuben's behavior. But I can't say for sure or with authority. So I will pass on to Dr. Foster.
Thomas Foster: I mean, I would agree with you on that point. I think class plays a role in a few ways here. You could provide cover it certainly for elites would just provide more opportunity for them to have private unobserved time. Or some sort of privacy, essentially. Are a measure of that. I do think elites could be subjected to policing, though, certainly if there's a morals campaign.
We do see, though, I think obviously, that elites would have much more leeway than non-elites. That being said, for class segregated world, non-elites, are also going to have opportunity if they are away from interaction or closely watched by elite. They would, however, be much more subject to policing by elites. And you see this in a whole host of contexts.
You would see this not only with not elites, but with dependents, servants. In the colonial context, you have cases where indigenous individuals engaged in same sex behavior are being policed as part of the colonial project, as part of bringing a different moral structure, and trying to overlay it and impose it on that society as colonial subjects. So I think there's a whole host of ways that we need to think about how class is playing a role here. But there's probably not a really simple way to just say that one group is allowed in one class and not the other.
I do want to add, however, that the elites seem to fall under more emasculating satire. For example, for first or suspect same sex socializing. And so you do see there were all those images of the Macaronis in the slideshow. It's sort of an example of an 18th century fop that is suspect. They are a queer character in that they have this kind of deviant same sex, social, and suggestive sexual world. They clearly dress in the manner and act in a manner that's effeminate. So the the awareness of same gender, sexuality, and intimacy is so prevalent in the culture that you can actually use it to emasculate men in in tropes that are somewhat cryptic.
And you see that in Europe. You see even in the colonies and certainly in the time of the Revolution.
Emma Silverman: And for those I know, we're making reference to the PowerPoint. If you joined us right at 6:00PM, you didn't show up ten minutes early for that. We will be playing it again at the end of the event.
So you can watch it with fresh eyes or you see it for the first time. And take a look at some of these images that are being referenced I wanted to return to that question.
We've touched on it a bit, but we've been speaking to the complexity of interpreting personal lives and intimacy in this time period and terms that read today and are even politically important today. So what do you all think about Matthew's question about the language or semantics to use?
I think both you have, and I, well, sort of a resistance to a very easy label like the "gay general." On the other hand, when I think about that webcomic, it ends with a sort of a plea for us to honor the contributions of LGBTQ service people to the nation.
In other words, von Steuben is being called the "gay general," in part to to talk about why queer people today should have rights and should be able to serve in the army. And so on. And so I just I guess, again, I'm coming into that sort of conundrum.
What I'm hoping you could speak to it just in terms of language. So if really practically if we're talking about the personal lives and intimacies of figures at Valley Forge, including von Steuben, then in some way, in relationship to the monument, what kind of language is actually being used in that interpretation?
Thomas Foster: It's a I think I mentioned this briefly earlier on, so I won't. I'll give Dave some time to talk about if he wants to. But I do think I agree with you. It's really hard to find shorthand terms that are going to really accurately capture for everybody what's going.
I do think it's I think what you're doing is really wonderful that you're having a series like this on monuments, but then that you would have a particular one to really do a much deeper dive to talk about all the issues here is what's needed.
And in the actual site, I just would hope there, you would have the discussion, the conversation, the fuller information provided. I think that's key.
I'm seeing in the chat some really important things that should also, I would think, be mobilized in that context. So that if a reference was made to the fact that others have referred to him as the "gay general," in other words, that's another way of doing it then. You don't have to own it then. You could say this is occurring, which I think is what you are doing.
But then you might also include some of this historical context that's so important. LGBTQ individuals have not been allowed to serve openly in the military until very recently. And so it just gives you, I think, another window into how important it is to be having this conversation and in a place that is like Valley Forge and so important to the founding and really to our understanding of patriotism. I think those are really important things to be accomplishing.
And there's another comment here that it's not that far back that LGBTQ individuals would not be allowed to work in the NPS. Right?
And that would...be...because they were fired in droves, LGBTQ people from the federal government. I think that's what that is a reference to. It's not that long ago. I mean, in many people's lifetimes. I think just also really important context.
I err on the side of more information than less. So - and it doesn't mean you can't be concise.
Dave Lawrence: Terminology is also difficult. I think, again, going back to what evidence that we can use what we can parse out, I think it's more important to point out the emotional connections that these folks had with one another and no matter what their physical intimacy might have been. Obviously von Scheuben remained deeply devoted to Benjamin Walker and North for much of for the rest of his life.
And we can use that as a springboard for their service together in the military and the times that they spent, you know, living together at --- post war as well. And so, you know, sometimes, rather than focusing on you the more physical aspects of the particular relationships, whether it be hetero or whether it be heterosexual or homosexual, the general focus should be instead on how they express their affection towards one another and love for one another.
As far as like the foundation, as a foundational theme for presenting for presenting these relationships, because that is something that we can more easily back up by using the documentation.
Emma Silverman: Yeah. And I wanted to follow up. I think also, I think it's really important to point out that this whole conversation about the interpretation of the monument is happening against a backdrop of the National Park Service and many other history institutions not recognising the existence of what we would now today call queer people or LGBTQ people for a very long time.
And I did mention, or put in the slideshow, and also a link that we will be sharing at the end is to the LGBTQ heritage study, which was done in 2016. So these same studies are studies of the National Park Service does to try to illuminate histories that have been obscured or excluded.
So this one was done in 2016 and part of it was to lift up sites to the National Register of Historic Places national historic landmarks or national monuments. In the case of Stonewall...so that that is available online. Thirty two chapters is a wealth of information. There is an incredible project. And it's relatively I mean, I would say quite recent in the over century long history of the National Park Service. So certainly that's the backdrop against which all of these conversations are happening.
But I wanted to switch to a question now that we had a pre submitted question from Maggie. Maggie had asked, "Are there other LGBTQ people in our history that we haven't learned about?"
And since we have limited time left in this Q&A, I wanted to narrow the question slightly to ask you to are there other LGBTQ or people that we would understand today as LGBTQ in the history of the founding of the nation and the American Revolution that should be more well known in your opinion?
Dave Lawrence: Well, the first part of the question I'll answer was yes. I am absolutely certain there were far more folks from the LGBTQ...who from history, who are not being properly recognised as such.
And again, I would allude to the fact that that is due in large part to the the issues of trying to clarify whether or not that person was or was not a good example in the opening in the opening scroll that we had. Some of the images include the image of Deborah Sampson. It's a perfect example. She dressed and as a man had joined the American army and served in the American army.
And there's a question, was she doing that as an expression of gender identity? Or was she doing it as an opportunity to get to enlist in the Army and get a salary and gain some positions and bonus and recruitment bonuses and basically get an opportunity for economic advancement that would otherwise be barred off to women...to women like her? Was she using this as an opportunity for what she's battling against sexism or gender identity or both? We don't know. And we can't. And sussing that out would be incredibly difficult. I'm sure that we're many people like her. And like others who, you know, who it's always going to be left up in the air.
I compare it similar similarly to trying to sometimes figure out the espionage game that was constantly going on through the American Revolution. One of the best ways to keep a spy secret was to not mention his name. And we have accounts I've been studying accounts of military operations that went on around Valley Forge and I get accounts and letters from officers regarding hey, we just got word from our friend regarding this movement, we never find out who that friend is.
It's coded specifically in order to maintain a secret. And that's sort of coding is for most people who are LGBTQ have that is what they have had to deal with for much of their lives until just very recently. So and trying to figure out that coding is an onerous task.
Thomas Foster: And seeing the time...I won't say much more. But I did want to say that there's a fascinating controversy that occurred about five years ago now. Actually, it was 2015, in a Civil War Journal, "We Proceeded On." I think it's the publication of the Lewis and Clark Trail Heritage Foundation. And so the name of the publication is "We Proceeded On" and this is actually about Lewis and Clark, that there's a scholar named William Benjamin, who was a two part series that was very speculative about Lewis Clark.
So it would be an interesting read if you're interested in sort of pushing the boundaries of this, but what is also great to read are the letters to the editor in the publications after it was published, in that it's a handful of people that are really outraged that their names could be dragged through the mud in this way, to capture their perspective.
And then others that really applaud the journal for taking this opportunity to explore that aspect or possible aspect of Lewis and Clark lives. And then the editor themselves has a statement in the letters to the editors. I would encourage people to check that out if they're interested in this topic and the controversy around it.
Emma Silverman: Sorry, I kept myself muted. I noticed that Mike in the chat. Also noted the recent study by the Smithsonian of Kazmir Polaski, another Polish American War hero, who's been honored in a number of events, including monuments and national parks. And what that study...they analysed Pulaski's bones and the study indicated that polaski might have been female or intersex.
It's a little bit unknown from the analysis that they did, but there's another sort of like example of a hero who their gender or sexual identity may have been different than what was presumed. We're still finding out information like that, even if it's not like we were talking about sources even if it's not in the official records, we don't have letters or even science analyses of remains. Materials are actually giving us new information to understand the landscape of gender and sexuality at the time.
I don't know if you had anything. We talked about Polaski in our conversation planning conversations. Dave, I don't know if you had anything more to say or Tom.
Dave Lawrence: No, I think that's also a good expression. And also, there is the question of if there's pretty strong evidence from the skeletal remains. And those remains have also been proven via DNA to be connected directly to Polaski, that he had some intersex not in her gender, but intersex characteristics. But then that also brings up the fact that throughout his life, he identified as male.
And so you also have to distinguish how he wanted himself to be seen and the gender identity that he embraced throughout his life. But while at the same time being true to truth and being true to, you know, what he was very likely going through in his life.
There have been also some questions about Polaski was kind of infamous during the American Revolution for putting himself conspicuously in dangerous situations and often braving...braving out on the open border, which was the considered the prerogative of young officers trying to prove their courage in the United States.
But there's also this question of, as a Count in...of Polish aristocracy possibly being unable to have an heir. One of the few ways he could establish his legacy was to die gloriously in battle. Some people have also suggested that might have been a cue to John Laurens recklessness on the battlefield during the American Revolution as well. He ended of dying in a small cavalry skirmish at the very end of the war that preserved forever more his, you know, his legacy as a Revolutionary War hero.
And there's some question about whether or not he was willing, as Hamilton did, to marry and live a life out of a married life after the war. But again, we're going deep into speculation here, which is fascinating to talk about, but also has to be couched with very very cautious terminology.
Emma Silverman: Yeah, and we've gotten a question about Stephen, from Stephen, "I wonder if von Steuben would want to be remembered for a sexual orientation?"
Dave Lawrence: We've taken this into consideration. I think that's what you're pointing to. Is this really it's a really complex question of how did the person see themselves?
Do we know that information that we only have limited records? What about the people who commissioned the monument? Obviously, the German American alliance. This is not really what they intended the discussion about von Steuben to be about.
And then what's important to visitors who might go to the Park and whether or not they identify as LGBTQ, the sort of the importance of understanding that there were diverse sexual and gender expressions amongst people during the American Revolution and the founding of our nation, including people that we today consider heroes and sort of presumed to be heterosexual to have a difference in mindset that can have a really important impact on present day politics. So I think these are all things that were trying to balance and this is such a fascinating conversation, I don't want to cut it off, but I also am looking at time and realizing we're coming to the end of it. And so I'm going to say thank you all for the questions we got more questions for this event than any others in the series. So we will be following up with you. If we didn't get to your question, just know that we've got them all recorded and we will be following any last short comments.
Tom and Dave, before I sort of wrap things up for everyone with some closing remarks I just want to ask you.
Thomas Foster: It's been great.
Dave Lawrence: It has. Thank you.
Thomas Foster: And I just want to thank all the people that contributed to the chat. Really excellent questions, thoughtful comments.
Dave Lawrence: It was great listening to Dr Foster's perspective on these things. I want to thank everyone for attending. And I hope if anybody has any additional questions directed to either of us, I'm hoping if you're able to pass them on to us, we know we will be open for additional questions if you have them.
Emma Silverman: Yes, I'm happy to do that. I was going to introduce my email later but I'll do it now. It's Emma underscore Silverman at Partner dot NPS dot gov. And if you have any questions or feedback about the series, you want me to pass on any questions or comments to Tom or Dave, I'm absolutely happy to do that.
I also wanted to give you all some resources, pass on some resources, so you can continue to think of continue this conversation.
So of course, we invite you to visit the Valley Forge National Historical Park in person and view the General von Steuben Monument with new eyes. The Valley Forge Park Alliance is also hosting a weekly lunch and learn virtual events during this summer.
So if you are not near Pennsylvania and the Philadelphia area, you can still learn more about Valley Forge. And the next program features one of the knowledgeable chat monitors who has been in communication with you throughout Park Guide Jennifer Bolton. She'll be speaking on the subject of the medical life and death of George Washington.
I mentioned again, I just wanted to reiterate that there is a detailed resource on LGBTQ heritage in the National Park Service. It's that multi chapter themed study. And so that's all available online.
There are also the National Park Service has heritage tours. So what that means is have sort of listed different places that you can visit that relate to LGBTQ heritage So we can include that as well.
I encourage you all to read Dr. Foster's book, "Sex and the Founding Fathers: The American Quest for a Relatable Past." And all these resources will pop up in the chat. And if they don't pop up in the chat, we will include them on an email to you tomorrow.
And Tom, I'll get some of the books that you mentioned as well to add those send them out to people. So I wanted to thank Dave and Tom presenting and National Park Service staff, including Kit, Taylor, Jennifer, and Greg, for all their behind the scenes work on the planning chat, Q&A technology.
Also, my NPS-Mellon team, the National Park Foundation, and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. And then, of course, to all of you out there in the audience for sharing so many excellent comments and questions, I couldn't keep up.
Well speaking on this event, but I'm really looking forward to reading through the chat log and hearing everything you have to say.
Description
This discussion broadens the conversation about LGBTQ community during the lifetime of General von Steuben Statue at Valley Forge National Historical Park and the challenge of interpreting queer history in the Early Republic. Together, the series illustrates the power of different publics to claim these sites, the power of educators to pull out overlooked narratives, and the power of community members to commission new monuments that paint a more accurate, and diverse, picture of vast early America.
Duration
40 minutes, 15 seconds
Date Created
07/07/2021
Copyright and Usage Info