Welcome to FAQ:
Homefront Archives: Behind the Uniform
The Military Spouse Digital History Project
(a.k.a. “Wait, What Is This?” )

Who Created the Military Spouse History Project?

Hi, I'm Mel. I'm a military historian and museum curator, but I'm also an Army BRAT, U.S. Air Force veteran,

and Air Force spouse going on 26 years. That combination matters more than you might think.

​

Here's why: I've lived this history, AND I study it professionally.

​

Those 26 years? They taught me how spouse networks actually function, how institutional expectations get

communicated (often through whispers at the softball game or meet up at the coffee shop), and how families adapt when the military demands the impossible.

 

That lived experience gives me insight into the informal systems—the ones that don't show up in official records but kept everything running anyway.

​

My historian and  curator training? That's where the rigor comes in. I know how to dig through archives, analyze primary sources, and build historically sound arguments. I can tell the difference between "this is my experience" and

"this is what the evidence shows."

​

Here's the important part: My personal experience is one piece of a much bigger puzzle. It helps me ask

better questions and understand what I'm reading in old letters and military reports. But my project stands on

archival research, institutional records, oral histories, and the work of other scholars—not just my story.

​

This isn't a memoir. It's not advocacy. It's history—rigorous, evidence-based history about people whose contributions have been systematically overlooked.

​​

Want to know more about my background? Check out 

 

​What’s the point of this project?

Short answer: Military spouses shaped U.S. military history in ways we've barely acknowledged. This project

brings that hidden history into full view.

​

Longer answer: I'm examining how spouses have influenced military institutions, culture, policy, and readiness

from the 1700s to today. The big question driving everything: How did military spouses actually shape military outcomes, not just survive them?

​

Here's the thing:  traditional military history focuses on battles, strategy, and generals. And that's important! But

you're missing half the story if you ignore the people who held everything together at home—often invisibly,

always unpaid.

​

Military operations don't happen in a vacuum. They depend on soldiers staying in the service, on families being

stable enough to handle deployments, on communities that support each other when things fall apart. Spouses

have been managing those systems for centuries.

 

They weren't just "there"—they were organizing, adapting, advocating, and sometimes fundamentally reshaping how the military operated. 

 

This project proves it with evidence.

​​

So… who’s this project actually for?

Everyone. Seriously.

• Military spouses: You'll see your experiences reflected in history and understand why current challenges have such deep roots.

• Veterans:  My work shows the family side of military service you might not have fully seen while you were in.

• History nerds: I hope you will find fresh perspectives on military effectiveness that go beyond battlefields and command decisions.

• Students: You'll get accessible analysis backed by authentic sources—perfect for research projects.

Anyone curious about military life: No insider knowledge required. I explain the jargon and provide context.

​

Why Does Military Spouse History Matter?

Because it changes how we understand military effectiveness.

​

Traditional military history asks: Who won? What was the strategy? How did command decisions play out? And so on.

​

My project asks: What enabled armies to sustain operations for months or years? Who kept

soldiers from deserting when family crises hit? Who built the support systems that prevented morale collapse?

Turns out, spouses were doing that work. And when institutions finally formalized family support programs,

they were often just catching up to what spouses had already created informally.

​

Here are some examples of how this played out:

​

Revolutionary War (1775–1783)

Camp followers—many of them soldiers' wives—cooked, did laundry, and nursed wounded soldiers. Without

them, the Continental Army couldn't have sustained campaigns. It wasn't "helping out." It was essential

logistics. And it wasn't just labor. Women like Esther De Berdt Reed organized fundraising campaigns that equipped

soldiers. Women were political actors during wartime, not just domestic supporters.

​

Civil War (1861–1865)

With soldiers gone for years, wives ran farms and businesses, keeping the economy stable enough that men

could stay in the field. Their letters home were morale lifelines. Some worked as nurses, expanding what the

military could do while challenging assumptions about women's capabilities.

​

World Wars

The military expanded so fast that family support couldn't keep up. Wives dealt with housing shortages,

rationing, and raising kids alone. They built informal networks—childcare co-ops, emergency funds,

information systems—that eventually became models for official programs.

War brides from Europe and Asia forced the military to grapple with questions about family integration and

citizenship that it had avoided before.

​

Vietnam War (1955–1975)

POW/MIA wives stopped being quiet. They organized, lobbied Congress, and applied public pressure that

influenced U.S. foreign policy. They proved spouse networks could hold institutions accountable. This was also when spouse employment became a formal concern. Frequent moves and long tours made it almost impossible for spouses to maintain careers, and the military started (slowly) to notice.

​

Post-9/11 Era (2001–Present) ( also my era)

Today's all-volunteer military depends on family stability. If families are miserable, service members leave. So

spouse employment, mental health support, and childcare became retention issues that the military can't ignore.

​

Digital platforms changed the game, too. Spouses are organizing across the country now, creating advocacy networks and non-profits that push back on institutional failures in real time.

​

The pattern across all these eras – Spouses weren't passive. They adapted, organized, and influenced outcomes

—even when the military refused to acknowledge their role.

 

​This History offers no quick fixes—but it does offer essential context.

​

Want the full timeline? 

​

How often do you post?

Regularly-ish. Quality over speed.

Most posts are 2,000–5,000 words because I'm doing real research—digging through archives, analyzing sources, building arguments that hold up to scrutiny. Some topics require months of work.

​

I'm a one-person operation, so I appreciate your patience. New content appears consistently, just not on a rigid schedule.

​

Is this just your personal story?

Nope.

My military lifecycle from childhood through adulthood in the military community gave me a head start—and a few gray hairs,  high blood pressure, and some anxiety on the side.

​

Still, the project is built on archives, oral histories, policy documents, and institutional records. My experience helps me ask better questions—but the answers come from the sources.

​

I bring a historian’s and curator’s disciplines, along with a veteran and spouse perspective, to this work.

 

What’s your research style?

I use a mix of approaches that historians call "theoretical frameworks." Don't let that phrase scare you—it just means I'm looking at spouse history through different lenses to understand how influence actually worked.

​

• Civil-military relations: How do military institutions depend on families? What happens when that dependency isn't acknowledged?

• Memory and storytelling: How do spouses remember and share their experiences? What gets preserved and what gets forgotten?

• Identity: How has "being a military spouse" changed over time? What roles were available, and who decided?

• Networks: How did spouses communicate, support each other, and create informal authority when they had no official power?

• Labor: What work did spouses do—paid and unpaid? How did that labor subsidize military operations?

• War and society: How are battlefronts and home fronts actually connected? (Spoiler: you can't separate them.)

• Organizational culture: How do informal expectations within military communities shape official policies?

 

These frameworks help me show that spouses didn't just react to military life—they actively shaped it through labor, networks, advocacy, and strategic decisions.  Yes, it’s nerdy. But I translate.

​

What kinds of sources do you use?

I pull from all kinds of materials:

• Archives: Letters, diaries, military orders, government documents—the dusty stuff in repositories like the National Archives and university collections.

• Official records: Family program documents, morale reports, retention studies, policy papers from the DOD and military branches.

• Personal accounts: Memoirs, oral histories, interviews that show what daily life actually felt like.

• Objects: Household items, photographs, uniforms, ephemera—material culture tells stories too.

• Research studies: Contemporary data from DoD, RAND, and other institutions examining spouse employment, mental health, and retention.

• My own experience: 26 years of observations, but always backed up by other sources. My experience helps me know what questions to ask and how to interpret what I find in archives—but it's not the foundation. The archives are.​

Together, these sources show both the official story and the informal reality of how spouses influenced the military machine.

​

How do you define "spouse"?

Inclusively and historically accurately.

Legal marriage? That's the obvious one. But throughout history, there have also been long-term partners, common-law spouses, same-sex couples (even when not legally recognized), and family members who functioned as spouses.

​

The project examines who was doing the work of "spousehood"—managing households during deployments, building support networks, and navigating military culture—regardless of their legal status or gender.

​

Definitions of family and marriage have changed a lot over time, and I hope my project reflects that rather than imposing modern categories on the past.

​

Do you think spouses “serve”?

No—and here's why that matters.

Spouses don't take military oaths. They're not subject to military law (well, that is debatable). They don't deploy to combat zones. They don't get veteran benefits. The experiences are not the same, and saying they are erases essential differences.

​

But—and this is crucial—not serving doesn't mean not contributing.

​

Spouses' labor, decisions, and networks created conditions that shaped military readiness, retention, and morale. Those contributions are historically significant and deserve serious study.

​

Here's the distinction: claiming spouses "serve" obscures the vulnerabilities they face. They're subject to military orders (through their service member's assignment) but have no formal authority or the same protections. (if any at all) They perform essential work without compensation or recognition. That structural position matters.

​

My goal isn't to expand the definition of military service. It's to establish spouse contributions as a legitimate part of military history—with their own mechanisms of influence that deserve rigorous analysis.

​

Why Does This Matter Right Now?

Because the challenges military spouses face today—employment struggles, childcare access, mental health concerns, retention questions—didn't just appear. They have deep historical roots.

​

• Spouse employment issues? Those go back to the Cold War, when frequent moves already made career continuity nearly impossible. The post-9/11 era intensified the problem, but institutions have been slow to respond—just like they were 50 years ago.

• Family readiness programs? During WWII, spouses were already creating informal childcare co-ops, emergency funds, and information networks. The military eventually formalized these—but only after spouses proved they were necessary.

• Retention concerns? Civil War soldiers deserted when family crises went unaddressed. Vietnam-era retention suffered as spouse dissatisfaction grew. Today's recruitment struggles reflect families' reluctance to accept sustained deployments. This pattern isn't new.

 

Understanding this history doesn't fix problems overnight, but it provides crucial context for why gaps persist and what kinds of solutions might actually work.

 

Are you part of a museum or university?

Nope, this is independent.

My day job as a curator focuses on traditional military history—soldier experiences, battles, and material culture.  My project is my own scholarly work, done on my own time, pursuing questions that institutions haven't prioritized.

​

Independence means flexibility. I can research what I want, publish when I'm ready, and explore angles that might not fit institutional priorities.

 

But don't mistake "independent" for "casual"—this work meets academic standards for research, analysis, and citation.

​

Will there be a book?

Yes! That's the plan.

I'm working on a monograph that will synthesize all this research—expanded case studies, deeper analysis, more historical detail. The goal is to create a foundational text on military spouse history that appeals to both general readers and academics.

​Complete transparency: I'm doing this unpaid, so progress is slow. But I know this work is needed, even if the audience is still being built.

​

Can I submit a story?

Not yet, but soon!

I'm planning to create a way for people to submit personal stories, letters, artifacts, and family histories. So much of this history lives in attics and shoeboxes—not in official archives—and preserving it matters.

​

When the submission portal is ready, I'll announce it here. In the meantime, I encourage you to preserve your own materials: scan letters, record oral histories, and photograph artifacts. These will become increasingly valuable as this field grows.

​

What kinds of posts are coming?

You'll find:

• Era-specific case studies showing how spouse influence changed over time

• Book discussions engaging with other historians' work

• Deep dives into forgotten policies that shaped military family life

• Analysis of how race, gender, and class shaped spouse experiences

• Examinations of digital spouse networks and institutional accountability

• Explorations of emotional labor and its role in military effectiveness

This isn't just "history happened, here are the facts." It's cultural analysis, institutional critique, and memory work—all grounded in evidence.

​​

Can I use this project in research, journalism, or teaching?

Absolutely. Just cite it properly.

My project is designed for historians, students, journalists, researchers, and advocates. The writing is accessible, but the research is rigorous. If you're using this work, standard citation rules apply—attribute properly and link back where appropriate.

That means don't just cite this blog, but also cite the original references. Give credit to people's hard work!

​I'm building this to be used, not locked away.

​​​​​​​

Let's Reframe Military History Together

Military spouses have always been part of this story. They managed logistics when systems failed. They sustained morale when support lagged. They organized politically when their voices and those of veterans and active-duty personnel were dismissed. They built networks that shaped retention, culture, and policy.

 

It's time we acknowledged that—with evidence, rigor, and  the respect this history deserves.

The spouse has always been behind the service member. Now it's time to see what they built there.

​

 

​

​