Helen, Women in Intelligence was very well received when first published. Is this an area of espionage history that is under-developed?
Most definitely. It is an area where historians still need to research deeply in declassified files and record what the women did in the history of intelligence, and not only focus on their role as agents behind enemy lines. The information can be in the files, but often hidden in obscure files or just missed in a sweep of research material. We can tend to overlook the fact that women’s history isn’t necessarily kept separately in its own files. The roles of women emerge also in general military, naval and air intelligence files.
WiI covered both world wars, and the extent to which women were involved in intelligence work was extensive. Did this surprise you?
I was completely taken aback by the sheer extent of women’s contribution to intelligence operations, in both the uniformed forces and in civilian services (MI5 and MI6). They were embedded right across this work from WW1 into the 1920s and 30s and WW2; often doing analytical work, becoming heads of specialist intelligence sections, running agents and networks abroad, and as double agents penetrating various communist or fascist organisations operating in the UK and for the German secret service.
Edith Cavell and others are famous examples from WW1 – is this a conflict where the women outshone the men?
I feel uncomfortable with comparing the roles of men and women in a competing rank of who outshone who, or who was the bravest. Of paramount importance is to record as many stories as we can, so we place their contributions on record. This is beginning to change our understanding of these wars, especially in assessing what difference the intelligence made on the battlefields and how it might have affected the outcome of the war in other areas. The work of Bletchley Park is a good example of this, as is the eavesdropping programme of WW2. The latter used the first female interrogators in uniform – astonishing.
What was the attitude of men towards their female colleagues?
It was various, but on the whole an acceptance that women were doing what they were assigned to do as the best person for the job, irrespective of gender. That’s not to say there were no challenges for women, but we have to be careful of reading modern-day concerns back into the history at that time. I think there was a different mindset in the latter part of WWI and certainly in WW2. The women did not challenge their status, and I found so many examples where women were in lead roles, undertaking challenges work, even if their job title didn’t reflect that.
During the First World War what was the work women were carrying out in Britain?
In terms of intelligence roles, women in MI5 largely ran the Registry, which catalogued the indexes of intelligence topics, suspects and wider records. Women gradually undertook analytical roles, as did the women of MI6 (SIS). They soon became experts in their particular field of intelligence and this expertise was so valuable that it frequently carried on into the 1920s and 30s. What surprised me was just how many of these women went on to have a 20 or 30-year career in intelligence with MI5 and Special Branch. They became specialists on Soviet spies and espionage in the UK, as well as experts on far-Right groups and the threat to our security in the 1930s.
Is there one particular female spy in this period you are most impressed by?
It is very hard to single out one female spy, as I am utterly inspired by all of them; but amongst the intriguing ones are the British woman Baroness Miske (born Walters) who was the only known spy swap of WWII in currently declassified files. She must have been so valuable to us. There are others… but too many to list.
During the inter-war period was there a reduction in the roles available for women?
Certainly no, there was not reduction in the intelligence work for the women of MI5 and MI6. They have been hidden to history under the mask of being ‘secretaries’, but they were engaged on whatever fields they were experts. The MI6 secretaries were running spy networks across Europe and elsewhere, and I found, on an egalitarian social familial bases with their chief of station in the city or capital where they were based. Astonishingly, I found two female heads of MI6 stations abroad in WWII, never heard of previously and hidden by secrecy. This is one example of the kinds of new research that may be unearthed in the future. Women were doing intelligence roles beyond the boundaries of our stereotypical, inherited preconceptions. That this picture is changing from new research is incredibly exciting.
The Second World War made SOE and their female agents famous. Was there other espionage work available?
There were so many other operations. It’s mainly the SOE agents of France who have gained the most attraction so far; but women were parachuted with SOE into Belgium, the Balkans, and other countries; some of their missions still too classified to be released, although we have glimpses of their missions in the files. Women were involved in some exciting MI6 intelligence networks behind enemy lines. I write about them in WiI; for example the White Lady network of WWI and Clarence of WWII. They gathered an extraordinary volume of eyewitness information on the ground, including miliary, industrial and economic intelligence. They operated as heads of sectors behind the lines, agent-handlers, couriers and ran safe-houses. For this, I used archives in Brussels and London. A similar MI6 network existed in France called The Alliance (or Noah’s Ark) that gave its agents the codename of animals. It was headed by a woman, Madame Madeline Fourcade. These stories display the courage, risks and determination of these women to play their part alongside their male colleagues – all united in the fight for freedom.
If Yale were to publish a new edition, is there anything you would change or add?
Standing back from the book now that it has been published, I think the balance is right. I would not change or add anything. There isn’t a story from my research across 25 years that I regret not putting in the book. The roles of women were so vast and diverse – inspirational – that it is never going to be realistic for any one historian to write a definite account. What we should focus on is gradually adding to the panoramic history that WiI has given. Thereby we build a deeper understanding of intelligence history, but importantly, too, the wider history of the Second World War.
Helen Fry is the author of Women in Intelligence, published by Yale University Press. You can listen to Helen on the Aspects of History Podcast.