Silas Deane: a foreign name to most students, and even to some historians too. His story isn’t fantastic, and he didn’t contribute a whole lot to the United States’ history. However, despite this, he is a phenomenal example that can be utilized to show the difference between what most believe history to be and the truth of what history actually is. The main point of the prologue to After the Fact: The Art of Historical Detection is more than a mere retelling of the dramatic life of Silas Deane. In fact, this story is actually more of a building block that is strategically used in favor of the argument that history, and historians, are more than “couriers between the past and present” that simply “deliver messages without adding to them.” The story of Silas Deane begins with a brief …show more content…
It brings up the point that not all points can be made, but that some seemingly unimportant facts may contribute more than meets the eye to the story. The prologue then delves into a more in-depth tale of the relationship between Deane and Bancroft. It mentions that Bancroft studied in South America before becoming invested in politics and becoming an American spy on the British. It is also revealed that Bancroft and Deane played the London insurance by taking advantage of Bancroft’s inside knowledge of both sides to make a private profit. It was also shown that Deane often skewed the status of the French deliveries of weapons, calling them private to make profits but public to avoid losses. Bancroft, as is later explained, is actually a dual-agent, spying on the Americans for an increased bonus salary from the British. Ben Franklin himself was suspicious of Bancroft’s connection with the British, but did little to stop him. It was also shown that Bancroft was hoping to gain rights from Parliament to create a monopoly on making