De Anne Blanton

Before reading this book, I was aware of one or two women who fought in the U.S. Civil War disguised as men. After reading this book, I now know that there were many more than one or two. It seems like women soldiers were an open secret during the war, and many, if not most, of the combatants were aware that there were women in their midst.

With few surviving letters or journals written by women soldiers, the authors pieced together mentions of women soldiers from official records, newspaper show more accounts, letters and journals written by men who served, and memoirs and recollections of war veterans. The bibliography and end notes show evidence of extensive research, yet much of the evidence is indirect. The authors accepted at face value the account of Melverina Elverina Peppercorn’s service as recounted in the 1916 memoir of Elizabeth Avery Meriwether, yet Melverina and her brother Alexander the Great don’t appear in contemporary censuses, Find-a-grave memorials, etc. It seems more likely that Melverina was either a pseudonym for someone whose identity Meriwether wanted to protect or a composite of women who served in the Civil War. show less

The authors' research into the topic shows that many more women fought in combat roles in the United States Civil War on both sides of the conflict that most of us suspect. Being caught usually meant they were sent home, but sometimes they were moved to non-combative roles such as the nursing. The authors also acknowledge that because so many used assumed male names, we may never know the true extent of the female battlefield presence. Excavations at battlefields such as Shiloh show women's show more bodies among the corpses. While the authors used some official records, they also used "recollections." In the case of one unusual name who allegedly fought from Tennessee, all references were to such a source. Not once did the authors attempt to prove the person or her brother's existence through the census or through official records. Another LibraryThing user and I attempted to find traces and concluded this person should have been omitted until existence could be proven. While the book is eye-opening about the extent of female involvement in combat, the reliance upon less trustworthy documents sometimes weakens it. show less

There is some very interesting information here about trans men in 1860s America. Unfortunately the authors themselves don't seem to realize they are writing about trans men as well as cis women.

Reviewed Jan 2007

Picked this up on a used book outing Mary and the kids. Really enjoyed (esp. the photographs) and learned a lot. Sadly it is not possible to know how many women actually served but it looks like several hundred not thousands. The authors point is that women who passed as men did so for “economic privileges and social opportunities otherwise closed to them. By taking a male social identity, they secured for themselves male power and independence, as well as full status as show more citizens of their nation.” (p.5) It seems that it wasn’t all that difficult for women to sneak in as the medical search was almost unheard of, they checked feet and teeth mainly. Also because young boys were also enlisting, most women passed for boys. Close quarters n army life were not a total challenge. Many soldiers sought privacy when reliving themselves and almost no washing or clothes changing was one for months at a time for everyone. Periods were probably hidden or skipped from stress overwork and bad nutrition. Women joined up for many of the reasons men did, but also to be with loved ones. Some who helped hide their gender and others did not know they were nearby but watching them. Women may have died in higher percentages because they refused to go to hospitals where their gender would have been revealed. When found out many women often tried again with a different name in a different regiment. 2-2007 show less