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.

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 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. ( )

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 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. ( )

Great book that will open your eyes about the women who wore uniforms and fought alongside their male counterparts. ( )

The authors obviously did some extensive research in putting this book together, and I learned quite a lot about how women managed to pass as men during the civil war and have even greater respect for women who had the courage to don the uniform and fight. However, there were some weaknesses and some missing information.

I would have wished for a different method of organization or indexing. It was as though each chapter was an independent entity, with no crossover or acknowledgment of information in other chapters. Women were referenced by both their female names and male identities each time (when known) which became tedious, and the few people that were in every chapter were reintroduced every time with new snippets of information included that would have been good to know earlier in the book. I think a more clear picture would have emerged with a chapter or appendix dedicated to each of a few key people, but I can understand why this wasn't done given the information available and length constraints.

I know a lot of details are unavailable, but the authors didn't explore the implications of some of the women dressing as men before and after the conflict unless it was in the context of freedom and fair wages; there had to have been other reasons, right?

Very little reference was made to the downsides of a women being discovered among men in the service or in a POW camp. There was an awful lot of "rah! rah! all the men were so impressed with the women!" and not much speculation or reference to the downsides (i.e. assaults or negative reactions). ( )