...This is such a coincidence I just published my book which I started right about the time of this picture. It is about the over 400 women who dressed as men to serve as soldiers in the War...Along with being historically acurate it is also a coming of age story
I'm gonna push back there. Women as soldiers in the CW is very much overplayed. There's little verifiable evidence that many, if even a dozen or two, of those "over 400" made it much past days or weeks before being discovered, escorted out or leaving on their own. In any event the "over 400" figure is a derived speculation. Since women did not muster in with their woman names there just isn't a reliable accounting of the phenomenon.
It's also a bit disingenuous to spin camp followers, such as Vivandiers, girlfriends and wives as soldiers, when their primary motivation and role was to be there and assist their men
in any way they could, and typically only during long-term and winter camp. (That's
not to say there weren't women motivated solely by their own patriotism and duty).
Some women, like boys and black men before 1863, would be taken into a unit as mascots -- i.e. given uniforms, "rank" and camp duties. Some would have guns and know how to use them, in the same way that pioneers generally knew how to handle a gun.
Now how did the exaggeration of the level of their participation as soldiers come about?
CW and post-CW newspapers enhanced individual accounts and reminisces, particularly home town newspapers. The stories are appealing; a mere sprinkle of authentication generally enough to carry them at the time. We attempt today to cite them as evidence or proof, of which they are neither, in a general trend to "empower women and girls."
Let's be honest about that (btw I'm all for that. I have a strong Mom, Wife and daughter and wouldn't have it any other way),
but this kind of enhancement is not the way to do it. Such accounts should be treated with the same skepticism and alternate source research as any other type of CW claim made in the mode of family reminisces or newspaper articles.
Anyway there are scores of legitimate verifiable accounts of brave and capable women in the Civil War: home front, nurses (many officially enlisted in the army), sanitary commission, contraband teachers, inspiring public speakers, fund raisers, and even some spies. These are more than enough to be proud of without having to stretch mere mentions or newspaper clips into full-blown legions (i.e. "over 400") of women who served any length of time at all as soldiers.
Did some women serve as enlisted soldiers through many campaigns? Yes, and verified. Don't make more of it, imho.