Comments on: #82f – Capt. John D. Imboden

By: Robert Moore

Robert Moore — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:52:50 +0000

Oh yes, those maps are extemely “tight” and difficult to read. I use a quilting magnifying glass. I said the battery seemed to be facing west, but I should have said what I originally thought, more west, northwest.

By: Harry Smeltzer

Harry Smeltzer — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:06:34 +0000

OK, you made me lug out the maps. I think Bearss means just barely northeast of the house, which would have the Staunton Arty firing NW into Ricketts. I like to think of the battlefield in quadrants, with the Sudley Rd and Warrenton Pike intersection forming roughly NE, SE, SW and NW quadrants. Imboden was in the SE quadrant, Ricketts in the NW, approximately equidistant from the intersection, maybe Imboden a little closer to it. Is that how you picture it?

See what I mean about Bearss’ maps? Too much stuff going on, too wide a scope. Plus I now wear bifocals, so my arms are too short.

By: cenantua

cenantua — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 16:28:58 +0000

OK, it’s the Bearss maps. Nonetheless, from the book accompanying the maps… and as mentioned in the report, Imboden unlimbered his four brass 6-pounders in a depression about 150 yards northeast of the Henry house sometime before 10:30 a.m. According to Imboden’s “Incidents of the First Bull Run” in Battles & Leaders, Vol. 1, pp. 230-33, it was from this position that the battery engaged first Ricketts’ and then Griffin’s batteries. Wouldn’t this mean that Imboden’s guns were facing west?

By: Robert Moore

Robert Moore — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 04:42:00 +0000

I think there is quite a bundle of maps. I have the sets for both 1st and 2nd BR. I’ll have to take a look tomorrow. Not sure if they are the same as the Bearss map study.

By: Harry Smeltzer

Harry Smeltzer — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 03:55:56 +0000

Are you referring to the maps that go along with Bearss’ map study book? I find them to be way too crowded. The text is very detailed, but I think they would have been better off doing about 15-20 maps rather than jamming everything onto six.

By: Harry Smeltzer

Harry Smeltzer — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 03:42:33 +0000

No no! I sincerely thank you for prompting me to check on this further.

And as far as being confused goes, I’m right there with you. Learning as I go – trying to figure this all out. Unfortunately, these reports don’t always reconcile with others or even with themselves.

By: Robert Moore

Robert Moore — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 03:41:15 +0000

Gents,

Speaking of unit positions, are you familiar with the troop movement map sets reproduced by H.E. Howard around 1990? I’ll have to dig mine out, but from what I remember, they are pretty detailed showing positions, sometimes on the half hour (I think).

Robert

By: caswain01

caswain01 — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:20:13 +0000

Harry, Didn’t mean to cause so much work!

But I’m still a little confused. Was Imboden’s first position the hill south of the Stone house, looking north? Or was that his second position? Rickett’s battery is depicted today about 200 to 250 yards south of that point, but that’s close enough for tolerances (and who is to say our “modern” depiction is on the money).

Four hours on the line with 460 rounds expended. With four guns, that is about a round every other minute. Taking in allowances for movement, maybe one round every minute and a half while “in battery”. That’s still a lot of shooting.

The casualty figures are notable for if nothing else to illustrate the one major weakness of artillery on the Civil War battlefield. For human casualties, he lists three serious ones, out of what 80 or so? But for the horses, 31 out of 71, for a loss rate of over 40%. And he mentions harnesses as a loss. Imboden’s battery was close to becoming a “mobility kill.” If Beauregard-Johnston did mount a credible pursuit, how many batteries were like Imboden’s?

And none of his men “quailed.” That’s a word we just don’t much today!

Craig.

By: Imboden’s Report « Bull Runnings

Imboden’s Report « Bull Runnings — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:38:49 +0000

[...] 1 01 2009 If you read my post on Imboden’s Report prior to about 2:30 PM on Jan. 1, you will notice that it looks a little different now. Prompted [...]

By: Harry Smeltzer

Harry Smeltzer — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 18:38:23 +0000

Craig,

The above report seems to be an abridgement of Imboden’s report that appears in Vol. II of The Rebellion Record, on pages 43-45. That report says that the rifles opened up “within 150 yards of our first position”. Also, the text marked “missing” above is included in the Rebellion Record – and it is significant. So, I am going to change this post so the text matches the longer report. Thanks for making me check on it – I think we’re better off now!