polkadot

so there are a lot of different terms for "cavalry whomst uses a gun to some degree" and IM HERE TO CLARIFY THEM BECAUSE ITS EXTREMELY CONFUSING TO A "RANDOM COOL DUMB SHIT" CONNOISSEUR SUCH AS MYSELF

I will present this as a spectrum from "heavy cav that maybe sometimes had pistols as sidearms" to" cav that focused on ranged fire", and then lastly dragoons who refuse to be categorizable. This is centered on 1500-1650 CE, but cuirassier/dragoon parts are relevant all the way through something like ~1850

Demi-lancer: The last heavy cavalry in europe, basically. Wore lots of armor, although still not as much as previous heavy knights, and would sometimes bring pistols to either fire in small amounts of harassing fire or to actually fire at close range as a way to quickly win a melee fight. After them, it seems you dont see lances used broadly in a category of cavalry very much in europe, and more than 2 pieces of armor is basically gone from cavalry.

Cuirassier: Wore a cuirass and a helmet, arguably the last in-force melee cavalry in europe and last real use of any armor besides helmets, which are still around. Used sabers as their main weapon instead of lances, reflecting how the lance was no longer necessary/useful in the newer eras of infantry and how cavalry tactics intersected with them. They used pistols as a sidearm once they developed into something more distinct from 1600s pistol focused hybrid cavalry.

Pistoleer / Reiter*: So, this is sort of the "generic" category for cavalry in a lot of the 1500s and 1600s. They focused on pistols and also had swords, and they ranged from fully armored(thus "black reiters" with full black armor), to being armored as much as cuirassiers, to sometimes no armor. They'd use hit and run tactics, including more involved ones like the caracole(TRANSLATION: snail. thats all you get). The swords would come out when their shock role/chasing role became relevant, otherwise they defaulted to safer medium ranged harassment.

*So "Reiter" here literally just means "Rider" in german, but has become associated with a specific type of cavalry in English. In German, they would say "German Rider" or "Black Rider" to indicate this role. But in English, that cavalry type just transferred over as "Reiter". Similar for "Ruyter" as a dutch version. A lot of terminology here is very specific to time and place. A word may mean one type of regiment in the late 1500s in X location, mean something else elsewhere, and mean something else in the mid 1600s or something, and the way words crossed languages is funky like with "Reiter".

rude:

Harquebusier / Carabineer(/carabinier/carbineer/carabiner) - Wielding carbines- rifles with shortened barrels that are easier to use from horseback than a full musket/arquebus- these were more like straight up riflemen on horseback. That means theyre cool

also for some reason carabineers eventually ended up usually being another form of melee cavalry with no guns, making their name nonsensical. i love words

Dragoons - Insanely context specific. Dragoon is not a real word it is just a Vague Gesture disguised as a word

Dragoons, at different times and places, ranged from:
-Cheap support cav that worked as laborers/scouts

-Mobile infantry who simply rode to a location, then dismounted to act as line infantry

-The above, but also acting like sabre cavalry when appropriate, somewhat similar to how reiters took on that role when it would work

-Motherfuckers who did everything- firing from horseback, acting like infantry, acting like sabre cavalry

-Occasionally in small instances they seemed to be treated like harquebusiers?

The role is often somewhat tied to cheap, small horses and cheap equipment, which further confuses what's going on with dragoons.

Generally, they seemed to mostly commonly be: Mobile rifle infantry who also acted as sabre cavalry, and often engaged in misc small-scale use like scouting and small scale harassing attacks. Depends on location and time.

Also, in general in this era, cavalry with guns were usually better at small scale harassing than large formation usage, due to coordination issues, and especially later on issues with large formations of cav being too vulnerable to gunfire. Gun cavalry were generally good at fucking up stray units and forcing enemy maneuvers prior to a big battle, rather than being straight up good at killing in a big battle themselves. But, like most cavalry, their morale shock value still was impactful in large battles.

Caveat: This all is the best i can figure it out from internetting, without going in on actual books and primary sources and so on

i think its just funny that:

the most recognizable term for gun cavalry: dragoon

but also: would you like to define dragoon in a simple, short way? god fucking help you, and final fantasy certainly isnt helping either

bonus:

So, people tend to think of Samurai as melee infantry who primarily use katanas, but they actually more often were either using spears or doing horseback archery. They also sometimes used guns from horseback, but its not clear to me how much- guns were definitely a major part of the Sengoku period in any case.

Oh yeah and here's the equivalent of a samurai pulling some Noel Vermillion shit

amazing. just amazing