ME 1650 2nd edition

yeap, I've done further looking and the term changed in how it was
used in the US, at first meaning cav. trained to fight as inf as well
(though in the AH game 1776, they are simply mounted inf - which is
where my recollection came from, shame on AH for not being
realistic<g>) but the term has morphed heere over time - and with the
mechanized modern war, I'm not sure what to really call them

--- In mepbmlist@y..., JeremyRichman@c... wrote:

I'm not the historian you guys are, but I do know that
the American Old West had many Englishmen. It seems
likely enough that the origin of the word dragoon came
about just as Mr. Tilley explained and migrated at
some point to America.

Jeremy Richman

--- In mepbmlist@y..., ggiacoppe@a... wrote:
> actually, there is room to disagree...
> I'm thinking the confusion is a cultural/language issue in part
>
>
> taken from a "fan site" of the 1st Cav
>
> 1st Cavalry Division Units have served the nation from 1833 to

the

> present; building a history rich in pride with solid ties to the
> traditions and heritages of the United States Cavalry. The famed

1st

> Cavalry Division was baptized by fire and blood on the western
plains
> in an era of horse-mounted cavalry. Dubbed the "First Team" by

Major

> General Chase, the division has always strived not only to be the
> first, but the best.
>
> By the 1830's it had become apparent that the rapidly expanding
> frontier demanded highly mobile troops capable of tracking down

and

> pursuing the Indians beyond their usual haunts to cover the vast
> expanses of the American West. The roots of the 1st Cavalry

Division

> are found in an answer to those who advocated a mounted military
> force for speed and mobility, yet trained and properly equipped

to

> fight dismounted as well as mounted. In 02 March 1833, the U.S.
> Regiment of Dragoons was constituted in the Regular Army and
> subsequently on 04 March, the Regiment was organized at Jefferson
> Barracks, Missouri, commanded by Colonel Henry Dodge, a former
member
> of the Battalion of Mounted Rangers. Dragoon Lt. Albert M. Lea
> described Colonel Dodge as "a splendid man, soldierly, erect,

with

an
> eagle eye, but lacking in the amenities and grammar."
>
> When the War Department created the U.S. Regiment of Dragoons,

it

> retained a number of the officers of the Battalion of Mounted
> Rangers. Among the commissioned staff of the Dragoons' were a

number

> of experienced infantrymen who were to become famous as

cavalrymen,

> Lt. Colonel Stephen Watts Kearny - 3rd Infantry, Lt. Jefferson

Davis

-
> 1st Infantry and Lt. Philip St. George Cook - 6th Infantry.
However,
> the reorganization did not include any of the enlisted personnel.
> Instead, the Adjutant General, who was responsible for

recruiting,

> sent the officers of the new regiment throughout the different
states
> with directions to recruit an elite unit. The orders emphasized
> aiming for a better class of recruits than usual and for "native
> born" Americans. The Dragoons were flamboyant by any military
> standard. Long hair, colorful scarfs, facial hair and even

earrings

> was adorned by these elite troopers.
>
>
> "U.S. Regiment of Dragoons"
> In the field, enlisted men wore dark-blue wool fatigue jackets
> trimmed with yellow worsted tape around the collar, cuffs and
> shoulder straps. Officers generally retained their dress coats

with

> two rows of brass buttons and gold or yellow epaulets to indicate
> rank; noncommissioned officers wore yellow sleeve chevrons.

Trousers

> were sky blue, with a single yellow leg stripe for enlisted men

and

a
> double stripe for officers and NCOs. Off the parade ground,

headgear

> consisted of the ubiquitous dark-blue round forage cap with its
small
> black leather visor and chin strap. In theory, the Dragoons had a
> yellow band on their caps, but most contemporary illustrations

show

a
> plain blue cap, occasionally with a brass letter indicating the
> wearer's company. The cap of the officers might sport large brass
> stars or such other devices that caught their fancy.
>
> The Dragoons were furnished with equipment representing the

latest

> in 19th Century technology. To carry his weapons, the trooper

wore

> two wide belts of whitened leather crossed on his torso. From the
> left side was suspended an iron scabbard for the heavy,
brass-handled
> horseman's sword, known not so affectionately as "The

Wristbreaker."

> To the right side a belt clip held a Hall-North carbine. It was
> supplemented by one or two huge .54-caliber caplock pistols,
> muzzleloading smoothbores carried in saddle holsters.
>
> The Dragoon version of the Hall-North carbine was a .52-caliber
> smoothbore with a 21-inch round barrel fastened by two bands. It

was

> the first percussion weapon and the first breech loading weapon
> adopted by any government on earth. Being a percussion cap

firearm,

> it was much more reliable in adverse weather conditions than the
> flintlock, which required loose black powder for the priming

charge.

> The percussion system used a small copper cup that held an

explosive

> charge that exploded and ignited the main charge as the hammer

fell.

> Being a breech loading weapon, it was immensely easier to load on
> horseback than a muzzle loader which called for a barrel-length
> ramrod to seat the lead ball projectile on the powder charge.
>
> When the U.S. Regiment of Dragoons were organized, the Western
> Department of the Army (Army of the West) protected the perimeter

of

> the western frontier, a line stretching from Fort Snelling,
> Minnesota, in the north, to Fort Gibson, Arkansas Territory, in

the

> south. At headquarters, Colonel Henry Dodge and Lt. Colonel

Steven

> Watts Kearny mapped the campaign that lay ahead. In the summer of
> 1834, their first western expedition was charged with impressing

the

> restless Pawnee, Kiowa and Comanche Indian Tribes of their

presence

> and force. On 25 June, they joined with the forces of General

Henry

> Leavenworth, commander of the Western Department of the Army, for

a

> two month exploration and survey of the western plains.
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In mepbmlist@y..., "Laurence G. Tilley" <laurence@l...> wrote:
> > ggiacoppe@a... wrote
> > >it's actually a troop type called dragoons
> > No, I'm sorry, but you are not correct. Dragoons were only one
very
> > specific type of mounted infantry, and they are very much from

the

> age
> > of gunpowder - their very name comes from their weapon,

dragoon, a

> short
> > musket. Because it had a short barrel, like a sawn off

shotgun,

it
> > tended to spit fire, like a dragon, hence dragoons. And they
> favoured
> > it, because, you could just about use it from horseback. Which
> sort of
> > makes them part mounted inf, part cavalry doesn't it? And
> ironically,
> > later on, in the British Army (where it still remains in use

for

> some
> > units) it evolved to become the term used for _heavy_ cavalry,

as

> > distinct from lancers and hussars, being the terms used for

light

···

> > cavalry.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

I only remember that Brooke Shields Movie "Blue Dragoon".

···

-----Original Message-----
From: ggiacoppe@aol.com [mailto:ggiacoppe@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 3:46 PM
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: 2nd ed. Thar be dragoons in tham thar hills!

yeap, I've done further looking and the term changed in how it was
used in the US, at first meaning cav. trained to fight as inf as well
(though in the AH game 1776, they are simply mounted inf - which is
where my recollection came from, shame on AH for not being
realistic<g>) but the term has morphed heere over time - and with the
mechanized modern war, I'm not sure what to really call them

--- In mepbmlist@y..., JeremyRichman@c... wrote:
> I'm not the historian you guys are, but I do know that
> the American Old West had many Englishmen. It seems
> likely enough that the origin of the word dragoon came
> about just as Mr. Tilley explained and migrated at
> some point to America.
>
> Jeremy Richman
>
> --- In mepbmlist@y..., ggiacoppe@a... wrote:
> > actually, there is room to disagree...
> > I'm thinking the confusion is a cultural/language issue in part
> >
> >
> > taken from a "fan site" of the 1st Cav
> >
> > 1st Cavalry Division Units have served the nation from 1833 to
the
> > present; building a history rich in pride with solid ties to the
> > traditions and heritages of the United States Cavalry. The famed
1st
> > Cavalry Division was baptized by fire and blood on the western
> plains
> > in an era of horse-mounted cavalry. Dubbed the "First Team" by
Major
> > General Chase, the division has always strived not only to be the
> > first, but the best.
> >
> > By the 1830's it had become apparent that the rapidly expanding
> > frontier demanded highly mobile troops capable of tracking down
and
> > pursuing the Indians beyond their usual haunts to cover the vast
> > expanses of the American West. The roots of the 1st Cavalry
Division
> > are found in an answer to those who advocated a mounted military
> > force for speed and mobility, yet trained and properly equipped
to
> > fight dismounted as well as mounted. In 02 March 1833, the U.S.
> > Regiment of Dragoons was constituted in the Regular Army and
> > subsequently on 04 March, the Regiment was organized at Jefferson
> > Barracks, Missouri, commanded by Colonel Henry Dodge, a former
> member
> > of the Battalion of Mounted Rangers. Dragoon Lt. Albert M. Lea
> > described Colonel Dodge as "a splendid man, soldierly, erect,
with
> an
> > eagle eye, but lacking in the amenities and grammar."
> >
> > When the War Department created the U.S. Regiment of Dragoons,
it
> > retained a number of the officers of the Battalion of Mounted
> > Rangers. Among the commissioned staff of the Dragoons' were a
number
> > of experienced infantrymen who were to become famous as
cavalrymen,
> > Lt. Colonel Stephen Watts Kearny - 3rd Infantry, Lt. Jefferson
Davis
> -
> > 1st Infantry and Lt. Philip St. George Cook - 6th Infantry.
> However,
> > the reorganization did not include any of the enlisted personnel.
> > Instead, the Adjutant General, who was responsible for
recruiting,
> > sent the officers of the new regiment throughout the different
> states
> > with directions to recruit an elite unit. The orders emphasized
> > aiming for a better class of recruits than usual and for "native
> > born" Americans. The Dragoons were flamboyant by any military
> > standard. Long hair, colorful scarfs, facial hair and even
earrings
> > was adorned by these elite troopers.
> >
> >
> > "U.S. Regiment of Dragoons"
> > In the field, enlisted men wore dark-blue wool fatigue jackets
> > trimmed with yellow worsted tape around the collar, cuffs and
> > shoulder straps. Officers generally retained their dress coats
with
> > two rows of brass buttons and gold or yellow epaulets to indicate
> > rank; noncommissioned officers wore yellow sleeve chevrons.
Trousers
> > were sky blue, with a single yellow leg stripe for enlisted men
and
> a
> > double stripe for officers and NCOs. Off the parade ground,
headgear
> > consisted of the ubiquitous dark-blue round forage cap with its
> small
> > black leather visor and chin strap. In theory, the Dragoons had a
> > yellow band on their caps, but most contemporary illustrations
show
> a
> > plain blue cap, occasionally with a brass letter indicating the
> > wearer's company. The cap of the officers might sport large brass
> > stars or such other devices that caught their fancy.
> >
> > The Dragoons were furnished with equipment representing the
latest
> > in 19th Century technology. To carry his weapons, the trooper
wore
> > two wide belts of whitened leather crossed on his torso. From the
> > left side was suspended an iron scabbard for the heavy,
> brass-handled
> > horseman's sword, known not so affectionately as "The
Wristbreaker."
> > To the right side a belt clip held a Hall-North carbine. It was
> > supplemented by one or two huge .54-caliber caplock pistols,
> > muzzleloading smoothbores carried in saddle holsters.
> >
> > The Dragoon version of the Hall-North carbine was a .52-caliber
> > smoothbore with a 21-inch round barrel fastened by two bands. It
was
> > the first percussion weapon and the first breech loading weapon
> > adopted by any government on earth. Being a percussion cap
firearm,
> > it was much more reliable in adverse weather conditions than the
> > flintlock, which required loose black powder for the priming
charge.
> > The percussion system used a small copper cup that held an
explosive
> > charge that exploded and ignited the main charge as the hammer
fell.
> > Being a breech loading weapon, it was immensely easier to load on
> > horseback than a muzzle loader which called for a barrel-length
> > ramrod to seat the lead ball projectile on the powder charge.
> >
> > When the U.S. Regiment of Dragoons were organized, the Western
> > Department of the Army (Army of the West) protected the perimeter
of
> > the western frontier, a line stretching from Fort Snelling,
> > Minnesota, in the north, to Fort Gibson, Arkansas Territory, in
the
> > south. At headquarters, Colonel Henry Dodge and Lt. Colonel
Steven
> > Watts Kearny mapped the campaign that lay ahead. In the summer of
> > 1834, their first western expedition was charged with impressing
the
> > restless Pawnee, Kiowa and Comanche Indian Tribes of their
presence
> > and force. On 25 June, they joined with the forces of General
Henry
> > Leavenworth, commander of the Western Department of the Army, for
a
> > two month exploration and survey of the western plains.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In mepbmlist@y..., "Laurence G. Tilley" <laurence@l...> wrote:
> > > ggiacoppe@a... wrote
> > > >it's actually a troop type called dragoons
> > > No, I'm sorry, but you are not correct. Dragoons were only one
> very
> > > specific type of mounted infantry, and they are very much from
the
> > age
> > > of gunpowder - their very name comes from their weapon,
dragoon, a
> > short
> > > musket. Because it had a short barrel, like a sawn off
shotgun,
> it
> > > tended to spit fire, like a dragon, hence dragoons. And they
> > favoured
> > > it, because, you could just about use it from horseback. Which
> > sort of
> > > makes them part mounted inf, part cavalry doesn't it? And
> > ironically,
> > > later on, in the British Army (where it still remains in use
for
> > some
> > > units) it evolved to become the term used for _heavy_ cavalry,
as
> > > distinct from lancers and hussars, being the terms used for
light
> > > cavalry.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

Middle Earth PBM List - Middle Earth and Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.egroups.com
http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

A possible change to troop types would be to allow Archers to fire before
combat would take place. This would give some benni in purchacing troops to
aquire a combined arms Army. I think this would make things more interesting
and make it worth purchasing archers. Also i agree in making LightInfantry
real bad asses in rough/mountian/& wood tearain. Just some ideas:)!

···

----- Original Message -----
From: <ggiacoppe@aol.com>
To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 12:02 PM
Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: ME 1650 2nd cavalry and infantry

it's actually a troop type called dragoons - no nor from starcraft,
but instead soldiers who fought on foot but had horse transport...
MEPBM could impelemt dragoons I guess I wouldn't care much, it'd be
either LI or HI in combat that moves like cav, and costs maybe just
the mounts?

--- In mepbmlist@y..., "Laurence G. Tilley" <laurence@l...> wrote:
> Stefan Maas <Joker_Macy@g...> wrote
> >Another idea:
> >What about an order to turn Cav into Infantry
> I like the principle, but I don't think it needs another order, just
> some adjustment of the combat algorithm.
>
> It's this idea from table top wargaming, where the cavalry unit was
a
> lead bloke welded to a lead horse, that caused the tradition.
>
> In RL (except as I said before, for the very proud 19th cav) cavalry
> would dismount to fight if the terrain necessitated it.
>
> Likewise, the concept of hi li ma being distinct and separate
creatures
> is poor. You are heavy, light or unarmoured according to what gear
you
> have (usually how lucky or rich you are)
>
> So we need 3 troop types only, cav, inf, and archers. Cav and inf
can
> have any amount of armour they can get, and their effectiveness will
> vary accordingly. Cav automatically count as if they were inf in
any
> terrain other than plains or shore hexes. This may sound harsh,
but you
> must remember that their mobility between battles already gives
them big
> advantages. This is consistent with the fact that much of the
cavalry
> of the pre-Napoleonic era, was in fact what should properly be
called
> mounted infantry.
>
> Regards,
>
> Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

Middle Earth PBM List - Middle Earth and Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.egroups.com
http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

ggiacoppe@aol.com wrote

actually, there is room to disagree...
I'm thinking the confusion is a cultural/language issue in part

??? Your material was very interesting, but it completely
confirmed what I said. That 'dragoon' was not a term used for mediaeval
mounted infantry. He's a guy with a gun, trained to fight on, or off of
his horse. All you've added, is a description of a C19th US parallel.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

ggiacoppe@aol.com wrote

yeap, I've done further looking and the term changed in how it was
used in the US, at first meaning cav. trained to fight as inf as well
(though in the AH game 1776, they are simply mounted inf - which is
where my recollection came from, shame on AH for not being
realistic<g>) but the term has morphed heere over time - and with the
mechanized modern war, I'm not sure what to really call them

So we come back in a circle to my original point. Dragoons, are an
early (but post mediaeval) type of special unit, because they have a
specific, centrally issued weapon, and a regimental designation. This
gives rise to a philosophy of the "troop type". Your dragoon unit is
the one you use for very specific military situations - genocide of the
remote, mobile western Indians in your text. BUT that's not what most
mediaeval mounted infantry are...

Your mediaeval solder is a more pragmatic chap. He doesn't have a
uniform, a unit designation, or tightly defined role. He follows a
banner, as a free man with the right (possibly temporary) to bear arms.
If he's got a pitch fork, he fights with that. If he kills a chap with
armour, or loots successfully he gets armour. IF he is rich enough to
afford a warhorse, AND its food, tackle, and usually a man to look after
it, then rides and maybe fights on horseback. (This btw is one
mediaeval definition of the man-at-arms, and why Richard Devereux
objects so much to the use of the term in MEPBM, he's basically just a
knight who isn't noble, or hasn't been knighted)

Hence, cavalry should fight as infantry, except in terrain where horses
give an advantage. That's what they did in RL. Even in Tudor times,
when the idea of the knight has been stylised, it was considered to be
essential for the knight to be a skilled fighter on foot. If you go to
the Royal Armouries, you can see Henry VIIIs tournament armour. It
comprised 3 suits of plate. The first, has an area of leather or wood,
several inches thick, completely encasing the chest and left arm; the
shied got bolted on; for jousting. The second is heavy plate, for
fighting on foot. The third is field armour - that is sensible armour
that you could actually use in a real battle. Two thirds of the
fighting in a tournament took place on foot. It's only a shadow of what
was taking place on the battlefield 200 years before, but you should not
imagine that they thought warfare was like a joust you'll see in a
Hollywood film - One pass with the lance, oops, chuck it away because
it's broken; one pass with the sword; get off, or get knocked off horse,
and commence fighting on foot. Knights often expected to fight on foot,
right from the start of a battle, and very rich ones like kings, had
specific armour, for each type of function.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/