18th-19th Century European Cavalry >Hussars >Dragoons >Cuirassiers

No tradition.

>>2924803
This
American armed forces copied Europoop armies. Oh how the times have changed

at the end of the day you don't need a bunch of fancy ways of saying "I'm a guy on a horse that has a pointy stick"

File: US Civil War Volunteer Militia-26.jpg (217KB, 891x1230px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 891x1230px

>>2924798
2 Answers

1) North America was wild and rough terrain. So much so that there will be times when cavalry is pretty much useless. As such, American cavalry was basically an entirely dragoon force of pretty much mounted infantry.

2) Americans sortaaa did have specialized cavalry types early in the 19th Century. This was because the US Standing Army was tiny as fuck, and in wartime, the US Military would be reliant on Volunteer Militias raised by the individual states. And States were highly irregular in raising militias: they both raise their own, and they also include private armies raised by private individuals who pooled their resources together to buy their own uniforms and weapons.

Most private militia groups were infantry but some were cavalry- composed usually of middle class or rich partiotic cunts. These men often memed themselves in the image of European cavalrymen, resorting to discrepancies of military doctrine between the regular army and the volunteers. Some of the most notable was the National Lancers, a militia group from Massachusetts who were the self-appointed bodyguards of their governor, who were the only formal Lancer unit in the Union Cavalry during the American Civil War.

>>2924803

only the traditions brought with them, they in fact did not spring into being from out the ether

>>2924812

naturally...

>>2924819

at one point in the 19th century there was a hussar regiment somewhere that had a similar story