[Lafayette C Curtis]

Where did the Reiters actually stand in the cavalry classification systems of their age? I've been applying the term rather loosely to both light and heavy forms of firearm-wielding cavalry, but I'm worried that my usage might not actually be correct.

Additionally, "Reiter" doesn't seem to enter into the 17th-century triad of Lancers, Cuirassiers, and Harquebusiers, so I'm wondering about whether the term was still used in a taxonomic sense after the L/C/H classification system crystallized into a definite form. Did it drop out of use, or was it part of a parallel-but-different classification system as in the case of the caliver and the Schutzrohr?

[David Evans]

[Daniel Staberg]

Stricktly spreaking the term Reiter has quite diffrent meanings in the 16th and 17th Centuries. The word it self simpy means "Horseman"
Begining in the mid-16th century the terms "Reiter"&"Schwartzreiter" was applied to German cavalry. The vast majority of them were pistoliers but in the 1550's there were still some bands equipped as light lancers i.e a form of demi-lancer.
These heavier Reiters can be hard to distinguish from the lighter mounted arquebusiers as some armies, notably the Imperial army classified all cavalry with firearms as "mounted arquebusiers" (pferdeschützen & Schwarz Schützen-Reutter) in this period regardess of wether they carried a arquebus or a pistol.

By the 1560's the heavy pistoliers were called "Gerüstete Reiter" in German while light arquebusiers were "Archibusier Ross"/Archibusierpferde/Schützenpferde.

In the last years of the 1590's Dutch and French influence led to changes, the best of the "(Gerüstete) Reiter" became "Kürassieren"/"Curassier Reitern" while both the "Schützenpferd" & the worst equipped of the "Reiter" became Arkebusier-Reuter (aka Bandelier-Reuter, aka Carabiners).

During the TYW the term "Reiter" came into use once more, essentialy it refered to any kind of military horseman armed with pistols and sword but soem soruces suggest that these "horsemen" were distinguished by the fact that they were only armed with offensive arms and made no use of defensive arms. (i.e armour)

[Gordon Frye]

I believe that according to Sir Roger Williams, "Rutters" would be classified as Medium Cavalry, rather than Heavy Cavalry. Likewise Basta and Cruso, his student, would classify them as such. Pretty much anyone in the 16th Century would reserve the title of "Heavy Cavalry" for the full-on Gendarmerie, the hommes d'armes of the compagnies d'ordonnance, and no one else. And there were precious few of those outside of service to the French Crown. The Spaniards had a few in the form of the old Burgundian bandes d'ordonnance, and the English in their companies of ordnance, but that's about it. Cheveaux legér, demi-launtiers, pistoliers (i.e. Reiters), etc. would all fall into the contemporary category of "light horse", which wasn't particularly light at all, but lighter than the Heavy Horse. Arquebusiers á cheval, Border Staves and the like were even lower/lighter on the scale, of course. Thus Reiters would fall neatly into "Medium Horse" by the standards of the day, if they were so inclined to use the term.

On the other hand, by the mid-17th Century, Reiters in 3/4 armour would have been considered Heavy Cavalry indeed.

Cheers!

Gordon

[Lafayette C Curtis]

So I wasn't entirely wrong in using "Reiter" as a generic term? Well, that's a relief. And all the extra information has certainly been quite enlightening.