Some research goes a long way to explaining why we did the dragoons/mounted infantry.
Yes, there is the reference to Gold's Dragoons. There are also references to "troops of mounted dragoons" or "troops mounted as dragoons" under Captain's Henchmen, Moseley, Wadsworth, Brattle, Newberry, etc. References regarding the following from kpwar.org indicate a higher level of sophistication than just mounted militia for some "dragoons." Additionally, the second reference shows that Connecticut provisioned 500 dragoons in 1673 for possible service against the Dutch. This is probably the reason for the better state of preparedness of the CT dragoons.
"The Second Battle of Nipsachuck illustrates the evolution in the complexity, sophistication, and effectiveness of English tactics (particularly among Connecticut's dragoon companies) as well as the aggressive attack and pursuit strategy employed by Connecticut forces throughout the war. Connecticut was the first colony to field fully integrated units of Colonial and Native soldiers throughout the war; a strategy that greatly contributed to the overall success of Connecticut's King Philip's War."
link
"August 14th, 1673, with the prospect of a war with the Dutch, the Court ordered that the respective Troops in the colony, with "500 Dragoones, be prepared and fitted for service forthwith."
The majority appear that they would be mounted militia armed with used as dragoons, meaning they would typically move to the action and typically dismount to fire. However, most were armed with swords and hatchets as well.
References are in several books, including:
King Philip's War: Based on the Archives and Records of Massachusetts, Plymouth, Rhode Island and Connecticut, and Contemporary Letters and Accounts, with Biographical and Topographical Notes
link
link
kpwar.org/archeology
and many others.
And for the link to the webstore for the figures:
link
looks at some new terrain products, which use space age technology!
