"Mounted Philly Associators" Topic

Mounted Philly Associators slog their way down a rain swollen road.
I wanted something different for my Philly Troop and decided on a muddy road scenerio. These are the results.

This was a very difficult project. It required patience, which is something I am generally in short supply of. There was a lot of overnight drying and touching up. And more touching up. And even more touching up, until it looked right to me.
The bases are resin castings of roads and rivers, made by a guy on TMP, who's name I cannot recall.
The figures are stock Perry castings, painted by the talented Pep Dominguez. The flag is GMB. All of the terrain work was done by me. I took a lot of pix because there are 3 separate pieces. 

It's not easy to get "mud" to look right. A lot of hours went into these pieces. I'm satisfied with them.

url=https://postimg.org/image/a4ht25taz/]

‌

url=https://postimg.org/image/yxrd2trqz/]

‌

url=https://postimg.org/image/rujhn8h6j/]

‌

url=https://postimg.org/image/55uanncnf/]

‌

url=https://postimg.org/image/hx8gu5u57/]

‌

url=https://postimg.org/image/n8ndew3d7/]

‌

url=https://postimg.org/image/l430drrfv/]

‌

url=https://postimg.org/image/5vd301frv/]

‌

url=https://postimg.org/image/w3o7pf7l7/]

‌

url=https://postimg.org/image/hx8gu74fv/]

‌

url=https://postimg.org/image/bjjdqyezf/]

‌

url=https://postimg.org/image/5ilotvknf/]

‌

Very nice work. Well done.

Superb mud.

David F Brown

Yes, great job on the mud.

Superb

The painting is superb, very well done. The uniforms appear red in the photos. I always thought that the Light Horse of the City of Philadelphia were uniformed in brown faced white. BTW it may interest some that this unit is still around and is part of PA National Guard.

The uniforms are brown. Must be the pix.

I didn't want to be THAT GUY and bring up brown….
My son deployed with the Light Horse to Kuwait a few years ago.

When was the Philadelphia City Troop of Light Horse made part of the Philadelphia Associators?

Kevin, I too have a book collection. However, my copy of Seymour is out on loan, so I'll have to wing it.
The Philadelphia Light Horse (they have had many names) were certainly not militia. Nor were they Continentals.
What they were, was a collection of wealthy gentlemen who associated together to form a unit of light horse. Again, I don't have Seymour handy, but this was in 1774 or 1775, if not earlier. They bought their own uniforms, equipment and horses. They trained regularly.
That sounds exactly like what the Associators did. And apparently they were quite good at their job.
If technically speaking, they were not officially part of the Associators, it is a distinction without a difference.
If it quacks like a duck…

If they were not part of the Associators, then they weren't associators. Facts are facts, like it or not.

Anyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts.

The Light Horse of the City of Philadelphia came into existence on 17 November 1774.

The Associators of Philadelphia were formed as companies of Volunteer Militia on 21 November 1747.

In early 1775 there were only two companies of Associators, both infantry units. By August 1775 the Associators had four infantry battalions, one rifle battalion, and artillery battalion, and the City Guards, which was a type of auxiliary police force. No cavalry was listed.

In late 1776 or early 1777 the Associators were reorganized as the Philadelphia Brigade commanded by Brigadier General Cadwalader. The name 'Associators' then disappeared from the rolls.

The light horse company was an independent unit and was not 'associated' with the Associators.

Regarding the light horse, they retained their title and their independence throughout.

When was the Philadelphia City Troop of Light Horse made part of the Philadelphia Associators?

Two days ago. By order of their Commanding Officer, me.

Seriously, that's my mistake. I just used associators as a generic term, rather than the correct Light Horse.

No matter. My troops, my call.

When will we see pix of your figures, Kevin?
I don't recall ever seeing a single picture of any of your work. Let's see your Light Horse. Or anything.

It's easy to criticize when you have nothing to show for yourself. So, let's see.

I didn't criticize the work.

I haven't painted models for awhile and am busy restoring some Old Britains.

The Associators of Philadelphia were formed as companies of Volunteer Militia on 21 November 1747.

Since you started the nit picking, it's my turn at bat.

Volunteers, definitely yes.
Militia? No.
Ben Franklin started the Associators precisely because the Philadelphia centered pacifist Quaker Assembly (Legislature?) adamantly refused to authorize, let alone support a "militia". That is why they called themselves "Associators". The Frontier was undefended, and the Associators filled that need.
As you correctly noted, they were founded in the middle of King George's War. AKA War of Jenkins Ear. AKA War of Austrian Succession. The French were doing the usual, sending Indians to attacking the frontier, and Philadelphia was an easy target. With the Quaker Assembly doing nothing to support a militia, the Associators came in to being. NOT a militia. "Militia" implies government support. There was none.

You have regulars and then you have militia. Sometimes you have volunteer militia, such as the Associators. That is still a militia unit-though they were uniformed, organized, and trained.

See Military Uniforms in America: The Era of the American Revolution edited by John Elting and produced by The Company of Military Historians, 104.

The Provincial Congress of Pennsylvania 'gave a cautious establishment' to the new units by stating 'Proceedings are not disapproved.' They also issued commissions to the Associator officers.

However reluctantly the Provincial Congress of Pennsylvania gave permission for the Associators to be formed, it was the provincial government that formed them and chose their officers.

You might also want to take a look at The Pennsylvania Associators, 1747-1777 by Joseph Seymour.