Features appear in each issue of Pennsylvania Heritage showcasing a variety of subjects from various periods and geographic locations in Pennsylvania.

Over the years the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has amassed a rich treasure of source materials for re­search and writing on Pennsylvania history.* The archival, manuscript, and microfilm holdings of the Pennsylvania State Archives are certainly significant as they relate to doing research on the era of the American Revolution, 1763 to 1790. It is unfortunate that these research re­sources located in Central Pennsylvania have been over­looked by reputable scholars and even by compilers of com­prehensive national finding “Guides.”

The intent of this article is two-fold: (1) to provide information on the wide range of resources available at the Pennsylvania State Archives as these relate to the study of the American Revolution, and (2) to suggest topics and subject areas worthy of research and investiga­tion inasmuch as there still remains much work to be done in “Penn’s Vineyard.”

Many important monographs on the revolutionary period have been published by such scholars as J. Paul Selsam, Theodore Thayer, Robert Brunhouse, David Hawke and John Hutson. In addition, countless articles and over 100 doctoral dissertations have been written on the subject. Yet, much of the above work was prepared without having spent any or little research time at the Pennsylvania Archives. To be sure, the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, which is one of the country’s great research facilities, is the starting place for any study of Pennsylvania’s revolutionary history. Nevertheless, researchers should bear in mind two essential facts: first, they need to consult firsthand the official records of the revolutionary years as well as the private collections; and, second, they need to realize that the published and unpublished studies cited above only represent the tip of the iceberg.


Research Resources

In Pennsylvania the official records, manuscripts, and microfilm resources are held by the three principal de­positories and/or agencies: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (PHMC); the Pennsylvania State Library, and the Bureau of Land Records. While the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has assembled a large body of research materials, complete records of the revolutionary period cannot be found at Harrisburg. Until the establish­ment of the state archives in 1903, no single agency of the Commonwealth had the responsibility for the care of its scattered records. Consequently, there was the inevitable attrition resulting from theft, mutilation by autograph hunters, improper storage, and destruction by accident or by custodians and printers unappreciative of their worth. During the nineteenth century state documents appeared regularly in book auctions and in sale catalogues. As the late Roy Nichols wrote: “Either there was a rationalization that, since the documents were now in print (referring here to the printed Pennsylvania Archives), there was no further need to give them space in cluttered offices, or perhaps some interested parties saw a chance for gain.” The indif­ference to archives in Pennsylvania was, of course, all too common in the original thirteen states.

I estimate that the state archives possesses a relatively modest percentage of the official records and papers of the revolutionary era for Pennsylvania. In light of the slow growth of preservation concerns and of archival practices, this percentage perhaps constitutes a better record than one might first imagine. Fortunately many of these missing public papers are still to be found in various private collec­tions within the state at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, and American Philosophical Society, and the His­torical Society of Western Pennsylvania. These public papers are also scattered in local historical societies and various state archives along the eastern seaboard. In this age of microfilm, photocopy, and interlibrary loan, however, a researcher can easily overcome the obstacles of. distance and expense.

Before focusing on the Pennsylvania State Archives, which manages the great bulk of the archives and re­cords of the Commonwealth, two supplemental research units should not be overlooked. One important state depository is the Bureau of Land Records, which is the oldest continuously existing office in the state, circa, 1682. The Land Office contains documents and land warrants relating to state boundaries. Donation Lands (land in western Pennsylvania given to members of the Penn­sylvania Line, for a nominal sum, as payment for service in the Revolutionary War) and Depreciation Lands (certi­ficates issued to troops of Pennsylvania, enlisting them to purchase land in the western part of the Commonwealth because of the depreciation of their salary due to inflation). At any rate, these records have been thus far largely ignored by researchers.

The Pennsylvania State Library, located also in Harris­burg, is a second important research facility. It holds valuable Pennsylvania Imprints, newspapers, and a very good run of the “Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of the Province and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.” A Rare Books section (some 5,000 titles) was created in 1965, including not only the work of notable revolutionary figures but also the titles of a host of lesser figures. Thus, the PHMC, along with the State Library and the Land Office, comprise an important research network.

The Division or Archives and Manuscripts of the Penn­sylvania Historical and Museum Commission holds the largest and richest research resources of the revolutionary period. Thus far, as noted earlier, the record suggests that genealogists, historians and generalists, if you will, have barely scratched the surface of available historical materials located there. Needless to say, the understaffed Bureau of Archives and History must shoulder some of the respon­sibility for the researchers’ lack of familiarity and use of its sources.

It is widely held that research tools often determine the message in that they pinpoint source material. Unfortunately the Division of Archives and Manuscripts, like so many institutions, started late in the arrangement of documents and in the preparation of finding aids. The last four impor­tant finding aids were published in the years 1966 to 1968. ** Important work is again going forward in these areas to assist researchers. Under the direction of Harry E. Whipkey, three important full-size guides (with indexes) describing the division’s map collection (at press). manuscript groups (December, 1976) and record groups (1978) will be pub­lished. In addition, Associate Historian John B. B. Trussell has completed a useful reference study of the Pennsylvania Line, which should pave the way for a number of thematic studies by specialists. Other work being done to aid research on the American Revolution includes a full­-length study on Valley Forge and a number of Commission leaflets. The extensive project to prepare military abstract cards for Revolutionary war service is nearly com­pleted. Finally. budgeted for next year will be the “Guide” (with name index) to the microfilmed “Records of Penn­sylvania’s Revolutionary Governments, 1775-90.”

Because of the wide range and sheer bulk of the source materials available for reconstructing the many aspects of the American Revolution, no brief summary can do justice to give them proper credit. In sampling the available collec­tions, one can at least present a large picture of the range of subjects and topics that they touch. With regard to sources, there are three broad categories to be analyzed: (1) Manu­script Groups; (2) Microfilmed Manuscripts and Newspapers relating to Pennsylvania History; (3) official records of the Pennsylvania’s governments, 1763-90.

There are approximately twenty manuscript groups that contain material relating to the American Revolutionary era. In terms of cubic feet of material, these manuscripts are not significant. Yet, pertinent items are to be found in the following groups or collections: Military Manuscripts, Baynton, Wharton, Morgan, Burd-Shippen Family, Edward Hand, Hiester Family, Edward Shippen Thompson, Jasper Yeates, John Franklin, John Mitchell, and the Willing, Morris, Swanwick Company Records. In the Pennsylvania Collection (Miscellaneous Manuscripts). for which there is an index card file, one can find letters of prominent figures of this period: Clement Biddle, William Bingham. Thomas Bradford, Tench Coxe, Charles Pettit, Thomas Fitzsimons, Joseph Galloway, Francis Hopkinson, Thomas Mifflin, Thomas McKean, Robert Morris, Timothy Pickering, Daniel Roberdeau and Charles Thomson. This listing by no means exhausts the store of manuscripts at the PHMC.

In the course of the research and publications program of the Commission, the Pennsylvania State Archives has also gathered significant research materials such as manuscripts, photostats, transcripts, theses, periodicals and newspapers from a variety of institutions and depositories. A large percentage of this material is on microfilm, and some of these collections have restrictions placed on them. (This means that when quoting this material the researcher must seek the permission of the original depository). With re­gard to manuscripts, the more notable collections bear the names of: Sir Jeffrey Amherst, Henry Bouquet, Thomas Gage, Henry Clinton, George Washington, Joseph Reed, Draper Collection (Correspondence of Daniel Brodhead, Josiah Harmar, William Irvine, etc.). Denny-O’Hara, Josiah Harmar, Moravian Archives, Pennsylvania Miscellaneous, Sullivan Expedition, and the Diaries and Journals of John Jenkins, John Hays, and Rufus Barringer. Also, the Commission possesses six microfilm reels of Papers of the Con­tinental Congress, 1774-89, that relate specifically to affairs in Pennsylvania (i.e., Committee Reports, Indian affairs, Pennsylvania State Papers, Letters of Maj. Gen. Henry Knox). In the newspaper collection, one will find significant runs of newspapers for Philadelphia {61 reels) and scattered issues for other areas of the Commonwealth of Pennsyl­vania. This is a valuable, although frequently overlooked, resource. Since time is crucial to a researcher, an awareness of these microfilmed materials could be highly beneficial. More details are available in the 1959 “Preliminary Guide to the Research Materials of the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission” and in the listing for Record Group 41, “Records of the W.P.A. Pennsylvania Historical Survey, 1933-42.”

The holdings of official records of the Pennsylvania State Archives consists of approximately 18,000 cubic feet in 45 record groups. Of this amount around 150 cubic feet deal with the American Revolutionary period. One will find pertinent material in five or six different record groups; however, the most significant items are to be found in three of these: RG 4, “Records of the Office of the Comptroller General”; RG 21, “Records of the Provincial Council, 1682-1776”; and RG 27, “Records of Pennsylvania’s Supreme Executive Council 1777-90,” which is to be renamed “Records of Pennsylvania’s Revolutionary Governments, 1775-90.”

The records of the Comptroller General are those docu­ments which are received or created by John Nicholson. Since the office was created to liquidate and to settle claims against the Commonwealth during and after the war, these documents represent a significant segment of the story of the Revolution in Pennsylvania. They enlarge upon the Revolutionary Records, first by furnishing the “nitty gritty” details on the war effort in terms of money, manpower, and material, and second, by supplying material which is not fully reported in the Minutes of the Supreme Executive Council. In addition, there are some 35 cubic feet of material dealing solely with military accounts, absentee returns, pension accounts, militia exempt books, militia fines, exonerations and military loan accounts. Although genealogists have used these records to a far greater degree than historians, it is expected that these valuable records will soon be microfilmed (with an appropriate finding aid) in order to protect them from damage that would result from repeated reference requests and handling.

Regarding the “Records of the Provincial Council 1682-1776,” there are approximately 300 items that relate to the period of 1763-76. (This collection was microfilmed in 1966, with an accompanying “Guide”). The official records, however, only partially detail the coming of the Revolution in Pennsylvania, and researchers should read them along with the Minutes of the Provincial Assembly. It seems that interpretative studies of this pivotal event have been based largely on the manuscript collections bearing the name of prominent figures of the era rather than derived from the close scrutinizing of the official records.

Record Group 27, the “Records of Pennsylvania’s Revolutionary Governments, 1775-90,” is potentially the most important record group available for historical use. Under a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities, PHMC is presently preparing an edited micro­film publication of these official records with an accompanying “Guide” and name index. For more than a century students of Pennsylvania history overlooked this historically valuable collection because the records of the revolutionary governments were not all that usable for purposes of efficient reference and research. Instead, researchers had to rely on the printed Colonial Records (Volumes X-XVI) and the Pennsylvania Archives (Volumes IV-XII), later known as the “First Series,” and other pertinent sections in subsequent series published in the following decades. This publishing venture which occurred during the decade before the Civil War contained an element of jobbery because the publishing was paid for according to the number of pages printed.

Samuel Hazard selected and edited these volumes under a state appointment. Given the size of the collection of papers and the restrictions placed on the editor by the Gen­eral Assembly, Hazard undertook an enormous assignment. Hazard’s edition, although more scholarly than subsequent series, is still haphazard in character. It is filled with omissions, alterations, arbitrary arrangement, occasional mistakes in transcription and typographical errors. The General Index to the Colonial Records and the Pennsylvania Archives, later known as the First Series, has to be used with caution. Perhaps the individual indexes to each volume are more reliable. “The Colonial Records were issued,” as Lyman H. Butterfield has written, “without benefit of editorial atten­tion, being a mere clerical and printing job that was sneaked through the Assembly in bills relating to the promotion of silk culture and the like.” The archival and editorial enter­prise of 150 years ago was no doubt characterized by immense zeal and by patriotism. Despite the editorial de­fects, some scholars have succeeded in using the monu­mental printed archives rather well. And, given the neglect and vandalism in later years, a good many of the documents of the Revolution are known only in their printed form. In short, the legislature acted none too soon. The significance is that historical preservation and scholarly inquiry are re­lated.

More specifically, the records of Pennsylvania’s revolu­tionary governments embrace the records of a number of extra-legal revolutionary bodies or institutions. These in­clude: the Committee of Safety, 1775-76; the Council of Safety, 1776-77; the (Second) Council of Safety, 1777; and the General Correspondence of the Presidents of the Supreme Executive Council and the Secretary of Council, both incoming and the (rough and fair) copy of the out­going. In addition, Record Group 27 includes the records of the State Navy Board, 1777; the Board of War, 1777; and the Council of Censors, 1783-84. The total volume of manuscript material would be 43 cubic feet. In terms of manuscript pages, the count would be more than 60,000 pages.

Supplementing and amplifying the executive correspon­dence and the minutes are the records of the government of Pennsylvania relating to various topics which have been arranged in subsections or subgroups. For example, there are items filed under Clemency, 1775-90; Appointments (political and military) 1775-90; Forfeited Estates, 1777-90; Application for Passes, 1776-88; Oaths of Allegiance, 1777-90; Military Returns, 1775-90; and Election Returns, 1777-90. Based on the above material alone, there will be approximately 5,000 one-line entries in the “Guide.” In every possible case, complete dossiers were arranged by name, occupation and date or by township, county and date.


Research Opportunities

Overall, the official records from Record Groups 4, 21, and 27 will be enormously useful for reconstructing the Revolutionary war years. Based on personal investigation and evaluation of these collections, I can see that these sources should lead to the publication of numerous articles (major and minor) and should serve as the basis for any number of monographs. A survey of research opportunities at the Pennsylvania State Archives, State Library, and Land Office follows.

At the 1974 Research Conference, sponsored by the Pennsylvania Historical Association, in cooperation with the PHMC, Associate Historian Trussell analyzed the writings on Pennsylvania history produced in the five-year period 1969-73. He found that the topic of the American Revolution received the greatest coverage in periodical articles, although the number of books was small. Unfortunately, he found that the same personalities and events, such as Benjamin Franklin and Valley Forge, domi­nate the field. My own investigation reveals that the trend continues. There are clearly a number of institutions and a number of personalities and events in the 1770’s and 1780’s that deserve further research. If the following topic sugges­tions are probably more suitable for articles, they would, nevertheless, require a thorough combing of the sources, manuscript and printed, which should make for a scholarly effort that would be both rewarding and meaningful.

What about the existing monographic literature? Scholar­ship on the pre-revolutionary years is plentiful, and it has been reflective of newer trends. Not so for the revolu­tion and post-revolution years. The classic studies of politics in Pennsylvania from 1776-90 by Theodore Thayer, J.Paul Selsam and Robert Brunhouse still remain the essential starting points for research. Obviously, researchers have paid less attention to these years than to the pre-1776 years. New thinking on the subject of the Revolutionary period is needed to transcend the democratic-oligarchic, West-East, farmer-businessman, poor-rich conceptual dichotomies which structures the evidence of the existing literature. In the process of reinvestigation and reconcep­tualization, it would be extremely useful to have a great many community, township and county histories of the event (i.e., see the study of Chester County by James Lemon and the community study of Germantown by Stephanie Grauman Wolf. Perhaps, with new local histories as a basis, something more than a Radical-Conservative framework would emerge to account for the patterns of leadership recruitment and electoral support and for the shifts which occurred in these patterns over the fifteen-year period.

The primary institutions of the revolutionary era do give the period unity and uniqueness. Certainly the inaug­uration of the new Commonwealth under the Constitution of 1776 and the development of governmental institutions and practices represents one starting point. Yet, two hundred years later, still needed is an administrative history of the Supreme Executive Council of Pennsylvania, 1777-90, which was the successor to the Committee and Council of Safety, 1775-77. Also needed are modern studies of the Commonwealth’s Revolutionary Presidents (Governors) and members of the officialdom. Joseph Reed, David Ritten­house and John Nicholson have had a biographer. It is difficult to understand why no new biographies have been written about George Bryan since 1922 or of John Dickin­son since 1891. New biographical sketches are also needed of such prominent local figures as William Moore, Robert Whitehill, Timothy Matlack, Jonathan Dickinson Sergeant, Jacob Morgan, Robert Levers, Capt. Joseph Blewer and Owen Biddle. Modern scholarly military studies are also needed covering the careers of Edward Hand, Anthony Wayne, Arthur St. Clair and William Irvine. And while a new biography of Thomas McKean can be applauded, still needed are works on such prominent continental figures from Pennsylvania as Robert Morris. Charles Thomson, and Charles Pettit. There are many other persons who were not movers and shakers of events, but they represent individuals who need to be assessed in order to complete the picture of the revolutionary era. Thus, with a little imagination, article opportunities surely exist to do studies of politicians and army officers of lesser rank.

Scholars have written about the political history in the revolutionary and post-revolutionary years, a time in which Pennsylvanians experimented with both popular and party governments without examining the record of executive appointments, both political and military. The relationship between the Supreme Executive Council and the Board of War in making appointments as well as the division of autho­rity between the Assembly and executive bodies also re­quires further study. A relevant set of appointment papers and appointment books (consisting of individual petitions, recommendations, appointment letters and commissions) is available. (There will be more than 1,200 individual entries by name in the appointments section of the “Guide”). These appointment records contain important information, and as such the documents are superior to the groundless rumors and elitist biases contained in newspapers and pri­vate correspondence. No doubt answers to the above questions will add much to the often told story of state party developments as well as the origins to the “first party system.”

In reopening the discussion on some of the political themes of the revolution, it might further point to the need to reformulate the era in terms of class. For example, class antagonisms and rather sophisticated political forms dominated urban Philadelphia as well as the inland towns of Lancaster and York. It is generally claimed that Pennsylvania had a “real” revolution, yet how much class con­flict existed between rich and poor and the internal elites has not been adequately measured. Such a probe would also lead to an analysis of the diversitY of allegiances of the common people in the Revolution, about what side they chose- or did not choose- in the conflict of patriot against Britain. Lower class white loyalism and black loyalism existed, each for their respective motives, but no such study pertaining to Pennsylvania has been published. These themes suggest, of course, that the older stereotypes of “patriot,” “loyalist” and “neutral” are of limited value when categorizing large numbers of people. So, too, historians need to discard the traditional patriotic stereotype about women in the revolution (i.e., the tokenism of a Molly Pitcher and a Deborah Sampson). and historians need to provide a broader perspective that deals with roles, divisions and individual and group perceptions. Ethnic religious studies, such as work done by Owen Ireland, are also needed. Fortunately, work in these areas is growing for Pennsyl­vania and perhaps the fruits of these efforts will soon be seen.

The question of the economic origins of the Revolution, which was long ignored by historians, in recent years, has been given a lift due to the research of Joseph Ernst. For Pennsylvania, economic topics have been comparatively neglected. The perceptive lead of Louis Hartz, who wrote Economic Policy and Democratic Thought: Pennsylvania, 1776-1860 (1948). has not been followed. We need to assess the economic assumptions underlying the debate over political and constitutional issues especially as these ques­tions relate to the “Keystone State.” If this line of inquiry is pursued beyond elite circles, it may be possible to con­struct not only a political economy of the merchant and planter classes but a related political economy of farmers and artisans. Work in this area has been initiated by Jacob Cooke (Tench Coxe) and by Charles Olten (the mechanics of Philadelphia) and the writer’s work on John Swanwick and Charles Pettit. Studies on the political economy of Pelatiah Webster and Hugh Henry Brackenridge could prove useful as well. Much work also needs to be done on public policy, the relations of business and government, state banking and banking policies, American corporations, individual businessmen and land speculation.

Of all the major subcategories of the discipline, social history topics appear to offer the greatest promise for future research. For example, the clemency subgroup of the re­cords of “Pennsylvania’s Revolutionary Governments” constitutes an untapped treasure of more than 2,200 items. It can be used to measure the impact the revolutionary war had on the society in Pennsylvania, particularly as it affected families, fatherless households, and children reared in a war-torn environment. Few have realized that during the war “affective” concerns for family and loved ones transcended allegiance to a political cause. The file is equally rich in assessing the response of civil authorities to fornication, bastardy and adultery and other capital crimes. Finally, an appreciation of how prisoners of war dealt with their plight and how the state law favored whites can also be gleaned from both executive and judicial records.

Respecting the social consequences of the American Revolution, official records of the Pennsylvania Archives will be most useful to researchers pursuing this neglected topic. Historians can be grateful for the work of John Alexander, Charles Olten, Gary Nash and James T. Lemon. Their combined efforts should spark other studies. The work of Henry Young has done much to enlighten researchers of “Treason and Its Punishment in Revolutionary Pennsylvania” and of loyalism. Still, a county-by-county investigation of the disposition of loyalist estates would be useful. Perhaps then valid generalizations can be drawn either to support or to refute Jameson’s thesis. Jesse Lemisch’s call for historians to investigate the past from the vantage point of the average people-“the powerless, the inarticulate, (and) the poor” can also be realized at the Pennsylvania Archives. It should point, however, not only to the impressment by the Royal Navy of American Seamen but also to the impressment by officers of the Continental and State Navy of indentured servants, blacks, and other “lesser sort.”

Concerning minorities and neglected groups, sections of the collection perhaps might best be utilized to show people in motion and to examine crowd behavior patterns during the revolution. In using these documents to analyze human interaction, social historians should be able to resort to and to employ any combination of approaches and techniques such as collective biography, family (kinship) history, aggregative analysis, interdisciplinary. Quantitative method, as well as “history from the bottom up.” ***

Along with stressing the opportunity for research in political, economic and social history areas, something needs to be said regarding military subjects. Until recent years, the preoccupation of historians with the war in and around Philadelphia during the years 1776-78 too often resulted in less attention being paid to military operations of the Western Department out of Fort Pitt. Thus, a scholarly study that focuses on the war on the western frontier would seem to be in order. This large canvass of the frontier aspects of the revolution should no doubt shed light on the careers of Gen. Lauchlan Mcintosh, Daniel Brodhead, William Irvine, and Archibald Lochry. It should also lead to further research on the Indians, particularly the Senecas. At present, adequate biographical treatment of Cornplanter and several other prominent Indian figures is also lacking. The kind of work begun by Frances Jennings, who has explored the interplay of politico-legal institutions of specific European and Indian communities in contact in New England, ought to be done for Pennsylvania.

Second, a scholarly study on the Pennsylvania militia is long overdue. In pursuit of this objective, it might be advisable to start with a number of county histories con­cerning militia activity, and the administrative problems faced by the county lieutenants and sub-lieutenants. Such an effort should prove not only significant to understand the politics of military affairs in Pennsylvania, but it should also pave the way tor research on social aspects of the military. Presently, we lack knowledge about the cul­tural milieu of military affairs and the nature of discharge requests. Opportunities abound tor research on military discipline, quality of equipment and training, and of the occupations of soldiers. At this writing, genealogists, more than historians, have made use of the muster rolls and the pension applications. Finally, despite the wealth of studies on events of the war, historians still need careful and more detailed examinations of the Wyoming Massacre, the cap­ture of Fort Freeland, the Sullivan Expedition, and the military role of loyalists in Pennsylvania.

In summary, it can be safely stated that there exists in Harrisburg a rather important research network, con­sisting of the Pennsylvania State Archives, the Pennsyl­vania State library and the Bureau of Land Records. Together, these three depositories contain valuable re­search resources for the study of the American Revolu­tion. Although the state of Pennsylvania history remains healthy. many topics and areas of investigation within the confines of the era of 1763 to 1790 are in need of coverage and further analysis. The recommendations mentioned herein represent a beginning more than an end in itself. And, if researchers proceed to work on some of these topics, it should do much to generate a greater understanding of the Era of the American Revolution in the history of Pennsylvania.


* This article was presented as two separate papers at the Eleventh Annual Research Conference held at Harrisburg (co-sponsored by the Pennsylvania Historical Association and the PHMC, April 23-24, 1976) and at the Bloomsburg State College History Conference (co-sponsored by the National Archives and the Columbia County Historical Society, April 29-30, 1976).

** “Guide to the Microfilm of the Records of the Provincial Council, 1682-1776” (1966); “Guide to the Microfilm of the Baynton, Wharton, and Morgan Papers” (1967); “Guide to the Microfilm of the John Nicholson Papers” (1967); “Inventory of Canal Commis­sioners’ Maps in the Pennsylvania State Archives” (1968).

*** “When using innovative techniques, however, scholars continue to focus largely on the elite groups. For three recent examples. see Randolph S. Klein, Portrait of an Early American Family: The Shippens of Pennsylvania Across Five Generations (Philadelphia, 1975); and respectively Mary Beth Norton, “Eighteenth-Century American Women in Peace and War: The Case of the Loyalists,” and Stephen Brobeck, “Revolutionary Change in Colonial Phila­delphia: The Brief Life of the Proprietary Gentry.” both in The William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser., XXXIII, (July, 1976). 386-409, 410-434.


Dr. Roland M. Baumann is the editorial consultant for the archival and historical work involved in the major project entitled “Records of Pennsylvania’s Revolutionary Governments, 1775-1790: Microfilm and Guide.” He is currently involved in the preparation of a finding guide for the archives and the manuscripts relating to the American Revolution. In Spring 1977 the PHMC will publish his compilation of doctoral dissertations on Pennsylvania history, 1886-1976.