Colonial Pennsylvania—A History (review)

BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTES61 that Friends in New Jersey, like those in eighteenth-century Rhode Island and North Carolina, had little political significance. When scholars begin to examine in detail the role of Quakers in New Jersey, they will need to consult frequently Pomfret's well-balanced survey of the colonial and revolutionary periods. Swarthmore CollegeJ. William Frost Colonial Pennsylvania—A History. By Joseph E. Illick. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1976. xix, 359 pages. $15.00. A treatise on colonial Pennsylvania always has to pass judgment on controversies that defy resolution and keep enlisting partisans long after the event. Like a tongue going to a sore tooth, the historians' pen will not stay away from die series of contentions from the squabbles between William Penn and his colonists to the complex of antagonisms on die questions of the day from 1763 to 1776. In all the classical episodes Friends figured prominently (often as the donkey on which somebody was trying to pin the tail) and have kept public attention ever since. Joseph E. Illick had to deliberate on the whole familiar procession when he undertook to write a comprehensive volume on colonial Pennsylvania for that elusive beast the general reader. Perforce, he relied heavily on the labors of others who had mined the sources, so his book reflects what historians over the years have chosen to investigate. As he points out, intriguing topics await inquiry. Still, he might have done more with the structure of commerce, the stratification of society, and the process of populating the province. Illick's task was to rise above the well-rehearsed arguments, select the choicest fruits of scholarship, and blend them with some fresh ideas. This he did most successfully in two long segments of die book, one revolving around William Penn and one on the political battles from the entry of Benjamin Franklin to the Declaration of Independence. Illick's previous work on Penn gave him a sure touch in handling the early period; the first few chapters are judicious and balanced. Though less masterful, the synthesis of new research on late colonial politics provides original insights and brings to this intricate subject as much clarity as reasonably may be expected. (Some may be disturbed by the undigested tidbits of psychohistory .) The middle of the book, lacking a focus on an eminent personage, often seems to ramble from one sub-topic to another. Readers of Colonial Pennsylvania may be troubled by a less than finished quality. There are too few connective passages linking one part with another , too many opaque or muddled paragraphs, clumsy sentences, and illchosen words. The followers of George Keith change occupations oddly; the celebrated schism in the Presbyterians is mentioned first in a passing remark on its resolution; implausibly, "plutocrats" dwelt in the colony before 1702. Such flaws, however, detract little from the value of the book, which offers a predominantly thoughtful, impartial, reliable, and readable survey of its subject. University of IowaSydney V. James ...