Pine Barren Folklore
- Thread starter Tom
- Start date
B
bach2yoga
Guest
Tom, I think you're talkin' about Jerry Munyhon. The quick version of the story is that one day, Jerry was looking for work at one of the furnaces in the Pines, but was turned down. Some say that the furnace was shut down when he filled it with black and white crows. He was then given the job, and the crows flew away. Anyway, that's the version that appears in The Pine Barrens by John McPhee (pgs 71-72). He also did other crazy things, like have axs magically chop wood, have a rooster pull a cart, and make his walking stick walk by itself to go get whisky...
I know I've read a more in depth version somewhere. I'm fairly sure it was either "Pine Barrens Legends and Lore or one of Father Beck's books, or maybe both. I'll have to check when I'm back at my apartment...
I know I've read a more in depth version somewhere. I'm fairly sure it was either "Pine Barrens Legends and Lore or one of Father Beck's books, or maybe both. I'll have to check when I'm back at my apartment...
Yup - it's in "Legend, Lore, and Lies." It's on page 33. Strangely enough, it was Hanover furnace. The operator is only known as "Jones."
You should be able to get the book in Barnes & Nobles or Borders. AFAIK it's still in print.
You should be able to get the book in Barnes & Nobles or Borders. AFAIK it's still in print.
Yep, it's still in print, but is currently printed as Pine Barrens Legends & Lore by William McMahon. Crites knows why they dropped the "& Lies" from the end, but I checked both titles and it's definately the same contents. It'll run ya $10. You can also find used copies a bit cheaper at half.com...
http://www.co.burlington.nj.us/info/index.htm#
The best picture I can find of the seal of Burlington County is there, I couldn't find a larger image. I can't really tell if the birds are crows or not from that...
The best picture I can find of the seal of Burlington County is there, I couldn't find a larger image. I can't really tell if the birds are crows or not from that...
The Great Seal of Burlington County
Mike, et al.:
I have pondered the Great Seal of Burlington County and its origins for a year or more. In my opinion, the birds flying overhead are some type of waterfowl, possibly Canada Geese. Depending on which seal you examine, there are either 15 or 16 birds in the sky and I cannot say with certainty whether the specific number of them represents anything notable. I originally thought the bridge depicted on the seal is the first free bridge over the Rancocas Creek between Willingboro Township and Bridgeborough, Delran Township (originally Chester Township) constructed by the Board of Chosen Freeholders in 1819 to replace the tollbridge constructed in the mid-1790s. However, it might also be the Bass River bridge from down county. I have been seeking access to the original minutes from the Burlington County Board of Chosen Freeholders to ascertain what the minutes say about the seal and when the county first created it. I believe it dates to circa 1820. I hope to look at those minutes sometime during the coming spring after I complete another project that has consumed much of my “free” time.
Best regards,
Jerseyman
Mike, et al.:
I have pondered the Great Seal of Burlington County and its origins for a year or more. In my opinion, the birds flying overhead are some type of waterfowl, possibly Canada Geese. Depending on which seal you examine, there are either 15 or 16 birds in the sky and I cannot say with certainty whether the specific number of them represents anything notable. I originally thought the bridge depicted on the seal is the first free bridge over the Rancocas Creek between Willingboro Township and Bridgeborough, Delran Township (originally Chester Township) constructed by the Board of Chosen Freeholders in 1819 to replace the tollbridge constructed in the mid-1790s. However, it might also be the Bass River bridge from down county. I have been seeking access to the original minutes from the Burlington County Board of Chosen Freeholders to ascertain what the minutes say about the seal and when the county first created it. I believe it dates to circa 1820. I hope to look at those minutes sometime during the coming spring after I complete another project that has consumed much of my “free” time.
Best regards,
Jerseyman
Sorry, Pine Baron, but I don’t consider Weakipedia an authoritative source for ANYTHING! The information is only as good as the person submitting it and anyone can go in and goof with it.
Best regards,
Jerseyman
__________________
scriptor rerum Nova Caesarea
Dei memor, gratus amicus
I think the reality is that most information on Wikipedia is accurate, and it fills in many of the corners that encyclopedias don't cover due to cost limitations. That said, you really can't cite wikipedia as a definitive source for the reasons Jerseyman points out.
Indeed, Mark. Wikipedia is not easily fudged with, either. The bottom line is that dubious claims always need to be checked against their sources.
Mark and Gabe:
While I agree that most of Weakipedia’s content represents true and correct data, I will not and cannot accept any of it at face value. If I EVER submitted an historic context or other documentation to a regulatory agency with a citation from Weakipedia, that governmental body would likely dismiss my report out-of-hand and I they would tell me to revise my source material and my text. As a result, I seldom consult this online source. For those not needing a high degree of accuracy and not required to use primary sources, then I’m sure Weakipedia fills the bill.
Best regards,
Jerseyman
While I agree that most of Weakipedia’s content represents true and correct data, I will not and cannot accept any of it at face value. If I EVER submitted an historic context or other documentation to a regulatory agency with a citation from Weakipedia, that governmental body would likely dismiss my report out-of-hand and I they would tell me to revise my source material and my text. As a result, I seldom consult this online source. For those not needing a high degree of accuracy and not required to use primary sources, then I’m sure Weakipedia fills the bill.
Best regards,
Jerseyman
I don't disagree, Jerseyman. There are sources, and then there are sources. Where I find wikipedia invaluable is in starting me off on a topic that likely no other online source would have covered in any detail. Say, Coppersmithing techniques, which I was researching a few nights ago. Whether wiki's data is definitive or not, what it does very well is provide a jumping off point to other resources which usually are.
I love wikipedia, absolutely love it and use it every day. I use it for everything, but mainly for music. I like to learn about a lot of the old bands I love, but I have used it for the very arcane too.
Lately, if I want to look at info on anything, like, the history of shoes for instance, I just type "shoes wiki" into google (no quotes needed), and the wiki source link usually pops up first. In fact, it seems it ALWAYS does. Shortening the wikipedia to wiki in the search makes researching a breeze.
Lately, if I want to look at info on anything, like, the history of shoes for instance, I just type "shoes wiki" into google (no quotes needed), and the wiki source link usually pops up first. In fact, it seems it ALWAYS does. Shortening the wikipedia to wiki in the search makes researching a breeze.
Hey, Folks—I’m not telling anyone here what they should or should not consult, whether on-line or off-line. If you all like using Wiki-Tiki, more power to you. This whole thread started because I refuse to accept as definitive evidence that Wikipedia states the birds on the Great Seal of Burlington County are seagulls.
Because I have one foot in the old world and one in the new relative to my research approach, I tend to lean towards finding a older book or manuscript material to answer my research questions rather than something like Wiki-Tiki.
For example, Mark mentioned researching coppersmithing. If I needed information on that subject—and I didn’t own some books on the subject (which I do)—I would tend to turn to something like Google Books before doing a general web search on the subject. A quick search on Google Books using “Coppersmithing” as a keyword finds 822 texts. Some have either snippet views on no preview at all, but you can compile a great bibliography on any given subject using Google Books. In the case of coppersmithing, there are several historical technical treatises on the subject that have full view on Google Books.
Another website—actually two websites—I like to use is “Making of America.” Cornell hosts a portion of the MOA web presence and the University of Michigan hosts the other part. These two sites allow you to search many historical books and journals and then will display a scan of the original magazine page complete with all figures and graphics. If you are researching machinery or some scientific question, it will show you how our forefathers approached the same subjects.
Every researcher has his or her unique “bag of tricks” for cracking tough research nuts. Over the years, I have accumulated many browser “favorites” that aid me in my research on the web, but Wiki-Tiki is not one of them. But in the final analysis, it comes down to whatever you feel comfortable using. I am just as happy pulling a book off the shelf in my library as I am performing a web search to answer a question.
I’m done with this thread.
Best regards,
Jerseyman
Because I have one foot in the old world and one in the new relative to my research approach, I tend to lean towards finding a older book or manuscript material to answer my research questions rather than something like Wiki-Tiki.
For example, Mark mentioned researching coppersmithing. If I needed information on that subject—and I didn’t own some books on the subject (which I do)—I would tend to turn to something like Google Books before doing a general web search on the subject. A quick search on Google Books using “Coppersmithing” as a keyword finds 822 texts. Some have either snippet views on no preview at all, but you can compile a great bibliography on any given subject using Google Books. In the case of coppersmithing, there are several historical technical treatises on the subject that have full view on Google Books.
Another website—actually two websites—I like to use is “Making of America.” Cornell hosts a portion of the MOA web presence and the University of Michigan hosts the other part. These two sites allow you to search many historical books and journals and then will display a scan of the original magazine page complete with all figures and graphics. If you are researching machinery or some scientific question, it will show you how our forefathers approached the same subjects.
Every researcher has his or her unique “bag of tricks” for cracking tough research nuts. Over the years, I have accumulated many browser “favorites” that aid me in my research on the web, but Wiki-Tiki is not one of them. But in the final analysis, it comes down to whatever you feel comfortable using. I am just as happy pulling a book off the shelf in my library as I am performing a web search to answer a question.
I’m done with this thread.
Best regards,
Jerseyman
I have to admit, I've only recently come to understand the full goodness that is Google Books. I wish they had every book in PDF format, and a shopping cart system for the ones still under copyright.
Wiki is a different sort of resource that I also find useful, and it is a lot faster for some kinds of information. The thing that is cool about it is that people with expertise can publish what they know. The uncool thing is that after they publish anyone can change it. I know that's sort of the central idea, but I like the "venue for experts to publish" part better than the "wisdom of the commons" part.
Wiki is a different sort of resource that I also find useful, and it is a lot faster for some kinds of information. The thing that is cool about it is that people with expertise can publish what they know. The uncool thing is that after they publish anyone can change it. I know that's sort of the central idea, but I like the "venue for experts to publish" part better than the "wisdom of the commons" part.
All:
I wasn't trying to say Wikipedia is the end all/be all source guide. It's
just that sometimes it's a starting point for further research. I for one
never count only one source as the truth, no matter where it's from.
Jerseyman: I sorry my post chased you off the thread.
