Content uploaded by Mike Viney
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mike Viney on Apr 01, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Appeal to American Apple Parers:
Historical Perspectives on Orchards and Yankee Ingenuity
Mike Viney
Apple Parer attributed to Moses Coates’s family
Chester County, Pennsylvania
Circa 1803-1816
Adapted from an article that appeared in the
The Midwest Quarterly. Vol LVIII, No. 1 (Autumn 2016): 9-27.
2
Introduction
School children most often learn about the importance of apples in
America through folklore. Many are familiar with the image of Johnny
Appleseed made famous by Walt Disney, wearing a cooking pan hat, walking
barefoot, and joyfully spreading apple seeds from his knapsack. John Chapman
(1774-1845), an American pioneer nurseryman is behind the almost mythical
figure of Johnny Appleseed. Chapman lived a simple life spreading apple seeds
and the biblical writings of Emanuel Swedenborg. In addition, he was a shrewd
businessman who planted apple seeds gathered from the pomace of cider mills
to establish nurseries ahead of developing settlements up and down the Ohio
River Valley during the first decades of the nineteenth century. He hired locals as
caretakers for his nurseries and offered them profit shares. Two to three-year-old
seedling trees from Chapman’s nurseries were perfect for complying with land
grants and making cider (Pollan, 2002, 15-23).
Chapman was against grafting trees for he believed the best trees came
from quality seed and God. Ironically, our folk hero’s practice of planting apple
seeds resulted in trees with only a small chance of producing edible apples and
was counter to a national trend in which orchards were increasingly established
using grafted varieties. The development of grafted varieties would make this
adopted fruit America’s own and lead to the invention of apple parers, ingenious
devices designed to peel, cut and core apples. These marvels of engineering, with
their dazzling array of designs, are testaments to “Yankee ingenuity.” An
examination of the history of apple parers will take us beyond the folklore of
Johnny Appleseed and provide a more complete view of apples and their place
in America history. Specifically, I explore the creation and evolution of the
American apple parer within the context of agricultural, social, and industrial
forces.
3
Invention of the Apple Parer
The apple parer is a truly American phenomenon. Knights Mechanical
Dictionary (1877) describes the apple parer as, “an ingenious American device”
that “created mingled emotions of admiration and amused surprise when it was
introduced into England; the date is not remembered, but it was referred to as a
novelty about 1840.” Knight goes on to say that over 80 patents for apple parers
had been granted; he provided illustrations and descriptions for lathe, return,
and arc parers (Knight, 124-125).
Legend has it that Eli Whitney (1765-1825), inventor of the cotton gin,
designed a mechanical apple parer in 1778 at age thirteen (Giedion, 553). Joseph
Sterling of South Woodstock, Vermont is said to have invented a gearless apple
parer in 1781 (Snodgrass, 722). In 1801 thirteen-year-old Thomas Blanchard of
Worcester County, Massachusetts supposedly invented a parer that “made him a
favorite at all the paring bees” (Thornton, XIV). The Bennington Museum in
Vermont has a bench-type parer with an intriguing label claiming it was, “made
in West Woodstock, Vermont, in 1785 by Daniel Cox and his sons” (Thornton,
XIV). Didsbury concludes that while it is logical to speculate that eighteenth
century apple parers existed, the evidence to support this claim is wanting
(Didsbury, 10-11).
The United States granted its first patent for an apple parer on February
14, 1803 to Moses Coates (1746-1816) farmer, postmaster, and inventor (Coates,
1803). In the same year Moritz Balthasar Borkhausen (1760-1806), a German
naturalist and forester gave the cultivated apple tree its most widely used
scientific name Malus domestica, see endnote (Borkhausen, 1272). Valentine’s Day
seems a fitting date for Coates’ apple parer patent as his cleverly designed device
embodies American ingenuity and love for apples. James Mease, in The Domestic
Encyclopedia of 1803 gives a favorable review for Mr. Coates’ invention (Willich
4
and Mease, 119- 120). Coates patented parer utilized a swivel-paring arm with
metal springs and direct drive design to spin the apple (Figure 1). Evidence
suggests a gear mechanism was later added to his original design (Levy, 1987, 2-
4; Thornton, 7).
Figure 1. Moses Coates Patented Apple Parer
Over the next 141 years, 328 U.S. patents illustrate innovative design
elements for apple parers, (Figure 2) (data compiled from Thornton, 227-231).
The first 44 years saw only a handful of patents. Indeed, there is abundant
evidence that apple parers became popular at about the same time or shortly
after Coates received his patent. A variety of unpatented designs dating from the
early 1800s through the 1850s are known. Don Thornton’s Apple Parers pictures
200 of these parers, many of which were manufactured in significant quantities
by local craftsmen and likely sold in surrounding communities (Thornton, 1-10,
193-226). Early parers made of wood and hand forged metal parts are referred to
as “primitive parers” but in fact many exhibit great sophistication and often
foreshadow later designs made in factories. The incredible variety of unpatented
apple parer designs from the first half of the nineteenth century are not visible on
our graph (Figure 2); nevertheless, they are a testament to the popularity of this
5
labor saving device. Patented improvements to apple parer designs were slow to
come. In 1836, Thomas Jones reporting on a new paring machine commented:
“This, we believe, is the sixth peeling machine that has been patented, and we do
not think it any improvement upon the first, which was that of Moses Coates,
obtained in 1803” (Jones, 182).
Figure 2. Number of U.S. Patents Pertaining to Apple Parers 1803-1944
From 1850 to the end of the century there was a proliferation of U.S.
patents for apple parers. What factors catalyzed this uniquely American
phenomenon? To fully answer this question, the occurrence and remarkable
proliferation of apple parers must be placed within the context of the growing
popularity of American apple varieties, apple orchard evolution, and the birth of
American industry. In her book Fruitful Legacy Susan Dolan identifies four
periods that define orchard evolution in North America (Dolan, 4-8). These
periods can be used to understand the origin and evolution of apple parers.
30134
28
39 46
90
20
33 29
19
10 3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Number of Patents Granted
Years by Decade
U.S. Apple Parer Patents 1803-1944
6
European Introduction of the Sweet Apple and Colonization: 1600-1800
European colonists introduced the sweet apple and other fruit trees to
North America in the early seventeenth century. Apples found a new home in
America and thrived in the more extreme climate with sustained low winter
temperatures (Juniper & Mabberley, 156). Early apple orchards were planted
from seed. Each tree grown from seed is unique and often produces unpalatable
apples. The typical farm orchard covered three to five acres of unkempt trees
browsed by animals. Apple crops were used primarily to make cider and feed
animals. Cider was critical to the colonists as water quality was unreliable in
many places; its importance can be gauged by the fact that it was sometimes
used as legal tender (Johnson, 32). Seeds used to plant orchards were gathered
from the pomace of cider mills and planted in autumn or cleaned, dried and
stored for spring planting (Coxe, 13). Apples were used to make vinegar and
apple butter as well as dried for use during winter. European cookbooks from
the 1600s and 1700s used in America included numerous recipes requiring
apples: ciders, vinegars, pies, puddings, fritters, jellies and marmalades
(Matterer; Harrison; Williams). Apples used for cider and animal feed did not
require paring. This fact may explain why parers were not invented or, if
invented, did not become popular during this time.
While most farmers grew apple trees from seed, some wealthy
landowners constructed fruit gardens consisting of varieties grafted to dwarfing
rootstocks. Trees were walled in ornamental enclosures and regularly pruned.
Grafted trees represent cloned varieties used to produce edible table fruits.
However, unique trees worth propagating as grafted clones are often found in
orchards grown from seed. The bewildering genetic variability produced
through sexual reproduction in orchards grown from seed provides the raw
ingredients for both artificial and natural selection. Such orchards are veritable
7
“gold mines” for the proliferation of new varieties. The flesh of an apple
develops from a tree’s flower while its seeds encapsulate unique embryos
formed through fertilization. Trees grown from seed are not an efficient way to
produce tasty apples; for this, it is necessary to take cuttings from a desirable tree
and graft them onto rootstalk. In this way, it is possible to clone a variety.
American varieties well adapted to local climates and graced with desirable
characteristics were found among farm orchards grown from seed. The Baldwin
and Newtown Pippin, two early American apple varieties are notable examples.
William Prince, Sr. (1725-1802), an American pioneer horticulturalist,
converted his father’s private gardens into the first commercial nursery in
America (Fusonie, 2016). The Prince Nursery, located in Flushing, New York,
opened around 1750 and promoted the grafting of varieties. The Prince Nursery
imported many European varieties of fruit tree. The nursery also helped to
develop and promote new American varieties.
Records as early as 1741, indicate American apples were exported from
New England to the West Indies (Taylor, 311, 343). The Newtown Pippin was the
first American apple variety to gain the attention of Europe (Beach, 148). In 1757,
Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) traveled to London as diplomat for the
Pennsylvania Assembly. Franklin requested a shipment of Newtown Pippins
from New York; the American variety was well received. While the variety was
well adapted to New York it did not grow well in London. The Newtown Pippin
led the way for the import of other American varieties (Dolan, 25; Johnson, 31).
Cloning apple trees through grafted varieties launched and popularized a
different kind of orchard suited for growing and distributing named varieties in
large quantities. The development of American apple varieties during this
period, their growing popularity, and effect on orchard evolution provided
impetus for the invention of the apple parer.
8
Industrialization and the Apple Business: 1801-1880
Early nineteenth century orchards—increasingly planted with varieties
grafted on seedling rootstocks—were still generally unpruned and natural. They
were, however, no longer composed of unique trees but were populated with
clones. Cloned variety trees were used to produce edible table fruits, also known
as dessert apples that could be eaten raw. Commercial orchards became popular
during this time. Horticultural societies, books, and periodicals popularized
American fruit varieties and helped to educate the farmer and pomologist.
The 1803 Domestic Encyclopedia presented to “. . . the American public the
first attempt ever made to collect into one view, a list of the finest kinds of apples
growing in the United States.” The list includes 62 eating varieties and 17
“cyder” varieties (Willich and Mease, 109-116). The article on Coates’ apple parer
invention appears just three pages after the list of apple varieties. Interest in
quality eating apples encouraged pomologists to discover and develop new
varieties that could be cloned through grafting. American apple varieties well
adapted to regional growing conditions proliferated and became a source of local
pride. By planting summer, autumn, and winter ripening varieties, apples could
be picked from June through November and stored over winter to spring, lasting
until the following June harvest.
A dramatic increase in U.S. apple exports occurred during the nineteenth
century (Figure 3) (data tabulated from Taylor, 344; Olmsted, 40, 41). In 1838
Andrew Stevenson (1784-1857), a U.S. politician acting as Minister to the United
Kingdom, presented Queen Victoria (1819-1901) with two barrels of Newtown
Pippins grown in Virginia. The queen was so impressed that she lifted the
English export tax on imported apples (Hatch, 73).
9
Figure 3. Average Annual U.S. Apple Exports by Decade
Data not available for the year 1869 (Olmstead, 41)
In The Fruits and Fruit-trees of America (1845), Andrew Jackson Downing
(1815-1852) made the first attempt to make a comprehensive list of all apple
varieties grown in America. His brother Charles Downing (1802-1885) revised
the work in 1869. Between the two editions apple varieties with an established
American provenance accounted for 1,099 out of 1,856 apple varieties grown in
America by 1869 (Beach, 15).
The abundance of apples and their value as a food source to be prepared
and stored generated social events known as “apple paring bees.” May Hale
Auer described paring bees as community events in which neighbors combined
efforts to pare apples for sauce and drying. These events included: sorting apples
for storage, production of cider, and making applesauce for family and
commercial sales. Auer’s account includes a description of one man who brings
his paring machine to speed up the process (Auer, 74).
20,422 18,525 30,504 38,860
99,316
196,310
546,987 575,529
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
Barrels
Years by Decade
Average Annual U.S. Apple Exports 1821-1900
10
In 1849, a regular contributing author to the American Agriculturist
identified only as E. S. described the importance of community gatherings
around apple preparation. The event starts with men having a “bee” to gather
apples when there is an unusual abundance or when the apples are cultivated for
large-scale export or sale. The article continues with an in-depth description of
“the great apple-paring bee,” which “always takes place on the evening
preceding the day appointed for boiling apple butter.” The writer worries that
the apple parer’s efficiency will take time away from the important social aspect
of these gatherings, “I do not think I quite like this labor-saving machine at an
apple paring; it does the work too soon; but it is a useful little thing that should
find a place in every kitchen.” (Allen & Allen 1849, 288).
Gladys Reid Holton provides multiple lines of evidence that farmers
exchanged dried apples for items at country stores (Holton, 34). At mid-century,
Henry F. French, of Exeter, New Hampshire noted, “. . . it is a fact beyond
controversy, that many towns in the county of Rockingham have received more
money in exchange for their surplus product of apples than for any other article
raised upon their farms.” (Hodges, 23). As apple growing expanded so did the
opportunity for profits and the need for a more efficient way of processing
apples. The apple parer considerably simplified the arduous task of paring large
numbers of apples.
The design and success of apple parers was greatly affected by the birth of
American Industry. Factories mass-produce items made from interchangeable
parts to be shipped and sold beyond surrounding communities. The first factory-
made table-mounted apple parers with interchangeable cast iron and steel parts
appeared and proliferated in the mid-1850s. As patents for metal apple parers
increased, four basic design strategies evolved: lathe, turntable, return, and arcs
(Figure 4) (Levy, 1984, 26-28).
11
Figure 4. Arc, Lathe, Turntable, and Return Parer
Increase in apple parer patents coincides with mass manufacturing. In
1865 the Goodell Company sold 2,400 apple parers with sales increasing to 16,800
the following year. In 1867 the establishment was destroyed by fire and quickly
rebuilt. In 1868 Goodell sold 108,000 parers (Dun’s Review, 70). The possibility of
selling large volumes of parers may have increased a desire to protect intellectual
property through the patent process.
Shortly after the advent of mass manufacturing—between 1860 and
1879—there was an increase in innovation in parers designed for household use
(Badger, 5-6). The goal of apple parer designers seems to have consisted of an
attempt to “out do” the competitor in mechanistic cleverness. Thornton’s Apple
12
Parers highlights around 50 manufacturers of apple parers from the nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries. Companies such as Lockey & Howland, Reading,
and Goodell not only had their own patents but also acquired the rights to other
inventor’s patents. It is easy to surmise that innovation was spurred by the
combination of a free market system and protection from patents.
With mass manufacturing came widespread advertising in newspapers
and magazines. An example of such a publication is the American Agriculturist, a
monthly magazine, first published in 1842 designed to “improve the planter, the
farmer, the stock-breeder, and the horticulturist” (Allen & Allen). The first apple
parer advertisements in the American Agriculturist appear in 1859. Some of the
early advertisers mention only that they sell apple parers, but others included
images and descriptions. By 1866 and 1867 some apple parer advertisements not
only provided descriptions of the mechanics of parers but also included
illustrations, endorsements, and awards. Mass production went hand in hand
with a revolution in mass marketing.
Interest in labor saving devices increased in the middle of the century. The
very factories that made these devices provided jobs to lower income families.
People who had worked as servants for middle and upper class families now
found jobs in manufacturing and sales. Labor saving devices also became an
expression of modernity (Metcalfe & Metcalfe, 30). An October 1862 article titled
“Farm” in the American Agriculturist emphasized the monumental tasks of
preparing for winter and the labor saving potential of various devices, including
the apple parer:
In-door Work should have the benefit of labor-saving implements—a
sewing and a washing machine, wringer, churn, apple-parer, knife and
scissors-sharpener, etc. Wives are too often over-tasked. Severe exertion
should not be added to the incessant cares and steps of the housewife
13
from early morning until late evening. If a man should be “merciful to his
beast,” how much more so should he be merciful to his wife! In far too
many cases these hints are needed, we regret to say (Judd 1862, 290).
In the same publication of November 1863 an article titled “Hints on Drying
Apples” speaks to the importance of the parer as a time saver:
The demand for such fruit [dried apples] is at present almost unlimited,
and those who prepare it, may not only have the satisfaction of receiving
good prices, but also of knowing that a large part of the stock will go to
improve the fare of our soldiers, to whom they will be a real luxury. The
work may be greatly facilitated with proper apparatus. The “turn-table”
apple parer, of which several modifications are to be found at most
hardware stores, is a great time and labor saver (Judd 1863, 341).
The nineteenth century was truly the golden age of variety in apples and
household parers. The growth of apple related industries had occurred within
the framework of an expanding infrastructure of roads, rivers, canals, and
railways, which facilitated the shipment of agricultural goods (such as apples)
and factory items (such as apple parers) to far off destinations. Between the years
1804 and 1904 some 14,000 apple varieties (see endnote) were referred to in
American publications (Ragan, 1905; Hensley, 2005). A new trend towards
commercial specialization would dramatically change the apple industry.
Commercial Specialization in the Apple Industry: 1881-1945
The years from 1880 to 1945 mark a movement away from revelry in apple
variety. A transition in orchard evolution started a trend toward planting fewer
apple varieties using seedling rootstock. Development and use of pesticides and
pruning techniques became the norm. Commercial orchards reduced the need to
plant apple trees near the home and the development of new parers designed for
household use waned.
14
A flourishing dried apple export would take the evolution of parers in a
new direction. The perfection of the fruit evaporator around 1870-1875 greatly
expanded the dried apple industry with large evaporators employing thousands
of people. The new commercial orchards produced apples in prodigious
amounts fueling the export of dried apples. Apple parers evolved into industrial
grade designs. The first patent for a commercial apple parer was granted in 1874.
Over 50 percent of the apple parer patents from 1880 to 1944 were granted for
commercial apple parer designs. Apples and apple parers were becoming more
about big business. Thornton’s Apple Parers highlights over 30 types of
commercial parers representing a dozen manufacturers (Thornton, 79, 141-160).
A growing market for dried apples explains the development of commercial
parers and the rapid increase of commercial parer patents (Figure 5, data
tabulated from Taylor, 344; Olmsted, 40, 41).
Figure 5. Average Annual Exports of Dried Apples by Decade, 1866,
1867, and 1868 originally reported in bushels (25 lbs.) (Olmsted, 40)
1,049,059
4,632,460
13,305,097
19,368,301
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
1864-1870 1871-1880 1881-1890 1891-1900
Pounds
Years by Decade
Average Annual U.S. Dried Apple Exports
1864-1900
15
Commercial parers were critical to Evaporators. An advertisement for the
Bonanza commercial parer (figure 6) in a Thomas Mills & Brother of Philadelphia
Catalog claims: “Any ordinary girl will pare and core 6 bushels an hour with it
by hand, and it is one of the most durable, easy running and perfect working
machines ever made” (Thornton, 141). A U.S. Department of Agricultural
Farmers Bulletin titled Evaporation of Apples notes that during a ten-hour day an
experienced operator can pare 60 bushels of apples (Gould, 19).
Monocultures to Preservation of Diversity: 1946-Present
Orchard evolution after World War II is defined by a trend towards
professional commercial orchards specializing in monocultures composed of
fewer varieties grafted on cloned dwarf rootstocks. By the 1960s nine winter
apple varieties and one fall variety dominated the market. Red Delicious and
Golden Delicious were the top two varieties, with Red Delicious accounting for
half of all apples grown by 1980 (Dolan, 124).
Figure 6. Bonanza Commercial Parer
16
Since the 1980s concerns about monoculture have spurred an interest in
preserving biodiversity, for thousands of old apple varieties are now extinct due
to the lack of propagation and cultivation. In what has been likened to a modern
day Noah’s ark, Phillip Forsline, curator of the apple collection at the USDA’s
Plant Genetic Resources Unit in Geneva, New York has archived 2,500 apple
varieties from around the world—two clones of each (Manaugh & Twilley).
Forsline also preserves seeds and cuttings from wild apple trees found in
Kazakhstan, the evolutionary center and source of ancient apple tree diversity
(Pollan, 1998).
As with apples, apple parers decreased in variety. Reading Hardware
Company turned their attention to armor plating during World War II. They
never continued production of parers after the war. In 1950 when the company
went out of business an employee, Sterling G. Withers, continued to make the
classic Reading No. 78 for another 43 years. In 1993 Lehman Hardware of
Kidron, Ohio purchased the molds for this parer and makes them to this day.
The current asking price for this marvelous cast iron parer of the “past” is
$199.95 (Lehmans, 2015). Goodell Company of Antrim, New Hampshire
continued to make both commercial and household parers into the 1960’s
including the Bonanza, Leader Electric, Bay State, ’98 Turntable, and White
Mountain. Goodell continued making the White Mountain lathe parer until 1973.
In the fullness of time, it was the lathe parer and specifically the White
Mountain, made since 1883, which would “win the day.” In the 1950s the White
Mountain parer was still being made at 30,000 to 40,000 per year (Thornton, 33).
In the minds of many, this parer became synonymous with the concept of an
apple parer (Figure 7). The lathe design is the monoculture or “Red Delicious” of
parers in our time.
17
Figure 7. White Mountain Lathe Parer
Today, lathe parers similar to the White Mountain with enameled cast
iron or aluminum frames can be found with prices in the mid-twenty-dollar
range. Commercial parers continue to be made by the F. B. Pease Company, Inc.
of Rochester, New York, established by Franklin Beech Pease (1851-1916) in 1876
(F. B. Pease Company, Inc.). Pease parers notwithstanding, China has taken the
place of the U.S. as the number one producer of apples and manufacturer of
apple parers. In addition to the lathe parers one can find plastic versions of hand
crank and electric turntable parers. Multiple suppliers from China offer
commercial parers. Although the diversity of parers has decreased the need to
pare (peel), slice, and core still exists.
Conclusion
United States apple varieties and apple parer designs reached their zenith
during the nineteenth century. The incredible appetite for variety in apples and
apple parer designs is quintessentially American, true to a pluralistic society. It is
for me aesthetically displeasing to utilize a single approach in engineering parers
or apples. Biologically, a clear danger exists in trying to maintain monocultures.
18
Clones remain genetically stagnant while biologic competitors continue to
evolve. We can imagine that Forsline’s efforts to preserve the world’s apple tree
diversity echoes Chapman’s delight in appreciating that each seed in every apple
is unique. Preserving the diversity of parers and apples is a matter of memory
and survival of the fruit. To archive and take care of these mechanical marvels
ensures that we remember our past genius. Protecting and nurturing the
biological diversity of apples helps secure the future of America’s favorite fruit.
Endnote
Malus domestica has been popularly used as the scientific name for the
cultivated apple. The name is often written as Malus x domestica. The x indicates it
is a hybrid species. Recent analysis of the M. x domestica genome provides
evidence that M. x domestica and M. sieversii are the same species. The authors
state that the more appropriate M. pumila could be adopted for the sweet apple
(Velasco et. al., 838). Philip Miller (1691-1771), an English botanist, erected Malus
pumila for the French paradise apple before Borkhausen’s M. domestica (Miller,
1768).
In The Midwest Quarterly I indicated that 6, 700 apple varieties were
mentioned in American publications between the years 1804 and 1904. Ragan’s
work lists 17,000; however, taking into account overlap due to different names
being used for equivalent varieties, the number may be closer to 14,000 (Ragan,
1905; Hensley, 2005).
Some readers have wondered why I did not mention the possible effects
ratification of the Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution,
which ushered in a period of prohibition from 1920 to 1933, had on the loss of
apple tree varieties. The evolution of apple orchards in the late 19th century was
driven by economics; dessert apples are worth more than apples crushed for
19
drink. This is also a factor in today’s resurgence of making quality hard cider. It
can be difficult to entice modern orchard growers to plant heirloom varieties
suitable for making quality cider when economic factors favor growing dessert
apples. Apple orchard evolution was already moving away from preserving
diversity among apple tree varieties long before the Eighteenth Amendment was
ratified. In addition to the fact that people could receive more money from
dessert apples, cider was receiving competition from a growing beer industry as
well as a strong market for other types of spirits during the late 19th century. The
demise of the hard cider industry, which was no doubt a local market, must have
had some effect on the loss of apple varieties and deserves further research.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the following people for their contributions to this
article: Susan Dolan, Rick Overton, Don Viney, Wayne Viney, and Mary Klass
for their encouragement and helpful comments. John Lambert for sharing the
image of his Bonanza apple parer.
Bibliography
Allen, Anthony B. & Richard, L. Allen, Editors, American Agricutlturist, Vol. 1.,
No. 1 (1842). New York: Geo A. Peters.
Allen, Anthony B. & Richard, L. Allen, Editors, American Agricutlturist, Vol. 8.,
No. 9 (September, 1849). New York: Geo A. Peters.
Auer, May H., “Variety in Old Apple Parers”, Antiques Vol. 42 (1942): 74-75.
Badger, Chuck. [Untitled article defining four periods of mass-produced cast iron
parers designed for household use.] International Soceity for Apple Parer
Enthusiasts, Vol. 2 (Spring, 1987): 5-6.
20
Beach, Spencer A, The Apples of New York. 2v. New York (State) Argicultural
Experiment Station, Geneva. Report, 1902/03, [pt] II. Albany, New York: J. B.
Lyon Company, 1905.
Borkhausen, Moriz B., Theoretisch-Praktisches Handbuch der Forstbotanik und
Forsttechnologie, Vol II p. 1272. Gießen und Darmstadt: Georg Friedrich Heyer,
1803.
Coates M, inventor; 1803 Feb. 14. Cutting Apples & Paring/Apple Parer. US X425.
Coxe, William, A View of the Cultivation of Fruit Trees, and the Management of
Orchards and Cider. Philadelphia: M. Carey and Son, 1817.
Didsbury, J. “Apple Parer-Where? When?,” The Chronicle of the Early American
Industries Association Inc. Vol. XVI, No. 1 (March 1963): 5, 10, 11.
Dolan, Susan A., Fruitful Legacy: A Historic Context of Orchards in the United States,
with Technical Information for Registering Orchards in the National Register of Historic
Places. Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2009.
Downing, Andrew J., Fruit and Fruit Trees of America. New York: Wiley and
Putnam, 1845.
Downing, Andrew J., Fruit and Fruit Trees of America. Revised by Charles
Downing. New York: John Wiley & Son, 1869.
Dun’s Review International Edition: A Journal of International Trade R. G. Dun & Co.
The Merchantile Agency, New York. Vol. IV. No. 1. (September, 1904): 70-72.
F. B. Pease Company, Inc. Accessed 6/10/2015:
http://www.fbpease.net/Hand_Operated_Apple_Parer.cfm
Fusonie, Alan. Prince Family Manuscript Collection. United States Department of
Agriculture National Agricultural Library Special Collections. Accessed
1/22/2016: https://specialcollections.nal.usda.gov/guide-collections/prince-family-
manuscript-collection
Giedion, Siegried, Mechanization Takes Command: A Contribution to Anonymous
History. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1969.
21
Gould, H. P., Evaporation of Apples. U. S. Department of Agriculture Farmers
Bulletin 291, 1907. Washington.
Harrison, Sarah, The House-Keeper’s Pocket-Book; and Compleat Family Cook 2nd Ed.
London: R. Ware, 1739.
Hatch, Peter J., The Fruits and Fruit Trees of Monticello. Charlottesville, Virginia:
University Press of Virginia, 1998.
Hensley, Tim. A Curious Tale: The Apple in North America (6/02/2005). Brooklyn
Botanic Gardens. Accessed 1/29/2017.
http://www.bbg.org/gardening/article/the_apple_in_north_america
Hodges, Silas H., Report of the Commissioner of Patents for the Year 1852: Part II
Agriculture. Washington: Robert Armstrong, 1853.
Holton, Gladys R, “The Dried Apple Industry and Apple-Peeling Machines,” The
Chronicle of the Early American Industries Association, Inc. Vol. XXVI, No. 3
(September 1973): 33-38.
Jones, Thomas P, Journal of the Franklin Institute Volume 17. Philadelphia: Franklin
Institute, 1836.
Johnson, Leonard G., “A Thing to Counterbalance Human Woes-The Apple,” The
Chronicle of the Early American Industries Association Inc., Vol. XVI, No. 3
(September 1963): 31-36.
Judd, Orange, editor, American Agriculturist Vol. 21, No. 10 (New Series no. 189).
New York: Orange Judd 1862.
Judd, Orange, editor, American Agriculturist Vol. 22, No. 11 (New Series no. 202).
New York: Orange Judd 1863.
Juniper, Barrie E. & David J. Mabberley, The Story of the Apple. Oregon: Timber
Press Portland, 2006.
Knight, Edward H., Knights American Mechanical Dictionary Vol 1. New York:
Hurd and Houghton Cambridge, 1877.
22
Lehman’s Own Reading 78 Apple Peeler. Accessed 6/7/2015:
https://www.lehmans.com/p-13-lehmans-own-reading-78-apple-
peeler.aspx?show=all
Levy, Marion I., “Would you known a Moses Coates AP if you saw it”?,
International Soceity for Apple Parer Enthusiasts, Vol. 2 (Spring, 1987): 2-4.
Levy, Marion, “There’s Fascination in Apple Parers,”in Franklin, L.C., 300 Years
of Kitchen Collectibles, 2nd edition. Alabama: Books Americana, Inc., 1984: 25-30.
Manaugh, Geoff & Nicola Twilly, “Our Comprehensive Living Archive of
Apples,” The Atlantic, (Feb, 27, 2013). Accessed: 9/20/2015:
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/02/our-comprehensive-living-
archive-of-apples/273538/
Matterer, James L., A Boke of Gode Cookery-17th Century English Recipes.
Accessed 5/30/2015: http://www.godecookery.com/engrec/engrec41.html
Metcalfe, Peter & Roger Metcalfe, Engineering Studies Year 11. Glebe, New South
Wales: Pascal Press, 2006.
Miller, P., The Gardeners Dictionary 8th Ed. London: John and Francis Rivington,
1768.
Olmsted, V. H., “Exports of Farm Products from the United States 1851-1908,”
U.S. Department of Agriculture Bureau of Statistics Bulletin 75. Washington:
Government Printing Office, 1910.
Pollan, Michael, “Breaking Ground: The Call of the Wild Apple,” The New York
Times November 5, 1998.
Pollan, Michael, The Botany of Desire: A Plant’s-Eye View of the World. (New York:
Random House, 2002). Accessed 9/20/2015: http://michaelpollan.com/articles-
archive/breaking-ground-the-call-of-the-wild-apple/
Ragan, William H., Nomenclature of the Apple; A Catalogue of the Known Varieties
Referred to in American Publications from 1804 to 1904. U.S. Department of
Agriculture Bureau of Plant Industry, Bulletin no. 56. Washington, 1905.
23
Snodgrass, Mary E., Encyclopedia of Kitchen History. London: Fitzroy Dearborn,
2004.
Taylor, W. A., The Fruit Industry and Substitution of Domestic for Foreign-Grown
Fruits. Bulletin No. 7. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Division of Pomology.
Washington: Government Printing Office, 1898.
Thornton, Donald, Apple Parers. Sunnyvale, California: Off Beat Books, 1997.
Velasco R. et al., “The Genome of the Domesticated Apple (Malus x domestica,
Borkh),” Nature Genetics Vol 42 (2010): 833-839.
Williams, T., The Accomplished Housekeeper and Universal Cook. London: J.
Seatcherd, 1797.
Willich, A. F. M. and James Mease (eds.) Domestic Encyclopedia, Vol. III.
Philadelphia: W. Y. Birch and Abraham Small, 1803.
The Union
