printǣ-pening
noun,
m.,
a-decl.,
hapax legomenon
Type: plant
Last Update: 28.03.2011 09:54
Reference Last Update: 27.12.2022 03:48
- openærs;
Meaning Last Update: 06.05.2009 11:12
-
A: plant: introduced
? Mespili fructus, medlar, Echte Mispel
Comment Last Update: 17.10.2011 08:24
-
Comment on (A): ? Mespili fructus, medlar, Echte Mispel
Occurrence Last Update: 31.03.2009 10:04
|
|
|
Research Literature
BW I:
Bierbaumer, Peter.
Der botanische Wortschatz des Altenglischen. Grazer Beiträge zur Englischen Philologie 1. Bern, Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 1975.
DOE:
Cameron, Angus, Ashley Crandell Amos, Antonette di Paolo Healey, et al. (eds.).
Dictionary of Old English (A to G). CD-Rom. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies for the Dictionary of Old English Project, 2008.
LB:
Cockayne, Oswald Thomas (ed.).
"Leech Book." In: Leechdoms, Wortcunning and Starcraft of Early England. Being a Collection of Documents, for the Most Part never before Printed, Illustrating the History of Sience in this Country before the Norman Conquest. Vol. 2. Rev. Ed. by Charles Singer. London: Longman [et. al.], 1961. 1-360.
LB:
Leonhardi, Günther.
Kleinere angelsächsische Denkmäler I. Bibliothek der ags. Prosa VI. Hamburg: Grand, 1905.
SHG:
Meritt, Herbert Dean.
Some of the Hardest Glosses in Old English. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 1968.
Banham, Debby.
The Knowledge and Uses of Food Plants in Anglo-Saxon England. Diss. Cambridge University. Index to Theses. 40. Cambridge: 1990.
Deegan, Marilyn.
A Critical Edition of MS. B.L. Royal 12.D.XVII: Bald's 'Leechbook'. Diss. Univ. of Manchester. 1988.
MS London, British Library, Royal 12 D.xvii.
Wright, Cyril E. (ed.).
Bald's Leechbook. Early English manuscripts in facsimile. 5. Kopenhagen: Rosenkilde & Bagger, 1955.
This identification is provided by Cockayne (1961,II,368) who, without giving a more detailed explanation, adverts to the context and the OE name of the medlar, Mispel: →open-ærs. Banham (1990,117) suspects the shape of the fruit ("with the large open calyx persisting at the base") being the source for the name. The plant was pobably introduced by the Romans; according to Clapham (1962,422) the first naturalised growth is recorded for 1597.
On the possibility that we do not have a plant name but a measurement (among a long list of fruit) cf. Meritt (1968,115); this interpretation is given as primary identification in the DOE, s.v..