Lifes preservative against self-killing

in the "index of botanical names", where the medieval Latin designations take you to the main dictionary, for example to the items satirion and testiculus leporis, under which the Middle English names are listed, in the case of satirion indiscriminately with other possible identifications, such as Arum and Endymion. Admittedly, the difficulties of identification are considerable-one reason being that the synonyma lists, unlike herbals, are most often devoid of descriptive data-but, in my view, Dr Hunt's stance is here too pessimistic and restrictive. The total knowledge available warrants at least some tentative lists of Middle English synonyms (cf. here lists as given by Bierbaumer, sub "Synonymenschliissel", and in my book, The English plant names in The Grete Herball, 1984). As mentioned above, the plant-name dictionary is filled with additions and antedatings for the OED; in some cases however, as with the antedatings of the sixteenth-century croyt marine and remcope, the sixteenth-century words are not continuations of the medieval forms. There are also notable post-datings, as with glovewort (for Convallaria and other plants) and raven's leek (an orchid name), both attested by Hunt as late as the fifteenth century (previous records only from Old and early Middle English). Anyone working on the early modem period is fully aware of "the debt of the sixteenthcentury English herbalists to their medieval predecessors" and of the fact that many of the plant names with "first" citations in the early printed herbals (or later) will prove to be of Middle English provenance. Dr Hunt's painstaking investigation is a good reminder of that (cf. also Ryden 1984, pp. 34 and 36 f.) and, on the whole, of the rich heritage of English plant names. But it is also obvious that relatively few of the Middle English names are represented in the early modem printed herbals. It is, however, a gross exaggeration to say (p. xlv) that this fact, together with our defective knowledge of Middle English plant names, has "led to a number of misapprehensions concerning the development of English plant nomenclature in more recent times". It has only occasioned "first" datings which later research, for example Dr Hunt's book, has antedated. More antedatings no doubt lie in wait for those with knowledge and time to seek them out. Tony Hunt's book is chiefly a work of reference, based on a thorough inventory of the highly relevant MSS selected. As such it will prove indispensable for future research on the history of English plant names. It makes us realize the rich variety of Middle English vernacular plant names as well as the bewildering richness of the Latin nomenclature of the time. Dr Hunt has established a firm factual base for the further linguistic evaluation of the vast material collected, in terms of word provenance and word formation, motives of denomination (in intraand inter-language perspectives), relative frequencies, currency (regional and social), etc. This nicely produced book extends and solidifies our knowledge of a neglected theme of English-language scholarship. Undoubtedly, many English plant names remain buried in medieval documents, but those brought to light by Dr Hunt significantly add to our knowledge of a fascinating and important section of the word-hoard of the Middle Ages and of an age which "prepared for the work of the great herbalists of the sixteenth century".