SC - Feast Report

[BaronessaIlaria@aol.com]

TG wrote:
> 
> Would some kind soul of the 'ear'-party [ ;-) ] please explain to me
> what are the reasons to keep the 'ear'-interpretation?

I suspect, only because Austin interprets it that way. And then there is
the fact that the OED's God-Given Soveriegn Rectitude is largely based
on the fact that it is written by a bunch of guys with degrees examining
old manuscripts. No, I'm not launching a criticism of formalized
education or anything like that; I'm just pointing out that while
there's a good chance that the OED's assertion of examples of the term
referring to kidneys is accurate, there's really no real reason to
assume Austin is wrong (after all, he was a guy with a degree examining
old manuscripts) _except_ for the fact that the OED team probably found
more references to neres referring to kidneys than Austin did to ears.

My concern with the OED is largely inspired by one particular situation,
in which they assert that "pomys", in the Middle English (15th-century)
sources they examined, always means apples, which has led to an
appearance of the term (Royal 17. A. iii) being interpreted by various
people as per the OED as a reference to apples. [Confusing, I need
shorter sentences.] If you look at the structure of the recipe _and_ the
recipes as they appear in the manuscript, it seems somewhat more likely
that "the foreseyd pomys" is not a reference to some previous reference
to apples since lost or excised in copying, but rather simply an early
use of the term "pomace", meaning either apple pressings in the
production of cider, or by extension some other pressings, in this case honeycombs.

My point is only that the OED has been known to be somewhat less than an
unimpeachable authority, and I'd _hate_ to see how they would have made cuskynoles.

That said, though, I would not be in the least surprised that Austin is
wrong and they are right, in this instance.      
 
> Thanks, Thomas
> (I know, that Austin wrote in his glossary "A. reads here 'eris'". What
> is "A.". The variant is not given among the Ashmole Ms. variants on p.
> xviii.)

Possibly Ancient Cookeries in WARNER, _Antiquitates Culinariae_ (1791) ,
which Austin lists in the beginning of his glossary?
 
Adamantius (the pomys, the pomys, snarllll twitch)
- -- 
Phil & Susan Troy

troy at asan.com