When I use a word . . . . The Lelamour Herbal

Herbs and herbals

“A plant of which the stem does not become woody and persistent (as in a shrub or a tree), but remains more or less soft and succulent, and dies down to the ground (or entirely) after flowering.” That is the first definition of the word “herb,” given in the Oxford English Dictionary (OED).1 However, as the next definition in the OED makes clear, not all herbal remedies come from herbs: “specifically applied to plants of which the leaves, or stem and leaves, are used for food or medicine, or in some way for their scent or flavour.”

The word was Middle English, the first example of its use cited in the OED coming from the late 13th century, and at that time it was usually written “erbe.” A 14th century text, The Forme of Cury (i.e. The Method of Cooking), included a recipe for “erbolat,” a dish containing eggs with herbs:

“Take persel, myntes, sauerey, & sauge, tansey, veruayn, clarry, rewe, ditayn, fenel, southrenwode; hewe hem, & grinde hem smale. Medle hem vp with ayren. Do buttur in a trap, & do 󠇮þe fars þerto, & bake it, & messe forth.”2

In classical Latin the word was herba, meaning grass or a small plant or herb, whether used for food, as a medicine, or for magical purposes. However, in late Latin, and in the Romance languages derived from it, the initial aitch was not aspirated and so dropped out of the spelling. In Old French it was spelled “erbe,” and although in modern French the aitch has been restored—“herbe”—it is not pronounced. Usage in other Romance languages varies—in Spanish it is hierba and in Romanian iarbă, but in Italian it is erba and in Portuguese erva. Whether the aitch appeared in Middle English spellings of the word or not, as it did from the 15th century on, it was not generally pronounced until the 19th century. This accounts for the fact that “herb” is still pronounced “erb” in American English. As in several other cases of differences between British English and American English, it is the British who have changed, not the Americans. The latter retain the pronunciation that the Pilgrim Fathers brought with them to America in the early 17th century.

In medieval Latin, words for books on certain subjects were formed by taking the relevant noun and adding the suffix –ale to it. [In all cases pronounce the final e.] Add –ale to nomen, a name, and you get nominale, a name-book, manus plus –ale gives us manuale, a handbook or manual, missa plus –ale gives missale, a missal, and so on. Thus, herba plus –ale gives herbale, a herbal.

The word “herbal” is first attested in English in the early 16th century, but examples of herbals antedate that by a long way.

John Lelamour

One of the earliest English herbals, containing descriptions of over 200 species, was compiled 650 years ago, in 1373, by John Lelamour, a schoolmaster. It later became known as the Lelamour Herbal.3 The manuscript of the Lelamour Herbal ends with an explicit, the general term for the closing words of a manuscript, in which we learn that Johannes Lelamour, schoolmaster of Herforde Est, though he was unworthy, in the year of our Lord 1373 turned the herbal of Macer the philosopher from Latin into English. “And if there be anything mis-said in the turning of the language, the wise reader and goodly understander he prays with all his heart the faults to amend.” [I have transliterated the 14th century English, retaining the words used.]

The Latin text that Lelamour translated was De viribus herbarum, a popular Latin poem in hexameters composed by “Macer Floridus,” a pseudonym for an 11th century French physician from Meung-sur-Loire, Odo Magdunensis. Macer in turn is thought to have relied on an earlier herbal called De herbis or Alexipharmaca, now lost, by a 1st century BCE Augustan poet, Aemilius Macer of Verona.4 Aemilius got his inspiration from the 2nd century BCE Greek physician and poet Nicander of Colophon, who wrote two relevant poems, still extant: Theriaca, dealing with venomous animals, and Alexipharmaca, dealing with poisons and alexipharmics, antidotes to poisons.5His source of information was the 3rd century BCE Egyptian physician, Apollodorus.6 None of this is unusual. Typically, authors of herbals, formularies, and pharmacopoeias copied the recipes of their predecessors.

However, the story of the compilation of the Herbal is more complicated than this simple explanation suggests. There is, for example, evidence that other sources contributed, and the time course over which the compilation occurred is not clear; indeed, it is certain that 1373 was not the year during which the whole corpus was amassed. Other important sources included an anonymous Middle English herbal called Agnus Castus, which described the uses of about 250 plants, and the provenance of several of the entries is unknown.

Lelamour in the Oxford English Dictionary

It is striking how often the Lelamour Herbal is cited in the OED—132 times in all. The OED is unclear about the actual date of the Herbal. Each citation is preceded by the date ?a1425, but with the parenthetic addition (?1373) and each citation is taken from a 1938 edition.7 This hesitation is justified, as with much Middle English,8 but I have assumed here that 1373 is the correct date.

Of all the words and phrases cited, just over half document the first recorded uses, assuming 1373 as the true date of compilation. If not all illustrate the very earliest uses, they are certainly early; some are not antedated even if the correct date is 1425 and two are hapax legomena. I have listed them in box 1 below. Many of them are the common names of plants, such as chickweed, costmary, dog fennel, germander, marigold, mullein, oak fern, heartwort, origanum, ox-tongue, papwort, pimpernel, primrose, red henbane, rosemary, swine's fennel, and swinecress.

However, there are also surprises, as, for example, the first recorded use of words such as hypochondrium, migraine, nephritic as a noun, paunch, and well known.

In some cases Lelamour used a word already in existence, but gave it a new meaning. Examples include nut, an Old English word that he used to refer specifically to nutmeg; pip, which in its original use referred to any of various respiratory diseases of birds, but which Lelamour used in the phrase “the pip,” probably referring to a disease of the mouth in humans; purge, originally a transitive verb but which Lelamour used intransitively; and receive, which Lelamour used to refer to the action of swallowing.

However, this uncertain dating gives another reason for the inclusion of so many citations from the Herbal, which is a go-to volume when a 15th century instance is required, even when earlier citations are available. In almost all the citations that fit that description, Lelamour’s is the only citation included that the lexicographers will have attributed to the 15th century.

Last thoughts

The Lelamour Herbal does not seem to be particularly well known, outside of scholars in the field, compared with other herbals, such as those of Pedanius Dioscorides (1st century), Apuleius Platonicus (4th century), Rembert Dodoens (1554), John Gerard (1597), Gaspard Bauhin (1623), John Parkinson (1640), and William Salmon (1710). That may in part be because it is not illustrated. It is not mentioned, for example in Blunt and Raphael’s comprehensive survey of illustrated herbals.9

Even allowing for the inaccuracy of the assumption that the whole text was compiled in 1373, Lelamour’s lexicographical importance is clear. For example, although Parkinson’s Theatrum Botanicum is cited 338 times in the OED, it is cited in earliest quotations only 29 times (8.6%). The corresponding figures for Gerard’s well known Herball are 1230 and 215 (17%), and for Salmon’s Botanologia 51 and 2 (3.9%). Mrs Grieve’s Modern Herbal (1931) weighs in with no earliest citations out of 96 in all.

Publication of Lelamour’s original manuscript, held in the British Library, is long overdue. This year, the 650th anniversary of its own claimed compilation, offers a good opportunity.