(inspired by [1])
Denis Stuart's 1995 Latin for Local and Family Historians: A Beginner's Guide and Eileen A. Gooder's 2014 Latin for Local History: An Introduction gloss this as "to brew"; the latter says "also brasio". (The next word in the dictionary is "braseum, -ei (n.) — malt, also brasium, brasseum" : related?) And with regard to localization, the 1955 Medieval Latin Word-list from British and Irish Sources has "*bracio 1086, 1419, [...] brascio 1221, *brasio c 1130, 1538[,] braxio 1086 to brew". - -sche(discuss)17:35, 26 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Does the book explain what the asterisk means? Maybe the verb is attested in some forms but not the first-person singular present active indicative. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:39, 26 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Oh, this is counter-intuitive: the only mention I can see of what asterisks are used for is: "In the later period only, words continuously attested between the earliest and latest dates given are marked with an asterisk." - -sche(discuss)20:12, 26 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Here are some sources I consulted before giving up and asking for advice:
It seems pretty clear that the verb exists, is derived from the noun, and is attested in at least the infinitive (I think I've found the third-person singular indicative here, the third-person singular subjunctive here, the third-person singular perfect active here, and what seems to be the supine here). I'm just leery of treating a Medieval Latin verb as if it's Classical Latin, complete with Classical pronunciation and a complete conjugation table giving forms that may not have been used after the Classical period. I might as well ping a couple of others who have dealt with post-classical Latin @Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV and @Metaknowledge. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
Romanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch has the following:
