1 Lawlor, H. J, ‘A calendar of the Liber Niger and Liber Albus of Christ Church, Dublin’, in Proc. R.I.A., xxvii, sect. C, no. I.Google Scholar

2 The following misprints etc. were noticed:—

p. 308 : the footnote is printed out of position ; it should follow the text printed on p. 309 or alternatively for ‘foregoing’ in line 1 of the note read ‘ following’.

p. 309, line 7 from below : delete ‘ sancti’

p. 309, line 6 from below : in creati—Fr Gwynn says it is ‘ almost eertain that the original text must have been in civitate’. That may be true of the text from which this entry has been copied ; but in the Black Book itself there does not appear to be space sufficient for the word civitate, and in any case the word which has been inked over appears to me to have ended with ‘ i’

p. 337, line 25 : for ‘ M°cc° primo’, read ‘ M°ccc° primo ’

3 RevGwynn, A., ‘The origins of the see of Dublin’, in I.E.R., 5, lvii (1941) 40–55, 97–112.Google Scholar

4 P. 286, line 20: for ‘ May 17’, read ‘May 7’. [Lawlor also (loc. cit., p. 39) has May 17. But the text is given correctly—septimo die Maii—on page 337, line 9 from below].

P 295, line 6 from below : for ‘ December 9 ’, read ‘ December 10’.

P 296, line 3 : for ‘December 11’, read ‘December 12’

P 305, line 26 : for ‘ five leaves (ff. 220–225)’, read ‘ six leaves (ff. 220–225)’.

5 The leaves of the Black Book measure on an average 27.5 x 18 cm. For comparison, the pages of this Journal measure 24.7 x 1 5.5 cm.

6 Both writers incorrectly make this analysis include f. 212. This folio must be related with the leaves after f. 211, or else be regarded as a single leaf.