254 



Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 



Table of the Yolumes mentioned in First, Second, and Third Lists- 

 continued : — 



A 



B 



C 



D 



Press-marks of 

 volume in T.C.D. 



42. F. 1. 20. 1 



L. 3. 54. 



K. 1. 13. 



T. 10.5.9. 



( CC. 16 (dd). 38. 

 { K. 1. 13. 

 ( L. 3. 54. 



(E. 19(gg).41. 

 \ T. 10.5.9. 



43. F. 2. 23. 



D.2. 7. 



K. 8. 2. 





( DD. 9 (?) (n). 7. 



K. 8. 2. 

 ( D. 2. 7. 



43a. F. 3. 6. { 





C. 11.20,21. 



T. 10. 1.8,9 (?). 



C. 7(k). 8, 9. 

 BB. 4(g). 1,2. 



44 F. 3. 8. 





C. 3.12.1 





I'DD. 6(k).26. 

 \ C. 3. 22. 



45. F. 3. 14. 





0. 7.7. 





(DD. ii. 61. 



DD. 1. 14. 

 ( 0. 7. 7. 



46. F. 3. 15. 





0. 7.8. 





/DD. 1. 15. 



\ 0.7.8. 



47. [F. 3. 16.] 



C. 1. 14. 



P. 2. 14. 





/DD. 1. 14. 

 IdD. 18(ii). 61. 

 { P. 2. 14. 

 / C. 1. 14. 

 V F. 3. 16.2 



48. F. 3. 18. 





G. 1. 18. 





I CC. ee. 41. 

 \ G. 1. 18. 



/ DD. 6(k). 19. 



49. F. 4. 1. 



0. 5. 34. 



D. 6. 13. 





) 0. 5. 34. 



1.186.44. 

 I C. 44. 



50. F. 4. 7.» 





0. 7. 36. 





DD. 18(ii). 53. 



51. F. 4.8. 



C. 2. 55. 







/ CC. 7 (k). 45. 

 \ C. 2. 55. 



1 Either this mark, or the corresponding mark in the book itself, is apparently 

 erroneous. 



^ If this book was in A, as the press-marks seem to prove, it was a duplicate 

 of F. 3. 14. In that case, F. 3. 17 may have been the corresponding duplicate of 

 F. 3. 15. But, if so, it had disappeared before C was written, since in it, as in the 

 present T. C. D. Library, only the first volume of the work is duplicated. The fact 

 that there is a second copy of vol. i. is, no doubt, the cause of the strange confusion 

 in the later press-marks. ^ A volume of tracts. 



