^{page 161 note [a]} Cap. 25.

^{page 161 note [b]} Higden, Polychron. p. 195. Edit. Gale.

^{page 161 note [c]} Hist. of the Isle of Thanet, p. 2.

^{page 161 note [d]} Ibid. p. 1.

^{page 161 note [e]} See the old chart in Lewis.

^{page 161 note [f]} This is the word in Higden.

^{page 161 note [g]} Trevisa, fol. lxiv. b. Edit. 1527, or Higden, p. 195.

^{page 161 note [h]} Lewis, p. 2.

^{page 162 note [i]} Sir James Ware's Antiq. of Ireland, p. 169. 228.

^{page 162 note [k]} Beda I. c. 1. Gir. Cambrensis I. c. 23. Gul. Neubrig. p. 192. See also Sir James Ware I. p. 15.

^{page 162 note [l]} Gir. Camb. II. c. 15.

^{page 162 note [m]} Sir James Ware I. p. 15.

^{page 162 note [n]} Gir. Cambr. III. c. 34.

^{page 163 note [o]} See Mr. Lewis, p. 46. I think it not improbable, that formerly there might be no venomous creatures in the island, for this reason, though there are now. Ireland, continuing under the same circumstances as anciently, is, I suppose, destitute of them at this time.

^{page 163 note [p]} Sir James Ware I. p. 15. from Solinus, cap. 25.

^{page 163 note [q]} See also Aelian. H. Anim. III. c. 32.

^{page 163 note [r]} Solinus, cap. 26. Plin. Nat. Hist. VIII. c. 58.

^{page 164 note [s]} Meursij Creta, p. 3.

^{page 164 note [t]} Ctesias Indica, p. 660. Edit. Gronov. And Apollonius, Hist. Mirab. 17. quotes the passage from that work, when it is plain the grew in India, and not in Crete; and therefore in Hesychius, where we have , we ought, certainly, to read, . That from Ctesias and Hesychius, Apollonius should be amended for . And lastly, that what Meursius says in his Creta, p. 108, and ad Apollonium, of this tree's being a production of that island, ought to be expunged, it being not a native of that place, but of India.

^{page 164 note [u]} Bocharr, Geogr. Sacr. III. c. 6. Meursii Rhodus, p. 4.

^{page 164 note [w]} Ibid. Pt. II. Lib. I. c. 35. Meurs. Cypr. p. 8.

^{page 165 note [x]} Gir. Cambr. I. c. 3.

^{page 165 note [y]} Idem, I. c. 5.