Four kinds of irregularities occurred in the footnotes:

  1. Some footnotes are referenced by more than one anchor, so two or more anchors may refer to the same footnote.
  2. Some anchors were out of sequence, apparently because they were added afterwards or because they are share a footnote with another anchor. They have been renumbered to match the numbers of the footnotes to which they refer.
  3. Some footnotes have no anchors. These are noted below.
  4. One footnote was misprinted beyond repair, and the next three footnotes were missing. These are noted below.

Page 1076: Footnote [61] (originally 42) has no anchor; the missing anchor would be in page range [1062]–1064.

Page 1121: Footnote [100] (originally 4) has no anchor; the missing anchor would be in page range [1091]–1093.

Page 1121: Footnote [103] (originally 7) has no anchor; the missing anchor would be in page range 1094–1097. Anchor [99] (originally 3) on page [1094] could be the missing anchor, as that number also is used on page [1091].

Page 1188: Footnote [210] (originally 13) has no anchor; the missing anchor would be on page [1171] or [1172].

Page 1189: Footnote [226] (originally 29) has no anchor; the missing anchor would be on page [1174] or [1175].

Page 1253: Footnote [329] (originally 9) has no anchor; the missing anchor would be in page range [1219]–1226.

Page 1287: Footnote [469] (originally 98) has no anchor; the missing anchor would be on page [1287].

Page 1333: Footnote [758] (originally 21) appears to be misprinted, and the next three footnotes 759–761 (originally 22–24) are missing.