Comments

I liked it.  Rare is an article which is not only well documented but also interesting.  

I'm a stickler for comma use, so I went ahead and fixed three small errant commas in the article.

As to content, I would raise only two points.  At note 64, you say something like this: "There was an attempt to assassinate the king."  Rather than saying "There was . . .," I think a better phrasing would be to use the actor as the subject and an action verb.  That is, "A group of landowners attempted to kill the king."  Is it known who was behind the attempt?  

Second, I see that some other people have commented about one-sentence paragraphs.  I wonder if a correction of that did not produce the paragraph at note 71.  that paragraph begins with the topic sentence saying that brewing was becoming popular in the area.  Then, the whole rest of the paragraph has to do with witch trials.  Were those things linked in some way?  Perhaps cut the first sentence free again and add a follow up line about the volumes of beer that were being brewed or something.

I hope these comments are not too pedantic.  I'm new to peer reviewing anything.  Also, I am totally in the dark about formatting for notes, so I've not even attempted to weigh in on those.