Nick’s distaste for endnotes has been well documented, and I would echo his sentiments. Endnotes can make for an exercise in frustration when trying to track down references cited in the text. As such, footnotes are just better. Period.
I was reading the first pages of Desta Heliso’s Pistis and the Righteous One: A Study of Romans 1:17 Against the Background of Scripture and Second Temple Jewish Literature and was pleased to see footnotes (which you would expect in this kind of work). But not just one here or there! On the first page, there are three lines of main text with the remaining 85% of the page filled with footnotes! Page 2? Four lines of the main text and the remainder of the page is footnotes! Obviously, this author felt there was plenty of pertinent information that was necessary to undergird the main text; can you imagine having to thumb to the back to track down a pesky endnote? Μη γενοιτο!
Αυτω η δοξα,