Nice catch. I cannot think of any other reason than a typo in the original prints, and the people reponsible for digitizing the books have mechanically filed t

Nice catch. I cannot think of any other reason than a typo in the original prints, and the people reponsible for digitizing the books have mechanically filed them with the date reported in the body as that of the first edition. Maybe it is the equivalent of a modern day copy/paste error, they got the sheets reporting the first edition mixed-up with those of another book, who knows.