I would like to have a footnote about the funding source of my work in the first page without marker.

I tried below approaches:

  1. \footnotetext{text goes here} This creates a footnote but with '0' as marker. However, the marker reference does not appear within the normal text where I placed this command.

  2. Used \def\blfootnote{\xdef\@thefnmark{}\@footnotetext} definition provided at http://help-csli.stanford.edu/tex/latex-footnotes.shtml#unnumber. I placed this definition in the main tex file just after package declaration. But, this gives the below error.

       ! Use of \@ doesn't match its definition.
       \blfootnote ->\xdef \@thefnmark{}\@f

As Stephen mentioned in his answer, if you're using your definition in your .tex file, you need to enclose it inside \makeatletter, \makeatother. Another option not involving the use of the special character @ (thus not requiring \makeatletter, \makeatother) would be to locally redefine \thefootnote (taking care of correcting the footnote counter):




Some text\blfootnote{A footnote without marker} and some more text\footnote{A standard footnote}


enter image description here

  • Thanks for the responses guys. Just looked at your suggestions, but was able to have the footnote working just sometime ago. The problem was that I had to keep the definition of blfootnote in the class file instead of the tex file. – Rajesh Oct 6 '11 at 19:18
  • @Rajesh: as Stephen mentioned in his answer, enclosing your definition with \makeatletter, \makeatother you can keep the definition in the .tex file. See also my updated answer for another option not involving internal commands. – Gonzalo Medina Oct 6 '11 at 19:21
  • 3
    What does "bl" in "blfootnote" stand for? – David Doria Oct 24 '12 at 15:14
  • 1
    @DavidDoria: Gonazalo is re-implementing a macro that the original poster copied from a resource that is no longer available. So we'll never know what bl stands for. One may guess “blind”, but the important think is that it be different from \footnote. – Matthew Leingang Dec 4 '14 at 16:36
  • 1
    @GonzaloMedina with the solution you have proposed hyper-link will provide and empty market were I place \blfootnote{}. Is there any way to continue to use hyper-link that provide links for the other footnotes and references but at the same time have just a note for the desired blfootnote? – rebatoma May 24 '16 at 9:33

@ is a special character in (La)TeX. Enclose your code with \makeatletter, \makeatother:


Edit (from my former comments):

Internal commands with @ can be used without \makeatletter and \makeatother in the class file (as you found out) as well as in style files, too. Only in the .tex file the "envelope" is needed. That said, I would prefer Gonzalo Medina's answer over my own (or your placement of the redefinition in the class file) because it only locally redefines footnote (respectively give a new command for unnumbered footnotes).

When you are using the hyperref package, you would probably want to add \addtocounter{Hfootnote}{-1}% to the code of GM, otherwise it will work but error messages about (hyper)footnotes will become tricky, because e.g. Hfootnote 42 then is footnote 41 - use \addtocounter{footnote}{-1} without \addtocounter{Hfootnote}{-1} for several cases, and the difference between footnote and Hfootnote makes debugging harder than necessary.

Edit (again):

As suggested by egreg, I changed \xdef (=\global\edef) to \gdef (=\global\def), because there is no need to *e*xpand the *def*inition's content here (as it is just empty).

  • \xdef should be \gdef; it doesn't make any difference here, it could in other situations. – egreg Oct 30 '11 at 18:53
  • +1, @Gonzalo Medina solution doesn't work 'well' with hyperref package, it lets an empty link box to the footnote! – Kevin Oct 29 '14 at 10:23
  • This is a better approach, because it only uses the footnotetext, not occupying space for the footnotemark. – THN Sep 14 '19 at 20:07

In some cases, you might want to suppress the number on a footnote. I looked around the web, and a few suggestions were out there, but the simplest one I could find was the following:

\let\thefootnote\relax\footnotetext{Put your text here}
  • This may work, but it is not really LaTeX style and may have serious side-effects, e.g., when switching back to normal footnotes. – jk - Reinstate Monica Sep 1 '15 at 12:56
  • Welcome to TeX.SX! A tip: You can use backticks ` to mark your inline code. I did not edit your answer just for this detail, you might want to change it yourself. – Philipp Imhof Sep 1 '15 at 12:56
  • 2
    You are the best. – Christina Sep 16 '19 at 13:17
  • 1
    Brutal but effective. For short documents without other footnotes this is the best! I think half of it should go in the preamble and the acutal not in the document. I hop you don't mind me editing your answer. – user4929 Apr 5 '20 at 21:54
  • The beautiful one. – Niing Apr 7 at 22:09

There’s also an old package, titlefoot, which has no documentation except a few comments in the .sty file. It provides a command, \unmarkedfntext{...}, which has never caused problems in my documents. A little example:

\title{My Brilliant Article}
\maketitle\unmarkedfntext{Originally published by Oxford.}

\blindtext\footnote{It seems to play well with hyperref.}
  • This seems causing some issues for me. All the figures are moved to the end of the document after adding \unmarkedfntext. A regular footnote would not cause so. – xuhdev Sep 20 '16 at 3:20
  • 2
    I like this answer the best, because, as you said, it plays well with hyperref. Other "markerless footnote" solutions I tried left a little blank box in the text (i.e., a link attached to the blank marker). – Joe Corneli Jun 19 '17 at 22:30
  • I had only one problem with the definition the command \keywords, apparently the command is already defined in the package, so I had to change the name. However, I find this "package"-solution more elegant that own defined functions. ;) – loved.by.Jesus Mar 13 '18 at 12:53

I know this is an old question, but the answers from both Gonzalo Medina and Stephen may interact poorly with hyperref. I did not test the titlefoot package but, from my limited understanding of the LaTeX code, it seems it may not be immune either.

Apparently, however, we are "safe" by using @xfootnotenext, as hyperref's implementation of it delegates to the default LaTeX footnote code. And it is simple to do so, just call \footnotetext with an optional parameter. To do that, switch footnote markers temporarily to symbols and select 0 as the symbol. Nothing gets printed (no symbol for 0), nothing gets added to the text (we are just using footnotetext), and hyperref does not try to add anchors or links.

  • Worked perfectly, thanks! 😎 – lukeuser May 5 at 11:32

You could use the \footnotemark[0] and \footnotetext[0]{Footnote text} pair. The [0] will suppress the label.

  • 4
    This is only true if \thefootnote is set to \roman{footnote} or \Roman{footnote}. – Werner Dec 6 '18 at 0:49
  • 3
    And it's \footnotemark, not "marker. – Phelype Oleinik Dec 6 '18 at 10:01
  • 1
    It did not work for me (in amsart style). – mathreader Sep 13 '20 at 22:14

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.