onthetrail, I am sure my 60th RotK is a 5th impression. I pre-ordered the boxed set in 2014.

Talking of errors, I'm reading three of Wayne and Christina's blogs, Lord of the Rings Comparison #1, #2, and #3 recently. It's been discussed that most of the errors were corrected in 8/7/7 impressions, and only two remained, which are the comma after "Dear Frodo" and the format of the line "All that is gold does not glitter".

I'm sorry to say but these two errors were uncorrected in the recent 15/14/14 reprints that I bought yesterday.

That's how mine looks; but check to see how Marazubul is spelt within the plate section - would be the middle image w/ the caption.

I'm glad that these three things are extremely minor, compared to some errors pre-50th anniversary revision.

insurrbution wrote:
That's how mine looks; but check to see how Marazubul is spelt within the plate section - would be the middle image w/ the caption.

I'm glad that these three things are extremely minor, compared to some errors pre-50th anniversary revision.

The 'Mazarbul' error was corrected by the 14th impression.

Thanks for the pics Lawrence! Actually if you don't mind, could you post a picture of page ix from your new Return of the King? (see if you can spot the error ;)

Finally, for now - does anyone know if these three errors were present in any printings of the single-volume hardback edition?

This one (not my photo). I'm curious how widespread it is. I was at a bookstore sometime last year thumbing through this copy, I forget which printing it was, however it was spelt 'Marzabul'. The foldout maps were also SLIGHTLY glossy, but not printed on glossy paper - sort of somewhere in between.

https://pictures.abebooks.com/SETANTABOOKS/22220408371_4.jpg

Hello Berelach, man of Gordor!

Thanks for the hint. I've never noticed this error before. Unfortunately it's still here.

Lawrence wrote:
Hello Berelach, man of Gordor!

Thanks for the hint. I've never noticed this error before. Unfortunately it's still here.

Good eye! Thank you.

insurrbution wrote:
Finally, for now - does anyone know if these three errors were present in any printings of the single-volume hardback edition?

This one (not my photo). I'm curious how widespread it is. I was at a bookstore sometime last year thumbing through this copy, I forget which printing it was, however it was spelt 'Marzabul'. The foldout maps were also SLIGHTLY glossy, but not printed on glossy paper - sort of somewhere in between.

https://pictures.abebooks.com/SETANTABOOKS/22220408371_4.jpg

Yeah this is covered on Hammond/Scull's site:

Lord of the Rings Comparison 1
Lord of the Rings Comparison 2
Lord of the Rings Comparison 3

insurrbution wrote:
That's how mine looks; but check to see how Marazubul is spelt within the plate section - would be the middle image w/ the caption.

I'm sorry but I'm a bit confused. All my 50th and 60th Anni. FotR copies use the spelling "Leaves from the Book of Mazarbul" on the colour plate. Is there anything wrong that I'm not aware of?

Lawrence wrote:

insurrbution wrote:
That's how mine looks; but check to see how Marazubul is spelt within the plate section - would be the middle image w/ the caption.

I'm sorry but I'm a bit confused. All my 50th and 60th Anni. FotR copies use the spelling "Leaves from the Book of Mazarbul" on the colour plate. Is there anything wrong that I'm not aware of?

Nope, that copy is fine. The error was made at some point after the 6th impression but was corrected by the 14th impression. The error was 'Marzabul' for 'Mazarbul'. I think 'Marazubul' may have been a typo, insurrbution?

The correct spelling is "Mazarbul", with the error - in some printings - being "Marzabul."

(I may have spelt it wrong myself, prior to the post before this one)