Good question! I saw several smaller pieces in between other works on the shelves.
We've developed into a bunch of Nosy Parkers! HA!

The late Stu wrote:

I'd assume one of the copies of Letters is the corrected version and the other is uncorrected. I can't see any reason to have two, otherwise. The ones without the page stub fix are less common.

Is there a reason to have 5 copies of A Descriptive Bibliography?

Luckyshot wrote:

The late Stu wrote:

I'd assume one of the copies of Letters is the corrected version and the other is uncorrected. I can't see any reason to have two, otherwise. The ones without the page stub fix are less common.

Is there a reason to have 5 copies of A Descriptive Bibliography?

Is there a reason to have 5 copies of any book, probably not unless you are a collector.

I might be blind but which papers? I didn’t see anything called Tolkien Gown. Some stuff is stacked because of duplicates like the beowolfs and others.

DMRoberts wrote:

I'm wondering what's up with the papers between the two copies of Tolkien's Gown.

Nosy Parker? Now I know how you felt when I used the word “Banger” earlier!

Becky wrote:

Good question! I saw several smaller pieces in between other works on the shelves.
We've developed into a bunch of Nosy Parkers! HA!

Yes, Josh - kinda!

TolkienBookBoy68 wrote:

I might be blind but which papers? I didn’t see anything called Tolkien Gown. Some stuff is stacked because of duplicates like the beowolfs and others.

DMRoberts wrote:

I'm wondering what's up with the papers between the two copies of Tolkien's Gown.

Sorry. I can't figure out how to get the second image off...

Trotter wrote:

Luckyshot wrote:

The late Stu wrote:

I'd assume one of the copies of Letters is the corrected version and the other is uncorrected. I can't see any reason to have two, otherwise. The ones without the page stub fix are less common.

Is there a reason to have 5 copies of A Descriptive Bibliography?

Is there a reason to have 5 copies of any book, probably not unless you are a collector.

That was kind of my point. This guy bought what he liked and didn't care if he already had it. Personally I hate seeing those stockpiled, as there were so few of them and it's the best breakdown to differentiate between early printings of Tolkien's work all in one place. I'd love to have a copy, but when they rarely are available they cost more than some very cool works I'd like to own that are actually written by Tolkien.

Becky wrote:

The L'Engles aren't such a big deal, although I would guess they are 1st editions, but the set is incomplete.

They aren't first editions (if by that is meant "true firsts", i.e. first printings of the first editions of each book), but I think it's pretty safe to assume those volumes are all signed.

Aelfwine wrote:

Becky wrote:

The L'Engles aren't such a big deal, although I would guess they are 1st editions, but the set is incomplete.

They aren't first editions (if by that is meant "true firsts", i.e. first printings of the first editions of each book), but I think it's pretty safe to assume those volumes are all signed.

Probably, but it is odd that the last one is missing, especially since there were several years to get the signature after publication.