Like I said garm - from memory!!

Having now had a quick look at Steve Frisby's guide to early HM copies, it is probably a 9th impression as it has the dual imprint but no printing history on the verso.

I just love to be mis-quoted!

Q.
How do you know it is a third impression?

A.
"This is my conclusion based on the research I've done. I'm not a rare books expert, but I've done a lot of reading about the early printing of "The Fellowship of the Ring." Additionally, this book was purchased from the estate sale of a long-time librarian who had in her collection many first editions - some dating back to the Victorian era (one of which I recently sold for quite a bit of money).

The definitive source for authenticating Tolkien works is "J.R.R. Tolkien: a Descriptive Bibliography" by Wayne G. Hammond. Another valuable reference source is Tolkien Books.net. The author of that website uses the Hammond book as a source as well as his own research at Reading Library in England. He studied the early correspondence and business documents of the original publisher in England, Allen and Unwin, to create a thorough list of the printing impressions of "The Fellowship of the Ring." Please see the following link:

http://www.tolkienbooks.net/php/lotr-print-runs.php#fr

Given the fact that my copy of the book reads "PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN" in the front of the book, doesn't have a publication date listed on the copyright page, and both publishers are listed on the title page, I feel confident what I have is the real thing.

I don't have the dust jacket for this edition, though, so I have recently lowered the price of the item (as I know this would put off some buyers)."

Size may be different. My HarperCollins copies are 229mm high.

Hmmm. It's not a third impression either. The dual A&U-HM imprint on the title page dates it to the 1960s, so (from memory) more likely an 11th, 12th or 13th impression.

A-ha!! So now I know who the competition will be!