1992 India Paper LoTR

No you are right - 1 or 2 a year on ebay i reckon
Ironically one came up recentl- sold for £56
No idea re numbers but remains one of the nicer versions i think

laurel wrote:
No you are right - 1 or 2 a year on ebay i reckon
Ironically one came up recentl- sold for £56
No idea re numbers but remains one of the nicer versions i think

Yep, I bought that one Slight damage to one of the box corners, which I should be able to tidy up, but otherwise a decent copy. I've only seen it come up a handful of times and the asking price previously has always been more than I have been prepared to pay, so I was glad to get it this time around.

Nice 1
Got mine a few years ago - poorly listed

Poorly described auctions are usually the best ones. Sometimes an element of risk, mind!

Paid £23 for my copy (eBay) back in 2009. It's a tidy little deluxe, but pretty scarce; not sure if I've even noticed as many, as laurel suggests, of one or two a year.

BH

Think some of them may have been issued with a set of Royal Mail Tolkien Centenary Stamps (£6) also. Have seen a few listed with the stamps included.

remy wrote:
Think some of them may have been issued with a set of Royal Mail Tolkien Centenary Stamps (£6) also. Have seen a few listed with the stamps included.

Any idea if it was just the book and the stamps or was there some other packaging also tying the two items together (metaphorically not physically)? I'm wondering if it was a HarperCollins thing or something specific to one of the UK book retailers of the era (e.g. WH Smiths).

My copy did not have any stamps with it.

I assume that the set referred to was the booklet as below










I don't think they were ever sold together.

The May 2012 issue of American Philately had an excellent article on Middle-earth stamp collecting, for those that are interested. It is available (in PDF form) to download here:

http://stamps.org/userfiles/file/AP/feature/Feature_05_12.pdf

Note there is a typo in the figure caption for this booklet in question, on page 4. The caption says it came out in 1998. The article just below correctly states the 1992 year of issue.