web stats

CSBG Archive

2/16 – Curious Cat Asks…

You know how, for example, the current Green Lantern series would be referred to as Green Lantern (Vol. 4)? Okay, so what do you do with, say, Thor? It was Thor (Vol. 3) but now it took over the original numbering with issue #600. So is it still Thor (Vol. 3)? Or is Thor (Vol. 1)? How would you classify it?



Still Vol. 3

Vol. 1. It’s the same as Fantastic Four and Amazing Spider-Man

Omar Karindu, back from an Internet Thogal ritual

February 16, 2009 at 4:02 pm

Either is acceptable if there’s no duplication of numbers across volumes.

How does it read in the indicia?

The current Thor and Amazing Spider-Man both do not show volume numbers, I even checked the Overstreet and the current Thor run doesn’t show a volume number. later!

Michael, to my knowledge Marvel stopped putting Volume information in their comics a couple of years ago.

And I like to think it is Vol. 1, but I can see the other side of the argument just as well.

I’d go with vol.1 again.

Vol. 3

on midtowncomics.com’s shipping lists ASM is still referred to as Vol. 2, so I imagine this will be the same

Cap and Ghost Rider are on Vol. 5, Punisher is on Vol.7, etc.

Comic Collector Live lists Thor #600 under Volume 1.

As long as the TITLE hasn’t changed, then I keep them in “vol 1″.

For instance, THOR has always been titled: THOR. (or, “The Mighty Thor”, but never anything else).

Doctor Strange, however, has had several title CHANGES:
Doctor Strange (: Master of Black Magic)
Doctor Strange : Master of the Mystic Arts
Doctor Strange : Sorcerer Supreme
AND, to make matters worse, his story had continued in several anthology series as well (Premiere, Feature, Strange Tales I and II)… he’ll NEVER get to issue 300.


Until it’s indicated as Thor (Voluminous 1), detailing the adventures of Volstagg and his sidekicks Thor, Hogun, and Fandral, it isn’t awesome enough to deserve the name. Same problems arise with all issues of Heavy Metal that don’t go all the way up to Volume 11.

Anyway, the Library of Congress listing for AMAZING SPIDER-MAN (couldn’t find specific info on THOR) reads thus:

Numbering re-starts with no. 1 in Jan. 1999; issues for Jan. 1999-Nov. 2003 constitute no. 442-no. 499 of original numbering; title reverts to original numbering with no. 500 in Dec. 2003.
Issues for 1963-1998 called also v. 1; issues for 1999- called also v. 2.
No. 1 (Mar. 1963)-no. 441 (Nov. 1998); no. 1 (Jan. 1999)-no. 58 (Nov. 2003); no. 500 (Dec. 2003)-

That seems to be indicating that ASM is currently on v. 2, despite the v. 1 re-numbering. Anyone know how the Dewey Decimal System handles this sort of thing? For that matter, how does the International Mathematical Union handle this? Seems to me the whole thing brushes the edges of string-theory, what with all these volumes occupying the same issues. Another reason to hate Joe Quesada: he’s destroying the very fabric of the space-time continuum!

Well…. aside from the whole “Journey Into Mystery” thing, it’s always been THOR.



If what Cove West says is true, does that mean that if I put Thor 600 in the wrong spot in my collection, I’ll create a black hole?

Volume 3, if only because the logic behind calling this issue #600 is somewhat specious.

Brad, just for good measure, maybe you should file THOR #600 with Deathmate: Black, maybe they’ll cancel each other out. But dear Odin in Asgard, whatever you do, DO NOT file the Black Galaxy Saga anywhere near those issues of SPAWN that were published out of order or the two instances of HUMAN TORCH COMICS #4!

We fanboys are a curious lot. Explain Cable, the family tree of the JSA, the DC multiverse, Kang? No problem. Count? Uhm….

Well, seeing as how only 13 issue numbers are actually duplicated (#1-13 of the second and third volumes), it would seem that the only time a volume need be mentioned or considered would be when discussing an issue numbered 1-13. Otherwise, it doesn’t seem a problem.

The question that I must ask is this: does anyone even CARE what volume it is as long as it has the correct numbering with the correct year on it?

I probably wouldn’t classify it at all, because I would just throw it into my Thor box (not that it would fit, as I do have a Thor box and it is full because I own more of Thor than anything else, but no, I haven’t bought the JMS series and don’t plan to), but if you held a gun to my head I would say call it volume one again but shelve it after volume three or whatever.

I would classify it as “hey Marvel, you don’t get to relaunch with issue #1 and then go ‘oh sorry, actually it’s issue #600′ down the track. You get the impressively huge issue number, or you get the immediate boost with relaunched issue ones. Don’t do both, it’s *cheating*.”

As loathe as I am to admit it, JMS’ THOR is very good thus far.

imho, of course.


I read the first… three? issues. And it was a lot of plod, plod, plod. And She-Loki is dumb. But maybe I’ll catch up one day.

Perhaps some certain publishers should completely stop trying to hit the big numbers and just make on-going mini-series…kinda like what IDW does with Transformers and Star Trek. This way, collectors can keep track by date of release.
It seems to me that numbering is really quite irrelevant these days unless a comic is publicized as being a #1 or a #600. That is only certain comic companies going for sales…and there’s nothing entirely wrong with that…but, it is cheating. Thor #600 may have been the 600th comic to feature Thor, but it’s not the 600th issue of Journey Into Mystery/Mighty Thor.
So, in the case of Thor…I guess my logic would dictate that it’s both Vol. 1 and Vol. 3.

Glad I could help…

This is why I just store my comics in chronological order by title character instead of by their numbering.

…I think that may be the most OCD thing I’ve ever admitted to.

It’s even more annoying when you’re trying to store them as computer files. I have a fair few downloaded issues (most of which I own anyway but can’t be bothered getting out of storage) and while it’s easy to just place one issue behind the other in a box, ordering on a computer is a nightmare!

And if Incredible Hercules took over from Incredible Hulk, does it keep that spot in the order? Or does he get his own, and Rulk take over? Is ‘Hulk’ Volume 1, or like Volume 4 or something? (Another computer issue, Hercules comes before Hulk alphabetically, so Herc comes first)

I have a question for everyone, if you now file ASM as Vol. 1, how do you file the issues where the numbering was split?

I’d classify it as “unnecessarily goddamn confusing”

I just file them in publication order no matter the number. Why is that so confusing? I also file War Machine after the last volume of Iron Man and Iron Man after The Order, though that is mostly because I didn’t want to get more dividers.

Does Curious Cat stay up nights worrying over stuff like this? Me-oWWW!

This is why I don’t mess with volume numbers. I find that “Green Lantern #38, May 2008″ clears it up pretty nicely. There’s no chance of mixing it up with the Green Lantern #38 that came out in October of 1967.

I just pulled those issue numbers & months out of thin air to illustrate my point, so you don’t have to point out if they’re innacurrate.

I like how UHBMCC handles it – after coming back to the original numbering, they file the series separately as, lets say, “Amazing Spider-Man (I) cont.”.

Are they counting the numbering of when the title went back to being “Journey into Mystery” during Heroes Reborn?

Wait…. what…….. She-Loki ????????????????

Jezus, am I glad I still don’t read this stuff.

@Greg Hatcher: if you store your books by character, where do you put your team books?

There aren’t that many I keep up with, but generally in a short box labeled “Justice League, all titles” or “JSA all titles” in chronological order. Treating the team itself as a character.

Are they counting the numbering of when the title went back to being “Journey into Mystery” during Heroes Reborn?

I do not believe so, which is why some folks look upon this re-numbering as extremely fishy.

Wait…. what…….. She-Loki ????????????????

Jezus, am I glad I still don’t read this stuff.

I don’t love the book, but the She-Loki stuff is actually not as bad as it sounds.


The concept of the book is that the Asgardians have all returned in the bodies of humans and Thor has to get to them and “free” the Asgardians from their mortal bodies.

He did so with mostly everyone, but he can’t find Sif, which of course irritates him. And we learn that it is because Loki has hijacked the Asgardian body waiting for Sif, just in an attempt to, naturally, screw with Thor. Loki knows it will be temporary, and eventually Sif WILL return, but for now, he’s dealing with using her body because it helps his plan to screw over Thor.

So in that sense, it really is a pretty standard Loki story.


Sounds a little like Sir Tristan/Lady Tristan from Camelot 3000

But still, couldn’t they come up with a better more creative name then She-Loki?????

But still, couldn’t they come up with a better more creative name then She-Loki?????


Well, that’s not the actual name for the character in the comic – they just call him/her Loki.

That’s a fan-given name.

I long for the days when you didn’t need a frickin instruction manual to figure out the numbering of comic books.

Leave a Comment



Review Copies

Comics Should Be Good accepts review copies. Anything sent to us will (for better or for worse) end up reviewed on the blog. See where to send the review copies.

Browse the Archives