Happy anniversary everyone!
1 of 1
- Andy E. Nystrom
- One Above All (Adminstrator)
Offline 
- From: Victoria, BC
- Registered: 1/03/2020
- Posts: 6,837
Official Index to the Marvel Universe: The Avengers, Thor & Captain Am
Historical text from Comixfan:
Andy E. Nystrom
Feb 16, 2010, 12:14 pm
Coming from Marvel in May...
OFFICIAL INDEX TO THE MARVEL UNIVERSE: THE AVENGERS, THOR & CAPTAIN AMERICA #1
The chronicle of the Marvel Universe returns as the All-New Official Index to the Marvel Universe delves into the history of three more of Marvel’s most enduring titles! Return with us to the Silver and Golden Ages to we launch our coverage of the Avengers (from AVENGERS #1), Thor (from JOURNEY INTO MYSTERY #83), and Captain America (from both CAPTAIN AMERICA #100 and 1941’s CAPTAIN AMERICA COMICS #1). Watch the Marvel universe’s history unfold month by month as each issue provides synopses for dozens of individual comics, including back-up strips, introducing the characters, teams, places and equipment that appeared within, providing vital information about first appearances, where they last showed up and where they appeared next!
Rated A …$3.99
In Stores: May 5, 2010
Wow! Definitely the oldest material to be officially indexed (probably in part because in the 1980s Golden Age stuff tended not to be perceived as canon, or at least was a lot more debated, whereas nowadays most of it is). Looks like fun. I can see the advantages of doing Cap and Thor along with Avengers, as their continuities will frequently weave in and out of Avengers.
Marty P
Feb 16, 2010, 01:02 pm
Yeah...one of the reasons I didn't understand Iron Man was 'in the other one'.
Andy E. Nystrom
Feb 16, 2010, 01:10 pm
Marty P wrote:
Yeah...one of the reasons I didn't understand Iron Man was 'in the other one'.
Probably because Iron Man was probably the biggest draw he'd ever been at the time, due to Civil War and the movie. Index titles are never going to be top tier books in terms of sales so for the first index I can see it being especially important to spotlight titles that might tempt the non-converted to sampling.
DrGoodwrench
Feb 16, 2010, 05:37 pm
Wow! Definitely the oldest material to be officially indexed (probably in part because in the 1980s Golden Age stuff tended not to be perceived as canon, or at least was a lot more debated, whereas nowadays most of it is).
I'm more excited about this set of indices than the previous one for that very reason.
rplss
Feb 16, 2010, 09:50 pm
The previous series was absolutely fantastic. I'm really looking forward to this next series. I'm going to learn a lot and be amazed, I just know it!
ToddCam
May 3, 2010, 06:01 pm
Out this week?! Hooray!
bigvis497
May 5, 2010, 03:14 pm
This is really good, just picked it up today. I had no idea Thor fought Magneto so soon after his first appearance.
There's a wierd format just on Captain America's chronolgy. This index ends at the 40's Captain America Comics #5, then jumps right to the Silver Age revival. I could have sworn that there were more Golden Age Cap issues, then checking future solicitations I see that 5 Golden Age comics will be indexed while the remainder of Cap's space is dedicated indexing to his post-Silver Age revival comics. Curious as to why it wasn't just done sequentially like everything else has been, the finished product is going to be all over the place.
My theory is that the Golden Age stuff is very, very lengthy. Almost a page and a half is dedicated to indexing a single Golden Age issue, since there were always several stories crammed into one issue, not just Cap's tales. Maybe this was done to give us readers more bang for the buck? I'm guessing that if it went straight through the Golden Age, we wouldn't get to Cap's revival until the Avengers and Thor indexes are covering the late 1970's. Writers, is this the case?
Andy E. Nystrom
May 5, 2010, 06:12 pm
I can also see Cap's 1940s chronology needing extra time to be examined, given all the flashbacks there've been over the years such at the recent Theater of War books, plus some of his appearances being retroactively given to the Spirit of '76, Patriot, and Grand Director.
Roger Ott
May 5, 2010, 09:08 pm
I can also see Cap's 1940s chronology needing extra time to be examined, given all the flashbacks there've been over the years such at the recent Theater of War books, plus some of his appearances being retroactively given to the Spirit of '76, Patriot, and Grand Director.
Oh my, I can't imagine the headache involved in trying to sort out all that spaghetti-like continuity. Yikes!
captainswift
May 6, 2010, 12:20 am
It has said in the solicits for each issue of this that Cap's entry is split between Golden and Silver Age chronology. I wasn't surprised.
Andy E. Nystrom
May 6, 2010, 12:14 pm
Really nice looking look as always.
A couple of nitpicks: I might remove the "rock" part of the Thing's decription in Avengers#1. While he was often inked during that era as rocks he was pencilled by Kirby as more of a dinosaur hide. While he became definitively rocky eventually I don't think there was consensus in this time period; certainly his drawing in #1 could be taken either way.
I would also argue that duen to his honorary status Rick Jones was a supporting character in the early issues and not a feature character, albeit more directly in the action than Jarvis usually is.
Avengers#4: under villains, Zemo's next appearance is probably What If#4, not 5. I've never read #4 but I'm pretty sure that's the only wholely 616 story in What If
ToddCam
May 8, 2010, 11:37 am
I haven't gotten far into it yet, but it's wonderful, as always.
I found an error. In Avengers #16, it has Quicksilver, the Scarlet Witch, and Hawkeye added to the Feature Characters. Their last appearances here are their chronological last appearances (in Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes), and their actual last appearances are omitted. I'm fairly sure that the twins had last appeared in X-Men #11. Is Hawkeye Tales of Suspense #64?
Andy E. Nystrom
May 8, 2010, 09:52 pm
More questions: in the Captain America section why is his descriptor given in Captain America #100 rather than in Captain America Comics#1?
Also the Thor pre-#83 section mentions BICMW, which is not in the abbreviations section; what does that stand for? I'm guessing it isn't a series devoted to a Bic lighter for men and women. 
Avengers#3 mentions Smash!#36, '66; given the number of issues and date this can't refer to the Hulk Smash! mini unless there's a few typos here; what was this title? I'm not familiar with it
oenglish
May 9, 2010, 12:24 am
Also the Thor pre-#83 section mentions BICMW, which is not in the abbreviations section; what does that stand for? I'm guessing it isn't a series devoted to a Bic lighter for men and women.
Avengers#3 mentions Smash!#36, '66; given the number of issues and date this can't refer to the Hulk Smash! mini unless there's a few typos here; what was this title? I'm not familiar with it
Never seen it myself, but Smash! appears to have been a British publication; for more information see
No clue on BICMW, sorry!
Sidney Osinga
May 9, 2010, 01:02 am
I got it this last Wednesday. I haven't read it yet (still have a big pile of books from Free Comics Book Day), but I have skimmed through it and am quite impressed. I have 28 of the 39 Avengers issue featured in this book.
Anyways, I found what might be a mistake. In Avengers #7, Baron Zemo was referred to once as Dr. Zemo, as he was in #6. Shouldn't that have been mentioned in the note for #7?
ToddCam
May 14, 2010, 11:08 pm
Just finished it, and went over it again. Awesome stuff. I love the distinctions between the flashbacks. It makes it a lot less confusing.
On further inspection, it seems that same "last appearance" problem is also there for Iron Man in Avengers #1.
It mentions that Journey Into Mystery #108 is the last appearance of the Dwarf King Sindri. Doesn't he appear again in the New Mutants Special Edition (1985, I think)?
Eric J. Moreels
May 15, 2010, 01:50 am
There's a bunch of abbreviations in this issue that didn't make it into the Key at the back, and one at least that I saw that wasn't consistent between sections (OHMU A-Z Vol. 12 in one section, OHMU HC #9 in another).
I'm working my way through these to add them to the key here ().
And on another note, they're indexing house ads now? Seriously? IMO that's space that would be better devoted to more chronologies and the like. I can't see anyone being more interested in knowing when Hawkeye pitched Avengers t-shirts rather than reading another sidebar chronology.
ToddCam
May 16, 2010, 09:45 pm
^^Nix that stuff about Sindri. I was thinking of Eitri, who is also a dwarf. My bad!
Roger Ott
May 17, 2010, 01:26 pm
Hey, it's understandable. Those dwarf names all kinda blend together after awhile.
Blue_Shield
May 18, 2010, 01:49 am
There's a bunch of abbreviations in this issue that didn't make it into the Key at the back, and one at least that I saw that wasn't consistent between sections (OHMU A-Z Vol. 12 in one section, OHMU HC #9 in another).
I'm working my way through these to add them to the key here ().
And on another note, they're indexing house ads now? Seriously? IMO that's space that would be better devoted to more chronologies and the like. I can't see anyone being more interested in knowing when Hawkeye pitched Avengers t-shirts rather than reading another sidebar chronology.
I agree with you about the house ads. I thought it was a strange addition.
Stuart V
May 27, 2010, 07:27 am
This is really good, just picked it up today. I had no idea Thor fought Magneto so soon after his first appearance.
There's a wierd format just on Captain America's chronolgy. This index ends at the 40's Captain America Comics #5, then jumps right to the Silver Age revival. I could have sworn that there were more Golden Age Cap issues, then checking future solicitations I see that 5 Golden Age comics will be indexed while the remainder of Cap's space is dedicated indexing to his post-Silver Age revival comics. Curious as to why it wasn't just done sequentially like everything else has been, the finished product is going to be all over the place.
My theory is that the Golden Age stuff is very, very lengthy. Almost a page and a half is dedicated to indexing a single Golden Age issue, since there were always several stories crammed into one issue, not just Cap's tales. Maybe this was done to give us readers more bang for the buck? I'm guessing that if it went straight through the Golden Age, we wouldn't get to Cap's revival until the Avengers and Thor indexes are covering the late 1970's. Writers, is this the case?
We really wanted to give fans both Gold and Silver Age Cap, for a slew of reasons. One is spacing - Golden Age takes up a disproportionate amount of space, and we'd likely find ourselves not getting to Silver Age until the other sections were into the 1990s, not the 1970s. Another is that it takes more time to research. Once you get past Masterworks, the writers handling that section have to go to public libraries which have microfiche of Golden Age titles - thus fewer writers are in a position to handle the workload and it takes them longer to do so (you can't do it in the evenings, but have to take time out of the day job or on weekends, lose time travelling, etc.) To ask them to then write 20 odd pages worth of entries per month without the option of splitting the workload between several writers just wasn't feasible.
I can also see Cap's 1940s chronology needing extra time to be examined, given all the flashbacks there've been over the years such at the recent Theater of War books, plus some of his appearances being retroactively given to the Spirit of '76, Patriot, and Grand Director.
And then there's this. Yes, the chronologies are convoluted, and although a lot of it has already been worked out, there's new retcon appearances going in of late.
Really nice looking look as always.
A couple of nitpicks: I might remove the "rock" part of the Thing's decription in Avengers#1. While he was often inked during that era as rocks he was pencilled by Kirby as more of a dinosaur hide. While he became definitively rocky eventually I don't think there was consensus in this time period; certainly his drawing in #1 could be taken either way.
True, but the descriptive intros are meant to be somewhat generic and brief. And he also arguably might be rocky here, as you note - if it was outright wrong at this point in his life, we'd have left it out, but since it was borderline and he will be unquestionably rocky soon after this point, the "rocky" descriptor was left in.
I would also argue that duen to his honorary status Rick Jones was a supporting character in the early issues and not a feature character, albeit more directly in the action than Jarvis usually is.
Lots of debate happened on this point, but the eventual decision came down to him being a team member - he was one right from the outset, even if only honourary, hence when he was active here he was listed as a feature character.
Avengers#4: under villains, Zemo's next appearance is probably What If#4, not 5. I've never read #4 but I'm pretty sure that's the only wholely 616 story
in What If I'll check, but iirc, his What If #4 appearance was purely in fb to this story - I don't think it added any new details. The rest of WI #4 did, but not the Zemo part.
I haven't gotten far into it yet, but it's wonderful, as always.
I found an error. In Avengers #16, it has Quicksilver, the Scarlet Witch, and Hawkeye added to the Feature Characters. Their last appearances here are their chronological last appearances (in Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes), and their actual last appearances are omitted. I'm fairly sure that the twins had last appeared in X-Men #11. Is Hawkeye Tales of Suspense #64?
Yes, actual lasts should have been in there. I'll check and confirm what they were - you are likely right with what you've suggested.
More questions: in the Captain America section why is his descriptor given in Captain America #100 rather than in Captain America Comics#1?
Different writers and editors on each section. It's not wrong per se to have it in Cap #100, as the start of a "new" section; arguably it should have been in CapC #1 as well, but I think it was left out because the story synopses covered his origin and hence his descriptor would have simply duplicated that content less concisely.
Also the Thor pre-#83 section mentions BICMW, which is not in the abbreviations section; what does that stand for? I'm guessing it isn't a series devoted to a Bic lighter for men and women.
Unsure off the top of my head. I'll check.
Avengers#3 mentions Smash!#36, '66; given the number of issues and date this can't refer to the Hulk Smash! mini unless there's a few typos here; what was this title? I'm not familiar with it
Never seen it myself, but Smash! appears to have been a British publication; for more information see
Correct. The first ever UK original Marvel material, pre-dating there being a Marvel UK.
Anyways, I found what might be a mistake. In Avengers #7, Baron Zemo was referred to once as Dr. Zemo, as he was in #6. Shouldn't that have been mentioned in the note for #7?
Probably, though to be fair, the notes are meant to be a general catch-all, and while we like to note errors or stuff like this, it's not automatically part of the remit - we sometimes cut stuff like that if we think it too minor or if space is tight.
Just finished it, and went over it again. Awesome stuff. I love the distinctions between the flashbacks. It makes it a lot less confusing.
Glad you like it. We revisited various formatting points between volumes, and felt how we handled flashbacks really needed a rethink.
On further inspection, it seems that same "last appearance" problem is also there for Iron Man in Avengers #1.
Blast. One for the errata. Thanks for spotting it.
There's a bunch of abbreviations in this issue that didn't make it into the Key at the back, and one at least that I saw that wasn't consistent between sections (OHMU A-Z Vol. 12 in one section, OHMU HC #9 in another).
Apologies on missing some of the abbreviations. Since the exact list changes each issue, it does happen, but we try to catch the ommissions. I'll raise the point about the inconsistency too, so that hopefully we don't repeat it in later issues.
And on another note, they're indexing house ads now? Seriously? IMO that's space that would be better devoted to more chronologies and the like. I can't see anyone being more interested in knowing when Hawkeye pitched Avengers t-shirts rather than reading another sidebar chronology.
House ads were noted in some of the Avengers issues, mostly because they were some of the first such ads, and hence we felt them to be of interest for that reason. It's not going to be carried on through the whole run.
Hey, it's understandable. Those dwarf names all kinda blend together after awhile.
Dwarfist. 
Eric J. Moreels
May 28, 2010, 08:54 am
Apologies on missing some of the abbreviations. Since the exact list changes each issue, it does happen, but we try to catch the ommissions. I'll raise the point about the inconsistency too, so that hopefully we don't repeat it in later issues.
No apologies necessary, Stuart. I know from experience how demanding the Index books are! I was merely pointing it out so that it might be addressed for future volumes.
Also, if it helps, I'm keeping track of the abbreviations in the Index issues in this thread (). I try and update that thread with the key from each new issue as it's released, and then add omissions as I get time to read through them.
1 of 1
*****HAPPY TWENTIETH ANNIVERSARY EVERYBODY!!! 2004-2024*****