Two different January, 1903's?

[TED WILLIAMSON]

Got a January, 1903 that is the thickest magazine published by the NGS up to that time. It contains a list of current members of the Society. On the other hand, have a much slimmer January, 1903 without the membership list, both magazines neatly bound by Judd & Detweiler. Which one is the real one? Buxbaum doesn't mention this variation (at least in his first edition). Anyone care to comment?

[Melvin L. De Vilbiss]

Neither Buxbaum nor Nathan mention this - which does not mean it isn't original.

I have two originals (loose and bound) and one bound reprint - all include the membership list.

However, this might fall into the category of "author issue/reprint," or undocumented NGS reprint (that Buxbaum talks about briefly), etc.

I have encountered anomalies like this that usually represent the index or table of contents or list of illustrations missing from an issue known to have these, and the issue in hand appears undamaged and bound tightly like the missing items were meant to be missing. This would (sort of) fit into that category as the membership list falls in the back of the issue - where an index would go.

Just thinking out loud here Ted - hope it gives you some insight.

Mel

[TED WILLIAMSON]

You make some good points, Mel. Hope all is well with you and yours down there in Magnolia.

Ted

[George Thomas Wilson]

Ted,

A quick comment, an aside, and a question.

First let me say an awesome find!!!  I love hearing about what's out there in the NG world.

I was actually going to start a discussion about this particular issue in the Maps and Supplements group awhile back but some more interesting topics came up and I never got back to it.  The discussion was going to be on the lines of "When is a Supplement not a Supplement?".  My one copy is an original and it has the list of members.  The last line of the contents on the cover reads:

MEMBERSHIP LIST NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY     Supplement

My question for you is: Are your covers identical, or is this line missing from your abbreviated version?

Tom Wilson

[TED WILLIAMSON]

Excellent idea, Tom! Yes, the last item of the list of contents of both magazines is exactly what you described. An error of omission in the press room, or wherever they collated the printed pages? Mel's thought has merit as well, i.e., that it's an author issue/reprint.