Question about X-Men Forever #5
Posted by Jeph! on April 02, 2001 at 14:54:58:

I have a question (or, a theory?) on the future-sequence in X-Men 
Forever #5.

In this sequence, our protagonists find themselves inhabiting their 
own bodies in the year 2014, in a future commonly known as the "Days 
of Future Past" timeline.  Jean Grey, however, is inhabiting the 
body of Rachel Summers, since in this timeline Jean was dead by 
2014.

Writer Fabian Nicieza makes a larger-than-usual deal about the fact 
that this is an *alternate* DoFP timeline from the one depicted in 
UX 141-142  he states that although this world's Kate Pryde did 
travel back in time to save Senator Kelly, she wasn't the Kate Pryde 
that came back to *our* time.  This seems to be an important point 
to Fabian.

Now, since I know at least one of you (Paul?) was involved in 
checking the background of the chronology for this series, maybe 
you can tell me the significance of Fabe's distinction.  Why was 
it so important that this be an alternate, yet similar DoFP?

A long time ago, the X-heads in the r.a.c.m.x-books newsgroup came 
up with a theory to explain a dangling continuity problem with 
Phoenix III (Rachel Summers).  The problem goes: in UX 141-142, 
Kate Pryde travels back from 2013, trying to stop the Brotherhood 
of Evil Mutants from assassinating Senator Kelly, Moira MacTaggert, 
and Charles Xavier.  She claims that they all died in one massive 
attack on the capitol.  These issues also introduced, in 2013, a 
young woman named Rachel  later to be revealed as the daughter of 
Scott and Jean.

However, in UX 184, Rachel travels back in time herself to join the 
modern-day X-Men.  Over time, bits of her past are revealed  including 
a flashback (NM 14, I think) that shows her, as a child, living in 
Xavier's mansion the day the government storms in and kills everyone 
presnt  including Illyana Rasputin and Charles Xavier.

If, the argument goes, in this timeline Charles Xavier died in UX 141 
alongside Senator Kelly, how could he have been there in Rachel's 
childhood to be killed at the seige of the mansion?

The fans created a theory: there are two DoFP timelines.  One where 
Xavier died with Kelly, one where he died at the mansion's seige, 
both resulting in very similar timelines.  The fans further say that 
the Kate Pryde that visited our time in UX 141 was from the first 
timeline; the Rachel Summers that traveled back in UX 184 was from 
the second.

So far, this is only fan theory.  The "two" timelines could very well 
be the same: Xavier could have been merely hurled into a coma, not 
killed, from the events of Kelly's assassination, and Kate Pryde 
could have been speaking quickly or using hyperbole.  But the point 
remains: Fabian used fans to help research the book.  Could someone 
have told him the "two DoFPs" theory, and could he be using it in 
this sequence?  Was he making a big deal out of the point that this 
*wasn't* the timeline seen in UX 141-142, but *was* the timeline that 
spawned "our" Rachel Summers?  Is this the first canon proof of the 
"two DoFPs" theory?

More to the point, what are the chances that we saw "our" Rachel 
Summers in that sequence, and need to add the issue to her MCP 
chronology?

Don't let me down, Paul.  :-)
	-Jeph!

			*	*	*

Re: Question about X-Men Forever #5
Posted by Paul O'Brien on April 03, 2001 at 03:48:34:
In Reply to: Question about X-Men Forever #5
posted by Jeph! on April 02, 2001 at 14:54:58:

> Don't let me down, Paul.  :-)

In story terms, I think the point is simply that there's tons of 
these marginally different DOFP timelines out there (and numerous 
contradictory versions have already been depicted), of which this 
issue features one.  It doesn't matter which one.

Why specify it as not being the first one we saw?  I have a vague 
feeling Iceman was established as dead in that timeline, but I 
couldn't swear to that.

As for the "two Rachels" thing - it's a continuity error.  To my 
mind, it doesn't justify complicating her already insane continuity 
further by trying to explain it away as a variant timeline.

			*	*	*

Re: Question about X-Men Forever #5
Posted by Jeph! on April 03, 2001 at 08:43:12:
In Reply to: Re: Question about X-Men Forever #5
posted by Paul O'Brien on April 03, 2001 at 03:48:34:

> As for the "two Rachels" thing - it's a continuity error.  To my 
mind, it doesn't justify complicating her already insane continuity 
further by trying to explain it away as a variant timeline.

Oh good.  Thank you.  :)  I'm having a hard enough time with Rob 
Weinberg erasing the validity of Rachel's founding the Clan Askani...

	-Jeph!

By the way, was Rachel the daughter of a de-powered Phoenix Force, 
or the real Jean Grey?  I'm looking through her flashback-chronology 
and trying to figure out what Alan Davis did to her.

			*	*	*

Re: Question about X-Men Forever #5
Posted by Paul O'Brien on April 03, 2001 at 09:53:52:
In Reply to: Re: Question about X-Men Forever #5
posted by Jeph! on April 03, 2001 at 08:43:12:

The official line is that she's the daughter of a de-powered Phoenix 
force.  Indeed, her entire story arc as the daughter of Phoenix makes 
no sense otherwise.  Alan Davis did a needlessly confusing issue of 
Excalibur which (apparently due to botched research on his part) 
attempted to retcon her into being the daughter of Jean Grey from a 
timeline in which Jean Grey never became Phoenix in the first place, 
and gave an entire history for that timeline which was completely 
irreconcilable with the character's established history.  The issue 
is mainly a flashback narrated by the Phoenix force and, somewhere 
buried deep in the later issues of Alan Davis' run, there's a 
throwaway line of dialogue in which the Phoenix force vaguely seems 
to admit having lied about the much of the flashback.  Where the 
Excalibur story conflicts with anything else, Excalibur is wrong.

			*	*	*

DOFP divergence point(s)? (was Re: Question about X-Men Forever #5)
Posted by StAkAr Karnak on April 04, 2001 at 15:39:08:
In Reply to: Question about X-Men Forever #5
posted by Jeph! on April 02, 2001 at 14:54:58:

I'm very deficient in X-books lore, but was wondering whether a 
divergence point from the Mainstream MU for the Days of Future's 
Past timelines has been established as yet and where this might 
be.

Thanks,
- StAkAr Karnak

			*	*	*

Re: DOFP divergence point(s)? (was Re: Question about X-Men Forever #5)
Posted by Paul O'Brien on April 05, 2001 at 08:44:06:
In Reply to: DOFP divergence point(s)? (was Re: Question about X-Men 
Forever #5)
posted by StAkAr Karnak on April 04, 2001 at 15:39:08:

There are various conflicting stories, and since these days "DOFP" 
is just an all-purpose term for any version of the future where the 
Sentinels end up winning, it's probably meaningless to talk of a 
single divergence point.

Sticking to the original timeline (Rachel Summers' homeworld, in 
other words), the original idea was that it diverted when the X-Men 
prevented the (first) assassination of Robert Kelly.  That was then 
retconned because they wanted to have Rachel as Jean's daughter, so 
they shifted the divergence point back and declared that DOFP had 
diverged at the end of the Dark Phoenix Saga, when Phoenix didn't 
commit suicide, the X-Men lost the trial by combat, and the Shi'ar 
removed her powers.  (That's the original ending of the story that 
was vetoed.)  This remains the official line today.

There is a very curious issue of Excalibur in which the Phoenix 
force gives a conflicting history for Rachel and claims that her 
timeline diverged when Jean never became Phoenix in the first place, 
but this is plainly a continuity error and makes no sense with the 
rest of the stories, so it seems to have been dismissed as a 
falsified flashback.

			*	*	*

What he said. :)  *nt*
Posted by Jeph! on April 05, 2001 at 08:53:44:
In Reply to: Re: DOFP divergence point(s)? (was Re: Question about 
X-Men Forever #5)
posted by Paul O'Brien on April 05, 2001 at 08:44:06:

Is it proper to do *no-text* posts on this forum, or is it 
considered too "low-class"?

			*	*	*

Re: What he said. :)  *nt*
Posted by Russ Chappell on April 05, 2001 at 19:17:10:
In Reply to: What he said. :)  *nt*
posted by Jeph! on April 05, 2001 at 08:53:44:

> Is it proper to do *no-text* posts on this forum, or is it 
considered too "low-class"?

They're acceptable, as long as you meet two conditions.

1. Let the visitor know that there's no text by putting *nt* in 
the header; and

2. The header must serve the purpose of the post and contribute in 
some way. Posting an empty message with the header "I agree! *nt*" 
or "What he said :) *nt*" doesn't serve a purpose, unless the thread 
is conducting a poll of some sort. Jeph, note that you're okay here, 
because your post wasn't empty, and other than running the risk that 
some people might not read the message, you've committed no sin 
because you've asked a valid question. However, if your post had 
been truly empty, we would frowned on it, since the subject by 
itself didn't shine any light on the discussion.

Empty posts without *nt* in the topic will be deleted, because 
we'll assume the poster made a mistake and didn't intend to post 
an empty message. nt posts that contribute nothing in the subject 
will be deleted, because, well, because they don't contribute.

			*	*	*

Answers and questions.
Posted by Jeph! on April 05, 2001 at 08:51:53:
In Reply to: DOFP divergence point(s)? (was Re: Question about X-Men 
Forever #5)
posted by StAkAr Karnak on April 04, 2001 at 15:39:08:

> I was wondering whether a divergence point from the Mainstream MU 
for the Days of Future's Past timelines has been established as yet 
and where this might be.

As far as I know...
::deep breath, guessing::

The original DoFP timeline split off definitively from our own at 
UX 137.  (This is based on Paul O'B's comment that Rachel's mother 
was the Phoenix Force in Jean's form.)  Quite how Kate Pryde was 
able to travel back and end up in *our* UX 141, when their timeline 
split at 137, has never been explained as anything more than "oops".

Other "evil" futures, however, have been shown in X-lore, all with 
different divergence points.  Cable's future, where Apocalypse ruled, 
seems to have been cancelled out after the recent Twelve crossover.  
Bishop's future, with the "X-Traitor" mystery, apparently diverged 
from our own at "Onslaught: X-Men".  And several other iterations 
of the DoFP timeline have been shown in comics such as What If? (v1) 
#27 and (v2) #32-33...

A continuity question, however: when we *have* seen stories that 
return to the DoFP idea, are they all in the *same* future-
continuity?  I mean, can the following all be resolved into one 
linear timeline?

"Days of Future Present" crossover (FF and X-annuals)
"Wolverine: Days of Future Past" limited series
Excalibur #66-67
Excalibur #94

Or, are they all different, examples of the various myriad of 
DoFP-like timelines that "X-Men Forever" insinuates are approaching?

	-Jeph!

			*	*	*

Nameless One
Posted by Masoud on April 05, 2001 at 09:26:18:

The Nameless One (I think the one designated II) appears in 
Sub-Mariner #22 and Incredible Hulk #126, recently reprinted in 
the Day of the Defenders Special.

			*	*	*

Scourge/Nomad?
Posted by Peter Lin on April 09, 2001 at 03:32:55:

I know you're busy people at the MCP, and that I can be somewhat 
vague when describing, so I decided to post this here, just in case 
someone else can clarify better.

In Thunderbolts #49, Scourge (III) is revealed to be Jack Monroe, 
the former Nomad (III). However, although MCP reflects TB 44 on 
Nomad III's list, it does not link to Scourge III, which reflects 
TB 38-46. Is this simply because 

			*	*	*

Shadowmasters
Posted by Peter Lin on April 09, 2001 at 03:42:01:

As you might have guessed by now... I only found the MCP today and 
am very very excited by the prospect of a whole neighbourhood of 
continuity freaks. Also, I wish to apologize for my last post about 
Scourge/Nomad. I meant to click reset, but instead clicked post. Bad, 
bad trigger finger.

I've recently discovered a group of Japanese/American heroes called 
the Shadowmasters. Apparently there was a 1989 4-issue miniseries, 
as well as appearances in Punisher 24 and 25. Could anyone who has 
these issues please add them to the MCP? Thanks. I just want to see 
the MCP as complete as possible, it's superb! Russ, you deserve more 
than just that mention in the Incredible Internet Guide to Comic 
Books and Superheroes.

Peter

			*	*	*

Re: Shadowmasters
Posted by Andy Holcombe on April 12, 2001 at 14:17:10:
In Reply to: Shadowmasters
posted by Peter Lin on April 09, 2001 at 03:42:01:

They first appeared in Punisher War Journal #1 with followup 
appearances in PWJ# 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9 prior to Punisher #24 & 25.

			*	*	*

someone help me with the chronolgy for characters in ff:the world's 
greatest comic magazine
Posted by comico on April 10, 2001 at 20:06:54:

i'm a continuity and chronolgy freak so i love to figure out this 
kind of stuff,but some of this is too hard even for me

characters we know chronology of

fantastic four:in between ff #100 & 101
others i don't know.....anyone got the issues?

			*	*	*

Re: someone help me with the chronolgy for characters in ff:the 
world's greatest comic magazine
Posted by Jeph! on April 10, 2001 at 21:58:40:
In Reply to: someone help me with the chronolgy for characters 
in ff:the world's greatest comic magazine
posted by comico on April 10, 2001 at 20:06:54:

> fantastic four:in between ff #100 & 101
> others i don't know.....anyone got the issues?

I'm trying to puzzle over the X-Men's appearance, myself.  
"Currently", they're appearing in X-Men: the Hidden Years, and 
the FF just appeared in that book (issues 7-8?), with an appearance 
that was placed around FF 98.

That means that FF:TWGCM takes place shortly after those issues 
of XHY.  However, all the X-Men -- the original five, Professor X, 
Havok and Polaris -- appear concurrently in FF:TWGCM #3 and 4, and 
they haven't all been at the mansion at the same time in the entire 
run of XHY so far.  One or the other of them is always missing; 
first Iceman, currently Professor X.  I expect that after the 
X-Men's current adventure with The Promise (XHY 18-19), there will 
be a brief period where they are all home at once -- and *that* 
will be where their appearance in FF:TWGCM fits in.

Of course, we may have to wait until the series' final issue (#22) 
for this to occur...

	-Jeph!

			*	*	*

Re: someone help me with the chronolgy for characters in ff:the 
world's greatest comic magazine
Posted by Peter Lin on April 11, 2001 at 02:38:00:
In Reply to: Re: someone help me with the chronolgy for characters 
in ff:the world's greatest comic magazine
posted by Jeph! on April 10, 2001 at 21:58:40:

Isn't the series out of continuity? Of course, I could be mistaken.

			*	*	*

Re: someone help me with the chronolgy for characters in ff:the 
world's greatest comic magazine
Posted by Johnny PT on April 11, 2001 at 21:05:23:
In Reply to: Re: someone help me with the chronolgy for characters 
in ff:the world's greatest comic magazine
posted by Peter Lin on April 11, 2001 at 02:38:00:

> Isn't the series out of continuity?

At the moment, it's very much in continuity-fit in snugly between 
FF #100 & 101.  Of course things may get so out of hand that we'll 
never be able to fit everybody and everything into place (the X-Men 
being one example-pretty good explanation Jeph, I'm for that), but 
we'll worry about that in November.

			*	*	*

Avengers/Beast
Posted by Andy Holcombe on April 12, 2001 at 14:25:36:

Why does the Beast chronology list Avengers #145 and 146 after 149.  
If this is how the story reads, please make a note of things like 
this because otherwise it looks like you messed up.

			*	*	*

Re: Avengers/Beast
Posted by Johnny PT on April 12, 2001 at 20:39:43:
In Reply to: Avengers/Beast
posted by Andy Holcombe on April 12, 2001 at 14:25:36:

Those two issues were fill ins by during the Englehart-Perez 
Squadron Supreme/Serpent Crown storyline.  There's a question 
whether 145 & 146 are even possible given Avengers membership 
at the time and the circumstances surrounding it (namely, Hawkeye's 
trips to the Old West and if Hank and Jan were out of the hospital).  
There's a lot of instances on the MCP where issues are out of order 
because it's the only way they work chronologically.

			*	*	*

Maximum Security 1 (Italian edition)
Posted by Max Brighel on April 14, 2001 at 03:20:06:

Guys, I'm having a little trouble recognising some of the aliens 
in Maximum Security 1. Namely, on page 11 (2nd panel), 12 (the 
three of them), 16 (the one with DD), 29 (fourth panel), 30 (first 
panel), and 33 (first panel). All the contributors will be awarded 
with a onorary mention on the italian edition of MS 1. Thanks and 
best regards from the editor. 

			*	*	*

Re: Maximum Security 1 (Italian edition)
Posted by Russ Chappell on April 14, 2001 at 21:53:42:
In Reply to: Maximum Security 1 (Italian edition)
posted by Max Brighel on April 14, 2001 at 03:20:06:

> Guys, I'm having a little trouble recognising some of the aliens in 
Maximum Security 1. Namely, on page 11 (2nd panel), 12 (the three of 
them), 16 (the one with DD), 29 (fourth panel), 30 (first panel), and 
33 (first panel). 

Page 33, first panel? That would be, ummmm, Duane Freeman, I 
suppose.

Seriously Max, I hope you get some sort of response, cause I'm 
stumped on most of them. Perhaps some of them might appear under 
the alien races appendices in the Marvel Handbooks. Many of them, 
I think, such as the Badoon battling Spider-Man in page 33 panel 2, 
are not particular characters, but just nameless representatives 
of alien races.

			*	*	*

Re: Maximum Security 1 (Italian edition)
Posted by Paulo Costa on April 16, 2001 at 02:05:53:
In Reply to: Maximum Security 1 (Italian edition)
posted by Max Brighel on April 14, 2001 at 03:20:06:

> Guys, I'm having a little trouble recognising some of the aliens 
in Maximum Security 1. Namely, on page 11 (2nd panel), 12 (the three 
of them), 16 (the one with DD), 29 (fourth panel), 30 (first panel), 
and 33 (first panel). 

On page 12, panel 2, they are, from letft to right: unknown, unknown, 
Gunthar (a Rigelian), Levan, Kell (a Taurian) and unknown. The ones I 
identified used to hang out with Nebula.

On page 33... there's a Badoon in the midscreen... and the one on the 
left kinda looks like Cthulhu, don't he?

PC

			*	*	*

Re: Maximum Security 1 (Italian edition)
Posted by Yellow Claw on April 19, 2001 at 05:21:10:
In Reply to: Maximum Security 1 (Italian edition)
posted by Max Brighel on April 14, 2001 at 03:20:06:

When the series came out, Prime Eternal listed them all on the 
Avengers Message Board, and Kurt Busiek filled in the gaps. These 
posts should be in the archives.

The board address is http://www.comicboards.com/avengers, then you 
want to click on archives/search and enter Maximum Security. It 
might take some searching, but it's there.

Hope this helps,

Yellow Claw.

			*	*	*

A little help from Daredevil fans, please...
Posted by Michael Blayde Bentz on April 15, 2001 at 19:20:50:

Was the Gladiator who appeared in the recent Daredevil/Spider-Man 
mini-series the same one (Melvin Potter) who has been around for 
much of the book's history?

It didn't look like him at all, and Paul Jenkins (the writer) never 
clarified if it was him or not.

Thanks.

			*	*	*

Re: A little help from Daredevil fans, please...
Posted by comico on April 16, 2001 at 04:42:59:
In Reply to: A little help from Daredevil fans, please...
posted by Michael Blayde Bentz on April 15, 2001 at 19:20:50:

my guess is that it is melvin potter,although one of the other 
posters could yet prove me wrong

comico

			*	*	*

Re: A little help from Daredevil fans, please...
Posted by Paul O'Brien on April 16, 2001 at 06:08:25:
In Reply to: A little help from Daredevil fans, please...
posted by Michael Blayde Bentz on April 15, 2001 at 19:20:50:

Well, they were all meant to be established super-villains who had 
met in jail, so unless there's some very pressing reason why it can't 
be the original Gladiator (more than a change of costume or hairstyle), 
I'd say it was the same guy.

Didn't Kesel and Kelly use this guy in their runs on Daredevil?  How 
did he look in their stories?

			*	*	*

a couple of chronological possibilities:re x-men the hidden years
Posted by comico on April 16, 2001 at 04:46:15:

have been trying in my head to figure out x-men:the hidden years 
chronologies in regards to a couple of more recent villains. we 
know now that kraven the hunter was in #17,my guess is this might 
come after amazing spider-man #111(although this is just a guess)

and we see mole man in #19,i think this might be after hulk #127,
or maybe fantastic four #88,anyone else have ideas?

comico

			*	*	*

Re: a couple of chronological possibilities:re x-men the hidden years
Posted by Russ Chappell on April 16, 2001 at 20:13:29:
In Reply to: a couple of chronological possibilities:re x-men the 
hidden years
posted by comico on April 16, 2001 at 04:46:15:

Although I've only read issue 16 so far, Spider-Man's chronology (in 
relation to the Fantastic Four) suggests that Kraven appears here 
sometime before Astonishing Tales #1.

			*	*	*

Zodiac questions, and Geirrodur
Posted by Sean Curtin on April 16, 2001 at 17:58:48:

First question: Why aren't the members of the android versions of 
the Zodiac included in the MCP?

Second question: Which incarnation of the Zodiac was involved in 
the "First Sign" Avengers crossover not too long before Herose 
Reborn?

Also: the entry for Geirrodur says that his first appearance was 
JIM #504, but my Official Handbook says that it was JIM #101.  
Slight discrepancy. ;)

-Sean Curtin

			*	*	*

Re: Zodiac questions, and Geirrodur
Posted by Russ Chappell on April 16, 2001 at 20:09:44:
In Reply to: Zodiac questions, and Geirrodur
posted by Sean Curtin on April 16, 2001 at 17:58:48:

> First question: Why aren't the members of the android versions 
of the Zodiac included in the MCP?

Where did they appear?

			*	*	*

Re: Zodiac questions, and Geirrodur
Posted by comico on April 16, 2001 at 20:14:52:
In Reply to: Re: Zodiac questions, and Geirrodur
posted by Russ Chappell on April 16, 2001 at 20:09:44:

> > First question: Why aren't the members of the android versions 
of the Zodiac included in the MCP?

> Where did they appear?

off the top of my head russ,i think west coast avengers 26-29 is 
their last appearanes,iron man #183 featured an appearance by one 
of them(taurus android,i think)

			*	*	*

Zodiacs, Scorpios and Nick Fury L.M.D.s
Posted by Don Campbell on May 29, 2001 at 14:24:57:
In Reply to: Re: Zodiac questions, and Geirrodur
posted by Russ Chappell on April 16, 2001 at 20:09:44:

> > First question: Why aren't the members of the android versions 
of the Zodiac included in the MCP?

> Where did they appear?

So far, the android Zodiac has appeared (as a group) in only three 
different storylines, first in the Defenders, then in West Coast 
Avengers Annual #1, and most recently in WCA2 #26-28.  In order to 
most accurately cover the android Zodiac, I will have to deal with 
the other Zodiacs as well.  Since the androids first appeared during 
the original Zodiac's existence, some of the Zodiac members already 
listed will have to be renumbered.  Also, for the sake of convenience, 
I will be dealing with the various characters by grouping them 
together under the headings of the Zodiac organizations to which 
they belonged.

ZODIAC I was a criminal organization that first appeared in 
Avengers #72 and existed until it was wiped out by the android 
Zodiac in West Coast Avengers (vol.2) #26.  The only known survivor 
is LIBRA.  Most of the chronologies for its members are accurate 
but some need to be edited slightly.  Nine of the twelve founding 
members kept their positions throughout the group's existence but 
three members were replaced.  In the cases of Aquarius and Aries, 
the replacement members first appeared after the android Zodiac 
debuted so I have chosen to bump the replacement members' numbers 
up one to make room for the androids of the same names.

Chronologies remain unchanged for the following members: 
Aquarius/Darren Bentley, Aries/Marcus Lassiter, Cancer/Jack Kleveno, 
Capricorn/Willard Weir, Pisces/Noah Perricone and Taurus/Cornelius 
Van Lunt.

Aquarius II is accurate but should be changed to "Aquarius III" to 
make room for Aquarius II of the android Zodiac.

Aries II/Grover Raymoend is accurate except that he did NOT appear 
in IM 184, IM 185 or WCA2 26.  Aries II DIED at the end of Captain 
America 178 and it was his disinterred corpse that appeared in the 
Iron Man 2000 Annual.

Aries III is allocated to the Zodiac android.

Aries IV appeared only in IM 184.  Although this Aries was depicted 
as a brown-skinned man like Aries II, he definitely could NOT have 
been Aries II since that character was already dead (see above).

Aries V appeared only in WCA2 26, just in time to get killed by the 
andriod Zodiac.  Since he was shown to be a pink-skinned man, he 
could not have been the same character as Aries IV.

Gemini/Joshua Link is accurate except that he did not appear in DEF 
50, DEF 66 or S-H 12.  That was the android Gemini.

Gemini II is allocated to the Zodiac android.  The character listed 
as "Gemini II" should be renumbered to "Gemini III" (of Zodiac IV)

Leo/Daniel Radford is accurate except that his appearance in A 123 
was not BTS.

Libra/Gustav Brandt is accurate except that he did not appear in 
DEF 64.  That was the android Libra.

LIbra II says "see Moonraker."  Since Avengers Forever revealed 
that Moonraker was actually a Space Phantom playing a role and 
not really the spirit of Gustav Brandt transplanted into the body 
of a hero from an alternate timeline, I don't think that that 
character should be connected to a Libra name.  Libra II should 
be allocated to the Zodiac android.

Sagitarrius/Harlan Vargas is accurate except that he did not appear 
in DEF 63 or DEF 64.  That was the android Sagitarrius.

Sagitarrius II is allocated to the Zodiac android.

Virgo/Elaine McLaughlin is accurate except that her appearance in 
A 123 is BTS.

I've left Scorpio for the last because it was the original Scorpio 
from Zodiac I who created the android Zodiac.  Also, an issue of 
the Marvel Handbook claims that the Scorpio who appeared in 
Avengers 120-122 was actually the original Scorpio disguised as 
his own successor.  In my opinion, this idea is false since it 
is contradicted by Defenders #49 in which Scorpio I states that 
he's been in hiding for seven years ever since he failed to kill 
his brother, Nick Fury.

SCORPIO/JACOB FURY (originally a human, now a human consciousness 
inhabiting an android body)
SGTF 69
W/NF - FB
FURY 1 - FB
WCA2 26 - FB (the Zodiac Key appears to Jake)
NFAOS 1
NFAOS 5
A 72 - FB
NFAOS 5
DEF 49 - FB
DEF 46
DEF 47 - BTS
DEF 48
DEF 49
DEF 50 (Jake Fury commits suicide)
WCA2 26 - FB (Jake's consciousness reborn in an android body)
WCA @1 (first android Scorpio, not specifically identified as 
being Jake Fury reborn)
WCA2 26
WCA2 27
WCA2 28

SCORPIO II/JACQUES LAPOINT
A 120
A 121
A 122
A 123 - BTS
IM 184
WCA2 26 - BTS

I've listed Scorpio II as being BTS in WCA2 26 because the Jake 
Fury android disguised himself as Jacques LaPoint in order to 
infiltrate the original Zodiac's final meeting.  I assume that 
the Jake android killed LaPoint before going to the meeting in 
his place.

ZODIAC II is a group of androids created by Jacob "Jake" Fury, 
the original Scorpio from Zodiac I.  Since these androids were 
often seemingly destroyed or had their appearances/powers/genders 
radically altered from story to story, it could be that there 
have actually been up to three different androids of the same 
name.  However, for the sake of convenience, I have chosen to 
believe that, unless specifically stated, there has only been 
one android for each sign of this Zodiac.

One thing about which I'm a bit uncertain is what constitutes 
their first appearances.  The eleven original Zodiac androids 
first appeared in Defenders #48 but only as vague shapes within 
the cylinders in which they were being made operational.  Those 
tubes were seen again in Defenders #49 but on the last page we 
see Scorpio standing alongside one fully-visible android (Leo) 
with seven shadowy figures standing behind them and it's not 
until Defenders #50 that we see all the androids in full view.  
I've chosen to list them as BTS only while they were in their 
tubes.

I've chosen to provide a single chronology for those androids 
that ONLY appeared as part of the group.  Six others have their 
own chronologies.  I've ommitted the Scorpio android because it 
is supposedly the consciousness of Jake Fury transferred into an 
android body and as such is already listed under Zodiac I.

Over the course of its existence, the android Zodiac's members 
were Aquarius II, Aries III, Cancer II, Capricorn II, Gemini II, 
Leo II, Leo III, Libra II, Pisces II, Sagitarrius II, Sagitarrius III, 
Scorpio I, Taurus II and Virgo II.

AQUARIUS II/ARIES III/CANCER II/CAPRICORN II/LEO II/PISCES II/VIRGO II
DEF 48 - BTS
DEF 49 (Leo II visible; Capricorn II, Pisces II & Virgo II BTS; others 
in shadow)
DEF 50 (all visible, Virgo II was "stillborn" and Capricorn II and 
Pisces II died soon after activation)
WCA @1 (Cancer, Capricorn and Pisces have different appearances/powers, 
Scorpio is now an android, Virgo is operational)
WCA2 26 (Aries, Capricorn and Pisces have changed appearances, 
Capricorn and Pisces are now female)
WCA2 27
WCA2 28

GEMINI II (android)
DEF 48 - BTS
DEF 49 (in shadow)
DEF 50
DEF 51
S-H 12 - FB
S-H 12
WCA @1 (different powers)
WCA2 26 (new powers, now a female)
WCA2 27
WCA2 28

LEO III/Tigra imposter (android)
WCA2 27
WCA2 28

LIBRA II (android)
DEF 48 - BTS
DEF 49 (in shadow)
DEF 50
DEF 63 - BTS
DEF 64
WCA @1
WCA2 26 (new shape, different powers, now female)
WCA2 27
WCA2 28

SAGITARRIUS II (android)
DEF 48 - BTS
DEF 49 (in shadow)
DEF 50
DEF 63
DEF 64
DEF 65
WCA @1
WCA2 26 ("killed" by Hawkeye)

SAGITARRIUS III/Hawkeye imposter (android)
WCA2 26
WCA2 27 (exposed and destroyed)

TAURUS II (android)
DEF 48 - BTS
DEF 49 (in shadow)
DEF 50
IM 183
WCA @1 (new costume)
WCA2 26 (new form, now female)
WCA2 27
WCA2 28

ZODIAC III was the group that appeared in the "First Sign" 
storyline.  While many "Agents of Zodiac" appeared in that 
storyline, only Libra III appeared as their leader (but he did 
threaten to return with "the rest of us" so presamably he was 
referring to other Zodiac leaders).

LIBRA III's chronology remains unchanged unless you continue to 
count Moonraker as a Libra character.  In that case, then LIBRA II 
is the android, LIBRA III is MOONRAKER, and the "First Sign" version 
is LIBRA IV.

ZODIAC IV is a group that has so far only appeared in the second 
Alpha Flight series.  Little is known about them except that they 
don't seem to have any connection with the previous Zodiac groups.  
This Zodiac's chronologies are listed accurately (but sometimes 
wrongly-numbered) under AQUARIUS III, ARIES III(should be VI), 
CANCER II(should be III), CAPRICORN II(should be III), 
GEMINI II(should be III), LEO II(should be IV), LIBRA IV, 
PISCES II(should be III), SAGITARRIUS II(should be IV), SCORPIO IV, 
TAURUS II(should be III), and VIRGO II(should be III).

Of course, if the eleven other as-yet-unseen members of Zodiac III 
ever turn up, then all Zodiac IV's members (except LIBRA IV) would 
have to be bumped up a number.

I disagree slightly with the entries for two of the members of this 
Zodiac.  First, I think it's more accurate to list their Gemini, 
the brainwashed Madison Jeffries, like this:

GEMINI III/MADISON JEFFRIES
from BOX IV
AF2 12

Second, their Scorpio is described as "a former hero" which could 
mean that he is actually the third Scorpio, Mikel Fury, whose 
chronology I will now list.

SCORPIO III/MIKEL FURY

W/NF (first appearance)
SCORPIO RISING
FURY OF S.H.I.E.L.D. 1 - FB
FURY OF S.H.I.E.L.D. 1
FURY OF S.H.I.E.L.D. 2
FURY OF S.H.I.E.L.D. 3
FURY OF S.H.I.E.L.D. 4
DD 344
GR3 65
DE:O
PUN3 1
PUN3 7

Finally, the listing for FURY, NICK L.M.D. is for the LMD that 
was retconned to save Nick from actually dying in the "Double 
Edge/Over the Edge" storyline that ended with the death of a 
major character (ie. Nick).  However, this overlooks the Nick 
Fury LMD that was Jake Fury's partner/servant during the first 
appearance of the android Zodiac.  It seems to me that there 
should be listings for two Nick Fury LMDs, like so:

FURY, NICK L.M.D. I
DEF 44 - BTS
DEF 45 - BTS
DEF 46
DEF 47
DEF 48
DEF 49 (revealed to be LMD)
DEF 50
DEF 51

FURY, NICK L.M.D. II
DE:A
DD 344 *
GR3 65
H 433
DRSTR3 81 *
DE:O *
F/A 1 ("corpse" shown to be an LMD)

I have to say that, as much as I want Fury's death in Double Edge: 
Omega to be retconned away, I have a problem with the idea that the 
Fury who appeared throughout the storyline was ALWAYS an LMD.  Some 
of those stories (marked with an "*") show us Fury's thoughts (via 
thought balloons) and it was my understanding that LMDs, while being 
very sophisticated androids, are not actually sentient beings 
themselves and only act according to their programming.  Only 
artificial beings who truly are sentient (ie. Machinesmith, the 
Vision, Ultron, Jocasta, the Jake Fury android, etc.) are shown 
with thought balloons.  All other androids are not shown with thought 
balloons because they are not sentient, and that should include the 
Fury LMD from the Double Edge storyline.  Of course, the LMD in 
Fury/Agent 13 #1 was supposedly more advanced than standard SHIELD's 
LMDs so I suppose it is possible that that particular LMD could have 
been programmmed with so much of Fury's history and thought patterns 
that it, in effect, was Nick Fury, right down to its (simulated) 
thoughts.  However, I prefer the idea that the real Nick Fury 
appeared in almost all of the storyline and only substituted the 
Fury LMD for himself between pages 35 and 36 of Double Edge: Omega.  
He then went off on his top-secret mission to meet 'Fallen Angel' 
and got trapped in that pocket dimension before news of "his" death 
reached him.

			*	*	*

2 months since update
Posted by OnionMan on April 19, 2001 at 02:22:00:

It't now been two months since the last update of this project... 
Is this a sign of this site fading away or are there big things to 
expect ahead?

/OnionMan

			*	*	*

Re: 2 months since update
Posted by SKleefeld on April 20, 2001 at 11:32:02:
In Reply to: 2 months since update
posted by OnionMan on April 19, 2001 at 02:22:00:

I'm sure Russ has his, most likely personal, reasons for not 
updating the site lately but I'm going to jump in here for a 
moment.

People like Russ and myself, who run these types of web sites, 
do it because we absolutely love comics. There's no profit motive, 
no real accolades reaped upon us... we're barely even recognized 
by the people who actually own and work with the characters we 
devote our time to. (And the MCP is, by my reckoning, one of the 
most-used, most-visited fan sites seen by comic pros.) We do what 
we do because we like it. Period.

Running a web site of any sort takes a lot of time and energy. 
One as research-intensive as the MCP even moreso. And since we're 
not getting paid AT ALL to do this, we have to hold down full-time 
jobs to pay the bills, leaving web site work for our free time. 
And if that free time is eaten up by other more important matters -- 
for example, family health or extra freelance work to compliment 
a full-time job -- the web site is going to take a back seat and 
put on hold until free time becomes more readily available again.

Keeping our web sites up to date is fun and I, for one, enjoy it. 
But it's not exactly a big money-making opportunity (in fact, I 
dare say Russ is technically losing money on the MCP even if you 
don't count the time/energy he personally spends on it!) and 
sometimes MUST be put off for things of a higher priority.

I certainly appreciate what Russ is doing here. Not only for the 
research involved, but for the selflessness with which he shares 
his time and information. 

I don't mean to direct it right at you, OnionMan, but it's a 
subject that's been nagging at me for a little while now.

 -- Sean

			*	*	*

Re: 2 months since update
Posted by Russ Chappell on April 20, 2001 at 22:20:04:
In Reply to: Re: 2 months since update
posted by SKleefeld on April 20, 2001 at 11:32:02:

> I'm sure Russ has his, most likely personal, reasons for not 
updating the site lately but I'm going to jump in here for a 
moment.

You're correct on just about every point, Sean. You've said it 
better than I could myself, but I'll still take a crack at it.

Let me preface my comments by saying that the sense I get from 
OnionMan's post is not one of nudging, or nagging, but one of 
excited anticipation. OnionMan's question has given me the 
opportunity to respond, and he can't be the only one asking the 
question.

> People like Russ and myself, who run these types of web sites, 
do it because we absolutely love comics. There's no profit motive, 
no real accolades reaped upon us... we're barely even recognized 
by the people who actually own and work with the characters we 
devote our time to. (And the MCP is, by my reckoning, one of the 
most-used, most-visited fan sites seen by comic pros.) We do what 
we do because we like it. Period.

> Running a web site of any sort takes a lot of time and energy. 
One as research-intensive as the MCP even moreso. And since we're 
not getting paid AT ALL to do this, we have to hold down full-time 
jobs to pay the bills, leaving web site work for our free time. And 
if that free time is eaten up by other more important matters -- for 
example, family health or extra freelance work to compliment a full-
time job -- the web site is going to take a back seat and put on 
hold until free time becomes more readily available again.

I have a nephew who played six-year-old T-ball last year. He was 
named to the local all-star team, where he played third base, and 
they went on to win the state championship last year. I didn't miss 
a single game, and had so much fun, I volunteered to coach this year. 
Now I'm coaching another nephew--Ryan's cousin--in six-year-old 
T-ball, and barring injury, he'll make the all-stars too, and 
challenge for the state championship. We practice two days a week, 
play two days a week, and on my off days, I scout. That's right...I 
scout. Our little town has a pretty long history of winning T-ball 
championships, so we're kind of serious about it. We use spreadsheets 
and cad software to draw up trend sheets on the opposing teams. We 
do it because everyone else in our league does it. So anyway, that's 
taking up a bit of time right now.

Some of you may be aware that my mom has cancer. She was diagnosed 
with it a little more than a year ago, but at the time we were 
thankful to hear that it was a very slow-growing form of cancer, 
which with proper treatment, would not threaten her life. She had 
emergency surgery in mid-March, and they discovered that the tumor 
was growing, well, a little bit faster than "slow". The prognosis 
at the time was very grim; in fact, we were cautioned that she might 
not recover from the surgery. We were told to plan on a hospital 
stay of about a month. She was released from the hospital after 
thirteen days. And now, the doctors say they're not ready to give 
up hope yet. She's paying a visit to MD Anderson (sp?) in Houston 
next month for a consultation/second opinion. We try not to get our 
hopes up--there's no reason to believe that she'll live much beyond 
six months--but it's difficult not to. During her recovery, she 
kept saying she wanted to see Ryan and Tyler play one more season 
of baseball, and she's getting that opportunity. She's a little bit 
slower walking up the hill to the baseball fields, but she's getting 
there.

So those are the two main reasons why attention to the MCP has been 
suffering, recently.

> Keeping our web sites up to date is fun and I, for one, enjoy it. 
But it's not exactly a big money-making opportunity (in fact, I dare 
say Russ is technically losing money on the MCP even if you don't 
count the time/energy he personally spends on it!) and sometimes 
MUST be put off for things of a higher priority.

Technically, yes, I lose money, just as I technically lose money 
on reading comics. I pay for the comics, and I enjoy reading them. 
I pay for the web site, and I enjoy what I'm doing here. I'd still 
be doing it if no one came. Heck, I was doing it for 15 years before 
I'd even heard of the internet.

> I certainly appreciate what Russ is doing here. Not only for the 
research involved, but for the selflessness with which he shares his 
time and information. 

> I don't mean to direct it right at you, OnionMan, but it's a 
subject that's been nagging at me for a little while now.

But to answer your question, OnionMan, we've added, at last count, 
about 75 books since the last update. I wouldn't necessarily call 
that "big things to come," because 75 books is about typical for a 
two-month period. What's a little atypical, of course, is that we 
haven't updated the site, and there's two reasons.

1. Although we've kept to schedule with adding new books recently, 
baseball and my mom's illness have contributed to a failure to 
add chronological analyses that have been donated by all of you, 
either through email or the message board. I've been reluctant to 
post an update which ignored your efforts, folks.

2. Although we've received some help from people who are working to 
close the second gap, we haven't received anything from anyone, 
through email or the board, who's attacking any of the books that 
we said we needed help with when we posted our last update. (And 
they said the art of the run-on sentence was dead. hmph) Let me 
try this again. Check out the updates page. Surely someone out 
there bought Marvel Boy #6, Deadpool #50, Daredevil/Spider-Man #3, 
X-Man #73, and others. Yet, no response.

No hard feelings, here. But if you haven't contributed, you hardly 
have the moral right to ask when we're going to update.

Finally, if anyone cared to send a card to my mom care of me...
Marianne Chappell
P.O. Box 1642
Tuscaloosa, AL 35403
just one card might get me off my butt.

Thanks for asking, OnionMan. I do work on it, but until I can find 
the time to add the contributions of people who have graciously 
donated their time and effort, I feel uncomfortable adding my stuff 
to the site.

Russ

			*	*	*

Marvel Boy #6
Posted by Mike (hriff99) on April 22, 2001 at 15:07:52:
In Reply to: Re: 2 months since update
posted by Russ Chappell on April 20, 2001 at 22:20:04:

I'll take a crack at Marvel Boy #6 as I'm staring right at it now. 
Sorry to hear about your mum (we call them mum in England) and am 
amazed you find any time to do this at all. I'm assuming you work 
as well. Excellent job.

			*	*	*

2 months
Posted by Jhaeman on May 06, 2001 at 14:15:40:
In Reply to: Marvel Boy #6
posted by Mike (hriff99) on April 22, 2001 at 15:07:52:

I certainly understand where you're coming from Russ.  It's also 
important to remember that a lot of people won't post to a site 
they're worried might be defunct, and that people will post more 
often when they get that quick approbation of seeing their stuff 
actually put into place 

			*	*	*

SHUMA-GORATH Chronology
Posted by Jeanne Burch on April 19, 2001 at 22:18:05:

Hi, there;

Going through my Marvel Premiere comics, I think corrections to 
Shuma-Gorath's appearances are in order.

As near as I can tell, the *only* time S-G ever is seen is in 
Marvel Premiere 10. The critter on the cover of Marvel Premiere 6 
is N'Gabthoth, the Shambler from the Sea. There's a thought balloon 
or two in Marvel Premiere 9 as Strange and S-G "converse," but 
S-G still isn't seen. Do thoughts count as first appearances? If 
not, it looks like the chronology should be Marvel Premiere 4-9 as 
all Behind The Scenes, with Marvel Premiere 10 as first (and last) 
appearance. If I've missed a tentacle in a corner someplace, please 
let me know!

This was the most requested bio for the old Villains page; I'm just 
getting around to it now. :-)

			*	*	*

Hey Jeanne!
Posted by Yellow Claw on April 23, 2001 at 06:11:03:
In Reply to: SHUMA-GORATH Chronology
posted by Jeanne Burch on April 19, 2001 at 22:18:05:

I'd just like to take this opportunity to say that it's great 
to see the Scorpion bio completed! The Villains of Marvel Comics 
page was hugely instrumental in getting me into comics collecting 
when I started 5 or 6 years ago, and I still think that it's one 
of the best sites out there.

Cheers,

Yellow Claw.

			*	*	*

Re: SHUMA-GORATH Chronology
Posted by StAkAr Karnak on April 21, 2001 at 06:30:27:
In Reply to: SHUMA-GORATH Chronology
posted by Jeanne Burch on April 19, 2001 at 22:18:05:

> it looks like the chronology should be Marvel Premiere 4-9 as all 
Behind The Scenes, with Marvel Premiere 10 as first (and last) 
appearance.  If I've missed a tentacle in a corner someplace, please 
let me know!

I don't have it with me at the moment, but I think S-G was among 
the entities Kulan Gath invoked in AVENGERS v3.

- StAkAr Karnak

			*	*	*

Shuma-Gorath and ST2???
Posted by Gary M. Miller on May 03, 2001 at 19:28:05:
In Reply to: SHUMA-GORATH Chronology
posted by Jeanne Burch on April 19, 2001 at 22:18:05:

I may be wrong, but didn't Shuma-Gorath also appear in the 1987 
volume of STRANGE TALES (ST2) somewhere around #14?

-Gary (who hasn't been here in a really long time!)

			*	*	*

SHUMA-GORATH (and Kulan Gath, too)
Posted by Don Campbell on May 10, 2001 at 02:46:49:
In Reply to: Re: SHUMA-GORATH Chronology
posted by StAkAr Karnak on April 21, 2001 at 06:30:27:

> > it looks like the chronology should be Marvel Premiere 4-9 as 
all Behind The Scenes, with Marvel Premiere 10 as first (and last) 
appearance.  If I've missed a tentacle in a corner someplace, please 
let me know!

> I don't have it with me at the moment, but I think S-G was among 
the entities Kulan Gath invoked in AVENGERS v3.

Hello

This is the first time that I've posted on this board so I may be 
a bit, uh, long-winded in my comments.  I therefore apologize in 
advance.

To date, there have been three storylines featuring an evil 
supernatural creature known as Shuma-Gorath.  For some reason, I 
found the whole "sleeping demon" concept intriguing to the extent 
that I recently bought those issues of CONAN that contain the 
whole "The Second Coming of Shuma-Gorath" storyline.  I can 
provide a complete listing of these appearances but there may 
be a problem.  Although it is SUPPOSEDLY the same demon in all 
three storylines, the character's appearance (and back-story) 
seems to be significantly different in each storyline.  This 
means that maybe there are actually more than one Shuma-Gorath 
in the Marvel Universe.  In the interests of clarity, I am going 
to treat Shuma-Gorath as three different entities and I will 
number them in the order in which the storylines were published.

SHUMA-GORATH I
M/PRM 14
M/PRM 3 - BTS
M/PRM 4 - BTS
M/PRM 5 - BTS
M/PRM 6 - BTS
M/PRM 7 - BTS
M/PRM 8 - BTS
M/PRM 9 - BTS
M/PRM 10 (voice only)
M/PRM 11 (true form seen)

Notes on Interest:

1) Shuma-Gorath's first published appearance is in either Marvel 
Premiere #10 or 11 (depending upon whether a character's 
disembodied voice counts as an appearance).  Also, Shuma-Gorath 
was BTS in Marvel Premiere #3 since it was on its behalf that 
Nightmare attacked Doctor Strange (although a spell prevented 
Nightmare from telling Strange who his master was).

2) Shuma-Gorath's appearance in Marvel Premiere #14 was part of a 
time-travel storyline.  Doctor Strange and Baron Mordo were 
witnesses to the sorcerer-god Sise-Neg's defeat and banishment 
of Shuma-Gorath.  A later story (UX @13/3) established that those 
events took place only centuries before the arrival of the First 
Host of the alien Celestials (which other sources have fixed at 
about one million years ago).

3) This Shuma-Gorath was spawned in an alien dimension but had 
long ago managed to enter Earth's dimension and prey upon the 
early ape-men of the time.  Shuma-Gorath I was many times larger 
than the ape-men and its body was spherical with a number (five 
to seven) tentacles for limbs.  Its skin was purple and its only 
feature was a single large eye (with a blue pupil).

4) In Marvel Premiere #11, the Ancient One mentions "the death 
of Shuma-Gorath."  Since he had just become "one with the universe," 
it seems likely that what he was saying was accurate.  If so, 
then it must be different beings who appear as Shuma-Gorath in 
the other two storylines.

SHUMA-GORATH II
ST2 1/2 - BTS
ST2 2/2 - BTS
ST2 3/2 - BTS
ST2 4/2 - BTS
ST2 5/2 - BTS
ST2 6/2 - BTS
ST2 7 - BTS
ST2 8/2 - BTS
ST2 9/2 - BTS
ST2 10/2 - BTS
ST2 11/2 - BTS
st2 12/2 - BTS
ST2 13
ST2 14 ~ FF 314

1) Beginning in Strange Tales (vol. 2) #1, Doctor Strange embarked 
on a quest to reimprison all those "forces of darkness" which he 
had released in Doctor Strange #81.  Since Shuma-Gorath II was 
later identified as the being who led those forces (aka "the Old 
Ones" or Lords of Chaos), it follows that Shuma-Gorath II could be 
considered to have been BTS during Strange's battles with the 
lesser demons and I have so listed it.

2) This Shuma-Gorath was a Lord of Chaos who claimed to rule 
hundreds of dimensions.  As such, it was an immensely powerful 
demon who seemed to be far stronger than the earlier Shuma-Gorath.  
In appearance, Shuma-Gorath II resembled Shuma-Gorath I but with 
several differences.  Shuma-Gorath II was HUGE (large enough for 
Strange to initially mistake it for a mountain).  Its spherical 
body had six tentacles, green skin (yellow on the underside of 
the tentacles) and its only feature was a single huge (as opposed 
to large) eye (with a pink pupil).

3) At the end of its encounter with Doctor Strange, this 
Shuma-Gorath was definitely dead (since Strange has stolen its 
power and blasted its body into pieces).

4) If this Lord of Chaos was NOT the same being whom Strange 
defeated earlier, then there may have been a connection between 
them.  Perhaps the earlier Shuma-Gorath was only a scout for the 
Lord of Chaos, some underling who was given the same form as its 
master and sent forth in its name to prepare the way for the 
conquest new dimensions.  This might explain both the similarities 
and the differences between the "two" Shuma-Goraths.

SHUMA-GORATH III
CTB 260 - FB
CTB 258 - FB - BTS
CTB 252 - BTS
CTB 253 - BTS
CTB 254 - BTS
CTB 255 - BTS
CTB 256 - BTS
CTB 257 - BTS
CTB 258 - BTS
CTB 259
CTB 260

1) The nine-part storyline in CONAN #252-260 was entitled "The 
Second Coming of Shuma-Gorath" so I've listed it as BTS for each 
of those issues in which it doesn't actually appear.

I should note that all those CONAN issues are cover-dated 1992...
which puts them in the gap.

2) Not much was revealed about this Shuma-Gorath's origin, only 
that it was a "cosmic obscenity" that had "drifted to Earth."  This 
seems to suggest that Shuma-Gorath III came from some alien planet 
within Earth's dimension and not from another dimension.

3) Shuma-Gorath III's appearance was vastly different from the 
first two Shuma-Goraths.  Its body was more pear-shaped than 
spherical and it had a definite head (at the narrow part of the 
pear).  Its head had multiple eyes, one red eye surrounded by 
nine smaller red eyes.  Below the eyes was a pair of nostrils 
that, except for their size, looked human, and below them was a 
large mouth filled with large pointed teeth.  Its skin was yellow 
with some green and it had multiple limbs of various configurations.  
Two limbs were tentacles that ended in three-clawed paws while 
other tentacles had spikes along their ends.  Two of its other 
limbs were jointed legs ending in pincers and it had at least 
four jointed hind legs.  In size, Shuma-Gorath III was much 
larger than humans, larger than Shuma-Gorath I but much smaller 
than Shuma-Gorath II. 

4) Shuma-Gorath III's back-story was also much different from 
that of Shuma-Gorath I.  It came to Earh millennia before the 
Great Cataclysm that sank Atlantis and ruled over (fed upon)
humans for ages until a shaman who worshipped a new god, Crom, 
managed to imprison it within the northern mountain that was 
henceforth known as the Mount of Crom.  During the Hyborean
Age, the iron-bound Books of Shuma-Gorath were used to free it 
but it was quickly defeated when Conan threw the books into the 
storm arond the mountain and Shuma-Gorath disappeared.  It
was not made clear in the story whether it was killed or merely 
reimprisoned within the Mount of Crom.

5) The letters page of Conan #252 contains a small box in which 
Roy Thomas listed Shuma-Gorath's previous encounters with Doctor 
Strange.  This seems to indicate that Thomas considered this 
Shuma-Gorath be the same demon who appeared in the earlier stories 
but, for reasons I've listed above, things don't seem to have 
worked out that way.

In the unlikely event that all three Shuma-Goraths are determined 
to actually be the SAME being, then the chronology listed for 
Shuma-Gorath III should be placed between M/PRM 14 and M/PRM 3-BTS.

Finally, here is a revised chronology for Kulan Gath's appearances 
prior to Marvel Team-Up 79:

CTB 258 - FB
CTB 14
CTB 15 (first body dies)
CTB 253 (in new body)
CTB 256
CTB 257
CTB 258
CTB 259
CTB 260 (second body destroyed)

Kulan Gath has since appeared in the Limited Series, Conan: The 
Flame and the Fiend #1-3, published in 2000.  In that storyline, 
Kulan Gath was resurrected but may have been killed again by the 
end.  In any event, it is known that Kulan Gath's last adventure 
in the Hyborean Age ended when Red Sonja cut out his heart (as 
mentioned in Marvel Team-Up 79).  As far as I know, that particular 
story has never been published or even written.  If it ever is 
written, then 

A3 29 - FB (Kulan Gath infuses his essence into a necklace) 
*untold RED SONJA story* (Red Sonja kills Kulan Gath over 9,000 
years ago)

should be inserted into his chronology immediately before M/TU 79.

Also, although Kulan Gath claimed to have served Shuma-Gorath (in 
A3 28), those Conan issues clearly show that that was NOT the case.

And while Shuma-Gorath was among the entities he invoked in A3 29, 
it's impossible to say whether Shuma-Gorath was one of the "dread 
masters" who eventually dragged him off to a suitably nasty place.

			*	*	*

Draft of SHUMA-GORATH bio
Posted by Jeanne Burch on May 10, 2001 at 22:37:54:
In Reply to: SHUMA-GORATH (and Kulan Gath, too)
posted by Don Campbell on May 10, 2001 at 02:46:49:

Hmmm, thanks, Don! Is it okay if I use some of that info? (I don't 
have MP 14, alas, or any Conan books)<p>Here's the draft that's 
been sitting on my hard-drive while I've been debating if I REALLY 
wanted to hook up the scanner and put this on the web site. It might 
have some typos and does have sentence fragments here and there. 
I'll have to decide what to do with the various S-Gs floating 
about, obviously.

Yellow Claw: I don't know if I should say "thanks for the 
compliments" or "sorry I got you involved in this..." ;;^_^

Real Name: Shuma-Gorath
AKA: He Who Sleeps But Shall Awake. The Ancient One.
First (and Last) Appearance: An argument could made for any issue 
after Strange Tales 115 since it isn't clear when Shuma-Gorath 
began to use Strange's mentor as a host. However, I'm going with 
Marvel Premiere 10, the only time Shuma-Gorath's "true form" is 
seen, although Dr. Strange did have to chase across half the 
universe after its thought balloons in Marvel Premiere 9. 

Powers: "Cosmic" is the best description I can come up with...

What's His Problem? Your basic maniacal evil thingee from another 
dimension, Shuma-Gorath's presence was first made known to Dr. 
Strange when the Ancient One, Strange's mentor, was sealed in a 
chamber in Shuma-Gorath's lost city of Kaa-u. About the only thing 
the good Doctor could figure out about Shuma-Gorath was that it 
represented a very ancient evil -- and it wanted him dead. 
Journeying to the coastal fishing village of Starksboro to prevent 
the arising of Shuma-Gorath, Strange found himself battling 
zombie-fied troglodyte townsfolk, a pitch-fork wielding high 
priestess, and various mystical entities with monikers like 
Sligguth and N'Gabthoth. Strengthened by the Ancient One's astral 
form, Strange beat back the bad guys but still didn't know how to 
keep Shuma-Gorath from awakening. It required trips to Stonehenge 
and Kathulos the Living Planet (and lots of expensive special 
effects) before Strange could discover the truth.

Favorite Quote: "Beore Man walked the earth, I ruled -- but I did 
tire, and I did sleep! Now I have returned, and so shall all the 
old customs! Earth shall be but the initial step in my conquest 
of the Cosmos!" (Marvel Premiere 10. Like most baddies, Shuma-Gorath 
gives in to the need to explain its long-term plans -- and why it 
is no one had heard from it recently!)

Heroes He Keeps Running Into: The Ancient One was Shuma-Gorath's 
exact opposite, and therefore the portal the mystic monster needed 
to enter the Earth realm. However, when the Ancient One perceived 
the evil within himself he decided that death was preferable to 
being a doorway to another dimension and began to starve himself 
to death. Trapped within the dying human body, Shuma-Gorath had 
his followers hound the Ancient One's pupil, Strange. Thus 
Shuma-Gorath was able to induce the dying Ancient One into 
casting a series of Strange-saving spells that weakened the 
mental hold the old soceror had on his unwelcome visitor, 
eventually permitting it to rip free of the Anicent One. 
Corporal reality came with a price; Shuma-Gorath found itself 
facing off against one very cheesed Dr. Strange. Not believing 
the upstart Strange could succeed where the Socerer Supreme had 
not -- or that the human had the willpower to do the one thing 
that would insure the demon's death -- Shuma-Gorath tried to 
intimidate Strange into surrender. Instead the Ancient One's 
disciple sent his mental self into the Ancient One's brain, 
tracked down the Master's "concept of self," and killed 
Shuma-Gorath by destroying the Master's self-image. Although 
this also meant the death of the Ancient One's physical form, 
A.O. graduated to a higher state of being, bid Strange a fond 
farewell, and headed off to to be one with the Universe, leaving 
a new-born Socerer Supreme in his wake.

People Who Think He's Not So Bad: The Eternal Vishanti didn't 
give a hoot about Shuma-Gorath one way or the other, but lots of 
other folks did.

Nightmare followed its bidding, but never spoke its name. High 
Priestess Ebora. Bewitched minions in Kaa-u the Accursed. The 
Living Buddha, lord of the Crypts of Kaa-u. The Shadowmen.

			*	*	*

Re: Draft of SHUMA-GORATH bio
Posted by Yellow Claw on May 15, 2001 at 02:53:51:
In Reply to: Draft of SHUMA-GORATH bio
posted by Jeanne Burch on May 10, 2001 at 22:37:54:

> Yellow Claw: I don't know if I should say "thanks for the 
compliments" or "sorry I got you involved in this..." ;;^_^

Both are probably applicable :)

I haven't read any Shuma-Gorath stuff, but here is one vote for 
adding the bio to the villains site. It reads well (as usual!) 
and frankly it's just nice to see that site get an update. 
Personally, I always wanted a Wizard bio...

Cheers,

Yellow Claw.

			*	*	*

Sinbad now continuity?
Posted by Randy Tischler on April 20, 2001 at 15:22:48:

With the upcoming Fantastic Four:  Fantastic 4th Voyage of Sinbad 
one-shot coming out, I was wondering if issues 7 and 8 of Worlds 
Unknown (The Golden Voyage of Sinbad) now become in-continuity.  
It was sort of one of those anomolous titles before...

Randy

			*	*	*

Re: Sinbad now continuity?
Posted by StAkAr Karnak on April 21, 2001 at 06:41:19:
In Reply to: Sinbad now continuity?
posted by Randy Tischler on April 20, 2001 at 15:22:48:

I would guess not, since the WU and FF versions of Sinbad are 
unlikely to be the same guy.  But you never know.

- StAkAr Karnak

			*	*	*

Reprint?
Posted by DrBruceBanner on April 24, 2001 at 17:41:45:

Is Jungle Action #5 just a reprint of Avengers #62?

Thanks
Jake

			*	*	*

Re: Reprint?
Posted by Russ Chappell on April 24, 2001 at 22:16:14:
In Reply to: Reprint?
posted by DrBruceBanner on April 24, 2001 at 17:41:45:

Yup.

			*	*	*

Reprint Redux
Posted by Jeph! on April 25, 2001 at 07:26:29:

While we're asking reprint questions...

Has Tales of Suspense #49 (at least the Iron Man story) been 
reprinted?  At all?  I know there's a Marvel Masterworks out there 
that collects it, but has it been reprinted anywhere *else*?

Probably off-topic, but any help would be appreciated.

	-Jeph!

			*	*	*

Re: Reprint Redux
Posted by Michel Racaud on April 25, 2001 at 14:26:34:
In Reply to: Reprint Redux
posted by Jeph! on April 25, 2001 at 07:26:29:

It has been recently reprinted in the Essential Iron Man Vol.1 

And according to the Arthur's Marvel Comics Reprints 
(http://www.math.ucla.edu/~alee/reprints.html)
it's been also reprinted in Giant-Size Iron Man #1

			*	*	*

a possible image for your future MR FANTASTIC page
Posted by Aaron Shirley on April 26, 2001 at 22:58:48:

I remember a few months back you had a bit of a discussion about 
the possibility of breaking off Mr. Fantastic from the M page, and 
you were looking for a good image for the head of the page:
by himself...
full body...
using his powers...
talking scientific jargon...
and so on...
How about FF vol1 #64 p10 frame 1?  I, for one, think something 
by Kirby would be cool... 
Aaron

			*	*	*

X-Men: True Friends
Posted by jay on April 27, 2001 at 15:56:22:

i just noticed that this miniseries isn't in the mcp and it didn't 
fall into the gap so i am just wondering if anyone can tell me 
where the 3 issues occur?  i know it must take place in the late 
1980's to very early '90's issues of Excalibur cuz rachel still 
has her old costume, but does anyone know exactly WHERE it goes? 
or at least an idea?

			*	*	*

Re: X-Men: True Friends
Posted by Paul O'Brien on May 01, 2001 at 06:34:48:
In Reply to: X-Men: True Friends
posted by jay on April 27, 2001 at 15:56:22:

Somewhere prior to the team leaving for the Cross-Time Caper.  
There's a whole clump of Excalibur stories falling into that 
category, and this being the last one to see print, I would 
just shove it in the last available gap, after all the other 
ones (which is a gap between pages in the issue where they 
depart, as I recall).

This story is the previous encounter with the Shadow King which 
Rachel references during the Cross-Time Caper (in the Crusader-X 
two-parter).  It's an abandoned story which was intended to be 
published at the time and was dusted off recently following 
Claremont's return to the books.  The footnotes refer to the 
unpublished Excalibur Special Edition #3-4, which were originally 
supposed to have carried the story.

-- Paul

			*	*	*

daredevil\spider-man #3 can be done......
Posted by comico on April 29, 2001 at 22:23:56:

but i need someone on this board to tell me simply and easily 
what i need to do.also is there a time limit in which you'll 
need this? i can probably do it in a week to two weeks if that's 
ok?

jesse

			*	*	*

Re: daredevil\spider-man #3 can be done......
Posted by Russ Chappell on April 30, 2001 at 22:04:18:
In Reply to: daredevil\spider-man #3 can be done......
posted by comico on April 29, 2001 at 22:23:56:

First of all, read the book carefully. List every character who 
makes an actual appearance in the story. If a character has an 
impact on the story, but doesn't actually appear, that would 
qualify as a behind-the-scenes appearance.

If there are any clues about when the story takes place in relation 
to other stories, tell us that. We can assume that Daredevil/Spider-
Man #3 takes place sometime after issue #2, but if there are any 
references to events in other titles, that would be an indication 
that the story also occurs after those titles.

If there are any flashbacks, tell us who appears in each flashback, 
what occurs, and when it occurs.

Russ




