Talk:The High Crusade

Synopsis
The synopsis is kinda strange. It feels as if the author hasn't read the book for a while...

During the talks, Baron de Tourneville ignores the truce

The book makes a particular point that a truce *wasnt* agreed

With Lady Catherine, Sir Roger's wife, Montbelle corners the baron and demands that he help the people of Ansby get back to Earth.

Again a particular point is that Montbelle plans to abandon the common people and go back to earth to take power in conjunction with the Wersgorix.

there are others, but the synposis has been around along time, didn't want to just rewrite, just present an alternative view

Baen books did not exist in 1960 as it was founded by Jim Baen in 1983. See the section titled "About Jim Baen" at: http://www.baen.com/FAQS.htm#About%20Jim%20Baen

The first edition, of 1960, of the High Crusade was published by Doubleday. Just type High crusade on a title search at the Library of Congress, where the book was originally deposited in 1960: http://catalog.loc.gov/


 * OK. --Merovingian ↕ T@Lk 01:12, Jun 21, 2004 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what the purpose of having the name of the book in German right at the beginning was, so I removed that comment J. Passepartout


 * In regards to the original date of publication, I have in front of me now a copy of the British edition of Astounding Science Fact & Fiction, dated November 1960 in which the first part of this story appears serialised, and I happened to look up this article, firstly just to see whether the Story had one, and what it might say if so, the story being a favorite of mine. I see here that the original date is listed as 1960 published by Doubleday, and that the source for this information appears to be the Library of Congress entry as noted above, this entry does not list a month as far as I can tell. Knowing that the British edition of Astounding reprinted the earlier American edition, though not sure by how much, I've looked this up and found that the first part had been serialised in the July 1960 edition of the American; Astounding Science Fiction: Vol. XLV No. 5 (July 1960), (which is only the cover date of course, magazines tending to be dated ahead I believe). This information should be integrated into the article, and it noted as possibly the first publication, considering the dates. Unless there is some further way to shed light on this matter? Here's one of the links found via google;(apologies for the slightly stilted tone of this message I've been reading old pulp sci-fi for a couple of hours :) ) Number36 (talk) 07:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I just saw that this is in the Trivia section, but I think it's a bit too significant to be labeled as trivia, and should be noted in the first paragraph. Also how does this info relate to the doubleday 1960 date of publication, because at present the article appears to contradict itself.Number36 (talk) 21:09, 15 September 2008 (UTC)