The title seems to imply there are two books collected here, but I believe there were three, and they were City of the Beast, Lord of the Spiders and Master of the Pit(?).

Were these published under different names in the USA, or condensed into two books instead of three?

Or is the Warriors of Mars part of the title a complete red herring? Or an editorial or essay?

As I recall, they are very influenced by ER Burroughs, and were written long before the Eternal Champion stories of the 1960s. I believe they were probably written while Moorcock was editing Tarzan Adventures in his late teens/early twenties, which would explain the theme, the style, and even some of the plot devices (LOL!)

The title seems to imply there are two books collected here, but I believe there were three, and they were City of the Beast, Lord of the Spiders and Master of the Pit(?).

Were these published under different names in the USA, or condensed into two books instead of three?

Or is the Warriors of Mars part of the title a complete red herring? Or an editorial or essay?

Michael Moorcock's original manuscripts for the trilogy were entitled City of the Beast, Lord of the Spiders, and Master of the Pit.

However, they were first published by Compact Books as Warriors of Mars, Blades of Mars, and Barbarians of Mars, all under the pen name Edward P. Bradbury.

This publication contains only the first book in the trilogy.

Thanks for that clarification. I am aware that Moorcock wrote under pseudonyms, possibly to deflect criticism that he had a conflict of interest in editing and publishing his own work! (Can anyone confirm if that was indeed the case, or were these published under another editor's tenure?).

As for the titles; personally I prefer the UK versions. I think using the initials EPB, and 'xxxx of Mars' as your titles is too likely to confuse the public and lead to accusations of copyright infringement, when placed alongside E R Burroughs own, much earlier work.

As for the titles; personally I prefer the UK versions.

Compact Books, in the UK, was the original publisher, so Warriors of Mars was the "UK version." (Lancer, the first US publisher, also used their titles, but they originated at Compact.)

The titles you like (the ones we're using) are maybe better identified as "the Moorcock titles," not "the UK titles."

Warriors of Mars was the "UK version." The titles you like (the ones we're using) are maybe better identified as "the Moorcock titles," not "the UK titles."

Thanks for that clarification; I have the first two books, but not the third. It's a long time since I read them (probably 20 years), and since I never had the whole set, I've not been tempted to go back to them until I knew I had the ending.

You've got me intrigued, now. I'll have to have a dig round my attic, to find out who published my copies, since I definitely only know them by the 'Moorcock' titles...

I just finished City of the Beast and...
Not to sound rude and obnoxious (because I really enjoyed the story) but there were quite a few spelling and grammatical errors in the book, at least more than I would have expected from such a short book. I was just curious as to whether these errors were contained within the original printing and therefore just copied, or whether they were just mistakes in the editing of the Paizo Manuscripts? I know you guys are under a lot of pressure with all of the new stuff you are doing, but that kinda thing just sticks out to me and really detracts from my reading experience. A mistake or 2 is cool in a 300 page novel, but I noticed at least 4 or 5 errors in a 157 page book, so it is a bit more noticable.
Again, I really don't mean to sound rude 'cause I do like and enjoy what you guys are doing. Please think of this as constructive criticism.

I just finished City of the Beast and...

Not to sound rude and obnoxious (because I really enjoyed the story) but there were quite a few spelling and grammatical errors in the book, at least more than I would have expected from such a short book. I was just curious as to whether these errors were contained within the original printing and therefore just copied, or whether they were just mistakes in the editing of the Paizo Manuscripts? I know you guys are under a lot of pressure with all of the new stuff you are doing, but that kinda thing just sticks out to me and really detracts from my reading experience. A mistake or 2 is cool in a 300 page novel, but I noticed at least 4 or 5 errors in a 157 page book, so it is a bit more noticable.
Again, I really don't mean to sound rude 'cause I do like and enjoy what you guys are doing. Please think of this as constructive criticism.

I would like to second the previous comment. I actually just finished "Lord of the Spiders". Are the spelling, etc. errors in these books [sic] or are you providing them uniquely for us. I would like to think this also as constructive criticism . BTW, I have no plans on cancelling my very enjoyable subscription.