At one point during Atlantis Attacks, Thor says that he and the Thing had fought Set in the past. The writer of this issue, John Byrne, missed that famous back-up in Punisher Annual#2 where
it was firmly stated that Seth is not Set, as Thor had never faced Set in a recorded encounter before Thor Annual#14; he had rather fought Seth with the Thing in MTIO#23.

Incidentally, Thor noted that Set is older than the Asgardians.
--Per Degaton

Counterpoint
by Donald Campbell

1. I think it should have been stressed that Set had created a mystical affinity with the dinosaurs LONG before Gaea decided that they should be replaced by mammals. Set used that affinity to absorb the life-energies released by their violent deaths and, over millions of years, had amassed an enormous amount of power. It was only after Gaea moved to eliminate Set's power source that he directed the dinosaurs to destroy all mammals.
   --Good point. So added. Thanks.
2.  After Gaea dared him to face her, Set appeared on Earth in a physical form created by the fusion of the bodies of three dinosaurs. Also, it was only after Set appeared that Gaea realized that she would need help fighting him and called upon her son Atum for protection.
   --Ditto
3. I'm not totally comfortable with the idea that the extinction of the dinosaurs on Marvel-Earth was solely the result of the war between Demogorge and Set. I would prefer that Marvel-Earth's history followed (for the most part) the same path as the real world's history did and in the real world it is believed that the dinosaurs died out during a "nuclear winter" caused by the impact of a large asteroid.
       In trying to reconcile the two theories, I first came up with the idea that maybe Demogorge (or Set) had pulled an asteroid down from space to use as a weapon against his enemy. However, that would mean that, without intervention, that asteroid would have missed Marvel-Earth -- something which would be a significant divergence from real-world history (in which that same asteroid DID hit without any help from Elder Gods). It then occurred to me that maybe, like in the real world, that asteroid was always going to hit Earth...and that maybe that was just something that Demogorge used to his advantage. Suppose that Demogorge was sensitive enough to celestial happenings to detect the approach of the asteroid before Set could and, realizing that it was going to impact on Earth, saw a way to use it to help both himself (in his war with Set) and his mother (with the extinction of the dinosaurs). Suppose that Demogorge used his powers to make the asteroid undetectable to Set and then manipulated the battle with Set until his enemy ended up (unknowingly) right at Ground Zero, the projected point of impact for the asteroid. This theory encompasses both the other two without contradicting either of them. Yes, it was an asteroid impact which doomed the dinosaurs but it was ALSO part of the War of the Gods.
   --Possibly. I listed only that the dinosaurs had mostly died out during the battle, rather than ascribing the battle as the cause. Potential causes of their deaths described in the MU are listed above. I have no opinion in whether how things occurred in the MU match up with what happened in the real world.
   I don't have any problem with the idea that the dinosaurs died out as a result of the decisions reached by both Gaea and That Which Endures combined with the negative environmental effects of the god-war between Set and Demogorge (which may have involved a meteor or comet impact). However, I ABSOLUTELY do NOT accept the idea that the gods of Asgard even existed 65 million years ago and I REALLY dislike the idea that the extinction was caused by sparks from the forging of Mjolnir which had traveled back in time. Don't get me wrong, I (generally) liked the final storyline in THOR II but there were some story elements and/or continuity errors which just made me cringe. The whole idea of hyping the importance of the Asgardians by "revealing" that mankind would never have had a chance to evolve to sentience if not for them was one such "creative choice" that I, well, detest.
   --Your opinion is noted.
4.  I don't believe that the Cobra Crown was created BEFORE the Serpent Crown. I'm at a bit of a loss in arguing my point since I don't have any of the Conan novels nor any issues of Savage Sword of Conan but I'll do my best. The fifth part of the Saga of the Serpent Crown (in Punisher Annual#2) begins with these two sentences: "I, Uatu the Watcher, saw how the Serpent Crown, talisman of the serpent-demon Set, was lost in the sinking of Lemuria. But Set eventually brought about the creation of another such power object, known as the Cobra Crown, and around 12,000 years ago he saw to it that it fell into the hands of the most sinister figure of the Hyborian Age - - Thoth-Amon, wizard-lord of the land of Stygia!"

       You can take things however you want it, but I say this proves nothing. Set was created like 5 billion years ago, and if he made something 4.975 billion years later, that's "eventually" to me. The sentence structure would seem to hint that the Cobra Crown was created later, but we know that's not the case. So even though it would seem to be saying the untrue, we must go with the alternative interpretation. It doesn't say he created the Crown in 10000 BC, only that it fell into Thoth-Amon's hands then.

        Made Cobra Crown, but found it inadequate, and so it was left hidden while Set made plans to create the Serpent Crown.

   It was later found by Conan, etc

        In general, I like to try to make all stories true and meld them together, but where two things seem to be arguing which came first, I TEND to go with the original. Source over resource.

        I consider Uatu to be about as reliable and impartial observer as you could hope to get and any "fact" that he states should (almost always) be considered accurate. However, if we chose to disregard Uatu's statement, is there any solid proof showing that the Cobra Crown was created first? According to your profile on it, page 91 of Conan the Buccaneer "makes it clear that the Cobra Crown was created when the Serpent Men still ruled Valusia, which would have been before the Great Cataclysm." However, as you pointed out yourself, novels are not generally made a part of Marvel continuity so it is the adaptation of that novel that appeared in Savage Sword of Conan#40-43 that is "in continuity." That leaves me with some questions: Does the storyline in those Savage Sword issues also claim that the Cobra Crown existed BEFORE the Great Cataclysm? If so, what is the nature of the claim and how reliable is the source? For example, if a character simply says that "legends claim" that the Cobra Crown was created during the Serpent Men's rule of Valusia, I would find that statement dubious (even if it was the "omniscient narrative" that made the claim). I would only really consider a Pre-Cataclysmic origin possible if there were a first-hand account of its creation by someone who was there at the time...like Uatu, who says it was created later.
       Also, in his commentary in the Saga of the Serpent Crown chapter in Spectacular Spider-Man Annual#9, Uatu says: "Both the Cobra Crown and the Golden Serpent had been destroyed - - And so, Set decided, he must find a new pawn to wear the first receptacle of his power, the long lost Serpent Crown."
   I don't think that proves anything, for the same reasons. It could be interpreted as first in importance, power level, or primacy.
   Savage Sword of Conan#41 has the smoking gun. The narration says "For hours, Thoth-Amon has searched the astral plane for some clue to the whereabouts of the Cobra Crown, precious relic of the Serpent Men of age-lost Valusia."
   Case closed.
   --I'd go with the original description, and consider the Watcher's description to be as prone to error as any writer's info.

5. I've always like the idea (first presented in Marvel Team-Up Annual#5) that Jormungand the Midgard Serpent was one of Set's offspring. And while I know that, in Norse mythology, Loki was the father of Jormungand (and Hela and Fenris), I've always felt that Walt Simonson's attempt to make that "fact" from the myths a part of the reality of the Asgardians of the Marvel Universe was misguided. After all, before Walt began writing THOR, there were over twenty years of Marvel stories about the Asgardians which didn't mention any connection between Loki and his three alleged children and so I've tended to discount any references to such a familial connection. My own theory is that Loki has such an enormous ego that he cast a spell which made all the Asgardians believe that he was the father of three of Asgard's greatest enemies. As I see it, Jormungand was one of Set's offspring who lived his own life until one day, thousands of years ago, when he came to interact with the gods of an earlier incarnation of Asgard and (somehow) became trapped in their Ragnarok Cycle, dying and being reborn just like the gods of Asgard and their enemies did.
   --I see no reason to perpetuate that idea which otherwise seems to have been abandoned by Marvel. My FFE entry lists Set as having had a fatherly relationship with the Midgard Serpent, meaning he may have been his mentor. Whether Loki called upon the power of Set in the Serpent's creation is unknown, but the Serpent is Loki and Angerboda's offspring. Sorry.
6.  I have a problem with the idea that the land known as Stygia during the Hyborian Age is now the country of Egypt. Looking at a map of the Hyborian Age, one can see how the Hyborian continent could be rearranged so as to produce the modern-day continents of Europe, Africa and Asia. After all, the basic shapes are all there, just squished together somewhat. However, it's much more difficult to see how Stygia could go from being on the western edge of the proto-African part of the Hyborian continent to being on the northeast corner of the current African continent. Since Stygia seems to be about where Cameroon is today (about 2,000 miles southwest of Egypt), it would take a massive deformation of the Hyborian continent to get Stygia to where Egypt is today and I just don't buy it. Personally, I prefer the idea that, instead of Stygia and Egypt actually being different names for the same land, ancient Egypt was a land that was settled/conquered by people who left (were forced out of?) Stygia and moved northeast after the end of the Hyborian Age.
   --That's how the information is presented. Sorry.
   "Red-haired Vanir adventurers came into Stygia, where they overthrew the reigning class and built up a vast southern empire which they call Egypt. From these red-haired conquerors the early pharaohs were to boast descent.........And then, another terrific convulsion of the earth hurled all into chaos again, carving out the lands as they are known to us now. Great strips of the western coast sank, and the mountains of western Cimmeria became islands later called British. A vast sea, later called Mediterranean, was formed then the Stygian continent broke away from the rest of the world."
7.  I'd replace the term "soldiers of Skarka" with "barbarians of Skarka."
   --OK, but only if you get more fiber in your diet.  ;)
8.  According to Marvel Team-Up Annual#5, once a mystical majority of 777 Serpent Crowns were brought to Project: PEGASUS, a spell would be cast which would bring ALL the other crowns remaining in the multiverse to Earth-616 to become part of a new physical body for Set. Since that body DID come into existence (even though it was destroyed just before Set could manifest upon Earth), it seems that that spell MUST have been cast and that ALL the crowns had already been brought to Earth-616 by that time. This is supported by Ghaur's statement (in Silver Surfer Annual#2/1) that "the serpent has never forgiven this Earth for destroying its influence throughout all reality!" I consider the destruction of the Serpent Crowns to be a multiverse-wide event.
   --There are tons of stories showing something to be permanent or complete, only to be shown that some aspect was temporary or partial. I think this point is open, and as discussed in the comments, it is fine as is.
9.  The idea that Ghaur and Llyra created their massive new Serpent Crown by bringing together Serpent Crowns from alternate Earths is TOTALLY WRONG. It's a mistake which only appears in WHAT IF II#25 as part of Uatu's recap of the events of the "Atlantis Attacks" crossover. If you read the various "Atlantis Attacks" stories themselves, there is NO mention of their new Serpent Crown being made out of other-dimensional crowns. Instead, this Serpent Crown was a totally new creation. However, this is some evidence of a connection to previous crowns. In Fantastic Four Annual#22/1, Llyra states: "The (new) crown partakes of the very essence of all the Serpent Crowns which once existed in many dimensions." While this statement could be interpreted to mean that the new crown was made out of many of the old crowns, I believe that the word "essence" is significant. Here's what I think happened: In MTU Annual#5, ALL the Serpent Crowns in the multiverse were brought to Earth-616 and merged into a single giant crown which was then destroyed. However, the mystical energy (essence) contained within that crown could not be destroyed but only dispersed. The newer crown created by Ghaur and Llyra in "Atlantis Attacks" was designed to gather that scattered essence into itself. This would also explain how Naga could appear and claim that he was "summoned back from oblivion when (Ghaur) created (his) massive new Serpent Crown." Apparently it was as Naga said: lying dead-and-buried with the Earth-616 crown on his brow made Naga a part of it, enough to be brought back when the essence of the previously-destroyed crown was incorporated into Ghaur's new crown. The fact that Naga was brought back could be proof that the new crown was NOT made up of the physical merging of multiple old crowns. Since the crown with which Naga was linked, the Earth-616 crown, was definitely destroyed in MTU Annual#5, that means that it no longer existed physically and thus could NOT have been a part of any new crown created by merging alternate Earth crowns.
   --So Uatu is always right in your above argument, but wrong in this one? It is a debatable point.
10.  Since Uatu's recap of "Atlantis Attacks" in WHAT IF II#25 was wrong, that means that there's no need to explain how "alternate Earth counterparts of Ghaur and Llyra (could bring) Serpent Crowns to their respective alternate Earth" in WHAT IF II#25. ALL the original Serpent Crowns from across the multiverse were brought to Earth-616 and destroyed in MTU Annual#5 but their combined essence remained on Earth-616 and was replicated throughout the multiverse with each subsequent divergence of the Earth-616 timeline. Thus, both the mainstream Earth and the alternate Earth in What If II#25 had their own "essence of all the Serpent Crowns which once existed in many dimensions" and NONE of the original Serpent Crowns existed on ANY of their respective alternate Earths after the events of MTU Annual#5.
    --You're basing this whole argument on a questionable assumption, which I don't see as certain.