Talk:Colophon (publishing)

Etymology
I have deleted the former etymology, and replaced it with the correct derivation from the Greek by way of Latin; I have, however, kept the reference to Colophon in Asia Minor, to avoid confusion. The etymology can be confirmed at http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=colophon; in the Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon; and elsewhere.

Page name
Since colophons don't appear in just printed publications, I'd suggest this be moved to colophon (publishing) or thereabouts. « alerante &#x2706; &#x2709; » 16:22, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, and while we're at it, can anyone come up with a definition that covers the usage of the term in the case of hand written (scribe copied) books. I got here by link from Codex Sinaiticus, where it refers to notations connected with particular "books" (in the biblical sense, comparable to chapters or parts, but possibly produced separately and only bound together) of this ancient Greek copy of the Bible. Mrnatural

It might also be worth noting that some Unix / Linux man pages have such a section (usually near the bottom) possibly as an alternative to "History". That was what actually brought me here - as I was unclear what the term really meant! SlySven (talk) 05:01, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * See "Colophon (publishing)". — SMUconlaw (talk) 08:47, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Another usage of the word
Doesn't the word "Colophon" also refer to the graphic representing the publisher, often found on the spine, cover, and/or title page? Examples would include the Penguin penguin, the Waite Group Press W, or the Larousse "Je séme à tout vent" fairy. 4.234.120.26 15:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * yes, maybe someone could add this - from websearches - "Colophon - An identifying inscription or emblem from the printer or publisher appearing at the end of a book. Also the emblem at the bottom of the spine on both the book and dust-wrapper as well as a logo on the title or copyright page." "COLOPHON (2) - An emblematic design; a trade emblem or device of a printer or publisher." "COLOPHON Details of the printer's typography or the publisher's symbol, often found on the last page of a book and sometimes referred to as such when a printer's or publisher's 'device' is found on the copyright page. Sometimes states the number of copies printed, and in the case of a limited edition, will cite the copy number and may contain the signature of the author, illustrator, or publisher." also, some artists have a colophon, which is a symbol used in place of a signature, often stylized initials. ffangs 19:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

No. this is incorrect. See my post on the Club of Odd Volumes discussion page regarding the incorrect use of the term "colophon" as the technical term for the "device" of the COV as depicted on that page. If one refers to the print version of the well respected "An ENCYCLOPEDIA of the BOOK, TERMS USED in PAPER-MAKING, PRINTING, BOOKBINDING and PUBLISHING with NOTES on ILLUMINATED MANUSCRIPTS, BIBLIOPHILES, PRIVATE PRESSES and PRINTING SOCIETIES" by Geoffrey Ashall Glaister, the author debunks the term "colophon" as used to describe the publisher's or other mark or device on the title page of a publication.

see my quote here: Image talk:CluboOddVolumes.jpg. I believe because of the relative scarcity of Glaister's " Encyclopedia ", it might be well to cite the entry here to correct this more universally accessible reference material and help establish what the "colophon" is NOT. HotType918 (talk)HotType918

I agree that colophon to mean a printer's device is an improper use of the word (deriving, I suppose, from the appearance of printers' devices on some colophons). It might be worth recording in the main article, however, that this usage exists, albeit as a "loose" or "careless" one. Paulwnash (talk) 11:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

yet another useage
In The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis, Jaques Lacan defines a colophon as the 'pointing-finger' in the margins of old books. is this an accurate meaning of the word? none of my research online has been able to defend it and google image search yields no such printed fingers. --Vinney 06:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps a mistranslation? --65.16.61.35 15:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

This is new to me, and I know well the poiting fist/finger chracters. In the U.S. they would fall into a category called "dingbats." ut not a colophon. As a graphic mark, on;ly a printer or publisher's mark would be called colophon presently. CApitol3 16:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Include a reference to the Wiseman hypothesis?
Not sure how to add such a reference, but here's a suggestion...

The Wiseman hypothesis, aka tablet hypothesis, has a small following among Bible-believing Christians. This hypothesis claims that the Book of Genesis was originally written on tablets by various figures mentioned in the text of Genesis itself. The basis for this theory is the claim that colophons can be found in the text. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiseman_hypothesis

Digiphon
I have removed:

"It has also been suggested that a digiphon or 'digital colophon' be used to share metadata about of a piece of digital media . A digiphon is a succinct descriprion the digital tools (including computer hardware, computer software, and any other digital equipment) used to create a piece of digital media. An example can be seen here."

The example cited states that it is a neologism and thus not suitable for Wikipedia. It is an interesting idea (it seems like a candidate for a microformat), but so far it is still a neologism.--Curtis Clark (talk) 13:45, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

yet still another usage
Colophons similar to those added by medieval scribes are found in literature dating back far earlier than 700 AD. For instance they are found at the beginning of Luke, 1 Cor. 16:21 and the little note after the end of the chapter, etc. A colophon of this type told who wrote the document, who their ancestors were and what their own virtues were (particularly as relating to how reliable they were), whether they wrote it with their own hand or used a scribe; what they wrote it on, who the intended audience was, and how they obtained the information in the document - whether as an eyewitness or an editor; and often a curse upon anyone who would do various bad things to the text, such as found at the end of the Book of Revelations of St. John. The Bremner-Rhind Papyrus carries a colophon by the author Nes-min, telling the date of writing, his titles and parentage, and a curse against stealing the book from anyone who rightly owns it.[Nibley, Since Cumorah, p.152] The BRP dates to around 300 BC.Friendly Person (talk) 03:31, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Should be a separate article on Printer's marks
See de:Druckermarke etc... -- AnonMoos (talk) 18:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I have started this article. Colonel Warden (talk) 18:46, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

some comments
I was assuming that the page you see in all modern books, pages which include copious info on publication dates, including dates of reissue, was a colophon, even though that page has usually has no heading. The article says that such pages are more properly called something else: In Great Britain colophons grew generally less common in the 16th century. The statements of printing which appeared (under the terms of the Unlawful Societies Act of 1799) on the verso of the title-leaf and final page of each book printed in Britain in the 19th century are not, strictly speaking, colophons, and are better referred to as "printers' imprints" or "printer statements". Why would that be?

I notice that many books from the early 20th Century and before do NOT contain information on date of issue. Why was that, and when did the modern practice of having complete details of the book at the front begin? Should that be dealt with in the article? Lastly, there are millions of books with such pages. I’m sure no publishers would mind if some of these were included as examples in this articles. Also, some early ones could be shown. These would be in the public domain anyway. The example given is not a good one, as examples should be those which are typical of their kind, and I have NEVER seen a page with “colophon” written at the top. Myles325a (talk)

usually at the end?
The article currently (29 Aug 2012) says, "in modern books usually located at the reverse of the title page, but can also sometimes be located at the end of the book." All the definitions I've found (e.g. Webster's, Chicago Manual of Style) say it's at the end of the book. What gives? Mcswell (talk) 15:23, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

What would be nice
What would be nice is to have a few examples of more recent colophons.

Currently the latest one illustrated in the article is from 1567. 2601:200:C000:1A0:399B:B3BD:A6CC:C6B3 (talk) 16:47, 22 December 2021 (UTC)