An imprint is evidence

William Carey’s A Grammar of the Punjabee Language survives in a digitised Oxford copy. Its title leaf names Serampore and the Mission Press and bears the date 1812. It separately presents Carey’s academic role at the College of Fort William. The author’s institutional affiliation and the printer’s location are different fields. Record both without treating one as another name for the other. The visible date is evidence for the imprint; it does not, by itself, prove when every sheet was completed or establish an earliest use of Gurmukhi type. A citation should also identify the particular scanned copy rather than rely on a modern platform’s upload date.[1]

Committee and superintendent

A second title leaf identifies A Dictionary of the Panjabi Language as prepared by a committee of the Lodiana Mission. The imprint names the Mission Press and Reverend L. Janvier as superintendent, with the year 1854 in Roman numerals. These credits describe collective preparation and a printing role; naming Janvier alone as author would discard the committee’s credit. The Internet Archive catalogue adds another material layer: it describes a 1980 University Microfilms photocopy within the University of California Libraries contribution. That later reproduction is not an 1854 original binding inspected here. Keep the printed credit, original imprint date and described reproduction distinct when documenting the surviving evidence.[2]

Reproduction and type

Emma Williams’s typography study warns against reading uneven reproductions as proof of different type designs. Her Serampore comparison considers facsimile quality, ink, paper and wear as possible causes of differences in printed appearance. She also distinguishes a specimen’s publication date from the design or casting date of its type. A surviving printed page therefore needs its reproduction history alongside a proposed identification of the printing technology.[3]

Sources & notes

Source records include access dates and, where known, limits on what was examined. Checks used AI assistance; independent human or specialist review has not been completed.

  1. William Carey. A Grammar of the Punjabee Language ↗original printed grammar and copy record · Source date: 1812 printed imprint · Locator: Actual 106-page PDF, title leaf PDF page5; imprint, 1812 date and author affiliation; archive copy metadata. Accessed 2026-11-02.Actual PDF downloaded; title leaf rendered and visually inspected. The archive describes an Oxford copy digitised by Google. Only the printed imprint date is asserted, not a first-publication day or an earliest-typeface claim. No original physical book or type was examined and no scan is reproduced. Other digital copies and catalogue versions are the same work.Return to An imprint is evidence, paragraph 1 ↑
  2. Committee of the Lodiana Mission; L. Janvier named as press superintendent. A Dictionary of the Panjabi Language: title leaf and copy record ↗original title leaf and institutional copy metadata · Source date: 1854 original imprint; 1980 photocopy described by catalogue · Locator: Actual reproduced title leaf on Commons, sourced to archive frame n6; full archive catalogue fields on preface credit and 1980 University Microfilms photocopy. Accessed 2026-11-02.Actual title-leaf image downloaded from its Commons record and visually inspected; the full relevant archive catalogue body was read. The B/W PDF request failed after an unsafe redirect and was not bypassed or represented as a downloaded book. No dictionary entry or complete original volume was examined.Return to Committee and superintendent, paragraph 1 ↑
  3. Emma Williams; University of Reading, MA Typeface Design. A Comparative Study of the Development of the Gurmukhi Script, part2 ↗original typography research · Source date: 2008-09 · Locator: Actual 38-page part 2 PDF: title leaf; printed pp.38–41 / PDF 2–3, publication versus design dates and Serampore facsimile comparison. Accessed 2026-11-02.Actual PDF downloaded and selected complete relevant text read. Part 1, part 2 and incorporated versions share one whole-study family with the existing LAN30 use. No new Afshar allocation, primary-specimen image reuse or independent physical type examination. The study’s universal first-example wording is not adopted.Return to Reproduction and type, paragraph 1 ↑
Help improve this entry. Suggest a correction with a source.
Record PH-COL-0071 · English edition · human review not performed