Miscellaneous Order: Manuscript Culture and the Early Modern Organization of Knowledge

Abstract

Ubi non est ordo, ibi est confusio. “Where there is no order, there is (inevitably) confusion.” This axiom, attributed to Italian mathematician and Franciscan friar Luca Pacioli, finds application across countless disciplines. In the history of the organization of knowledge, early modern miscellanies and manuscripts provide no paucity of disorder and confusion to most observers. Many volumes appear arbitrary in content, casually organized, and even chaotic. In Miscellaneous Order: Manuscript Culture and the Early Modern Organization of Knowledge, Angus Vine presents an ardent endeavor to dispel the misnomer of disorder. Examining several models of early modern miscellany, Vine reveals similarities among seemingly disparate sources and the institutions that used them.Early modern miscellany has received increased attention from scholars in recent years, and especially over the last decade. Ann Blair has published extensively on the evolution of note-taking in early modern Europe. Richard Yeo's work involving notebooks of pioneers in early modern science is likewise considerable to miscellany historiography, as are a number of recent essays on early modern miscellany. Vine distinguishes Miscellaneous Order, however, in several ways. Above all, the breadth of sources the author consulted is nothing short of remarkable. He spent nearly a decade on this book, researching manuscript collections of the British Library, the Bodleian Library at Oxford, the Beinecke Library at Yale, and more than two dozen other repositories. Another distinction is Vine's focus on sources from the sixteenth century and first half of the seventeenth century. Though there are some exceptions, much recent scholarship on the subject involves sources from the second half of the seventeenth century and later—when archival systems were developing throughout Europe. Vine draws attention to models of manuscript culture found more than a century earlier, and in unlikely places. These cultural elements evolved not only in scholarly circles, but also among merchants, mappers, artisans, and even travelers. Finally, though Miscellaneous Order could have been written by another expert in the field, Vine's particular style would have been missed. Vine's experience and expertise in early modern literature shine through well. The plethora of literary references Vine weaved into his analysis make for a far more interesting work than if omitted.In the book's first chapter, Vine explores the “disorderly” commonplace book. The humanist tradition of commonplacing involved a compiler copying noteworthy information in a specific manuscript for reference and future use. What may be deemed a “hodgepodge” of knowledge, a commonplace book could include names and maxims of famous pedagogues, major principles from disciplines of the era, and even vocabulary the compiler deemed relevant. Vine next explores the evolution of early modern encyclopedism and questions of taxonomy. The concept of an omnigatherum, a “catch-all” manuscript intended to contain notes on different subjects of knowledge within a single volume, presents an intriguing contrast to the mobile and ever-evolving nature of knowledge in the twenty-first century. Thereafter, Vine highlights some particular antiquaries, chorographers, and models of mercantile miscellany. The remaining chapters focus on Hugh Plat and Francis Bacon, discussing their respective pivotal roles in manuscript culture and how knowledge is organized.For each model researched, Vine extensively evaluates the scope, purpose, and methods for the information transmission. What information did each manuscript model contain? For what purposes was it utilized? Vine also explores logistics. That is, literally, how did early modern compilers record information? Modern-day technology has advanced such that we can (and do) revise and republish encyclopedias and anthologies routinely to incorporate new knowledge. Though sixteenth-century knowledge compilers enjoyed no such extravagance, Vine explains, they nonetheless developed methods for adding newly acquired information without the need to rewrite the entire work.Miscellaneous Order is an impressive contribution to scholarship of early modern manuscript culture. Librarians and students of library science or the history of knowledge will find the book unmatched in scope and detail. The book's thirty-page bibliography is itself a tremendous resource for those exploring further research on the subject. Like other admirable scholarship on early modern miscellany, however, Miscellaneous Order is unlikely to spur new interest in the subject from a general audience of readers. Vine's effort to define miscellany and its significance in the book's introduction provides invaluable background to readers without expertise. The book's glossary offers a modicum of relevant terminology. Vine's copious footnotes throughout the book—in the early modern humanist tradition—offer far more value.Overall, Vine capably defends the existence of common cultural threads while thoroughly educating readers on models of miscellany from the early modern era—an era where the recording and subsequent transmission of knowledge was onerous and intricate. Miscellaneous Order prompts us to cherish advancements that yielded the consistency, ubiquity, and orderliness of modern classification systems.