In perusal of history, first, provide you some writers in chronology and
cosmography. For if you be ignorant of the times and places when and
where the things you read were done, it cannot choose but breed
confusion in your reading, and make you many times grossly to slip and
mistake in your discourse. When, therefore, you set to your book, have
by you Helvicus, his _Chronology_, and a map of the country in which you
are conversant; and repair unto them to acquaint you with time and
place, when and where you are. If you be versing the ancient histories,
then provide you Ptolemy's maps, or Ortelius, his _Conatus Geographici_:
if the latter, then some of the modern cards....
Before you come to read the acts of any people, as those that intend to
go to bowls will first see and view the ground upon which they are to
play, so it shall not be amiss for you first to take a general view of
that ground, which you mean more particularly to traverse, by reading
some short epitome.... This will give you a general taste of your
business, and add light unto particular authors....
From the order of reading and the matters in reading to be observed, we
come to the method of observation. What order we are for our best use to
keep in entering our notes into our paper-books.
The custom which hath most prevailed hitherto was commonplacing, a thing
at the first original very plain and simple; but by after-times much
increased, some augmenting the number of the heads, others inventing
quainter forms of disposing them: till at length commonplace books
became like unto the Roman Breviary or Missal. It was a great part of
clerkship to know how to use them. The vastness of the volumes, the
multitude of heads, the intricacy of disposition, the pains of
committing the heads to memory, and last, of the labour of so often
turning the books to enter the observations in their due places, are
things so expensive of time and industry, that although at length the
work comes to perfection, yet it is but like the silver mines in Wales,
the profit will hardly quit the pains. I have often doubted with myself
whether or no there were any necessity of being so exactly methodical.
First, because there hath not yet been found a method of that latitude,
but little reading would furnish you with some things, which would fall
without the compass of it. Secondly, because men of confused, dark and
cloudy understandings, no beam or light of order and method can ever
rectify; whereas men of clear understanding, though but in a mediocrity,
if they read good books carefully, and note diligently, it is impossible
but they should find incredible profit, though their notes lie never so
confusedly. The strength of our natural memory, especially if we help
it, by revising our own notes; the nature of things themselves, many
times ordering themselves, and _tantum non_, telling us how to range
them; a mediocrity of care to see that matters lie not too chaos-like,
will with very small damage save us this great labour of being
over-superstitiously methodical. And what though peradventure something
be lost, _Exilis domus est_, &c. It is a sign of great poverty of
scholarship, where everything that is lost is missed; whereas rich and
well-accomplished learning is able to lose many things with little or no
inconvenience.--J. HALES. _Golden Remains._