One offshoot of the Enlightenment spirit was the Encyclopaedia Britannica, a compendium of information arranged in a wholly original manner to reflect the widening knowledge and increasingly scientific interests of the late eighteenth century. Compiled by ‘a society of Gentlemen in Scotland’, its first editor was the Edinburgh printer and publisher William Smellie. The first volume was published in 1768, and the first three-set series completed in 1771. The second edition was printed in a ten-volume set, in 1777–84. Smellie’s introduction to the three-volume work typifies the sometimes overweening confidence of the intellectual and critical Scottish man of letters.
The method of conveying knowledge by alphabetical arrangement, has of late years become so universal, that Dictionaries of almost every branch of literature have been published, and their number still continues to increase. The utility of this method is indeed obvious; and experience has given it the stamp of approbation.
Among the various publications of this class, those of the greatest importance are General Dictionaries of Arts and Sciences: But it is to be regretted, that these, of all other kinds of Dictionaries, have hitherto fallen shortest of their purpose and yielded the least satisfaction.… The systematic nature of the Sciences will not admit of their being dismembered, and having their parts subjected to such fortuitous distributions: Yet they have suffered this violence in all the Dictionaries hitherto published …
In a work of this kind, the Sciences ought to be exhibited entire, or they are exhibited to little purpose. The absurdity and inefficacy of the contrary method, which has hitherto obtained, will be evident from an example or two. Supposing then, you want to obtain some knowledge of AGRICULTURE: You reasonably expect to be gratified by consulting one or other of these Dictionaries; as in all their Prefaces or Introductions the reader is taught to believe, that they contain the whole circle of Science and Literature, laid down in the most distinct, and explained in the most familiar manner. Well, how are you to proceed? The science is scattered through the alphabet under a multitude of words, as Vegetation, Soil, Manure, Tillage, Fallowing, Plough, Drain, Sowing, Marle, Chalk, Clay, Loam, Sand, Inclosure, Hedge, Ditch, Wheat, Barley, Harrow, Seed, Root, &c &c. After consulting a few of these articles, ignorant at the same time in what order you should have taken them, new references unexpectedly spring up, and multiply so thick, that you suddenly find yourself bewildered as in a labyrinth, without a clue to direct your course; and if haply you get through all the windings, you are still as far from the end of your inquiry as ever. To think of collecting a distinct or connected Whole from such a farrago, is vain: As well might you hope to acquire the idea of an edifice, the form of which is entirely demolished, from being shewn the scattered stones which once composed it. – But is there nothing to the purpose under the leading word, Agriculture, itself? No. After a definition of the word, the signification of which nobody is supposed to be ignorant of, you have a descant on the uses of the science, which every person must be sensible of, and then a few words upon its origin, which scarce any body can be at a loss to trace, without the help of a Dictionary. But nothing to the main point; no elements of the science, no particulars relating to the practice: But to complete the mortification of the wearied inquirer, he is at last given to understand, that he must for satisfaction have recourse to such and such authors who have written upon the subject; and these he must be at the expense of purchasing, or find other means than what his Dictionary affords of attaining the desired information.
Such are the defects of the old plan with regard to the Sciences: And so fond do the Compilers seem of derangement and demolition wherever it can be effected, that instead of giving a connected detail even of such subjects as according to their own plan naturally admit of being treated fully under one word, they industriously split them into many. For example, you want to know the history of BEES, their oeconomy and various operations. You therefore look out the word BEE, and are told it is ‘An insect of which there are a great many species, &c. See APIS.’ Upon turning to APIS, ‘APIS, in zoology, a genus of four-winged insects, having their tails furnished with a sting, &c. See BEE, SWARM, HIVE, HONEY, WAX &c.’ Well, you turn to the next word referred to, ‘SWARM of BEES. See HIVE.’ Upon consulting HIVE, you are told it is ‘A convenient receptacle for bees. See BEE.’ Then mention is made of two or three sorts of them, of which no other account is given, but that some are made with willow, others with straw; some of wood, others of glass; and that their usual form is conical. And so, with much the same satisfaction, you are carried through Hiving, Honey, Honey-comb, Wax, &c; and after being referred back from the last article to Honeycomb, Honey, Hive, Bee, Apis, you perhaps throw down the book in the heat of disappointment …
With a view to remedy these defects, and render a distinct knowledge of the Sciences attainable, the following Work has been planned. Being the first attempt of the kind, extensive in its nature, and difficult in the execution, it is offered to the Public with the utmost diffidence, and under a full sense of its requiring their utmost candour and intelligence.