Bibliography:
This is the project blog for ArchBook, an online, open-access reference resource of textual features that illustrate technologies and human practices for transmitting knowledge in textual form.
Wednesday, 11 January 2012
Notes on the frontispiece as graphical navigational interface
Posted by Brent NelsonBibliography:
Spring cleaning of available topics list
Posted by Alan GaleyYesterday I updated the page with a list of topics that are already underway, or which team members have expressed interest in working on. That list is pretty long, which is good, but we need to make the list of available topics is also healthy -- especially now that we're about to solicit a bunch of new entries.
I've updated that list with some new topics that emerged from offline discussions with Richard, Scott, and Rebecca. Defining a good topic is tricky, and I've erred on the side of inclusiveness, figuring that it's best to record ideas before they slip our memories, and then to refine them later. The criteria for a good entry, as I see them, would be:
- the feature has long enough history or range of use to support an entry (as opposed to being a one-off oddity that would work better as a blog post); remember, that history can be one of success or failure, or both
- the feature has what Scott calls "digital potential," in that it can inform digital interface design (including but not limited to e-books)
- the feature's "digital potential" isn't simply that of a cute literalized metaphor, like page-turning animations, but can be connected to a more abstract sense of functionality; for example, bookmarks are a good feature because they point us toward bookmarking as an activity that fits into a bigger picture of discontinuous reading (thinking of Stallybrass's "Books and Scrolls" article)
Note: with the above criterion I'm hoping we can avoid the mistakes that Johanna Drucker warns against in her chapter "Modeling Functionality: From Codex to E-book" in SpecLab. That chapter is essential reading for us. Further in the background here, but also important, is John Unsworth's notion of scholarly primitives -- that's probably not a concept we need to apply dogmatically here, in the sense of matching features up with primitives, but the spirit of that article could help us think about what textual features matter, and why. - ideally, though not necessarily, the feature should be relevant to the work of the other INKE teams; I don't want to confine my students to this criterion, but we should ensure that new entries undertaken by INKE team members meet this requirement
In any case, what entry topics should we add to the list? Would you define any of the existing ones differently? Do you have an idea for an entry that you can't quite put a name to?
Thursday, 29 December 2011
The Scholarly Edition: Distinguishing Different Kinds of Notes
Posted by Brent Nelson- representation of the various states and expressions of the text , most commonly variants between editions, or sometimes (usually in the case of manuscripts) authorial or editorial changes within a single text, such as additions or cancellations
- glosses of unfamiliar words
- paraphrases of difficult phrases or passages
- annotations providing interpretation and clarifying references
![]() |
| Fig. 1 |
![]() |
| Fig. 2 |
![]() |
| Fig. 3 |
![]() |
| Fig.4 |
Thursday, 15 December 2011
Varying Complexity in the Table of Contents
Posted by Brent Nelson![]() |
| Fig. 1. Simple representation of "Contents" in Roston, Soul of Wit (1974) |
![]() |
| Fig. 2. Detailed "Contents" for Rock, Church of Our Fathers (1905). |
![]() |
| Fig. 2. Section on “The belief of the Anglo-Saxons in Transubstantiation” with page numbers of the original edition indicated in parentheses: “(20)” and “(21).” |
The forgotten encoder: Plantin, mise-en-page and some thoughts towards the future
Posted by Scott Schofield

Designers working with digital media, particularly those with an interest in layout, should look to the early modern book for inspiration. Consider, for example, Christopher Plantin's eight-volume folio Polyglot Bible, the Biblia Sacra (Antwerp: 1568-1573). What an amazing feat. First devised by Plantin in 1566, the set was finally completed in 1573. This remarkable multilingual translation, (which is based on versions in Chaldean, Greek, Hebrew and Latin), was supervised by Arias Montano and Plantin’s Bible received royal patronage from the Spanish King, Philip II.
What always amazes me, though, is Plantin’s mise-en-page: remarkable layout, brilliant engravings, and several ancient languages set side by side. How long would it take to set a single page of Plantin’s Bible, and what compositor had the qualifications to do such work? Unfortunately, the compositors of the early modern period almost always go unnamed. Will today's encoders and web designers face a similar fate? Looking back fifty years from now, in 2061, how often we will know who did the work on a website produced in 2011? Perhaps the problem, if it is a problem, will not be whether we can identify the encoders, but if we can find the site. Just a thought….
The two images shown here are taken from the second volume of Plantin’s work. Figure 1. shows a typical opening from Plantin's Bible; figure 2. shows one of five frontispieces commissioned for the eight-volume work. Both the frontispiece and the historiated initials used to begin the different sections of the translation have been expertly handcoloured.
Images come courtesy of the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, University of Toronto. Call # G-10 00137. The Fisher has volumes 2-6, 8 of the Polyglot Bible.
Works Cited
Biblia Sacra, Hebraice, Chaldaice, Graece, & Latine. Excud. Antuerpiae : Christoph. Plantinus, 1568-1573.
Bowen, Karen L. and Dirk Imhof. Christopher Plantin and Engraved Book Illustrations in Sixteenth-Century Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Friday, 28 October 2011
Among other things, the Modern Language Association considers the following essential in scholarly editions:
1. Explanatory annotations to various words, passages, events, and historical figures.
2. A statement, or series of statements, setting forth the history of the text and its physical forms, explaining how the edition has been constructed or represented, [and] giving the rationale for decisions concerning construction and representation. . . . Statements concerning the history and composition of the text often take the form of a single textual essay, but it is also possible to present this information in a more distributed manner.
3. Appropriate textual apparatus or notes documenting alterations and variant readings of the text, including alterations by the author, intervening editors, or the editor of this edition. http://www.mla.org/resources/documents/rep_scholarly/cse_guidelines
In spite of these overtures to standardized expository annotations, a quick survey of scholarly editions exposes varieties of styles of providing supplementary information.
In some cases, notes are used minimally. Consider, for instance, Albert J. Geritz’s edition of John Rastell’s The Pastyme of People and A New Boke of Purgatory. In his introduction, Geritz offers remarks on the history of the texts, their representation in his edition, their composition, and so on (indeed, all of the editions that I mention here do as much). Geritz does not provide supplementary footnotes in the body of Rastell’s prose; instead, there is a short section of notes and a glossary at the end of the book (fig. 1). Oddly, the presence of the notes and the glossary is not indicated anywhere else in the book. Without superscripted numbers or other marks in Rastell’s text to draw a reader’s attention to Geritz’s notes and glossary, one wonders how useful these tools are.
| fig. 1. Geritz's notes |
| fig. 2. Quinn and Cheshire's commentary notes |
| fig. 3. Quinn and Cheshire's footnotes |
| fig. 4. Robertson's footnotes |
In their edition of Thomas More’s Utopia, George Logan, Robert Adams, and Clarence Miller offer annotations in more accessible, straightforward manner than the previous three examples do. There is no commentary section or glossary at the end of the book; that is, supplements are not divided based on content. Instead, all expository material is placed in footnotes at the bottom of each page (fig. 5). A range of information is thus made readily available and, significantly, apparent to readers.
Although annotations and contextual supplements are required elements of scholarly editions, this brief survey highlights the lack of standardization not only in the form but also the functionality of their notational structures. It may seem intuitive, but the accessibility of annotations is a key part of their usefulness.
Works Cited
Thursday, 15 September 2011
Case study: the shifting form of the table of contents in Judith Drake's An Essay in Defence of The Female Sex (1696)
Posted by Brent Nelson| fig. 1. Title page of Drakes An Essay in Defence of the Female Sex (1696). |
In the main body of the book, marginal notes are the only markers of a new section of content (e.g."Character of a Vertuoso" [sic] fig. 2).
| fig. 2 Marginal note marking the start of a new section of content |
The one element of the book's architecture that gives an explicit signal of representing "THE CONTENTS" comes not in the form of a table correlating section breaks with line numbers, but rather an index at the back of the book, an example of how close in function these two navigational aids are (fig. 3). In some cases, these subject headings, like the list of contents on the title page, are marked in the margins of the text (fig. 2).
![]() |
| fig. 3 "Contents" as index |
Works cited:
Drake, Judith. An essay in defence of the female sex: in which are inserted the characters of a pedant, a squire, a beau, vertuoso, a poetaster, a city-critick &c. in a letter to a lady. London, 1696.












