The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.
To defend the sequence of alphabetisation may seem bizarre, so obvious is its application that it is hard to imagine a reference, catalogue or listing without it. But alphabetical order was not an immediate consequence of the alphabet itself. In the Middle Ages, deference for ecclesiastical tradition left scholars reluctant to categorise things according to the alphabet - to do so would be a rejection of the divine order. The rediscovery of the ancient Greek and Roman classics necessitated more efficient ways of ordering, searching and referencing texts. Government bureaucracy in the $16$th and $17$th centuries quickened the advance of alphabetical order, bringing with it pigeonholes, notebooks and card indexes.
- Unlike the alphabet, once the efficacy of the alphabetic sequence became apparent to scholars and administrators, its use became widespread.
- The alphabetic order took several centuries to gain common currency because of religious beliefs and a lack of appreciation of its efficacy in the ordering of things.
- The ban on the use by scholars of any form of categorisation - but the divinely ordained one - delayed the adoption of the alphabetic sequence by several centuries.
- While adoption of the written alphabet was easily accomplished, it took scholars several centuries to accept the alphabetic sequence as a useful tool in their work.