Produced by Steven Gibbs and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net







                             [Illustration]


                       The Book-Lover's Library.

                               Edited by

                       Henry B. Wheatley, F.S.A.




                         =By the Same Author.=

_Tastefully printed and bound in cloth_, =4s. 6d.=; _in Roxburgh_, =7s.
6d.= _Large Paper_, =21s.=

                        _HOW TO FORM A LIBRARY._

"An admirable guide to the best bibliographies and books of
reference.... It is altogether a volume to be desired."--_Globe._

"Everything about this book is satisfactory--paper, type, margin,
size--above all, the contents."--_St. James's Gazette._

                     _HOW TO CATALOGUE A LIBRARY._

"Every collector of books knows how many and difficult are the problems
that present themselves in connection with cataloguing. Mr. Wheatley
deals with all patiently, wisely, and exhaustively."--_British Weekly._

"Mr. Wheatley's volume is unique. It is written with so much care and
such profound knowledge of the subject that there can be no doubt that
it will satisfactorily meet all requirements."--_Bristol Mercury._

                             ELLIOT STOCK,
                      62, PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON.




                              HOW TO MAKE
                                AN INDEX


                                   BY

                       HENRY B. WHEATLEY, F.S.A.

                 AUTHOR OF "HOW TO CATALOGUE A LIBRARY"
                  "HOW TO FORM A LIBRARY," ETC., ETC.


    "M. Bochart ... me prioit surtout d'y faire un Index, etant,
    disoit-il, l'âme des gros livres."--_Menagiana._


                                 LONDON
                   ELLIOT STOCK, 62, PATERNOSTER ROW
                                  1902




                             [Illustration]


                               _PREFACE._


[Illustration: _I]n 1878 I wrote for the Index Society, as its first
publication, a pamphlet entitled "What is an Index?" The present little
book is compiled on somewhat similar lines; but, as its title suggests,
it is drawn up with a more practical object. The first four chapters are
"Historical," and the other four are "Practical"; but the historical
portion is intended to lead up to the practical portion by showing what
to imitate and what to avoid._

_There has been of late years a considerable change in public opinion
with respect to the difficulties attending the making of both indexes
and catalogues. It was once a common opinion that anyone without
preparatory knowledge or experience could make an index. That that
opinion is not true is amply proved, I hope, in the chapter on the "Bad
Indexer."_

_I have attempted to describe the best way of setting to work on an
index. To do this with any hope of success it is necessary to give
details that may to some seem puerile, but I have ventured on
particulars for which I hope I may not be condemned._

_I must also ask the forbearance of my readers for the constant use of
the personal pronoun. If I could have left it out, I would gladly have
done so; but to a great extent this book relates to the experiences of
an old indexer. They must be taken for what they are worth, and I hope
forgiveness will be extended to me for the form in which these
experiences are related._

                                                            H. B. W.




                             [Illustration]


                                CONTENTS.


                             _HISTORICAL._
                                                                PAGE
                               CHAPTER I.

                              INTRODUCTION

The So-called Evils of Index Learning--Glanville and
    Swift--Thomas Fuller's Defence of the Index--Advantages of
    saving the Brain by knowing where to find what is
    wanted--Dr. Johnson's Division of Necessary
    Knowledge--Gradual Introduction of the Word
    "Index"--Synonyms--Final Triumph of Index--Interesting
    Indexes--Prynne's Index to his _Histrio-Mastix_--Index to
    Richardson's Novels--David Hume an Indexer--Sir James Paget
    enjoyed making Indexes--Amusing Blunder in Musical Index       1


                               CHAPTER II.

                     AMUSING AND SATIRICAL INDEXES.

Leigh Hunt's Good Word for Indexes--Indexes to _Tatler_ and
    _Spectator_, and _The Athenian Oracle_--Table of Contents to
    Shenstone's _Schoolmistress_--Index to _Biglow Papers_--Dr.
    William King and his Satirical Indexes--"Boyle upon
    Bentley"--The Royal Society and Sir Hans Sloane
    ridiculed--Speaker Bromley's _Travels_--Reprint with King's
    Index                                                         25


                              CHAPTER III.

                            THE BAD INDEXER.

Some of the Worst Indexes in Periodicals--Jewel's
    _Apology_--Classified in place of completely Alphabetical
    Indexes--Mr. Poole's Opinion of Indexes to Periodicals--Miss
    Hetherington's Examples of Bad Indexes--Want of Complete
    Alphabetization--Confusion of _u_ and _n_, and Blunders
    caused by it--Classification within the Alphabet--Variety of
    Alphabets--Want of Cross References--Useless Cross
    References--Amusing Mistranslations--Incorrect Filling-up of
    Contractions--Bad Index to Walpole's _Letters_--Incorrect
    Use of the Line for Repetition of Heading--Index to Pepys's
    _Diary_--Evil of an Indexless Book--Complaints                53


                              CHAPTER IV.

                           THE GOOD INDEXER.

Difficulties of being Exact--Value of a Good
    Index--Scaliger, Nicolas Antonio, Pineda, Samuel
    Jeake--Carlyle on Indexless Books--Macaulay's Opinion of the
    Aim of an Index--Official Indexes--Amount paid by Parliament
    for Indexes--Good Legal Indexes--Indexes to Jeremy Bentham's
    _Works_, and to Ruskin's _Fors Clavigera_--Dr. Birkbeck
    Hill's Index to Boswell's _Life of Johnson_--Boswell's
    Original Index--Issue of Revised Index to Ranke's _History
    of England_--The Indexer born and made--Characteristics of a
    Good Indexer                                                  85


                              _PRACTICAL._

                               CHAPTER V.

                     DIFFERENT CLASSES OF INDEXES.

Easiest Kinds of Indexes to make--Concordances--Scientific
    Books--Incompleteness of some Indexes--Indexes to Catalogues
    of Libraries--Proposed Subject Index to the Catalogue of the
    British Museum--Controversy in _The Times_--Mr. Fortescue's
    Opinion--Dictionary Catalogue                                118


                               CHAPTER VI.

                GENERAL RULES FOR ALPHABETICAL INDEXES.

Rules, with Explanations and Illustrations: (1) One Index to each
    Book; (2) One Alphabet; (3) Order of the English Alphabet;
    (4) Arrangement of Headings; (5) Arrangement of Foreign
    Proper Names; (6) Proper Names with Prefixes; (7) Titles of
    Peers rather than their Family Names; (8) Compound Names;
    (9) Adjective _v._ Substantive as a Catchword; (10)
    Shortness of Entries; (11) Repetition of Short Entries; (12)
    Abstracts of the Contents of Articles in Periodicals; (13)
    Authorities to be Indexed; (14) Division of the Page for
    Reference; (15) Use of Numerals for Series of Volumes; (16)
    Certain Entries to be printed in Capitals; (17) Type for
    Headings--Arrangement of Oriental Names--Sir George
    Birdwood's Memorandum                                        132


                              CHAPTER VII.

                       HOW TO SET ABOUT AN INDEX.

Hints as to the Making of an Index--Two Kinds of Index--Arrangement
    of Growing Indexes--Use of Cards, Paper Slips, or
    Foolscap--Indexer's Knowledge of the Book to be
    Indexed--Selection of the best Catchword--Use of
    Numerals--Index for Different Editions of Same Book--Cutting
    up and arranging Slips--Sorting into Alphabet--Pasting down
    the Slips--Paste to Use--Calculations of the Relative
    Lengths of the Letters of the Alphabet--Preparation of
    "Copy" for the Printer--Correction of the Press              172


                             CHAPTER VIII.

                      GENERAL OR UNIVERSAL INDEX.

Early Proposals for an Index Society--Foundation of a
    Society--Indexes of History and Biography--General Index:
    What it should be                                           206

INDEX                                                           225




                             [Illustration]


                         HOW TO MAKE AN INDEX.

                               CHAPTER I.

                             INTRODUCTION.


    "I for my part venerate the inventor of Indexes; and I know not
    to whom to yield the preference, either to Hippocrates, who was
    the great anatomiser of the human body, or to that unknown
    labourer in literature who first laid open the nerves and
    arteries of a book."
                          --ISAAC DISRAELI, _Literary Miscellanies_.


[Illustration: I]t is generally agreed that that only is true knowledge
which consists of information assimilated by our own minds. Mere
disjointed facts kept in our memories have no right to be described as
knowledge. It is this understanding that has made many writers jeer at
so-called index-learning. Thus, in the seventeenth century, Joseph
Glanville, writing in his _Vanity of Dogmatizing_, says: "Methinks 'tis
a pitiful piece of knowledge that can be learnt from an index, and a
poor ambition to be rich in the inventory of another's treasure." Dr.
Watts alluded to those whose "learning reaches no farther than the
tables of contents"; but then he added a sentence which quite takes the
sting from what he had said before, and shows how absolutely needful an
index is. He says: "If a book has no index or table of contents, 'tis
very useful to make one as you are reading it."

Swift had his say on index-learning, too. In the _Tale of a Tub_
(Section VII.) he wrote: "The most accomplisht way of using books at
present is twofold: Either serve them as some men do Lords, learn their
titles exactly, and then brag of their acquaintance. Or secondly, which
indeed is the choicer, the profounder and politer method, to get a
thorough insight into the Index, by which the whole book is governed and
turned, like fishes by the tail. For to enter the palace of Learning at
the great gate, requires an expense of time and forms; therefore men of
much haste and little ceremony are content to get in by the back-door.
For, the Arts are all in a flying march, and therefore more easily
subdued by attacking them in the rear.... Thus men catch Knowledge by
throwing their wit on the posteriors of a book, as boys do sparrows with
flinging salt upon their tails. Thus human life is best understood by
the wise man's Rule of regarding the end. Thus are the Sciences found
like Hercules' oxen, by tracing them backwards. Thus are old Sciences
unravelled like old stockings, by beginning at the foot."

Thomas Fuller, with his usual common-sense, wisely argues that the
diligent man should not be deprived of a tool because the idler may
misuse it. He writes: "An Index is a necessary implement and no
impediment of a book except in the same sense wherein the carriages
[_i.e._ things carried] of an army are termed _impedimenta_. Without
this a large author is but a labyrinth without a clue to direct the
reader therein. I confess there is a lazy kind of learning which is only
indical, when scholars (like adders which only bite the horses' heels)
nibble but at the tables, which are calces librorum, neglecting the body
of the book. But though the idle deserve no crutches (let not a staff be
used by them but on them), pity it is the weary should be denied the
benefit thereof, and industrious scholars prohibited the accommodation
of an index, most used by those who most pretend to contemn it."

The same objection to "indical" learning is urged to-day, but it is
really a futile one. No man can know everything; he may possess much
true knowledge, but there is a mass of matter that the learned man knows
he can never master completely. He does not care to burden his mind with
what might be to him useless lumber. In this case his object is only to
know where he can find the information when he wants it. Indexes are of
the greatest help to these men, and for their purposes the indexes ought
to be well made. But it is needless to labour this point, for has not
Johnson, in his clear and virile language, said the last word on the
matter?--"Knowledge is of two kinds; we know a subject ourselves, or we
know where we can find information upon it. When we inquire into any
subject, the first thing we have to do is to know what books have
treated of it. This leads us to look at catalogues and the backs of
books."

Before going further, it would be well for author and reader to come to
an agreement as to what an index really is. An index may, in certain
circumstances, be arranged in the order of the book, like a table of
contents, or it may be classified or chronological; but the index to a
book such as we all think of when we speak of an index should be
alphabetical. The other arrangements must be exceptional, because the
books indexed are exceptional.

It is strange, however, to find how long the world was in coming to this
very natural conclusion. The first attempt at indexing a book was in the
form of an abstract of contents in the order of the book itself. Seneca,
in sending certain volumes to his friend Lucilius, accompanied them with
notes of particular passages, so that he "who only aimed at the useful
might be spared the trouble of examining them entire." Cicero used the
word "index" to express the table of contents of a book, and he asked
his friend Atticus to send him two library clerks to repair his books.
He added that he wished them to bring with them some parchment to make
indexes upon.

Many old manuscripts have useful tables of contents, and in Dan Michel's
_Ayenbite of Inwyt_ (1340) there is a very full table with the heading:
"Thise byeth the capiteles of the boc volyinde."

It was only a step to arrange this table of contents in the order of the
alphabet, and thus form a true index; but it took a long time to take
this step. Alphabetical indexes of names are to be found in some old
manuscript books, but it may be said that the general use of the
alphabetical arrangement is one of those labour-saving expedients which
came into use with the invention of printing.

Erasmus supplied alphabetical indexes to many of his books; but even in
his time arrangement in alphabetical order was by no means considered
indispensable in an index, and the practice came into general use very
slowly.

The word "index" had a hard fight with such synonyms as "calendar,"
"catalogue," "inventory," "register," "summary," "syllabus." In time it
beat all its companions in the race, although it had the longest
struggle with the word "table."[1]

  [1] All these words are fairly common; but there is another
      which was used only occasionally in the sixteenth century. This
      is "pye," supposed to be derived from the Greek [Greek: Pinax],
      among the meanings of which, as given in Liddell and Scott's
      Lexicon, is, "A register, or list." The late Sir T. Duffus
      Hardy, in some observations on the derivation of the word
      "Pye-Book," remarks that the earliest use he had noted of pye in
      this sense is dated 1547: "A Pye of all the names of such
      Balives as been to accompte pro anno regni regis Edwardi Sexti
      primo."--_Appendix to the "35th Report of the Deputy Keeper of
      the Public Records,"_ p. 195.

Cicero used the word "index," and explained it by the word "syllabus."
Index was not generally acknowledged as an English word until late in
the seventeenth century.

North's racy translation of Plutarch's _Lives_, the book so diligently
used by Shakespeare in the production of his Roman histories, contains
an alphabetical index at the end, but it is called a table. On the
title-page of Baret's _Alvearie_ (1573), one of the early English
dictionaries, mention is made of "two _Tables_ in the ende of this
booke"; but the tables themselves, which were compiled by Abraham
Fleming, being lists of the Latin and French words, are headed "Index."
Between these two tables, in the edition of 1580, is "an Abecedarie,
Index or Table" of Proverbs. The word "index" is not included in the
body of the dictionary, where, however, "Table" and "Regester" are
inserted. "Table" is defined as "a booke or regester for memorie of
thinges," and "regester" as "a reckeninge booke wherein thinges dayly
done be written." By this it is clear that Baret did not consider index
to be an English word.

At the end of Johnson's edition of Gerarde's _Herbal_ (1636) is an
"Index Latinus," followed by a "Table of English names," although a few
years previously Minsheu had given "index" a sort of half-hearted
welcome into his dictionary. Under that word in the _Guide into Tongues_
(1617) is the entry, "vide Table in Booke, in litera T.," where we read,
"a Table in a booke or Index." Even when acknowledged as an English
word, it was frequently differentiated from the analytical table: for
instance, Dugdale's _Warwickshire_ contains an "Index of Towns and
Places," and a "Table of men's names and matters of most note"; and
Scobell's _Acts and Ordinances of Parliament_ (1640-1656), published
1658, has "An Alphabetical Table of the most material contents of the
whole book," preceded by "An Index of the general titles comprized in
the ensuing Table." There are a few exceptions to the rule here set
forth: for instance, Plinie's _Natural Historie of the World_,
translated by Philemon Holland (1601), has at the beginning, "The
Inventorie or Index containing the contents of 37 bookes," and at the
end, "An Index pointing to the principal matters." In Speed's _History
of Great Britaine_ (1611) there is an "Index or Alphabetical Table
containing the principal matters in this history."

The introduction of the word "index" into English from the Latin word in
the nominative shows that it dates from a comparatively recent period,
and came into the language through literature and not through speech. In
earlier times it was the custom to derive our words from the Latin
accusative. The Italian word _indice_ was from the accusative, and this
word was used by Ben Jonson when he wrote, "too much talking is ever the
indice of a fool" (_Discoveries_, ed. 1640, p. 93). The French word
_indice_ has a different meaning from the Italian _indice_, and
according to Littré is not derived from _index_, but from _indicium_. It
is possible that Jonson's "indice" is the French, and not the Italian,
word.

Drayton uses "index" as an indicator:

  "Lest when my lisping guiltie tongue should hault,
   My lookes might prove the index to my fault."
               --_Rosamond's Epistle_, lines 103-104.

Shakespeare uses the word as a table of contents at the beginning of a
book rather than as an alphabetical list at the end: for instance,
Nestor says:

  "Our imputation shall be oddly poised
   In this wild action: for the success,
   Although particular, shall give a scantling
   Of good or bad unto the general;
   And in such _indexes_, although small pricks
   To their _subsequent volumes_, there is seen
   The baby figure of the giant mass
   Of things to come at large."
                --_Troilus and Cressida_, I. 3.

Buckingham threatens:

                          "I'll sort occasion,
  As _index_ to the story we late talk'd of,
  To part the queen's proud kindred from the king."
                           --_Richard III._, II. 2.

And Iago refers to "an _index_ and obscure prologue to the history of
lust and foul thoughts" (_Othello_, II. 1). It may be remarked in the
quotation from _Troilus and Cressida_ that Shakespeare uses the proper
plural--"indexes"--instead of "indices," which even now some writers
insist on using. No word can be considered as thoroughly naturalised
that is allowed to take the plural form of the language from which it is
obtained. The same remark applies to the word "appendix," the plural of
which some write as "appendices" instead of "appendixes." In the case of
"indices," this word is correctly appropriated to another use.

Indexes need not necessarily be dry; and some of the old ones are full
of quaint touches which make them by no means the least interesting
portion of the books they adorn. John Florio's translation of
Montaigne's _Essays_ contains "An Index or Table directing to many of
the principal matters and personages mentioned in this Booke," which is
full of curious entries and odd cross references. The entries are not in
perfect alphabetical order. A few of the headings will give a good idea
of the whole:

    "Action better than speach."

    "Action to some is rest."

    "Beasts are Physitians, Logitians, Musitians, Artists, Students,
    Politikes, Docible, Capable of Military Order, of Affections, of
    Justice, of Friendship, of Husbandry, of thankefulnesse and of
    compassion," etc.

    "Bookes and Bookishnesse."

    "Bookes not so profitable as Conference--as deare as children."

    "Bruit creatures have imagination."

    "Cloysters not without cares."

    "Good fortune not to be despised altogether."

    "Societie of bookes."

Here are some of the cross references:

    "Alteration _vide_ Inconstancy."

    "Amitie _vide_ Friendship."

    "Ant _vide_ Emmets."

    "Apprehension _vide_ Imagination."

    "Balladmakers _vide_ Rymers."

    "Boasting _vide_ Vaunting."

    "Chance _vide_ Fortune."

    "Common People _vide_ the Vulgar."

    "Disparity _vide_ Equality."

    "Emperickes _vide_ Physitians."

An instance of how loosely the word "index" has been used will be found
in Robert Boyle's _Some Considerations touching the Usefulnesse of
Experimental Natural Philosophy_ (Oxford, 1663). This book is divided
into two parts, and at the end of each part is "The Index." This
so-called index is arranged in order of the pages, and is really only a
full table of contents.

Indexes did not become at all common till the sixteenth century, and Mr.
Cornelius Walford asked in _Notes and Queries_ what was the earliest
index. Mr. Edward Solly answered: "Polydore Vergil in _Anglicæ Historiæ_
(1556), has what may fairly be called a good index--thirty-seven pages.
This may be taken as a starting-point as to date; and we may ask for
earlier examples" (6th S. xi. 155). Another contributor referred to an
earlier edition of Polydore Vergil (1546), and still another one cited
Lyndewood's _Provinciale_ (1525), which has several indexes.

One old index may be singled out as having caused its author serious
misfortune. William Prynne concocted a most wonderful attack upon the
"stage" under the title of _Histrio-Mastix_ (1633), which is absolutely
unreadable by reason of the vast mass of authorities gathered from every
century and every nation, to prove the wickedness of play-acting.
Carlyle refers to the _Histrio-Mastix_ as "a book still extant, but
never more to be read by mortal."

If Prynne had sent his child out into the world without an index, he
might have escaped from persecution, as no one would have found out the
enormities which were supposed to lurk within the pages of the book. But
he was unwise enough to add a most elaborate index, in which all the
attacks upon a calling that received the sanction of the Court were
arranged in a convenient form for reference. Attorney-General Noy found
that the author himself had forged the weapons which he (the prosecutor)
could use in the attack. This is proved by a passage in Noy's speech at
Prynne's trial, where he points out that the accused "says Christ was a
Puritan, in his Index." Noy calls it an index, but Prynne himself
describes it as "A Table (with some brief additions) of the chiefest
passages in this treatise."[2]

  [2] There is a note to the table which shows that the book grew
      in size during the printing--"p. signifying the page, f. the
      folioes from pag. 513 to 545 (which exceeded the Printer's
      computation), m. the marginall notes: if you finde f. before any
      pages from 545 to 568, then looke the folioes which are
      overcast; if p. then the page following."

The entries in the index are so curious and one-sided in their
accusations that it is worth while to quote some of them rather fully:

    "Actors of popular or private enterludes for gaine or pleasure,
    infamous, unlawfull and that as well in Princes, Noblemen,
    Gentlemen, Schollers, Divines or Common Actors."

    "Æschylus, one of the first inventors of Tragedies--his strange
    and sudden death."

    "Christ wept oft, but never laughed--a puritan--dishonoured and
    offended with Stage playes."

    "Crossing of the face when men go to plays shuts in the Devil."

    "Devils, inventors and fomentors of stage plays and dancing.
    Have stage plays in hell every Lord's day night."

    "Heaven--no stage plays there."

    "Herod Agrippa smitten in theater by an angel and so died."

    "Herod the great, the first erecter of a theater among the Jews
    who thereupon conspire his death."

    "King James his statute against prophaning scripture and God's
    name in Playes--his Statutes make Players rogues and Playes
    unlawfull pastimes."

    "Kings--infamous for them to act or frequent Playes or favour
    Players."

    "Plagues occasioned by stage plays. All the Roman actors
    consumed by a plague."

    "Play-bookes see Bookes."

    "Players infamous ...
     ---- many of them Papists and most desperate wicked wretches."

    "Play haunters the worst and lewdest persons for the most
    part...."

    "Play haunting unlawfull...."

    "Play-houses stiled by the Fathers and others, the Devil's
    temples, Chappels and synagogues...."

    "Play-poets examples of God's judgements on the chiefest of
    them...."

    "Puritans, condemners of Stage-playes and other corruptions
    stiled so--The very best and holiest Christians called
    so....--Christ, his prophets, apostles, the Fathers and
    Primitive christians Puritans as men now judged--hated and
    condemned onely for their grace yea holinesse of life--Accused
    of hypocrisie and sedition, and why."

    "Puritan, an honourable nickname of Christianity and grace."

    "Theaters overturned by tempests."

It was the strong terms in which women actors are denounced that gave
such offence at Court, where the Queen and her ladies were specially
attracted to the stage. Prynne's book was published six weeks before
Henrietta Maria acted in a pastoral at Somerset House, so that the
following passage could not have been intended to allude to the
Queen:[3]

  [3] See Cobbett's _State Trials_, vol. 3, coll. 561-586.

    "Women actors notorious whores ... and dare then any Christian
    women be so more than whorishly impudent as to act, to speake
    publikely on a stage perchance in man's apparell and cut haire
    here proved sinfull and abominable in the presence of sundry men
    and women?... O let such presidents of impudency, of impiety be
    never heard of or suffered among Christians."

There are some interesting letters in Ellis's _Original Letters_ (2nd
Series, vol. 3) which illustrate the effect on the Court of these
violent expressions of opinion. Jo. Pory wrote to Sir Thomas Puckering
on September 20th, 1632: "That which the Queen's Majesty, some of her
ladies and all her maides of honour are now practicing upon is a
Pastorall penned by Mr. Walter Montague, wherein her Majesty is pleased
to acte a parte, as well for her recreation as for the exercise of her
Englishe."

George Gresley wrote to the same Puckering on the following 31st of
January: "Mr. Prinne an Utter Barrister of Lincoln's Inne is brought
into the High Commission Court and Star Chamber, for publishing a Booke
(a little before the Queene's acting of her play) of the unlawfullness
of Plaies wherein in the Table of his Booke and his brief additions
thereunto he hath these words [the extracts given above are here
printed], which wordes it is thought by some will cost him his eares, or
heavily punnisht and deepely fined."

Those who thought thus were amply justified in their opinion. Mr. Hill
Burton observes that it was a very odd compliment to Queen Henrietta
Maria to presume that these words refer to her, and he adds that the
supposition reminds him of Victor Hugo's sarcasm respecting Napoleon
III., that when the Parisian police overheard any one use the terms
"ruffian" and "scoundrel," they said, "You must be speaking of the
Emperor!"

Prynne is so full in his particulars that he might have given us much
information respecting the stage in his own day, which we should have
welcomed; but, instead, he is ever more ready to draw his examples from
Greek and Latin authorities.

In the eighteenth century a practice arose of drawing up indexes of
sentiments and opinions as distinguished from facts. Such indexes
required a special skill in the indexer, who was usually the original
author. There is a curious poetical index to the Iliad in Pope's
_Homer_, referring to all the places in which similes are used.

Samuel Johnson was very anxious that Richardson should produce such an
index to his novels. In the _Correspondence of Samuel Richardson_ (vol.
v., p. 282) is a letter from Johnson to the novelist, in which he
writes: "I wish you would add an _index rerum_, that when the reader
recollects any incident, he may easily find it, which at present he
cannot do, unless he knows in which volume it is told; for Clarissa is
not a performance to be read with eagerness, and laid aside for ever;
but will be occasionally consulted by the busy, the aged and the
studious; and therefore I beg that this edition, by which I suppose
posterity is to abide, may want nothing that can facilitate its use."

At the end of each volume of _Clarissa Harlowe_ Richardson added a sort
of table of all the passages best worth remembering, and as he was the
judge himself, it naturally extended to a considerable length. In
September, 1753, Johnson again wrote to Richardson suggesting the
propriety of making an index to his three works, but he added: "While I
am writing an objection arises; such an index to the three would look
like the preclusion of a fourth, to which I will never contribute; for
if I cannot benefit mankind I hope never to injure them."

Richardson took the hint of his friend, and in 1755 appeared a volume of
four hundred and ten pages, entitled, _A Collection of the moral and
instructive Sentiments, Maxims, Cautions, and Reflexions contained in
the Histories of Pamela, Clarissa and Sir Charles Grandison, digested
under proper heads_.

The tables of sentiments are arranged in separate alphabets for each
novel. The production of this book was a labour of love to its author,
who, moreover, was skilled in the mechanical work of indexing, and in
the early part of his career had filled up his leisure hours by
compiling indexes for the booksellers and writing prefaces and
dedications. At the end of his "collection" are two letters from the
author to two of his admirers; one was to a lady who was solicitous for
an additional volume to _Sir Charles Grandison_, supposing that work
ended too abruptly.

David Hume is to be added to the list of celebrated men who have been
indexers, although he does not appear to have liked the work. In
referring to the fourth edition of his _Essays_ he wrote: "I intend to
make an index to it." Two years later he is grateful that the work of
indexing another book is to be done for him; writing to Millar (December
18th, 1759), he says: "I think that an Index will be very proper, and am
glad that you free me from the trouble of undertaking that task, for
which I know myself to be very unfit."[4]

  [4] Letters of David Hume to William Strahan, edited by G.
      Birkbeck Hill, D.C.L. Oxford, 1888.

Sir James Paget, the great surgeon, not only made indexes, but delighted
in the task. He told Dr. Goodhart, _apropos_ of the Hunterian Museum
Catalogues, College of Surgeons, that "it had always been a pleasure to
him to make an index."[5]

  [5] Paget's _Life_, p. 350.

At the end of this chapter I must refer to an excellent blunder, because
it would not be fair to introduce it with the work of the bad indexer,
as it is an instance not exactly of ignorance, but of too great
cleverness.

Of the Fétis Musical Library, bought by the Belgian Government at his
death for 152,000 francs, an excellent catalogue was compiled and
printed. In the index are references to Dumas (Alexandre) _père_, and
Dumas (Alexandre) _fils_. The musician who consults the work will be
surprised at this unexpected development of these two famous authors'
powers, but will be disappointed on referring to the numbers cited to
find that they are reports of some legal proceedings brought by the firm
of Alexandre _père et fils_, the well-known harmonium-makers, against a
rival firm. The indexer's better acquaintance with _Les Trois
Mousquetaires_ and _La Dame aux Camélias_ led him astray.

My friend Mr. J. E. Matthew, who communicated this to me, adds: "After
many years of constant use of the catalogue, this is the only mistake,
beyond a literal, that I ever found."




                             [Illustration]

                              CHAPTER II.

                     AMUSING AND SATIRICAL INDEXES.


    "It will thus often happen that the controversialist states his
    case first in the title-page; he then gives it at greater length
    in the introduction; again perhaps in a preface; a third time in
    an analytical form through means of a table of contents; after
    all this skirmishing he brings up his heavy columns in the body
    of the book; and if he be very skilfull he may let fly a few
    Parthian arrows from the index."--J. HILL BURTON'S
    _Book-Hunter_.


[Illustration: O]ne of the last things the genuine indexer thinks of is
to make his work amusing; but some wits have been very successful in
producing humorous indexes, and others have seen their way to make an
author ridiculous by satirically perverting his meaning in the form of
an ordinary index. We can find specimens of each of these classes.

Leigh Hunt has a charming little paper, "A Word upon Indexes," in his
_Indicator_. He writes: "Index-making has been held to be the driest as
well as lowest species of writing. We shall not dispute the humbleness
of it; but since we have had to make an index ourselves,[6] we have
discovered that the task need not be so very dry. Calling to mind
indexes in general, we found them presenting us a variety of pleasant
memories and contrasts. We thought of those to the Spectator, which we
used to look at so often at school, for the sake of choosing a paper to
abridge. We thought of the index to the Pantheon of Fabulous Histories
of the Heathen Gods, which we used to look at oftener. We remember how
we imagined we should feel some day, if ever our name should appear in
the list of Hs; as thus, Home, Howard, Hume, Huniades, ----. The poets
would have been better, but then the names, though perhaps less
unfitting, were not so flattering; as for instance Halifax, Hammond,
Harte, Hughes, ----. We did not like to come after Hughes."

  [6] To the original edition of the _Indicator_; the reprint (2
      vols. 8vo, 1834) has no index.

The indexes to the _Tatler_ and the _Spectator_ are full of piquancy,
and possess that admirable quality of making the consulter wish to read
the book itself. The entries are so enticing that they lead you on to
devour the whole book. Hunt writes of them: "We have just been looking
at the indexes to the Tatler and Spectator, and never were more forcibly
struck with the feeling we formerly expressed about a man's being better
pleased with other writers than with himself. Our index seemed the
poorest and most second-hand in the world after theirs: but let any one
read theirs, and then call an index a dry thing if he can. As there 'is
a soul of goodness in things evil' so there is a soul of humour in
things dry, and in things dry by profession. Lawyers know this, as well
as index-makers, or they would die of sheer thirst and aridity. But as
grapes, ready to burst with wine, issue out of the most stony places,
like jolly fellows bringing burgundy out of a cellar; so an Index, like
the _Tatler's_, often gives us a taste of the quintessence of his
humour." The very title gives good promise of what is to be found in the
book: "A faithful Index of the dull as well as the ingenious passages in
the Tatlers."

Here are a few entries chosen at random:

    Vol. 1--
    "Bachelor's scheme to govern a wife."
    "Knaves prove fools."

    Vol. 2--
    "Actors censured for adding words of their own in their parts."
    "Dead men, who."
    "Dead persons heard, judged and censured.
    ---- Allegations laid against them, their pleas."
    "Love letters before and after marriage, found in a grave."
    "Mathematical sieve to sift impertinences in writing and
       discourse."
    "News, Old People die in France."

    Vol. 3--
    "Flattery of women, its ill consequences."
    "Maids of Honour, their allowance of Beef for their Breakfast in
       Queen Elizabeth's time."
    "Silence, significant on many occasions.
    ---- Instances of it."

    Vol. 4--
    "Blockheads apt to admire one another."
    "Female Library proposed for the Improvement of the Sex."
    "Night, longer formerly in this Island than at present."

In 1757 _A General Index to the Spectators, Tatlers, and Guardians_ was
published, and in 1760 the same work was re-issued with a new
title-page. Certain supposed blots in the original indexes were here
corrected and the following explanation made in the preface:
"Notwithstanding the learning and care of the compilers of the first
Indexes to these volumes, some slight inaccuracies have passed, and
where observed they are altered. Few readers who desire to know Mr.
Bickerstaff's Opinion of the Comedy called the Country Wife, or the
character of Mrs. Bickerstaff as an actress, would consult the Index
under the word _Acts_." This seems to refer to an entry in the index to
the first volume of the _Tatler_:

    "Acts the Country-Wife: (Mrs. Bignel)."

The index to the original edition of the _Spectator_ is equally good
with that of the _Tatler_, but the entries are longer and more elaborate
than those in the latter. The references are not made to the pages, as
is the case with the _Tatler_, but to the numbers of the papers. The
following entries are worthy of quotation:

    Vol. 2--

    "Gentry of England generally speaking in debt."
    "Great men not truly known till some years after their deaths."
    "Women, the English excel all other nations in beauty.
     ---- Signs of their improvement under the Spectator's hands.
     ---- Their pains in all ages to adorn the outside of their
          heads."

A precursor of the _Tatler_ and _Spectator_ was the curious _Athenian
Oracle_, of the eccentric John Dunton, each volume of which contained
"An Alphabetical Table for the speedy finding of any questions, by a
member of the Athenian Society," from which the following amusing
entries are taken:

    "Ark, what became of it after the Flood?"

    "Bees, a swarm lit upon the Crown and Scepter in Cheapside,
    what do they portend?"

    "Hawthorn-tree at Glassenbury, what think you of it?"

    "Noah's flood, whither went the waters?"

    "Pied Piper, was he a man or dæmon?"

    "Triumphant Arch erected in Cheapside 1691, described."

A selection from this curious seventeenth-century miscellany was made by
Mr. J. Underhill, and published by Walter Scott a few years ago.

Shenstone's _Schoolmistress_ is one of the works of genius which is
little known in the present day, but well repays perusal. A humorous
table of contents was prepared by the author, which he styled an index.
He wrote: "I have added a ludicrous index purely to show (fools) that I
am in jest." This was afterwards omitted, but D'Israeli reprinted it in
his _Curiosities of Literature_. It contains an amusing _précis_ of the
chief points of the poem; the whole is short, and a few extracts will
give an idea of its plan:

    "A CIRCUMSTANCE in the situation of the mansion of early
    Discipline, discovering the surprising influence of the
    connexion of ideas."

    "SOME peculiarities indicative of a country school, with a short
    sketch of the sovereign presiding over it."

    "SOME account of her night-cap, apron and a tremendous
    description of her birchen sceptre."

    "HER titles and punctilious nicety in the ceremonious assertion
    of them."

    "A VIEW of this rural potentate as seated in her chair of state,
    conferring honours distributing bounties and dispensing
    proclamations."

Gay composed a full and humorous index for his interesting picture of
eighteenth-century London--_Trivia_. The poet added a few entries to the
index in the quarto edition of his _Poems_ (1720). The following
selected references will show the character of the index:

    "Asses, their arrogance."
    "Autumn, what cries then in use."
    "Bully, his insolence to be corrected."
    "Chairs and chariots prejudicial to health."
    "Cellar, the misfortune of falling into one."
    "Coach fallen into a hole described."
    "Glazier, his skill at football."
    "London, its happiness before the invention of Coaches and Chairs."
    "Periwigs, how stolen off the head."
    "Quarrels for the wall to be avoided."
    "Schoolboys, mischievous in frosty weather."
    "Wall, to whom to be given.
      ---- to whom to be denied."
    "Women, the ill consequence of gazing on them."

Of modern examples of the amusing index, by far the best is that added
to the inimitable _Biglow Papers_ by the accomplished author, James
Russell Lowell. Here are some extracts from the index to the First
Series:

    "Adam, eldest son of, respected."

    "Babel, probably the first congress."

    "Birch, virtue of, in instilling certain of the dead languages."

    "Cæsar, a tribute to. His _Veni, Vidi, Vici_ censured for undue
    prolixity."

    "Castles, Spanish, comfortable accommodation in."

    "Eating Words, habit of, convenient in time of famine."

    "Longinus recommends swearing (Fuseli did the same thing)."

    "No, a monosyllable. Hard to utter."

    "Noah enclosed letter in bottle, probably."

    "Ulysses, husband of Penelope. Borrows money. (For full
    particulars see _Homer_ and _Dante_.)"

    "Wrong, abstract, safe to oppose."

The following are from the Second Series:

    "Antony of Padua, Saint, happy in his hearers."

    "Applause, popular, the _summum bonum_."

    "'Atlantic,' editors of, See _Neptune_. [There is no entry under
    Neptune.]"

    "Belmont. See _Woods_."

    "Bible, not composed for use of coloured persons."

    "Charles I, accident to his neck."

    "Ezekiel would make a poor figure at a Caucus."

    "Facts, their unamiability. Compared to an old fashioned
    stage-coach."

    "Family trees, a primitive forest of."

    "Jeremiah hardly the best guide in modern politics."

    "Missionaries, useful to alligators. Culinary liabilities of."

    "Rum and water combine kindly."

    "Shoddy, poor covering for outer or inner man."

    "'They'll say,' a notable bully."

    "Woods, the, See _Belmont_."

    "World, this, its unhappy temper."

    "Writing, dangerous to reputation."

The witty Dr. William King, student of Christ Church, Oxford, and
afterwards Judge of the Irish Court of Admiralty, presented an example
of the skilled controversialist spoken of by Hill Burton as letting fly
"a few Parthian arrows from the Index." He was dubbed by Isaac D'Israeli
the inventor of satirical indexes, and he certainly succeeded in
producing several ill-natured ones.

When the wits of Christ Church produced under the name of the Hon.
Charles Boyle the clever volume with which they thought to annihilate
the great Dr. Bentley, Dr. King was the one who assisted by producing a
bitter index.

The first edition of _Dr. Bentley's Dissertation on the Epistles of
Phalaris and the Fables of Esop examin'd_ (1698) has no index; but Dr.
King's work was added to the second edition published in the same year.
It was styled, _A short account of Dr. Bentley by way of Index_. Then
follows:

    "Dr. Bentley's true story of the MS.  prov'd false by the
        testimonies of
    ---- Mr. Bennet, p. 6.
    ---- Mr. Gibson, p. 7.
    ---- Dr. King, p. 8.
    ---- Dr. Bentley, p. 19."
    "Dr. Bentley's civil usage of Mr. Boyle.
    "His civil language to
    ---- Mr. Boyle.
    ---- Sir W. Temple.
    "His singular humanity to
    ---- Mr. Boyle.
    ---- Sir Edward Sherburne.
    humanity to Foreigners.
    "His Ingenuity in
    ---- relating matters of fact.
    ---- citing authors.
    ---- transcribing and plundering
    notes and prefaces of
    ---- Mr. Boyle.
    ---- Vizzanius.
    ---- Nevelet.
    ---- Camerarius.
    ---- Editor of Hesychius.
    ---- Salmasius.
    ---- Dr. Bentley.
    "His appeal to Foreigners.
    ---- a suspicious plan.
    ---- a false one.
    "His modesty and decency in contradicting great men.
    "(Long list from Plato to Every body).
    "His happiness in confident assertions for want
    ---- of Reading.
    ---- of Judgment.
    ---- of Sincerity.
    "His profound skill in Criticism
      From beginning to
        The End."

This is certainly more vindictive than witty.

All the wits rushed madly into the fray, and Swift, in his "Battel
fought last Friday between the Antient and Modern Books in St. James's
Library," committed himself irretrievably to the wrong side in this way:
"A captain whose name was B-ntl-y, in person the most deformed of all
the moderns; tall but without shape or comeliness, large but without
strength or proportion. His armour was patched up of a thousand
incoherent pieces...."

Then look at the leader of the opposing host: "Boyl clad in a suit of
armor which had been given him by all the gods immediately advanced
against the trembling foe, who now fled before him."

It is amazing that such a perverted judgment should have been given by
some of our greatest writers, but all is to be traced to Bentley's
defects of temper, so that Dr. King was not altogether wrong in his
index.

Sir George Trevelyan in his _Life of Macaulay_ refers to Bentley's
famous maxim (which in print and talk alike he dearly loved to quote),
that no man was ever written down except by himself, and quotes what the
historian wrote after perhaps his tenth perusal of Bishop Monk's life of
the great critic: "Bentley seems to me an eminent instance of the extent
to which intellectual powers of a most rare and admirable kind may be
impaired by moral defects."

Charles Boyle's book went through four editions, and still there was
silence; but at last appeared the "immortal" _Dissertation_, as Porson
calls it, which not only defeated his enemies, but routed them
completely. Bentley's _Dissertation upon the Epistles of Phalaris_, with
an answer to the objections of the Hon. C. Boyle, Esq., first appeared
in 1699. De Quincey described it as one of the three most triumphant
dissertations existing upon the class of historico-critical problems,
"All three are loaded with a superfetation of evidence, and conclusive
beyond what the mind altogether wishes."[7] In another place De Quincey
points out the line of argument followed by Bentley: "It was by
anachronisms of this character that Bentley detected the spuriousness of
the letters ascribed to Phalaris. Sicilian towns, &c., were in those
letters called by names that did not arise until that prince had been
dead for centuries. Manufactures were mentioned that were of much later
invention. As handles for this exposure of a systematic forgery, which
oftentimes had a moral significance, these indications were valuable,
and gave excessive brilliancy to that immortal dissertation of
Bentley's."[8]

  [7] _Rosicrucians and Free-Masons_ (De Quincey's _Works_, vol.
      13, p. 388).

  [8] _Memorial Chronology_ (De Quincey's _Works_, vol. 14, p. 309).

The fate which the wits thought to bring upon Bentley fell upon them,
and they quarrelled among themselves. It was believed that Charles
Boyle, when credit was to be obtained, looked upon himself as author of
the book; but afterwards, when it was discredited, he only awaited the
public trial of the conspirators to wash his hands of the whole affair.
Atterbury, who had much to do with the production of the volume, was
particularly annoyed by Boyle's conduct. He wrote to Boyle: "In laying
the design of the book, in writing above half of it, in reviewing
[revising] a great part of the rest, in transcribing the whole and
attending the press, half a year of my life went away. What I promised
myself from hence was that some service would be done to your
reputation, and that you would think so. In the first of these I was not
mistaken--in the latter I am. When you were abroad, sir, the highest you
could prevail with yourself to go in your opinion of the book was, that
you hoped it would do you no harm. When you returned I supposed you
would have seen that it had been far from hurting you. However, you have
not thought fit to let me know your mind on this matter; for since you
came to England, no one expression, that I know of, has dropped from you
that could give me reason to believe you had any opinion of what I had
done, or even took it kindly from me."[9]

  [9] _Memoirs of Bishop Atterbury_, compiled by Folkestone
      Williams, vol. i. (1869), p. 42.

In the same year (1698) King turned his attention to a less formidable
antagonist than the great Bentley. His _Journey to London_ is a very
ingenious parody of Dr. Martin Lister's _Journey to Paris_, and, the
pages of the original being referred to, it forms an index to that book.

The Royal Society in its early years had to pass through a long period
of ridicule and misrepresentation. The author of _Hudibras_ commenced
the crusade, but the gibes of Butler were easier to bear than those of
Dr. William King, who was particularly savage against Sir Hans Sloane.
_The Transactioneer_ (1700) and _Useful Transactions in Philosophy_
(1708-1709) were very galling to the distinguished naturalist, and
annoyed the Royal Society, whose _Philosophical Transactions_ were
unmercifully laughed at. To both the tracts referred to were prefixed
satirical tables of contents, and what made them the more annoying was
that the author's own words were very ingeniously used and turned
against him. King writes: "The bulls and blunders which Sloane and his
friends so naturally pour forth cannot be misrepresented, so careful I
am in producing them."

Here is a specimen of the contents of _The Transactioneer_:

    "The Tatler's Opinion of a Virtuoso."
    "Some Account of Sir Hans Sloane.
    ----  of Dr. Salmon.
    ----  of Mr. Oldenburg.
    ----  of Dr. Plot."
    "The Compiling of the Philosophical Transactions the work of a
          single person.
    ----  the excellence of his style.
    ----  his clearness and perspicacity.
    ----  Genius to Poetry.
    ----  Verses on Jamaica Pepper.
    ----  Politicks in Gardening.
    ----  Skill in Botanicks."

The following appear in the contents of the "Voyage to Cajamai" in
_Useful Transactions_:

    Preface of the author--

    "Knew a white bramble in a dark room."

    Author's introduction--

    "Mountains higher than hills."

    "Hay good for horses."

The most important of King's indexes was that added to Bromley's
_Travels_, because it had the effect of balking a distinguished
political character of his ambition of filling the office of Speaker of
the House of Commons.

William Bromley (1664-1732), after leaving Christ Church, Oxford, spent
several years in travelling on the Continent. He was elected a Member of
Parliament in 1689, and soon occupied a prominent position among the
non-jurors. In 1692 he published "_Remarks in the Grande Tour of France
and Italy, lately performed by a Person of quality._ London. Printed by
E. H. for Tho. Basset at the George in Fleet Street, 1692." A second
edition appeared in the following year: "_Remarks made in Travels
through France and Italy, with many Publick Inscriptions. Lately taken
by a Person of Quality_. London (Thomas Basset) 1693."

In March, 1701-1702, Bromley was elected Member of Parliament for the
University of Oxford, which he continued to represent during the
remainder of his life. In 1702 he published another volume of travels:
"_Several Years' Travels through Portugal, Spain, Italy, Germany,
Prussia, Sweden, Denmark and the United Provinces performed by a
Gentleman_."

In 1705 Bromley was supposed to have pre-eminent claims to the
Speakership, which office was then vacant; but what was supposed to be a
certainty was turned into failure by the action of his opponents. They
took the opportunity of reprinting his _Remarks_, with the addition of a
satirical index, as an electioneering squib. This reprint appeared as
"_Remarks in the Grand Tour ... performed by a Person of Quality in the
year 1691_. The second edition to which is added a table of the
principal matters. London. Printed for John Nutt near Stationers' Hall,
1705." This was really the third edition, but probably the reprinters
overlooked the edition of 1693. It was reprinted with the original
licence of "Rob. Midgley, Feb. 20th, 1691-2."

In the Bodleian copy of this book there is a manuscript note by Dr.
Rawlinson to the effect that this index was drawn up by Robert Harley,
Earl of Oxford; but this was probably only a party rumour. Dr. Parr
possessed Bromley's own copy of the reprint with the following
manuscript note by the author:

    "This edition of these travels is a specimen of the good nature
    and good manners of the Whigs, and I have reason to believe of
    one of the ministry (very conversant in this sort of calumny)
    for the sake of publishing '_the Table of the principal matters
    &c_' to expose me whom the gentlemen of the Church of England
    designed to be Speaker of the House of Commons, in the
    Parliament, that met Oct. 25 1705. When notwithstanding the
    Whigs and Court joining to keep me out of the chair, and the
    greatest violence towards the Members, turning out some, and
    threatening others, to influence their votes, I had the honour
    (and I shall ever esteem it a greater honour than my
    competitor's success) to have the suffrages of 205 disinterested
    gentlemen for me: such a number as never lost such a question
    before; and such as, with the addition of those that by force,
    and contrary to their inclination, with the greatest reluctance
    voted against me, must have prevailed for me.

    "This was a very malicious proceeding; my words and meaning
    plainly perverted in several places; which if they had been
    improper, and any observations trifling or impertinent, an
    allowance was due for my being very young, when they were made.
    But the performances of others, not entitled to such allowance
    may be in this manner exposed, as appears by the like Tables
    published for the Travels of Bp. Burnet and Mr. Addison. _Wm.
    Bromley._"

Dr. Parr took this all very seriously, and set great value upon the
book. He added a note to that written by Bromley, in which he said:

    "Mr. Bromley was very much galled with the republication, and
    the ridiculous, but not untrue, representation of the contents.
    Such a work would unavoidably expose the author to derision:
    instead therefore of suffering it to be sold after my death, and
    to become a subject of contemptuous gossip, or an instrument of
    party annoyance, I think it a proper act of respect and kindness
    for the Bromley family, for me to put it in possession of the
    Rev. Mr. Davenport Bromley, upon the express condition that he
    never sells it nor gives it away, that, after reading it, he
    seals it up carefully and places it where no busy eye, nor
    thievish hand can reach it.
                                                         "S. P."

This note was written in 1823, and the precautions taken by Parr seem
rather belated. Even the family were little likely to mind the public
seeing a political skit more than a century old, which did no dishonour
to their ancestor's character.

It is very probable that Harley was at the expense of reprinting the
book, as it is reported that every one who came to his house was asked
if he had seen Mr. Bromley's _Travels_; and when the answer was in the
negative, Harley at once fetched a copy, which he presented to his
visitor. There is no doubt, however, that the index was drawn up by Dr.
King.

The index is neither particularly amusing nor clever, but it is very
ill-natured. Dr. Parr infers that the book is not misrepresented, but
there can be little doubt that the index is in most instances very
unfair. Thus the first entry in the table is:

    "Chatham, where and how situated, viz. on the other side of
    Rochester bridge, though commonly reported to be on this side,
    p. 1."

The passage indexed is quite clear, and contains the natural statement
of a fact.

    "Lodged at Rochester, an episcopal seat in the same county
    [Kent]. The cathedral church is plain and decent, and the city
    appears well peopled. When I left it and passed the Bridge I was
    at Chatham, the famous Dock, where so many of our great ships
    are built."

The following are some further entries from the index:

    "Dover and Calais neither of them places of Strength tho'
    frontier towns, p. 2."

    "Boulogne the first city on the French shore, lies on the coast,
    p. 2." [These are the same words as in the book.]

    "Crosses and Crucifixes on the Roads in France prove it not
    England, p. 3."

The passage here indexed is as follows:

    "Crosses and Crucifixes are so plentiful every where on this
    road, that from them alone an Englishman will be satisfied he is
    out of his own country; besides the Roads are much better than
    ours."

    "Eight pictures take up less room than sixteen of the same size,
    p. 14."

This is founded on the following:

    "They contain the Histories of the Old and New Testaments, and
    are placed in two rows one above the other; those that represent
    the Old Testament are in the uppermost reaching round the room
    and are sixteen. Those of the new are under them, but being only
    eight reach not so far as the former, and where no pictures are
    be the doors to the presses where the sacred vestments are
    kept."

    "Travelling by night not proper to take a view of the adjacent
    countries, p. 223."

This is a version of the following:

    "The heat of the weather made travelling in the night most
    desirable and we chose it between Sienna and Florence.... By
    this means I could see little of the country."

    "The Duchess dowager of Savoy who was grandmother to the present
    Duke was mother to his father, p. 243."

This is a perversion of the following
perfectly natural observation:

    "This was designed by the Dutchess Christina grandmother of this
    Duke in the minority of her son (his father) in 1660."

The entry, "Jews at Legorn not obliged to wear red hats, p. 223,"
contains nothing absurd, but rather is an interesting piece of
information, because the Jews were obliged to wear these hats in other
parts of Italy, and it was the knowledge of this fact that induced
Macklin to wear a red hat when acting Shylock, a personation which
induced an admirer to exclaim:

    "This is the Jew
     That Shakespeare drew."

Such perversions as these could have done Bromley, one would think,
little harm; but the real harm done consisted in bringing to light and
insisting upon the author's political attitude when he referred to King
William and Queen Mary as "the Prince and Princess of Orange." The
passage is as follows:

    "A gallery, where among the pictures of Christian Princes are
    those of King Charles the Second and his Queen, King James the
    Second and his Queen and the Prince and Princess of Orange."

It would indeed seem strange that one who had thus referred to his King
and Queen should occupy so important a public office as Speaker of the
House of Commons. Another ground of offence was that when in Rome he
kissed the Pope's slipper.

Although Bromley was disappointed in 1705, his time came; and after the
Tory reaction consequent on the trial of Sacheverell he was in 1710
chosen Speaker without opposition. There is a portrait of Bromley in the
University Picture Gallery in the Bodleian at Oxford.




                             [Illustration]

                              CHAPTER III.

                            THE BAD INDEXER.

    "At the laundress's at the Hole in the Wall in Cursitor's Alley
    up three pair of stairs, the author of my Church history--you
    may also speak to the gentleman who lies by him in the flock
    bed, my index maker."--SWIFT'S _Account of the Condition of
    Edmund Curll_ (Instructions to a porter how to find Mr. Curll's
    authors).

[Illustration: B]ad indexers are everywhere, and what is most singular
is that each one makes the same sort of blunders--blunders which it
would seem impossible that any one could make, until we find these same
blunders over and over again in black and white. One of the commonest is
to place the references under unimportant words, for which no one would
think of looking, such as A and The. The worst indexes of this class are
often added to journals and newspapers. A good instance of confusion
will be found in the index to a volume of _The Freemason_ which is
before me; but this is by no means singular, and certainly not the worst
of its class. Under A we find the following entries:

    "Afternoon Outing of the Skelmersdale Lodge."
    "An Oration delivered," etc.
    "Annual Outing of the Queen Victoria Lodge."
    "Another Masonic MS."

Under B:

    "Bro. Bain's Masonic Library."

Under F:

    "First Ball of the Fellowship Lodge.
    "First Ladies' Night."

Under I:

    "Interesting Extract from an 'Old Masonian's' Letter."

Under L:

    "Ladies' Banquet."
    "Ladies' Night."
    "Ladies' Summer Outing."
    "Late Bro. Sir B. W. Richardson."

Under N:

    "New Grand Officers."
    "New Home for Keighley Freemasons."
    "New Masonic Hall."

Under O:

    "Our Portrait Gallery."

Under R:

    "Recent Festival."

Under S:

    "Send-off dinner."
    "Summer Festival."
    "Summer Outing."

Under T:

    "Third Ladies' Night."

Under Y:

    "Ye olde Masonians."

There are many other absurd headings, but these are the worst instances.
They show the confusion of not only placing references where they would
never be looked for, but of giving similar entries all over the index
under whatever heading came first to the mind of the indexer. For
instance, there is one _Afternoon_ Outing, one _Annual_ Outing, one
_Ladies'_ Outing, one _Summer_ Outing, and three other Outings under O.
None of these have any references the one from the other.

There are a large number of indexes in which not only the best heading
is not chosen, but the very worst is. Thus, choosing at random, we find
such an order as the following in an old volume of the _Canadian
Journal_:

    "_A_ Monograph of the British Spongiadæ."

    "_On_ the Iodide of Barium."

    "_Sir_ Charles Barry, a Biography."

    "_The_ late Professor Boole."

    "_The_ Mohawk Language."

The same misarrangement will sometimes be found even in standard English
journals.

The edition of Jewel's _Apology_, published by Isaacson in 1825,
contains an index which is worthy of special remark. It is divided into
four alphabets, referring respectively to (1) Life; (2) Apology; (3)
Notes to Life; (4) Notes to Apology; and this complicated machinery is
attached to a book of only 286 pages. I think it is scarcely too much to
say that there is hardly an entry in the index which would be of any use
to the consulter. A few examples will show that this is not an unfair
judgment:

    "_Belief_ of a Resurrection."

    "_Caution_, Reformers proceeded with Caution."

    "_If_ Protestants are Heretics let the Papists prove them so
    from Scripture."

    "_In_ withdrawing themselves from the Church of Rome,
    Protestants have not erred from Christ and his Apostles."

    "_King_ John."

    "_The_ Pope assumes Regal power and habit."

    "Ditto employs spies."

That this idiotic kind of index (which can be of no possible use to any
one) is not yet extinct may be seen in one of those daintily printed
books of essays which are now so common. In mercy I will not mention the
title, but merely say that it was published in 1901. A few extracts will
show the character of the work:

    "_A_ Book," etc.

    "_Is_ public taste," etc.

    "_On_ reading old books."

    "_The_ advantage," etc.

    "_The_ blessedness," etc.

    "_The_ Book-stall Reader."

    "_The_ Girl," etc.

    "_The_ Long Life," etc.

    "_The_ Preservative," etc.

    "_The_ Prosperity," etc.

    "_Two_ Classes of Literature."

There are many instances of such bad indexes, but it would be tedious to
quote more of them. The amazing thing is that many persons unconnected
with one another should be found to do the same ridiculous work, and
suppose that by any possibility it could be of use to a single human
being. But what is even more astounding is to find intelligent editors
passing such useless rubbish and wasting good type and paper upon it.

Another prominent blunder in indexing periodicals is to follow in the
index the divisions of the paper. In an alphabetical index there should
be no classification, but the alphabet should be followed throughout.
Nothing is so maddening to consult as an index in which the different
divisions of the periodical are kept distinct, with a separate alphabet
under each. It is hopeless to consult these, and it is often easier to
turn over the pages and look through the volume than to refer to the
index. The main object of an index is to bring together all the items on
a similar subject which are separated in the book itself.

The indexes of some periodicals are good, but those of the many are bad.
Mr. Poole and his helpers, who had an extensive experience of periodical
literature, made the following rule to be observed in the new edition of
Poole's _Index to Periodical Literature_:

    "All references must be made from an inspection, and if
    necessary the perusal of each article. Hence, no use will be
    made of the index which is usually printed with the volume, or
    of any other index. Those indexes were _made by unskilful
    persons_, and are full of all sorts of errors. It will be less
    work to discard them entirely than to supply their omissions and
    correct their errors."

This rule is sufficiently severe, but it cannot be said that it is
unjust.

Miss Hetherington, who has had a singularly large experience of indexes
to periodicals, has no higher idea of these than Mr. Poole. In an
article on "The Indexing of Periodicals" in the _Index to the Periodical
Literature of the World_ for 1892, she gives a remarkable series of
instances of absurd entries. Some of these are due to the vicious habit
of trying to save trouble by cutting up the lists of contents, and
repeating the entries under different headings. Miss Hetherington's
examples are well worth repeating; but as bad indexing is the rule, it
is scarcely worth while to gibbet any one magazine, as most of them are
equally bad. It is only amazing how any one in authority can allow such
absurdities as the following to be printed. These six groups are from
one magazine:

    "Academy in Africa, A Monkey's."

    "Africa, A Monkey's Academy in."

    "Monkey's Academy in Africa, A."

    "Aspects, The Renaissance in its Broader."

    "Renaissance in its Broader Aspects, The."

    "Campaign, His Last, and After."

    "His Last Campaign, and After."

    "Entertainment, The Triumph of the Variety."

    "Triumph of the Variety Entertainment, The."

    "Variety Entertainment, The Triumph of the."

    "Evicted Tenants, The Irish, Are they Knaves?"

    "Irish Evicted Tenants, The, Are they Knaves?"

    "French Revolution, Scenes from the."

    "Revolution, Scenes from the French."

    "Scenes from the French Revolution."

Miss Hetherington adds, respecting this particular magazine: "But the
whole index might be quoted. The indexer seems to have had three lists
of contents for his purpose, but he has not always dared to use more
than two, and so "The Irish Evicted Tenants" do not figure under the
class "Knaves." The contributors are on another page, with figures only
against their names, the cause of reference not being specified."

Equally absurd, and contrived on a similar system, are the following
entries from another magazine:

    "Eastern Desert on Foot, Through an."

    "Foot, Through an Eastern Desert on."

    "Through an Eastern Desert on Foot."

    "Finds, The Rev. J. Sturgis's."

    "Sturgis's Finds, The Rev. J."

    "Complexion! What a Pretty."

    "Pretty Complexion! What a."

    "What a Pretty Complexion!"

These two groups are from a very prominent magazine:

    "Creek in Demerara, Up a."

    "Demerara, Up a Creek in."

    "Up a Creek in Demerara."

    "Home, The Russians at."

    "Russians at Home, The."

    "The Russians at Home."

In the foregoing, by giving three entries, one, by chance, may be
correct; but in the following case there are two useless references:

    "Baron de Marbot, The Memoirs of the."

    "Memoirs of the Baron de Marbot, The."

    But nothing under _Marbot_.

Some indexers have a fancy for placing authors under their Christian
names, as these three from one index.

    "Philip Bourke Marston."

    "Rudyard Kipling."

    "Walt Whitman."

These entries are amusing:

    "Foot in it, On Putting One's."

    "On Putting One's Foot in it."

Surely it is strange that such absurdities as these should continue to
be published! Mr. Poole drew attention to the evil, and Miss
Hetherington has done the same; yet it continues, and publishers are not
ashamed to print such rubbish as that just instanced. We may add a quite
recent instance--viz. _Longman's Magazine_ for October, 1901, which
contains an index to the thirty-eighth volume. It occupies two pages in
double columns, and there are no duplicate entries. In that small space
I find these useless entries:

    "According to the Code" (not under Code).

    "Disappearance of Plants" (not under Plants).

    "Eighteenth Century London through French Eye-glasses" (not
    under London).

    "Gilbert White" (not under White).

    "Mission of Mr. Rider Haggard" (not under Haggard).

    "Some Eighteenth Century Children's Books" (not under Children's
    Books).

    "Some Notes on an Examination" (not under Examination).

                               * * * * *

The two chief causes of the badness
of indexes are found--

    1. In the original composition.

    2. In the bad arrangement.

Of the first cause little need be said. The chief fault is due to the
incompetence of the indexer, shown by his use of trivial references, his
neglect of what should be indexed, his introduction of what might well
be left out, his bad analysis, and his bad headings.

The second cause is still more important, because a competent indexer
may prepare his materials well, and keep clear of all the faults noticed
above, and yet spoil his work by neglect of a proper system of
arrangement.

The chief faults under this second division consist of--

    1. Want of complete alphabetisation.

    2. Classification within the alphabet.

    3. Variety of alphabets.

    4. Want of cross references.

These are all considerable faults, and will therefore bear being
enlarged upon.

1. _The want of complete alphabetisation_ is a great evil, but it was
very general at one time. In some old indexes references are arranged
under the first letter only. In the index to a large and valuable map of
England, published at the beginning of this century, the names of places
are not arranged further than the third letter, and this naturally gives
great trouble to the consulter. In order to save himself, the compiler
has given others a considerably greater amount of trouble. In arranging
entries in alphabetical order it is necessary to sort them to the most
minute difference of spelling. The alphabetical arrangement, however,
has its difficulties, which must be overcome; for instance, it looks
awkward when the plural comes before the singular, and the adjective
before the substantive from which it is formed, as "naval" and "navies"
before "navy." In such cases it will be necessary to make a heading such
as "Navy," which will include the plural and the adjective.

The vowel I should be kept distinct from the consonant J, and the vowel
U from the consonant V.

More blunders have probably been made by the confusing of u and n in old
books than from any other cause. These letters are identical in early
manuscripts, and consequently the modern copyist has to decide which
letter to choose, and sometimes he blunders.

In Capgrave's _Chronicles of England_ is a reference to the "londe of
Iude," but this is misspelt "Inde" in the edition published in the
Master of the Rolls' Series in 1858. Here is a simple misprint caused by
the misreading of I for J and n for u; but this can easily be set right.
The indexer, however, has enlarged it into a wonderful blunder. Under
the letter I is the following curious piece of information:

    "India ... conquered by Judas Maccabeus and his brethren, 56"!!

Many more instances of this confusion of the letters u and n might be
given, some of them causing permanent confusion of names; but two (which
are the complement of each other) will suffice.

George Lo_n_don was a very eminent horticulturist in his day, who at
the Revolution was appointed Superintendent of the Royal Gardens;
but he can seldom get his name properly spelt because a later
horticulturist has made the name of Lo_u_don more familiar. In fact, I
was once called to account by a reviewer who supposed I had made a
mistake in referring to Lo_n_don instead of Lo_u_don. The reverse
mistake was once made by the great Duke of Wellington. C. J. Loudon
(who wrote a very bad hand) requested the Duke to let him see the
Waterloo beeches at Stratfieldsaye. The letter puzzled Wellington, who
knew nothing of the horticulturist, and read C. J. Lo_u_don as C. J.
Lo_n_don, and beeches as breeches; so he wrote off to the then Bishop of
London (Dr. Blomfield) to say that his Waterloo breeches disappeared
long ago.

2. _Classification within the alphabet._--Examples have already been
given where the arrangement of the book is followed rather than the
alphabetical order; but these were instances of bad indexing, and
sometimes a good indexer fails in the same way, thus showing how
important is good arrangement. An index of great complexity, one full of
scientific difficulties, was once made by a very able man. The _précis_
was admirable, and the various subjects were gathered together under
their headings with great skill--in fact, it could not well have been
more perfect; but it had one flaw which spoiled it. The nature of the
index necessitated a large number of subdivisions under the various
chief headings; these were arranged on a system clear to the compiler,
and probably a logical one to him. But the user of the index had not the
clue to this arrangement, and he could not find his way through the
complicated maze; it was an unfortunate instance of extreme cleverness.
When the index was finished, but before it was published, a simple
remedy for the confusion was suggested and carried out. The whole of the
subdivisions under each main heading were rearranged in perfect
alphabetical order. This was a heroic proceeding, but it was highly
successful, and the rearranged index gave satisfaction, and the same
system was followed in other indexes that succeeded it.

3. _Variety of alphabets._--An index should be one and indivisible, and
should not be broken up into several alphabets. Foreigners are greater
sinners against this fundamental rule than Englishmen, and they almost
invariably separate the author or persons from subjects. Sometimes,
however, the division is not very carefully made, for in the _Autoren
Register_ to Carus' and Engelmann's _Bibliography of Zoology_ may be
found the following entries: _Schreiben_, _Schriften_, _Zu_ Humboldt's
Cosmos, _Zur_ Fauna. Some English books are much divided. Thus the new
edition of Hutchins's _Dorset_ (1874) has at the end eight separate
indexes: (1) Places, (2) Pedigrees, (3) Persons, (4) Arms, (5) Blazons,
(6) Glossarial, (7) Domesday, (8) Inquisitions.

The index to the original quarto edition of Warton's _History of English
Poetry_ (1774) has six alphabets, but a general index compiled by Thomas
Fillingham, was published in 1804, uniform with the work in quarto. The
general index to the _Annual Register_ has as many as fourteen
alphabets. The general index to the _Reports of the British Association_
is split up into six alphabets, following the divisions of each volume.

4. _Want of cross references._--Although an alphabetical index should
not be classified, yet it is necessary to gather together the synonyms,
and place all the references under the best of these headings, with
cross references from the others. For instance, Wealth should be under
W, Finance under F, and Population under P; and they should not all be
grouped under Political Economy, because each of these subjects is
distinct and more conveniently found under the separate heading than
under a grouped heading. On the other hand, entries relating to
Tuberculosis must not be scattered over the index under such headings as
Consumption, Decline, and Phthisis, but be gathered together under the
heading chosen, with cross references from the others. In bad indexes
this rule is invariably broken, and it must be allowed that the proper
carrying out of this rule is very difficult, so that where it is
invariably adopted, we have one of the best signs of a really good
index. Bad indexers are usually much too haphazard in their work to
insert cross references.

The careful use of cross references is next in importance to the
selection of appropriate headings. Great judgment, however, is required,
as the consulters are naturally irritated by being referred backwards
and forwards, particularly in a large index. At the same time, if
judiciously inserted, such references are a great help. Mr. Poole says,
in an article on his own index in the _Library Journal_: "If every
subject shall have cross references to its allies, the work will be
mainly a book of cross references rather than an index of subjects." He
then adds: "One correspondent gives fifty-eight cross references under
Mental Philosophy, and fifty-eight more might be added just as
appropriate."

The indexer should be careful that his cross references are real, but he
has not always attended to this. In Eadie's _Dictionary of the Bible_
(1850) there is a reference, "Dorcas _see_ Tabitha," but there is no
entry under Tabitha at all.

In Cobbett's _Woodlands_ there is a good specimen of backwards and
forwards cross referencing. The author writes:

    "Many years ago I wished to know whether I could raise birch
    trees from the _seed_.... I then looked into the great book of
    knowledge, the _Encyclopædia Britannica_; there I found in the
    general dictionary:

    "'BIRCH TREE--See _Betula_ (Botany Index).'

    "I hastened to BETULA with great eagerness, and there I found:

    "'BETULA--See _Beech tree_.'

    "That was all, and this was pretty encouragement."

William Morris used to make merry over the futility of some cross
references. He was using a print of an old English manuscript which was
full of notes in explanation of self-evident passages, but one difficult
expression--_viz._ "The bung of a thrub chandler"--was left unexplained.
In the index under Bung there was a reference to Thrub chandler, and
under Thrub chandler another back to Bung. Still the lexicographers are
unable to tell us what kind of a barrel a "thrub chandler" really was. I
give this story on the authority of my friend, Mr. S. C. Cockerell.

No reference to the contents of a general heading which is without
subdivision should be allowed unless of course the page is given.

There are too many vague cross references in the _Penny Cyclopædia_
where you are referred from the known to the unknown. If a general
heading be divided into sections, and each of these be clearly defined,
they should be cross referenced, but not otherwise. At present you may
look for Pesth and be referred to Hungary, where probably there is much
about Pesth, but you do not know where to look for it in the long
article without some clue. Sometimes cross references are mere
expedients, particularly in the case of a cyclopædia published in
volumes or parts. Thus a writer agrees to contribute an article early in
the alphabet, but it is not ready in time for the publication of the
part, so a cross reference is inserted which sends the reader to a
synonym later on in the alphabet. In certain cases this has been done
two or three times. An instance occurs in the life of the distinguished
bibliographer, the late Henry Bradshaw (than whom no one was more
capable of producing a masterly article), who undertook to write on
"Printing" in the _Encyclopædia Britannica_. When the time for
publication arrived (1885), Bradshaw was not ready, and in place of the
article appeared the cross reference, "PRINTING, TYPOGRAPHIC--See
_Typography_." Bradshaw died on February 10, 1886, and the article on
"Typography" which was published in Vol. 23 in 1888, was written by Mr.
Hessels.

Cross referencing has its curiosities as well as other branches of our
subject. Perhaps the most odd collection of cross references is to be
found in Serjeant William Hawkins's _Pleas of the Crown_ (1716; 5th ed.,
1771; 7th ed., 4 vols., 1795), of which it was said in the _Monthly
Magazine_ for June, 1801 (p. 419): "A plain, unlettered man is led to
suspect that the writer of the volume and the writer of the index are
playing at cross purposes."

The following are some of the most amusing entries:

    "Cards _see_ Dice."

    "Cattle _see_ Clergy."

    "Chastity _see_ Homicide."

    "Cheese _see_ Butter."

    "Coin _see_ High Treason."

    "Convicts _see_ Clergy."

    "Death _see_ Appeal."

    "Election _see_ Bribery."

    "Farthings _see_ Halfpenny."

    "Fear _see_ Robbery."

    "Footway _see_ Nuisance."

    "Honour _see_ Constable."

    "Incapacity _see_ Officers."

    "King _see_ Treason."

    "Knaves _see_ Words."

    "Letters _see_ Libel."

    "London _see_ Outlawry."

    "Shop _see_ Burglary."

    "Sickness _see_ Bail."

    "Threats _see_ Words."

    "Westminster Hall _see_ Contempt and Lie."

    "Writing _see_ Treason."

This arrangement of some of the cross references is perhaps scarcely
fair. They are spread over several elaborate indexes in the original,
and in their proper places do not strike one in the same way as when
they are set out by themselves. One of the instances given by the critic
in the _Monthly Magazine_ is unfairly cited. It is there given as
"Assault _see_ Son." The cross reference really is, "Assault _see_ Son
Assault."

Hawkins's work is divided into two parts, and the folio editions have
two indexes, one to each part; the octavo edition has four indexes, one
to each volume.

The index to Ford's _Handbook of Spain_ contains an amusing reference:

    "Wellington, _see_ Duke."

Besides these four divisions of the chief faults in indexing, there are
many other pitfalls gaping wide to receive the careless indexer.

Names are a great difficulty, but it is not necessary to refer to these
more generally here, as they are fully dealt with in the rules (_see_
Chapter VI.)

It is not often that an English indexer has to index a French book, but
should he do so he would often need to be careful. The Frenchman does
not care to leave that which he does not understand unexplained. The
translation of _Love's Last Shift_ as _La Dernière Chemise de l'Amour_,
attributed by Horace Walpole to the Dowager Duchess of Bolton in George
I.'s reign, is probably an invention, but some translations quite as
amusing are genuine. G. Brunet of Bordeaux, having occasion in his _La
France Littéraire au XV^e siècle_ to mention "White Knights," at one
time the seat of the Duke of Marlborough, translates it into _Le
Chevalier Blanc_. When Dr. Buckland, the geologist, died, a certain
French paper published a biography of him in which it was explained that
the deceased had been a very versatile writer, for besides his work on
geology he had produced one _Sur les Ponts et Chaussées_. This was a
puzzling statement, but it turned out to be a translation of
_Bridgewater Treatises_, in which series his _Geology and Mineralogy_
was published in 1837.

Sometimes contractions give trouble to the indexer, and he must be
careful not to fill them out unless he is sure of what they mean. Many
blunders have been made in this way. In the _Historie of Edward IV._
(1471), edited by that careful and trustworthy antiquary John Bruce for
the Camden Society in 1838, there is the following remarkable statement:
"Wherefore the Kynge may say, as Julius Cæsar sayde, he that is not
agaynst me is with me."

This chapter might be made a very long one by instancing a series of
badly indexed books, but this would be a tedious recital devoid of any
utility, for the blunders and carelessness of the bad indexer are
singularly alike in their futility. It is nevertheless worth while to
mention the index to Peter Cunningham's complete edition of Walpole's
_Letters_, because that work deserves a good index. We may hope that
when Mrs. Toynbee publishes her new and complete edition of the
_Letters_, she will add a really satisfactory index. The present index
is very bad and most irritating to the person who uses it. Examples of
most of the careless and foolish blunders in indexing are to be found
here; for instance, there are long lists of references without
indication of the reason for any of them. The same person is entered in
two places if he is spoken of under slightly different names. The same
nobleman is referred to as Lord ---- and as the Earl of ----, while
sometimes a heading devoted to Lord ---- contains references to two
distinct men. Van Eyck has one reference under Van and another under
Eyck. Mrs. Godfrey is entered under both Godfrey and _La_ Godfrey. Many
other absurdities are to be found in the index, but the extract of one
heading will be sufficient to show how ill the arrangement is:

  "Gower, edition of,
  ---- Baptist Leveson,
  ---- Countess of,
  ---- Dowager Lady,
  ---- Duke of,
  ---- Earl of,
  ---- John, Earl,
  ---- Lady,
  ---- Lady Elizabeth,
  ---- Lady Mary Leveson,
  ---- Lord,
  ---- Richard Leveson."

There is no authority at all for a Duke of Gower, and if we look up the
reference (iv. 39) we find that it refers to "the late Lord G----,"
possibly the Earl Gower.

The confusion by which two persons are made into one has sometimes an
evil consequence worse than putting the consulter of an index on the
wrong scent, for the character of an innocent person may be taken away
by this means. (Constance) Lady Russell of Swallowfield points out in
_Notes and Queries_, that in the index to _Familiar Letters of Sir
Walter Scott_ (1894) there are three references under Lady Charlotte
Campbell, one of which is to a Lady C----, really intended for the
notorious Lady Conyngham, mistress to George IV. In another index Mary
Bellenden is described thus: "Bellenden, Miss, Mistress of George II."
This is really too bad; for the charming maid of honour called by Gay
"Smiling Mary, soft and fair as down," turned a deaf ear to the
importunities of the king, as we know on the authority of Horace
Walpole.

The index to Lord Braybrooke's edition of Pepys's _Diary_ has many
faults, mostly due to bad arrangement; but it must be allowed that there
is a great difficulty in indexing a private diary such as this. The
diarist knew to whom he was referring when he mentioned Mr. or Mrs.----;
but where there are two or more persons of the same name, it is hard to
distinguish between them correctly. This has been a stumbling-block in
the compilation of the index to the new edition, in which a better
system was attempted.

It has been said that a bad index is better than no index at all, but
this statement is open to question. Still, all must agree that an
indexless book is a great evil. Mr. J. H. Markland is the authority for
the declaration that "the omission of an index when essential should be
an indictable offence." Carlyle denounces the publishers of books
unprovided with this necessary appendage; and Baynes, the author of the
_Archæological Epistle to Dean Mills_ (usually attributed to Mason),
concocted a terrible curse against such evil-doers. The reporter was the
learned Francis Douce, who said to Mr. Thoms: "Sir, my friend John
Baynes used to say that the man who published a book without an index
ought to be damned ten miles beyond Hell, where the Devil could not get
for stinging-nettles."[10] Lord Campbell proposed that any author who
published a book without an index should be deprived of the benefits of
the Copyright Act; and the Hon. Horace Binney, LL.D., a distinguished
American lawyer, held the same views, and would have condemned the
culprit to the same punishment. Those, however, who hold the soundest
views sometimes fail in practice; thus Lord Campbell had to acknowledge
that he had himself sinned before the year 1857.

  [10]  _Notes and Queries_, 5th Series, VIII. 87.

These are the words written by Lord Campbell in the preface to the first
volume of his _Lives of the Chief Justices_ (1857): "I have only further
to express my satisfaction in thinking that a heavy weight is now to be
removed from my conscience. So essential did I consider an index to be
to every book, that I proposed to bring a Bill into Parliament to
deprive an author who publishes a book without an Index of the privilege
of copyright; and moreover to subject him for his offence to a pecuniary
penalty. Yet from difficulties started by my printers, my own books have
hitherto been without an Index. But I am happy to announce that a
learned friend at the Bar, on whose accuracy I can place entire
reliance, has kindly prepared a copious index, which will be appended to
this work, and another for a new stereotyped edition of the Lives of the
Chancellors."

Mr. John Morley, in an article in the _Fortnightly Review_ on Mr.
Russell's edition of Matthew Arnold's _Letters_, lifts up his voice
against an indexless book. He says: "One damning sin of omission Mr.
Russell has indeed perpetrated: the two volumes have no index, nor even
a table of contents."[11] _George Selwyn and his Contemporaries_, a most
interesting but badly arranged book, by John Heneage Jesse, was
published without an index, and a new edition was issued (1882) also
without this necessary addition. The student of the manners of the
eighteenth century must constantly refer to this book, and yet it is
almost impossible to find in it what you want without great waste of
labour. I have found it necessary to make a manuscript index for my own
use.

  [11]  Quoted _Notes and Queries_, 8th Series, IX. 425.




                             [Illustration]

                               CHAPTER IV.

                           THE GOOD INDEXER.

    "Thomas Norton was appointed Remembrancer of the city of London
    in 1570, and directions were given to him that 'he shall gather
    together and reduce the same [the Bookes] into Indices, Tables
    or Kalendars, whereby they may be more easily, readily and
    orderly founde.'"--_Analytical Index to "Remembrancia,"_ p. v.


[Illustration: T]he acrostic
    I  I
    N  never
    D  did
    E  ensure
    X  exactness
made by a contributor to _Notes and Queries_ as a motto for an index
expresses very well the difficulties ever present to the indexer; and
the most successful will confess the truth that it contains, however
much others may consider his work to be good.

There are many indexes which are only of partial merit, but which a
little more care and experience on the part of the indexer would have
made good. If the medium indexer felt that indexing was work that must
be done to the best of his ability, and he studied the best examples, he
would gradually become a good indexer.

The famous bibliographer, William Oldys, rated the labours of the
diligent indexer very highly, and expressed his views very clearly thus:

    "The labour and patience, the judgment and penetration which are
    required to make a good index is only known to those who have
    gone through this most painful, but least praised part of a
    publication. But laborious as it is, I think it is indispensably
    necessary to manifest the treasures of any multifarious
    collection, facilitate the knowledge to those who seek it, and
    invite them to make application thereof."[12]

  [12]  _Notes and Queries_, 2nd Series, XI. 309.

Similar sentiments were expressed by a writer in the _Monthly Review_
which have been quoted by Dr. Allibone in his valuable _Dictionary of
English Literature_.[13]

  [13]  Vol. i., p. 85.

    "The compilation of an index is one of those useful labours for
    which the public, commonly better pleased with entertainment
    than with real service, are rarely so forward to express their
    gratitude as we think they ought to be. It has been considered a
    task fit only for the plodding and the dull: but with more truth
    it may be said that this is the judgment of the idle and the
    shallow. The value of anything, it has been observed, is best
    known by the want of it. Agreeably to this idea, we, who have
    often experienced great inconveniences from the want of indices,
    entertain the highest sense of their worth and importance. We
    know that in the construction of a good index, there is far more
    scope for the exercise of judgment and abilities, than is
    commonly supposed. We feel the merits of the compiler of such an
    index, and we are ever ready to testify our thankfulness for his
    exertions."

A goodly roll may be drawn up of eminent men who have not been ashamed
to appear before the world as indexers. In the first rank we must place
the younger Scaliger, who devoted ten months on the compilation of an
elaborate index to Gruter's _Thesaurus Inscriptionum_. Bibliographers
have been unanimous in praise of the energy exhibited by the great
critic in undertaking so vast a labour. Antonio describes the index as a
Herculean work, and LeClerc observes that if we think it surprising that
so great a man should undertake so laborious a task we must remember
that such indexes can only be made by a very able man.

Nicolas Antonio, the compiler of one of the fullest and most accurate
bibliographies ever planned, was a connoisseur of indexes, and wrote a
short essay on the makers of them. His _Bibliotheca Hispana_ is not
known so well as it deserves to be, but those who use it find it one of
the most trustworthy of guides. The system upon which the authors' names
are arranged is one that at first sight may seem to give cause for
ridicule, for they appear in an alphabet of Christian names; but when we
consider that the Spaniards and Portuguese stand alone among European
nations in respect to the importance they pay to the Christian name, and
remember, further, that authors and others are often alluded to by their
Christian names alone, we shall see a valid reason for the plan. Another
point that should not be forgotten is the number of Spanish authors who
have belonged to the religious orders and are never known by their
surnames. This arrangement, however, necessitates a full index of
surnames, and Antonio has given one which was highly praised both by
Baillet and Bayle, two men who were well able to form an opinion.

Juan de Pineda's _Monarchia Ecclesiastica o historia Universal del
Mundo_ (_Salamanca_, 1588) has a very curious and valuable table which
forms the fifth volume of the whole set; and the three folio volumes of
indexes in one alphabet to the _Annales Ecclesiastici_ of Baronius form
a noble work.

Samuel Jeake, senior, compiled a valuable work on "Arithmetick" in 1674,
which was published by his son in 1696: [Greek: Logistikêlogia]; _or,
Arithmetick Surveighed and Reviewed_. Professor De Morgan specially
refers to this book in his _Arithmetical Books_, saying: "Those who know
the value of a large book with a good index will pick this one up when
they can." He praises it on account of the value of the information it
contains and the fulness of the references to that information. The
alphabetical table, directing to some special points noted in the
precedent treatise, was probably the work of Samuel Jeake, junior. The
author's epistle is dated from Rye, 1674, and one of the entries is
curious:

    "Winchelsea, when drowned 74."

S. Jeake being a resident at Rye had an interesting note to add to this:

    "Among the records of this town of Rye is a Memorandum entered
    that the year old Winchelsea was drowned (1287) corn was 2_s._
    the quarter."

Thomas Carlyle denounced the putters forth of indexless books, and his
sincerity is proved by the publication in 1874 of a separate index to
the people's edition of his Works. In his introduction to _Cromwell's
Letters and Speeches_ he is very severe on some of the old folios he was
forced to use:

    "The Rushworths, Whitelocks, Nalsons, Thurloes; enormous folios,
    these and many other have been printed and some of them again
    printed but never yet edited,--edited as you edit wagon-loads of
    broken bricks, and dry mortar simply by tumbling up the wagon!
    Not one of those monstrous old volumes has so much as an index.
    It is the general rule of editing on this matter. If your editor
    correct the press, it is an honourable distinction."

A very eminent name may be added to the list of indexers, for, when a
boy of fifteen, Macaulay made the index to a volume of the _Christian
Observer_ (of which periodical his father was editor), and this he
introduced to the notice of Hannah More in these words:

    "To add to the list, my dear Madam, you will soon see a work of
    mine in print. Do not be frightened; it is only the Index to the
    thirteenth volume of the _Christian Observer_, which I have had
    the honour of composing. Index-making, though the lowest, is not
    the most useless round in the ladder of literature; and I pride
    myself upon being able to say that there are many readers of the
    _Christian Observer_ who could do without Walter Scott's works,
    but not without those of, my dear Madam, your affectionate
    friend, THOMAS B. MACAULAY."

Although proud of his work, Macaulay places index-making in a very low
position. In later life he used a contemptuous expression when he was
describing the appearance of those who followed the lowest grade in the
literary profession. The late Mr. H. Campkin, a veteran indexer, quotes
this description in the preface to one of his valuable indexes--that to
the twenty-five volumes of the _Sussex Archæological Collections_:

    "The compilation of Indexes will always and naturally so, be
    regarded as a humble art; 'index-makers in ragged coats of
    frieze' are classed by Lord Macaulay as the very lowest of the
    frequenters of the coffee houses of the Dryden and Swift era.
    Yet ''tis my vocation, Hal,' and into very pleasant
    companionship it has sometimes brought me, and if in this
    probably the last of my twenty-five years' labours in this
    direction, I have succeeded in furnishing a fairly practicable
    key to a valuable set of volumes, my frieze coat, how tattered
    soever signifieth not, will continue to hang upon my shoulders
    not uncomfortably."

Though he did not rate highly the calling of the indexer, Macaulay knew
that that lowly mortal has a considerable power in his hand if he
chooses to use it, for he can state in a few words what the author may
have hidden in verbiage, and he can so arrange his materials as to turn
an author's own words against himself. Hence Macaulay wrote to his
publishers, "Let no d---- Tory make the index to my History." When the
index was in progress he appears to have seen the draught, which was
fuller than he thought necessary. He therefore wrote to Messrs.
Longmans:

    "I am very unwilling to seem captious about such a work as an
    Index. By all means let Mr. ---- go on. But offer him with all
    delicacy and courtesy, from me this suggestion. I would advise
    him to have very few heads, except proper names. A few there
    must be, such as Convocation, Nonjurors, Bank of England,
    National Debt. These are heads to which readers who wish for
    information on these subject will naturally turn. But I think
    that Mr. ---- will on consideration perceive that such heads as
    Priestcraft, Priesthood, Party spirit, Insurrection, War, Bible,
    Crown, Controversies, Dissent, are quite useless. Nobody will
    ever look for them; and if every passage in which party-spirit,
    dissent, the art of war, and the power of the Crown are
    mentioned, is to be noticed in the Index, the size of the
    volumes will be doubled. The best rule is to keep close to
    proper names, and never to deviate from that rule without some
    special occasion."[14]

[14] Trevelyan's _Life and Letters of Macaulay_, chap. xi.

These remarks exhibit Macaulay's eminently common-sense view of the
value of an index, but it is evident that he did not realise the
possibility of a good and full index such as might have been produced.
The _History of England_, with all its wealth of picturesque
illustration, deserves a full index compiled by some one capable of
exhibiting the spirit of that great work in a brilliant analysis.

Sir George Trevelyan's delightful _Life_ of his uncle was originally
published without an index, and Mr. Perceval Clark made an admirable
one, both full and interesting, which was issued by the Index Society in
1881. Mr. Clark writes in his preface:

    "The single heading MACAULAY of course takes up a large space of
    the Index, and will be found, together with a few other
    headings, to contain everything directly touching him. The list
    of his published writings refers of course only to writings
    mentioned by his Biographer, and lays no claim to be considered
    an exhaustive bibliography of his works. The books Macaulay read
    that were 'mostly trash' have their places in the body of the
    Index, while those that stood by him in all vicissitudes as
    comforters, nurses, and companions, have half a page to
    themselves under one of the sections of MACAULAY. The
    particulars of his life and work in India are given under INDIA;
    localities in London under LONDON; various newspapers under
    NEWSPAPERS, and certain French and Italian towns visited by
    Macaulay under their countries respectively."

Just such an index one would like to see of the _History of England_.

It may be added that the popular edition of the _Life_ published
subsequently has an index.

A large number of official indexes are excellent, although some very bad
ones have been printed. Still, it may be generally stated that in
Government Departments there are those in power who know the value of a
good digest, and understand that it is necessary to employ skilled
labour. The work is well paid, and therefore not scamped; and plenty of
room is devoted to the index, which is printed in a satisfactory manner
in type well set out.

We have no modern statistics to offer, but the often quoted statement
that in 1778 a total of £12,000 was voted for indexes to the Journals of
the House of Commons shows that the value of indexes was appreciated by
Parliament in the eighteenth century. The items of this amount were:

    "To Mr. Edward Moore £6400 as a final compensation for thirteen
    years labour; Rev. Mr. Forster £3000 for nine years' labour;
    Rev. Dr. Roger Flaxman £3000 for nine years' labour; and £500 to
    Mr. Cunningham."

One of the most admirable applications of index making is to be found in
the series of Calendars of State Papers issued under the sanction of the
Master of the Rolls, which have made available to all a mass of
historical material of unrivalled value. How many students have been
grateful for the indexes to these calendars, and also for the aid given
to him by the indexes to Parliamentary papers and other Government
publications!

It is impossible to mention all the good official indexes, but a special
word of praise must be given to the indexes to the _Statutes of the
Realm_, the folio edition published by the Record Commission. I have
often consulted the _Alphabetical Index to the Statutes from Magna
Charta to the End of the Reign of Queen Anne_ (1824) with the greatest
pleasure and profit. It is a model of good workmanship.

The lawyers have analytical minds, and they know how important full
indexes and digests are to complete their stock-in-trade. They have done
much, but there is still much to be done. Lord Thring drew up some
masterly instructions for an index to the Statute Law, which is to be
considered as a step towards a code. These instructions conclude with
these weighty words:

    "Let no man imagine that the construction of an index to the
    Statute Law is a mere piece of mechanical drudgery, unworthy of
    the energy and ability of an accomplished lawyer. Next to
    codification, the most difficult task that can be accomplished
    is to prepare a detailed plan for a code, as distinct from the
    easy task of devising a theoretical system of codification. Now
    the preparation of an index, such as has been suggested in the
    above instructions, is the preparation of a detailed plan for a
    code. Each effective title, is in effect, a plan for the
    codification of the legal subject-matter grouped under that
    title, and the whole index if completed would be a summary of a
    code arranged in alphabetical order."[15]

  [15] These instructions, with specimens of the proposed index, are
       printed in the _Law Magazine_ for August, 1877, 4th Series,
       vol. 8, p. 491.

That this question of digesting the law is to be considered as one which
should interest all classes of Englishmen, and not the lawyer only, may
be seen from an article in the _Nineteenth Century_ (September, 1877) on
the "Improvement of the Law by Private Enterprise," by the late Sir
James Fitzjames Stephen, who did so much towards a complete digest of
the law. He wrote:

    "I have long believed that the law might by proper means be
    relieved of this extreme obscurity and intricacy, and might be
    displayed in its true light as a subject of study of the deepest
    possible interest, not only to every one who takes an interest
    in politics or ethics, or in the application of logic and
    metaphysics to those subjects. In short, I think that nothing
    but the rearrangement and condensation of the vast masses of
    matter contained in our law libraries is required, in order to
    add to human knowledge what would be practically a new
    department of the highest and most permanent interest. Law holds
    in suspension both the logic and the ethics, which are in fact
    recognised by men of business and men of the world as the
    standards by which the practice of common life ought to be
    regulated, and by which men ought to form their opinions in all
    their most important temporal affairs. It would be a far greater
    service to mankind than many people would suppose to have these
    standards clearly defined and brought within the reach of every
    one who cared to study them."

The following remarks will apply with equal force to a more general and
universal index than that of the law:

    "The preparation of a digest either of the whole or of any
    branch of the law is work of a very peculiar kind. It is one of
    the few literary undertakings in which a number of persons can
    really and effectively work together. Any given subject may, it
    is true, be dealt with in a variety of different ways; but when
    the general scheme, according to which it is to be treated, has
    been determined on, when the skeleton of the book has been drawn
    out, plenty of persons might be found to do the work of filling
    up the details, though that work is very far from being easy or
    matter of routine."

The value of analytical or index work is set in a very strong light by
an observation of Sir James Stephen respecting the early digesters of
the law. The origin of English law is to be found in the year-books and
other series of old reports, which from the language used in them and
the black-letter printing with its contractions, etc., are practically
inaccessible. Lord Chief Justice Coke and others who reduced these books
into form are in consequence treated as ultimate authorities, although
the almost worshipped Coke is said by Sir James to be "one of the most
confused, pedantic, and inaccurate of men."

A good index is that to the Works of Jeremy Bentham, published in 1843
under the dictation of Sir John Bowring. _The Analytical Index to the
Works of Jeremy Bentham and to the Memoirs and Correspondence_ was
compiled by J. H. Burton, to whom it does great credit. The indexer
prefixed a sensible note, where he writes:

    "In some instances it would have been impossible to convey a
    notion of the train of reasoning followed by the author, without
    using his own words, and in these no attempt has been made to do
    more than indicate the place where the subject is discussed. In
    other cases where it has appeared to the compiler that an
    intelligible analysis has been made, he may have failed in his
    necessarily abbreviated sentences in embodying the meaning of
    the original, but defects of this description are indigenous to
    Indexes in general."

But here all is utility, and it is to the literary index that we turn
for pleasure as well as instruction.

The index to Ruskin's _Fors Clavigera_, vols. 1-8 (1887), is a most
interesting book, especially to Ruskin admirers. There are some
specially delightful original and characteristic references under the
heading of _London_, such as the following:

    "London, Fifty square miles outside of, demoralised by upper
        classes

    ---- Its middle classes compare unfavourably with apes

    ---- Some blue sky in, still

    ---- Hospital named after Christ's native village in,

    ---- Honestest journal of, _Punch_.

    ---- crossings, what would they be without benevolent police?"

The index is well made and the references are full of life and charm,
but the whole is spoilt by the bad arrangement. The entries are set out
in single lines under the headings in the successive order of the pages.
This looks unsystematic, as they ought to be arranged in alphabet. When
the references are given in the order of the pages they should be
printed in block.

There are several entries commencing with "'s"; thus, under

      "ST. GEORGE."
    p. 386:
      "'s war
      "of Hanover Square."
    p. 387:
      "'s Square
      's, Hanover Square"
    p. 389:
      "'s law
      's school
      's message
      's Chapel at Venice."

In long headings that occupy separate pages these are repeated at the
top of the page, but the headings are not sufficiently full: thus the
saints are arranged in alphabet under _S_; George commences on page 386.
On

    p. 387:
      "Saint--Saints _continued_ story of,"
    p. 388:
      "what of gold etc. he thinks good for people, they shall have"
    p. 389:
      "tenth part of fortunes for"
    p. 390:
      "his creed"
    p. 391:
      "loss of a good girl for his work"

In the case of all the references on these pages you have to go back to
page 386 to find out to whom they refer.

There is a particularly bad block of references filling half a page
under _Lord_.

  "Lord, High Chancellor, 7.6; 's Prayer vital to a nation, 7.22;
  Mayor and Corporation, &c of Hosts."

It is a pity that an interesting index should be thus marred by bad
arrangement.

Dr. Birkbeck Hill's complete index to his admirable edition of Boswell's
_Life of Johnson_ is a delightful companion to the work, and may be
considered as a model of what an index should be; for compilation,
arrangement, and printing all are good. Under the different headings are
capital abstracts in blocks. There are sub-headings in alphabet under
the main heading _Johnson_.

A charming appendix to the index consists of "Dicta Philosophi: A
Concordance of Johnson's Sayings."

Dr. Hill writes in his preface:

    "In my Index, which has cost me many months' heavy work, 'while
    I bore burdens with dull patience and beat the track of the
    alphabet with sluggish resolution,' I have, I hope, shown that I
    am not unmindful of all that I owe to men of letters. To the
    dead we cannot pay the debt of gratitude that is their due. Some
    relief is obtained from its burthen, if we in our turn make the
    men of our own generation debtors to us. The plan on which my
    Index is made, will I trust be found convenient. By the
    alphabetical arrangement in the separate entries of each article
    the reader, I venture to think, will be greatly facilitated in
    his researches. Certain subjects I have thought it best to form
    into groups. Under America, France, Ireland, London, Oxford,
    Paris and Scotland, are gathered together almost all the
    references to those subjects. The provincial towns of France,
    however, by some mistake I did not include in the general
    article. One important but intentional omission I must justify.
    In the case of the quotations in which my notes abound I have
    not thought it needful in the Index to refer to the book unless
    the eminence of the author required a separate and a second
    entry. My labour would have been increased beyond all endurance
    and my Index have been swollen almost into a monstrosity had I
    always referred to the book as well as to the matter which was
    contained in the passage that I extracted. Though in such a
    variety of subjects there must be many omissions, yet I shall be
    greatly disappointed if actual errors are discovered. Every
    entry I have made myself, and every entry I have verified in the
    proof sheets, not by comparing it with my manuscript, but by
    turning to the reference in the printed volumes. Some indulgence
    nevertheless may well be claimed and granted. If Homer at times
    nods, an index maker may be pardoned, should he in the fourth or
    fifth month of his task at the end of a day of eight hours' work
    grow drowsy. May I fondly hope that to the maker of so large an
    index will be extended the gratitude which Lord Bolingbroke says
    was once shown to lexicographers? 'I approve,' writes his
    lordship, 'the devotion of a studious man at Christ Church, who
    was overheard in his oratory entering into a detail with God,
    and acknowledging the divine goodness in furnishing the world
    with makers of dictionaries.'"

It is impossible to speak too highly of Dr. Hill's indexes to Boswell's
_Life of Johnson_ and Boswell's _Letters_ and _Johnson Miscellanies_.
Not only are they good indexes in themselves, but an indescribable
literary air breathes over every page, and gives distinction to the
whole. The index volume of the _Life_ is by no means the least
interesting of the set, and one instinctively thinks of the once
celebrated Spaniard quoted by the great bibliographer Antonio--that the
index of a book should be made by the author, even if the book itself
were written by some one else.

The very excellence of this index has been used as a cause of complaint
against its compiler. It has been said that everything that is known of
Johnson can be found in the index, and therefore that the man who uses
it is able to pose as a student, appearing to know as much as he who
knows his _Boswell_ by heart; but this is somewhat of a joke, for no
useful information can be gained unless the book to which the index
refers is searched, and he who honestly searches ceases to be a
smatterer. It is absurd to deprive earnest readers of a useful help lest
reviewers and smatterers misuse it.

Boswell himself made the original index to the _Life of Johnson_, which
has several characteristic signs of its origin. Mr. Percy Fitzgerald, in
his edition (1874), reprints the original "Table of Contents to the Life
of Johnson," with this note:

    "This is Mr. Boswell's own Index, the paging being altered to
    suit the present edition; and the reader will see that it bears
    signs of having been prepared by Mr. Boswell himself. In the
    second edition he made various additions, as well as
    alterations, which are characteristic in their way. Thus, 'Lord
    Bute' is changed into 'the Earl of Bute,' and 'Francis Barber'
    into 'Mr. Francis Barber.' After Mrs. Macaulay's name he added,
    'Johnson's acute and unanswerable refutation of her levelling
    reveries'; and after that of Hawkins he put 'contradicted and
    corrected.' There are also various little compliments introduced
    where previously he had merely given the name. Such as 'Temple,
    Mr., the author's old and most intimate friend'; 'Vilette,
    Reverend Mr., his just claims on the publick'; 'Smith, Captain,
    his attention to Johnson at Warley Camp'; 'Somerville, Mr., the
    authour's warm and grateful remembrance of him'; 'Hall, General,
    his politeness to Johnson at Warley Camp'; 'Heberden, Dr., his
    kind attendance on Johnson.' On the other hand, Lord Eliot's
    'politeness to Johnson' which stands in the first edition, is
    cut down in the second to the bald 'Eliot, Lord'; while
    'Loughborough, Lord, his talents and great good fortune,' may
    have seemed a little offensive, and was expunged. The Literary
    Club was reverentially put in capitals. There are also such odd
    entries as 'Brutus, a ruffian,' &c."

One wishes that there were more indexes like Dr. Hill's in the world;
and since I made an index to Shelley's works, I have often thought that
a series of indexes of great authors would be of inestimable value.

First, all the author's works should be indexed, then his biographies,
and lastly the anecdotes and notices in reviews and other books. How
valuable would such books be in the study of our greatest poets! The
plan is quite possible of attainment, and the indexes would be
entertaining in themselves if made fairly full.

It is not possible to refer to all the good indexes that have been
produced, for they are too numerous. A very remarkable index is that of
the publications of the Parker Society by Henry Gough, which contains a
great mass of valuable information presented in a handy form. It is the
only volume issued by the society which is sought after, as the books
themselves are a drug in the market. Mr. Gough was employed to make an
index to the publications of the Camden Society, which would have been
of still more value on account of the much greater interest of the books
indexed; but the expense of printing the index was too great for the
funds of the society, and it had to be abandoned, to the great loss of
the literary world. Most of the archæological societies, commencing with
the Society of Antiquaries, have issued excellent indexes, and the
scientific societies also have produced indexes of varying merit.

The esteem in which the indexes of _Notes and Queries_ are held is
evidenced by the high prices they realise when they occur for sale. Mr.
Tedder's full indexes to the Reports of the Conference of Librarians and
the Library Association may also be mentioned.

A very striking instance of the great value which a general index of a
book may possess as a distinct work can be seen in the "Index to the
first ten volumes of Book Prices Current (1887-1896), constituting a
reference list of subjects and incidentally a key to Anonymous and
Pseudonymous Literature, London, 1901."

Here, in one alphabet, is a brief bibliography of the books sold in ten
years well set out, and the dates of the distinctive editions clearly
indicated. The compilation of this index must have been a specially
laborious work, and does great credit to William Jaggard, of Liverpool,
the compiler.

The authorities of the Clarendon Press, Oxford, are to be highly
commended for their conduct in respect to the index to Ranke's _History
of England_. This was attached to the sixth volume of the work published
in 1875. It is by no means a bad index in itself; but a revised index
was issued in 1897, which is a greatly improved edition by the addition
of dates and fuller descriptions and Christian names and titles to the
persons mentioned. The new index is substantially the same as the old
one, but the reviser has gone carefully through it, improving it at all
points, by which means it was extended over an additional twenty-three
pages. It is instructive to compare the two editions. Four references as
they appear in the two will show the improvement:

      _Old index._              _New index._

    "Lower House."            "Lower House see
                               Commons, House
                               of."

    "Window tax v. 102."      "Window tax, imposed
                               1695 v. 102."

    "Witt, John de."          "Witt, Cornelius de."

    "Witt, Cornelius de."     "Witt, John de."

Miss Hetherington has very justly explained the cause of bad indexing.
She says that it has been stated in the _Review of Reviews_ that the
indexer is born, _not_ made, and that the present writer said: "An ideal
indexer needs many qualifications; but unlike the poet he is not born,
_but_ made!" She then adds to these differing opinions: "More truly he
is born _and_ made."

I agree to the correction and forswear my former heresy. Certainly the
indexer requires to be born with some of the necessary qualities innate
in him, and then he requires to have those qualities turned to a
practical point by the study of good examples, so as to know what to
follow and what to avoid. Miss Hetherington goes on to say:

    "As a matter of fact, people without the first necessary
    qualifications, or any aptitude whatever for the work are set to
    compile indexes, and the work is regarded as nothing more than
    purely mechanical copying that any hack may do. So long as
    indexing and cataloguing are treated with contempt rather than
    as arts not to be acquired in a day, or perhaps a year, and so
    long as authors and their readers are indifferent to good work,
    will worthless indexing continue."[16]

  [16] _Index to the Periodical Literature of the World_ (1892).

What, then, are the chief characteristics that are required to form a
good indexer? I think they may be stated under five headings:

1. Common-sense.

2. Insight into the meaning of the author.

3. Power of analysis.

4. Common feeling with the consulter and insight into his mind, so that
the indexer may put the references he has drawn from the book under
headings where they are most likely to be sought.

5. General knowledge, with the power of overcoming difficulties.

The ignorant man cannot make a good index. The indexer will find that
his miscellaneous knowledge is sure to come in useful, and that which he
might doubt would ever be used by him will be found to be helpful when
least expected. It may seem absurd to make out that the good indexer
should be a sort of Admirable Crichton. There can be no doubt, however,
that he requires a certain amount of knowledge; and the good cataloguer
and indexer, without knowing everything, will be found to possess a keen
sense of knowledge.

As I owe all my interest in bibliography and indexing to him, I may
perhaps be allowed to introduce the name of my elder brother, the late
Mr. B. R. Wheatley, a Vice-President of the Library Association, as that
of a good indexer. He devoted his best efforts to the advancement of
bibliography. When fresh from school he commenced his career by making
the catalogue of one of the parts of the great _Heber Catalogue_. He
planned and made one of the earliest of indexes to a library
catalogue--that of the Athenæum Club. He made one of the best of indexes
to the transactions of a society in that of the Statistical Society,
which he followed by indexes of the Transactions of the Royal Medical
and Chirurgical Society, Clinical, and other societies. He also made an
admirable index to Tooke's _History of Prices_--a work of great labour,
which met with the high approval of the authors, Thomas Tooke and
William Newmarch.

                             [Illustration]




                             [Illustration]

                               CHAPTER V.

                     DIFFERENT CLASSES OF INDEXES.


    "Of all your talents you are a most amazing man at Indexes. What
    a flag too, do you hang out at the stern! You must certainly
    persuade people that the book overflows with matter, which (to
    speak the truth) is but thinly spread. But I know all this is
    fair in trade, and you have a right to expect that the publick
    should purchase freely when you reduce the whole book into an
    epitome for their benefit; I shall read the index with
    pleasure."--WILLIAM CLARKE TO WILLIAM BOWYER, NICHOLS'S
    _Literary Anecdotes_, vol. 3, p. 46.

[Illustration: I]n dealing with the art of the indexer it is most
important to consider the different classes of indexes. There are simple
indexes, such as those of names and places, which only require care and
proper alphabetical arrangement. The makers of these often plume
themselves upon their work; but they must remember that the making of
these indexes can only be ranked as belonging to the lowest rung of the
index ladder.

The easiest books to index are those coming within the classes of
History, Travel, Topography, and generally those that deal almost
entirely with facts. The indexing of these is largely a mechanical
operation, and only requires care and judgment. Verbal indexes and
concordances are fairly easy when the plan is settled; but they are
often works of great labour, and the compilers deserve great credit for
their perseverance. John Marbeck stands at the head of this body of
indefatigable workers who have placed the world under the greatest
obligations. He was the first to publish a concordance of the Bible,[17]
to be followed nearly two centuries later by the work of Alexander
Cruden, whose name has almost become a synonym for a concordance. After
the Bible come the works of Shakespeare, indexed by Samuel Ayscough
(1790), Francis Twiss (1805), Mrs. Cowden Clarke (1845), and Mr. John
Bartlett, who published in 1894 a still fuller concordance than that of
Mrs. Clarke. It is a vast quarto volume of 1,910 pages in double
columns, and represents an enormous amount of self-denying labour. Dr.
Alexander Schmidt's _Shakespeare Lexicon_ (1874) is something more than
a concordance, for it is a dictionary as well.

  [17] "A Concordance, that is to saie, a worke wherein by the
       ordre of the letters of the ABC ye maie redely finde any
       worde conteigned in the whole Bible, so often as it is there
       expressed or mencioned ... anno 1550."--_Folio._

A dictionary is an index of words. We do not mention dictionaries in
this connection to insist on the fact that they are indexes of words,
but rather to point out that a dictionary such as those of Liddell and
Scott, Littré, Murray, and Bradley, reaches the high watermark of index
work, and so the ordinary indexer is able to claim that he belongs to
the same class as the producers of such masterpieces as these.

Scientific books are the most difficult to index; but here there is a
difference between the science of fact and the science of thought, the
latter being the most difficult to deal with. The indexing of books of
logic and ethics will call forth all the powers of the indexer and show
his capabilities; but what we call the science of fact contains opinions
as well as facts, and some branches of political economy are subjects by
no means easy to index.

Some authors indicate their line of reasoning by the compilation of
headings. This is a great help to the indexer; but if the author does
not present such headings, the indexer has to make them himself, and he
therefore needs the abilities of the _précis_-writer.

There are indexes of Books, of Transactions, Periodicals, etc., and
indexes of Catalogues. Each of these classes demands a different method.
A book must be thoroughly indexed; but the index of Journals and
Transactions may be confined to the titles of the papers and articles.
It is, however, better to index the contents of the essays as well as
their titles.

Before the indexer commences his work he must consider whether his index
is to be full or short. Sometimes it is not necessary to adopt the full
index--frequently it is too expensive a luxury for publisher or author;
but the short index can be done well if necessary.

Whatever plan is followed, the indexer must use his judgment. This ought
to be the marked characteristic of the good indexer. The bad indexer is
entirely without this great gift.

While trying to be complete, the indexer must reject the trivial; and
this is not always easy. He must not follow in the steps of the lady who
confessed that she only indexed those points which specially interested
her. We have fair warning of incompleteness in _The Register of Corpus
Christi Guild, York_, published by the Surtees Society in 1872, where we
read, on page 321:

    "This Index contains the names of all persons mentioned in the
    appendix and foot-notes, but a selection only is given of those
    who were admitted into the Guild or enrolled in the Obituary."

The plan here adopted is not to be commended, for it is clear that so
important a name-list as this is should be thoroughly indexed. However
learned and judicious an editor may be, we do not choose to submit to
his judgment in the offhand decision of what is and what is not
important.

There is a considerable difference in the choice of headings for a
general or special index--say, for instance, in indexing electrical
subjects the headings would differ greatly in the indexes of the
Institution of Civil Engineers or of the Institution of Electrical
Engineers. In the former, dynamos, transformers, secondary or storage
batteries, alternate and continuous currents would probably be grouped
under the general heading of Electricity, while in the latter we shall
find Dynamos under D, Transformers under T, Batteries under B, Alternate
under A, and Continuous under C.

The indexes to catalogues of libraries, etc., are among the most
difficult of indexes to compile. It was not usual to attach an index of
subjects to a catalogue of authors until late years, and that to the
_Catalogue of the Athenæum Club Library_ (1851) is an early specimen.
The _New York State Library Catalogue_ (1856) has an index, as have
those of the _Royal Medical and Chirurgical Society_ (1860) and the
_London Library_ (1865 and 1875). That appended to the _Catalogue of the
Manchester Free Library_ (1864) is more a short list of titles than an
index.

There are special difficulties attendant on the indexing of catalogues.
Books are written in many languages, and there is considerable trouble
in bringing together the books on a given subject produced in many
countries. The titles of books are not drawn up on the same system or
with any wish to help the indexer. Titles are seldom straightforward,
for they are largely concocted to attract the readers, without any
honest wish to express correctly the nature of the contents of the book.
They are usually either too short or too enigmatical. The titles of
pamphlets, again, are often too long; and it may be taken as an axiom
that the longer the title the less important the book.

The indexer, however, has a great advantage over the cataloguer, because
the latter is bound by bibliographical etiquette not to alter the title
of a book, while the indexer is at liberty to alter the title as he
likes, so as to bring together books on the same subject, however
different the titles may be. Herein consists the great objection to the
index composed of short titles, as in Dr. Crestadoro's _Index to the
Manchester Free Library Catalogue_. Books almost entirely alike in
subject are separated by reason of the different wording of the titles.
It is much more convenient to gather together under one entry books
identical in subject, and there is no utility in separating an
"elementary treatise" on electricity from "the elements" of electricity.
One important point connected with indexes to catalogues is to add the
date of the book after the name of the author, so that the seeker may
know whether the book is old or new.

An index ought not to supersede the table of contents, as this is often
useful for those who cannot find what they want in the index, from
having forgotten the point of the heading under which it would most
likely appear in the alphabet.

In the year 1900 there was a controversy in _The Times_ on a proposed
subject index to the catalogue of the library of the British Museum. It
was commenced on October 15th by a letter signed "A Scholar," and closed
on November 19th by the same writer, who summed up the whole
controversy. "A Scholar" expressed himself strongly against the
proposal, and as he himself confesses he used very arrogant language. In
consequence of which, most readers must have desired to find him proved
to be in the wrong. This desire was satisfied when Mr. Fortescue, the
keeper of the printed books at the British Museum, delivered his address
as President of the Library Association on August 27th last.

The two points made by the "Scholar" were: (1) That the making of a
general subject index to the catalogue proposed by the authorities of
the British Museum would be a waste of money; (2) That it was a great
evil for the five-yearly indexes originated by Mr. Fortescue to be
discontinued.

Now let us see what is to be said with authority on these points.

Mr. Fortescue said:

    "Last Autumn ... I read with respectful astonishment a letter to
    'The Times' from a writer who preferred to veil his identity
    under the modest signature of 'a Scholar.' There I read that
    'the studious public of this country and Europe in general have
    been surprised by the news that the authorities of the British
    Museum seriously contemplate the compilation of a subject index
    to the vast collection of printed books in that library.' I can
    assure you that the surprise of the studious public and of
    Europe in general cannot have surpassed my own when I thus
    learned of what the authorities were seriously contemplating.
    Nevertheless, it left me able, I thought, to discern that their
    vast conceptions had not been so fortunate as to gain the
    approval of 'a Scholar' and to marvel whence _The Times_ and
    other great journals had drawn their truly surprising
    information. Some of the arguments put forth in sundry
    criticisms of the 'scheme' showed how much thought had been
    bestowed upon matters which then first dazzled my bewildered
    imagination. It may come some day (who shall say what will
    not?), this General Index, or it may never come. But up to the
    present moment I am aware of no authority who is seriously
    contemplating so large a venture unless perhaps it be 'a
    Scholar' himself."

Then as to the five-yearly indexes Mr. Fortescue said:

    "Experience has taught us that there is no form of subject-index
    which the public values so highly as one which gives the most
    recent literature on every possible subject. And to meet this
    manifest want we shall certainly continue to issue, with all the
    latest improvements I hope, the modest Indexes which we have
    hitherto published in five-yearly (I am afraid as President of
    The Library Association I should say 'in quinquennial') volumes.
    The Museum sweeps its net so wide and in such remote seas that a
    more or less complete collection of books on almost every
    subject or historical event is gathered within it for future
    students. To take only two incidents from the last year or two,
    the next index will contain not less than a hundred and forty
    books and pamphlets, in almost every European tongue, on the
    Dreyfus case, and from four to five hundred books on the present
    war in South Africa. Such bibliographical tests have more than
    an ephemeral or immediate value. They will remain as records of
    events or phases of thought long after their causes shall have
    faded from all but the page of history."

Of late years the dictionary catalogue has come very largely into use in
public libraries. This consists of a union of catalogue of authors and
index of subjects which is found to be very useful and illuminating to
the readers in free libraries, most of whom are probably not versed in
the niceties of bibliographical arrangement, but are more likely to want
a book on a particular subject than to require a special book which they
know. Mr. Cutter has written the history of the dictionary catalogue in
the _United States Special Report_ (pp. 533-539), and he traces it back
in America to about the year 1815.

Excellent specimens of these dictionary catalogues have been produced.
They are of great value to the ordinary reader at a small public
library, but I venture to think that to construct one for a large
library is a waste of power, because if several large libraries of a
similar character do the same thing, there is constant repetition and
considerable loss by the unnecessary outlay. If a fairly complete
standard index were made, it could be used by all the libraries, and in
return the libraries might unite to pay its cost. I am pleased to know
that Mr. Fortescue prefers to keep index and catalogue distinct. He said
in his address:

    "I have formed, so far as I know, but one dogmatic conviction,
    and it is this: that the best catalogue which the art of man can
    invent is a catalogue in two inter-dependent yet independent
    parts; the first and greater part an alphabetical catalogue of
    authors, the second and lesser part a subject-index. I know well
    that I shall be told that I am out of date, that such an opinion
    is as the voice of one crying in the wilderness--that the
    dictionary catalogue has won its battle--but even so, perhaps
    the more so, do I feel it the part of a serious and immovable
    conviction to declare my belief that--for student and librarian
    alike--this twofold catalogue, author and subject each in its
    own division, is the best catalogue a library can have, and that
    the dictionary catalogue is the very worst. But whatever may be
    our individual opinion on this head, it is only necessary to
    enter into a very simple calculation to see that if the
    dictionary system could have governed the rules of the British
    Museum Catalogue it would by now have consisted of not less than
    twelve million entries; and assuredly it would have been neither
    completed nor printed to-day."

                             [Illustration]




                              CHAPTER VI.

                     GENERAL RULES FOR ALPHABETICAL
                                INDEXES.

    "In order to guard against blunders Bayle proposed that certain
    directions should be drawn up for the guidance of the compilers
    of indexes."


[Illustration: T]hese rules, originally drawn up by a committee of the
Index Society, were primarily intended for the use of indexers making
indexes of indexless books to be published by the society, which, being
produced separately from the books themselves, needed some introductory
note. In all cases, however, some explanation of the mode of compilation
should be attached to the index. The compiler comes fresh from his
difficulties and the expedients he has devised to overcome them, and it
is therefore well for him to explain to the user of the index what those
special difficulties are.

The object of the Index Society was to set up a standard of uniformity
in the compilation of the indexes published by them. Although rigid
uniformity is not needed in all indexes, it is well that these should be
made in accordance with the best experience of past workers rather than
on a system which varies with the mood of the compiler. It is hoped that
the following rules may be of some practical use to future indexers.

In the eighth chapter of _How to Catalogue a Library_ there are a series
of rules for making a catalogue of a small library in which are codified
the different points which had been discussed in the previous chapters.
In the present chapter the Index Society rules are printed in italic,
and to them are now added some illustrative remarks. There is
necessarily a certain likeness between rules for indexing and rules for
cataloguing, but the differences are perhaps more marked. At all events,
the rules for one class of work will not always be suitable for the
other class.


    1. _Every work should have one index to the whole set, and not an
    index to each volume._

An index to each volume of a set is convenient if a general amalgamated
index to the whole set is given as well; but a work with several indexes
and no general one is most inconvenient and irritating, while to have
both seems extravagant. If, however, the author or publisher is willing
to present both, it is not for the user of the book to complain.


    2. _Indexes to be arranged in alphabetical order, proper names
    and subjects being united in one alphabet. An introduction
    containing some indication of the classification of the contents
    of the book indexed to be prefixed._

In an alphabetical index the alphabet must be all in all. When the
alphabet is used, it must be used throughout. There is no advantage in
dividing proper names from subjects, as is so often done, particularly
in foreign indexes. Another objectionable practice frequently adopted in
the indexes of periodical publications is to keep together the entries
under the separate headings used in the journal itself, and thus to have
a number of distinct alphabets under different headings. This union of
alphabetical and classified indexing has been condemned on a former
page, and need not here be referred to further.

In the case of large headings the items should be arranged in
alphabetical order under them. There is occasionally a difficulty in
carrying this out completely, but it should be attempted. We want as
little classification as possible in an alphabetical index. Mr. W. F.
Poole wisely said in reference to the proposal of one of his helpers on
the _Index of Periodical Literature_ to place Wealth, Finance, and
Population under the heading of Political Economy: "The fatal defect of
every classified arrangement is that nobody understands it except the
person who made it and he is often in doubt."


    3. _The entries to be arranged according to the order of the
    English alphabet. I and J and U and V to be kept distinct._

There are few things more irritating than to find the alphabet confused
by the union of the vowel _i_ with the consonant _j_, or the vowel _u_
with the consonant _v_. No doubt they were not distinguished some
centuries ago, but this is no reason why they should again be confused
now that they are usually distinct. There may be special reasons why
they should be mixed together in the British Museum Catalogue, but it is
not evident that these are sufficient.

The only safe rule is to use the English alphabet as it is to-day in an
English index. One of the rules of the American Library Association is:
"The German _ae_, _oe_, _ue_ always to be written _ä_, _ö_, _ü_, and
arranged as _a_, _o_, _u_." By this Goethe would have to be written
Göthe, which is now an unusual form, and I think it would be better to
insist that where both forms are used, one or other should be chosen and
all instances spelt alike. It is a very common practice to arrange _ä_,
_ö_, _ü_, as if they were written _ae_, _oe_, _ue_; but this leads to
the greatest confusion, and no notice should be taken of letters that
are merely to be understood.


    4. _Headings consisting of two or more distinct words are not to
    be treated as integral portions of one word; thus the
    arrangement should be_:

        _Grave_, John      }     { _Grave_ at Kherson
        _Grave_ at Kherson }     { _Grave_, John
        _Grave_ of Hope    }     { _Gravelot_
        _Grave_ Thoughts   } not { _Grave_ of Hope
        _Gravelot_         }     { _Gravesend_
        _Gravesend_        }     { _Grave_ Thoughts.

The perfect alphabetical arrangement is often ignored, and it is not
always easy to decide as to what is the best order; but the above rule
seems to put the matter pretty clearly. If no system is adhered to, it
becomes very difficult to steer a course through the confusion. When
such entries are printed, a very incongruous appearance often results
from the use of a line to indicate repetition when a word similar in
spelling, but not really the same word, occurs; thus, in the above,
Grave _surname_, Grave _substantive_, and Grave _adjective_ must all be
repeated. It is inattention to this obvious fact that has caused such
ludicrous blunders as the following:

    "Mill on Liberty
     ---- on the Floss."[18]

      [18] Miss Hetherington gives an additional instance of this
           class of blunder, but her only authority is "said to be
           from the index of a young lady's scrap book":

                "Patti, Adelina,
                 ---- oyster."

           The example in the text is absolutely genuine, although
           it has been doubted.

    "Cotton, Sir Willoughby,
     ----, price of."

    "Old age
     ---- Artillery Yard
     ---- Bailey."

These are all genuine entries taken from books, and similar blunders are
not uncommon even in fairly good indexes; thus, in the _Calendar of
Treasury Papers_, 1714-1719, issued by the Public Record Office, under
_Ireland_ are the following entries:

    "Ireland, Mrs. Jane, Sempstress and Starcher to King William;
    cxcvii. 32.

    ... Attorney General of, _See_ Attorney General, Ireland."

Then follow nearly two columns on Ireland with the marks of repetition
(...) throughout.

The names of streets in the _Post Office Directory_ are now arranged in
a strict alphabetical order on the lines laid down in this rule; thus we
have:

    "White Street
     White's Row
     White Heart
     Whitechapel."

Again:

    "Abbott Road
     Abbott Street
     Abbott's Road."

Again:

    "King Square
     King Street
     King and Queen Street
     King David Street
     King Edward Road
     King William Street
     King's Arms Court
     King's Road
     Kinglake Street
     Kingsbury Road
     Kingsgate Street."

Sometimes there is a slip, as might be expected in so complicated a list
of names. Thus in the foregoing sequence Kinghorn Street comes between
King William Street and King's Arms Court, while I think it ought to
come immediately before Kinglake Street; but, after all, this is a
matter of opinion. Strattondale Street comes before Stratton Street; but
this is merely a case of missorting.

There is one piece of alphabetisation which the editor of the _Post
Office Directory_ has always adopted, and that is to place Upper and
Lower under those adjectives, and Old Bond Street under _Old_, and New
Bond Street under _New_. These two names belong to what is practically
one street (although each division is separately numbered), which is
always spoken of as Bond Street, and therefore for which the majority of
persons will look under Bond. South Molton Street is correctly placed
under South because there is no North Molton Street, and the street is
named after South Molton; while South Eaton Place is merely a
continuation of Eaton Place. Some persons, however, think that names
should be treated as they stand, and that we should not go behind them
to find out what they mean.


    5. _Proper Names of foreigners to be arranged alphabetically
    under the prefixes_--

        _Dal_   }    { _Dal Sie_
        _Del_   }    { _Del Rio_
        _Della_ }    { _Della Casa_
        _Des_   } as { _Des Cloiseaux_
        _Du_    }    { _Du Bois_
        _La_    }    { _La Condamine_
        _Le_    }    { _Le Sage_,

    _but not under the prefixes_--

        _D_   as  _Abbadie_  not  _D'Abbadie_
        _Da_   "  _Silva_     "   _Da Silva_
        _De_   "  _La Place_  "   _De La Place_
        _Von_  "  _Humboldt_  "   _Von Humboldt_
        _Van_  "  _Beneden_   "   _Van Beneden_.

    _It is an acknowledged principle that when the prefix is a
    preposition it is to be rejected; but when an article, it is to
    be retained. When, however, as in the case of the French Du,
    Des, the two are joined, it is necessary to retain the
    preposition. This also applies to the case of the Italian Della,
    which is often rejected by cataloguers. English names are,
    however, to be arranged under the prefixes_:

        _De_   }    { _De Quincey_
        _Dela_ } as { _Delabeche_
        _Van_  }    { _Van Mildert_,

    _because these prefixes are meaningless in English, and form an
    integral part of the name._

Whatever rule is adopted, some difficulty will be found in carrying it
out: for instance, if we consider Van Dyck as a foreigner, his name will
appear as Dyck (Van); but if as an Englishman, his name will be treated
as Vandyck.

A prefix which is translated into the relative term in a foreign
language cannot be considered as a fixed portion of the name. Thus
Alexander von Humboldt, when away from his native Germany, translated
his name into Alexandre de Humboldt. The reason why prefixes are
retained in English names is because they have no meaning in themselves,
and cannot be translated. There is a difficulty here in respect to
certain names with De before them; for instance, the Rothschilds call
themselves De Rothschild, but when the head of the family in England was
made a peer of the United Kingdom he became Lord Rothschild without the
De. In fact, we have to come to the conclusion that when men think of
making changes in their names they pay very little attention to the
difficulties they are forging for the cataloguer and the indexer.

In this rule no mention is made of such out-of-the-way forms as Im Thurn
and Ten Brink. It is very difficult to decide upon the alphabetical
position of these names. If the indexer had to deal with a number of
these curious prefixes, it would probably be well to ignore them; but
when in the case of an English index they rarely occur, it will probably
be better to put Im Thurn under I and Ten Brink under T.

With respect to the translation of foreign titles, the historian Freeman
made a curious statement which is quoted in one of the American Q.P.
indexes. Freeman wrote:

    "No man was ever so clear [as Macaulay] from the vice of
    thrusting in foreign words into an English sentence. One sees
    this in such small matters as the accurate way in which he uses
    foreign titles. He speaks, for instance, of the 'Duke of Maine,'
    the 'Count of Avaux,' while in other writers one sees the
    vulgarism of the _Court Circular_, 'Duke de Maine,' 'Duc de
    Maine,'--perhaps 'Duc of Maine.'"

Duke de Maine and Duc of Maine may be vulgar, they are certainly
incorrect; but I fail to see how it can be vulgar to call a man by his
right name--"Duc de Maine." I do not venture to censure Macaulay, but
for lesser men it is certainly a great mistake to translate the names of
foreigners, in spite of Freeman's expression of his strong opinion.


    6. _Proper names with the prefix St., as St. Albans, St. John,
    to be arranged in the alphabet as if written in full--Saint.
    When the word Saint represents a ceremonial title, as in the
    case of St. Alban, St. Giles, and St. Augustine, these names are
    to be arranged under the letters A and G respectively; but the
    places St. Albans, St. Giles's, and St. Augustine's will be
    found under the prefix Saint. The prefixes M' and Mc to be
    arranged as if written in full--Mac._

This rule is very frequently neglected, more particularly in respect to
the neglect of the difference between Saint Alban the man and St. Albans
the place.


    7. _Peers to be arranged under their titles, by which alone in
    most cases they are known, and not under their family names,
    except in such a case as Horace Walpole, who is almost unknown
    by his title of Earl of Orford, which came to him late in life.
    Bishops, deans, etc., to be always under their family names._

About this rule there is great difference of opinion. The British Museum
practice is to catalogue peers under their surnames, and the same plan
has been adopted in the _Dictionary of National Biography_. It is rather
difficult to understand how this practice has come into being. There are
difficulties on both sides; but the great majority of peers are, I
believe, known solely by their titles, and when these noblemen are
entered under their family names cross references are required because
very few persons know the family names of peers. The Library Association
and Bodleian rules adopt the common-sense plan of entering noblemen
under their titles, and Mr. Cutter gives some excellent reasons for
doing this, although he cannot make up his mind to run counter to a
supposed well-established rule. Mr. Cutter writes:

    "STANHOPE Philip Dormer, 4th _Earl of Chesterfield_.... This is
    the British Museum rule and Mr. Jewett's. Mr. Perkins prefers
    entry under titles for British noblemen also, in which I should
    agree with him if the opposite practice were not so well
    established. The reasons for entry under the title are that
    British noblemen are always spoken of, always sign by their
    titles only, and seldom put the family name upon the title-pages
    of their books, so that ninety-nine in a hundred readers must
    look under the title first. The reasons against it are that the
    founders of noble families are often as well known--sometimes
    even better--by their family name as by their titles (as Charles
    Jenkinson, afterwards Lord Liverpool; Sir Robert Walpole,
    afterwards Earl of Orford); that the same man bears different
    titles in different parts of his life (thus P. Stanhope
    published his _History of England from the Peace of Utrecht_ as
    Lord Mahon, and his _Reign of Queen Anne_ as Earl Stanhope);
    that it separates members of the same family (Lord Chancellor
    Eldon would be under Eldon, and his father and all his brothers
    and sisters under the family name, Scott), [Mr. Cutter forgot
    that Lord Eldon's elder brother William was also a peer--Lord
    Stowell] and brings together members of different families (thus
    the earldom of Bath has been held by members of the families of
    Chandé, Bourchier, Granville and Pulteney, and the family name
    of the present Marquis of Bath is Thynne), which last argument
    would be more to the point in planning a family history."

The advocates of the practice of arranging peers under their family
names make much of the difficulties attendant on such changes of name as
Francis Bacon, Viscount St. Alban's, Benjamin Disraeli (afterwards Earl
of Beaconsfield), Sir John Lubbock (now Lord Avebury), and Richard
Monckton Milnes (afterwards Lord Houghton). These, doubtless, are
difficulties, but I believe that they amount in all to very few as
compared with the cases on the other side.

This is a matter that might be settled by calculation, and it would be
well worth while to settle it. Mr. Cutter says that ninety-nine in a
hundred must look under the title first, but I doubt if the percentage
be quite as high as this. If it were, it ought to be conclusive against
any other arrangement than that under titles.

Moreover, these instances do not really meet the case, for they belong
to another class, which has to be dealt with in cataloguing--that is,
those who change their names. When a man succeeds to a peerage he
changes his name just as a Commoner may change his name in order to
succeed to a certain property.


    8. _Foreign compound names to be arranged under the first name,
    as Lacaze Duthiers. English compound names under the last,
    except in such cases as Royston-Pigott, where the first name is
    a true surname. The first name in a foreign compound is, as a
    rule, the surname; but the first name in an English compound is
    usually a mere Christian name._

This rule is open to some special difficulties. It can be followed with
safety in respect to foreign names, but special knowledge is required in
respect to English names. Of late years a large number of persons have
taken a fancy to bring into prominence their last Christian name when it
is obtained from a surname. They then hyphen their Christian name with
their surname, because they wish to be called by both. The Smiths and
the Joneses commenced the practice, but others have followed their lead.
The indexer has no means of telling whether in a hyphened name the first
name is a real surname or not, and he needs to know much personal and
family history before he can decide correctly.

Hyphens are used most recklessly nowadays, and the user has no thought
of the trouble he gives to the indexer. If the Christian name is
hyphened to the surname, and all the family agree to use the two
together as their surname, the indexer must treat the compound name as a
true surname. Often a hyphen is used merely to show that the person
bearing the names wishes to be known by both, but with no intention of
making the Christian name into a surname. Thus a father may not give all
his children the same Christian name, but change it for each individual,
as one son may be James Somerset-Jones and another George Balfour-Jones.
In such a case as this the hyphen is quite out of place, and Jones must
still be treated as the only surname. No one has a right to expect his
Christian name to be treated as a surname merely by reason of his
joining the Christian name to the surname by a hyphen. He must publicly
announce his intention of treating his Christian name as a surname, or
change it by Act of Parliament. Even when the name is legally changed,
there is often room for confusion. The late Mr. Edward Solly, F.R.S.,
who was very interested in these inquiries, drew my attention to the
fact that the family of Hesketh changed their name in 1806 to Bamford by
Act of Parliament, and subsequently obtained another Act to change it
back to Hesketh. The present form of the family names is
Lloyd-Hesketh-Bamford-Hesketh.

With respect to Spanish and Portuguese names it is well to bear in mind
that there are several surnames made from Christian names, as, for
instance, Fernando is a Christian name and Fernandez is a surname, just
as with us Richard is a Christian name and Richards a surname.


    9. _An adjective is frequently to be preferred to a
    substantive as a catchword; for instance, when it contains the
    point of the compound, as Alimentary Canal, English History;
    also when the compound forms a distinctive name, as Soane
    Museum._

The object of this rule is often overlooked, and many indexers purposely
reject the use of adjectives as headings. One of the most marked
instances of an opposite rule may be seen in the index to Hare's _Walks
in London_ (1878), where all the alleys, bridges, buildings, churches,
courts, houses, streets, etc., are arranged under these headings, and
not under the proper name of each. There may be a certain advantage in
some of these headings, but few would look for Lisson Grove under Grove,
and the climax of absurdity is reached when Chalk Farm is placed under
Farm.


    10. _The entries to be as short as is consistent with
    intelligibility, but the insertion of names without
    specification of the cause of reference to be avoided, except in
    particular cases. The extent of the references, when more than
    one page, to be marked by indicating the first and last pages._

This rule requires to be carried out with judgment. Few things are more
annoying than a long string of references without any indication of the
cause of reference, but on the other hand it is objectionable to come
across a frivolous entry. The consulter is annoyed to find no additional
information in the book to what is already given in the index. It will
therefore be found best to set out the various entries in which some
fact or opinion is mentioned, and then to gather together the remaining
references under the heading of _Alluded to_.

The most extreme instances of annoying block lists of references under a
name are to be found in Ayscough's elaborate index to the _Gentleman's
Magazine_, where all the references under one surname are placed
together without even the distinction of the Christian name. The late
Mr. Edward Solly made a curious calculation as to the time that would be
employed in looking up these references. For instance, under the name
Smith there are 2,411 entries _en masse_, and with no initial letters.
If there were these divisions, one would find Zachary Smith in a few
minutes, but now one must look to each reference to find what is wanted.
With taking down the volumes and hunting through long lists of names,
Mr. Solly found that two minutes were occupied in looking up each
reference; hence it might take the consulter eight days (working
steadily ten hours a day) to find out if there be any note about Zachary
Smith in the magazine, a task which no one would care to undertake.

A like instance of bad indexing will be found in Scott's edition of
Swift's _Works_. Here there are 638 references to Robert Harley, Earl of
Oxford, without any indication of the reason why his name is entered in
the index. This case also affords a good instance of careless indexing
in another particular, for these references are separated under
different headings instead of being gathered under one, as follows:

    Harley (Robert)         277 references.
    Oxford (Lord)           111     "
    Treasurer, Lord Oxford  300     "

The late Mr. B. R. Wheatley read a paper before the Conference of
Librarians (1877) on this subject of indexes, without details of the
reason or cause of reference, entitled, "An 'Evitandum' in Index-making,
principally met with in French and German Periodical Scientific
Literature" (_Transactions_, p. 88). He pointed out that often in German
Indexes the entries in the _Sach Register_ would be full and correct,
while those in the _Namen Register_ would usually be meagre, and consist
merely of the surnames of the authors and the initials of their
Christian names. He then referred to many instances of the uselessness
of these indexes. He further referred to the forty so-called indexes of
subjects added to Allibone's valuable _Critical Dictionary of English
Literature_, which are practically useless. He concluded his paper with
these words:

    "You are referred to the 'Morals and Manners' index for such
    varied subjects as Apparitions, Divorce, Marriage, Duelling,
    Freemasonry, Mormonism, Mythology, Spiritualism and Witchcraft.
    There are 1,365 names in this index, and how are you to discover
    which belong to any of the above subjects without wading through
    the whole? It is, in fact, an entire system of indexing
    backwards from particulars to generals, instead of from generals
    to particulars. It is something like writing on a sign-post on
    the road to Bath, 'To Somersetshire,' and if in one phrase I
    were to add a characteristic entry to these sub-indexes, or to
    give one form of reference which should be typical of this style
    of index, I should say--Needle, _see_ Bottle of Hay. You find
    the bottle of hay--but where is the needle?"

The form in which the various entries in an index are to be drawn up is
worthy of much attention, and particular care should be taken to expunge
all redundant words. For example, it would be better to write:

    "Smith (John), his character; his execution,"

than

    "Smith (John), character of; execution of";

or

    "Brown (Robert) saves money,"

than

    "Brown (Robert), saving of money by."

A good instance of the frivolous entry is the hackneyed quotation,

    "Best (Mr. Justice), his great mind,"

which is supposed to be a reference to a passage in this form: "Mr.
Justice Best said that he had a great mind to commit the man for trial."
This particular reference is almost too good to be true, and I have not
been able to trace it to its source. That has been said to be in the
index to one of Chitty's law-books, and it is added that possibly Chitty
had a grudge against Sir William Draper Best, one of the Puisne Judges
of the King's Bench from 1819 to 1824, and Lord Chief Justice of the
Common Pleas from 1824 to 1829, in which latter year he was created Lord
Wynford. Another explanation is that it was a joke of Leigh Hunt's, who
first published it in the _Examiner_.


    11. _Short entries to be repeated under such headings as are
    likely to be required, in place of a too frequent use of cross
    references. These references, however, to be made from cognate
    headings, as Cerebral to Brain, and vice versâ, where the
    subject matter is different._

Cross references are very useful, but they are not usually popular with
those who are unaccustomed to them. They ought to be used where the
number of references under a certain heading is large, but it is always
better to duplicate the references than to refer too often to
insignificant entries.


    12. _In the case of journals and transactions brief abstracts of
    the contents of the several articles or papers to be drawn up
    and arranged in the alphabetical index under the heading of the
    article._

The advantage of this plan is that a _précis_ can be made of the
articles or papers which will be useful to the reader as containing an
abstract of the contents, much of which might not be of sufficient
importance to be sorted out in the alphabet; in the case where the
entries are important they can be duplicated in the alphabet. A good
specimen of this plan of indexing may be found in the indexes to the
Journal of the Statistical Society.


    13.  _Authorities quoted or referred to in a book, to be indexed
    under each author's name, the titles of his works being
    separately set out and the word "quoted" added in italics._

This rule is quite clear, and there is nothing to be added to it. It is
evident that all books quoted should be indexed.


    14.  _When the indexed page is large, or contains long lists of
    names, it is to be divided into four sections, referred to
    respectively as a, b, c, d; thus if a page contains 64 lines,
    1-16 will be a, 17-32 b, 33-48 c, 49-64 d. If in double columns,
    the page is still to be divided into four--a and b forming the
    upper and lower halves of the first column, and c and d the
    upper and lower halves of the second column._

This division of the page will often be found very useful, and save much
time to the consulter.


    15.  _When a work is in more than one volume, the number of the
    volume is to be specified by small Roman numerals. In the case
    of long sets, such as the "Gentleman's Magazine," a special
    Arabic numeral =for= indicating the volume, distinct from the
    page numeral, may be employed with advantage._

The frequent use of high numbers in Roman capitals is very inconvenient.


    16.  _Entries which refer to complete chapters or distinct
    papers, to be printed in small capitals or italics._

This is useful as indicating that the italic entry is of more importance
than those in Roman type.


    17.  _Headings to be printed in a marked type. A dash, instead
    of indentation, to be used as a mark of repetition. The dash to
    be kept for entries exactly similar, and the word to be repeated
    when the second differs in any way from the first. The proper
    name to be repeated when that of a different person. In the case
    of joint authors, the Christian name or initials of the first,
    whose surname is arranged in the alphabet, to be in parentheses,
    but the Christian names of the second to be in the natural
    order, as Smith (John) and Alexander Brown, not Smith (John) and
    Brown (Alexander)._

Dashes should be of a uniform length, and that length should not be too
great. It is a mistake to suppose that the dash is to be the length of
the line which is not repeated. If it be necessary to make the
repetition of a portion of the title as well as the author, this should
be indicated by another dash, and not by the elongation of the former
one.

The reason for the last direction in this rule is that the Christian
name is only brought back in order to make the alphabetical position of
the surname clear; and as this is not necessary in respect to the second
person, the names should remain in their natural order.

The initials which stand for Christian names often give much trouble,
particularly among foreigners. Most Frenchmen use the letter M. to stand
for monsieur, giving no Christian name; but sometimes M. stands for
Michel or other Christian name commencing with M. The Germans are often
very careless in the use of initials, and I have found in one index of a
scientific periodical the following specimens of this confusion: (1) H.
D. Gerling, (2) H. W. Brandes, (3) D. W. Olbers. Here all three cases
look alike, but in the first H. D. represent two titles--Herr Doctor; in
the second, H. W. represent two Christian names--Heinrich Wilhelm; and
in the third one title and one Christian name--Dr. W. Olbers.

The above rules do not apply to subject indexes, and in certain cases
may need modification in accordance with the special character of the
work to be indexed. On the whole, it may be said that an alphabetical
index is the best; but under special circumstances it may be well to
have a classified index. Generally it may be said that there are special
objections to classification, and therefore if a classified index is
decided upon, it must needs be exceptional, and rules must be made for
it by the maker of the index.

In the foregoing rules no mention is made of the difficulties attendant
on the use of Oriental names. Under "Rules for a Small Library" in _How
to Catalogue a Library_, I wrote:

    "7. Oriental names to be registered in accordance with the
    system adopted by a recognised authority on the subject."

This, however, is only shifting the responsibility. In an ordinary
English index this point is not likely to give much trouble, and the
rule may be safely adopted of registration under the first name. But
where there are many names to be dealt with, difficulties are sure to
arise. In India the last name is usually adopted, and the forenames are
frequently contracted into initials, so that it is obligatory to use
this name. We must never forget the practical conclusion that a man's
real name is that by which he is known. But the indexer's difficulty in
a large number of cases is that he does not know what that name is. Sir
George Birdwood has kindly drawn up for me the following memorandum on
the subject, which is of great value, from the interesting historical
account of the growth of surnames in India under British rule which he
gives.


                    ON THE INDEXING OF THE NAMES OF
                            EASTERN PEOPLE.

    Confining myself to the people--Parsees, Hindoos, and Mussulmans
    (_muslimin_)--of India, I find it very difficult to state an
    unexceptionable rule for the indexing of their names; and I
    index them in the order in which they are signed by the people
    themselves. The first or forename of a Parsee or a Hindoo, but
    not of a Mussulman if he be a Pathan, is his own personal or, as
    we say, "Christian"--that is, baptismal or "water"--name; and
    their second their father's personal name, and not his family
    or, as we say, "blood" name, or true surname. The naming of
    individuals in the successive generations of a Parsee or Hindoo,
    and certain Mussulmanee families, runs thus: A. G., N. A., U.
    N., and so on, the grandfather's name disappearing in the third
    generation.

    The Parsees only in comparatively recent times adopted family or
    true surnames derived from the personal or paternal names, or
    both, of the first distinguished member of the family, or from
    his occupation or place of residence, or from some notable
    friend or patron of his, or from some title conferred on him by
    the ruler whose subject he was. Thus the Patels of Bombay are
    descended from Rustom (the son of) Dorabjee, who, for the
    assistance he gave the English in 1692 against the Seedee of
    Junjeera, was created, by _sanad_ (_i.e._ patent), _patel_
    (_i.e._ mayor) of the Coolees of Bombay.

    The Parsee Ashburners derive their patronymic from an ancestor
    in the early part of the late century, the friend and associate
    of a well-known English gentleman then resident in Western
    India. The Bhownaggrees take their name from an ancestor, a
    wealthy _jaghirdar_, who in 1744 built a tank of solid stone for
    public use at Bhavnagar in Kattyawar, and also from their later
    official connection with this well-known "model Native State."
    The Jamsetjee Jejeebhoys and Comasjee Jehanghiers derive their
    double-barreled surnames from the first baronet and knight,
    respectively, of these two eminent Parsee families. Other
    well-known Parsee surnames are Albless, Bahadurjee, Banajee,
    Bengalee, Bhandoopwala, Bharda, Cama (or Kama), Dadysett,
    Damanwala, Gamadia, Gazdar, Ghandi, Kapadia, Karaka, Khabrajee,
    Kharagat, Kohiyar, Marzban, Modee, Petit (Sir Dinshaw Manockjee
    Petit, first baronet of this name), Panday, Parak, Sanjana,
    Sayar, Seth, Sethna, Shroff, Talyarkan, Wadia. Some of their
    surnames are very eccentric, such as Doctor, Ready-money,
    Solicitor, etc., and should be abolished. There is actually a
    Dr. Solicitor.

    The interesting point about the Parsee surnames is that when
    first introduced, through the influence of their close contact
    with the English, they were not absolutely hereditary, but were
    changed after a generation or two. Thus the present Bhownaggrees
    used, at one time, the surname of Compadore, from the office so
    designated held by one of their ancestors under the Portuguese.

    The Hindoos have always had surnames, and jealously guard their
    authenticity and continuity in the traditions of their families,
    although they do not, even yet in Western India, universally use
    them in public. Their personal and paternal names are derived,
    among the higher castes, from the names of the gods, the
    thousand and one names of Vishnoo and Seeva, of Ganesha, etc.,
    and from the names of well-known mythological heroes, historical
    saints, etc., the name selected being one the initial of which
    indicates the lunar asterism (_nakshatra_) under which the
    child (_i.e._ a son) is born; but their surnames have a tribal,
    or, as in the case of the Parsees, a local, or official, or some
    other merely accidental, origin.

    If, then, we had only to deal with the Hindoos and Parsees, they
    might be readily indexed under their surnames. But when we come
    to the Indian Mussulmans the problem is at once seen to be beset
    with perplexities which seem to me impossible to unravel. The
    Indian Mussulmans--indeed all _muslimin_--are classified as
    Sayeds, Sheikhs, Mo(n)gols, and Pathans. The Sayeds (literally,
    "nobles," "lords") are the descendants of the Prophet Mahomet,
    through his son-in-law Allee; those descended through Fatima
    being distinguished as Sayed Hussanee and Sayed Hooseinee, and
    those from his other wives as Sayed Allee. The first name given
    to a Mussulman of this class is the _quasi_-surname Sayed or
    Meer (also, literally, "nobleman," "lord"), followed by the
    personal name and the paternal name; but these _quasi_-surnames
    often fall into disuse after manhood has been reached.

    The Sheikhs (literally, "chiefs"),--and all _muslimin_ descended
    from Mahomet and Aboo Bukeer and Oomur are Sheikhs,--have one or
    other of the following surnames placed before or after their
    personal and paternal names: Abd, Allee, Bukhs, Goolam, Khoaja,
    Sheikh. But as Sayeds are also all Sheikhs, they sometimes, on
    attaining manhood, assume the surname of Sheikh, dropping that
    of Sayed, or Meer, given to them at birth.

    The Mo(n)gols, whether of the Persian (Eranee) sect of Sheeahs,
    or the Turkish (Tooranee) sect of Soonnees, have placed before,
    or after, their personal and paternal names, one or other of the
    following surnames: Aga ("lord"), Beg ("lord"), Meerza, and
    Mo(n)gol. But in Persia both Sayeds and Sheikhs assume, instead
    of their proper patronymics, the surname of Aga, or Beg, or
    Mo(n)gol; while Mo(n)gols whose mothers are Sayeds are given the
    pre, or post, surname of Meerza.

    The Pathans have the surname Khan ("lord") placed invariably
    after their personal and paternal names. But Sayeds and Sheikhs
    often have the word Khan placed after their class, personal, and
    paternal names--not, however, as a surname, but as a
    complimentary or substantial title, pure and simple.

    Again, all classes of _muslimin_, and the Hindoos also, and even
    the Parsees, are in the habit of adding all sorts of
    complimentary and substantial titles both before and after their
    names. How, then, is it possible to apply any one rightly
    reasoned rule to the indexing of such names, or any but the
    arbitrary rule of thumb:--to index them in the order in which
    the bearer of them places them in his signature to letters,
    cheques, and other documents? This gets over all the
    embarrassing difficulties created by the paraphernalia of a
    man's official designations, complimentary--or substantial,
    titles, etc. Take, for example, this transcript of a
    hypothetical Hindoo official's visiting-card:

        "Dewan Sahib" (official and courtesy titles).

        "Rajashri" (special social title).

        "A." (personal name).

        "B." (paternal name).

        "Z." (family or true surname).

    No Englishman unfamiliar with the etiquettes of Indian personal
    nomenclature could possibly index such a card as this with
    intelligent correctness. But this Hindoo gentleman would simply
    sign himself in a private letter, "A. B. Z." (_i.e._ A., the son
    of B., of the clan of Z.), and so he should be indexed.

    The personal names of _muslimin_ also have for the most part an
    astronomical association, being generally selected from those
    beginning with the initial or finial letter of the name of the
    planet ruling the day on which the child (_i.e._ a son) is born.

    I presume that what I have here said of the methods of naming
    the Indian Mussulmans also applies to the _muslimin_ of Persia
    and Central Asia and Turkey and Arabia; but beyond these
    countries I have no information as to the methods of naming
    people in the other Oriental Indies, such as Ceylon, Burmah,
    China, and Japan.

    As to the transliteration of Oriental personal names, I always
    accept that followed by the person bearing them.

    I have put the matter as briefly as possible, and almost too
    briefly for absolute accuracy of expression; and it will be
    noted I say nothing of local exceptions to the general rule
    regulating Hindoo names of persons; and, again, nothing of
    female names, Hindoo, Mussulmanee, or Parsee.

                                                GEORGE BIRDWOOD.
    _January 9, 1902._

                             [Illustration]




                             [Illustration]

                              CHAPTER VII.

                      HOW TO SET ABOUT THE INDEX.

    "And thus by God's assistance we have finished our Table.
    Miraculous almost was the execution done by David on the
    Amalekites who saved neither man nor woman alive to bring
    tidings to Gath. I cannot promise such exactness in our Index,
    that no name hath escaped our enquiry: some few, perchance,
    hardly slipping by, may tell tales against us. This I profess, I
    have not, in the language of some modern quartermaster, wilfully
    burnt towns, and purposely omitted them; and hope that such as
    have escaped our discovering, will only upon examination appear
    either not generally agreed on, by authors, for proper names, or
    else by proportion falling without the bounds of Palestine, Soli
    Deo gloria."--THOMAS FULLER.


[Illustration: R]ules are needed for index making in order to obtain
uniformity, but the mode of working must to a large extent be left to
the indexer. Most of us have our own favourite ways of doing things, and
it is therefore absurd to dictate to others how to set to work. If we
employ any one to do a certain work, we are entitled to expect it to be
well done; but we ought to allow the worker to adopt his own mode of
work. Some men will insist not only on the work being well done, but
also upon their way of doing it. This takes the spirit out of the
worker, and is therefore most unwise.

Still, I have found that those who are unaccustomed to index work are
anxious to be informed how to proceed. The following notes are therefore
only intended as hints for the use of those who wish for them, and need
not be acted upon if the reader has a plan that he finds better suited
for his purpose. Two essentially different kinds of index must be
considered first: (1) There is the index which is always growing; and
(2) there is the index that is made at one time, and is printed
immediately it is ready for the press. The same course of procedure will
not be suitable for both these classes.

1. Indexes to commonplace books belong to this category. It has been
usual here to leave a few pages blank for the index, and to arrange the
entries in strict alphabetical order under the first letters and then
under the first vowel following a consonant, or the second, when the
initial is a vowel. This is highly inconvenient and confusing,
especially when words without a second vowel, as _Ash_ and _Epps_, are
placed at the head of each letter, _Ash_ coming before _Adam_ and
_Abel_, and _Epps_ before _Ebenezer_. It is better to spare a few more
pages for the index, and plan the alphabet out so that the entries may
come in their correct alphabetical order. Unfortunately the blank index
is usually set out according to this absurd vowel system. Commonplace
books are now, however, very much out of fashion. A better system of
note-keeping is to use paper of a uniform size, to write each distinct
note on a separate sheet of paper, and to fasten the slips of paper
together by means of clips. If this plan is adopted, the notes are much
more easily consulted, and they can be rearranged as often as is
necessary. Now the index can be made on cards, or a special
alphabeticised[19] book can be set aside for the purpose. Cards of a
uniform size, kept in trays or boxes, are very convenient for the
purpose of making an ever-growing index. You can make a general index in
one alphabet, and when you have any special subject on hand, you can
choose out the particular cards connected with that subject, and arrange
them in a distinct alphabet. When the distinct alphabet is no longer
required, the cards can be rearranged in the general alphabet. Cards are
unquestionably the most convenient for an index that is ever changing in
volume and in form. Rearrangement can be made without the trouble of
re-writing the entries.

  [19] Some may consider this a monstrous word; but it conveys a
       convenient description of blank books with the alphabet
       marked on the leaves of the book either cut in or with
       tablets projecting from the margin.

2. For an index which is made straight off at one time, and sent to the
printer when finished, foolscap paper is probably the most convenient to
use. The pages as written upon can be numbered, and this will relieve
the mind of the indexer of fear that any of these should be lost. The
numbering will serve till the time comes for the index to be cut up and
arranged.

Some indexers use separate slips of a uniform size, or cards, with a
single entry on each slip. Although this plan has the advantage that you
can keep your index in alphabetical order as you go along, which is
sometimes convenient for reference, it is, on the whole, a cumbersome
one for an index, although it is almost essential for a catalogue.

In the present day when paper is so cheap, it is well to use fresh
sheets all of the same size--either quarto post or foolscap. Some
persons are so absurdly economical as to use the blank sides of used
paper, such as envelopes, etc., so that their manuscript is of all sizes
and will never range. It is necessary to warn such persons that they
lose more time by the inconvenient form of their paper than they gain by
not buying new material.

In general practice the most convenient plan is to make your index
straight on, using the paper you have chosen. Another plan is to use a
portfolio of parchment with an alphabet cut on the leaves, and with
guards to receive several leaves of foolscap under each letter. Thus
every entry can be written at once in first letters. Where there are
many large headings this is very convenient, and time is saved by
entering the various references on the same folio without the constant
repetition of the same heading. Possibly the most convenient method is
to unite the two plans. Those references which we know to belong to
large headings can be entered on the folios in the alphabetical
guard-book, and the rest can be written straight through on the separate
leaves.

Before commencing his work, the indexer must think out the plan and the
kind of index he is to produce; he will then consider how he is to draw
out the references.

Whatever system is adopted, it is well to bear in mind that the indexer
should obtain some knowledge of the book he is about to index before he
sets to work. The following remarks by Lord Thring may be applied to
other subjects than law:

    "A complete knowledge of the whole _law_ is required before he
    begins to make the index, for until he can look down on the
    entire field of law before him, he cannot possibly judge of the
    proper arrangement of the headings or of the relative importance
    of the various provisions."

During his work the indexer must constantly ask himself what it is for
which the consulter is likely to seek. The author frequently uses
periphrases to escape from the repetition of the same fact in the same
form, but these periphrases will give little information when inserted
as headings in an index; and it is in this point of selecting the best
catchword that the good indexer will show his superiority over the
commonplace worker.

This paramount characteristic of the good indexer is by no means an easy
one to acquire. When the indexer is absorbed in the work upon which he
is working, he takes for granted much with which the consulter coming
fresh to the subject is not familiar. The want of this characteristic is
most marked in the case of the bad indexer.

In printing references to the entries in an index it is important to
make a distinction between the volume and the page; this is done best by
printing the number of the volumes in Roman letters and the page in
Arabic numerals. When, however, the volumes are numerous, the Roman
letters become cumbersome, and mistakes are apt to occur, so that one is
forced to use Arabic numerals; and in order to distinguish between
volume and page, the numbers of the volumes must be printed in solid
black type.

When a book is often reprinted in different forms it would be well to
refer to chapters and paragraphs, so that the same index would do for
all editions. The paragraphs in Dr. Jessopp's edition of North's _Lives
of the Norths_ are numbered, but they are not numbered throughout. The
references are very confusing and require a key. Thus, P stands for
Preface; F for Life of the Lord Keeper; D, Life of Dudley; J, Life of
Dr. John; R, Autobiography of Roger, and also Notes; R L, Letters from
Lady North; R I, Letters from Roger North; and S, Supplementary. In the
Letters the references are to pages and not to paragraphs. With such a
complicated system, one is tempted to leave the index severely alone.
This is the more annoying in that the index is not a long one, and the
pages might have been inserted without any great trouble.

Much confusion has been caused by reprinting an index for one edition in
a later one without alteration. An instance may be given by citing the
reprint of Whitelock's _Memorials_, published at the University Press,
Oxford, in 1853. The original edition is in one volume folio (1682,
reprinted 1732), and the new edition is in four volumes octavo. But to
save expense the old index was printed to the new book. The difficulty
was in part got over by giving the pages of the 1732 edition in the
margin; but as may be imagined, it is a most troublesome business to
find anything by this means. Moreover, the old index is not a good one,
but thoroughly bad, with all the old misprints retained in the new
edition. As a specimen of the extreme inaccuracy of the compilation, it
may be mentioned that under one heading of thirty-four entries Mr.
Edward Peacock detected seven blunders. Although Mr. Peacock had no
statistics of the other entries, his experience led him to believe that
if any heading were taken at random, about one in four of the entries
would be found to be misprinted.

In the case of a large index it is necessary to take into consideration
the greatly increased work connected with arrangement. The amount of
this may be said to increase in geometrical rather than in arithmetical
progression. When the indexer comes to the last page of a great book he
rejoices to have finished his work; but he will find by experience, when
he calculates the arrangement of his materials, that he has scarcely
done more than half of what is before him.

If cards or separate slips are used, these will only need to be arranged
for the press; but if sheets of paper have been, written upon, these
will have to be cut up. There is little to be said about this, but it is
worth giving the hint that much time is saved if shears or large
scissors are used, so that the whole width of paper may be severed in
two cuts.

In the case of a small index there is little difficulty with material,
for it can be arranged at once into first letters, and when the table is
cleared of the slips these can be placed in the pages of an ordinary
book to keep them distinct, and can then be sorted in perfect alphabet
and pasted down. In the case of a large index it will be necessary to
place the slips in a safer place. Large envelopes are useful receptacles
for first letters; and when the slips are placed in them, the indexer
will feel at ease and sure that none will be lost.

It is well to go through the whole of the envelopes of first letters and
sort the slips into second and third letters before the pasting is
commenced, so that you may know that the order is correct, or make such
alterations as are necessary before it is too late. The final perfect
alphabetical arrangement can be made when the slips are placed on the
table ready to be pasted.

The sorting of slips into alphabetical order seems a simple matter which
scarcely needs any particular directions; still such have been made.

The late Mr. Charles F. Blackburn, who had had a considerable
experience, gave some instruction for sorting slips in his _Hints on
Catalogue Titles_ (1884). He wrote:

    "Having never seen in print any directions for putting titles
    into alphabetical order, I venture to describe the system I have
    been accustomed to use. First sort the entire heap into six
    heaps, which will lie before you thus:

        A--D  E--H  I--M
        N--R   S    T--Z.

    Then take the heap A--D and sort it into its component letters,
    after which each letter can be brought into shape by use of the
    plan first applied to the whole alphabet. It is best to go on
    with the second process until you have the whole alphabet in
    separate letters, because if you brought A, for example, into
    its component parts and put them into alphabetical order, you
    might not impossibly find some A's among the later letters--one
    of the inevitable accidents of sorting quickly. With this hint
    or two the young cataloguer will easily find his way; and
    various devices for doing this or that more handily are sure to
    suggest themselves in the course of practice. The great thing is
    to be started."

The latter part of this extract is good advice, but I think it is a
mistake to make two operations of the sorting in first letters, for it
can be done quite easily in one.

The following suggestion made by Mr. Blackburn is a good one, and is
likely to save the very possible mixture of some of the heaps:

    "In my own practice I have got into a way of letting the slips
    fall on the table at an angle of forty-five degrees. Then, if
    the accumulation of titles should cause the heaps to slide, they
    will run into one another distinct, so that they can be
    separated instantly without sorting afresh."

I have never myself found any difficulty in sorting out into first
letters at one time, and it soon becomes easy to place the slips in
their proper heaps without any thought. Mr. F. B. Perkins, of the Boston
Public Library, however, in his paper on "Book Indexes" gives some good
directions which are worth quoting here:

    "Next alphabet them by initial letters. This process is usually
    best done by using a diagram or imaginary frame of five rows of
    five letters each, on which to put the titles at this first
    handling. The following arrangement of printers' dashes will
    show what I mean. (The letters placed at the left hand of the
    first row and right hand of the last indicate well enough where
    the rest belong.)

        A ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- U
        B ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- V
        C ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- W
        D ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- X
        E ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- YZ."[20]

      [20] _Public Libraries in the United States._ Special Report.
           Part I., 1876, p. 730.

When the alphabetical arrangement is completed so far as the indexer
considers it necessary for his purpose, it is time to think of the
pasting down of the slips. This can be done in several ways, and the
operator will doubtless choose that which suits him best. As already
remarked, men will always find out the way most agreeable to themselves,
and it is unwise to insist on others following our way in preference to
their own.

The human mind is capable of interesting itself in almost anything it
may undertake; but indexing cannot be other than hard work, and it is
unfair to make it harder by fixing unnecessary limits. The worker is
always happier at his work if he is allowed to do it in his own way.

The first thing to settle is as to the paper upon which the index is to
be pasted. A very large-sized paper is inconvenient, and foolscap or
quarto is the best for constant handling,--all the pages should be of
exactly the same size. Sometimes it is necessary to have a small margin,
but generally the width of the paper used for the index should be
followed. There is no greater mistake than to study economy in the use
of paper for pasting on. Some persons have facilities for the use of
wastepaper that has been printed on on one side, and, not having been
used, is in good order and of equal size. Some persons cut up
newspapers, but this is a practice not to be recommended, not only on
account of the print, but because the paper is generally so abominably
bad and tearable. If the wastepaper referred to above is not within
reach, it is well to buy a good printing-paper, which can be cut into
the size required. There are, however, many cheap papers already
machine-cut into the size required, which can easily be obtained.

Some with the love of saving strong upon them cut up newspapers into
lengths of about four inches wide, and paste the slips upon these, with
the result that all the ragged ends give continual trouble, and are apt
to be torn away. Of all savings, this is the most ill-advised.

Although the "copy" is to be printed from at once, and will soon become
useless, it is a great comfort to have material that is convenient to
handle while it is required. Some thought may also be given to the
compositor, whose life will be made a burden to him if you send him
"copy" with all the ends loose. It is also well to keep the pages as
flat as possible, so that a heap of these do not wobble about, but keep
together smooth and tidy.

Sometimes it may be desirable to paste only on half the paper, so as to
have room for additional entries. If this is done, the side must be
altered periodically, or the pages will slip about and give endless
trouble.

When the index is in course of arrangement the greatest care must be
taken that none of the slips are lost, for such a loss is almost
irreparable--first because you do not know when a slip goes astray; and
even if you do know of your loss it is almost impossible to remedy it,
as you have no clue to the place from which the slip came.

There will always be anxiety to the indexer while his work is being cut
up and sorted. A breeze from a window when a door is opened may blow
some of his slips away. Too many of the slips should not be allowed on
the table at one time, and the indexer will feel the greatest comfort
when he knows that his slips are safely reposing in their several
envelopes. All queries should also be kept in envelopes, and each
envelope should be inscribed with a proper description of its contents.
When the slips are pasted down they are safe--that is if they have been
affixed securely to the paper.

Having made these general observations, we may now proceed to consider
how to paste. It seems a very simple matter, that requires no
directions; but even here a few remarks may not be out of place.

When your paper is ready in a pile of about fifty pages, each page
numbered in its proper sequence, you can proceed to work. For the
purpose of laying down slips on uniform pages at one time, paste is the
only satisfactory material. Gum will only be used by the inexperienced.
It cannot be used satisfactorily on large surfaces, like paste, and when
it oozes up between the slips it is stickier and does more damage in
fixing the pages together than paste does. You might as well fix
paperhangings on your walls with gum.

As to paste, if you have a long job on hand it is better to have it made
at home, of a good consistency, but not too thick. It ought to run
freely from the brush. A good cook will make good paste, but if you are
specially particular you can make it yourself. If you require it to last
for any time, you must add a little alum; but when you have a big index
before you, you will use a bowl of paste in an evening, and there is
therefore no question as to keeping.

"Stickphast" is a very good material; it sticks well and keeps well, and
it is an excellent adjunct to the writing-table, but it is not suitable
for pasting down a long index. It is too dear, it is too thick, and it
is too lumpy. If the paste is made at home, it need not be lumpy; and
lumps, when you are pasting, are irritating to the last degree.

The paper and the paste being ready, with a fair-sized brush to spread
the paste, we come to consider how best to proceed with the work in
hand. You require a good-sized table,--a large board on tressels in an
empty room is the best, but a dining-table will serve. At the extreme
right of the table you place the batch of paper upon which you are about
to paste, and then sort your slips in perfect order, ranging them in
columns from right to left. The object of thus going backwards is to
save you from passing over several columns as you take the slips off the
table, and, instead, going straight on. You can push your batch of paper
on as the various columns successively disappear. More slips should not
be set out than you can paste at one sitting, as it is not well to leave
the slips loose on the table. Of course, you can paste from the left
side if you wish, and then the columns will range from left to right;
but this is not so convenient for continued arrangement of the columns
of slips as you require them.

There are more ways than one in placing the paste upon the paper; the
most usual way is to paste down the two sides of the paper just the
width of the slips, and some add a stroke down the middle. Another way
is to put a plentiful supply of paste on a page or board, and then to
place the back of each slip upon this. If you place your fingers on the
two ends and press them towards the middle, the slip will be ready to be
placed in its proper position, having taken up just sufficient paste. A
still different plan is to paste the board or paper as in the previous
case, and then place the face of the whole page on this. You then take
it off, and, placing the dry side on the batch of paper, proceed to
affix the slips to it. The advantage of the two last processes is that
the paper is not so wet as in the first-mentioned plan, and in
consequence the paper does not curl so much, but lies flatter. In the
first place the sheets must be set out separately on the floor to dry,
so that they may not stick together, but this is not so necessary in the
two latter processes.

Some indexers strongly object to pasting. This was the case with Mr. E.
H. Malcolm, who wrote thus to _Notes and Queries_:

    "I long ago discovered the cause of imperfections in my own
    work. It was the 'cutting into slips' and 'laying down'
    processes. The fact is you cannot be sure of preserving the
    cuttings or slips, if very numerous; they are almost certain to
    get mixed or lost, or elude you somehow. My remedy is this. I
    now take cheap notepaper and write one entry only on each leaf.
    Having compiled my index thus from A to Z, I arrange my slips
    and manipulate them as I would a pack of cards, although
    shuffling only for the purpose of getting the arrangement of the
    letters right. Thus I save myself all the labour and trouble of
    pasting or laying down the slips in analytical order. I do not
    mind a little extra expenditure of paper by only entering one
    item on every slip, for I am compensated for the appearance of
    bulk by finding that I have secured order and arrangement free
    from the consequences of a finical arrangement of the slips and
    a dirty and tiresome labour of pasting down."[21]

      [21] 5th S., vi. 114 (1876).

As already pointed out in these pages, Mr. Malcolm is quite right
respecting slips for a growing index; but when it comes to sending the
"copy" to the printer the case is different. Here there is more safety
in the pasted down slips, which are less likely to be lost than the
loose ones even when numbered.

As you proceed in your work you may wish to know how far your index
agrees with other indexes in its proportion of letters, and to calculate
what proportion of the whole you have already done.

Some calculations as to the relative extent of the different letters
have been made. Thus B is the largest letter in an index of proper
names, but loses its pre-eminence in an index of subjects; and S takes
high rank in both classes.

Mr. F. A. Curtis,[22] of the Eagle Insurance Office, made in 1858 a
calculation of the relative proportions of the different letters of the
alphabet in respect to proper names. He described his object in a letter
entitled, "On the Best Method of Constructing an Index." He wrote that,
having had occasion to construct an index of the lives assured in the
"Eagle" Company, he had drawn up a few observations upon the subject.
"The requirements of an index and the proportions of its several parts
are the two principal questions to be considered. Under the first head
it may be observed that the index of a company upon a large scale should
afford as much abstract information as possible. Those who refer to it
do so with different views, for the objects of their inquiry must
necessarily vary with their respective duties. It is therefore desirable
that the index should be constructed with a view to provide for the
wants of each person, so far, at least, as to enable him to obtain
information in the most direct way; and it will be proper to insert in
the index particulars some of which do not usually find a place in such
a book. Let it be supposed that an individual signing his name 'J.
Smith' inquires about the bonus, premium, or assignment, etc., of his
policy, without stating either number, date, or amount. This is not an
unusual case, and it will serve to illustrate my meaning by showing the
nature of the difficulties which have to be encountered. J. may stand
for John, James, Joseph, etc. There will probably be many of each kind
in connection with the like surname, and it would be very difficult to
discover, without a tedious investigation, to which policy J. Smith
refers, unless the individuality of each person recorded in the index
under that name be distinctly shown. The 'locality' of the assurance
might be adopted as a mark of distinction; and we should in many
instances be able to fix upon the right name by simply comparing the
address of the writer with the place where the policy was effected."

  [22] _Assurance Magazine_, vol. viii., 1860, pp. 54-7.

This is a most valuable suggestion to all indexers. Many persons, to
save trouble at the time, write initials instead of full Christian
names. It should be a rule always to write these in full. When the index
comes to be printed, the Christian names can be contracted if it is
necessary to save space. The most important matter in the arrangement of
an index is to avoid the confusion of two persons as one, and the
possibility of making this blunder is greatly increased by the use of
initials instead of full names. In the _British Museum Catalogue_ it has
been found necessary in many cases to add particulars to distinguish
between men with the same names.

Mr. Curtis goes on to say:

    "With regard to the second part of this subject--_i.e._ the
    proportions of the several parts of the index--I may observe
    that the most useful mode of division appears to me to be that
    which is adopted by many offices--namely, to classify the
    surname under its first letter, and to subdivide according to
    the first vowel thereafter, adopting the first subdivision for
    such names as 'Ash,' 'Epps,' etc., which have no succeeding
    vowel."

This, however, is a very unnatural arrangement, and has been, I believe,
very generally given up. It is therefore unnecessary to refer further to
Mr. Curtis's calculations of the proportions of the vowels in the
subdivisions. Calculations can be made for the subdivision of the
complete alphabet with a better result. Of course, in the case of
initial vowels the following consonants have most to be considered, and
in initial consonants the following vowels. Mr. Curtis's calculations
respecting the first letters of surnames are of much value. He used the
commercial lists of the _Post Office London Directory_, and compared
them with Liverpool, Hull, Manchester, Sheffield, Birmingham, and
Bristol directories, and with three lists of different assurance
companies; and after making his calculations from nearly 233,000
surnames, he found the total average very similar in its result. Mr.
William Davis made similar calculations from the _Clergy List_, which
came out much the same. These he contributed to _Notes and Queries_,[23]
and subsequently he made a further calculation from French names.[24]

  [23] 2nd S., vi. 496.

  [24] 3rd S., iv. 371.

I have united these results in one table as follows:

           MR. CURTIS.   CLERGY LIST.   FRENCH NAMES.
    A         3·1            3·1            2·9
    B        10·9           11·3           11·5
    C         8·5            7·9            9·2
    D         4·3            4·7           10·7
    E         2·4            2·5            0·9
    F         3·6            3·1            3·9
    G         5·1            4·6            7·4
    H         8·6            9·3            3·5
    I, J      3·2            3·5            2·4
    K         2·0            1·8            6·4
    L         4·7            4·3           10·8
    M         6·7            6·9            8·8
    N         2·0            1·6            1·2
    O         1·0            1·1            0·6
    P         5·9            6·1            6·7
    Q         0·2            0·0            0·3
    R         4·6            4·4            5·3
    S         9·7            7·7            4·3
    T         4·0            4·4            3·3
    U, V      1·0            1·3            3·2
    W         7·9            8·3            0·8
    X         0·0            0·0            0·0
    Y         0·5            0·4            0·1
    Z         0·1            0·0            0·0

It will be noticed that B is strongest in all three, and C is fairly
equal. S is smaller in French names, but probably would be much larger
in German names. H and W are also much smaller in French, while D and L
are much larger. The preponderance of the latter letters is of course
caused by the large number of names beginning with _De_ and _La_.

Indexes are not confined to proper names, and therefore it is necessary
to add some calculations as to the proportions of the several letters in
indexes of subjects. The following table is formed from three large
indexes, each different in character. I. represents Gough's _Index to
the Publications of the Parker Society_, which may be taken as a very
good standard index. The subjects are very varied, and there are no
specially long headings; it also contains proper names as well as
subjects. II. represents an index of subjects in Civil Engineering which
contains a good number of large headings. III. represents the index to
the Minutes of a public board, and also contains a considerable
proportion of large headings. It will be seen that the numbers vary so
considerably as to be of very little practical value. The percentages
are, I think, interesting, but they show conclusively that indexes will
vary so considerably that in order to obtain a satisfactory percentage a
separate calculation will have to be made in each case. Large headings
will vitiate any average; in fact, I have lately had to do with an index
in which R was the largest letter, on account of such extensive headings
as _Railways_ and _Roads_.

One striking point in the averages is that B is found to be displaced
from the pre-eminent position it occupies in the percentages of proper
names.

           I.      II.    III.
    A    10·67    2·63    5·58
    B     6·94    5·07    6·28
    C    15·63    8·26    8·84
    D     2·48    4·50    4·65
    E     3·23    6·94   11·39
    F     2·85    3·38    1·63
    G     4·34    3·56    1·86
    H     4·34    3·19    2·09
    I     1·74    2·72    1·39
    J     3·97    0·14    0·46
    K     0·74    0·05    0·23
    L     5·58    4·97   15·12
    M     5·71    5·82    7·67
    N     1·37    0·19    0·93
    O     1·74    1·31    1·63
    P     9·31    6·75    7·67
    Q     0·12    0·94    0·47
    R     2·48   12·38    8·14
    S     8·44   13·32    8·14
    T     3·60    5·72    1·40
    U     0·50    0·05    0·47
    V     0·99    0·61    2·33
    W     2·61    7·41    1·51
    X     0·03    0·00    0·00
    Y     0·22    0·00    0·00
    Z     0·37    0·09    0·06
        ------  ------   ------
       100·00   100·00   100·00

When the whole index is pasted down it is not yet ready for the printer,
as it will require to be marked for the instruction of the compositor.
The printer will have general instructions as to the kind of type to be
used and the plan to be adopted, but it will be necessary to mark out
those words that are not to be repeated and to insert lines indicating
repetition. There are also sure to be little alterations in wording,
necessitated by the coming together of the slips, which could not be
foreseen when the slips were first written out.

In a large work it is probable that your employers are importunate for
"copy," and you will be urged to send this to the printer as you have it
ready. If possible, it should be kept to the end, so that you may look
over it as a whole, and so see that the same subjects are not in more
places than one. You will probably have to make modifications in your
plan as you go along, and this may cause difficulties which you will now
be able to set right.

Much of the value of an index depends upon the mode in which it is
printed, and every endeavour should be made to set it out with
clearness. It was not the practice in old indexes to bring the indexed
word to the front, but to leave it in its place in the sentence, so that
the alphabetical order was not made perceptible to the eye.

There is a great deal to arrange in preparing for the press. Lines of
repetition are often a source of blundering, specimens of which have
already been given.

The dash should not be too long, and very often space is saved and
greater clearness is obtained by putting the general heading on a line
by itself, and slightly indenting the following entries.

Black type for headings and for the references to volume and page add
much to the clearness of an index, but some persons have a decided
objection to the spottiness that is thus given to the page.

Tastes differ so much in respect to printing that it is not possible to
indicate the best style to be adopted, and so each must choose for
himself. One point, however, is of the greatest importance, and that is
where a heading is continued over leaf it should be repeated with the
addition of _continued_ at the end of the heading. It is not unusual in
such cases to see the dash used at the top of the page, which is absurd.

When the index has been put into print, the indexer has still to correct
the press, and this is not always an easy matter, as the printer is
scarcely likely to have understood all the necessarily elaborate and
complicated marks used in preparing for the press. It will therefore
still be some time before the end is in sight, and probably the indexer
will see cause to agree with my statement on a former page, that in the
case of a large index, when the indexing of the book itself is
completed, little more than half of the total work is done.

                             [Illustration]




                             [Illustration]

                             CHAPTER VIII.

                      GENERAL OR UNIVERSAL INDEX.

    "When Baillet, the learned author of the _Jugemens des Savans_,
    was appointed by M. de Lamoignon keeper of the exquisite library
    collected by that nobleman, he set to work to compile an index
    of the contents of all the books contained in it, and this he is
    said to have completed in August, 1682. After this date,
    however, the Index continued to grow, and it extended to
    thirty-two folio volumes, all written by Baillet's own hand."


[Illustration: A]s knowledge increases and books and magazines gather in
number, the need for many indexes becomes daily more evident. We often
are certain that something has been written on a subject in which we are
interested, but in vain we seek for a clue to it. We want a key to all
this ever-increasing literature.

As long ago as 1842 the late Thomas Watts, of the British Museum, one of
the most learned and all-knowing of librarians, spoke to the late Dr.
Greenhill of Hastings on the need for the formation of an Index Society.
This date I give on the authority of Dr. Greenhill. Mr. Watts was a
perfect index in himself, and few inquirers sought information from him
which his fully stored mind was not able to supply; and he was not
jealous of the printed index, as some authorities are. Twelve years
after--in 1854--an announcement was made in _Notes and Queries_ of the
projected formation of a "Society for the Formation of a General
Literary Index." In the 2nd Series, vol. i., p. 486, the late Mr. Thomas
Jones, who signed himself "Bibliothecar. Chetham.," commenced a series
of articles, which he continued for several years, as a contribution to
this general index; but nothing more was heard of the society. Inquiries
were made in various numbers of _Notes and Queries_, but no response was
obtained. In 1876 a contributor to the same periodical, signing himself
"A. H.," proposed the formation of a staff of index compilers. In 1874
the late Professor Stanley Jevons published his _Principles of Science_.
In the chapter on Classification he enlarged on the value of indexes,
and added:

    "The time will perhaps come when our views upon this subject
    will be extended, and either Government or some public society
    will undertake the systematic cataloguing and indexing of masses
    of historical and scientific information, which are now almost
    closed against inquiry" (1st ed., vol. ii., p. 405; 2nd ed., p.
    718).

In the following year Mr. Edward Solly and I, without having then seen
this passage, consulted as to the possibility of starting an Index
Society, but postponed the actual carrying out of the scheme for a time.
In July of this same year, 1875, Mr. J. Ashton Cross argued in a
pamphlet that a universal index might be formed by co-operation through
a clearing-house, and would pay if published in separate parts. In
September, 1877, some letters by Mr. W. J. Thoms, who signed himself "A
Lover of Indexes," were published in the _Pall Mall Gazette_, in which
the foundation of an Index Society was strongly urged. In October, 1877,
Mr. Cross read a paper before the Conference of Librarians, which was a
revival of the scheme previously suggested. Mr. Robert Harrison, late
Secretary of the London Library, in a report of the Conference of
Librarians published in the _Athenæum_ for October 13th, 1877, wrote:

    "Could not a permanent Index Society be founded with the support
    of voluntary contributions of money as well as of subject
    matter? In this way a regular staff could be set to work, under
    competent direction, and could be kept steadily at work until
    its performances became so generally known and so useful as to
    enable it to stand alone and be self-supporting. Many readers
    would readily jot down the name of any new subject they met with
    in the book before them, and the page on which it occurs, and
    forward their notes to be sorted and arranged by any society
    that would undertake the work."

Mr. Justin Winsor, the late distinguished librarian of Harvard
University, writing to the _Athenæum_, said:

    "We have been in America striving for years to get some
    organised body to undertake this very work."

Following on all this correspondence, the Index Society was founded; but
after doing some useful work it was amalgamated with the Index Library
founded by Mr. Phillimore, having failed from want of popular support.
This want of permanent success was probably owing to its aim being too
general. Those who were interested in one class of index cared little
for indexes which were quite different in subject.

I fear that the interest of the public in the production of indexes
(which is considerable) does not go to the length of willingness to pay
for these indexes, which from the fewness of those who care for these
helps must always be expensive. When suggestions were made in _Notes and
Queries_ for the compilation and publication of certain needed indexes,
Mr. J. Cuthbert Welch wrote that the editor of a journal offered to
publish an index if he could obtain sufficient subscribers. Respecting
this offer, the publisher said, "Altogether I had six offers to take one
copy each." This rebuff caused Mr. Welch to say, "Is it not rather that
people are not energetic to buy such indexes than that publishers are
not energetic enough to issue them?"[25]

  [25] 8th S., i. 364.

There is still a great want for indexes of history and biography, and it
is probable that if the objects of the Index Society had been confined
to these it might have been more successful. In November, 1878, Mr.
Edward Solly wrote a letter to me in which he sketched out a very
important scheme for a biographical index which would be of the greatest
value. He wrote:

    "I do not think the Index Society can take up any subject of
    greater utility, or one more likely to be of service to the
    general public as well as students, than an Index of
    Biographies. An entire index of all known lives would obviously
    be much too large an undertaking; we can only attempt a part of
    the subject. Probably in the first instance we should do well to
    try and form an index of British lives; such a work would I
    think, if tolerably complete, certainly fill at least ten large
    octavo volumes.

    "The work might be considerably diminished in bulk if we were to
    determine to leave out all names now to be found in certain
    standard works such as Chalmers' Biographical Dictionary. It is
    evident, however, that to do this would greatly diminish the
    value of our index, and would cause us to put aside hundreds of
    memoranda which it is most important to index, I mean references
    to more recent notes, memoirs, letters and anecdotes, which are
    to be met with in journals and lives, and which often throw new
    and important light on older published Biographies.

    "It is on account of these difficulties that I would propose
    that we endeavour to undertake an index of Biographical
    references of persons who have died in a certain given
    period--say 1800-1825, or 1800-1850, or perhaps 1750-1800.

    "With a view to this I should like to see lists made of all
    Biographical matters in such books as the Gentleman's Magazine,
    European Magazine, Monthly Magazine, Anti-Jacobin Magazine, etc.
    Also such books as the Annual Necrology, Public Characters,
    Living Authors, etc., and thirdly of references to Biographical
    Memoranda dispersed throughout Lives and Memoirs such as
    'Kilvert's Memoirs,' I mean books in which no one from the title
    would expect to find such information."

It will be seen that such an index as is here sketched would be an
inestimable help to the student. It would form a useful supplement to
the _Dictionary of National Biography_, for it must be remembered that
such an index would contain a majority of references to men and women
whose claims to distinction or notoriety do not attain to the standard
set up by the promoters of that grand work. Possibly, if such an index
was undertaken by co-operation as an object in itself, and not as one
among other subjects, it might be compiled in one alphabet instead of in
periods, which would make it much more valuable for reference. Naturally
the great advantage of periods is that, if left incomplete, what is
published (if it covers a period) will always be of value, while a
portion of the alphabet would be almost worthless.

The Rev. John E. B. Mayor has collected a great mass of biographical
references which are of much value. In an interesting communication on
his indexes he suggests the formation of a British Biographical Society
which might be called the Antony Wood Society.[26]

  [26] _Notes and Queries_, 5th S., xii. 511.

There is one project of the Index Society which has never been
undertaken, but which is still wanted as much as ever--_viz._ a general
or universal index. Some think this to be an impossibility, and that to
attempt its preparation is a waste of time. Those who hold this opinion
have not sufficient faith in the simplicity and usefulness of the
alphabet. Every one has notes and references of some kind, which are
useless if kept unarranged, but, if sorted into alphabetical order,
become valuable.

The object of the general index is just this, that anything, however
disconnected, can be placed there, and much that would otherwise be lost
will there find a resting-place. Always growing and never pretending to
be complete, the index will be useful to all, and its consulters will be
sure to find something worth their trouble, if not all they may require.

Some attempts have been made at compiling a general index, for what are
_Poole's Index_, _Index of Essays_, Q.P. Indexes, Hetherington's _Index
to the Periodicals of the World_, and _Indexes to "The Times,"_ but
contributions towards a universal index? Such a work as is here proposed
can scarcely be carried out unless Government aid is extended to it; but
surely the small amount of money that need be expended upon a sort of
general inquiry office would be well laid out!

A sort of skeleton index of universal information might be drawn up, and
this could be added to gradually, partly by specialised effort and
partly by the reception of any stray references of interest sent by
those who recognise that their notes would find a home. This could be
kept in a clearing-house and reference-room.

When the index had become of some importance, and was recognised as a
help to the inquirer, it could be printed. When published, it might be
interleaved, so that additions might be made which could be sent to the
office. Gradually the index would grow into a work of very considerable
importance.

One of the chief objections to index catalogues of public libraries is
that the same work is practically repeated by each library, while a
general index would be useful to all. Surely some arrangement might be
made by which the various libraries would contribute funds to the
central office and receive the indexes, which would serve their purpose
as well as those of all the other libraries!

Having said so much, it seems necessary to explain rather more fully
what the general index should contain and what should be omitted. To
explain it in a few words, it should be a sort of encyclopædia of
references rather than of direct information; but it should contain more
headings than any existing encyclopædia. Every one must have felt the
want of some book which would give information or references on a large
number of subjects that are constantly topics of ordinary conversation,
but are consistently ignored in the ordinary books of reference. On the
other hand, mere technical references should be omitted, because these
details would overload the work, and because specialists have their own
sources of information. It is the general information which every one is
supposed to possess that is so difficult to obtain.

In the first instance the groundwork of the index should be laid down
with care by an expert. All special bibliographies should be entered
under their subjects, both those published separately and those included
in other books. Various societies have published indexes. There are
those among the publications of the Index Society and many others. The
Bibliographical Society has published indexes to the German periodical
_Serapeum_ and to Dibdin's edition of Ames' and Herbert's _Typographical
Antiquities_; but very few persons know of these books.

The authorities of the British Museum have given students an immense
help by gathering separate indexes and bibliographies on various
subjects into the dwarf bookcases in the Reading-room. Here are a large
number of aids to knowledge of which the general reader would have known
nothing if they had not so obligingly been brought under his notice.[27]

[27] The late Professor Justin Winsor gave a list of indexes in
     his useful _Handbook for Readers_ (for the Boston Public
     Library); and I added a "Preliminary List of Indexes" to _What
     is an Index?_ London, 1879. Other lists have also been published
     by the British Museum, etc.

A large number of books contain special information of importance on
various subjects, the existence of which would never be guessed from the
titles. Attempts at general indexes of special subjects have been
published, such as F. S. Thomas's _Historical Notes_ (1509-1714), and
the main points of these should be included in the proposed General
Index.

When a good groundwork has been made, the index could be printed; and
doubtless, if this printed index was widely circulated, a large number
of helpers would speedily be found. Many persons know of places where
full information on some subject may be found, and would be glad to
place their collections where they would be helpful to others.

There can surely be no doubt that a general inquiry office with such an
ever-growing index and a library of printed indexes would be a boon not
only to the student, but to the general public. Every day the great
truth that keys to knowledge are more and more required is generally
appreciated.

As a groundwork for such a general index, selection could be made from
the books already mentioned; and from the index volumes of Watt's
_Bibliotheca Britannica_ (1824), which, with all its faults, is one of
the most valuable helps to bibliography, and the subject index of James
Darling's _Cyclopædia Bibliographica_ (1854-1859), many useful
references could be obtained. These two books are gradually getting out
of date, but information may be obtained from their pages which is not
easily to be obtained elsewhere.

In closing this subject, I feel that too great honour cannot be done to
the memory of W. F. Poole, who placed the world under great obligations
by the production of his _Index of Periodical Literature_. As far back
as 1848, when a student at Yale College, he published an _Index to
Subjects treated in the Reviews and other Periodicals_ (New York). In
1853 an improved edition was published as the _Index to Periodical
Literature_. When Mr. Poole attended the Library Conference at London in
1877 he expressed publicly his pleasure in seeing on the shelves of the
British Museum Library a copy of his first index, which he had not seen
for some years elsewhere. He realised that the work, if it were to be
continued, was too great an undertaking for one man, and he succeeded in
arranging for a co-operative index, which is continued now in several
supplements under the able superintendence of Mr. William I. Fletcher.

An _Index to the "Times"_ was started by J. Giddings in 1862-63, but not
continued. Later, Mr. S. Palmer commenced a _Quarterly Index_, which has
been continued forward to the present time, and also backward. In 1899
Bailey's _Annual Index to the "Times"_ came into being.

The indexing of a paper such as the _Times_ is a very arduous and
difficult undertaking. In consequence, these indexes cannot be
considered as models of what such works should be.

Mr. Corrie Leonard Thompson criticises in _Notes and Queries_ (7th S.,
x. 345) the arrangement of the headings of Palmer's _Index to the
"Times"_ severely, but not unfairly. He writes:

    "The following are instances of the absurdities which appear in
    the volume just issued (Oct.-Dec. 1842), and will serve to
    illustrate the system which has been adopted throughout the
    index:

    "In November, 1842, a floating chapel on the Severn was loosed
    from its moorings; this occurrence appears in the index under
    the heading, 'Disgraceful Act.' Again, referring to the dry
    weather that was prevailing at the time, the entry is, 'Present
    Dry Season.' Other references to the same subject are, however,
    to be found under the heading 'Weather,' which of course is
    correct.

    "A more marked example of carelessness or ignorance of the art
    of indexing, or both, is that of two women who were committed to
    Ruthin prison--one, Amelia Home for firing a pistol at a man
    named Roberts; the other, Jane Williams, for stealing a mare
    belonging to Robert Owen. This occurrence is entered under the
    letter R--'Rather uncommon for Females.' The chance of any one
    looking under Rather for an occurrence of this kind must be
    infinitesimal, to say the least of it; and so on. A storm at
    Saone-et-Loire is indexed under 'Fatal Storm,' and an account of
    the trial of a small boy for stealing a twopenny pie will be
    found under 'Atrocious Criminal.' A certain Jane Thomas was so
    overjoyed at seeing her mother waiting at the stage-door of a
    theatre that she died in her arms. The employment of capitals is
    most remarkable, as is also the arrangement of the words, 'Death
    of Jane Thomas in her Mother's Arms in Holborn at Joy in Seeing
    her parent at the Stage Door to Receive her.'

    "The errors pointed out in these examples, omitting the last
    instance, as well as the additional fault of indexing under
    adjectives which have no distinctive feature in them to guide
    the searcher, evidently arise from the fact that the simple
    heading of the newspaper article has been taken, without any
    attempt being made to discover the actual contents of such
    article."

As already stated on a previous page, it is most important to index the
articles in periodicals afresh, and not always to follow the heading of
the original. This is of course more particularly the case in respect to
newspapers, where the headings are drawn up to catch the reader's eye.
The same rule may be insisted on in respect to all indexing, and this is
so important that the restatement of it may well conclude this little
volume.

In making a general index of several volumes, always index the volumes
afresh, and do not be contented with using what has been done before. It
is always wiser to put 'new wine into new bottles.'




                             [Illustration]

                                 INDEX.


  Abecedarie as a synonym of index, 8.

  Acrostic as a motto for an index, 85.

  Adjectives, when to be used as catchwords, 151.
    ---- (substantival) as headings, 151.

  Allibone's _Dictionary of English Literature_ alluded to, 87.
    ---- the forty indexes, 155.

  Alphabet (One) for indexes, 134;
    order of the English alphabet, 135.

  Alphabetisation, Want of complete, in indexes, 65.

  Alphabets, Variety of, in indexes, 69.

  _Annual Register_, fourteen alphabets in the index, 70.

  Antonio (N.), value of his _Bibliotheca Hispana_, 88.
    ---- his quotation of the remark that an index should be made by
         the author of the book, 109.

  Appendix, objection to the plural appendices, 12.

  _Archæological Epistle to Dean Milles, not_ by Mason, but by
      Baynes, 82.

  Arrangement (Bad) in indexes, 64.

  _Athenæum (The)_, suggestion of an Index Society in 1877, 209.

  Athenæum library catalogue, index of subjects, 117, 124.

  _Athenian Oracle_, Index to, 30.

  Atterbury (Bishop), his connection with the attack upon Dr. Bentley,
    40.

  Authorities quoted or referred to to be indexed, 159.

  _Ayenbite of Inwyt_, table of contents to the book, 6.


  Baillet, his index to the books in the Lamoignon Library, 206.

  Baret's _Alvearie_, use of the words "index" and "table" in that
    book, 8.

  Baronius, noble index to his Annales _Ecclesiastici_, 89.

  Bartlett (John), concordance to Shakespeare, 120.

  Bayle, his opinion on the need of judgment in the compilation of an
    index, 132.

  Baynes (John), his terrible curse, 82.

  Bellenden (Mary) maligned in an index, 81.

  Bentham's _Works_, Good index to, by J. H. Burton, 102.

  Bentley's _Dissertation on the Epistle of Phalaris_, attack of the
    "Wits" upon this book and Dr. King's Index, 36.

  Best (Mr. Justice), his great mind, 157.

  Bible, Concordances to the, 119.

  "Bibliothecar. Chetham.," his contribution to a general index in
  _Notes and Queries_, 207.

  _Biglow Papers_, Humorous index to, 33.

  Biographical (British) Society suggested by the Rev. John E. B.
    Mayor, 214.

  _Biography, Dictionary of National_, plan of arranging peers under
    their surnames instead of their titles, 146.

  Birdwood's (Sir George) note "On the Indexing of the Names of Eastern
    People," 164.

  Blackburn (Charles F.), _Hints on Catalogue Titles_ quoted, 183.

  "Book Prices Current," General index to, 113.

  Boswell's _Life of Johnson_, Boswell's own index, 109.
    ---- Dr. Birkbeck Hill's admirable index to his edition, 105.

  Boyle (Hon. Charles), his attack upon Bentley, 36.
    ---- offended Atterbury, 40.

  "Boyle upon Bentley," 36.

  Boyle's (Hon. Robert) _Considerations touching Natural Philosophy_,
    table of contents called an index, 13.

  _British Association Reports_, index in six alphabets, 70.

  British Museum, collection of indexes in the Reading-room a great
    boon, 218.
    ---- proposed subject index to the catalogue of the library, 126.

  Bromley's (William) _Travels_, ill-natured index made to them by Dr.
    King, 44;
    his note on the attack made upon him, 46;
    his Jacobite leanings, 52;
    his portrait at Oxford, 52.

  Bruce's (John) edition of _Historie of Edward IV._, absurd filling
    up of initials J. C., 78.

  Brunet (G.) translates _White Knight_ as _Le Chevalier Blanc_, 77.

  Buckland (Dr.) said to be the author of a work _Sur les Ponts et
    Chaussées_, 77.

  Burton (Hill), _Book-Hunter_, allusion to the power in the hands of
    an indexer, 24.
    ---- his reference to Prynne's _Histrio-Mastix_, 20.
    ---- his index to Bentham's _Works_, 102.


  Calendar as a synonym of index, 7.

  Camden Society's publications, Proposed index to, 112.

  Campbell (Lady Charlotte) maligned in an index, 81.

  Campbell (Lord) proposed punishment for the publication of an
    indexless book, 82.
    ---- his confession, 83.

  Campkin (Henry), plea for index-makers, 92.

  _Canadian Journal_, bad index, 56.

  Capgrave's _Chronicle of England_, blunder in the index, 66.

  Cards or separate slips used for indexes, 182.

  Carlyle (Thomas), he denounces the putters-forth of indexless books,
    82, 91.
    ---- his reference to Prynne's _Histrio-Mastix_, 15.
    ---- his remarks on the want of indexes to the standard historical
         collections, 91.

  Catalogue as a synonym of index, 7.

  Catalogues, Indexes to, 123.
    ---- of libraries, Indexes to, 123.

  Chitty (E.), his supposed grudge against Justice Best, 157.

  _Christian Observer_, Index to, by Macaulay, 91.

  Cicero, his use of the word "index," 6, 8.

  Clark's (Perceval) index to Trevelyan's _Life of Macaulay_, 95.

  Clarke (Mrs. Cowden), her _Concordance to Shakespeare_, 120.

  Clarke (William) quoted, 118.

  Classification within the alphabet, Evils of, 58, 67.

  Cobbett's _Woodlands_ quoted, 72.

  Coke (Lord Chief Justice) an inaccurate man, 101.

  Commonplace books, Indexes to, 174.

  Concordances to the Bible, 119.

  Concordances to Shakespeare, 120.

  Contractions, dangers in filling them out, 78.

  _Corpus Christi Guild, York_, Incomplete index to _The Register_ of,
    122.

  Crestadoro's _Index to the Manchester Free Library Catalogue_, 125.

  Cross (J. Ashton), proposal for a universal index, 208, 209.

  Cross references not usually popular, 158.
    ---- curiosities of, 72.
    ---- want of, in indexes, 70.

  Cunningham (Mr.) paid £500 for indexing, 97.

  Curll's authors, instructions how to find them, 53.

  Curtis (F. A.) on the best method of constructing an index, 195.

  Cutter's rule as to the arrangement of peers under their surnames,
    146.

  Cutting up of entries when written on pages of paper, 182.


  "Da," surnames not to be arranged under this prefix, 141.

  "Dal" surnames to be arranged under this prefix, 141.

  Darling's (James) _Cyclopædia Bibliographica_, Index, 220.

  Dashes in printing representing repetition to be of uniform length,
    161, 204;
    instances of incorrect use of them, 80, 138.

  "De," French surnames not to be arranged under this prefix, 141;
    English surnames to be arranged under this prefix, 142.

  De Quincey on Bentley, 39.

  "Del," "Della," surnames to be arranged under these prefixes, 141.

  "Des," surnames to be arranged under this prefix, 141.

  Dictionary catalogue, its history, 129.
    ---- Mr. Fortescue's objections to it, 130.

  Dictionary makers really indexers, 120.

  Disraeli's (Isaac) _Literary Miscellanies_ quoted, 1.

  Drayton (M.), his use of the word "index," 11.

  "Du," surnames to be arranged under this prefix, 141.

  Dugdale's _Warwickshire_, the words "index" and "table" both used, 9.

  Dumas (Alexandre) _père et fils_, confused with Alexandre _père et
    fils_, harmonium-makers, 24.


  Eadie's _Dictionary of the Bible_, Cross reference in, 72.

  Electricity, Indexes of, 123.

  Ellis's _Original Letters_ quoted, 19.

  _Encyclopædia Britannica_, Cross references in, 72, 74.

  Envelopes as safe receptacles for index slips, 182, 189.

  Erasmus made alphabetical indexes, 7.


  Fétis Musical Library, blunder in the index to the catalogue, 24.

  Flaxman (Dr. Roger) paid £3000 for indexing, 97.

  Fleming (Abraham), his use of the word "index," 8.

  Fletcher (William I.), his valuable additions to index literature,
    221.

  Ford's _Handbook of Spain_, Amusing cross reference in, 76.

  Forster (Rev. --) paid £3000 for indexing, 97.

  Fortescue (G. K.) on the proposed subject index to the British
    Museum library catalogue, 126.
    ---- on five-yearly indexes to the British Museum catalogue, 128.

  Freeman's  opinion  that foreign names should be Englished, 144.

  _Freemason_, bad index quoted, 54.

  Fuller (Thomas) quoted, 3, 172.


  Gay's _Trivia_, humorous index, 32.

  _Gentleman's Magazine_, badness of the index of names, 153.

  Gerarde's _Herbal_, by Johnson, use of the words "index" and "table"
    in that book, 9.

  Giddings (J.), index to _The Times_, 221.

  Glanville's (Joseph) _Vanity of Dogmatizing_ quoted, 2.

  Gough (H.), index to Parker Society's publications, 112.

  Greenhill (Dr.) on the formation of an Index Society, 207.

  Gruter's _Thesaurus Inscriptionum_, index to the book by Scaliger, 88.

  Gum an unsatisfactory material for laying down slips, 189.


  Hardy (Sir T. Duffus), remarks on the "Pye-book," 7.

  Hare's _Walks in London_, Index to, 152.

  Harley (Robert, Earl of Oxford), the index to Bromley's _Travels_
    attributed to him, 46, 48.

  Harrison (Robert) proposes the formation of an Index Society in
    _The Athenæum_, 209.

  Hawkins's _Pleas of the Crown_, Odd cross references in, 75.

  Headings, alphabetical arrangement of, 137.
    ---- instances of bad, 54.
    ---- printing of, 160.

  Henrietta Maria offended with Prynne's _Histrio-Mastix_, 18.

  Heskeths, their change of name, 151.

  Hetherington's (Miss) opinions on the indexing of periodicals, 59;
    specimens of absurd references quoted by her, 60;
    on the qualifications of an indexer, 114.

  Hill's (Dr. Birkbeck) admirable indexes, 105-108.

  Historical collections, need of indexes to these standard works, 91.

  Homer, poetical index to Pope's translation of the Iliad, 21.

  House of Commons' Journals, sums paid for the indexes, 97.

  Hume (David), index to his _Essays_, 23;
    he was glad to be saved from the drudgery of making one, 23.

  Hunt (Leigh), his opinion on index-making, 26.
    ---- supposed author of the joke on Best's great mind, 157.

  Hutchins's _Dorset_, Separate indexes to, 69.

  Hyphen, Use of, in compound names, 149.


  I and J to be kept distinct, 66, 135.

  Im Thurn, place of this name in the alphabet, 143.

  Index, alphabetical order not at first considered essential, 6;
    classification to be abjured in an alphabetical index, 58, 67;
    evils of dividing an index into several alphabets, 69;
    _General or Universal Index_ (chap. viii.), 206, 223;
    history of the word, 7;
    use by the Romans, 6;
    naturalisation of the word in English, 8;
    introduced into English in the nominative case, 10;
    _How to Set About the Index_ (chap. vii.), 172-205;
    long struggle with the word "table," 7;
    soul of a book, _Title-page_;
    one index to each book, 134;
    two chief causes of the badness of indexes, 64;
    varied kinds of, 5.

  Index-learning ridiculed, 2.

  Index Society, its formation, 210;
    published index to Trevelyan's _Life of Macaulay_, 95;
    amalgamation with the Index Library, 210.

  Indexer, chief characteristics of a good indexer, 116;
    difference of opinion as to whether the indexer is "born, _not_
    made," "not born, _but_ made," or "born _and_ made," 114;
    power in his hands, 93;
    _The Bad Indexer_ (chap. iii.), 53-84;
    _The Good Indexer_ (chap. iv.), 85-117.

  Indexes, _Amusing and Satirical Indexes_ (chap. ii.), 25-52;
    _Different Classes of Indexes_ (chap. v.), 118-131;
    _General Rules for Alphabetical Indexes_ (chap. vi.), 132-171;
    list of indexes, 218;
    official indexes, 96;
    to great authors proposed, 111;
    veneration due to the inventor of indexes, 1.

  India said in the index to Capgrave's _Chronicle_ to be conquered by
    Judas Maccabeus, 66.

  Indical, word used by Fuller, 4.

  Indice, word used by Ben Jonson, 10.
    ---- French word, 10.
    ---- Italian word, 10.

  Indices, objections to the use of this plural in English, 11.

  Indicium, the original of the French _indice_, 10.

  Initials, Careless use of, 161.

  Inventory as a synonym of index, 7.


  J.C., absurd filling out of these initials, 78.

  Jaggard's (William) index to _Book Prices Current_, 113.

  Jeake's _Arithmetick Surveighed and Reviewed_, Index to, 89.

  Jevons (Professor Stanley), his suggestion of an Index Society, 208.
    ---- his _Principles of Science_ quoted, 208.

  Jewel's _Apology_ by Isaacson, bad index, 56.

  Jews generally wore red hats in Italy, but not at Leghorn, 51.

  Johnson (Dr.), his division of necessary knowledge, 5.
    ---- advises Richardson to add an index to his novels, 21.

  Jones (Thomas), his contribution to a general index in _Notes and
    Queries_, 207.

  Jonson (Ben), his use of the word "indice," 10.


  King (Dr. William), the inventor of satirical indexes, 35.
    ---- his attack upon Bentley in the index to "Boyle upon Bentley,"
         36.

  King (Dr. William), his parody of _Lister's Journey to Paris_, 42.
    ---- his attack upon Sir Hans Sloane and the _Philosophical
         Transactions"_, 42.
    ---- satirical index to Bromley's _Travels_, 44.

  Knowledge, what is true, 1.


  "La," surnames to be arranged under this prefix, 141.

  Lamoignon (M. de), his library, indexed by Baillet, 206.

  Lawyers good indexers, 98.

  "Le," surnames to be arranged under this prefix, 141.

  Library Association, Index to _Reports_, 113.

  Lister's _Journey to Paris_ parodied by Dr. King, 42.

  Littré, his derivation of indice, 10.

  Lo_n_don (George), his name often spelt Lo_u_don, 67.

  _Longman's Magazine_, bad index, 63.

  Lo_u_don (C. J.), the Duke of Wellington mistakes his signature for
    that of the Bishop of London, 67.

  Lowell's _Biglow Papers_, humorous index, 33.


  "M'" and "Mc" to be arranged as if written "Mac," 145.

  Macaulay (Lord) an indexer, 91.
    ---- indexers treated with contempt by him, 92.
    ---- his opinion on the index to his _History_, 93.
    ---- objection to the indexing of his _History_ by a Tory, 93.
    ---- his Englishing of foreign names approved by Freeman, 144.
    ---- on Bentley's foibles, 38.

  Maine (Duc de), Duc of Maine, Duke de Maine, or Duke of Maine, 144.

  Malcolm (E. H.) quoted, 193.

  Markland (J. H.), remarks on indexing, 82.

  Mayor's (Rev. John E. B.) collection of biographical references, 214.

  Michel's (Dan) _Ayenbite of Inwyt_, table of contents, 6.

  Minsheu, his use of the word "index," 9.

  Montaigne's _Essays_, index to Florio's translation, 12.

  Moore (Edward) paid £6400 for indexing, 97.

  More (Hannah), Macaulay's letter to her, 91.

  Morley (John) protests against indexless books, 84.

  Morris (William) on an absurd cross reference, 72.


  Names, authors arranged under their Christian names, 89;
    compound names, 149;
    proper names with prefixes, 145;
    rule for the arrangement of compound names, 149;
    rules for the arrangement of foreign and English respectively,
      141, 142.

  North's _Lives of the Norths_, index to Jessopp's edition, 179.

  Norton (Thomas), Remembrancer of London, an indexer, 85.

  _Notes and Queries_, announcement in its pages of the projected
    formation of an Index Society in 1854, 207.
    ---- indexes highly appreciated, 112.

  Noy (Attorney-General) prosecutes Prynne, 15

  Numerals, Use of, for series of volumes, 159.


  Oldys (William) on the need of indexes, 86.

  Oriental names, Rules for indexing, 163;
    Sir George Birdwood's notes on the names of Eastern people, 164.

  Oxford (Robert Harley, Earl of) reported to be author of the index
    to Bromley's _Travels_, 46, 48.


  Page, when a division of a, should be marked, 159.

  Paget (Sir James) pleased to make an index, 23.

  Paper, saving of, an unwise economy, 176, 187.

  Parr (Dr.), note on the index to Bromley's _Travels_, 47.

  Paste the only material for laying down slips, 189.

  Peacock (Edward), detection of blunders in Oxford reprint of
    Whitelock's _Memorials_, 181.

  Peers to be arranged under their titles, 145.

  _Penny Cyclopædia_, vague cross references in, 73.

  Periodicals, transactions, etc., Indexing of, 121;
    usually badly indexed, 59.

  Perkins (F. B.), plan of arranging slips, 185.

  _Philosophical Transactions_ laughed at by Dr. King, 42.

  Pineda (Juan de), index to his _Monarchia Ecclesiastica_, 89.

  Plays, Prynne's attack upon, 16.

  Plinie's _Natural Historie_, by Holland, Use of the word "index"
    in, 10.

  Plutarch's _Lives_, by North, the index called a table, 8.

  Poole's (W. F.) _Index to Periodical Literature_ quoted, 59;
    its great value, 220;
    new edition by co-operation, 221;
    his remarks on cross references, 71.

  Printing of headings, 160;
    special type, 160.

  Prynne, _Histrio-Mastix_, specimens from the index, 14.
    ---- a martyr to his conscientiousness in making an index, 15.

  Puritans, Prynne's praise of, 17.

  "Pye" as a synonym of index, 7 (note).

  "Pye-book," derivation, 7 (note).


  Ranke's _History of England_, issue of revised index by the
    Clarendon Press, 113.

  Rawlinson (Dr.) on the index to Bromley's _Travels_, 45.

  Register as a synonym of index, 7, 8.

  _Remembrancia_, Index to, quoted, 85.

  Repetition, Marks of, in an index, 161, 204;
    instances of incorrect use of them, 80, 138.

  Richardson (S.), index to his three novels, 22.
    ---- a practised indexer, 22.

  Royal Society attacked by Dr. King, 42.

  _Rules for Alphabetical Indexes_ (chap. vi.), 132-171.

  Rules for cataloguing referred to, 133.

  Ruskin's _Fors Clavigera_, Index to, 103.

  Russell (Constance, Lady) points out confusions in indexes, 80.


  "St." to be arranged in the alphabet as "Saint," 145.

  Saints to be arranged under their proper names, 145.

  Scaliger, his index to Gruter's _Thesaurus Inscriptionum_, 88.

  Schmidt (Dr. Alexander), _Shakespeare Lexicon_ (1874), 120.

  "Scholar's (A)" opposition to publication of a subject-index to the
    British Museum library catalogue, 126.

  Scientific books, Indexing of, 120.

  Scobell's _Acts and Ordinances of Parliament_, the words "index" and
    "table" both used, 9.

  _Selwyn (George), and his Contemporaries_, published without an
    index, 84.

  Seneca, his indication of the contents of his books, 6.

  Shakespeare, his use of the word "index," 11.

  Shenstone's _Schoolmistress_, humorous table of contents, 31.

  Shylock acted by Macklin in a red hat, 51.

  Sloane (Sir Hans) laughed at by Dr. King, 42.

  Solly (Edward), calculation of the time wasted in looking up a
    reference in the index to the _Gentleman's Magazine_, 153.
    ---- note on early indexes, 14.
    ---- proposes the formation of an Index Society, 208.
    ---- scheme of a biographical index, 211.

  _Spectator, The_, Index to, 30.

  _Spectators_, _Tatlers_, and _Guardians_, general index, 29.

  Speed's _History of Great Britaine_, the words "index" and "table"
    both used, 10.

  State papers, indexes to the calendars, 97.

  Statutes of the realm, valuable index to the edition of the _Record
    Commission_, 98.

  Stephen (Sir J. Fitzjames) on a complete digest of the law, 99.
    ---- on the early digesters of the law, 101.

  Summary as a synonym of index, 7.

  Swift's _Battle of the Books_ quoted, 38.
    ---- _Condition of Edmund Curll_ quoted, 53.
    ---- his satirical reference to index-learning, 2.
    ---- _Tale of a Tub_ quoted, 2.
    ---- _Works_ edited by Scott, bad index, 154.

  Syllabus as a synonym of index, 7, 8.


  Table as a synonym of index, 7, 8, 9.

  _Tatler, The_, Index to, 27.

  Tedder (H. R.), his indexes to _Reports of Conference of Librarians
    and Library Association_, 112.

  Ten Brink, place of this name in the alphabet, 143.

  Thomas (F. S.), _Historical Notes_ referred to, 219.

  Thompson (Corrie L.), his criticism of Palmer's index to
    _The Times_, 221.

  Thoms (W. J.) urged the formation of an Index Society, 209.

  Thring (Lord), his instructions for an index to the _Statute Law_, 98.

  Thrub-chandler, Bung of a, 73.

  _Times (The)_, Indexes to, 221;
    criticism on Palmer's index, 221.

  Translations (French) of titles, 77.

  Trevelyan's _Life of Macaulay_, Index to, by Perceval Clark, 95.


  U and N, Confusion between, 66.

  U and V to be kept distinct, 66, 135.


  "Van," foreign names not to be indexed under this prefix, 141.
    ---- English names to be indexed under this prefix, 142.

  Vergil (Polydore), _Anglicæ Historiæ_ has a good index, 14.

  "Von," surnames not to be arranged under this prefix, 141.


  Walford (Cornelius), inquiry for the earliest index, 14.

  Walpole's _Letters_, Bad index to, 79;
    examples of bad entries, 80.

  Warton's _History of English Poetry_, index, 70.

  Watt's _Bibliotheca Britannica_, index, 219.

  Watts (Dr.), his warning against index-learning, 2.

  Watts (Thomas), his expression of the need for an Index Society, 207.

  Welch (J. Cuthbert) on the publication of an index to a journal, 211.

  Wellington (Duke of), amusing misreading of Lo_u_don's letter, 67.
    ---- cross reference in Ford's _Handbook to Spain_, 76.

  Wheatley (B. R.) as a good indexer, 117;
    his "Evitandum" in indexing, 155.

  _White Knights_ translated as _Le Chevalier Blanc_, 77.

  Whitelock's _Memorial_, Carlyle's condemnation of, 91;
    index to Oxford reprint, 180.

  Winsor (Justin) advocated the formation of Index Society, 210.

  Wynford (Lord), previously Sir W. D. Best, 157.


  _York, Register of Corpu Christi Guild_, index, 122.


                _Elliot Stock, Paternoster Row, London._




                             [Illustration]




                          PREVIOUS VOLUMES OF
                         BOOK-LOVER'S LIBRARY.

_Cloth, price_ =4s. 6d.=; _Roxburgh Half Morocco_, =7s. 6d.=;
_Large Paper_, =£1 1s.= _net_.


=How to Form a Library.= By HENRY B. WHEATLEY, F.S.A. Second Edition.

CONTENTS: How Men have Formed Libraries.--How to Buy.--Public
Libraries.--General Bibliographies.--Special Bibliographies.--Publishing
Societies.--Child's Library.--One Hundred Books.

=Old Cookery Books and Ancient Cuisine.= By WILLIAM CAREW HAZLITT.

=The Literature of Local Institutions.= By G. LAURENCE GOMME, F.S.A.
    The work is divided into the following Sections: 1. Local Government
    generally.--2. The Shire.--3. The Hundred.--4. Municipal
    Government.--5. Guilds.--6. The Manor.--7. The Township and Parish.

=Foreign Visitors in England, and What They have Thought of Us.= Being
    some Notes on their Books and Opinions during the last Three
    Centuries. By EDWARD SMITH.

=Modern Methods of Illustrating Books.= Commencing with the early forms
    of illustrating books, and tracing the art down to our own day, the
    author leads the reader up to modern processes of producing
    illustrations.

=The Dedication of Books.= To Patron and Friend. A Chapter in Literary
    History. By HENRY B. WHEATLEY, F.S.A.

=Gleanings in Old Garden Literature.= By WILLIAM CAREW HAZLITT.

=The Story of some Famous Books.= Second Edition. By EDWARD SAUNDERS,
    Author of "Salad for the Social." Interspersed in the narrative are
    many amusing anecdotes, curious and suggestive allusions, and much
    out-of-the way information which will be welcomed by the book-lover
    and the student, as well as the reader who seeks amusement only.

=The Enemies of Books.= By WILLIAM BLADES. Second Edition. This
    entertaining volume gives a series of readable chapters on the
    various causes which have operated in the destruction of books.

=The Book of Noodles.= Stories of Simpletons; or, Fools and their
    Follies. By W. A. CLOUSTON, Author of "The Book of Sindibad,"
    "Popular Tales and Fictions," etc., etc.

=How to Catalogue a Library.= By HENRY B. WHEATLEY, F.S.A., Author of
    "How to Form a Library."

CONTENTS: Introduction on Cataloguing Generally.--The Battle of the
Rules.--Print _v._ MS.--How to treat a Title-page.--Reference and
Subject-Index.--The Arrangement of a Catalogue.--Something about
MSS.--Rules for a Small Library.--A List of Latinised Names of
Places.--A List of Classical Names.--An unusually copious Index is
added.

=Reporting in the Olden Time and To-day.= By JOHN PENDLETON,
    Author of "The History of Derbyshire."

=Studies In Jocular Literature.= A Popular Subject more closely
    Considered. By WILLIAM C. HAZLITT.

=The Story of the IMITATIONE CHRISTI.= By LEONARD WHEATLEY. With
    a Portrait of Thomas à Kempis.

=Books Condemned to be Burnt.= By JAMES ANSON FARRER.

=Books in Chains=, and other Bibliographical Papers. By WM. BLADES.

=Literary Blunders=: A Chapter in the History of Human Error. By
    HENRY B. WHEATLEY, F.S.A.

=Book Song=: An Anthology of Poems of Books and Book-men, from
    Modern Authors. Edited by GLEESON WHITE.

=Walton and the Early Writers on Fishing.= By R. B. MANSTON,
    Editor of the _Fishing Gazette_.

=Books that have been Fatal to their Authors.= By Rev. P. H.
    DITCHFIELD.

=Book Verse=: An Anthology of Poems of Books and Book-men, from
    the Earliest Times to Recent Years. Edited by W. ROBERTS.

=The Literature of Music.= By JAMES E. MATTHEW, Author of "A
    Manual of Musical History."

=The Novels of Charles Dickens.= A Bibliography and Sketch. By
    FREDERIC G. KITTON, Author of "Charles Dickens by Pen and
    Pencil," etc. With a portrait which has not been published
    before.

=The Minor Writings of Charles Dickens=: A Bibliography and
    Sketch. By F. G. KITTON, Author of "Dickensiana," "The Novels of
    Charles Dickens," "Dickens and his Illustrators," etc.

=Book Auctions in England in the Seventeenth Century.= By JOHN
    LAWLER, Compiler of the Sunderland and Ashburnham Catalogues.


                                LONDON:
                   ELLIOT STOCK, 62, PATERNOSTER ROW.




                           Transcriber Notes:

Passages in italics were indicated by _underscores_.

Passages in bold were indicated by =equal signs=.

Small caps were replaced with ALL CAPS.

Throughout the document, the oe ligature was replaced with "oe".

Throughout the dialogues, there were words used to mimic accents of
the speakers. Those words were retained as-is.

The illustrations have been moved so that they do not break up
paragraphs and so that they are next to the text they illustrate. Thus
the page number of the illustration might not match the page number in
the List of Illustrations, and the order of illustrations may not be the
same in the List of Illustrations and in the book.

Errors in punctuations and inconsistent hyphenation were not corrected
unless otherwise noted.

In the first page, a period was added after "F.S.A".

On page 6, the y in "boc volyinde" was a yogh in the book.

On page 22, a quotation mark was removed after "proper heads.".

On page 58, a quotation mark was added after "Classes of Literature."

On page 77, the caret symbol followed by an "e" represents a
superscripted e.

On page 110, a quotation mark was added before "Heberden, Dr."

On page 112, "It it" was replaced with "It is".

On page 115, "wil" was replaced with "will".

On page 188, "with slip about" was replaced with "will slip about".

On page 213, a period was placed after "etc".

On page 216, a period was placed after "considerable importance".

On page 225, a period was placed after "88".

On page 228, a period was placed after "220".

On page 229, a period was placed after "54".

On page 229, a comma was placed after "Athenæum".

On page 232, a period was placed after 44.

On page 235, a period was placed after "Corrie L".

In the advertisements, a period was added after "Henry B".






End of Project Gutenberg's How to Make an Index, by Henry B. Wheatley