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 Littre 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 _Anglicae Historiae_
(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."
"AEschylus, 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 Fetis 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) _pere_, 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 _pere et fils_, the well-known harmonium-makers, against a
rival firm. The indexer's better acquaintance with _Les Trois
Mousquetaires_ and _La Dame aux Camelias_ 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 daemon?"
"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 _precis_ 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."
"Caesar, 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 Spongiadae."
"_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 _precis_
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 _Encyclopaedia 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 Cyclopaedia_
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 cyclopaedia 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 _Encyclopaedia 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 Derniere 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 Litteraire au XV^e siecle_ 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 Chaussees_. 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 Caesar 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.