How to Make an Index

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 bepreferred 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:

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 crossreferences. 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'sMagazine," 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.