UNIV. OF PREFACE In the preparation of this index,-a labour of love which has afforded no small pleasure, the compiler has proceeded upon the assumption that the usefulness of an index is limited only by its scope and by the accuracy with which the work is done. Such being the case, an attempt has been made to index and to cross-reference every topic and every name which appears in Stith's HISTORY OF VIRGINIA,—as well cross-references of general topics, as also of the references under the more important names and general topics-with a view to covering the volume treated, in a comprehensive and intelligent manner, so as to furnish to the student a final key,-whether he be interested agriculturally, economically, educationally, ethnologically, financialyy, geographically, governmentally, industrially, religiously, socially, or what not. In the matter of the value and importance of Stith to students of the early history of Virginia, we know of no more eminent nor acceptable authority than Prof. Herbert L. Osgood, of the Department of History of Columbia University, New York City, who contributed the following estimate to Larned's LITERATURE OF AMERICAN HISTORY (1902), No. 1164: "This is, and is always likely to be, one of the standard books on early Virginia history. As planned by the author, it is the first volume of an extended work; but it is the only installment which ever appeared. It covers the history of Virginia under the London Company. The author had access to the archives of the colony, to the papers of Sir John Randolph, to the Byrd library, to the Records of the London Company. He treats the writings of John Smith as reliable so far as they relate to events which occurred while he was in the country; considers Smith an honest man, but that his writings are very confused. The first part of Stith's volume is largely based on Smith, the latter part on the Records of the London Company. Defends the cause of the Company against the King. Written in dignified style, with thorough scholarship." For this work, there has been used a copy of the Edition of the Sabin Reprint (1865) of Stith,—this being a reprint of the Williamsburg Edition of 1747,—which I have designated as (i),—as well as a reprint of the London Reprint of 1753,-here designated as (iii),—as is pointed out on p. vii of the Bibliographical Note of the Sabin Reprint. The orthography and phraseology of Stith have been preserved as near as may be; and the choice of "key-words" and a repeated indexing of the same entry under another "key-word" have both been determined by the importance of the subject involved, as well as by the number of entries under that particular caption.-the same entry ofttimes appearing more than once, but under a different "key-word," where there are many entries under a caption,- -as is the case under "COLONISTS," "SMITH, CAPT. JOHN," "TOBACCO," etc. In the matter of cross-references, an attempt has been made to cite as crossreferences, under any particular caption, all synonymous terms and phrases appearing NO VIMU in the volume, whether they were synonymous in Stith's day and generation or are so in this, and this for the obvious reason that the indexer could not be in a position to anticipate the interpretation that the student is likely to place upon any word or phrase. And for the same reason,-and contrary to what seems to be more or less of a general custom,-all cross-references have been put at the beginning instead of, as usual, at the end of the entries under the caption, as being probably the more expeditious method of enabling the student to locate that phase of the situation which he is seeking. In order to reduce the bulk, resort has been had to a liberal use of certain arbitrary abbreviations,- -a list of which will be found opposite p. 1,—but an effort has been made not to start any entry with an abbreviation. As a result of errors in the pagination* of certain editions of Stith (as indicated below), it has been necessary to devise a system of combination references,-which is fully explained below,-in order to provide an index which would indicate the desired topic or name, irrespective of the edition in hand. It may appear odd to some that these combination references were devised, but this would seem the less cumbersome method when one recalls the fact that the editions designated as (i), (iii) and (v) contain two pages each of the pages numbered 247 to 256, inclusive, while the edition designated as (ii) contains two pages each of the pages numbered 295 to 304, inclusive, which would appear to necessitate some system of -A and -B subpagination, but once such pagination were used in the index, one would have no means of telling without further explanation which page so-and-so it was that he had really turned to, as the pages are not numbered with the suggested -A and -B subpagination. Of the several editions of Stith, there appear to have been five (5):— (i) 1747,-Williamsburg (Fine Paper Edition, so called);† (ü) 1747,-Williamsburg (Poor Paper Edition, so called);† (iv) 1753,-Williamsburg;† (v) 1865, Sabin Reprint. As Stith remains one of the unsolved bibliographical puzzles of American literature, it has seemed that a bibliographical note might not be out of place. As I have been unable to have any but a limited access to the several editions indicated,-never having seen a copy of the edition indicated as (iv)—it was manifestly impossible that I should make an extended bibliographical study of all these editions. However, the appended Bibliographical Note has been added, for the purpose of setting forth the latest and most competent information along that line in the hope that it may not only help to clear up the situation, but also that it will put in the hands of such students as use this index, certain bibliographical information which would probably not be available without access to a good library. The present writer has been able, as stated, to make a more or less restricted examination of a copy of each of these editions, except (iv), and has found the same errors and peculiarities in (i), (iii) and (v), while (ii) shows the corrections and variations indicated by the black type in column (ii) in the following table: No attention has been paid in the references to the isolated error of 410 for page 104; nor to that of 223 for page 333, but the combination references to this latter page are 333 (323), as though there were no error. †No claim is here made to establish the priority of the volumes under the dates 1747 or 1753, but it will be noted that the arrangement under each date is alphabetical. Pagination intervening here is uniform and correct in all editions indicated. p. 255 p. 256 p. 247 p. 248 p. 249 p. 250 301 (top) p. 290 p. 300 p. 289 302 (top) p. 291 p. 290 303 (top) p. 292 p. 301 p. 291 p. 302 p. 293 p. 292 p. 294* p. 303 p. 293 p. 304* 306 (top) p. 295* p. 294* p. 295* 308 (top) 307 (top) p. 296 p. 295* p. 296 p. 297 p. 296 p. 297 p. 298 p. 297 p. 298 p. 298 Pagination intervening here is uniform and correct in all editions indicated. However, for the purposes of the indexer, these bibliographical data are not necessarily of the first importance, but the matter of greater import is whether the text falls page-for-page alike in all the editions,-if one index is to serve all editions. While "differences occur on almost every leaf," as has been pointed out by Cole (CHURCH CATALOGUE, IV, No. 963: see also Bibliographical Note below), yet the liberal paragraphing so adjusts the text that a page-for-page examination of the editions indicated has shown that there is comparatively no variation in the "catchwords" at the end of the last (47th) line of each page,—the pages thus being substantially the same for all intents and purposes, even to the last page of the text, as is shown by the following comparisons, which are all the variations which have been found,—the first quotations being from the text of (i), (iii) and (v), while those in parentheses are from (1):— *Note that this error in (ii),—after the correction at p. 256-7,-adjusts the pagination to the same basis in all these editions. |