Accounting, Representation and Responsibility:

Deleuze and Guattarí Perspectives 1st Edition

Niels Joseph Lennon install download

https://textbookfull.com/product/accounting-representation-and-
responsibility-deleuze-and-guattari-perspectives-1st-edition-
niels-joseph-lennon/

Download more ebook instantly today - get yours now at textbookfull.com

We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click
the link to download now, or visit textbookfull.com
to discover even more!

Philosophy After Deleuze Deleuze and the Genesis of

Representation II 1st Edition Joe Hughes

https://textbookfull.com/product/philosophy-after-deleuze-
deleuze-and-the-genesis-of-representation-ii-1st-edition-joe-
hughes/

Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook Loucas

https://textbookfull.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-
loucas/

Responsible management accounting and controlling : a

practical handbook for sustainability, responsibility,
and ethics First Edition Ette

https://textbookfull.com/product/responsible-management-
accounting-and-controlling-a-practical-handbook-for-
sustainability-responsibility-and-ethics-first-edition-ette/

Deleuze and the diagram aesthetic threads in visual

organization Deleuze

https://textbookfull.com/product/deleuze-and-the-diagram-
aesthetic-threads-in-visual-organization-deleuze/
Deleuze and the history of mathematics in defence of
the new Deleuze

https://textbookfull.com/product/deleuze-and-the-history-of-
mathematics-in-defence-of-the-new-deleuze/

Global Versus Local Perspectives on Finance and

Accounting: 19th Annual Conference on Finance and
Accounting (ACFA 2018) David Procházka

https://textbookfull.com/product/global-versus-local-
perspectives-on-finance-and-accounting-19th-annual-conference-on-
finance-and-accounting-acfa-2018-david-prochazka/

Arctic Marine Resource Governance and Development 1st

Edition Niels Vestergaard

https://textbookfull.com/product/arctic-marine-resource-
governance-and-development-1st-edition-niels-vestergaard/

Multiplicity and Ontology in Deleuze and Badiou 1st

Edition Becky Vartabedian

https://textbookfull.com/product/multiplicity-and-ontology-in-
deleuze-and-badiou-1st-edition-becky-vartabedian/

Deleuze and Film A Feminist Introduction 1st Edition

Teresa Rizzo

https://textbookfull.com/product/deleuze-and-film-a-feminist-
introduction-1st-edition-teresa-rizzo/
Accounting, Representation
and Responsibility

In organizations, accounting produces organizational knowledge that

affects decision-making and managerial action. Companies placing
importance on shareholder value sometimes tend to elevate account-
ing to a higher truth criterion for justifying managerial actions. Yet,
the nature of accounting renders it difficult to argue that accounting
information necessarily produces a better basis for decision-making
than arguments which are not based on accounting. This is because, as
previous research has also argued, accounting counts some things but
omits many others, while managers are accountable for much more
than what accounting actually counts.
Using a theoretical apparatus from Deleuze and Guattarí, this book
illustrates that accounting-based actions such as making management
decisions, maintaining organizational responsibility and hierarchical
control are manifestations of the ways in which accounting is com-
posed. This concise introduction will be invaluable for researchers and
advanced students of management accounting exploring responsibil-
ity accounting and accountability.

Niels Joseph Lennon has a Ph.D. from Copenhagen Business School,

Denmark, and is currently Associate Professor at Aalborg University,
Denmark. He is interested in performance measurement, especially
how accounting calculations construct visualizations of organizations
and how such visualizations affect decision-making and managerial
action.
Routledge Focus on Accounting and Auditing

Advances in the fields of accounting and auditing as areas of research

and education, alongside shifts in the global economy, present a con-
stantly shifting environment. This presents challenges for scholars and
practitioners trying to keep up with the latest important insights in
both theory and professional practice. Routledge Focus on Account-
ing and Auditing presents concise texts on key topics in the world of
accounting research.
Individually, each title in the series provides coverage of a key topic
in accounting and auditing, while collectively, the series forms a com-
prehensive collection across the discipline of accounting.

The Boundaries in Financial and Non-Financial Reporting

A Comparative Analysis of their Constitutive Role
Laura Girella

The Future of Auditing

David Hay

Accounting Regulation in Japan

Evolution and Development from 2001 to 2015
Masatsugu Sanada and Yoshihiro Tokuga

Gender and Corporate Governance

Francisco Bravo Urquiza and Nuria Reguera-Alvarado

Accounting, Representation and Responsibility

Deleuze and Guattarí Perspectives
Niels Joseph Lennon
For more information about the series, please visit www.routledge.com/
Routledge-Focus-on-Accounting-and-Auditing/book-series/RFAA
Accounting, Representation
and Responsibility
Deleuze and Guattarí Perspectives

Niels Joseph Lennon

First published 2021
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2021 Niels Joseph Lennon
The right of Niels Joseph Lennon to be identified as author of this
work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78
of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or
reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical,
or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including
photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks
or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and
explanation without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Lennon, Niels Joseph, author.
Title: Accounting, representation and responsibility : Deleuze
and Guattarí perspectives / Niels Joseph Lennon.
Description: Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge, 2021. |
Series: Routledge focus on accounting and auditing |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2020013889 (print) | LCCN 2020013890 (ebook) |
ISBN 9780367136017 (hardback) | ISBN 9780367136024 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Accounting—Philosophy. | Decision making. |
Responsibility accounting. | Managerial accounting.
Classification: LCC HF5625 .L46 2021 (print) | LCC HF5625
(ebook) | DDC 657.01—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020013889
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020013890

ISBN: 978-0-367-13601-7 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-0-367-13602-4 (ebk)
Typeset in Times New Roman
by codeMantra
Contents

Acknowledgments vi

PART I
Theoretical plateaus 1

1 Introduction 3
2 What can accounting learn from Deleuze? 8
3 Is accounting representation work or
visualization (re-presentation) work? 23
4 What is accountability? Accountability,
responsibility and responsibility accounting 46

PART II
Empirical plateaus 55

5 Territorializing accountability 57
6 Deterritorializing accountability 71
Epilogue 81

Index 87
Acknowledgments

Writing this book has only been possible due to many discussions
with great colleagues. My thanks therefore go to my colleagues at
Copenhagen Business School, who have listened to my ideas and shaped
my arguments. I also want to acknowledge helpful comments made by
participants at the Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Accounting Con-
ference in Stockholm (2015), where parts of the book were presented.
During the writing up of the manuscript, I owe a very big thanks
to my colleagues at Aalborg University – especially Thomas Borup
Kristensen and Niels Sandalgaard, who gave me space to concentrate
on this work while teaching and supervision pressed on. At Aalborg
University, I also owe a very big thanks to Kasper Trolle Elmholdt,
who shares my theoretical interests in Deleuze and Guattarí’s writ-
ings. Kasper has always been very helpful and open to both discuss-
ing and reading my more or less unfinished work. Kasper read all the
chapters in their entirety and came up with great suggestions to im-
prove the arguments throughout. Therefore, he deserves major credit
for quality of the book, of course, without bearing any responsibility
for its shortcomings.
Part I

Theoretical plateaus
Taylor & Francis
Taylor & Francis Group
http://taylorandfrancis.com
1 Introduction

In our everyday lives we are surrounded by different elements and

things. These, as obvious as they seem in our everyday lives, can theo-
retically be understood as signs that our minds decode and assign with
meaning. In his work with Felix Guattarí, the French philosopher
Gilles Deleuze offers some postmodern theoretical concepts to un-
derstand how this process works (Deleuze, 2004; Deleuze & Guattarí,
2004). Accounting is no different than other elements and things we
engage with. Accounting information acts essentially as signs that us-
ers, whether they are accountants, top-level managers or lower level
managers/decision makers, decode with a meaning; the actor signifies
the sign. Through the process of signification, the user creates an un-
derstanding of the message that the accounting calculation provides.
This is the accounting ontology I unfold in this book. In that way, the
book offers an alternative, postmodern view on accounting that dif-
fers from the mainstream idea of ‘accounting as representation’ (Ijiri,
1975; Ryan, Scapens, & Theobald, 2002).
The postmodern literature has already shown the importance of
understanding how an accounting sign1 is formed through processes
of fabrication in order to understand its organizational and social
effects (Chua, 1995; Preston, Cooper, & Coombs, 1992; Robson, 1992).
Postmodernism turned causality upside down by arguing that in order
to create effects, accounting (as well as other inscriptions) assembles a
collective network of relations in organizations, and the organizational
effects are therefore mediated by the composition of this collective.
However, while the present postmodern literature proves this point
well, the process of signifying accounting information – that is, the
process by which users ascribe meaning to accounting information –
also affects managerial action and decision-making in non-intentional,
non-prescriptive ways. This aspect of postmodern thought is not yet de-
scribed in the accounting literature. In short, signification of signs hap-
pens within a regime that together conditions how the sign is signified.
4 Theoretical plateaus
This book focuses on these processes of engaging with accounting
information and signifying the meaning of this information to use it
to guide managerial action. I do so by studying the role accounting
plays in managerial action in a responsibility center, where accounting
information is used for accountability purposes.

Accountability
Accountability is the act of giving and receiving accounts of one’s
conduct and has deep roots in Western culture (Munro, 1996). One
central way of rendering people in organizations accountable is to
construct accounts of their conduct, for example, through respon-
sibility accounting. Due to the central role accountability plays in
accounting for control (Zimmerman, 2011), the literature has dis-
cussed accountability from a variety of theoretical points of views,
including financial considerations (Ijiri, 1975), ethics (Messner, 2009;
Roberts, 2009), management technologies (Kirk & Mouritsen, 1996)
and accountability as an everyday practice, with deep roots in the
construction of society (Munro, 1996). Another, related, stream of ac-
counting literature describes responsibility accounting as a method to
render business unit managers accountable.
Responsibility accounting treats economic responsibility through
delegation. The organization delegates a particular part of a budget
to the manager in charge of a business unit. Thereby, this manager
is in principle evaluated based on one single number, dependent on
which kind of responsibility center the manager is in charge of; these
numbers can be revenue, costs, profit, return on investment (ROI),
economic value added (EVA) or other measures. The idea of this is to
hold the manager responsible for the decisions he or she makes in ac-
cordance with the decision rights, the responsibility center is assigned.
Thus, accountability is measured in terms of the decisions’ effects on
financial numbers (Zimmerman, 2011).
On the practical side, responsibility accounting is about construct-
ing business units in which managers are held responsible for (parts
of) the business unit’s finances. Briefly, if a manager has decision
rights over both the revenue and the cost side of the business unit, it
is a profit center. If the manager has control over the cost side only, it
is a cost center; and if the manager can control revenue exclusively,
but does not have decision rights over the cost side of the business
unit, it is a revenue center. If the manager has decision rights over
investments within the business unit, it is considered to be an invest-
ment center. Then, as mentioned, the different responsibility centers
 Introduction 5
are made responsible for certain financial figures according to which
responsibility center it is. An investment center is typically responsi-
ble for ROI, residual income or EVA; a profit center is responsible for
profit (revenue – controllable costs of operations) (Merchant & Van
der Stede, 2007) and a revenue center is responsible for the revenue
line, its profit and loss statement, but typically cannot control the cost
side and thus is not responsible for that part (Merchant & Van der
Stede, 2007; Zimmerman, 2011).

Purpose and contribution of this book

The purpose of this book, which focuses on the themes of account-
ing, representation and responsibility, is to zoom in on what re-
sponsibility means in an accounting context. Accounting is by the
functionalist, mainstream research perspective often understood
as a practice of representation. However, when closely examining
the practice of accounting as a technology for rendering people in
organizations responsible, it soon becomes visible that this process
of representing certain things through accounts works differently
than what the theory of representation would suggest. Our aim is
to show that accounting does not represent performance, customer
behavior or other social phenomena as the representation theory
would suggest. Rather, it presents these things in new and surpris-
ing (and often contradictory and conflicting) ways. Thus, account-
ing certainly has the capacity to render people accountable through
numbers, but this accountability, and what it means for managers
to be accountable, is significantly different from what conventional
theory suggests.2
Thus, this focus means that our attempt is to describe more deeply
how accounting, representativity and accountability relate. I do so
by studying how managers’ decision space is constructed and de-
constructed by various objects in the practice in which the managers
operate. Our claim is that the signification of accounting informa-
tion is affected by these objects that managers engage with in their
daily work.
More specifically, the book contributes by examining how account-
ing mobilizes a certain version of what it means to be accountable, but
accountability is a network of relations in many different, and often
contradictory, directions. This goes against accounting as representa-
tion because these relations mean that accounting does not represent
certain things, but it presents in a new version of these things, often
through numbers, calculations (e.g., ratios and other performance
6 Theoretical plateaus
indicators) and other kinds of visualizations of performance (graphs,
trends, colors of different variance levels and so on).
Thus, accounting is composed of heterogeneous circumstances that
shape managers’ decision opportunities and space of possible actions
(decision space), and, as a result, the accounting version of managers’
accountability is generalized and sometimes disconnected from the
reality in which it is mobilized. In popular terms, one could say that
accounting counts some matters and leaves other out, but accountabil-
ity is a broader social phenomenon related to the accountable subject,
and its composition is exterior with relations in many different direc-
tions that the subjects must think about.

Notes
1 Accounting signs are often called accounting ‘inscriptions’ in this stream
of research.
2 ‘Conventional’ refers to mainstream, functionalist accounting theory.

References
Chua, W. F. (1995). Experts, networks and inscriptions in the fabrication of
accounting images: A story of the representation of three public hospitals.
Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2/3), 111–145.
Deleuze, G. (2004). Difference and Repetition. New York, NY: Continuum.
Deleuze, G., & Guattarí, F. (2004). A Thousand Plateaus. New York, NY:
Continuum.
Ijiri, Y. (1975). Theory of Accounting Measurement. Sarasota, FL: American
Accounting Association.
Kirk, K., & Mouritsen, J. (1996). Spaces of Accountability: Accounting
Systems and Systems of Accountability in a Multinational. In R. Munro &
J. Mouritsen (Eds.), Accountability. Power, Ethos and Technologies of Man-
aging (201–224). London: International Thomson Business Press.
Merchant, K. A., & Van der Stede, W. A. (2007). Management Control Systems.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Messner, M. (2009). The limits of accountability. Accounting, Organizations
and Society, 34(8), 918–938.
Munro, R. (1996). Alignment and Identity Work: The Study of Accounts and
Accountability. In R. Munro & J. Mouritsen (Eds.), Accountability. Power,
Ethos and Technologies of Managing (1–19). London: International Thom-
son Business Press.
Preston, A. M., Cooper, D. J., & Coombs, R. W. (1992). Fabricating budgets:
A study of the production of management budgeting in the national health
service. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(6), 561–593.
 Introduction 7
Roberts, J. (2009). No one is perfect: The limits of transparency and an ethic
for ‘intelligent’ accountability. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(8),
957–970.
Robson, K. (1992). Accounting numbers as “inscription”: Action at a distance
and the development of accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society,
17(7), 685–708.
Ryan, R., Scapens, R. W., & Theobald, M. (2002). Research Methods and
Methodology in Accounting and Finance. London: Thomson.
Zimmerman, J. L. (2011). Accounting for Decision Making and Control
(7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
2 What can accounting learn
from Deleuze?

Post-structuralist research has informed accounting since the first

research papers were published toward the end of the 1980s and the
start of the 1990s, after Hopwood’s call for more contextual and
organizational-focused accounting research (Hopwood, 1978, 1983).
The journal Accounting, Organizations and Society played an impor-
tant role in directing accounting research toward that end (see Miller &
Oleary, 1987; Miller & Rose, 1990; Robson, 1991, 1992 as examples of this
turn). Since then, research incorporating insights from post-structuralist
thought has grown steadily and actor-network theory (ANT) has become
a major theoretical inspiration. The seminal paper by Robson (1991),
which included the notion of translation in accounting, became a land-
mark due to its ambition and potential to expand our knowledge about
what accounting does in organizational and managerial practice and
in society at large, a perspective that provided significant new insights
about accounting. This was followed up by a number of publications
drawing on the perspective of ANT (such as Chua, 1995; Mouritsen &
Bekke, 1997; Preston, Cooper, & Coombs, 1992; Robson, 1992).
ANT may be considered as extending the lines of post-structuralist
thinkers such as Foucault, Serres and Deleuze, affording an empirical
or ethnographic version of post-structuralist thought (Law, 2009; Mol,
2005). Deleuze was a major influence in the post-structuralist literature
and also a great inspiration to ANT. Yet, in accounting, researchers
have been reluctant to do research inspired by Deleuze’s scholarship,
and only few papers draw explicitly on Deleuze’s scholarship (Martinez,
2011; Martinez & Cooper, 2017; Neu, Everett, & Rahaman, 2009). It is
our contention that many new insights may be provided by exploring
continuities and discontinuities between Latour’s ANT and Deleuze’s
theory on assemblage in relation to accounting. As such, this chapter
will describe assemblage theory and how it is used to study responsibil-
ity accounting in the empirical case later in the book.
 What can accounting learn from Deleuze? 9
Assemblage theory emerged in Gilles Deleuze’s work and his collab-
oration with Felix Guattarí (Deleuze, 2004; Deleuze & Guattarí, 2004)
and was extended in Manuel DeLanda’s Assemblage Theory (DeLanda,
2006). This line of thought will be connected to the organizing proper-
ties of accounting as described by Miller and Power (2013).

Assemblage theory
Assemblage theory and Deleuzian scholarship are used here to broaden
the understanding of accounting’s effects in practice. Through the no-
tion of sign-signification relationship, assemblage theory covers some
of the same concerns as the notion of interpretation in the influential
interpretivist research agenda. Yet, there are important differences
(Deleuze, 2004), which will be discussed later. Due to this similarity,
assemblage theory can arguably bridge the interests of the constructiv-
ist perspective with the interests of interpretive research (Chua, 1986).
Assemblage theory gives a theoretical apparatus where the network
mindset, which is also articulated in Latour’s work (e.g., Latour, 1987,
2005), is considered alongside the concerns of the construction of
meaning and how this influences action (Chua, 1986). However, the
difference between assemblage theory and the social constructivist
concept of interpretation is mainly that, as Latour (2005) also notes,
significations are not considered social cognitive constructions de-
signed to explain phenomena that are otherwise difficult to explain,
such as culture, but rather significations are ontological constructions
which emerge as effects of relations.
An important concern in assemblage theory is that the assemblage
of relations forms a regime of signs within which individuals act and
within which significations of signs emerge. By understanding signi-
fication this way, assemblage theory differs from that of social con-
structivism’s influential concept of interpretive flexibility. Interpretive
flexibility means that “the empirical observations and the purposes of
technology scientists and engineers refer to, allow different interpre-
tations to a certain degree” (Meyer & Schulz-Schaeffer, 2006, p. 26).
In social construction of technology (SCOT), which Pinch and Bijker
pioneered, the concept of interpretive flexibility relates, according to
Meyer and Schulz-Schaeffer (2006), to the usefulness of technology.
In this way, interpretive flexibility is interested in showing how mean-
ings associated with technology are the same within social groups but
may vary between groups; hence, interpretations of the meaning of
a technology are effects of intergroup negotiations and reduction of
the interpretive flexibility of the technology (Klein & Kleinman, 2002;
10 Theoretical plateaus
Meyer & Schulz-Schaeffer, 2006). Interpretive flexibility is based on
relativism (Klein & Kleinman, 2002), which implies that

technology design is an open process that can produce differ-

ent outcomes depending on the social circumstances of devel-
opment. Some sociologists of science argue that the very entities
of physics, such as the particles studied in particle physics, are
the products of intergroup negotiations over the interpretation
of observations.

Consensus is an important concern in relation to interpretive

flexibility. The technology develops openly and relatively based on
the social group that engages with its design. Interpretation there-
fore explains the relativism component: it explains design concerns
that the researcher cannot account for. Consequently, keywords for
interpretive flexibility are ‘consensus’ and ‘relativism’, whereas for
ANT and assemblage theory, they are ‘controversy’ and ‘relational-
ism’. These are important distinctions because in assemblage theory,
technology stabilizes not through social negotiations and consen-
sus building but by enrollments and translations that mobilize the
technology and, thus, materialize in ways people can live with (see,
e.g., Preston, Cooper, & Coombs, 1992; Robson, 1991, 1992). Put dif-
ferently, an accounting number cannot be said to be shaped, at the
outset, by different occupations or different cultural backgrounds
(being a manager, being an employee) but as a result of heterogene-
ous translations and due to its multiple relations. Hence, the network
establishes enough power to convince people about its significance
through the enrollment of actors that translates its performance (here
we often see the controversy).
As such, signification in the Deleuzian version differs slightly from
conventional interpretive research as its conceptualization of meaning
constructions is consistent with the ontology of networks in, for exam-
ple, ANT. Rather than using the notion of interpretation and social
construction to explain what cannot be theorized through the concerns
raised in the empirical data, the theory uses the assemblage approach
to conceptualize how meanings are constructed and how meanings
become strategic. As such, the work of Deleuze offers concepts to un-
derstand how significations of signs are constructed through regimes
of signification. The wording ‘signification’ is an explicit choice here,
as it calls for understanding meaning and the construction of mean-
ing differently. Signification is less ‘interpretive’ but based on the
same principles of networks (réseaux) or assemblages. Signification is
 What can accounting learn from Deleuze? 11
therefore considered not a social construction but, rather, a construc-
tion to be understood by its relations of exteriority.
By mobilizing assemblage theory, which subscribes to relationalism
rather than relativism, the point is that meaning does not come about
because of the flexible interpretive capacities of accounting numbers,
but signification comes about by enrollment in signifying regimes and
translation. Thus, signification is an effect of the relations the tech-
nology constructs in the assemblages in which it is signified. In this
way, the theories of Deleuze (2004), Deleuze and Guattarí (2004) and
DeLanda (2006) provide concepts that make it possible to obtain new
insights about how accounting technologies unfold in organizations,
for instance, how they become important as organizing elements
(Hopwood, 1978, 1983). This is in line with Miller and Power (2013) who
argue that “organizing without accounting is increasingly unthinkable
today, accounting also makes organizing thinkable and actionable in
a particular way”, and we may add, the effects of accounting as organ-
izing being effects of assemblages of signification. In sum, Deleuze’s
theory is able to offer a conceptual frame of analysis where significa-
tions, as a production in the minds of human beings, are also at stake.
This signification is not explicitly developed in ANT, but here we see
how it can provide new insights about accounting in practice.

What are assemblages?

Assemblage is a central concept in our analysis and requires elabo-
ration. DeLanda (2006) explains how assemblage theory extends the
analytical level from being concentrated on the particularity of objects
to also concern larger entities such as interpersonal networks or insti-
tutional organizations:

Assemblages, being wholes whose properties emerge from the

interactions between parts, can be used to model any of these
intermediate entities: interpersonal networks and institutional
organizations are assemblages of people; social justice move-
ments are assemblages of several networked communities; central
governments are assemblages of several organizations; cities are
assemblages of people, networks, organizations, as well as of a
variety of infrastructural components, from buildings and streets
to conduits for matter and energy flows; nation states are assem-
blages of cities, the geographical regions organized by cities, and
the provinces that several such regions form.
(DeLanda, 2006, p. 5)
12 Theoretical plateaus
Building on DeLanda, we may consider an assemblage as different
modes of organized wholes where an industrial, public or private or-
ganization is one example and an accounting representation is another,
yet, still entwined with the organization (Miller & Power, 2013). To
introduce assemblage theory in the study of the practical significance of
accounting technologies helps to understand how the effects of account-
ing technologies emerge within the assemblage and the significations of
calculations. In this sense, the frame of analysis is not limited to study
objects and their relations to one another, but it also directs an ana-
lytical view on the signification of objects – how organizational mem-
bers construct certain understandings of what calculations (re-)present
(see Chua, 1995, for an elaboration on accounting representation and
re-presentation). Again, we have to keep in mind that constructing
meaning and representations is not a matter of certain occupational
memberships of ‘invented’ explanations, such as different cultures, but
a relational momentary accomplishment of an assemblage. While these
representations enact an assemblage, a sort of organizational form, they
also have important organizing properties (Miller & Power, 2013).
Assemblage theory is correspondingly interesting because of its em-
phasis on extending the analytical approach in a way that allows us
to study how technologies perform in practice. It does so through a
set of concepts that allow, to a larger degree, to study multiplicity and
movement within the particularity of the practice through which tech-
nologies are mobilized. Assemblage theory aims not to understand the
part/whole relationship as mechanistic totalities with interior relations,
but rather to study how the assemblage creates a nexus of relations in
the organization that it unfolds within and thereby how the relations
of the assemblage, qua their particularity, change its significance and
modus operandi. In this way, assemblage theory is more interested in
entities’ capacities and the movements of the assemblage, rather than
their properties or characteristics. This line of thought is consistent
with our understanding of accounting representations as inherently
entwined with organizing (Miller & Power, 2013). Moreover, assem-
blage theory shares ANT’s ontology that no inherent essence of objects
exists. The significance of objects is constructed in the assemblage and
will, therefore, be different between different assemblages (DeLanda,
2006). Building on Deleuze’s theoretical apparatus, assemblage theory
pays attention to multiplicity and heterogeneity of assemblages and
their effects on performance. The theory is very explicit about the role
of capacities of objects – which is conceptualized by the concern that
everything is treated as a sign and the significance of a sign is a matter
of decoding what the sign means, or its mode of operation – where
 What can accounting learn from Deleuze? 13
the assemblages in which the significations unfold also constitute the
assemblage of the signification. Deleuze and Guattarí treat this un-
der the notion of regimes of signs and sometimes signifying regimes
(Deleuze & Guattarí, 2004).
In sum, through its theoretical focus on movements and becom-
ings, assemblage theory gains significance in analysis. Accounting re-
search that draws on assemblage theory can extend the insights from
mainstream accounting research, and also constructivist accounting
research, by focusing on the particularity of practice and the role
significations of objects play in relation to describing how and why
technologies produce the effects they do (Martinez, 2011; Martinez &
Cooper, 2017; Neu et al., 2009).
In what follows, I will describe the following Deleuzian concepts
related to assemblage theory: the rhizome; sign, signification and re-
gimes of signs; assemblage, territorialization, de- and reterritorializa-
tion; and lines of flight and lines of active destruction.

The rhizome
The rhizome is a concept through which it is possible to explain the
movements of social phenomena. In biological terms, the rhizome
refers to a certain part of some plants close to their roots. The rhi-
zome is, under certain conditions, able to reproduce the plant vegeta-
tively. If even a very small part of the rhizome is removed and planted
elsewhere, the plant can reproduce itself there. If an animal eats part
of the rhizome, it might disperse small parts of the rhizome on the
ground and reproduce the plant as new plants. The implication is that
it is impossible to anticipate where the plant will reproduce and which
connections the plant will make to other entities (Deleuze & Guattarí,
2004, p. 7). The concept of the rhizome is developed by Deleuze and
Guattarí (2004), who explain its use of the term as follows:

It is tracings that must be put on the map, not the opposite. In

contrast to centered (even polycentric) systems with hierarchical
modes of communication and preestablished paths, the rhizome
is an acentered, nonhierarchical, nonsignifying system … the rhi-
zome has no beginning and no end; it is always the middle, between
things, interbeing, intermezzo. The tree is filiation, but the rhizome
is alliance, uniquely alliance. The tree imposes the verb “to be”, but
the fabric of the rhi- zome is the conjunction … This conjunction
carries enough force to shake and uproot the verb “to be”.
(Deleuze and Guattarí, 2004, pp. 23 and 27)
14 Theoretical plateaus
The rhizome conceptualizes continuous becoming, a becoming
that comes from the acentered conjunctions (links or relations) that
move the assemblage rhizomatically without underlying structural
order. The rhizome is, as Deleuze and Guattarí (2004) state in the
quote, to be contrasted with centered systems. It is acentered and
nonhierarchical.
The authors argue that the rhizome contradicts the root-tree, which
is organized with a root system, a trunk, branches and leaves. This
structure organizes the tree. However, Deleuze and Guattarí argue
that the root system and the rhizome are always intermingled with
each other and cannot be understood as two opposite models. The
two are always present at the same time: one as the structural organ-
izing model (the root-tree) and the other as continuous movements in
relation to the particularity in which it operates (the rhizome). Plants
provide the example; even when they have a root, trunk and branches,
they also have an outside that constructs a rhizome with the wind, an-
imals and humans. In terms of accounting and management control,
this means that accounting signifies a structural organized system –
the accounting system – but this system has an outside that connects
with the particular (the specific context). Thus, the performance of the
structural system is realized by the structure and its rhizomatic side,
which moves the performance according to the rhizomatic conjunc-
tions it is exposed to. Thus, both the signifying structure of the ac-
counting system and the nonsignifying rhizomatic movements coexist,
and the performance of the accounting system is an effect of both sides
of the control system.

While claiming to be traditional Deleuze nevertheless defines phi-

losophy in an unusual way as the art of forming, inventing and
fabricating concepts (Deleuze and Guattarí, 1994, p. 2). It has
nothing to do with contemplation, reflection, or communication
(ibid., p. 6). At its deepest level it is the creation of concepts …
This description suggests the famous rhizome concept, a multi-
plicity whose parts are interconnected but not according to an un-
derlying structural order, where connections can be made at any
point to any point, where new branches can grow and old ones
regenerate and reconnect. The rhizome is an image of what phi-
losophy should be, a complex, ungovernable place of spontaneous
encounters and devisings standing in sharp contrast to all the ef-
forts of systems of established power to capture, block, channel
and control the force it expresses.
(Heywood, 2002, p. 373)
 What can accounting learn from Deleuze? 15
This quote explains that the rhizome contrasts with all systems of
established power. But equally important, it shows that we need an
empirical awareness when mobilizing the concept of the rhizome in
accounting research. This highlights that we cannot take anything for
granted or use general structures as explanatory variables – here the
different to interpretivism also becomes visible.
Heywood (2002) argues that the rhizome is a multiplicity, which res-
onates Deleuze and Guattarí’s (2004, p. 8) “principle of multiplicity”.
As Deleuze and Guattarí state, within multiplicity, and therefore
within the rhizome, there is no axis or taproot. The multiplicity does
not have an object or a subject but only “determinations, magnitudes,
and dimensions that cannot increase in number without the multiplic-
ity changing in nature” (Deleuze & Guattarí, 2004, p. 9). As a con-
sequence, there are no points in a rhizome that form a structure; its
fabric is multiplicity. Thus, the concept exists alongside other signi-
fying structural systems, but the two are entangled in each other in a
complex relationship. As an example of the use of the rhizome in social
science research, Bidima and Warren (2005) discuss identity through
the notion of the rhizome:

“They [Deleuze and Guattarí] established a perspective … of

thinking, a thinking of the root and of the rhizome. The unique
root is one which kills its surroundings whereas the rhizome is
a root that extends towards an encounter with other roots”. On
the basis of this distinction, Glissant challenges atavistic notions
of cultures that define their identity in terms of territory, origin,
and ancestry. He opposes to this the idea of composite cultures,
which, in the image of a rhizome, disregards territories and de-
emphasizes genealogies and unilinear affiliation, thus giving rein
to pluralities.
(Bidima and Warren, 2005, p. 554)

The quote shows how Bidima and Warren (2005), drawing on Glissant,
apply the concept of the rhizome to problematize the identity of culture.
In the same way, the rhizome is able to explain how management tech-
nologies (the general models that can be understood as management
technology’s taproot) will extend and connect in the particularity they
act within, which changes the identity of the particular management
technology. This means that we cannot understand two management
technologies that build on the same general model, for example, the
Balanced Scorecard, as the ‘same’ in their practical unfolding. Their
performances are co-constructed by the rhizomatic connections they
16 Theoretical plateaus
develop in the particularity they are mobilized within (the principle of
multiplicity). In this way, accounting practice is understood rhizomati-
cally because it connects and moves with the assemblage it constitutes.
From the Deleuzoguattarian perspective, the model has two sides that
together form its organizational performance. One side of the model is
its capacity as a signifying model that prescribes certain actions and
performances, and the other side is the rhizomatic one, which chal-
lenges and constructs particular becomings of the technology when the
signifying model connects with the idiosyncratic particularities of the
organization (the particular context in which it is mobilized to work).

Sign, machinic assemblages and regimes of signs

Machinic assemblages and regimes of signs are important concerns to
understand the performance of assemblages and the meanings people
tend to ascribe to the signs they engage with in their everyday lives.
For Deleuze, all things that humans engage with are essentially under-
stood as signs, and when humans produce an understanding of a sign
in a certain way, it is done because the mind ascribes a meaning to the
sign. Machinic assemblages have an important role in this. Machinic
assemblages form the constructs that mediate which meanings are as-
cribed to signs. This section discusses machinic assemblages and their
relation to thought and, thereafter, to regimes of signs.

Machinic assemblages
Deleuze and Guattarí (2004) think about the existence of free state-
ments in their work on machinic assemblages. In their discussion
of machinic assemblages, the existence of free will (treated in some
places in the scholarship as pure thinking) is questioned. They argue
that ‘pure thinking’ does not exist because statements are always prod-
ucts of machinic assemblages:

There are no individual statements, only statement-producing ma-

chinic assemblages … For the moment, we will note that assemblages
have elements (or multiplicities) of several kinds: human, social, and
technical machines … We can no longer even speak of distinct ma-
chines, only of types of interpenetrating multiplicities that at any
given moment form a single machinic assemblage … Each of us is
caught up in an assemblage of this kind, and we reproduce its state-
ments when we think we are speaking in our own name; or rather we
speak in our own name when we produce its statement.
(Deleuze and Guattarí, 2004, pp. 40–41)
 What can accounting learn from Deleuze? 17
The quote illustrates Deleuze and Guattarí’s metaphysics about
the world, humans and agency. There is, according to Deleuze and
Guattarí, no free will, no ‘pure desire’. There are statement-producing
machines (abstract machines) that produce the statements that humans
speak. They continue:

There are no individual statements, there never are. Every state-

ment is the product of a machinic assemblage, in other words, of
collective agents of enunciation (take “collective agents” to mean
not peoples or societies but multiplicities). The proper name (nom
propre) does not designate an individual: it is on the contrary
when the individual opens up to the multiplicities pervading him
or her, at the outcome of the most severe operation of deperson-
alization, that he or she acquires his or her true proper name. The
proper name is the instantaneous apprehension of a multiplicity.
(Deleuze and Guattarí, 2004, p. 42)

Individuals are depersonalized by the multiplicities pervading them,

Deleuze and Guattarí argue. As such, the thought-experience relation-
ship that happens in humans’ minds is a complex assemblage emerg-
ing by the multiplicities the human is connected with. Therefore, the
notion of machinic assemblages is a counterclaim against the phenom-
enological ideas of subjectivism and the idea of the human agent as
an interpreting actor. As they state, our perception of the world and
articulation is constituted by the multiplicities that ‘interpenetrate’ us
and determine our perception of the world.
In accordance with Deleuze and Guattarí’s work on assemblages,
DeLanda (2006) outlines a model of the subject, where the subject
emerges as relations of exteriority among contents of experience. In
that conceptualization, experience constitutes the representations in
memory. But, as discussed previously, this is a synthesis of past assem-
blages of multiplicities that is not representing the present. It is chains
of repetitions that constitute the representational fixity that forms
memory, and memory is a generalization of the particularity of the as-
semblage that the synthesis strived to represent (Deleuze, 1968, p. 91).
Thus, memory is also simulacrum, constituted by the passive synthesis
of mind. This means that our perception of the world builds on mental
representations that themselves are simulacra emerging from synthe-
sis of the past. And these representations frame our perception of the
world. In DeLanda’s terms, those framings are constructed by social
assemblages, which are not to be considered stable, but moving multi-
plicities that interconnect in the mind of the human. Thus, experience
through memory makes us understand things and beings in certain
18 Theoretical plateaus
ways as fixities. But the fixities are illusions, the object is always more
than the memory’s synthesis of it.

Regimes of signs
To understand how accounting representations come to matter and
how they become entwined with organizing, we turn to the notion
of regimes of signs. As described, machinic assemblages frame our
being and understanding of the world. Deleuze and Guattarí (2004)
devote a chapter (Chapter 5) to the connection between sign and sig-
nification, which is at least as important for understanding the theo-
retical approach to the study as are machinic assemblages. Deleuze
and Guattarí (2004) write about regimes of signs and the signifiant
(signal) and signifié relationship (the generation of the meaning of the
sign). The notion of regimes of signs explains the relationship between
signifiant and signifié. As mentioned, signs are assemblages of multi-
plicities, and, thus, the sign is not understood as a sign of a thing:

Why retain the word sign for these regimes, which formalize an
expression without designating or signifying the simultaneous
contents, which are formalized in a different way? Signs are not
signs of a thing; they are signs of deterritorialization and reterri-
torialization, they mark a certain threshold crossed in the course
of these movements …
Next, if we consider regimes of signs using this restrictive defini-
tion, we see that they are not, or not necessarily, signifiers. Just as
signs designate only a certain formalization of expression … sig-
nifiance itself designates only one specific regime among a number
of regimes existing in that particular formalization.
In any case, content and expression are never reducible to signified-
signifier … Expression can never be made into a form reflecting
content.
(Deleuze and Guattarí, 2004, pp. 75–76)

Here Deleuze and Guattarí argue that the relationship between sign and
signification is also characterized by multiplicity. Sign-signification is
therefore a matter of exterior relations to the assemblage that territo-
rializes or deterritorializes the signification and, thus, to explain the
sign-signification relationship, it is important to understand that sig-
nification is constituted by the regime of signs. This is interesting in
relation to the analysis in this book, because accounting information
is perceived as formalized expressions. But as Deleuze and Guattarí
 What can accounting learn from Deleuze? 19
(2004, p. 123) note, the formalization in itself is not enough to under-
stand its signification:

One can proceed as though the formalization of expression were

autonomous and self sufficient. Even if that is done, there is such
diversity in the forms of expression, such a mixture of these forms,
that it is impossible to attach any particular privilege to the form
or regime of the “signifier.”
(Deleuze and Guattarí, 2004, p. 123)

The complication of understanding signs as signifiers of a thing is

based in the argument of difference and repetition, where difference
is inherent in chains of repetitions. The signs are therefore “signs of
signs” (Deleuze & Guattarí, 2004, p. 124). Thus, the signifying regime
is the semiotic that constructs signification of meaning. But this sig-
nification, as mentioned in the quotes, is only one signification among
others (constituted by other regimes of signs). Thus, several regimes
of signs can decode the sign and construct a signification of it. The
formalization of information is therefore not enough to understand its
signification. Because of the chains of repetitions, the signs are signs
of signs (of assemblages of multiplicities); there is therefore not “one”
meaning of the sign, no essence. Thus, epistemological objectivity,
which is about following the right formalization (procedure) in con-
structing accounting information, does not resolve the problem of how
the sign (of accounting information) is decoded, because it does not
refer to a ‘thing’ or essence but to continuous territorializations and
deterritorializations.
This idea is consistent with recent work on connecting organizing
and accounting. For instance, Miller and Power (2013) argue that ac-
counting is never just applied to an organizational activity; rather, it
must be understood as constituting a calculable space of such activi-
ties (see also Lennon, 2019), which they term a ‘territorializing’ move.
Although not building on Deleuze, the work of Miller and Power
resembles some aspects of Deleuzoguattarian theory, and their con-
cepts of territorializing may be further developed by incorporating
Deleuze and Guattarí’s theory. Indeed, accounting territorializes also
in a Deleuzian sense. As Neu et al. (2009) write, “technologies such
as accounting, and discourses such as accountability come to claim
or ‘territorialize’ particular physical and discursive spaces” (p. 320),
and “the first concrete rule for assemblages is to discover what terri-
toriality they envelope” (Deleuze & Guattarí, 1987, pp. 503, 505, 504).
Neu et al. (2009, p. 323) suggest that “every social space will be formed
Another Random Scribd Document
with Unrelated Content
The text on this page is estimated to be only 21.97%
accurate

1196 INDEX III. Pa^e. FI«h. .113, 215. 312, 582, 682, 752,
753, 779, 895 Fiaher, 10, 25, 263. 272, 278, 279, 312, 315. 316 333,
504, 305, 309, 321, 550, 560, 564. 572 576, 012, 615, 617, 620,
625. 644. 665. 666 743, 754. 769, 800, 885. Fi«k. 9. 11. 12. 20. 25.
30. 45, 170, 255, 532. 533 665. 746, 746, 781,894. Fitch
190,191,236,255.617, 778 FittB 465,684, 685 Fitzgerald 627 Flagg
514, 528. 629. 570 Flaherty 528 Flavell 233 Fletcher. 89. 92, 93.
103. 122, 257, 258, 263 268, 327, 334. Flint
22,29,244,339,360,361.569,661 Flynn 481 Fogarty 785 Fohs 63
Follansby 602, 723 Follett 127, 597 Folaom ... 44l, 595 FoDda 698.
715 Fooea 795 Foot 166 Foote 352 Forbes 16,23,75, 85 Forbush 24,
36.533, 571 Ford . . .49, 175. 288, 659. 692. 806, 845, 923 ForisUll
578,635, 776 Forister 162 Forrester 667, 819 Forster 411 Forsyth HI,
870 FoM 446 Foster, 22, 27. 33, 63, 78, 103, 138, 172. 258 286,
306, 489, 492, 569, 604, 656, 709, 727 729, 783, 827, 856.
Fountaine 786, 911 Fowie 49,73, 737 Fowler 608 Fox 43, 125, 4)1
Foy 210 Francia...' 678 Frank 382,654, 655 Franklin... 224, 325 Frary
8Fraser. 468 FraTor; 209' Frazer 671 Fredenbarsh ...860 Freeborn...
902. FreeloTe . 152 Freeniao. ..317,667,694, 847 Page. French, 274,
342, 394, 397, 41«, 425, 447, 556 601, 633, 638, 674, 692, 773,
844. 896. Frese 908 Fretts 777 Frick 688 Frlsbee 172,622.665, 877
Friwtine 163 Frost 96,258,660,744. 889' Frothlngham 462 Frye
163Fullam ... 279. 290 Fuller. 149, 195, 213, 242, 284, 390, 544,
662, 644 669.687. Fullerton 279, 290 Furber 442 Furbush 461
Farman 301 Fussell 8 Gable 34 Ga«e 99, 478, 497 Gaines TIS
Galbraith 667 Gale 171, 173, 277, 339, 604, 640, 672, 679 Gallup
396, 921 Galusha 878, 680, 898 Qambell 828 Gamraage 761, 752
Oamwoll 818 Gangewar 188 Oapen 183 Gardner, 99, 114, 143, 371,
428, 630, 634, 648 715, 744, ns. Gardiner 143 Garfield •. 890
Garland 419, 469 Garner 900,981 Garrett 449 Garrey 448 Garrlsh
841 Garron 444 Gartner 810 QarTey 178 . Gaskill 668^ GsMAtt..
199. 23T Gates. 544. 897, 813, 731, 796, 829. 918^^ Gauldropp.- -
310GaTett.....i 884 Gavit - 73r Gay 48,307,309,431,433,680,833. S3S
Gaylord 710,853, 88T: Ge« 334, 37t Gehskie 800,918 GeiTltz.. 915
Genahl 50
The text on this page is estimated to be only 20.48%
accurate

INDEX III. 1197 Pass. George 2H6 tierstle 820 Gerbardt

768 Geiry 449 GIbbs 81C, 720, 825 Gibson. 16, 118. 123, 370, 387,
868, 617. 672 690, 791. GIfford 366, 545,fi22, 623, 693, 812 Gilbert.
. 211, 241, 428, 535, 682, 585, 695. HS Glle 428 Giles 207 QllfilJan
736 Gill 462 Glllett : 801 Gllliran 198 Gillow 643 Gilman 398, 809
Gilmore 75, 413, 941 Gilroy .. 225 Gllson 149, 328 Gladden 27
Glazier 693 Gleaaon 46. 160.534. 829 Glen 103, 120 Glidden...: 229
Qlineg 717 Gloid 813, 923 Glover 272, 411, 4:3, 458, 524 Goan
198,237 Goddard 35, 63, 383, 617 Goddin 864. 644 Godfrey
180,616, 914 Gofl 820 Gold 128. 173 Goldlog 865, 783
Goldsborough 137 GoIdsmitU 942 Gooch 662 Goodala 546, 610
Goodell 617,703, 854 Goudhue 120 Goodnow 522 Goodrich
46,323,443,444.446,702, 748 Go
The text on this page is estimated to be only 22.10%
accurate

1198 INDEX III. Pksa. Hagerman M4 Haggett 88, 92 HalgLt

99,113. 115 Baines 367,384, 386 Hair 628, 763 Hake* 280. 290
Hale, 26, 96. 105. 106, 116, 173, 261. 265, 658 319. 874. Halen
363, 761 Hall, 37, 109, 115. 164, 164, 178, 229, 250, 270 349, 368.
373. 401, 421. 429, 459. 6S6, 580 611. 634. no, 784. 795, 881.
Hallett 814 Halliday 584 Hallock 113 Halpin 772 HaUe7 783, 909
HaUtead 99, 361 Ham 460 Hamant 20 Hamblln 896 HamiltOD, 111,
574, 537, 638, S65, 566, 570 663,809. Hamlin 560,579, 784
HammontI 309, 560, 619, 656, 772, 803, 851. 895 Hanoock. 461
Hand 181. 769 Handyride 597 Haner 677 Hanifan 846 Hanka 476
Hann 368, 482 Hanner ■ 466 Hannigan 192 Hansoom 460,452, 475
Hanaon 486,499, 892 Hapgood..' 122, 673 Harbougb 912 HardlDg,
8, 9. 15. 30. 33, 53. 511. 621. 622, 525 C28, 631, 532, 668, 629,
669. 744. HardinlDK 671 Hardatock 144 Hardwick ......429, 817
Hardy 183, 774,; 820r Harlao -. U2: Harlow.. 4l(i.>444^ Harmon
110, 643L Harod 408 Harper 28.38.^307, Haring;ton..l86, 269. 463,
629. 537. 5a9,';566; 568, 569. 589, 690^609, 638, 660, 616.;. 64«
736. Hani mam 36;6«,.816i Harria, 14, 190^ 220, 334. 418. 663.
630, 73U 820 Pace. Harsh 778 Hanhman 876 Hart 871. 764, 897
Hartford 766 Hartman 70, 184, 737 Hartrampt 483 Hartahom
33.49.73.277 Hartwell 466 Hartz 447 Harvey 472, 863 Harwood 676
Haakell 131 HaaklU 660 Haakina 149,672,590, 699, 829
Ha«tings..320,580,&49,S71.fi78, 704. 749. 802 833. 864, 920, 938.
Hatob 201,283, 336, 365, 720, 864, 901 Hatfield 748 Hathaway
456,731,732,765, 821 Hathorn 827 Hatton 41,52, 61 Haven 11, 12,
186, 334, 363. 750, 891 Haviland ., 113 Hawee 790 Hawley 684
Hawkina 4U, «18 Hawks 625 Haxtam .161 Hay 429 Hayden 426,
607,642,769, Tli Hayes 440, 586, ni Hayford 433 Haynes 196, 773
Hay ward -19, 412, 429, 432, 456, 618, 747, 766 Haywood 161
Hazard 430 Hazeltlne 396, 390, 777 Hazen 191, 611. 739 Hazewell
468 Heal 730 Heart 649 Heath. 127, 179, 230, 349, 606, 730, 816,
861, 020 Heald.v 123, IflO Heckle...^ - 60 Heddiag.' :.. — .^~>_
9ia< Hedge*. ..h**^** •■••*••••••-••»* »•.•*.... 623 ' Hellen .>
........ 422 HeUU ■- ~-... 483! Hemenway. . ...'. 331« 348, 628:
Hemmenway. 116,150, 196, 76(1, ,824 Henderson...;. 34S>
Hendrick — 331 Heniston ......._ 38 Henning.' 71S^
The text on this page is estimated to be only 20.49%
accurate

INDEX III. 1199 Pase. Henry 46, 172. 221. 440 Henshaw
829,537, 370, 64«. 6«4, 810 Herbert 843 Heredeen 809 Herman 70
Herrlck 127,170,191, 709,751, 892 Herring 79, 135, 940 Herwsy 25.
38, 6S3, 809 Bertzler TRT HenstU 2T5 Hew 750 Hnwins 72 Hey
wood 268 Hick 147.184,662. 807 Hierommus 146, 192 Biggins 418,
456,485.714.782. 839 Hlldreth 120. 123, 261,268, 553 Hill. 9, 19.
116, 144, 315. 320, 321, 329, 362, 439 442, 443. 461. 469. 512,
532, 54«, 560, 676 618, 708, 731. 813. 848, 863, 874, 893, 925
930,937,943. Hillhooae 18S Hillard 485 HiUman 381 HIIU.., 303,
633. 699,767. 773 Hillyard 146, 193 Hilton 666. 675 Hincher 368
Hinckley 477. 497, 620, 621, 622, 704 Hine 167, 212 Hiner 215
Hlnman 31.437,648.749, 784 Hinsdale 650 Hire 717 HUcock 286
Eltcboock 537.590, 591,631,699, 789 Hittbid 609 hlxon 528, 674,
640, 657, 673. 678. 822 HiSRon 414 Hoag 731, 881 Hoar 102, 628
Hobart..392, 394, 400, 409, 424,681, 685, 6H6 687, 848. Hobbs
154, 537, 666, 509, 691, 648. 772 Hodgdon 406.417. 419 Hodge
363 Hodges 882 Hodgklns. 362 Hodgman 241.282, 413, 436
Hoffman 716 Hoge 877 Hugle 183 Holbrook. .17, 20, 332, 344, 350,
365. 384, 425 455, 556, 657, G68, 670, 833. Pa«e. Holcomb 607,
d09 Holden 509,602, 808 Holland 362,381, 429, 767, 818, 906
Hollenbeck 340,653, 7S8 HoUiday 118, 144,191. 487 Hollls 656
Holloway 741 Hollmao 348 Holmes. .132, 133. 271. 282. 333, 448,
348, 671 887, 615, 652, 74.3, 750, 884. Holt.. 15, 100, 101, 117.
176,267, 346, 465, 538 844, 606. 876, 6T7. 725, 781, 798. Homer
38,648, 773 Hood 663 Hook 46, 437 Hooker 070 Hooper 4S2
HooToer 311 Hopkins 168,213. 214 Hopper 830 Horn 419, 877
Hornby 18 Homer 863 Homing 717 Horr 338, 343 Hortoo. .218, 384.
449, 601, 604, 609, 693, 723 Hosley 196 fiobmer 283, 411
Hotchkias 660 Hoagb 324,338, 724 Houghtaling 180, 346 Hoagbton.
. 17, 28, 412, 533. 636. 601, 873, 735 819. House 111,172,713.861
Hooser 198 Honston 369. 273 Hovey 466.899, 710 Howard. 64, 66,
116, 255, 368, 30H. 307. 300 310. 352. 371. 412. 405. 341, 568,
693, 084 704, 779, 829, 860, 873, 942. Howe. 51, 74, 119, 155,
204, 330, 337. 426, 481 536. 537, 507, 090^ 629. 680, 792. Howell
333 Howes 477 Bowlaad 3R8, 368. 664. 810 Hoyle ...728 Hoyt
405,415,435.472.578.681.638 Hoxie 98 Bubbard 338.587. 797
Hubbell ...186.890^718 Huckina •• 770 Budson 549, 617.626. 699
Huff 109 Hugbes • 333, 337. 373, 85^ 793
The text on this page is estimated to be only 18.40%
accurate

1200 INDEX III. Pane. Hnbard "« HaJl 99.113,217, 317

Hulett 136.13P. 827 Hume 172 Hamiston *'' Humphrey TI5, 821 Hun
«» Hunt. .397, 393, 401, 4.V), 454, 435. 479, 006 568, 600, 659,
811, 92.3. Hunter «, H6. 488 HuntioK 302. 306, 670, 749, 776, 818
Huntington 200,613, 742 Hurlbert 876 Hurd 450,481, 545 Huge 'M
Hutchlniion 217, 7n5 fluchins 41,53. 148,362.581, 704 Hyde. .40, 60,
96, 138. 170, 171, 183. 218, 316 322, 807, 604 605, 632, 879. 945.
Hymes 703 We 16 llsley *85 IngalU 27,158. H55 In^e 3»1 InRersoll
K'7 Ingbram 7S6 Ingoldsfed »13 InRraham • • • • 707 Ingram
587.690.695,697,841, 84« Inman 811 Irons 8!i5 Irwin *^ lafaam
335,353 lamond 13" Izard Jackman 440, 915 Jackaon 65,
198,214,889, 949 Jacobs 368, 415,591, 827, 851 Jaffrey 902
Jameson 139, 458, 47.% 585 Janverin 391,405. 441 Jarris 6*-a
Jencks .■588.700.821 Jeffords 325, 818 Jenkins 379. 757 Jenney
618 Jennings 181, T!»3, 71)6 Jersey 3«« Jewell 679,682,710 Jewett
5;% 547, 65-2 Johnson, 29. 60, 63, 78, 15.%, ItfiS, 182. 194, .%8
38«l. 404. 407, 423, 43:1, 43W, 440, 44.1, 453 454, aVi, 4H4. 48.1.
488. 909. 019. 925, 527 632, 541, W», 574, 583. 599.645, 683. n9
732, 74!., 751, 752, 7W», n2, TIU, 819, «H>» 892. 893, 894, 931.
PsseJones. 80, 13.1, 137, 183, 186, 214, 296, 297, 340 350, 360,
394. 396, 398, 449, 531, 509, 561 672, 575, 597, 608, 631, 6R3,
687, 719, 736 750, 7H6, 768, 770, 786, 810, 843, 847, 850 873,
893, 910. Jordon 58, 441, 616 Josselyn 669 Jourdan 700 Joyner 381
Judd 134, 177, 353 Jump 171 Kaiser 282, 291 Kalor 552 Kane 180
Karr 151 Karrick 729 Keeler 768 Keet M6, 680 Keigwin 124 Keith
321,535, TM Keiser 733, 875 Kelley 444, 485, 893 Kellogg 689, 823,
839 Kelly 45, 169 Kerney 703 KeUey 667,798 Kelt 450 Kemmis 663
Kempton 382, 390, 842 Keodail 28, 101, 123,229, 600 Kendrick 534
Kennard 153 Kenuedy 437,607, 733 Kenney 210, 336 Kennient 409,
616 Kent 148,602, 831, M40 Keoyon 02, 70, 644, 666 Kerr 661
Ketchum 189,646, 739 Keyes 104,109,347,749,887 Klbbe 674, 674
Kibble. 717 Klbling 117 Kidder 116,460, 699 Kihlberg 461 Kilborn
647,746, 868 Kilbarn 235 Kile 880 Klllbury 801 KlUen 799 Kimball,
179, 278, iO:*, 633. 610. 603, 618, 669 770. »39. King, 44. 6.1,
119. 216, 34X, 374. 594. 680. 6011 654. 684. 700, T7V. 831. 892.
940.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 19.65%
accurate

INDEX III. 1201 rage. KiDsmao 342. «S, 729, 884

Klnnsbury, 29, 107, 174, 220.328, 344,804, 674 KiD^sley 126, 130,
173,807,608, 933 Kinne 162 Kionear 469 KiDoey 2S9, 443. 449, 882
KiDsel wood 3B1 Kinsley 818 Kinsman 23, 48, 71 Kirby 124,876
Kirlcpatrick 760,797, 901 Kirtland 342 Kissam 727 KitcbeU 688
Kittredge 809 Kizzer 808 Knapp 13, 148,171,438,734, 828 Kneeland
023 Knixbt. 106, 186. 168, 206, 269, 280, 684, b91 74«.
Kniclierbaclcer 614 Knollin 44 Knowles 731 Knowlton 278. 480, 4«1,
803 Koox 449,693, 846 Kohler...; 780 Kraeger 909 Kraus 640 Kuhn
403 La iiree 882 Lackey 014, 828 Ladd 890, 678, 831 La Favour 22,
34 Laird 133, 660 Lakin 891 Lally )i82 Lamarie 178 Lamb, 014, 000,
068, 612, 647, 649. 6S0, 788 789. Lambert 761 La May 884 La
Montague 880 Lamphere 141 Lamphier 369 Lamprey 286 Lamson
089 Lane 110, 638, 704, 733 Laning 64, 80 Lang.... 163 Lange 78
Langley 472, 494 Langwortby 38, 727 Lapbam 7a, 139 Larkin
80,264,860,732 Pace. I>amard and Lamed 080, 732, 870 Latimer
186 Latbrop 170. 218 Laaghton 438 Law 629 Lawrence, 28, 61, 64.
106, 187, 269. 279, 383 071, 083, OUO, 670, 782. Laws 383 Lawson
143, 189 Lawton 178,690 Lavery 488 Laverty 186 Lasell :..873, 870
Leach 104,163,340, 420, 740 Learned 48,298, 026 Leatherow 47
Leavitt 44.1,667, 826 Le Baron 172 Lecbliter 67 Lee. 1(«. 132, 140,
166, 181. 201, 232, 3h3, 380 476, 497, 790. LeEngle 881 Leet 703,
803 Legg 009 Legge 479, 030 Leighton 108 Leland 12,
13,321,011,539,642, 782 Leonard 141, 187,309.631,725, 8«S Lepper
44 Lerner 370 Lescreaox 644 Leslie 469, 880 Lester 140 Letberland
66 Lever 369 Lewis, 33, 54, 98, 128, 131. 139, 341, 363, 386 033,
607. 618, 632, 667, 707, 851. 890, 901 Libbey 498 Libby 422, 442,
478 Licey 190 Lleb 228, 247 Lillibridge 613 Llnoh 694 Lincoln
410.489,689,734 Lindon '. 620 Link 860, 941 Litchfield 318 Little
217, 436, n4, 777 Littlefleld, 17, 23, 24, Oil, 012, 019, 526, 532
731,814. Litz 707 Livingstone ........668, 712 Liviogston 924, 904
Lobb 203
The text on this page is estimated to be only 20.36%
accurate

1202 INDEX III. PageLock 101, IMO Locke 277 Lockwood

197.236,611, 895 Lod« 478 LoKaD 47 Lombard 99^ 710, 753, 898
LoDK 63, 1«4, 351 LooRley 266, 275 LoDKwell 45, 67 Looker 40
LoomU 191. 330, 353, 374, 541, 686, 837 Lord 437, 438, 447, 647.
761, 901 Loucks 203, 715 Loud 467 Loveland 214.339.340,361,544,
779 LoTelesg 330 Lovering 6Hfi, M15 Lovejoy 274, 844 Lo-rell 13,
15. 21, 201, 296, 321. 551, 571 Lovett 107 Lowe 516,585,588, 699
Lowell 272,677 Lowder 623 Lloyd 32 Loxo «82 Lucaa 41, 778, 893
Luce 173. 245 Lufkio 266 Lukens 7;«. 879 LuDd 11« LuDdoo 1>>8
Luningbam 820 Lnnt 424,488,638, 709 J ,utber 569, fi(i2 Lyford 416
Lyman 179,584, 693 Lynch 454 Lynde 162,208, 529 Lynn 22S, 248
Lynnfleld 17fl, 425, 455 Lyon, 134, 195. 410, 559. 602, 630, 768,
7ti9, 936 Lyona 632 Lytle U2 Lyttltf. 802, 846. Mable 847i Mac«<
78*, Macey Ua, 163MacKenna'. ~ 203 Maclean ■■:. 80< Maddan....
.440> Maffee .. .. 4« Maionn 331 Magolre 68(1 Mahony 873 Page.
Malloo 462 Mallory 123,341, 363 Manley 546 MaoD. 242, 320, 438,
529. 568, 575, 758, 746 747. Manning.. 161, 264 Manny 720
Mansfield 158,280, 60S Manson 09 Man tor .' 547,612 Maples 174
Marble 180,303, 724 Marclay 850 Marden 435, 463 Marks 797
Marker 192 Harr 709 Marsb. 15. 21. 22. 172, 2C9, 221, 397. 639,
641 655, 661, 749. 808, 820. Marshall 261,629,766, 810 Marston
488,551, 623 Martins , 847 Martlina 342 Martin 67, 83, 156, 185,
.•»7, 640, 597, 676 Marvel 619 Marrin 167,606,685, 914 Massey 43
Mason, 29, 46. 48, 112, 175, 302, 303. 306. 503 530. 552, 629, 701,
787. 789, 795, 815, 872 927. Massey 43 Masters 210 Matlong 778
Mather 556,631,690 Mathers 469 Matthews 44». 808;, 820 Maynard
626 Mayo 6B6 McAdama h63 McAllUter 838. 6oa McBride
215McCalvin .- 371
The text on this page is estimated to be only 20.54%
accurate

INDEX III. 1203 Page. McCourtland 911,933 McC'base

McChilson 947 MoClain 81 McCleaoe 753 McClellan 667 McCllntock
118 McClaney 196 McCIure 829, 796 McCord 187 McCoy 636 McCrea
810 McCullum 339, 826 McCumber 1*4 McDaniel 134 McDonald 133,
188 McEIroy 138, 18;, 873 McFarland 750, 883 McFarlan 204
McFaddea 632, 770, 771, 906 McGaffee Ifi9 McGan 447 McGee 843
McGraft 878 McGregor 331 Mclntire 304, 791 McKee 31, 364
McKenzie 492 McKinstrs 123 McLaugblin 381, 839 McLean 898
McLees 759, 928 McLeod 38 McMannis 172, 221 McMasters 832
McMead 60 McMichael 191, 236, 304 McMillen 470 McMalleo 360
McMun hy 31 McNaughty 388 McNeai 123 McNeil 463 McNett 194
Mctjaeen 346, 370 McQuinlln 440 McVlcker 924 McWethy 807, 734
Mc W borten 50 Meach 126 Meactaam 381, 617, 614, 742 Mead 94,
483 Meatus. 166 Mears 13, 154 Page. Meech 844 Meeker 440
Meeking 843 Meigs 280 Meiggs 34. 54 Mellen 284 Mellor 943 MelTin
489 Menzies 174 Men warren 72S Merchant 272, 801 Merewether
463 Merferd 381 Mergarth 388 Merriam 43,622, 627,732, 752
Merrick.. 374, 827 Merrill 174, 337,416,516, 708 Merritt 225,318, TK
Merrow 468 Merryfield 13,562, 878 Merrin 632 Merwin . 132, m,
738, 739 Mesick 54«| Meaaenger 773 Metcalf. II. 16, 201, 238, 312,
383. 390, 394, 811 312, 5X3, 526, 527, 632, 660, 641, 644, 781
814, 827, 833, »26, 935. Metzger 875 Miette 822 Miles 78, 83 Millard
63 Millen 913 Miller, 148, 172, 249, 465, 566, 574. 616, 631 646,
666, 674, 677. 705, 727, 785, 816, 840 842, 87S, 879. 897, 937,
940. Mills 156,370,429. 440,545, 646, 611 Milliken m Mlnard ibs
Miner 174,342,357, 400, 409, 848 Minkler 730, 872 Minot 103, 120
Mitchell 333,579,633, 671,678, 682 Mitchem 144 Moffet 80 Molby
738, 878 Molyneauz 463 Monegban 213 Monroe 203,282, 607, 608
Monson 44J1 Montany 688, 800 Mon teitb 334 Montgomery
40,60,646,668,783, 80O Moody 43,388, 487 Moon 147, 366
The text on this page is estimated to be only 18.57%
accurate

1204 INDEX III. Page. Moore, 38. 112, IIB, 116, 140, 194,
196, 30M, 372 463, 616, 639, 647, 711, 886. MoNhesd 646
MorehoDM 210, 880 Morey 669 Morgu, 129, 133, 171, 173, 2(4,
323, 332, 600 678, 732, 745, 830. Morrell 816 Honill 415, 637, 673,
701, 895 Morris 80, 86,345,469. 632 MorriMD 79, 112, 803, 851
Mor«e, 10, 13, 19, 23, 27, 28, 41, 195, 318, 322 32», 451, 47J, 519,
530, 557, 606, 6ti9, 616 B74, 889, 736, 746, 750, 788, 818, 840,
870 889. Hortoo 413, 556, 716 Moaes 668 Moss 844 Motch 896
Monl 896 Uoulton 45, 790, 910 Mower 224 Mowry 820 Madge 95
Moirnesd 72 Uumford 109, 134 Munroe 473, 707 Mauton ft89
Murdock 829 Marpbey 476 Marphy 804, 861 Murray 180,342,435,
513 Myer 696 Myere 40,368. 860 Mylee 858 MyrADt. 3C2 Nasle 232
Naglee 612 Nahor 24 N»U 772 Nmab 161, 607, 733, 771 Naaon 129.
224 N»y 45, 64 Ne»1 204 Neale 284, 395 Ne«ly 443, 472 Near 712,
860 Nelll 492. 607 Neff 220, 716, 862 Negrin 766 NeUon 32». 604,
727 Nerr 490 Natherwood 197 Metters 820 Pmcs. Neuberger 768,
905 Nevins 844,937 Newberry ;. ... 151 Newoomb, 28, 230, 410,
412, 424, 432, 459, 463 637. 825. Newell 33.53, 194, 593Newball
17, 157,401, 565 Newitt 114 Newl»Dd 637 Newman 431. 432. 482.
658 Newtou 148, 190,235, 701, 892NicboU. 118, 136, 142, 154,
530, 570, 592, 623631, 761, 885. Nicholson 283,454 Nickel 75
Nickerson 440,619,620, 69» Nlckle- (586^ Nightingale 621, 747
Nlgus 821 Nlles 145,612, 675 NIms 46, 666,789 Nixon 514 Noble Ml,
679 Nobles 734 Norcroas 648, 71»1, 825 Norman 70, 83 Northrup
184, 896 Norton 409,416,436,847,613.688, 794 Nourse 91.574. 675
Nowllng 317 Noyes 231. 334, 37-A B»3, B33 Nutter 172,221,406,
421,435,438, 439Nutting 683,687 Nye 226,461,785 Oakes 2<6 Oaks
218 Ober 640, 777 O'BoU 470 U'Connell 80 Ogden 453, 862 O'Hara
743 Ulcott 168, 213 Olds 214, 783 OlesoD 882, 939 OllTer
237,428,867. 608 Olmstead 113 Olney 171, 219 Olson »15 Ordway
358, 379 Orme 332; 349 Ormsbee 39 Ormsby 739. 769 O'NoU 647,
704 Ome 81»
The text on this page is estimated to be only 23.28%
accurate

INDEX III. 1205 Page. Orr 654, 799 Orris 152. 689 Osborn
368, 700 Osgood.. 39, 158, 178, 405, 448, 65K, 830 Otis 682
O'Toole 804 Oustine T95, 915 Overholt... .." 69 OTerton 377 Owen.
385,401, 705, 800 Owens 164. 448 Paige 116,728, 774 Paine, 5, 88,
277, 314, 317, 324, ;«5, 397. 403 409, 455, 558, 642. 653, 670, 774.
Page, 182. 202, 234, 432, 480, 572, 668, n4. 813 925. Packard 413,
T15, n2, 889 Packer 212 Palmer, 66, 125, 128, 166, 170, 336, 346,
354 370, 374, 376, 548, 564, 568, 599, 745, 790. Panny 694, 847
Panton 230, 633, 773 Parish 135, 181, 693, 845 Parkburst, 21, 83.
160, 259, 261, 271, 282, 364 3»4, 545, 003, 641, 761, 787, 912.
Parker, 11, 16, 72, 89, 93, 104, 123, 150, 160 163, 2t6, 209, 254,
262, 264, 296, 317, 318 350, 368, 373, 461, 530, 583, 652, 653,
656 729, 792, 796. S03, 813, 871, 927. Park 25,37, 628 Parka 766
Parkman 15 Parmenter 191, 624, 892 Parris 788 Parrish • f53 Parrott
718 Parshley 448 Parsons 128,169, 440, 467, 611 Partridge, 11, 33,
52, 76, 127, 295, 296, 315, 316 500, 510, 512, 521. 525. 5;12, 660,
561, 573 677, 578, 615, 613, 657, 674, 747, 820, 822. Paschall 324
Patch 102,683,638, 643 Patten 166,657, 742 Patterson, 128, in, 273.
274, 604, 727, 790 822,856. Pawlis 153 Paul 163,417, 438 Payne
198, 3n, .■»» Payson ......719, 749 Peaks 109 Pearl 487, 660 Pearry
304 Pease... 228,718, 832 Pace. Pearson 144 Peck, 31, 34. 54. 9.\
98. 134. 516. 541, 681, 800 «63, '.as. Peckham T93 Pelcber 841
Pellett 106, 127,517 Pelton n Pemer f»3 Pendexter 885 Pendleton /
136,175,543, 603 Penfield «I3 Penhollow 166 Penn 430 Penniman
397, 622 Penrose 713, 85C, 861 Peabody 448, 479 Pepper 306,79.1
Perham 15*, 20fl, 356,271,283, 291 Perkins, 46, 91, 267, 346, 370,
420, 430, 485 474. 477, 497, 535. 638, 740, 746. Perley «2» Pero
602 Perrin 81 Perrine Ill Perry. 9. 13. 50, 102, 104, 112, 117, 2lft.
273 .126, 548, 557, 860, B17, 635, 654, 721, 749 777, 825, 826,
866, 928. Persons 590 Peterson 245, 732. T72 Pettee.... 273, 286
Pettengill 97,290 705, 855 Pettigrew 149, 150, 195, 199, 278 Pettis ,
227, 613 Petrie 452 Pererly 416 Phasants 208 Phelpa
46.130,353,669,684,763 Phillips, 2.% 52, 422, 615, 568, 674, 606.
624 670. 673. 724, 759, 790, 831. Phinney 16B, 608, 603 Phlpps,
11, 12, 16, 18, 26, 42», 616, 744, 749 750, 884. 887, 946. Pickering
398, 406, 420, 422, 458. 46>l Pierce, 21, 63, 74. 136, 145, 209,
259, 265. 303 334. 488, 571, 583, 694. 602, 661. 673^ 7U 722, n*,
749, 763, 858, 866, 903. Pierpont 540 Plerson ..3t^ 718 Pike
36,50,316,446,469, 649 Pindar 598 Pingrey — 616 Pingry 117
Pinkbam 422, 437, 441 Piper 131,278,567,633,653, 843
The text on this page is estimated to be only 22.88%
accurate

1206 INDEX III. Pitcher 174,263, 269 PltUo 714 PittFar 767
Pltti 859 PUUter 198 Plank 69 Piatt 361 Pleasant 675 Plimpton, 8,
11. 300. 314, 621, 825, 827, 559 OM. 592, 642. 679, 706, 791.
Plammer, 283, 436, 442, 463, 670, 682, 738, 822 Poland 707, 840
Pollock 713 Pomeroy 739 Pond, 24, 33, 320, 329, 445. 474, 52fi,
527, F>2» 660. 563, 675, 782, 814, 820, 926. Pool 201, 370 Pope
139, 413, 432, 445,580, 638 Porter 138, 364, 461, 646,696. 752
Post 582 Potter 27, 193, 421, 450,805,613, 786, 890 950. Potwin
597 Powell 641 Powers 88, 91 , 612, 691 Pratr, 68, 156, 196, 603.
589, 691, 646, 682, 760 836,840,848. Pray 142, 189, 428, 432, 403
Preble 700 Presoott, 118, 206, 2«1, 262, 265, 43C, 646, 719
773,864. Preston 32, 67, 83, 358, 379. 749 Price 274, 469, 671 Pride
110 Prime 924 Printice 15,570, 610 Printlss 683 Pritcbard 609, 721,
865 Prior 848 Proctor 102, 159, 257, 259, 26.', 606 Proaty 869, 572,
662, 791, 808, 811, 851 Purdy 343 Pnrington 536 Putnam 124, 429,
430, 459, 654, 8tSt 949 Pyle 142 Pyno*»on 177; Qnaokenbosh. 181,
800 Qoimby 630, 642; Qnlncy , 464. 484^ Qainin 45T. Raffan 186,
609 Ralpii 173 Ramsay as*. Rand. 400, 422, 440, 4A2. 468, 828,
842, 93T Page Randall, 165, 440, 449, 478, 480, 639, 710, 867 925.
Ranier 446 Kaokin 271 Ranney 610, 818 Ransom 112,140, 141
Raplee 151 Ratbbarn 60 Rawson 243.397,427.457,667. 833 Kay 383,
H82, 760 Raymond. 173, 224. 230, 266, 274, 447, 551, 621
Raymore 069, 638 Rayner 253 Read 284.700 Reckard 63. 79 Rector
•■■66, .82 Redding M* Redlugton 42 Redman 354, 377 Reed. 30,
174, 221, 264, 266, 268, 274. 326. 339 340, 354. 356, 371, 400.
45x. 586. 692, 601 6A*, 672, 732, 762, 827. 936. Reese 374, 839
Reeves 660 Reid 893 Reiggs 347 Reilly «7 Reinswold 480 Remington
427, 660 Renick 18* Reynolds, 154, 163, 212, 249, 269, 657, 858,
911 937,940. Rlieene S73 Riant 266 Ribenburg 144 Rice, 17, 212,
278, 332, 367, 374, 634, 538, 656 384, 660, €67, 671, 762, T13,
817. 888. 893 Rich 517 Richards, 21, 32. 47, 265, 352, 362, 457, 607
671. Richardson, 10. 18, 21, 33, 151, 196, 257, 268 266, 267. 2H8,
276, 300, 303, 307, 410, ^441 462,: 604. 614. 515. 622, 628, 662,
666,1671 677,606,624,674,689^879,924,927. Richer- 468,492
Klchey «» Richie «33 Richmond 273,433, 824 Ricker « RIckert...!
645 Ridenoor. 860 Ridenoat. T63 Ridley .- ^20 RigaJoman 836
The text on this page is estimated to be only 22.54%
accurate

INDEX III. 1207 Pa«e Riggs C93 Biley 711. 722 Ripley 105,
2H, :23. 333 RisiDg 348, 604 Bisley 782, 800 Rix M2 Rizzley 866
BobbiDB, 27. 42, 88, 91, 103. 116, 121. 147, 159 194, 335, 342,
248, 551. 623, 624, 757. 890. RoberU, 364, 420, 449, 672. 685, 687,
825, 827 841. Roberteon 424 Robie 628, 740, 882 Robins 277
Robinson, 120. 126. 12>>. 137. 164, 171. 183. 204 263. 270, 415.
537. 471. 488, 641, 628, 734 1*19, 828. 902, 952. Robotham 742
Roby 262, 627 Rockwell 341, 610 Rockwood. 7, 12. 18, 23, 295,
344. 409. 510 515. 525. 615, 616. 681, 749. 815. Ro« 883 Rogers,
31, 363, 516, 588, 600, 717, 753, 765 782. Roggen . . 758 Rolfe 402
Rollins 18 Rood 813 Root 121,180. 232, 595, n4, 904, 944 Roper 822
Roraback 219 Roscoe 637 Rose 283, 333 Roaeboom 110, 137
Roeeokrans 682 Ross 362, 415. 4.-W, 836, 726 Rotb 9H, 730 Roands
300, 723 Rowdon 2H2 Rowe 432, 606 Rowell 629 Rowland... 794
Rowley 197,366, 789 Roy 794 Royce ....353, 361, 374 Kngg 132, 177
Ruggles 7,341,743, 746 Rule 727 Rundell 43, 62 Ranasey 112
RuiDwell 274 Russell, 29, 117, 150, 157, 173, 174, 178, 231 284,
437, 650, 651, 653, 683, 738, 793, 883 Pkge. Rust 688 Ruttenber
164 Rutter 575 Ryder. 9, 12, 369, 387, 473, 475, 494, 551, 621 753,
95L Sabln 27,38,313,323. 663 Saint John 171, 218 Saddington ....
689 Sadler 588 Safford 106,126,130,168,214, 616 Sabner 768
Salisbury 210,240, 536 Salmon 912 Sampson 431, 514,752,762,807.
921 Sanborn 337, 471 Saoches 773 Sanders 334, 503 Sanderson 417
Sanford 186, 329,8(3. 504 Sanger 318,469, 773 Sargent 40, 81, U7,
146, 148, 441 Satchwell 44 Saul 473 Saunders 191,437,444, 790
Savage 476. 496, 737, 741 , 877 Savll 392,394,395,397 Saville 432
Sawin 9 Sawtelle 261 Sawyer. ..2T5, 276,302,306,289,586,617, 8B2
Saxby 6U SaxoD 153 Sazton 178,240 Sayies 681,835 Scales 481
Scammell 817 ScsDimon 467, 492 Scafb<>ronxh 790 Scarlett ". 447
Schaffer 944, 955 Schaeffer 860 Schooley 878 Schuyler 764
Schwether 944 Scofleld 112 Scott, 134, 148, 181. 172, 221, 651,
see, 690, 704 815, 816, 842, 879. 911. Scovllle o ... 817 Scraoton
332 Scripture 27 Scudder 430,622,623, 788 Seabrook 32 Searl 123
SearU 21«
The text on this page is estimated to be only 19.40%
accurate

1208 INDEX III. Page. S«mman IH Sean 238, 507 S«STer

111.155,337.751, 891 tjeavey '^^i ^^^ See 3».5 Seeley... 717. WS,
777 Seelye 171.230 Secomb 264. 272 Seger 'M Seigler 835 Selleck
318 8«Uew 683 Bennett 385 Senter 442, 471 SesaioDs 826
Severance 772 Sewall 610 Seward 435, 721 Seymour 341,691, 844
Sbackford 406. 420 Shaft 75 Shaffer 764. 845 Shailor 170 Shane .
813 Shapleigh 481 Sharp 352 Sharpp 167 Sharpnock 351 Sharta .'48
Shattuck 676, 775 Shaw 129, 173. 375, 3«9, 463, 6r.7 Shearman
188, &J7 Shearer 225 Shedd 633, 727, 870 Sheffield 295, 884
Sheldon 32,268.278, 690 Shelley 65 Shenberger 82 Sbepard 581,
612 Sheppard 308 Sherburne 814 Sheridan 734 Sherk 878 Shermao,
73, 112, 142, 559, 647. 670,.72l,i 753 887,901. Sherwin 648>
Shlbley 830Shield< 559■ Shindler 942. Shiraa 688^338^ Shock ••
451. Sholes 601; Shoemaker 346 ShoppeU 198 Fase. Short 542, 601
Shrigley 824 Shultis 859 Shulta 914 Shultz 913 Shumway
558,567,616,656, 791, 800 ShurtleS 653 Shute 306 Sbuttleworth 315
Shutter T41 Slas 800 Sibley sn, 662, 647, 807 Siefert 182, 233
Silsbee 26 Signer 193 Simmons 698, 619, 645, 785 Slmonds 218.
6.M Simons .•«2, 764. 787, 912 Simpson 158,420, 424. 6J6, 946
Sinsel 192 SIsler 798. 917 SUson 41. 218 Situ 209 SItzer 1*0
Skelton 996 SkiUinits 34 Skiiiner, 137, 182, 183, 375, 561, 60:«. 607.
677 840. Slack 345 Slade 172,220. 767 Slate 684 Slater 41. fi2. 180.
771 Slayton 588. 646, 700 Sleeper 485,774 Slocum 663,655. 929
Slough 368 Smalley 130, 162, 208 Smart 436, 600 Smille 417, 441
Smith. 9, 11. 21, 22. 29. 52, 65, 111, 116, 117 128, 135, 139. 140,
152, 157, 161, 162, 173 r 178, 180,1 182, 185, 207, 216. 218, 221 J
230, 283^ 288. 294, 297, 298. 203, 318, 317 323, 329, 330, 337,
344, 346, 363, 364,, 366 . 36«, 381, 386, 398, 406w 407, 408,'
409/417 420. 421, 422, 428, 434.-446,i448..479.; 488; 803, 509.
6a0,:921, 525, 546, .663., StO. 571: 59», 599, 606, 610, 619, 638,.
638, 648, 651 661, 666, 669, 671, 676, 683, 692, 697, e98' 701,
703, 707; 716, 723, 75V 754, 764, 766.7V2, 802, 82«», 828.. 828,
844,1 84«„ 887, 863 87», 874, 878, 882. 887, 892, 896.. 913,
943944. Snaahall 197, 23S.
The text on this page is estimated to be only 23.45%
accurate

INDEX III. 120& Pa«e. Snoad 9V), 955 Snell 72, 836, 777
Snow, 186, 337. 411, 430, 555, 565,581, 729, 768 807, 830, 922.
Snyder 713, 860 Somayndicke 734 Sorter 346 Soule 478.498
Souther 455, 458, 486 Southwonh 131, 433 Soules... 125, 163
Spafford 149, 347 Spaldinir, 89, 94, 99, 152, 157, 255, 266, 259
2G0, 262, 518, 613, 648, 6B2. Spalter 68 Sparbawk 6 Spauldiog
267,268, 269,741, 883 Spear. 73, 401, 410, 429, 432, 459, 463, 523,
624 581, 583, 686. Spencer, 128, 172, 381, 540, 563, 564, 644. 655
788,. 802, 820, 835, 913. Spicer. 43, .136 Spinney 42u Spitzer 645
SpOOD*T 639,653,687,751, 893 Sprague 605, 647, 650 Spraker 214
Spray 282, 291 Spring 703, 854 Springer 72,214 Sproat 540 Spurr
706 Squier 169 Squires 217,249,739 Stacey 571 Staley 902 SUfford
Tli Stall 540 Standish 600 Stanford 102. 444 SUnbope 763, 903
Stanion 474 StAnnard 886 Stan wood 228 SUplea 449, 576 Stapley
101 Stark 105,124,220,468,646,709 Starks 786.798 Stearna. 168,
401, 504. 514, 648. 693, 604, 616 630, 681, 727, 768. Stebbina
583,684, 893 Steffy 731 Stedmao 318 Steele 348. 651. 710 Pace.
Sternberg 716 Stephens 187 Sterling 787 Stetaon 356, 562, 563,
591, 041, frC, 697 Stevens, 40, 65, 108, 170, 229. 250. 266, 279
290, 338, 351. .%7. 383. 485, 589, 690, 703 m, 825, 851, 854. 873,
932. Steyenson 929 Stewart. . .69, 264. 273, 571, 733, 750, 859,
936 Stiles 117, 176, 575, 862 Stillwager 893 Stillwell 880 Stimson
811 SUnchfield 719 Stlnson 719 Stingon iM Stockdale 651 Stockham
879, 945 Stockwell 617, 792, 823, 824. 889 Stoddard 5T4, 700
Stone, 17, 110, 266. 284, 285. 292. 564, 5T!, 581 648, 656, 673,
688, 701, 782. 792. 804. Stopp 946 Storar 174 Stores 131 Storms «,
220, 244 Stouffer 288,292 Stout 369 Stowe 533, 647, 712, 859 Stow
548 Stowell 777 Stratton 265,291,302, 432. 627. 843 Straw 696
Streetor 149, 745 Strickland 769 Stringham 143 Strong
136,550,587,840,847,938 Stuart 26, 183, 462 Studebaker 228 Stull
187,236,858, 940 Sturgis 896 Sturterant 787 Stnltz 906 Styer 943
Saekman 70 Snder 941 Sullivan 182 Salloway 878 Sumner 637,668,
659 Sunderland 641 SattOQ 209,625. 853 Snttle 736 Swan 12. 486
Swaia 181 483
The text on this page is estimated to be only 25.83%
accurate

1210 INDEX III. Page. Swallow 285 Swarman 03 Sweeney

761, 897 Sweet 347, 698, 740, 813, 883, 892 Sweetrer 271. 283
Swjft 14,122,510,831 Sylvester 196, 700, 719 Symond* 667 Taber
800. fi23 Taft 018, 019, 533, 559, 665. 677, 811 Taggart 29 Talley
217 Talp«y 406 Taney 108 Tanner 813 Tarbell 61.652, 759 Tarbox
730 Tarr 769 Taah 760 Taut 790 Taylor, 7, 30, 61, 98. 108, 112, 123.
132. 148 100, 161. 260. 26.3, 291, 364, 430, 430, 448 461, 460,
479, 488, 052, 670, 672, 685, 707 760, 850, 861, 940. Teal 184 Teel
138 Teeple 646 Tennant 136, 183 Temple 23, 670, 920 Terrill 604
Thatcher 603 Thaxter 498 Thayer. 27, 33. 268, 364. 384, 397, 401,
410, 428 406, 463, 507. 530, 556. 560, 563. 872, 670 615, 643,
668, 728, 735. Thaise 942 'lliomas, 38, 275, 308, 362. 368, 3TI, 414,
670 780, 822, 841. Thompson, 34, 68, 70. 130. 216, 278, 284, 289
361, 390, 013, 613, 630, 768, 817, 840. Thomdike 2fiO Thome 114,
110. 144 Thorp 001 Thraaher 45, 107, 781 Thurber 418 Thuraton
359, 437 Tbwing 300 Tibbetts 840 Tibbita 662 Tiffany 127, 000
Tilden 129, 637 Tlllinghaat 70, 84 TUlotaon 831 TUton 727,889, 949
PaseTinker T03 Tirrell 630, 729 Tisdale «» Tittemary 005 Tobey
331,417,004,096,628,711, 765 Tol man 161, 207, 625, 666 Tomlin
029 Torallnson. . . .272, .T40, 47ti, 496, 795, 796, 916 Tompkins
141,860,941 Toogood 19* Tooley 802, 920 Topliff «5, 494 Topping
349, tiHO Torrey MT Torry 424, 533 Totten 748, 890 Tower 332, 577,
683, 736, 808, 814, 922 Towle 287, 292 Town 260 Towne 219, 929
Towner ** Townley 139, 186 Townsend, 68, 112, 114, 120, 142,
188, 400, 638 607. Tracey, 129, 174, 334, 465. 500. 510. 726, 727
803. Trafton 6* Train 113,325 Trail 154 Treadway 40, 423 Tread well
^78 Treat 6^9 Trefethen 446, 472 Trimball 801 Trimbley 705 Tripp
799 Trombly »'7 Trott B09 Trowbridge 775 True 172, 468, 819 '
Truesdell 606 Tryon 91 Tubbs 161.198,345, 367 Tucker 288, 510,
524, 628, 730, 763 Tufts 663,711,809 Tukey 465, 488 Tapper 230,
717 Turner, 21, 33, 34, 04, 329, 381, 384, 390, 408 424, 428, 500,
505, 509, 614, 742, 748. Torell • 148 Turtelock 073, 647 Tuttle 25,
140, 197, 363 TwiUiger 366 Twist 365
The text on this page is estimated to be only 23.99%
accurate

INDEX III. 1211 Pass. Twitchell 11,17,521, 576, 743 Tyler,

66, 83, 168, 186, '214, 281, 333, 364, 666 704, 816. Udall 824
Dlman 476 UnderdoDk fi98 Underbill 113 Underwood 303, 447, 373
Updegraft 785 Updyke 369 Upham 117,671,663,788,809, 811 Usher
923 Utley 612 Utton 229 Vail 142,213, 327 Valentine 823 Van Araam
698 " Anken 80 " Bergen 327, 361 " Buren 240 " Campen 181 Vance
688 Vanderbogart 6S5 Vanderwater ..\ 887 VanDeWalker. 63 '*
Dozen 114 " Horn 209,771, 873. 907 " Houten 787, 910 Vannamee
147 Van Pelt 177 " Rensselaer 836 " Schalck 887, ffi'S •• Tawell 847
•• Wonner 608.609,735.736 Varney 178,416.439 Varnnm 262
Vaughn 345.367,661.672,873, 792 Veo 869 Vezie 413. 433 Vlnal 680
Vincell 694 Vincent 876, 694, 608, 740 Vinton 410.428, 728 Vivian
888 Vo«bargh 440 Vose .......9, 269 Wachlea 195 Wade T40
Wadham 861 Wadleigh »78. 831 Wadsworth 823, 824 Wagner 167,
770 Wait... .631, 801 Fnga. Walte 897, 819 Walbridge 133, 230
Waicott 338 Walden 98, 126, 643 Waldo 180,253, 65* Waldron 67,
361 Wales .404, m, 672, 676, 688, 665, 667, 668 Walker, 37, 150,
157, 306. 345, 405, 438, 468 837, 557, M8. 584, 664, 702, 727, 733,
737 749, 774. n8. 793, 811, 827, 896. Wall... 730 WaUace. 110, 176,
194. 419. 487, 639, 649, 694 792. 882. Walley 802 Wallln 783
Walling 143, 190, 748 Walrad 598, 715 Walsh 58, 77 Walters 190,
381 Ward. 330, 412, 463, 512, 613, 559.593,653. 677 688, 702,
751. 791, 826, 883. Wadner 890 Ware, 344, 386, 465, 641, 849,
571, 672. 577, 668 673. Warfleld 13 Warner. ..13a 334. 357, 580,
654, 684, 797, 910 Warnock 736 Warren. 23, 12P. 149, 157. 199,
170, 350, 510 575. 682, 637, 638, 653, 691, 754, nO. 798. Warrick
147 Washburn, 24. 44, 428. 140, 519, 633, 658. 796 916. Waason ..
868 Waterman 542,562.666,723. SOT Waters 47.166, 409 Watkins
141, 475, 512, 524, 548, 657, 765 Watkinaon 163 Watson. 169, 441.
616. 817. 537, 542. 690, 60S 705, 716, 717, 733, 797. Watta
839,628 Waugh 228, 249 Weaver •• 17T Webb, 253, 255, 375, 392,
393, 395, 398, 431. 807 815, 767. Webber 80,153,207,565, 818, 927
Webster 161, 187, 206, 533, 871, 772, 811 Weed ..- 168 Weeks
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com