24F-2NT

                                    February 22, 1994




Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Judiciary Plaza
Washington, D.C.  20549


            Re:   Rule 24f-2 Notice for
                  T. Rowe Price Index Trust, Inc.
                      T. Rowe Price Equity Index Fund
                  100 East Pratt Street
                  Baltimore, Maryland  21202
                  File Number 33-32859


Gentlemen:

     In accordance with the provisions of Rule 24f-2, the T. Rowe Price
Index Trust, Inc. hereby files its Rule 24f-2 Notice on behalf of its
T. Rowe Price Equity Index Fund ("Fund"). 

     This "Rule 24f-2 Notice" is being filed for the fiscal year ending
December 31, 1993 ("Fiscal Year").

     5,497,357 shares of the capital stock of the Fund were sold during
the Fiscal Year.

     All 5,497,357 shares of the capital stock of the Fund were sold
during the Fiscal Year in reliance upon the Declaration of the Fund of an
indefinite amount of securities under Rule 24f-2 ("24f-2 Declaration").

     Attached to this Rule 24f-2 Notice, and made a part hereof, is an
opinion of counsel indicating that the securities, the registration of
which the Notice makes definite in number, were legally issued, fully
paid, and non-assessable.

     In accordance with subsection (c) of Rule 24f-2, the registration fee
in the amount of $8,920.70 has been forwarded to Mellon Bank, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania.  The fee computation is based upon the actual aggregate sale
price for which such securities were sold during the Fiscal Year, reduced
by the difference between:



      (1)   The actual aggregate redemption price of the shares
            redeemed by the Fund during the Fiscal Year, and

      (2)   The actual aggregate redemption price of such
            redeemed shares previously applied by the Fund
            pursuant to Rule 24e-2(a) in filings made pursuant
            to Section 24(e)(1) of the Investment Company Act of
            1940.

                  Aggregate Sale Price for Shares Sold 
                  During Fiscal Year in Reliance Upon
                  the 24f-2 Declaration                     $ 71,884,009

                  Reduced by the Difference Between

                  (1)   Aggregate Redemption Price
                        of Shares Redeemed During
                        the Fiscal Year                     $ 46,014,150

                  and,

                  (2)   Aggregate Redemption Price
                        of Redeemed Shares Previously
                        Applied by Fund Pursuant to
                        Rule 24e-2(a) Filings Made 
                        Pursuant to Section 24(e)(1) of
                        Investment Company Act of 1940      $    - 0 - 

                  Equals                                    $ 25,869,859


            Any questions regarding the matter should be
addressed to Henry H. Hopkins, Esquire at the above address.

                                    Very truly yours,




                                    /s/ CARMEN F. DEYESU

EX-99.5

                                    February 22, 1994



T. Rowe Price Index Trust, Inc.
100 East Pratt Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202

Dear Sirs:

      T. Rowe Price Index Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the
"Corporation"), is filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
behalf of T. Rowe Price Equity Index Fund a Rule 24f-2 Notice containing
the information specified in paragraph (b)(1) of Rule 24f-2 under the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (the "Rule").  The effect of the Rule 24f-2
Notice, when accompanied by this Opinion and by the filing fee, if any,
payable as prescribed by paragraph (c) of the Rule will be to make
definite in number the number of shares sold by the Corporation during the
fiscal year ended December 31, 1993 in reliance upon the Rule (the "Rule
24f-2 Shares").

      We have, as counsel, participated in various corporate and other
proceedings relating to the Corporation and to the Rule 24f-2 Shares.  We
have examined copies, either certified or otherwise proven to our
satisfaction to be genuine, of its Charter and By-Laws, as currently in
effect, and a certificate dated February 3, 1994 issued by the Department
of Assessments and Taxation of the State of Maryland certifying the
existence and good standing of the Corporation.  We have also reviewed the
Registration Statement on Form N-lA and the form of the Rule 24f-2 Notice
being filed by the Corporation. We are generally familiar with the
corporate affairs of the Corporation.

          The Corporation has advised us that the Rule 24f-2 Shares were
sold in the manner contemplated by the prospectus of the Corporation that
was current and effective under the Securities Act of 1933 at the time of
sale, and that the Rule 24f-2 Shares were sold in numbers within the
limits prescribed by the Charter of the Corporation for a consideration
not less than the par value thereof as required by the laws of Maryland
and not less than the net asset value thereof as required by the
Investment Company Act of 1940.


      Based upon the foregoing, it is our opinion that:

      1.    The Corporation has been duly organized and is legally
existing under the laws of the State of Maryland.

      2.    The Corporation is authorized to issue one billion
(1,000,000,000) shares of Capital Stock, par value one cent ($0.01) per
share.  Under Maryland law, (a) the number of authorized shares may be
increased or decreased by action of the Board of Directors and (b) shares
which were issued and which have subsequently been redeemed by the
Corporation are, by virtue of such redemption, restored to the status of
authorized and unissued shares.

      3.    The Rule 24f-2 Shares were legally issued and are fully paid
and non-assessable.

          We hereby consent to the filing of this Opinion with the
Securities and Exchange Commission together with the Rule 24f-2 Notice of
the Corporation, and to the filing of this Opinion under the securities
laws of any state.


          We are members of the Bar of the State of New York and do not
hold ourselves out as being conversant with the laws of any jurisdiction
other than those of the United States of America and the State of New
York.  We note that we are not licensed to practice law in the State of
Maryland, and to the extent that any opinion herein involves the law of
Maryland, such opinion should be understood to be based solely upon our
review of the documents referred to above, the published statutes of the
State of Maryland and, where applicable, published cases, rules or
regulations of regulatory bodies of that State.

                                  Very truly yours,


                                  /s/ Shereff, Friedman, Hoffman & Goodman