text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/401

 to him, 10,000l. Woodford joined his regiment in 1801, but it was not until 1807 that he saw active service, when both he and his elder brother Alexander were at the siege of Copenhagen. In the following year he went to the Peninsula with the expedition under Sir David Baird [q. v.], which joined the British forces under Sir John Moore. Woodford was deputy-assistant quartermaster-general and aide-de-camp to Sir John Moore during the many engagements in the memorable retreat, and at dusk was wounded in the heel in the battle of Coruña by, it is said, the last shot fired. In eighteen months' time he was again able to join the army which, under Wellington, had just crossed the Ebro, and to resume his staff appointment of deputy-assistant quartermaster-general. He was present at the battles of Nivelle, Nive, Orthes, and Toulouse, for which engagements he received a cross. In the final engagement at Toulouse on 10 April 1814 Woodford, serving under Sir Henry Clinton (1771–1829) [q. v.] in the sixth division, took a distinguished part.

In September Woodford was back in London, and with the legacy left him by ‘Old Q,’ which had been paid in 1813, he purchased his captaincy in the first regiment of the grenadier guards, which is equivalent in rank and pay to that of lieutenant-colonel of infantry in the line. On the unexpected return of Napoleon in 1815 he joined Wellington's army, serving as assistant quartermaster-general to the fourth division under Lieutenant-general Sir Charles Colville. The division was detailed to support Prince Frederick of the Netherlands on the road to Hal when the great engagement of Waterloo began. Woodford was despatched by Colville on the dark and stormy night of 17 June to the general for orders, and, riding with great difficulty through the forest of Soignies, arrived in the early morning at Wellington's quarters. The duke informed him that the battle was imminent, and that it was too late for the Hal division to move up, but ordered Woodford to remain with him as aide-de-camp. He continued to serve under General Colville in the march to Paris, and assisted in the occupation of Cambray. On the break-up of the army in Paris he returned to London, but in 1818 was appointed to the command of the army of occupation until the final evacuation of France in October of that year. He took advantage of his position to obtain leave to make a survey of the field of the battle of Agincourt and its vicinity. Discoveries of considerable antiquarian and historic interest resulted.

In 1821 he was given the command of the 3rd battalion of the grenadier guards at Dublin, and finally he was posted to it as colonel on 23 Nov. 1823. He carried out various reforms in military discipline. He would not allow flogging in the battalion under his command, and on 26 May 1830, on his own responsibility, published the order, ‘The punishment called “Standing under Arms” is abolished.’ Though Woodford's action drew from the Duke of Wellington a strong remonstrance, the punishment was never restored. The regimental orders of the grenadier guards from 1830 to 1835 are full of evidence of his thoughtful desire to improve the conditions of a soldier's life. On 18 May 1835 Woodford gave evidence before the commissioners for inquiry into the system of military punishments in the army. He published a pamphlet in the same year entitled ‘Remarks on Military Flogging: its Causes and Effects, with some Considerations on the Propriety of its entire Abolition.’ Woodford, among other reforms, recommended recreation for soldiers in barracks, the establishment of carpenters' shops, &c., to teach the men useful trades, and regimental libraries. His command of the household troops brought him into contact with the king, William IV, who presented him with the royal Hanoverian Guelphic order of knighthood; but his reforming zeal, particularly an attempt to introduce a more comfortable uniform, greatly annoyed the king. Largely owing to Woodford's advocacy, and in spite of the Duke of Wellington's persistent opposition, purchase of commissions, and the stock, which he considered a useless discomfort to the soldier, were abolished before his death. In 1834, under the will of his aunt, Lady William Gordon, he inherited an estate on the western bank of Derwentwater, with Waterend House, erected by Lord William, and, resolving to occupy it, he issued on 10 Jan. 1837 his last regimental order, was promoted to the rank of major-general, and retired from the service in Oct. 1841. He had been made C.B. in 1815 and K.C.B. in 1838. As a consistent advocate of abolition of purchase, he sold his commission to the government for 4,500l., half its market value. A good linguist, of scholarly tastes, he subsequently devoted much of his time to antiquarian research. Though he continued to live much like a soldier in camp, he surrounded himself with rare books and curiosities. Removing to Keswick, he died there on 22 March 1879.

[Memoir by J. Fisher Crosthwaite, Kendal, 1881, with photographic portrait; personal knowledge.]


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hatton, John Liptrot

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hauch, Johannes Carsten


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hauer, Franz, Ritter von


text:
Author:Enrico Fermi

Works

 * Concerning a Contradiction between the Electrodynamic and Relativistic Theory of Electromagnetic Mass (1922, Wikisource translation)

title: Author:Enrico Fermi


title: File:Fermi1922.png


text:
Page:Romances of Chivalry on Greek Soil.djvu/20

Rh master. The heroine Polyxena affected French costumes.

The imagination of these poets has been struck by some of the ways and fashions of the Franks, but all these Western touches are adventitious and decorative. That they are superimposed as ornament upon Greek stories is hardly concealed. Consider that the daughter of the Frank king of Antioch is named Chrysantza; consider that the Frank Lybistros has a name that is not Frank: consider, again, that the Indian king Chrysos and his daughter are Greeks in name and customs. A tournament (, 'joust') indeed is held at their court, but when Lybistros is prompted to be the colleague of his father-in-law the whole ceremony is Byzantine. Take the furniture of the tales. The descriptions of luxurious palaces and gardens, which are a conventional feature of these romances, presume the art and luxury of Byzantium. In the Tale of Achilles there is a golden plane-tree in the garden of Polyxena, with golden birds on the branches, each of which sings its own song. Singing birds of gold were also seen by Belthandros in the Castle of Love, A mechanism of this kind was one of the wonders in the palace of the emperors at Constantinople. But the taste for descriptions of gardens, marvellous fountains, and works of art has also a long literary tradition among the Greeks. It can be traced in the prose romances of the Alexandrine school—sometimes called the novels of the sophists—a species of literature which reaches back into the Hellenistic period and comes down to the twelfth century. These fantastic love-tales, with their antique flavour, had a decisive influence on the poems of which I am speaking.

So much for the staging and apparatus; they are Greek. What about the plots? Here the affinity to


text:
Page:The Habitat of the Eurypterida.djvu/278

 {|
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" width="40px" | 201. || align="right" width="40px" | 1902. || The Geographical Distribution of Freshwater Decapods and its Bearing upon Ancient Geography. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., Vol. XLI, No. 171, pp. 267–400.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 202. || align="right" | 1856. || On the Pterygotus and Pterygotus Beds of Great Britain. Reprint Brit. Ass. Adv. Sci. Glasgow, 1855, in Transactions of the Sections, pp. 89–91.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 203a. || align="right" | 1856. || Advanced Textbook of Geology, 1st edit., pp. 128, 135, 136, figs.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 203b. || align="right" | 1859. || Ibid., 2d edit., pp. 163, 171, 181, 189.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 204. || align="right" | 1859. || Handbook of Geological Terms, 1st edit., pp. 161, 305–6, 340.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 205. || align="right" | 1811. || Organic Remains of a Former World. Vol. III, p. 267, pl. XVII, fig. 18.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 206. || align="right" | 1912. || The Evolution of the Vertebrates and their Kin. Philadelphia.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 207. || align="right" | 1880. || On Some New Crustaceans from the Lower Carboniferous Rocks of Eskdale and Liddesdale. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, Vol. XXX, pp. 73–91.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 208. || align="right" | 1880. || On Some New Species of Fossil Scorpions from the Carboniferous Rocks of Scotland and England Borders, with a review of the Genera Eoscorpius and Mazonia of Messrs. Meek and Worthen. Ibid., pp. 397–412, pls. XXII, XXIII.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 209. || align="right" | 1881. || Further Researches among the Crustacea and Arachnida of the Carboniferous Rocks of the Scottish Border. Loc. cit., pp. 511–529, pls. XXVIII, XXIX.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 210. || align="right" | 1885. || Ancient Air Breathers. Nature, Vol. XXXI, pp. 295–298, figs. 1, 2.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 211. || align="right" | 1899. || New Discoveries in the Silurian of Lanarkshire and Ayrshire. Summary of Progress of the Geological Survey of the United Kingdom for 1898, pp. 64–66.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 212. || align="right" | 1910. || The Geology of the Neighborhood of Edinburgh. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Scotland.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 213. || align="right" | 1880. || The Old Red Sandstone of Orkney. Read before Royal Physical Soc. 21 April, 1880, 15 pp.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 214. || align="right" | 1898. || New Discoveries in the Silurian and Old Red Sandstone of Scotland. Summary of Progress of the Geological Survey of the United Kingdom for 1897, pp. 74–83.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 215. || align="right" | 1899. || The Silurian Rocks of Britain. Mem. Geol. Surv. United Kingdom, Vol. 1, Scotland.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 216. || align="right" | 1885. || Manual of Geology. Edited by Robert Etheridge.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 217. || align="right" | 1854. || Traiteéde Paléontologie, Paris. 2nd edit, tome II, pp. 529, 536–539.
 * }


text:
Translation:Electrodynamic and Relativistic Theory of Electromagnetic Mass

By.

1. It's known that simple electrodynamic considerations lead to the value $$\tfrac{4}{3}\tfrac{U}{c^{2}}$$ for the electromagnetic mass of a spherical electricity-distribution of electrostatic energy $$U$$, when $$c$$ denotes the speed of light. On the other hand, it's known that relativistic considerations for the mass of a system containing the energy $$U$$ give the value $$\tfrac{U}{c^{2}}$$. Thus we stand before a contradiction between the two views, whose solution seems not unimportant to me, especially with respect to the great importance of the electromagnetic mass for general physics, as the foundation of the electron theory of matter.

Especially we will prove: The difference between the two values stems from the fact, that in ordinary electrodynamic theory of electromagnetic mass (though not explicitly) a relativistically forbidden concept of rigid bodies is applied. Contrary to that, the relativistically most natural and most appropriate concept of rigid bodies leads to the value $$U:c^{2}$$ for the electromagnetic mass.

We additionally notice, that relativistic dynamics of the electron was studied by, though from the standpoint only partially different from the ordinary electrodynamic one, so that the value $$\tfrac{4}{3}\tfrac{U}{c^{2}}$$ for the Electron's mass was found of course.

In this paper, 's principle will serve as a basis, being most useful for the treatment of a problem subjected to very complicated conditions - conditions of a different nature than those considered in ordinary mechanics, because our system must contract in the direction of motion according to relativity theory. However, we notice that although this contraction is of order of magnitude $$v^{2}:c^{2}$$, it changes the most important terms of electromagnetic mass, i.e, the rest mass.

2. Let us consider a system of electric charges connected by a rigid dielectric, being under the action of an electrostatic field, partially stemming from the system itself, and partially from external causes, describing a world-tube in the world. We further assume, that the motion is translatory, by which we understand: When we consider any reference frame and assume, in which at a certain moment, for example at time zero, a point of our conducting system is at rest, then all points of the conducting system must rest at time zero. From that it follows, that the world-lines of the points of our system are the orthogonal paths of a family of linear spaces; the rigidity is expressed by the condition, that the shape of the system in these spaces remains unchanged.

To be able to apply 's principle, we need a variation of motion of our system satisfying the condition of rigidity. Now we will prove, that we are led to $$\tfrac{4}{3}\tfrac{U}{c^{2}}$$ or to $$\tfrac{U}{c^{2}}$$ as the electromagnetic mass, depending on whether one chooses the first or the second of both variation systems, which in the following will defined by us, and denoted with the letters $$A$$ and $$B$$.

As we will immediately see, however, variation $$A$$ has to be excluded, because it is in contradiction with relativity theory.

Let $$T$$ be a world-tube described by the system. In the figure, we have indicated the space in a one-dimensional way by the $$X$$-axis, and replaced time $$t$$ by $$ict$$, to reach a definite metric.

Variation $$A$$: Consider as a variation satisfying the condition of rigidity, an infinitesimal displacement (parallel to space $$(x, y, z)$$ and rigid in the ordinary kinematic sense) of the parallel cross-sections of the world-tube parallel to the same space. We will obtain this variation in the figure, by displacing all cross-sections $$t$$=const of the tube by arbitrary infinitesimal lines parallel to the $$X$$-axis. If we confine ourselves to the consideration of translatory displacements, then $$\delta x,\ \delta y,\ \delta z$$ are arbitrary functions of time, and $$\delta t=0$$.

Variation $$B$$: Consider as a variation satisfying the condition of rigidity, an infinitesimal displacement (perpendicular to the world-tube and rigid in the ordinary kinematic sense) of the normal intersections of the world-tube. We will obtain such a variation in the figure, by displacing all normal-intersections of the tube parallel to itself, by arbitrary infinitesimal lines.

To be able to apply 's principle, we have to subject our variations to the additional condition, that it must vanish at the limits of the arbitrary integration field $$G$$. Due to this additional condition, the integration field contracts to $$ABEF$$ when the variation system $$A$$ is applied; so $$\delta x, \delta y, \delta z$$ must vanish in the fields $$BDE$$, $$ACF$$ because they must be constant for $$t=const$$, and must vanish at the limits of $$G$$, i.e., at the lines $$BD$$, $$AC$$. However, if we apply the variation system $$B$$, the integration field contracts to $$ABGH$$ due to the same reasons.

Now it can be immediately seen, that variation $$A$$ is in contradiction with relativity theory, because it has no invariant characteristics against the world-transformation, and is based on the arbitrary space $$xyz$$. On the other hand, variation $$B$$ has the desired invariant characteristics, and is always based on the proper-space, i.e., the space perpendicular to the world-tube, thus it is without doubt to be preferred before the previous one.

3. Let us denote for the sake of convenience, $$(t, x, y, z)$$ and $$\left(x_{0},x_{1},x_{2},x_{3}\right)$$ respectively as space-time coordinates, and $$F_{ik}$$ as the electromagnetic field.

's principle, that combines the laws of, of , and of mechanics, reads: The total action, i.e., the sum of actions of the electromagnetic field, of the electric charges, of the material masses, and in the case of general relativity, of the metric field, remains stationary when a variation (which satisfies the problem-conditions, and which vanishes at the limits of the arbitrary integration field "$$G$$") of the following things takes place: of the components of the four-potential, of the coordinates of the points of the world-lines followed by the charges and the masses, and of the components of the metric tensor.

In our case, however, the metric field remains unchanged, because we assumed it to be Euclidean since the material masses are missing, and because the only magnitudes to be varied, are the coordinates of the points of the world-lines followed by the charges. Thus it suffices to set the variation of the charges $$=0$$, i.e.:

where the first integration is to be extended over the charge element $$de$$ of the system, the second over the distance contained in the integration field $$G$$ of the world-line followed by $$de$$.

Now, we will separately derive the conclusions from the two variation systems $$A$$ and $$B$$.

4. Conclusions from variation $$A$$. In this case, the integration field contracts to $$ABEF$$. If $$t_1$$ and $$t_1$$ mean the times of $$A$$ and $$B$$, and if we consider that $$\delta x_i$$ only depend on the time, and that $$dt=0$$, then we can (1) write:

$\begin{array}{c} \sum\limits _{ik}\int\limits _{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}dt\ \delta x_{i}\int\ de\ F_{ik}\frac{dx_{\mu}}{dt}=0\\ \\(i=1,2,3)\ (k=0,1,2,3).\end{array}$|undefined

However, because $$\delta x_i$$ are arbitrary functions of time, we obtain from it the three equations:

$\sum\limits _{k}\int\ de\ F_{ik}\frac{dx_{k}}{dt}=0$|undefined

i.e. when $$E$$ and $$H$$ mean the electric and magnetic force:

$\int\left\{ E_{x}+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{dy}{dt}H_{z}-\frac{dz}{dt}H_{y}\right)\right\} de=0$

and the two corresponding equations for $$y$$ and $$z$$.

If the velocity in the reference system $$(t, x, y, z$$ is equal to zero in the relevant instant, then the three previous equations contract to a single vectorial equation:

We would have arrived at these equations without further ado, when we (as it ordinarily happens in the derivation of the electromagnetic mass and as it was essentially done by as well) would have assumed from the outset, that the total force of the systems is equal to zero. However, we have derived eq. (2) from 's principle, to demonstrate the source of the error. From (2), $$\tfrac{4}{3}\tfrac{U}{c^{2}}$$ immediately follows as electromagnetic mass.

Namely, if we notice that $$E$$ is the sum of a portion $$E^i$$ stemming from the system itself, and of a portion $$E^e$$ stemming from external causes, then we obtain from eq. (2):

$\int E^{i}de+\int E^{e}de=0$

On the other hand, either direct observation or in a familiar manner the consideration of electromagnetic momentum shows, that:

$\int E^{i}de=-\frac{4}{3}\frac{U}{c^{2}}\Gamma$|undefined

when $$\Gamma$$ means the acceleration. If we also notice, that $$\int E^{e}de$$ represents the total external force $$F$$, then we find:

$F=\frac{4}{3}\frac{U}{c^{2}}\Gamma$|undefined

A comparison of this equation with the basic law of point-dynamics $$F=m\Gamma$$ eventually gives us:

$m=\frac{4}{3}\frac{U}{c^{2}}$|undefined

5. Conclusions from variation $$B$$: In this case, the integration field contracts to $$ABGH$$. Let us imagine, that it is cut by infinitely many spaces perpendicular to the world-tube, into infinitely thin layers. With respect to any layer we also assume, that $$(t, x, y, z)$$ is the rest-system. Then $$dt=0,\ \delta x,\ \delta y,\ \delta z$$ will be arbitrary constants for our layer.

It is also: $$\delta x=\delta y=\delta z=0$$, because the velocity relative to the rest-system vanishes at time $$0$$, and $$dt=$$ the height of the layer $$=d\tau(1-\varkappa\times P-O)$$. Here, $$P-O$$ means the vector whose origin is located at point $$O$$, in which any arbitrary but fixed world-line $$L_0$$ hits space $$t=0$$, and whose endpoint is located in point $$P_0$$, in which the world-line $$L_0$$ followed by the charge element $$de$$ hits the space $$t=0$$: $$\varkappa$$ and $$d\tau$$ mean the curvature and the element of world-line $$L_0$$ contained in the layer, $$\times$$ eventually means the scalar product. The contribution to integral (1) stemming from our layer, thus becomes:

$\begin{array}{c} \int de\left\{ F_{10}\delta x+F_{20}\delta y+F_{30}\delta z\right\} \\ (1-\varkappa\times P-O)d\tau.\end{array}$

Now, if $$\Gamma$$ is the acceleration, then it is:

$\varkappa=-\frac{\Gamma}{c^{2}}$|undefined

If we also consider, that in the integration with respect to $$de$$, $$\delta x,\ \delta y,\ \delta z$$ and $$\delta\tau$$ can be seen as constant, then we find for the previous integral:

$\begin{array}{c} -d\tau\left[\delta x\int E_{x}\left(1+\frac{\Gamma\times P-O}{c^{2}}\right)de\right.\\ \\+\delta y\int E_{y}\left(1+\frac{\Gamma\times P-O}{c^{2}}\right)de\\ \\\left.+\delta z\int E_{z}\left(1+\frac{\Gamma\times P-O}{c^{2}}\right)de\right]\end{array}$|undefined

This expression must vanish for all possible values of $$\delta x,\ \delta y,\ \delta z$$. Therefore we obtain three equations, that can be combined into a single vectorial equation:

This equation takes the place of (2), and gives the value $$\tfrac{U}{c^{2}}$$ for the electromagnetic mass. Namely, if we put $$E^{(i)}+E^{(e)}$$ in (3) instead of $$E$$, then we find:

$\int E^{(e)}de+\int E^{(e)}\frac{\Gamma\times P-O}{c^{2}}de+\int E^{(i)}de+\int E^{(i)}\frac{\Gamma\times P-O}{c^{2}}de$|undefined

or as it was previously found:

$\begin{array}{c} \int E^{(e)}de=-\frac{4}{3}\frac{U}{c^{2}}\Gamma\\ \\\int E^{(e)}de+\int E^{(e)}\frac{\Gamma\times P-O}{c^{2}}de-\frac{4}{3}\frac{U}{c^{2}}\Gamma+\int E^{(i)}\frac{\Gamma\times P-O}{c^{2}}de=0\end{array}$|undefined

It follows first, that $$E^{(e)}$$ is of order of magnitude $$\Gamma$$. If we neglect terms containing $$\Gamma^2$$, we can neglect the second integral and find, when we set $$\int E^{(e)}de=F$$ as before:

In order to calculate the last integral, we consider that $$E^{(i)}$$ is equal to the sum of the force

$\int\frac{P-P'}{r^{3}}de$|undefined

(where $$P$$ means the up-point, $$P'$$ the source-point of charge $$de'$$, and $$r$$ the distance $$PP'$$), and a force of order $$\Gamma$$. The last-mentioned one would only give terms of order $$\Gamma^2$$, which are neglected by us. By that, the last integral (4) becomes:

$\frac{1}{c^{2}}\iint\frac{P-P'}{r^{3}}(\Gamma\times P-O)de\ de'$|undefined

If we interchange $$P$$ and $$P'$$, by which the integral is not changed, and take the arithmetic average of the two values thus obtained, then we find:

The $$x$$-component of this expression is:

$\begin{array}{c} \frac{1}{2c^{2}}\iint\frac{P-P'}{r^{3}}\\ \\\left\{ \Gamma_{x}(x-x')+\Gamma_{y}(y-y')+\Gamma_{z}(z-z')\right\} de\ de'\end{array}$|undefined

In the case of spherical symmetry, the integrals

$\begin{array}{c} \iint\frac{(x-x')^{2}}{r^{3}}de\ de',\ \iint\frac{(x-x')(y-y')}{r^{3}}de\ de',\\ \\\iint\frac{(x-x')(z-z')}{r^{3}}de\ de'.\end{array}$|undefined

still can be calculated without any ado, if one considers that the expressions

$(x-x')^{2},\ (x-x')(y-y),\ (x-x')(z-z')\,$

can be replaced by their mean value for all directions of $$PP'$$; these mean values are $$\tfrac{1}{3}r^{2},0,0$$. By that, the three integrals become:

$\frac{1}{3}\int\frac{de\ de'}{r}=\frac{2}{3}U,\ 0,\ 0$

and the $$x$$-component of (5):

$\frac{1}{3}\frac{U}{c^{2}}\Gamma_{x},$|undefined

thus the integral (5) becomes:

$\frac{1}{3}\frac{U}{c^{2}}\Gamma$.|undefined

If one substitutes this value into (4), then one finds:

$F=\frac{U}{c^{2}}\Gamma$,|undefined

thus the electromagnetic mass $$\tfrac{U}{c^{2}}$$.

 * Pisa, January 1922.

(Received May 9, 1922.)


text: Translation talk:Electrodynamic and Relativistic Theory of Electromagnetic Mass


text:
Page:Romances of Chivalry on Greek Soil.djvu/21

16 many of the romans d'aventure is manifest. But there is not the least reason for supposing that the Greeks were indebted to Provence. On the contrary. Provence did not produce original fiction. Her poets only wrought up, in their inimitable manner, arguments which they derived from foreign sources. And chief among these sources were tales which circulated in the Greek and Oriental worlds, and which reached France not in books but by transmission from mouth to mouth—some, it has been conjectured, through Greek channels. Such floating matter was shaped independently by the Greeks. We have an example in the adventurous romance of Callimachus and Chrysorrhoe, written possibly by a member of the Palaeologus family towards the end of the thirteenth century; it can be shown that this poem was constructed out of various legends of enchantment which were current in Greece.

But there are other features in our romances which have still to be accounted for. We are in a sensibly different atmosphere from that of the Alexandrine novels. The heroes, Lybistros and his fellows, are not pseudo-antique figures, descendants of the young men who frequented the Hellenistic gymnasia; they are warriors,, peers of the Western knights. Transfer them to Provence, and they would be at home with the heroes of troubadour fiction. The Greeks had no word for knight-errant, but they coined a verb which expresses a similar notion,, to roam the world on a quest. Must we then resort here to the hypothesis of Western influence and suppose that the Greek poets borrowed from the


text:
Page:Romances of Chivalry on Greek Soil.djvu/22

Rh Franks both the idea of a knight and the fantastic ideal of chivalrous adventure?

I think not. The kavallarioi of these romances have a different lineage. In prowess and manliness they rival the knights of the West; but they constitute no order; there is no institution of knighthood, none of the distinctive customs of Latin chivalry like the new knight's vigil over his arms. The Latin institution was not the model which produced the Greek ideal. For the Greeks already had their own. While Latin chivalry was developing into a social fact, under feudal conditions, there was an analogous but perfectly independent development of a chivalrous ideal in the Greek-speaking world, and to show this I must ask you to accompany me into a different field of literature.

Before the Crusades there was another experience, both persistent and exciting, which made a deep impression upon the Greeks—their experience of the world of Islam. An intercourse of many centuries, the commerce of war but also the commerce of peace, did not fail to lead to mutual influence of the Greek and Saracen civilizations. For generation after generation the tide of strife flowed backward and forward over the mountain barriers, and was the great imminent fact for the Christian population of Asia Minor. This perennial war and all it meant entered into their very soul. To hold the mountain passes—everything depended on that; and the commanders of frontier fortresses, Greek and Saracen, maintained continually a wild irregular warfare, full of surprises and adventurous incidents. These circumstances developed a new type of warrior, a kavallarios, whose heart was set on adventure and who was accustomed to act independently of orders from the emperor or a military superior. These watchers of the frontier were popularly


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/402

 WOODFORD, SAMUEL (1636–1700), divine and poet, born on 15 April 1636 in the parish of All Hallows in the Wall, London, was the eldest son of Robert Woodford of Northampton. After leaving St. Paul's school he matriculated on 20 July 1654 as a commoner at Wadham College, Oxford, whence he graduated B.A. on 6 Feb. 1657 (N.S.) Two years later he entered as a student at the Inner Temple, where his chamber-fellow was Thomas Flatman [q. v.], the poet. He afterwards lived, first at Aldbrook, then at Binstead, near Ryde, ‘in a married and secular condition.’ In November 1664 he was elected to the Royal Society. In January 1669 he took holy orders, and in 1673 was presented by Sir Nicholas Stuart to the benefice of Hartley-Mauduit, Hampshire. Through the influence of George Morley [q. v.], bishop of Winchester, he was appointed canon of Chichester on 27 May 1676, and of Winchester on 8 Nov. 1680. He received the degree of D.D. by diploma of Archbishop Sancroft in 1677. He died at Winchester on 11 Jan. 1700. He married after the Restoration, and had several sons, of whom the youngest, William Woodford (d. 1758), was fellow of New College from 1699 to 1712, censor of the Royal College of Physicians in 1773, and regius professor of medicine at Oxford from 1730 till his death.

Woodford began his poetical career by contributing in 1658 to the ‘Naps upon Parnassus’ of the younger Samuel Austin (fl. 1658) [q. v.] Of his poem ‘On the Return of Charles II,’ 1660, Wood had seen no copy. His chief works were ‘The Paraphrase upon the Psalms’ and ‘The Paraphrase upon the Canticles.’ The first originally appeared in quarto in 1667, with a dedication to Bishop Morley, and was reissued in octavo in 1678. In a lengthy preface the reader is informed that the ‘Paraphrase’ was written while Woodford ‘had the convenience of a private and most delightful retirement’ in the company of Mrs. Mary Beale [q. v.] and her husband. He had been forewarned against prolixity ‘by a very judicious friend, Mr. Thomas Sprat’ (afterwards the bishop). The object of the poet, who drew his inspiration from Cowley, was to give as nearly as he could ‘the true sense and meaning of the psalms, and in as easy and obvious terms as was possible.’ The result may be pronounced successful from a literary point of view; and the ‘Paraphrase’ won the praise of Baxter in his preface to ‘Poetical Fragments,’ 1681.

In 1679 appeared his ‘Paraphrase upon the Canticles and some select Hymns of the New and Old Testaments, with other Occasional Compositions in English Rimes.’ The volume, which is dedicated to Archbishop Sancroft, has prefatory verses by Sir Nicholas Stuart and Thomas Flatman, besides an ode by W. Croune, D.D.

Woodford's miscellaneous poems include two odes to Izaak Walton [q. v.] and verses in commendation of Denham's ‘New Version of the Psalms of David.’ An edition of Woodford's complete works published in 1713 is described as ‘the second edition corrected by the author.’ A manuscript ‘Ode to the Memory of John, Lord Wilmot, Earl of Rochester,’ is among the Rawlinson collections in the Bodleian, to which library Woodford in March 1657 presented a map of Rome (, Annals, p. 427). Parisot, writing a century later, thought his poems had fallen into undeserved oblivion.

[Wood's Life, pp. xxxv–vi, Fasti, ii. 192, and Athenæ Oxon. (Bliss), iii. 675, 826, 1133, iv. 730–1; Wadham Coll. Reg. ed. Gardiner; Foster's Alumni Oxon. 1500–1714; Chalmers's Biogr. Dict.; Woodford's Works; Allibone's Dict. Engl. Lit.; Biogr. Universelle, 1828 (art. by Parisot); Winchester Scholars, ed. Kirby; Munk's Coll. of Phys. ii. 115. J. Nichols's Select Collect. of Poems, iv. 1780–2, has two pieces by Woodford—‘The Voyage,’ and a sonnet addressed to Seth Ward, bishop of Sarum.]

 WOODFORD or WYDFORD, (fl. 1380–1411), opponent of Wycliffe, is erroneously identified by Wadding with William of Waterford, who appears to have flourished about 1433, and wrote a ‘Tractatus de Religione,’ which he addressed to Cardinal Julian Cesarinus (cf., Writers of Ireland, pp. 87, 88). There seems to be no doubt that Woodford was an Englishman. He became a Franciscan and was educated at Oxford, where he graduated D.D. He taught in the schools and came into friendly contact with Wycliffe. ‘When I was lecturing concurrently with him on the Sentences,’ he says, ‘Wycliffe used to write his answers to the arguments, which I advanced to him, in a notebook which I sent him with my arguments, and to send me back the notebook’ (, Grey Friars, p. 81). With the development of Wycliffe's views, however, Woodford became increasingly hostile, and when, in his ‘Confessio’ in 1381, the reformer repudiated transubstantiation, Woodford wrote his earliest extant work in reply. It was entitled ‘Septuaginta Quæstiones de Sacramento Eucharistiæ,’ and is thought to have been composed as a course of lectures de-


text:
Page:The Habitat of the Eurypterida.djvu/279

 {|
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" width="40px" | 218. || align="right" width="40px" | 1881. || On Certain Fossils of the Waterlime Group near Buffalo. Buff. Soc. Nat. Sci., Vol. IV, No. 1, Art. 3, pp. 17–22, figs. 1–7.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 219. || align="right" | 1882. || Additional Notes on the Fauna of the Waterlime Group near Buffalo. Ibid., Vol. IV, No. 2, Art. 2, pp. 41–45, pls. II, III.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 220. || align="right" | 1886. || Fossils from the Waterlime Group near Buffalo, N. Y. Buff. Soc. Nat. Sci. Bull., Vol. V, No. 1, pp. 23–32.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 221. || align="right" | 1861. || On the Old Red Sandstone Rocks of Forfarshire. Q. J. G. S., Vol. XVII, pp. 534–542, (Figure, giving cross-section in Forfarshire).
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 222. || align="right" | 1843. || Report on the Geology of Londonderry and of Parts of Tyrone and Fermanagh, Dublin, p. 316, pl. XXIV, fig. 2.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 223. || align="right" | 1885. || Sur la faune pélagique de la mer Baltique et du golfe de Finlande. Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires des Séances de l'Académie des Sciences, t. 100, pp. 919–921.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 224. || align="right" | 1840. || On the Geology of Coalbrook Dale. Trans. Geol. Soc. Lon. 2nd series, Vol. V, pp. 413, 493, t. XLI, figs. 1–8.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 225. || align="right" | 1887. || Geology, Chemical, Physical and Stratigraphical, Vol. II.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 226. || align="right" | 1907. || Sprach ueber Molukkankrebse. Monatsber. d. d. geol. Ges. No. 8/9, Vol. LIX, pp. 187–189.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 227. || align="right" | 1899. || On the Genera Psilophyton, Lycopodites, Zosterophyllum, and Parka decipiens of the Old Red Sandstone of Scotland. Their Affinities and Distribution. Trans. Edin. Geol. Soc., Vol. VII, pp. 368–380.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 228. || align="right" | 1855. || Ueber eine neue Krusterspecies aus der Böhmischen Steinkohlenformation. Paläontologische miscellen III Denk. d. k. akad. d. Wiss., Wien, Bd. X, pp. 81–83, t. III, IV.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 229. || align="right" | 1863. || On some Crustacean Tracks from the Old Red Sandstone near Ludlow. Q. J. G. S., Vol. XIX, pp. 233–235.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 230. || align="right" | 1863. || On the Upper Silurian Passage-Beds at Linley, Salop. Q. J. G. S., Vol. XIX, pp. 229–232.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 231. || align="right" | 1851. || Ueber ein bisher nicht beschreibenes Exemplar von Eurypterus aus devonischen Schichten des Staats New York in Nord-Amerika. Dunker and Meyer's Palæontographica, 1te, Bd. pp. 190–193, t. XXVII.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 232. || align="right" | 1873. || Notiz ueber das Vorkommen von Eurypterus Scouleri im Niederschlesischen Steinkohlengebirge. Zeit. d. d. geol. Ges. Bb. XXV, pp. 562–565, 3 figs.
 * }


text:
Page:Romances of Chivalry on Greek Soil.djvu/23

18 called akritai or hillsmen, and in the tenth century many of them possessed large domains and resembled feudal barons rather than Roman officers.

In this novel world, abounding in excitement, the popular imagination was touched into a creative effort. Hitherto men of Greek speech had only once been stirred by the epic impulse; they had produced only one popular epic cycle, the Homeric poems. The holy war with the Saracens led to the birth of another. The epic of Digenes Akrites is divided by an immeasurable interval in art from the Iliad and the Odyssey; but it stands out in the history of Greek literature after Homer as the only national epic, and it has Homeric qualities. In Western Europe its name is hardly known; yet it has had its fortunes elsewhere. The Nibelungenlied exercised no influence on literature beyond Germany; the poem of Digenes had a career in the steppes of Russia.

This poem has no tragic interest in it, like the Iliad, or like that other epic of which the background is warfare with unbelievers, the Song of Roland. There is no catastrophe as in the Odyssey. It is a biography in which the incidents lead up to no culmination; the hero, stricken by a malady, ends his adventurous life peacefully in his bed. The cycle of stories from which the epic was constructed have perhaps their nearest parallel in the ballads in which the mythopoeic fancy of the Spaniards celebrated the possibly historical figure of the Cid. But though a central dramatic motif is wanting, the Digenes has an epic quality, which justifies us in naming it along with Homer and the Nibelungenlied—its comprehensiveness. As Homer reflects all sides of a certain stage of early Greek civilization, as the Nibelungen song mirrors the civilization of the Germans during the period of the migrations,


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/403

 livered in the Grey Friars' church, London, as a preparation for the feast of Corpus Christi on 10 June 1381 (, Fasc. Zizaniorum, Rolls Ser. p. 517); five manuscripts at least of this work are extant (Brit. Mus. Royal MS. 7 B. iii.; Harl. MSS. 31, ff. 1–94 and 42; Exeter Coll. Oxford MS. 7; St. John's Coll. Oxford MS. 144). This was the first of a series of works in which Woodford attacked Wycliffe and his followers, and his writings occasionally throw light on Wycliffe's career, though his statements—e.g. that Wycliffe was expelled from Canterbury Hall—are not always to be accepted if lacking corroboration (cf., Wycliffe, 1878, i. 166–8; Church Quarterly Review, v. 129 sqq.; , Universities of Europe, ii. 498). He also replied to the attacks of Richard Fitzralph [q. v.] on the mendicant orders.

There is little doubt that Woodford is the William de Wydford whom Margaret, countess of Norfolk, described in 1384 as her ‘well-beloved father in God,’ and for the term of whose life she granted the minoresses of Aldgate Without a yearly rent of twenty marks from ‘le Brokenwharf,’ London (Cal. Patent Rolls, 1381–5, p. 452). In 1389 he was regent-master in theology among the minorites at Oxford, and in 1390 was vicar of the provincial minister; in both years he lectured against Wycliffe, and Thomas Netter [q. v.] was one of his pupils (Fasc. Zizaniorum, p. 525). Henceforth he seems to have resided principally at the Grey Friars, London, and in 1396 he obtained from Boniface IX sanction for the special privileges he enjoyed in this convent. Bale, Pits, and Wadding state that he died in 1397 and was buried at Colchester, but Sbaralea pointed out that in one of his works Henry was referred to as king; he also says that Woodford was deputed from Oxford to attend a council in London in 1411. Probably he died soon after; he was buried in the choir of Grey Friars church, London (Cotton MS. Vitellius, F. xii. f. 274 b).

Bale and subsequent bibliographers give a long list of works by Woodford, many of which are lost, and some of which can only be doubtfully attributed to Woodford (see, Grey Friars, pp. 248–9); but the numerous copies extant of the others indicate that Woodford's works were widely read, and he was considered ‘acerrimus hereticorum extirpator.’ The following is a list of his extant works: 1. ‘Commentaries on Ezechiel, Ecclesiastes, St. Luke, and St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans’ (Brit. Mus. Royal MS. 4, A. xiii.). 2. ‘Determinationes Quatuor,’ i.e. lectures at Oxford, 1389–90 (Harl. MSS. 31 and 42; Bodl. MSS. 2224, 2766, 3340; Digby MS. 170, ff. 1–33). 3. ‘De Causis Condempnacionis Articulorum 18 dampnatorum Johannis Wyclif, 1396’ (Brit. Mus. Royal MS. 8, F. xi.; Harl. MSS. 31 and 42; Bodl. MS. 2766; Merton Coll. MSS. 198 and 318; C.C.C. MS. 183, ff. 23 sqq.; printed in, Fasc. Rerum expetendarum, i. 190–265). 4. ‘De Sacerdotio Novi Testamenti’ (Brit. Mus. Royal MS. 7, B. iii.; Merton Coll. MS. 198). 5. ‘Defensorium Mendicitatis contra Armachanum,’ i.e. Richard Fitzralph [q. v.], archbishop of Armagh (Magdalen Coll. Oxford MS. 75; Cambr. Univ. Libr. MS. Ff. i. 21). 6. ‘De erroribus Armachani’ (Cambr. Univ. Libr. Ff. i. 21; New Coll. MS. 290, ff. 258 sqq.). 7. ‘Responsiones contra Wiclevum et Lollardos’ (Bodl. MS. 2766). 8. ‘De Veneratione Imaginum’ (Harl. MS. 31, ff. 182–205).

[Tanner's Bibl. pp. 364, 784–5; Wadding's Scriptt. Ord. Min. p. 108; Sbaralea's Suppl. p. 332; Fabricius's Bibl. Med. Ævi, iii. 512; Oudin's Scriptt. Eccl. 1722, iii. 1171–4; Chevalier's Répertoire, cols. 980–1; Wood's Hist. and Antiq. Univ. Oxon. ed. Gutch, i. 482, 493, 512, 513; Netter's Fasc. Zizaniorum (Rolls Ser.), pp. xv, 517, 523; Lechler's John Wycliffe, 1878, i. 166–8, 192, 198, 247, ii. 141; Little's Grey Friars in Oxford, passim, esp. pp. 246–8; Bernard's Cat. MSS. Angliæ; Coxe's Cat. MSS. Coll. Aulisque Oxon.; Cat. Bodl. MSS.; Cat. Harl. MSS.; authorities cited.]  WOODFORDE, SAMUEL (1763–1817), painter, born at Castle Cary in Somerset on 29 March 1763, was the second son of Heighes Woodforde (1726–1789) of Ansford, by his wife Anne, daughter and heiress of Ralph Dorville. He was a lineal descendant of Samuel Woodford [q. v.] At the age of fifteen he was patronised by the well-known banker Henry Hoare (d. 1785) of Stourhead, Wiltshire, where many of the painter's early works are preserved. In 1782 he became a student at the Royal Academy, where he exhibited pictures in 1784 and the two following years. In 1786 he was enabled by the liberality of his late patron to travel in Italy. After studying the works of Raphael and Michel Angelo at Rome, and copying ‘The Family of Darius’ by Paolo Veronese, he visited Florence and Venice, accompanied by Sir Richard Colt Hoare [q. v.] He returned to London in 1791, and resumed his contributions to the Royal Academy in 1792. From that year till 1815 he was a constant exhibitor of portraits, scenes of Italian life, historical pictures, and subjects from literature. He sent in all


text:
Page:The Habitat of the Eurypterida.djvu/280

 {|
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" width="40px" | 233. || align="right" width="40px" | 1852. || Description of the Pterygotus problematicus Agass. Q. J. G. S., Vol. VIII, pp. 386–388, pl. XXI, figs. 1a, b, 2a, b.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 234. || align="right" | 1856. || On Some New Crustacea from the Uppermost Silurian Rocks with a Note on the Structure and Affinities of Hymantopterus. Ibid., Vol. XII, pp. 26–34, figs. 1–7.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 235. || align="right" | 1859. || On some New Species of Eurypterus; with notes on the Distribution of the Species. Ibid., Vol. XV, pp. 229–236, figs. 1–20.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 236. || align="right" | 1862. || On a Crustacean Track in the Llandeilo Flags of Chirbury, Shropshire. Ibid., Vol. XVIII, p. 347.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 237. || align="right" | 1863. || On some Fossil Crustacea from the Coal-Measures and Devonian Rocks of British North America. Q. J. G. S., Vol. XIX, pp. 75–80, figs. 1–12. (Abstract: Q. J. G. S., Vol. XVIII, p. 346).
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 238. || align="right" | 1863. || On Some Species of Eurypterus and Allied Forms. Ibid., Vol. XIX.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 239. || align="right" | 1863. || On the Upper Old Red Sandstone and Upper Devonian Rocks. Ibid., pp. 474–496.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 240. || align="right" | 1903. || A New Eurypterid Fauna from the Base of the Salina of Western New York. N. Y. State Museum Bulletin 69, pp. 1080–1108.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 241. || align="right" | 1858. || Untersuchungen ueber die Silurische Formation von Ehstland, nord-Livland und Oesel. Archiv für d. Naturk. Liv.-Ehst.-und Kurlands, ser. I, Bd. II, pp. 1–249. (Especially pp. 159–180, 191). Map of Estland, Nord-Livland and Oesel.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 242. || align="right" | 1859. || Beitrag zur Geologie der Insel Gotland, nebst einigen Bermerkungen ueber die untersilurische Formation des Festlands von Schweden und die Heimath der norddeutschen silurischen Geschiebe. Ibid., pp. 403–464. Map of Gotland.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 243. || align="right" | 1859. || Nachträge und Berichtungen zu den Untersuchungen ueber die Silurische Formation von Ehstland, nord-Livland und Oesel. Ibid., pp. 465–474.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 244. || align="right" | 1866. || Ueber Thyestes verrucosus Eichw. und Cephalaspis schrenckii Pand. nebst einer Einleitung ueber das Vorkommen silurischer Fischreste auf der Insel Oesel. Verh. d. russ.-kais. min. Gesell. St. Petersburg, 2nd S. Vol. II, No. 13, pp. 217–250, pls. IV, V, VI.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 245. || align="right" | 1876. || Einige Bemerkungen ueber die podolisch-galizische Silurformation und deren Petrefacten. Verhandlungen der Russisch-Kaiserlichen Mineralogischen Gesellschaft, ser. 2, Bd. X, pp. 1–21, taf. 1.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 246. || align="right" | 1880. || Revision der Ostbaltischen silurischen Trilobiten nebst geognostischer Übersicht des ostbaltischen Silurgebiets. Mem. Acad. Imp. d. Sci. St. Petersbourg. VIIe sérié, T. XXX, No. 1. Section on Schichtengruppe K. Obere Oeselsche Schicht, pp. 49–54.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 247. || align="right" | 1882. || On the Silurian (and Cambrian) Strata of the Baltic Provinces of Russia, as Compared with those of Scandinavia and the British Isles. Q. J. G. S., Vol. XXXVIII, No. 48, pp. 514–536, with map.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 248. || align="right" | 1883. || Die Crustaceenfauna der Eurypterenschichten von Rootziküll auf Oesel. Mem. Acad. Imp. d. Sci. Saint-Petersbourg, VIIe serie, tome XXXI, No. 5, Miscellanea Silurica III, pp. 28–88, 7 plates.
 * }


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/404

 133 pictures to the Royal Academy, and thirty-nine to the British Institution. His ‘Dorinda wounded by Sylvia’ is in the Diploma Gallery at Burlington House, and a watercolour, ‘Pan teaching Apollo’ (1790), is in the South Kensington Museum. Many of his pictures were engraved, including the forest scene in ‘Titus Andronicus,’ engraved by Anker Smith for Boydell's ‘Shakespeare’ (1793), several subjects engraved by James Heath and others for an edition of Shakespeare published by Longmans (1805–7), and, among larger subjects, ‘A Vestal’ (1800), by S. W. Reynolds, and ‘The Soldier's Widow’ (1801), by Maria Gisborne, both in mezzotint. Most of Woodforde's compositions were in the correct classical style of his period. He was elected an associate of the Royal Academy in 1800, and an academician in 1807. In 1815 he married and went to Italy. He died of fever at Ferrara on 27 July 1817, leaving no issue.

WOODHALL or WOODALL. [See .]

WOODHAM, (1743–1803), singer and actress, previously called, and generally known on account of the elegance of her dress and person as ‘Buck’ Spencer, was born in 1743, and was a pupil of the celebrated Dr. Arne. She played at Covent Garden Euphrosyne in ‘Comus,’ and was regarded as a rival to Miss Brent, subsequently Mrs. Pinto. She sang at Marylebone Gardens under Dr. Arnold, from whom she received further instruction. This must have been between 1769 and 1773. Thence she proceeded to Ireland, and was for many years a favourite on the Dublin stage. She married a man named Smith, and had by him a daughter, who married ‘Young’ Astley, the son and successor of Philip Astley [q. v.] On his death she married a Mr. Woodham, from whom she was divorced. In her later years she lived entirely with her daughter. On the morning of 2 Feb. 1803 Astley's amphitheatre took fire and was consumed. Mrs. Woodham heard the alarm of fire and came to the door (or the window) where means of escape were awaiting her, but returning for a dress or to secure the receipts of the house for the last two nights, which were in her charge, was suffocated and burnt, a few calcined remains alone being available for interment. Her name, which appears as Woodham in the ‘Gentleman's Magazine,’ is given in the ‘Monthly Mirror’ as Woodman. No reference to her is to be traced under any of her names in theatrical histories.

WOODHAM or, ADAM (d. 1358), Franciscan. [See .]

WOODHEAD, ABRAHAM (1609–1678), Roman catholic controversialist, son of John Woodhead of Thornhill, Yorkshire, was baptised at Meltham in the parish of Almonbury in the same county, on 2 April 1609. Having acquired the rudiments of learning at Wakefield, he was entered as a student at University College, Oxford, in 1624, and soon afterwards became a scholar of that house. His tutors were successively Jonas Radcliff and Thomas Radcliff. He graduated B.A. 5 Feb. 1628–9, and M.A. 10 Nov. 1631. On 27 April 1633 he was elected a fellow of University College. He took holy orders, passed a course in divinity, and in 1641 was elected proctor. During his tenure of that office he made a determined stand on behalf of the university against the efforts of the puritan parliament to impose the ‘solemn league and covenant.’ He was summoned to appear at the bar of the House of Commons, where he made so strong and prudent a defence for his proceedings that he was dismissed without further molestation. Wood's statement that he resigned his office in consequence of the denial of the grace of [q. v.] is a groundless surmise.

At the expiration of his proctorship Woodhead procured the college license to travel abroad with two pupils, and on 22 June 1645 he had leave of absence for four terms. At this period he began to entertain doubts concerning the truth of the protestant faith, and felt some inclination to join the Roman communion. A comparison of the dates shows that he was never at Rome, as Anthony à Wood asserts. In 1648 he was ejected from his fellowship by the visitors of the university of Oxford. Some time before this Mr. (afterwards Sir Thomas) Aylesbury, governor to George Villiers, second duke of Buckingham [q. v.] and to Lord Francis, his brother, induced Woodhead to undertake their instruction in mathematics. Woodhead accompanied them on their return to London, receiving a handsome allowance with apartments at York House in the Strand. He continued to act as their tutor until the defeat at Kingston (1648), when Lord Francis was killed and the duke incurred the danger of utter ruin. Afterwards he lived till 1652 in the family of Arthur, lord Capel (afterwards Earl of Essex), who settled on him an


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/405

 annuity of 60l. for life. This pension he resigned on quitting his lordship's service. He then retired to the house of his friend Dr. John Wilby, a physician, who resided in the city. In 1654 or 1655 he and a few select friends purchased the house and garden at Hoxton formerly belonging to Lord Monteagle, where they lived in common, putting into one fund what had been saved from the wreck of their fortunes, and devoting themselves to prayer, meditation, and study. Woodhead was now avowedly a lay adherent of the Roman catholic church. The statement that he spent his time at Hoxton in educating youth is incorrect.

In 1660 the king's commissioners summoned him from his retirement and reinstated him in his fellowship. He accepted it again, rather as a mark of justice due to the cause for which he was deprived of it than with any design to retain it as a protestant, and in fact he never communicated with the church of England then or afterwards. Finding residence in college inconsistent with his religious principles, which were now well known, he soon withdrew to his solitude at Hoxton. But through the influence of Obadiah Walker [q. v.], the master of University College, he enjoyed the profits of his fellowship for eighteen years, and did not formally resign the appointment until 23 April 1678, a few days before his death (, Hist. of University College, p. 257). Wood says ‘he was so wholly devoted to retirement and the prosecution of his several studies that no worldly concerns shared any of his affections, only satisfying himself with bare necessaries; and so far from coveting applause or preferment (though perhaps the compleatness of his learning and great worth might have given him as just and fair a claim to both as any others of his persuasion) that he used all endeavours to secure his beloved privacy and conceal his name’ (Athenæ Oxon. ed. Bliss, iii. 1158). He died at Hoxton on 4 May 1678, and was buried in St. Pancras churchyard, where an altar-monument was placed over his remains, with a Latin inscription: ‘Elegi abjectus esse in domo Dei; et mansi in solitudine, non quærens quod mihi utile est, sed quod multis’ (, Epitaphs at Saint Pancras, i. 22). If James II had continued on his throne two years longer, Woodhead's body would have been translated to the chapel in University College, where a monument would have been erected ‘equal to his great merits and worth.’ The intended inscription has been printed (Athenæ Oxon. iii. 1165 n.)

By his will, dated 8 June 1675, Woodhead left the residue of the yearly rents of his lands at Meltham ‘to ye minister of the Word of God yt shall be settled and officiatt at ye Chappell of Meltham afforesaid at the time of my decease, and so to his successors in the same place and office for ever.’ The will and four letters written by Woodhead have been printed by the Rev. Joseph Hughes, who says: ‘These documents, both purely protestant in their character, seem to disprove the statements so frequently made and generally believed as to his having joined the Romish church, and tend to establish our confidence in him as a consistent clergyman of the church of England’ (, Hist. of Meltham, 1866, p. 82). It is certain, however, that Woodhead was a member of the Roman catholic church, though he never entered the priesthood.

Daniel Whitby [q. v.] described Woodhead as ‘the most ingenious and solid writer of the whole Roman party;’ Thomas Hearne more emphatically wrote: ‘I always looked upon Mr. Abraham Woodhead to be one of the greatest men that ever this nation produced;’ and Wood says that ‘his works plainly show him to have been a person of sound and solid judgment, well read in the fathers and in the polemical writings of the most eminent and renowned defenders of the church of England.’

His works appeared either anonymously or under initials, and many of them were printed after his death at the private press of his friend Obadiah Walker. Among them are: 1. ‘Some Instructions concerning the Art of Oratory,’ London, 1659, 12mo; 2nd edit., augmented, Oxford, 1682. 2. Treatises on ancient church government, in five parts, which are respectively entitled as follows: (a) ‘A brief Account of antient Church Government, with a Reflection on several modern Writings of the Presbyterians (the Assembly of Divines, their Jus Divinum Ministerii Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ, published 1654, and Dr. Blondel's Apologia pro Sententia Hieronymi, and others), touching this Subject,’ London, 1662 and 1685, 4to. The authorship has been erroneously ascribed to Dr. Richard Holden. (b) ‘Ancient Church-Government, and the Succession of the Clergy,’ pt. ii., Oxford, 1688, 4to. (c) ‘Antient Church Government, Part III: Of Heresy and Schisme [Lond.] 1736, printed at the cost of Cuthbert Constable, who was the “Catholic Mæcenas of his day.”’ (d) ‘Antient Church-Government, Part IV: What former Councils have been lawfully General and obliging. And what have been the Doctrines of such Councils, obliging in relation to the Reformation. Reviewing the Exceptions made by the Reformed.’ This remains in manuscript. (e) ‘Church Go-


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/406

 vernment. Part V: A Relation of the English Reformation, and the Lawfulness thereof, examined by the Theses delivered in the four former parts,’ Oxford, 1687, 4to. This was answered the same year in ‘Animadversions’ by George Smalridge [q. v.] 3. ‘The Guide in Controversies: or a rational Account of the Doctrine of the Roman Catholics concerning the ecclesiastical Guides in Controversies of Religion; reflecting on the later Writings of Protestants, particularly of Archbishop Laud and Dr. Stillingfleet on this Subject,’ London, 1666–7, 4to; reprinted 1673. 4. ‘The Life [and Works] of … St. Teresa,’ 1669 and 1671, 4to; translated from the Spanish. 5. ‘Dr. Stillingfleet's Principles, giving an Account of the Faith of Protestants consider'd,’ Paris, 1671, 8vo. 6. ‘The Roman Doctrine of Repentance and Indulgence vindicated from Dr. Stillingfleet's Misrepresentations,’ 1672, 8vo. 7. ‘The Roman Churche's Devotions vindicated from Dr. Stillingfleet's Misrepresentations,’ 1672, 8vo. 8. ‘Exercitations concerning the Resolution of Faith against some Exceptions,’ 1674, 4to. 9. ‘An Appendix to the four Discourses concerning The Guide in Controversies: Further shewing the Necessity and Infallibility thereof, against some contrary Protestant Principles,’ 1675, 4to. Some copies are entitled ‘A Discourse of the Necessity of Church Guides for directing Christians in necessary Faith.’ 10. ‘Life of Gregory Lopez, a Spanish Hermit in the West-Indies;’ 2nd edit. 1675, 8vo. 11. ‘A Paraphrase and Annotations upon the Epistles of St. Paul,’ Oxford, 1675, 8vo; 2nd edit. 1684. This was the joint production of Woodhead, Obadiah Walker, and Richard Allestree [q. v.], the probable author of ‘The Whole Duty of Man,’ which has been erroneously attributed to Woodhead. The third edition, London, 1702, reprinted in 1703 and 1708, 8vo, was corrected and improved by Bishop Fell. The work was reprinted at Oxford, 1852, 8vo, under the editorship of William Jacobson, afterwards bishop of Chester. 12. ‘St. Augustine's Confessions,’ London, 1679, 8vo; translated from the Latin. 13. A modernised edition of Walter Hilton's ‘Scale (or Ladder) of Perfection,’ London, 1679, 8vo. 14. ‘Propositions concerning Optic Glasses, with their natural Reasons drawn from Experiment,’ Oxford, 1679, 4to. 15. ‘Of the Benefit of our Saviour Jesus Christ to Mankind,’ Oxford, 1680, 4to. 16. ‘An historical Narrative of the Life and Death of … Jesus Christ,’ Oxford, 1685, 4to. 17. ‘Two Discourses concerning the Adoration of our Blessed Saviour in the Eucharist,’ Oxford, 1687, 4to. 18. ‘Two Discourses. The first concerning the Spirit of Martin Luther and the Original Reformation. The second concerning the Celibacy of the Clergy,’ Oxford, 1687, 4to. This was answered by Francis Atterbury (afterwards bishop of Rochester), to whose work a rejoinder was published by Thomas Deane of University College. 19. ‘Pietas Romana et Parisiensis: or a faithful Relation of the several Sorts of charitable and pious Works eminent in the Cities of Rome and Paris. The one taken out of a Book written by Theodor Amydenus, the other out of that by Mr. Carre,’ Oxford, 1687, 8vo. James Harrington wrote ‘Reflections’ on this work. 20. ‘Of Faith necessary to Salvation, and of the necessary Ground of Faith salvivical,’ Oxford, 1688, 4to. 21. ‘Motives to holy Living; or, Heads for Meditation, divided into Considerations, Counsels, and Duties,’ Oxford, 1688, 4to. 22. ‘A compendious Discourse of the Eucharist,’ Oxford, 1688, 4to. 23. ‘Apocalyps paraphras'd,’ Oxford, 1689, 4to, not completed. 24. ‘A larger Discourse concerning Antichrist,’ Oxford, 1689, 4to, not completed. 25. ‘Catholic Theses,’ Oxford, 1689, 4to.

He also left numerous unpublished works in manuscript, some of which are preserved in a collection of autograph letters, original manuscripts, transcripts, and miscellaneous writings by or relating to Woodhead, collected in the latter part of the eighteenth century by Cuthbert Constable (17 volumes, folio and quarto), and now in the library of Sir Thomas Brooke, bart., F.S.A., at Armitage Bridge House, near Huddersfield.

[Manuscript Life of Francis Nicholson or Nicolson, kindly lent to the writer, with other manuscripts relating to Woodhead, by Sir Thomas Brooke, bart., F.S.A.; Life by the Rev. Simon Berington (1736); Catalogue of Manuscripts and Printed Books collected by Thomas Brooke (1891), ii. 703; Burrows's Register of the Visitors of the Univ. of Oxford, p. 556; Catholic Miscellany, 1825, iv. 1, 43; Dalton's translation of the Life of St. Teresa, 1851, p. 408; Dodd's Church Hist. iii. 266; Echard's Hist. of England, 3rd edit. p. 960; Foster's Alumni Oxon. early ser. iv. 1675; Gillow's Bibl. Dict. i. 198; Hughes's Hist. of Meltham, p. 303; Jones's Popery Tracts, pp. 187, 196, 218, 234, 333, 355, 358, 374, 385, 432, 434, 485; Kennett's Register, pp. 598, 674; Le Neve's Monumenta Anglicana; Lysons's Environs, iii. 354; Notes and Queries, 3rd ser. ix. 38, vi. 475, vii. 142, x. 211, 4th ser. i. 367.]

WOODHOUSE, JAMES (1735–1820), ‘the poetical shoemaker,’ was born at Rowley Regis, Staffordshire, on 18 April 1735. His parents came of old yeoman stock. James


text:
Page:The Habitat of the Eurypterida.djvu/281

 {|
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" width="40px" | 249. || align="right" width="40px" | 1890. || Bemerkungen über die Schichtenfolge des Silur auf Gotland. Zeit. d. d. geol. Gesell, Band II, pp. 249–266.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 250. || align="right" | 1891. || Einige Bemerkungen über das Baltische Obersilur in Veranlassung der Arbeit des Prof. W. Dames über die Schichtenfolge der Silurbildungen Gotlands. Mélanges Géologiques et Paléontologiques tirés du Bull. l'Acad. Imp. Sci. St. Peters. Tome I, pp. 119–138. Map of Baltic area.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 251. || align="right" | 1892. || The Eurypterus-beds of Oesel as Compared with those of North America. Bull. G. S. A., Vol. III, pp. 59–60.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 252. || align="right" | 1902. || Communication before the Section of Geology and Mineralogy of Oct. 19, 1902, announcing the discovery of Eurypterus simonsoni. Comptes rendus des Séances, in Travaux de la Société Impériale des Naturalists de St. Pétersbourg. T. XXXIII, livr. 1, No. 6, pp. 202–3 (in Russian).
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 253. || align="right" | 1904. || Ueber die neue Merostomenform Stylonorus (?) simonsoni aus dem Obersilur von Rootziküll auf Oesel. Bull. Acad. Imp. d. Sci. St. Petersbourgh, tome XX, No. 3, ser. Ve, pp. 99–105, one plate.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 254. || align="right" | 1854. || Uebersicht des obern Silurischen Schichtensystems Liv- und Ehstlands vornämlich ihrer Inselgruppe. Archiv für d. Naturk. Liv.-Ehst-. und Kurlands, ser. I, Bd. I, 112 pp. Especially pp. 35, 47, 86.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 255. || align="right" | 1904. || Review of Kindle's paper on the Stratigraphy and Paleontology of the Niagara of Northern Indiana. A. Jour. Sci. 4th ser. XVIII, pp. 467–469.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 256. || align="right" | 1908. || Palaeogeography of North America. Bull. G. S. A., Vol. XXII, pp. 427–606, pls. XLVI–CI.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 257. || align="right" | 1868. || Descriptions of Fossil Insects. Geological Survey of Illinois. Geology and Palæontology. Vol. III, pp. 566–572.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 258. || align="right" | 1854. || British Palaeozoic Rocks and Fossils, p. 174, pl. I E, figs. 7, 21.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 259. || align="right" | 1906. || Beiträge zur Gigantostrakenfauna Böhmens. Beitr. zur. Pal. u. Geol. Oest.-Ung. u. d. Orients. Bd. XIX, pp. 49–57, Taf. IV, text figs. 1, 2.
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 260. || align="right" | 1907. || Das Mittelböhmische Obersilur- und Devongebiet südwestlich der Beraun. Ibid., Bd. XX, heft II, pp. 69–114.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 261. || align="right" | 1898. || Die Gigantostraken des ältern Böhmischen Palaeozoicum. Beitr. zur Pal. u. Geol. Oest.-Ung. u. d. Orients, Bd. XI, pp. 71–88. Taf. XII, text figs. 5–14.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 262. || align="right" | 1909. || Notes on Fossil Plants from the Witteberg Series of Cape Colony. Geol. Mag. dec. 5, Vol. VI, pp. 482–485, pl. XXVIII, figs. 5, 6.
 * - valign="top"
 * colspan="3" |
 * - valign="top"
 * align="right" | 263. || align="right" | 1906. || Die Paläozoischen Gebilde Podoliens. Beitr. zur. Pal. u. Geol. Oest.-Ung. u. d. Orients. Bd. XIX, Heft II, III, pp. 173–212; Heft IV, pp. 213–286, Pl. XIX, taf. V, fig. 24.
 * }


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/407

 had to leave school at the age of eight. He became a shoemaker, and, having married early, added to his means by elementary teaching. In 1759 he addressed an elegy to William Shenstone [q. v.], whose estate, The Leasowes, was some two miles from Woodhouse's cottage. Shenstone became much interested in him, and sent the elegy to his friends in London, and had it printed in Dodsley's edition of his own poems. A collection was made for Woodhouse, and in 1764 he was able to publish a volume entitled ‘Poems on sundry Occasions.’ The poems were reissued in 1766 as ‘Poems on several Occasions,’ introduced by a modest ‘Author's Apology.’ Woodhouse was now celebrated. The anxiety of Dr. Johnson to meet him afforded Mrs. Thrale a pretext for inviting him for the first time to her house in 1764. It was either on this or a subsequent occasion that the doctor recommended Woodhouse to give his nights and days to the study of Addison. In 1770, however, Johnson spoke disparagingly of Woodhouse: ‘He may make an excellent shoemaker, but can never make a good poet. A schoolboy's exercise may be a pretty thing for a schoolboy, but it is no treat for a man.’

Before this time Woodhouse had given up his trade. For some time a carrier between Rowley and London, he was appointed by Edward Montagu, soon after the publication of the second edition of his poems, land bailiff on either his Yorkshire or Northumberland estates. He held the position for some twelve years, till about 1778. He was on a friendly footing with Montagu, but was never on good terms with his wife, Mrs. Elizabeth Montagu [q. v.] She is the ‘Patroness,’ the ‘Scintilla’ or ‘Vanessa’ of his autobiography, where she is ridiculed as the quintessence of tyranny, meanness, vanity, and hypocrisy. About 1778 he returned to Rowley, but soon re-entered the employment of Mrs. Montagu (her husband being now dead) as house steward. He was finally dismissed, six or seven years later, according to his own story, on account of his opinions on religion and politics, which were repugnant to Mrs. Montagu. In 1788 Woodhouse issued a new volume of poems, which he called, like his former volume of 1766, ‘Poems on several Occasions never before printed.’ He was then suffering much privation, but by the help of James Dodsley [q. v.], the brother of his former publisher, he was able to establish a fairly prosperous bookselling and stationery business. From 211 Oxford Street he issued in 1803 a small volume, called ‘Norbury Park and other Poems,’ all the verses in which had been written some years before. It was dedicated to William Locke [q. v.], the owner of Norbury. His last volume, ‘Love Letters to my Wife,’ written in 1789, was printed in 1804 (cf. Monthly Review for 1804, ii. 426). Woodhouse died in 1820, and was buried in St. George's Chapel ground, near the Marble Arch. One of his sons, George Edward, realised a fortune as a linendraper in Oxford Street. In old age Woodhouse was noted for his patriarchal appearance and stately bearing.

A complete edition of Woodhouse's poems, edited by a descendant (R. I. Woodhouse), was published in 1896. Prefixed to it is an engraving by Henry Cook of a painting by Hobday of the poet at the age of eighty-one. Another portrait is mentioned by Bromley and Evans.

The collective edition contains Woodhouse's autobiography, which remained in manuscript at his death. The author called it ‘The Life and Lucubrations of Crispinus Scriblerus: a Novel in verse, written in the last Century.’ It is written in rhymed blank verse, and abounds in long digressions of a pious or political nature, but contains some good satirical lines.

[Gent. Mag. 1764 pp. 289, 290 (written by a friend of Shenstone); Blackwood's Mag. November 1829 (art. ‘Sorting my Letters and Papers’); Mrs. Piozzi's Anecd. p. 125; Boswell's Life of Johnson, ed. Hill, i. 225 n., 520, ii. 127; Doran's An English Lady of the last Century (Mrs. Montagu); Allibone's Dict. of Engl. Lit.; Woodhouse's Works, with prefaces, especially to the Life and Poems, 1896; Winks's Illustrious Shoemakers, 1883, p. 296.]

WOODHOUSE, PETER (fl. 1605), poet, was the author of ‘The Flea,’ or, adopting the subsidiary title, ‘Democritvs his Dreame, or the Contention betweene the Elephant and the Flea.’ The poem, which appeared in 1605, was printed for John Smethwick, whose shop was ‘in St. Dunstans Churchyard in Fleet Street, vnder the Diall.’ The only copy known to be extant is in possession of Earl Spencer at Althorp; a reprint, limited to fifty copies, was made in 1877, under the editorship of Alexander Balloch Grosart. Woodhouse was by no means destitute of merit as a poet, but ‘The Flea’ is the only memorial of him that exists. Although he disclaims any personal applications in his poem, and declares that his censures are directed at ‘some kinde of faultes and not some faultie men,’ it is possible that the elephant, the flea, and the other actors in the tale typify persons whom it might have been dangerous to satirise more openly. The poem is prefaced by an ‘Epistle to the Reader,’ some verses ‘in laudem authoris’ signed ‘R. P., Gent.,’ and an ‘Epistle Dedi-


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/408

 catorie to the Giddie Multitude,’ in which there is a reference to ‘Justice Shallowe’ and ‘his cousen Mr. Weathercocke.’

WOODHOUSE, ROBERT, (d. 1345?), treasurer of the exchequer. [See .]

WOODHOUSE, ROBERT (1773–1827), mathematician, born at Norwich on 28 April 1773, was the son of Robert Woodhouse, a linendraper and freeholder in the town, by his wife, the daughter of J. Alderson, a nonconformist minister of Lowestoft, who was the grandfather of Sir [q. v.] and of Mrs. [q. v.] He was educated at the grammar school at North Walsham, and was admitted to Caius College, Cambridge, on 20 May 1790, graduating B.A. in 1795 as senior wrangler, and M.A. in 1798. In 1795 he was also first Smith's prizeman. He held a scholarship at Caius College from 1790 to 1798, and a fellowship from 1798 to 1823, and after graduating devoted himself to the study and teaching of mathematics. On 16 Dec. 1802 he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society.

Woodhouse is entitled to distinction in the history of mathematics in England for the important share he had during his earlier years as a teacher at Cambridge in bringing to the notice of his countrymen the development in mathematical analysis which had taken place on the continent. He was the first in England to explain and advocate the notation and methods of the calculus. In 1803 he published ‘The Principles of Analytical Calculation’ (Cambridge, 4to). In this work he reviewed the methods of infinitesimals, limits, and expansions, and severely criticised the principles adopted by Lagrange in his theory of functions, regarding them as logically insufficient. By thus exposing the unsoundness of some of the continental methods he rendered his general support of the system far more weighty than if he had appeared to embrace it as a blind partisan. ‘The Principles of Analytical Calculation’ was followed in 1809 by ‘Elements of Trigonometry’ (Cambridge, 8vo; 5th edit. 1827, 8vo), a work which, according to (1791–1858) [q. v.], ‘more than any other contributed to revolutionise the mathematical studies of this country.’ In his former work he had appealed, somewhat fruitlessly, to the teacher, but in his ‘Trigonometry’ he more successfully addressed the student and prepared the way for the introduction of the differential calculus. In 1810 appeared ‘A Treatise on Isoperimetrical Problems and the Calculus of Variations’ (Cambridge, 8vo), in which he traced the course of continental research from the earliest isolated problems of the Bernoullis to the development of Lagrange's comprehensive theory. In 1812 he published a ‘Treatise on Astronomy’ (Cambridge, 8vo), which was intended as the first volume of a more extended work. A second volume followed in 1818 on the theory of gravitation, somewhat improperly entitled ‘Physical Astronomy.’ In this treatise he endeavoured to lay before the student the results of continental research since the time of Newton.

In 1820 Woodhouse was elected to succeed [q. v.] as Lucasian professor of mathematics; and in 1822, on the death of [q. v.], he was removed to the Plumian professorship of astronomy and experimental philosophy. On the completion of the observatory at Cambridge he was appointed its superintendent; but, though he possessed a genuine love of practical astronomy, he was hardly able to carry out his duties owing to the failure of his health. He died at Cambridge on 28 Dec. (or, according to some authorities, 23 Dec.) 1827, and was buried in the chapel at Caius College. In 1823 he married Harriet, daughter of William Wilkins, an architect of Norwich, and sister of the architect [q. v.] By her he left a son Robert.

Woodhouse is entitled to the entire credit of introducing the calculus into England, but it is doubtful whether he alone, in spite of his logical power and his caustic wit, would have succeeded in converting his contemporaries. Much of his success was due to the earnest support of his three disciples, George Peacock, Herschel, and [q. v.], who in 1812 founded the Cambridge Analytical Society.

WOODHOUSE, THOMAS (d. 1573), Roman catholic martyr, was a native of Lincolnshire. He was ordained priest shortly before the death of Mary in 1558, and was presented to a parsonage in Lincolnshire. In 1560 he resigned his living on account of the changes introduced in the English church, and, retiring to Wales, became tutor


text: Author:William Charles Popplewell

title: Author:William Charles Popplewell


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/409

 in a gentleman's family. This situation he also resigned soon afterwards on religious grounds, and shortly after was arrested while celebrating mass and committed on 14 May 1561 as ‘a pore prist’ to the Fleet prison, where he lived on charity like other pauper prisoners (cf. Harl. MS. 360, f. 7). In 1563, during a severe visitation of the plague in London, he was removed to Cambridgeshire for a short time with the other prisoners in the custody of Tyrrel, the warder of the Fleet. At his urgent request Woodhouse was admitted to the Society of Jesus in 1572. He was so animated by his admission that on 19 Nov. 1572 he wrote to Cecil exhorting him to persuade Elizabeth to submit to the pope. The original is preserved in the British Museum (Lansdowne MS. 99, f. 1). He also wrote papers ‘persuading men to the true faith and obedience,’ which he signed with his name, tied to stones, and threw out of the prison window into the street. On 16 June 1573 he was tried for high treason in the Guildhall, London. He distinguished himself by his intrepid bearing and the frankness of his answers, was found guilty, and was executed at Tyburn on 19 June. Woodhouse was the first priest who suffered in Elizabeth's reign, and the first Roman catholic, with the exceptions of John Felton (d. 1570) [q. v.] and John Story [q. v.]

Two narratives of his life and martyrdom exist. The earlier, dated 1574, is contained in a small quarto volume of manuscripts, entitled ‘Anglia, Necrol. 1573–1651,’ in the archives of the Society of Jesus at Rome. In this account, which is written in Latin, he is called William Woodhouse. Three hundred and thirty verses are appended, written by him in prison. The second and fuller account is in English, and was sent to Rome by Henry Garnett [q. v.] It is now among the Stonyhurst manuscripts.

Woodhouse was included in the representation of the ‘Sufferings of the Holy Martyrs’ in England, painted by Nicholas Circiniani, in the English Church of the Most Holy Trinity at Rome, by order of Gregory XIII. The original painting was destroyed about the end of the eighteenth century, but engravings of it still exist (, Acts of English Martyrs, 1891, pp. 370–2).

[Foley's Records of the English Province, 1883, vii. 859–61, 967, 1257–67; Berselli's Vita del Beato Edmundo Campion, Rome, 1889, pp. 218–33; Stow's Annales, 1615, p. 676; Rambler, 1858, x. 207–12; Parsons's Elizabethæ Angliæ Reginæ hæresim Calvinianam propugnantis sævissimum in Catholicos sui regni edictum, 1592, p. 189.]

WOODHOUSELEE,. [See, 1747–1813.]

WOODINGTON, WILLIAM FREDERICK (1806–1893), sculptor and painter, was born at Sutton Coldfield, Warwickshire, on 10 Feb. 1806. He came to London in 1815, and about 1820 was articled to Robert William Sievier [q. v.], who was at that time practising engraving, but who shortly afterwards abandoned that art in favour of sculpture, and in this was followed by his pupil. Woodington first appeared at the Royal Academy in 1825, and until 1882 was a frequent contributor of fancy figures and reliefs of sacred and poetical subjects which, though deficient in the highest qualities of the art, were composed with much grace and feeling. He also modelled many portrait busts. To the Westminster Hall competition of 1844 he sent ‘The Deluge’ and ‘Milton dictating to his Daughters,’ and in that for the Wellington monument in St. Paul's Cathedral he was awarded the second premium. He subsequently executed two of the reliefs on the walls of the consistory chapel in which the monument, the work of Alfred Stevens [q. v.], was temporarily placed. His other works in sculpture include the bronze relief of the battle of the Nile on the plinth of the Nelson column in Trafalgar Square, the statues of Columbus, Galileo, Drake, Cook, Ralegh, and Mercator on the colonnade of the Exchange buildings at Liverpool, and the colossal bust of Sir Joseph Paxton at the Crystal Palace. Woodington also practised painting, and frequently exhibited pictures of a similar class to his works in marble. In 1853 he sent to the Academy ‘The Angels directing the Shepherds to Bethlehem,’ in 1854 an illustration to Dante, and in 1855 ‘Job and his Friends;’ his ‘Love and Glory’ was engraved by J. Porter. For some years Woodington held the post of curator of the school of sculpture at the Royal Academy, and in 1876 he was elected an associate of that body. He died at his house at Brixton on 24 Dec. 1893, and was buried in Norwood cemetery.

[Daily Chron. 27 Dec. 1893; Times, 27 Dec. 1893; Athenæum, 30 Dec. 1893; Stannus's Alfred Stevens and his Work, 1891; Graves's Dict. of Artists, 1760–1893.]

WOODLARK, ROBERT (d. 1479), founder of St. Catharine's College, Cam-bridge. [See .]

WOODLEY, GEORGE (1786–1846), poet and divine, born at Dartmouth, and baptised at Townstal church in that town on 3 April 1786, was the son of Richard Woodley, a


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/410

 a man of humble position. His education was slight, but he sedulously cultivated every opportunity for self-improvement. When very young he served in a British man-of-war, and began versifying for the amusement of his messmates before he was twelve years old. After spending several years at sea he lived at Plymouth Dock, now Devonport, and in London, engaged in literary pursuits, but his work brought him very little profit. He was of a mechanical disposition, and in 1804 competed for the gold medal of the Royal Humane Society for the best essay ‘On the Means of preventing Shipwreck.’ Through a change of dates on the part of the society the essay arrived after the distribution of the prizes, but he claimed to have anticipated the invention of George William Manby [q. v.] He applied to the admiralty, the navy commissioners, and the corporation of Trinity House for aid in furthering his scheme, but could not obtain any assistance. His address to Dr. Hawes (Gent. Mag. 1807, ii. 1051–2) is dated from Dover.

In 1808 Woodley left London for his health's sake, and soon afterwards settled at Truro as editor of the ‘Royal Cornwall Gazette,’ the tory paper of the county. Here he employed himself in writing several volumes of poetry, and in competing for prize essays on theological and social subjects. About June 1820 he was ordained by the then bishop of Exeter, and he at once proceeded to the Scilly Islands as the missionary, at a salary of 150l. per annum, of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, in the islands of St. Martin and St. Agnes. He was ordained priest by Bishop Carey in Exeter Cathedral on 15 July 1821. At Scilly he remained until June 1842, and during that time rebuilt the church on St. Martin's, and restored that on St. Agnes. At that date he retired with a gratuity of 100l. and a pension of 75l. per annum. He was appointed on 12 Feb. 1843 to the perpetual curacy of Martindale in Westmorland, and held it until his death on 24 Dec. 1846. His wife, Mary Fabian, whom he married at Stoke Damerel, died at Taunton in August 1856. Their only son, William Augustus Woodley, was the proprietor of the ‘Somerset County Gazette’ (Taunton) and other papers; he died at 3 Worcester Terrace, Clifton, Bristol, on 11 March 1891, and was buried in St. Mary's cemetery, Taunton.

Woodley was the author of 1. ‘Mount Edgcumbe,’ with the ‘Shipwreck’ and miscellaneous verses, 1804; preface signed G. W. (cf. and, Anon. Lit. ii. 1670). 2. ‘The Churchyard and other Poems,’ 1808. 3. ‘Britain's Bulwarks, or the British Seaman,’ 1811 (composed for the most part in 1803). 4. ‘Portugal Delivered: a Poem in five books,’ 1812. 5. ‘Redemption: a Poem in twenty books,’ 1816. 6. ‘Cornubia: a Poem in five cantos,’ 1819. 7. ‘The Divinity of Christ proved,’ 1819; 2nd edit. 1821. For this essay he received a prize of 50l. from the St. David's diocese branch of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. He was the author of similar essays ‘On the Succession of the Christian Priesthood’ and on ‘the Means of employing the Poor.’ 8. ‘Devonia: a Poem,’ five cantos, 1820. 9. ‘View of the present State of the Scilly Isles,’ 1822; the best work on that district which had been published. 10. ‘Narrative of the Loss of the Steamer Thames on the Scilly Rocks’ on 4 Jan. 1841.

Woodley was a contributor to the chief periodicals, and the ‘Gazetteer of the County of Cornwall,’ published at Truro about 1817, has been attributed to him.

[Boase and Courtney's Bibl. Cornub. ii. 902–903, 951, 1362–3; Allen and McClure's S.P.C.K. 1898, pp. 400–1; British Lady's Mag. February 1818, p. 93; Gent. Mag. 1847, i. 444; Notes and Queries, 3rd ser. iii. 399; postscript to Portugal Delivered; information from Mr. Arthur Burch, F.S.A., Diocesan Registry, Exeter.]  WOODMAN, RICHARD (1524?–1557), protestant martyr, born about 1524 at Buxted, Sussex, was by trade an ‘iron-maker,’ living in the parish of Warbleton, East Sussex, and keeping a hundred workmen in his employ. He became known as a protestant at the beginning of 1554 by ‘admonishing’ George Fairebanke, the rector of Warbleton, when in the pulpit. Woodman was arrested for this infringement of the ‘act of 1553 against offenders of preachers and other ministers in the churche’ (1 Mary st. 2. c. 3). He was taken before the local magistrates, and twice brought up before quarter sessions to give security for good behaviour. For contumacious refusal to do this he was imprisoned during two periods of three months (‘two more sessions’) under the act. During this time he was twice examined before the bishop of Chichester, George Day [q. v.], and five times before Cardinal Pole's ‘commissioners.’ In June 1554 he was committed by the Sussex magistrates to the queen's bench prison, London, a measure of doubtful legality; there he remained a prisoner nearly eighteen months. In November 1555 Woodman was sent by Dr. John Story [q. v.], Bonner's persecuting chancellor, to that bishop's notorious ‘coal-


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 62.djvu/411

 house.’ After a month's imprisonment here he was called up for repeated examinations. He proved by thirty respectable witnesses that he had not been arrested for heresy, and on 18 Dec. 1555 was set unconditionally at liberty, his detention under the statute on which he was arrested being held illegal.

Assertions being made that he had purchased his release by submission to the church, Woodman vindicated his consistency by itinerant preaching in the neighbourhood of his home. A warrant was issued for his arrest, but he escaped to Flanders, and thence to France. After an absence of three weeks he secretly returned home; he was at last betrayed by his brother, with whom he had had disputes upon money matters. He was taken in his own house, and on 12 April 1557 sent to London. Confined again in Bonner's ‘coalhouse,’ he was six times examined during a period of eight weeks. Thence he was removed to the Marshalsea, the sheriff's prison in Southwark. While here he wrote the account of his examinations preserved by Foxe. His second examination took place on 27 April before John Christopherson [q. v.], bishop-designate of Chichester, during which it appeared that a technical difficulty vitiated the legality of the proceedings, the bishop-designate not yet having been consecrated. On 25 May 1557 Woodman was brought before John White (1510?–1560) [q. v.], bishop of Winchester, at St. George's Church, Southwark. White had no jurisdiction except such as arose out of Woodman's answers to Pole's commissioners which had been given in his diocese. These were on a second hearing (15 June) at St. Mary Overy produced against him. Woodman at once took the legal point that he was not resident within White's diocese, and that White had therefore no jurisdiction under the act 2 Henry IV, c. 15. He was remanded till 16 June, when Christopherson appeared as an assessor together with William Roper [q. v.], one of the commissioners for the suppression of heresy appointed in the previous February. Woodman was now ordered to be sworn, under this inquisitorial commission, as suspect of heresy. He refused to swear, and again appealed to his ordinary under the statute of Henry IV. This point had been foreseen, for Christopherson not being yet consecrated, Pole had nominated Nicholas Harpsfield [q. v.], archdeacon of Canterbury, as ordinary. Thereupon Woodman allowed himself to be entrapped into a declaration upon the nature of the sacrament and excommunicated. Throughout his examinations he behaved with great boldness. He was taken to Lewes, and burnt there in company with nine others on 22 June.

Traditions of Woodman linger in Sussex. The site of his house is still pointed out. He is said to have been confined in the second story of the church tower of Warbleton, which bears some indications of having been used as a prison. An old stone cellar at Uckfield is said to have been another place of his imprisonment, and the third is the great vault under the Star inn (now the town hall) at Lewes, in front of which he and his fellow-martyrs were burnt.

[Foxe's Actes and Monuments (Book of Martyrs), ed. 1641, pp. 799–827; Burnet's Hist. of the Reformation; Wilkins's Concilia, 1737, vol. iv.; Lower's Worthies of Sussex, 1865, pp. 138–147; Strype's Memorials of the Reformation, vol. iii.; Dixon's Hist. of the Church of England, 1891, vol. iv.; Horsfield's Hist. of Sussex, 1835, i. 572.]  WOODMAN, RICHARD (1784–1859), engraver, son of Richard Woodman, an obscure engraver who worked at the end of the last century, was born in London on 1 July 1784. He served his apprenticeship with Robert Mitchell Meadows, the stipple engraver, in whose manner he worked, and for some years found considerable employment upon book illustrations, chiefly portraits of actors, sportsmen, and nonconformist ministers. Plates by him are found in Knight's ‘Gallery of Portraits,’ the ‘Sporting Magazine,’ the ‘British Gallery of Art,’ and Cottle's ‘Reminiscences.’ His largest and best work is the ‘Judgment of Paris,’ from the picture by Rubens, now in the National Gallery. During the latter part of his life Woodman practised chiefly as a painter of miniatures and small watercolour portraits, which he exhibited occasionally at the Royal Academy between 1820 and 1850. He died on 15 Dec. 1859.

[Redgrave's Dict. of Artists; Graves's Dict. of Artists, 1760–1893.]  WOODNOTH. [See and .]

WOODROFFE, BENJAMIN (1638–1711), divine, son of the Rev. Timothy Woodroffe, was born in Canditch Street, St. Mary Magdalen parish, Oxford, in April 1638. He was educated at Westminster school, and was elected to Christ Church, Oxford, in 1656, matriculating on 23 July 1656. He graduated B.A. 1 Nov. 1659, M.A. 17 June 1662, and he was incorporated at Cambridge in 1664. From about 1662 he was a noted tutor at Christ Church, and in 1663 he studied chemistry with Antony Wood, John Locke, and others, at


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hauff, Wilhelm


text:
Talk:Three Stories and Ten Poems

Copyvio and deletion
For reference, this document has been discussed as a possible copyright violation on the following occasions: AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Possible copyright violations/Archives/2009-05: Deleted
 * Possible copyright violations/Archives/2008-03: Restored
 * Possible copyright violations: Withdrawn

title: Talk:Three Stories and Ten Poems


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Haug, Martin


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Wood, Searles Valentine (1798-1880)


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Wood, Searles Valentine (1830-1884)


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Wood, Shakspere


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Wood, Thomas


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Wood, William (1609-1691)


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Wood, William (1671-1730)


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Wood, William (1745-1808)


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Wood, William (1774-1857)


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Wood, William Page


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodall, John


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodard, Nathaniel


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodbury, Walter Bentley


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodcock, Martin


text:
User:Peter Buch

My user page in the German Wikipedia

title: User:Peter Buch


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodcroft, Bennet


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodd, Basil


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Wooddeson, Richard


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodfall, George


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodfall, Henry Sampson


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodfall, William


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodford, Alexander George


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodford, John George


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodford, Samuel


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodford, William of


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodforde, Samuel


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodham, Mrs.


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodhead, Abraham


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodhouse, James


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodhouse, Peter


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodhouse, Robert


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodhouse, Thomas


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodington, William Frederick


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodley, George


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodman, Richard (1524?-1557)


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Woodman, Richard (1784-1859)


text:
Author:Stephen Paget

Works

 * "The Patient" in Medicine and the Church (1910)
 * "The Patient" in Medicine and the Church (1910)
 * "The Patient" in Medicine and the Church (1910)
 * "The Patient" in Medicine and the Church (1910)
 * "The Patient" in Medicine and the Church (1910)
 * "The Patient" in Medicine and the Church (1910)

Works about Paget

 * Review of Paget 1897 in The Zoologist, 4th series, vol 1 (1897), issue 677, November, pp. 527–528
 * Review of Paget 1897 in The Zoologist, 4th series, vol 1 (1897), issue 677, November, pp. 527–528

title: Author:Stephen Paget


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hauge, Hans Nielsen


text:
Page:A history concerning the pension claim of Harriet Tubman.djvu/1

 Harriet Tubman was sent to Hilton Head—She says—in May 1862, at the suggestion of Gov Andrew, with the idea that she would be a valuable person to operate within the enemies lines—in procuring information & scouts. She was forwarded by Col Frank Howe—the Mass. State agent in New York, by the Gov’t transport Atlantic—was sent-up to Beaufort, attached to the H'Qrs of Gen’l Stevens—and rendered much, and very valuable service acting as a spy within the enemies lines—and obtaining the services of the most-valued Scouts and Pilots in the Gov’t employ in that Department.

Among the original papers in Harriet’s possession—is a list of the names of the Scouts & Pilots—

 * “Issac Hayward” “Mott Blake”
 * “Gabriel Cahern” “Sandy Sellus”
 * “Geo Chisholm” “Solomon Gregory”
 * “Peter Burns”

"Pilots who know the channels of the River in this vicinity, and who acted as such for Col. Montgomery up the Combahee River


text:
Page:A history concerning the pension claim of Harriet Tubman.djvu/2

 ::“Cha Simmons”
 * “Saml Hayward”

Endorsed

 * "app
 * R. Saxton,
 * Brig. Gen’l”

Unconscious of the great value of the official documents she had from the several officers at different times, Harriet has lost some of them—and the first documentary proof we have of her service in the Department of the South is a pass issued by Gen’l Hunter—a copy of which is hereto appended:

Headq’rs Dept’t of the South, Hilton Head, Port Royal, S.C., Feb. 19, 1863.

Pass the bearer, Harriet Tubman, to Beaufort, and back to this place, and wherever she wishes to go, and give her passage at all times on all Government transports. Harriet was sent to me from Boston, by Gov. Andrew, of Mass., and is a valuable woman. She has permission, as a warrant of the Government, to purchase such provisions from the commissary as she may need.

D. HUNTER, Maj. Gen. Com’g.

H.Q. Dep’t of the South, July 1, 1863.

Continued in force.

Brig. Gen'l Com'g.

On July 6, 1863 Col. Montgomery wrote as follows.

“HdQrs Col. Brigade

St. Helena Island

July 6, 1863

“Brig Genl Gillmore

 * Com’d’g Dept of the South

General:

I wish to commend to your attention Mrs. Harriet Tubman, a most remarkable woman, and valuable as a scout. I have been acquainted with her character and actions for several years.

Walter D. Plown is a man of tried courage and can be made highly


text:
Page:A history concerning the pension claim of Harriet Tubman.djvu/3

 useful.

I am General

Your most obt servt”

Signed “James Montgomery

“Col Comd’g Beaufort

on the back is endorsed

"I approve of Col. Montgomery’s estimate of the value of Harriet Tubman’s service."

 * Signed R. Saxton
 * Brig Genl.”

I certify that I have been acquainted with Harriet Tubman for nearly two years, and my position as Medical officer in charge of “contrabands” in this town, and in hospitals, has given me frequent and ample opportunity to observe her general deportment, particularly her kindness and attention to the sick and suffering of her own race.

I take much pleasure in testifying hereby to the esteem in which she is generally held.

I concur fully in the above.

R. SAXTON, Brig. Gen.

From the annexed of an original paper in Harrietts possession we find that she was still rendering valuable services at Beaufort, where she remained until the month of January or Feb'y 1865. When she came North on leave of absence to see her aged parents residing in this City—she was taken sick and so failed to return to New York City within the time specified in her leave, and for that reason was refused return transportation to Hilton Head. To remedy this difficulty she went to Washington and on representing her case at the War Dep’t she was promptly furnished with the following:

“Pass Mrs. Harriett Tubman (colored) to Hilton Head and Charleston, S.C.


text:
Page:A history concerning the pension claim of Harriet Tubman.djvu/4

 with free transportation on a Gov’t transport. By order of Sec’t of War

Dated Washington, March 20, 1865.

"To Bvt. Brig. General Van Vliet,

U.S.Q.M., N.Y.”

Returning with the intention of embarking at New York—she was intercepted in Philadelphia by some members of the Sanitary Commission who persuaded her to go instead to the James River Hospitals—where there was pressing need of such service as she could give in the Gov’t Hospitals. And relinquishing her plan of returning to the Dept. of the South—without a thought as to the unfortunate pecuniary result of this irregular proceeding she went to the Hospitals of the James River, and at Fortress Monroe or Hampton—where she remained until July 1865. In that month she went to Washington again to advise the Gov’t of some dreadful abuses existing in one or more of the Hospitals there. And so great was the confidence of some officers of the Gov’t in her that Surgeon Gen’l Barnes directed that