Thomas Woodward Part 2

From RoyalWeb
Jump to: navigation, search
(Some observations regarding Thomas Woodward, the immigrant)
(Some observations regarding Thomas Woodward, the immigrant)
Line 38: Line 38:
 
Thomas Woodward the immigrant is last known (for certain) to have resided in England in 1649 (20). Thereafter, we can only speculate, due to insufficient evidence. Thomas Woodward the immigrant may or may not have been the same man (by that name) who was appointed High Sheriff of Surrey in February 1650. Perhaps indeed he was, but it must be quickly admitted that no proof exists to support this statement. And (in any case), how could a man who was evidently so unpopular with Cromwell's 'Long Parliament' have been appointed to yet '''''another''''' post, only a few short months after he had been sacked from an earlier one (by the same hostile Parliament)? Thomas Woodward the immigrant first provably appears in Virginia colony in '''''1652''''' (21). This would certainly mean he was absent from England “by 1655”, in time for him to be considered dead and gone (even if only temporarily). This last is mentioned only because it fits the known evidence.
 
Thomas Woodward the immigrant is last known (for certain) to have resided in England in 1649 (20). Thereafter, we can only speculate, due to insufficient evidence. Thomas Woodward the immigrant may or may not have been the same man (by that name) who was appointed High Sheriff of Surrey in February 1650. Perhaps indeed he was, but it must be quickly admitted that no proof exists to support this statement. And (in any case), how could a man who was evidently so unpopular with Cromwell's 'Long Parliament' have been appointed to yet '''''another''''' post, only a few short months after he had been sacked from an earlier one (by the same hostile Parliament)? Thomas Woodward the immigrant first provably appears in Virginia colony in '''''1652''''' (21). This would certainly mean he was absent from England “by 1655”, in time for him to be considered dead and gone (even if only temporarily). This last is mentioned only because it fits the known evidence.
  
Despite the Restoration of Charles II to the English throne in 1660, and Thomas Woodward’s publicly-stated opinion that the King’s absence from the throne (prior to 1660) was his reason for not returning to England (22), Woodward in fact never again set foot in England—though he would have had plenty of opportunity to do so after 1660. The statement of the King himself in 1665, upon the death of Woodward’s son John, indicates as much (23).
+
Despite the Restoration of Charles II to the English throne in 1660, and Thomas Woodward’s publicly-stated opinion that the King’s absence from the throne (prior to 1660) was his reason for not returning to England (22), Woodward in fact apparently never again set foot in England—though he would have had plenty of opportunity to do so after 1660. The statement of the King himself in 1665, upon the death of Woodward’s son John, seems to indicate as much (23).
  
 
Moreover, Thomas Woodward the immigrant seems to have shown a decided reluctance to communicate with certain people back in England (at least to his son John, and to the King—both of whom seem to have had no earthly idea where Thomas might have ended up [24]). But strangely, Thomas Woodward could be downright chatty with people in England when it suited his purpose (just evidently not with his son John, or with his Monarch): witness the long, detailed letter he wrote on 2 June, 1665, to Sir John Colleton, one of the Lords Proprietors of Carolina colony, regarding the (then-current) state of affairs in said colony (25).  Given Thomas Woodward’s huge public stature in the colonies (even notoriety, in Puritan quarters), I find it difficult to fathom how or why his son John and especially his king, Charles II, can have been so ignorant as to his whereabouts in 1665. As Surveyor for the colonies of Virginia and Carolina, it would have been Thomas Woodward’s bounden duty to communicate regularly with his superiors in England and elsewhere in the colonies. Sir John Colleton apparently knew where he was in 1665. How is it then that the King of England (and Woodward’s own son) did not? It simply doesn’t add up.
 
Moreover, Thomas Woodward the immigrant seems to have shown a decided reluctance to communicate with certain people back in England (at least to his son John, and to the King—both of whom seem to have had no earthly idea where Thomas might have ended up [24]). But strangely, Thomas Woodward could be downright chatty with people in England when it suited his purpose (just evidently not with his son John, or with his Monarch): witness the long, detailed letter he wrote on 2 June, 1665, to Sir John Colleton, one of the Lords Proprietors of Carolina colony, regarding the (then-current) state of affairs in said colony (25).  Given Thomas Woodward’s huge public stature in the colonies (even notoriety, in Puritan quarters), I find it difficult to fathom how or why his son John and especially his king, Charles II, can have been so ignorant as to his whereabouts in 1665. As Surveyor for the colonies of Virginia and Carolina, it would have been Thomas Woodward’s bounden duty to communicate regularly with his superiors in England and elsewhere in the colonies. Sir John Colleton apparently knew where he was in 1665. How is it then that the King of England (and Woodward’s own son) did not? It simply doesn’t add up.

Revision as of 05:12, 8 June 2008

Personal tools
MOOCOW
Google AdSense