1121
Woodward’s pursuit of photomicrography was
grounded in two intellectual traditions. One was the
published work of Donné, Hogg, Dean, and other Eu-
ropean and American photomicrographic pioneers. The
other arose from his unwavering commitment to the
usefulness of the microscope as an aid to understanding
the causes of disease. Woodward’s knowledge and posi-
tion aided the efforts of two assistant army surgeons,
William Thomson and William Norris, who, using the
wet collodion process, fi rst took photomicrographs of
pathological preparations in spring 1864. The speci-
mens were prepared by Woodward and photographed
through a Zentmayer microscope (the offi cial U.S.
Army instrument stipulated by Woodward). During
the next two decades, Woodward himself produced
thousands of photomicrographs depicting a dazzling
array of pathological conditions and other biological
specimens.
For Woodward, photomicrography was fi rst and
foremost a scientifi c tool. Although like many amateur
microscopists and photographers he did capture in his
photomicrographs the beauty of diatoms (phytoplank-
ton that exhibited many beautiful shapes, appearances
and arrangements) better than any one else, this aim
did not fully interest him. Rather, he used these mi-
croscopic creatures as test subjects to determine the
resolving power of his lenses; owing to his skills both
as a microscopist and photographer, he was able to work
at the absolute technical limits of the best equipment
available. Woodward’s Toner Lecture series presented
in 1873 at the Smithsonian Institution is also exemplary
of his scientifi c approach. Concerned by the structure of
cancerous tumors and how adjacent tissue was affected,
Woodward prepared a series of 70 lantern slides from
the museum’s collection of photomicrographs for his
lectures. Not only did he wish to educate his medical
audience through these novel visual media, but he also
desired to show how his illustrations corresponded
with the latest scientifi c fi ndings of European histolo-
gists. In so doing, Woodward ably demonstrated how
photomicrography was becoming a necessity in the
laboratory setting.
Woodward’s legacy to scientifi c photomicrography
went beyond his own contributions, for the AMM
spawned successors through the nineteenth century and
beyond: Dr. George M. Sternberg used this technique in
bacteriological studies of the blood of yellow fever suf-
ferers in Cuba; army surgeon William M. Gray, museum
microscopist and photographer, became known for his
series of histological photomicrographs. By the close of
the nineteenth century, photomicrography had advanced
enough to record such intricate processes as the repro-
duction of cells and their nuclei by division (mitosis and
meiosis), with chromosomes clearly visible.
Overlapping the activities of laboratory-based in-
vestigative scientists who used the microscope-camera
combination as a powerful scientifi c tool were the
activities of other Victorians who pursued photomicrog-
raphy as an uplifting recreation or who, as avocational
scientists, studied natural history (i.e., descriptive and
inventory-based science). Microscopy, then, like pho-
tography, became a feature of polite Victorian culture,
especially in England. The study of the microscopic
world became genteel recreation for both men and
women, as they peered at the teeming life in samples of
pond water or at the beauty of a butterfl y’s scales. The
natural revelations of the microscope bolstered religious
viewpoints of God’s infi nite creativity and wisdom.
Photomicrography fi t nicely with this worldview as it
could make tangible to many what only amateur micros-
copists previously could see. Numerous books existed
which included plates of photomicrographs of minutely
detailed examples of the plant and animal kingdoms,
while extolling the virtues of photomicrography. In
Nature through Microscope & Camera, for example,
published by the Religious Tract Society of London,
Richard Kerr bemoaned the fact that amusement had
become the order of the day in later Victorian England
at the expense of education. However, the evils of
trashy novels, bridge parties, and football and cricket
talk could be counteracted somewhat, he maintained,
through the entertaining and civilizing power of the
microscope, especially when it was equipped with
a camera. Photomicrography was instructive, useful
and an intellectual pastime that would be good for
the nation. Commercial vendors also sold slide sets
of preserved biological specimens for “amateurs” to
photograph through their microscopes. Especially
enchanting for photographers were diatoms owing to
the distinct markings of these microorganisms, consist-
ing of striations and concentric rings of dots. Equally
intriguing was photographing snowfl akes. In 1885,
the American amateur photomicrographer, Wilson A.
“Snowfl ake” Bentley, fi rst photographed an ice crystal
through a microscope; he would continue this work in
sub- freezing weather for the next 40 years, producing
about 4,500 photomicrographs, and helping to prove
that no two snowfl akes were the same.
The apparatus available for photomicrography ranged
from the relatively simple and cheap to the most com-
plex and expensive. Regardless of sophistication or cost,
the hobbyist, serious amateur, and scientist alike used
a similar combination of equipment for photographing
through the microscope. Critical was the light source,
which had to be intense and constant to compensate for
the lack of sensitivity of photographic plates. Bright
sunlight was effective. At the AMM Woodward was
able to take full advantage of natural daylight because
of Washington, D.C.’s, southern latitude and his use of
a heliostat, which constantly tracked the sun. But those