Ophthalmy, Psorophthalmy, and Purulent Eye,’ London, 1780, 8vo; 2nd edit. 1785; reprinted 1787; 3rd edit. 1795; another edit., called the second, was published in 1805, and the 5th edit. in 1814. This work was translated into Spanish, Madrid, 1796, 16mo. 2. ‘Chirurgical Observations relative to the Epiphora or Watery Eye, the Scrophulous and Intermittent Ophthalmy, the Extraction of the Cataract, and the Introduction of the Male Catheter,’ London, 1792, 8vo; 2nd edit. 1800. 3. ‘An Enquiry into the Causes which have most commonly prevented Success in the Operation of Extracting the Cataract,’ London, 1795, 8vo. 4. ‘Chirurgical Observations relative to the Eye,’ London, 1798, 2 vols. 8vo; 2nd edit. 1805–12; translated into German, Göttingen, 8vo; 2te Bd. 1809. 5. ‘Remarks on the Fistula Lachrymalis,’ to which are added observations on hæmorrhoids and additional remarks on the ophthalmy, London, 1798, 8vo. 6. ‘Remarks on the Purulent Ophthalmy which has lately been epidemical in this country,’ London, 1808, 8vo. 7. ‘Observations on the Treatment of the Epiphora;’ edited by his son, Martin Ware, London, 1818, 8vo, and Exeter. 8. ‘On an Operation of largely Puncturing the Capsule of the Crystalline Humour in Gutta Serena,’ London, 1812, 8vo. He published several papers of professional importance in the ‘Transactions’ of the Medical and of the Medical and Chirurgical societies, of which the most interesting are the cases of recovery of sight after long periods of blindness. He also edited Reade's ‘Practical Observations on Diseases of the Inner Corner of the Eye,’ London, 1811, 8vo; and he translated Wenzel's ‘Treatise on Cataract,’ 1791, 8vo.
[Pettigrew's Biographical Memoirs of the most Celebrated Physicians, Surgeons, &c., vol. iii.; Wadd's Nugæ Chirurgicæ, London, 1824. Additional information kindly given by A. M. Ware, esq., a great-grandson of James Ware.]
WARE, SAMUEL HIBBERT- (1782-1848), antiquary and geologist. [See Hibbert.]
WARE, WILLIAM of (fl. 1300), theologian. [See William.]
WARELWAST, WILLIAM de (d. 1137), bishop of Exeter, a Norman by birth, and said, though on what authority is not known, to have been a nephew of William the Conqueror (Oliver), appears to have derived his name from a little place now called Veraval, not far from Yvetot (Rule). He was chaplain, or clerk, of the chapel or chancery of William Rufus, and in the spring of 1095 was sent by the king with Gerard, afterwards archbishop of York, on an embassy to Urban II, and returned in company with the cardinal-bishop of Albano in May [see under Gerard]. When Anselm was about to leave England in October 1097 the king sent William to him at Dover, and William remained with him, eating at his table, until the wind was favourable for crossing; and then, as the archbishop's luggage was being taken to the ship, searched it all, in obedience to the king's command, in the presence of a crowd of people. Late in 1098 Rufus, in consequence of the pope's demand that the temporalities should be restored to Anselm, again sent William to Urban; he addressed the pope in plain terms, and, being answered with a threat that unless the king obeyed before the council to be held in the third week after Easter he would be excommunicated, replied to the pope that before leaving he would do some business with him in private. He distributed money among the pope's advisers and obtained a respite for the king. His name is appended to the letter of Henry I recalling Anselm in 1100. According to William of Malmesbury (Gesta Pontificum, p. 111), he was elected to the see of Exeter in 1103; but this is almost certainly a mistake (his predecessor, Osbern, lived until after 5 Aug. 1103, ib. p. 202; William is not styled bishop-elect by Eadmer at this time nor in the letters of the pope and Anselm; and Eadmer, in recording his consecration in 1107, seems to imply that he was then lately elected; he may, however, have been promised the see by the king on, or even before, Osbern's death). In the autumn he was again sent to Rome to uphold the king's claim to investiture. Paschal II having received him in Anselm's presence, he spoke boldly to the pope, declaring that his ‘lord the king of the English would sooner part with his kingdom than lose the right to investiture.’ The pope replied in the same spirit, but William obtained for his master some concessions not affecting the main question. On the pretext of a vow of pilgrimage to the shrine of St. Nicholas of Bari, he remained in Rome after Anselm's departure and tried to obtain some further concessions. Failing in this, he left with a letter from the pope to the king, and overtook Anselm at Piacenza. He travelled with Anselm for some days, and, on leaving him to go back to England, gave him a message from the king signifying that his return depended on his acquiescence in the king's claim. About Michaelmas 1105 he was sent to Anselm, then at Reims, to inform him that he was about to go to Rome
