New Leeuwenhoek Microscopes
Table 1 : Microscopes attributed to Antony van Leeuwenhoek. No Metal
Plates (mm)
1 Brass 16 × 40 2 Brass 17 × 40 3 Brass 24 × 46 4 Brass 28 × 47 5 Brass 28 × 37 6 Silver 19 × 32 7 Silver 22 × 39 8 Brass 22 × 46 9 Silver 25 × 45 10 Silver 17 × 34 11 Silver 22 × 39 12 Brass 17 × 41
Magnifi- cation Owner
118× 74× 266× 110× 112× 80× 69× No lens 167× 68× 248× [180×]
Boerhaave Museum
W. de Loos
University Museum
Royal
Zoological Society
Deutsches Museum
Boerhaave Museum
Undisclosed
Boerhaave Museum
Deutsches Museum
Boerhaave Museum
Planetarium Zuylenburgh
Camacho Pallas
Collection Vigo, Spain
Home’s apartment in 1832. One recent account [ 4 ] considers 18 Leeuwenhoek microscopes since 1875 of which most have since been lost. Table 1 shows a list of the standard Leeuwenhoek microscopes beginning with the nine accepted ones, followed by three newly authenticated examples. Table items 1, 2, and 8 are of documented provenance via the descendants of Leeuwenhoek himself. Most of the remainder are accepted as genuine, though this author has cast doubts on items 4, 5, and 9. One known example made of silver was sold by auction in London in 2009 (table item 7). Clearly, this was recognized as an extremely important instrument, and its value was refl ected in the money paid by the purchaser—a total of half a million dollars [ 5 ].
However, not all the microscopes attributed to Leeuwenhoek are of reliable provenance. One is part of the Henri van Heurck collection of the Royal Zoological Society, which for over a century was in Antwerp (#4). In 2002 it was moved to the Museum for the History of Science at the University of Gent, Belgium. Although the microscope looks somewhat like an original Leeuwenhoek microscope, the lens housing is of crude conception and seems too prominent; it lacks the subtlety of the genuine article. Similar doubts can be expressed about another brass example at the Deutsches Museum in Munich, Germany (#9). As was said in my book [ 2 ], it “seems to show a more modern approach to manufacture.”
40 None Place Leiden, Netherlands
Rotterdam, Netherlands
Utrecht, Netherlands
Museum for History of Science, University of Gent, Belgium
Munich, Germany Leiden, Netherlands
Purchased at Christie's, London
Delft, Netherlands Munich, Germany Leiden, Netherlands
Oud-Zuilen, Netherlands
Provenance Authenticity Since 1747 Documented Since 1747 Documented Since 1843 Documented Since 1914 Since 1906
Hallmarked before 1831
Since 1866
Included in a catalog dated 1914; previously unknown
Supplied in 1906 without documentation
Known since 1872 and accepted
Accepted as genuine Since 1745 Documented Since 1906 None None
Supplied in 1906 without documentation
Authenticated by Boerhaave Museum
Authenticated by the author and Boerhaave Museum
Authenticated by the author after SEM macrography
First Newly Discovered Microscope
In 1982 the first new candidate to appear unexpectedly emerged. Following my discovery of original specimens by Leeuwenhoek, there was renewed interest in his work, and a member of the public recognized that they possessed a microscope ( Figure 1 , #10) similar in appearance to one made by Leeuwenhoek. It was taken to the experts at the Boerhaave museum in Leiden, Netherlands, where nothing was done and it was locked away in a cupboard. Only in 2002 was it published in an obscure Dutch journal [ 6 ]; few other investigators have heard of its existence. This in itself was an extraordinary event, bringing the total of presumed Leeuwenhoek microscopes to ten.
Second Newly Discovered Microscope T e next example emerged in March 2014 when an item of silver was delivered to auctioneers in London. I was contacted for an opinion and concluded that this was almost certainly a genuine Leeuwenhoek microscope ( Figure 2 , #11). Regularly I am asked to opine about instruments similar to these, and they have invariably been copies rather than originals. Although opinions are the ultimate resort in matters of authentication, I was now beginning to form the view that we needed a more objective rationale. T e proposed technique of SEM macrog- raphy described next should resolve the issue.
www.microscopy-today.com • 2015 November
Believed Genuine
Yes Yes Yes Dubious Doubtful Yes Yes Yes Doubtful Yes Yes Yes
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68