No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
And then there were 12-distinguishing Van Leeuwenhoek microscopes from old or new copies
Abstract
In the wake of announcements of the authentications of two previously unknown Van Leeuwenhoek microscopes in one month, this article reviews the possibilities and potential pitfalls that might be involved in distinguishing 17(th)/18(th) century single lensed microscopes from historical and modern copies. It is clear that a combination of characteristics must be considered, no single parameter will do.
© FEMS 2015. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
... They include some based on the Utrecht microscope by Filibri and others based on one of the Haaxman microscopes at Museum Boerhaave in Leiden, all of which are marked as copies. Previous identification often depended on physical examination and the idea that since the microscopes were handmade, they should not resemble each other too closely (van Zuylen 1981;Robertson 2015b). Modern makers generally mark their products. ...
In the 300 years since Van Leeuwenhoek died, some of the details around his life and his work have provided material for discussion or dispute. As archives and libraries are being scanned and technology improves, information is becoming more readily available. This review therefore aims to take a new look at some of those discussions, and Van Leeuwenhoek’s possible experimental methods. Digital photography has made it possible to show exactly what can be seen through his simple microscopes, and how he could have obtained his results by, for example, modifying his microscopes and lighting. Equally, the completion of the series known as the Collected Letters, begun in 1931 with volume 1 published in 1939 and to be completed in 2023, allows researchers to see complete letters in English and modern Dutch. Theories about experimental methods can be tested and the results recorded photographically. Additionally, new, non-destructive techniques such as neutron tomography have improved the evaluation of the authenticity of surviving microscopes.
A rare brass microscope was discovered in mud dredged from canals in Delft, the Netherlands, in December 2014. The instrument (pictured, left) is thought to have been made by Dutch pioneer microscopist Antony van Leeuwenhoek (1632–1723; see P. Ball Nature 520, 156; 2015) and is an important find — if it is genuine. The last Leeuwenhoek microscope in public hands was a silver instrument that sold for more than US$500,000 in 2009. The ten microscopes attributed to Leeuwenhoek are diminutive, comprising a biconvex lens sandwiched between two riveted body plates. A positioning screw holds a stage block and a pin to secure the specimen. A smaller screw moves the stage block to focus the image. The Delft microscope's design and dimensions are comparable to those of a Leeuwenhoek microscope in the Boerhaave Museum in Leiden. Although the lens is abraded, it would have given about 160 × magnification. The Delft find cannot be a replica. First, it has a rounded body plate — a comparable microscope in the Boerhaave Museum is rectangular (pictured, right), and a copy would have an identical configuration. Second, my analysis of the screw thread at the Cavendish Laboratory at the University of Cambridge, UK, shows that it is unlike threads produced by modern mechanical methods. The distance between the threads (or pitch) of the main screw is 0.9 millimetres, comparable with that in authentic instruments. I am preparing a protocol through which the production details of all existing Leeuwenhoek microscopes can be scrutinized. Scanning electron microscopy should then be able to detect any forgeries. Brian J. Ford Cardiff University, UK. brianjford@cardiff.ac.uk Brian J. Ford 2 8 M a y 2 0 1 5 | V O L 5 2 1 | N a T U R E | 4 2 3
When Antonie van Leeuwenhoek died, he left over 500 simple microscopes, aalkijkers (an adaption of his microscope to allow the examination of blood circulation in the tails of small eels) and lenses, yet now there are only 10 microscopes with a claim to being authentic, 1 possible aalkijker and 6 lenses. He made microscopes with more than one lens, and possibly three forms of the aalkijker. This paper attempts to establish exactly what he left and trace the fate of some of the others using the earliest possible documents and publications.
© FEMS 2015. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Facsimile microscopes have been used to examine the possibilities of van Leeuwenhoek microscopes with a range of magnifications, particularly to confirm that bacteria can be seen if the microscope is strong enough. The relevance of historical microbiology in education is also illustrated by adapting versions of van Leeuwenhoek's pepper water experiment and Beijerinck's use of bioluminescent bacteria as oxygen probes. These experiments can demonstrate fundamentals such as enrichment and isolation cultures, physiology and experimental planning as well as critical reading of published material.
© FEMS 2015. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
The seventeenth-century Dutch microscopist, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, was the first man to make a protracted study of microscopical objects, and, unlike his contemporary Robert Hooke, he viewed by transmitted light. Leeuwenhoek made over 500 of his own, curious, simple microscopes, but now only nine are known to exist. The exact nature of the lenses Leeuwenhoek made, has for long been a puzzle. The existing microscopes have now been examined in detail, and their optical characteristics measured and tabulated. It is proposed that the lens of highest magnification, x 266, was made using a special blown bubble technique.
The seventeenth-century Dutch microscopist, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, was the first man to make a protracted study of microscopical objects, and, unlike his contemporary Robert Hooke, he viewed by transmitted light. Leeuwenhoek made over 500 of his own, curious, simple microscopes, but now only nine are known to exist. The exact nature of the lenses Leeuwenhoek made, has for long been a puzzle. The existing microscopes have now been examined in detail, and their optical characteristics measured and tabulated. It is proposed that the lens of highest magnification, x 266, was made using a special blown bubble technique.
Groots in het kleine
- J Backer
- C Biemans
- J Van Doorn
Backer J, Biemans C, van Doorn J, et al. Van Leeuwenhoek. Groots in
het kleine. Amsterdam: Veen Media, 2014.
Scientific Investigation of Copies, Fakes and Forgeries
- Pt Craddock
Craddock PT. Scientific Investigation of Copies, Fakes and Forgeries.
Oxford: Routledge, 2009.
Non-destructive studies on Mughal silver coins
- P Dasgupta
- B N Mondal
Dasgupta P, Mondal BN. Non-destructive studies on Mughal silver coins. Sci Cult 2013;79:512-7.
Leeuwenhoek's microscopes. In: Bracegirdle B (ed)
- S B Engelsman
Engelsman SB. Leeuwenhoek's microscopes. In: Bracegirdle B
(ed). Beads of Glass: Leeuwenhoek and the Early Microscope. Leiden: Museum Boerhaave, 1983, 28-40.
Lensje maken deel 4, of maak zelf een Van Leeuwenhoek microscoop
- H Loncke
Loncke H. Lensje maken deel 4, of maak zelf een Van Leeuwenhoek microscoop. Microwereld Oktober 2006a;46:1-13.
Cantor lectures. The microscope. Lecture II
- J Mayall
Mayall J. Cantor lectures. The microscope. Lecture II. J Soc Arts
1886;34:1007-21.
Through Van Leeuwenhoek's Eyes
- L A Robertson
Robertson LA. Through Van Leeuwenhoek's Eyes. Oxford University Press, 2014. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
OniSF8QrHac (date last accessed, 15 July 2015)
Van Leeuwenhoek's schenking van 26 microscopen aan de Royal Sociëty
- A Schierbeek
Schierbeek A. Van Leeuwenhoek's schenking van 26 microscopen aan de Royal Sociëty. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd.
1947;91:708-9.
Leeuwenhoecks microscopen, praepareeren en observatiemethodes
- W H Van Seters
van Seters WH. Leeuwenhoecks microscopen, praepareeren en
observatiemethodes. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1933;77:4571-89.
MerkwMerkw¨Merkwürdige Reisen durch Niedersachsen, Holland und Engelland Band 3. Ulm: Gaum, 1754. van Zuylen J. The microscopes of Antoni van Leeuwenhoek
- Zc Von Uffenbach
von Uffenbach ZC. MerkwMerkw¨Merkwürdige Reisen durch Niedersachsen, Holland und Engelland Band 3. Ulm: Gaum, 1754.
van Zuylen J. The microscopes of Antoni van Leeuwenhoek. J
Microsc 1981;121:309–28.
Een microscoop van Antoni van Leeuwenhoek
- M Fournier
- De Doos Van Pandora
Fournier M. De doos van Pandora. Een microscoop van Antoni
van Leeuwenhoek. Gewinia 2002;25:70-4.
Lensje maken, deel twee
- H Loncke
Loncke H. Lensje maken, deel twee. Microwereld 2006b;44:
6-15.
Catalogus van het vermaarde cabinet van vergrootglasen met zeer veel moeite, wen kosten in veele jaren geïnventeert, gemaakt, en nagelaten door wylen den Heer Anthony van Leeuwenhoek
- A Rees
Rees A. Catalogus van het vermaarde cabinet van vergrootglasen met
zeer veel moeite, wen kosten in veele jaren geïnventeert, gemaakt,
en nagelaten door wylen den Heer Anthony van Leeuwenhoek.
Delft: Reinier Boitet, 1747.
Ulm: Gaum, 1754. van Zuylen J. The microscopes of Antoni van Leeuwenhoek
- Z C Von Uffenbach
von Uffenbach ZC. Merkwürdige Reisen durch Niedersachsen, Holland und Engelland Band 3. Ulm: Gaum, 1754.
van Zuylen J. The microscopes of Antoni van Leeuwenhoek. J
Microsc 1981;121:309-28.
Leeuwenhoek's microscopes
- SB Engelsman
- B Bracegirdle
De doos van Pandora. Een microscoop van Antoni van Leeuwenhoek
- Fournier
- Craddock