On April 23, our team had the pleasure of visiting the Utrecht University Special Collections, where we were warmly welcomed by Andrea van Leerdam. During our visit, we explored a variety of fascinating materials and engaged in in-depth discussions. The day began with a short presentation by team member Ellemijn Aerts, who shared insights on the images found in the printed letters of Antoni van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723).
Many of Van Leeuwenhoek’s original letters detailing his observations have been remarkably well-preserved. These letters, which began appearing in printed form in the Dutch Republic in 1684, were accompanied by various illustrations. They showcase his journey to becoming a self-publishing author and the decisions made in translating observations to print.
One particularly interesting letter, dated April 14, 1684, provides a glimpse into this process. Van Leeuwenhoek initially created red chalk drawings of microscopic observations, such as the lenses of various animals. Once he completed these sketches, he collaborated with a skilled artist, instructing him to replicate the drawings as accurately as possible. He critiqued the drawings, noting issues such as lines being too close together, which made them difficult to distinguish. Despite these criticisms, he still sent the drawings to the Royal Society, trusting the artist’s assurance that the lines would be much clearer when engraved.
The letter and the engraved drawings were published in the Philosophical Transactions and in the Dutch Republic by Daniel van Gaesbeeck (1634-1693), a printer from Leiden. This process highlights the careful consideration of how images would be reproduced in print, reflecting a growing awareness of the significance of visual clarity in scientific communication.
Moving on from Van Leeuwenhoek, the team took a closer look at Insectorum sive Minimorum Animalium Theatrum, a work by the English entomologist Thomas Muffet (1553–1604). Muffet completed the manuscript in 1589 and obtained a license in 1590 to have it printed in The Hague. However, it was not published until 1634 by the physician Theodore de Mayerne (1573-1655). The original manuscript was acquired by Hans Sloane (1660-1753) and is now housed in the British Library. Many scholars argue that the book was published posthumously because the English market for books on natural science was weak at the time Muffet completed it.
The book features a plethora of insect images, originally detailed watercolor illustrations in the manuscript. These illustrations demonstrate early use of the microscope, as wasps and bees are depicted with tiny hairs, and almost every animal is shown true to size. It seems to be that these watercolor illustrations were deemed too expensive to reproduce and were therefore replaced with woodcuts. The approximately 100 woodcuts in the published book seem to hold more importance than the text, as they are sometimes placed at the center of the page, overshadowing the fragmented text surrounding them. This reflects how cost influenced the visual presentation of these books, affecting the page layout and relegating the text to a secondary role.
The last book the team examined was Observations sur la structure des yeux de divers insects by Louis de Puget, published in 1706. This work focused on the anatomy and physiology of insect eyes. De Puget often compared the structure of insect eyes to architecture as seen in the images he included. He used analogies and metaphors from architecture to describe the complexity of insect eye structures. By using architectural references De Puget aimed to give a better understanding of the composition and functional aspects of insect eyes. These comparisons likely made abstract concepts more accessible to his audience and contributed to a vivid and illustrative description of his observations.
These three different authors each had unique approaches to translating their observations into print and communicating them to a wider audience. The day concluded with a visit to the Museum Catharijneconvent exhibition, The Creation of Science. Former MicroLab team member Geertje Dekkers guided us through the exhibition, explaining how the history of natural sciences in Western Europe cannot be understood without recognizing the influence of Christianity. It was the perfect ending to a day full of variety and new insights and it provided the team with valuable insights that will be very helpful for the next VisionLab.