“6 
326 LEEUWENHOEK AND HIS “LITTLE ANIMALS” 
Haaxman (1871, 1875), Mayall (1886), Locy (1910, 1925), 
Sabrazes (1926), and divers other writers. ‘‘ Leeuwenhoek’s 
microscope’”’ has even appeared in a recent film, in a modern 
advertisement for a proprietary dentifrice, and in popular 
periodicals—such as the Dutch illustrated weekly De Prins, 
which lately published (38 January 1925) the best photograph 
which I have yet seen. 
Although Leeuwenhoek made and left many microscopes, 
nearly all of them have long since disappeared. Not only have 
those bequeathed to the Royal Society vanished without 
trace, but even some of the few other examples mentioned 
by Haaxman and Harting—still surviving in 1875—cannot 
now be found. According to my friend Professor Crommelin 
(1929a) only 8 specimens in all are now known to exist, 5 of 
which are in Holland. Of these, 1 is in the Zoological 
Institute at Utrecht, and 3 others were, until recently, in the 
private possession of Mr P. A. Haaxman at The Hague: but 
2 of the latter have now passed into the Historical Scientific 
Museum at Leyden, and have thus become the property of the 
Dutch nation.” (All three were exhibited at a congress in 
Leyden in 1907. Cf. van Leersum, de Feyfer, and Molhuysen, 
pp. 114, 115.) Iam informed that two other genuine instru- 
ments are now in Germany—one in a well-known museum, 
the other in the possession of an optical firm: but I have not 
yet been able to verify these statements. I have also been 
told* that the late Dr Henri Van Heurck, of Antwerp, had an 
authentic specimen of Leeuwenhoek’s handiwork in his collec- 
tion which was sold in 1914. The Nachet Collection (Paris) 
also claims to possess one.* Neither in England nor America, 
1 There seems to be a general suspicion—probably fostered by some 
injudicious remarks of Saville Kent (Vol. I, p. 9, footnote)—that Baker, the 
last man known to have handled these instruments, was in some way 
responsible for their disappearance. This is entirely unjustifiable: for a 
search through the Society’s records (made on my behalf by Mr A. H. 
White, our learned librarian) has shown that we still possessed L.’s micro- 
scopes long after Baker’s death. They vanished from the Royal Society’s 
collection only about a century ago, and the few remaining records appear 
to incriminate a very different person. 
2 Cf. Crommelin (1929a). 
* By Mr W. E. Watson Baker, who—with his father—valued the 
collection before the sale. 
* The Nachet Catalogue, I may remark, is grossly inaccurate in nearly 
