LEEUWENHOEK’S DRAUGHTSMEN 345 
was a pupil of Verkolje—the artist who painted Leeuwenhoek’s 
portrait. 
What could be more likely, therefore, than that 
Leeuwenhoek employed Thomas van der Wilt to draw the 
pictures for some of his earlier epistles? When all the 
circumstances are taken into account, this seems to me to 
be something more than a plausible guess at the identity of 
one of the original draughtsmen. 
But Leeuwenhoek must have known other artists who 
lived in his native town, and the evidence in favour of Thomas 
van der Wilt is clearly not conclusive. Among Leeuwenhoek’s 
acquaintances we must include, for example, that incomparable 
painter Jan Vermeer. He was born in the same year as 
Leeuwenhoek, in the same place, and at almost the same 
hour (their baptisms are registered on the same page), and 
lived and worked all his life in Delft—of which he has left us 
one of the most beautiful pictures in existence (see Plate VII). 
Moreover, we know that, on Vermeer’s untimely death in 
1675, Leeuwenhoek was appointed as his executor.’ 
I must note, in conclusion, that Thomas van der Wilt once 
painted a portrait of the poet Hubert Poot (1689-1733), who 
wrote Leeuwenhoek’s epitaph ; and an excellent engraving of 
this picture, by Houbraken, was prefixed to Poot’s collected 
Gedichten (Delft, 1722)—reproduced here in Plate XVI. 
I have seen no other specimens of Thomas’s artistic work, 
but according to Boitet and others he also painted the 
Rev. Mr Gribius—Leeuwenhoek’s minister, who announced 
his death to the Royal Society (see p. 93 supra). The only 
sample of Thomas's poetry which I have seen is the poem 
explaining the engraved title-page—‘ Op de Titel-prent’’— 
of Leeuwenhoek’s Send-brieven (1718: not printed in the 
Latin edition [Epist. Physiol.]|, 1719). 
For my part, I accept Boitet’s evidence that Leeuwenhoek’s 
later letters were illustrated by Willem van der Wilt, and 
I incline to the view that some, at least, of the earlier ones 
were illustrated by his father Thomas. But the subject 
obviously demands further research, which I must leave to 
future students possessed of the time and opportunities 
requisite for pursuing inquiries of this character. 
1 Vide p. 35 sq., supra. It is noteworthy also that L.’s microscopes 
were ultimately auctioned in the chamber belonging to the artists’ Guild of 
St. Luke—of which Vermeer was sometime “ Master ”’. 
