Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (1632 - 1723) and Johannes Vermeer

. . my work, which I've done for a long time, was not pursued in order to gain the praise I now enjoy, but chiefly from a craving after knowledge, which I notice resides in me more than in most other men. And therewithal, whenever I found out anything remarkable, I have thought it my duty to put down my discovery on paper, so that all ingenious people might be informed thereof.

Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (Letter of June 12, 1716)

Tge Geographer by Vermeer The Geographer (detail)
Johannes Vermeer
The Astronomer by Vermeer The Astronomer (detail)
Johannes Vermeer
Antonie van Leeuwenhoek Portrait of Anthony van Leeuwenhoek (detail)
J. Verkolje

Van Leeuwenhoek and Vermeer

The connection between Antonie Philips van Leeuwenhoek, citizen of Delft and father of microbiology, and Johannes Vermeer has tantalized art historians for at least a generation.

Both men were baptized within a few days in October, 1632. They lived a few minutes walk from one another and both worked with, and were fascinated by state-of-the-art optical devices, optics and its philosophical ramifications. However, even though writers from a range of disciplines have liberally speculated upon the human, professional and philosophical ties between the great Delft scientist with the great Delft artist, only one documented contact between them has been registered, albeit, when the artist was already dead but the scientist still alive (Van Leeuwenhoek would survive Vermeer by 48 years).

Van Leeuwenhoek, Verkolje Anthonie van Leeuwenhoek
Jan Verkolje (I)
Oil on canvas, 56 x 47.5 cm.
Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam

Both men worked with lenses. And both men were ambitious. An experienced businessman, Van Leeuwenhoek realized that if his simple method for creating the critically important lens were revealed, the scientific community of his time would likely disregard or even forget his role in microscopy. He therefore allowed others to believe that he was laboriously spending most of his nights and free time grinding increasingly tiny lenses to use in microscopes. After seven years and a dozen letters published in their peer-reviewed journal, Philosophical Transactions, the Royal Society of London elected him a Fellow in 1680.

On the other hand, when Vermeer painted his masterwork, The Art of Painting, its compositional complexity, exceptional dimensions and grand theme whereby the artist could claim eternal fame through his art, he left no doubt as to his lofty ambitions. And although there is no objective proof in regards, circumstantial strongly suggests that the courting Vermeer had made serious inroads among upper crust of elite art collectors and men of culture in and around Delft.

For Van Leeuwenhoek, observation of the microscopic world through his tiny, hand-made devices (he made more than 200 of them in his lifetime)carried with it an implicit confirmation of God’s creation. After having seen teaming "animacules"’ in water drawn from his gutter her wrote:

"Once more we see here the unconceivable Providence, perfection, and order bestowed by the Lord Creator of the Universe upon such little creatures which escape our bare eye, in order that their kind shouldn’t die out."

commemorative plate of Anthony van LeeuwenhoekCommemorative plate of
Anthony van Leeuwenhoek
Anonymous
c. 1725
Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam

For Vermeer instead, observation of overlooked moments of daily life though his camera obscura revealed aspects of nature, and perhaps of vision itself, that inspired paintings that were broader in scope and intellectual depth than the works of any other genre painter of the time. Upon viewing a few pieces of stale bread and worn kitchen crockery lit by the sun through the lens of his camera obscura, he depicted, perhaps, one of the most arresting passages in European easel painting, the still life of the Milkmaid. For both the artist and scientist then, only tiny fraction of the world and a state-of-the-art optical device were needed to uncover worlds much larger. The camera obscura opens up a new view of things for the painter; like the microscope and telescope it is an instrument of enquiring sight.1

Naturally, Van Leeuwenhoek would have know everything Vermeer needed in order to build a camera obscura, he was an expert lens maker and he was interested in optical phenomena. But from a practical point of view, the artist could have acquired the same technical knowledge or even a ready built camera based on other sources.2 In fact, the only component of the camera obscura that cannot be easily fabricated with thin wood planks, oiled paper, a small saw and a few nails, is a convex lens necessary to to produce a brighter image than the original pin-point hole through which light entered the camera (indispensable for use in painting). Lens grinding was a taxing and exacting procedure glass, based on the centuries-old technique of grinding lenses for eye-glasses (spectacles).3

Did Van Leeuwenhoek Pose for Vermeer?

face of Anthony van Leeuwenhoek, Jan Verkolje
Anthonie van Leeuwenhoek (detail)
Jan Verkolje (I)
Oil on canvas, 56 x 47.5 cm.
Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam

Various art historians have mused that Van Leeuwenhoek might have posed for both in Astronomer and Geographer by Vermeer. Considering the manner in which the scientist had himself portrayed by Jan Verkolje, one of the most fashionable painters of the time, it is difficult to imagine that he would not have been in synchrony with the refined dignity with which Vermeer’s two scientists are depicted and the nobility of the scientist’s quest.

Similar in cut and fabric to the Japonsche roks worn by Vermeer’s geographer and astronomer—one pale blue with fancy orange cuffs and the other marine green—Van Leeuwenhoek had donned on a plush yellow rok of his own for his formal portrait. Roks, a highly desired garment imported from Japan, were essentially a kimono tailored into a kind of house robe. They was especially worn by scholars in their studios who wished to distinguish themselves from mere dabblers. They appear in a great many Dutch paintings of doctors, geographers and astronomers. By the mid-17th century, roks were made from imported Indian and Chinese silk and became a more common imitation ware but in Vermeer's and Van Leeuwenhoek’s day, to wear a rok is to wear a garment which had not yet been commodified. However, that Van Leeuwenhoek would have been willing to model for not one, but three elaborate paintings done by cutting edge artists of the day may or may have not been in character with the Delft scientist.

face of The Geographer, by Johannes Vermeer
The Geographer (detail)
Johannes Vermeer
c. 1668-1669
Oil on canvas, 53 x 46.6 cm.
Städelsches Kunstinstitut, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

The art historian Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. speculated that the Vermeer and Van Leeuwenhoek must have interacted; they had too much in common and Delft was too small not to notice each other’s exceptional activities. Vermeer’s father and Van Leeuwenhoek could have easily made each other’s acquaintance through their dealings in the silk-weaving business (Vermeer’s father was a caffa weaver and Van Leeuwenhoek traded in silk goods for a living). Moreover, according to Wheelock, “they probably shared interests in globes and maps which was somewhat of an obsession among men of knowledge of the time,” although maps and globes were standard fixtures in many Dutch paintings and homes of Dutch burghers.

On the other hand, John Michael Montias views the artist-scientist relationship, and consequentially the likelihood that Van Leeuwenhoek had commissioned the two pictures, with circumspection.4 He finds no particular resemblance between “the elegant, distinguished looking scholars” and the “coarse features” exhibited in know portraits of Leeuwenhoek (see details above). Certainly, the two men in Vermeer’s probable pendants do not look much like Van Leeuwenhoek as he was portrayed by Verkolje. But those who hold fast to the idea that Vermeer did paint the scientist are comforted by the fact that Verkolje painted a fifty-year-old-man and not one of thirty-seven.

Face of Johannes Vermeer's Astronomer
The Astronomer (detail)
Johannes Vermeer
1668
Oil on canvas, 50 x 45 cm.
Musée du Louvre, Paris

Moreover, Montias doubts that Van Leeuwenhoek could have been “appointed to the curatorship of the artist’s estate because he was a friend of the family.” since there is not evidence of any connections between the scientist and Vermeer and his family, which “would have been expected to show up if they had had regular dealings with each other.” There is also no evidence that Van Leeuwenhoek assumed a favorable disposition towards the interests of Catharina, Vermeer's widow, during his curatorship of the Vermeer estate.

Van Leeuwenhoek and the Estate of Vermeer

Among the few documents that reveal Vermeer's life is this note from the delft public records which states that the aldermen of the city designate Anton Leeuwenhoek as the receiver in the bankruptcy case of Catharina Bolnes, Vermeer widow. It is dated September 30, 1676, a year after the artist's death. Ironically, both men's names appear on another page in the Delft ledger: the one recording their births in 1632.

On September 30, 1676, a year after the artist's death, the town council of Delft designated Van Leeuwenhoek to administer the assets of Catharina Bolnes, “widow of the late Johannes Vermeer during his lifetime master painter.” This was not the first time that Van Leeuwenhoek had been made the executor of an estate. But since the job was likely to procure more worries than benefits, one writer concluded that Leeuwenhoek’s acceptance of the more or less insolvent Vermeer estate suggests some acquaintance between the two men.5

Catharina Bolnes' efforts to preserve The Art of Painting as part of her inheritance, and to prevent it from being auctioned with other works of art in the estate, almost certainly failed. Van Leeuwenhoek noticed this omission in the inventory and summarily reclaimed the painting having discovered it in Vermeer’s mother-in-law’s household. Van Leeuwenhoek rightfully determined that the transferal of the work to the late painter's mother-in-law, Maria Thins, had been illegal. The Art of Painting and other works, most likely as a part of the artist’s stock and trade, were auctioned off on 15 May 1677.

Leeuwenhoek's gravemarker The memorial and grave of the Antonie van Leeuwenhoek is in the tower wall of the Oude Kerk in Delft, on the side of the northern aisle. The memorial was commissioned by his daughter Maria. The poem chiseled in the wall at the entrance was written by Huibert Corneliszoon Poot, a good friend of Van Leeuwenhoek:

‘Hier Rust Anthony van Leeuwenhoek out synde 90 jaar, 10 maanden en 2 dagen. Heeft elk, o wandelaer alom ontzagh voor hoogen ouderdom en wonderbare gaven. Soo set eerbiedigh hier uw stap. Hier legt de gryse wetenschap in Leeuwenhoek begraven.’

[‘Here rests Antonie van Leeuwenhoek having reached the age of 90 years, 10 months and two days. O stroller, be respectful of great old age and wonder.]

Montias also noted that in 1678, Van Leeuwenhoek, having gotten wind that Vermeer’s wife Catharina Bolnes had inherited a house in Gouda (where Catharina’s mother was born) in which her father had lived and died, and three morgans of land in Wilnis, empowered the Thins family notary in Gouda to sell the properties on behalf of Vermeer’s bankrupt estate, presumably for the benefit of the creditors.

Even if Van Leeuwenhoek and Vermeer had entertained a relationship while the artist was alive, being a man of honor, it is not surprising that he acted according legal prescription in his dealings with the artist’s estate, which in effect, went counter the interests of the artist’s widow more than once.

The house of Antonie Leeuwenhoek, Delft

At birth, Van Leeuwenhoek was called was Thonis Philipszoon. His letters, however, were signed " Antonie van Leeuwenhoek." He was probably known as Van Leeuwenhoek from a young age because he was born in a house at the corner of Lion's Gate in Delft (Van Leeuwenhoek means "lion's gate")

The image to the right shows the corner of Lion's Gate in Delft as it appears today.

"The original house and door of the Van Leeuwenhoek house at number 7 have disappeared. The present day (year 2000) plaque is on the wrong house; it should be to the left side of the entrance of the present day 'Deen' store. Another commemorative plaque is at the corner of Oude Delft and Boterbrug."*

* Kees Kaldenbach, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723), <http://kalden.home.xs4all.nl/dart/d-p-leeuwenh.htm>

Publications, Websites & Resources

  1. Carsten Wirth, "The Camera Obscura as a Model of a New Concept of Mimesis
    in Seventeenth-Century Painting", Inside the Camera Obscura – Optics and Art
    under the Spell of the Projected Image
    , 2007, p.177
  2. Van Leeuwenhoek was no the only lens grinder in Delft. "In 1664 and 1665 Christiaan and Constantijn Huygens II, who, like their father, were fascinated with optical problems, were in communication with Johan van Wyck, a manufacturer of lenses in Delft." (source Arthur K Wheelock Jr.,. Perspective, Optics and Delft Artists Around 1650, Garland, New York and London, 1977, page 284.)
  3. Douglas Anderson, “Tiny Lenses”, Lens on Leeuwenhoek, <http://lensonleeuwenhoek.net/lenses.htm>
  4. John Michael Montias, Vermeer and His Milieu: A Web of Social History, Princeton, 1989, pp. 225-226
  5. Anthony Bailey, Vermeer: A View of Delft, New York, 2001, p. 165
  6. Carsten Wirth, "The Camera Obscura as a Model of a New Concept of Mimesis
    in Seventeenth-Century Painting", Inside the Camera Obscura – Optics and Art
    under the Spell of the Projected Image
    , 2007, p.195
Constantijn Huygens
Portrait of Constantijn
Huygens
(detail)
Jan Lievens
1628/29
Oil on panel, 99 x 84 cm.
Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam
survey software

need + information?

initiated: march 12, 2014