In 1703 two articles appeared in the Transactions of the Royal Society, authored by an unnamed gentleman. The articles, with deference to Leeuwenhoeck, described recent observations made with a microscope. Clifford Dobell, in his biography of Leeuwenhoeck, remarked at length on the extraordinary quality of the illustrations and descriptions of “animalcules”. He declared the anonymous author to be the scion and master draughtsman of Leeuwenhoeck’s followers. Still today, one of the illustrations is credited with being the first unambiguous depiction of a diatom. Here I present evidence that the anonymous author was Charles King of Staffordshire and evidence of his talent. John Hill is often credited for the first naming and illustrating Paramecium and other ciliates in his 1752 book, but it has been claimed repeatedly that he copied the anonymous 1703 illustrations without attribution. Here, the illustrations from 1703 and 1752 are given, and casual examination suffices to show not only that the illustrations were copied, but also that the 1703 illustrations (and text descriptions) of Charles King are of a far higher quality than those of John Hill. Although very little is known about Charles King, he deserves recognition as a pioneer of protistology.

1703年，由一位不愿透露姓名的绅士撰写的两篇文章出现在《皇家学会的交易》中。文章引用了Leeuwenhoeck的观点，描述了最近用显微镜所做的观察。克利福德·多贝尔（Clifford Dobell）在他的吕伐霍克传记（Leeuwenhoeck）中详尽地评论了“动物”的插图和描述的非凡品质。他宣布匿名作者为吕伐霍克追随者的接班人和主要起草人。时至今日，其中一个插图仍被认为是硅藻的第一个明确描绘。在这里，我提供证据证明匿名作者是斯塔福德郡的查尔斯·金（Charles King）和他的才华。约翰·希尔（John Hill）通常以首次命名和说明草履虫而闻名和其他纤毛在他的1752年著作中，但屡屡声称他抄袭了匿名的1703年插图而没有署名。在这里，给出了1703年和1752年的插图，通过随意检查就足以证明不仅插图被复制，而且查尔斯·金（Charles King）的1703年插图（和文字描述）的质量远远高于约翰·希尔（John Hill）的质量。 。尽管对查尔斯·金的了解甚少，但他应被公认为是宗教学的先驱。