Item 1961/2 - Four letters from Herbert Schneider, the second with two attachments

4 items, paper

Four letters of Herbert Schneider:
(a) typescript, one folio (recto & verso), dated from Antwerp on 17 October 1961, replying that it was not a typographical error when he wrote that more than twenty pairs of dies were used to produce about 25,000 angels under Charles I.
(b) typescript, one folio (recto & verso), dated from Antwerp on 25 October 1961, with two attachments, belabouring the anomalous die-output figures of only about 1000 angels per pair of dies during the reign of Charles I. Regarding Henry VI, HS notes that there are a few in addition to those listed by Derek Allen and Blunt & Whitton, but the real problem concerns how the bullion was used. He then refers back to his letter of 7 June, saying that his interest in Briot's work in Scotland comes in response the Stevenson's attribution of Briot's pattern angel to Edinburgh, with which he does not agree. In closing, he asks IS whether he would be able to have lunch or supper with him in London at the beginning of November, and he adds a PS, asking whether Potter has been able to assist IS's research on die output under Edward VI and Henry VII. The attachments consists in photocopies of two charts: "Use and life of obverse dies" and "Use and life of reverse dies".
(c) typescript, four pages in two folios (recto & verso), dated from Antwerp on 2 November 1961, evidently in reference to the paper that he mentioned in letter to IS on 25 October and explaining that he covered the die-output anomaly under Charles I but only briefly because he felt it was a side-issue. On reflection, however, he agrees with IS that he "should not leave it at that". In the letter, HS goes on to "place certain figures before the reader", namely the discrepancy the number of angels in the pyx trials and the amount of angel gold coined, "admission tickets to the touching ceremonies" exceeding "the number of angels struck at the Tower", and deliveries of bullion "to the Tower Mint out of the Privy Purse". Returning to the question of die output, he doesn't believe that dies were worn out after only about 1000 strikings and finds it unthinkable that serviceable dies were condemned. He is struck by comparison of the coinage of Charles I with that of James I, where "there are fewer dies for a coinage which was 2½ times that of Charles I. HS says that he would be prepared to accept an exceptionally low figure for the number of angels per pair of dies but not one so low as 1000 coins per pair. There is a concluding paragraph about Potter.
(d) typescript, three pages on two folios, dated from Antwerp on 18 December 1961, congratulating IS on "a very good and fair review of the basic problem" and discussing some of the difficulties arising from the inexact terminology on coin dies in secondary and primary sources. He also discusses the way that dies were actually used and how portable reverse dies might have sometimes been mixed, with an example of such a mixed die-link chain added in manuscript in the top margin of the first folio verso. He mentions evidence in "the English post-medieval series ... that ... larger and more valuable dies were from time to time withdrawn for cleaning and recutting and also for alterations of the privy marking", and in such cases not always "married" with the same dies as before. He describes "1066 and all that" as the source of all his knowledge on the Anglo-Saxon series and "the sole relevant and intelligible book on English history which has ever been published". He also discusses the possibility of fixed trussel dies having been fitted with removable caps and of hot striking, on the latter of which he suggests that IS may wish to "tackle one of the practising engineers at the Royal Mint". A heated flan would have required a less substantial blow but might have had a detrimental effect on the die. HS mentions an enclosure consisting in a "copy of ... drawings of the angel links of Charles I", but it is no longer attached. In closing, he thanks IS for sending an Edward IV angel to Spink's for his inspection.