The numismatic chronicle and journal of the Royal Numismatic Society

24:2 G. F. HILL.
must be admitted.) Apart from points of detail, if
we look at the general handling of the work, at
the drawing and rendering of light and shade, it
is clear that there is a world of difference between
the two pieces. Compare for instance the brilli-
ance and sureness of the lines which indicate the
hair, or which give the shadow under James's right
cheek, in the British Museum example, with the
monotony and lack of life of the same parts
in the
Kensington specimen. The one stands out in relief,
the other fades away. In the one the various lines
are given their true relative value, in the other the
work has all gone to pieces, owing to the failure to
maintain these relations. These differences are not
such as could possibly have been found in pieces struck
from the same die.
The evidence as I have attempted to state it
and I have tried to be fair may not appear to be
conclusive; but I think it will be agreed that the
balance is largely in favour of the plaques having
been separately engraved ; and the same applies
to the great majority of the counters, or at any
rate to the finer classes of them. As the Drake
map was mentioned at the beginning of this paper,
I may add that a careful examination of three
specimens side by side showed conclusively that
there were various small differences only explicable
on the assumption that the plates were separately
engraved.
G. F. HILL.