Five letters from Christopher Blunt to Ian Stewart and four letters from Ian Stewart to Christopher Blunt:
(a) letter from Ian Stewart to Christopher Blunt, manuscript, single page, dated from the House of Commons on 7 February 1977, returning "the T.T. memo and 957/9 + photocopies" and sending "the rest of A/S gold", noting that he would welcome any comments and criticisms.
(b) letter from Christopher Blunt to Ian Stewart, manuscript (carbon-copy), four pages on four folios (recto only), dated 12 February 1977, thanking IS for returning the papers and commenting at length on his draft on Anglo-Saxon gold.
(c) letter from Christopher Blunt to Ian Stewart, manuscript, one folio (recto & verso), dated from Ramsbury on 25 March 1977, writing that he has been through IS's draft introduction; he suggests a couple of paragraphs and makes a few comments on it. He mentions running into David Wilson while he was working at the BM and talking to MMA [i.e. Marion Archibald]. He says that he enquired about the Sylloge, suggesting that it should be a British Museum publication and have a longer introduction than other volumes and further enquiring about the prospects for a later volume. CEB says that the Sylloge Committee warmly supported the idea of MD [i.e. Michael Dolley] doing such a thing as long as the project had British Museum approval. He also states that DW "was obviously fully aware of the problems and made it clear that he backed his Keeper", noting that "he described MD as 'a disruptive influence' and [...] expected trouble" over the keepership vacancy, all while MMA was there. CEB says that he was surprised by all this and when he said so, DW answered that Michael was trying to move to Ireland. CEB notes that he has labelled his letter "in confidence" for obvious reasons but says that he will tell Dorothy [Whitelock] about and invites IS to tell Philip [Grierson]. He also talked with DW about the Lausanne gold penny. On the recto, in the upper left margin, there is a manuscript note in CEB's hand that reads "Confidential", underlined. The letter is accompanied by a carbon-copy on two folios (recto only).
(d) letter from Christopher Blunt to Ian Stewart, manuscript, one folio (recto & verso), dated from Ramsbury on 2 April 1977, advising IS that his draft needs a few alterations. He notes that Rev. George Musgrave was Lord of the Manor of Shillington and not the vicar., and that Commander and Mrs Lucas recently took up residence in the Manor following the death of his mother. Once they have an agreed draft, CEB suggests to "try it in Spinks", asking them if they would have any objection to their telling Commander Lucas about their problem and enquiring whether he produce evidence of the marriage. He says that he "wouldn't like to write without their assurances because" he feels that they might "have been given the name of Lucas in confidence". In closing, he asks for the return of the carbon. There are traces of typescript on the verso, running almost perpendicular to the manuscript.
(e) letter from Ian Stewart to Christopher Blunt, manuscript, single page, dated from St George's Road, London SE1, on 16 April 1977, stating that Douglas Liddell had casually told him "that the 'Shillington' parcel came from one of two brothers Lucas who, like his grandfather, was in the church and who lived at Lewes". IS suggests that they send the draft to DL, saying that they are planning to offer it to the Numismatic Circular and asking him whether to submit it to Mr Lucas and about the propriety of contacting the commander. IS notes that he is now working on Droitwich and asks the meaning of the name of the Worcester moneyer PICINC. In connection with this, he states his interest in illustrating the Hunter "two sceptres" coin and asks from whom should he seek permission. In a postscript, he hopes that CEB enjoyed his holiday and expresses excitement about an unnamed hoard of early pennies.
(f) letter from Christopher Blunt to Ian Stewart, manuscript, three pages on three folios (recto only), dated 8 May 1977, thanking IS for his letter and expressing his satisfaction that IS has found time to work on Droitwich. He comments on a paper of Mark Blackburn, the options for illustrating the Hunter "two sceptres" coin, the suggestions of Dorothy W. [i.e. Whitelock] for the Sylloge and IS's interesting idea about the name PICINC. There is also discussion of the Shillington note, a copy of which CEB says that he sent to Douglas Liddell, of matters relating to their work on the 10th-century volume, and of the constraints of the Act under which the BM operates in regard to the disposal or exchange of anything that is not an absolute duplicate.
(g) letter from Ian Stewart to Christopher Blunt, manuscript, one folio (recto & verso), dated from St George's Road, London SE1, on 1 June 1977, agreeing that Mark Blackburn "seems to be the best prospect for a long time". He asks whether it would be convenient to visit Ramsbury at the end of August and refers to the agreements they have reached [with Stewart Lyon] on questions of format, presentation and style [in their joint work on the 10th century]. There is a note in pencil in the upper right margin, in CEB's hand, which reads: "Ans 7/6".
(h) letter from Christopher Blunt to Ian Stewart, manuscript, one folio (recto & verso), dated from Ramsbury on 13 June 1977, enclosing a first draft on the cross and rosette type for a joint paper with CSSL [i.e. Stewart Lyon]. He has also sent copies to him and to MMA [i.e. Marion Archibald] and they would appreciate any comments. He also encloses his suggestions for the make-up of their volume, and there is discussion of other guests [who will be at Ramsbury when IS visits]. The letter concludes with CSSL's fundraising ideas for the BNS and a reference to a forthcoming BNS meeting.
(i) letter from Ian Stewart to Christopher Blunt, manuscript, one folio (recto & verso), dated from the House of commons on 15 June 1977, noting that the Shillington proof was sent to Stockwell and asking for CEB's help in gathering together casts for Droitwich illustrations. He agrees with some of CEB's suggestions about format and style for their 10th-century volume but raises further questions to be addressed. He says that he may not be able to attend the BNS meeting as he expects to be tied up in the House of Commons. There is a manuscript note in the upper right margin, apparently in CEB's hand, which reads: "Ack 24/6".