Item 1990/1 - Two letters from Stewart Lyon

2 items, paper

Two letters from Stewart Lyon:
(a) manuscript, one folio (recto & verso), dated 27 March 1990, thanking IS for the lunch at the House of Commons and the "very useful chat", also apologising "for the delay in following it up". He says that his revisions "leave the order of the sword types unresolved", but he is certain that "hammer/mallet came first", based on Bossall, which he describes as "the main source of both Regnald and hammer/mallet but not of cross". He also says that the hoard looks like "a parcel of coins of c. 920 ±3, with a lacing of later issues including Athelstan". He says that "most of the other considerations point in the same direction" and build up to a telling combination. He will not press IS against his will if he still wishes to the leave the question open and therefore leaves the paper's finishing touches to him.
(b) typescript, two pages on two folios, dated 12 November 1990, thanking IS for his letter and his draft of the Bossall paper. He notes that the Numismatic Chronicle is short of contributions asks whether IS would consider placing it there. If so, he suggests that he refer at the beginning of the article to his earlier joint paper with Christopher [Blunt] in 1983. Other suggestions focus mainly on "[Michael] Dolley's long-standing preoccupation with the views of leading historians about Lincoln in 918". He points out that Dolley was already ill by the time that IS and CEB developed the "numismatic solution of removing Sihtric and Circumscription Sword across the Humber and allowing the sword of St Peter to fill the gap, with the Raienalts fitting in with the Regnald of 919. He also asks IS to correct a minor error in the 1983 article.