Showing 8773 results

Letter from W.E.D. Allen to Peter Skelton to say that he has found the missing volumes and to apologise for any trouble he has caused. Dated: 30 January 1967.

Letter from W.E.D. Allen to Peter Skelton in which he writes that he is looking forward to getting the copy of the material and that he has made good progress in recent weeks. Dated: 31 August 1961.

Letter from W.E.D. Allen to Peter Skelton in which he thanks Skelton for returning the copy of Antiquity, for sending the Virginia Magazine, and for his reference regarding Turkish atlases. Allen has received Armstrong's proofs. Dated: 7 May 1969.

Letter from W.E.D. Allen to Peter Skelton in which he thanks him for photocopies made. He writes that he once owned a microfilm reader when he was in Istanbul which he lent to a Romanian professor who was subsequently kidnapped by the Russians. Dated: 8 May 1961.

Letter from W.E.D. Allen to Peter Skelton in which he thanks Skelton for returning the transcript of his introduction, thanks him for his positive comments and writes about further plans and progress. Dated: 9 October 1964.

Letter from W.E.D. Allen to Stanley Gilliam, Secretary of London Library, in which Allen files a request that Gray be allowed to join London Library. Dated: 15 August 1958.

Letter from W.E.D. Allen to Terence Armstrong with which Allen returns the volume II proofs to Armstrong with minor corrections. With the letter is a receipt for a registered postal packet. Dated: 1 December 1969.

Letter from W.E.D. Allen to Terence Armstrong in which Allen informs Armstrong that he will not be able to attend the Hakluyt Society's Council meeting. Dated: 10 May 1968.

Letter from W.E.D. Allen to Terence Armstrong in which he write of his shock on hearing of Peter Skelton's death. He also writes of visiting John Galvin and his potential involvement in publications. Allen writes of his forthcoming travels to Morocco. Dated: 11 December 1970.

Letter from W.E.D. Allen to Terence Armstrong in which Allen attacks Cambridge University Press for their incompetence regarding supplying review copies. He then stresses that he feels reviews are relatively unimportant to him - more so that a book is quoted in footnotes in later history or there is a demand for it to be reprinted. Dated: 11 November 1971.