There are several more interesting and noteworthy items in the nearly 30 internal emails and documents The Herald has received concerning Creative Scotland's controversial regular funding decisions of earlier this year.

The documents are all penned by Janet Archer, the chief executive, to staff.

Because of this, we cannot see the replies, and in some cases the context, of the emails. Some are also heavily redacted - in more than one case, an entire page is blacked out.

That being said, and I have written today about the key aspects of the documents, there are other noteworthy items:

• On January 26, the day after the Regularly Funding Organisations announcement, which included cuts to several theatre, disabled arts and music companies, she said: "We have received significant comment on our decisions around children's theatre and disability led arts and there is much traffic on Twitter."

Indeed there was.

•By January 28 it appears that over the preceding weekend, she had held discussions with Ben Thomson, the-then interim chair.

She says in an email to Mr Thomson: "Thanks for your time on the phone this weekend. My advice is that the Board should meet as soon as possible to discuss the viewed being expressed publicly and director to me, as well as directly to Ministers."

It is clear that some of the concerns about the funding deals had been communicated to the Scottish Government.

These phone conversations clearly also led to the emergency board meeting which led to an eventual U-turn on the funding cuts.

•In a note to staff on January 30, she told staff that changes to the original RFO decisions may be likely in the emergency board meeting.

"It may result in a small number of organisations being added to the network in the context of strong sector views being presented to us, especially, but not inclusively by the theatre sector. The Board will consider of its decision not to fund organisations and take a view on whether it feels there is justification in adding new organisations."

*In a note, apparently sent to herself on January 30, she writes: "Did we get the decision on Catherine Wheels wrong? We made our decisions within the parameters of the budget we set for RFO complemented by an additional £2m to work with performing arts touring companies to resolve the issues raised by the theatre and dance touring review. Given strong sector views being presented to us especially, but not inclusively by the theatre sector, we are considering our options on how to respond."

•The funding decisions were contentious internally. There seems no doubt about that.

READ MORE: Drama at the heart of funding crisis in Creative Scotland

In a February 5 email to an anonymous senior member of staff, ccd to the chair, Ben Thomson, she writes: "It concerns me profoundly that you don't understand the rationale for their final award." She adds: "It concerns me hugely that we didn't get the communication right last week and I'm deeply saddened by the fact that some staff weren't aware of the final list before it was made public.

"I have worked as an art form leader of a smaller art form within a large organisation and know how hard it can be to have to work within a historic funding paradigm which centres on theatre and music. I agree we need to work to rebalance across the art forms but achieving that will require careful discussion and planning if we are going to take sectors along with the process."

•The furore led to MSPs from the Scottish Government's Culture Committee, chaired by Joan McAlpine, asking Ms Archer and Mr Thomson to appear before the committee to explain the funding decisions.

In an email before her appearance at the Parliament committee, to her deputy, Iain Munro, she says "we will need to agree what we consider the facts to be prior to the committee taking place whether or not you are planning to attend, to ensure the organisation isn't exposed."

She notes that she had "expressed anxiety" about "treating theatre differently".

The full quote - which shows that Ms Archer had perhaps well-founded concerns about the route being taken - is this: "For the record, my recollection of my input related to asking consistently that strategic funds be considered separately from RFO. I accepted that in the context of -15% and -30% [Government funding] scenarios, we would need to enhance RFO investment through strategic funding, however I requested that we separate this out from the RFO process. I also expressed some anxiety about treating theatre differently, however on balance and in light of the strong recommendations from the theatre team, I agreed to support the proposition put forward on the basis that it would resolve touring issues and had been discussed with FST."

•On February 27, she wrote to the Senior Leadership Team. She said: "Like you all I am deeply concerned worried about the toll the process has taken everyone involved."

She adds: "I am sensing a level of criticism for not robustly defending staff and their work. My view is that we need to do this from a position of strength."

READ MORE: Drama at the heart of funding crisis in Creative Scotland

Again on February 28, she wrote to the board: "Staff feel particularly strongly about wanting to know that the board value their work in generating the first 116 organisations recommended for their RFO network."

•In a longer document about the RFO process, which Ms Archer wrote and was initially intended to be published as a blog but in the end was not published, she says: "The brutal honest picture is that we had we had to reduce Regular Funding by £18m over the three year period we would likely have had to fund 50 less organisations than we are now planning to fund. I'm profoundly grateful we didn't have to in the end consider this option."