Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search


Please help our efforts with a donation. It's time to pay our annual server hosting bill. We've collected 2736.00 towards our goal of 2400 USD. View Goal Progress
Last 10 Donors: Tobias Capwell, Radovan Geist, Scott Hrouda, Anonymous, Leo Todeschini, Neil Eddiford, Joel Minturn, Josh Wilson, Neil Bockus, Adam Rose (View All Donors)

Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Miscategorization of Pommels? Reply to topic
 
Author Message
Craig Peters




PostPosted: Sun 23 Apr, 2006 4:47 pm    Post subject: Miscategorization of Pommels?         Reply with quote

Maybe it's just me, but after reading through the new article about Oakeshotte it seems that some of the pommels in his typology aren't categorized in a very logical manner. This will probably prompt comments of "So what?" but for the sake of organization, its worth considering my point here.

The problem as I see it lies in the Type T section of pommels. To me, some of the pommels listed as "scent stoppers" don't really belong in that category. What I'd do is revise the category such that Type T, T3, T4 and T5 were in the same category. I'd create a new category, Type U, for pommels T1, and T2 which don't really belong with the other scent stoppers. The current Type U pommel would become Type V, the current Type V would become W, and the current Type W would become Type X. I might even split up the current type V's, keeping V and V2 together, while moving the Type V1 into the grouping of pommels T1, T2, since aside from the line down the center of V1, its shape is seems a bit more consistent with the T2 pommel than with a fish tail pommel.

http://www.myArmoury.com/feature_oakeshott3.html

Thoughts?
View user's profile Send private message
Felix Wang




PostPosted: Sun 23 Apr, 2006 5:12 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

There is some sense in re-assigning the two flattened T types T1 and T2. One might move them into group V, or at leaast with V1; and then shove the two fishtails V and V2 into group X or Y.
View user's profile Send private message
Craig Peters




PostPosted: Sun 23 Apr, 2006 5:25 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Felix Wang wrote:
There is some sense in re-assigning the two flattened T types T1 and T2. One might move them into group V, or at leaast with V1; and then shove the two fishtails V and V2 into group X or Y.


Exactly. I'm more open to debates upon mixing some of the Type Ts with Vs because there may be good reasons for keeping the Vs together and seperate from T1 and T2. But I have a real hard time with the idea that this pommel:

http://www.myArmoury.com/view.html?reviews/alb_15th_h.jpg

should be in the same category as this one:

http://www.myArmoury.com/view.html?reviews/alb_lansem_g.jpg

Simply put, the two wedge shape pommels are too flattened and different in character to properly belong with the other scent stopper styles of pommel.
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Miscategorization of Pommels?
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2013 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum