If this has been posted already I apologize. Just wanted to point out Albion's summary of the Oakeshott Typology with additional info from Peter's research. This looks like it will be a great resource, not only for people who have don't have direct access to Oakeshott's books, but also as a supplement (average weight etc.) for those of us who do. Thanks Peter and Albion.
http://www.albion-swords.com/articles/oakeshott-typology.htm
| Dan Dickinson wrote: |
| If this has been posted already I apologize. Just wanted to point out Albion's summary of the Oakeshott Typology with additional info from Peter's research. This looks like it will be a great resource, not only for people who have don't have direct access to Oakeshott's books, but also as a supplement (average weight etc.) for those of us who do. Thanks Peter and Albion.
http://www.albion-swords.com/articles/oakeshott-typology.htm |
Dan,
Have you seen our article on Ewart Oakeshott? It's much more comprehensive and includes the pommel and guard typologies. Albion's article is great, but there are other sources out there, too, including on this site. :)
The average weight info seems to be blank for every type on Albion's version. I suspect it'd be hard to get to measure a large enough cross-section of examples to find an average.
Sorry if I placed this it in the wrong forum, I figured an article about one of the most important sytems for understanding historical arms belonged in the Historical Arms talk. However, I guess I can see where it might better fit here. Woops, :)
Yes, the Oakeshott articles here on myArmoury are great. However, it looks like Albion's article is a work in progress and that it will feature data from Peter's hands-on research. Thus, I hope that the missing data such as average weights will be filled in later.
Yes, the Oakeshott articles here on myArmoury are great. However, it looks like Albion's article is a work in progress and that it will feature data from Peter's hands-on research. Thus, I hope that the missing data such as average weights will be filled in later.
Last edited by Dan Dickinson on Mon 20 Nov, 2006 8:50 am; edited 1 time in total
| Dan Dickinson wrote: |
| Sorry if I placed this it in the wrong forum, I figured an article about one of the most important sytems for understanding historical arms belonged in the Historical Arms talk. Woops, :)
Yes the articles of Oakeshott's individual types here on myArmoury are great, however, it looks like Albion's article is a work in progress and that it will feature data from Peter's hands-on research. Thus, I hope that the missing data such as average weights will be filled in later. |
Dan,
In addition to the individual spotlights, there is a massive article on Oakeshott that summarizes the typologies all in one place. Please check it out: http://www.myArmoury.com/feature_oakeshott.html
Albion's article may be a work in progress, but looks basically unchanged from a year ago or so when I last looked at it.
The Off-topic forum is the appropriate forum since you're simply pointing out a link to an article, not discussing historical weapons or typologies specifically.
Sorry Chad, was in the process of editing my last post. Also, I took another look at the Ewart Oakeshott: The Man and his Legacy article. I guess there's been a lot more added since I last took a look at it ,so it's even better than I remembered.
Thanks,
Dan
Thanks,
Dan
I agree the myArmoury piece is more thorough, but i for one am glad to see any new efforts to clarify or expand Oakeshotts typology. Something like either 'average' or specific (by individual case) weights would be a very welcome addition since Mr Oakeshott himself often neglected this information at least in the copies of his books that I own.
jean
jean
| Dan Dickinson wrote: |
| Sorry Chad, was in the process of editing my last post. Also, I took another look at the Ewart Oakeshott: The Man and his Legacy article. I guess there's been a lot more added since I last took a look at it ,so it's even better than I remembered.
Thanks, Dan |
Dan,
Nothing of any substance (if anything at all) has been added since it was published. :) Regardless, we're all pretty proud of that piece.
Hmm...I was pretty sure that when I first saw it, that article only had the first part and I figured that you had published the others later. Perhaps though they were all there and I need to get my eyes checked more than I thought. :\ Either way, thanks to all of you who contributed to that article.
Also, I agree with the sentiment that weights and measurements for actual swords would be much appreciated for later medieval swords, Something like a Swords of the Viking Age for the high middle ages. That's what I was hoping for in the Albion article. Obviously weights and balance points don't help you fully understand the subtleties of handling, but they certainly help.
So if someone with hands on experience wants to add such things to either article, it would be much appreciated! :lol:
Also, I agree with the sentiment that weights and measurements for actual swords would be much appreciated for later medieval swords, Something like a Swords of the Viking Age for the high middle ages. That's what I was hoping for in the Albion article. Obviously weights and balance points don't help you fully understand the subtleties of handling, but they certainly help.
So if someone with hands on experience wants to add such things to either article, it would be much appreciated! :lol:
Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou 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 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum