| Considering all of the features for this week's site update, please rate the quality of our efforts. |
| Excellent |
|
80% |
[ 84 ] |
| Very Good |
|
12% |
[ 13 ] |
| Good |
|
4% |
[ 5 ] |
| Fair |
|
1% |
[ 2 ] |
| Poor |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 104 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
|
    |
 |
Alexi Goranov
myArmoury Alumni
|
 Posted: Mon 22 Nov, 2004 6:27 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Great updates this week.
Thanks!!
I am a but curious though. The type XVIa.4 {From the Tower of London} in the spotlight article was listed as XVIa by Oakeshott in "swords in the age of chivalry" but if memory serves me right it is listed as XIIa in "the records of the medieval sword".
Is my memory playing tricks on me, or did oakeshott really move this sword in the XIIa category, as there was no such at the time "swords in the age of chivalry" was being written.
Alexi
Edit: I need to learn to watch what I copy and paste  . I meant the XVIa.4 From the Tower of London. This sword is re-classified as XIIa. I edited the original text to read XVIa.4 and not XVIa.3 . Sorry if I caused confusion.
Last edited by Alexi Goranov on Mon 22 Nov, 2004 5:14 pm; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremiah Swanger
|
| Posted: Mon 22 Nov, 2004 12:24 pm Post subject: Re: Nov 22: myArmoury.com news and updates |
|
|
With hands-on reviews by folks who know how a sword is to be used, and excellent, scholarly articles, I believe that myArmoury.com stands heads-and-shoulders above the competition. I anticipate every update eagerly! 
"Rhaegar fought nobly.
Rhaegar fought valiantly.
Rhaegar fought honorably.
And Rhaegar died."
- G.R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire
|
|
 |
|
Alexi Goranov
myArmoury Alumni
|
| Posted: Mon 22 Nov, 2004 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Alexi Goranov wrote: | Great updates this week.
Thanks!!
I am a but curious though. The type XVIa.4{From the Tower of London} in the spotlight article was listed as XVIa by Oakeshott in "swords in the age of chivalry" but if memory serves me right it is listed as XIIa in "the records of the medieval sword".
Is my memory playing tricks on me, or did oakeshott really move this sword in the XIIa category, as there was no such at the time "swords in the age of chivalry" was being written.
Alexi |
Now that I have " Records " in front of me I can answer my own question.
This sword is now classified as XIIa (XIIa.3 in "Records") . There Oakeshott writes "Publication: ...Oakeshott SAC, Plate 29, where it is erroneously classified as Type XVIa, instead of XIIa."
Alexi
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
| Posted: Mon 22 Nov, 2004 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Alexi Goranov wrote: | | Alexi Goranov wrote: | Great updates this week.
Thanks!!
I am a but curious though. The type XVIa.4{From the Tower of London} in the spotlight article was listed as XVIa by Oakeshott in "swords in the age of chivalry" but if memory serves me right it is listed as XIIa in "the records of the medieval sword".
Is my memory playing tricks on me, or did oakeshott really move this sword in the XIIa category, as there was no such at the time "swords in the age of chivalry" was being written.
Alexi |
Now that I have " Records " in front of me I can answer my own question.
This sword is now classified as XIIa (XIIa.3 in "Records") . There Oakeshott writes "Publication: ...Oakeshott SAC, Plate 29, where it is erroneously classified as Type XVIa, instead of XIIa."
Alexi |
Looking at Records, you're right, Oakeshott says he erroneously classified this sword as a XVIa.
I now need to find another XVIa to replace this one in the article. I originally put this in the article because it was so odd looking for a XVIa and so worthy of being featured. Now I know why it's odd looking!
Thank you for bringing this to my attention! This is why our site rocks: because the members do just as much to guide the content as anybody. Thanks again.
.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
|
|
|
|
|
Gordon Frye
|
| Posted: Mon 22 Nov, 2004 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nathan, I have been very impressed from the start as to the quality of not only the forums, but of the other features as well. The essays on arms and armour, the reprinting of articles I thought long gone, and the albums and collections are just wonderful. Superb is probably a better term actually. I really want to give you a lot of kudos for this site, and for keeping the tenor of the discussions on a very high, gentlemanly level. I have dropped many a forum in disgust because of the childish behaviour exhibited, and I just wanted to take this opportunity to say "Thanks!" for your stewardship of this site. Bully.
Gordon
"After God, we owe our victory to our Horses"
Gonsalo Jimenez de Quesada
http://www.renaissancesoldier.com/
http://historypundit.blogspot.com/
|
|
 |
|
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Tue 23 Nov, 2004 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Alexi Goranov wrote: |
Now that I have " Records " in front of me I can answer my own question.
This sword is now classified as XIIa (XIIa.3 in "Records") . There Oakeshott writes "Publication: ...Oakeshott SAC, Plate 29, where it is erroneously classified as Type XVIa, instead of XIIa."
Alexi |
Alexi,
Thanks for pointing this out. Like Nathan said, this is what makes this site to great: informed readers looking to learn more and share more.
Nathan is the primary (usually solo) illustrator of almost all of the articles, even though he rarely takes by-line credit or acknowledgment. I'd like to publicly thank him for providing the images that make the text we write come alive. I know he puts a ton of work into the imaging and formatting of the articles. Kudos, bud.
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Tue 23 Nov, 2004 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'll back up Chad on this point.
The content may be the key, but Nathan's work with imaging and illustrations is what draws the reader in. In my opinion it's one of the key things that makes myArmoury what it is.
"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
|
|
|
|
|
Greyson Brown
|
| Posted: Tue 23 Nov, 2004 10:28 am Post subject: Thanks for the XVI's |
|
|
Excellent update. I really wanted to see my favorite sword type (Oakeshott type XVI's) covered in the spotlight section. Imagine my joy when I logged on yesterday to discover that they had been added. As an added bonus, there was a review of a replica based on a sword that I have long admired (XVI.3). That particular sword caught my eye the first time I read The Archeology of Weapons, so it was great to see it as it might have looked during its using life.
Thanks again, and keep up the good work.
-Grey
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adam Lloyd
Location: Chicago, IL Joined: 29 Jan 2004
Posts: 91
|
| Posted: Wed 24 Nov, 2004 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
the spotlights are the best
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Spitler
|
| Posted: Wed 24 Nov, 2004 10:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
XVIs are also my favorite, and it was gratifying to see them get some attention (especially as it coincides with a certain recent purchase ) The reviews in particular are excellent, since they provide both a lot of information as well as hi-res eye candy. Thanks on behalf of the lurkers for such a fun and educational site 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Esa Etelävuori
|
| Posted: Fri 26 Nov, 2004 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I'm not so big fan of XVI's, but this update was very good. Now I can understand how and why, even if I dislike the looks. Actually, I'm thinking of getting one now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic
