Pronouncing Oakeshott Typology
I'm a bit embarrassed to ask this but I am starting to study Oakeshott's typology. The one that I'm a bit confused about is how one would verbally say them. I'm assuming you just say the number that corresponds with the Roman numeral but I am not certain. I'd rather clear this up here than say it incorrectly infront of someone who knows their sh...stuff. Thanks!
Re: Pronouncing Oakeshott Typology
Joshua Reptsik wrote:
I'm a bit embarrassed to ask this but I am starting to study Oakeshott's typology. The one that I'm a bit confused about is how one would verbally say them. I'm assuming you just say the number that corresponds with the Roman numeral but I am not certain. I'd rather clear this up here than say it incorrectly infront of someone who knows their sh...stuff. Thanks!


Just say the numbers: XVIII = "eighteen," XVIa = "Sixteen A," etc. You probably already know this but we have a whole series of articles on the Oakeshott Typology. The last one, Type XVII (seventeen :) ) will be published in the coming weeks.
Now I know. Thanks for the timely answer.
You're not the only one who ever wondered about that! For a while there I wondered if it was "Type Ex-Vee" or "Type Fifteen." I decided the latter by default but this is the first time I've been reasonable sure of that :-)
While we're at it, I've got a similar question. Is the I:33 manuscript pronouced I (like eye) or 1? I'm honestly glad I've never had a reason to talk about it in person because I have no idea what to call it.

Thanks

Kenton
Kenton Spaulding wrote:
While we're at it, I've got a similar question. Is the I:33 manuscript pronouced I (like eye) or 1? I'm honestly glad I've never had a reason to talk about it in person because I have no idea what to call it.

Thanks

Kenton


Yeah, I have the same question, considering I've seen instructions to say it both ways on seperate websites. Personally, I think "one-thirty-three" makes more sence, as its supposedly the museum catalogue number, but "eye-thirty-three" is awfly tempting to say.
Eric Allen wrote:
Personally, I think "one-thirty-three" makes more sence, as its supposedly the museum catalogue number,


Yep, that's exactly right.
According to the Royal Armouries who own the manuscript and who gave it its catalogue name, the I is a roman numeral one, not the letter I.

So one thirty three.

Page 1 of 1

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 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum