[Craig Peters]

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?

[Felix Wang]

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.

[Craig Peters]