Brian W. Rainey wrote:I said eerily... because I could not remember the details of the Oakeshott piece, having seen it once and not having any pictures. My head contained a foggy rememberance of the piece. I could not remember details. Hence my request for pictures. Perhaps vaguely was a more correct word than eerily.
Vaguely would be much more apt. The Oakeshott arm is a nice paralell to the arm at Churburg cataloged as #9 by Scalini and #47 by Trapp. Even here it is only broadly similar but is follows the same general lines. The Paris arm compares most favorably to the arm at Churburg cataloged as #10 by Scalini and #22 by Trapp. Here the coparison is even less closely matching. THe paris arm is definaely later than the Churburg arm reguardless of wether you ascribe to Scalini or Trapp's dating of the piece.