VEMBRACES

[Gaius Colletti]

But Matt, there is really NO evidence for vambraces. We have evidence for the Kalkriese Seg and others. Your logic doesn't really fit here. And they do in fact have several theories, many of them plausible on how the Pyramids were built.

It's a fine line to walk, inventing something out of nothing. At least stretch what we know...not what is made up.

Agreed. Although while we have plausible theories on how the Pyramids, I believe every one has been debunked for one reason or another, for these reasons: Each side is nearly perfectly facing each direction NSEW without the use of a compass being only 1/12 of a degree off, as well as being no more than 3 feet or so difference in length on each side, The Great Pyramid of Egypt covering 13 acres, climbing to 485ft, constructed out of 2.3 million stones each of which is weighed between 2 tons-70 tons, the fact that the total perimeter corresponds correctly with the amount of days in a (solar and modern) century (36,524), as well as a bunch of other fascinating and impossibly coincidental facts and trivia. It is impossible for the Egyptians to have built what they did with the technology available to them to what we understand, a ramp required to get to the top of the pyramid to push these several ton stones would need to be miles long, and a spiraling ramp would be impossible. Sorry to get off topic.

Let me be clear, I am not arguing that reenactors should wear vambraces, I am not stating that there is proof that the Romans used vambraces. It is not only logical and stupid not to protect your most important and clearly (by Roman styles of fighting) most vulnerable extremities. I grit my teeth when you guys say "Roman reliefs don't depict *insert whatever here*" When at the same time your beloved reliefs clearly do not correlate with archaeological finds.

As I told you before Matt, I will never wear vambraces in reenacting simply because we do not have the evidence. But I do not agree that anyone is stupid for implying or questioning that some sort of arm protection is reasonable. Such reasoning as many of you impose is not only dogmatic, but makes for poor historians if we do not think outside the box.