06-11-2008, 02:18 PM
Juan,
I agree that for SCA thicker is better. Brass may scratch but it hardens when you strike it.
The manica like all armors was there for the incidental hit, not that you stick your arm out and have it struck. For that matter 'the thickness would be irrelevant. If as Peroni mentions there were 2mm thick lames, then yours are within "historical accuracy".
But we cannot catagorically say that thinner would not be useful armor. Remember that scales were not very thick, but it was the overlap that made them thicker; not 2mm, closer to .9 mm and still was considered armor.
By the way can you PM me your phone number. I live in NYC.
Paolo
I agree that for SCA thicker is better. Brass may scratch but it hardens when you strike it.
The manica like all armors was there for the incidental hit, not that you stick your arm out and have it struck. For that matter 'the thickness would be irrelevant. If as Peroni mentions there were 2mm thick lames, then yours are within "historical accuracy".
But we cannot catagorically say that thinner would not be useful armor. Remember that scales were not very thick, but it was the overlap that made them thicker; not 2mm, closer to .9 mm and still was considered armor.
By the way can you PM me your phone number. I live in NYC.
Paolo
"You have to laugh at life or else what are you going to laugh at?" (Joseph Rosen)
Paolo
Paolo
