[Dan Howard]

Anything's possible. Vikings could have worn lorica segmentata too - there is nothing to say they didn't. At the moment, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that native Scandinavians wore any metal armour other than mail in Scandinavia during the viking period. In time, evidence might turn up to change this. Yes the Varangians would have been issued lamellar if they didn't have their own armour. However, there is no documentation to suggest that they were permitted to take it home when they left service. How many US troops are allowed to keep their body armour after leaving the Army? Yes some Russ who lived and fought in the East might have worn local variants of lamellar - but can a second or third generation Russian really be called a Viking?

[Hisham Gaballa]

Sorry Dan, I have to disagree with you here. Lorica Segmentata was used by the Romans up until the beginning of the 3rd century AD, it's use seems to have died out by the middle of the 3rd century. It is therefore extremely unlikely that it would have been used by the Norse 6 centuries later . Lamellar on the other hand was widely used in Eastern Europe, the Near east and Asia from the 3rd century AD until the 15th century. The Norse in addition to being far-ranging raiders were also far ranging traders. There is little doubt that they would have encountered lamellar armour in their travels. Since lamellar armour is easier to manufacture than mail, it was also probably cheaper. Poorer Viking warriors who couldn't afford mail may well have bought (or looted) lamellar armour.

Finally fragments of lamellar dating 800-950 AD, have been found in Birka in Sweden.

[Douglas S]

[Dan Howard]

[Gabriel Stevens]

The English used essentially the same strategy in each of their major victories in the Hundred Years war. They formed up their battles, dismounted troops to the center flanked by archers, in a strong defensive position (usually with some sort of natural obstacles between themselves and the enemy) Each time the French came to them. I've heard the muddy ground theory applied to Agincourt as well. Regardless it was the French army which was the least diciplined of the two (They attacked the Geonese crossbowmen at Crecy) and despite the numerical advantage in each of the engagements they were defeated. Who fought the smarter fight? By the time we get to Agincourt you have a small sick, starving, English army drawn up against a much larger French force and the French are scratching their heads going "Well here we are again, and oh yeah it rained last night too, and I can hear that English king from here giving a speech...."

As for the original topic of the thread my guess would be that mail would go to those that could afford it, and then whatever was next best for the next level of wealth/social status and right on down the line (however many steps that might be). Also I was under the impression that swords were more a wealthy status symbol so I've always saw the average arms of a Viking as being spear, shield, and axe.

[Risto Rautiainen]