Sub-Roman Britain (Cavalry etc)

[Alanus]

Sure, a lot of it could be quite old, inherited or gifts. At least a little would be looted, but having dead *armored* enemies to loot would be a lot less common than dean *UNarmored* enemies! And as I understand it, good loot was generally claimed by the boss, to keep or give to his buddies.

This reminds me of the reason Timujin rose to being Gengis Khan. When a leader keeps all the good stuff for himself and his "buddies," then his retainers become discouraged and defect to a more generous leader (as Gengis was).

If post-Roman Britain began in 409, or 476 (my call), and it ended in 700, then we are talking about a very short period of time in the long run. Britain fell to the Saxons not because men could no longer arm or armor themselves, but because they could not get their act together. And the "rapid" disintigration of armor seems to be poor rhetoric. If there is a paucity in archaeological finds, we are still looking at a small percentage of the total area yet to be covered. Britain is not King Tut's tomb, where you can home-in on the "good stuff" in a mile-wide area.

The very idea that all the blacksmiths ran out of iron (the most common metal on the planet), or that the leather-workers all got amnesia (What was I? What are all these cow-hides doing on my bench? :? roll: