The point is, though, that solid fighting weapons [i]were[/i] accessible to the average man, even if only when he went to go on a march to war. A stout spear, a used sword, a fighting axe, a mace, a shield - all of these are perfectly reasonable weapons to own, and it certainly isn't unheard of.

You wouldn't go to war with a woodcutting axe. A woodcutting axe isn't very effective for warfare. You'd have a specialized fighting axe which COULD be used for other purposes in a pinch. You'd have a spear designed to kill people that you COULD use to go hunting. Your bow would quite possibly be higher poundage than a hunting bow. While at the beginning of the medieval era I'm pretty sure you'd see peasant levies with seriously crap-tier weapons, the point is you'd have a real weapon in war, not an improvised one.

You are right that the wealthy would have really expensive swords as a status symbol... but that doesn't mean that decent fighting swords were too expensive for normal men to own.

One thing you said was definitely true, though:

[quote]Any high ranking soldier had access to better arms and gear, this has always been the truth. If I was paid more I'd buy lifesaving gear. Proper swords, some good armor. A shield that's not made from a table.[/quote]

Especially among mercenaries, the more experienced sorts would have the best armor and weapons, and they'd do exactly what you said: spend their money on getting better armor to stay [i]alive.[/i]