The answer to this somewhat depends on your meaning of 'armed'. For example, early medieval English fashion called for the carrying of a Seax, a long, single-bladed knife that was worn horizontally hanging from a belt on the waist, roughly the size of large kitchen knife. The Saxons derive their demonym from this, but it was carried by Angles as well. Early medieval English culture is essentially one of ostentatious display; from horse tackle, to brooches, to jewellery, wealth and status are displayed in personal ornamentation and the Anglo-Saxons are famed for their metalwork featuring ornate patterns and inlaid gems. For those who could no afford gold and gems, burnished brass and glass could be used, much like costume jewellery today. Part and parcel of this culture of display, therefore, would have been the regular wearing of a seax, both as an indicator of wealth, but also as a practical tool for everyday life.

While the seax was technically a weapon, it was predominantly a hunting or utility weapon; in warfare the main weapon of the Anglo-Saxons would have been the spear or javellin, and these are unlikely to have been carried socially. Swords are a slightly different beast again; although they are weapons of war, the time and skill necessary to make a sword means that they are largely constrained to the nobility, and as such once again become an object indicative of wealth and status. As such, we might not expect to see a thegn or ealdorman "casually" wearing a sword, but we might if he was performing a civil action - presiding over a trial, say - as a signifier of his status.