Single Edged Viking Swords

You are quite right that frankish swords were considered to be the best and gave high status. Import of frankish blades started in the 7th century, and it even seems that some of the customs of the frankish has been imported. This points to strong trade even at this early time. From burial sites horse equipment has been found, and the composition of weapons and equipment seems to be similar to frankish burial customs. I know of at least two early viking time burial findings from Western Norway where the jarl had been buried with both a single edged viking sword and a frankish double edged sword. Perhaps the frankish weapons were mere status symbols, while the locally made swords were fighting tools?

There were actually mass production of blades and "false" signatures in late viking ages, low quality swords were actually given famous smith signatures and charactheristics of high quality work. Ulfberth-swords were famous and popular, and several copies has been found in Norway. These are later copies of the high quality works that came out of the frankish forges, and both workmanship and steel quality are far lower than on the earlier versions.

To my knowledge there are no clear findings of arabic weapons from this time in Scandinavia, possibly arrow points, but lots of coins, pearls and glass, and even clothing and possibly leather armour. This may be an indication that arabic weapons wasn't so popular among the vikings, I guess they relied on the weapons they had used all their life instead of switching them out for something unknown, and the reputation of the european smiths at the time was higher in regard than arabic. Even though primary sources don't tell the whole story, anything else is speculation.

Indeed, and it makes sense. This is the wonderfull part of loose anthropological and evolutionary psychology. To formulate the theory you can say. "Hmmmm what would I do if I was back then". The evolutionary reason is we have'nt evolved any more then our ancient ancestors (also homosapien sapien) so even though our knowelege and culture is different the primary reasoning's would of been the same. "Do I use the expensive luxury or cheaper sturdy tool for mundane jobs", of course with all associated (and obvious risk's). Or at the fancy feast "Do I wear my tailored suit or well used work overalls". This being the metaphor of imported and local Viking swords.

Its great for personal reviews (whether you quantify it with academic evidence or not) you can make judgements based on 'human nature'.

But yeah its likely they [Vikings] would of used more 'traditional' items rather then foreign imports from Arabia. The Varangian Guard is an example of Vikings who when in Rome" 'afiéd their gear. Although we know that the Norse were MAJOR traders and sailors, some of the places they must of visited (in a time before whole countries were at each others throats) they must of sampled a great deal of other cultures "cool stuff". One LIGHT reference is (taken from Hurstwic):

"The Icelanders referred to these bows as húnbogi (Hunnish bows), although the only reference to them in the Icelandic saga literature appears to be as personal names (such as Húnbogi Þorgilsson, the father of a 12th century lawspeaker). The term does not appear in any of the Sagas of Icelanders.

Konungs skuggsjá (The King's Mirror), a 13th century Norwegian training text, refers to a hornbogi (horn bow) as being a useful weapon for a mounted warrior, since it is easy to draw while on horseback (chapter 38). The hornbogi may refer to a recurve húnbogi, made partially of horn" -http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/viking_bow.htm

Its such a shame that we just cant find a grave with a composite bow and say "Hey check it out this guy had one". Although (furthur down the page) they found a bone thumb ring which has led to theories that it was for traditional drawing of a composite bow.

Alot of speculation but hey thats where the fun is right .