^{page 67 note 1} C.R. lvi (1942), 113 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 68 note 1} Aethiopica, ix. 15.Google Scholar

^{page 68 note 2} For long swords as weapons of cataphracts there seems to be no other evidence, though all are agreed that their conti were long and heavy. This may account for Spooner's needless inversion; his interpretation, though wrong, shows that he did not make the mistake of supposing that praelongos could refer to conti and not to gladii. Tacitus (Ann. vi. 35) speaks of conti gladiique again in connexion with Sarmatians, but he does not there mention their length. Heliodorus allows his cataphracts swords as a secondary weapon, but since he uses the wordκοπίς, he can hardly have had very long swords in view. However, there is no reason for supposing that the armament of all cataphracts was identical.

^{page 68 note 1}

^{page 69 note 1} The cataphract's coat of mail was so constructed as to leave no opening for attack while he was mounted, but on foot he exposed soft places. Cf. C.R. lvi (1942), p. 114.Google Scholar