^{page 48 note a} Archæologia, Vol. XXXIV.

^{page 49 note a} Decline and Fall, c. 43.

^{page 49 note b} “Medium fuisse videtur inter lanceam majorem et minorem.”—Cluverius, Ph. Germ. Ant. lib. i. c. 44.

^{page 49 note c} The original passage is so interesting that it will be more satisfactory to give it at length, as the History of Agathias is not always readily accessible. ““Βουτιλῖνος μὲν οὖν ταῦτά τε καὶ τοιάδε παραινῶν τοῖς πλήθεσιν οὐκ ἀνίει. Οἱ δὲ ἐπεῤῥώννυντο ταῖς ἐλπίσι, καὶ τὰ ὅπλα, ὥς πῃ ἑκάστῳ ϕίλον, παϱεσεσκευάοντο. ὡδὶ μὲν γὰϱ πελέκεις ἐθήγοντο πολλοὶ, ὡδὶ δὲ τὰ ἐπιχώϱια δόϱατα οἱ ἄγγωνες, ἑτέϱωθι δὲ τῶν ἀσπιδων αἱ διεῤῥωγυῖαι πϱὸς τὸ ἐνεϱγὸν μετεποιοῦντο, καὶ ῥᾳδίως αὐτοῖς ἄπαντα παϱεσκεύαστο^. λιτὴ γὰϱ τοῦδε τοῦ ἔθνους ἡ ὅπλισις, καὶ οἵα οὐ τεχνιτῶν δεῖσθαι ποικίλων, ἤ μόνον ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν οἶμαι τῶν χϱωμένων διακοσμεῖσθαι, εἰ καί τι διαϕθαρείη. Θωράκων μὲν γὰϱ καὶ κνημίδων ἀγνῶτες τυγχάνουσιν ὄντες, τὰς δὲ κεϕαλὰς οἱ μὲν πλεῖστοι ἀσκεπεῖς ἔχονςιν, ὀλίγοι δὲ καὶ κράνη ἀναδούμενοι, μάχονται. γυμνοὶ δὲ τὰ στέρνα εἰσὶ καὶ τὰ νῶτα μέχρι τῆς ὀσϕύος, ἐνταῦθα δὲ ἀναξυϱίδας, οί μὲν λινᾶς, οἱ δὲ καὶ σκυτίνας διαωννύμενοι τοῖς σκέλεσι πεϱιαμπίσχονται. ἴπποις δὲ ἥκιστα χρῶιται, πλὴν σϕόδρα ὀλίγων ἅτε δὴ αὐτοῖς τὸ πεομαχεῖν σύντϱοϕόν τε ὄν καὶ πάτριον καὶ ἄϱιστα μεμελετημένον. ξίϕος δὲ τῷ μηρῷ και ἀσπίς τῇ λαιᾷ πλευϱᾷ παϱῃώρηται. καὶ τοίνυν τόξα ἤ σϕενδόνας ἤ ἄλλα ἄττα ἑκηβόλα ὅπλα οὐκ ἐπιϕέϱονται ἀλλὰ πελέκεις γὰϱ ἀμϕιστόμους καὶ τοὺς ἄγγωνας, οἶς δὴ καὶ τὰ πλεῖστα κατεργάονται Εἰσὶ δὲ οί ἄγγωνες δόρατα οὐ λίαν σμικϱὰ, οὐ μὲν οὖν ἀλλ᾽ οὐ δὲ ἄγαν μεγάλα, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσον ἀκοντίεσθαί τε (εἴπου δεησοι) καὶ ἐς τὰς ἀγχεμάχους παραταξεις πρὸς τὰς ἐμβολὰς ἐϕικνεῖσθαι. τούτων δὲ τὸ πλεῖστον μέϱος σιδήρῳ πάντοθεν πεϱιέχεται, ὠς ἐλάχιστόν τι διαϕαίνεσθαι τοῦ ξύλου, καὶ μόλις ὄλον τὸν σαυρωτῆϱα. ἄνω δὲ ἀμϕὶ τὺ ἄκρον τῆς αἰχμῆς καμπύλαι τινὲς ἀκίδες εξέχουσιν ἐκατέϱωθεν ἐξ αὐτῆς δήπου τῆς ἔπεδοϱατίδος, ὥσπεϱ ἅγκιστρα ὑπογναπτόμενα, καὶ ἐς τὰ κάτω νενεύκασι, και οὖν ἀϕίησι τυχὸν ἐν συμπλοκῇ τοῦτον δὴ τὸν ἄγγωνα Φϱάγγος ἀνήϱ. καὶ εἰ μὲν σώματί που ἐγχρίμψειεν, εἰσδύεται μεν εἴσω, ὤσπεϱ εἰκὸς, ἡ αἰχμὴ, οὔτεδὲ αὐτὸν τὸν βληθέντα οὔτε ἄλλον τινὰ ἐϱύται ῤᾳδίως ἔνεστι τὸ δόρυ. εἴϱγουσι γάϱ αί ἀκίδες ἔνδον ἐνεχόμεναι τῇ σαρκὶ, καὶ πικροτέϱας ἐπάγουσι τὰς ὀδύνας, ὥστε εἰ καὶ μὴ καιϱίαν τὸν πολέμιον τϱωθῆναι ξυνενεχθείη, ἀλλὰ ταύτῃ γε διαϕθαρῆναι. εἰ δέ γε ἐς ἀσπίδα παγείη, ἀποκρέμαται μὲν αὐτίκα ἐξ αὐτῆς, καὶ ξυμπεϱιά. γεται, συϱομένη ἐν τῷ ἐδάϕει τοῦ ἀπολήγοντος. ὁ δὲ βληθεὶς οὔτε ἐξελκύσαι τοῦτο δὴ δύναται τὸ δόρυ, διὰ τὴν εἴσδνσιν τῶν ἀκίδων, οὔτε ξίϕει διατεμεῖν τῷ μὴ ἐϕικνεῖσθαι τȏυ ξύλου, ἀλλὰ τὸν σίδηϱον παϱατετάσθαι. ἐπειδὰν δε τοῦτο ἐσίδοι ὀ Φϱάγγος, ὀ δὲ ἀθϱόον ἐπιβὰς τῷ ποδὶ καὶ ἐμπατήσας τὸν σαυρωτῆϱα, καταβϱίθει τὴν ὰσπίδα καὶ κατάγει, ὡς ὑποχαλάσαι τὴν τȏυ ϕέροντος χεῖϱα, καὶ γυμνωθῆναι τὴν κεϕαλὴν καὶ τὸ στέρνον. τότε δὴ οὖν αὐτὸν ἄϕϱακτον ἐκεῖνος ἑλὼν ῥᾳδὶωσ απόλλυσιν, ἢ τὸ μέτωπον πελέκει πατάξας, ἢ δόϱατι ἑτέϱῳ τὴν ϕάϱυγγα διελάσας. τοιαύτη μὲν τοῖς Φράγγοις ὅϕλισις, και ἐν τοῖσδε τὴ ἐς τὸν πόλεμον παϱεσκευάοντο.”—Agathias, Hist. lib. 2, c. 5.

The apparent discrepancy between this account of the Frankish arms, and that given by Procopius, only fifteen years previously, may, I think, easily be explained. Procopius, De Bello Gothico, speaking of the Franks who invaded Italy, A.D. 539, says, “οἱ λοιποὶ δὲ πεοὶ ἅπαντες οὔτε τόξα οὔτε δόϱατα ἔχοντες..” De Bell. Goth. 1. 2, c. 25. As bows are also mentioned Procopius may allude to missiles generally, and mean us to understand rather δοϱάτια—spicula or darts thrown at a long distance. Agathias expressly says there were no ἑκηβόλα ὅπλα—missiles for distant fighting—among the Frankish arms. But the Frankish confederacy was not formed of one German tribe, but of many, and no doubt widely differing. Their armies, therefore, drawn at different times from different places, would very probably exhibit different arms and modes of fighting. How widely different, for example, are the spears we find in different parts of England.

^{page 52 note a} The following extract from Procopius seems strongly in favour of the double-edged axe: “ϕέϱων ἓκαστοςκαὶ πέλεκυν ἑνὰ, οὗ δὴ ὁ μὲν σίδηϱος ἁδρός τε καὶ ὀξὺς ἑκατέρωθι ἐς τὰ μάλιστα ἦν, ἡ λαβὴ δὲ ἐξ ξύλου βραχεῖα ἐς ἅγαν. τοῦτον δὴ τὸν πέλεκυν ῥίπτοντες, ἀεὶ ἐκ σημείου ἑνὸς, εἰώθασιν ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ ὁϱμῇ τάς τε ἀσπίδας διαϱϱηγνύναι τῶν πολεμίων καὶ ἀυτοὺς κτείνειν.—Procopius de Bell. Goth. 1. 2, c. 25. How is ἑκατεϱωθι to be understood unless it be spoken of a double-edged axe?

^{page 52 note b} It is worth remarking that Diodorus Siculus ascribes a very similar weapon to the Lusitanians, “χρῶναι δὲ καὶ σαυνίοις ὁλοσιδήϱοις ἀγκιστρώδεσι,, lib. 5, c. xxxiv. In the preceding chapter, 29, he has also named the σαύνιον as used by the Celts of Gaul. The σαύνιον,, however, is described as capable of being hurled a considerable distance, and would therefore have been lighter than the angon, and was, perhaps, one of the minores lanceæ, or spicula.

^{page 52 note c} The original drawing was lately sent to Mr. Akerman by that indefatigable antiquary, M. Troyon of Bel- Air. They are thus described in his letter, “La figure 3, de grandeur naturelle, est un point de trait en fer, de la forme du harpon, et pareille aux dessins que vous donnez dans vôtre dernier mémoire (Mr. Akerman's paper of May, 1851). Une pièce analogue mais plus longue, representée dans sa derni-longueur (fig. 4), provient d'un tumulus Norvegien, ouvert dans la paroisse de Hola, district de Riagerike; le même tumulus renfermait encore trois fers de lance, un umbo en fer de forme demi-spherique, un couteau en fer, et les fragments d'un vase en bronze.”

^{page 53 note a} Lib. 4, epist. xx. ad Domnitium.

^{page 53 note b} Isidor. lib. 18, c. viii.; Procop. rer. Goth, lib, 2, c. xxv.

^{page 53 note c} “Quid juvat in nudis hamata retundere tela

Ossibus?”—Ovid. Amor. Eleg. lib. ii. 9, 13.

“Pars cadit hamatis miserè confixa sagittis.”

Trist lib. iii. Eleg. 10, 63.

^{page 53 note d} Monumens de la Monarchie Française, torn. 1.

^{page 54 note a} The fleur-de-lis is visible in the rich ornamentation of a bronze-gilt fibula I found at Fairford, in an Anglo-Saxon cemetery. To these remains a very early date must be assigned, long prior to the common adoption of the fleur-de-lis as a distinctive emblem of Frankish royalty.

^{page 54 note b} Musée du Louvre; collection of Assyrian antiquities.