The cataphract was a very heavily armoured horseman who usually rode a heavy horse also wearing partial or complete armour. The combination made for a warrior that was very difficult to injure and very difficult to stop once they got going, so they were the ultimate hammer blow against an enemy. Such fearsome warriors were employed by many ancient civilisations, not just the Eastern Romans (also known as Byzantines), but they were of course very expensive to create and so tended to be the core of an army but only a minority of its troops. Their most feared weapon was the kontos, a lance of about four metres in length, which would develop into the lance of the high medieval period, producing the mounted European knight which is so recognisable even today.

While the kontos or lance might be a defining aspect of the cataphract, and the later European knight, it was far from their only weapon. In the east the bow was also an important weapon, but this set (the second of two from RedBox) concentrates on the many secondary weapons that such men might carry. All have a sword of course, and in this set all seem to be of the straight spathion type, which is fine. Half of the poses have actually drawn this, and so perhaps have already lost or laid aside their lance or bow. The first two poses in the second row carry another important and fairly common weapon for such men – the mace. Because they were generally iron, many mace heads have survived to the present day, so we can be confident of how they looked, and the two here look fine. Lastly we have a man with an axe, which was also known to have been carried, but was perhaps not so common, so having just a single pose with one feels appropriate (although another pose has an axe of a different shape by his side). As a collection of secondary weapons then, this bunch serves us well.

Regardless of what weapon has been drawn, cataphracts were heavily armoured, and all these figures wear scale or lamellar armour as basic body protection, sometimes with the characteristic Byzantine breastband and shoulder bands. Splint vambraces and greaves are also much in evidence, and there are a variety of helmets, each with a plume from the centre, and some with a turban wrapped around the crown. As with the other sets in this series some of the men wear their cloaks, which would be very unlikely in battle, but otherwise everything about the costume here looks authentic.

We have looked at the weapons already (three poses also have a bow and quiver), but the men also carry a shield. Four are of the simple and timeless circular type, but two are of the more modern kite or almond style, which first appeared in the 11th century and gave better protection on the non-sword side of the man. Where visible this is held by putting the forearm through a strap and holding a second, which is correct. None of the shields are decorated, allowing the painter to choose whatever design is preferred.

We really liked the look of these figures straight from the box. The sculpting is lovely and crisp, and the detail is very good everywhere (and there is a lot). The sculptor has made a good impression of movement with plumes and ribbons flying off to left and right, so these are quite dynamic. The poses are generally good, although regular visitors will know we do not like the last pose in the second row as this man holds his arm in an anatomically impossible position, apparently threatening to bring his axe down, yet with his head directly in the way. Otherwise these are nicely done and not at all flat, and the good impression is ably enhanced by the complete absence of flash on any piece. On our example, however, the scabbard of the first figure in the second row is noticeably too short, and as the box shows this much longer, it appears to be a case of inadequate filling of the mould, which may or may not be the case with any example you buy.

The horses do not quite match the standard of the men, for some of the leg positions are not natural, although this is less apparent as they all wear barding. In addition, most of the animals have little or nothing in the way of ears, which are always a problem for sculptors, but are generally handled a bit better than here. These are the same horses as those found in set 1, and apart from the poses, which are generally quite unrushed, they are nice models. The barding they all wear front and back is clearly made of scale, mail, fabric or solid plate, and all of it looks good, although not all is appropriate for the whole of the Byzantine period. Equally, the quite high saddles are better for the later part of the Byzantine period, and the fact that every horse has stirrups means they can only date from the late 6th century anyway. Most of the animals have a chanfron to protect the face, either solid or covered in scale plates, so look the part of the ancient or medieval equivalent of a tank. However, riding a tank is not particularly easy, and the same goes for these horses, all of whom are rather too thick in the saddle to permit the men to sit on them. Some filing will be necessary, which is particularly galling as like the men, the horses are free of flash and so ready to go out of the box.

The classic view of a cataphract would be a man bearing down on his enemy with lance in hand, and those sorts of figures can be found in the first set. This second set adds a lot more variety in terms of weapon and pose, which is great as it allows modellers to decide on the proportions they need without buying poses they do not want. It also means there are a respectable 12 poses on offer, and while we thought not all the poses were excellent, they are all usable. The figures are pretty typical for the subject, and very nicely presented, so the main problem is the poor fit between man and horse, which can be overcome of course, but this remains an appealing set for a great range, and helps to fill a major hole in the available figures for the Eastern Empire.