Original sentence: It seems so that the cavalry's tactical role or prestige wasn't any greater.The 3rd and 4th centuries saw the emergence of many upgraded smaller polygonal fortifications to make them more defensible with fewer men.The evidence suggests that whatever the defence, it was apparently less successful in preventing barbarian incursions than in the 1st and 2nd centuries.The theory of an increase in the proportion of cavalry in the late army as compared to the Principate army been brought forward, but is not widely accepted.There is an ongoing debate whether the army adopted a defence-in-depth strategy or the same posture of "forward defence" as in the early Principate
Edited sentence: But there is no evidence of a defence-in-depth strategy of the kind proposed by Edward Luttwak.Instead, the same posture of "forward defence" as in the early Principate appears to have been in place, although it was apparently less successful in preventing barbarian incursions than in the 1st and 2nd centuries.Nor was the cavalry's tactical role or prestige any greater.The 3rd and 4th centuries saw the upgraded fortification of army forts and installations to make them more defensible.There is no evidence for an increase in the proportion of cavalry in the late army, as compared to the Principate army