Alba Regia. Annales Musei Stephani Regis. – Alba Regia. Az István Király Múzeum Évkönyve. 19. 1979 – Szent István Király Múzeum közleményei: C sorozat (1981)
Szemle – Rundschau - Fitz Jenő: Notes. p. 291–292.
eut échangé Singidunum contre Aquincum pour contrôler le front sarmathe. L'identification des deux Caecilius Rufinus restera question ouverte, comme auparavent. La legio IUI Flauia ne stationnait certainement à Aquincum qu'en 163/64; selon toute vraisemblance c'était l'époque ou Crepereianus était gouverneur. Si le proconsul gouvernait la Crète et Cyrenaica avant 163, l'identification des deux personnages serait vraisemblable. Pourtant une certaine ressemblance des inscriptions de Gortyn laissent croire, qu'entre leur érection il ne pouvait avoir 15 ans. Sela emble plutôt prouver que Q. Caecilius Rufinus devait être proconsul pendant une époque ultérieure du règne de Marc Aurèle, donc il ne pouvait être identique avec le gouverneur pannonién. 18. Legio XV Apollinaris in the East under Trajan D. L. KENNEDY, Legio VIFerrata: the Annexation and early Garrison of Arabia. Harward Studies in Classical Philology, LXXXIV, 1980, 283—309. The second stationing of legio XVApollinaris in the East, under the reign of Trajan, belongs to the unsolved questions of research. No unequivocal data are available on the time and reason of its withdrawal from the Danubian region, on the task it had to accomplish in the East, nor on an eventual other garrison than Satala where its presence can be demonstrated for the first time towards the end of Hadrian's reign. In his paper the author examined the question of the first garrisons occupying the province of Arabia under the emperors Trajan and Hadrian, while treating but casually the other legions stationed in the East. What he writes about legio XV Apollinaris does not include any substantial new elements, but is rather representative of actual investigations about the oriental legions. According to the author, the legion's history took the following course: It left its camp in Carnuntum in order tojóin Trajan's Parthian campaign. When Hadrian ascended the throne and the situation in the Danubian region became critical, it returned there together with the other Pannonian troups. In a few years, when conditions in Pannónia and Dacia were already consolidated — not later than about 122 A.D. — the legion was again transferred to the East, this time definitely (1980, 302—303). However, there is not a single moment of this history that could be verified. E. Ritterling (1924/25, 1738), R. S y m e (1971, 106), and В. Lőrincz (1977, 170) tried to determine the legion's withdrawal from Carnuntum on the strength of the inscription CIL, III, 4491 : M. Ulpius Dasius, who had received the civic rights from Trajan, died in Carnuntum after having served in the legion for 20 years. In interpreting the epitaph, E. Ritterling and especially R. S y m e relied upon the hypothesis suggesting that the legion marched off about the year 114 to take part in the Parthian war. This conduced to bold but untenable conclusions. However, the military service of Dasius probably began not with his entry into the legion, and so his burial-stone erected at the beginning of the II nd с is of no significance for the determination of the legion's stationing in Carnuntum (cf. my article in Oikumene). Now, the question can be raised: What is the proof for the legion's participation in the Parthian war? According to the author there is no evidence at all, apart from the mere fact that it had left Carnuntum (1980, 302, Note 55). With other words : The legio has left Carnuntum in 114, because it took part in the Parthian war, while its participation in the war proves that it had left Carnuntum. So there is no relying on these hypotheses verifying one another. And this settles the next question, too: Why should we suppose that the legion has returned to Pannónia after the Parthian war, if we do not even know whether it was actually fighting in Trajan's army or not? (The hypothetic definite transfer to the East, dated from 122, is not even worth mentioning, since it obviously follows from the return from the Parthian war.) The history of legio XV Apollinaris from the beginning of the II nd century has two sure points: 1. The abundant series of stone monuments left by the legion in Carnuntum ends before the first Dacián war (about 101). Henceforth, the presence of the legion in Pannónia is not demonstrable any more. 2. Under Trajan's reign the legion has left an inscription in Aegyptus (CIL, III, 25). Erected on Mons Claudianus in the quarry of Gebel Fatireh, this inscription proves only that the legion's vexillatio under centurio Annius Rufus (praepositus . . . operi marmorum ) has quarried grey granite. The monument is an undeniable evidence for the fact that the legion was stationed in the East, precisely in Aegyptus, already under Trajan. Rufus has received his appointment ab optimo Imp. Traiano; this refers to the 110's (Trajan was wearting the epithet optimus officially since August 114, but actually used it already earlier. Hanslik 1965, 1097; CIL, VIII, 10117 = ILS, 293). Relying upon the two starting-points, the history of the legion can be outlined as follows: the legio XV Apollinaris took part in Trajan's Dacián wars (CIL, III, 1478; Ritterling 1924/25. 1753—1754) and was transferred to the East probably in 106 for the occupation of Arabia. The first occupation troup in Arabia was the legio III Cyrenaica (the author is also of this opinion, 1980, 284, specifying earlier literature) stationed so far in Aegyptus. Until Hadrian's era there were two legions stationed in Aegyptus. The place of the leaving legio III Cyrenaica did not remain vacant (Kennedy 1980, 309), but was most probably occupied by the legio XV Apollinaris stationed undoubtedly in Aegyptus in the 110's. In 119 the legio III Cyrenaica belonged again to the armed forces of Aegyptus (BGU, I, 140), so the two legions had again relieved each other previously perhaps after the end of the Parthian war. It was then, in 117/118, the legio XV Apollinaris may have obtained its definite garrison in Satala, Cappadocia. J. Fitz BIBLIOGRAPHIE ALFÖLDY 1977 DOBÓ 1968 Eck 1972/73 Fitz 1978a Fitz 1978b Hanslik 1965 Lőrincz 1977 Németh 1976 Piso 1979 Ritterling 1924/25 SYME 1971 G. ALFÖLDY, Konsulat und Senatorenstand unter den Antoninen. Antiquitas, 1/27, 430 p. Á. DOBÓ, Die Verwaltung der römischen Provinz Pannonién von Augustus bis Diocletianus . Budapest —Amsterdam, 201 p. W. ECK, Über die prätorischen Prokonsulate in der Kaiserzeit. Zephyrus, XXI1I/XXIV, 233—260. J. FITZ, Notes. Alba Regia, XVI, 373—374. J. FITZ, Revision der Inschrift der legio IUI Flavia aus Aquincum (A. É. 1967, 362 J. ZPE, XXVIII, 51—54. R. HANSLIK, M. Ulpius Traianus. RE, Suppl. X, 1035—1102. B. LŐRINCZ, A barátföldpusztai tábor bélyeges téglái. AÉrt, CIV, 167—170. M. NÉMETH, Septimius Severus 202. évi látogatásának újabb feliratos emléke Aquincumból. A further epigraphic monument from Aquincum of the visit of Septimius Severus in the year 202 A. D. BpR, XXV, 193—199, 203—204. Piso, Carrières sénatoriale II. AMN, XVI, 69—86. E. RITTERLING, Legio. RE, XII, 1212—1829. R. SYME, Danubian papers. Bucharest, 252 p. 292
