Collection du Centre d’Études Romaines et Gallo-Romaines

Nouvelle série, no 20

LES LÉGEIONS DE ROME

SOUS LE HAUT-EMPIRE

Actes du Congrès de Lyon

(17-19 septembre 1998)

rassemblés et édités
par Yann Le Bohec

avec la collaboration de Catherine Wolff

Lyon, 2000

Diffusion De Boccard
11, rue de Médicis – 75006 Paris

ISBN 2-904974-19-9
N.B. This pdf of the original manuscript marks page breaks of the published
version (pp.259-308) in bold in double brackets.
 Everett L. Wheeler*

Legio XV Apollinaris:
From Carnuntum to Satala—and beyond

Emil Ritterling’s portrait of the XV Apollinaris reflects the work of an “old master.”1 The
broad strokes of this masterpiece retain the integrity of their basic outlines even after seventy-
five years. An Augustan legion with a Balkan base, the XV illustrates the Danube-Euphrates
strategic nexus: dispatched to Nero’s Parthian War (55-63) and retained for the Jewish War (66-
70), the XV returned to its old base at Carnuntum in 71; Trajan sent it to the East, where it
eventually camped at Satala (Armenia Minor), remaining there until at least ca 395 (Not.Dig.Or.
38.13). Thereafter all trace is lost. Epigraphical and archaeological discoveries since 1925 permit
some retouching of Ritterling’s portrait—mainly supplements and expansions, rarely corrections.
Nearly 200 inscriptions of this legion are now known—the overwhelming majority from
Carnuntum. Elsewhere the XV’s epigraphical record is spotty, details of its activities obscure.
Even its appearance on the famous list of legions at Rome (ILS 2288) is, as recently noted, a
restoration.2 Progress in the XV’s history is most discernible in its prosopography and
Rangordnung, though these areas also remain lacunose.3 Nevertheless, actives and veterans of
XV Apollinaris have left their trace quite [[260]] literally from one end of the Empire to the

* Assistant Editor, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, Department of Classical Studies, Box 90103, Duke
University, Durham, N.C. 27708-0103, U.S.A.
1The following special abbreviations will be used: Bosch=E. Bosch, Quellen zur Geschichte der Stadt Ankara im
Altertum, 1967 (Ankara); DGCN =E.M. Smallwood, Documents Illustrating the Principates of Gaius, Claudius and
Nero, 1967 (Cambridge); DNTH =E.M. Smallwood, Documents Illustrating the Principates of Nerva, Trajan and
Hadrian, 1966 (Cambridge); Dabrowa=E. Dabrowa, The Governers of Roman Syria from Augustus to Septimius
Severus, 1998 (Bonn); Dobson=B. Dobson, Die Primipilares, 1978 (Cologne); Franke=T. Franke, Die
Legionslegaten der römischen Armee in der Zeit von Augustus bis Traian, 1991 (Bochum); Genser=K. Genser, Der
österreichische Donaulimes in der Römerzeit. Ein Forschungsbericht, 1986 (Vienna); I.Pan =A. Bernand, Pan du
désert, 1977 (Leiden); Mann=J.C. Mann, Legionary Recruitment and Veteran Settlement during the Principate, ed.
M. Roxan, 1983 (London); Parker=H.M.D. Parker, The Roman Legions, 1928 (Oxford); Rémy=B. Rémy, Les
carrières sénatoriales dans les provinces romaines d’Auguste au Haut-Empire (31 av. J.-C.-284 ap. J.-C.) (Pont-
Bithynie, Galatie, Cappadoce, Lycie-Pamphylie et Cilicie), 1989 (Istanbul); Ritterling=E. Ritterling, legio, RE XII,
1925; Sablayrolles=R. Sablayrolles, Libertinus Miles: Les cohortes de vigiles, 1996 (Rome); Saxer=R. Saxer,
Untersuchungen zu den Vexillationes des römischen Kaisersheeres von Augustus bis Diokletian, 1967 (Cologne);
V2=E. Vorbeck, Militärinschriften aus Carnuntum2, 1980 (Vienna). I wish to thank Karlheinz Dietz, Thomas
Drew-Bear, Kristian Elschek, Dieter Hennig, William Kerr, Ioan Piso, and Kent Rigsby for their generous dispatch
of materials not available in North Carolina and/or for their expert opinions on various points. My sincere thanks
also to Professor Yann Le Bohec for his kindness in inviting me to participate in the Lyon Congress. All errors of
fact and interpretation, however, remain my own responsibility.
2P. Cosme, Les légions romaines sur le forum: recherches sur la colonnette mafféienne, MEFRA CVI, 1994, p.169.
3See Appendix A for an up-date of Ritterling’s list (1755-57) of the XV’s officers and ranks. The issues of
recruitment and veteran settlement (cf. Ritterling, 1757-58) lie beyond the parameters of this paper; for these matters
see G. Forni, Il reclutamento delle legioni da Augusto a Diocleziano, 1953 (Milan), pp.39-44, 80-81, 232-33, with a
supplement in his Esercito e marina di Roma antica: Raccolta di contributi, ed. M.P. Speidel, Mavors V, 1992
(Stuttgart), p.136; Mann, pp.31-33, 41, 44, 117-20, 152-53. An attempt will be made here to include references to
nearly all significant epigraphical texts relevant to XV Apollinaris either unknown to Ritterling or published 1920-
94 in AE and up to 1998 in ZPE, although all brick and title stamps of the legion will not be included. Space
precludes reprinting all these epigraphical texts. The XV’s inscriptions from Carnuntum are conveniently collected
in V2, which reprints unchanged the first edition’s introduction (1954, pp.7-13), but renumbers all the texts.
other—from Portugal to Abkhazian Pityus, not to mention Slovakia in Barbaricum, Ammaedara
in North Africa, and Kainepolis/ Valarshapat in Armenia.
Taken as a whole, the surviving evidence for XV Apollinaris indicates a unit more attuned to
a peactime than a wartime army.4 The XV became a legion of builders. Few quintadecimani with
dona militaria are known.5 Rather, these men constructed camps on the middle Danube at
Carnuntum, Vindobona, and Brigetio, and managed trade and supplies; they supervised quarries
at Egyptian Mons Claudianus and Euboean Carystus; in the East the XV kept watch on the Black
Sea and guarded Armenian kings.
The extant evidence, however, may yield a false view, especially given the fragmentary
literary evidence for eastern wars and the XV’s posting for two centuries on the upper
Euphrates—the most epigraphically impoverished frontier in the Empire.6 The XV Apollinaris
tended to be where the action was: in the West its participation is attested or safely presumed at
Actium, the Pannonian war of A.D. 6-9, and the Danubian wars of Domitian, Trajan, and Marcus
Aurelius; on the eastern front its role in Corbulo’s final Armenian campaign (A.D. 63), the
Jewish War (A.D. 66-70), and Arrian’s Alan campaign (A.D. 135) are certain. The sources’
relative silence on the XV’s activities in Parthian/Persian wars from Trajan on seems too
deafening to be accurate. Indeed, as will be argued here, service in Trajan’s Parthian War and
suppression of the Jewish revolt in Cyrene and Egypt is more than an assumption.
Nor should the XV be seen as apolitical. If its mutiny in 14 with the other Pannonian legions
(VIII Augusta, IX Hispana) is a black spot on its record (Tac. Ann. 1.16-30), the XV proved
itself politically astute in backing the Flavian cause in 69, especially as its legate at the time was
Vespasian’s son Titus, and in resisting Avidius Cassius’ revolt in 175. Similarly in 193-194, as
argued below, it recognized that the winds of change favored Septimius Severus over Pescennius
Niger.
A full history of the XV Apollinaris still cannot be written. New discoveries since
Ritterling’s day cannot overcome the unyielding poverty of fragmentary literary sources. Thus
four major periods of the XV’s history in the Imperial era remain valid: an initial Illyrian-
Pannonian phase (31 B.C.-A.D. 63), its first Eastern tour (63-71), a second Pannonian phase (71-
ca 106), and a second tour in the East (ca 106-ca 395). In contrast to Rittering, the second
Eastern tour will be argued here to consist of two phases: service in Egypt (ca 106-ca 117) and
the final posting in Cappadocia (ca 117?-ca 395). Definitive solutions to all problems cannot be
offered and, given the sparse evidence, may not be possible. But fresh views are permissible,
when the evidence can be read from a different perspective from that of Ritterling and more
recent scholars.
Any discussion of the XV Apollinaris must begin with its origins, which are inseparable from
questions about its cognomina and possible emblem. Subsequently a chronological perspective
will trace the XV from Carnuntum to Satala and beyond.

4On this issue see B. Dobson, The Roman Army: Wartime or Peacetime Army, Heer- und Integrationspolitik: Die
römischen Militärdiplome als historische Quelle, eds. W. Eck and H. Wolff, 1986 (Cologne), pp.10-25.
5Dona certain: CIL III 5334; V2 150; possible, although placement of dona in the inscription of a soldier who served
in several units leaves it uncertain in which unit the award was received: CIL III 390-91 (cf. Ritterling 1751 n.*; V.
Maxfield, The Military Decorations of the Roman Army, 1981 [Berkeley], pp.189-90), 7397; ILS 9200 (Dobson no.
94; cf. Maxfield, p.l190; Z. Visy, Der Beginn der Donau-Kriege des Domitian, AArchHung XXX, 1978, p.54), 2658
(cf. Maxfield, pp.198-99).
6Cf. J. Crow, A Review of the Physical Remains of the Frontiers of Cappadocia, The Defense of the Roman and
Byzantine East, eds., P. Freeman and D. Kennedy, 1986 (Oxford), I, pp.77-91, with E.L. Wheeler, Rethinking the
Upper Euphrates Frontier: Where Was the Western Border of Armenia?, Roman Frontier Studies 1989, eds., V.
Maxfield and M. Dobson, 1991 (Exeter), pp.505-11.
 Cassius Dio (55.23.5) knew the XV Apollinaris in Cappadocia as one of the nineteen legions
of the twenty-three (or twenty-five) established by Augustus still existing in his own time. The
Apollinaris would be the third or possibly the fourth legion of the Late Republican-[[261]]
Triumviral period to be numbered XV. Sling bullets of a Marian legio XV survive from the siege
of Asculum in 90-89 B.C. during the Social War.7 Julius Caesar raised a legio XV from
Cisalpine Gaul in 53 B.C. to replace his losses at Atuatuca the previous year. In 51 B.C. this
legio XV moved to Aquileia. This would be the first contact of a legio XV with the northeastern
Italian frontier. But at the Senate’s request Caesar transferred in 50 B.C. the legions XV and I
(recruited by Pompey in 55 B.C. and transferred to Caesar) for use in Pompey’s projected
Parthian campaign. Both were dispatched to Capua.8 Caesar’s legio XV became the legio III on
Pompey’s left flank at Pharsalus two years later.9 To recoup his losses to Pompey, Caesar might
have recruited a second legio XV in 49 B.C. or earlier, about the same time as he converted a
Gallic militia unit into a iusta legio, the V Alaudae.10
Dio’s statement (55.23.2, 5) that Augustus founded the Apollinaris does not, however,
eliminate possible connections with the Caesarian legions XV, as his list includes legions that
were continuations of Caesarian units.11 The Nachleben of Caesar’s first legio XV is
problematic. As generally agreed, members of this legion, Pompey’s legio III, joined the over
24,000 Pompeian POWs after Pharsalus redistributed into other Caesarian legions.12 A new
inscription of a legio XV, found in 1980 at Most na Soci in the middle Isonzo River valley
(north-northeast of Aquileia) permits speculation otherwise. This very fragmentary text of an
ignotus, probably of the tribe Velina, is dated by letter forms to the Late Republic or Triumviral
period.13 For Sasal this text, to be dated either 51/50 B.C. or 48-31 B.C., offers evidence of direct
continuity between the Caesarian legio XV and the Augustan XV Apollinaris: after Pharsalus the
legion was not dissolved, but moved to northeastern Italy and Illyricum, where it remained
through 44 B.C.; here in Illyricum, the concentration point of a future eastern war, it became

7CIL I2 867-74; J. Harmand, L’armée et le soldat à Rome de 107 à 50 avant notre ère, 1969 (Paris), pp.35 n.72, 77
n.151, 231.
8For references and discussion see Parker, p.56; Harmand (supra n.7), p.33; P. Brunt, Roman Manpower 225 B.C.-
A.D. 14, 1971 (Oxford), p.466; L. Keppie, The Making of the Roman Army, 1984 (London), pp.87, 102; J. Sasel, Zur
Frühgeschichte der XV. Legion und zur Nordostgrenze der Cisalpina zur Zeit Caesars, Römische Geschichte,
Altertumskunde und Epigraphik: Festschrift für Artur Betz, eds. E. Weber and G. Dobesch, 1985 (Vienna), pp.547-
48, followed by M. Sasel Kos, The 15th Legion at Emona—Some Thoughts, ZPE CIX, 1995, p.229; dispatch to
Capua: App. BC 2.29, 115. I have not seen M. Sasel Kos, Caesarian Inscriptions in the Emona Basin? Epigrafica
Romana in area Adriatica, ed. G. Paci, 1998 (Pisa), pp.101-12.
9Caes. BC 3.88.2; Parker, p.57; Brunt (supra n.8), p.473.
10Parker (pp.57-58) assigns it the number XVI; Keppie (supra n.8, p.200) numbers it XV and has it lost in Caesar’s
African campaign of 49 B.C., but elsewhere (Colonization and Veteran Settlement in Italy 47-14 B.C., 1983 [Rome],
pp.215-26) posits its continuation to 41 B.C., although its commander and location are unknown. V Alaudae: Keppie
(supra n.8), pp.98, 132, 206; Parker, p.266.
11E.g. 55.23.4 on X Fretensis and X Gemina; Parker (p.268) identifies X Fretensis with Caesar’s Liebling legio X,
but Keppie (supra n.8, pp.204, 209) prefers equation with X Gemina. The Caesarian V Alaudae, omitted from Dio’s
list since it no longer existed in the third century, lasted until 70 (K. Strobel, Die Legio V Alaudae in Moesien: Eine
Phantomtruppe der römischen Militärgeschichte, Historia XXXVII, 1988, pp.504-508) or 86 (?): sic Keppie,
pp.206, 214, and (supra n.10), p.191; but cf. Parker, pp.266-67. In any case, the later III Gallica is not Pompey’s
legio III at Pharsalus (=the first Caesarian legio XV), as Ritterling (1518) thought: see Parker, pp.60-62, 264-65; cf.
Keppie (supra n.8), p.206.
12Brunt (supra n.8), p.476; Parker, pp.60-62.
13D. Svoljsak and B. Zbona-Trkman, Novi Napisi v Posocju, ArhVest XXXVII, 1986, pp.390-91 no. 6 with Pl. 3: [-
]/ [-] ... vel(ina )/ [-?] .. (?)/ [-mi]les leg(ionis) XV / [-] .. vis / [-].....meni / [-]st (?)/ [-].ulgart . {sic}/ [-] ... inae /.
Not recorded in AE. My special thanks to William Kerr for providing this text and a translation of the commentary
from Slovene.
available to Octavian; the large number of gravestones from legio XV and its actives in the
general area between Aquileia and Emona for the period up to Claudius further suggests the
XV’s continued presence there.14
[[262]] Unfortunately for Sasel’s argument, as the XV Apollinaris became under Augustus
an Illyrian legion, the high number of its veterans and actives in this area proves nothing about
the first Caesarian legio XV’s continuity with the Apollinaris. Nor does the ignotus’ membership
in the tribe Velina help (if correctly restored), though at least three other milites of the
Apollinaris in the first half of the first century belonged to this tribe and left inscriptions in the
same area.15 Legionary recruitment, however, was not limited to members of a single tribe. In
fact another text of legio XV, the gravestone of an Apollinaris veteran (an ignotus) of the tribe
Pupinia but dated to the first half of the first century, has been fished from the Isonzo River near
Mainizza at a Roman bridge on the Aquileia-Emona road (AE 1978.357). This find casts a
shadow on the Most na Soci text’s uniqueness despite its supposed Late Republican lettering.
But more compelling is Sasel’s failure, though aware of the legion’s role at Pharsalus, to
acknowledge that Caesar’s first legio XV changed its number to become Pompey’s legio III
(Caes. BC 3.88.2); he tacitly assumes this legion retained the number XV throughout its
existence. If the Most na Soci text really does date to 51/50 B.C., then it can only belong to
Caesar’s first legio XV, but any connection between this legion and the XV Apollinaris remains
unproven and unlikely. But if the Most na Soci text postdates 36 B.C. (cf. infra), then it may in
fact belong to the Apollinaris.
The second Caesarian legio XV is most obscure. Its establishment is inferred from
conflicting sources on how many legions Caesar had in 49 B.C., and no location or commander
for it is known for the period 49-41 B.C.16 But when Octavian reorganized his forces after the
battle of Phillipi (42 B.C.), a veteran colony was established at Cremona in 41 B.C. Veterans of
legions II and X settled there, as did Naevius, a veteran of XV Apollinaris.17 Naevius’ gravestone
from Ricengo northwest of Cremona would be the earliest datable attestation of the Apollinaris,
i.e., a terminus post quem of 41 B.C. or soon after. Thus, if some veterans of XV Apollinaris
were due for retirement in 41 B.C. and the supposed second Caesarian legio XV also still existed
at that time, is there cause not to equate the two legions?
But the evidence is not so clear-cut. Naevius, if one of the original colonists, would be the
sole veteran of a Caesarian legion in an apparent Antonian colony. Although a 2-1 ratio in a
sampling of three items may not seem decisive, the evidence as a whole suggests that post-
Phillipi colonies tended to be assigned to paired legions of identical political sympathies—either
Caesarian or Antonian.18 Even this point, however is debatable at Cremona: should legio X,
originally a Caesarian legion reconstitued by M. Lepidus in 44 B.C. and transferred to M.

14Sasel (supra n.8), pp.547-55, who draws on W. Schnitthenner’s unpublished 1958 Oxford D.Phil. thesis, “The
Armies of the Triumviral Period: A Study of the Origins of the Roman Imperial Legions.” Although Schnitthenner’s
thesis has not been available to me, Sasel’s citation (p.548 n.10) of H. Botermann, Die Soldaten und die römische
Politik in der Zeit von Cäsars Tod bis zur Begründung des zweiten Triumvirats, 1968 (Munich), p.206, does not
support his argument on the XV’s move to Illyricum after Pharsalus: Botermann criticizes Schnitthenner. Indeed
Illyricum was not a concentration point for a projected eastern war: P.S. Freber, Der hellenistischen Osten und das
Illyricum unter Caesar, 1993 (Stuttgart), p.166.
15CIL III 4535 (Aequinoctium): L. Volusi [L.f.] Ve[lina ?; 10769 (Emona [M. Sasel Kos, The Roman Inscriptions in

the National Museum of Slovinia, 1997 [Ljubljana], no. 88]); V2 173 (Carnuntum). The tribe Velina was common at
Aquileia: Sasel Kos (supra n.8), p.241.
16Conflicting sources: Parker, pp.57-58 on Cic. Att. 7.7.6, Flor. 2.13.5, Suet. Caes. 29.2, Plut. Pomp. 58; Keppie
(supra n.10), pp.24-26.
17Keppie (supra n.10), pp.64, 190-92; nos. 66, 67, 68 (Apollinaris: AE 1975.442); cf. pp.58-69 for a survey of post-
Phillipi colonization. The date of 41 B.C. for the colony’s foundation is firm: Keppie, p.190.
18Keppie (supra n.10), pp.64-67.
Antonius only in 43 B.C., be paired with the Caesarian XV or the Antonian II?19 Further, if
Cremona was an Antonian colony, Naevius of the Apollinaris could have settled there much
later. Two other stones at Cremona attesting veterans of legions IIX and IX Hispanensis and of
early or mid-Augustan date could indicate later Augustan settlements there, or these veterans
might be sons of original colonists.20 Thus the problems raised by the Cremona inscription of an
Apollinaris veteran and any connection with the second Caesarian legio XV are not easily
solved. This Cremona text, however, would also be the earliest attestation of the cognomen
Apollinaris, an epithet assumed to have been gained [[263]] by the XV’s distinction at Actium
(31 B.C.).21 Either Naevius (or his heir) added Apollinaris to the Cremona inscription after
Actium, or the cognomen Apollinaris must antedate the battle of Actium.22 The first alternative
seems improbable, especially as the connection between the XV’s cognomen and the battle of
Actium rests on shaky ground.
Before discovery of the Cremona text, a gravestone from Ateste (mod. Este) in northeastern
Italy was considered the earliest attestation of the XV Apollinaris. This post-Actium veteran
colony founded ca 30 B.C. has yielded twenty-seven late first-century B.C. inscriptions of seven
legions (IIII, V, IX, XI, XII, XIV, XV, XIIX) and three cohorts. In five (or six?) texts of Ateste
veterans the men proudly proclaim themselves veterans of Actium—Actiacus—the only known
cognomen to commemorate a specific battle.23 Only one veteran of legio XV appears at Ateste,
the miles L. Valerius, but he neither calls himself Actiacus nor specifies his legion as
Apollinaris.24 It would be hypercritical to suggest that Valerius’ stone proves that L. Valerius and
legio XV did not participate at Actium or that legio XV did not know yet have the cognomen
Apollinaris, since (so far as known) only veterans at Ateste from legio XI took the cognomen
Actaicus, but not all undecimani did.25 Further, legionary epithets appear only irregularly in
inscriptions before Claudius and their absence on stones does not indicate their non-existence
(Ritterling 1747 n.*). Besides, the Cremona text of Naevius clearly attests at least an early
Augustan (i.e., post-Actium) existence of the cognomen Apollinaris.
What the Ateste text does confirm is, first, that the legio XV was in service by 31 B.C. and
therefore had probably been so since at least 41 B.C. when Octavian reorganized his forces.
Octavian is not known to have raised new legions 41-31 B.C. Thus the Ateste and Cremona texts
must refer to the same legio XV and the continuity of this legio XV, the Apollinaris, with
Caesar’s second legio XV, raised ca 49 B.C., becomes more likely. Second, the Ateste text casts
strong doubt on the connection of the cognomen Apollinaris with the battle of Actium. If the
epithet had been awarded in 31 B.C. for distinction at Actium, it seems inconceivable that
Valerius would have omitted this mark of pride from his stone.
Apollo of course became Octavian’s patron deity, so the cognomen Apollinaris suggests a
special relationship between the god, the legion, and Octavian. A tale circulated that Octavian
was Apollo’s son (Dio 45.1.2-3; cf. Suet. Aug. 94.4) and Apollo was credited with winning the
battle of Actium, fought at the foot of a promontary topped by a temple of Apollo—a deed that
Vergil and Propertius amplified in verse.26 But the men of legio XI, not XV, called themselves

19Keppie (supra n.10), p.67.

20Keppie (supra n.10), p.192 with nos. 69-70.
21Keppie (supra n.8), pp.135, 143, 210.
22Keppie (supra n.8), p.210, and (supra n.10), p.192.
23See Keppie (supra n.10), pp.27, 73-74, 77, 111, 195-96, 195; cf. Ritterling 1747; Parker, p.270.
24CIL V 2516 (Keppie [supra n.10] no. 17): L. Valerius / T. f. leg. XV / T.F.I.
25Keppie (supra n.10), pp.111-12 with nos. 3, 14, 23.
26Ritterling 1747; Parker, 270; G. Webster, The Roman Imperial Army of the First and Second Centuries A.D., 1969
(London), p.112; Keppie (supra n.8), pp.135, 143, 210; on the Actium legend in Vergil and Propertius, see J. Gagé,
Apollon Romain, BEFAR 182, 1955 (Paris), pp.479-522; J.F. Miller, Vergil, Apollo, and Augustus, Apollo: Origins
Actiacus and the silence of Vergil and Propertius on the heroics of a legio Apollinaris at Actium
is most curious. A legion’s ability to win distinction in a naval battle like Actium poses no
problem, for Octavian boarded eight legions on ships (Oros. 6.19.8; cf. Dio 50.31.3).
Nevertheless, the absence of Apollinaris from Valerius’ inscription at Ateste is glaring, if the
epithet were recently bestowed for Actium, especially as Naevius’ stone from Cremona, if post-
and not ante-Actium, broadcasts it. To solve the problems of the XV [[264]] Apollinaris’ origins
three points must be established: first, the likelihood (conclusive proof is impossible) that
Apollinaris on the Cremona stone antedates Actium; second, the emblem of the XV Apollinaris
and its association with Apollo; third, an historical context for bestowal of the epithet before
Actium.
Divine epithets for legions are rare. Apart from the XV Apollinaris, only Domitian’s I
Minerva, raised in 83, had this distinction among post-Augustan legions.27 Thus it is surprising
to find veterans at Cremona after 41 B.C. from two legions with divine epithets: Naevius of the
XV Apollinaris and C. Lanius of the X Veneria.28 As noted above, Cremona was a colony of
paired Antonian legions established in 41 B.C., so a terminus post quem for Lanius’ text seems
secure. One could argue that Julius Caesar had set the precedent for giving legions divine
epithets‚ in this case, advertising his descent from Venus through an epithet for his favorite
legion. But legio X as Veneria is attested only by the Cremona text; no literary sources report
such an honor for legio X and such would surely have attracted the attention of at least an author
like Suetonius. Thus with all probability the epithet originated after 44 B.C. and in a context
when veterans (at least) of this unit wanted to advertise their Julian origins despite the legio X’s
assignment after 43 B.C. to M. Antonius. An emphasis on Julian origins would be particularly
striking for the period after Phillipi when Antonius began his fetish for Dionysus.29 Further, Dio
reports that Octavian in 32 B.C., already anticipating the clash with M. Antonius, made special
efforts to win over Antonian colonists in Italy. Bononia is specifically cited, but other colonies
were no doubt solicited in efforts that probably began before 32 B.C.30 In sum, the political
context of the two texts from Cremona speaks for two veterans of that colony advertising their
loyalty to Octavian’s cause—Lanius through the Caesarian origins of his old unit and Naevius
through his unit’s new cognomen bestowed at some point between 41 B.C. and 31 B.C. The
camaraderie of these veterans would be even greater if the Apollinaris was in origin Caesar’s
second legio XV. Further, even though precise dates of death for these two veterans cannot be

and Influences, ed. J. Solomon, 1994 (Tucson), p.159 nn.4-5; P. Zanker, Augustus und die Macht der Bilder, 1987
(Munich), pp.57-61. R.A. Gurval (Actium and Augustus: The Politics and Emotions of Civil War, 1995 [Ann
Arbor]), however, launches a detailed attack on traditional views of Augustus, Apollo, and the legend of Actium:
e.g. the stories of Apollo’s fathering Augustus are post-, not pre-Actium (pp.100-102). Despite a detailed
examination of artistic monuments, literary sources (both prose and verse), and numismatic sources, he is unaware
of the military evidence, such as the cognomen Actiacus and the problem of the legio XV’s cognomen. Detailed
responses to all his arguments cannot be undertaken here.
27Ritterling 1420; Parker, pp.108-109, 262; J.-L. Girard, Domitien et Minerve: une prédilection imperiale, ANRW,
1981, II.17.1, 243; cf. on I Minerva, W. Eck elsewhere in this volume.
28Apollinaris: AE 1975.442 (Keppie [supra n.10], no. 68); Veneria: ILS 2241 (Keppie no. 66). Keppie (p.63 with no.
7; cf. p.180) conjectures that a Caesarian legion XXIX? settled in a post-Phillipi colony at Hadria may also have
carried the epithet Veneria, but this only a guess; the stone is lost.
29Zanker (supra n.26), p.58; L.R. Taylor, The Divinity of the Roman Emperor, 1931 (Middletown), pp.107-110.
Like Alexander the Great, Antonius’ associations with Dionysus did not rule out his claim to descent from Hercules:
Plut. Ant. 4.1-2; Taylor, p.107 with n.4; C.B.R. Pelling, ed., Plutarch, Life of Antony, 1988 (Cambridge), pp.123-24;
cf. B.A. Kellum, The City Adorned: Programmatic Display at the Aedes Concordiae Augustae, Between Republic
and Empire: Interpretations of Augustus and His Principate, eds., K. Rauflaub and M. Toher, 1990 (Berkeley),
p.282. A view that Octavian sought to make Apollo a god exclusively of his own partisans must be rejected: Gurval
(supra n.26), pp.116-18.
30Dio 50.6.3; cf. Keppie (supra n.10), pp.187-88 on Bononia.
determined, the stones still testify to how they wanted to be remembered and to their political
loyalties. Cremona, in fact, continued to supply recruits (descendants of earlier quintadecimani?)
to the Apollinaris into the next century (V2 169, 209, 232).
If Actium is now eliminated as the occasion for the XV’s Apollinaris, the meaning of the
cognomen, “of Apollo” or “sacred to Apollo,” offers no clue to pursue.31 No emblem of the
legio XV is generally accepted: neither the bull common to legions of Caesarian origin, if the
Apollinaris was a continuation of Caesar’s second legio XV, nor the capricorn, the sign of an
Augustan creation.32 The Notitia Dignitatum (Or. 38, p.83 Seeck) lacks a shield symbol for legio
XV. Countermarks of the Apollinaris on eastern coins display only the laconic LXV, [[265]] XV,
or a ligature of these letters, never an animal symbol, whereas some Augustan coins from Siscia,
Emona and elsewhere in the Illyrian-Pannonian region are countermarked Apol.33 Nevertheless,
four fragments of a statue base of Commodian date, found at Colonia Ulpia Sarmizegetusa in
1994-95, present the first direct evidence that a vexillatio of XV Apollinaris served in Marcus
Aurelius’ Marcomannic wars, although other evidence suggested it earlier (discussed infra). This
discovery lends support to von Domaszewski’s suggestion that the griffin portrayed on a Roman
helmet in Scene XV of the Aurelian Column indicates the presence of the XV Apollinaris, since
the griffin was sacred to Apollo. Subsequent scholarship tacitly rejected von Domaszewski’s
view, which Piso now endorses.34 If the new inscription confirms the XV’s presence in the
Marcomannic wars, it does not necessarily prove von Domaszewski correct about the griffin and
the legio Apollinaris. This equation needs further investigation, especially as studies of the
griffin by art historians omit the griffin helmet of the Aurelian Column.
The griffin, most commonly in the Roman view a winged lion with the head of an eagle
(Paus. 1.24.6; Serv. ad Verg. Ecl. 8.27), served as an heraldic symbol often with the peaceful
function of either guarding a gate or temple, or decoratively flanking a central figure (e.g.
sphinx, crater). At first glance the griffin is not an obvious symbol for a legion. One might expect
at least Apollo’s bow. From the second half of the seventh century B.C. griffins as a purely
decorative motif on Protocorinthian and archaic Corinthian pottery were widely disseminated in
the Mediterranean world, and in Italy they occur in the role of a hostile monster in Etruscan
funerary art from the fourth to the first century B.C. At Rome griffins are absent from Sulla’s
coins stamped with Apollo and his symbols (tripod, Sibyl, cithara, sphinx), but appear with a
totally unclear context and meaning on denarii of L. Papius, issued probably in in 78/77 B.C.35

31Itshould be noted that Dio (55.23.5) erroneously gives the cognomen as ÉApoll≈neion. No other occurrence of
the XV’s cognomen in a Greek literary text survives and Latin literary sources show the expected Apollinaris:
Not.Dig.Or. 38.5, 13; cf. Itin. Ant. 183.5: Satala leg. XV Apollinans [sic]. The very few Greek inscriptions with more
than the usual abbreviation ÉApol. transliterate the Latin Apollinaris: IGR I 10; III 281, 777; AE 1972.616, 617.
Standard lexica permit no discernment of meaning between Apollinaris and ÉApoll≈neion: Lewis & Short s.v.;
OLD s.v.; LSJ 9 s.v. ÉApoll≈niow.
32See Ritterling, 1371-76; Parker, pp.261-63; Keppie (supra n.8), pp.139-40, 210.
33See Sasel Kos (supra n.8), p.237 with n.53; C.J. Howgego, Greek Imperial Countermarks, 1985 (London) p.257.
The historical value of these eastern countermarks will be treated below.
34See I. Piso, Die Legio XV Apollinaris in den markomannischen Kriegen, ActaMusNapocennsis XXXV, 1998, 97-
104, esp. 99-101 with bibliography at nn.9-11; A von Domaszewski, in E. Petersen, A. v. Domaszewski, G.
Calderini, Die Markussäule auf Piazza Colonna in Rom, 1896 (Munich), pp.112-13. Ritterling (1754) acknowledged
the argument, but ignored taking the griffin as a legionary symbol; similarly, C. Caprino, I relievi della colonna: la
guerra germanica e sarmatica, La colonna di Marco Aurelio, eds., C. Caprino et al., 1955 (Rome), p.88 with n.29.
35In general see A. Furtwänger, Gryps, Roscher Lex., 1886-90, I.1, pp.1742-77, views recycled in F. Duerrbach,
Gryps, DarSag, 1890, II.2, pp.1668-73 and H. Prinz and K. Ziegler, Gryps, RE 7, 1912, 1902-29; more recently, M.
Leventopoulou, Gryps, LIMC, Suppl. 1, 1997, 609-11; and especially, I. Flagge, Untersuchungen zur Bedeutung des
Greifen, 1975 (Sankt Augustin); C. Delplace, Le Griffon de l’archaïsme à l’époque impériale: Étude
Moreover, griffins are eastern—a Greek (indeed a Minoan-Mycenaean) borrowing from Syria
and Egypt and first associated with Apollo on monuments at Delos in the sixth century B.C.—
references to the myths of Apollo and the Hyperboreans.36 In the West griffins adorn the reverse
of denarii struck by Bogud, king of western Mauretania, who ca 40 B.C. sided with M. Antonius
before being ousted in 38 B.C.37 Griffins would seem to send the wrong message, especially
since Octavian’s Apollo led native Roman gods against the hideous demons of Antonius’ East
(cf. Verg. Aen. 8.678-713). Yet the griffin was a traditional symbol on bronze coinage of Greek
cities in Asia Minor, such as Assos and Teos, where Augustus would later appear on coins
having a griffin on the reverse. An intriguing tetradrachma of Egyptian Alexandria is also known
from Nero’s fourteenth year (67/68); its reverse shows a griffin with its right foot atop a small
wheel. This [[266]] unique type of Alexandrian griffin coin appeared the year after the XV
Apollinaris had wintered in the city (Jos. BJ 3.8).38
The puzzle of the griffin, the legio Apollinaris, and Octavian can be solved, if focus is
directed to the six years 42-36 B.C. In the war against Brutus and Cassius, both sides evoked
Apollo’s patronage: “Apollo” was the watchword of both armies at Phillipi (Plut. Brut. 24.7;
Val.Max. 1.5.7) and the Liberators struck coins with Apollo types. Octavian’s attachment to
Apollo coincides with Antonius’ fetish for Dionysus ca 42 B.C. Octavian began sealing
documents with the sphinx, the symbol of Apollo’s regnum prophecized by the Sibyl.39 But in
the early 30s B.C. military attention soon turned to southern Italy and Sicily and the naval war
against Sextus Pompeius that culminated in Octavian’s victory at Naulochus (36 B.C.). Apollo
(cf. Propert. 4.1.3: Phoebus navalis) got the credit for Naulochus and a vow of thanks from
Octavian: he would build a temple of Apollo on the Palatine—a work dedicated in 28 B.C. and
now known to have been decorated both with Campanian terracotta plaques featuring two
griffins flanking a crater and with a door jamb showing two griffins with their backs turned to a
central tripod.40 But the Apollo of Magna Graecia was not the Delphic Apollo, rather the

iconographique et essai d’interprétation symbolique, 1980 (Brussels). Corinthian pottery: Delplace, pp.27-38, 109;
Etruscans: Delplace, pp.167-78; Flagge, pp.47-48; Sulla: Zanker (supra n.26), p.57; L. Papius: Delplace, p.329.
36Furtwängler (supra n.35), p.1770; L. de Ronchaud, Apollo, DarSag, 1877 (Paris), I, p.317; L.R. Farnell, The Cults
of the Greek States, 1907 (Oxford), IV, pp.313-16; Delplace (supra n.35), pp.365-67; E. Simon, Zur Bedeutung der
Greifen in der Kunst der Kaiserzeit, Latomus 21, 1962, pp.749-52.
37A. Burnett, M. Amandry, Père P. Répollès, Roman Provincial Coinage, 1992 (London), I, p.210 with nos. 854-55.
38Burnett et al. (supra n.37), pp.393 with no. 2320 (Assos), 424 with no. 2514 (Teos); cf. p.414 with no. 2437
(Phocaea); Alexandria: p.710 with no. 5324. My thanks to William Metcalf for pointing out the Alexandrian coin to
me. The griffin-with-wheel type reappears in Domitianic Alexandrian coins and becomes frequent in the Trajanic-
Antonine periods. This type symbolizes the goddess Nemesis, whose attribute as a deity of revenge has connections
with Helios and thus overlaps with Apollo as a solar deity. See Simon (supra n.36), pp.770-71; Flagge (supra n.35),
pp.106-21; Delplace (supra n.35), pp.303-305, 399, 411. All three of these scholars ignore the Neronian coin. The
avenging griffin of Nemesis does not necessarily eliminate the Neronian coin as a commemoration of the XV, an
“avenging” legion, especially as the Neronian coin is the first known occurrence of the type. Cf. n.44 infra on
griffins and Mars Ultor.
39Gagé (supra n.26), pp.480-85; seal: Zanker (supra n.26), p.58. Gurval (supra n.26, pp.71-72) does not recognize
the sphinx as an Apolline symbol. He also (pp.98-100) uses the Phillipi watchword and coinage as evidence against
Octavian’s promotion of Apollo’s patronage for himself, but Brutus’ well-known Homeric prediction (Il. 16.489)
that Apollo’s son would kill him speaks against Gurval’s argument that stories of Apollo as Octavian’s father
postdate Actium: Val.Max. 1.5.7; Plut. Brut. 24.4-7; App. BC 4.134; cf. supra n.26. Dio’s version (42.43.1-2) that
Brutus’ army used libertas as a watchword (not mentioned by Gurval) might reflect Octavian’s post-Phillipi efforts
to obscure the Liberators’ appeals to Apollo.
40Vell.Pat. 2.81.3; Dio 49.15.5, 53.1.3-4; Zanker (supra n.26), p.58; plaques and door jamb: Delplace (supra n.35),
pp.254 with n.1090, 291, 379; on the temple and its archaizing traits, see also B. Kellum, Sculptural Programs and
Propaganda in Augustan Rome: The Temple of Apollo on the Palatine, The Age of Augustus, ed. R. Winkes, 1985
(Louvain/Providence), pp.269-76. Gurval’s attempt (supra n.26, pp.113-15) to dissociate the vow for Apollo’s
temple from the battle of Naulochus seems reductionist. He would deny any religious connotation to the battle at a
Hyperborean Apollo, which had strong connections with Delos, where the association of Apollo
and griffins began. Herodotus (4.15) already knew a myth of Aristeas, a figure intimately
associated with the Hyperboreans, in connection with a cult of Apollo at Metapontum, where he
appears as an hypostasis of Apollo. Further, Pythagoras was said to be a descendant or son of
Apollo; dissemination of the cult of the Hyperborean Apollo throughout Magna Graecia may be
associated with the Pythagorean movement. In any case, Apollo and griffins flourished in the art
and numismatics of Sicily, Tarentum, and other Greek cities of Magna Graecia from the Archaic
through the Hellenistic period. The Hyperborean Apollo riding a griffin would later appear on
Augustus’ cuirass in the well-known Prima Porta statue of 20-17 B.C.41 Thus [[267]] Naulochus,
not Actium, fought in an area where the association of Apollo with griffins was common,
provides the proper context for the XV’s cognomen Apollinaris and for the griffin as the legion’s
emblem: the griffin’s victorious strength symbolized the virtus Augusti. Indeed the griffin as a
helmet decoration had a distinguished ancestry in Phidias’ statue of Athena Parthenos besides
coins of Dionysius I of Syracuse and Alexander the Great.
If Naevius’ Apollinaris was a subsequent addition to his stone, it would be after 36 B.C., not
after 31 B.C., and would accord with Lanius’ advertisement of his old unit’s Caesarian origin.
But more probably Naevius fought at Naulochus and settled at Cremona after the battle, when
another wave of colonization in Italy is known.42 Octavian may have already begun moving to
insert his own influence into Antonian colonies. Naulochus of course was a naval battle, which
earned Agrippa the first ever bestowal of the corona classica (Vell.Pat. 2.81.3; Dio 49.14.3-4).
But here a definition preserved in Hesychius provides the proper connotation of the griffin as a
legionary emblem: griffins could refer to a ship’s tackle or gear or even its anchors; it also
denoted a winged animal called “hooked revenge.”43 Could there be a connection between the
griffin and Agrippa’s invention of a new type of grapnel, the harpago, shot from catapults (App.
BC 5.118–19)? In any case, the quintadecimani were Apollo’s “hooked avengers,” which
probably derived from an exploit at Naulochus, where they no doubt served along with the X
Fretensis, which derived its cognomen and perhaps two of its known emblems, the galley and the
dolphin, from the same campaign. In fact the connection of griffins and revenge reappears in 2

time when Antonius was promoting his connections with Dionysus and Sextus Pompeius’ propaganda stressed his
association with Neptune. Cf. Taylor (supra n.29), pp.120-21. Naulochus cannot have been fought in a religious
vacuum. Phoebus navalis: Propertius refers to the Palatine temple of Apollo. Gurval (p.257 n.19) and Gagé (supra
n.26, p.540) take this as a reference to Actium, but it need not be so.
41On the Hyperborean Apollo see Farnell (supra n.36), pp.99-106, 313 with n.c; Flagge (supra n.35), pp.74-76;
Delplace (supra n.35), pp.137, 365-67; M. Maher, Metapontum, RE 15.2, 1932, 1357-58; cf. Gagé (supra n.26),
p.20 n.2: “… l’Apollo romain sans doubte à cause de ses prototypes de Grand-Grèce, a parfois curieusement gardé
des affinités, moins avec l’Apollon hellénique classique et delphique qu’avec de dieu asianique, voici avec un
Hyperboréen probablement connu anciennement dans l’aire illyrienne de Dodone et dont les rapports avec de dieu
asianique sont incertains.” Pythagoreans: Delplace, pp.370-71, 381; griffins in Magna Graecia: Flagge, p.56;
Delplace, pp.28 n.142, 29 n.144, 34 n.156, 35 n.159, 36 n.160, 50 n.214, 51 nn.216-17, 133 with nn.601-602 and
Fig. 148, 139, 151-52, 155, 157, 166, 187 n.827, 209, 218-20, 234-35; Prima Porta statue: Simon (supra n.36),
p.773; Flagg, p.59; Delplace, pp.269-70. It should also be noted that apart from the myth of the Hyperboreans and
Apollo griffins do not appear in literature before the Roman Imperial era (Simon, pp.760-61). Thus Vergil’s
seemingly innocent insertion of griffins at Ecl. 8.27, a work dated by references to the Perusian War to 39-38 B.C.,
may be significant, especially if the addressee of the poem is Octavian: sic G.W. Bowersock, The Addressee of the
Eighth Eclogue. A Response, HSCP 82, 1978, pp.201-202; contra, R. Tarrant, The Addressee of Virgil’s Eclogue,
ibid., pp.197-99, arguing for Asinius Pollio.
42Athena: Paus. 1.24.5-6; Alexander: G.F. Hill, Alexander the Great and the Persian Lion-Gryphon, JHS 43, 1923,
pp.156-61; other helmets: Simon (supra n.36), pp.752-53; Flagge (supra n.35), p.34; Delplace (supra n.35), pp.280-
83; colonization: Keppie (supra n.10), pp.69-73.
43Hesych. s.v. grËpew: m°row t«n t∞w ne∆w skeu«n, ka‹ êgkurai. ka‹ e‰dow z≈on ptervtoË, ˘ kaloËsi

gupon°mesin.
B.C., when Augustus dedicated the temple of Mars Ultor, vowed at Phillipi for the defeat of his
father’s assassins (Suet. Aug. 29.2; Aug. RG 2). The temple’s cult statue featured a giant statue
with a cuirass featuring lion-griffins.44
To summarize the origins of the legio Apollinaris, Julius Caesar initially recruited it as a
legio XV ca 49 B.C. in partial replacement for two legions (XV and I) tranferred to Pompey the
year before. Its record in the civil wars of 49-45, 43-42 B.C. as well as its commanders and
postings have left no trace, although some of the original members might have been discharged
in 41 B.C. The legion then served in the war against Sextus Pompeius and distinguished itself at
Naulochus, winning its cognomen Apollinaris and taking the griffin as its new emblem. Some of
its veterans, like Naevius at Cremona, were discharged after the battle. Subsequently Octavian
shipped the Apollinaris off to Illyricum, where (as generally assumed) it served in Octavian’s
campaigns there 35-33 B.C.45 Two years later it fought at [[268]] Actium and some of its
veterans were discharged to settle at Ateste. The legion then returned to Illyricum.

If the award of the cognomen Apollinaris indicated some special relationship with the victor
of Naulochus and Actium, the relationship was short-lived. No subsequent close association
between the Apollinaris and Augustus is on record, but imperial favor is thought to have returned
under a later emperor. Ritterling hypothesized that the new Flavian legions of 70, IV and XVI,
received those specific numbers to honor the outstanding support of III Gallica and XV
Apollinaris for the Flavian cause in 69—part of his broader theory that all new legions received
numbers to honor older legions of a lower number. Parker rejected Ritterling’s theory, though
without a suitable explanation of his own.46 Certainly III Gallica, formerly a Syrian legion and
transferred to Moesia (probably Oescus) in 68 (Tac. Hist. 2.74.1; Suet. Vesp. 6.3) may have been
the first to proclaim Vespasian Imperator at Aquileia (Suet. Vesp. 6.3), if its action antedates
that of the two Egyptian legions, III Cyrenaica and XXII Deiotariana on 1 July 69 (Tac. Hist.
2.79). Precise chronology is impossible. The Judaean legions, of which the Apollinaris at that
time was one, swore the oath on 3 July. As the XV’s legate then was Vespasian’s son Titus, a
leading role for the Apollinaris can be assumed, if not explicitly attested. No doubt men of the
XV joined Licinius Mucianus’ Flavian force when it left Antioch for Italy.47 At least two
quintadecimani, probably part of Mucianus’ army, were rewarded with promotion to elite units
in Rome: C. Germanius Valentinus to the Urban Cohorts and L. Arnius Bassus to the
Praetorians—beneficiaries of Mucianus’ purge of Vitellians from these units.48 In the Jewish

44Parker, p.268; Keppie (supra n.8), pp.208-209; Mars Ultor: Simon (supra n.36), pp.773-74; cf. pp.775-77
(followed by Flagge, supra n.35, pp.58-59) for scenes of griffins attacking Amazons or Armaspi as a common
theme of Roman Imperial propaganda indicating Roman superiority to barbarians. It should be noted that the griffin
of the Auelian Column bears some (but not extensive) resemblance to the griffin on a pot from Montans (central
Gaul) of the first century: Delplace (supra n.35), p.247 no. 26 with Tab. I no.26.
45Ritterling, 1747; Sasel (supra n.8), p.549; for summaries of the operations see A. Móscy, Pannonia and Upper

Moesia, tr. S. Frere, 1974 (London), pp.21-23; J.J. Wilkes, The Danubian and Balkan Provinces, CAH2 X, 1996,
pp.549-50.
46Ritterling, 1750; 1268, expanded by J. Nicols, Vespasian and the Partes Flavianae, 1978 (Wiesbaden), pp.102,
132; contra, Parker, pp.97, 107, 113-14.
47Saxer, pp.19-20.
48Germanius: CIL X 1263; Arnius: Inscr.Ital. X.4 49 (CIL V 522); H. Freis, Die Cohortes Urbanae, 1967
(Cologne), pp.13-14, followed by Visy (supra n.5), pp.44-45. Ritterling’s emendation (1286-87), V[espas(iano )] for
N[ervae] at line 6 of CIL X 1263, is widely accepted: e.g. Fries; L. Keppie, Colonization and Veteran Settlement in
Italy in the First Century A.D., PBSR LII, 1984, pp.95, 111. A third possibility is M. Pompeius Asper (Dobson no.
101), a centurion of the XV promoted to centurion cohors III of the Praetorians, then later primus pilus of III
Cyrenaica and praefectus castrorum of XX Victrix, though some date the inscription to ca 100 rather than to
Vespasian’s reign.
War, however, Josephus only notes closely the combat record of the Apollinaris while it
remained under Titus’ command; he loses interest after Tittius Frugi became the XV’s legate in
the summer of 69.49 After Jerusalem’s fall, the XV escorted Titus through Syria in 70-71 before
its dispatch from Alexandria to Carnuntum in summer 71. Perhaps reassignment to its old
Danubian base was a reward for faithful service and loyalty, but the V Macedonica shared the
honor of escorting Titus in 70-71 and also returned to the Danubian front. In sum, apart from
Ritterling’s theory about legionary numbers, there is little to support a view of Flavian affection
for the Apollinaris as a unit. Individuals were rewarded, but no additional epithet for the whole
legion, such as pia fidelis, was received.
Indeed, XV Apollinaris—even in the third century when legionary cognomina proliferated—
was never (so far as known) Severiana, Antoniniana, or Gordiana. Its only additional title, pia
fidelis, came (according to Ritterling) in 175, when the two Cappadocian legions under Martius
Verus (Rémy no. 175) refused to support the usurper Avidius Cassius, then governor of Syria.50
Twelfth Fulminata was subsequently honored as certa constans and XV Apollinaris as pia
fidelis. Ritterling sought to explain two different cognomina for the same act of loyalty by
conjecturing that XII Fulminata had withstood a siege by Avidius Cassius at Melitene, the
legion’s base.51
Of course this siege is unattested. Twelfth Fulminata’s certa constans, though only twice in
evidence, certainly dates from Marcus Aurelius’ reign (ILS 2748; cf. 2760), and Avidius [[269]]
Cassius’ revolt provides as good a context for it as any, unless one conjectures some heroic deed
from its activity in the Marcomannic wars.52 In contrast, however, XV Apollinaris as pia fidelis
occurs only on the base of an equestrian statue at Lyon (ILS 139; cf. PME A 127), which dates ca
200, approximately a quarter century after Avidius Cassius’ revolt. Moreover, as will be argued
below, in 175 the XV was so decimated by the dispatch of vexillationes that only a skeleton force
would have been present at its base of Satala. The Lyon statue base honors Tib. Antistius
Marcianus, who had earlier served as tribune in the XV. After his tertia militia as praefectus alae
Sulpiciae c.R. in Germania Inferior, this native of Circina in Africa was advanced by the
Augusti, presumably Septimius Severus and Caracalla, to take a census of the Three Gauls. As
other inscriptions of XV Apollinaris dated between 175 and 193 do not include the title pia
fidelis,53 perhaps another context for the XV’s pia fidelis can be posited—the civil war of 193-
194.
It is generally assumed that all the eastern legions—at least initially—supported in 193-194
the bid of Pescennius Niger, the Syrian governor, for the purple.54 But the only real evidence is

49For references see infra on the XV’s first eastern tour.

50On the revolt see A.R. Birley, Marcus Aurelius: A Biography 2, 1987 (New Haven), pp.183-89.
51See E. Ritterling, Epigraphische Beitraege zur roemischen Geschichte, RM N.F. LIX, 1904, pp.196-98, repeated at
RE XII, 1754-55.
52Twelfth Fulminata may not be the legion of the famous Rain Miracle, as Birley argues (supra n.50, pp.172-74,

251-52, and Septimius Severus the African Emperor2, 1989 [New Haven], pp.66-67) for I Adiutrix, but he concedes
(supra n.50, p.186) that both Cappadocian legions contributed troops to the Marcomannic wars. Cf. E.L. Wheeler,
The Laxity of Syrian Legions, The Roman Army in the East, ed. D. Kennedy, 1996 (Ann Arbor), p.234 n.19.
53E.g. SEG XV 839 (AE 1956.31), ILS 394, 9117. The date of the XV’s pia fidelis could perhaps be resolved, if the
first line of CIL X 1127 were preserved: 7 leg(ionis ) XV Ap[oll(inaris)]. This is one of the career inscriptions of Cn.
Marcius Rustius Rufinus, who began his career as a centurion with XV Apollinaris under Marcus Aurelius and rose
to praefectus vigilum under Septimius Severus and possibly praefectus praetorio under Commodus. See Dobson no.
154; Sablayrolles, pp.496-99, 559-60, though he omits CIL X 1127 without explanation.
54E.g. M. Plautnauer, The Life and Reign of the Emperor Lucius Septimius Severus, 1918 (Oxford), p.78 with n.7;
C.R. Whittaker, Herodian, 1969 (Cambridge [Mass.]), I, p.186 n.1 ad 2.7.7; Birley (supra n.52), p.98, and Caecilius
Capella: Persecutor of Christians, Defender of Byzantium, GRBS XXXII, 1991, p.94.
negative: literary sources speak vaguely of the East or name only Syria and Egypt;55 a series of
legionary coins showing support for Septimius Severus reveals the absence of eastern legions,
including those in Cappadocia.56 Rémy (pp.233-34) posits that C. Iulius Flaccus Aelianus,
attested by milestones for 198, would have been installed by 194/195 as Severus’ replacement
for a supporter of Niger. In view of Severus’ Mesopotamian plans for 195, however, i.e., the
annexation of western Osrhoene and reassertion of Roman might throughout northern
Mesopotamia, a new Cappadocian governor may have been likely anyway. Further, even if XII
Fulminata at Melitene supported Niger—and there is no evidence that it did—it is again only an
assumption that the two Cappadocian legions, based about 200 km apart, always acted politically
in unison.
Niger, in reality, won over Syria, Palestine, Egypt, and Bithynia;57 the rest of Asia Minor
seems to have been pro-Severan or at least neutral. If an active role of the Cappadocian legions,
and the XV Apollinaris in particular, cannot be demonstrated, other indirect evidence is more
promising. Severus did not punish Cappadocian cities for support of Niger as he did Syrian.
Indeed the Cappadocian capital Caesarea was already striking Severan coins in 194.58 Niger was
desperate for troops: he recruited youth from Antioch, whom he did not have time to train
properly,59 and solicited aid from Parthia, Armenia, and Hatra (Hdn. 3.1.2). The Armenian
king’s response is most suggestive: he chose to remain neutral, since he would have his hands
full if Severus attacked him. With Syria under Niger’s control, the only western approach to
Armenia was via Cappadocia. It would appear that Cappadocia was pro-Severan.
[[270]] But to view the problem more positively, the Lyon text shows an equestrian officer
and an African native, whose career advanced under Septimius Severus. Antisius Marcianus
proudly broadcasts his tribunate in XV Apollinaris pia fidelis. Neither his advancement (despite
his African origo) nor his publication of service in the XV seems likely if the Apollinaris had
backed Niger; nor would an epithet recalling loyalty to Marcus Aurelius be very relevant ca 200.
Another prominent equestrian of the third century, also once a tribune of XV Apollinaris and
possibly later praefectus vigilum and even Praetorian Prefect, T. Porcius Cornelianus, chose not
to include pia fidelis on his stone.60 Moreover, VI Ferrata, which abandoned Niger’s cause,
became fidelis constans, and other legions received the title pia fidelis from Severus.61 The
uniquenes of pia fidelis on the Lyon statue base may well indicate the Apollinaris’ support for
Severus rather than Pescennius Niger. Such are the origins and context of the XV Apollinaris’
cognomina. A chronological survey of the XV’s history can now be pursued.

From ca 31 B.C. to A.D. 63 the XV Apollinaris served in northern Illyricum, the later
Pannonia. Direct evidence of its activities in this period, especially under Augustus and Tiberius,
are lacking, although veterans and actives of the XV have left epigraphical traces and its
participation in various wars in the province can be assumed. Certain, however, are only its
mutiny in 14 with the two other Pannonian legions, VIII Augusta and IX Hispana (Tac. Ann.
1.16-30), its posting at Carnuntum by the early 50s (V2 324), and its departure for the East in 63
(Tac. Ann. 15.25.3). Its initial camp probably lay close to the northeastern border of Italy,

55HA, Did.Iul. 5.2; Sev. 6.7, 8.6-7; Pesc.Nig. 2.1-2; Hdn. 2.7.7, 8.7; Eutrop. 8.18.4; Aur Vic. 20.8-9.
56R. Ziegler, Die Legionsmünzen des Kaisars Septimius Severus, Münster.Numismat.Zeitung XLI, 1971, 1-4.
57D. Magie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor, 1950 (Princeton), pp.669-70.
58Syrian punishment: e.g. Birley (supra n.52), pp.114-15; Caesarea: Magie (supra n.57), p.1540 n.21.
59See Wheeler (supra n.52), pp.233-34.
60ILS 8852 (IGR I 10); cf. PIR P 636; PME P 95; L.L. Howe, The Praetorian Prefect from Commodus to Diocletian
(A.D. 180-305), 1942 (Chicago), p.86 no. 65.
61Ritterling 1593, 1371.
perhaps near Aquileia, as numerous inscriptions of both actives and veterans suggest.62
Throughout the Julio-Claudian period the XV would primarily recruit from northern Italy.63
Between 31 and 16 B.C. the Illyrican front remained quiet. Legio XV might have been
transferred for a time to Spain for the Cantabrian War (26-19 B.C.).64 However that may be,
service on the northeastern border of Italy had to concern surveillance of Pannonian tribes to the
east and communications with the Danube (potential avenues of invasion) either via the
traditional amber trade route (“the Pannonian Highway”), which crossed the Danube at
Carnuntum and proceeded south to Aquileia by way of Scarbantia, Savaria, Poetovio, and
Emona, or through the Alpine passes of Noricum. The Most Na Soci text (supra n.13), if it does
not date to 51/50 B.C., could attest the XV on duty soon after Actium, guarding the northeastern
approaches to Aquileia. The annexation of Noricum in 15 B.C. brought new duties to the
Illyrican legions. Lauriacum (mod. Lorch) presumably gained a military post (of the XV?) to
survey the Danubian valley and to protect access to the Enns River. The trans-mountain routes of
central Noricum also required surveillance. Detachments of VIII Augusta appear at
Magdalensburg and a miles of legio XV died at Rotterman close to the Enns River in the valley
between the crossing over the Niedere Tauern and the Pyhrn Pass.65 No doubt [[271]] the bellum
Pannonicum of 14-9 B.C. called the Apollinaris to more active service than guardposts in
Noricum, as did the great Pannonian revolt of 6-9 A.D., but no specific details of the XV’s deeds
survive.
The bellum Pannonicum (14-9 B.C.) probably also drew the legions away from the Aquileia
area to permanent bases in the then northern Illyricum, which in A.D. 8 or 9, at the end of the
Pannonian revolt, became the new province of Pannonia. The new province included the old
amber route between Aquileia and Carnuntum, hitherto part of Noricum.66 In August A.D. 14,
when the three Pannonian legions, XV Apollinaris, VIII Augusta, and IX Hispana, mutinied,
they were jointly encamped at an unknown site, although their permanent camps were elsewhere
(Tac. Ann. 1.16.2, 30.4). Debate has long raged over the location of the three camps. Poetovio,
Siscia, Sirmium,. Savaria, Emona, and Carnuntum all have advocates without decisive
epigraphical or archaeological evidence to settle the issue.67 For the Apollinaris this debate

62Ritterling, 1748; Wilkes (supra n.45), p.570; Mann, pp.31-33. Aquileia: I.Aquil. 2791-96, 2798 with Sasel Kos
(supra n.8), p.240.
63See Forni and Mann in supra n.3; Sasel (supra n.8), p.549 with n.14.
64See Appendix B.
65VIII Augusta: CIL III 4458; XV at Rottermann: CIL III 5636; H. Vetters, Lauriacum, ANRW, 1977, II.6, pp.355,
357; G. Alföldy, Noricum, tr. A. Birley, 1974 (London), p.66; G. Winkler, Noricum und Rome, ANRW 1977, II.6,
pp.198, 201. The gravestone at Lauriacum of A. Barbius Gratus, miles of legio XV (CIL III 3680), is dated to the
mid-first century; he cannot have served at the site under Augustus. The Barbii, an Aquileian family, probably had a
trading post at Lauriacum: see Alföldy, p.66 n.28. E. Swoboda, Carnuntum. Seine Geschichte und sein Denkmäler,
1964 (Graz), pp.235-36, dates Roman occupation of Noricum to 8 B.C.—a response to the rise of Maroboduus’
kingdom north of the Danube. A fragmentary tile of legion X or XV at Lentia (mod. Linz) will not support a view
that a detachment of the Apollinaris served there: see Genser, pp. 112, 119. Bricks of legio XV have also surfaced at
Wallsee near Lauriacum (Vetters, p.357), but they certainly cannot date before Claudius and probably not before 71:
C.M. Wells, Emona and Carnuntum: Evidence for the Start of Roman Occupation, Roman Frontier Studies 1967,
eds. E. Birley, B. Dobson, M. Jarrett, 1974 (Cardiff), p.186; B. Lörincz, I bolli laterizi militari in Pannonia. Risultati
delle recerche cronologiche, La Pannonia e l’Impero Romano, ed. G. Hajnóczi, 1995 (Milan), p.115.
66Wilkes (supra n.45), pp.554, 566; Winkler (supra n.65), p.202 (transfer of territory from Noricum in A.D. 6); cf.
on the date of the province of Pannonia, Ritterling, 1748 (A.D. 8 or 9); Swoboda (supra n.65), p.41 (A.D. 8); Móscy
(supra n.45), p.39 (A.D. 8); J. Fitz, Die Eroberung Pannoniens, ANRW, 1977, II.6, pp.447-49 (A.D. 9).
67Parker, p.125: Poetovio (VIII Aug.), Siscia, Sirmium (no legions specified); B. Saria, Emona als Standlager der
Legio XV Apollinaris, Laureae Aquincensis I, 1938, pp.245-55, esp. p.245: Poetovio (VIII Aug.), Siscia (IX Hisp.),
Emona (XV Apol.); Móscy (supra n.45), p.43 for A.D. 14/15: Poetovio (VIII Aug.), Siscia? (IX Hisp.), Carnuntum
(XV Apol.); Fitz (supra n.66), p.549: Poetovio (VIII Aug.), Siscia (IX Hisp.), Carnuntum (XV Apol.); Keppie
chiefly concerns Emona: was it a legionary base? was it that of the Apollinaris? when did Emona
become a colony—under Octavian during his Illyrican campaigns (35-33 B.C.) or later in A.D.
14? The strategic location of Emona, close to the Illyrico-Italian Gates at Karst leading north,
and a crossroads between Pannonia and Illyricum to the east and Italy and the Po River valley to
the west, suggests the site’s military desirability. A Roman fort, known from pre-World War I
excavations, existed there at some point.68 Emona may indeed have been one of the areas in
which veterans were being assigned poor marshy lands upon discharge—a cause of the mutiny in
A.D. 14.69 Further, the absence of any reference both to Emona in Tacitus’ account of the
mutiny and to a legion in a building inscription dated between 19 August 14 and spring 15
(ILJug 303) suggests that the site had not been a legionary base in the years immediately before
14. The case for Emona as the Apollinaris’ base—at least in 14— must be abandoned, although
the date of the town’s rise to colonial status remains obscure.70
If Emona is now eliminated as the Apollinaris’ base under Augustus, the date of its move to
Carnuntum, its post until 63, is equally obscure and controversial. Carnuntum, where the old
amber route from the north crossed the Danube, was to have been Tiberius’ base for his prong of
the massive offensive against Maroboduus in Bohemia in A.D. 6. Winter quarters [[272]] had
been built there, but the great revolt in Pannonia halted the Roman plans. Inclusion of legio XV
in Tiberius’ expeditionary force can be reasonably conjectured.71 Dates for the XV’s move to
Carnuntum range from 15 B.C. to A.D. 50; the motive for the move is also not explicitly
attested.72 Fitz argues cogently that the Apollinaris must have already been at Carnuntum by
A.D. 9; otherwise the annexation of the amber route from Noricum to Pannonia makes little
strategic sense, for the Roman terminus of the route at Carnuntum would have been left
unoccupied. On this view, surveillance of Maroboduus supplies the motive.73 Other views posit
either A.D. 14, on the false assumption that the XV had been at Emona and that the Emona
building inscription of 14/15 proves its departure, or the period 17-19, partly based on the
changes across the Danube (the end of Maroboduus, the rise of Vannius’ realm), that required
Roman observation, and partly on the false view that a Tiberian level at the later legionary fort at

(supra n.8), p.153: Poetovio, Siscia, Emona; cf. p.169 for Emona as the site of the mutiny in A.D. 14; Sasel Kos
(supra n.8), pp.236-37, 243: Poetovio (VIII Aug.), Sirmium (IX Hisp.), Siscia (XV Apol.); the mutiny of A.D. 14 at
Siscia, following, J. Sasel, Siscia, RE Suppl. XIV, 1974, 734; Wilkes (supra n.45), p.570: Poetovio (VII Aug.),
Siscia (? IX Hisp.), Emona (? XV Apol.). G.D. Tully, The STRATARXHS of Legio VI Ferrata and the Employment
of Camp Prefects as Vexillation Commanders, ZPE CXX, 1998, p.230, erroneously believes that Pannonia was a
war-zone in A.D. 14.
68Strategic location: J. Sasel, Emona, RE Suppl. XI, 1968, 541; fort: Saria (supra n.67), p.252; Wells (supra n.65),
pp.268-71.
69Tac. Ann. 1.17.3-4; J.J. Wilkes, A Note on the Mutiny of the Pannonian Legions in A.D. 14, CQ N.S. XIII, 1963,
pp.268-71.
70The case for Emona as the XV’s base: Saria (supra n.67), pp.245-55; questioned by Wells (supra n.65), pp.185-
87; Sasel (supra n.8), pp.562-63; extensive bibliography on the issue at Sasel Kos (supra n.8), pp.227-28 with nn.3,
5, 7-8, who (pp.237-44) demolishes most of Saria’s arguments, though admitting the presence of a fort there at one
time. See also Genser, p.628 with n.342. Sasel Kos has not convinced Keppie: The Changing Face of the Roman
Legions (49 BC-AD 69), PBSR LXV, 1997, p.93. On the colonia Iulia Emona (Plin. HN 3.147) see also Keppie
(supra n.48), pp.77-78, (supra n.10), p.209; Mann, pp.3, 9, 31.
71Vell.Pat. 2.109.5-110.2; cf. Plin. HN 4.80; H. Stiglitz, in H. Stiglitz, M. Kandler, W. Jobst, Carnuntum, ANRW,
1977, II.6, pp.587-88.
72Surveys of views in Genser, p.629; D. Gabler, Zum Anfangsdatum des römischen Carnuntum, Mitt. Gesell.
Freunde Carnuntum, III, 1981, pp.2-6; cf. Sasel Kos (supra n.8), p.243. For 50 A.D.: Parker, p.132.
73Fitz (supra n.67), pp.549-50, arguing in part from Tac. Ann. 2.63.3; cf. Móscy (supra n.45), p.40. Germans were
certainly in the area: see K. Elschek, Die germanische Besiedlung von Brastislava-Dúbravka während der älteren
römischen Kaiserzeit, Kelten, Germanen, Römer im Mitteldonaugebiet vom Ausklang der Latène-Zivilisation bis
zum 2. Jahrhundert, 1995 (Brno-Nitra), pp.39-52.
Carnuntum was archaeologically attested.74 But the year 50 is surely too late for the initial move
to Carnuntum, despite Tacitus’ explicit reference (Ann. 12.29.2) that the Pannonian governor
Sex. Palpellius Hister moved a legion (probably the Apollinaris) and auxilia to the Danubian
banks in response to German unrest at the time of Vannius’ fall, for a classis Pannonica was
already operating on the Danube at that time (Ann. 12.30.2)75 and fleets require bases on land.
Besides, the 30s witnessed a general move to the Danubian bank all along that river.76
As the stone legionary fort at Carnuntum is now known to be Trajanic and little proof exists
for an earth-timber fort there before Claudius’ reign,77 attention may be directed at the wrong
site: the original camp of Carnuntum may differ from the later legionary fortress, just as is the
case for Vetera I and II on the lower Rhine. The occurrence of some late Augustan pottery at
Devin, north of the Danube on the eastern bank of the Marus River at its confluence with the
Danube (about 10 km downstream from the later legionary site of Carnuntum), could indicate the
proximity of Tiberius’ Carnuntum camp in A.D. 6.78 Most attractive, however, is the affirmation
that in the La Tène period the old amber route from the north crossed the Danube at the eastern
end of the Bratislavaer Tor, the area of Gerulata-Rusovce (not the western ford opposite
Hainburg). Some evidence also suggests that an earlier earth-timber fort may lie below the
Flavian auxiliary fort at Gerulata. On this view the Romans preferred the Petronell-Bad-Deutsch
site (west of the Hainburg ford) for the permanent legionary site, [[273]] because this area was
less subject to flooding.79 Thus the Carnuntum of Tiberius in A.D. 6 probably lay in the area of
Gerulata, the traditional crossing of the Danube.
If so—and much remains uncertain—the XV Apollinaris moved to the Petronell-Bad-
Deutsch area only under Claudius and probably in connection with the minor crisis that marked
the end of Vannius’ rule ca 50, since Tacitus implies (Ann.12.29.2) that Palpellius Hister’s move
to the Danube bank was a new development. But the novelty may only be the move to Petronell,
not the move to the Danube. Of course the ford at Carnuntum/Gerulata may have been covered
by a vexillatio of the Apollinaris or an auxiliary unit; before ca 50 the main camp of the XV may
have been elsewhere.
Probably under Tiberius, Scarbantia, the next station south of Carnuntum on the amber route,
became a veteran colony, and Savaria, the next station south after Scarbantia on the same
highway, gained colonial status under Claudius. Both sites attracted veterans of legio XV.80

74Ritterling, 1748-49; Saria (supra n.67), p.254; Swoboda (supra n.65), pp.35-38; H. Stiglitz, Carnuntum, RE
Suppl. XII, 1970, 1576; V2, p.7. See also M. Grünewald, Zur Frühzeit des römischen Carnuntum, AAWW CXVI,
1979, 2-8 for 35-40, followed by H. Stiglitz and S. Jilik, Das Auxiliarkastell von Carnuntum: Bericht über die
Grabungen 1977-1988, Das Auxiliarkastell Carnuntum 1: Forschungen 1977-1988, ed. H. Stiglitz, 1997 (Vienna),
p.72.
75Cf. C.G. Starr, The Roman Imperial Navy 31 B.C.-A.D. 3243, 1993 (Chicago), p.139.
76Gabler (supra n.72), pp.18-22; for Danubian developments in the 30s see also R. Werner, Tiberius and the
Continuation of Augustan Policy on the Moesian Limes, in Winkes (supra n.40), pp.163-68; M. Mirkovic, The Iron
Gates (Derdap) and the Roman Policy on the Moesian Limes AD 33-117, Roman Limes on the Middle and Lower
Danube, 1996 (Belgrade), pp.27-40.
77Wells (supra n.65), pp.187-88; Kandler, in Stiglitz et al. (supra n.71), p.659; M. Vetters, in M. Kandler and H.
Vetters, Der römische Limes in Österreich. Ein Führer, 1986 (Vienna), p.24-25; Genser, pp.647-50, 664; Wilkes
(supra n.45), p.570.
78Wells (supra n.65), pp.188-89; Gabler (supra n.72), pp.6-16.
79M. Picklerová, Gerulata und seine Rolle im Bratislavaer Tor, ArchRozhledy XXXVIII, 1986, 435-38; cf. her Die
Stellung Gerulatas zu Carnuntum, Akten des 14. Internationalen Limeskongresses 1986 in Carnuntum, eds. H.
Vetters and M. Kandler, 1990 (Vienna), pp.657-66.
80Scarbantia: RIU 162, 185, 192, 194, 197, 213; Keppie (supra n.48), p.78 with n.10, (supra n.70), p.93; Mann,
p.32; Stiglitz, in Stiglitz et al., (supra n.71), p.589; Swoboda (supra n.65), p.41; Savaria: RIU 32, 56, 145, 146, 149;
Stiglitz, p.589; Mócsy (supra n.45), pp.76-77.
Either site may have housed the Apollinaris before becoming a colony, although at least some
veterans at these sites could represent only detachments of the XV: they settled where they
served.81 Some Apollinaris veterans at Savaria, however, preferred Carnuntum to the colony and
resettled at the legionary site, as their gravestones attest. Whether this really indicates that
Carnuntum at that point was already a significant settlement—dating more precisely than “under
Claudius or Nero” is impossible—or that these veterans missed former comrades-in-arms, found
the frontier more exciting, or disliked farming can be debated.82 In any case, Carnuntum
apparently had a flourishing slave trade: an Apollinaris veteran at Savaria had six liberti; a
female slave called Carnuntina is also known.83
The present state of the evidence precludes more precision about the date and motive for the
XV’s move to Carnuntum/Petronell. Tacitus’ reference to Palpellius Hister’s move to the
Danube sub anno 50 and the fragment of a Claudian building inscription (V2 324) remain the
only secure dates for the XV’s arrival there, even though the stone is now lost and its Fundort is
problematic. Likewise the thirty-nine gravestones of quintadecimani, most from along the so-
called Gräberstraße leading southwest from the Petronell legionary camp, provide no useful
dating criteria, despite assertion to the contrary and the relative dating of some to the first half of
the first century or the mid-first century.84 But any building [[274]] completed in 53/54 surely
began earlier and Tacitus’ date of 50 can be pushed back by at least a year.
Tacitus’ annalistic technique in the Annales is a chronological nightmare. Events of militiae
interrupt the annals of domi and often required summarizing many years’ events under a single
year.85 Under the year 50 Tacitus inserts an excursus on militiae at Ann. 12.27.2-40. The end of
Vannius’ kingdom at Ann. 12.29 is sandwiched between the German campaign of P. Calvisius
Sabinus Pomponius Secundus, governor of Germania Superior (12.27.2-28), and the British
events of P. Postorius Scapula (12.12.31-40). Pomponius’ campaign began in 49 and Ostorius’
activities range from 48-51.86 Further, Tacitus notes Vannius’ end coming after thirty years of
rule (12.29.3). Drusus confirmed him in power in 19 (Ann. 2.63.6), so, if the reference to thirty
years is taken literally, Palpellius Hister’s move to the Danube (12.29.2) should belong to 49, not

81Colonies as former camps: Forni, Reclutamento (supra n.3), pp.40-41; Mann, p.32.
82A. Alföldi, Jr., Zur Entstehung der Colonia Claudia Savaria, Arch.Ertesitö III.4, 1943, pp.80-86, followed by
Móscy (supra n.45), p.77; Stiglitz, in Stiglitz et al. (supra n.71), p.589; Mann, p.32; but contra Alföldi, cf. Forni,
Reclutamento (supra n.3), p.39 n.3. Stiglitz’s attempt to create a relative chronology between Carnuntum and
Savaria is unwarranted, given the uncertainty of precisely when Carnuntum/Petronell became a legionary base and
when Savaria gained colonial rank. Only two Apollinaris veterans at Savaria (RIU 145, 149) claim to be deducti,
which may indicate they were original members of the colony, but their post at the time of their discharge need not
have been Carnuntum/Petronell.
83RIU 146; Mócsy (supra n.45), p.77. There was a lively trade with Germans north of the Danube: see L.F. Pitts,
Relations between Rome and the German ‘Kings’ on the Middle Danube in the First to Fourth Centuries A.D., JRS
LXXIX, 1989, p.48 with n.22.
84Building inscription: Genser, p.647; gravestones: Genser, p.629-30 with a list at p.630 n.360, citing thirty-four for
the first half of the first century and five for the mid-first century; to this list now add AE 1988.930, 1992.1403.
Vorbeck (V2 p.7) believes the gravestones can push back the date of the XV’s arrival to long before 50, but a recent
attempt to date AE 1982.772 more closely on the basis of gravestone types at Carnuntum can do no better than the
40s or 50s: see H. Zabehlicky, Der Grabstein eines Soldaten der XV. Legion aus Carnuntum und sein Typ, in Weber
and Dobesch (supra n.8), pp.677-85. A new gravestone of an ignotus of the XV, found beneath one of the oldest
streets of the auxiliary fort and dated by letter forms (unclosed rounding of “P”) to the mid-first century at latest, has
just been published by Stiglitz (1997, supra n.74), p.140: [---]/ [---]/ Vol(tinia)/ R(eis)/ mil(es)/ X(V A)p(ollinaris)/
an(norum) XXXV/ stip(endiorum) XVI/ h.s.e./ h.p.
85Cf. E.L. Wheeler, The Chronology of Corbulo in Armenia, Klio LXXIX, 1997, pp.383-97, esp. 388-89.
86Pomponius: W. Eck, Die Statthalter der germanischen Provinzen vom 1.-3. Jahrhundert, 1985 (Cologne), pp.20-
21 with n.8; Ostorius: A.R. Birley, The Fasti of Roman Britain, 1981 (Oxford), p.43.
50. Only the final settlement, the division of Vannius’ kingdom between his nephews, probably
occurred in 50.
Thus (with some probability) the XV Apollinaris took up its station at Carnuntum/Petronell
in 49. Its likely commander and first known legate was M. Iulius Romulus, a favorite of
Claudius, who had adlected him to tribunus plebis the previous year. In the ranks of the
Apollinaris was P. Clodius Quirinalis, whose son P. Palpellius Clodius Quirinalis, later
apparently adopted by a relative of the Pannonian governor Sex. Palpellius Hister (cos. suf. 43),
would rise to prefect of the Ravennan fleet under Nero.87 But the move to Carnuntum brought
changes at the top. The building inscription of 53/54 (V2 324) shows L. Gellius Publicola
Vissantus Gallus as the governor and the Apollinaris’ legate is now the notable Q. Iulius
Cordinus Rutilius Gallicus, who had previous Pannonian experience as tribune of XIII Gemina at
Poetovio just a few years before. Gallicus’ post can be dated 52-54. After a praetorship, probably
in 55, he would be off to the East as legatus Galatiae during a Parthian war.88
The specific evidence for the Apollinaris’ first Balkan tour breaks off at this point. The next
twelve or thirteen years lie in obscurity except for the gravestones of quintadecimani at
Carnuntum. Exceptions are a gravestone of a centurion of the XV, C. Atius, at Vindobona, dated
to the mid-first century, and a possible brick of the Apollinaris. Speculation, however, that a
detachment of the XV built an earthen camp there has not found archaeological confirmation.89
On the other hand, a site significant enough to receive a legionary camp under Trajan might have
already attracted Roman attention a half-century earlier.

The next phase of the Apollinaris’ history, its first eastern tour 63-71, attests the Danube-
Euphrates strategic nexus. Like the V Macedonica summoned from Troesmis in Moesia to join
Caesennius Paetus’ army for the 62 campaign in Armenia, the XV headed an expeditionary force
including other Danubian vexillationes for Domitius Corbulo’s operations [[275]] of 63. A.
Marius Celsus, the XV’s legate and soon a rising star of the early Flavian era, no doubt
commanded the Danubian expeditionary corps.90 Corbulo concentrated his army at Melitene in

87Romulus: DGCN 237; PIR 2 I 523; H.G. Pflaum, La chronologie de L. Caesennius Sospes, Historia II, 1953-54,
p.446-50; Franke no. 104, who believes Romulus, a Narbonesian, was the first provincial to be a legatus legionis;
Clodius Quirinalis: Inscr.Ital. X.4 43 (CIL V 540); Palpellius Clodius Quirinalis: Dobson no. 62; PME P 9. Sex.
Petricius, perhaps the earliest attested eques of the XV, may have also served at this time: AE 1988.930.
88Rutilius Gallicus: Rémy no. 203; Franke no. 105. On one view he was a praetorian governor of Galatia: M. Heil,
Die orientalische Aussenpolitik des Kaisers Nero, 1997 (Munich), pp.205-207.
89CIL III 4570, p.232840; Genser, pp.444, 502-503, 518; cf. Ritterling, 1750, 1753; A. Neumann, Vindobona, RE,
Reihe 2, IX.A.1, 1961, 60, 62; K. Strobel, Zur Dislozierung der römischen Legionen in Pannonien zwischen 89 und
118 n. Chr., Tyche III, 1988, p.211 with n.122, who disputes Ritterling’s restorations of the brick stamp. Cf. also
Lörincz’s contention (supra n.65, p.115) that no bricks of the XV antedate 71.
90V Mac.: Tac. Ann. 15.6.3, 9.2, 26.2; XV Apol.: Tac. Ann. 15.25.3, 26.2; Ritterling, 1750; Saxer no. 11; Webster
(supra n.26, p.132) erroneously dates the transfer to 60; Marius Celsus: Franke no.106; Dabrowa no. 73, though
(contrary to Franke, Dabrowa, and Heil [supra n.88, p.39]) Marius, who is not known to have written anything, need
not be the Celsus tacticus of Lyd. Mag. 3.33—a point to be pursued elsewhere. More significantly, Heil (pp.117-20,
220) would revise the chronology: the XV’s move from Carnuntum to Cappadocian Melitene would date to 63 and
Corbulo’s campaign to 64. The argument rests on the peculiar placement of Cassius Dio’s summary of Nero’s
Armenian-Parthian war in 64 after the great fire at Rome (62.19-23.4) and the supposed impossibility of the
Apollinaris traversing the distance from Carnuntum to Melitene between Nero’s receiving news of Paetus’ defeat
(late 62) and spring 63 (Tac. Ann. 15.24.1), the opening of Corbulo’s campaign. But Dio apparently (Xiphillinus’
excerpts are the intermediary) pegged his summary on when the news of Corbulo’s last Armenian campaign reached
Rome (62.19.1). Tacitus firmly assigns Corbulo’s campaign to 63 (Ann. 15.23-32: C. Memmius Regulus and L.
Verginius Rufus coss.), though the campaign need not have begun in the spring. The campaign season in Armenia
would not begin until about May in any event (Wheeler, supra n.85, p.395) and the various negotiations with the
Parthian may have extended into 64. Heil’s Sachkritik on the XV’s lack of speed is hardly decisive. Orders to
Cappadocia, the base of XII Fulminata from 70 on, and invaded Armenia via the Tomisa
crossing, Lucullus’ route in 69 B.C.91 Tacitus’ vague account (Ann.15.27) leaves no hope of
recovering the Apollinaris’ role in the campaign, which soon produced negotiations. Roman
troops remained in the western Arsanias River valley of Armenian Sophene until at least October
65; withdrawal of all Roman units from Armenia is not explicitly attested as part of the Rhandeia
agreeement of 63, as it had been in the terms of 62.92 Possibly legio XV had its first experience
with Satala in the period 64-66, the site that would become its permanent base from Hadrian on.
Satala first became important during Corbulo’s initial Armenian campagin 55-58 as the
immediate base for communications with his supply line from Trapezus on the Black Sea.93
By 66 Nero’s plans for expeditions against the Albani, the Eithiopians, and perhaps (as some
believe)94 even the Parthians were underway.95 The Apollinaris was dispatched [[276]] probably
in summer 66 to Alexandria, where it was to await vexillationes from the German armies.96 Its
legate is unknown, for Marius Celsus, the XV’s commander in 63, was probably long gone. He
resurfaces at Rome in January 69 as a supporter of Galba but enough of a political survivor to be
suffect consul in July-August of that year. But the quintadecimani would recognize a familiar
face in Alexandria: Ti. Iulius Alexander, on Corbulo’s staff in 63-64, became prefect of Egypt in
66.97

Marius Celsus to transfer the Apollinaris to the Euphrates could have come much earlier than Tacitus (Ann. 15.25.3)
implies. In any case, there is no cause to prolong the XV’s stay at Carnuntum beyond spring 63. Heil’s belief (p.111
n.50) that V Macedonica failed to arrive in time for Paetus’ 62 campaign (Tac. Ann 15.26.2) because of a special
mission in Pontus (rather than the traditional view of the poor road system in Asia Minor at that time) is fanciful.
91Tac. Ann. 15.26.2, 27.1; Tomisa: Wheeler (supra n.6), p.506 with n.7; M. Salvini, Le testimonianze storische
urartu sulle regioni del Eufrate MELITHNH, KOMMAGHNH, SOFHNH, TOMISA, PP XXVII, 1972, pp.100-11.
92III Gallica at Elazig (Kharput) 13 October 64-12 October 65: CIL III 6741-42a; agreement of Rhandeia: Tac. Ann.
15.17.3; cf. 15.28-32; Dio 62.23.1-4, 63.6.6. Heil (supra n.88, pp.121-41) castigates all who apeak of a “treaty of
Rhandeia,” but his literalist interpretation of Roman-Parthian relations between the reigns of Nero and Trajan hardly
convinces that no agreement with future guidelines existed. On the problem of Sophene, see Wheeler (supra n.6),
p.506, and Sophene 189 B.C.-A.D. 299: Southwestern Armenia as a Roman Frontier, in Historic Armenian Cities
and Provinces, ed. R.G. Hovannisian, forthcoming.
93Heil (supra n.88, p.192 n.48) assumes the Apollinaris spent 64-66 encamped at Melitene, but for Corbulo to keep
his army of 63 concentrated would have been a logistical nightmare. Not even Syrian Antioch could support large
forces for lengthy periods: see Wheeler (supra n.52), pp.231, 251; Satala and Corbulo: Wheeler (supra n.85),
pp.395-96.
94There is no basis for Saxer’s conjecture (no. 12=Jos. BJ 2.50) that a vexillatio of the XV participated in Cestius
Gallus’ disastrous efforts to put down the Jewish revolt in 66; Saxer assumes the Apollinaris belonged to the Syrian
army, but the XV along with the V Macedonica and probably one other legion remained under Corbulo’s command.
Heil (supra n.88, pp.169-70) believes that Dio’s report at 63.8.1 must be taken seriously: Nero planned a new
Parthian war. But it is preferable to take the passage as another contrivance of an anti-Neronian Tendenz in the
sources.
95On Nero’s Eithiopian and Caucasian expeditions, contrast the extravagant speculations of W. Schur, Die
Orientpolitik des Kaisers Nero, 1923 (Leipzig), pp.39-114, with the literalist reductionism of Heil (supra n.88),
pp.142-200. Neither is convincing. Troop transfers indicate that something big was afoot, even if details of the real
goals have become victims of the sources’ anti-Neronian Tendenz. Flavian interest in Transcaucasia suggests
legitimate strategic goals there, which had nothing to do with the Alans. See blbliography at Wheeler (supra n.85),
p.387 n.16, and idem, Methodological Limits and the Mirage of Roman Strategy, J.Milit.Hist. LVII, 1993, pp.31-33.
A detailed reply to Heil must be reserved for another venue.
96Alexandria: Jos. BJ 3.8; Tac. Hist. 1.31.3. Heil (supra n.88, p.167) puts the XV’s departure for Egypt at about the
same time as Corbulo’s suicide, which he dates (p.128) at the end of 66 or beginning of 67, although elsewhere
(p.192) he puts the departure in summer or fall of 66. Heil rightly (p.167 n.47) rejects Ritterling’s suggestion (1750)
that the XV went to Alexandria for transport by sea back to Pannonia.
97Tac. Hist. 1.77.2; Dabrowa (supra n.90), p.63 with n.617; Iulius Alexander: PIR 2 I 139; Heil (supra n.88), pp.53-
54.
 The XV Apollinaris spent the winter of 66-67 in Alexandria—its first but not its last
Egyptian service. An Alexandrian coin of 68 with a griffin on the obverse might actually
commemorate its presence. But plans for an Eithiopian campaign evaporated in the dust of
Cestius Gallus’ disastrous failure to squash the Jewish revolt in fall 66. Nero in early 67
appointed Vespasian to command the Judaean theater and Vespasian immediately sent his son
Titus to take command of the XV at Alexandria.98 By spring 67 the XV joined its old Armenian
comrades V Macedonica and X Fretensis at Phoenician Ptolemais. It received little respite from
its long march. Vespasian soon invaded Galilee and easily captured Gabara. Josephus’ detailed
description of Vespasian’s agmen almost certainly includes the XV Apollinaris.99 The next rebel
nut was harder to crack. The stronghold at Iotapata withstood a siege of forty-seven days (8
June?-20 July 67), before the XV led by Titus and a tribune Domitius Sabinus launched a
surprise assault at dawn that decided the issue.100 On 23 July Vespasian’s army departed
Iotapata: V Macedonica and X Fretensis to Caesarea and XV Apollinaris to Scythopolis for
twenty days’ rest.101 Subsequently Titus reconcentrated all three legions at Scythopolis for new
operations (Jos. BJ 3.409-13, 444, 446-47), but for the battles at Tarichaeae and Lake
Gennesareth Josephus chooses to focus on Titus’ personal heroics, which no doubt involved—
although tacitly—the legio XV (BJ 3.462-71, 485-505, 522-31).
By now it was late September (Jos. BJ 3.542) and one more operation remained—Gamela, a
stout stronghold east of Lake Gennesareth and already under siege by Agrippa for seven months.
Vespasian occupied the heights west of the town and the XV erected an assault ramp opposite
the city’s highest tower (BJ 4.10-13). An assault entered [[277]] the city, but intensive street-
fighting and battles on collapsing roof-tops doomed the Roman efforts (4.17-29). The siege
dragged on for nearly another month, until three quintadecimani in the early morning of 9
November successfully undermined a projecting tower opposite their position causing its
collapse. The next day Titus, absent during the earlier assault, now led a picked force that gained
entry to the town; Vespasian ordered a general assault, and the slaughter was on (Jos. BJ 4.63-
81). Vespasian then sent X Fretensis into winter quarters at Scythopolis, while he accompanied
the Apollinaris and V Macedonica to Caesarea. The long year of 67, which had begun for the
legio XV in Alexandria, was finally over. Notably, however, Josephus’ account of the 67
campaign provides the most detailed narrative of the XV Apollinaris in combat operations that
has survived.
All sight of the XV in Vespasian’s rather limited conduct of the Jewish War in 68-69 is lost,
until 3 July 69 when the Apollinaris with the other two Judaean legions swore allegiance to
Vespasian as emperor. Although Titus was not with the XV on 3 July—throughout the period

98Jos. BJ 3.8, 64-65; cf. Suet. Titus 4.3; Franke no. 107; coin: supra nn.38, 44. Parker (p.138, 139) erroneously
believes V Macedonica and X Fretensis had been in Alexandria. A view, going back to Mommsen and revived by
B.W. Jones (Which Alexandria? Athenaeum LXII, 1984, 281-85), that legio XV spent the winter of 66-67 at
Alexandria-ad-Issum, has been properly rejected many times: Schur (supra n.95), pp.99-100; L. Keppie, Legions in
the East from Augustus to Trajan, The Defense of the Roman and Byzantine East, eds. P. Freeman and D. Kennedy,
1986 (Oxford), p.418; Heil (supra n.88), p.167 n.95 (though unaware of Jones and Keppie).
99Jos. BJ 3.115, 132-34; agmen: BJ 3.116-26; cf. BJ 5.47-49; Arr. Acies 1-11. It is noteworthy that the two most
detailed descriptions of an agmen in the Imperial period, those of Josephus and Arrian, both concern the Apollinaris.
100Jos. BJ 3.141-339; surprise attack: 3.32-34; Domitius Sabinus: PIR 2 D 163; PME D 32; on the operations and
recent excavations, see M. Gichon, Sallies from Iotapata and their Designation as LhstrikÆ (LESTRIKE),
Homenaje a Jose M. Blásquez, eds. J. Mangas and J. Alvar, 1996 (Madrid), III, pp.75-86; D. Adan-Bayewitz and M.
Aviam, Iotapata, Josephus, and the Siege of 67: Preliminary Report on the 1992-94 Seasons, JRA X, 1997, 131-65.
101Jos. BJ 4.87-88. Cf. E. Mary Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule: From Pompey to Diocletian, 1976
(Leiden), p.309 with n.62, who has the XV spend the winter 67-68 at Scythopolis, but this view ignores the second
half of the 67 campaign season and derives from taking xeimer€sonta at BJ 3.412 literally, when a metaphorical
meaning is evident. The same error in Ritterling, 1751.
68-69 he was away on various special assignments—there can be little doubt of its loyalty to the
Flavian cause.102 Vespasian soon dispatched from Antioch Licinius Mucianus with VI Ferrata
and 13,000 additional vexilliarii—probably ca 2,000 from the XV, some of whom earned
promotion to elite units at Rome.103 After Vespasian’s departure to consolidate his position in
Egypt, Titus succeeded to command of the Jewish War and the legate of the Apollinaris became
M. Tittius Frugi, perhaps previously no more than a tribunus laticlavus but a close friend of
Titus.104 Late in 69, however, a new problem arose in the eastern Euxine, where Anicetus, a
libertus of Polemon II of Pontus and former commander of Polemon’s fleet, was wrecking havoc
in the name of Vitellius: Trapezus had been raided, a Roman cohort formerly in Polemon’s
service had been cut up, and some Colchian tribes, inclined to piracy, profited from Mucianus’
dispatch of the fleet to Byzantium. Vespasian sent an expeditionary force composed of legionary
vexillationes under the otherwise unknown but militarily experienced Virdius Geminus, who
chased down Anicetus at the Chobus River (half-way between Phasis and Sebastopolis). There is
speculation that quintadecimani served in this campaign. If so, it was the XV’s introduction to
the Colchian coast, which other vexillationes of this legion would come to know well in the next
century.105
To complete the Jewish War, the capture of Jerusalem remained, a task for which Titus set
out in spring of 70 and finished only at the end of September. The Apollinaris participated in the
campaign (Tac. Hist. 5.1.2; Jos. BJ 5.41), but only episodic glimpses of its performance are
recorded in Josephus: its initial camp with the V Macedonica at Scopus (5.67), its ram that shook
a tower of the first Jerusalem city wall (5.282), the tribune Domitius Sabinus’ heroics, as earlier
at Iotapata, in the capture of the second city wall (5.340), the XV’s ramp against the third wall at
John the High Priest’s tomb (5.468; cf. 5.259), and Tittius Frugi’s presence at the council of war
on the fate of the Temple (6.237).106
After the destruction of Jerusalem, the Apollinaris and V Macedonica accompanied Titus
with the spoils and prisoners to first Caesarea on the coast (Jos., BJ 7.19-20), then Caesarea
Phillipi (7.23-24), Berytus (7.96), Antioch (7.100), Zeugma for meeting with a Parthian embassy
(7.105), back to Antioch, and finally to Alexandria via Jerusalem (7.111-12). At Alexandria
Titus shipped off the Apollinaris and V Macedonica to their old bases on the Danube, then sailed
off to Rome himself, probably in the company of Tittius Frugi, destined [[278]] for a suffect
consulship in 80. It was by this time the early summer of 71.107 The first chapter of the legio
XV’s history in the East was over. A new tour at Carnuntum was about to begin under the new

102Tac. Hist. 2.79; Titus’ absences summarized in Franke, pp.253-54; XV and the Flavian cause: Nicols in supra
n.46. It is tempting to assign the soldiers’ opinions of Jos. BJ 4.592-601, if not literary invention, to the
quintadecimani.
103See supra nn.46-47.
104Tac. Hist. 2.82.3; Jos. BJ 4.656-5.1; Frugi: PIR T 208; Franke no. 108; Nicols (supra n.46), p.105
105Tac. Hist. 3.47-48; Saxer, pp.20-22 (no. 35). The Anicetus affair is misdated 68-69 and exaggerated in D.
Braund, Georgia in Antiquity, 1994 (Oxford), pp.176-77. Vespasian in Alexandria received news of the Pontic
success and the battle of Cremona (November 69) at about the same time: Tac. Hist. 3.48.3.
106J.J. Price, Jerusalem under Siege: The Collapse of the Jewish State 60-70 C.E., 1992 (Leiden), is not helpful for
military details of the siege.
107Ritterling, 1751-52; Keppie (supra n.98), p.421; Parker (p.149) implies a return of the XV to Carnuntum in 70,
but he overlooks Jos. BJ 7.20, where Titus’ peregrinations are said to be the result of the winter season preventing a
return to Italy in 70. Frugi cos. suf.: CIL VI 2059. A dupondius of Claudius from the Antioch mint, countermarked
LXV, was found at Dura-Europos and probably derives from the Apollinaris’ first eastern tour: see A.R. Bellinger,
The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Final Report VI: The Coins, 1949 (New Haven), p.149 no.1604c; cf. p.203.
legate, Sex. Sentius Caecilianus, who probably took command of the legion in Alexandria and
supervised the move to the Danube.108

The Apollinaris’ return to Carnuntum coincided with an infusion of new manpower from
both the West and the East. Some veterans of the disbanded Vitellian legions were inserted in the
XV’s ranks: five with an origo of Cologne have gravestones at Carnuntum.109 In contrast,
thirteen stones of quintadecimani with eastern origines occur. Three of these may reflect normal
recruiting areas,110 but ten are Syrian and correspond to cities explicitly attested or probably
visited during Titus’ travels in 70-71.111 Almost certainly the twenty-five-year-old M. Antonius
Lentinus from Antioch, dead at Carnuntum after only three stipendia, entered the XV in 70/71 or
not much earlier (V2 157).
The XV’s new eastern recruits (on the traditional view) would have brought with them an
oriental religion. C. Sacidius Barbarus, a centurion, set up an altar at Carnuntum to Mithra—the
earliest evidence for Mithraism on the Danube. Dates for the altar range from the 70s or 80s to
ca 100.112 Some would take the case further. The gravestone (end of the first century) of C.
Caecilius Celer at Carnuntum, a quintadecimus, bears an elaborate relief of a snake in the center
of a large wreathe with four male busts at each of the corners—taken as [[279]] representations
of the gods of the four winds. The relief is thought to reflect Mithraic symbolism. Similarly the
Carnuntine gravesteone of C. Pedusius, a veteran of the Apollinaris, dated to the first half of the
first century, displays a half-moon and stars—also possibly Mithraic symbolism.113 Western
Pannonian urban dwellers seem to have delighted in oriental cults. Worship of Egyptian gods,
introduced via Aquileia, flourished at Savaria. The earliest Danubian evidence for the cult of
108See Franke no. 26, p.51. Various transfers from V Macedonica to XV Apollinaris probably also occurred between
the fall of Jerusalem and the departure from Alexandria: the decorated centurion L. Lepidus Proculus (CIL X 390,
391 with Ritterling, 1751 n.*) and the ignotus trib.mil. of CIL XI 4789 (cf. PME Inc. 204); cf. also the ignotus
trib.mil. of IIII Mac. and presumably V Mac. (CIL X 6442; cf. PME Inc. 183), but this one may be earlier.
109V2 162, 165, 176, 193, 218; Ritterling, 1752; Mann, pp.173-74 n.362.
110Pisidian Antioch: AE 1981.706 (V2186); Apri, Thrace: V2 183; Astypalaea?: V2 179.
111Antioch: V2 157, 204; Cyrrhus: 138, 158, 172; Berytus: 144, 202; Chalcis: 147; Hieropolis: 163 (Ieropolis), 192.
Cf. Móscy (supra n.45), p.155 with n.149 and Mann, p.41, both now out-of-date. Two additional recruits from
Heliopolis can be noted: M. Alfius Olympiacus, the aquilifer who set up the notable career inscription at Heliopolis
of C. Velius Rufus, ILS 9200 (IGLS VI 2796). Although Rufus’ inscription does not attest his service in legio XV,
clearly either Alfius Olympiacus and Rufus both once belonged to the XV and Rufus, promoted to primus pilus,
transferred to XII Fulminata, or Alfius transferred from the XII. The former solution seems more probable. See
Dobson no.94 and Maxfield and Visy in supra n.5. On Rufus’ career see K. Strobel, Zur Rekonstruktion der
Laufbahn des C. Velius Rufus, ZPE LXIV, 1986, 265-86, who does not address this issue.
112V2 143: ca 100; M.J. Vermasseren, Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum Religionis Mithraicae, 1956-60
(The Hague), II, p.223 no.1718; C.M. Daniels, The Role of the Roman Army in the Spread and Practice of
Mithraism, Mithraic Studies, ed. J.R. Hinnells, 1975 (Manchester), II, 250-51, who favors the 70s or 80s, or the the
period 105-114, but any date after 106 is impossible, as will be argued below. R. Beck, The Mysteries of Mithras: A
New Account of their Genesis, JRS LXXXVIII, 1998, p.118 with n.24, calls Sacidius’ text a “datable dedication.”
Stiglitz, in Stiglitz et al. (supra n.71, p.548) also asserts a Carnuntine cult of Mithra at the end of the first century.
Daniels’ contention (p.251) that the Carnuntine cult derives from the XV’s service in Armenia, as seen in Tiridates
I’s Mithra worship, is baseless. Tiridates I’s devotion to Mithra was Parthian Zoroastrianism; he had scarcely ruled
long enough in Armenia to absorb Armenian variants of the cult. For Armenian Zoroastrianism see J.R. Russell,
Zoroastrianism in Armenia, 1987 (Cambridge [Mass.]). Beck (pp.121-23) now posits a Commagenian origin for
Mithraism and dissemination on the Danube via the XV and V Macedonica. Possible contacts between the XV and
Commagenian units are possible at Ptolemais in 67 and the siege of Jerusalem in 70 (Jos. BJ 3.68, 5.460-65),
although Beck seems to think the XV and V participated in the annexation of Commagene in 72 (they did not) and
erroneously implies that the II Adiutrix (formed only in 70) had an eastern tour in this period.
113Sic Swoboda (supra n.65), p.193 with Tafel L.2 (photo of the stone), citing V2 164 (Caecilius) and V2 232
(Pedusius). Neither of these stones is included in Vermasseren’s corpus (supra n.112).
Jupiter Dolichenus also occurs at Poetovio under Antoninus Pius.114 Further, V Macedonica,
which returned from the East at the same time as the Apollinaris, left Mithraic monuments at
Troesmis, where it was stationed 71-162, and at Dacian Potaissa after 167, although the
monuments themselves are not precisely datable.115
Nevertheless, if Pedusius’ stars and half-moon are Mithraic, the XV did not introduce
Mithraism on the Danube after its first eastern tour: Pedusius’ Mithraic affectation would
antedate the XV’s departure for the East. It is also noteworthy that none of the soldiers identified
as eastern recruits (supra n.111) display Mithraic symbols on their gravestones. Nor are
Caecilius and Sacidius orientals. Caecilius from Sirmium died at age fifty-three after twenty-two
stipendia. If his stone dates ca 100, then he must have been an early recruit after the XV’s return
to Carnuntum in 71. Sacidius of unknown origo and stipendia probably was not an oriental, for
the name Sacidius—rather than indicating some wild Galatian or Cappadocian origin—is formed
from an Etruscan root with variants frequent in Italy; Saccidius/Sacidius is attesed at Ravenna,
Aquileia, Ateste, Verona—areas of northeastern Italy where the XV normally recruited.116
Perhaps the Apollinaris did bring a Mithraic cult to Carnuntum in 71, although, if it did, the
legion’s exposure to it would have been only in the period 63-66 during its tenure on the
Armenian border or, if Beck’s thesis be accepted, during the Jewish War (67-70) from contact
with Commagenian troops. In any case, the Mithraism at Carnuntum is not a proven result of the
XV’s first eastern tour.

When Sentius Caecilianus brought the Apollinaris back to its old base at Carnuntum, one of
its first tasks involved renovation of the legionary camp. But a building inscription shows
Caecilianus no longer legate of the XV by 73: the inscription (V2 325-26) names Q. Egnatius
Catus legate. A Carnuntum-North Africa nexus appears in operation in the 70s, for Sentius left
the Apollinaris to become legate of III Augusta, essentially governor of Numidia, 73/74, then
legate of both Mauretanias in 75. As legate of III Augusta, he coordinated efforts with Rutilius
Gallicus, a former legate of the XV, then proconsul of Africa, in redrawing the border between
the two provinces. Egnatius Catus likewise advanced to legate of III Augusta for 75/76-76/77.117
Few other legates of the second Carnuntum tour are known. Q. Fabius Postumius (cos.suf. 96),
once thought possible for the mid- or late 80s under Domitian, should probably be discounted.118
That leaves only C. Minicius Fundatus (cos.suf. 107), a [[280]] former tribune of XII Fulminata
in Cappadocia ca 90, as the only other known legate of the XV in its second Carnuntum period—
probably in the late 90s under Trajan.119

114See Móscy (supra n.45), pp.181, 255.

115Daniels (supra n.112), p.251.
116See W. Schulze, Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen, ed. O. Salomies, 1991 (Zürich), p.223 with n.6;
alleged Galatian or Cappadocian name: Daniels (supra n.112), p.251.
117Caecilianus: ILS 8969; Franke no.26; B. Thomasson, Sentius 8, RE Suppl. IX, 1962, 1368-69, and Laterculi
Praesidium, 1984 (Göteborg), I, 394, 409; Y. Le Bohec, La troisième legion Auguste, 1989 (Paris), pp.353, 355; W.
Eck, Senatoren von Vespasian bis Hadrian, 1970 (Munich), p.121 n.41; Rémy, p.250; Egnatius: Franke no.27; A.
Garzetti, Nerva, 1950 (Rome), pp.121-23. It is debated whether Cn. Domitius Afer Titius Marcellus Curucius Tullus
as legate of III Augusta belongs between Caecilianus and Egnatius or was Caecilianus’ predecessor: see Franke
no.25; Thomasson, Laterculi, p.394; Le Bohec, p.125; Eck, pp.115, 116 n.26, and Jahres- und Provinzialfasten der
senatorischen Statthalter von 69/70 bis 138/139, Chiron XII, 1982, pp.290-97.
118Ritterling, 1755; PIR 2 F 54; cf. Garzetti (supra n.117), pp.123-24. Franke (p.312) now argues that the two
fragments of CIL XIV 2933 (near Praeneste), combined to suggest Postumius as legate of the Apollinaris, refer to
two different people. Hence a new ignotus legate of legio XV. Cf. CIL IX 3008; Ritterling, 1755; Rémy, pp.261:
another ignotus as legate.
119Franke no. 109; Rémy, pp.264-65.
 The renovations of the legionary camp completed in 73 (V2 325-26) marked only the
beginning of the Apollinaris’ extensive building projects at Carnuntum. Another fragmentary
building inscription dated 76 is known and the dates of similar fragmentary texts extend through
the Flavians into Trajan’s reign, although by the late first century construction activities of X
Gemina also begin to appear. Conversion of the fort from earth and timber into stone began ca
100. The bath in the stone auxiliary fort at Carnuntum seems another product of the Apollinaris
or at least its bricks.120 Indeed construction and administrative activities characterize the
Apollinaris’ second tour at Carnuntum more than its military operations. Bricks and tiles of the
XV are found throughout the middle Danubian areas and even north of the river. If the stone fort
at Carnuntum may be assigned primarily to the XV’s work, the fort at Brigetio (discussed below)
was a joint venture with other vexillationes. The brick factory at Vienna/Hernals, ca 2 km west
of Vindobona, has yielded stamped bricks of the Apollinaris, suggesting its participation in
building the legionary fort at Vindobona. Six of eleven first-century bricks at Vindobona belong
to the Apollinaris and an altar of the XV to the Nymphs at Baden near Vienna may also date to
this period.121
Bricks of legio XV, however, also show connections with the area north of the Danube. Two
fragments of bricks have surfaced at the old La Tène ford at Gerulata-Rosovce. Two others in
secondary use are known from Bratislava Burgberg and Bratislava-Altstadt. Farther north at
Stupava have appeared 28 bricks of XV Apollinaris, 162 of XIV Gemina, 17 of X Gemina, and
269 other Roman bricks, some from private officina. To the east at Milanovce (mod. Velky Kyr),
some 30 km up the Nitra River from Brigetio, a single brick (in secondary or tertiary use) is
known and another Apollinaris brick (unpublished) occurs at Staré Mesto on the Marus River
over 100 km north of Carnuntum.122 Although some of these bricks appear in secondary or even
tertiary use and others lack a stratographical context, it is difficult to divorce them entirely from
the active Roman trade with Germans north of the Danube, especially the area immediately north
of Carnuntum. Indeed the funerary inscription of an Apollinaris centurion, Q. Atilus Primus, an
interpreter but also a businessman (negotiator), has been found built into the south wall of a
church at Boldog (just southwest of Cifer Pác, Slovakia), and dated to the second half of the first
century. Atilius was probably [[281]] related in some way to a family of amber-route traders, the

120V2 328-30, 337, 346-47; Stiglitz (1970, supra n.74), p.1576; Genser, p.664; H. Stiglitz, Auxiliarkastell
Carnuntum, CarnuntumJb 1986, 1987, pp.193-225; S. Jilek, Die Kleinfunde aus dem Auxiliarkastell von
Carnuntum, in Maxfield and Dobson (supra n.6), p.230. If the bath dates after 106, then the numerous bricks of the
XV used in its construction (nineteen types) belong to stockpiles left behind by the XV after its transfer from
Pannonia: sic Stiglitz and Jilik, in Stiglitz (1997, supra n.74), pp.41, 42, 44, 46, 73-74, although this view posits a
curious connection between construction of the bath and a new survey of all territory of Pannonia Superior after
creation of Pannonia Inferior in 106. X Gemina: V2 331-32.
121Altar: AE 1907.142; bricks: Vetters, in Kandler and Vetters (supra n.77), p.212; Genser, pp.502-503; Strobel
(supra n.89), p.211 with notes.
122Gerulata-Rosovce: T. Kolník et al., Doba rimska, Najstarsie dejiny Bratislavy, ed. T. Stefanovicová, 1993
(Bratislava), p.222; Bratislava Burgberg and Altstadt: Kolník et al., p.232; K. Elschek, Das “Bratislavaer Tor” im 2.
Jahrhundert, Marcomannenkriege: Ursachen und Wirkungen, 1994 (Brno), p.206; Stupava: T. Kolník, Zum Anteil
der Militäreinheiten beim Aufbau der sogenannten römischen Stationen im Mitteldanubischen Barbaricum, Roman
Frontier Studies 1995, eds. W. Groenmen-van Waateringe et al., 1997 (Oxford), p.421; cf. AE 1980.706, 1987.822c;
Genser, p.732; Milanovce: Kolník, pp.419, 421; Staré Mesto: T. Kolník, Römische Stationen in Slowakischen
Abschnitt der pannonischen Limesvorlandes, ArchRozhledy XXXVIII, 1986, p.426. Dr. Elschek informs me (per
litt.) that “secondary use” for the Bratislava bricks means medieval layers of the ninth-eleventh centuries. For an
attempt to date the bricks of X Gemina, XIII Gemina, and XIV Gemina at Stupava more precisely, see B. Lörincz,
Zu den Verbindungen zwischen Pannonien und Barbaricum: die Verbreitung and Datierung der Ziegelstempel, Klio
LXXII, 1989, pp.96-106, who argues (pp.99-100) that the XV’s bricks from Stupava and Milanovce have no known
Pannonian parallels and must date 97-118/119. His end date, as will be argued below, should be 106.
Atilii.123 His promotion from interprex to centurion is also peculiar, although Roman interpreters
for Germans and Dacians on the Danube, Germans on the lower Rhine, and Sarmatians in the
Black Sea area are also known.124 The interaction of the Apollinaris with barbarians north of the
Danube, which Atilius’ inscription suggests, probably also included supervision of various
civitates peregrinae. L. Volcacius Primus, praefectus of cohors I Noricorum at Arrabona in the
early Flavian era, also served as praefectus civitatis of the Boii near Carnuntum. A similar post
probably fell to a primus pilus of the XV.125 Of course Roman trade and commerce also involved
supplies for the army. The names of two new Apollinaris centurions are now known at
Carnuntum from the handles of Spanish amphoras. Iulius Ilo and Q. Aconius Verus in the period
before Trajan acted as agents in the purchases of fish sauce (garum) and recipients of bulk
consignments.126
From 85-106 the middle and lower Danube blazed with military activity, as the Romans
fought Dacians, Germans, Sarmatians, and Dacians again. The XV Apollinaris, encamped at the
Pannonian captial of Carnuntum, might be assumed to have played a major role in these
conflicts. If it did, few records or monuments of its activities have survived. For the wars of 85-
97 the record is particularly sparse.127 Notable, however, is that the XV’s training, perhaps from
82 on, stood under the watchful eye of L. Pellartius Celer Iulius Montanus. Of a remarkable
forty-three stipendia, this veteran decorated by Titus for sevice in the Jewish War was recalled
by Domitian to be the Apollinaris’ armidoctor.128 It can be conjectured that a vexillatio of the
XV formed part of the Pannonian force under its governor L. Funisulanus Vettonianus that
repulsed a Dacian invasion of Moesia in 86 after Oppius Sabinus’ defeat the previous year;
Domitian’s hastily prepared 89 campaign from Carnuntum against the Marcomanni might also
have involved quintadecimani; and likewise for Pomponius Longinus’ 97 campaign, for which
Carnuntum was the probable base.129 M. Iulius Avitus, a centurion of XV before serving in V
Macedonica and XVI Flavia Firma, received Domitianic dona for a bello Dacico et bello
Germanico, and the dona from an unnamed emperor of the XV’s tubicien M. Praeconius
Iucundus are almost certainly Domitianic. The multiple centuriates in various Danubian legions,
including the Apollinaris, of M. Herrenius Valens indicate wartime activity and probably extend
through the wars of both Domitian and Trajan, whereas the dona of T. Cassius Secundus, another
centurion of the XV, though apparently Domitianic or Trajanic, are problematic. Similarly, M.
Pompeius Asper might have won his promotion from centurion of the XV to the centurion of the
Praetorian Guard for Domitianic service (if his inscription dates ca 100), as did M. Apicius Tiro

123T. Kolník, Q. Atilius Primus—Interprex Centurio und Negotiator, AArchHung XXX, 1978, pp.61-74; AE
1978.635; Atilii: Kolník, pp.66-67. Pitts (supra n.83, p.48) dates the inscription—without argument—to the first half
of the first century. Trade: Pitts, pp.55-56; Kolník, pp.66, 71-74. An Atilia Firma ran a private brick factory at
Carnuntum in the second century: CIL III 4700; a similar and contemporary venture of C. Valerius Constans at
Carnuntum is also known: Lörincz (supra n.122), p.99.
124On the promotion cf. AE 1988.938; translators: a list at AE 1978.635, to which can be added: IPE II 862; CIRB
1053; IGR I 261 (CIL VI 5207).
125Volcacius: ILS 2737; Móscy (supra n.45), p.69: the argument is by analogy with a primus pilus of V
Macedonica, C. Baebius Atticus, praefectus civitatum Moesiae et Tribelliae (ILS 1349).
126See T. Bezeczky, Roman Amphora Trade in Pannonia, in Hajnóczi (supra n.65), p.261, with commentary by J.

Wilkes, Pannonia’s Identity and Entry into the Empire, JRA IX, 1996, p.421. For Q. Aconius Verus, cf. V2 346: 7
C(ai) Aconi of the XV. A bronze pitcher made by a quintadecimanus is also known: V. Gassner et al., in Stiglitz
(1997, supra n.74), p.241 Abb. 46b.
127Cf. Ritterling, 1753; Genser, p.639; Parker, pp.153, 155.
128I.Aquil. 2997 (AE 1952.153) with J. Brusin’s commentary; cf. Mann, p.33; Maxfield (supra n.5), pp.132, 210-12;
G. Horsmann, Untersuchungen zur militärischen Ausbildung im republikanischen und kaiserzeitlichen Rom, 1991
(Boppard am Rhein), pp.84-92.
129Sic K. Strobel, Die Donaukriege Domitians, 1989 (Bonn), pp.44, 48, 86, 105, 107.
his advancement to primus pilus of XXII Primigenia.130 Nor are many specific activities on
record for Trajan’s two [[282]] Dacian wars. Fragments of an architrave from Trajan’s Forum in
Rome may be part of a list of legions that served in the Dacian campaigns. One fragment
includes the names of XX Valeria Victrix and XV Apollinaris.131 If so, specific deeds lie in the
realm of conjecture: a vexillatio of the XV might have joined in operations with the ala I
Thracum victrix, which occupied the auxiliary camp at Carnuntum,132 or the dona militaria of
Q. Glitius Agricola, Pannonian governor during the First Dacian War, may indicate that a
vexillatio of the XV should share the honors.133 But as Ritterling correctly noted, the inscribed
umbo of uncertain reading found at Dacian Hermannstadt will not prove the XV’s active role in
the Dacian Wars, nor will settlement of a signifer of the XV at Colonia Ulpia Sarmizegetusa,
though if the centurion C. Iulius Macer who set up this stone belonged to the XV, there might be
more room for argument.134 In any case, enough evidence survives to assert the continued
presence of the XV Apollinaris at Carnuntum through 106, the end of the Second Dacian War.135
A brief conflict (106-107) with the Sarmatian Iazyges was of no consequence and did not
involve the XV; Hadrian, the praetorian governor of the new province of Pannonia Inferior,
quickly snuffed it out.136

Perhaps no aspect of the XV Apollinaris’ history has become as controversial as the date of
its departure from Carnuntum and its posting at Satala in Armenia Minor, a part of provincia
Cappadociae. The XV was definitely at Satala by 135, when Flavius Arrianus, then governor of
Cappadocia, mobilized his forces against the Sarmatian Alans raiding Armenia. A later facsimile

130Iulius Avitus: CIL III 7397; cf. Strobel (supra n.129), p.124; M. Praeconius Iucundus: V2 150; Strobel’s
conjecture (supra n.89, p.199) that his gravestone dates to the second decade of the second century is unconvincing;
M. Herrenius Valens: CIL III 13360; T. Cassius Secundus: CIL III 5334; cf. Strobel (supra n.129), p.133; Ritterling
(1753) thinks his dona Domitianic; Pompeius Asper: Dobson no. 101; cf. supra n.48; Apicius Tiro: Dobson no. 245.
131CIL VI 32902a-c; K. Strobel, Untersuchungen zu den Dakerkriegen Trajans, 1984 (Bonn), pp.100-101 with n.11;
cf. Cosme (supra n.2), pp.183-84 with additional bibliography.
132Strobel (supra n.131), p.118, but the presence of the ala I Thracum at Carnuntum before 113 is disputed: J. Spaul,

Alae 2, 1994 (Andover), pp.224, 226.

133ILS 1021a (DNTH 205); B. Lörincz, Some Remarks on the History of the Pannonian Legions in the Late First and
Second Centuries A.D., Alba Regia XIX, 1981, p.286; other general conjectures of the XV’s participation: W.
Reidinger, Die Statthalter der ungeteilten Pannonien und Oberpannoniens von Augustus bis Diokletian, 1956
(Bonn), pp.134, 140; Móscy (supra n.45), p.92; F. Lepper and S. Frere, Trajan’s Column, 1988 (Glouchester),
p.293.
134Umbo: CIL III 16402; signifer: CIL III 1478; Ritterling, 1753-54; Mann (p.14) speculates that a vexillatio of the
XV was at Sarmizegetusa ca 106.
135It is also important to establish where the XV was not in the late first and early second centuries. Three alleged
ancient inscriptions, two Latin and one Greek, were found at Kara-Kamar in northern Bactria and published by Yu.
N. Ustinova (Naskal’naye Latinskiye i Grecheskaya Nadpisi iz Kara-Kamara, VDI 1990.4, pp.145-47). No. 2 reads:
PAN/G.REX/AP.LEG. These dubious texts, which can only be modern griffiti, spawned a cautionary discussion by
David Braund, New “Latin” Inscriptions in Central Asia: Legio XV Apollinaris and Mithras? ZPE LXXXIX, 1991,
pp.188-90, who concluded (p.189): “Legion XV was certainly in Transcaucasia from the late first century A.D., so
that it is conceivable that a detachment came even this far east.” Later (p.190), he also posits a second-century date
for the texts. Braund’s bizarre discussion rests on his confusion of the XV with XII Fulminata, whose centurion L.
Iulius Maximus left a Domitianic inscription (AE 1951.263) at Aljatskaja Grjada, 70 km southwest of Baku. In the
late first century the XV Apollinaris was nowhere near Bactria or Transcaucasia. It was making bricks at Carnuntum
and doing its duty in the Danubian wars.
136HA, Had. 3.9; Dio 68.10.3; Strobel (supra n.131), p.205 with nn.3-4, and Die Jahre 117 bis 119 n. Chr., eine
Krisenphase der römischen Herrschaft an der mittleren and unteren Donau, Studien zur Alten Geschichte. Siegfried
Lauffer zum 70. Geburtstag, 1986 (Rome), III, p.948; A.R. Birley, Hadrian: The Restless Emperor, 1997 (London),
pp.52-53.
of his march and battle plans in this campaign survives from his lost Alanica.137 The XV’s
absence from Carnuntum is now argued as certain for 130-132, when [[283]] Q. Lollius Urbicius
is thought to have been legate of X Gemina at Vindobona; hence X Gemina had moved from
Aquincum to Vindobona and XIV Gemina, shifted to Carnuntum, replaced the XV there by
130.138 But this is of little help.
If the termini are thus narrowed to 106-130 from a Carnuntine perspective, a series of five
inscriptions from Satala, four of which derive from a low hillside overlooking the legionary fort
(the supposed site of a second-century military cemetery) are suggestive but chronologically
disappointing: none can be precisely dated. The fifth, a gravestone built into a private house 100
m. from the mosque at modern Sadak, names an evocatus serving as custos armorum of the XV,
L. Antonius Paternus.139 Though once touted as the first epigraphical evidence (except tiles) for
the Apollinaris at Satala, this text’s statistics for Paternus, dead at 53 after 28 stipendia, offer no
specific chronological date beyond the stone’s second-century date. More exciting, however, are
three texts naming normal recruiting areas of the XV as the soldiers’ origines. Ti. Iulius
Martialis, a miles of the XV from Pannonian Savaria, died at 30 after 13 stipendia and received a
stone from his brother also in the XV, Iulius Buccio with the rare rank of optio equitum. T.
Flavius Mansuetus, a beneficiarius legati (surely of the XV) from Noric Virunum, died at 35
after 18 stipendia.140 Finally, the centurion P. Turranius Severus from Bellunum (ca 50 km north
of Venice) died at Satala with 41 years. He was promoted to hastatus prior of cohors VI, legio
XV from princeps posterior of cohors V, legio IIII Flavia Felix. Although the number of his
stipendia is not given, his age indicates recruitment directly into the centuriate.141 His promotion
to the XV probably occurred before the Apollinaris left Carnuntum, since IIII Flavia, a Dacian
legion at this time, did not serve in Trajan’s Parthian War and a trans-provincial promotion under
other circumstances, though possible, seems unlikely.142

137Arr. Acies 5, 15, 24; cf. Dio 69.15.1; Them. Or. 34.8, 32; on the date see E.L. Wheeler, The Occasion of Arrian’s
Tactica, GRBS XIX, 1978, pp.351-53, and A New Book on Ancient Georgia: A Critical Discussion, Ann.Soc. for the
Study of Caucasia VI-VII, 1994-96, p.67 with nn.60, 62. As the Alanica is explicitly attested by author and title by
Joh. Lydus (Mag.3.53, p.142 Wuensch=Arr. Parth. fr. 6 Roos; cf. Arr. Script.Min., p.286 Roos=Procop. 6.14.47ff)
and by Photius (Parth. fr.1 Roos), there is no basis for A.B. Bosworth’s hypercritical denial of the work’s existence:
Arrian and Rome: The Minor Works, ANRW, 1993, II.34.1, pp.243 n.96, 266 n.206. P.A. Stadter’s contention
(Arrian of Nicomedia, 1980 [Chapel Hill], pp.45-46, 162-63) that the Acies contra Alanos was a separate work, not
part of the Alanica, is unconvincing.
138Lörincz (supra n.133), p.186; cf. CIL VIII 6706; Birley, (supra n.86), p.113.
139T.B. Mitford, Some Inscriptions from the Cappadocian Limes, JRS LXIV, 1974, p.167-68 no.4=idem, The
Inscriptions from Satala (Armenia Minor), ZPE CXV, 1997, p.143 no.7; AE 1975.818.
140Martialis: T.B. Mitford, Further Inscriptions from the Cappadocian Limes, ZPE LXXI, 1988, p.171 no.1=id.,
ZPE (supra n.139), p.144 no. 8; D.H. French and J.R. Summerly, Four Latin Inscriptions from Satala, AS XXXVII,
1987, p. 18 no. 2; AE 1988.1043; Mansuetus: Mitford, p.172 no.3=ZPE (supra n.139), pp.145-46 no. 10; French and
Summerly, p.17 no.1; AE 1988.1042. Given the absence of a specific legion on Mansuetus’ stone, French and
Summerly correctly argue from its apparent Hadrianic date that the legion must be XV Apollinaris rather than XVI
Flavia Firma. Yet they err in asserting that D(is ) M(anibus), seen on Mansuetus’ stone, occurs only once on pre-
Trajanic gravestones at Carnuntum: see V2 148 (ca 100), 229 (1st half, 1st c.), 231 (2nd half, 1st c.).
141Mitford (supra n.140), p.171 no.2 (=ZPE, supra n.139, p.145 no. 9); AE 1988.1044; French and Summerly
(supra n.140), pp.19-21 no. 3 with discussion of the career.
142IIII Flavia: Ritterling, 1284; F. Lepper, Trajan’s Parthian War, 1948 (Oxford), pp.186-87; Strobel (supra n.131),
pp.89-90 with nn.34-35, and (supra n.136), p.946 with n.185; Mitford (supra n.140, p.172; ZPE [supra n.139],
p.145) correctly sees the move from one legion’s cohors V princeps posterior to another’s cohors VI hastatus prior
as a promotion (cf. ILS 2446), though it is not clear why he believes Severus was only an optio hastati prioris, citing
ILS 2345. The commentator on AE 1988.1044 argues erroneously for a promotion from the XV to the IIII and
postulates a detachment of IIII Flavia in the East. But detachments of IIII Flavia in evidence for Aulutrene near
Phrygian Apamea would not date to the period under discussion here. For this Phrygian evidence see M. Christol
and T. Drew-Bear, Inscriptions militaires d’Aulutrene et d’Apamée de Phrygie, La Hiérarchie (Rangordnung) de
 In any case, no data from these recently published inscriptions from Satala—neither the age
of the soldiers nor their number of stipendia—dictate that the XV remained at Carnuntum after
106. Iulius Martialis from Savaria, dead at Satala after only 13 stipendia, could indicate [[284]]
the XV’s arrival there in 119, if his recruitment fell in 106.143 But, as the year of his recruitment
is unknown, his 13 stipendia could be made to fit other suggested arrival dates at Satala: 114,
117, 123. The problem of the XV’s date of departure from Carnuntum and its arrival at Satala
actually subdivides into three different questions: when did it leave Carnuntum? did it participate
in Trajan’s Parthian War? and when did its tour at Satala begin? Many scholars have tried too
hard to reduce these three questions to one or two and to rely on a domino theory of legionary
transfers.
Ritterling believed the XV left Carnuntum in 114 with I Adiutrix, auxiliary vexillationes,
and probably also XXX Ulpia; Trajan’s new province of Cappadocia-Armenia would require
three legions: XV would be added to the XII and XVI already there. Elsewhere he was more
cautious about a departure in 114 and dated the posting at Satala to 117 (the end of the Parthian
War) without ruling out 123 (a Parthian crisis).144 A departure in 114 is attractive to many; some
see it as the latest possible date for departure and already have the XIIII Gemina moving to
Carnuntum ca 114.145 Indeed Fronto (Princ.Hist. 7, 9, pp.194-95 van den Hout) claims that the
soldiers of Trajan’s Dacian Wars also fought his Parthian War. Danubian units, some Pannonian,
confirm Fronto to a certain extent.146 The ala I Flavia Augusta Britannica milliaria c.R., cited in
diplomata of the Lower Pannonian army from 110, was missa in expeditione in a diploma of 1
September 114 (CIL XVI 61) and possibly set up an inscription at Nicopolis in Armenia Minor
besides another later at Amaseia on its return march to the Danube. But a Lower Pannonian ala’s
movements cannot prove the activity of the Apollinaris, an Upper Pannonian unit, and (despite
the Nicopolis text) of Danubian troops only a vexillatio of the Lower Moesian I Italica is known
to have served in Armenia.147

l’armée romaine, ed. Y. Le Bohec, 1995 (Paris), pp.75-76, 78; T. Drew-Bear and W. Eck, Kaiser-, Militär-, and
Steinbruchinschriften aus Phrygien, Chiron VI, 1976, pp.308-309. The IIII’s participation in Parthian campaigns
(CIL III 387, 195; Ritterling, 1545-46) would long postdate Trajan. Severus’ text adds new fuel to the debate on the
order of centurions’ promotions.
143Mitford posits ca 120: supra n.140, p.171.
144Rittering, 1284-85; cf. 1754, a hesitation shared by Parker, p.159 n.6
145Webster (supra n.26), p.81; Móscy (supra n.45), pp.98-99; Mann, p.44 n.514; Mitford, JRS (supra n.139), p.168,
and Cappadocia and Armenia Minor: Historical Setting of the Limes, ANRW, 1980, II.7.2, p.1197; additional
bibliography in Genser, p.639 n.403; 114 as latest date: Swoboda (supra n.65), p.47; Stiglitz (supra n.71), 1576;
XIV to Carnuntum: Parker, p.154; L. Keppie, The Legionary Garrison of Judaea under Hadrian, Latomus XXXII,
1979, p.861; D. Kennedy, Legio VI Ferrata: The Annexation and Early Garrison of Arabia, HSCP LXXXIV, 1980,
pp.302-303.
146See Mitford (supra n.144), pp.1197-98; a more critical discussion at Lepper (supra n.142), pp.176-77, who notes
that the XXX Ulpia’s participation depends on interpretaion of the career of M. Annius Martialis (ILS 305; CIL VIII
2354); cf. Le Bohec (supra n.117), p.160. Strobel (supra n.136, p.946 with n.185) denies the XXX’s participation in
the war.
147See Lepper’s critique of Ritterling’s theory, modified by Filow, on auxiliary vexillations requiring legionary
accompaniment: (supra n.142), pp.176-77. Ala I Flavia: Stud.Pont. III no.104 (CIL III 6748, Amaseia); AE 1908.23
(Nicopolis); cf. Strobel (supra n.131), pp. 107-109; Spaul (supra n.137), pp.68-71; Genser, pp.504-505. Mitford
(ZPE, supra n.139, p.143) takes the ala I Flavia’s activity as proof of the XV’s role on the Armenian front. Coins
countermarked by the XV have also been adduced to prove the Apollinaris active on the upper Euphrates under
Trajan: one of Nicopolis dated 105/106 (SNG IV: Fitzwilliam IV no.4046; Fundort unclear); another of suspected
Trajanic date, an aes from the mint of Cappadocian Caesarea, found at Vahsin near the Agin ford (ancient
Dascusa?): T.B. Mitford, The Euphrates Frontier in Cappadocia, Studien zu den Militärgrenzen Roms II, 1977
(Cologne), p.508; id. (supra n.139), p.144; cf. French and Summerly (supra n.141), p.22. Unfortunately for this
view, the date of a coin and the date at which a countermark was applied need not be the same, and since the XV
was later permanently stationed at Satala under Hadrian at latest, these coins can prove nothing about the initial
 The departure of the XV Apollinaris in 114 and especially any role for it in operations on the
upper Euphrates or in Armenia during Trajan’s Parthian War would seem wishful [[285]]
thinking. Some even deny the XV’s participation in the war;148 others prefer its service in whole
or part, though arguing either a return to Pannonia for 117-ca 122149 or the departure of its
remnants in Pannonia ca 119 to join the main body retained in the East.150 But two remaining
aspects of the Pannonian evidence complicate the picture: a gravestone from Carnuntum,
possibly the last evidence for the XV’s presence there, and bricks of the Apollinaris.
Ritterling briefly noted the gravestone of M. Ulpius Dasius from Sirmium, an optio of the
Apollinaris dead at age 40 after 20 stipendia.151 A short note is all it probably merits. Neverthe-
less, Sir Ronald Syme saw the stone as confirmation of a departure of the XV for the Parthian
War in 114: given Dasius’ gentilicium, he would have been recruited in 94 when Trajan
governed Moesia Superior. Of course, as now known, Trajan was never governor of Moesia
Superior, which Cn. Pinarius Aemilius Cictricula Pompeius Longinus commanded 93/94-95/96,
and Sirmium, Dasius’ origo, belonged to Pannonia, not Moesia Superior, before 106.152 That
much lies beyond dispute in a lively debate between Lörincz, Strobel, and Fitz over
interpretation of Dasius’ stone and career. This debate is inseparable from the weight attached to
various bricks of the Apollinaris: in combination these two issues can produce a date of 118/119
for the Apollinaris’ departure from Pannonia. But the Dasius text should be discussed first, since
it alone provides any hope of a precise chronology.
Lörincz derives the date of Dasius’ recruitment and death from the domino effect of the
return of I and II Adiutrix from the Parthian War in 118/119: II Adiutrix reclaimed its old fort at
Aquincum, X Gemina left Aquincum for Vindobona, and XIIII Gemina at Vindobona moved to
Carnuntum, replacing XV, which then departed for Satala. Confirmation is sought in part from
the Aquincum gravestone of P. Aelius Lucus, dead in the 140s, but clearly from his gentilicium a
Hadrianic recruit to the II Adiutrix, presumably immediately upon its return in 118/119. Thus
Dasius died in 118/119 and was recruited in 98/99.153 But Lucus’ text offers even less
chronological precision than Dasius’: his stipendia are not given, nor does Lörincz document the
evidence for a date of death in the 140s. Lucus’ stone will prove nothing about Dasius or the

appearance of the XV on the upper Euphrates. Finally, Mitford also argues (supra n.140, p.175 no. 4, and supra
n.139, pp.146-47 no.11; cf. AE 1988.1045) that the gravestone of Flavia Valentia, dead at age 25 and the wife of
Flavius Valentinus (assumed to be a soldier of the XV), is contemporaneous with AE 1988.1042-44, since it derives
from the same supposed military cemetery at Satala, and offers further proof of an early date for the Apollinaris
there. Yet nothing can be argued from this stone and the commentary of AE dates it to the middle or end of the
second century.
148B. Rémy believes the XV went from Pannonia to Satala in 117, his date for the reassignment of XVI Flavia Firma
to Samosata: L’évolution administrative de l’Anatolie aux trois premiers siècles de notre ère, 1986 (Lyon), p.75;
Lörincz (supra n.133, p.286) takes no stand on the XV’s participation in the war and would seem to keep the whole
legion in Pannonia until 118/119.
149Kennedy (supra n.145, pp.302-303) has the whole XV march off to the East in 114, return in 117/118 to
Pannonia, and then leave for Satala ca 122. This case, pure conjecture based on his domino theory of legionary
transfers in the East, is ridiculed by J. Fitz, Legio XV Apollinaris in the East under Trajan, Alba Regia XIX, 1981,
p.292. Kennedy seems unaware of the alleged Pannonian evidence for keeping the XV at least in part in Pannonia
until 118/119.
150Strobel (supra n.131), p.97 with n.73, (supra n.136), p.945 with n.184, and (supra n.89), pp.193-222, although
(except for his paper of 1988: supra n.89) he does not discuss what the XV did in the Parthian War or in which
theater it operated.
151V2 149 (CIL III 4491); Ritterling, 1754.
152R. Syme, Hadrian in Moesia, ArhVest XIX, 1968, pp.106-108 (=Danubian Papers, 1971 [Bucharest], pp.210-12);
Longinus: Eck, Chiron (supra n.117), pp.321-30; Sirmium: Strobel (supra n.136), p.912.
153Lörincz (supra n.133), p.286; Lucus: CIL III 10500. Lörincz’s arguments by no means convinced J. Fitz,
Geschichtliche Probleme des Forums von Gorsium, Oikumene V, 1986, p.334.
Apollinaris’ date of departure. The domino theory only works if the XV was still at Carnuntum,
but on Lörincz’s argument (and without the bricks: see below) the Dasius text will not confirm it.
In response to Lörincz, Fitz postulates a Pannonian governorship of Trajan 92/93-96 and
Dasius’ service as an auxiliary before joining the Apollinaris; he further stresses the lack of
monuments of the XV at Carnuntum after the first years of the second century.154 Strobel’s
[[286]] reply to Fitz, a defense of Lörincz’s date of 118/119, scores several debater’s points,
which demand discussion.155
First, dating middle Danubian gravestones on the basis of style, when the accounts of the
inscribed texts preclude more precision, leads to subjective and impressionistic analysis.
Rigorous method in such situations, however, requires that all such evidence be discarded, since
a case cannot be proven objectively. If Fitz’s assertion that evidence for the XV at Carnuntum
ends ca 100 is, upon examination, found untenable, Strobel’s counter-argument does not prevail
by asserting dates for the same monumetns as the first decades of the second century.
Indisputable is only the curious absence of quintadecimani—both at Carnuntum and elsewhere in
Pannonia—epigraphically proclaiming loyalty to Trajan or broadcasting their role in the Dacian
Wars.156 This silence favors Fitz’s view. Second, Dasius’ career cannot be reconstructed from
his gravestone,157 and there is no proof that Dasius was the first in his family to have Roman
citizenship,158 or that Dasius received it from Trajan whether as emperor or as a governor.159 If
Fitz can be faulted for an overly zealous interpretation of the Dasius inscription, opponents
cannot prove that the stone’s date is 118/119. Fitz is correct: nothing about the date of the XV’s
departure from Carnuntum can be proved from Dasius’ text.160

154Fitz (supra n.153), pp.334-35, 346-50, 356; cf. idem (supra n.149), p.292.
155Strobel (supra n.89), pp.329-69. A departure date in 118/119 has attracted some adherents: Genser, p.639;
Vetters, in Kandler and Vetters (supra n.77), p.213 (end of Trajan). Stiglitz and Jilik (Stiglitz 1977, supra n.74)
seem skeptical—and rightly so.
156See Strobel (supra n.89), pp.197, 199-201 with extensive bibliography on middle Danubian gravestones; on the
problems cf. Zabehlicky (supra n.84). Strobel’s conjecture that the stone of Praeconius Iucundus, who received dona
from an unnamed emperor (V2 150), belongs to the second decade of the second century cannot be taken as a
suggestion sine studio. Cf. supra n.130. Vorbeck (V2 149) dates Dasius’ stone to the beginning of the second
century.
157Strobel would date Dasius’ citizenship to 98: supra n.89, pp. 197-99; cf. supra n.131, p.97 n.73: “Wie die
Inschrift CIL III 4491 aus Carnuntum eindeutig beweist”—surely an overconfident assertion. Not all Strobel’s
arguments against Fitz’s view that Dasius was an auxiliary before service in the XV are valid: e.g. (supra n.89,
p.197-98 with n.29) his rejection of V2 140 (ILS 2596), which clearly shows a career from eques in an ala to a
centuriate in the XV; admittedly not all readings and restorations of CIL V 898 are unquestionable, but line 4, inde
translatus in l(egionem) Au(gustam ?) factus signif(er) does justify Fitz’s citation for an auxiliary’s promotion to a
legion.
158Strobel (supra n.89, p.197 n.27) argues that even if Dasius’ father had received citizenship as an auxiliary, this
changes nothing about the chronology of Dasius filius’ career—certainly a non sequitur. French and Summerly
(supra n.140, pp.21-22) conjecture that Dasius’ father might have received citizenship from Trajan pater after his
consulship of 70, possibly as governor of Moesia in the early 70s before his Syrian governorship began in 73. But
other scenarios are possible and none can be proven.
159Strobel (supra n.89, pp.198-99) denies that Trajan was governor Pannonia 93-96, but constructs his own equally
conjectural scenario for Trajan’s career in the 90s. Certainly a Pannonian governorship for Trajan cannot be proved,
but it also cannot be disproved and is indeed likely: see Birley (supra n.136), p.31 with n.12; cf. J. Bennett, Trajan
Optimus Princeps: A Life and Times, 1997 (Bloomington), pp.45-46, who adduces some garbled Byzantine evidence
(Cedrenus, p.433.20-434; Leo Gram. p.283.6-9; citation of Georg.Monach. 3.338 is in error), probably ultimately
derived from Cassius Dio. This evidence connects Trajan with Paeonia (=Pannonia: Dio 49.36.4-6; cf. App. Illyr.
14, 40) at the time of his adoption by Nerva. Although Bennett ignores that Pompeius Longinus was Pannonian
governor from 96/97 (Eck in supra n.152) in his attempt to argue the total accuracy of the Byzantine evidence, the
memory that Trajan had been in Pannonia before his adoption may be right.
160Fitz (supra n.153), p.348.
 The case for a departure in 118/119 is thus reduced to bricks. Fitz ignored this aspect—
perhaps wisely. Bricks of the XV appear in the first building phase of the auxiliary fort at
Quadrata,161 where terra sigillata of the early second century also occur. These bricks, [[287]]
allegedly dated 115-118 (without justifying argument or evidence), are said to be delivered from
Carnuntum and are at Quadrata succeeded by (or mixed with—how can one ascertain a
distinction archaeologically?) bricks of the XIIII Gemina, which replaced the XV at Carnuntum.
The pottery is Hadrianic and only a late dating of the Dasius inscription assigns the bricks to
118/119.162 But the Dasius inscription cannot be precisely dated, as already demonstrated. Bricks
are a commodity that can be manufactured and stockpiled. Possibly the XIIII Gemina was
delivering both its own bricks and older stockpiled bricks of the XV to Quadrata—a scenario that
(without additional new evidence) cannot be disproved. In fact the bath in the stone auxiliary fort
at Carnuntum, apparently built with bricks of the XV after it had left Pannonia, offers a parallel.
Besides, pottery and coins can only date when the bricks received a common archaeological
context with these other objects; they cannot attest the bricks’ date of manufacture. The early
Hadrianic pottery of Quadrata will not prove that the Apollinaris still camped at Carnuntum in
the 110s.
But bricks of the Apollinaris also occur at Brigetio, where the building of the legionary camp
is said to extend from 97-114? or possibly later. Three building periods are discerned: 97-101,
the activity of the I Adiutrix and a Bauvexillatio of XIII Gemina, XV Apollinaris, and XIIII
Gemina; 101-105, the presence of a Bauvexillatio of XI Claudia, XV, and XIIII; and 105-114?
(or later?), a Bauvexillatio of XXX Ulpia, XV, and XIIII. Stamped bricks in the local kiln attest a
joint vexillation of the XV and XIIII for 101-104 and other stamped bricks from the local kiln
also show three vexillationes present without specifying legionary components.163 Strobel’s
refinement of this interpretation actually weakens the case, for he argues that all the bricks for
the tres vexillationes belong to the period before the First Dacian War (101-103). But the case
already had problems: no evidence from the local kiln is presented for the third period, i.e., 105-
114?, when the XV and XIIII supposedly continued the building jointly; indeed the only
evidence cited for this period at all is Saxer no. 260, who not only dates the bricks 101-104, but
also supposes that the XV is no longer at Brigetio for his nos. 261-62.164 Bricks of the XV at
Brigetio will not prove the Apollinaris’ presence in Pannonia after 106.
In its second tour at Carnuntum the XV, a legion of builders, must have produced tons of
bricks. Besides Carnuntum, bricks of the Apollinaris occur at Vindobona, Wallsee near
Lauriacum, Mauerbach on the Pannonian-Noricum border, and at various sites in Slovakia, north

161Lörincz (supra n.65, p.119) also notes bricks of the XV, allegedly dated to the 110s at Arrabona, but no details
are given to justify the date, nor does Arrabona elsewhere appear in the controversy on the date of the Apollinaris’
departure. Bricks of the XV and XIIII Gemina are also known at the auxiliary fort at Ad Statuas: D. Gabler, The
Structure of the Pannonian Frontier on the Danube and its Development in the Antonine Period—Some Problems,
Roman Frontier Studies 1979, eds. W. Hanson and F. Keppie, 1980 (Oxford), p.639, although Ad Statuas does not
figure in Lörincz’s arguments.
162See Lörincz (supra n.133), p.286, followed by Strobel (supra n.89), p.203. In fact, even the argument from the
pottery is based on silence: the absence of South Gallic Banassac ware at Quadrata, though it is plentiful from
Nerva’s reign on at Arrabona, Ad Flexum, and Gerulata. But the pottery itself derives its date from the occurrence of
Hadrianic coins (not specifically identified). See Gabler (supra n.161), pp. 639, 641.
163 Saxer no. 260 (CIL III 11365) a: v(exillatio) l(egionis) XIIII et XV ; b: XIIII et XV; no. 261 (=III 4677=11374):
vexil(lationes) tres; no. 262 (III 11374) b: vexil(lationes) (tres); c: vexil(l)atio(nes) (tres); for detailed discussion see
B. Lörincz, Zur Erbautung der Legionslager von Brigetio, AArchHung XXVII, 1975, pp.343-52.
164Strobel (supra n.89), pp.203-205; cf. pp.214-15; Lörincz (supra n.163), p.350 with n.85; Saxer, p.88; cf. p.83 on
the problems of equating a legion’s presence with finds of its bricks. Cf. also M. Kandler, Die Legio I Adiutrix and
Carnuntum, in Maxfield and Dobson (supra n.6), p.237, who states that Brigetio was built before 100 by the XIV
and XV.
of the Danube in Barbaricum.165 Further, bricks of the XV occur at Austrian Zeiselmauer—one
in a late Flavian earth-and-timber fort, but others in a context with bricks of the II Italica, a
legion not raised until ca 166.166 From this perspective, the bricks of the [[288]] XV at Quadrata
and those at Brigetio cannot lay the foundation for any conclusions. In fact, no evidence—
material or epigraphical—proves the continued presence of the XV Apollinaris at Carnuntum or
elsewhere in Pannonia after 106.

L. Terentius Rufus, a centurion of I Minerva, won dona militaria in one of Trajan’s Dacian
wars and promotion to primus pilus in the XV Apollinaris. Perhaps he had caught the eye of
Hadrian, legate of I Minerva 105-106, for Rufus as a primus pilus would in 106 no doubt have
special responsibilities in overseeing the transfer of the XV to the East.167 The conclusion of the
Second Dacian War and the annexation of Dacia was followed in 106 by the annexation of
Arabia. A eastern legionary slot was open: the III Cyrenaica, one of the two Egyptian legions
since Augustus’s reign, moved to Arabia.168 The XV already had eastern experience, its tour of
63-71, and had wintered in Alexandria in 66-67. The lack of Pannonian proof for the XV’s
presence there after 106 coincides with some Trajanic evidence, though admittedly slight, for its
Egyptian tour.169
At some point after 103—more probably after 106— a centurion of the XV, Annius Rufus,
set up an altar inside the temple of Sarapis at Egyptian Mons Claudianus in fulfillment of a vow.

165Vindobona: supra nn.89, 121; Mauerbach: B. Lörincz, Pannonische Ziegelstempel und die militärischen
Territorium, in Maxfield and Dobson (supra n.6), p.246 no. 14; Wallsee: Vetters (supra n.65), p.357; Slovakia:
supra n.122. Daniels (supra n.112, p.258) mentions tiles of the XV at a temple of Mithra north of the Danube, which
was restored after the Marcomannic wars and continued in use until Constans (337-350), although no
bibliographical reference is given.
166Genser, pp. 388, 391. This discussion in no way seeks to diminish the historical value of legionary bricks and
tiles, on which see the stimulating discussion of Y. Le Bohec, Les estampilles de l’armée romain sur briques et sur
tuilles, Epigraphica LIV, 1992, pp.43-62; on the importance of bricks and tiles for the history of the Lower Moesian
army, see M. Zahariade and T. Dvorski, The Lower Moesian Army in Northern Wallachia (A.D. 101-118), 1997
(Bucharest).
167HA, Had. 3.6; Strobel (supra n.131), pp.86-87; Birley (supra n.136), pp.50-51; Rufus: Dobson no. 110;
Sabayrolles, pp.549-50, who dates his centuriates 102-106 before a tribunate in the vigiles ca 110, but the
coincidence of promotion to primus pilus, service in Hadrian’s legion, and the XV’s departure suggests that the
promotion and the XV’s new mission cannot be unrelated. Hadrian had recognized a capable man. The promotion
may fall only in 106.
168See K. Strobel, Zu Fragen der frühen Geschichte der römischen Provinz Arabia und zu einigen Problemen der
Legionsdislokation im Osten des Imperium Romanum zu Beginn des 2. Jh. n. Chr., ZPE LXXI, 1988, pp.251-80; P.
Freeman, The Annexation of Arabia and Imperial Grand Strategy, in Kennedy (supra n.52), pp.91-118, although
there is more than ample room to dispute many of his views. The death of a tribune of III Cyrenaica, C. Iulius Carus,
who expired in Cyrene with troops of both III Cyrenaica and XXII Deiotariana while on a recruiting mission, must
surely date before 106. See E. Birley, Roman Britain and the Roman Army, 1953 (Kendal), pp.22-24 ad AE 1951.88;
M. Pucci, La rivolta ebraica al tempo de Traiano, 1981 (Pisa), p.71; Smallwood (supra n.101), p.403 n.56. Some
argue, however, emphasizing British evidence, for an early Hadrianic date: see A.R. Birley, A New Tombstone from
Vindolanda, Britannia XXIX, 1998, p.302. One can object that this view conflicts with the unlikelihood of fruitful
recruiting in a Cyrene devastated and depopulated by the Jewish uprising of 115-117. Strobel (pp.262-63, 266-67)
assumes that only one legion, XXII Deiotariana, manned the Egyptian garrison for twelve years—an assumption
treated as fact elsewhere (Strobel, supra n.89, p.196). Professor John F. Oates advises me that in his view Trajan’s
reign is much too early for Egypt to be left with a single legion.
169Reidinger (supra n.133, pp.133, 134, 140, 199 n.38) was the first to posit the XV’s departure for the East in 106,
a view now followed by Fitz (supra n.149), p.292, and (supra n.153), pp.333, 360, although Fitz conjectures a role
for the XV in the annexation of Arabia. There is no evidence (so far) that the Apollinaris was ever in Arabia during
Trajan’s reign. It transferred from Pannonia to Egypt.
He names himself praepositus of the quarries.170 Since Ritterling, scholars have often seen Rufus
as a centurion dispatched on special assignment perhaps because of some special experience with
quarries. A parallel could be found in the dedication to Heracles at a quarry near Euboean
Carystus of another centurion of the XV, T. Sergius Longus (CIL III 12286).171 Others believe
the Apollinaris was in the East but only in 114 or later and that Trajan’s demands for manpower
and competent officers in a Parthian war did not prevent a centurion’s detachment from his unit
for special assignment in Egypt.172 But this view rests [[289]] on the assumptions that Sergius
Longus’ mission parallels Annius Rufus’, that Optimo in Rufus’ text precisely dates the
inscription to 114 or later, and that the XV remained at Carnuntum until 114, when it (in whole
or part) left for the Armenian front. As already demonstrated, the last assumption is false and
Rufus’ text will not prove that the XV participated in the Parthian War.173 If Sergius Longus was
on a special mission (as seems likely), that case still proves nothing about Annius Rufus and the
legio XV, for there is no possiblity that the XV was ever stationed on Euboea.174
Nor is the Optimo Imp. Traiano of Rufus’ text a definitive indication of 114 or later.175 Apart
from Pliny’s Panegyricus, delivered 1 September 100 and in final form by 103/104, the title
Optimus first appears in an inscription of 99 from Cilician Mopsuestia (if correctly restored) and
on the reverse of Roman coins from 103. Although the official title was bestowed by the Senate
between 10 August and 1 September 114, other scattered epigraphical attestations occur before
114.176 Further, the placement of Optimo in Rufus’s text is highly unusual and the combination
Optimus Imperator is unparalleled in documentary sources;177 only Hadrian’s supposed use of
the term at the time of Trajan’s funerary rites in Rome, as quoted in the Historia Augusta (Had.
6.3), reproduces the phrase. The Optimo of Rufus’ text hardly supplies a sufficient criterion for
dating the text to 114 or later.178

170CIL III 25 (ILS 2612; I.Pan 39): Annius Rufus 7 leg. XV/ Apollinaris praepositus/ ab Optimo Imp. Traiano/ operi
marmarum Monti/ Claudiano/ v.s.l.a.
171Ritterling, 1755; M.J. Klein, Untersuchungen zu den kaiserlichen Steinbrüchen an Mons Porphyrites und Mons
Claudianus in der örtlichen Wüste Ägyptiens, 1988 (Bonn), p.31; R. Alston, Soldier and Society in Roman Egypt,
1995 (London), p.164.
172Strobel (supra n.89), p.195; cf. Maxfield, in D.P.S. Peacock and V. A. Maxfield, Survey and Excavation Mons
Claudianus 1987-1993, I: Topography & Quarries, 1997 (Cairo), p.111; Bernand ad I.Pan 39, pp.93-94.
173 Fitz (supra n.153), p.335.
174Sergius is also known from two inscriptions on columns at Rome: texts in comm. ad CIL III 12286. In one he is
still a centurion of the XV, but the other shows him in the XXII Primigenia, a legion of Germania Superior, though
apparently he was still on special assignment at some imperial quarry. His date would be Hadrianic—therefore after
the XV’s move to Cappadocia—if the libertus Crescens of the second column is the same Crescens of a third
building block dated 132.
175Rightly Fitz (supra n.153), p.335. Bernand’s supposed parallel (comm. ad I.Pan 39, p.94), felicissimus Traianus
Dacicus (I.Pan. 37), from the hydreuma at Mons Claudianus is unconvincing, since grammatically the text is
ambiguous; the adjective for “most happy” in both the Latin and parallel Greek texts could refer to the spring and
not Trajan: 37a: Fons felicissimus/ Traianus Dacicus/ ÖAmmoniw; 37b: ÜUdreuma eÈtux°staton/ TraianÚn
DakikÒn/ Khsοnίou. In a desert environment any water source could be seen as a “most blessed” site.
176Plin. Paneg. 2.7; 88.4, 6; Bennett (supra n.159), pp.63-64; coins of 103 with SPQR OPTIMO PRINC(IPI):
BMCRE III, pp.lxx, 54f; cf. RIC II, p.235 on Optimus as an official title on the obverse of coins only in 114 and
later; note also Lepper (supra n.142), pp.46-48; Mopsuetia: IGR III 914; Lyttos, Crete, 107 A.D.: I.Cret. I.xviii 19
(IGR I 984): ÉArίstƒ ÉArmenik“ (!); Simitthu, Numidia, A.D. 112: ILS 293 (DNTH 98); Asseria, Dalmatia, A.D.
113: CIL III 15021; cf. in general T. Frankfort, Trajan Optimus: recherche de chronologie, Latomus XVI, 1957,
pp.333-34.
177P. Kneissel, Die Siegestitulatur der römischen Kaiser, 1969 (Göttingen), pp.86-87.
178Strobel (supra n.98, p.194) argues Rufus’ text must date to 114 or later, because other inscriptions at Mons
Claudianus give precise dates and are from 114 or later. The view is false for many reasons. An unpublished
Domitianic text, dated trib.pot. V (September 85/September 86) long antedates Rufus’ altar: J. Bingen et al., Mons
Claudianus: Ostraca Graeca et Latina I (O.Claud. 1 à 190), 1992 (Cairo), pp.11, 13. Other texts adduced are either
 Even if Rufus’ text antedates 114, it remains to be demonstrated that the XV Apollinaris was
in Egypt and that Rufus was not detached from the XV actually serving in some other province.
After all, Rufus does not identify himself as praepositus of a detachment of the Apollinaris.179
Rufus is praepositus operi marmorum Monti Claudiano.180 But a parallel [[290]] occurs at I.Pan
53 (Wadi Semna, A.D. 150-152/153) lines 3-4: sup | Ulpio Himero p[raef (ecto) Mon]ti where
p[raep (osito) Mon]ti is equally possible. If this parallel cannot be pressed, Strobel has ably
shown that Egyptian quarries had a regular administrative structure: a conductor metallorum and
a procurator metallorum—both often imperial liberti—besides a centurion from a legion or an
auxiliary unit commanding a force no larger than a centuria or a turma.181 Rufus’ text, a private
dedication, gives only his specific commission at Mon Claudianus: praepositus is the Latin
equivalent for §pί with the genitive or dative attested in Greek texts for other centurions at Mons
Claudianus and Mons Porphyrites with the same assignment in this period,182 and denotes either
command of a detachment from the XV or temporary command of an auxiliary contingent. In
either case Rufus’ presence at Mons Claudianus indicates that the Apollinaris is posted in Egypt,
for only regular units of the Egyptian army received assignments at the quarries—a mission
prohibited to non-Egyptian troops. It escaped Strobel that all the units attested at Egyptian
quarries in this period are regular units of the Egyptian army.183
But more is known about Annius Rufus and Mons Claudianus in this period. Rufus, as
Ritterling recognized, is probably identical with the centurion Annius Rufus of XIII Gemina in a
text from Vindobona, where the XIII encamped from ca 92 until departure for Trajan’s First
Dacian War in 101. The legionary camp at Vindobona was under construction 98-107 and XIII
Gemina also contributed a vexillatio to building the camp at Brigetio 97-101. As the XV
participated in both these projects, Rufus probably had building experience and ample
opportunity for contact with the Apollinaris, already a legion of builders.184 Perhaps Rufus’
transfer occurred before 101, when the XIII marched off to Dacia.185 In any case, Rufus’ building

not from Mons Claudianus or are chronologically irrelevant: I.Pan 20 (SEG VIII 645) is from Mons Porphyrites, a
different administrative district from Mons Claudianus: W. van Rengen, in J. Bingen et al., Mons Claudianus
Ostraca Graeca et Latina II: O.Claud. 191 à 416, 1997 (Cairo), p.193; IGR I 1235-44 come from quarries in the
Hamamat valley and date from Tiberius through Domitian. Although O.Claud. 5 (not cited by Strobel) is dated 31
October 110 and does not call Trajan Optimus, no attempt is made to produce a full titulature. The strongest point
against Strobel’s view, however, is that all Strobel’s evidence is from public documents, whereas Rufus’ text is a
private dedication.
179Strobel (supra n.89), 195, who also notes (p.194) that Rufus’ altar is unfinished, indicating to him that Rufus was
in Mons Claudianus for a short time. Observation of the altar’s unfinished state goes back to J.G. Wilkinson in 1832
(see Bernand ad I.Pan 39, p.92), but the point is meaningless. The temple of Sarapis itself was unfinished, though it
received a formal dedication on its architrave on 23 April 118: I.Pan 42; Maxfield (supra n.172), p.115. The
unfinished altar may say more about the stonecutter’s schedule than Rufus’; various scenarios other than Rufus’
supposed short stay in Mons Claudianus could be envisioned.
180Cf. Bernand ad I.Pan 39, p.94, who takes both datives with praepositus rather than emending Monti to an
ablative of place Monte, but operi could be taken as a dative of purpose.
181Strobel (supra n.89), pp.194-95; Klein (supra n.171), pp.30-31.
182I.Pan 21 (gen.), 38 (dat.), and especially 41 (dat.), where a centurion of XXII Deiotariana is not identified as
commanding a detachment of this legion. On praepositus see Birley (supra n.168), pp.300-301.
183Already recognized by J. Lesquier, L’armée romaine d’Egypte d’Auguste à Dioclétien, 1918 (Cairo), p.520; cf.
Klein (supra n.171), p.31, who acknowledges the principle, but refuses (apparently because of preconceptions about
the XV) to believe it; ala Vocontorum (I.Pan 20) and cohors I Flavia Cilicium (I.Pan 42) as regular Egyptian units:
Alston (supra n.171), pp.24, 26. The XXII Deiotariana (I.Pan 41) is beyond debate.
184CIL III 151964; Ritterling, 1757; XIII Gemina: Genser, pp.505-506, 510; Strobel (supra n.131), pp.95-96; cf.
supra nn.121, 163. Lörincz (supra n.122, p.98) dates the XIII’s transfer to Vindobona to 97.
185It is tempting to identify Rufus with L. Annius Rufus, twice honored for patronage at Canusium, although the

name is too common to press this possibility: CIL IX 340; ILS 5500; PIR 2 A 722. A possible granddaughter of this
experience made him a prime candidate for assignment at Mons Claudianus after the XV’s
transfer to Egypt in 106, for the period 106-112, when the Basilica Ulpia and other Trajanic
construction projects were underway at Rome, saw an upswing of activity at Mons
Claudianus.186 Intriguing also is an ostracon from Apollinopolis Magna (Edfu), dated 18 May
116—the last evidence of payment of the Jewish poll tax before the Jewish revolt in Cyrenaica
reached the Nile valley. This slave, Thermauthos, was or had been the property of a centurion
named Annius. Of course positive identification with Annius Rufus of the Mons Claudianus text
is impossible but not out of the question. Indeed the heir of the XV’s centurion P. Turranius
Severus, dead not long after the Apollinaris’ arrival at Satala, is a libertus Turranius
Epaphroditus. Greek names are rare in inscriptions of legio XV at Carnuntum and elsewhere
before 117, and are extremely sparse at Carnuntum in general [[291]] before 106.187 Nor are
Greek names prominent at Satala either before or after the XV’s arrival there; eastern
Cappadocia and Armenia Minor were not strongly hellenized.188 In all likelihood, Turranius
Severus bought Epaphroditus in Egypt.
When Trajan’s Parthian War began in 114, the XV Apollinaris could expect to see some
action. As shown above, however, it would not be in Armenia. The legions IV Scythica, VI
Ferrata, and a vexillatio of I Italica are attested at Artaxata in 116 and the two Cappadocian
legions, XVI Flavia Firma and XII Fulminata can be assumed to have served in at least the
Armenian campaign of 114, but not the Apollinaris.189 A hoard of unknown Syrian provenience
containing coins of Domitian and Edessa countermarked by XII Fulminata, X Fretensis, and III
Cyrenaica, suggests that at some point before 116 these three legions (or their vexillationes) were
joined as an operational group.190 The XV’s service would be farther south. A coin of Arados
and a Domitianic issue thought to be from Samarian Neapolis, both countermarked by the
Apollinaris (LXV) attest the activity of a vexillatio in Phoenicia or Palestine in 115-117—
probably in logistical support of operations elsewhere or in response to Jewish unrest.191 These

L. Annius Rufus married the Antonine senator P. Cassus Dexter: PIR 2 A 687; cf. Rémy no. 307; G. Alföldy,
Konsultat und Senatorenstand unter den Antoninen, 1977 (Bonn), p.160.
186Maxfield (supra n.172), p.115, who shows that activity at Mons Claudianus from Domitian to Antoninus Pius
was sporadic. It is thus erroneous to posit constant activity at the site. Similarly the Hadrianic building activity of
Sergius Longus (supra n.174) was probably connected with construction of the temple of Roma and Venus: cf. D.
Kienast, Zur Baupolitik Hadrians in Rome, Chiron X, 1980, pp.402-403 on the dates of construction.
187Thermauthos: DNTH 56 (CJP 229); Turranius: AE 1988.1044; supra nn.141-42; cf. V2 indices.
188Cf. Mitford, JRS (supra n.139), pp.170-71 no. 6=id., ZPE (supra n.139), pp.154-55 no. 26: the supposed first

Greek inscrition from Satala (2nd c.); on hellenization in the area see bibliography at Wheeler (supra n.6), p.505 n.1.
It is worth noting that the libertus named in the dedicatory inscription on the Sarapis temple at Mons Claudianus
(I.Pan 42) is an Epaphrodeitus Seigerianus.
189AE 1968.510-11; Arr. Parth. fr. 85 Roos; cf. Parth. fr. 80, a possible reference to VII Claudia but not necessarily
to service in Armenia.
190See G.L. Brunk, A Hoard from Syria Countermarked by the Roman Legions, ANSMN XXV, 1980, pp.63-70;
Howgego, (supra n.33), p.18, who thinks the Parthian crisis of 123 equally possible as the hoard’s date of burial,
although there is no evidence for the XII’s detachment in whole or part from Cappadocia for this crisis; Howgego is
influenced by Kennedy’s erroneous supposition (supra n.149) that the XV returned to Pannonia in 117 and came
back to the East in 122.
191BMC, Phoenicia, p.xxxvii; J.P. Rey-Coquais, Arados et sa pérée, 1974 (Paris), p.167, and Syrie romaine, De
Pompée à Dioclétien, JRS LXVIII, 1978, p.68, who believes that XV actually encamped at Arados for a time—a
point disputed by Howgego (supra n.33, p.257), who conjectures an alternative date of 132-135, i.e., the Bar-
Kokhba War. But this is pure speculation, since no evidence attests the XV’s participation in that war and the
Apollinaris is at full strength for Arrian’s Alan campaign of 135: Acies 5, 15, 24. Howgego (p.257) dates the Arados
coin 115/116, but Reinach says 111/112 and others put it 113/114 or 114/115: see T. Reinach, La mari de Salomé et
les monnaies de Nicopolis d’Arménie, REA XVI, 1914, pp.6-7 with p.6 n.4.
coins provide the only evidence (so far) that the XV participated in the Parthian War of 114-117
but not (obviously) in the Armenian theater as hitherto generally thought.
Yet for the two Egyptian legions a secondary front blazed up: a Jewish revolt in Cyrenaica,
ignited in 115, devasted that region and by early summer of 116 had spread to the Nile valley.192
A papyrus letter from Hermoupolis relates the defeat of a legion and the rout of a hastily raised
local militia. But the Egyptian prefect Rutilius Lupus had “another legion” (êllh lege≈n) on its
way to Memphis. The most natural interpetation of the passage requires the presence in Egypt of
two legions. Whether the XV suffered defeat and the XXII is the reenforcement or the converse
cannot be determined. But the “other legion” under Rutilius’ command cannot be the III
Cyrenaica, which returned to Egypt with other vexillationes (probably including that of the XV)
under the extraordinary command of Marcius Turbo.193 Contingents of one or both Cappadocian
legions (XII, XVI) might have been in Turbo’s army, if Trajanic issues from the mint at
Cappadocian Caesarea recorded at [[292]] Ptolemais in Cyrenaica are any indication, but the
Apollinaris, not in Cappadocia since 66, cannot be their source.194 The Jewish revolt in Egypt
and Cyrenaica was over by summer 117 or at least some time before Trajan’s death in early
August, for the Optimus Princeps selected L. Gavius Fronto, praefectus castrorum of the XV
Apollinaris to begin the resettlement of the devastated Cyrenaica by founding a colony of 3,000
veterans in Cyrene.195 Although the career of Gavius Fronto cannot be reconstructed with total
certainty, it seems to confirm the presence of the XV in Egypt 106-117.
A prominent citizen of Pamphylian Attaleia, L. Gavius Fronto is honored as the first of his
family to achieve the rank of praefectus castrorum. He also fathered senators: a son, L. Gavius
Aelianus, became quaestor propraetore (possibly of Lycia and Pamphylia, 134-138) and a
grandson, L. Gavius Clarus, reached the praetorship and became a friend of Cornelius Fronto the
orator.196 References to the senatorial careers of the son and grandson would date the text late
under Hadrian or early under Antoninus Pius, and Fronto is apparently still alive, though no
doubt elderly. As often in inscriptions of primipilares, the career before the primipilate is not
given. But Fronto received equestrian rank and dona militaria from an unnamed Augustus, who
must surely be Domitian. As the III Cyrenaica, in which Fronto became primus pilus (the first
attested military post in this text), did not serve in the Danubian wars of Domitian, it can be

192General overviews in Pucci (supra n.168) and Smallwood (supra n.101), pp.393-427; cf. S. Applebaum, Jews
and Greeks in Ancient Cyrene, 1979 (Leiden), p.270.
193DNTH 57 (P.Bremen 1; CPJ 438). Birley (supra n.136, p.74) rightly discerns the defeat of a legion; Pucci (supra
n.168), pp.57-58 with n. 167; cf. pp.58-59; contra, Smallwood (supra n.101), p.402 with n.50, who labors under the
misconception that only the XXII was in Egypt at this time and has to find another meaning for êllh; Keppie (supra
n.143, p.862) also identifies “the other legion” as III Cyrenaica. Return of III Cyrenaica: Pucci, p.58; Applebaum
(supra n.192), pp.310-14; Strobel (supra n.168), pp.266-67, and (supra n.89), p.196, who concedes a vexillatio of
the XV in Egypt either before or with Turbo’s expeditionary force.
194See C.H. Kraeling, Ptolemais, City of the Libyan Pentapolis, 1962 (Chicago), pp.17, 268, 269 with n.291; BMC,
Cyrenaica, p.ccx, although these Cappadocian coins (cf. BMC, Galatia, Cappadocia, and Syria, p.53 nos. 54-57,
p.59 nos. 112-16) with the head of Zeus Ammon on the reverse were generally popular in Cyrenaica and Kraeling
concedes that some of these Trajanic coins were purchases at Pentapolis, not finds.
195AE 1972.616 (SEG XVII 584; DNTH 313; Dobson no. 113); AE 1972.617 (a shorter version of no. 616). Whether
Gavius Fronto’s colony is Teucheira is not relevant here. See (for Teucheira) P.M. Fraser and S. Applebaum,
Hadrian and Cyrene, JRS XL, 1950, pp.84, 86, 88; Applebaum (supra n.192), pp.270-71; Smallwood (supra n.101),
pp.404, 409, 411; contra, Pucci (supra n.168), pp.138-39.
196See H. Halfmann, Die Senatoren aus dem östlichen Teil des Imperium Romanum bis zum Ende des 2.
Jahrhunderts n. Chr., 1979 (Göttingen), nos. 71 (Aelianus), 106 (Clarus). Rémy (p.337) rejects Aelianus’
quaestorship in Lycia and Pamphylia. Fronto is not the first L. Gavius to serve in the Apollinaris: a L. Gavius from
Verona retired to a probable Tiberian veterans’ settlement in the Trebizat valley of Dalmatia. See AE 1979.444; cf.
1979.445: another veteran of the XV at the same site.
posited that he was recruited directly into the centuriate, distinguished himself in the Danubian
wars, and was promoted and transferred to the III Cyrenaica.197
Problematic, however, is the date of Fronto’s promotion to praefectus castrorum of the
Apollinaris. Fronto’s experience was surely required for the III Cyrenaica’s role in the
annexation of Arabia in 106, and his promotion would thus at earliest fall after the dust of
annexation had settled. Dobson believes Fronto’s colonizing activity occured while Fronto was
still primus pilus of III Cyrenaica, but Dobson seems to imply that his promotion to the XV
occurred in 117 or later. Yet nothing in Fronto’s text suggests his continued service after
founding the colony, i.e., he did not accompany the Apollinaris to Cappadocia. Indeed a man
who began his career under Domitian would be due for retirement by 117. Strobel conjectures
that Fronto was promoted and transferred to the XV to lead its vexillatio in the expeditionary
force of Marcius Turbo. Legionary vexillationes, however, were not commanded by praefecti
castrorum; senatorial rank was required—at least in the period before the Marcomannic wars.198
Further, it is entirely moot whether the prohibition of [[293]] senators from Egypt would have
required that all senatorial officers in Turbo’s expeditonary force be ousted from their posts in
favor of equestrians. Legalistic niceties need not always apply in emergency situations and such
reorganization is totally impractical in time of crisis.
A third possiblity lies open: Fronto’s promotion and transfer fell before the Parthian War
began in 114. His new post with the Apollinaris was essentially that of its commander, precisely
because the prohibition of senators from Egypt eliminated from service in the XV not only
legates but also tribuni laticlavi. This is not to say that Fronto held the ducentary post of
praefectus castrorum Aegypti (or in Aegypto). If he had, that would be clear in his inscription.
But the command structure of the Egyptian army is very imperfectly known for this period and
the arrival of the Apollinaris marked the first legionary change in the Egyptian garrison in nearly
a century.199 Fronto could well be the praefectus castrorum of the XV but under the charge of a
praefectus castrorum Aegypti, in turn under the ultimate command of the Prefect of Egypt.
Moreover, an Egyptian tour would help explain the huge lacuna in the fasti of legates of the
XV—fairly full ca 49-73, but largely a tabula rasa thereafter. C. Minicius Fundatus held the post
early under Trajan, but no more are known until M. Vettius Valens commanded the XV in
Arrian’s Alan campaign.200 Certainty is elusive in the present state of the evidence, but long-term
service of Fronto with the Apollinaris seems likely—a promotion to command a new Egyptian
legion for a man with Egyptian experience, and when the Jewish revolt was put down, Trajan

197Sic Dobson, p.233 ad no. 113; for another veteran of III Cyrenaica at Attaleia, see J. and L. Robert, Bull.Epigr.
1948.19. Strobel (supra n.89, pp.197 n.25) believes the anonymous emperor was Hadrian, who rewarded Fronto’s
colonizing efforts. This is unconvincing. If the grantor was Trajan or Hadrian, the emperor’s name would appear,
especially in a text possibly erected during Hadrian’s reign. Placement of the reference to the dona immediately
before the reference to the colony in the text is meaningless. As Strobel has demonstrated in his reconstruction of the
career of C. Velius Rufus, such career inscriptions of primipilares often do not follow a clear descending or
ascending chronological order: (supra n.111), pp.265-86. Besides, dona for founding a colony seem unlikely.
198Dobson, p.233; Strobel (supra n.89), pp.195-96; commanders of legionary vexillationes: Saxer, pp.120-21.
Examples at Dobson, p.71 nn.183-84 (cited by Strobel) involve praefecti supervising training outside the camp,
detachments of a group from a legion to perform separate operations in the same theater (not a true vexillatio sent
outside the home province), or postdate 161. The command of C. Velius Rufus (ILS 9200; Dobson no. 94) is too
extraordinary to take as a rule: cf. Saxer, p.23
199We can agree with Strobel (supra n.89, p.196) that Fronto did not hold the ducentary post. For what little is
known of the Egyptian army’s command structure see A. von Domaszewski, Die Rangordnung des römischen
Heeres2, ed. B. Dobson, 1967 (Cologne), pp.120-21; Dobson, pp.72-74, and Praefectus Castrorum Aegypti—a
Reconsideration, CE LVIII, 1982, 322-37.
200Fundatus: Franke no. 109; Valens: Arr. Acies 5, 24; CIL XI 303.
selected a competent “man on the spot” to oversee the foundation of a veteran colony—the final
duty of Gavius Fronto’s military career.201
Unfortunately neither the location of Fronto’s colony nor—more importantly—the legions
from which the veterans were drawn are known.202 Even so, it seems beyond dispute that Gavius
Fronto founded a colony of 3,000 veterans in Cyrene and he did so as praefectus castrorum of
the XV in 117. If, as argued here, the Apollinaris had been in Egypt since 106, then many of its
members must have been due for retirement by 117. Settlement of at least some quintadecimani
in Cyrene does not require a great leap of faith. Nor does it seem likely, given the chaotic
military situation in the East in 117, when Trajan was desperately trying to salvage something
from the initial gains of his Parthian War, that he would pick a man not already present in Egypt
and familiar with local conditions to start the “clean up” process after the Jewish uprising. The
text of Gavius Fronto confirms the implications of that of Annius Rufus: the XV Apollinaris was
stationed in Egypt from 106 to at least 117.
One question remains: when did the XV move to Satala? It had certainly left Egypt by 119
when XXII Deiotariana and III Cyrenaica are again attested as a joint garrison at Nicopolis near
Alexandria.203 Sixth Ferrata replaced III Cyrenaica in Arabia, but not from Samosata, as [[294]]
some think: its last previous attestation is Artaxata, if a restoration is correct.204 Only assumption
brings IV Scythica back to Zeugma in 117, although it is clear that the Pannonian contingents
rushed back from the East for a new Dacian-Sarmatian crisis in 118-119.205 The whereabouts of
XVI Flavia Firma in 117—at Satala before 114 and assigned to Samosata by Hadrian at some
point—are unknown; the situation is likewise unclear for XII Fulminata and III Gallica. A total
and immediate Roman evacuation of all territory east of the Euphrates, as generally assumed,
may not be valid: Osrhoene remained a client-kingdom and the situation in Sophene and
Gordyene is open to debate.206 In any event, a domino theory for legionary transfers in 117 has
too many gaps.
Perhaps another approach is more fruitful. Hadrian almost immedately after assuming the
purple in early August 117 replaced Rutilius Lupus, the Egyptian prefect, with Q. Rammius
Martilis, a former prefect of the vigiles—a sign of the new emperor’s Egyptian housecleaning.207

201A townsman of Fronto from Attaleia, a certain Crepereius, performed his secunda militia as tribune of the XV
probably under Antoninus Pius (IGR III 777; PME C 254). Was it just chance, or did the Gavii have strings to pull
when an opening occurred in the XV?
202CIL III 6 was once thought to attest a veteran of XV Apollinaris at Teucheira, but a new reading of this poorly
preserved text reveals a reference to II Adiutrix and a third-century date: see J. Reynolds, A Roman Legionary
Veteran at Teucheira, SocLibyanSt, Ann.Rep. 9, 1977-78 (1980), pp.27-28=AE 1982.916; she nevertheless believes
veterans of the XV settled there. A connection between CIL III 6 and Fronto’s colony was widely accepted: Mann,
pp.55 n.514, 181 n.591; Fraser and Applebaum (supra n.195), p.88; Smallwood (supra n.101), p.411 no.86; Strobel
(supra n.89), p.196 with n.21. Pucci (supra n.168, p.139) would date Fronto’s colony to 115, but the argument is
circular. The new reading of CIL III 6 demolishes in part the case for Teucheira as the colony, but cf. supra n.195.
203BGU I 140 (DNTH 333); Keppie (supra n.145), p.862; Strobel (supra n.168), p.266.
204VI Ferrata in Arabia: Kennedy (supra n.145), pp.297-99; Strobel (supra n.168), p.267; Artaxata: AE 1968.511:
[mile]s leg(ionis)/ [VI Fer]r(atae). Keppie’s conjecture (supra n.145, p.860), followed by Kennedy (supra n.145,
pp.283, 303) and Strobel (p.168, though erroneously citing Keppie, supra n.98, p.424f), that VI Ferrata was posted
at Samosata in the Flavian era is without foundation. It was probably the base of III Gallica: Keppie (supra n.98),
pp.422-24; Rémy (supra n.148), p.61; Wheeler (supra n.52), pp.255-56.
205IV Scythica: M.A. Speidel, Legio IIII Scythica, its Movements and Men, D. Kennedy et al., The Twin Towns of
Zeugma on the Euphrates: Rescue Works and Historical Studies, 1998 (Postsmouth, R.I.), p.170; Dacian crisis:
Strobel (supra n.136), esp. pp.942-61.
206Total evacuation: sic (recently) Birley (supra n.136), pp.78, 83; Osrhoene: Birley, pp.153-54; cf. Wheeler (supra
n.6), p. 506 and in Hovannisian (supra n.92).
207Birley (supra n.136), p.79 with n.8. Rammius was in place by 25 August (P.Oxy. LV 3781); on his earlier career
see Sablayrolles, pp.484-85.
With the return of the III Cyrenaica and the Jewish rebels pacified, the XV’s Egyptian tour was
finished. Gavius Fronto retired to Pamphylian Attaleia and a new (but unknown) legate took
command of the Apollinaris. A departure from Egypt in 117 can be posited, as can an arrival at
Satala by 119, for the gravestone of Iulius Martialis from Savaria must surely date to 119, if not
118. Alternative dates of arrival (noted earlier) can now be eliminated: certainly 114 is out, as the
XV did not serve in the Armenian theater or leave Carnuntum in that year; 117 requires too tight
a chronology: leaving Egypt no sooner than August 117 and arriving at Satala in the middle of an
Armenian winter—not a likely scenario when there is no attested crisis on that frontier; 123,
barring new evidence, has no support, for involvement of the XV in the mobilization connected
with the Parthian crisis of that year is totally lacking. To view the issue more positively, if
Martialis was recruited in 106, the last year the XV was in Pannonia, then the Apollinaris
reached Satala by 119; if recruited in 105, then 118.208
But, as often, a conflicting piece of evidence can cast doubt on even the most carefully
constructed theory. A gravestone from the Roman colony at Sinope bears the bilingual Greek
and Latin inscription of a veteran’s wife. The dedicator, P. Aelius Pompeius, had been a
centurion in an unnamed legion and proudly broadcasts his origo in Carnun(t)um Pan(n)oniae
superioris. Omission of a legion’s name in veterans’ inscriptions in the East is not unusual, but
his settlement in Asia Minor in the second century with an origo in Carnuntum indicates a
possible quintadecimanus. Termini for the text are 106, division of Pannonia into two provinces,
and the mid-second century, when fines for disturbing graves (like that given in this text) begin
to appear in Anatolian inscriptions.209 The gentilicium could indicate recruitment under
Hadrian—a date long after the XV’s transfer from Pannonia, and there is no point in falling into
another quagmire like the debate over the Dasius inscription. Pompeius need not have served his
whole career in the XV and certainly did not [[295]] experience the Egyptian tour. Nevertheless,
if Pompeius had been a quintadecimanus, his text may show that the Apollinaris continued to
recruit from Pannonia and the Balkans even after its departure from that region. If so, then all
discussion of Iulius Martialis’ thirteen stipendia and the Pannonian origines of second-century
quintadecimani buried at Satala becomes otiose. There is good reason to think that the XV left
Egypt in 117, but a direct transfer to Satala remains elusive.

Ritterling’s treatment of the Apollinaris at Satala and of its second eastern tour in general is,
from a current perspective, the most inadequate part of his discussion—in part the result of the
very limited knowledge of the upper Euphrates in 1925. The Janus-faced history of the
Apollinaris at Satala divides into two parts: first, its role as a frontier legion vis-à-vis Armenia
and Roman struggles with Parthia and later Sassanid Persia; second, its mission in guarding the
coast of Colchis from Trapezus to Pityus.
Satala, the northernmost legionary base on the eastern limes during the Early Empire, lay
north of the Erzincan plain, through which the Kara Su, the northern branch of the Euphrates
flowing west from its sources near Erzerum, begins its swerve to the south. Blocked off from
Erzincan to the south by the Sipikör Dagh and from Trapezus 100 km to the north by the Pontic
Alps, Satala occupied a low-lying passageway connecting the upper Euphrates valley of western
Armenia with the Lycus River valley to the west leading into Pontus and central Anatolia—the
natural trade/invasion route north of the Anti-Taurus and hence the parallel to Melitene and the
Tomisa ford into Sophene and the Arsanias River valley, the route into central Armenia. The

208AE 1988.243; cf. supra nn.140, 143.

209T. Reinach, Inscriptions de Sinope, RA Ser. 5 III, 1916, pp.347-51 no. 8; cf. A. Salac, Note sur trois inscriptions
de Sinope, BCH XLIV, 1920, pp.354-61. The terminus ante quem is not firm, since so many stones cannot be dated
precisely: cf. e.g. I.Magnesia am Sypylos (=IK 8) no. 19 (IGR IV 1339) dated 154/155 at earliest; J. and L. Robert,
La Carie II, 1954 (Paris), p.356 no. 176 (Sebastopolis): 144 or even 244.
Romans first made Satala important: Corbulo established his initial base here in 55-56 and, by
opening a supply route to Trapezus via the Zigana Pass over the Pontic Alps, he created what
later became the limes road of the Cappadocian frontier from Trapezus on the Black Sea to
Melitene and on to Samosata in Commagene. Hereafter Satala formed the node of east-west and
north-south routes,210 although it is erroneous to think that the Cappadocian army depended for
centuries on Bosporan grain delivered via Trapezus and the Zigana Pass: the rich agricultural
area around Nicopolis, a colonia founded by Pompey and not far west of Satala, probably
provided the bulk.211 Wartime demands, especially if whole legions and vexillationes from
outside Cappadocia were operating on the upper Euphrates, would be a different situation and
probably require additional supplies via Trapezus.
When the Apollinaris arrived at Satala, it probably only had to occupy a fort built by its
predecessor, the XVI Flavia Firma, posted there in the 70s. The site, though long known, remains
unexcavated; extant remains of the fort are Justinianic.212 Over the three centuries of the XV’s
presence at Satala,213 some rebuilding and renovation would be inevitable. Ten tiles of the XV
attest repairs, but apart from the recently discovered inscriptions (discussed [[296]] above), only
very fragmentary texts from the site—mainly second century—are known.214 Nor has knowledge
greatly advanced on the XV’s recruitment or veteran settlement. Within Cappadocia
recruitment/settlement is attested for Neoclaudiopolis, Lycaonian Lystra, and Isauria, to which
Caesarea, the provincial capital, can now be added; outside the province, Thrace provided at
least one quintadecimanus.215
Little survives of the XV’s role in provincial administration. Like the XVI Flavia earlier,
centurions of the XV (presumably with troop detachments) were regularly posted at Ancyra.
Whether their duty there involved road security or they served in an administrative capacity for
the provincial governor can be debated. In any case, three centurions and one tribune of the XV
died there—all apparently in the second century.216

210On the strategic importance of Satala see Mitford, JRS (supra n.139), pp.165-66; on the precise location of the
Roman-Armenian border: Wheeler (supra n.6), pp.507-509; cf. T.B. Mitford, High and Low Level Routes across the
Taurus and Antitaurus, The Eastern Frontier of the Roman Empire, eds. D. French and C. Lightfoot, 1989 (Oxford),
pp.329-33. Corbulo at Satala: Wheeler (supra n.85).
211See E.L. Wheeler, From Pityus to Zeugma: The Northern Sector of the Eastern Frontier 1983-96, Roman
Frontier Studies 1997, ed. N. Gudea, forthcoming (Cluj), for bibliography. The Cappadocian army’s dependence on
Trapezus is still maintained by T.K. Kissel, Untersuchungen zur Logistik des römischen Heeres in den Provinzen
des griechischen Ostens (27 v. Chr.-235 n. Chr.), 1995 (St. Katharinen), pp.39-40, 68-72; so also: M. Reddé, Mare
Nostrum. Les infrastructures, le dispositif et l’histoire de la marine militare sous l’empire romain, 1986 (Paris),
p.389; D. Braund, Roman and Native in Transcaucasia from Pompey to Successianus, in Maxfield and Dobson
(supra n.6), p.421.
212On the fort see discussion and bibliography at S. Gregory, Military Architecture on the Eastern Frontier, 1995-96
(Amsterdam), II, pp.39-42: publication in 1995-96 of an unrevised D.Phil thesis of 1991. Not even an accurate scale
plan of the site exists; a project to produce such a drawing is still unrealized: C. Lightfoot, Satala Survey 1989, AS
XL, 1990, pp.13-16.
213Cf. Dio 55.23.5; Itin.Ant. 183.5; Not.Dig.Or. 38.13.
214See Mitford, ZPE (supra n.139), pp.137-67, the tiles at pp.142-43 no. 6 (CIL III 13647a-d). It is doubtful that
Satala was ever a colonia; the case depends on a questionable interpretation and restoration of CIL III 13629; cf.
Mann, p.l44 with n.513; Mitford, p.149 no. 14.
215Neoclaudiopolis: Stud.Pont. III, p.48 no.34; Lystra: CIL III 6787; Caesarea: Mitford, JRS (supra n.139),
p.163=AE 1975.783; Isauria: IGR III 281, with G. Laminger-Pascher, Römische Soldaten in Isaurien, in Weber and
Dobesch (supra n.8), p.391, and Kleine Nachträge zu isaurischen Inschriften II, ZPE XII, 1973, pp.73-74; cf. IGR III
398 (Kestel, Pisidia); Thrace: AE 1956.277 (SEG III 525). Cf. Mann, pp.152-53; S. Mitchell, Anatolia: Land, Men,
and Gods in Asia Minor, 1993 (Oxford), I, p.139 n.179; M.P. Speidel, Legionaries from Asia Minor, ANRW (1980),
II.7.2, pp.730-46.
216Bosch nos. 178 (CIL III 342), 187 (III 6761), 365 (III 6752), 366 (III 268); XVI Flavia: Bosch nos. 110 (III
6767), 111 (III 264), 112 (III 6766); a tribune of XII Fulminata also died there: Bosch no. 183 (ILS 2760; PME I
 The operational history of the XV offers more, if episodic, information. In 135 declining
relations between Hadrian and Pharasmanes II of Iberia produced an Iberian statement of
dissatisfaction: Pharasmanes invited his Alan allies to raid Armenia. But the Alans first looted
Albania and Media Atropatene before hitting Armenia and threatening Cappadocia. A Parthian
crisis ensued, which Rome could hardly welcome while mopping-up operations in the Bar-
Kochba War (132-135) still lingered. Flavius Arrianus mobilized the Cappadocian army and
deterred the Alan threat to Roman territory. A battle with the Alani—if it occurred, the first ever
Roman combat with this Sarmatian tribe—cannot be proven. Arrian’s concentration point must
have been Satala, for the XV appears at full strength (in comparison to a vexillatio of the XII) in
Arrian’s march and battle plans, seen in the Acies contra Alanos, and provincial contingents from
Trapezus, Rhizos, Colchis, and auxiliary units of Armenia Minor also appear. At least a
vexillatio of the XV must also have accompanied Arrian to Iberia to settle affairs with
Pharasmanes.217
Further, Arrian’s Acies contains the most detailed account of a Roman battle formation that
has survived for the Early Empire—gone is the Caesarian triplex acies, replaced by a phalanx
eight ranks deep and differentiation of armament within the legion. Rather than a figment of
Arrian’s imagination, the phalanx demonstrates a change in Roman deployment and tactics at
least under certain circumstances in the East. It was a sign of things to come. Arrian’s Acies
shows the XV Apollinaris, deployed as a phalanx, on the “cutting edge” of Roman tactical
developments.218
[[297]] The next Parthian crisis of ca 140 also had at least a ripple effect on the Apollinaris.
L. Burbuleius Optatus Ligarianus, Arrian’s successor as Cappadocian governor (137/138-
139/140), brought his son-in-law M. Messius Rusticianus to Cappadocia as tribune of the XV.
The well-bred M. Acilius Glabrio Cornelius Severus, a later proconsul of Africa under Marcus
Aurelius, also served as tribune of the XV at this time. When Ligarianus moved on to govern
Syria in 140, perhaps during the crisis, Rusticianus became a tribune in the Syrian III Gallica.
Conceivably, the Apollinaris may have contributed some troops to the vexillationes that L.
Neratius Proculus, legate of XVI Flavia Firma at Samosata, collected and brought into Syria in
response to the crisis.219

103). Bosch (pp.135, 139), following Ritterling (1754), sees these men as on administrative duties, but Mitchell
(supra n.215, pp.134-35) argues for highway security.
217The XV’s legate at this time, the first attested since C. Minicius Fundatus in the late 90s, was M. Vettius Valens:
Arr. Acies 5, 24; CIL XI 383; Rémy no.210, who dates his Cappadocian activity to 137; sources of the Alan
campaign at supra n.137. The most comprehensive treatment of Arrian’s Alan campaign and Roman-Iberian
relations remains E.L. Wheeler, Flavius Arrianus: A Political and Military Biography, 1977 (Diss. Duke Univ.),
pp.54-135, 213-328, which corrects the errors and misconceptions of A.B. Bosworth, Arrian and the Alani, HSCP
LXXXI, 1977, pp.217-55; for Bosworth’s reply see supra n.137, pp.264-72, to which a rejoiner by Wheeler is in
preparation. See also Braund, (supra n.105), pp.232-35, corrected by Wheeler, Ann.Soc.Caucasia (supra n.137),
pp.51-78, esp. 62-71. M.P. Speidel’s placement of Arrian’s base at Apsarus in Colchis is fanciful: The Caucasus
Frontier. Second Century Garrisons at Apsarus, Petra and Phasis, Studien zu den Militärgrenzen Roms III, 1986
(Stuttgart), p.658. Mitford (supra n.145, p.1202) would date the Alan raid to 134 and posits two different Alan
raiding parties.
218On Roman use of the phalanx and detailed discussion of the Acies, see Wheeler (supra n.217), pp.260-328, and
The Legion as Phalanx, Chiron IX, 1979, pp.303-18; cf. J.-C. Balty and W. van Rengen, Apamea in Syrian: The
Winter Quarters of Legio II Parthica, tr. W.E.H. Cockle, 1993 (Brussels), pp.24-26; on the confused attempt of A.
Goldsworthy (The Roman Army at War 100 BC-AD 200, 1996 [Oxford]) to discuss Arrian’s phalanx and Roman
tactics in general, see E.L. Wheeler, Battles and Frontiers, JRA XI, 1998, pp.644-51.
219Ligarianus: Dabrowa no.140; Rusticianus: AE 1983.517, 1988.720; Rémy no.218; Neratius: ILS 1076; Saxer no.
52. On the Parthian crisis, Rémy (supra n.148, pp.78-81) sees the crisis as a result of the Alan raid of 135, which
damaged Parthian territory; but Antoninus Pius’ installation of a new Armenian king may be an additional or the
 The reign of Marcus Aurelius (161-180) marks the last period for which any detailed
information of the XV’s combat activities are known or can be reasonably inferred. In spring
161, Vologaeses IV exploited the transfer of power at Rome from Antoninus Pius to Marcus
Aurelius and Lucius Verus as an opportunity to replace the Roman candidate on the Armenian
throne with his own appointee. This casus belli prompted a quick response from the
Cappadocian governor, M. Sedatius Severianus, who mobilized his army at Satala and headed
for Artaxata. About three days after the campaign opened, Severianus was dead and his army at
Elegeia destroyed.220 Dio (71.2.1) reports the loss of a stratÒpedon. If the Greek word is taken
as “legion,” the lost unit was certainly not the XV Apollinaris.221 By the end of 163, however, L.
Verus was already Armeniacus. Statius Priscus, the newly appointed governor of Britain, had
been hastily recalled to take charge in Cappadocia, now reinforced by Danubian vexillationes.222
A specific role for the Apollinaris in the reconquest of Armenia in 163 is not on record. But in
172, when Martius Verus, the Cappadocian governer (166/167-174/175), had to intervene in
Armenia to halt a coup against Sohaemus, the Armenian king installed in 164, a Roman garrison
resided at the new Armenian capital of Valarshapat/Kainepolis. That garrison must have
included a vexillatio of the XV, as Kainepolis would continue to be a regular outpost of
detachments of the XV into the reign of Commodus.223 But more on the Apollinaris at
Kainepolis later.
From 164 until 166 Mesopotamia became the war’s main theater.224 Indirect evidence
permits inference of the XV’s continued active participation in the operations. A. Iulius
Pompilius Piso’s unusual double tribunate in first XII Fulminata, then XV Apollinaris before
becoming quaestor urbanus ca 166 points to an active role in the war. Flavius Marcianus, a
centurion of the XV and on post at Ancyra ca 166 or soon after, if references to Aesculapius
[[298]] and Hygia in his text indicate a concern for plague, had transferred from the XIV
Gemina, which sent a vexillatio to Cappadocia in 162. Petronius Fortunatus, a centurion in
twelve legions, including the XV, over fifty years in the late second and early third centuries,
received dona militaria for a Parthian war, though it is not clear which Parthian war. Similarly,
M. Aurelius Claudianus, later prominent under Commodus, served eleven centuriates in ten
eastern and Danubian legions, including the XV, and T. Vitellius Atillianus, also a centurion in
ten legions during his forty-eight stipendia, had consecutive Cappadocian service in the XV and
the XII. Certainly these careers indicate wartime activity, but participation in Verus’ Parthian
War as quintadecimani again is elusive. Yet more likely are Cn. Marcius Rusticus Rufinus,
prefect of the vigiles 205-207, who began his long career as a centurion in the XV under Marcus

major cause. Cf. M.-L. Chaumont, L’Arménie entre Rome et l’Iran I. De l’avènement d’Auguste à l’avènement de
Dioclétien, ANRW, 1976, II.9.1, pp.146-47.
220Dio 71.2.1; Fronto Princ.Hist. 17, p.199 van den Hout; Lucian Alex. 27, Hist.conscr. 21, 25-26; HA, Verus 6.9;
Sedatius: Rémy no. 172; cf. Chaumont (supra n.219), pp.147-48.
221For the debate on whether the lost legion was the IX Hispana, cf. E. Birley, The Fate of the Ninth Legion, Soldier
and Civilian in Roman Yorkshire, ed. R. Butler, 1971 (Leicester), pp.71-80, and L. Keppie, The Fate of the Ninth
Legion—a Problem for the Eastern Provinces?, in French and Lightfoot (supra n.210), pp.247-53, and id. elsewhere
in this volume.
222On the course of events see Birley (supra n.50), pp.123-25, 128-29 with notes; Chaumont (supra n.219), pp.148-
50; Danubian reinforcements: Saxer, p.33.
223Dio 71.3.1; cf. 71.14.2 Birley (supra n.50), p.175; Chaumont (supra n.219), pp.149, 150-51 with n.448; Rémy,
p.227.
224Cf. David Kennedy’s comment on ILS 1102 (The Special Command of M. Valerius Lollianus, Donum amicitiae:
Studies in Ancient History, ed. E. Dabrowa, 1997 [Cracow], p.79): “Cappadocia was only a flanking frontier
requiring support in 162, it was not the very seat of the war as was Mesopotamia in both Trajan’s and Lucius Verus’
Parthian Wars.” This gross underestimation of the significance of Armenia seems to ignore that Mesopotamian
campaigns were only possible if Rome had first secured its hold on Armenia.
Aurelius, and L. Caecilius Optatus, a centurion transferred from VII Gemina in Spain to the XV,
then discharged by Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus.225 Further, C. Tetius Iucundus, a native
of Ammaedara in Numidia, probably came to the East with a vexillatio of III Augusta,
transferred to the Apollinaris, then later retired to his birthplace. Other members of III Augusta
died in Parthia or in Syria possibly in Verus’ Parthian War, which at least for Iucundus appears
the most likely occasion.226 But if in some of these careers service in the XV might have
occurred in the XV’s participation in the Marcomannic wars in the 170s, an additional scrap of
evidence points to possible activity of the XV in the Mesopotamian campaigns of 165-166: an
aes of Hadrian from the mint at Cappadocian Caesarea and countermarked by the XV appears at
Dura-Europos in a group of coins of L. Verus dated 165/166.227 Avidius Cassius fought a major
battle there in 165 before moving on to Ctesiphon and Seleuceia-on-the-Tigris, and III Gallica
need not have been the only legion under his command.228
Even before the Parthian war reached its conclusion, war clouds were already gathering on
the middle Danube and new legions (II and III Italica) were being raised in Italy 165-166. The
Marcomannic wars would occupy Marcus Aurelius for the last fourteen years of his reign (166-
180). As in 118, Danubian contingents had to scurry back to their home bases from a Parthian
war.229 The Roman counter-offensive 170-175 of course required additional manpower, which
included vexillationes from both Cappadocian legions. On its march through Thrace the XV
picked up new recruit, Aurelius Dizes, who set up an altar pro expeditione. The year is unknown,
although the Apollinaris actively campaigned in Barbaricum in 172, as the griffin emblem on a
Roman soldier’s helmet from Scene XV of the Aurelian Column demonstrates—the scene
immediately preceeding the Rain Miracle of that year. A new inscription from a statue base at
Sarmizegetusa further confirms the XV’s service in this phase of the war, if correctly restored.230
[[299]] In the 175 the revolt of Avidius Cassius, then governor Syria, halted Danubian
campaigning. News of the uprising came to Marcus Aurelius from Martius Verus, the
Cappadocian governor, but the whole affair of scarcely three months’ duration ended before
Marcus set out for the East in July; Cassius was murdered by two of his own soldiers.231
Although Martius Verus’ loyalty was rewarded with the governorship of Syria (175-178),
caution is required about his active resistance to Cassius (cf. Rémy, p.227). His Cappadocian

225Pompilius Piso: AE 1980.952; Rémy no.221; Marcianus: Bosch no. 178 (CIL III 242); cf. Saxer, p.33; Fortunatus:
ILS 2658; cf. Maxfield (supra n.5), pp.198-99 (dona for Verus’ Parthian War); Le Bohec (supra n.117), p.177 (dona
for Septimius Severus’ Parthian War); Claudianus: AE 1981.158; Vitellius: CIL VIII 3001; cf. Le Bohec, p.165;
Marcius Rusticus: Dobson no. 154; Sablayrolles, pp.496-97, 559-60; Optatus: ILS 6957.
226Iucundus: ILAfr. 167; in Parthia: ILS 2306; cf. CIL VIII 2976; Ritterling, 1299, 1500; Mann, p.44 with n.506;
Syria: CIL III 6036 (not datable). For transfers from a vexillatio to another legion see Saxer, pp.42-43, on filling the
ranks of Danubian legions depleted by losses in the Marcomannic wars with men from III Augusta. Contacts
between the Apollinaris and III Augusta are, except for ILAfr. 167, unknown.; cf. G. Di Vita-Eurard, Légionnaires
africains en Pannonie au IIe s. ap. J.C., in Hajnóczi (supra n.65), pp.97-114. Le Bohec (supra n.117, pp.214, 278)
assigns ILS 2306 to Trajan’s Parthian War on the argument that a specific Parthian war is not mentioned, but such
details are rarely given for Parthian wars in epigraphical texts. Cf. V. Rosenberger, Bella et expeditiones. Die antike
Terminologie der Kriege Roms, 1992 (Stuttgart), pp.80-81, 94-95, 100-102, 112-112-13, 115-16, 117, 123. The
secunda Parthica felicissima expeditio of AE 1957.123 (Lambaesis) is highly exceptional.
227Bellinger (supra n.107), p.100 no. 2070a; Howgego (supra n.33), p.257.
228Lucian, Hist.conscr. 20, 28; cf. Wheeler (supra n.52), pp.260-62.
229Wheeler (supra n.52), p.260; Birley (supra n.50), pp.142, 145, 148-49; cf. pp.249-55.
230Dizes: AE 1956.227 (SEG III 525, Basikarova); Sarmizegetusa text: Piso (supra n.34), pp.97-104, though his
arguments about the Rain Miracle and the XV’s presence there can be debated. W.G. Kerr will soon offer a new
study of the chronology of the Marcomannic wars: cf. his A Chronological Study of the Marcomannic Wars of
Marcus Aurelius, 1995 (Diss. Princeton Univ.), and The Praetentura Italicae et Alpium (ILS 8977): New
Numismatic Perspectives, in Groenman-van Waateringe et al. (supra n.122), pp.405-409.
231Dio 71.23.3, 27.2-32; Cassius: Dabrowa, pp.112-17; Verus: Rémy no. 175; cf. Birley (supra n.50), pp.183-91.
army was short of legionaries in 175: vexillationes of the XV and the XII were no doubt still on
the Danube; a vexillation of one or both of these legions was at Armenian Caenepolis (discussed
below); a vexillation of the XV was probably at Trapezus; and another of the XV was already on
assignment at Pityus on the northeastern coast of Colchis. Thus in all likelihood only a skeleton
force of the XV remained at Satala in 175, although (as Ritterling argued: supra n.51) enough of
the XII was in Cappadocia to warrant the award of a new cognomen, certa constans.
Another text also suggests the XV’s service in the Marcomannic wars. A centurion of the
Apollinaris, M. Aebutius Victorinus from Poetovio, died at Ancyra. Initially recruited at age
forty-nine directly into the centuriate of the X Gemina at Vindobona, he served fourteen
stipendia in seven mainly Danubian legions before his transfer to the XV. Duty in the
Marcomannic wars seems obvious, especially as he last served in the Upper Moesian VII
Claudia before his transfer. Recruitment of a man at age forty-nine surely indicates an
emergency situation, which could well reflect the situation of 166-168, and as it now is
established that the XV did serve in the Marcomannic wars, his transfer most probably occurred
while the XV was still in the war theater. Thus, rather than having Aebutius transfer to
Cappadocia and receive an assignment at Ancyra (sic Bosch ad no. 187 [CIL III 6761]), this
centurion probably died at Ancyra on the march back to Satala from the Danube in 180 or 181.

The Antonine era witnessed the assignment of vexillationes of legio XV far beyond Satala at
Kainepolis/Valarshapat in Armenia and on the Colchian coast at Trapezus and Pityus. The
Armenian detachment dates from Statius Priscus’ reconquest of Armenia in 163. Artaxata’s
recapture, as now known, involved some damage to the city but not its total distruction. When
Sohaemus was restored to the Armenian throne in 164, his residence became Valarshapat, which
the Romans called Kainepolis (on the Kasakh River about 20 miles northwest of Artaxata).232
Roman occupation of Kainepolis or Artaxata in wartime would not be surprising, but the
decision was made to continue a Roman military presence after the end of the Parthian war in
166—with some justification, for the rival pro- and anti-Roman factions within the Armenian
nobility still rendered that people an ambigua gens (Tac. Ann. 2.56.1).233 In 172, despite the
Roman garrison, an Armenian satrap (nakharar), Tiridates, [[300]] stirred up a revolt, chased
Sohaemus from Armenia, and killed a king of the Heniochi, a tribe of southwestern Colchis long
allied with Rome. Martius Verus, the Cappadocian governor, had to intervene and restore
Sohaemus. Perhaps at this time Kainepolis became the official royal residence with an increased
Roman garrison. A motive for changing the capital to Kainepolis is obscure.234

232Dio 71.3.11=Suda s.v. Mãrtiow; destruction at Artaxata: references in Wheeler (supra n.211). Dio should not be
taken to mean that Statius Priscus founded a new city. The Armenian tradition (Moses Chor. 2.65) attributes
Valarshapat’s foundation to a king Vologaeses, whose accession is dated ca 180. Though (as often) the chronology
of the Armenian historiographical tradition does no coincide with the Graeco-Roman, this disagreement does not
necessarily negate the events described in the Armenian tradition. The reconstructions of the dynastic aspects of
Armenian events 140-172 by Chaumont (supra n.219, pp.146-51, and Recherches sur l’histoire d’Arménie de
l’avènement des Sassanides à la conversion du royaume, 1969 [Paris], pp.16-19) and J.G. Vinogradov (The Goddess
Ge Meter Olybris: New Epigraphical Material from Armenia, Pontische Studien, ed. H. Heinen, 1997 [Mainz],
pp.605-12 [=East and West XLII, 1992, pp.18-26]), are unconvincing: if the Parthian invasion of Armenia in 161
did not involve a change of kings, then any motive for initiating the war is lacking. A detailed discussion of these
issues cannot be undertaken here.
233Cf. Tac. Ann. 13.45.5, 37.1; 14.62.2 on pro- and anti-Roman factions. The revolutionaries that Martius Verus

squelched at Kainepolis (Dio 71.3.11) are more probably Armenians than a mutinous Roman garrison.
234Dio 71.3.11, 14.2; increased garrison: conjectured by Mitford (supra n.145), 1205 with n. 109, though he errs in
implying that Artaxata had been destroyed. Trajan had named Artaxata a metropolis in his new Cappadocia-
Armenia province and the city began a new era in 114, as bronze coins of 183 show. The city flourished as a major
trade center into the fifth century. See M.-L. Chaumont, A propos d’une ère d’Artaxata, capitale de la Grand
 The long-term commitment of Roman troops in Armenia marked a return to Claudian policy,
when Roman troops (probably auxiliaries) propped up the rule of Mithridates the Iberian 41-
51.235 Specifics about the detachment at Kainepolis first come from a text of 177, when
vexillationes of the XV and the XII are recorded in the governorship of C. Arrius Antoninus
under two praepositi: Popilius Macrinus, tribune of the otherwise unattested cohors milliaria eq.
c.R., and T. Aurelius Varus, centurion of the XV.236 Presumably a joint vexillation of the XV
and the XII formed the core of the Roman garrison at Kainepolis from 163, but by 184 only a
detachment of the Apollinaris is known under a tribune Licinius Saturninus and a centurion
Aurelius Labrase.237 A third text, not precisely datable but certainly of the same period, records
the epitaph of a tribune of the XV, P. Aelius Vales, to his wife and his ten-year-old daughter.238
Apparently officers on a long-term vexillatio could take along their families, and service in the
new Armenian capital might have provided more amenities than the rigors of Satala, which did
not enjoy municipal status.
Two additional pieces of evidence may also be connected with the XV’s vexillatio at
Kainepolis. A very fragmentary Latin text from ca 20 miles southwest of Kainepolis has been
conjectured as a milestone of Commodus, but the text is too fragmentary to support this view and
Roman milestones in north central Armenia are otherwise (not surprisingly) unattested—it was
not Roman territory.239 More promising is a small altar discovered in 1978 and inscribed to G∞
M∞thr ÉOlubriw (this divinity’s first attestation) by an ÉEmίliow OÈãlhw. The Fundort, the
village of Areni near the ancient site of Arpaneal, lies about 65 miles southeast of Artaxata and
about 35 miles south of Lake Sevan, in other words, deep in eastern north central Armenia.240
Vinogradov, following Rostovtzeff, argues that Valens/Vales is a cognomen militare in eastern
Anatolia, that the text can be dated by its lettering to the same period as Aelius Vales’ text from
Valarshapat, and the Emilios must be a veteran of either the XV or the XII.241 As Emilios does
not identify himself as a veteran—omission of a specific unit is not unusual in the East—he
cannot be claimed as a quintadecimanus. But if Vinogradov’s other arguments can be accepted,
Emilios offers a [[301]] second epigraphical example of Roman recruitment from Armenia
Maior.242 In any event, the vexillatio of the Apollinaris at Kainepolis probably did not extend

Arménie, REArm XVIII, 1984, pp.397-409, though her attempt to redefine the era to ca 53 B.C. (rather than A.D.
114) is unconvincing.
235Cf. Wheeler (supra n.52), p.268. Antonine use of legionaries marked a shift in power vis-à-vis a declining
Parthia, whose sensibilities about Armenia no longer carried the same weight in international calculations, especially
after the Roman victory in 161-166. Rémy (supra n.148, p.86) erroneously believes in a continuous Roman military
presence in Armenia from Nero on.
236ILS 9117; Saxer no. 275; Popilius: PME P 92; on the date see I. Piso, Fasti Provinciae Daciae I: Die
senatorischen Amsträger, 1993 (Bonn), pp.112-16, correcting Rémy no. 176. In general on the Kainepolis
vexillationes see Ritterling, 1754; Mitford (supra n.145), pp. 1205-206.
237ILS 394; Saxer no. 276; on the date, Rémy, p.233. Licinius: PME L 17.
238AE 1956.31 (SEG XV 839), a text that escaped Rittering’s notice, though published by M.I. Rostovtzeff in 1914:
A New Greek Inscription from Echmiadzin, Christian Orient III.3, pp.246-48 (in Russian).
239CIL III 13627a, seen only by a monk in the nineteenth century: Imp./ Caes. Divi/ [...]; milestone of Commodus:
Mitford (supra n.144), p.1205 n.109, followed by Crow (supra n.6), pp.78, 81; contra, Wheeler (supra n.6), p.505
with n.3.
240Cf. an alleged (and now lost) Latin inscription of XII Fulminata from Karjagino on the left bank of the Araxes,
which Mitford (supra n.145, p.1194 n.57) connects with the Albanian text of the XII under Domitian (AE 1951.263).
Until a text is published, nothing can be argued about its date or its historical context.
241Vinogradov (supra n.232), pp.602-605.
242Cf. AE 1991.1585, a bilingual Greek and Syriac text of the veteran Antonius Domittianus (early 3rd c.?) from
Çattepe at the confluence of the Bohtan and Tigris Rivers in Armenian Arzanene. See Wheeler (supra n.211) for
bibliography and discussion.
beyond Commodus’ reign, and perhaps a peaceful transition to Sohaemus’ successor (whoever
he was) made a continued Roman presence unnecessary. When Pescennius Niger appealed to the
Armenian king in 193 for support against Septimius Severus (Hdn. 3.1.2), the Armenian could
politely refuse. Apparently no Roman garrison, which Niger could use as leverage, still resided
at Kainepolis. Besides, quintadecimani (if there) would not have been under the Syrian
governor’s direct control and (as argued earlier) the Apollinaris did not support Niger anyway.

Besides the Armenian front, the Cappadocian army also had responsibilities for control of the
Euxine coast of Colchis. Roman policing of the Euxine began with the Flavians: Josephus
mentions a fleet of forty ships and 3,000 troops along the coasts (BJ 2.367), but all these forces
cannot be assumed to be based in or aimed at Colchis; Pliny identifies castella at Apsarus at the
mouth of the Acampsis River and at Dioscurias/Sebastopolis, an old Hellenistic trading center
with the Colchian and Caucasian tribes (HN 6.12, 14). The most detailed account of the Roman
military presence in Colchis, however, occurs in Arrian’s report of his inspection of the Colchian
coast from Trapezus to Sebastopolis ca 131 (Peripl. 1-11), which reveals an additional (but not
new: cf. Peripl. 9.3-4) Roman fort at Phasis.
As noted earlier, Trapezus first gained strategic importance as a supply base for Corbulo’s
army on the upper Euphrates, but this aspect probably declined over time and varied in
intensity—great activity during an Armenian campaign but little in peacetime. With the
extension of Roman military presence along the Colchian coast Trapezus’ greater significance
lay elsewhere: it became the lynchpin of the Euphrates and Colchian branches of the
Cappadocian army. By the second century Trapezus minted bronze coins for paying the Colchian
garrisons.243 As often assumed, apparently because Polemon II of Pontus had based his fleet
there (cf. Tac. Hist. 3.47.1-2), Trapezus served as headquarters of the classis Pontica. But the
city lacked a good harbor until Hadrian built one (Arr. Peripl. 16.6; cf. Dio 69.5.3), and Arrian
does not mention a garrison. At some point, presumably in the second century, vexillationes of
the Cappadocian legions were stationed there. Detachments of the XV and the XII are attested,
though not as a joint vexillation,244 to which another text of a quintadecimanus can now be
added. The new text records the epitaph of T. Aurelius Apolinaris from Cappadocian Caesarea, a
vexillarius dead after six stipendia. Mitford deduces from his gentilicium a probable grant of
citizenship from Antoninus Pius and dates the stone ca 200 from letter forms.245 But if this
Aurelius received citizenship upon recruitment in the XV under Pius, his enrollment must date to
161 at the latest, and his death after six stipendia would fall ca 167. Hitherto it could have been
argued that vexillations of the Cappadocian legions at Trapezus filled a gap caused ca 175, when
the headquarters of the classis Pontica abandoned Trapezus for Cyzicus—a response to inroads
of the Costoboci deep into Greece.246 Additional evidence, however, suggests stations of the
Pontic fleet at Amastris, Sinope, and elsewhere, and that the classis Pontica did not abandon the
eastern Euxine.247 Thus, regardless of whether Trapezus ever really was the headquarters of the
[[302]] classis Pontica, Aurelius Apolinaris, if his text is now correctly dated to the 160s—and

243G. Dondua and G. Lordkipanidze, Pitiunt-Bitschwinta in der Spätantike. Zur Geschichte der auswärtigen
Beziehungen vom 1.-4. Jh. v.Z., Georgica III, 1980, 41-42, 43-44.
244XII: CIL III 6745 (=Saxer no. 274); XV: CIL III 6747 of very uncertain reading; the word MEDICUS alone is
clear. Mitford (ZPE, supra n.139, p.149 no.15) argues that the centurion Iulius Proculus who set up a gravestone for
a libertus at Satala is the same Iulius Proculus, centurion of the XII, attested at Trapezus.
245 Mitford, JRS (supra n.139), p.163 no.2 (AE 1975.783).
246Starr (supra n.75), pp.128-29, followed by O. Bounegru and M. Zahariade, Les forces navales du Bas Danube et

la Mer Noire aux 1er-VIe siècles, 1996 (Oxford), pp.18-19.

247D. Kienast, Untersuchungen zu den Kriegsflotten der römischen Welt, 1966 (Bonn), pp.117-18; D. French,
Classis Pontica, EA IV, 1983, 53-60; cf. Kissell (supra n.211), p.72.
in eastern Anatolia letter forms of the 160s can hardly be distinguished from those of ca 200—
must have been at Trapezus for logistical or adminstrative duties tied to Verus’s Parthian War.248
How long the Cappadocian legions continued to maintain vexillationes at Trapezus is not
clear. When the Borani, probably a Sarmatian tribe, captured Trapezus in 258,249 Trapezus had a
permanent garrison besides numerous troops en route for Valerian’s Persian offensive and
temporarily in residence.250 Whether the permanent garrison consisted of a vexillatio of the XV
or the XII cannot be said and some believe the garrison was merely members of the Pontic
fleet.251 Given the Persian offensives of the 250s, the Sassanid conquest of Armenia in 251, and
Valerian’s campaign plans, the Apollinaris may well have been elsewhere. Indeed there is no
trace of the XV, nor any resistance on record for the Sassand attack on northeastern Cappadocia
probably in 252, when Hormizd, the Sassanid crown prince and governor of Armenia, captured
Satala, Domana, Artangil, Souisa, and Phreata.252 Only an inscription from Nicopolis (Armenia
Minor), which hails the Cappadocian governor P. Petronius Polianus as svt∞|ra t[oË ¶y]nouw
might offer some proof of the XV’s combat against the Persians. But Polianus’ governorship
more likely dates to the late 240s rather than the early 250s and the connotation of svtÆr need
not be military.253 In any event, the Borani’s capture of Trapezus had its effect: Diocletian would
station the newly created I Pontica there.254

[[303]] The XV Apollinaris, however, was taking casualties in the third century far from
Satala. Arrian notes Sebastoplis/Disocurias as the endpoint of the Roman Empire (Peripl. 7.2);

248Kienast conjectures (supra n.247, p.117) that the Parthian invasion of Armenia in 161 reached Pontus
Polemoniacus, which included Trapezus and Colchis, because L. Valerius Maximianus, a praepositus orae gentium
Ponti Polemoniaci in this war, received dona militaria for this assignment (AE 1956.124). But this is idle. Dona
could be awarded for logistic duties, as was the case of L. Aurelius Nicomedes, a libertus and praefectus
vehiculorum in the same war. See Maxfield (supra n.5), pp.130-31.
249Zos. 1.33; on the date see E. Olshausen, Die Anfänge der grossen Völkerwanderung im 3. Jahrhundert n. Chr. am
Schwarzen Meer—Zur Frage der innen Struktur wandernder Stämme, Die Schwarzmeerküste in der Spätantike und
im frühen Mittelalter, eds. R. Pillinger, A. Pülz, H. Vetters, 1992 (Vienna), p.10 n.4; cf. his Feste Grenzen und
wandernde Völker: Trapezus und die Boraner. Ein Beitrag zur Migrations- und zur Grenzraumproblematic, Pontica
I: Recherches sur l’histoire du Pont dans l’Antiquité, ed. B. Rémy, 1991 (Istanbul), pp.25-37. The year 259 is also
possible: Reddé (supra n.211), p.610, following M. Christol; for 256, see A. Schwarcz, Die gotischen Seezüge der 3.
Jahrhundert, in Pillinger et. al., p.50. A date of 253 (sic Mitford, ZPE, supra n.139, p.138) is out of the question,
unless one wants to connect the Borani’s capture of Trapezus with the supposed raid of the Sanni on Lycia, as
implied at Or.Sib. 13.139-40. That the Sanni, a recalcitrant mountain people southeast of Trapezus (cf. Arr. Peripl.
11.2) learned to sail and launched such an expedition is accepted by D. Potter, who even believes they captured
Ephesus: Prophecy and History in the Crisis of the Roman Empire, 1990 (Oxford), pp.310-12. But on use of Or.Sib.
13 as an historical source, see K. Strobel, Das Imperium Romanum im 3. Jahrhundert. Modell einer historischen
Krise?, 1993 (Stuttgart), pp.139, 211-13, 229, 230, 248, 253.
250Zos. 1.33.1: t“ TrapezoËnti ... ka‹ prÚw to›w §yãsi strati≈taiw murίvn •t°rvn dÊnamin proslaboÊs˙;

Olshausen, in Rémy (supra n.249), p.35, following Kienast (supra n.247), p.119. Zosimus’ account (1.33.2) that the
soldiers’ negligence and drunkenness were responsible for the city’s capture need not be taken seriously: see
Wheeler (supra n.52), p.253.
251Olshausen, in Rémy (supra n.249), p.35.
252RGDS 18-19 (Gk.); see E. Kettenhofen, Die römisch-periischen Kriege des 3. Jahrhunderts n.Chr., 1982
(Wiesbaden), pp.83-85; cf. Strobel (supra n.249), p.229, who prefers 256. Mitford (ZPE, supra n.139, p.138) posits
ca 254 and explains Persian success through the XV’s losses to the Borani at Trapezus in 253. But cf. supra n.249
for the date of Trapezus’ capture.
253AE 1909.19; Polianus: K. Dietz, Senatus contra principem, 1980 (Munich), p.199 no. 65; Rémy no. 192;
connecton with the Persian invasion: B. Bleckmann, Die Reichskrise des III. Jahrhunderts in der spätantiken und
byzantinischen Geschichtsschreibung: Untersuchungen zu den nachdionischen Quellen der Chronik des Johannes
Zonaras, 1992 (Munich), p.81 n.95.
254Not.Dig.Or. 38.16; ILS 639; cf. CIL III 236; Ritterling, 1437; J.F. Gilliam, A Diocletianic Inscription from
Ayasofya and Imperial Military Supernomina, ZPE XV, 1974, pp.183-91.
the new terminus imperii (cf. Theodrt. HE 5.34.8) would be Pityus, ca 60 km northwest of
Sebastopolis on the Colchian coast, which from the mid-second century housed a vexillatio of
XV Apollinaris. Like Sebastopolis/Dioscurias, Pityus was an old Hellenistic trading post with
ample access to timber and stone. The Heniochi sacked it at some point in the first century
during their migration from northern to southern Colchis (Plin. HN 6.16). A wooden fort already
stood there in the second half of the first century,255 though the silence of Pliny and Arrian
indicates that it did not house Roman troops. The stratigraphy of the site and various
archaeological finds suggest the establishment of a Roman garrison there in the mid-second
century under Antoninus Pius. A very fragmentary Latin inscription from a rubble pile of the
third century produces a consular date of 152, if correctly restored.256 The initial stone fort
following the typical rectangular plan of a Roman border fort was at 150 x 130 m. large enough
to house about 500 men. A praetorium leads to speculation that Pityus became the headquarters
of Roman garrisons north of the Phasis.257 Not least, stamped bricks from a late second/early
third century context attest the presence of a vexillatio of XV Apollinaris.258 That legion of
builders on the Danube, now active in Colchis, was—so far as known—the initial garrison and
constructors of the Pityus fort.
A motive for expansion of the Empire by ca 60 km up the Colchian coast under Pius is
obscure. A Sarmatian threat to Colchis from beyond the Caucasus is a scholarly myth. No hostile
Sarmatian activities are on record for the first three Christian centuries in Colchis and Rome
made no efforts in Colchis to control directly more than the coastal emporia. A relatively small
vexillation, as the size of the initial Pityus fort implies, could hardly deter massive armed hordes.
Speculation259 about the need for tightened security in northern Colchis is unsubstantiated. The
client-kings near Pityus and Sebastopolis, appointees of Hadrian, Spadagas of the Sannigae and
Stachemphax of the Zilchi, may well have expired during Pius’ reign; apparently Hadrian’s Laz
king, Malassas, did die and a Pacorus received Pius’ nod.260 Unrest in the area is unattested.
Rather than local problems or grandiose Sarmatian threats, the modest expansion in Colchis finds
its parallel in Pius’ equally modest projection of the limes in Germania Superior and Raetia by 15

255A. Lüning, Ausgrabung in Georgien: Pizunda, Georgica X, 1987, p.65. For surveys of the site see Braund (supra
n.105), pp.198-200; G. Lordkipanidze and D. Braund, Recent Work at Pityus (Pitsunda/Bichvinta, USSR), in
Maxfield and Dobson (supra n.6), pp. 335-36; O. Lordkipanidze, Archäologie in Georgien: Von der Altsteinzeit zum
Mittelalter, tr. D. Mcheidse, 1991 (Weinheim), pp.163-64. Additional bibliography in Wheeler (supra n.211).
256Date of fort: Braund (supra n.105), p.198: “within a decade or so of Arrian’s visit”; M.P. Speidel and T. Todua,
Three Inscriptions from Pityus on the Caucasus Frontier, SJ XLIV, 1988, pp.56, 58; inscription: Speidel and Todua,
p.58 no. 1: [- - -]P`C`[- - -] / d(onum) [d (edit)]/ Glab[rione et Homullo co(n)s(ulibus)].
257V.A. Lekvinadze, Pontiyskiy Limes, VDI 1969.2, 85; Lüning (supra n.255), p.66. Lekvinadze much exaggerates
the argument for a headquarters, since the only other known Roman garrison north of the Phasis in the second and
third centuries was at Sebastopolis.
258N.S. Kiguradze, G.A. Lordkipanidze, T.T. Todua, Klejma XV legiona iz Pitsundskogo gorodishcha, VDI, 1987.2,
pp.88-92. Another brick stamped LEG occurs at an outpost on Lake Inkita (a lagoon in antiquity) ca 3 km northwest
of Pityus and in a context of the third or fourth century: see Lekvinadze (supra n.257), p.87; Braund (supra n.105),
p.200.
259Braund (supra n.105), p.198.
260Spadagas and Stachemphax: Arr. Peripl. 11.3, 18.3; Malassas: Arr. Peripl. 11.2; Pacorus: HA, Pius 9.6. A silver
bowl inscribed parå Basil°vw PakÒrou found at Daskovska in the Majkob region of the northern Caucasus
probably was a gift from the new king of the Lazi rather than from Aurelius Pacorus, the Parthian candidate for the
Armenian throne installed by the invasion of 161, as Chaumont (supra n.219, p.148) conjectures; cf. IGR I 222;
bowl: L. Moretti, Due note epigraphiche, II. Quattro iscrizione greche dell’Armenia, Athenaeum XXXIII, 1955,
p.45.
miles in the early 150s under the German governor C. Popilius Carus Pedo—a supposed
compen- sation for abandonment of the Antonine Wall in Britain.261
[[304]] But even Pityus had no immunity from warfare. Presumably the vexillatio of the XV
was still there in 254, when its commander Successianus (perhaps an equestrian praepositus)
thwarted a sea-borne attempt of the Borani, then in cooperation with a Bosporan usurper, to
capture the fort. Zosimus’ panegyric on Successianus’ success (1.32.1-2), no doubt derived from
Dexippus’ Scythica, probably reflects accurately contemporary acclaim for a Roman victory in
the midst of so many barbarian intrusions in the 250s, for Successianus caught Valerian’s eye
and a promotion to Praetorian Prefect, charged with rebuilding Syrian Antioch. He would share
Valerian’s capture by Sapor I in 260.262 But the Borani returned in 258. After a failed attempt on
Phasis, they attacked Pityus from the south and surprised the garrison, destroying the fort and
taking numerous prisoners. These captured quintadecimani were then compelled to row the ships
as the raid continued to Trapezus, which fell the same summer.263
An entire (though admittedly small) vexillatio of the Apollinaris had been wiped out. It is
unlikely that quintadecimani ever returned to Pityus: the single brick stamped LEG at the outpost
on Lake Inkita (supra n.258) is hardly enough to support such a view, and an ala I felix
Theodosiana held the site at the end of the fourth century (Not.Dig.Or. 38.32). Despite the claims
of excavators that Pityus quickly recovered, the numismatic evidence sharply decreases from the
250s until an upsurge in the Tetrarchic and Constantinian periods shows a flourishing economy.
The rebuilding of the fort would also date to the late third or early fourth century.264
A final possible Colchian connection with the XV should be mentioned. An unusually thick
brick (6.5 cm) was found in 1924 near Tsikhisdziri, the same general area as the Justinianic fort
of Petra, north of Apsarus. It bears the stamp VEX·FA, which some take to mean vex(illationes
legionum XII) F(ulminata et XV) A(pollinaris).265 Speidel would interpret the stamp as vexillatio
Fasiana with reference to the 400 strati«tai §pίlektoi found at Phasis ca 131 (Arr. Peripl.
9.3), which he takes as pedites singulares.266 Neither of these solutions is satisfactory. No
vexillation of the XII is known in Colchis except for a single text from Trapezus (supra n.244)
and a joint vexillation of the two Cappadocian legions is unique to Kainepolis (ILS 9117). The
400 §pίlektoi at Phasis need not be singulares: the Greek term can refer to vexilliarii.267 The
brick is a stray-find without archaeological context and does not correspond to other bricks
known at Phasis or Petra.268 Further, at some point in the second or third century, the Romans
abandoned central Colchis, including Phasis, to the Lazi; by the fourth century the whole of

261See Birley (supra n.50), p.133; Eck (supra n.86), pp.60-62. It should be noted, however, that if a founding under
Pius is the correct date, the numismatic evidence from Pityus, which is considerable (ca 1400 coins, 2nd-4th cc.),
will not support it. No coins of Pius appear and large numbers of coins first occur in the Severan era: see Dondua
and Lordkipanidze (supra n.243), p.43, Tab. 1.
262Borani: Olshausen, in Pillinger et al. (supra n.249), pp.9-11; Successianus: Howe (supra n.60), pp.80-81 no. 49.
263Zos. 1.32.3-33.1; Lüning (supra n.255), p.66-67.
264Dondua and Lordkipanidze (supra n.243), pp.43-45, Tab. 1-4; Lüning (supra n.255), pp.66-67; G.
Lordkipanidze, Forschungen in Pityous (Pizunda-Bitschwinta), Prinzipat und Kultur im 1. und 2. Jahrhundert, 1995
(Bonn), p.308; Braund (supra n.105), p.199. The bronze box from a catapult, found in a weapons stockpile dating
from the fourth to the six centuries, and several plumbatae postdate the XV’s presence. See D. Baatz, Eine Katapult-
Spannbüchse aus Pityus, Georgien (UdSSR), SJ XLIV, 1988, pp.59-64; J. Bennett, Plumbatae from Pitsunda
(Pityus, Georgia), and some Observations on their Probable Use, JRMES II, 1991, pp.59-63.
265Lekvinadze (supra n.257), p.87, followed by Mitford, JRS (supra n.139), p.163.
266Speidel (supra n.217), pp.659-60.
267Cf. Jos. BJ 2.500. Baatz’s argument that the troops at Phasis cannot be auxiliaries because they have artillery is
(in my view) circular. See D. Baatz, Zur Geschützbewaffnung römischer Auxiliartruppen in der frühen und mittleren
Kaiserzeit, BJ CLXVI, 1966, pp.194-207.
268Braund (supra n.105), p.189, who conjectures a local origo near Petra.
central Colchis was Lazica. The Borani in their raid of 258 did not encounter Roman troops at
Phasis, which they failed to take, nor apparently did garrisons still exist at Sebastopolis or
Apsarus. The last securely datable evidence for Sebastopolis before the Late Empire consists of
six coins of [[305]] Commodus and Septimius Severus.269 Neither a Phasian origin (Speidel),
nor a Petran origin (Braund), nor even a Apollinarian-Fulminatian origin (Lekvinadze) will
account for this undatable brick, which cannot contribute to the history of the XV Apollinaris.

The Borani’s capture of the XV’s vexillatio at Pityus in 258 marks the last combat, in which
the legion can with some probability be associated. The silence of the sources on the XV’s role
in eastern wars of the second, third, and fourth century is particularly frustrating. An equestrian
officer, P. Aelius Hammonius led a Cappadocian force in Severus Alexander’s Persian war
(232),270 but nothing survives about the XV in this campaign. Galerius used Satala as his base in
fall 297, when he defeated Narses in Armenia.271 Again nothing about the XV. This legion’s last
attestation, Not.Dig.Or.38.13 finds it still at Satala ca 395 but under a praefectus legionis.
Armenia’s partition in 387 led to a forward shift of the Roman frontier into the former Armenia
Maior. Satala ceased to be a legionary base at some time after 395272 and the “Hooked
Avengers” of the XV Apollinaris sank into Byzantine oblivion.

Appendix A
Officers and Ranks of XV Apollinaris: A Supplement to Ritterling

Legatus legionis
M. Iulius Romulus, ca 49, AE 1925.81, Franke no. 104
C. Minicius Fundanus, late 90s, Franke no. 109; Rémy no.216
Rutilius Pudens Crispinus, ca 223-225, Dietz (supra n.253), no. 75; Rémy no. 212
Tribunus Laticlavus
M. Messius Rusticianus Aemilius Lepidus Iulius Celsus Balbinus Arrius Proclus, ca 137-140, AE 1983.517,
1988.720; Rémy no. 218
ignotus, 2nd c., Iscr.Ital. IV.1 100 (CIL XIV 3587); Rémy no. 222: formerly identified with Arrianus Aper Veturius
Severus
Tribunus angusticlavus
P. Aelius Vales, ca 163?-ca 192?, AE 1956.31 (SEG XV 839)
L. Campanius Flaccus, 1st c., AE 1980.218 (CIL X 474*)

269Zos. 1.32.3-33.1; Lekvinadze (supra n.257), p.84. Apsarus (so far) is a tabula rasa between Arrian’s report in the
Periplus and the Byzantine era. Georgian archaeologists assert evidence of a Roman fort at Petra ca 300 (sic
Braund, supra n.105, p.189), but what that evidence is remains unclear and the silence of the Notitia Dignitatum on
Petra seems decisive. Against Braund’s objections (p.265), C. Zuckerman’s evaluation of Roman garrisons in
Colchis is to be preferred until archaeology provides sufficient contrary evidence: see The Early Byzantine
Strongholds in Eastern Pontus, TM XI, 1991, pp.527-53. Cf. Wheeler (supra n.137), p.61 with n.39. The fear of the
Borani (Zos. 1.32.1) in 254 that other garrisons might send support to Pityus—given as one motive for their
retreat—is no doubt Dexippus’ conjecture, unless he had some oral source from inside the Borani’s leadership corps.
Since no such garrisons seem present during the second inroad of 258, that year might offer a terminus ante quem
for Roman withdrawal from the forts of the central Colchian coast.
270See I. Piso, La carrière équestre de P. Aelius Hammonius, Dacia XX, 1976, pp.251-76; cf. Wheeler (supra n.52),
p.249 n.41.
271Ps.-Faust. Byz. 3.66, p.98 Garsoïan.
272On the new frontier see Nov.Theod. 5.3 with C. Zuckerman, Sur le dispositif frontalier en Arménie, le limes et
son évolution sous le Bas-Empire, Historia XLVII, 1998, pp.108-28.
Domitius Sabinus, 67?-70, PIR2 D 163; PME D 32
C. Iulius Capretanus, after 73, V2 138
[- - - ]pus Severus, 2nd/3rd c., AE 1947.19; PME S 103
ignotus, age of Caracalla or later, AE 1972.592; PME Inc. 24
Praefectus castrorum
L. Gavius Fronto, late Trajanic, AE 1972.616-617 (SEG XVII 584); Dobson no. 113
Armidoctor
L. Pellartius Celer Iulius Montanus, Domitianic, I.Aquil. 2797 (AE 1952.152)
Custos armorum
L. Antonius Paternus, Hadrianic?, AE 1992.1402
T. Flavius Secundus, ca 100, V2 148
M. Iulius Clemens, 2nd half 1st c., V2 147
Centurio
nd st nd
Q. Aconius Verus, 2 half 1 /early 2 c., Bezeczky (supra n.126), p.261
P. Aelius Maximus, 2nd half 2nd c., AE 1983.127
P. Aelius Pomponius, 2nd c., Reinach (supra n.209), pp.347-51 no. 8
Aemilius Diogenis, 2nd half 1st c., AE 1978.635
M. Alpinius Agrippa, hastatus posterior, 1st c., V2 252: in XV or XIV?
Q. Atilius Primus, 2nd half 1st c., AE 1978.635
L. Atilius Silvanus, hastatus prior, 2nd half 1st c., V2 347
M. Aurelius Claudianus, late 2nd/early 3rd c., AE 1981.158
Cassianus, 2nd half 1st c., V2 147
Claudius Augustanus, 1st c., AE 1992.1404
Cornelius Sulla, 1st c., V2 255: in XV or XIV?
Cuspius Flavianus, 2nd c., Mitford, JRS (supra n.139), p.170 no. 6=ZPE (supra n.139), pp. 154-55 no. 6:
•katÒntarxon restored.
[[306]] Fenius Balbus, 2nd half 1st c., V2 165
Iulius Ilo, 2nd half 1st /early 2nd c., Bezeczky (supra n.126), p.261
C. Petronius, 2nd half 1st c., V2 215
Reburrius, 1st half 1st c.?, V2 163; cf. Appendix B
Sempronius Niger, 2nd half 1st c., V2 203
Sirpicus, A.D. 14, Tac. Ann. 1.25.3
P. Turranius Severus, hastatus prior, Hadrianic?, AE 1988.1044
Venustus, 2nd half 1st c., V2 155
Eques
Sex. Peticius, ca 50, AE 1988.930
P. Valerius, 2nd half 1st c., AE 1992.1402
P. Valerius Genialis, 2nd half 1st c., V2 203: in XV?
Optio equitum
Ti. Iulius Buccio, Hadrianic?, AE 1988.1043
Interprex
Q. Atilius Primus: see Centurio
Aquilifer
Sex. Valerius Fronto, ca 100, V2 145
 Imaginifer
T. Terentius Fronto, mid-1st c., V2 146
Signifer
nd st
Antonius Firmus, 2 half 1 c., V 147 2
[- - -] Capitonius Bassus, mid-1st c.?, Iscr.Ital. IX.1 60
T. Flavius Ingenuus, ca 100, V2 148
ignotus, inc. anno, Mitford, ZPE (supra n.139), p.149 no. 14?
Tubicien
M. Praeconius Iucundus, ca 100, V2 150
C. Valerius, 1st half 1st c., V2 151
C. Vibius, mid-1st c., V2 174
Beneficiarius
T. Flavius Mansuetus, Hadrianic?, AE 1988.1042
Cornicularius
[- - -] Catul[l- - -], 1st half 1st c., AE 1990.795
Cuspius Flavianus: see Centurio
Sex. Trebonius Proclus, 2nd half 1st c., V2 144
Medicus
L. Iulius Optatus, 1st c.?, Swoboda (supra n.65), pp.47, Taf. 39.2: in XV?
ignotus, 2nd/3rd c., CIL III 6747?
Architectus
Q. Valeius Seius, 2nd half 1st c., V2 211
Structor ?
L. Plotidius Vitalis, 2nd half 1st c., V2 200 (AE 1954.119)
Veterinarius
L. Cliternius, 1st or 2nd c., V2 281: in XV?

Appendix B
The XV Apollinaris in the Cantabrian War?

The gravestone of L. Cosconius Reburrus, a miles of legio XV dead at age twenty-three, derives from a church
courtyard at São Miguel de Odrinhas in Portugal, a site ca 30 km northwest of Lisbon.273 Though the text’s date is
uncertain, it appears to be early and a legio XV in Spain is most curious. Le Roux identifies the soldier as a
Lusitanian in the XV Primigenia (?) and dates the text to the Claudian era because of its formulation in the dative.274
The XV Apollinaris would initially seem out of consideration, as Spain was not a normal recruiting ground for this
legion and only two inscriptions relating to the Apollinaris—both of Antonine date—are known: a tribunus
laticlavus (M. Messius Rusticianus: AE 1983.517 [Seville; AE 1988.720]; Rémy no. 218) and a centurion transferred
from the Spanish VII Gemina to the Apollinaris (L. Caecilius Optatus: Barcino, ILS 6957). But Le Roux’s
conjecture of the XV Primigenia has little to support it. If Cosconius Reburrus belonged to Primigenia, he would be
its only known Spanish recruit (Mann, p.93), and the dative does not necessary eliminate an Augustan date for the

273P. Le Roux, L’armée romaine et l’organisation des provinces ibériques d’Auguste d l’invasion de 409, 1982
(Paris), p.186 no.56: L(ucio) Cosconio / [.] f(ilio) Rebur(ro), / militi l(egionis) XV / an[n(orum)] XXIII: cf. AE
1954.252, Forni, Esercito (supra n.3), p.91 with n.19 (but cf. p.41 with n.89).
274Le Roux (supra n.273), pp.186, 260; cf. Mann, pp.85, 93; Keppie (supra n.8), pp.155, 240 n.17, who seems to
favor an Augustan date, but declines to cite a cognomen for the legion.
text: Keppie’s collection of 97 Triumviral and Augustan inscriptions of veterans to 14 B.C. found in Italy shows 32
in the dative.275 Le Roux’s identification of the soldier as a Lusitanian, however, is doubtlessly correct: the name
Reburrus/Reburrius is of Celtic origin and does not [[307]] occur in Italy.276 Rather, it appears most frequently in
western and southern Spain, especially among soldiers of VII Gemina, rarely elsewhere.277 The distinctively
western Iberian name Reburrus in a mysterious legio XV especially intrigues because a centuria Reburriana of XV
Apollinaris occurs on the gravestone of C. Baebius Bassus at Carnuntum, dated to the second half of the first century
(V2 163). Can the Lusitanian text of Reburrus be related to the Carnuntum stone?
The centuria Reburriana would seem to conform to a well-known pattern. Centuriae were generally named
after their centurions, whose name would appear in the genitive in an epigraphical or papyrological document, e.g.,
L. Aurelius Celer, a miles of XV Apollinaris at Carnuntum in the (centuria) Cassii Falviani (V2 162). The
occurrence of a cenuria’s name in adjectival form, as in the centuria Reburriana, would indicate that the document
was composed after the centurion of the unit had died, been transferred, promoted, or discharged, and before a new
centurion had been appointed.278 On this view, a centurion Reburrus of legio XV had died, been discharged,
promoted, or transferred and a new centurion for the unit had not yet been named when Baebius Bassus’ gravestone
was cut. Baebius’ domus, given as Syrian Hieropolis, would identify him as an Apollinaris recruit during its first
eastern tour (63-71) and date his text to after 71. Thus, conceivably, this centurion Reburrus with his Iberian name
would have formerly belonged to a disbanded Vitellian legion from the Rhine; five other former Vitellians with an
origo of Cologne appear as members of the Apollinaris at Carnuntum in texts dated to the second half of the first
century, and a L. Reburrinius also from Cologne is attested in the coh. XXVI vol. c.R. at Baden-Baden in the late
80s.279
But another view is possible. The above explanation of the names of centuriae ending in -ana does not seem to
explain all cases. Fink’s study of the phenomenon in Dura papyri for cohors XX Palmyrenorum shows a centuria
Malchiana, which despite various moves up and down in its ranking over the years, would seem to have lacked a
centurion from 218 (P.Dura 11 recto) to some point in the period 223-228 (P.Dura 16 verso), when it finally
appears under a centurion Prudens. A centuria without a centurion for at least five years is unthinkable.280
Similarly, Birley adduces ILS 2483 listing centuriae of the Egyptian legions XXII Deiotariana and III Cyrenaica.
Certainly the appearance of a centuria Gavisidiana in one legion may correspond to the centuria Gavisidi in the
other—Gavisidius was transferred from one legion to the other.281 But the same text reveals that three other

275Keppie (supra n.10) nos. 2, 4, 9, 10, 12, 18, 19, 29-34, 36, 37, 44, 46, 49, 50, 53, 54, 56, 63, 64, 77, 85, 86, 89,
91, 93, 97; nos. 15, 59, and 77 are in the genitive. A study of Augustan veterans at Pisidian Antioch yields 3 of 10 in
the dative: see T. Drew-Bear, Vétérans et soldats légionnaires à Antioche en Pisidie, in Paci (supra n.8), pp.303-32,
esp. nos. 4, 9, 10. My special thanks to Prof. Drew-Bear for permitting me to see this important paper in advance of
publication.
276L. P. Dean, A Study of the Cognomina of Soldiers in the Roman Legions, 1916 (Diss. Princeton University),
pp.95-96; Schulze (supra n.116), p.53.
277Dean (supra n.276), p.261: from Tarraco and VII Gem.: CIL II 4143 (T. Flavius Reburrus), 4157 (C. Iulius
Reburrus), 4169 (C. Val(erius) Reburrus), 6088 (L. Val(erius) Reburrus); from Lara Tarraconensis and VII Gem.: II
2853 (C. Terentius Reburri(nus)); two civilians with variants of the name are also known: a Reburrinius at
Tarraconensis (CIL II 2614) and a Reburrius Tertius at Gades (J. Vives, Inscripciones Latinas de la España, 1971
[Barcelona], no. 607; H. Solin and O. Salomies, Repertorium nominum gentilium et cognominum Latinorum, 1994
[Hildesheim], p.154). Elsewhere: a centurion Reburrinus of unknown date and legion in Britain (CIL VII 201); L.
Reburrinius, a native of Cologne, in the coh. XXVI vol. c.R. in a text from Baden-Baden (ILS 2573), probably of
Flavian date and before 89. See E. Stein, Römische Beamte und Truppenkörper in Deutschland, 1932 (Vienna),
pp.230-31; K. Kraft, Zur Rekrutierung der Alen und Kohorten an Rhein und Donau, 1951 (Bern), pp.85, 198 (no.
3132), who suspects that he is the son of a Spanish recruit for a Rhine legion.
278See Birley (supra n.168), pp.128-29 ad ILS 4724 and CIL VI 3211 (M.P. Speidel, Die Denkmäler der
Kaiserreiter Equites Singulares Augusti, 1994 [Cologne], no.132): the same principle for a turma Lucaniana of the
equites singulares), and Alae Named after their Commanders, AncSoc IX, 1978, p.262-63 ad ILS 2483; R. Fink,
Centuria Rufi, Centuria Rufiana, and the Ranking of Centuries, TAPA LXXIV, 1953, pp.210-15 ad P.Dura 3, 11-12,
16. Cf. also CIL VI 1063, 32623 with 32625; VII 841, 848, 859; AE 1955.238 col. II line 32, col. IV line 20.
279Vitellians from Cologne: V2 162, 165, 176, 193, 218; Mann, p.173 n.362; L. Reburrinius: see supra n.277.
280See Fink (supra n.278), pp.211-12, 215, whose attempts to explain away the problem are not convincing.
281Birley, Alae (supra n.278), p.262.
vacancies for centurions [[308]] (centuriae named with adjectives in -ana ) existed in these two legions (four, if the
centuriae Gavisidiana is included)—an unusally high number in my view.282
The centuria Reburriana is a unique phenomenon in texts of the Apollinaris at Carnuntum, which—it should be
emphasized—are not few in number. More examples of centuriae with names ending in -ana might be expected, if
the Birley-Fink explanation were valid for all cases. Seeing Reburrus as a recently departed ex-Vitellian from the
Rhine may be plausible, but it is not the only view possible. As is well-known, alae, especially under Augustus and
Tiberius, could be named for their commander—either their original commander or a commander who achieved
fame in service.283 Legionary centuriae may have had a similar practice, particularly under Augustus when legions
as fixed professional units acquired cognomina, emblems, and regimental identities. Naming a centuria after some
well-liked or highly decorated centurion could reflect a regimental tradition commemorating past heroics and
building ésprit de corps. Nor is this suggestion purely fanciful: a series of altars dedicated to the genius centuriae
are attested at Carnuntum for the XIV Gemina.284 On this view, the Lusitanian gravestone of Cosconius Reburrus
suggests the presence of the Apollinaris in the northwestern Iberian peninsula under Augustus. This Reburrus died
young, but another, hardier Reburrus was probably also recruited at that time, achieved centurion rank, and became
a regimental legend reflected in the centuria Reburriana of the Carnuntum text. The occasion must be the
Cantabrian War (26-19 B.C.), a period of relative quiet in Illyricum, but a conflict requiring more manpower and
time than Augustus originally planned. Indeed IX Hispana, a companion legion of the Apollinaris in Pannonia in
A.D. 14, may have also served in the same war.285

282Cf.ILS 2304 (Alexandria): 6 of 11 centuriae have the adjectival form of the name.
283See v. Domaszewski (supra n.199), pp.122-23; Birley, Alae (supra n.278), pp.257-73; M.P. Speidel, Auxiliary
Units Named after Their Comanders: Four New Cases from Egypt, Aegyptus LXII, 1982, pp.165-72.
284V2 130-37; cf. 129; cf also at Mainz: CIL XIII 6681, 6683; J. Röpke, Domi Militiae Die religiöse Konstruktion
des Krieges im Rom, 1990 (Stuttgart), pp.188-89.
285G. Alföldy, Spain, CAH2 X, 1996, p.453; contra, Le Roux (supra n.273), pp.61-63.