Limes pannonicus

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Limes in Pannonia
The border shifts of Pannonia with the legionary camps, deduction colonies and the Amber Road between the 1st and 4th centuries
The Valentinian fortress chain on the Pilis Mountains
Sculpture of a river god, possibly Danuvius (3rd century AD), Museum Carnuntinum
The Heidentor near Petronell-Carnuntum , today one of the most famous monuments on the Pannonian Limes and symbol of Roman Austria
Wall painting from the governor's palace of Aquincum , 4th century. In late antiquity, this was the seat of the commander-in-chief of the Pannonian province of Valeria
Legion camp and vicus of Vindobona
Legion camp and canabae of Carnuntum
Findings sketch of the late antique fort of Györ ( Arrabona )
Site plan of the military and civil structures of the Brigetio legionary camp
Floor plan of the Nagytétény (Campona) castle from the middle and late imperial period with fan-shaped corner towers and walled-in side gates.
Simplified reconstruction proposal for the late antique Visegrád – Sibrik castle over the Danube
Klosterneuburg Castle: A late antique horseshoe-shaped tower overlays its older rectangular predecessor
Dunabogdány (Cirpi) fort with the late antique remainder of the fort in the SW corner
The late antique small fort Visegrád-Gizellamajor from the time of Emperor Constantius II with its construction scheme reminiscent of the Middle Imperial period
Excavation sketch of the inner fort of Keszthely-Fenekpuszta, 4th century AD
The watchtowers on the Carnuntum - Ad Flexum road, drawn by
Maximilian von Groller-Mildensee at the beginning of the 20th century
The two eastern, early Middle Imperial watch towers at Fort Aequinoctium ( Fischamend / Lower Austria). The left tower was surrounded by a curtain wall
Baureste one of the last third of the 4th century n. Chr. Derived Burgus, of the Gerulata replaced
Floor plan of the Valentinian Burgus Visegrád-Lepence, from which some walls over two meters high could be excavated
Attempt to reconstruct the
Celemantia bridgehead fort , as it was in the 4th century AD.
The late antique fortress on March 15th in
Pest, known under the name Contra Aquincum
Attempted reconstruction of the Contra Aquincum fort , view from the south-east.
The Valentinian Ländeburgus of Dunakeszi based on the findings of the 2002 excavations
Attempt to reconstruct the state castle of Szentendre-Dera
Today's state of preservation of the Burgus Verőcemaros-Dunamező with a view from the northwest of the core plant (2015)
Sole-shaped brick stamp of the Legio X Gemina from the Ala Nova fort
Brick stamp in the form of a tabula ansata of the legio XIV Gemina MV , 101–114 AD, found in the cloister of the Klosterneuburg monastery .
Bronze infantry helmet of the Weisenau type from the 1st century AD, found in the Rhine near Mainz. It was the property of Lucius Lucretius Celer, legionary in the Centurie of Gaius Mummius Lolianus, Legio I Adiutrix
Inscription from Trenčín (179 AD), ( CIL 3, 13439 )
Victoriae / Augustoru (m) / exercitus cui Lau / garicione sedit mil (ites) / l (egionis) II DCCCLV / [M (arcus) Val (erius ) Maximi] an (u) s leg (atus) leg (ionis) II Ad (iutricis) cur (avit)
“Dedicated to the victory of the emperors out of 855 legionaries of Legio II of the army stationed in Laugaricio ( Trenčín ). Erected under the supervision of Marcus Valerius Maximianus, legate of the Legio II Adiutrix "
A brick
stamp of the Lower Pannonian Army picked up in Sotin , EXER (citus) PAN (noniae) INF (erioris)
Late Roman crested helmet of type II, found in Intercisa
Spangenhelm of the Migration Period, approx. 500 AD
Roman horsemen, 1st to 2nd centuries AD
Roman river liburnal
Roman barge ( prahm )
The Roman network of paths on the Tabula Peutingeriana , section between Aquincum and Annamatia (today Baracs).
Reconstruction of the civil town of Vindobona , illustration in the Roman Museum Hoher Markt
The civil town of Carnuntum
The ruins of the civil city of Aquincum
Plan of the mansio in the camp village of the Limes Fort Százhalombatta-Dunafüred (Matrica), Hungary

As Limes Pannonicus (German "Pannonian Limes "), the approximately 420 km long, from the fort Klosterneuburg in Austria up to the castle Belgrade ( Singidunum ) in what is now Serbia -reaching part of the Danube Limes called. The garrisons of his forts protected the Pannonian provinces against attacks from the north from Augustus (31 BC – 14 AD) and until the beginning of the 5th century . In places this section of the Limes also extended over the river into the area of ​​the Barbaricum .

The Danube Limes was one of the most troubled areas in the European part of the Roman Empire. During the more than 400 years of Roman rule, Pannonia was one of the most important provinces, especially after the abandonment of Dacia in AD 271, as from this point the migration of peoples increased the pressure on this section of the Limes. The Limes also had a great influence on the economic and cultural life of the civilian population, as its hinterland was one of the most important supply areas for the border troops and these were the guarantors for the rapid Romanization of the province.

The majority of the occupation troops were stationed in forts, small forts, watchtowers, burgi and fortified bridgeheads, which were erected at regular intervals along the river bank. In an emergency, these units received support from the legions , which had their headquarters in the four large military centers with an urban character. With the advance on the Danube, the Roman Empire embroiled itself in a long series of conflicts with Trans-Danubian Germanic and Sarmatian barbarian and wandering peoples, which in the 5th century led to the collapse of the western part of the empire.

Definition and function

Initially, the Latin word limes stood for paved roads leading to the enemy. The term changed and expanded over time. In the end, it marked a border line held by the Roman troops. The river borders were also called ripae (river bank), but no clear separation of the two terms can be observed in ancient times. The Limes in Pannonia essentially consisted of a chain of forts and watchtowers, which were connected to one another by a well-developed road that could be used all year round. The Danube made a continuous earth wall, palisade or a wall as in Britain , Germania or Raetia superfluous. The protective structures were lined up in a different density due to the strategic position prevailing on the respective section. So far, around 50 camps and around 100 other military installations (watchtowers, Ländeburgi small fort) have become known.

Their occupations protected the provinces

from late antiquity the newly founded

  • Pannonia I ,
  • Savia ,
  • Valeria and
  • Pannonia II .

Several functional phases can be distinguished in the development of the Pannonian Limes. In its early days, the border protection system, like the politics of Rome, still had an offensive character. The wood and earth forts were supposed to sufficiently secure and stabilize the conquered territory in order to create a reliable springboard for the further expansion of the empire. As early as the 2nd century AD, however, imperial policy took on more and more defensive features. The Romans dug into the Danube and tried to secure their economically and culturally well-developed territory as well as possible. With the expansion of the forts in Stein, however, a rigid, linear security system was created at the same time, which was not structured in any depth. If the barbarians made a breakthrough, they could then swarm almost unhindered into the interior of the provinces and plunder undisturbed. In the 3rd and especially in the 4th century AD, building activity therefore revived, also due to the changed power-political and military situation on the Pannonian Limes. This manifested itself particularly in the large-scale renovations and extensions of the forts, the defense of civil cities and the installation of additional security systems on both sides of the Danube such as Ländeburgi, the Limes Sarmatiae and large inland fortifications inland. The primary task of the Limes, control of border traffic and the observation and defense against invaders, did not change.

The military stationed in Pannonia was also a main buyer of agricultural and handicraft products because the soldiers were regularly paid with coins, as they were largely self-sufficient in the province. It was subsequently also a driving force for the Romanization and the political and cultural life of the province.

development

1st century

During their advance into Illyricum between 35 and 33 BC. The Roman troops first made acquaintance with the extremely warlike Celtic tribes in this region. The gradual conquest of Pannonia demanded a high toll in blood from the Romans. When about half of the available Roman troops had withdrawn from their ready rooms at the beginning of 6 AD against the king of the Marcomanni and Suebi , Marbod , who ruled between Bohemia and Moravia, the Pannonian uprising , which lasted until 9 AD, broke out. a revolt against the still rather unstable domination of the Romans, with full force. The general and later Emperor Tiberius , who was sent to suppress the uprising, required 15 legions and a large contingent of auxiliary troops.

After consolidating their rule, the Romans under Emperor Claudius began to secure Pannonia with fortifications. Initially, the border defense was mainly organized, at the time there was only one large camp on the Danube, Carnuntum . Little by little, however, important Danube crossings were secured by cavalry squadrons ( ala ) and units of the fleet (Vindobona, Raaber Pforte, Brigetio). The focal points of the Limes were in the Vienna Basin , at the Theben Gate and in the estuaries of the great Slovak rivers. The area of ​​today's Hungary was initially largely spared from military occupation, as Rome allowed the Sarmatian Jazyans , who were then just immigrating into the Great Hungarian Plain , to settle near the Danube. The Romans bound these tribes as new allies through treaties. In return for military and economic aid, they had to secure the Limes apron. Which units (infantry, riders) were stationed where, depended on the strategic or topographical conditions. In confusing, difficult terrain, foot troops were preferred. Mounted troops were concentrated in easily visible plains or at road junctions. In these camps there were mostly only riders or units composed of infantry and riders.

Initially, the large bases of Vindobona and Carnuntum belonged to the neighboring province of Noricum, but because of the constant danger of invasion, their sections were annexed to Pannonia under Tiberius, then one, later two more legions were stationed in Upper Pannonia. Towards the end of the 1st century, the chain of castles on the Danube was further dense under Domitian (81–96), during whose reign there were serious tensions between the Romans and the Jazygens. Dioes also led to the massive expansion of the Limes in today's Hungary. Due to the rapid formation of civil and veteran settlements around the new legionary and auxiliary camps, these soon developed into centers of Romanization. With the stationing of the legions in the 1st century AD, important veteran settlements (coloniae) also emerged in

The administration, the road network and the infrastructure were also expanded. Of particular military importance was the construction of the great Limes road (via iuxta Danuvium) , which connected the security systems of the Pannonian Limes on the right bank of the Danube . This road - primarily designed for the needs of the military - was also important for civil and goods traffic, as the Danube was an important trade route as early as pre-Roman times. Under Hadrian the last gaps in the Pannonian Limes were closed. At that time, however, Rome's power still extended far beyond its borders and the land north of the Danube was probably also used by the military as pasture and arable land.

2nd century

After the conquest of Dacia by Emperor Trajan in 106 AD, Pannonia was split up and reorganized into two provinces: in a (larger) western part of Upper Pannonia (Pannonia superior) and in the east in the area of ​​slightly smaller Lower Pannonia (Pannonia Inferior) . Through the expansion of the Romans beyond the Danube, the Sarmatians , the scattered remains of Dacian tribes, quadrants and vandals were pushed into the Great Hungarian Plain and thus also from the Pannonian Limes. The tension finally erupted in the protracted and devastating Marcomann Wars (166–180), which Emperor Mark Aurel (161–180) could only end victoriously with great military efforts. The emperor died before the end of the fighting in Sirmium , probably of the " Antonine Plague " named after him . The establishment of two new provinces in the Hungarian Plain, Marcommania and Sarmatia , planned by his government , has been dropped. In 193, in the turmoil after the murder of Commodus, the governor of Pannonia Superior , Septimius Severus , was proclaimed emperor in Carnuntum with the help of the Danube regions . He later formed a new Praetorian Guard in Rome from the Pannonian soldiers who were particularly devoted to him .

3rd century

In the second half of the 3rd century, the Pannonian Limes section was hit by further heavy attacks, such as the Gothic-Sarmatian-Quadic invasion of 260 and a campaign of the Vandals, Suebi and once again the Sarmatians a decade later. The extent of the destruction of the military objects led, among other things, to the abandonment of the Budapest-Albertfalva Castle around 259/260, and all of the military settlements suffered severe damage. In the ensuing chaos of the imperial crisis of the 3rd century , almost all of the military commanders of the Illyrian military command established by Emperor Philip Arabs (244–249) were proclaimed emperors. With great effort they were able to contain and put down the separatist uprisings, which soon flared up all over the empire and were taking on dangerous proportions, especially in the east. Due to the increasingly violent attacks by barbarian tribes on the Dacian Limes (Limes Daciae) , the province had to be cleared again under Emperor Aurelian (270–275). From then on, the imperial border ran directly on the banks of the Danube again and the pressure of the onset of the migration of peoples was now largely on the Pannonian Limes in the west. From 292 AD, the Danube Limes was further strengthened by a reconstruction and modernization program initiated under Diocletian through the construction of new camps, small forts and Ländeburgi, the two Pannonian provinces again divided and this time reorganized into four administrative units. Another extensive new or expansion campaign on the Limes Pannonicus was commissioned by his successor Constantine I (306–337).

4th century

The loss of Dacia had far-reaching consequences for the defense of the Pannonian Limes. According to the records in the Notitia Dignitatum , the Pannonian surveillance area was apparently divided into two parts ( pars superior and pars inferior ) during this period . I. on the orders of Constantine or possibly one of his sons was raised a multiple barrier system from the kilometer-long earthen walls in the early 4th century. Chr. In the Great Hungarian Plain, stretching from the Danube bend the provincial capital north Aquincum ( Budapest ) to the Iron Gates extended , the so-called Limes Sarmatiae . After the usurpation of Magnentius was suppressed in AD 353, Constantius II succeeded in re-establishing imperial unity. From 357 to 359 the emperor established his residence in Sirmium , from where he led campaigns against the tribes of the Quadi , Sarmatians and Limigantes. After its successful completion, Constantius held a triumphal procession in Sirmium and had some forts on the middle Danube Limes repaired. With the construction of a victory memorial near Carnuntum , a striking symbol of the unrestricted power and invincibility of Rome on the hard-fought Pannonian Limes was set for the last time, especially at a time when the Roman Empire was exposed to great upheaval and dramatic political changes. Christianity, too, had been recognized as a religion for decades and was gaining increasing influence in the empire.

The last major structural changes on the Pannonian Limes were carried out on behalf of Valentinian I. The emperor was a native Pannonian and tried with great effort to stabilize the border guards, which were already being dissolved everywhere. Most of the destroyed forts were largely repaired by 369/370, after which a new chain of watchtowers was built on the banks of the Danube from around 371/372. These construction activities are only likely to have concentrated on the sections of the Limes that are particularly at risk from incursions. Valentinian set up his headquarters in Brigetio , where he died the following year during the peace negotiations with the Quadi. It was to be the last serious attempt to reorganize the Danube Limes. The appearance of the Huns and the upheavals of the Great Migration in the decades after the death of Valentinan soon completely changed the balance of power in the Carpathian Basin . At the end of the 4th century, the rapidly expanding Huns triggered a wave of migrants and refugees of unprecedented proportions, which Ambrosius of Milan described as follows: “The Huns rose against the Alans , the Alans against the Goths, the Goths against the Taifals and Sarmatians ”. The arrival of the vanguard and finally the bulk of this steppe people at the gates of the empire, already weakened by constant defensive wars on all fronts, finally heralded the end of Roman rule in Pannonia.

5th to 8th centuries

While fleeing from the Huns, the Terwingen and Alan peoples also reached the Danube and forced their admission into the empire after the battle of Adrianople . Under Emperor Theodosius I (379–395) they were finally taken over as semi-autonomous Foederati in the Roman army and mostly distributed to the castles of the Danube Limes, where they bear the brunt of border security after the gradual withdrawal of the regular Roman limit units to defend the Roman heartland should.

At that time the number of men in the regular Roman army in Pannonia had sunk so much that the large castles could no longer be held and were therefore largely left to the otherwise largely defenseless civilian population. Only a few watchtowers, small forts and larger camps survived the beginning of the 5th century. They had long since ceased to form a complete monitoring and signal line and had thus practically forfeited their previous defensive function. The subsequent partial conversion of the camps into fortified settlements ( Oppida ) and the construction of tower-like remaining forts in the corners of the camp and heavily fortified watchtowers ( Burgi ) on both sides of the Danube bank could no longer guarantee an effective border defense. Between 420 and 430 these facilities finally lost their military importance. A large part of the provincials began to migrate to Italy. With the contractual cession of the Pannonian provinces to the Hun Empire of Attila in 433, the last meager remnants of the Roman Limes organization in Pannonia dissolved.

Settlement continuity in the forts could be observed even after the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, especially in the west of the province. Odoacer's order to withdraw from the Romanes in 488 depopulated the oppida to a large extent, but did not leave them completely deserted. New immigrants settled within the still standing fort walls and soon mingled with the Romanesque population. After the dissolution of the Hun Empire, Ostrom claimed Pannonia for itself, but could only hold it until the Battle of Horreum Margi (505 AD). The Roman army, under the Magister militum per Illyricum , Sabinianus , was defeated by Theodoric the Great and Pannonia was incorporated into the Ostrogoth Empire in Italy. The remnants of the Romanesque population also experienced the Avar conquest of Pannonia. When the Carolingian Pannonia, advancing along the Danube from the west, wrested the Avars from the Avars again in the 8th century , their memory of the former belonging to the Roman Empire was still alive, which made the integration of the region into the Frankish Empire much easier. The former Roman forts became part of the Franconian royal estate and were partially rebuilt or given as fiefs and repopulated. Numerous forts and legionary camps developed into important settlements in the Middle Ages and, in the case of Aquincum and Vindobona, even became the capitals of modern Hungary and Austria .

Military infrastructure

Limes fort and legionary camp

To secure Pannonia, four large legionary camps and numerous forts were built for the auxiliary troops (horsemen and infantry). Since some of them have not yet been discovered, their exact number cannot be given. For some of them it was not possible to determine from the findings whether they were in constant or temporary use. After the consolidation of Roman rule over Pannonia, a cohort fort was built every 10 to 30 kilometers along the right bank of the Danube in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD. A large part of the early and mid-imperial auxiliary camps has an almost uniform floor plan and were the most advanced of their time. The density of the fort chain depended on the topographical conditions at the respective Limes section. The camps were usually built on flat spots or small plateaus and as close as possible to the banks of the Danube. At the points where the Danube divided into several tributaries or was bordered by swamps (Moson Danube, corridor near Sarret), longer distances - up to 15 Roman miles - were recorded between the camps. The furthest distance (32 Roman miles) lay between the forts of Solva and Cirpi and was primarily determined by the mountainous character of the landscape. Local peculiarities and strategic requirements often led to minor deviations in the linear security system. In between, the legionary camps, which were occupied for several hundred years, were built at central traffic junctions, river mouths or at particularly endangered places. Most of the diagonal roads leading to them did not end there, but continued on the other side of the Danube into the interior of the Barbaricum .

In the Augustan and Tiberian times most of the Roman troops in Pannonia were still concentrated at Carnuntum . Today it is difficult to decide whether their bases were only temporary marching camps. Some of the inland camps were abandoned in the course of the advance to the Danube. B. Siscia , taken under Augustus, with Legio VIIII Hispana as garrison troops. Another of these early legionary camps was in Poetovio ( Pettau ; location of Legio VIII Augusta ). During the reign of Emperor Claudius, Pannonia probably reached its final expansion; there is literary evidence of a winter camp for Carnuntum as early as the beginning of the 1st century AD. Then the first, permanently occupied legionary camp in Pannonia was built here, where the Legio XV Apollinaris was initially located and was then replaced by the Legio XIIII Gemina . From 80 AD Vindobona began to develop from an auxiliary fort into an important legionary base. Furthermore, under Domitian in Upper Pannonia, new auxiliary troop forts as well as numerous watchtowers and small forts (e.g. small fort Höflein and small fort Stopfenreuth ) were built. Some early wood and earth forts in the Hungarian section of the Pannonian Limes can also be dated to this period. Although it has not been archaeologically proven, it is likely that auxiliary troops were already constantly present at the mouths of the Drava and Sava, near Mursa and Sirmium . Epigraphic sources indicate that the number of auxiliary troops in Pannonia increased significantly, especially in the 80s of the 1st century. A large-scale warehouse expansion program began under Vespasian and Domitian . a. the legionary camp of Aquincum was laid out. A large part of the auxiliary troops was assigned to Pannonia in the Flavian-Traian era. The continuous security of the Pannonian border was completed by the construction of further fortifications. The construction of the last Pannonian Danube fort for the next 200 years and the final expansion of the legionary camps Carnuntum, Vindobona , Brigetio and Aquincum date from this time .

Some Pannonian castles were built in stone very early, mostly towards the end of the 1st century AD. The auxiliary camps of Solva , Szentendre (Ulcisia Castra) , Budapest-Albertfalva and Vetus Salina were possibly even a little earlier made of stone built. This conversion process has been accelerated particularly under Emperor Hadrian, but came by the outbreak Marcomannic wars again largely to a standstill. In Intercisa , for example, a wooden tower of the south gate was left to exist for the time being; the stone flank towers here were probably only built under Caracalla or under Gordianus III. Completed, the situation was similar in the Quadrata fort . A large part of these new stone camps was exposed to heavy sieges as early as the middle of the 2nd century AD. Even during Hadrian's reign, the devastation of the Sarmatian-Quadic attacks (138-139) required the complete rebuilding of individual forts, especially those that had stood in the vicinity of Aquincum . It was particularly noticeable that the partition walls of their inner buildings were in most cases only made of adobe bricks.

During the Marcomann Wars, which lasted almost 20 years under the Marcus Aurelian government, the camps in Pannonia were completely destroyed or badly damaged, which shook the Limes system to its foundations. The reconstruction of the forts almost certainly took a longer period of time, so that the work could probably only be largely completed towards the end of the 2nd century - under Marcus Aurelius's successor, Commodus . During this period, small forts, so-called praesidia, are mentioned for the first time in Pannonia . After the linear border defense during the 3rd century had proven to be increasingly unsuitable due to the increasing pressure of the peoples advancing on the territory of the empire, the late Roman movement army ( comitatenses ), which became increasingly important from the reign of the emperors Diocletian and Constantine I , stepped up. in the foreground. In view of the new strategic challenges, it was now necessary to switch from the classic linear defense to a multiple staggered defense in depth, in which fortified cities and so-called inland forts (see below) in the interior also played an important role. These measures also led to a profound reorganization of the border troops. The legions and auxiliary associations of the old style that still existed were partially reorganized or put together or their team strength reduced.

The border fort and the defense system of Pannonia therefore underwent some profound changes for the first time under Marcus Aurelius, but especially under his later successors Diocletian, Constantius II and Valentinian I. Many camps were z. B. considerably reduced in area in order to adapt them to the reduced teams. However, the towers in particular were always affected by the renovations. Most of them were completely demolished and - in several successive construction periods - replaced by round, U- (horseshoe-shaped) or at the corners by fan-shaped, bastion-like building types. The fort walls were strengthened or raised, the multi-row defense ditches were leveled in advance to make room for the new towers protruding far outwards and then moved further forward. The earth ramps (agger) on the inside of the walls were also completely removed, in their place new barracks were built, which were attached directly to the defensive wall, the center of the area, however, remained free of buildings. The relatively weakly fortified camps of the Principate's time were transformed into defensive fortresses.

In the 4th century AD, new fort buildings were added, some of which also followed the earlier ground plans. Their shape and location (preferably mountain tops, heights and hills) were mainly adapted to the local topography and the new defensive doctrine. In most cases, however, took place during the late antiquity - such as the Castle Klosterneuburg or at the fort Kölked (Altinum) a complete rebuilding or reinforcement of older fortifications instead of as at the fort Szentendre - (Castra Constantia) and the fort Nagytétény (Campona) also went hand in hand with the blocking of most of the camp gates by a horseshoe-shaped front wall. New buildings such as Castra ad Herculem and the small fort Visegrád-Gizellamajor also replaced a previous complex in some places ( Contra Aquincum in Budapest). It was often again a question of regularly square systems, similar to the designs from the Middle Imperial period. Good examples of this are once again Contra Aquincum , Transaquincum but also the Tokod fort . In some cases, heights were also built, but the ground plan had to be strictly based on the local terrain, as was particularly evident at the Visegrád – Sibrik fort .

In other places, such as at Fort Gerulata or Cirpi , in the final phase of the Pannonian Limes, new but considerably smaller fortifications (Burgus, remaining fort) with an average size of 10 to 30 square meters were built within the fort walls. The now vacated camp area took - at least partially - the civilian population pouring in from the no longer safe camp villages and was transformed into a fortified fortified village ( oppidum ) . According to Sándor Soproni (1926–1995) these structures were built to a greater extent after the Battle of Adrianople (378) , but they were probably not built until the turn of the 5th century. In Aquincum , the reconstruction of the Porta Praetoria of the legionary camp under Diocletian is the last demonstrable military construction activity, after which the old camp was torn down except for the east wall and a new fort was built near the banks of the Danube. Since no fan towers could be archaeologically proven in Brigetio , it is possible that a similar solution was used there. In the lower Pannonian legionary camps, traces of further late Roman building activity are otherwise almost completely missing. A few types of garrison, such as the Budapest-Albertfalva Castle, were completely evacuated and abandoned by the army after their destruction. The last major, centrally organized building campaign in Pannonia, the replacement of the fan and horseshoe towers at the inland forts with round towers (see below), could not be observed at the Limes forts, which is either due to a waning interest of the military leadership or to a labor or labor force .Material shortage lets close.

In the period from the death of Valentinian I to the evacuation of Pannonia by the Roman troops in 433 AD, clear signs of decay can be seen at the garrison sites. Repairs were carried out with little care or only extremely poorly. The large administrative buildings, such as B. the staff quarters (Principia) , were partially abandoned. These last verifiable activities on the fort areas also include the construction of primitive grain depots ( Fort Ács-Vaspuszta - Ad Statuas ) and rubbish pits (Fort Százhalombatta-Dunafüred - Matrica ).

Inland fort

The so-called inner fortifications or inner fortresses formed a special group of forts. L. Borhy defined these as “those fortified complexes [...] that were built in the hinterland of the Limes, in the interior of the province in the period of the later imperial era, and with regard to their construction method - fortifications, construction phases, internal development, chronology - striking Show similarities. ”They were the largest planned construction projects of late antiquity in the provinces of Pannonia I and Valeria . The need to build such forts, which were relatively far from the Limes, also resulted from the late Roman military reforms and the conception of a multi-tiered defense system in the 4th century AD. Since they were not located directly on the Danube, they were initially believed to be fortified settlements or cities. They were probably created at the end of the reign of Constantine I or under Constantius II. They are almost certainly also listed by name in the directory of the Notitia Dignitatum , but have not yet been assigned. A total of four forts of this type have been known since the Middle Ages, their ruins are in

  • Fenékpuszta near Keszthely on the southwestern shore of Lake Balaton , in
  • Környe, on the ancient road between the legionary camp Brigetio and Aquincum, in
  • Ságvár around ten kilometers south of the north-eastern shore of Lake Balaton and in
  • Alsóhetény halfway between Lake Balaton and Fünfkirchen (Sopianae) .

Presumably, Tac (Gorsium) was one of these internal fortifications. It belonged to the province of Pannonia I , while the other three belonged to the territory of the province of Valeria . The forts of the Valeria were located on a north-south axis parallel to the course of the Danube, about 20 to 60 kilometers from the Limes. Only the fort of Fenékpuszta was a little further to the east, at the western end of Lake Balaton. Some of the ancient names of the fortresses have not been handed down or are controversial in research.

When the Romans ceded Pannonia to the Huns in 433 , the inland fort was also given up and left to decay. From the Middle Ages they were used as quarries for the construction of the surrounding churches or castles. Only the fortress of Fenekpuszta, which is a little more difficult to access, was used for centuries.

The army alone was probably able to implement and coordinate the construction of such large facilities throughout the province. The largely identical construction of the forts and the renovation work that often took place at the same time also speak in favor of the central planning. In addition to their military functions, the inland fort also fulfilled logistical tasks. They served as supply hubs and supply bases for the Limes fort on the front line and the mobile army units. In an emergency, the soldiers and probably also the civilian population could retreat to the forts, which would also explain their large area. The cohorts permanently stationed in the inland forts were relatively small and only performed routine garrison tasks; they were unable to defend the fortresses without reinforcements.

Particular care was taken to build the forts in places with plenty of water. This can be seen particularly well in Alsoheteny. The Roman engineers dammed the water from a spring into a small lake in the middle of the walled area. The inner fort was not built over earlier settlements, only Gorsium was an important early imperial settlement that was destroyed around 260. The location of the forts and their relatively narrow enclosing walls from the first construction period suggest that the military leadership did not expect a serious threat from sieges at the time. These were multi-phase systems with a north-facing square floor plan, unusually large dimensions (7.3 to 21 hectares) and 2.3 to 2.8 meters wide walls. In phase I, the defensive walls were still equipped with horseshoe-shaped or rectangular (Sagvar, Tacs) intermediate towers and fan-shaped towers at the corners, as was also often observed at other Pannonian Limes forts of this time, in phase II they were replaced by round towers. Phase II could not be detected only in Tacs, where rectangular specimens were found at irregular intervals on the sides and fan-shaped specimens at the corners. The largest fortress was that of Alsoheteny, the smallest that of Sagvar. The larger ones had four gates, the smaller ones like Tacs and Sagvar (north and south walls) only had two gates.

The first scientifically supported excavations began in the 1970s and proved that the forts with round side towers were already in their second construction period. The dimensions of the fortresses had not increased significantly. The positions of the four gates also remained unchanged in all cases; round towers with a diameter of 12 m were added to the gate flanks on both sides. Identical towers were also found at the corners of the camp. The enclosing walls were removed down to the ground level and completely removed in the area of ​​the towers. Then they were raised again and widened to 2.0 m to 2.7 m. The walls of the round towers were also 2.7 m thick, and their diameter was 14 to 15 m. The findings in Fenekpuszta and Alsoheteny showed that the conversions in these two camps were carried out under Valentinian I.

The interior of all four fortresses essentially consisted of a villa-like main or command building, a warehouse, a farm building, stables or pens, a kind of barracks and a bathing building. Decorative equipment such as mosaics, frescoes, marble floors or the like was waived without exception. In the second construction period, only the floors of some buildings were raised a little. The operation of large ovens, metal processing, agriculture and cattle breeding are also known from these internal fortifications.

Watchtowers

Research into the Pannonian watchtowers is still considerably behind, as it is much easier to locate large camps than these often very small systems, which in many cases left hardly any traces of the ground. However, aerial photographs and targeted excavations have recently brought numerous new results, which means that the number of known towers has almost doubled.

After the consolidation of Roman power, the first watchtower chains were built along the Danube from the time of the Dacian Wars, the majority of them were initially made of wood. On the Danube Bend, they were all made of stone, in the south, near Intercisa , Annamatia , they were still made of wood. Square structures predominated around the Intercisa fort , and round specimens are rare. Since many wooden tower sites were built over with burgi from stone successor buildings, at the latest during the Valentine era , it is usually very difficult to prove them. From the time of Commodus, however, 13 fragments of building inscriptions from watchtowers are known, which date from the years between 184 and 185. Some of the stone-built towers (Csillaghegy, Nyergesujfalu, Visegrad Castle Gardens) were able to date their origin to the 2nd century AD. Most of the watchtowers were built under Valentinian I in the 4th century AD .

They were set up at as regular intervals as possible, preferably on the banks of the Danube or at the mouth of a stream, so that the crews still have visual contact with one another so that in the event of an alarm they can quickly pass on light, horn or smoke signals to the neighboring forts. As with the forts, the density of the watchtower chain depended on the strategic situation on site. In particularly endangered sections, they were sometimes only 400 to 500 meters apart, in some places up to 5 kilometers. The buildings sometimes only served as pure signal towers, such as the tower of Scharndorf, Lower Austria , which has probably been preserved as the parish church's bell tower. A distinction was no longer possible at the sections where the Limesstrasse ran directly along the banks of the Danube. At other points, however, the watchtowers built exclusively for border protection on ridges, river valleys, etc. must again be clearly distinguished from the signal towers that are mostly erected in the Limes hinterland. However, based on the type of construction, they differ only very slightly. As the excavations showed, most of the towers could only be entered via a ladder that led to the entrance on the first floor.

The archaeological dating of watchtowers between Aquincum and Intercisa as well as in the area around Lugio is supported by local findings and inscriptions that report a major construction campaign during the reign of Commodus . The stone towers from the time of Commodus were - at least partially - surrounded by walls. For the most part, however, they were only secured by trenches. In the Visegrád-Várkert watchtower, which was repaired around 230 and finally destroyed around 270, three of these trenches could be found.

An interesting tower from the Middle Imperial period was also excavated near the Pilismarot-Szob ferry on the Danube Bend. As numerous skeletal remains and other finds showed, this tower was destroyed during the Marcomann Wars. After the end of the fighting, the Romans had already prepared the square by leveling it, but did not build it up again. Another watchtower, which already indicates the next expansion phase, was also excavated near Pilismarot in Dömös-Tófenék. The stone tower was possibly built during the reign of Emperor Commodus (180-192). As a special feature, the station had two larger connected rooms. Near this point, at Visegrád -Lepence, another middle-imperial square 5 × 5 meter watchtower made of stone was discovered, which dates from the time before 214 AD.

Burgi

For a more detailed analysis, however, only the late Roman towers are usually suitable. Of all Roman border posts of this type, the innumerable stone burgi - which were considerably larger than the watchtowers of the Princely era - are the best-preserved remains of the Pannonian Limes today. 14 such plants are currently known for the provinces of Pannonia I and Valeria . Most of these Valentinian towers were found around Brigetio and on the Danube Bend. The first section of this chain of watchtowers had the task of monitoring the road leading through the Waagal valley from the north, the second was to report any attacks that were brought in from the direction of the Limes Sarmatiae . These military posts, which were often built from spoils from their surroundings , mostly also had a circumferential moat that was dug at a relatively large distance from the building as an obstacle to the approach. Sometimes a curtain wall could also be detected. The distance between the burgi was usually around one to two kilometers. Under certain circumstances, however, this distance could also be a little smaller. Visual contact between the posts was also essential for these border installations. Many of these burgi and towers, in contrast to their mid-imperial predecessors, were not built in the immediate border area, but along the Limesstrasse, which partly stretched far from the banks of the Danube. A complete monitoring of the border area was not possible from these stations. They were therefore primarily used as signal towers to transmit messages. However, these watchtowers did not have a long lifespan, most of them were probably given up again towards the end of the 4th century, as the finds on the Burgi mostly fell off completely in post-Valentine times. Exactly when they were abandoned could only be ascertained in isolated cases; in the vast majority, this date will probably coincide with the evacuation of the Pannonian provinces by the Romans (433 AD).

Typical examples of late Roman watchtowers are the Burgus Leányfalu , the Burgus Szentendre-Hunka and the Burgus Budakalász-Luppa csárda . The dating can be done very precisely due to building inscriptions and brick stamps. At Visegrád-Lepence two consecutive Burgi building inscriptions from the years 371 and 372 show. In addition, the stamps of the respective commander in chief, mostly that of Frigeridus dux , who exercised control over the province of Valeria from 371 to 373/374 AD at the latest, also prove that the last expansion phase of the Pannonian Danube Limes falls into this time period.

Military installations in the Barbaricum

The area north of the Danube has been under the rule of a group of Germanic tribes since the beginning of the 1st century, which had its center of power in present-day Bohemia . In the early 2nd century, the regnum Vannianum developed here , a preliminary stage of the later quadratic state. This Marcomannic quadratic area soon came under Roman influence and led to the emergence of client states, which were dependent on Rome to varying degrees, and were intended to keep the northern Germanic tribes away from the Danube border. Since the Roman border defense developed over the course of time from an area to a linear security, the creation of an upstream buffer zone became necessary. The client states, which largely fulfilled their purpose until the outbreak of the Marcomann Wars, offered themselves for this.

To protect against enemy attacks, a number of forts were built on the north bank of the Danube in Upper Pannonia, mostly as temporary marching camps during military campaigns. All of these fortifications stood on roads that led from the interior of Germania to the Danube. The majority of these were wood-earth constructions, which can only be seen clearly on aerial photographs. The earliest examples (near Pressburg-Theben , Staré Hradisko, and Mušov / Muschau-Burgstall) were made around 6 AD, when Tiberius crossed the Danube near Carnuntum to wage war against the Marcomann king Marbod . From the middle of the Imperial Era, they too were made of stone.

Roman brick stamps found in present-day Moravia also suggested military buildings there. Strangely enough, however, they had no defensive walls or towers, but were equipped with all the comforts of the time, such as B. underfloor heating ( stupava ). These secondary bricks were found in the Great Moravian settlements of Mikulčice (XIIII Legion), Sady, Staré Město (XIIII Legion, GANI, C VAL CONST KAR) and Uherské Hradiště . They are believed to come from older, demolished buildings, as they are unlikely to be imported during the Slavic Empire. For the Hungarian archaeologist Zsolt Mráv, these are villas for allied tribal chiefs, which were built by Roman "guest workers" under Trajan and Hadrian. Based on the development plans, it can be concluded that the buildings will be constructed at the same time. Where brick temples of the Legio XV Apollinaris could be recovered, the bricks must have been delivered before 114 AD. In contrast to this, the archaeologist Frantisek Krizek considered these buildings, which had advanced far into the territory of the allies, to be military stations (praesidia) , which did not have any defensive structures, but were equipped with all the necessary facilities for a longer stay. They were big enough to accommodate a number or a vexillation . Fortifying them with the usual ramparts and trenches was obviously considered unnecessary, since the Romans were living through a long period of peace at this time and therefore probably had no enemy raids to fear. The presence of transdanubian bases is also proven by reliefs on the Marcus Aurelius column in Rome. Praesidia have been archaeologically proven in Oberleis and Niederleis, Stillfried an der March, Stampfen, Stupava and Milanovce, in Etsdorf am Wagram and Borinka there were probably only watchtowers. Their crews presumably had to perform border police duties.

Mušov: It was the farthest north located fort on the central Danube border and measured 60 mx 63 m square. The infrastructure included a heated commandant's house, a 60 m × 63 m bath, barracks and a water pipe. The camp was built within a Celtic rampart, and the most common finds were brick temples from the Xth Legion.

Oberleis: Here a square, 59 m × 59 m measuring and 80 cm wide fortification with barracks and commanders building (praetorium) was excavated, a fire horizon could either result from a violent or a planned destruction by the Romans themselves. It is noteworthy that a number of late antique brick stamps of Dux Ursicinius were found here, which suggests that the station was occupied in the Valentine period. This fortification - like that of Mušov, Stillfried an der March and the neighboring Stampfen - was built over a pre-Roman fortification from the Latène period .

Niederleis: A heatable house was also discovered here, the bricks of which were produced by the X. Legion and the Cohors I Aelia Sagittariorum (Klosterneuburg Fort).

Stampfen: The rectangular Roman camp measured 65 mx 72 m and was equipped with a bathhouse and a commandant's building. In addition to small finds, brick stamps of the X., XIV. And XV. Legion. It is believed to have been abandoned or destroyed around AD 180.

Stillfried an der March: In this - not completely excavated - camp, which was located directly on Bernsteinstrasse , a defensive ditch and brick stamps of the X. Legion, the Dux Ursicinius and other late antique specimens from a factory near Arelape Castle (4th Century). Civilians probably also lived here and the camp was occupied until the time of Valentinian I.

Stupava: A house with an inner courtyard and underfloor heating and a bathing building with a water distributor (castellum aquae) stood within a 69.55 m × 65.40 m × 73.30 m × 64.85 m surrounding wall measuring 75 - 80 m wide . The bricks are from the X. and XIIII. and XV. Legion but also from privately operated brickworks.

Milanovce: This complex consisted of a late Roman residential building measuring 21 mx 30 m, which was probably surrounded by a wall and older earth walls. The bricks used secondary originate from the I. Legion Adiutrix and the X., XIIII. and XV. Legion. Some copies were also produced privately (stamped: LSEX and C AL CONST KAR) or date to the Valentine period.

During the Marcomannic Wars, up to 20,000 men were temporarily relocated from Upper Pannonia to the neighboring Germanic tribal territories and some fortified camps were built to accommodate them. Probably a total of over 40,000 Roman soldiers stayed at times in the area of ​​the Marcomanni and Quadi north of the Danube. An inscription carved into a rock in honor of the goddess of victory Victoria by soldiers of the Legio II Adiutrix under the leadership of the legate Marcus Valerius Maximianus from Zana near Trenčín (Laugaricio) testifies to the presence of a special unit of this legion, which consisted of around 850 men. After the war, which was victorious for the Romans, both tribes were strictly forbidden to settle on a border area on the Danube, which they had precisely defined. The mid-imperial forts of Iža-Leányvár, Budapest-Petöfi and Contra Aquincum built on the left bank of the river served to control this exclusion zone, but could not prevent the Germanic peoples from infiltrating in the long term. Nothing is known about the creation of new fortifications in the Barbaricum until the end of the 3rd century.

At the time of Constantine I, a huge protective wall system of earth dams ( Limes Sarmatiae ) was built in the tribal area of ​​the Sarmatians in the Hungarian lowlands , which was an important link in a large-scale defense concept. Above all, it was supposed to take the enormous pressure off the Pannonian Danube Limes, separate the Germanic tribes from the Sarmatians and direct enemy attack wedges to the well-guarded and particularly strongly fortified endpoints of the earth walls. These were closely guarded by the Roman army and the wall system was able to fulfill its function to a large extent until 378 AD. The connection points of the wall system to the Limes and the lower Danube at Djerdap and at the Danube Bend were strengthened by the construction of new camps (e.g. Ponte Navate / Visegrad and Castra ad Herculam / Pilismarot). Such fortification work was also carried out on the Lower Pannonian Limes near Rakovac, presumably in order to better protect the town of Sirmium .

In the course of the establishment of the Limes Sarmatiae , little changed in the established fort sites. The Iža / Leányvár medieval fortress opposite the Brigetio legionary camp was simply retrofitted to the standard of that time and equipped with fan-shaped corner towers in three places, while with the exception of the Porta praetoria the gates were walled up - like many other Pannonian forts. In Pest, on the other hand, at an unknown point in time during the 1st half of the 4th century, the 84 × 84 meter fortress was built on the square of March 15th (Contra Aquincum) with its 3.4 meter wide walls and a fan-shaped corner in place of the older fort - and U-shaped intermediate towers. With the Göd-Bócsaújtelep fort on the Sarmatian Limes, Rome would even have had an outpost 30 kilometers to the west, but the fortress was never completed for unknown reasons. On the basis of this largely still undeveloped complex, the development process of a late Roman stone fort can be clearly understood - although it did not get beyond the stage of determining the floor plan.

A special feature of the late Roman border security of this province are the fortified landing sites built on both banks of the Danube, the so-called Ländeburgi. To date, 14 such plants have become known in the provinces of Pannonia I and Valeria . At the border of Pannonia II , only the Burgus contra Florentiam in Bács-Kiskun county has so far been detected. Sándor Soproni found that such burgi were always created in pairs, on both sides of the Danube and directly opposite each other. Most of them were probably built during the usage time of the Limes Sarmatiae , from 324 to 378 AD. The Ländeburgi of the province of Valeria were created in the course of building measures to strengthen the Limes under Constantius II. Especially in the area of ​​the Danube Bend, a number of Ländeburgi, mostly from Valentine Time to receive. The tribal areas of the Quadi and the Jazygen - both peoples were considered a great threat by Rome - once bordered the Roman Empire here. In the Notitia Dignitatum they are listed as Burgus . They also served as watch and signal stations. Since large quantities of burned grain were found in some, they could also have served as regional harvest stores. In Pannonia, these small fortifications usually have a standardized, uniform construction method (central tower construction with two inner support pillars and wing walls running to the river bank with small towers at their corners or ends) and are also referred to in the specialist literature as bridgeheads, as this is where the main task of their crews is insisted on securing important fords across the Danube. Because many of them were already standing on the banks of the Barbaricum or the Danube Islands, the soldiers stationed there were also able to monitor these border areas from them. One of the most modern investigations took place at Burgus Dunakeszi . Burgus Bölcske , which can only be investigated using methods of underwater archeology, became known in particular due to the large number of built-in, valuable spoils with partly unique inscriptions . In the relevant literature, the excavation of the still well-preserved Burgus Verőcemaros-Dunamező is emphasized again and again .

troops

Upper Pannonia was administered by an imperial legate of consular rank, the three legions stationed there each commanded by a legatus legionis. The governor of Lower Pannonia was a legate of praetorical rank and at the same time commander of the only legion in this province. As a result of the ongoing wars and defensive battles, the Pannonian troops developed into one of the most powerful army groups in the Danube Army, which at times also played a major role in domestic politics.

Legions

At the time of their existence, the Pannonian castles were occupied by the legions and auxiliary units of the Pannonian provincial army (exercitus Pannoniae) . The first occupation of Pannonia consisted of three legions, which were stationed in the fortress triangle Emona- Poetovio - Siscia . The Danube bank was only at a few important fords, such as B. Carnuntum , guarded by troops. The Legio XV Apollinaris was the first to move into their quarters there. But epigraphic or archaeological evidence of a longer presence in Carnuntum is not available for all. It is possible that the Legio X Gemina was briefly replaced by the Legio VII Gemina around 69 AD . The Legio XXII Primigenia could also have stayed there in the late 1st century. Other crossing points secured by the army were in Arrabona , Brigetio and Aquincum . In AD 69, the Danube regions first acted as emperors in the civil war that broke out after the death of Nero (54–68) (so-called Four Emperor Year ) and helped Vespasian, who ruled from 69 to 79, to the throne. The gradual reconstruction of the wood-earth camp in Stein under Emperor Trajan also led to the establishment of the four Pannonian legions, which remained in their camps as permanent garrisons until the end of Roman rule. These were the:

Around 100 AD, a legion was also stationed in Brigetio . After the assassination of Pertinax , the governor of Upper Pannonia, Septimius Severus , was proclaimed emperor by the Pannonian legions in Carnuntum in 193.

Auxiliaries

For the battles in the year of the Four Emperors , units of Vespasian's Oriental Army were relocated to Pannonia to protect the Danube Limes, including the Cohors II Italica from Syria, which was probably in Carnuntum between 69/70. The grave inscription of a tuba blower (tubicen) of the Cohors I Montanorum from Carnuntum indicates that this troop was present in the middle of the 1st century. The cohors I Alpinorum could also have reached Carnuntum in the course of the Pannonian uprising as support for the Legio XV . The Spanish ala I Hispanorum Aravacorum had been in Pannonia since pre-Flavian times to ward off the Germanic Quadi, where they had set up quarters in the Arrabona fort . At that time there was probably a vexillation of this unit in Carnuntum . Members of the cohors XVIII Voluntariorum are said to have stayed in Carnuntum as well as in Fort Cirpi in the first half of the 2nd century . The partially mounted cohors I Ulpia Pannoniorum could also have been in Fort Solva and in Carnuntum under Trajan around 123 . Grave inscriptions from members of various auxiliary units indicate missions or short stays in or near Carnuntum. In Vindobona there were not only legions; at least one auxiliary force unit (auxiliary cavalry ala I Flavia Augusta ) was also demonstrably stationed there. As already mentioned, the cavalry units were probably housed in their own fort in the 1st district. Brick stamps of auxiliary troops are known from the ala I Thracum stationed in Carnuntum in the 2nd century and the archers of the cohors I Aelia sagittariorum from the Klosterneuburg fort for Vienna. The reorganization of the Pannonian Limes after the devastating Marcomannic Wars under Emperor Mark Aurel brought a refresh and partial replacement of the units of the Pannonian army. On the border with the tribal areas of the Sarmatians, horsemen and archer formations were mainly placed in the camps.

Military diplomas from the middle of the 1st century AD prove the presence of numerous auxiliary troop cohorts in the province. A diploma from AD 60 lists a total of seven of these cohorts, according to inscriptions, in addition to these, some equestrian aliens were stationed here. A diploma issued under Emperor Domitian lists a total of 5 Alen and 15 auxiliary troop units in his troop list.

List of Pannonian auxiliary units in the 2nd century:

  • civium Romanorum = Roman citizens
  • equitata = partially mounted
  • milliaria = 1000 strong
equestrian Horsemen / Infantry infantry

ala I Praetoria Singularium civium Romanorum (Guard cavalry)
ala I Hispanorum Aravacorum
ala I Flavia Britannica milliaria civium Romanorum
ala I Brittonum civium Romanorum
ala I Cananefatium civium Romanorum
ala I civium Romanorum
ala I Augusta Ituraeorum
ala I Thracum victrix
ala I Ulpia contariorum milliaria cataphractarii (Ironshirts )
ala I Thracum veterana sagittariorum (mounted archers)
ala II Augusta Thracum
ala III Augusta Thracum sagittariorum (mounted archers)

Cohors I Alpinorum equitata
Cohors I Montanorum equitata
Cohors I Noricorum equitata
cohors I Ulpia Pannoniorum milliaria equitata
Cohors I Thracum Syriaca equitata
cohors II Augusta Thracum equitata
cohors II Alpinorum equitata
cohors II Asturum et Callaecorum equitata
cohors II Augusta Dacorum milliaria equitata
cohors III Batavorum milliaria equitata
Cohors V Callaecorum Lucensium equitata
cohors VII Breucorum civium Romanorum equitata

cohors I Brittonum
cohors I Alpinorum peditata
cohors I Campanorum voluntariorum civium Romanorum
cohors I Lusitanorum Cyrenaica
cohors I Thracum civium Romanorum
cohors I Thracum Germanica
cohors I Aelia Caesariensis sagittariorum milliaria (archers) cohorsitum sagorum
milliaria
III Bogenschuetzen (Bogenschützen) cohorsitiar (Aelia Gaesiorum

Danube Fleet

Another important part of the armed forces for border surveillance was the Classis Flavia Pannonica , which had been founded under the Flavian emperors (69–96) and existed with a changed organizational structure until the 5th century. The fleet was not only active for military security in the border area. Many of the tributaries flowing into the Danube, which also had to be strictly monitored, were also suitable as traffic and incidence routes. It therefore also had to keep these navigable tributaries free and should guarantee that the trade routes on the water remained safely passable. She was also responsible for transport and logistics tasks that were carried out on behalf of the military. Above all, this included the shipping of building materials and supplies. In times of crisis, the fleet soldiers, as bridge building pioneers, had to ensure a safe passage of the land troops across the Danube.

Late antiquity

Commander of the Comitatenses and Limitanei in the 4th century AD

Under the emperors Diocletian and Constantine, the army was divided into mobile field troops ( comitatenses ) and stationary border troops ( limitanei or ripenses ) with lower status . Military service was now largely hereditary and the border guards, in addition to guard duty in the forts with their families, also ordered their own tax-exempt farms or worked as artisans on the side. The two pannonia were at that time divided into four provinces, whose troops were now commanded by Duces Limites :

The former also commanded the previously independent units of the Noric Army. In exceptional cases of crisis, a Comes Illyrici (Count of Illyria) was appointed commander in chief of all troops stationed on the upper and middle Danube. These military leaders - including their units and stations - are mentioned in the list of troops of a late Roman state almanac from the end of the 3rd century AD, the Notitia Dignitatum . These lists are the last written evidence for the troops stationed on the Pannonian Limes.

Under Valentinian I, the Roman Empire was finally divided into a western and an eastern half, with the Pannonian provinces falling to the Western Roman Empire. After the conquest of North Africa by the Vandals , the government in Ravenna could no longer pay its troops regularly or recruit new ones. At this time, the first signs of disintegration on the Limes were already beginning to appear, as, according to the Notitia, units were withdrawn from their ancestral forts and transferred to other locations, but in return obviously no longer occupied. The result was a catastrophic reduction in the number of border guards, who now had to be used as the last contingent to defend Italy against the Goths and Huns . By the middle of the 5th century, the Pannonian forts had lost their military importance and were left to the civilian population as refuge castles ( oppida ) . Citizens militias took over their defense. The remaining crews of the regular army (mostly around 50 men), which were now predominantly made up of barbaric foederati , withdrew to tower-like small forts / burgi (e.g. Gerulata, Cirpi ) in the corners of the camp. These mercenaries, who had systematically settled on the territory of the empire since the beginning of the 4th century, gradually blurred the border line to the Barbaricum and finally made the Pannonian Limes superfluous. When Pannonia was handed over to the Huns in 433 AD, the Roman army organization finally dissolved. Some units were taken over into the Austrian army.

Military operations

The military mostly had a number of businesses close to the Danube, which were mainly intended to cover the needs of the troops for consumer goods. These businesses included brickworks and pottery. The military affiliation of such an enterprise can usually only be proven by brick stamps. To the east of the Brigetio legionary camp, the remains of such a brickworks were found, as well as two pottery quarters that had existed since the reign of Emperor Hadrian (117-138) and in which so-called legionary goods were made. The products created there include mass consumer goods as well as high-quality terra sigillata pieces as well as clay lamps. Also on the Danube Bend , in the vicinity of the forts of Pilismarót , a legionary brick in today's Dömös could be secured, which - like in Brigetio - was operated by the Legio I Adiutrix .

Cities

After the establishment of Roman rule in Pannonia, part of the new province was organized and administered as municipalities in Civitates peregrinae or according to Latin city law , other areas were confiscated and declared state property ( ager publicus ) . Civilian settlement areas soon developed around the Limes fort, which were initially under military administration. The largest of them arose around the legionary camps and were later raised to colonies. Their often very extensive area was divided into even smaller sub-units, pagus or vicus .

Carnuntum and Aquincum were by far the largest cities in the province and are best researched archaeologically. After the province was divided by Emperor Traian (98–117 AD), Carnuntum became the metropolis of Upper Pannonia. Under Emperor Hadrian (117-138 AD) it was initially declared an autonomous city of the second order, the Municipium Aelium Carnuntum . When Septimius Severus (193–211 AD) had himself proclaimed emperor here, it was finallyraisedto the rank of Colonia in194 AD in gratitude for the loyalty of its citizens. As the Celtic name Vindobona suggests, the place should have been inhabited long before the arrival of the Romans. The civil settlement was also elevated to a municipality inAD 212. Of the two civil settlements that developed near the Brigetio legionary camp, only the canabae rose to greater importance. In terms of area, although not larger than the civil city, they wereraisedto Colonia under Septimius Severus or his successor Caracalla , or perhaps a little later. The name of the neighboring municipality and some of its rulers are passed down through several inscriptions. One of them names the civil town as Municipium Brigetio Antoninianum . The Colonia Brigetio , however, is only mentioned on one inscription. The importance of Aquincum also grew considerably after it was designated the capital of the new province of Pannonia Inferior in AD 106. In its heyday, the city probably had up to 60,000 inhabitants. It covered an area of ​​380 m × 520 m and was surrounded by a double wall. With the relocation of the Second Legion to Aquincum and the establishment of a governor's seat, the economy and trade expanded very quickly. In 124 AD the city received the status of a municipality , in 194 AD it was alsoelevatedto a colonia under Septimius Severus. The two administrative boards ( vici magistri ) were selected from among the veterans and Roman citizens, the veterani et cives Romani . It is known from the inscription on a consecration altar that, as in the larger cities, colleges were founded in the camp settlements that took on public tasks.

Camp villages

The military settlements at the legionary camps are called canabae , those at the auxiliary forts are called vicus . Locals, craftsmen, traders and relatives of the soldiers lived in them. The legal status of these places is likely - at least in the early years - to have been unclear, but they were probably largely legally autonomous. They were therefore named after their residents such as B. territorium Matricensum or Vetussalinensum , the latter have only been handed down from epigraphic sources from the time of Emperor Hadrian. Public and private building activity can still be seen in Pannonia up to the 4th century. However, the number of civilians decreased more and more due to the increasing insecurity and the large-scale devastation in the Pannonian provinces. The last of them finally fled behind the fort walls in late antiquity and gave up their former settlement areas. The largely destroyed civil settlements eventually lost their independent status and were united with the military territories. Together with them, they finally formed the so-called limit landings, which were left to the border soldiers ( limitanei ) for tax-free management. The buildings fell into disrepair or were demolished, the areas partially used as burial places. An early Christian burial chapel was uncovered near the Szentendre castle. In Pannonia it can often be observed that late antique burial grounds were particularly close to the respective forts.

At the end of the 20th century, extensive excavations took place in the camp villages of the auxiliary forts of Arrabona , Albertfalva, Matrica and Intercisa , which showed that the vici there reached an area of ​​20 to 30 hectares. Their settlement structure was based on Limesstrasse and the other roads leading to the camps, along these access roads the building development developed in several phases. In those cases in which it was not the Limesstrasse itself, but only a junction to the camp, as in Annamatia , the area between Limesstrasse and the fort was chosen as the settlement site. When the forts had to be rebuilt in stone after the Marcomann Wars at the end of the 2nd century, this partly also happened with their camp villages. The individual construction periods and horizons of destruction of the civil settlements always corresponded to those of the forts. The uniform sequence of settlement was particularly evident in Budapest-Albertfalva, where the two construction periods also resulted in a reorientation of all buildings in the vicus . The Vici usually lay around the camps on three sides and were not surrounded by fortifications. The residential houses were preferably built on the main streets and as close as possible to the fort, with their buildings often being up to 20 m away from the defensive wall. For the acquisition of the land that was closest to the fort, you had to dig a little deeper into your wallet. While the camp villages were initially very similar to the villages of the local population due to their wooden construction (pit houses), a fundamental change in construction technology began here in the late 2nd century after a certain prosperity had been established. A large part of the houses had been built in half-timbered and on stone foundations from this point in time. Many were also equipped with wall frescoes, stucco decorations and underfloor heating. At the end of the 2nd century, the streets in the area of ​​the camp villages were also paved with stone. In addition to residential houses, barns, workshops, granaries / horrea , small temples (e.g. the Dolichenum in Adony), hostels / mansiones (Matrica) and baths / thermae (Intercisa) were observed in terms of building types . After finding various inscriptions, it is assumed that the Vici also owned council buildings / curiae . Workshops, storage buildings and hostels were always on the outskirts of the settlement. Sanctuaries, however, were found everywhere in the vicus areas , the Mithraeum of Nagyteteny was even a few kilometers away from the vicus . The public buildings such as baths and hostels, which were usually erected by soldiers, were mostly among the most architecturally sophisticated in the vicus .

Due to the regular pay of the soldiers, a flourishing economic life developed in the camp villages. The supraregional trade brought expensive imported goods from distant provinces to their obviously numerous customers in the Pannonian camp villages, as evidenced by a terra sigillata depot found at the Tac fort . In addition to trade, craft (iron and bronze processing, pottery, glass production) and agriculture also played a major role for the residents. In larger auxilliarvici there were also stonemasons. In terms of agricultural production, country estates / villae rustica , such as those found at Matrica and Intercisa , stood out.

The inhabitants of Pannonian camp villages often offer a very colorful picture. As a rule, however, the indigenous-Celtic element predominated. This is proven by epigraphic and archaeological finds, such as B. Late Latene ceramics. In the vicus of Solva (Esztergom) there is evidence that the inhabitants of the former oppidum were settled on the castle hill. The second group included merchants who had traveled there, along with their relatives and freedmen / liberti . The third and largest group of the population was formed by the soldiers stationed in the camp. From the reign of Septimius Severus, soldiers still on active service were allowed to live with their families in the camp villages. In particular, the stationing of ethnically diverse troops influenced the composition of the population. B. in the Szentendre fort and in Dunaújváros, where a Syrian one, or in the Százhalombatta-Dunafüred (Matrica) fort , where a section of Moors did their service. Their relatives were of similar origin and lived in the respective vici of these forts. However, their number was not very high and after a generation or two they were mostly completely assimilated by the ancestral population.

Limes Street

The most important source on the trunk road network of the Roman Empire is the Tabula Peutingeriana , the medieval copy of a late antique road map. But also due to older and more recent archaeological findings as well as the production of aerial photographs, it was possible to follow the course of the Pannonian Limes Road in some sections over a length of 30 to 40 kilometers. However, since the river bed of the Danube has changed several times since ancient times due to floods and river regulations, a complete reconstruction of the route is no longer possible today. Some modern road structures still follow the former route of this most important Roman road in Pannonia.

In addition to the Danube, which is important for the transport of economic goods, the well-developed road should above all enable rapid troop movements. The construction and maintenance of the Limes Road also fell within the remit of the military, as the use of the road was primarily reserved for the troops. Presumably, each unit stationed on the Limes was assigned a road section for regular maintenance. The Limesstraße connected the forts with each other and in some fortifications also formed the main road of the camp, the Via principalis . Signal towers were usually erected on the right-hand side of the street, the watchtowers only had a connection to Limes Street if it ran directly along the banks of the Danube. However, commercial traffic also used the military infrastructure very quickly, which also offered good transport links to the hinterland.

The Roman engineers tried to get the road as close as possible to the river bank. It had a sub-structure about 0.80 meters deep, densely packed with earth and rubble, and a surface covering 8 to 10 meters wide with gravel and slaked lime. Stone slab paving could only be proven within the settlement areas. There was a drainage ditch at both edges, which collected and drained the rainwater and meltwater. Where the terrain made it necessary, obstacles were bypassed or bridged by means of piled up road embankments, the remains of which have partially been preserved to this day, but perfectly straight road sections of up to 20 kilometers in length are also known. On the basis of these construction measures, subsequent changes to the routing can also be observed through aerial photo archeology, which have been considered necessary over the centuries. Milestones, often found in situ , often bore propaganda inscriptions and also indicated the distances from the most important Pannonian cities in Roman miles. They also provided valuable reference points for tracking the course of the ancient road and for measuring distances. With the help of these milestones it was also possible, among other things, to accurately date three streets south of Dunaújváros (3rd century AD). The infrastructure of a large Roman military road also included the numerous rest and changing stations ( mansiones ) . Here, among other things, riders and the wagons of the state postal service could change their horses and have necessary repairs carried out. It was possible for travelers to sleep, dine and bathe here.

Long after the evacuation of Pannonia by the Roman troops, its very robust roads guaranteed the population - especially in winter - safe and comfortable travel. Most of them were used intensively well into the Middle Ages and can still be seen along the Danube, partly under fields, dirt roads and modern roads.

Todays situation

Attempt to reconstruct a watchtower in the Archeopark, Polgár, HU (4th to 5th century)

A large number of Roman buildings along the Pannonian Limes are known and scientifically investigated, at least in sections. Many of these structural remains, of which mostly only the foundation area remained due to the centuries-long stone robbery, could then be developed and made accessible to the public. The important finds from these excavations can be viewed in regional and central museums along the Danube. In particular, the destruction of the 20th and 21st centuries, mostly consciously caused by human hands, the regulatory efforts on the Danube since the 19th century, but also the natural forces of the river have destroyed more of the substance than the medieval stone robbery would have ever been able to do. Thus, a number of objects near the Danube had completely disappeared at the beginning of scientific research. Many important questions about the buildings and finds, especially dating approaches, are still controversially discussed by science to this day.

On the initiative of the archaeologist and Limes expert Zsolt Visy , the Hungarian part of the Pannonian Limes was built during the XIX. International Limes Conference in Pécs 2003 nominated as future UNESCO World Heritage . Slovakia would also like to achieve UNESCO recognition for its Limes section with the help of the transnational project “Danube Limes - UNESCO World Heritage”, which includes Hungary and Austria.

In addition to the financially weaker state agencies since the turn of the millennium, important measures for the preservation of some selected ancient sites could only be carried out with aid from the European Union's cultural program.

See also

literature

  • Jenő Fitz (ed.): The Roman Limes in Hungary. Fejér Megyei Múzeumok Igazgatósága, 1976.
  • Kurt Genser: The Austrian Danube Limes in Roman times. A research report . Publishing house of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna 1986, ISBN 3-7001-0783-8 (The Roman Limes in Austria 33).
  • Kurt Genser: The Austrian Limes in Roman times. A research report (dissertation) Salzburg 1982, part II.
  • Manfred Kandler, Hermann Vetters (ed.): The Roman Limes in Austria , Vienna 1989.
  • Sándor Soproni : The last decades of the Pannonian Limes . Becksche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Munich 1985, ISBN 3-406-30453-2 .
  • Sándor Soproni: The late Roman Limes between Esztergom and Szentendre. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest 1978, ISBN 963-05-1307-2 .
  • Sándor Soproni:  Limes Pannonicus . In: Richard Stillwell et al. a. (Ed.): The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ 1976, ISBN 0-691-03542-3 .
  • Sándor Soproni: Military and fortifications on the Pannonian Limes , Ed. Office of the Lower Austrian Provincial Government, Section III / 2, Catalog of the Lower Austrian State Museum, New Series No. 55, The Romans on the Danube, Noricum and Pannonia , Vienna 1973, p. 59 -68.
  • Endre Tóth : The late Roman military architecture in Transdanubia . In Archaeologiai Értesitő. 134, Budapest 2009.
  • Zsolt Visy (Ed.): The Roman Army in Pannonia. An Archaeological Guide of the Ripa Pannonica. Teleki László Foundation, Budapest 2003. ISBN 963-86388-2-6 .
  • Zsolt Visy: The ripa Pannonica in Hungary. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2003, ISBN 963-05-7980-4 .
  • Zsolt Visy, Endre Tóth, Dénes Gabler, Lazlo Kocsis, Peter Kovacs, Zsolt Mráv, Mihaly Nagy u. a .: From Augustus to Attila - life on the Hungarian Danube Limes. Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, ISBN 3-8062-1541-3 (publications of the Limes Museum Aalen 53).
  • Zsolt Visy: The Pannonian Limes in Hungary . Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 1988, ISBN 3-8062-0488-8 .
  • Herma Stiglitz : Military and fortifications on the Austrian Limes , Ed. Office of the Lower Austrian State Government, Section III / 2, Catalog of the Lower Austrian State Museum, New Series No. 55, The Romans on the Danube, Noricum and Pannonia , Vienna 1973, p. 45 -59.
  • Frantisek Krizek: The Roman stations in the foreland of the Norico-Pannonian Limes up to the Marcomann Wars. In: Studies on the military borders of Rome. Lectures at the 6th International Limes Congress in Southern Germany. Böhlau Verlag, Cologne / Graz 1967, pp. 131-137.
  • Miroslava Mirkovic: Orbis Provinciarum, Moesia Superior, A Province on the Middle Danube , Zabern's illustrated books on archeology, special volumes of the ancient world, Verlag Philipp v. Zabern, Mainz 2007, ISBN 978-3-8053-3782-3 .
  • Orsolya Heinrich-Tamáska: Considerations on the main buildings of the Pannonian interior fortifications in the context of late Roman villa architecture , pp. 233–242, in: Gerda v. Bülow and Heinrich Zahbelicky: (Eds.) Bruckneudorf and Gamzigrad. Late antique palaces and large villas in the Danube-Balkans.Room , files from the International Colloquium in Bruckneudorf from October 15 to 18, 2008, Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn 2011. ISBN 978-3-900305-59-8 .

Web links

Carnuntum:

Aquincum:

Inner fort:

Remarks

  1. ^ Sándor Soproni: 1973, p. 59.
  2. ^ Zsolt Visy : The Pannonian Limes in Hungary . Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 1988, ISBN 3-8062-0488-8 , pp. 26-27.
  3. ^ Sándor Soproni: 1973, p. 66.
  4. Sándor Soproni: 1973, pp. 59-60.
  5. ^ Hermann Bengtson : Roman history. Republic and Imperial Era until 284 AD. Verlag CH Beck, Munich 1982, ISBN 3-406-02505-6 , p. 212.
  6. ^ Hermann Bengtson: Roman history. Republic and Imperial Era up to 284 AD. Verlag CH Beck, Munich 1982, ISBN 3-406-02505-6 , p. 236.
  7. Gassner / Jilek 1997, p. 30
  8. Herma Stiglitz: 1973, p. 45
  9. Marcelo Tilman Schmitt: The Roman Foreign Policy of the 2nd Century AD. Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart 1997, ISBN 3-515-07106-7 , pp. 84–85.
  10. a b Zsolt Visy in: Zsolt Visy, Endre Tóth , Dénes Gabler, Lazlo Kocsis, Peter Kovacs u. a .: From Augustus to Attila - life on the Hungarian Danube Limes. Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, ISBN 3-8062-1541-3 , pp. 11–15 (publications of the Limes Museum Aalen 53).
  11. Frantisek Krizek: 1967, pp. 133-134.
  12. Zsolt Visy in: Zsolt Visy, Endre Tóth, Dénes Gabler, Lazlo Kocsis, Peter Kovacs and others. a .: From Augustus to Attila - life on the Hungarian Danube Limes. Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, ISBN 3-8062-1541-3 , pp. 15-16 (publications of the Limes Museum Aalen 53).
  13. Zsolt Visy: 2000, pp. 16-18.
  14. Notitia dignitatum occ .:
  15. ^ Sándor Soproni: Limes Sarmatiae. In: A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve. 2, 1969, 1969, pp. 117-133.
  16. ^ Zsolt Mráv : Castellum contra Tautantum. To identify a late Roman fortress. In: Ádám Szabó , Endre Tóth : Bölcske. Roman inscriptions and finds - In memoriam Sándor Soproni (1926–1995) . Hungarian National Museum, Budapest 2003, ISBN 963-9046-83-3 , p. 331 (Libelli archaeologici Ser. Nov. No. 2).
  17. Expositio in Lucam 10, 10.
  18. Sándor Soproni: 1973, pp. 64–65.
  19. Miroslava Mirkovic: 2007, p. 98
  20. Herma Stiglitz: 1973, p. 56.
  21. Zsolt Visy in: Zsolt Visy, Endre Tóth, Dénes Gabler, Lazlo Kocsis, Peter Kovacs and others. a .: From Augustus to Attila - life on the Hungarian Danube Limes. Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, ISBN 3-8062-1541-3 , pp. 16-18 (Writings of the Limes Museum Aalen 53).
  22. Sándor Soproni: 1973, pp. 66-67.
  23. Zsolt Visy: 2000, p. 23.
  24. Zsolt Visy: 2000, pp. 25-27.
  25. Herma Stiglitz: 1973, p. 53.
  26. Herma Stiglitz: 1973, pp. 57-58.
  27. Sándor Soproni: 1973, pp. 60-61.
  28. Zsolt Visy: 2000, pp. 24-25.
  29. Sándor Soproni: 1973, pp. 62–63.
  30. Zsolt Visy: 2000, p. 28.
  31. Jenő Fitz (ed.): The Roman Limes in Hungary . Fejér Megyei Múzeumok Igazgatósága, 1976, p. 117.
  32. ^ Zsolt Visy: The Pannonian Limes in Hungary . Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 1988, ISBN 3-8062-0488-8 , pp. 77-78. Especially also fig. P. 77.
  33. Zsolt Visy: 2000, p. 30.
  34. ^ Zsolt Visy: The Pannonian Limes in Hungary . Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 1988, ISBN 3-8062-0488-8 , p. 76.
  35. Zsolt Visy: 2000, p. 30.
  36. Zsolt Visy: 2000, p. 28.
  37. ^ Dénes Gabler in: Communications from the Archaeological Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences . 5, 1976, p. 208.
  38. ^ Dénes Gabler: Ad Statuas, Castellum. In: Zsolt Visy (ed.): The Roman army in Pannonia. Teleki Lázló Foundation, Budapest 2003, ISBN 963-86388-2-6 , p. 72.
  39. ^ Péter Kovács : The late Roman Army. In: Zsolt Visy (ed.): The Roman army in Pannonia. Teleki Lázló Foundation, Budapest 2003, ISBN 963-86388-2-6 , p. 110.
  40. ^ Endre Tóth: Karpen in the province of Valeria. On the question of late Roman smooth ceramics in Transdanubia. In: Communicationes archeologicae Hungariae . 2005, p. 382.
  41. Endre Tóth in: Zsolt Visy, Endre Tóth, Dénes Gabler, Lazlo Kocsis, Peter Kovacs and others. a .: From Augustus to Attila - life on the Hungarian Danube Limes. Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, ISBN 3-8062-1541-3 , p. 33. 35. 36 ( Writings of the Limes Museum Aalen 53).
  42. a b Endre Tóth in: Zsolt Visy, Endre Tóth, Dénes Gabler, Lazlo Kocsis, Peter Kovacs u. a .: From Augustus to Attila - life on the Hungarian Danube Limes. Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, ISBN 3-8062-1541-3 , pp. 34-35 ( publications of the Limes Museum Aalen 53).
  43. Endre Tóth in: Zsolt Visy, Endre Tóth, Dénes Gabler, Lazlo Kocsis, Peter Kovacs and others. a .: From Augustus to Attila - life on the Hungarian Danube Limes. Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 2000, ISBN 3-8062-1541-3 , p. 33 (Writings of the Limes Museum Aalen 53).
  44. Orsolya Heinrich-Tamaska: 2011, pp. 233-234
  45. Orsolya Heinrich-Tamaska: 2011, p. 235
  46. Zsolt Visy: 2000, pp. 30-31.
  47. a b Zsolt Visy: 2000, p. 31.
  48. a b c Zsolt Visy: The Pannonian Limes in Hungary . Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 1988, ISBN 3-8062-0488-8 , p. 33.
  49. Jenő Fitz (ed.): The Roman Limes in Hungary . Fejér Megyei Múzeumok Igazgatósága, 1976, p. 59.
  50. ^ Sándor Soproni: The late Roman Limes between Esztergom and Szentendre. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 1978, ISBN 963-05-1307-2 , p. 59.
  51. ^ Zsolt Visy: The Pannonian Limes in Hungary . Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart 1988, ISBN 3-8062-0488-8 , p. 70.
  52. Endre Tóth: Roman watchtowers of Pilismarót. In: Communicationes archeologicae Hungariae. Budapest 1984, p. 67 ff.
  53. Jenő Fitz (ed.): The Roman Limes in Hungary. Fejér Megyei Múzeumok Igazgatósága, 1976, p. 61.
  54. ^ Sándor Soproni: The late Roman Limes between Esztergom and Szentendre. Akademiai Kiado. Budapest 1978, ISBN 963-05-1307-2 , p. 38.
  55. a b Zsolt Visy: The ripa Pannonica in Hungary. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2003, ISBN 963-05-7980-4 , p. 51.
  56. Sandor Soproni: 1973, p. 65.
  57. AE 2000, 1223 .
  58. ^ Dániel Gróh , Péter Gróf : Vízlépcsőrendszer és régészeti kutatás Nagymaros-Visegrád térségében. Magyar múzeumok, 1995, 2, 1996, pp. 22-24 (in Hungarian).
  59. Jenő Fitz (ed.): The Roman Limes in Hungary. Fejér Megyei Múzeumok Igazgatósága, 1976, p. 63.
  60. ^ Sándor Soproni: The late Roman Limes between Esztergom and Szentendre . Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 1978, ISBN 963-05-1307-2 , p. 33.
  61. ^ Sándor Soproni: The late Roman Limes between Esztergom and Szentendre . Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 1978, ISBN 963-05-1307-2 , p. 51.
  62. Zsolt Mráv : Archaeological research 2000–2001 in the area of ​​the late Roman fortress of Göd-Bócsaújtelep (preliminary report) 2002. In: Communicationes archeologicae Hungariae. 2003, p. 101.
  63. Frantidek Krizek: 1967 S. 131st
  64. Zsolt Mráv: 2000, p. 49.
  65. Frantisek Krizek: 1967, p. 134
  66. Zsolt Mráv: 2000, p. 49.
  67. Frantisek Krizek: 1967, pp. 136-137.
  68. Herma Stiglitz: 1973, pp. 55-56.
  69. ^ Frantisek Krizek: 1967, pp. 134-135.
  70. CIL 3, 13439 ; Data sheet at ubi-erat-lupa  ( page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. .@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.ubi-erat-lupa.org  
  71. Zsolt Mráv: 2000, p. 48.
  72. ^ Sándor Soproni: 1973, p. 64.
  73. ^ Paula Zsidi : Research in Aquincum, 1969–2002. In honor of Klára Póczy. Budapesti Történeti Múzeum 2003, ISBN 963-9340-23-5 , p. 98.
  74. Zsolt Mráv: 2000, p. 51.
  75. ^ Ádám Szabó , Endre Tóth : Bölcske. Roman inscriptions and finds - In memoriam Sándor Soproni (1926–1995) . Hungarian National Museum, Budapest 2003, ISBN 963-9046-83-3 , p. 39 (Libelli archaeologici Ser. Nov. No. II).
  76. Zsolt Visy: 2000, p. 31.
  77. ^ Sándor Soproni: 1973, p. 64.
  78. ^ Zsolt Mráv in: Bölcske. Roman inscriptions and finds - In memoriam Sándor Soproni (1926–1995) . Hungarian National Museum, Budapest 2003, ISBN 963-9046-83-9 , p. 38 (Libelli archaeologici Ser. Nov. No. II).
  79. ^ Attila Gaál: Bölcske fortlet. In: Zsolt Visy (ed.): The Roman army in Pannonia. Teleki Lázló Foundation, Budapest 2003, ISBN 963-86388-2-6 , p. 176.
  80. ^ Géza Szabó: A "bölcskei sziklák" és a magyarországi víz alatti régészeti kutatások kezdetei. In: Géza Szabó (ed.): Múlt és jelen Bölcskén. Bölcskei tanulmányok 1. Bölcske Községi Önkormányzat Képviselő-testülete, Bölcske 1994, ISBN 963-03-3811-4 , pp. 115–128, here: p. 115.
  81. ^ Sándor Soproni: Előzetes jelentés a bölcskei késő római ellenerőd kutatásáról. (Preliminary report on research into the late Roman counter-fortress in Bölcske.) In: Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 1990, pp. 133–142, here: p. 142.
  82. Sándor Soproni, 1973, pp. 59-68
  83. Gabriella Fényes: Investigations into ceramic production in Brigetio. In: Acta Archaeologica. 54, Budapest 2003, pp. 101-163; here: p. 120.
  84. Éva B. Bónis: Vessel depot in the pottery quarter of the military town of Brigetio. In: Folia Archaeologica. 27, 1976, pp. 73-88; here in particular: p. 87.
  85. Márta H. Kelemen: A legio I adiutrix téglavetõje Dömösön - The brickworks of the legio I Adiutrix in Dömös. In Archaeologiai Értesitő. 121-122, 1994-1995, pp. 97-114.
  86. Mihaly Nagy: 2000, pp. 80-81.
  87. CIL 3, 11007 .
  88. CIL 3, 4335 .
  89. Peter Kovacs: 2000, p. 75.
  90. a b c Peter Kovacs: 2000, p. 76.
  91. Mihaly Nagy: 2000, p. 81.
  92. a b Peter Kovacs: 2000, p. 78.
  93. a b Peter Kovacs: 2000, p. 77.
  94. Zsolt Visy: 2000, pp. 31-32.
  95. a b Zsolt Visy: 2000, p. 32.
  96. ^ University of Vienna: The Central Europe Project “Danube Limes - UNESCO World Heritage” 2008–2011. [1]  ( Page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / www.univie.ac.at