[13] NOTE ON THE NAME OF THE PROVINCE GALATIA. It is not easy to find a more absolute contradiction than there is between the view adopted in the text and that of Dr. E. Schurer in Theologische Literaturzeitung, 1892, p.468: "An official usage, which embraced all three districts (Galatia, Pisidia, and Lycaonia) under the single conception Galatia, has never existed." This extraordinary statement is made with equal positiveness by Dr. Schurer in Jahrbuecher fuer protestantische Theologie, 1892, p.471, where he affirms that "the name Galatia is only a parte potiori, being taken from the biggest of the various districts which were included in the provinces, and is not an official designation: the name and the conception Galatia did not embrace more than the special district of this name." When I read such a statement I fall into despair. 1 I have stated the facts with some care in my Histor. Geogr., pp.253 and 453; and Dr. Schurer devotes considerable space to restating them in a less complete, and, as I venture to think, less accurate way, treating a small selection of inscriptions as if they represented the official usage, while the overwhelming majority of passages, which describe the entire province by the name Galatia, are entirely disregarded by him. The history which I have given of the development of the province Galatia is inconsistent with his [14] view, and I see no reason to alter what I have said on any important point; a Roman province must have had a name, and the name of the province in question was Galatia. I shall not spend time in arguing the point, but shall lay down the following series of proposition~, which I believe to be correct and founded on the ancient authorities: --

1. The province in question was, in its origin, the kingdom left by Amyntas at his death in B.C. 25, and not merely Galatia proper.

2. Pliny says that the whole of Pisidia, as far as the border of Kabalia, in Pamphylia, was called Galatia (Galatia attingit (Pamphyliae Cabaliam V. 147. Cp. Ptolemy V. 4, II, 12).

3. The first governor appointed is called "Governor of Galatia."

4. Inscriptions prove that the extreme parts of Galatic Pisidia and Galatic Lycaonia were under the government of the officers of Galatia, as we see from the following: -- A Latin official document of the most formal type, recording a demarcation of boundaries in the western part of Galatic Pisidia, and dating in A.D. 54, or immediately after, defines the Roman officer who carried out the delimitation as procurator, and an inscription of Iconium describes the same person as procurator of the Galatic province (C.I.G., 3991). 2

5. Honorary inscriptions, in which it is an object to accumulate titles, speak of the official as governor of Galatia, Pontus, Paphlagonia, Pisidia, Phrygia, Lycaonia, etc.; but we possess the actual text of the inscription in which the people of Iconium expressed their gratitude to the procurator of the Galatic province, who had been charged by the Emperor Claudius with the duty of reorganising the city; hence they call him "Founder." The city takes its new name of Claudiconium in this inscription, and the date must be about the year 54. 3 Here Iconium formally reckons itself as Galatic.

6. When a large part of Pontus was incorporated in the province about A.D. 2 - 35 it was named Galaticus, i.e., the part of Pontus attached to the province Galatia, as distinguished from Pontus Polemoniacus, i.e., the part of Pontus governed by King Polemon. [15] The term Galaticus implies that Galatia was recognised as the official name of the province. Precisely the same distinction exists between Lycaonia Galatica and Lycaonia Antiochiana (C.I.L., V., 8660).

7. There are cases in which the Roman official title of a province was a compound name, e.g., Bithynia Pontus, Lycia Pamphylia, the three Eparchiae, Cilicia, Lycaonia, Isauria. But in all these cases there was a permanent distinction between the component parts: each retained a certain individuality of constitution, which is well marked in our authorities. In the case of Galatia there is no trace * that such distinction between its constituent parts existed; but all the evidence points to the conclusion that the parts were as much merged in the unity of the province as Phrygia was in Asia. The name Phrygia retained its geographical existence as a district of Asia; but the official name of the province was Asia.

8. Under Vespasian the province Cappadocia was added to Galatia, but continued to enjoy a separate constitution. The governor presided over united, yet distinct, provinces; and this novelty is clearly marked in the inscriptions, which henceforward use the plural term "provinciarum," or {eparcheiõn}.

9. After Cappadocia was separated from Galatia by Trajan, the plural usage persisted, at least in some cases, as is clear from the inscription given in C.I.L., III., Suppl., No.6813. This is contrary to the old usage. The plural gave more dignity to the title; and, moreover, it was in accordance with the spirit of individuality which was stimulated in these oriental districts by western education and feeling under the Empire. It is possible that the Koinon of the Lycaonians was founded under the Flavian Emperors, but I still think that it was instituted later (see Hist. Geogr., p.378). It is, however, not improbable that a distinction in constitution between Lycaonia and Galatia proper began in the Flavian period, and culminated in their separation between 137 and 161 AD., when Lycaonia became one of the three southern Eparchiae under a single governor.

FOOTNOTES:

1 Some of my German critics consider that I have spoken too strongly in my Histor. Geogr. regarding the erroneous ideas about the country held by some German scholars. [Dr. Schurer has since retracted his statement in view of the language of Pliny V. 146 f., Ptolemy V.4, 12 (Theolog. Littztg., September 30th, 1893).]

2 I have published it in American Journal of Archaeology, 1886, p.129, 1888, p. 267.

3 C.I.G. 3991. The date is shown by the fact that the procurator was appointed by Claudius, who died October 13th, 54; and the inscription was composed under his successor Nero.

4 One exception, dating from the second century, is alluded to below (9). Consideration of space prevents me from discussing more fully the evidence in favour of identity in constitution among the various parts of Galatia Provincia. Domaszewski in Rhein. Mus., 1893, p.245, ignores the geographical evidence, and dates C.I.L., III., Suppl., no.6818, too late.