priestly families (Woch. f. klass. Phil. 1S98, p. 3) ; the arrnnpe- ment was probably made B.C. 18i>-164. Gordium, a great emporium m 189, must have been Phrygian ; later, it waa con- quered by Gauls, and disappeared from history.
* On the priestlv power see Hennig, Ag. kin. Regen Sacer- dotal; Ramsay, Cuies and Biehoprics, i. pp. lOf., 101 1., 1305., 292 5.
t The name Gallograecia is appealed to as evidence of the Hellenization of the Gauls ; but this name is Roman in origin, and had no such implication amon<r its originators.
t Momjnsen (Rom. Gesch. v. p. 92) accepts the testimony of Jerome, which Perrot and Van Gelder try to discredit.
methods of Greece and Rome, probably caused the first steps in change to be made. The chiefs con nected themselves with the powerful priesthood, became priests themselves, and gradually the freer olu Gaulish sj'stera was repriced by the tyranny of kings. The general ojiinion among tlio.se scholars who hold the Nortli-Galatian theory .seems to be right, that these Gauls, even in A. U. 50, retained much of the Gallic character ; an<l they vainly seek to support that theory bj' linding Gallic characteristics in the con^egations to which St. Paul wrote his Epistle, when Livy (xxxvii. 8) speaks of cxoleta stirpe qentU, .as the fact of his own time, he refers to tlie decay of their warlike character rather than to any cliange of manners and customs.* Lighlfoot (p. 12) rightly says, ' the tough vitality of the Celtic character maintained itself comparatively unimpaired.'
No trace remains in local inscriptions (chiefly A.D. 100-250) of Gallic manners or language, and little of Gallic names ; but that does not prove that the Gallic manners and language had been lost. A Gaul who received anj' education learned Greek ; and all who wrote, wrote in Greek. The Gaulish language was a proof of barbarism, and a reason for shame (whence the contempt for Gala- tians which iippears in the Cappadocian Fathers, see Ramsay, HUtorical Geography, p. 2SS) ; no one would blazon his want of education to the world, and it may be doubted whether any one could write who spoke only Gaulisli. Moreover, the in.scriptions .almost all belong to the gTeat cities, which were civilized seats of Gra!co-Roman culture, inliabited by Greeks, Romans, Phrygiiins, Jews, and Itoiiiauized Gauls (tlie latter forming a small aristocracy). Ancyra was quite a Ronumizcd city, civilized and rich ; and Pessinus was so in a less degree. The native languages of Asia Minor, Phrygian, Lycaonian, etc., persisted through the Roman period, until destroyed by the language of the NT, but no traces of them remain in inscrip- tions (except a few execrations on tombs in the Phrygian langu.age).
In the time of St. Paul, therefore, there was prob- ably a great and marked diit'erence between the rustic Gaulish population of Galatia, who retained much of the old ruder barbarian character, and were probably little affected by Greek manners or language,! and the population of the cities, who spoke (jreek, and the majority of whom were not of Gaulish origin. J But, while continuing Gauls in feeling, the G.alatian tribes in A.D. 50 must have been to some extent attected in habits and standard of life during three centuries spent as a conquering caste amid more civilized peoples. The chief point to notice is that they were an aristocracy among inferiors ; and the eflfect pro- duced by that long experience on a r.ace always proud, free, and bold, must be estimated.
It is not justihable in any case to select one or two of the long list of vices in G.al 5"--', and quote some passage in which a similar fault is ch.arged against Gauls ; the list in these verses is chargeable against human nature, not specially against Gaulish nature. In 0"- ' niggardliness is a cii.aracteristic of the Galatians, and in 1° they change their religion quickly. It may be doubted whether either fact was characteristic of the Gauls; though Hckle in some respects, they never were quick to change their religion, but rather the con-
* The speech of Manlius, xxxviii. 17, is apparently Livy'a free invention, and contains a similar sentiment.
t Similarly, Mommsen (Rom. Gesch. v. 92) shows that in Gau! the Gallic language continued in common use at least as late aa the 4th century.
I Salmon fully recognizes that the Christians of the North- Galatian Churches were not as a riile the Gauls, but the Phrygians ; and that the attempt to find Celtic characteristics in those whom St. Paul addresses is a failure (Smith, DR' i. p. IlOU).
GALATIA
GALATIA
85
trary ; * greedy to seek money they were said to be, Imt at the same time the fault to which they tend is to be too apt to spend even to ostentation. Tlie further quality, that the Galatians are 'a super- stitious people given to ritual observances,' was peculiarly cnaracteristic of the type of religion widely spread over Asia Minor, with its great seats at places like Pessinus, Pisidian Antioch, Comana, Ephesus, etc. We may say that the characteristics of the Galatian congregations are those of the general native population of Asia Minor, and not those of the Gauls.
After the Koman imperial centre was trans- ferred first to Nikomedia, and afterwards to Constantinople, the Hellenization of Galatia pro- ceeded much more rapidly, for the north side of the plateau then rapidly advanced in civilization and importance (Ramsay, Histor. Geogr. pp. 74, 197 11'.), while the south side, which had previously lain on the line of the greatest routes, declined. Chris- tianity spread the knowledge of Greek in the 4th cent. ; and hence we find expressions like that of Themistius (p. 360), that Galatia is almost wholly Greek. That, however, is a rhetorician's phrase ; Jerome and the contempt expressed by Basil and Gregory show that it is probably exaggerated ; but, even if it be near the truth, it must not be applied to the 1st cent.