(a) Ptolemy devotes the successive chapters of his Book V. to the Roman provinces of Asia Minor : ch. 1. UdfTov Kal Bitfw/as (the ofhcial name was strictly double, and so was the constitution in some respects) ; 2. riji ISlas 'Aala! (as distinguished from Asia the continent) ; 3. Amias ; 4. VaXariat (containing Paphlagonia, and parts of Pisidia, Lycaonia, and Isauria, with the cities Antioch, Lystra, Isaura) ; 5. napupvXias (which he says is bounded by Galatia on the north).
(6) Pliny (who often uses G. in the narrower sense of G. Proper) delines in v. 146, 147, <jalatia [i.e. the province) as reaching to Cabalia of Pam- pbylia and to the Milyip, and as containing Lj-stra and various cities in the Phrygian, Pisidian, and Paphlagonian territories, altogetlier 195 peojiles.t
((■) Tacitus {Jli.ft. ii. 9) mentions (Jalatia and Pamphylia as being governed by Calpurnius Asprcnas, implying that tlie two formed one great continuous district. Eutro])ius (vii. 10) and Syncellus (i. p. 592) aj)ply the name G. to the whole province formed in li.c. 25 ; and they siiuplj- reproduce an old authority, using G. in a sense which it no longer bore in their time.
• On the date, sec Itemif drs Hi. Grecijii.-s, 1804, p. 251.
t Itnhoof BlumtT, X/l. /. .\'umvrm. 1SD7, p. 2(10.
t I'aphlatfonU (ialaticn am] I'onttis (.lalaticiis are called r«A<.i.«, Dion, 48, 33, 6 (see Holder, AUk. SpruclMhall, p. 16U1), aud Stepb. Byz. s.v. K«^>a (Smb. p. 6UUJ.
id) A practical people like the Romans would never use as the strictly technical and official title of a province ' (Jalatia, Paphlagonia, Pisidia, Phrygia, Lycaonia, Pontus Galaticus.' That accumulation of names was used for the sake of clearness on milestones, enumerating the Kite of the various districts of the province (C//, iii. 312, 318), and on honorary inscriptions to give addi- tioM.al dignity to the governor of so many vast regions. These in.scriptions belong to the later years of the century, when the constructive effort was exhausted, and the national spirit was reviving (Hadrian, at last, frankly recognized it).
It is, however, clear that it was not the current and popular Greek usage to designate G. Pro- vincia by the name Galatia. The Greek-sneaking natives, so far as evidence survives, called it Ihe Gal- atic Province {CIG 3991), or enumerated the parts. It was onlytho.se who adopted fully the Roman point of view that employed the simple name Galatia ; and the use of that name must be taken as a sign that the person who uses it speaks as a Roman, and deliberately follows the Roman pro- vincial divisions, and would destroy those national distinctions which were opposed to the organizeil Roman unitj'. It is implied in theSouth-Galatian theory that St. Paul took that view (see Gala- TIANS II.). The author of Acts, however, did not take that view ; and he never speaks of the pro- vince as Galatia, but mentions its parts (see Galatia, Region of, IV.).
No information has been preserved to enable us to sketch the constitution of this vast province, except that it was governed by a praetorian legatus A u gust i pro prcetore, and had no legions stationed in it. The name TaXaTiidi 'Eirapxia, which the people of Iconium employed to desig- nate the province about A.D. 54 {CIG 3991), clearly implies that the intention was to work the province into a unity, like Asia Provinria, and to override the national distinctions of Lycaonian, Phrygian, etc. Undoubtedly, this attempt ultim- ately proved a failure: the national characteristics were too strong, and revived after a time. Hut in the period of growth (B.C. 25 to A.D. 63) a vigorous elibrt was made to impose a Roman unity, ex- pressed by the Roman title G. Provincia, on the various races. If we could trust a rather bold interpretation of an inscription, which seems to make Apollonia a part of the Trokmi (Studia Iliblica, IV. p. 53 f.), it would even aiipiar that the attempt was made to enrol the various parts in one or other of the three Gaulish tribes of G. Proper {ra rpia (dv-q), just as Asia with its equally great variety of peoples was ' the nation Asia ' {ri'kala ri lOfos, Dion Cass. liv. 30); so the term Idvos is frequently applied in inscriptions to desig- nate any entire province, however varied its popu- lation was. Unfortunately, inscri[)tions other than epitaphs are very rare in the province Galatia.
Ancyra was the capital of the province G. ; and it is probable that Colonia (."asareia Antiocliia (see Antioch) was a sort of secondary metropolis, being the centre of a system of Roman garrison towns (ro/f/niVr) and military or imperial roads {oSol /JatriXnaf, Ramsay, Church in lioin. Em]), p. 32), and a place where ceremonies of the iirovincial cultus were held (op. cit. p. .396). Proiialily, the various parts of the ]iiovince retained some separate iiulividuality, though its nature is un- certain. Kven after Pontus Galaticus and Pontus Polemoniacus hail been merged in G. Provincia, they retained their separate names (in inscriptions aiui in Ptolemy), which implies that these artillciiil divisions of purely Roman origin liad some retJ political distinction to preserve their separate existence. So also St. Luke .seems to indicate some distinction between tho districts of the pro-
B8
GALATIA
GALATIA
vince (see GALATIA, Region of). Metropolcis of ■ arious districts are known from coins or inscrip- tions (Poniiieiopolis of I'aiililagonia, Laranda of Lycaonia, Sa^'alassos of I'isidia, Isaura of Isaurica, Amascia and Ncoi;L'sareia of the Pontic divi- sions) ; but tlie titles appear only in the 2nd or 3rd century, and are no argument for tlie Pauline period. Wlictlier the Komon of G. vas a pro- vincial institution or conlined to Galatia Proper, cannot be determined ; but the Koinou of Lycaonia (which has been quoted as a similar institution) was not founded till Lycaonia was incorporated (probably by Pius) in the new province of the Three Eparcliiai (Ramsay, Histor. Gcorjr. p. 377).