In the Roman time Phrygia was divided between two provinces, Asia and Galatia, with thorough Roman indifference to national frontiers in mapping out their province—an indifference which resulted in the final failure of those provincial divisions to attain permanence. These two parts were called Phrygia Asiana and Phrygia Galatica: for the former name, see Galen, 7. τροφ. dur. iv. p. 312 (Kuhn, vi. p. 515); for the latter, see a notice in a Byzantine Menologion (taken from a good and ancient source) quoted in Acta Sanctorum, Sept. 28, p. 563.
That part of Phrygia was included in the province Galatia, though often ignored, is no longer denied by any scholar. A number of inscriptions, enum- erating the parts of the province Galatia, mention among them Phrygia; e.g. CJL iii. 6818, mentions the parts as Galatia, Pisidia, Phrygia, Lycaonia, Isauria, Paphlagonia, Pontus Galaticus, Pontus Polemoniacus ; compare CJL iii. 6819; Frankel, Inschr. Pergam. No. 451 (the lists vary at different periods as districts were added to or taken from the province). See also GALATIA, vol. ii. p. 90f.
Moreover, several cities which Strabo and Ptolemy assign to Phrygia, e.g. Apollonia and Antioch, are shown by their coins and by other means to belong to the province Galatia, and Ptolemy gives the region which he calls Pisidian Phrygia as a part of the province Galatia.
Galatic Phrygia, or the Phrygian region of the province Galatia, was not a very large country.
t was a strip of territory extending in ἀπ στον length along the front of the Pisidian mountains ; and it included the cities of Iconium (in the native
* It is often wrongly said that Paroreios denoted the country west and south from Sultan-Dagh, with the city of Pisidian Antioch. That was Pisidic Phrygia (see following note).
t Pisidic Phrygia, Polybius, xxii. 6 14; Phrygir πρὸς Mieidig, Strabo, pp. 557, 566, 5797; Phrygia Πισιδία, Ptolemy, V. v. 4
Σ Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, i. pp. 6, 1888
PHRYGIA
nase), Antioch the Colonia, Apollonia, and, as Ptolemy says, several others. Asian Phrygia was immensely larger, including all Paroreios and Epictetus and far the larger part of Great Phrygia. In process of time the Disidian connexion became stronger, and the name Pisidian Phrygia was gradu- ally disused. Antioch ceased to be considered a city of Phrygia and was called ‘of Pisidia.’ Some of the epigraphic lists of the regions making up the rovince Galatia omit Phrygia and mention only isidia. At last a distinct Roman province Pisidia was constituted about A.D. 295, with the metropolis Antioch and a secondary metropolis Iconium. But in the time of St. Paul, and long after, the view was dominant among the people that Antioch and Iconium were cities of ‘pees ian region.*
A distinction between High Oihegele and Low Phrygia can be traced in the Roman time from Strabo, A.D. 20, onwards. Low Phrygia was 4 name that included Hierapolis (Philostratus, Imagines, i. 12) and Lake Anava (Strabo, i. p. 49) and the Sangarios (Steph. Byz. s.v.), t.e. it included those districts that were less elevated above sea- level, while High Phrygia (ἡ ἄνω Φρυγία) was the elevated region of central Phrygia τος between the Sangarios on the north-east and the great road passing close to Hierapolis in the Lycus valley and along the edge of Lake Anava. Aristides speaks of a certain city (probably Akmonia, possibly Synnada) as in High Phrygia. The pair of terms rarely occur in literature; but they clearly were in current local use.
We have seen how Phrygia steadily diminished, losing parts on the west, north-west, north-east, south-east, and south. About A.D. 295 or soon after- wards, when the great province Asia was broken up, two new provinces were formed,+ Phrygia Prima and Secunda, called also Great and Small,t or Pacatiana and Salutaris: the last pair of names
came into use in the latter part of the 4th cent., and soon established themselves in almost universal
usage. The name Salutaris is explained by the Byzantine writers as caused by the fact that St. Paul had preached the gospel of salvation there. This is a curious statement: it implies that St. Paul had ayreashed much more in Phrygia Secunda than in Phrygia Prima (which was the western half under the primacy of Laodicea). Now that may be either a belief founded on old authority, or a mere groundless fabrication of the Byzantine time, to explain a curious name. In the former case it would afford valuable evidence bearing on the history of St. Paul, for there was good author- ity underlying the really old tradition in Asia
inor. In the latter case it would be absolutely valueless. Unfortunately, the latter alternative is pretty certainly true. ‘The name is Latin (Salu- taris) transformed into a Greek word; but if it had rested on a genuine popular tradition or belief, it would have been Greek, for Greek was the language of the country, and very few can have known Latin in Phrygia. The name Salutaris has probably nothing to do with St. Paul or with religion.
The name Phrygia henceforth was restricted within the limits of those two provinces. The
* In Antioch the memory of its Phrygian character remained as late as the 8rd cent. (see evidence in Ramsay, Histor, Comment. on Galatians, §§ 19, 20); but outsiders called it ‘of Pisidia’ in the 2nd cent. Similarly in Iconium.
t Malalas mye that Constantine divided Phrygia into two provinces, implying that in 295 only one province, Phrygia, was constituted. If so, Constantine's action is older than a.p, 325, as is shown in Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, pt. Lp. 81; Malalas, in fact, mentions Constantines act before the Council of Nicmwa (4.D. 825), xiii. p. 323.