I '^6?'
A Historical Commentary on St. Paul's
Epistle to the Galatians
MAY I?"" 1SS
A HISTORICAL COMMENTARY
ON ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE
TO THE GALATIANS
by
Wm. M. Ramsay
BAKER BOOK HOUSE
Grand Rapids, Michigan
1965
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 65-23751
Reprinted 1965 by
Baker Book House Company
Reprinted from
the 1900 edition
Printed in New York by
G.P. Putnams Sons
PHOTOLITHOPRINTED BY GUSHING - MALLOY. ING.
ANN ARBOR, MIGHIGAN, UNITED STATES OF AMERIGA
1965
PREFACE.
The attempt is made in this book to show how
much Hght the Epistle to the Galatians throws
on contemporary history in the widest sense — the
history cf religion, society, thought, manners, educa-
tion— in the Eastern Provinces of the Empire. The
introductory study of society and religion in Central
Asia Minor may seem perhaps too elaborate ; but it
could not be put more briefly if any adequate con-
ception were to be given of the forces acting on the
minds of Paul's Galatian hearers.
The Commentary is intended to be complete in
itself, able to be read and fully understood without
continually looking back to the Introduction. The
Commentary was written first, and published in the
Expositor, June, 1898 — September, 1899. Many
passages have now been completely rewritten (after
the Introduction had been composed), three chapters
have been suppressed and eleven added.
My first intention was tacitly to carry out the
South Galatian Theory, leaving the reader to con-
trast the flood of light thrown on South Galatia by
the Epistle with its barrenness as regards North
Galatia. But it might be stigmatised as unscholarly
viii Preface
if no reference were made to the view still widely
assumed as true in Germany and wherever fashion-
able German views (yet see p. 316) are taken as final.
Hence I am, as Lightfoot says, "distracted between
the fear of saying too much and the fear of saying
too little ". Probably I say too little ; but the cause
(an accident preventing work) is stated on p. 478.
The same cause prevented the proper final revision
of proofs, which may perhaps have left some errors
unremoved.
In former works I applied simply the principles
of Imperial history learned from Prof. Mommsen.
On this book Prof. Mitteis's Imperial Law a7id
National Law [Reicksrecht und Volksrechl) has
left a strong impression. His title emphasises the
opposition between Roman and National, which I
have been for years entreating the North Galatian
champions to notice. As to my nov^l theory of
Seleucid law in Galatians, ignoring Halmel, those
who want German authority for everything may find
it in Prof. Mitteis's words : jedenfalls wird audi
durch Ihre Ausfiihrungen dasjenige was Lialmel
" das rom. Recht im Galaterbrief" sagt, aus dem
Feld geschlagen.
We must all study German method, and practise
it day and night ; but the first principle in German
method is to disregard authority (even German) and
follow after truth.
I have not seen Mr. Askwith's recent work on
the Galatian Question (see p. 478).
CONTENTS.
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION :
PAGE
Society and Religion in Central Asia Minor in the Time of
St. Paul 1-234
Section i. Preliminary .-.-....-i
2. North Galatia : Land and Peoples 12
3. Pre-Galatic History of North Galatia - - - - 19
4. The Pre-Gaulish Inhabitants of Galatia - - - - 26
5. The Religion of Asia Minor 35
6. Settlement of the Gauls in Galatia 45
7. The History of Galatia B.C. 232-64 ■ - ■ - 53
8. The North Galatian State - - - - - - 72
9. The Religion of North Galatia ..... 86
10. Galatia as a Roman Client State ----- 95
11. Origin of the Province Galatia ..... 103
12. History of the Province Galatia, B.C. 25 — a.d. 50 - - 113
13. Civilisation of North Galatia under the Roman Empire - 128
14. Language and Letters in North Galatia - - - - 147
15. The Influence of Christianity in North Galatia - - 165
i6. Later History of the Province Galatia - - . . 175
17. The Cities and the Peoples of South Galatia - - - 180
18. The Jews in South Galatia 189
19. Pisidian Antioch 197
20. Iconium --..-....- 214
21. Lystra --..-..... 223
22. Derbe 228
23. Summary ......... 233
b
X Contents
PAGE
HISTORICAL COMMENTARY 237-27*
§ I. The Introductory Address 237
§ II. The Epistle Authorised by the Church in Antioch - 238
§ III. Persons mentioned in the Epistle .... 246
§ IV. Relation of Paul to Barnabas 248
§ V. "I Marvel" 249
§ VI. "Ye are so quickly Removing" - - - - - 251
§ VII. Cause of the Galatian Movement .... 254
§ VIII. Paul as a Judaistic Preacher, I 6-10 .... 256
§ IX. Another Gospel, I 6-7 ...... 260
§ X. " Seeking to please Men," I 10 266
§ XI. Tone of Address to the Galatians .... 267
§ XII. The Gospel which ye Received 269
§ XIII. Dates of the Autobiography 271
§ XIV. The Province of Syria and Cilicia, I 21 - - - 275
§ XV. The Klimata of Syria and Cilicia .... 278
§ XVI. The Visits to Jerusalem, I 18, II i ff - - - - 280.
§ XVII. The First Visit to Jerusalem, I 18-20 - - - - 283
§ XVIII. The Second Visit to Jerusalem, II i-io - - - 285
§ XIX. Limits and Purpose of the Autobiography ... 301
§ XX. St. Peter in Antioch - - 304
§ XXI. Spirit of Chapters III, IV - - - - - - 306
§ XXIL The Address "Galatians," in III I .... 308
§ XXIII. Galatia the Province 314
§ XXIV. Galatians and Gauls 318
§ XXV. St. Paul's Roman Point of View 320
§ XXVI. Foolish Galatians 321
§ XXVII. The Two Stages, III 3 - - ... 324.
§ XXVIII. The Marvellous Powers, III 2-5 326
§ XXIX. The Teaching of Paul 328
§ XXX. The Message to the Galatians 329
§ XXXI. Sons of Abraham, III 6-9 - - - - - - 337
§ XXXII. Oi iK v'umws ........ 3^.
§ XXXIII. A Man's Will, Diatheke, III 15-18 - - - - 349
§ XXXIV. The Use of Dia^/r«)fe^ in the Pauline Epistles - - 356-
§ XXXV. Greek Law in Galatian Cities 370
Contents xi
PAGE
§ XXXVI. The Argument from Seed, III i6 - - - - 375
§ XXXVII. Function of the Law, III 19-22 377
§ XXXVIII. The Mediator, III 20 379
§ XXXIX. Law the Child-Guardian, III 23-25 - - - - 381
§ XL. Equality in the Perfect Church, III 26-30 - - - 385
K % XLI. The Infant Son and Heir, Gal. IV. 1-7 - - - 391
§ XLII. The Rudiments of the World, Gal. IV 3 and 9 - - 394
§ XLIII. He sent forth His Son, Gal. IV 4 - - - - 39^^
§ XLIV. The Address at Pisidian Antioch ... - 399
§ XLV. Paul's Visits to Galatia in Acts 401
§ XLVI. Paul's Visits to the Churches of Galatia - - - 4^5
§ XLVII. Cause of the First Galatian Visit - - - - 4^7
§ XLVIII. The Thorn in the Flesh - - - - ^ - 422
§ XLIX. Sequence of Thought in IV 12-20 - - - - 428
§ L. The Allegory of Hagar and Sarah, IV 21, V i - - 430
§ LI. The Conclusion, V i 434
§ LII. Personal Recapitulation, V 2-12 ... - 435
§ LIII. The Whole Law, V 2-4 44°
§ LIV. Freedom and Love, V 13-15 44^
§ LV. The Spiritual Life, V 16-26 445
§ LVI. The Faults of the South Galatic Cities - - - 44^
§ LVII. The Unforgiving Phrygians, VI 1-5 - - - - 454
§ LVI 1 1. Voluntary Liberality to Teachers, VI 6-10 - - 45^
§ LIX. Was there a Letter from the Galatians ? - - - 461
§ LX. The Large Letters, VI 11-17 4^4
§ LXI. The Parting Message 4^7
§ LXII. The Concluding Blessing and Denunciation, VI 16-17 470
§LXIII. The Stigmata of Jesus, VI 17 47*
§ LXIV. Result of the Epistle 474
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
Society and Religion in Central Asia Minor in
the time of St. Paul.
SECTION I.
PRELIMINARY.
The Epistle to the Galatians is a document of the highest
importance for students of history. Not merely is it a
peculiarly important authority for all who study the early
stages in the Christianisation of the Roman Empire : it
also throws much light on the condition and society of one
of the Eastern Roman Provinces during the first century
of the Empire — a difficult subject and an almost unknown
land.
The study of this document is encumbered with a great
preliminary difficulty. It is not certain who were the per-
sons addressed. While some scholars maintain that the
" Churches of Galatia," to whom the Epistle is addressed,
were planted in the four cities of Southern Galatia, Derbe,
Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch, others assert that
those Churches were situated in North Galatia. These two
opposite opinions are conveniently designated as the South-
Galatian and the North-Galatian Theory.
This doubt as to the destination of the Epistle hardly
Historical Inh'oductio n .
affects the study of its dogmatic or doctrinal value, with
which we are not concerned.
Even as regards its historical value, small importance
might seem on a first superficial view to attach to the
question whether the Churches addressed were situated in
the south of the province or in the north. The distance of
Pessinus, the nearest in the northern group, from Iconium
in the southern is only about 120 miles. From Pessinus to
Antioch is about 30 miles less as the crow flies, but almost
as much as the traveller goes.
Similarly, the question has been discussed whether the
so-called " Epistle to the Ephesians " was addressed to the
Church of Ephesus or of Laodicea, or is a general Asian
letter. The distance by road from Ephesus to Laodicea
was 91^ Roman miles. But it makes no very serious dif-
ference even to the historical student whether the letter
was addressed to the one or the other city : no question
as regards the time of composition, or the order of Paul's
travels, or the history of the Church as a whole, is affected
by the doubt.
But the doubt as regards the Galatian Churches stands
on a quite different footing. The date when the letter was
composed, the order and facts of Paul's travels, several
important questions of general Church history, are all
affected by the doubt. To the student of Roman history
and society there are also serious differences between the
two theories. The North-Galatian cities belong to quite a
different line of development from the South-Galatian. See
Sections 15, 17.
In this case, as in all other historical questions, the doubt
is due to insufficiency of knowledge. The countries both
of North and of South Galatia are most obscure. A good
Section i : Preliminary.
deal has been done by modern scholars to illuminate the
history of North Galatia in the pre-Roman period by col-
lecting and comparing the references in literature ; but little
has been done for the Roman period. South Galatia was
no more than a name, and hardly even a name, until within
the last few years.
It might have been expected that, in a question so im-
portant and so obscure, all investigators who approached
the subject would have begun by carefully studying the
condition of both districts, North and South Galatia ;
and thereafter would have reached a conclusion based on
adequate knowledge.
That method, however, has not been practised. The
commentators on the Epistle, with the single exception of
Lightfoot, have had little inclination to the historical side
of their subject. The dogmatic and doctrinal overpowered
every other aspect in their view. Where they touched
on the historical questions that are involved, they did so
unwillingly and as briefly as possible. As a rule, having
made up their minds beforehand that Paul wrote to the
Churches of North Galatia, they took a hasty glance
into the history of the country and people, and selected a
few facts that seemed to suit their foregone conclusion,
when taken apart from the surroundings. In their prepos-
session any facts that were unfavourable to their view
remained unnoticed. They did not even observe that
Juliopolis, which many of them pitched upon as the site
of one of Paul's Churches, was a city of Bithynia, not of
Galatia.^
^It was attached to Galatia about a.d. 295; and most of our
authorities for the northern limits of Galatia are later than that
date. Hence the error.
Historical Introduction.
Even as regards Lightfoot, his historical faculty is not
shown at its highest level in his Galatian commentary. He
began his great series of Pauline commentaries with per-
haps the most difficult Epistle, certainly the one that is
most widely decisive as regards Pauline history. It might
have been a more fortunate choice if he had first practised
his method on one or two Epistles which determine fewer
questions beyond their own scope, and then applied his
perfectly trained powers to Galatians. Comparing his
introductions to Galatians and Colossians, one sees how
much more thorough and well-balanced the latter is. In
his Galatians he devotes a quite disproportionate space to
the question whether the European invaders of Asia Minor
belonged to a Germanic or a Celtic stock : the answer to
that question makes practically no difference to the right
understanding of the Epistle.
It is remarkable, considering how delicate the balance of
evidence seemed to him and how much he was able to say
on the opposite side in several places, that he seems never
to have re-opened the case. The reason doubtless was that
no new evidence became available until the last years of
his life. The study of Asia Minor is, pre-eminently, one
in which the scholar at present must never consider his
opinion final, and must be prepared to modify and change
it as new evidence is discovered.^
It is a duty here at the outset to make clear my attitude
towards that great scholar, who necessarily will be so often
mentioned in the following pages.^ I have been charged
with " holding up to ignominy " as " intellectually or morally
^ See below, note on p. lo.
'^This paragraph is adapted from Expositor, May, 1896, p. 344, in
answer to a charge made in the preceding number, p. 254.
Section i : Preliminary.
discreditable " his opinion on points on which we differ.
The charge is peculiarly painful to me. For Lightfoot's
work I have felt and often expressed to friends the highest
admiration since my undergraduate days ; for his personal
kindness to me as a beginner in the path of learning I feel
gratitude that grows stronger and warmer as the years pass
by. But his immense and well-deserved influence is now
supporting an error, which could only have arisen in his
mind about an unknown land. An example from another
topic will make clear my relations to him on this subject.
In the traditional epitaph of Avircius Marcellus, Lightfoot
rightly caught the ring of genuineness amid all the corrup-
tions that defaced it. Rightly maintaining its authenticity,
he attempted to disprove the arguments which seemed to
older scholars, like Tillemont and Garrucci, to be conclu-
sive proof of its spuriousness ; but his discussion of the
evidence was wrong throughout.^ Fortunately he lived to
recognise the complete change which better knowledge of
the country necessitated ; and in the latest edition he cut
out the whole of his erroneous discussion, and substituted
a brief reference to the real facts ; yet, had he died a few
years earlier, I should have had to struggle long against the
almost universal belief in England that his discussion of
that subject rrfust be correct. So now, had his life been
prolonged a few years more, he would have been the first
to see (long before I saw) the bearing of the new informa-
tion about Phrygia, Lycaonia, and Galatia, on the founda-
tion of the early Church in Asia Minor ; he would have
himself corrected the errors about the history and geography
of these countries that were inevitable, when his earlier
^ See his edition of Colossians, p. 54 ff.
Historical Introduction.
works were written ; and I should never have been com-
pelled to assume the position of criticising him, but have
been free to be in external appearance, as I always have
been in reality, his humble admirer.
For a number of years the present writer has maintained
that the North-Galatian Theory is seen to be impossible,
as soon as one makes oneself properly acquainted with the
history and character of the people, and the geography of
the country. That theory seemed to be possible only so
long as no clear conception of the facts existed ; but when
the facts were collected and looked at in their entirety, it
lost any appearance of justification. To collect the his-
torical and antiquarian evidence bearing on the question, to
try to show Galatia as it really was about A.D. 50, is the
proper method of treating this subject.
In these circumstances, the necessity is entailed of pre-
fixing to this commentary on the Epistle a careful study
of a district where the Apostle Paul never set foot, and to
which he never wrote. The process may seem strange ;
but in the progress towards truth the first step is often the
elimination of errors.
Further, it may appear that the introductory study is
too elaborate, even if it had been devoted solely to the
country where St. Paul travelled and to whose people he
wrote. But it is much more difficult to dispose of an in-
veterate error than it would be simply to illustrate the
Epistle, if the task were encumbered by no erroneous
prejudice. An illustration of this may here be quoted : —
"In every department of historical investigation," says
Professor R. Engelmann, the distinguished archaeologist,
" examples may be quoted to show how long errors that
have once established themselves in the ordinary teaching
Section i : Preliminary.
may last, and how even the noblest and best scholars give
themselves the toil of championing them and demonstrating
that they are the only truths." ^ He goes on to exemplify
from the department of Greek architecture this remarkable
tendency to cling to an error that one has been taught from
childhood. He shows how the view that Greek temples as
a rule were open above to the sky, founded on a mistrans-
lation of a passage of Vitruvius 2 and supported by mis-
interpretation of several other passages — though vigor-
ously combated by one or two investigators on grounds
that are now seen to be correct — established itself in
general opinion, was taught in every school, and dominated
archaeological research for fifty years. Only recently has
it been successfully attacked ; and some time must pass
before it disappears from the lecture-room and the ordinary
manuals. So blinded were some excellent investigators
by the prejudice created in their minds, that they found in
the modern discoveries of the last twenty years conclusive
demonstration of the accepted theory, and on the result
of modern excavations they exultingly declared that their
few opponents were demonstrated to be strangers to the
realities of Greek Art.
Similarly, the North-Galatian Theory, which was possible
only because of the obscurity of the subject and the general
misapprehension of historical facts, established itself in
current opinion and was taught in every school and in all
ordinary text-books. Though always denied and contested
by a few, yet it was practically master of the field of
instruction ; and thus it could create a presumption in its
^ Quoted from his admirable resume in Vossische Zeitung, Beilage,
26th March, 2nd April, 1899,
'III I.
8 Historical Introduction.
favour in almost every mind. The vast majority of readers
never heard of any other theory ; and it became known to
individuals usually through some contemptuous reference
made by some revered teacher, who glanced at it only to
dismiss it. Finally, distinguished and deservedly respected
scholars deduced from the epigraphic results of modern
research conclusive proof of the accepted theory, and de-
clared that the opposite view was now finally ejected from
educated minds.
These facts and the analogy just quoted, show how
carefully and deeply laid the foundation must be on which
the South-Galatian Theory is to rest. It is not enough to
state in a brief summary the general bearing of the facts,
geographical, political, historical, legal, which disprove the
current North-Galatian view. That has been done, and
the North-Galatian champions meet some one statement
with a flat denial, and treat the rest with silent contempt :
then, dislodged from their first defence, they deny some
other statement, and again necessitate a laborious demon-
stration.
It is therefore best to attempt to picture the state of
Central Asia Minor, at the time when Paul and Barnabas
crossed the great belt of the Taurus mountains, and to show
how the racial, political, geographical and religious facts
of previous history had contributed to produce it. Some
of the historical facts mentioned in the following sections
may seem at first sight remote from the Epistle ; but all
have a real bearing on the argument. Our aim is to make
the student judge for himself on the " Galatian Question ".
Instead of describing the character of the Galatians — a
method which always is liable to seem too subjective, over-
qoloured to sqit the argument — we attempt to exhibit the
Section i : Preliminary.
Galatians in action and in history, so that the reader can
judge of their character for himself.
The account of the Galatian wars and raids (which occupy
most part of the existing treatises on Galatia) has been cut
down as much as possible, but may even yet be considered
too long. It was however necessary to bring out the fact,
which has not been noticed previously, that the mixed
Galatic State was much stronger than the unmixed Gaulish
armies ; and that Galatia increased in influence over the
surrounding countries, and reached its highest importance
as a power in Asia Minor during the Roman period.
Commonly, the history of the Gauls in Asia Minor is
painted as a process of steady decay from initial power.
Really, the Gaulish element ruled an immensely wider tract
of country in the first century B.C. than it had ever done
before. In the third century the Gauls were fighting for
existence : in the first century Gauls ruled Galatia proper
with parts of Lycaonia, Paphlagonia, Pontus, and Armenia.
The " Galatian Question " should not be taken in too
narrow a sense. It is not merely a question of Pauline
interpretation and chronology. Under it is concealed the
great subject of the Christianisation of the entire inner Asia
Minor, and the relation of the new religion to the older
religion, society and education of those many regions and
countries, Phrygia, Upper Lydia, Upper Caria, Lycaonia
and Isauria, Cappadocia, North Galatia, Pontus. He that
desires to understand the " Galatian Question " thoroughly
will not be content with dipping into books on the history
and antiquities of Asia Minor, in order to pick out, with
least trouble and in the shortest time, illustrations of the
Epistle and arguments to support a foregone conclusion as
to its meaning and scope. He will first acquire as good a
lO Historical Introduction.
conception as possible of life, religion and society in inner
Asia Minor before Paul entered the country ; and he will
then proceed to study the history of the country under
the new influence. The subject is very obscure, and the
authorities deplorably scanty. At present we must be
content with tentative and inadequate results. But we
can at least make a foundation, on which exploration and
discovery will build, and we can lay down principles by
which both present study and future exploration may be
guided.
In this preliminary study of pre-Pauline society and life
in inner Asia Minor, the settlement of the Gauls in the
country is a critical epoch. As Monsieur Theodore Rein^ch
says, the Gauls were un element destine pendant trots siecles
a j'ouer un role preponderant dans I'histoire de la peninsule}
To study even South Galatia one must study the relations
of that warlike and proud Gaulish people, " the noblest of
barbarians," as Plutarch calls them, to the oriental peoples
around them. From every point of view the student of
central Asia Minor must make North Galatia his starting
point.
Note. — Dr. Hort on the Galatian Question. In
Dr. Hort's posthumously published works (taken from his
university lectures), there are some indications pointing to
a development in his views on this question. In his
Lectures on i Peter, delivered in 1882 and the following
years, he takes one view: in those on Ephesians, 1891,
he expresses a different opinion.
In the former he points out that St. Peter included as
Churches of Galatia " the Churches founded by St. Paul in
^ ^oh d( Bithynie, p. 8,
Section i : Preliminary. 1 1
Galatia proper, in Lycaonia and in Phrygia " ; but he de-
clines to admit that St. Paul reckoned the latter as Churches
of Galatia, on the sole ground that Lightfoot has proved
the contrary.^
But in the later series of lectures he says that, in the
journey described in Acts XVIII 23, St. Paul "visited
. . . Antioch, where he stayed some time, and then followed
his old course through southern Asia Minor, and this time
was allowed to follow it right on to its natural goal,
Ephesus ". That sentence contrasts Paul's uninterrupted
route through Cilicia, Derbe, Lystra, etc., to Ephesus in
XVIII 23 with his previous attempt, XVI 1-5, to reach the
same goal, which was interrupted in the middle.^ No one
could speak thus who held the North-Galatian Theory, for
that theory inexorably implies that, in Acts XVIII 23,
Paul did not traverse southern Asia Minor, but took a
new route from Cilicia northwards to Tavium, Ancyra,
and Pessinus.
Hort had evidently become a " South-Galatian " between
1882 and 1 89 1, already seeing the bearing of recent dis-
coveries in Asia Minor. Death prevented him, as it had
prevented Lightfoot, from being the pioneer of the South-
Galatian Theory in England.
1 See pp. 17, 158, etc. The views on the Provinces were probably
left unrevised after 1882, see Expositor, Jan., 1899, p. 46.
^ See the preceding part of the paragraph.
SECTION 2.
NORTH GALATIA: LAND AND PEOPLES.
The peninsula of Asia Minor, stretching out like a bridge
from Asia to Europe, consists of a great central plateau,
from 2000 to 4000 feet above sea level, with a fringe of
low-lying coast around it. A rim of mountains, called on
the south side Taurus, separates the plateau from the
coast-lands.
The country that was called Galatia included a broad
zone in the northern part of the central plateau. It was
an irregular oblong, which may be roughly estimated as
about 200 miles long from east to west, and 60 to
80 miles broad from north to south. If we leave out
of notice the extreme northern parts which border on
Paphlagonia (as these are historically quite unimportant
and practically almost unknown to modern travellers), the
country as a whole is of uniform character. It consists of
a vast series of bare, bleak up-lands and sloping hill-sides.
It is almost devoid of trees, except, perhaps, in some places
on the north frontiers ; and the want of shade makes the
heat of summer more trying, while the climate in winter
is severe. The hills often reach a considerable altitude,
but have never the character of mountains. They are
commonly clad with a slight growth of grass to the summit
on ^t least one side. The scenery is uninteresting. There
(12)
Section 2 : North Galatia : Land and Peoples. 1 3
are hardly any striking features ; and one part is singularly
like another. The cities are far from one another, separ-
ated by long stretches of the same fatiguing country,
dusty and hot and arid in summer, covered with snow
in winter.
In the description which is given on p. 35 of the geo-
graphical character of the plateau as a whole, almost the
only trait that is not true of Galatia is the " certain charm ".
Galatia is the least interesting, the most devoid of charm
of all the Asia Minor lands, the only one that the writer
found wearisome. The great plains in the centre of the
plateau are far more interesting, because being more
absolutely level, they permit a wide view; and the eye
sweeps over a vast extent of country to the distant lofty
mountains, Taurus, Hassan-Dagh, etc., which rim the
plateau or rise like steep volcanic islets from its bosom.
But Galatia is just undulating enough to make the view
almost everywhere contracted and confined : rarely, if ever,
does the traveller get the impression of width, of greatness,
of long lines, or of the contrast between level plain and
sharp mountain peak, needed to give a standard by which
one can realise the immensity of the eye's range.
To show the impression that North Galatia makes on
a competent observer, one may quote a description of the
central and western parts from Major Law's Report on the
Railways of Asiatic Turkey (Blue Book : Turkey, No. 4,
May, 1896): "The aspect of the country is exceedingly
monotonous — a series of larger or smaller plains, surrounded
by bare, desolate-looking hills, with streams or small rivers
flowing in the centre, but little cultivation and few villages.
The average high elevation is maintained, and the climate
is trying both in winter and in summer ; there is a terrible
14 Historical Introduction.
absence of trees, and the soil, which is fairly productive
under the influence of seasonable rains, is too frequently
burnt up by the prolonged droughts which in unfavourable
years are the cause of distressing famines. There is ex-
tensive pasturage, but the country is exposed and the grass
poor, and the cattle look generally in poor condition ;
sheep, goats and camels are, however, reared with success
in large numbers, and the Angora mohair and wool have
long been famous. Where there is water and cultivation,
cereals grow well, and there is a considerable production of
cotton, besides tobacco, opium and hemp. The town of
Angora {Ancyra) itself is exceptionally favourably situated
in a sheltered, fertile plain."
Owing to difficulty of transport (which the recently
opened railway from the Bosphorus to Dorylaion, i.e.,
Eski-Sheher, and Angora will in time obviate), the only
products of Galatia which play any important part in
modern commerce are wool and mohair (the product of
the fleece of the beautiful Angora goat). In ancient times
wool and slaves formed the only important Galatian articles
of trade,^ so far as our authorities go ; but much more
wheat and other cereals were grown then than now.
A country of this character can never have nourished a
dense population. In ancient times the aspect of most of
the land away from the few great cities was much the same
as it is at the present day — bleak stretches of pastoral
country, few villages, sparse population, little evidence of
civilisation. There would, however, be much larger flocks
of sheep in ancient than in modern times. But in the
occasional districts where arable land abounds, the scene
would be very different then and now : the soil would be
^ Also perhaps mohair, Impressions of Turkey, p. 273.
Section 2 : North Galatia : Land and Peoples. 1 5
thoroughly cultivated, houses and villages numerous, the
activity and education of man apparent everywhere. Such
districts, however, are not many, and are found chiefly beside
the cities which were fostered by them.
The description given of one of these fertile spots, given
by Mr. J. G. C. Anderson in the Journal of Hellenic Studies,
1899, p. 91, may be quoted here : " The little village at the
foot of the mound is pleasantly situated near the head of
a plain which runs down to the railway and contains some
fairly fertile arable land — a rare thing in this neighbour-
hood. The country through which the road passes between
the Sangarios and Angora is, as Hamilton says, ' perfectly
uncultivated ; no traces of vegetation were visible except
in the dried-up stems of a few thorny plants and flowers,
which cover the ground instead of grass '. The description
may be extended to the whole Haimane-country : ' there
are no gardens here, it is all desert,' as a Turk of Balik-
koyundji wearily said to us."
Bithynia and Paphlagonia bordered on Galatia to the
north, Pontus to the east, Cappadocia and Lycaonia to the
south, Phrygia in the narrower and later sense to the west.
The exact bounds are best studied on the map.
The country afterwards called Galatia was in primitive
time divided ethnographically and politically into two
parts, eastern and western : the division was made by the
river Halys, which in this part of its course runs in a
northerly direction towards the Black Sea. Galatia east
of the Halys seems to have been originally reckoned to
Cappadocia, though part of it was probably sometimes
described as included in Paphlagonia ; but the bounds of
those countries were so indeterminate, and the ancient
writers themselves were so ignorant of the geography of
1 6 Historical Introduction.
those lands, that it is quite impossible to say anything
positive and certain on the subject.
The enigmatic race called White-Syrians (AevKoa-upoi)
certainly inhabited part at least of Eastern Galatia. But
it is useless to speculate whether the population of Eastern
Galatia, at the time when the Galatae first entered the
country, was mainly Cappadocian, or White-Syrian, or of
any other race.
Eastern Galatia lies mostly in the basin of the Halys
(Kizil-Irmak, the "Red River"). The Halys itself has
very few and quite insignificant tributaries. In Eastern
Galatia the Delije-Irmak (whose ancient name is unknown)
is the only tributary of any consequence ; and most of the
country lies in its basin ; but the river, though it looks
large on the map, carries very little water except in flood,
when it becomes a broad and raging torrent, exactly as its
name indicates, the " Mad River ".
The eastern frontier-lands of Galatia lay in the valley of
the Iris (Yeshil-Irmak, the " Green River"). Tavium, the
Galatian and Roman capital of the district, and Pteria, the
pre-Galatian capital, once the imperial city of Asia Minor,
were situated on affluents of the Iris.
The Halys at the crossing of the road between the
capitals Tavium and Ancyra is 2350 feet above sea level.
The altitude of Eastern Galatia averages between 2300
and 3000 feet.
Galatia west of the Halys, which was much larger than
the eastern country, was the most important and the most
typical part of the country ; most of our scanty information
relates to it ; and in general, when any statement is made
about North Galatia, the writer has the western part of it
in his mind. This western region was originally part of
Section 2 : North Galatia : Land and Peoples. 1 7
the vast land called Phrygia ; and, clearly, the population
of the country in the early part of the fourth century were
known to the Greeks as Phrygians {^pvye. 158, X 4.
Section 4: Pre-Gaulisk Inhabitants of Galatia. 31
foreign slavery,^ which they seemed to accept as their
natural lot. They wore ear-rings like women,^ The only
Phrygian who attained any celebrity in Greek story was
Aesop the slave. They are described as slaves by nature,
and of small value as slaves ; but this last point probably
refers only to their simple character and slowness of wit,
for Socrates said that the Phrygians, being industrious,
were for that very reason suited for slavery : ^ he was, of
course, judging from those Phrygians whom he saw slaves
in Attica.
But in these qualities we may see rather the effect of
their situation than an index of their real character. They
were far from the sea and the opportunities of travel and
intercourse ; they had few products except slaves in their
country that would reward and stimulate trade ; the oppor-
tunity of getting education from contact with other races
was denied them, and their religious system, so far from
favouring education, tended to keep them on a lower social
plane than their Greek neighbours ; Greek coast colonies
surrounded them on three sides, and the keen, enterprising,
quick-witted, highly-trained colonists regarded with ex-
treme contempt the slow, apathetic, contented, and unutter-
ably ignorant Phrygians, incapable of being roused or
excited by any cause except their vulgar and degrading
superstitious rites.
This contrast between Greek and Phrygian, and the
inevitable victory of intellect in the conflict between them,
1 Philostr. ^^0//. VIII.
'^Dio Chrys. XXXII 3 (so Lydians Xen. Anah. Ill i, 31).
'Aelian Var. Hist. X 18 : people who were naturally idle, like the
Persians, had a more independent spirit, said Socrates.
32 Historical Introduciion.
gave form to many legends — Marsyas conquered and
tortured by Apollo, Lityerses slain by Herakles.^
Almost the only inventions attributed to the Phrygians
were in music : various kinds of cymbals and similar in-
struments, the flute, the trigonon, perhaps the syrinx, were
considered Phrygian : a musical mode, said to be of melan-
choly yet emotional and exciting character was called the
Phrygian : certain tunes, the Lityerses or harvest song,
the harmateion or carriage song,^ etc., were of Phrygian
origin. There was also a Phrygian dance. These are all
creations and accompaniments of the Phrygian religion.
Associations connected with the Phrygian worship, pass-
ing under various names in different parts of Asia Minor,
such as the Herdsmen, the Korybants, the Hymn- Singers,
the Satyroi, survived even in Roman time and have thus
become known to us.^ They are still represented by the
Mevlevi or dancing dervishes of modern Turkey, with their
strange yet most impressive music and dance, which have
probably been preserved in essential characteristics from
the worship of Cybele.
Further, the art of embroidery was said to be derived
from Phrygia ; and the Romans gave the name Phrygiones
to those that practised the art. The occupation is of a
feminine, and therefore Phrygian, type.
In literature, only the fable, the least cultured of literary
1 Not that this contrast is the only element in those tales. Each
is a growth, to which only the final form was given by this idea of
contest between Greek and Phrygian. Another form of the Lityerses
legend is that he was slain in the field by the sickles of the reapers,
evidently the older form (see p. 35).
" Many conflicting accounts of the dpfidrfiov fitXos are given, as war-,
song, etc.
^Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, Part II, pp, 359, 630,
Section 4' Pre-Gaulish Inhabitants of Galatia. -y^"^
forms, the simple expression of rustic wisdom and wit under
the guise of anecdotes about beasts and birds, was attri-
buted to Phrygia. Even this came probably from much
further east ; but the Greeks heard it from Phrygia and
thought it characteristic of that country.
In this picture of Phrygia, as Greeks and Romans have
handed it down, the living characteristics of a real people
are clear. Scanty and vague as is the picture, it is at
least true and convincing in the general effect. The people
stands before us in its general type. Every traveller will
recognise in it the modern, so-called " Turkish," peasantry
of the same country ; and he sees before him every day in
the country the same old conflict between the quick-witted,
subtle, enterprising Greek, and the slow, dull, contented
Turk. The modern peasantry has reverted under the
pressure of similar external conditions, and through the
influence of the same natural surrounding, to the primeval
Phrygian type. Whatever pride of religion and stock was
for a time imparted to the landsmen by the Turkish inter-
mixture has now almost disappeared, since the Turks ceased
to be a dominant warrior caste.
What we may call the " Phrygian " race, then, is the
fundamental stock into which by degrees all immigrant
races tend to melt, as soon as circumstances cease to support
the favoured and dominant position of the "outlander"
aristocracy. It was not without reason that the Phrygians
called themselves the autochthonous people, the original
and oldest race in the world. But that old stock was not
the European immigrant Phryges, it was the older Ash-
kenaz, the people of the Amazones.
In North Galatia and in South Galatia we meet this
ground-stock in two totally different stages. In North
3
34 Historical Introduction.
Galatia it was mastered and overlaid and ruled by an
immigrant aristocracy, which gave tone and colour and
variety and power of development to the inert mass, so
that the latter, with its plastic nature, took on it for the time
the character of the dominant race ; and the Galatians were
severed by a broad and deep chasm from all the surrounding
peoples.
In South Galatia the same stock appears as trained to
a certain extent in the cities by some centuries of Greek
municipal institutions and law and a smattering of Greek
literature and education. With their marked receptivity
and plasticity, the Phrygians took on themselves with
perfect readiness a certain element of Hellenism : " without
any observable resistance and with great facility they
adopted Greek myths, fashions, education and language " }
The result was not true Greek — the Phrygians could never
become Greeks even on the surface — but it was at least a
new product, which showed something of the qualities of
both Phrygian and Greek — Phrygian sincerity and simplicity
and readiness to sink their own individuality in what they
accepted as a higher training — Greek desire for learning
and education.
He that would appreciate rightly the " Galatian Question"
must begin by rightly conceiving the historical development
of North and South Galatia ; and he will not neglect to
acquire some conception of the Phrygian ground-stock, as
it can best be seen either in actual contact with the modern
peasantry or in the picture of them drawn by sympathetic
travellers. Equally necessary is it to appreciate the general
type of Phrygian religion, on which see next Section.
1 Haase in Ersch und Gruber Realencyc. s.v. Phrygien, p. 292.
SECTION 5.
THE RELIGION OF ASIA MINOR.
The tone and spirit of the Anatolian land have been
described in the following words, which I quote from the
Historical Geogr, of Asia Min., p. 23 : —
" The plateau from the Anti-Taurus westwards consists
chiefly of great, gently undulating plains. The scenery, as
a rule, is monotonous and subdued ; even the mountains of
Phrygia seem not to have the spirit of freedom about them.
The tone everywhere is melancholy, but not devoid of a
certain charm, which, after a time, takes an even stronger
hold of the mind than the bright and varied scenery of the
Greek world. Strong contrasts of climate between the long
severe winter and the short but hot summer, a fertile soil
dependent entirely on the chances of an uncertain rainfall,
impressed on the mind of the inhabitants the insignificance
of man and his dependence on the power of nature. The
tone can be traced through the legends and the religion of
the plateau. The legends are always sad — Lityerses slain
by the sickles of the reapers in the field, Marsyas flayed by
the god Apollo, Hylas drowned in the fountain — all end in
death during the prime of life and the pride of art."
The influence of these climatic surroundings on the mind
of the people that dwell among them may be illustrated
from an author who has observed human nature with the
(35)
36 Historical Introduction.
eye at once of a physician and of a man of letters. Narrat-
ing his experience in a ship, shut in the ice and waiting the
single chance of a favourable wind to open a passage through
the impassable barrier, he says : "At present we can do
nothing but . . . wait and hope for the best. I am
rapidly becoming a fatalist. When dealing with such
uncertain factors as wind and ice, a man can be nothing
else."i
In the course of generations the influence of those sur-
roundings on the race that dwells among them must be
deep and powerful. Even on the individual who lives
and works among them, they exercise a very perceptible
influence.
In the preceding section it has been shown clearly that
the one strong feature in the Phrygian character lay in their
religion. Only through their religion and the accom-
paniments which it created — music, musical instruments,
religious dances, religious societies — did the Phrygians
impress or affect other races.
In 205 the Phrygian religion was solemnly welcomed
into the Roman State from its old seat in Galatia. It was
brought into Attica in the fourth and even in the fifth
century B.C., and continued to be an influence there in spite
of the ridicule of the comic poets, the scorn of philosophers,
and the hatred of patriots.
How is it possible to recover any knowledge of the
Phrygian religion at that early time?
We can do so, because that religion was so permanent
and unchangeable over great part of Asia Minor. When
Paul traversed the region of Phrygia, the religion was the
same as that which prevailed when the Gauls entered
^ Conan Doyle, Captain of the Pole-star, p. 23.
Section 5 ; The Religion of Asia Minor. 2>7
Galatia. A cult of fundamentally the same character — the
native Anatolian religion — prevailed over the whole vast
peninsula before Gauls, or Phryges, or Greeks had entered
the country. Those three immigrant peoples produced
considerable effect on it within their own sphere ; but the
effect was more in the way of limiting its power than of
changing its character. The brief allusions made to its
rites by Demosthenes, Aristophanes, and many other Greeks
who satirised it in the fourth and fifth centuries, show
beyond question that it was fundamentally always the same.
Hence, with proper discretion, we can use the memorials
of the Roman time for the illustration of the ancient period.
The evidence is gathered slowly, point by point, from the
monuments scattered over the country, illustrated by the
references of ancient writers. The scattered fragments are
all collected and studied individually in the Cities and
Bishoprics of Phrygia. Here we can only give a brief
outline of the facts needed (i) for the study of the Epistle
to the Galatians, and (2) for the comprehension of the
" Galatian Question ".
The accounts which have been transmitted to us of the
Phrygian religion are most unfavourable. Demosthenes de-
scribes with the keenest contempt and sarcasm the Phrygian
rites of which his great rival Aeschines, as he says, had
been a celebrant.^ Certainly, with their loud cries or howls,
and their grotesque ceremony of purifying the nude mystes
with potter's clay and bran, they lent themselves readily
and deservedly to caricature as the irrational and degrading
ritual of unwashed savages.
The Christian writers, and especially Clement of Alex-
andria,^ give a terrible picture of the repulsive and immoral
^ Di Corona, 259-260. "^ Protrept, 2, p. 76.
38 Historical Introduction.
drama of divine life that was acted before the initiated in
the Phrygian Mysteries. The details cannot be quoted.
The drama that was acted was the drama of humanity, as
it was apprehended by a rude and primitive people, who
regarded the mystery of life, changing from parents to
children, yet remaining unchanged through its variations,
as the great fact in which the divine nature was manifested.
The divine parents give birth to the divine children ; and
the children are only the parents in another form. The
daughter is the mother : Leto melts into Artemis, and
Artemis into Leto : they are only two slightly differentiated
forms of the ultimate divine personality in its feminine
aspect : the continuity of life is unbroken : the child re-
places the parent, different and yet the same.^ The feminine
element is regarded as the fundamental one : the male god
is its accompaniment to complete the cycle of life, but he
is almost always regarded as the inferior, the servant, or
the companion of the Mother-Goddess. From their union,
which is represented as an act of violence and deceit, springs
the daughter, Kora or Artemis in Greek names. Again
from another act of violence and deceit the daughter bears
the young god ; and he is simply " the god " once more,
different and yet the same : " the bull is the father of the
serpent, and the serpent of the bull ".
The punishment for these horrors is the mutilation which
the god perpetrates on himself, and which the celebrants
often in religious ecstasy performed upon themselves.
To understand the relation in which the Epistle stands
to this religion, we must observe the following points : —
I. The Anatolian religion was carried out in an elaborate
^ Taken nearly verbatim from Citi&s and Bish. of Phrygia, pt. I,
p. 91.
Section 5 ; The Religion of Asia Minor. 39
and minute ritual. Demosthenes' satirical description of
the ceremony of purification in preparation for the celebra-
tion of the Mysteries,^ would be enough to show this. Also
there was a separate kind of purification for bloodshed,^ and
there were regulations about sacred animals, distinction of
prohibited and permitted food, and many other rules imply-
ing a highly artificial system of life.^
II. In the oldest Anatolian system, the divine power
exercised through the priests was the chief, almost the only,
ruling influence acting permanently upon the people.
There was no municipal system, nothing corresponding
to the Greek city with its thinking citizens, acting on their
own initiative, and interesting themselves directly in the
fortunes of their state. The evils of the Greek city system,
with its weakness in the central government and the law,
and its over-stimulation of the half-educated individual,
are apt to blind us at the present time to the immense gain
that has accrued to the world from the healthy freedom
that inspired the Greek citizen-states.^ We can imagine
the contempt with which the free, thinking, acting Greek
looked down on the enslaved, mindless, priest-guided
Phrygian or Lycaonian.
The Anatolian social system was the village organisation.
The villagers lived side by side, but apparently had no
administrative rights. They looked solely to the religious
centre for direction and for orders. The prophets and
priests interpreted the divine will to the people ; and " the
* See above, p. 37. "^ Herod. I 35.
^Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, I, p. 134 ff.
* To have recognised properly this glory of the Greek system is
Grote's merit. Some more recent historians abroad have neglected
it too much.
40 Historical Introduction.
command of the God (or Goddess) " is very often mentioned
in the inscriptions as the motive for the villagers' actions.
Beyond this there was no education, and no state, and
probably little or no formal law.^
There was probably in the earliest time a central rule
of a king; but this was exercised, undoubtedly, in alliance
with, and through the agency of, the priests at the great
religious centres.
III. The Phrygian religion was the perpetuation of a
primitive social condition, which the people in their ordinary
life had long risen above. There was in that religion no
marriage, but merely secret ^and fraudulent union of goddess
and god. Hence there arose this dangerous situation that
the religion of the country was on a lower moral standard
than the ordinary life of society. In their religion the
people learned that the divine life was the unrestrained
existence of the wild animals, and that those who were
serving the god, possessed by the divine ecstasy, or acting
under the divine command, were bound lo act contrary to
the social customs recognised in ordinary life.^
IV. The Anatolian religion was a glorification of the
female element in human life. As has appeared in the
preceding section, the national character is receptive and
passive, not self-assertive and active. The character of
the people was created and nourished by the genius of the
land in which they lived ; and their religion represented
to them the female element as the nobler development of
humanity, while the male is secondary and on a lower plane.
The Goddess-Mother was represented in the mystic ritual
^ On the village system see Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, I, pp. 124,
129; Anderson mjourn. Hell. St., 1897, p. 412.
2 Compare the Church in the Rom. Emp., p. 397 f,
Section 5 ; The Religion of Asia Minor. 4 1
as the prominent figure ; the God comes in only to cause
the crises in her Hfe, and of his life we hear nothing more :
the life of the Goddess is the fulness and the permanence
of nature.
Among the peoples of the west it was very different.
The most complete and characteristic development of
Hellenism — in Athens and in the great colonising cities of
Ionia — was accompanied by a depreciation and subordina-
tion of the female element. The true glory of woman among
them was to be as much as possible unheard of and un-
known. She was, if honourable, to live a life of seclusion
and repression : she could be educated and active only
through dishonour and shame,
A race which, like the Phryges, forced its way into Asia
Minor by violence and war, necessarily trusted to the quali-
ties that are most easily developed and maintained in the
male sex. A conquering race in a foreign land usually
brings with it more men than women : it takes wives from
the daughters of the conquered land, and the power of
the male in the family is inevitably strengthened in such
a condition of the nation.
It is natural, therefore, to find in the neighbourhood of
the old Metropolis of the Phryges that the worship of Zeus
the Charioteer and Zeus the Thunderer was predominant
in the Roman period (p. 30). Beyond this, there was a con-
siderable change produced throughout Phrygia (i) in the
outward forms of religion, and (2) in social institutions.
(i) There were several personages in the divine family,
whose interaction makes the drama of nature and life.
One of these personages was commonly selected in each
district as the most prominent in ordinary life ; and, accord-
ing to the qualities of the people and the influence of the
42 Historical Introduction.
natural surroundings, characteristics and powers, titles and
epithets, were bestowed upon this divine personage. In
the mysteries the entire divine drama of Hfe was revealed ;
but in common life some one deity was usually appealed
to. The power of the Phryges tended to give popular
pre-eminence to the God, and to make the Goddess less
conspicuous than she had formerly been.
(2) As we have seen, the Anatolian religion stereotyped
a primitive phase in the social system of the country. It
had taken form as the consecration and divine authorisation
of that primitive system ; and in its inner character it pre-
served the original features. The immigrant Greeks and
Phryges and Gauls powerfully affected the whole fabric of
society and law ; Greeks and Phryges certainly modified
the external aspect of the ritual ; they made the inner
mysteries of the Anatolian religion more secret, more
mysterious, further removed from the light of day, and of
course prevented it from being the universal guide and
director of the people ; they raised up alongside of it new
motives to action ; the Greeks, especially, circumscribed its
power by imparting education, philosophic thought, political
interests, and municipal ambition to part of the people.
V. The practical performance of the ritual was much
connected with the grave ; but the grave was regarded not
as concerned with death, but as the opening of life : it is
expressly stated on many gravestones, that the stone is
" the Door," and this was made clear by its shape or by
the name " Door " engraved upon it.^ Every grave was a
^ On the Phrygian customs of burial, see Cities and Bish. of Phrygia,
pt. I, p. 99, pt. II, p. 367, no. 226, p. 384, and J. G. C. Anderson in
Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1899, p. 127. Noack has described the
"door-stones" in Mittheil. Instit. Athen., 1894, p. 326. Illustration?
also in Cities and Bish., pt. II, pp. 628, 661, 7QI,
Section 5 ; The Religion of Asia Minor. 43
sanctuary, and the dead man was living in and with the
divine nature ; the making of the grave was regarded as
the discharge of a vow to the God ; the deceased is described
on some stones as the " God " ; common forms of dedication
are " to the Gods beneath the earth and the deceased," " to
the deceased and to the God a vow" ; a man often prepares
his own tomb as "a vow to the God (or the Goddess),"
" on behalf of his own salvation a vow to the God," or even,
" by (divine) command a vow to the God, and for himself
while still living ".
Further, as the tomb was a sanctuary, so every sanctuary
was closely connected with a tomb. The ancient Phrygian
hero went back to the mother that bore him, for all sprang
from the Mother-Goddess in some one of her various mani-
festations, whether she is the divine lake Koloe beside
Sardis and the Naiad Nymph of the Troad,^ or appears in
human form to her favoured Anchises. She is the Earth,
the universal Mother, called Ma by all men. She is the
life of Nature, the spirit of the lakes and forests and rivers
and crops, the patroness of all wild animals, of everything
that is free and strong and joyous. Beside her sanctuary
is the burial-place of her sons. Wherever there was a
shrine marking some holy place, it took the form of a great
mound covering a grave, or a rock-sculpture forming the
front of a grave, or rising high beside a grave. The same
custom lives on to the present day under the Mohammedan
veneer that is spread over it. Wherever the divine presence
is indicated by any outward sign, such as hot springs, or
even simply by the haunting presence of ancient life and
civilisation amid their ruins, there is a shrine — always in
the form of the grave of some hero, who now bears a
''Iliad, II 865, XIV 444, XX 384.
44 Historical Introduction.
Mohammedan name such as Black-Akhmet, or Uryan
Baba, or Omar Baba, or so on. But of old the shrine and
the hero were there ; only they bore Phrygian, instead of
Arabic or Turkish names.
Further, if the custom has continued to the present day,
must it not have lasted unbroken through the Christian
period ? Paul expostulated with the Phrygians of Colossae
about their devotion to the "worship of angels," Col. Ill
12 ; this is usually represented by commentators as a
Judaistic or Essene idea, but may it not be the Christian-
ising form given to the worship of the dead heroes? In
later time, if we knew more about the worship of martyrs
in the country, we should probably find that it retained
much of the ancient connection with the grave. That is
certainly the case with the legend of Saint Abercius ; but
few Acta of the Phrygian Saints are preserved.
How easy and natural it was for any one brought up in
the Jewish theology to identify the worship of the deified
dead with the worship of angels is shown by the following
comment on the remarkable passage of Luke XX 36, they
are equal to angels, for they are sons of God, since they are
sons of the resurrection. "The Jews shared in the common
notion that the dead lived in the underworld. They also
believed that some persons could escape from the dead and
be taken directly to the abode of God, like Elijah. This
was interpreted to mean that they became angelic members
of the heavenly host (Ethiopic Enoch 12, 3, 4). Further, in
Gen. VI 4, angels are called sons of God. Luke XX 36,
means, therefore, that when the resurrection occurs, all who
participate in it are heavenly beings." ^ '
1 Professor Shailer Matthews in a notice of Professor G. E. Barton
on the "Spiritual Development of Paul," Biblical World, April, 1899,
p. 279.
SECTION 6.
SETTLEMENT OF THE GAULS IN GALATIA,
In the year B.C. 278-7 a large body of Gauls, who had
been ravaging the south-eastern parts of Europe, Greece,
Macedonia and Thrace, crossed into Asia Minor at the
invitation of Nicomedes, king of Bithynia (278-250). They
came as a migrating nation, with wives and children, not
as a mere body of mercenary soldiers engaged by a king
to help in his wars. This national character gave per-
manence to their settlement, and made their migration an
epoch in the history of Asia Minor.^ Bodies of Gauls often
in the following century engaged as mercenaries for a time
with some king ; but the nation remained a body to which
the mercenaries returned. Had the Gauls consisted only
or mainly of men, they would probably have soon been
scattered in military colonies and rapidly have been merged
in the native population. But it is recorded that of the
20,000 who came under Leonnorius and Lutarius in 278-7,
only half were armed men.
But, owing to this national character of the immigration,
the Gauls required to have something in the way of a home
and a centre. However hardy and courageous their women
were, families cannot live a life of raiding, as a body Oi
mercenaries could. Naturally they would gradually drift
^ See above, p. 10.
(45)
46 Historical Introduction.
to the point of least resistance ; and the account which has
just been given of the Phrygian people explains why this
point was found in Phrygia.
Further, it was found in north-eastern Phrygia, for the
south and west were strengthened against the Gauls by
the armies of the Seleucid kings of Syria and of the Per-
gamenian rulers. The fate of the western and southern
two-thirds of Asia Minor hung on the rivalry between those
two dynasties. The Seleucid dominion over Lycaonia,
Phrygia, Caria, Lydia, etc., was contested with varying
success by the Pergamenian kings, until at last, in B.C.
189, the Seleucid armies were finally expelled. But while
they held to their Lydian rule, the Seleucid kings had to
maintain the open road through Lycaonia and southern
Phrygia against the Gauls. Similarly in north-western
Phrygia the Pergamenian kings were always striving to
establish their authority, and thus kept pushing the Gauls
eastward.
Thus, after fifty years of promiscuous raiding over great
part of western Asia Minor, during which the Gauls, " alter-
nately the scourge and the allies of each Asiatic prince
in succession, as passion or interest dictated, indulged their
predatory instincts," ^ they were at last fixed in a country
which was recognised as their permanent possession.
The conditions, as thus described, explain why the
final settlement of the Gauls is attributed variously by
ancient authorities. Their settlement was the result of the
long-continued pressure of circumstances ; and some single
event in the fifty years' fighting is selected by one historian
as the most critical and decisive, while others mention other
events as more important. The Gauls, or according to the
^ Lightfoot, Galutians, p. 6.
Section 6 : Settlement of the Gauls in Galatia. 47
Greek name, Galatae,^ were during this period struggling
for life and a home : they were powerful rather through
alliance or mercenary service with some of the warring
kingdoms in Asia Minor than through their own strength.
It is practically certain that they could not have stood
unaided against either of the two great Hellenistic powers,
the rising Pergamenian kingdom, or the huge Seleucid
Empire (which stretched from Smyrna on the Aegean Sea
to some vague limit far in the heart of the Asian continent) ;
but they never were unaided. The principal events in that
fifty years of raids and wars may be described as follows.
According to Apollonius, the Carian historian,^ the
Galatae were in alliance with Mithridates I, King of Pontus
(B.C. 302-266), and were by him settled round Ancyra; and
E. Meyer infers that that country must have belonged to
the Pontic kings at the time. But the inference is wrong.
The facts merely prove that Antiochus's authority over
north-eastern Phrygia was weak at the time. Kings prefer
to give away their neighbour's dominions rather than their
own ; and so Mithridates did to the Gauls.
According to Livy^ the Gauls at this early period of
their ravages were in three divisions : the Trocmi wasted
the lands towards the Hellespont, the Tolistobogii plun-
dered Aeolis, and the Tectosages took the inner country
as their sphere of operations. It was, therefore, the Tecto-
* Gain, warriors : Galatae, nobles. The latter name probably spread
from the Greeks of Marseilles. There is some tendency to use KeXrot
or Ke'Xrai as the generic name of all cognate tribes. The general
name for the speech is K^Xtwcij, KeXTttrrt.
2 Apollonius, of unknown date, is often said to belong to the Cilician
Aphrodisias ; but obviously he was of the Carian city. Suidas says
only 'Apo8i(Tifvs.
'XXXVIII 16, 13 (on the authority doubtless of Polybius).
48 Historical Introduction.
sages, doubtless, who were aided by Mithridates to settle
about Ancyra ; and the understanding between the Gauls
and the Pontic kings lasted for a considerable time. The
Seleucid Antiochus I was at this time the chief enemy of
both. He is said to have gained a great victory over the
Gauls ; but it cannot have been a very decisive one ; and
in 281 he was slain by a Gaul, probably in a battle against
either Philetaerus of Pergamus or Ariobarzanes of Pontus
(266-246).
The reign of Antiochus II was very disturbed ; and he
could not regain the lost Seleucid authority over the region
of Ancyra, seized by the Tectosages. His son Seleucus II
(247-226) gave his youngest sister (perhaps named Laodike)
in marriage to Mithridates II (246-190); and as dowry
she brought with her Great Phrygia to the Pontic king.^
This fact means that Seleucus in his difficulties was trying
to secure the Pontic alliance, or at least neutrality ; and
relinquished his claims to a country, in the remoter parts
of which his predecessors had ceased to possess any author-
ity. It also implies, as E. Meyer recognises rightly, that
the Gauls round Ancyra were regarded as more or less
dependents, and not exactly as equal allies of Mithridates.
At this period so dangerous were the Gaulish raids over
the western regions of Asia Minor (in which they are said
to have ravaged as far south as even Themisonion^ and
Apameia^), that Eumenes I of Pergamos (263-241) bought
safety by paying tribute to the Tolistoagii.* His successor
1 Justin, XXXVIII 6.
^Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, I, p. 264. ^ Ibid., II, p. 422.
*Tolistoagii is the name in the early inscriptions. The form
Tolistobogii is also found in early authorities, and is universal in
inscriptions and coins of the Roman period. The relation between
the names is obscure.
Section 6: Settlement of the Gauls in G alalia. 49
Attalos I (241-197) refused to continue this tribute ; and
when the ToHstoagii invaded his country, he defeated
them in a great battle at the sources of the Caicos, 240,
or possibly a little later.
Soon after began the " Brothers' War " between Seleucus
and Antiochus Hierax, the prize being the Seleucid domi-
nions in Asia Minor. The Gauls were hired as mercenaries
by Antiochus, and Mithridates also preferred this alliance
to that of his father-in-law, Seleucus, who was defeated in a
battle beside Ancyra ^ about 235. Then followed a quarrel
between Hierax and his Gaulish mercenaries ; and Hierax
escaped by flight. Thereafter the Gauls appear as equal
allies of Hierax, who became lord of Seleucid Asia Minor;
and war broke out with Attalos I. In this war Attalos
gained four great victories. The first, or second, was fought
at the sanctuary of Aphrodite close to Pergamos (implying
a raid by the allies up to the city) against the ToHstoagii
and Tectosages and Hierax. In the other three battles
(in Hellespontine Phrygia,^ at Koloe, and on the Harpasos
in Caria) only Antiochus is mentioned ; hence probably the
Gauls were decisively defeated at the Aphrodision, and the
limits of their country were definitely drawn about 232, and
a peace concluded with them, so that they took no further
part in the war, whose issue was that Attalos I became lord
of all Asia up to Taurus.
At this point, the Gaulish tribes were compelled to con-
centrate themselves in the country which henceforth bore
1 So Polyaenus ; Eusebius says in Cappadocia. Cappadocia here
means, doubtless, the territory of the Pontic king (the name Pontus
for the kingdom had hardly yet come into use), and therefore may
include Ancyra. The Gauls are named as the victors by Trogus and
Polyaenus ; Mithridates by Eusebius.
*This may possibly have been the first battle.
4
50 Historical Introduction.
their name. The Tectosages remained about Ancyra ; the
other two were forced into the same neighbourhood. There
was a kind of bargain struck. On the one hand Attalos
recognised the right of the Gauls to that land ; they were
no longer to be regarded as interlopers and outlaws ; they
now had their acknowledged home as one of the peoples
of Asia Minor. On the other hand, the Gauls evidently
agreed to observe their fixed boundaries on the side towards
Attalos, and to refrain from raiding his territory.
Clearly, their bounds on the west were now drawn more
narrowly. A region west from Pessinus bore in later times
the name of the Gaulish tribe Troknades ; and yet it was
part of Asia {i.e.^ the Pergamenian kingdom), and not
included in Galatia. There seems no other occasion except
this when such a region is likely to have been taken from
the Gauls by the Pergamenian kings. At the same time
Pessinus was relieved from the pressure of the Gauls.
Whether they had ever succeeded in capturing that great
religious centre, or had only mastered the open country
round it while the strong and populous city maintained
itself against them, certain it is that for the following fifty
years Pessinus was in close alliance with Pergamos and at
variance with the Gauls.
If the Gauls were thus shut in on the west, how were
they to find room? Probably they found it by spreading
in other directions. They did not spread north, because
we find them henceforth allied with their northern neigh-
bour Paphlagonia ; and Bithynia seems not to have lost
any territory to them, as Juliopolis remained Bithynian for
centuries. South, they bordered on territory disputed
between Attalos and the Seleucids, from which therefore
they were debarred. But on the east they had more scope ;
Section 6 : Settlement of the Gauls in Galatia. 5 1
and the friends of Pergamos, which represented the Hellen-
ising and civilising power in Asia Minor, must be foes of
Pontus, the oriental and barbarian power. This makes it
probable that now they crossed the Halys, and occupied
part of the Pontic territory. Some years afterwards, too,
we find them in the later stages of a quarrel with Cappa-
docia about territory claimed by both, evidently east of
the Halys. For a time, then, the face of the new nation,
the Galatae, was turned towards the east.
Here originates the name Galatia. The use of that name
implies more than mere occupancy of the land by roving,
unsettled bands of Gauls. It implies a political reality, a
form of government, a recognised "land of the Galatae".
Henceforth, we speak of this people by the name which
they bore among the Greek-speaking races — TaXaTai.
But what was the sense in which this term, Galatae, was
used ? Did it indicate simply the Gaulish conquerors ? or
did it include the entire population of the country Galatia?
At first, of course, the Galatae were only the Gaulish con-
querors, who were as sharply marked off from the Phrygian
subject-people, as Normans were from English about A.D.
1066- 1 100. But, obviously, not a thought of separation
between two sections of the population remains in the minds
of those writers who in late-Roman or Byzantine times
speak of the Galatian people. After the lapse of several
centuries, the Gauls had become as undistinguishable from
their subjects as Normans now are in England : a {ev^ old
families might trace their Gaulish descent,^ but it was not a
practical factor in the life of the country.
^ That families in Galatia boasted of their ancient lineage, Gaulish
or otherwise, is proved by several inscriptions : C.I.G. no. 4030 and
Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, pt. II, p. 649.
52 Historical Introduction.
When and how this change was produced will be shown
in Section 8.
Note. — Principal Modern Authorities (apart from
Commentators) : —
Holder, Alt-Celtischer Sprachschatz (A-M).
Van Gelder, De Gallis in Graecia et Asia ante an. 150 (1888).
Staehelin, Geschichte der Kleinasiatischen Galater (iSg'j).
Korte in Mittheilungen des Instituts A then. Abth. (1897).
Zwintcher, de Galatarum Tetrarchis.
Anderson in Journal of Hellenic Studies (iSgg).
Crowfoot in Journal of Hellenic Studies (1899).
Perrot, Explor. Archeol. de la Galatie (1862).
Perrot, de Galatia Provmcia Romana (1867).
Perrot, Memoires d'A rcheologie, p. 229 fF.
Meyer, Geschichte des Koenigreichs Pontes (1879).
Th. Reinach, Rois de Bithynie, de Pont, de Cappadoce (1888 and 1887).
Hennig, Symbolae ad As. Mm. Reges Sacerdotes (1893).
Wroth, Catalogue of Brit. Mus. Coins, Galatia, etc. (1899).
Radet in Revue des Universites du Midi (i8g6).
Ramsay, Histor. Geography of Asia Minor, Ch. H, K.
Pauly-Wissowa, Real. Encyclop. s.vv. Attalos, Antiochos, etc.
The General Histories of the period.
See also p. 102.
SECTION 7.
THE HISTORY OF GALATIA, b.c. 232-64.
During this period only isolated glimpses are afforded us
into the fate and fortunes of Galatia, as the Gaulish tribes
came into relations with the western peoples, whose history
is better known.
Before describing the scattered facts, we may summarise
the general result as follows. The Galatian power on the
whole declined ; and finally the skilful and vigorous Perga-
menian policy, by gradually introducing Greek civilisation
into the country and forming a philo-Greek party, was on
the point of destroying the Galatic isolation, and bringing
the tribes under Pergamenian and Hellenistic influence,
when Rome interfered to preserve the Galatian independ-
ence. The result was a strong reaction against Hellenism
and a recrudescence of the old barbaric and Celtic char-
acter : the philo-Greek party in Galatia seems to have been
annihilated, and Galatian isolation and dissimilarity from
the surrounding Graeco-Asiatic peoples was maintained.
The amalgamation of the immigrant Celtic and the old
Phrygian population in Galatia seems to have proceeded
rapidly after 189 B.C. ; and there ensued a decided growth
in Galatic strength, unity and vigour, and this reinvigorated
nation began to press outwards on its weaker neighbours
and to enlarge its bounds, no longer by mere raid, but by
(53)
54 Historical Introduction.
occupation. Finally it was able with Roman help to main-
tain itself against the united Asiatic and Greek reaction
under Mithridates, and to emerge from that terrible struggle
stronger and greater than before.
As we saw, the Gauls played no part in the later wars of
Attalos. The cis-Tauran dominion of the Pergamenian
king lasted only for a few years. Seleucus Keraunos
(226-223) started personally for a campaign in Asia Minor,
when he was poisoned by a Gaul named Apatourios, doubt-
less a leader of mercenaries in his service.^ Under his
successor Antiochus the Great, Achaios recovered the
Seleucid dominion in Lydia, Phrygia, etc. Thereafter he
rebelled against his cousin, King Antiochus, once more
endangering the Seleucid realm in Asia Minor. Attalos
now began to recover his power ; and, in order to strengthen
himself, brought over from Europe a Gallic tribe, the
Aigosages, with whose aid he made a raid in B.C. 218 into
Aeolis and then eastward across Lydia into north Phrygia
as far as Apia. Thereafter he settled the Gauls in the
Hellespontine Phrygia, where, however, they were destroyed
by Prusias, King of Bithynia, in 217-16.
The northern part of Phrygia seems henceforth to have
remained subject to Attalos, probably by arrangement
with Antiochus the Great. The latter had Attalos as his
ally, while besieging Achaios in Sardis, which he captured
in 214. During the following years Attalos became pos-
sessed also of Phrygia Epiktetos, the region of Kotiaion
^ Galatic mercenaries regularly served in the Seleucid armies and
were courted by rebellious satraps : compare Polybius, V 53, 3 and 8 ;
79, 11; XXI 20; Livy, XXXVII 8 and 38; Appian Syr. 6 and 32.
Galatic mercenaries in the Egyptian armies, Polybius, V 65, 10 ;
82,5.
Section y: The History of Galatia. 55
and Dorylaion, which previously belonged to the kings of
Bithynia. Perhaps this acquisition was the result of the
war with Prusias in 207-6. That Attalos's dominion
reached to the neighbourhood of Pessinus, and that he
cultivated friendly relations with the great sanctuary there,
is proved by the following events.
In B.C. 205 the Sibylline Books were found to promise
victory in the Carthaginian War to the Romans, if they
brought the Great Idaean Mother from Pessinus to Rome.
This pointed to an active Eastern policy in Rome ; it im-
plied that the state must come into closer relations with the
eastern Mediterranean peoples ; and in view of Hannibal's
settled plan of uniting those peoples in an anti-Roman
league, the new Roman policy was prudent.
Five ambassadors with five quinqueremes were sent to
Delphi, and the Oracle referred them to Attalos. Attalos
seized the opportunity of linking his fortunes to the great
republic of the west, welcomed the ambassadors, and in
person conducted them to Pessinus. Through his influ-
ence the sacred stone, the symbol of the goddess, was
delivered to the Romans, and brought in state to Rome.
Along with the sacred stone, the whole Phrygian ritual,
with its eunuch priests, was established in Rome.
In this transaction it is obvious that the Gauls had no
part. The power of Attalos extended close up to Pessinus,
and he was in direct relations with the governing priestly
hierarchy. The Gauls did not need to be consulted, and
therefore cannot have had any footing in Pessinus. As we
shall see, it was not till between 189 and 164 that they
succeeded in establishing themselves in that city.
In the period 232-200 the Gauls of Galatia were not
active in western Asia Minor. Whatever was the reason,
56 Historical Introduction.
the agreement concluded with Attalos when they were
settled in Galatia, was strictly observed by them for a time.
Apparently they turned their attention northwards, and
their unsuccessful siege of Herakleia on the Euxine may
be referred to this period.^
The alliance with Morzeos, King of Paphlagonia, which
we find existing in 189, apparently as an old-standing con-
nection, would be useful in this siege.
Shortly after 200 they were turning their attention west-
wards once more. In 196, the year after Attalos died,
they were threatening Lampsakos on the Hellespont, and
that city procured from Massalia in Gaul a letter of re-
commendation to the Tolistoagii.^ All the chiefs of the
Gauls had renounced their friendship with Pergamos
before 189, with the single exception of Eposognatus,^ one
of the Tolistoagii. This formal renunciation of friend-
ship implies that the Galatian tribes had begun to observe
international courtesies, and wage regular war in place of
raids.
Probably the Galatian tribes were on bad terms with
Pontus during this time. In 189 the Trocmi must have
dreaded attack from the east, for they sent their wives and
children for safe keeping among the Tektosages.
In 189 the consul, Cn. Manlius Vulso, in order to strike
terror once for all into the nations west of the Halys, led
an army against the Gauls, who had fought for Antiochus
against Rome at the battle of Magnesia.
1 Memnon 28, the only authority, says that the siege occurred
"before the Romans entered Asia," i.e., before igo.
2 Lolling and Mommsen, Mitth. Instit. Athen., VI, p. 96 ff, 212;
Mommsen, Rom. Gesch., Ed. 8, I, pp. 724, 742, (transl. II, pp. 447, 469).
a Livy, XXXVIII 18, i.
Section j: The History of Galatia. 57
The Tolistobogii with their families and the warriors of
the Trocmi occupied Mount Olympus, evidently a hill of
no great height,^ probably part of the low range on the
right hand as one goes from Pessinus to Ancyra.^ Manlius
defeated them with immense slaughter,^ and captured
40,000 prisoners to be sold as slaves. Then he proceeded
to occupy Ancyra, and thereafter defeated the Tectosages,
who had concentrated on Mount Magaba (probably
south-east from Ancyra) ; the slain Gauls are estimated
at not more than 8000, and of the captives no estimate
is given .^
Content with these severe blows, Manlius finally made
peace, stipulating only that the Gauls should no longer
make those armed raids in western Asia Minor, which
had been the terror of all the cities for about eighty
years. ^
The stipulation is significant. It shows that the danger of
a Gallic raid was still ever present to the peoples of western
Asia Minor : the victories of Pergamenian and Seleucid
armies over the Gauls had not been so decisive as to tame
the unruly Galatian barbarians. According to Roman
ideas, the consul was fully justified, now that Rome had
interfered decidedly in Asian affairs, in ensuring peace by
making the Roman power felt all round the limits which
the republic for the present set to itself, viz., the Taurus
mountains and the Halys river. That he carried out this
policy with a spirit of greed and rapine is true ; but it is
a mistake to regard the expedition as a mere plundering
^ The operations, as described by Livy, prove this.
2 It IS the watershed between the Ancyra stream and the Ilidja-Su.
* Estimates of slain vary from 10,000 to 40,000.
<• Livy, XXXVIII 27. « Ihid., 40.
58 Historical Introduction.
raid. The blow against the Gauls was inevitably demanded
by Roman policy.^
Taken in connection with the Paphlagonian alliance, the
Heracleian siege, and the threatening of Lampsakos, the
terms concluded by Manlius show how powerful and
menacing was this Galatic state in the heart of the Gra^co-
Asiatic world as late as 189. The Roman allies were
more gladdened by the defeat of the Gauls than of Antio-
chus himself, such was their hatred of those terrible bar-
barians ^ and their never-ceasing terror of a possible attack
at any moment. The relief which was felt all through
Asia carried the fame of the Romans even to Syria and
Palestine, and a confused recollection of the results of the
Galatian war was part of the foundations of their reputa-
tion in the eyes of Judas Maccabaeus, and induced him to
seek alliance with them against his Seleucid foes in B.C. 161.^
In this war we observe that the chiefs of the Galatae
were divided. One of the tetrarchs, Eposognatus, sided
with Eumenes and the Romans. A small party among
the Galatae was now inclined to prefer the alliance with
the west, the side of civilisation, though the vast majority
rallied to the standard of barbarian independence. In the
following years the former party grew stronger.
But, while ready to strike down the Galatic pretensions
to terrorise Asia, the Romans were not disposed to en-
courage Eumenes too much ; and their subsequent policy
shows a settled intention of discouraging his schemes and
1 Such is Mommsen's view, as against the superficial opinion that
Manlius was a mere piratical raider.
^ Immanium barbarorum, says Livy, XXXVIII 37.
3 1 Mace, VIII 2 : the passage illustrates the vague and inaccur-
ate conceptions of the Jews as to the Roman exploits.
Section 7 ; The History of Galatia. 59
preventing his acquiring a decided supremacy in Asia.
The aim of Rome was to keep the various interests in
Asia balanced uneasily against one another, and draw the
hopes of all towards herself. As usual, she governed by
dividing and by preventing the concentration of power in
any hands but her own ; and the immediate necessity
was to keep Eumenes weak by encouraging the Galatian
tribes.
Manlius had charged the Galatians to keep peace with
Eumenes ; ^ but very soon a war broke out, in which they,
along with Pharnaces of Pontus and Prusias of Bithynia,
fought against the Pergamenian king.^ Ortiagon, a chief
of the Tolistobogii,^ aimed at supreme power among the
Gauls ;* but in 181 several chiefs are mentioned, implying
that the ordinary tetrarchic or cantonal system ^ continued.
As Polybius conversed with Ortiagon's wife at Sardis,
while other chiefs are mentioned as the regular allies of
Pharnaces,^ it is probable that two factions existed after
189 in Galatia : one headed by Ortiagon favoured a Per-
gamenian alliance and consolidation of the country after
the analogy of a Greek kingdom ; the other favoured the
Pontic alliance, and the old Gaulish tribal system. The
latter party proved stronger, and Ortiagon had to retire
with his family into Pergamenian territory.
But it soon became evident to the Galatians that a
Pontic alliance meant a Pontic tyranny. Pontic armies
domineered in Galatia. In these circumstances the same
1 Livy, XXXVI 1 1 40. 2 Trogus, XXXI I prolog.
^ He fought at Mt. Olympus, where no Tectosages were engaged ;
and his wife was with him, while the women of the Trocmi had been
sent to Mt. Magaba.
* Polyb., XXII 21. " See section 8, p. 72. « Polybius, XXIV 8, 6.
6o Historical Introduction.
chiefs, Carsignatus and Gaizatorix/ that had previously
led the Pontic faction, now joined Eumenes in B.C. i8i ;
and the Pergamenian king marched through Galatia intp
Cappadocia to join his ally Ariarathes ; but, when they
were about to attack Pharnaces in his own land, the
Roman ambassadors ordered both sides to cease hostilities.
At last in 179 peace was concluded, one condition being
that Pharnaces should abandon all attempt to interfere in
Galatia, and that his agreements with Galatian chiefs should
be invalid.
Thus the Pergamenian faction apparently gained the
upper hand in Galatia for a tinie after B.C. 179; and
Galatian auxiliaries are mentioned in the Pergamenian
armies 171 and 169.^ Among them Carsignatus, the
former ally of Pharnaces, is mentioned, showing how com-
pletely the friendship of Eumenes was adopted in Galatia,
and making it probable that Ortiagon's policy of unifying
Galatia was at an end. Eumenes had learned, with his
usual tact, that a Greek system of monarchic government
could not be forced on the Gauls. It is, however, highly
probable, as Van Gelder has rightly recognised, that at
this time the amelioration of Galatian manners and the
introduction of more civilised ways into the country, was
gradually and cautiously fostered by the patient skill and
administrative ability of Eumenes.
The magnificent temple at Pessinus, whose construction
Strabo assigns to the Attalid dynasty, was probably built
or at least begun during this period.
But Roman jealousy of Eumenes's success stopped the
pacification of western Asia, which Eumenes was carrying
1 Gaizotorios in Polyb., XXV 4. ^ Ljvy, XLII 55, XLIV 13.
Section 7 ; The History of Galatia. 6 1
out so skilfully. True and loyal as the king had been to
Rome, he was accused falsely of favouring the Macedon-
ians, though he had actively assisted Rome against them.
In 167 the Galatians, instigated by Prusias, invaded his
country, under a chief named Advertas, and nearly suc-
ceeded in destroying his monarchy,^ and the Romans
would not permit him to punish the nation. In the follow-
ing years they lent ready ear to Bithynian and Galatian
ambassadors complaining of Eumenes.
In spite of the Roman covert opposition, Eumenes
again proved victor. A peace was concluded in 165
with the help of the Romans, guaranteeing the freedom
of Galatia, but binding the Gauls to abstain from raids
like those of 167 and 166. Thus Eumenes's Galatian
ascendancy was ended, and the reactionary Galatian party
was triumphant.
This war had evidently been carried out by the reaction-
ary party in Galatia, and was marked by a recrudescence
of the old barbarous custom. The handsomest captives
were sacrificed to the Gods ; the rest were speared ; and even
those whose hospitality the Gauls had previously enjoyed
were not spared.^
About 164-160 there was a long dispute between the
Galatians and Ariarathes of Cappadocia as to certain
border country, which the Trocmi had tried vainly to seize.^
At first the Roman favour inclined to the Galatians, but
Ariarathes bought the favour of all ambassadors, and
finally of the senate ; and the dispute was probably decided
1 Livy, XLV 19.
^Diodor, excerpt, de Virt. et Vit. 31, 2, p. 582, referred to this period
by Van Gelder, p. 265, rightly,
s Polyb., XXXI 13.
62 Historical Introduction.
in his favour (which Polybius evidently considered to be
just).
To the years immediately following belongs a corre-
spondence between Eumenes or his successor Attalos II
(158-138) and the high priest of Pessinus.^ The high
priest who had assumed the priestly sacred name Attis,
was a Gaul,2 j^yj- ^ccx adherent of the Pergamenian faction ;
and the correspondence shows that there was a good deal
of dissension among the Gauls and intriguing for and against
the Pergamenian influence, which had its chief centre at
the great hieron of the Pessinuntine Goddess. Pessinus,
then, had by this time come under Galatian power, and a
Gaul was high priest. Now, an inscription of the Roman
period shows that half of the college of priests who minis-
tered at the hieron of Pessinus were of Gaulish birth, so
that the priest who ranked tenth in the college was fifth
among the Galatian priests ; and this seems to prove that
an arrangement must have been made dividing the priest-
hoods between the old priestly families and the Gaulish
conquerors^ (doubtless all of the Tolistobogiaii tribe, to
whom Pessinus belonged).
The acquisition of Pessinus by the Tolistobogii must be
assigned to the period between 189 and 164.
In these long wars it is evident that the Trocmi occupied
the most unfavourable, and the Tectosages the most favour-
able situation. The Trocmi were close to Pontus ; the Pon-
tic kings were always trying to assert their authority over
^Best published by Domaszewski in Arch. Epigr. Mittheil. OesUr-
reich, 1884, p. 95 ff.
'^His brother bore the Gaulish name Aiorix.
* Professor A. Korte found and published the inscription Mittheil.
Inst. Athen., 1897, pp. 16, 39; and accepts the above interpretation,
Philolog. Wochenschrift, 1898, p. i f.
Section / : The History of Galatia. 63
Galatia; and in every war the Trocmi would suffer most.
They were evidently cramped for room, for they had made
many attempts to seize parts of Cappadocia;^ but ultimately
failed, at least in part. They then probably turned their
efforts in another direction. They could not go north, for
the allied Paphlagonia prevented them. Bithynia was too
strong on the north-west ; Pergamos pressed them on the
west and south-west.
On the south alone was Galatic expansion comparatively
easy during this period. Here lay the open, defenceless
country of Lycaonia. Under the Seleucid kings Lycaonia
was shut against them, for it was the gate to the Seleucid
Phrygian and Lydian territory, and must be kept open and
safe at all costs. But when the Seleucid power was driven
out, and confined to the country south and east of Taurus,
then Lycaonia was the most distant and defenceless part
of the Pergamenian territory. Moreover, as Pisidian
Antioch was made a free state, Lycaonia was nearly cut
off from the Pergamenian realm ; and a glance at the map
will show how difficult it must have been to maintain Per-
gamenian power in Lycaonia when thus separated. What,
then, was the lot of Lycaonia in the century following the
constitution of the Pergamenian kingdom in 189?
The authorities, Polybius and Livy, are both agreed that
Lycaonia was assigned to Eumenes in 189. On the other
hand, it is certain that Lycaonia was not part of the Perga-
menian kingdom in 133, for the whole kingdom passed to
Rome and became the Roman Province Asia. The assured
^ Incidentally, we note that this implies a very scattered system
of habitation among the Gauls. For their numbers their territory
was not really narrow. But evidently their system consisted in a
parcelling out of the territory in lots to the tribal aristocracy.
64 Historical Introduction.
fact then is that, if Livy and Polybius are right,^ Lycaonia
dropped out of the Pergamenian realm between 189 and 133.
Now, Ptolemy mentions a country called the " Added
Land,"^ which was at some period tacked on to Galatia.
It lay on the west side of Lake Tatta, and therefore must
have originally belonged to Lycaonia, and been taken and
added to Galatia, just as the " Acquired Phrygia " ^ had been
taken from Bithynia and added to Phrygia about 206.
Further, Pliny* mentions that a part of Lycaonia was
given as a tetrarchy to Galatia — making one of the twelve
tetrarchies into which Galatia was divided.
Evidently these facts must be taken together, the tetrarchy
taken from Lycaonia was " added " to Galatia ; and the
time when this occurred was when Lycaonia was protected
neither by the Pergamenian nor by the Seleucid kings,
between 189 and 133. We may go further, and say that
the time was probably about 160, when the Galatae had
failed to get the accession of territory from Cappadocia
which they desired, and when the Roman influence protected
the Cappadocian bounds as settled by the Imperial State;
and the Galatae, pressed in on all other sides, found ex-
pansion easiest on the Lycaonian frontier.
It is not a real objection to this identification that
Ptolemy excludes Iconium from the " Added Land," while
Pliny says that Iconium was the capital of the Lycaonian
1 Here one need not estimate the value of the conjecture advanced
in Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, pt. I, p. 285. It must either remain
uncertain, or be absolutely set aside, unless new evidence should be
found. Livy, XXXVIII 39, had before him Polybius, XXII 27, as
the MSS. have it now.
2 n.poaftXrjfj.fiei'r], V 4, 10. The word has been corrupted in many
MSS.
* 'EmKTTiTos. * Nat. Hist., V 95.
Section y : The History of Galatia. 65
tetrarchy added to Galatia. As we shall see, p. 105 ff,
the double division of Lycaonia into the Tetrarchy or
Added Land and Lycaonia Proper"' gave place later to a
triple division into the Added Land, the Lycaonian Diocese,
and Cappadocian Lycaonia ; and that is the system which
Ptolemy tries to describe, though as usual he makes mistakes.
Thus about B.C. 160 Galatia was greatly extended,
having taken in Pessinus and probably Lycaonia as far as
Iconium and Lystra.^ This expansion must have taken
place with the consent of the sovereign Rome, and is doubt-
less connected with their anti-Pergamenian bias at this
time. The Galatians were encouraged in order to counter-
balance the strength of Pergamos.
Trogus mentions ^ that Lycaonia and Cilicia were given in
129 to the sons of Ariarathes, King of Cappadocia, in reward
for the help their father had given to Rome in the Asian
revolt. It is fairly certain that the expression Lycaonia
et Cilicia^ used by Trogus, describes the same stretch of
country in Lycaonia and Cilicia which is mentioned by
Strabo, pp. 535, 537, as having been given to the kings of
Cappadocia by the Romans : * this territory stretched from
Derbe on the west by Kybistra to Kastabala on the skirts
of Mount Amanus, and was called the Eleventh Strategia
of Cappadocia, so that it includes all that part of Lycaonia
which was not in the Galatic tetrarchy.
The testimony of Trogus, when rightly understood, thus
^ Called Lycaonia ipsa by Pliny, V 95 (using an old authority).
2 There were fourteen cities in the tetrarchy, and it seems impos-
sible to make up that number without going as far south as Lystra,
which moreover was closely connected with Iconium, being only
eighteen miles from it.
sjustin, XXXVII i, 2.
* So rightly Bergmann, de Prov. Asia, pp. 16, 17.
5
66 Historical Introduction.
corroborates our conclusion as to the tetrarchy. Lycaonia
now consisted of two parts : one was attached to Galatia
as an "added tetrarchy," and one to Cappadocia as an
" eleventh Strategia ".
Thus, for some years the history of Galatia shows the
Gaul^ fluctuating between the Pergamenian and the Pontic
alliance. The former represents the tendency to civilisa-
tion and order ; and had it triumphed, Galatia might have
adopted Greek manners and law. But the party which
favoured the Gaulish manners and the old barbarian methods
gained the upper hand, thanks chiefly to the moral support
that Rome, jealous of Pergamenian power, gave them.
In the following century, when the Pontic kings roused
the Greeks of Asia Minor against Rome, the Galatian tribes,
as the faithful allies of the Italian state, were thrown into
still more violent antagonism to the Greek element in Asia.
Thus the Galatians were kept free from Greek civilisation.
Against it they allied themselves first with the Asiatic
barbarism of Pontus and thereafter with Roman order.
The progress of the tribes was from Gaulish barbarism to
Roman manners ; and only when the Roman spirit found
itself too weak to assimilate the Asiatic Provinces and
allowed the Greek spirit free play, did the tribes turn
towards Greek civilisation (see Sections 13, 14).
After 160 the strength of the Pontic kingdom appears
to have grown greater. Mithridates III Philopator Phila-
delphos Euergetes (169-121), son of Mithridates II, brother
of Pharnaces I (190-169), father of Mithridates the Great
(121-63),^ had a glorious and successful reign. He aided
^I follow Th. Reinach, against the older opinion, in spite of some
serious difficulties in his view (acknowledged fully by himself). He
has also remodelled the whole Mithridatic genealogy, and reduced
the number of kings.
Section y : The History of Galatia. 67
Attalus II in 154 against Prusias, became an ally of Rome,
and sent troops to their aid in the Third Punic War, and
again during the rebellion in Asia, 131 -129.
In 129 Great Phrygia was granted to Mithridates III by
Manius Aquillius ; and though the Senate did not confirm
the Consul's acts, yet Mithridates seems to have ruled
Phrygia till his death in 121. But it seems impossible that
he could rule Phrygia, unless he possessed the ascendancy
in Galatia.^ Yet Van Gelder's suggestion that between
160 and 130 Galatia lost its independence and passed
under the Pontic domination, is improbable and unneces-
sary. The existence of two opposite parties in Galatia, one
favouring the civilised Pergamenian and afterwards the
Roman alliance, and one the barbaric and Pontic connection,
furnishes a sufficient explanation. At this period the Pontic
party was triumphant. But the ascendancy of Pontus, by
which Galatia was now surrounded east and west, was
likely soon to arouse the jealous and independent spirit
of the Gauls. Rome, too, was on the watch against any
Asiatic state that was growing more powerful than its
neighbours.
Two measures of Rome, in 126 and 121, against the
Pontic rule over Phrygia are mentioned. In 126 the Senate
declared the acts of Aquillius inoperative, and recognised
Phrygia as a free country. That decree of the Senate
remained inoperative ; and in the negotiations between
Mithridates the Great and the Roman officers in B.C. 88,
it is assumed on both sides that Phrygia had been given
by the Romans to his father Mithridates Euergetes. This
unanimous assumption must be taken to represent the
^ So Van Gelder, p. 277, rightly argues.
68 Historical Introduction.
actual fact ; and recently it has been confirmed by an
important inscription of the Phrygian city, Lysias, quot-
ing a Senatus-consultum of B.C. \\6} in which the Senate
recognises as valid all the arrangements of Mithridates
Euergetes, implying obviously that he had been de facto
ruler of Phrygia till his death in 121. Then, in the troubles
that ensued, the Senate interfered to regulate Phrygia, and
confirmed all that the king had done in the country, but
took it away from his son Mithridates the Great.
When Mithridates the Great succeeded in 121, he was
a child ; and his mother Laodice ruled with full power.
The Romans acted on their usual principle of reducing the
strength of the leading power in Asia Minor : they now
took away Great Phrygia from the Pontic rule, and made
it nominally free, though of course really dependent on
Rome and the governor of the Province Asia. The anti-
Pontic party among the Galatae at the same time recovered
the ascendancy ; and they fought against Mithridates
in the operations that inaugurated his first war with
Rome.^
Yet the Senate's decree of 126, though an empty form,
was appealed to by Sulla in the winter of 85-84, to prove
that Mithridates the Great had never possessed any right
to Phrygia. Sulla was resting his argument on an inopera-
tive decree, which had been contradicted by the course
of history. Similiarly, when he went on to maintain that
Phrygia had been made free and not tributary, his con-
tention may probably have been justified by the nominal
action of the Senate ; but the actual fact disproved his
1 Citiis and, Bish. of Phrygia, pt. II, p. 762.
^Appian, Mithr., 11 and 17.
Section 7 ; The History of Galatia. 69
argument. Fhrygia, if nominally free, was treated by the
Romans as subject, or at least dependent. Phrygian con-
tingents were enrolled in the armies that fought against
Mithridates, and the Roman officers, after their defeat on
the river Amneias, tried to collect a new army of Phrygians,
but found them too unwarlike to be of any use. The
epitome of Livy, LXXVII, when it says that Mithridates
in 88 entered Phrygia, a Province of the Roman people,
may be using an expression technically too strong ; but,
practically, when Mithridates crossed the Phrygian frontier,
he was invading a country that was treated by the Romans
as dependent upon, and part of, their Empire.
But in 88 Mithridates overran western Asia Minor down
to the Aegean Sea ; and Galatia now once more passed
under the Pontic ascendancy. The only people in Asia
from whom Mithridates apprehended any serious opposi-
tion were the Galatians ; and to guard against it he sum-
moned all the chief men, to the number of sixty, to Perga-
mos, where he had established his court, and massacred
them all except one, who escaped.^ Those tetrarchs who
had not come to Pergamos, he killed by secret attacks.
Only three tetrarchs escaped.
At this point our authorities again permit a glimpse of
the divided spirit, which seems to have been a fatal weak-
ness to the Galatians : Mithridates massacred indiscrimi-
nately his friends and his opponents among the tetrarchs.^
There was therefore a party that favoured and one that
had opposed him.
^ Plutarch, de Mul. Virt., 23, and Appian, Mithr., 46, doubtless, are
describing the same plan. The whole families of the tetrarchs were
massacred, as Mommsen says, Rom. Hist.y transl., ed. II, vol. IV, p. 46.
^Appian, I.e.
JO Historical Introduction.
The result showed that the old Gaulish spirit was still
strong among the Galatae. Instead of being disheartened
by this blow, the nation united ; the party that had
favoured the Pontic cause and facilitated Mithridates's
victory, evidently joined heartily in the resistance.
Eumachus, who had been sent as satrap to Galatia, was
expelled along with the garrisons which he had intended
to station in the Galatian fortresses ; and the Galatians
henceforth were the hearty allies of Rome in the wars,
which terminated in A.D. 66 in the complete defeat of
Mithridates.
The massacre of the tetrarchs was a critical event in
Galatian history. It drove the Galatae over entirely to
the Roman side ; and the connection lasted long, for the
war was protracted. Not long after it we find the Galatian
army, at least in part, armed and disciplined in the Roman
style. Whereas Greek and Pergamenian civilisation had
apparently failed to make much impression in Galatia,
the Roman organisation exercised more influence, as is
not unnatural, since the Galatae were still a western people
at heart, essentially unlike the Greek and Asiatic peoples
around them. As Mommsen says at a later date, " in spite
of their sojourn of several hundred years in Asia Minor,
a deep gulf still separated these Occidentals from the
Asiatics ". At the same time the massacre weakened the
old tetrarchic system, partly by reducing the number of
the great nobles, partly probably by convincing the nation
that the division into twelve tetrarchies was a serious
weakness against external attack.
In B.C. 74, at the beginning of the Third Mithridatic
War, Eumachus, the Pontic general, overran Phrygia and
subdued the Pisidians and Isaurians and Cilicia, as Appian
Section 7 ; The History of Galatia. 7 1
says (designating ^ as Cecilia that territory which Tro-
gus calls Lycaonia et Cilicia and Strabo calls the Eleventh
Strategia).^ The countries attacked by Eumachus, there-
fore, were the territories lying round Galatia as enlarged by
the Lycaonian tetrarchy. When this tetrarchy is taken
into account, the references made by Trogus and by Appian
become consistent with one another, and give an outline of
the fate of the entire region lying between North Galatia
and Cilicia Campestris.
Thereupon, Deiotaros, one of the tetrarchs who had
escaped the great massacre, attacked Eumachus and drove
him out. In 73 Lucullus carried the war into Pontus, and
Galatia was free henceforth from Pontic armies.
^ So BM. Civ., V 75, see below, p. log note.
2 See above, p. 64 f.
SECTION 8.
THE GALATIAN STATE.
Strabo, p. 567, gives a sketch of the Galatian organisation
and government. The three tribes all spoke the same
language and were of similar character. Each tribe was
divided on the old Gaulish system into four cantons, called
by the Greeks tetrarchies. Each tetrarchy was administered
by a special chief under whom were a judge and a general
and two lieutenant-generals. There was a senate of 300
members, drawn from the twelve tetrarchies, which met at
a place called Drynemeton,^ and judged cases of murder ;
but everything else was arranged by the tetrarchs and the
judges. This constitution lasted till B.C. 64.
In time of war the disadvantage of multiplication of
leaders made them sometimes, at least, entrust the conduct
of operations to three chiefs, one for each tribe, as was
the case in B.C. 189. In other respects also Strabo's account
must not be pressed too closely as implying an unvarying,
cast-iron system. But its general truth is beyond question.
Strabo was a very careful writer, and abundant evidence
was open to him. The meeting of the 300 representatives
1 M. Perrot took Drynemeton as the Oak-grove, and placed it seven
hours south-west of Ancyra, where a few oaks still grow in that
treeless land. But Holder, Altcelt. Sprachschatz, explains dry as an
intensive prefix, and nemeton as sanctuary.
(72)
Section 8: The Galatian State. y2>
at the holy place Drynemeton was clearly in accordance
with an old Gaulish custom. It may be compared with
the meeting of the representatives of the sixty-four Gallic
states at Lugudunum beside the central altar : this meet-
ing, instituted in its Roman form in B.C. 12, was "adapted
to a pre-existing national institution, for ist August, the
day of the dedication of the altar (to Rome and Augustus)
and of the meeting, was also the great Celtic festival of the
Sungod Lug".^
Doubtless there was an altar at Drynemeton. The altar,
as distinguished from the temple, was a feature of the
Gaulish religion (and of all primitive religions).
As Livy mentions, the Gauls had no cities. They were
too barbarous to found cities, or to maintain the Phrygian
cities. They dwelt in villages, and in time of war they
sent women and children, flocks and herds, to strongholds
on hill tops.^ The chiefs seem to have maintained rude
state in castles, surrounded by their tribesmen, and exer-
cising sway over the subject Phrygians around. The
evidence of Livy {i.e., of his authority Polybius) is con-
firmed by the facts of history and of archaeological dis-
covery (see Anderson and Crowfoot in Journal of Hellenic
Studies, 1899, pp. 34-130).
There had been cities of the Phrygians, Ancyra, Gor-
dium, Pessinus, Gorbeous, and others unknown to fame.
But Gordium was utterly destroyed by the Gauls.^ Pes-
^ Rushforth, Latin Histor. Inscrip., p. 48 f. ; Rhys, Hibbert Lectures,
pp. 409, 421, 424.
=2 Livy, XXXVIII 18,15; 19,1; 19,5-
3 It disappeared from history soon after 190, having previously
been a great trade centre, though not a large city. Professor A.
Korte has placed it at Pebi on the Sangarios, on a site which shows
no remains except of the early period.
74 Historical Introduction.
sinus was a city of importance, but it was not Gaulish
in the same sense as Ancyra. It was not taken by
the Gauls until between 190 and 164, and even then
there seems to have been a compromise between the old
families and the Gauls. Deiotarus, B.C. 64-40, ruled the
tribe, not from Pessinus, but from the fortresses Peion
and Bloukion. Such was the state 'of things among the
Tolistobogii.
Among the Tectosages, Aricyra, which had been a great
city in the pre-Galatic period, became a mere chief fort
among the Gauls ; and Strabo does not call it a 7roXtv ov)( anrofxevoi.
2 See p. 62.
SECTION 9.
THE RELIGION OF GALATIA.
Few traces of the old Gaulish religion can be detected in
Galatia. It would be difficult to mention any except the
sacrifice of captives, which was practised as late as about
B.C. 160, and presumably the rites at Drynemeton.^ It is
hardly probable that the Gaulish religion was wholly dis-
used or forgotten in the last century B.C. But, certainly,
almost all the references — unfortunately very few — to Gal-
atic religion point to the rapid adoption of the ancient and
impressive religion of Cybele. That was the one possession
of the old Phrygian people that exercised a really great
influence on the world. The.Galatians may perhaps have
modified to some degree the character of the Phrygian
ritual by their own nature and customs, as both the Phryges
and the Greeks did.^ But we have no evidence on this
point.
There were two reasons why the Gauls should adopt the
religion of the conquered race.
(i) They had to govern the conquered people ; and the
easiest way of doing so was to use the already existing
forms of rule. The priests of the great religious centres
^ See p. 73. 2 See p. 41 f,
(86)
Section g : The Religion of Galatia. 87
had hitherto been dynasts and had ruled the country round ;
and the GauHsh chiefs made themselves easily heirs to the
immense power of the Phrygian priests by taking their
place as far as possible. At Pessinus the Gauls took only
half the places in the great priestly college. It is uncertain
whether this can be taken as typical for other cases ; but
probably it was not typical. Pessinus was the greatest and
most powerful of the sanctuaries ; it was not taken posses-
sion of by the Gauls until after 189, and would certainly
be able to make a much better bargain with the Gauls
than the lesser hiera could. Probably the higher priest-
hoods elsewhere were almost all monopolised by Gaulish
chiefs : examples on pp. 62, 88.
(2) A strange people always found it needful to adopt
the gods of their new country. Those gods were the gods
of the land ; and any calamity that happened to the immi-
grants was naturally attributed to the wrath of the native
gods, offended at the loss of their privileges : compare the
story in 2 Kings XVII 26. Thus Cybele was soon an
object of worship to the Gaulish conquerors.
An example of the influence of the Anatolian religion on
the Galatian tribes, probably as early as the second century,
is found in a tale recorded by Plutarch.^ The wife of
Sinatos, one of the most influential of the tetrarchs, was
Kamma, a beautiful woman, much respected for her char-
acter and wisdom and kindliness to the subject people.^
^ De Mul. Virt., 20; Amat., 22.
TToOtWTf Tois vnrjKoois 8ta(f)ep6vTa>s vtt evfieveias kol ^^p^^ororj^roj.
Plutarch's authority, some earlier writer (possibly Polybius, from
whom Mul. Virt. 22 is quoted), undoubtedly understood vitt^kool as
the subject Phrygiaji population, whom most of the Gauls treated
with harshness and contempt.
88 Historical Introduction.
She was hereditary priestess of Artemis,^ and the magnifi-
cent attire in which she was seen in the processions and
sacrifices of the goddess made her a conspicuous figure in
the country.
Sinorix, another tetrarch, fell in love with her, and slew
Sinatos by treachery. Then he wooed Kamma, and made
a merit of having murdered Sinatos from love of her, and
not from malice of heart. Her friends pressed her to
accept Sinorix, who was a man of specially great influence ;
and she accepted him, and invited him to complete the
betrothal in presence of the goddess. When he came, she
led him before the altar of Artemis. Then, taking a cup,
she poured a libation, drank of the cup, and handed it to
him to drink. When she saw that he had drunk, she cried
out calling the goddess to witness that for this day alone
had she survived Sinatos, and that now having avenged his
death she was going down to join him. Then to Sinorix
she added : " For you, let your folk prepare a tomb instead
of a marriage". The Gaul, as the poison began to work,
leaped on to his chariot, hoping to work off the effect
through the rapid tossing motion ; but he soon changed
from the car to a litter, and expired the same evening (pre-
sumably on the homeward road). Kamma heard of his
death, and died rejoicing.
Van Gelder (p. 199) remarks that the ceremonial preceding
the marriage— formal betrothal, the great crowd of people
convoying the pair, the offering of vows at the altar of
Artemis, the drinking of the pair from a common cup —
must be Gaulish, and certainly is not Greek or Oriental.
His judgment seems to be mistaken. Professor Rhys,
^narpiaos Upaxrvvr), Plut., A mat., 22.
Section g : The Religion of G alalia. 89
when consulted, says that he knows of no Celtic custom
suggesting that bride and bridegroom drank of the same
cup as a ceremony of marriage, or of betrothal ; but that
one expression ^ may possibly (though not necessarily)
indicate that eating of the same dish, something like con-
farreatio in the Roman religious ceremony, was a marriage
custom.
Now drinking of the common cup is to this day part of
the Greek marriage ceremony ; ^ and this makes it probable
that the custom was not Gallic, but part of old Anatolian
ritual. Plutarch's words convey the impression that
Kamma made the ceremonial as priestess, that it belonged
to the ritual of Artemis and was novel to Sinorix. Artemis,
then, was here not a Greek name for a Gallic goddess
(which would be a reasonable hypothesis at the first
glance). The Artemis, whose priestess Kamma was, was
the Anatolian Goddess, Ma or Bellona, in whose ritual the
annual procession, the Exodos of the deity, formed an
important part. In that procession Kamma, in the gorgeous
robes of the goddess herself, whom she represented, would
play the conspicuous part that Plutarch describes.
With regard to marriage ceremonial in the Anatolian
religion, we have unfortunately no evidence. While in all
probability true marriage was not in accordance with the
spirit of that religion, still it is certain that the relation
^ At the opening of the story of Kulhwch and Olwen, a prince wants
a wife of the same food, with himself. This may refer to a marriage
ceremony of eating food together, but more probably implies a wife
of rank fitting her to sit always along with him at food.
^The Kubarra, or assistant, who also drinks of the same cup, is
thenceforward a close relation : if a man, he may not marry the
bride, if the bridegroom dies : if a woman, she may not marry the
groom, if the wife dies.
90 Historical Introduction.
between man and woman was always a very important
fact in it, being closely associated with the temple service
and considered as a religious act ; and it is probable that
some common ritualistic ceremony would be performed in
the temple and before the altar of the goddess by the two
parties. It is also certain that a mixed cup was a feature
in the Phrygian Mysteries, and that the celebrants partook
of this cup.
It is quite probable, therefore, that this drinking of
the cup in the Mysteries might be adapted to a sort of
marriage ceremony. A similar adaptation is known in
respect of another act in the Mysteries. It is well known
that the celebrant initiated in the Phrygian Mysteries
pronounced the formula, " I have escaped evil, I have found
a better" ; and that this same formula was pronounced as
part of the Athenian marriage ceremony.
That some ceremony in the temple of Artemis formed
an accompaniment of marriage in ancient Anatolia is
indicated in one place. In the legend of St. Abercius, it
is said to have been arranged that, after the return of
Verus from the Parthian War, his marriage with Lucilla,
daughter of Marcus Aurelius, should be celebrated in the
temple of Artemis at Ephesus. As the legend, though
embodying a real tradition, was not written down before
about A.D. 400, it would be a plausible explanation that
" this detail is suggested (to the person who gave literary
form to the legend) by the Christian ceremonial of marry-
ing in church ".^ But the story of Kamma suggests that
the author may have correctly incorporated in the legend
of St. Abercius a detail taken from the pagan marriage
^ So in Expositor, April, 1889, p. 256.
Section g : The Religion of Galatia. g i
ceremonial of Asia Minor, for he wrote before paganism
was extinct in the country.^
The romance of Kamma carries us back to the time
when relations between the ruling Gauls and the subject
Phrygians were beginning to be less purely that of lord
and serf. Kamma was recognised by the Phrygians as
a friend, partly because of her kindliness to them, still
more because she was a priestess of their religion.
It is most unfortunate that no clue is given in the story
to her date, except that she lived and died before B.C. 86. If
the suspicion expressed above, that Polybius was Plutarch's
authority, be correct, she could not be much later than
B.C. 140. That is probable from other facts of history,
stated in Section 7. It was during the period 181- 160 that
the moderating and civilising influence was strongest ; and
this influence was thereafter weakened. Kamma repre-
sents the progressive and milder type among the Gauls.
However that may be, the second century is the period to
which, doubtless, the incident belongs.
The tale points, beyond doubt, to the inference that
participation in the common religion led to a gradual ap-
proximation between the Gauls and the Phrygians of
Galatia. This is in itself probable : a common religion
was the uniting bond in every society or association in
ancient time.
Again, Deiotaros was devoted to divination and augury,
and guided his life by them. According to Cicero, who had
^ Abb6 Duchesne places the composition of the Abercius legend
much later than I do. His arguments seem to be wholly founded on
misapprehension, as Prof. A. Zahn, Forsch. zur Gesch. des N. T. Kanons,
V, p. 62 «, has recognised : see Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, II, pp. 709
ff, 723 ff.
92 Historical Introduction.
seen a good deal of him, and conversed with him on this
subject, comparing their augural principles, he never did
anything important without taking the omens. He often
turned back from a journey, even after several days' pro-
gress, when an unfavourable omen occurred ; and he won
Cicero's heart by declaring that the favourable omens which
accompanied him, as he went to join Pompey before the
battle of Pharsalos, had come true, for they had led him to
defend the senate and freedom and constitutional govern-
ment, and the glory of this conduct outweighed in his
estimation the loss of territory by which Caesar had pun-
ished him.
The augury which he followed, and which had once
saved his life, was very different from the Roman prin-
ciples of interpretation. It drew omens from almost all
birds, whereas the Romans paid regard only to a few ; it
interpreted their flight and direction in different ways,
sometimes drawing a conclusion exactly the opposite of
the Romans.^
Deiotaros's augury was not of Gaulish origin. It was
that of Cilicians, Pamphylians, Phrygians, Pisidians, Ly-
cians.2 It was the system of which an Ephesian fragment
has been preserved,^ The Great Goddess of Asia Minor
made Phrygian birds fly and had taught her priests to
interpret the signs. Pausanias (X 21) mentions that the
Gauls did not practice augury (yet see Diodorus, V 31, 3).
^ Cicero de Div., I 15, 26 f. ; II 8, 20 ; 36, 76 f. ; 37, 78, composed
in B.C. 44.
^Cicero de Div., I 15, 26, compare De Legibus, II 13, 33.
' In the collections of Hicks, Brit. Mus., 678 ; Roberts, 144 ; Roehl,
499; Cauer, 478; Bechtel, 145; see Bouch6-Leclercq, Hist, de la
Divin., I, p. 140 f.
Section g : The Religion of G alalia. 93
Aelian mentions that, when a plague of locusts afflicts
the country, the Galatians of Asia offer prayers and perform
rites invoking certain birds,^ which come and destroy the
locusts. Aelian does not vouch for the truth of this, but
it is the truest thing in his book. I have seen the locust
bird often during the plague that ended in 1882.^ It is a
singularly beautiful bird of bright and variegated plumage,
about the size of a starling, I should think, which follows
and preys on the armies of locusts, and is never seen at
any other time in the country. That the inhabitants would
pary for the birds and invoke them with rites, as soon as
the locusts appeared, may be regarded as certain. Doubt-
less they do so to the present day.
This custom is attributed to the Galatians by Aelian,
but it was obviously not a Gaulish custom, but a native
Anatolian practice, which the immigrant Gauls adopted.
The persistence of ancient feeling about locusts is note-
worthy in the horror with which the idea of eating them
is still regarded in Anatolia, whereas the Arab tribes eat
them with relish. The same contrast between the natives
of Phrygia or of Pontus and the Arabs struck St. Jerome
in the fourth century.^ This, incidentally, proves how keen
was his observation as he travelled through the country,
and confirms his other statements about the people.
In the inscriptions of the Roman period no allusion is
made to any religion except that of the old Phrygian gods
and that of the Emperors. It is possible, even probable,
^ Aelian, D« Naf. Anim., XVII 19 : read ta-Tiv Stv according to Valc-
kenaer's certain emendation.
3 On the facts and the superstitions connected with locusts in Asia
Minor see my Impressions of Turkey, p. 274 ff.
* Jerome, Adv. Jovin., II 7.
94 Historical Introduction.
that the Koinon of Galatians, by which the imperial reli-
gion was maintained, was the successor of the old meeting
at Drynemeton, and thus concentrated in itself the relics
of Gaulish feeling and cultus ; but the officials mentioned
do not differ from the ordinary type in the provincial asso-
ciations.
The inscriptions (all of Roman time) alluding to the
religion of private individuals are quite undistinguishable
from the ordinary Phrygian votive inscriptions, except that
the personal names are often recognisably Celtic. The
chief collection of inscriptions from the country districts,
distinguished from the city of Ancyra, is that of J. G. C.
Anderson in Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1 899.
SECTION lo.
GALATIA AS A ROMAN CLIENT STATE.
At the pacification and re-organisation of the East in
B.C. 64, Galatia was placed by Pompey under the rule of
three chiefs, Deiotaros, Brogitaros, and a third unknown,
retaining the old triple division according to the three
tribes, Tolistobogii, Trocmi, and Tectosages, but discard-
ing the subdivision into tetrarchies. The ruling tetrarchic
families had been reduced to three at the great massacre.
Moreover, the Romans always liked to have some single
head in each district with whom they might conveniently
communicate ; and it was against their policy to raise up
a single king in whose hands the whole power of the
Galatian state should be concentrated. But the ambition
of the leading Gauls had led to at least one previous
attempt at monarchy ; and the same cause is discernible
in the following period, until from B.C. 44 onwards there
was a single king of Galatia.
Pompey did not restore to Galatia the whole of the
Lycaonian tetrarchy ; ^ but apparently he did permanently
attach to it the northern part of the tetrarchy, including
the country immediately to the west of Lake Tatta, but
not (if Ptolemy may be followed) including Savatra. This
1 See below, p. 106.
(95)
96 Historical Introduction.
district retained the name of the " Added Land," ^ and is so
described by Ptolemy in the second century after Christ In
this way the " Added Land " came to be smaller than the
old tetrarchy, which Pliny describes (see p. 64 f.).
It may seem a poor return to the Galatae for their
services in the Mithridatic Wars, to deprive them of the
best part of the tetrarchy ; but there may have been
compensation given them, as for example, we know that
Deiotaros received Armenia Minor from Pompey, and
Brogitaros got Mithridation (which previously had be-
longed to Pontus).
The tetrarchies now disappeared finally from the
political geography of Asia Minor ; and, when Pliny
speaks of the Lycaonian Tetrarchy given to Galatia, he
must be quoting the name from an authority speaking of
the period before the Mithridatic Wars. The name might
last, as other historical names lasted.^ The term tetrarchy
now lost its meaning. There were three chiefs, one for
each tribe, and each was called a tetrarch ; so that the
term tetrarchy could henceforth denote only the territory
of a tetrarch, i.e., of a whole tribe. As there is no trace
of such usage, probably the tetrarchies ceased to be a
political fact in 64.
This corroborates our previous conclusion that the
Lycaonian Tetrarchy was attached to Galatia during the
second century.
The history of North Galatia during the period 64-40
^ irpoaeiKrjfifievr] (x^ypa).
2 Pontus Polemoniacus lasted as a name in inscriptions long after
it ceased in a.d. 63 to be a political reality. Lycaonia Antiochiana
ceased to be a real division in a.d. 72, but an inscription dating later
than A.D. 166 uses the name. Ptolemy employs both these names.
Section lo : Galatia as a Roman Client State. 97
has its centre in the ambition, prudence and craft of
Deiotaros, He had been appointed by Pompey chief
and tetrarch of the Tolistobogii, as Brogitaros was of the
Trocmi, and an unknown person ^ of the Tectosages. In
reward for his services to Rome, Pompey also added to
Deiotaros's realm Gazelonitis and part of Armenia Minor.^
Thus the dominions of Deiotaros lay both to east and to
west of the other two Galatian chiefs, and were much more
extensive. His influence was strengthened by his being
far more distinguished than the other two chiefs ; and
he augmented it by marrying two of his daughters to
Brogitaros^ and to Kastor, son of the chief of the
Tectosages. He had succeeded his father [Dumjnorix as
one of the four Tolistobogian tetrarchs. He was, appar-
ently, among the three tetrarchs who escaped the massacre
by Mithridates about 87. He served Sulla, 87-84, Murena,
84-82, Servilius Isauricus, 78-76, Lucullus, 74-66, Pompey,
66-64, Bibulus, 51, and Cicero, 50 ; and he was honourably
mentioned by all of them.
Deiotaros was a remarkable man, and evidently had
strongly impressed Cicero, who saw a good deal of him
in his Cicilian pro-consulate 51-50. He perceived that the
best career for a king in Galatia lay in faithful adherence to
the Roman cause ; and he earned frequent commendation
^ He was father of Kastor and Domnilaos, see below, p. loo.
Now, Bepolitanus was one of the chiefs who escaped the Mithridatic
massacre, Plutarch, de Mul. Virt., 46. Only three escaped.
'^ As Pompey's acts were confirmed by the Senate in 59, this
kingdom is often said to have been given by the Senate. Gazelonitis
lay immediately east of the Halys in its lower course.
3 Cicero, de Harusp. Resp., 13, 29, which cannot be taken in the
sense advocated by Monsieur Th. Reinach, Rev. Numism., 1891, p.
384 note.
7
^B Historical Introduction,
from the Senate by his zeal. He led his troops, thirty
cohorts, 12,000 men, armed in Roman style, in Cicero's
army. He discussed topics of comparative religion and
ritual with Cicero. He appreciated and imitated the
Roman discipline and arms ; ^ and, undoubtedly, he
carried his imitation into other departments than war.
The Gauls had always despised agriculture, and eaten the
bread cultivated by others ; ^ but Deiotaros managed his
estates well, practising agriculture as well as pasturage —
a great merit in the Roman eyes.
Naturally in 48 he joined Pompey against Caesar.
Pompey was actual master in the East ; and loomed far
greater in the Galatian view than Caesar. Deiotaros led
his own troops to Epirus, though he was now very old,^
and had to be lifted on to his horse. We need not credit
Deiotaros with any motives of gratitude to Pompey : he
was too ambitious to have room for the kindlier and
weaker emotion. He was ready immediately afterwards
to co-operate with Caesar's lieutenant Calvinus, and with
Caesar himself. It was for the Romans to settle their own
affairs: he acted along with the nearest officer or the
strongest.
Pompey had not given the three Galatian chiefs the
title of king, but only of tetrarch, though he had made
Deiotaros king of Lesser Armenia. In 58 P. Clodius
passed a law through the comitia tributa, granting the
1 He had two legions for several years before B.C. 48. But he
suffered severely at Nikopolis, and brought only one legion to Caesar
in 47.
* See above, p. 78.
" Plutarch, Crass., 17, calls him in b.c. 54 a very old man, itaw
yrjpaiov.
Section lo : Galatia as a Roman Client State. 99
higher title to Deiotaros and Brogitaros. Cicero says that
the Senate had often declared Deiotaros worthy of the
kingly title ; but Brogitaros had merely bought it from
Clodius without desert. At the same time Brogitaros
induced Clodius to pass a law ejecting the high priest of
Pessinus and putting Brogitaros in his place. As Pessinus
was in the realm of Deiotaros, this was an interference
with his rights, and caused enmity between him and the
usurping priest. Within the course of the next year or
two, Deiotaros ejected his son-in-law Brogitaros, and re-
covered possession of Pessinus.^
Cicero's words might perhaps imply that the rightful high
priest, ejected by Brogitaros and restored by Deiotaros,
belonged to the old native priestly family ; but it is far
from probable that Cicero knew anything of such delicate
distinctions, and his words cannot be pressed.
Brogitaros died, or was killed perhaps by Deiotaros,
some time between 56 and 51 ; for in 47 we learn that
Deiotaros had seized several years ago the country of the
Trocmi, thus reducing the number of chiefs from three to
two.
It is probable that some shadow of the old common
council and festival at Drynemeton still existed at this
period. Something like common determination and plan
among all the tribes is clearly shown during the Mithri-
datic Wars and again in the Roman Civil War, for the
contingent sent to aid Pompey was evidently fixed at
300 cavalry from each tribe. Deiotaros, as chief of two
tribes, led 600 horsemen. Kastor and Domnilaos led 300 :
they were therefore joint chiefs of the Tectosages.
^Cicero, ^. Sc%t., 26, dc Harusp. Resp., 13, 28 f.
lOO Historical Introduction.
Now we observe that Kastor's seat was Gorbeous, whereas
Ancyra was indubitably always the capital of the Tecto-
sages. The inference seems clear that Kastor Saokondaros
(of Gorbeous) and Domnilaos^ (of Ancyra) were the two
sons of the Tectosagan tetrarch appointed by Pompey in
64, and hence they jointly commanded the troops of their
tribe.
Further, as Deiotaros was ruler of almost all Galatia in
47, he evidently seized the land of Domnilaos in the end of
48, presumably because Domnilaos was killed at Pharsalos.
Deiotaros was then actively aiding Calvinus, Caesar's lieu-
tenant, on the eve of a serious war ; and his usurpation was
easily pardoned. Thus in 47, Deiotaros and his son-in-law
Kastor were the sole remaining Galatian chiefs. The latter
had only a small territory and inferior title, whereas Deio-
taros and his son, who was also called Deiotaros, had
both been honoured with the title king by the Senate.
Kastor seems to have felt his position dangerous, and he
employed his son Kastor to bring an accusation in Rome
against Deiotaros for attempting to poison Caesar. Thus a
bitter enmity arose between Deiotaros and his son-in-law,
which had lasted for some time before 45.
In 47 Deiotaros appeared as a suppliant before Caesar
on the Pontic frontier. He brought a legion with him to
the impending Pontic War ; and Caesar restored his royal
robes,^ and used his services in the war. Other claimants
^ Called Domnekleios, Strab., p. 543, if the two are rightly identified
by Niese, Rhein. Mus., 1883, p. 567 ff., and Th. Reinach, Rev. Numism.,
1 891, p. 380 ff.
2 Caesar recognised only tetrarchs in Galatia, but acknowledged
Deiotaros's title as king of Armenia (this had been granted by the
Senate in his consulship, when it had confirmed Pompey's acts in the
East).
Section lo : Galatia as a Roman Client State. loi
were contesting his rights ; possibly Brogitaros had left
sons, certainly Domnilaos had two sons, Adiatorix and
Dyteutos. Caesar postponed consideration of some of these
questions to a more convenient opportunity ; but punished
Deiotaros by giving part of his Armenian kingdom to Ario-
barzanes of Cappadocia, and the whole of his Trocmian
tetrarchy to Mithridates of Pergamos, Caesar's active and
able supporter. The mother of Mithridates was Adobo-
giona of the Trocmian tetrarchs, daughter of another
Deiotaros and sister of Brogitaros. His father was believed
to be really Mithridates the Great, though a citizen of
Pergamos was husband of Adobogiona.
In 45 the younger Kastor was in Rome prosecuting the
case against his grandfather Deiotaros ; and Cicero defended
the latter. Caesar again postponed his decision ; and nothing
was settled when he died. Immediately on hearing of
Caesar's murder in 44 B.C., Deiotaros seized all his former
realm. He captured Gorbeous, and put to death his own
daughter and her husband Kastor Saokondaros. The elder
Kastor was still living in 45, when Cicero was pleading the
case in Rome ; but Deiotaros took advantage of the disorder
ensuing on Caesar's death, to push his own claim to all three
tetrarchies, A bribe to Antony and his wife Fulvia ensured
him in the enjoyment of his power until his death in B.C. 41.
Thus the number of Galatian chiefs was reduced to one.
In order to ensure the peaceable succession of one of his
sons, Deiotaros is said by Plutarch to have put all the rest
to death. But, in spite of his care, Antony conferred the
kingdom of Galatia with the eastern part of Paphlagonia on
Kastor in 40. Perhaps his son Deiotaros died before him
or shortly after.
The monarchic system must have tended to weaken the
I02 Historical hitroduction.
tribal feeling and the old free Gaulish character. The
monarch in the maintenance of his authority was apt to
introduce the administrative devices of more advanced
nations. Deiotaros, who armed and trained his soldiers in
Roman style, was fully alive to the advantages of " civilised "
methods. But the monarchical system lasted barely twenty
years ; and no serious and permanent effect on national
feeling could have been produced before Galatia became a
Roman Province in B.C. 25, for the tribal system continued
in full force under the Empire.
The preceding and following Sections show how largely
Galatia now bulked in the Roman mind. As in the second
century the eastern question was summed up in the word
" Asia," so now the Central Asia Minor problem was
summed up in the word " Galatia ". In each case, when
a regular Province was constituted, the new name was
given to it.
iVo/e.— Additional Authorities (see p. 52).
Th. Reinach in Revue Numismatique (1891), p. 378 ff.
Niese in Rheinisches Museum (1883), p. 583 ff.
SECTION II.
ORIGIN OF THE PROVINCE GALATIA.
The Roman range of authority and action in any foreign
land constituted a Provincia, i.e., a sphere of duty.^ In the
early part of the first century B.C. Asia Minor contained
two Provinciae, Asia and Cilicia, the latter being the
Roman term for a great, ill -defined, half-subdued agglom-
eration of lands, comprising parts of Cilicia, Pamphylia
and other regions. In 80 we begin to get a conception of
the range of this new Provincia, in which the Roman
interests in southern and south-eastern Asia Minor were
contained. Dolabella and his proquaestor Verres governed
it (80-79) ; ^"^^ Cicero's speech against the latter gives some
conception of the range of his authority, including parts of
Lycia, Milyas, Phrygia, Pamphylia and Pisidia, as well as
Cilicia.^ Servilius Isauricus succeeded and governed Cilicia
78-75. The first and most pressing duty of the Provincia
was to put down the pirates of Isauria or Cilicia Tracheia.
^ The word provincia had originally no territorial implication :
the decision of law-cases between cives and strangers was the pro-
vincia of one of the praetors.
"^Verr., II I 38, 95, where the word totam is rhetorical: it is to
be connected with all the preceding list of names (and not simply
with Phrygian) ; Verres plagued all Lycia, Pamphylia, Phrygia, etc.
No stress can be laid on it as proving that entire Phrygia was under
Polabella ; it is a stroke of rhetoric.
(103)
I04 Historical Introduction.
Servilius did so to some extent, and was the first Roman
officer to lead an army across Mount Taurus. For the
efficient conduct of operations it was necessary to have
the countries on both sides of Taurus under his command,
and in fact part of Phrygia as well as Pamphylia, Lycia,
etc., obeyed him.
Asia had been sufficiently and finally regulated by Sulla
in B.C. 85-84 ; but the new Province Cilicia was open to
continual variation according as the frontier interests of
Rome varied, and for many years the history of Roman
conquest and foreign policy in the East was practically
identical with the Cilician sphere of duty.
To understand the subject before us, we must bear in
mind that there were three classes of States in Asia Minor :
(i) Countries incorporated in the Empire, in which law
was administered by a Roman governor; (2) Countries
connected with Rome by an agreement or alliance the
terms of which were expressed in a treaty, i.e.^ client-states,
according to the usual and convenient expression, among
which the chief were Galatia and Cappadocia ; (3) States
in no formal and recognised relations with Rome, especially
Pontus and the Isaurian pirates.
The first two classes were included in the conception of
the Roman world,^ the third were its enemies.^
Strabo on p. 671 describes the intention^ of the Romans
in setting up these subject kings. He is speaking of
Cilicia Tracheia, but he expresses the Roman theory as
^ See Christ Born in Bethlehem, p. 117 ff.
^No international law was recognised then, except in so far as it
was expressed in a formal treaty.
^ This paragraph is taken verbatim from Christ Born in Bethlehem,
p. 132.
Section ii : Origin of the Province Galatia. 105
it was applied generally. Some of the subject countries
were specially difficult to govern, either on account of the
unruly character of the inhabitants, or because the natural
features of the land lent themselves readily to brigandage
and piracy. As these countries must be either administered
by Roman governors or ruled by kings, it was considered
that kings would more efficiently control their restless sub-
jects, being permanently on the spot and having soldiers
always at command. But the history of the following
century shows how, step by step and district by district,
these countries were incorporated in the adjacent Roman
Provinces, as a certain degree of discipline and civilisation
was imparted to the population by the kings, who built
cities and introduced the Graeco-Roman customs and
education.
The Eastern frontier policy of Rome at this time was
expressed in the Cilician sphere of duty or Provincia. Every
change in the relations of Rome to its enemies in Asia
Minor implied a change in the bounds of that Provincia.
Every officer sent to regulate the foreign policy, i.e., the
relations with the enemies of Rome, was officially governor
of Cilicia.
Lycaonia had been divided between the two chief client-
states, Galatia and Cappadocia ; ^ but when these states
were fighting for existence against Pontus, their authority
was necessarily relaxed in Lycaonia. From 80 to 75 we
see that it was connected with Cilicia, and doubtless the
same arrangement lasted until the end of the Mithridatic
Wars, though in practice temporary conquests by the enemy,
e.g., by Eumachos in 74, might interfere with the connection
for a time.
^ See p. 64 f.
io6 Historical Introduction.
Pisidic Phrygia^ (including Pisidian Antioch) certainly
was added. Philomelium and most of Phrygian Paroreios,
with Iconium and the west of Lycaonia, formed the Lyca-
onian Dioecesis,^ as part of the Cilician Province.
Now as to the fate of Lycaonia when the readjust-
ment of Provinciae occurred after the Mithridatic Wars :
in B.C. 64 Pompey gave the eastern part of the former
Eleventh Strategia to Cappadocia. This part extended
from Kastabala to Kybistra, and the frontier lay a little
to the west of Kybistra, for Cicero marching from near
Iconium on 2nd September, B.C. 51, was on the frontier
between Lycaonia and Cappadocia on i8th September,
and reached Kybistra on 19th or 20th September.^ This
would not be possible if the frontier extended to the
neighbourhood of Derbe, as it probably did in the original
Strategia. Moreover, Derbe and Laranda were under the
administration of Antipater, who afterwards entertained
Cicero during his Anatolian journeys. Antipater was under
the authority of the Roman governor of Cilicia ; * and
therefore this part of Lycaonia must have been under the
Cilician Provincia or sphere of duty.
' Pisidic Phrygia, Polyb., XXII 5, 14 (where it is misunderstood by
most modern writers), is practically identical with Galatic Phrygia,
a later name meaning the part of Phrygia included in the Province
Galatia. It was the part of Phrygia towards Pisidia (Strab., pp. 557,
569, 577, Ptolemy, V 5, 4). See Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, I, p. 316.
2 Cicero, Alt., V 21, 9, more fully defined in Pliny, Nat. Hist., V 25,
as Lycaonia in Asiaticam lurisdictionem versa, and distinguished from
the three Phrygian Dioeceses by Cicero, Fam., XIII 67. The boundary'
between the Phrygian and Lycaonian Dioeceses lay between the
Lakes of Ak-Sheher (XL Martyrs) and Eber Gol.
^ He started from Iconium on 29th August, but returned to it on
the following day. Schmidt, Briefwechsd des Cicero, pp. 80 f., 397.
''Cicero, Fam., XIII 73.
Section ii: Origin of the Province Galatia. 107
Justin defines the territory added to Cappadocia in 129
{i.e., the Eleventh Strategia in its former condition) as
" Lycaonia and Cilicia " {i.e., part of the two countries) ; but
Appian describes it in 64 as " part of Cilicia, viz., Kastabala
and other cities " ; ^ we now see the reason of this difference.
Evidently Phrygia Paroreios continued as before, with
its chief city Philomelium, to form part of the Cilician
Province, for the same reason of convenience as before
under Servilius Isauricus,
It is strange that Kybistra and along with it perhaps
the pass leading down to the Cilician Gates was permitted
to remain part of Cappadocia, for it was regularly traversed
by the Cilician governor when he crossed into Campestris
Cilicia ; but Cicero calls it Cappadocian, though he had
his army encamped there. The Cappadocian king was
apparently found so submissive that his nominal rule over
Kybistra was no inconvenience.
From 56 to 50 three Dioeceses of Asia, Laodiceia or
Cibyra, Apameia, and Synnada, were attached to the
Cilician Province.^ The reason was evidently convenience.
The governor, landing at Ephesus, could conveniently hold
the assizes in those three cities, as he went along the great
highway to the East, which passed through them as well
as through Philomelium and Iconium. This arrangement
shows the paramount importance of the Province. Cilicia
was governed by consular, while Asia was usually admin-
istered by praetorian officers at this time.
It was the governor of Cilicia, not the governor of Asia,
who was brought into close relations with Galatia during
^ Justin, XXXVII I : he merely epitomises Pompeius Trogus, and
the spirit evaporates in an epitome. Appian, MtfAr., 105.
"^ They were Asian, demonstrably, 62-56 and 49-46.
io8 Historical Introduction.
this period, as we see from Cicero's language about Deio-
taros.
When the Civil War broke out, the importance of the
Cilician Provincia was at an end. Asia, as being nearer
the seat of war, resumed its ancient importance. There
was no leisure to think of foreign relations for many years.
The bounds of Rome in these regions shrank. Lands
which had been enrolled in a province were even given
over to dependent or client princes, implying that the over-
burdened empire was no longer fit to maintain order in
these outlying districts.
In these circumstances the three Phrygian Dioeceses,
Laodiceia, Apameia, and Synnada, were restored to Asia ; ^
and this arrangement continued in force from 50 onwards.
But the Philomelian Dioecesis was, as before, attached to
Cilicia along with the intermediate regions, Lycaonia and
Pisidic Phrygia. Thus, about 46 to 44, Cicero was beg-
ging the officials of Cilicia, Philippus and Gallus, to attend
to the affairs of his friend Egnatius, which his agent L.
Oppius at Philomelium found difficulty in managing.^ The
Philomelian assizes are called forum Lycaonium by Cicero,
and Pliny mentions that part of Lycaonia was in the same
conventus with Philomelium.^
The troubled period of the Civil Wars seems to have
1 Cicero, Fam., XIII 67, says pointedly that the three Asiatic
Dioeceses were thus shifted about, showing that the Philomelian or
Lycaonian Dioecesis was treated separately.
2 Cicero, Fam., XIII 43, 44, 73, 74. At the same time Cicero wrote
to Appuleius, proquaestor in Asia, asking him to attend to Egnatius's
affairs in that province, which were managed by his slave Anchialos,
Fam., XIII 45.
^ Cicero, Att., V 21, 9. Lycaonia . . . cum qua conveniunt Philomeli-
cnses, Pliny, Hist. Nat., V 25.
Section ii: Origin of the Province Galatia. 109
stirred up Antipater of Derbe to shake off the Roman
authority; already under Philippus he had been on bad
relations with his superior, and that governor had taken
his children as hostages for his good conduct.^ Cicero
wrote to Philippus interceding on behalf of Antipater, who
had formerly entertained him in some of his progresses
through the Cilician Province, 51-50. Afterwards matters
became worse, and Antipater became an open enemy of
Rome, which Strabo expresses when he calls him a brigand.
In B.C. 40, when Antony came to regulate the eastern
half of the empire, which had been placed under his care,
he gave to Amyntas, secretary of the late Deiotaros, a
new kingdom, comprising Pisidic Phrygia and Pisidia
generally. Great part of Pisidia was still practically in-
dependent, so that Amyntas's duty really was to preserve
order in this mountainous and disturbed region. Pisidian
Antioch must have been his capital, and from this time
onwards that city began to be important in the eastern
Roman world. Amyntas, like the other client kings of
this period, was a sort of chief constable for Rome ; a
Roman army could not be spared for this district, and the
king was free to construct an army of his own, and keep
the country quiet as best he could.
A similar kingdom was at the same time constructed
further east. Part of Lycaonia and Isauria and Cilicia
Tracheia^ was entrusted to Polemon of Laodiceia, an able
man, who henceforth played an important part in the
1 Perhaps the children of Antipater were permanently retained as
hostages by the provincial government; but Philippus seems to have
had them in his power after he left his province, Cicero, Fam., XIII
74-
2 Appian, Bell. Civ., V 75 ; cp. Strabo, pp. 569, 577.
no Historical Introduction.
eastern Roman world. Polemon was entrusted on the
Cilician frontier with the same task as Amyntas on the
Phrygian frontier. Iconium was probably Polemon's capi-
tal.^ How much of Cilicia Tracheia was given to Polemon
is uncertain, and probably was uncertain even to Antony
and to Polemon. The country had only been very im-
perfectly subdued ; many of the tribes had never seen a
Roman soldier or official, and were completely ignorant of
Roman ways. Polemon evidently was left to do the best
he could in his difficult and ill-defined realm.
Both these kingdoms are mere scraps out of the vast
Cilician Province. Rome had abandoned for the time her
duties in this region ; the Cilician Province shrank into
insignificance ; and new kings were permitted to rule parts
even of Campestris Cilicia.
Polemon had an interesting and remarkable career, the
vicissitudes of which throw light on the confused state of
inner Asia Minor at this time. He was the son of Zeno,
a rhetorician of Laodiceia, the great Phrygian city on the
Lycus, who had led the successful resistance to the Par-
thian inroad in B.C. 40. In reward for Zeno's services on
this occasion his son was promoted successively to the
kingdoms of Cilicia Tracheia and of Pontus, Armenia,
and Bosphorus. Though he did not, like Amyntas and
Deiotaros of Paphlagonia, desert his first patron Antony
before Actium, he was taken into favour by Augustus, and
passed a long and successful life in the Roman alliance.
He married Pythodoris, a rich lady of Tralles in Lydia,
whose mother was Antonia, daughter of the triumvir.
Thus the Roman rank and the name of Antonius was
1 Strabo, p. 568.
Section ii : Origin of the Province Galatia. 1 1 1
bequeathed to the sons of Polemon, though he was only
a Greek ; and his daughter, Tryphaina, played a part in
Pauline semi-historical legend.^
These and other kings, such as Herod in Samaria and
Idumaea, Kastor in Galatia, had all to pay a fixed tribute.
In 36 there was a fresh shuffle of the cards and the kings.
Kastor died, and his Galatian realm was given to Amyn^
tas, while his Paphlagonian dominions were left to his
brother Deiotaros. Amyntas retained his Phrygo-Pisidian
sovereignty ; and, if his enlarged realm was to be easily
manageable, evidently either part of the province Asia, or
else Iconium and the old Lycaonian Tetrarchy, must be
given to him, so that Galatia might be joined to Pisidia.
The latter course was taken, and Polemon lost Iconium
and Lycaonia. At the same time his Cilician dominion
was transferred to Cleopatra, and he was made king of
Pontus, to which was added Armenia Minor in 35 as a
reward for his services in the Parthian War.
A great Asiatic kingdom was now constructed for
Antony's favoured Cleopatra ; ^ and a Cleopatran era
was instituted of which the year i was reckoned to end
on 31st August, B.C. 36. These changes were therefore
made during the earlier months of that year.
The kingdoms of Amyntas and Polemon could be justi-
fied as attempts to provide a substitute for Roman rule
amid its present difficulties. Antony did not desire to
occupy his soldiers on the east in case of trouble from his
western rival, Augustus. But the kingdom of Cleopatra
was merely the result of Antony's infatuation.
Amyntas did not neglect the arts of peace. He had
^ See the Church in the Roman Empire, ch. XVI.
" See Kromayer in Hermes, 1894, p. 574 f.
TI2 Historical Introduction.
vast flocks of sheep in the great plains that extend between
Iconium, North Galatia and Lake Tatta.
Preparations for the final struggle between Antony and
Augustus interfered with the progress of affairs on the
plateau of Asia Minor. Amyntas and Polemon both
served at Actium under their lord, Antony. But both
were pardoned and confirmed in their power by Augustus,
who doubtless recognised their ability and their readiness
to serve him as well as they had served Antony. Augustus
even gave to Amyntas the country of Cilicia Tracheia,
which Cleopatra had held since 36.
Amyntas was now entrusted with the whole task of
maintaining order on the south side of the plateau, which
at first, 39-36, had been shared with Polemon. He was
to keep the peace among the mountaineers of Taurus,
who were accustomed to raid the more fertile lands north
of the mountains. Pamphylia had been added in 36 to his
dominions, so that he had the mountains between his
hands and was able to attack from either side. He
vigorously set about his task of introducing the Roman
peace into the mountains by the Roman method of war,
and overcame Antipater, the lord of Derbe and Laranda,
who seems to have set up as an opposition prince.
He was, however, killed in B.C. 25 during a war with the
Homonades, a powerful tribe who inhabited the mountains
west of Isaura, around lake Trogitis (Seidi-Sheher-lake).
Augustus, thereupon, resolved to take into the Empire
great part of Amyntas's kingdom, as being now sufficiently
inured to Roman methods. He despatched Lollius (to
whom afterwards Horace addressed the eighth Ode of his
Fourth Book) to organise the new Province, which included
all the northern and western part of the kingdom.
SECTION 12.
HISTORY OF THE PROVINCE GALATIA, b.c. 25— a.d. 50.
The history of the Province Galatia is a difficult and com-
plicated subject ; and the variation in its bounds is very
puzzling. It took the place which the Cilician Province
had filled under the later Republic : the growth of the
Roman power on this side was now concentrated in the
Galatic province. The relations of the Empire to the client-
states of Pontus, Paphlagonia and Cilicia Tracheia was part
of the Galatic sphere of duty. As those states were succes-
sively raised to the Roman standard of peace and order
through the exertions, the personal presence and the ever-
ready armies of their kings, they were one by one taken
into the Empire by being incorporated in the Province
Galatia. The history of that Province for almost a century
is " the history of Roman policy in its gradual advance
towards the Euphrates frontier, a long slow process, in
which the Roman genius was exerted to the utmost to
influence and impress, to educate and discipline, the popu-
lation of the various countries taken into the Province
Galatia".^ The foundation of the Galatian Churches is an
episode in the history of the Province ; and he that would
understand the " Galatian Question " aright must look at it
from that point of view.
1 Hastings, Diet, of the Bible, II 86.
8 (113)
1 1 4 Historical Introduction.
The complicacy of the history of this Province between
B.C. 25 and A.D. 72 is a proof of its importance in the
Roman policy. It resembles in that respect the history
of Cilicia Provincia between B.C. 80 and 50. But in A.D.
72 the importance of Galatia ceased ; and Cappadocia took
its place as the centre of Roman frontier policy. Cap-
padocia had been a Roman Province since A.D. 17 ; but
it was prematurely incorporated before it was ready for
strict Roman organisation, and it was placed only under a
procurator, who seems to have left the native organisation
undisturbed, and was probably chiefly concerned to see that
the proper taxes were paid.
In A.D. 72 Cappadocia was created a consular Province
with an army ; and the Galatic Province sank again into
comparative insignificance, being included in a joint Pro-
vince with Cappadocia until about A.D. 106, and thereafter
separated from it.
It is somewhat remarkable that during the century of
its political importance, the Galatic Province never con-
tained an army. Its formation was due to the defeat of
the Roman agent, King Amyntas, by the Homonades
(see p. 112); and Lollius, the first governor, must have
taken with him a body of troops to inaugurate the
provincial system. But the Homonades were left for a
number of years unpunished, and the Pisidian mountain-
eers to the west were far from orderly and peaceable, their
raids constituting a permanent danger. When at last an
army was needed, the Syrian army was employed ; and an
imperial legate was sent on a special mission to operate
with the troops of the Province Syria-Cilicia, though the
Homonades were far distant from the frontier of that
Province, divided from it by the realm of Archelaos, and
Section 12 : History of the Province Galatia. 1 15
pressing hard on the Galatian frontier. An official speci-
ally charged with this duty had to be sent, as his absence
outside of the territory of Syria-Cilicia was required for a
considerable time ; but his work was strictly part of the
Syrian Provincia or sphere of duty, as he was leading the
troops of that Province. He was therefore in the strict
and legal Roman sense Legatus Augi^sti Pro Praetore Pro-
vinciae Syriae et Ciliciae} His name was P. Sulpicius
Quirinius ; and the date of his command is approximately
given by the simultaneous operations conducted on the
Galatian side, where a series of garrisons {Coloniae) con-
nected by military roads with the military capital, Antioch
in Pisidian Phrygia, were established by Cornutus Aquila
in B.C. 6.
Otherwise Galatia was administered without a standing
army, though of course a few soldiers were needed there
for the ordinary purposes of order and government. The
police-system of the Empire was one of its weakest sides,
so that soldiers were needed for police and for revenue-
officers and on the great imperial estates ; also to act as
escort and ministers of the higher Roman officials, and so
on. It is true that that vast Empire was administered and
guarded with an astonishingly small army ; but, considering
that Galatia was so new as a Province and so close to
foreign and dangerous tribes, we can hardly understand
how it was left for nearly a century dependent on the
^ This has been pointed out in Christ Born in Beihlehem, ch. XI ;
and only a blindness to the real inner nature of the Roman provin-
cial system could suggest a doubt whether such a special mission
was consistent with Roman usage, or whether such a special officer
would be styled Legatus Syriae Provinciae ; those who doubt the
second point are forgetting the Roman sense of Provincia, and
taking it in our territorial sense.
ii6 Historical Introduction.
distant Syrian army in the event of any disturbance, internal
or external, unless we take into account the character of the
population and their loyalty.
The Gaulish tribes were certainly enthusiastically loyal.
The long wars side by side with Rome against Mithridates
had cemented a permanent feeling of friendship, the most
striking proof of which is that Augustus could take one of
Deiotaros's Roman-armed Galatian legions and turn it into
a Roman legion, calling it XXII Deiotariana. Other
causes described in Section 13 contributed to bind them
closely to Rome, and separate them from the Asiatic and
Greek races around them.
The non-Gaulish peoples in the rest of the Province were
kept loyal and orderly by two causes. In the first place,
the peace and comparatively good government of the
Empire made such a welcome change from the almost
ceaseless wars of the period B.C. 334-31, with the oppres-
sion and rapacity accompanying them, that the rule of
Augustus and his successors was welcomed as a direct gift
from heaven to wretched war-worn men. In the second
place, the temper of the Asia Minor peoples was essentially
quiet and obedient ; ^ and from the beginning of history to
the present day it has always been an easy task to maintain
peace and order among them. The people are always
capable of being roused to fanaticism ; but it requires a
strong stimulus to excite them; and, where the govern-
ment prevents such a stimulus being applied, and maintains
anything like justice, the population remains marvellously
quiet and submissive.
In these circumstances Galatia could safely be left with-
out a standing army.
1 See section 4 £.
Section 12 : History of the Province Gatatia. 1 1 7
The importance attached at first in the imperial policy
to the Galatic Province appears from a series of facts, small
indeed in themselves, but attesting the continued attention
paid to it by the Emperors. In the obscurity that envelops
this region, it is remarkable how many such small details
have become known to us.
The conquered Homonades were incorporated in the
Province,^ and the effort to pacify the southern frontier is
probably connected with the foundation of the Colonia
Caesareia Antiochia^ and Colonia Julia Felix Gemina
Lustra, with four others towards the western side of the
Pisidian frontier. This brought a considerable Latin-
speaking population to Antioch and Lystra, and the
municipal government in both cities was remodelled after
the Roman fashion. Duoviri, Quaestors and Aediles took
the place of Strategoi or Archontes ; lictors marched in
front of these Roman magistrates ; decuriones were sub-
stituted for the Boule ; the language used in the municipal
deeds was Latin (as we see in the inscriptions); the law
administered among the cives Romani in the Colonies was
Roman ; the personal names became in large proportion
Roman. ^ If we had as many names of Lystran and
Antiochian as we have of Corinthian converts, we should
doubtless find quite as large a proportion of Roman names
in the two Galatian as in the Grecian Colonia.*
This event was a marked step in the Roman isation of
^ See C. I. L., Ill 6799, in their territory, dedicated to Afrinus,
governor of Galatia under Claudius.
2 It may possibly have been founded earlier, being called Caesareia
while the others are called Augusta ; but, if so, it is likely to have
been strengthened at this time.
^ See section ig.
* See Hastings' Diet, of the Bible, I, p. 480.
1 1 8 Historical Introduction.
Southern Galatia. Neither of these two cities had previ-
ously ranked among the greater cities of Asia Minor ; and
Lystra, in fact, had been an utterly insignificant place.
Now Antioch was a Latin city, and its citizens had Latin
rights. Considering what dignity and practical advantages
lay in the Roman or Latin citizenship, the presence in
Antioch of so large a proportion of cives gave it a position
in the land that nothing else could have conferred upon
it. Moreover, it was the military centre of the provincial
frontier defence on the south ; and it was all the more im-
portant because there was no army in the Province, and
the defence lay with the burghers of the Coloniae.
The two Coloniae were connected by a "royal road,"
an imperial highway, which is mentioned in the Acts of
Paul and Thekla, and which in an administrative point of
view must have been a most important road, until the
thorough pacification of Pisidia, and the incorporation in
the Empire of the whole mountainous country between the
Provinces Galatia and Cilicia in A.D. 72, did away with the
need for frontier defence. Then Lystra sank back into
comparative insignificance, and the use of Latin declined,
as we see in the later inscriptions.
It is important to observe that the dignity and rank of
these cities depended, entirely in the case of Lystra, and
mainly in the case of Antioch, on their Roman character.
Apart from that they were of little or no consequence.
With that they were more honourable than their neigh-
bours. No one who has taken any interest in the history
of Asia Minor at this period will doubt that the Roman
feeling was strong in these cities. The mutual rivalry of
the cities in the East is familiar to every student. They
wrangled for precedence, until even the Emperor was
Section 12: History of the Province Galatia. 119
appealed to for a decision ; they invented titles of honour
for themselves to outshine their rivals and appropriated
the titles invented by their rivals. In Asia, Smyrna, Ephe-
sus and Pergamos vied with one another, in Bithynia,
Nikomedia and Nicaea, in Cilicia, Tarsus and Anazarbos.
In Macedonia a trace of the rivalry between Philippi and
Amphipolis is visible in Acts XVI \2} So in South
Galatia it may be taken as certain that there was keen
rivalry between the chief cities. Antioch and Lystra,
strong in their Roman rank, could congratulate themselves
on outshining Iconium, the old capital. See § LIII.
Yet in face of these facts, which are familiar to all who
have studied the actual history of Asia Minor, it has been
seriously maintained by some Biblical critics in the last
year or two that about A.D. 50, the natural and hardly
avoidable address for an audience in these two cities would
have been " Phrygians " and " Lycaonians ". To see the
relation of these national names to the existing situation
in South Galatia, we must observe the implication.
We must observe that a non-Roman people, and an
individual who is not a Roman or Latin citizen, could
belong to the empire only by virtue of belonging to a
Province. The status of each non-Roman person in the
Empire was that of a " provincial" ; and he was desig-
nated as a member of the Roman Empire, not by his
nation, but by his Province. His nation was a non-Roman
idea ; so long as a person is described as a Phrygian or
a Lycaonian, he is thereby described as outside of the
Empire. In the Roman theory, the foreigner, the enemy,
and the slave, are related ideas. If the Roman citizen can
1 St. Paul the Trav., p. 206.
I20 Historical Introduction.
get a foreigner into his power, the latter thereby at once
becomes a slave : the foreigner has no rights and is merely
regarded as an enemy, except in so far as by a special
treaty Rome has guaranteed certain rights to all members
of his nation. The slave was designated by his national
name as Phryx or Lycao or Syrus : so was a horse. But
the Roman soldier was designated by his home in the
Empire, i.e., either his Province, or his city as one of the
units composing the Province : only the marines, classiarii,
who were originally slaves, were regularly designated after
the servile fashion.^
When an audience of Antiochians and Lystrans was
addressed by a courteous orator, he would certainly not
address those citizens of the Coloniae by the servile desig-
nation as Phrygians or Lycaonians. If he sought to please
them, he would designate them either as Galatae, i.e.,
members of the Roman Empire as being members of the
Province Galatia, or as Coloni, citizens of Roman Coloniae,
which would be an even more honorific term. An inscrip-
tion ^ of one of the Pisidian Coloniae, Comama, opens with
the address, in Latin and in Greek, " To the Coloni," im-
plying the pride of that obscure town in the designation.
Much more would Antioch and her sister Lystra ^ demand
some such Roman address, instead of the national designa-
tion, Phrygians and Lycaonians, which ruled them out as
non-Roman and foreign and barbarian : a Lycaonian, in
^ Mommsen has discussed the subject with his usual logical pre-
cision and wide knowledge from several points of view. See his
papers in Hermes, 1884, p. 33 ff, and in Festgabe fur G. Beseler, p. 255
fF. Also Mitteis, Reichsrecht und Volksrecht, p. 358 ff.
^ See American Journal of Archaeology, 1888, p. 264.
^ See section 21.
Section 12: History of the Province Galatia. 121
the Roman view, was either an enemy outside, or a slave
inside, the Empire.
In B.C. 5 great part of Paphlagonia was taken into the
Galatic Province. Paphlagonia, which was in close alliance
with Galatia during part at least of the second century B.C.,
was conquered by Mithridates and Nikomedes of Bithynia
about B.C. no; and the conquerors divided it. Pompey,
in the settlement of 64, retained the partition, and appar-
ently gave the western half to l^ylaimenes, the eastern to
Attalos.
The connection of Paphlagonia with Galatia is shown by
the facts that part (probably the western) was called " the
country of Gaizatorix," ^ and that the eastern with its
capital Gangra was governed by Kastor 40-36, and then
by his brother Deiotaros Philadelphos ^ until B.C. 5, when
it passed to the Romans,
The relation of Paphlagonia to Galatia is similar to that
of northern and western Lycaonia, as we saw in Sections
8, 10, In each case the strong Galatian state tended to
swallow up the weaker state on its frontier.
In B.C. 2 an addition on the north-eastern frontier was
made to Galatia.^ There was there a small state carved
out of Pontus, which Antony or Augustus had granted to a
Gaul of tetrarchic family named Ateporix ; it comprised a
village called Karana, formerly subject to Zela, which was
now formed into a city by concentrating there the people
of the surrounding territory. This was now taken into the
^ Strabo, p. 562.
2 So M. Theod. Reinach, R&v. Numism., 1891, p. 395. Deiotaros
married Adobogiona (perhaps daughter of Mithridates and grand-
daughter of the older Adobogiona, p. loi).
3 Date : see Rev. Etudes Grecqucs, 1894, p. 251.
122 HistoHcal Introduction.
Empire, and Karana was re-named SebastopoHs in honour
of its new rank.
Along with this accession came the more important
territory of Amasia, formerly the capital of the Pontic
kingdom ; apparently it was for some reason taken away
from King Polemon, to whom it had been given in B.C. 36.
Gazelonitis (except its sea-board) was also probably annexed
now to the Galatic Province, which thus comprised a con-
siderable part of Pontus.
Tiberius, as is well known, made a point of preserving
Augustus's arrangement with the least possible change ; but
Galatia attracted some attention. In Pisidia, south-east
from Antioch, was a tribe named Orondeis, whose former
tribal organisation was now changed into the city organisa-
tion of the ordinary Graeco-Roman type : ^ in other words,
a city was founded, and part of the tribe was concentrated
in it after the fashion of Greek municipalities. This city,
of course, was enlarged from one of the tribal villages. The
name of the village had been Pappa or Papa : it now
became Tiberiopolis ; but the old name returned, first
alongside of, and after a time instead of, the new title.
In 34-35 the territory of Comana Pontica, one of the
greatest priestly centres in Asia Minor, was annexed to
the Empire. It had been ruled by a Gaul, Dyteutos (grand-
son of Domnilaos), about whom Strabo tells a romantic
tale. His elder brother had been condemned to death
along with his father Adiatorix for massacring the Romans
resident in Heracleia Pontica. Dyteutos claimed to be
the elder : the real elder would not permit Dyteutos to take
^ This was a characteristic process in the imperial period. The
tribal organisation was much less developed and " civilised " than the
city.
Section 12 : History of the Province Galatia. 123
his place. Thus arose a contest between the brothers, each
claiming to die for the other. Dyteutos survived, and was
made by Augustus high priest of Comana, an office which
he held at least till A.D. 19. He or perhaps his son pro-
bably died in 34-35, and Tiberius annexed the territory.
Claudius gave his name to five Galatic cities, Claudio-
Seleuceia in Pisidia, Claudio-Derbe and Claud-Iconium ^
in Lycaonia, Germanicopolis-Gangra and Neoclaudiopolis-
Andrapa in Paphlagonia. These honorary names were,
doubtless, connected with some new arrangements intro-
duced into the respective districts. Derbe was the frontier
city from 41 onwards, and a station for customs on goods
entering the Province.^
Nero in 63 annexed the country called Pontus Pole-
moniacus, incorporating it in the Province Galatia. Pontus
consisted of three parts: (i) The coast on each side of
Amisos, in the province Bithynia-Pontus : (2) The kingdom
of Polemon II, grandson of Polemon and the noble Queen
Pythodoris, called for a century afterwards Pontus Pole-
moniacus ; (3) The Galatic territory of Pontus, called
Pontus Galaticus, a name which lasted even after Pontus
Polemoniacus was incorporated in the Galatian Province.
This sketch brings out the real sterling strength of the
Galatic element in central Asia Minor. Not merely their
narrower old Galatia, but most of the surrounding countries,
were under Celtic rule before they came into the Roman
Empire. These facts in their entirety show how pre-emi-
nently the Galatic realm must have occupied the Roman
attention. All others but the Galatae were an Asiatic
^This act is misrepresented by some Biblical critics as the
establishment of a Roman Colonia Iconium, see p. 218.
* \t.\u\v Steph. Byz. See section 22.
124 Historical Introduction.
mob : the Galatae were men, chiefs, kings and rulers. Only
Polemon was excepted, and Polemon was closely connected
with the Antonian family.
The fate of Tracheiotis or Cilicia Tracheia was closely
connected with the Galatic sphere of duty. When the
Province was created, Tracheiotis was given to Archelaos,
King of Cappadocia ; and Strabo says that the same extent
of Tracheiotic territory was ruled by Cleopatra, by Amyntas,
and by Archelaos. Archelaos was degraded and died soon
after in A.D. 17 ; but even before that, about A.D. 11, owing
to his imbecility, Augustus took two districts, Kennatis
and Lalassis, from him, and gave them to Ajax, son of
Teucer, of an ancient priestly dynastic family.
In 17 Archelaos II was allowed by Tiberius to rule part
of his father's Cilician kingdom, while Cappadocia was
made a Procuratorial Province. The rest of Tracheiotis,
including Olba, Lalassis and Kennatis, was given to M.
Antonius Polemon in 17 or soon after. Ajax, who struck
coins in his fifth year under Tiberius, had probably
died ; and Polemon, Asiatic dynast and Roman citizen,
son of Polemon I of Pontus, descended from Antony the
Triumvir, ruled and coined money for eleven years or
more.
In 35 Archelaos instituted a census and valuation after
the Roman fashion (doubtless acting under Roman orders,
like Herod in Palestine B.C. 8-6), which provoked a rebellion
among his subjects the Kietai.^ As Polemon is not men-
1 Only part of Ketis or Kietis was ruled by Archelaos, evidently the
northern part with its centre at Hiera-polis Koropissos (see Cities
and Bishoprics of Phrygia, p. 11 note). The southern part had its
centre at Olba, the city of Polemon. On the census see Christ Born
at Bethlehem, ch. 8.
Section 12 : History of the Province Galatia. 1 2 5
tioned, he was probably dead, and perhaps Archelaos had
succeeded to his power.^
In 37 Antiochus IV of Commagene was granted part of
Tracheiotis by Caligula ; and, though he seems soon to
have been disgraced, Claudius in 41 restored and enlarged
his Tracheiotic realm. The government of the two Cap-
padocian kings seems to have been feeble ; and a more
energetic ruler was needed. Part of Lycaonia, viz., Laranda
and the territory around, was given to Antiochus, who was
reckoned as king " of the Lycaonians ".
Laranda had hitherto been part of the Roman Province,
and supplied soldiers to the Roman legions.^ But, though
a Lycaonian city, it is the true centre for the administration
of Tracheiotis, because from it radiate the roads that lead
across Tracheiotis to the coast ;^ and, apparently, the
necessity for assigning it to the king of Tracheiotis was
now recognised. Coins with legend ATKAO'^n^\ were
struck by Antiochus, evidently at Laranda. Derbe now
became the frontier city of Roman territory and a customs
station ; and its new importance was marked with the title
Claud io-Derbe.
Antiochus proved a vigorous ruler. He founded in Trach-
eiotis a large number of cities, two named Claudiopolis a
Germanicopolis, an Eirenopolis, two named Antiocheia, an
lotapa after his queen ; and his reign marks an important
step in the spread of Grasco-Roman civilisation in that
wild and mountainous region.* So successful was he, that
1 There is, however, no certain proof that Archelaos was king of
the whole of the wide Ketian or Kietian territory in 36.
2 C. I. L., Ill 2709, 2818, with Mommsen's commentary on p. 281.
3 Historical Geogr. of Asia Minor, p. 361.
* Revue Numismatique, 1894, p. i6g f.
126 Historical Introduction.
Vespasian recognised Tracheiotis as fit for incorporation
in the Empire, and Antiochus was degraded in A.D. 72.
Note. — North Galatian Theorists on Polemon.
We have said, p. 4, that the North Galatian Theory rests
only on want of knowledge of the facts of Asia Minor in
the time of Paul ; thus, e.g., in the latest edition of Meyer-
Sieffert, 1899, p. 8, we find the assertion that Polemon's
territory had by that time come under Roman ownership
(Polemon's Gebiet unter rom. Herrschaft gekommen war).
In truth, by far the greater part of Polemon's first kingdom
was still governed by king Antiochus, and practically the
whole of his second kingdom was still ruled by his grand-
son Polemon II.
I have been blamed for unreasonably expecting theo-
logians to be familiar with all the most recent historical
investigations ; but it may surely be expected that they will
refrain from repeating historical blunders and founding their
theories of Pauline history on those false premises. There
are a dozen works about Polemon, from Waddington's
Melanges de Nutnismatique, II, p. 109 ff., onwards, any of
which would be sufficient to show the erroneousness of
Meyer-Sieffert's statement. There remain many serious
controversies about the various persons, Polemon I, M.
Antonius Polemon, Polemon II, on which we cannot enter.
We have given the views which seem established as the most
probable; and Mr. G. F. Hill will soon publish a detailed
argument demonstrating independently the view advocated
here and in Hastings' Diet, of the Bible, art. Galatia.
It would be an endless task to correct every historical
misstatement about Asia Minor made by the North
Galatian Theorists. But it goes beyond the bounds of
Section 12 : History of the Province Galatia. 127
ordinary mistakes such as we wink at in theologians with
a fixed prejudice, when Meyer-Siefifert, p. 1 1 note, state
that Strabo wrote before the Roman Province Galatia was
constituted, and Dion Cassius wrote after it had been dis-
solved. Did Meyer-Siefifert fancy that Galatia was consti-
tuted in 25 A.D., or did they forget when Strabo wrote?
Galatia was constituted about forty years before Strabo
composed his history. Galatia was much smaller when
Dion wrote, but even then it was a huge Province.
SECTION 13.
CIVILISATION OF GALATIA UNDER THE ROMAN EMPIRE.
In our sketch of the history of the Province Galatia,
we have reached the period when Paul and Barnabas
entered it. We must now state the evidence showing the
character of the southern and northern parts of the Province
respectively.
It is, of course, not open to dispute that Paul founded
churches in four cities of South Galatia, viz., Antioch,
Iconium, Derbe and Lystra. The only point in dispute is
whether Paul founded also another set of churches in North
Galatia. The South Galatian theory is that no churches
were founded by Paul in North Galatia ; and that when he
speaks of the churches of Galatia, he means the four
churches in the south of the Province Galatia. The North
Galatian theory is that Paul also founded churches in
North Galatia, and that, when he speaks of his churches of
Galatia, he means only the churches of North Galatia, and
excludes the four South Galatian cities.
The opinion that Paul included in his "churches of
Galatia " both those of South and others of North Galatia
is not held by any ; and is, in fact, barred by the conditions
of the question.^ On this we need not enter.
1 In his admirable Einleitung, 1897, Prof. Th. Zahn finds in the
Churches of Galatia a certain North-Galatian part, but only second-
(128)
Section / j : Civilisation of Galatia. 129
To the scholar who studies the society of the eastern
Roman provinces, North Galatia stands apart and isolated
from the cities of the southern part of the Province. Re-
serving South Galatia for the final Sections, we now gather
together all that is known about society and civilisation in
Imperial North Galatia.
We saw in the sketch of its history, the failure of
Greek civilisation to establish itself there, and the strength
of the reaction towards the Celtic national character. It
has never proved easy to eliminate the national genius of
a Celtic race ; and the Celtic element in North Galatia,
though numerically inferior, was immeasurably superior in
practical strength to the older Phrygian element.
A convincing proof of the essential contrast in character
between Galatia and the Graeco-Asiatic Provinces that
bordered on it, lies in the societies of Hellenes which formed
a feature in all of them. These Hellenes were really
Hellenised people of the province, and not as a rule Greeks
by blood or descent ; and in many provinces the Hellenes
were formed into associations, meeting in the worship of
the Emperors. In Asia and in Bithynia the Association of
Hellenes was the Provincial Association, the Koinon of the
cities of the province. The titles, " the Hellenes in (the
Province) Asia," "the Koinon of the Hellenes in Asia,"
are precisely equivalent to " the Koinon of Asia," and the
head of " the Hellenes in Asia " was the Asiarch ^ or high
ary and unimportant : to him the important and determining element
lies in the four South-Galatian Churches. In proportion as that
North-Galatian element is insignificant, it withdraws itself from
consideration, and the self-contradictoriness of the view escapes
notice.
^We do not enter on controversies as to the powers, etc., of the
Asiarch.
9
130 Historical Introduction.
priest of the Province. Similarly the Koinon of the
Hellenes in Bithynia was simply the Koinon of Bithynia,
the assembly of representatives of the cities of Bithynia,
of which the head and president was the Bithynarch. This
is very clearly put by Dion Cassius, LI 20, where he says
that " Augustus permitted the non-citizens, Xenoi, (accord-
ing them the title Hellenes) to erect temples to him,
those of Asia at Pergamos, and those of Bithynia at
Nikomedeia ".
But in Galatia the Koinon of the Province, or the Koinon
of Galatians,^ was distinct and separate from the Association
of the Hellenes. The Koinon was apparently organised
on the basis of the three tribes ^ (though details are quite
unknown), and its president was the Galatarch. The
Association of Hellenes had as its president the Helladarch;
and was doubtless formed of representatives from the poleis,
the cities so far as they had adopted the Greek fashion,
sent either by the cities officially or by special societies in
the cities. There is no evidence as to the date when the
Association of Hellenes in Galatia was formed ; but none
of the inscriptions mentioning it are earlier than about
A.D. 1 50, whereas the Koinon of Galatians was organised by
Augustus,
As to the organisation and law of household and family
^To Koivoi/ YoKaxiitv in first century inscriptions, C. I. G., 4039, Citi&s
and Bish. of Phr., pt. II, p. 648, no. 558 : to Koivov tS>v raXaTciv in C. I.
G., 4016, 4017 (third or late second century): Koivov TaXarias on coins
of Trajan.
^edvT] : in C. I. G., 4039, the only authority of much consequence,
"the three tribes" and "the two tribes" are often mentioned: "the
two tribes" apparently held a joint meeting at Pessinus, while "the
three tribes" met on certain festivals in Ancyra. The Trocmi were
far less civilised than the " two tribes ".
Section ij : Civilisation of Galatia. 131
in Galatia under the Romans, the two leading modem
authorities have pronounced a decisive judgment.
Professor Mitteis, speaking of the slow and imperfect
adoption of Hellenic civilisation in inner Asia Minor, says
that " the Galatians especially constituted a distinct and
exclusive stock of the population " through the preserva-
tion of its language at least in the early imperial period,^
and the continuance of Celtic customs.
Mommsen points out that, though the Phrygian religion
was adopted by the Galatians, ''nevertheless, even in the
Roman Province of Galatia, the internal organisation was
predominantly Celtic. The fact that even under Pius, A.D.
1 38- 16 1, the strict paternal power foreign to Hellenic law
subsisted in Galatia is a proof of this from the sphere of
private law."
The last sentence refers to the evidence of the Roman
lawyer Gaius, I 55, who, speaking of the characteristic
Roman custom that the father had absolute power over his
children (even to life and death), says that there are hardly
any others among whom this right exists, with the one
exception of the Galatians, quoting from a rescript of
Hadrian the recognition of this Galatian custom. Caesar ^
mentions the same custom as ruling among the tribes of
Gaul.
Such power of a father over his children was repugnant
to the Greeks ; and its existence in Galatia shows how
fundamentally un-Hellenic was the social system of that
country even in the second century after Christ
^ He means the first two centuries, and leaves the question as
to the authority of Jerome (see p. 155), to be discussed by others,
Reichsrecht und Volksrecht, p. 23.
^ Bell. Gall., VI 19 (false reference in Mitteis, p. 24 note).
132 Historical Introduction.
Here the questions may be asked by those who have
not specially studied the Roman provincial system, whether
the Galatian law would be made uniform throughout the
Province, and whether the Roman law would not be intro-
duced in the Province in place of the old native law. Neither
would be done : both were contrary to the Roman system.
Each district was administered according to its private law
and hereditary usage (as is pointed out in the beginning
of Section 17). Violent or sudden changes in society were
shunned by Roman policy.
The old custom that the chiefs and leading men feasted
the tribesmen, which flourished from the beginning of the
Galatian state,^ was still practised in the reign of Tiberius.
The public gifts and donations of leading Gauls about A.D.
10-30 are recorded in a fragmentary inscription. Such
inscriptions are common also in Asia ; and a comparison
of Asian and Galatian inscriptions shows the difference of
manners in the two Provinces. The chief Galatian enter-
tainment is a banquet to the people : the gifts of almost
every donor begin with a public feast ; sometimes it is
stated that the feast was given to the two tribes at Pessinus,
sometimes to the three tribes (meeting, of course, in Ancyra),
generally a " public feast" alone ^ is given.
After the feasts are often mentioned shows of gladiators
and combats of wild beasts {venationes) after the Roman
fashion ; these were not much to the Greek taste, and were
not very popular in the Province Asia, nor very common
there : inscriptions show that gladiators were sometimes
shown in the great Asian cities, but were far less popular
and common than games of the Greek style.
^ See above, p. 79. ^ 8i]fio6oivia.
Section ij : Civilisation of Galatia. 133
Thereafter, distributions of oil are mentioned. These
were after the Greek fashion, and are the commonest form
of pubHc hberahty in Asian inscriptions; but the lavish
use of oil was universal in the Mediterranean lands, and does
not prove much for Galatian imitation of Greek customs.
The characteristic point lies in the games that were given.
These were almost always of the Roman and bloody type.
An athletic contest is mentioned only once. Chariot races
and horse races were commoner, but these were by that
time as characteristic of Rome as of Greece. What was
aimed at by the Galatian donors was clearly Circensian
games of the Roman style. Bull-fights, which were said
to be of Thessalian origin, but were regarded as un-Hellenic
and barbaric by the true Greeks, are several times mentioned.
The least Hellenic among Greek sports is the one which
the Galatians patronised, for it was more after the Roman
sanguinary style.^
Hecatombs also are often mentioned among the gifts.
These were undoubtedly great sacrifices in the Imperial
religion practised by the Koinon of the Galatians, Heca-
tombs were no longer a Greek custom, and are hardly
mentioned in the inscriptions of the thoroughly Hellenised
cities. Probably these Galatian hecatombs are a mild and
civilised representative of the Celtic and early Galatian
custom of human sacrifices on a gigantic scale (see p. 78).
Thus under Tiberius, the spectacular side of society, the
shows under the patronage of the Koinon, are mainly of
Celtic or of Roman, not of Greek style. And later inscrip-
tions of the Pessinuntine State are similar.
In the tribal organisation lay the essence of the Celtic
^ M, Perrot well states this, d& Galatia Prov. Rom.., p, 85,
134 Historical Introduction.
character as it worked itself out in practical society. Where
the Celtic people has created any organisation, it gives to
it the tribal character. The Celtic Church, as it temporarily
ruled in Northern England and Scotland, rises to one's
mind (in the brilliant sketch, for example, of J. R. Green).
Its strength and its weakness lay in the loose, but free, tribal
system.
The Romans did not attempt to destroy the tribal system
in Galatia. Not merely were they always unwilling to
force sudden and violent changes on the subject peoples ;
they also saw that the tribal system was the antithesis of
Hellenism, and they were not at first eager to make Hel-
lenism absolutely supreme in Asia, There were only two
alternatives in the last days of the free Galatian state : it
must either be Celtic, or it must yield to the pressure of the
Greek ocean that surrounded it on three sides.
In other Provinces of the Roman State the fiction was
usually maintained that there was only one " tribe " or
" nation ".^ Even in provinces which were composed of
many distinct nations, such as Asia,^ the official form ad-
mitted only one "nation," viz., the Roman idea, the Province:
in other words, the " nation " officially was the Province.
"The Nation Asia" (^ ' Aala to edvov TfKToadyav.
^ Hitherto it was weak in Pessinus, see pp. 55, 62, 73 f.
2 C. I. G., 4085 ; Athen. Mittheilungen, 1897, P- 44 (Kbrte).
* See p. 132. * See p. 74.
Section /j; Civilisation of Galatia. 141
Koinon of the Galatians,
Koifoi' YoLKarmv.
Under Vespasian, 69-79, and Nerva, 96-98, coins with the
full name and title of the Roman governor, and the name
of Ancyra half-hidden in monogram, were struck ; similar
coins under Titus, 79-81, are mentioned, with KO ' TAA ' in
place of the city name ; and under Trajan, 98-117, similar
coins with the Roman governor and the full title Kowov
raXarlafi, but without the city name, were struck.
Under Pius, i38-i6i,the fully developed Greek fashion —
Of the Metropolis Ancyra,
was introduced and permanently fixed.
In inscriptions composed in name of the city, a similar
practice was observed. Those of the later second and third
centuries are in the name of Metropolis Ancyra ; but in the
early second century the title runs (C. I. G., 401 1) : —
Metropolis of Galatia Imperial Tectosagan Anc)a'a,
J] fjLTjTpvnoKis rrfs TaXarlas 2f/3acrT^ TfKTOcrdycov "AyKvpa ',
earlier still the form —
Senate and People of the Imperial Tectosages,
r] ^ovXt) Koi 6 Brjuos "Sit^aarqvmv TfKTOtrdycoi/.
At Tavium the legend —
Of the Imperial Trocmi,
was regular in the first century, and under Pius. Coins are
very rare from 100 to 200. Then under Severus and Cara-
calla they are numerous with —
Of the Imperial Trocmi Tavians,
'2e^aaTT)vci>v TpoKfiav TaoviavS>Vj
and also the pure Greek style Taoviavwv. Later coins
hardly occur.
In the first century B.C. rare coins reading TaovUov occur.
142 Historical Introduction,
of the pure Greek style. These point to some isolated
Greek influence at work in Eastern Galatia ; and we 're-
member that Graeco-Pontic influence was strong in Galatia
for a time, and would be strongest in Tavium.
These facts show how long the tribal idea continued
dominant in Galatia. Only after the Greek style of title
for the city had become the regular official form, are we
justified in saying that the Greek manners and customs
were dominant in the cities: i.e., at Ancyra about 150,
at Pessinus about 165, at Tavium about 205. Naturally
there was a Hellenised element in the cities from an early
period, but it became the dominant element about that
time.
If such are the dates in the three great cities, what must
we say about the rustic districts and the villages, which are
found as cities and bishoprics in the fourth century, but
whose very names are sometimes unknown in the second
century? It is certainly quite unjustifiable to speak of
Greek manners, Greek civilisation, Greek ways of thinking
among them about a.d. 50.
As to the constitution of the Galatian cities, Ancyra and
Pessinus are the only two about which any evidence has
been preserved. They are the two that were earliest
Hellenised ; and the inscriptions which give evidence are
almost all of the late Hellenising period.
Three characteristics are at once evident : —
I. The strong dissimilarity in almost every respect to
the Hellenised cities of the Province Asia. Archons,
Agoranomoi and Agonothetai are almost the only Greek
titles that occur, probably the Agoranomoi are Roman
aediles (p. 143), while the Agonothetai were presidents of
Circensian games (p. 133), not of Greek sports.
Section ij : Civilisation of Galatia. 143
2. The resemblance in many points to the Hellenised
cities of Bithynia-Pontus and the Euxine coasts, e.g.^
Astynomoi, Politographoi.^
These facts show that, as might have been expected, the
Galatian cities were in far closer relations with the cities of
Bithynia-Pontus than of Asia. We notice in corroboration
of this that the resident strangers mentioned in Galatian
inscriptions are two from Nikomedeia, C. I. G., 4077, Bull.
Corr. Hell., VII, p. 27 ; two from Sinope, /t>«r«. Hell Stud.,
1899, p. 58; one from Byzantium, Mordtmann, Mann.
Ancyr., p. 22; but none from Asia. See p. 154.
3. Roman facts and analogies, so rare in the Province
Asia, are very numerous in Ancyra. Even the comitium ^
is mentioned there. Each town tribe ^ met separately and
passed its own decrees, like the Vici in Colonia Antiocheia :
the Phylarch of the town tribe was an important official,
corresponding to the Roman magister vici. The title " Son
of the Phyle " takes the place of the Asian compliment,
"Son of the City".
Eirenarchs, who occur everywhere in Asia as in Galatia,
were responsible more to the Roman officers than to the
city administration. There is an extraordinarily large pro-
portion of Latin inscriptions and of Latin names among
the people. Hence the agoranomoi, who are so often men-
tioned, are more likely to be in reality Roman aediles
than strictly Greek magistrates (as they were in Asia).
The chief results may now be summed up as follows.
1 No Astynomoi are mentioned in Asia, and only once the noun
Politographia (in a Latin inscription of Nakoleia, C. I. L., Ill 6998).
^ C. I. G., 4019 read iv Kofieria.
* ^vX^, not Z6vos.
144 Historical Introduction.
The Gauls of Galatia were brought in contact chiefly with
three classes : the Phrygian inhabitants of Galatia, the Hel-
lenised peoples of Asia Minor, and the Romans. They
learned much from all of them.
From the Phrygians they adopted their religion, adding
to it certain Celtic elements. Further, they coalesced with
them into a single people. The amalgamation became
much more thorough after Galatia ceased to be a sovereign
power, and became a mere Province of the Roman Empire.
The governing Romans treated all Galatians as practically
equal ; and valued most those who were most useful to
them. The privileges of the Gaulish aristocracy could not
be long maintained under a foreign government, except in
so far as they were supported either by wealth and landed
property^ or by natural ability. The domination of the
aristocratic caste came to an end when Galatia became a
Roman Province, and with it the broad line of separation
was rapidly obliterated.
From the Hellenes of Asia Minor they adopted a second
language,'^ along with many educated customs and arts.
The Oecumenical Association of athletes and Dionysiac
artists, known also widely over the eastern provinces, began
to appear in Ancyra and Pessinus in the second century ;
and along with it appeared the Society of Hellenes of
Galatia ; and more attention was then paid to the Greek
style of games. But the Hellenes whom they took as
models and teachers were not of Pergamenian Asia but
of the Black Sea coasts.
From the Romans they learned most of the arts and
devices of administration. Their cities adopted the Greek
1 See p. 145 f. ^ See section 14.
Section ij : Civilisation of Galatia. 145
name polls} but they were Roman more than Greek in
type ; and the name ttoXi? was used only because they
had Greek as their official language. If they have more
resemblance to the Pontic than the Asian cities, we must
remember that the Pontic cities were more Roman in type
than the Asian cities, where Hellenism was so old and
deep-rooted.
Under all these foreign elements, however, there lay a
fundamental substratum of true Celtic tribal character in
the family, the society, and the town centre, as Mommsen
and Mitteis have recognised.^ It is not until about A.D.
160 that it becomes justifiable to speak of Ancyra and
Pessinus as, in the strictest sense, cities of the Graeco-Roman
type : and the change occurred even later in Tavium.
Before that time these towns were rather Galatic- Roman
tribal centres, using Greek as the official language. That
character was, of course, quite consistent with a high degree
of splendour and magnificence : there were great towns
both in European Gallia ^ and in Asiatic Galatia,
We should be glad to know more about the actual
condition of those tribal centres ; but more exploration is
needed in order to furnish evidence. Clearly, so long as
there were only single tribal centres, the other places known
by name in the territory could only be villages. But when
the Greek city idea was adopted about A.D. 150-200, the
more important villages had the opportunity open to them
of developing into cities.
M. Perrot points out one interesting fact about North
Galatia, which is characteristic of a country containing a
1 It appears thrice in C. I. G., 4039 (v. Perrot, Expl. Arch, de la Gal.,
p. 261 f.), A.D. 15-37, alongside of the more common Three Nations.
2 See quotations on p. 131. ^ Called Galatia in Greek.
10
146 Historical Introduction.
conquering aristocracy ^ — wealth and power fell to a great
extent into the hands of a few leading nobles. He traces
the signs of this during the first fifty years of the Roman
Province. Later than that the subject passes beyond our
limits.
^ A similar state of things once existed in the most " civilised "
part of Phrygia, the part most open to conquest : see Cities and Bish.
of Phrygia, II, p. 419 f. The Tetrapyrgiai of the Phrygian nobles
corresponded to the castles of the Galatian chiefs.
Note. — Van Gelder is mistaken, p. 202, in taking Pliny, Nat. Hist.,
VII ID, 56, as showing that a Galatian boy did not speak Celtic.
The boy was born in Asia, and the marvel lay in the fact that he so
closely resembled a boy bom in Gaul, when the two were diversarum
gentium. The more diverse the races, the greater the wonder and
the consequent price of the pair. In 1882, writing home from
southern Cappadocia, and wondering at the beautiful fair com-
plexions of many boys among the Christian families (lost as they
grew to manhood), I said they were like children in our own
country (though Pliny's story was not then in my mind).
SECTION 14.
LANGUAGE AND LETTERS IN NORTH GALATIA.
It has been shown that the Gaulish tribes, when they
entered the land which took from them the name Galatia,
found there a much more numerous population amid which
they settled as a ruling aristocracy, and thus formed a
distinct country and government, recognised by the sur-
rounding governments as one of the powers among whom
Asia Minor was divided.
At first the two sections, which composed the population
of this new country, Galatia, spoke two separate languages.
The aristocracy spoke a Celtic tongue. Of the populace,
presumably some few could speak Greek, but Phrygian was
the sole tongue generally known, and even those who knew
Greek must also have spoken Phrygian. There seems to
be no reasonable doubt on these points, though no actual
evidence remains on the subject.
The problem is to determine what was the fate of these
languages. It is certain that at last Greek came to be the
one sole language used in Galatia ; but the dates at which
Celtic and Phrygian ceased to be spoken are unknown, and
form the subject of the present investigation.
The subject has been briefly discussed by a distinguished
French scholar and traveller, M. Georges Perrot. But he
has not taken into account all the conditions of the problem,
(147)
148 Historical Introduction.
and subsequent exploration has added considerably to the
scanty stock of evidence available to him. As his authority
and arguments have convinced many recent scholars —
though Mommsen unhesitatingly and decisively rejects
them — it will be best to begin by briefly stating his reasons,
and showing why they must be pronounced inadequate to
support his conclusion, that before the time of Christ the
Celtic language had ceased to be spoken in Galatia, and
Greek had become the sole language of the country.
It will be observed that he leaves out of sight one factor.
He does not take into consideration the Phrygian language.
He speaks as if the struggle had been only between Greek
and Celtic.
'The omission is due to that singular prepossession in
the minds of almost all scholars — except Mommsen — who
have touched this subject : they all speak and reason as if
Galatia had been inhabited by Gauls only. If occasionally
some one, like Lightfoot, p. 9, refers to the Phrygian element
in the population, he forthwith dismisses it again from his
thought and his argument. Mommsen alone declares posi-
tively and emphatically that the Galatian people must be
regarded as a mixed race, in which the tone and spirit was
given by the Gaulish element.
Though it cannot be proved, yet we must regard it as
probable, that the Celtic language became the common
tongue of the mixed race. The impressionable Phrygian
population, devoid of energy, yielding readily to the force
of circumstances, accepted the language of the conquerors,^
just as of old that older race which had been conquered by
1 But perhaps on the southern frontier near Kinna Phrygian was
still spoken in the Roman time : one example of the Phrygian formula
(see below) occurs there, Journ. of Hell. Stud., 1899, p. 119, no. 117.
Section /^ ; Language and Letters in Galatia. 1 49
the Phryges adopted the speech of their rulers. The
Phrygians of Galatia, though far more numerous, contri-
buted much less to the prominent characteristics of the
mixed race : they gave their religion and their manual
labour in some of the simpler and more fundamental
arts of life.
Thus M. Perrot's first assumption may be accepted as
probably correct. In the century before Christ the battle
of tongues in Galatia was between Celtic and Greek.
His next argument is founded on the supposed fact that
the ancient Lydian and Phrygian languages had died out
before the time of Strabo, about A.D. 19, so that " in the
whole country from the Sangarios to the sea nothing but
Greek was spoken ". That supposition is incorrect. Strabo,
XIII 4, 17, is quoted as the authority; but Strabo's words
do not imply that. Strabo does not mention the Phrygian
language : he says that the Lydian language had ceased to
be spoken in Lydia and was used only in Cibyra, a city in
the south-west corner of Phrygia, which contained a Lydian
colony.
Epigraphic discovery has now proved that the Phrygian
language was known in various parts of central and eastern
Phrygia at least as late as the third century after Christ.
Some of the Phrygian inscriptions of the Roman period
were published before M. Perrot wrote, but had not yet
been identified as Phrygian.^ Their number has now been
much increased. One is bilingual, a Greek and Phrygian
epitaph. Two are longer, untranslated documents. The
rest contain only a concluding formula in Phrygian, while
^ See Phrygian Inscr. of the Roman Period in Zeitschrift f. Vergleich.
Sprachforsch., 1887, p. 381 ff. Literature of the subject quoted by
Anderson, Journ. 0/ Hell. Stud., 1899 (second half).
150 Historical Introduction.
the body of the inscription is in Greek : the Phrygian
formula is a curse on the violator of the grave, and there
seems to have been an idea that this appeal to Divine
power was more efficacious in the old religious speech.
The formula varies so much as to show that it was expressed
in a living language, and was not merely a repetition of an
ancient hieratic form of words.
Moreover, the exceeding badness of the Greek in some
inscriptions found in Phrygia proves that they were written
by persons who were almost utterly ignorant of the lan-
guage. They were composed by uneducated rustics, who
had only a smattering of Greek, and who ordinarily spoke
in another tongue.^
In fact, it is no longer a matter of doubt that the native
languages of Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycia, Lycaonia, Cappadocia,^
etc., persisted in common use far longer than was believed.
It was only in the cities that Greek was much used, while
the rustic population continued to speak their own native
languages.
Thus, in place of the argument that, since Phrygian had
been forgotten in Phrygia before A.D. 19, Celtic probably
had been forgotten in Galatia, we must substitute the
exact opposite. Since Phrygian was still spoken in
Phrygia in the third century after Christ or later, Celtic
might be expected to persist in Galatia at least as long,
inasmuch as Galatia was distinctly less open to Hellenic
influence than Phrygia, and the Galatian people had much
stronger national pride than the Phrygians.
^ Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, I, p. 131.
^ See Mommsen, Rum. Gesch., V, pp. 92, 315. On Pisidian, the present
writer's Inscriptions en Langue Pisidienne in Revue des Univ. du Midi,
1895, p. 353 ff. On Lycaonian, Acts XIV 11.
Section 14 : Language and Letters in Galatia. 151
Again, it was argued that no Galatian inscriptions in the
Celtic language remain, and therefore the Celtic language
could not have been spoken in Galatia.
This argument would serve equally well to prove that
Greek was spoken universally in Isauria, Lycaonia, Cappa-
docia, Pontus, etc. Strabo says that in Cibyra four
languages were spoken in his time ; yet not a trace of any
tongue except Greek occurs in the inscriptions of Cibyra.
Are we to conclude that Strabo was wrong, and that only
Greek was known there ?
In truth, that line of argument is founded on a miscon-
ception as to the facts of society in Asia Minor, and has
no force. Fashion was powerful. It was thought rude,
barbarous and uncultured to use any language but Greek.
All persons that had even a smattering of Greek aired their
knowledge of the educated speech. Moreover, it is highly
probable that nobody who was ignorant of Greek was able
to write : those who got any education at all learned Greek,
and hardly anybody in Asia Minor wrote in any language
except Greek. The thirty or forty late Phrygian inscrip-
tions mentioned above are the only exception, and they
have mostly a special character.
The dearth of Celtic inscriptions in Galatia only
shows that Celtic was not the educated speech of the
country — a fact which we know independently. Few
inscriptions in Galatia are older than the second century
after Christ ; the epigraphic evidence tends to prove that
the mass of the people were only beginning in that
century to think of engraving epitaphs on the tombs of
their dead.
As to the natural probabilities of the case, there is no
doubt that the Roman influence was on the side of Greek.
152 Historical Introduction.
While Rome favoured the Galatic spirit in many respects,
it never seems to have admitted the Celtic tongue in offi-
cial matters. Greek, the language of education, found full
official recognition, and Rome made no attempt to force
Latin on the eastern Provinces ; but it admitted no third
language. Those who wished to make full use of the
opportunities of the Empire must speak either Latin or
Greek. All whose knowledge was confined to some other
tongue were barbarians and outsiders. The civilisation
that Rome sought to impress on the East was Graeco-
Roman ; and the constitution of the Roman Province
would naturally exert a powerful influence in forcing a
knowledge of Greek upon all that sought honours and
official employment, if they did not know it before-
hand.
Even under the kings Deiotaros and Amyntas, before the
Province was constituted, Greek must have been much used
in diplomacy and foreign affairs. Greek at that time filled
a place like what French filled no long time ago in Europe,
as the international and diplomatic tongue. But Greek was
more than that : it was the speech of education and of all
educated men (like Latin in the Middle Ages) : it was the
language in whose literature almost all scientific and artistic
knowledge was locked up. No Galatian could play a part
in the extra-Galatian world without Greek. There is no
doubt that Cicero and Deiotaros ^ conversed in Greek.
Coins struck in Galatia bore Greek legends ; coins with
Celtic legends could never have found international cur-
rency in Asia Minor at that time, as any numismatist will
testify. In many such ways Greek was a necessity in
Galatia.
1 See p. 92.
Section 14: Language and Letters in Galatia. 153
But those facts do not prove that the Celtic language was
unknown : they prove nothing as regards the speech of the
uneducated mass of the population, and they prove nothing
about home and family intercourse. They only show that
Greek must have been familiar to the few : they do not
show that it was used by the many. The strong Celtic
tinge in certain respects, which indubitably coloured the
Galatian State, could hardly have maintained itself so long
amid the just and even tenor of Roman imperial rule, with-
out a national language to support it.
We have more than this general presumption to trust
to. There is distinct evidence to prove that Celtic was
still spoken during the second century in Galatia. Both
Mommsen and Mitteis ^ are fully convinced by the evidence
on this point.
About the middle of the second century after Christ
Pausanias ^ speaks of a native, non-Greek language, actually
spoken in Galatia : " the shrub which the lonians and the
rest of the Greeks call kokkos, and which the Galatians
above Phrygia call in their native tongue hus". This
native tongue can only be Celtic. It is not possible here
to plead that Pausanius is speaking on the authority of
some old book, and passing off borrowed information about
the past as his own true knowledge about the present. A
few pages before he mentions a fact which he had learned
in that way regarding the cavalry of the Gaulish invaders,
and there he puts it in a different way : " this organisation
they called trimarkisia in their own tongue ",^ Moreover,
^ Mommsen, Rom. Gesch., V, p. 314 ; Mitteis, Reichsrecht, etc., p. 24.
^ X 36, I : Frazer's translation is quoted : his note endorses this
obvious interpretation.
3X 19, II.
154 Historical Introduction.
his statement about the Galatians of Pessinus ^ is couched
in a form suggesting personal knowledge ; and he had been
in the sanctuary of Zeus at Ancyra, I 4, 5.
A trace pointing to the persistence of the Celtic language
in Galatia about the middle of the second century after
Christ, is found in Lucian.^ When the false prophet Alex-
ander was in repute at Abonouteichos on the Pontic coast,
persons came to visit him from the countries round, Bithynia,
Galatia,^ and Thrace. Occasionally questions were pro-
pounded to him by barbarians in the Syrian or the Celtic
language : in such cases he had to wait until he could find
some visitor able to interpret the question to him, and
occasionally a considerable interval elapsed between the
propounding of the question and the issuing of the reply,
if a translator was not readily found. It is not necessary
to understand that all questions in Celtic had to wait long
for an interpreter : it was probably easier to find an inter-
preter in Celtic than in Syriac. But even if it were some-
times the case that Celtic interpreters were difficult to find,
that would only prove that some of the Galatic visitors
could not speak Celtic, while others could. But that might
happen naturally. Most of those who came from Galatia,
especially at first, would be traders and travellers, classes
of persons who must have picked up in a rough way a good
deal of education. The language of trade was, beyond all
question, Greek throughout those regions ; and those who
were engaged in trade (many, of course, hereditarily), would
be likely to be the most thoroughly Hellenised of the
^ Quoted on p. 85.
"^Alexander Pseudomantis, 51. The attempt to explain away this
evidence, Revue Celtique, I, p. 179 flf, is a failure.
^ Pontic intercourse, see p. 143.
Section 14: Language and Letters in Galatia. 155
Galatians. Thus, there might be cases when an interpreter
of a Celtic question was not readily found among Galatian
merchants at Abonouteichos.
Such seems the natural explanation. The propounders
of questions in Syrian or Celtic are called " barbarians " by
Lucian ; but that does not prove them to have been from
regions outside the Roman Empire. Any one who spoke
any language but Greek (or Latin) was called by the Greeks
a barbarian ; so, e.g., the people of Malta are called by
Luke, although Malta had belonged to Rome for about 270
years when Luke visited it. Probably some of the questions
were propounded in barbarian tongues merely for the pur-
pose of testing Alexander's skill, for the tendency to test
even that in which one believes lies deep in human nature.
Hence we need not suppose that those who put questions
in Celtic were all ignorant of Greek.
Again, in the fourth century the witness of Jerome is
emphatic — the Galatians spoke the universal language of
the East, Greek, but they also spoke a dialect slightly
varying from that used in Gaul by the Treveri. This clear
testimony by a man who had travelled in Galatia and
among the Treveri cannot be twisted and perverted (as
Lucian and Pausanias are by some writers). There is
therefore only one method : when testimony is dead against
you, you can always refuse to believe it. And so Jerome
is set aside, without any reason given that can stand a
moment's investigation.
But the old plain and simple method of disbelieving
all that contradicts one's prepossessions is now becoming
discredited as belonging to the Dark Age of modem
scholarship. The one argument which used to be counted
sufficient — that Jerome was a Christian, and that anything
156 Historical Introduction.
stated in a Christian work is suspicious — is now no longer
implicitly accepted.
Mitteis pronounces no decision on this point : it is not
necessary for his purpose. Mommsen accepts Jerome's
testimony, and justifies it by solid reasons; and the voice
of healthy historical criticism will assuredly be on his side.
That the Galatian people was bilingual for centuries is
an interesting, but well -ascertained fact. Compare the
Welsh in modern times after many centuries of English
rule.
Now, as to the date when Greek spread most among
them, the evidence is far from satisfactory.
Almost the only evidence comes from the reception of
Greek names in Galatia; Already in the third and second
centuries Gauls with Greek names occur : Apatourios B.C.
223, Lysimachus 217, Paidopolites 180. At that time the
Gauls were serving as mercenaries in various camps, and
their leaders must have found it convenient to use Greek
names. Probably Apatourios and Lysimachus had two
names, Celtic and Greek, according to a widespread custom
in districts where a smattering of Greek was spread : it
was convenient to have a Greek name amid Greek surround-
ings, and a native name amid the surroundings of home.
But no evidence exists, and in fact Galatia is almost the
only country of that kind in which no explicit proof of the
use of alternative or double names has been found (though
in all probability they were used).
This use of Greek names, beginning so early, taken in
conjunction with intermarriages, might have been expected
to have spread very widely in the second and first centuries.
But, as we saw on p. 66, the tendency to adopt Greek ways
was checked, and a strong reaction of the Gaulish spirit
Section 14: Language and Letters in Galatia. 157
occurred in the second century. The anti- Hellenic ten-
dency was strengthened by the Mithridatic Wars (in which
Hellenism rallied to the Oriental king against Rome and
the Galatian tribes), and by the subsequent Romanisation
of Galatia under Deiotaros. The almost exclusive use of
Celtic names in the ruling families, B.C. 90-40, proves that
the national feeling was still strong against Hellenisation.
Many names are known in the three tetrarchic dynasties,
and almost all are Celtic. There is, however, one notable
exception.
Amyntas bears a Greek, especially a Macedonian name.
At this time the great Galatic families seem to have used
Gaulish names almost exclusively.^ Was Amyntas, then,
a Greek ? ^ This is highly improbable, because it would
have been difficult for a Greek to govern the Galatian
aristocracy, and Augustus was too politic to offend a strong
national feeling. Moreover, Dion Cassius calls him Amyn-
tas the Galatian.^
Now, it is probable that Amyntas did not belong to one
of the great ruling families. He had been secretary to
Deiotaros, and his selection for that office implies that he
had not merely natural ability, but also considerable edu-
cation ; and the educated classes always tended to use
Greek names. Very probably Amyntas had a Celtic
name also ; but in his relations with his South Galatian
subjects and with foreign nations he would use the name
which marked him as of the educated class.
^ Kastor is an exception (yet Holder gives Castoriacum as a Celtic
city).
2 Van Gelder, p. 200, thinks he was a Greek.
' Dion, L 13, 8, 'A/xui/ras 6 raXar»;s. Compare Plutarch, Amat. 22,
Tm VaKaTT) simply, when speaking of the Tetrarch Sinorix.
158 Historical Introduction.
Similarly, of the four envoys sent by Deiotaros to Rome
in B.C. 45 three bear Greek names ; ^ it is, however, not
certain that all were Gauls ; the king might have found
some convenient tools among the Greeks. His physician,
Pheidippos, was of course a Greek,
M. Perrot, in a lucid survey of the evidence, fixes on the
year A.D. 10 as about the decisive turn in the tide of naming.^
Henceforward Celtic names are exceptional, and Greek or
Latin names are customary. On this quite correct result
two remarks are to be made.
In the first place, the disuse of Celtic names was not so
complete as it is said by some writers to have been. In
Ancyra, the centre of Galatian civilisation, they might be
expected to disappear most rapidly ; but even there we find
in M. Perrot's inscriptions of the second century the follow-
ing names, certainly or probably Celtic:^ 133 Epona, 123
[Kau ?]aros, Borianus, Mamus, Barbillus, An[. . .Jnatus ;
and in a rural district, 151 Masclus.* In the only rustic
part of Galatia where inscriptions have been found in
appreciable number, the following Celtic names occur (all
probably second century A.D. or later) : Vastex, Barbollas,
Meliginna, Zmerton, Leitognaos, Dobedon. A short
inscription of Laodiceia Combusta ^ (third or fourth century),
with the names Kat[t]oios and Droumamaris, probably
shows a Celtic family in that Lycaonian or Galatic city.
These specimens out of a larger number known will
^ Van Gelder, p. 200, says that all the names are Greek ; but
Blesamios is obviously Celtic.
* Perrot, dc Gal. Prov. Rom., p. 78, 89 f.
3 Evidence in Holder /)flssMM.
^ Anderson in Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1899, p. 81 fif.
5 Athen. MiUheil, 1888, p. 266.
Section i^: Language and Letters in Galatia. 159
suffice : they are taken from the first two sources that
suggested themselves.
Secondly, it is hardly correct to say as some do, that
native names lingered far longer than the native languages
in Asia Minor. That is true where a language dies out
in presence of the speech of a more energetic section of the
population (as Phrygian did in Galatia) : in such cases, as
M. Perrot says, on sait que les noms propres survivent en
general aux noms communs, quits restent comnie te dernier
vestige dune langue sortie de f usage. This rule is perhaps
true in a sense in Asia Minor, but it is far from expressing
the whole truth. It is also true, and a more vital point in
the present question, that proper names began to be dis-
used, and Greek names came into wide use, centuries before
the native language disappeared. The very persons who
inscribed Phrygian formulae on their graves ^ bore Greek,
not Phrygian names.
The disappearance of names not Greek or Roman in
Asia Minor is too large a topic for our pages : it is only
part of a much wider subject. The fact is that at this
period and throughout the Empire, the old national names
were everywhere discouraged by the prevailing tone of
society, which was Graeco-Roman in the East, and Roman
in the West. It was generally esteemed barbarous, rustic,
the mark of a mere clown, to bear a native name : as the
comic poet of an older time said : " It is a shame for a
woman to have a Phrygian name ". ^ The aristocratic
feeling of the old Gaulish families made them cling for
a time to the hereditary names ; but the fashionable tone
was too strong for them.
1 See p. 149 f. "^ See p. 30.
i6o Historical Introduction.
In the dearth of inscriptions — itself a proof of illiteracy
— authorities for Galatian names are so few that the argu-
ment resting on them is feeble ; but so far as it goes it is
that the early Roman period was the time when Celtic
names passed out of fashion ; and the change heralded a
marked increase in the use of the Greek language.
As to any literary interests in Gala^tia, not a sign is
quoted earlier than the fourth century. Galatia like Cappa-
docia is a blank in literature ; and those are the two
countries in which fewest cities (in the strict Greek sense)
existed.^
The evidence is overwhelming. About A.D. 50 Galatia
was essentially un-Hellenic.^ Roman ideas were there super-
induced directly on a Galatian system, which had passed
through no intermediate stage of transformation to the
Hellenic type. It was only through the gradual slow
spread under Roman rule of a uniform Graeco-Roman
civilisation over the East that Galatia began during the
second century after Christ to assume a veneer of Hellen-
ism in its later form.
Road-building in North Galatia seems to have begun
under Vespasian, when Galatia was united to Cappadocia
as a frontier and military Province. The only Roman
colony was probably founded by Domitian. It was during
the first century one of the least civilised corners of the
Empire, remote, difficult of access, with little trade, lying
apart from the world, with a strongly marked character of
its own. As Mommsen with his unerring historic instinct
long ago recognised, it had become a Celtic island amid the
1 See p. 135 f ; Strabo, p. 537, says there were only two cities in.
Cappadocia.
2 On the talk about evidence to the contrary, see p. 173.
Section 14: Language and Letters in Galatia. 161
waves of the Oriental races, and remained so in its internal
organisation even in the Roman Imperial period.^ ... In
spite of their sojourn of several hundred years in Asia
Minor, a deep gulf still separated these Occidentals from
the Asiatics (among whom the Greeks of Asia Minor must
for some purposes^ be counted). The strong mutual dis-
like that kept the Asiatic Greeks and the Galatians apart
is evident from the time of Mithridates onwards : at that
time Galatians and Romans faced and conquered the
Graeco-Asiatic reaction.
The dislike of the Asiatic for the northern barbarians
may be paralleled at the present day by the hatred of the
Turkish inhabitants of the same country for the Circassian
immigrants, who resemble in many respects the picture
that is drawn for us of the Gauls, free, proud, rapacious,
unruly, a terror to their more peaceful and submissive
neighbours. Every traveller in Asia Minor, who has come to
know anything of the feelings and life of the people even
in the most superficial way, learns that the Mohammedan
Turk hates the Mohammedan Circassians far more than he
dislikes his Christian neighbours ; and his hatred is rooted
in fear. So the Gauls were hated in ancient Asia Minor.
This hatred lasted late ; and one observes its effects, in
the fourth century, in the jealousy and contempt expressed
for the Galatians by the Cappadocians. Thus Basil, Epist.
207, I, speaks with marked innuendo of Sabellius the
^ Colonia Julia Augusta Felix Germa was not founded by
Augustus (see Mommsen's commentary on his colonies in Monu-
mentum Ancyr., p. 120) : Domitian named it after his beloved Julia
Augusta, see Revue Numismatique, 1894, p. 170.
^ In certain ways, of course, Greeks are Occidental as contrasted
with Asiatics.
II
1 62 Historical Introduction.
Lydian and Marcellus the Galatian. Gregory of Nyssa,
Epist. 20, mentions that the garden Vanota, where he
writes, was called by a Galatian name, but deserved a
name more in accordance with its beauty than a mere
Galatian word. And the heretic Eunomios complained,
as of an insult, that Basil had called him a Galatian,
whereas he was a Cappadocian of Oltiseris.^
In view of these facts every one who considers how closely
the writings of Paul and the other Apostles (so far as we
know) keep to actual life, how vivid and realistic are their
pictures of the Churches which they address — every such
scholar must expect that, in a letter written by Paul to a
group of North Galatian churches, there should be found
touches which bring before us the special character and
position of these churches. He must expect that the
address would throw light on, and receive illustration from,
the peculiar position of the Galatians, so distinct and apart
from the type and tone of all the surrounding races,
whether Greek or Anatolian.
This expectation is not realised. On the contrary, there
are only three points in the Epistle that have ever been
alleged as signs of Gallic character.
One is the stock joke, that the Galatian Christians
changed their form of belief, and the French are a fickle
people. It is surprising that such a sane and clear-headed
scholar as Lightfoot should have repeated this from his
predecessors. In truth, he was here misled by his own
historic instinct : he felt that, if the North Galatian theory
was true, there must be traces of Celtic character in the
Epistle, and as he would not abandon the theory he must
find the traces.
* Greg. Nyss. contra Eunomium, pp. 259, a8i.
Section 14: Language and Letters in Galatia. 163
The sufficient and only reply is to quote Luther's argu-
ments that the Galatians must have been a Germanic race,
because the Germans are fickle. As a matter of fact, Paul
nowhere calls the Galatians fickle, or implies that their
change of faith was caused by fickleness: see p. 255.
The second is that among the sins against which Paul
warns his Galatian correspondents are "drunkenness and
revellings," "strife and vainglory," and that he charges
them with niggardliness in giving alms : it is said that these
are characteristic vices of the Celtic character. They are
only too characteristic of most nations and most Churches.
On their nature in Galatia, see p. 450 ff, 458 f.
The third is that the Celtic people were superstitious
and "given over to ritual observances," and Deiotaros
was characterised by " extravagant devotion to augury : the
Gauls in Galatia would find the external rites of the worship
of Cybele attractive from their analogy to their own Druidic
ritual," though " the mystic element in the Phrygian worship
awoke no corresponding echo in the Gaul ". Hence, it is
argued, the Galatians were likely to fly from Pauline to
Judaistic Christianity.
One can only marvel at this pedantic analysis of Galatian
character. It is hardly worth while to point out that the
best authorities consider Druidism a very late fact in Gallic
history, and that scholars who study Galatia observe that
not a trace of Druidic religion can be discovered there.
The superstition of the Galatians amounts to this, that they
had adopted the religion of Asia Minor !
The truth is that, though North Galatia had a peculiar
and strongly marked character, not the slightest reference
to its special character can be found in the Epistle. Yet
the Epistle is full of references to the circumstances and
164 Histo^Hcal Introduction.
everyday surroundings of the persons addressed — full even
to a degree beyond Paul's custom.
Note. — It may be here added that, in the article Galatia
in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, I have gone too far in
admitting Hellenic influence in North Galatia, being over-
anxious not to colour favourably to my own theory an
account which ought to be strictly impartial. But in that
article the term " Graecised city," applied to Ancyra, is
intended to indicate "Greek-speaking," and not "Hellen-
ised ".
SECTION 15.
THE INFLUENCE OF CHRISTIANITY IN NORTH GALATIA.
At what time and from what direction Christianity was
introduced into North Galatia is uncertain. I hope shortly
to discuss the subject of " the Diffusion of Christianity in
Asia Minor" in a special work. Here only the salient
features in the evangelisation of North Galatia can be
stated. It probably began either from Bithynia or from
the Province Asia, and not from the side of Syria.
The new religion was introduced in all probability at an
early date : doubtless Ancyra had been evangelised during
the first century (possibly even Pessinus), But there can
be no reasonable doubt that the process began in the great
provincial centre, Ancyra, just as in Asia it began at
Ephesus, and in Achaia at Corinth. The tribal constitu-
tion of the country made Ancyra the necessary centre for
at least its own tribe ; and the backward state of the country
districts must have long been a decided bar to the progress
of the new religion.
Ancyra and the Bithynian city Juliopolis (which was
attached to Galatia about 297) are the only Galatian
bishoprics mentioned earlier than 325 : they alone appear
at the Ancyran Council held about 314. The Ancyran
Church^ is first mentioned about A.D. 192 as having been
^ 17 Kara ronov tKKkrjcria, the local Church (on the phrase see Cities
and Bish. of Phrygia, I, p. 272 f, no. 192).
(165)
1 66 Historical Introduction.
»
affected by Montanism, but saved by the writer of an anti-
Montanist treatise quoted by Eusebius. There was a great
persecution at Ancyra under Diocletian, and some of the
martyrs who suffered there were doubtless brought from
other towns of the Province for trial before the governor
resident in Antioch. Thus, e.g.^ we find that at Juliopolis
in the sixth century the martyrs Plato, Heuretos and
Gemellos were peculiarly venerated at Juliopolis. Of
these Plato is known to have suffered at Ancyra on 22nd
July probably under Diocletian,^ and hence probably he
was brought up from Juliopolis for trial at the metropolis,
but continued to be specially remembered in his own city.
The Acta of Theodotus, a work of high authority, contains
an interesting account of Diocletian's persecution, which
the writer seems perhaps to have regarded as the first that
occurred there.
Ancyra and Juliopolis, then, are the two points in
Galatia or on its borders where Christianity can be traced
earliest. Now these are two of the points on the short
road from Nikomedia to Ancyra and the east — the line
which afterwards became famous and important as the
" Pilgrim's Road ". ^ As we have seen,^ Galatia was in
specially close relations with Bithynia and Pontus ; and the
extraordinary strength of Christianity in that Province at
the very beginning of the second century is attested by the
famous despatch of Pliny. Bithynian Christianity would
spread through Juliopolis to Ancyra in the natural course
of communication.
The epigraphic evidence about Christianity in Galatia
1 I can find nothing about the other two.
2 Histor. Geogr. of Asia Minor, pp. 197, 240.
' See above, pp. 143, 154.
Section i^ : Influence of Christianity in Galatia. 167
will be treated more thoroughly in the proposed treatise
on the diffusion of that religion in Asia Minor. Here we
will say only that the early Christian inscriptions found in
the ** Added Land," west of Lake Tatta, are due beyond
doubt to the influence radiating from Iconium ; and that
in the rest of North Galatia no early Christian inscriptions
occur with the exception of three or four at Pessinus, which
however are more probably of the fourth than the third
century.
On the other hand, there is in North Galatia an unusually
large number of late Christian inscriptions in proportion to
the epigraphic total.
Now the want of early Christian inscriptions in a district
constitutes no proof that Christianity was not known there
in early time. But the contrast between the large number
of third century Christian inscriptions in Phrygia ^ and the
lack of them in Galatia is remarkable ; and certainly sug-
gests that the new religion had nothing like the same hold
on Galatia at that time as on Phrygia. Mr. J. G. C.
Anderson expresses himself even more strongly as to the
inference to be drawn from the epigraphic facts in Journal
of Hellenic Studies, 1899 (second part).
The evidence as to the number of Jews in Galatia has
been much misrepresented by the North Galatian critics.
For example, an inscription found beside Dorylaion in the
Province Asia is quoted as a proof of the presence of Jews
in Galatia ; ^ and a decree of Augustus addressed to the
Koinon of the Province Asia, a copy of which was ordered
to be kept in the Augusteum at Argyre, is similarly quoted
1 Citiis and Bish. oi Phrygia, Ch. XII, XVII.
^ Schiirer, das Jild. Volk im Zeitaltcr J. C, 2nd Edition, I, p. 690. It
shows a, geven-braqched ga,ndlestigk and the name 'Po-avoy,
1 68 Historical Introduction.
as granting privileges to the Jews of Ancyra.^ With such
geography anything can be proved. In the latter case the
conjectural alteration of the MSS. to read Ancyra would
not help the North Galatian Theorists ; for it would then
be necessary to understand that the Asian Ancyra was
meant. Waddington boldly reads Pergamos for Argyre, on
the ground that there was only one Augusteum in Asia
when the decree was issued (which is indubitable). Momm-
sen, while recognising that an Asian city is meant, does not
propose any solution for the unintelligible Argyre.
A few late Galatian inscriptions, belonging to the fourth
and fifth centuries, mention persons with Jewish names :
at Eudoxias Jacob the Deacon ^ and Esther, at Tavium
Daniel, Joannes, etc., elsewhere Joannes, Sanbatos, Thadeus,
etc. ; but all are probably late, and may be Christian (or
Jewish Christian).
At Pessinus an inscription mentioning a person Matatas,
C. I. G., 4088, is regarded as Jewish by Lightfoot ; and
similarly several in which the name Akilas or Akylas is
used. We may fairly treat Matatas as a Jewish name,
Mattathias ; or, as the copy is bad, we might venture perhaps
to change it to Mata[i]as, i.e., Matthaias ; but, even if that
be the true reading, since the wife of Mataias was named
Kyrilla, he was more probably a Christian ^ than a Jew
(unless he was Jewish-Christian). Akilas seems to have
^ Schiirer, op. cit., I, p. 690, Lightfoot, p. 11, Josephus, Ant. Jud.,
XVI 6, 2.
^ fiPTJfia etepa)[ZdTov SJetaKwi/os Eta»ca)/3 [Mrpi]<»7V0v.
^ Kyrilla, though sometimes pagan, favours Christian origin : hence
the other alteration Ma[i]atas is less probable. With Mataias com-
pare Mathas in a Christian inscription, Cities and Bish. of Phrygia,
II, p. 562,
Section i§ : Infiuence of Christianity in Galatia. 169
been a Phrygian name ; ^ but I think Lightfoot may be
right in regarding it as one favoured by Jews : we find
Jacob the son of Achilles at Oxyrhynchos in Egypt,^ and
Akilas was probably regarded as equivalent to Achilles.
Further, at Pessinus, there occurs an inscription men-
tioning the strange names Annonios, Eremaste, Paith[o]s,
Momaion, Deidos;^ M. Perrot suggests that Annonios
may be the Hebrew Ananias, which seems very probable.
A rather bold speculation, which has been advanced on
the strength of some Phrygian inscriptions,* treats a noble
family settled in Akmonia and in Ancyra, bearing the
name Julius Severus, as Jewish. Members of this and of
some allied families boast themselves as " descendants of
kings and tetrarchs ". The usual interpretation treats these
as Galatian kings and tetrarchs : but, according to the
theory just mentioned, they would be Jewish kings and
tetrarchs, probably of the Herod family. But the specula-
tion has too slender foundations to be treated as more than
an interesting hypothesis at present ; and it is ridiculed by
Prof. E. Schurer in his review of the book ^ as merely a
groundless fancy.
The Jews of North Galatia were immigrants not direct
from the East, but either from South Galatia or from Asia
or from Bithynia. No settlements of Jews are known to have
been made in North Galatia by the Greek kings, whereas
large bodies of Jews were settled in the cities along the
great line of communication through Lycaonia and Southern
^ Histor. Gebgr. of A sia Minor, p. 226.
2 Grenfell and Hunt, I, p. 97.
* C. I. G., 4087; Perrot, Explor. Arch., No. 105.
* Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, II, pp. 648 ff, 673.
^ Theolog. Literaturztg, 1898.
170 Historical Introductiov.
Phrygia by the Seleucid kings. Thus North Galatian
Jewish settlements are later and sporadic. Lightfoot re-
cognises this secondary origin of the North Galatian Jews.
The relation of North Galatia to the rest of the Roman
world was changed in the end of the third century, when
Diocletian about 285 made Nicomedia, the Bithynian
metropolis, one of the four capitals of the Roman world.
The road system of Asia Minor had hitherto been planned
with a view to communication with the one imperial centre,
Rome ; and North Galatia was then on a by-path. Hence-
forth, communication began to run towards Nicomedia ;
and North Galatia was in an important position. The
change was intensified when Constantinople was made the
one great capital of the Roman world. The road system
was practically the same in the East for both those centres.
Ancyra now lay on the greatest of roads. All communi-
cation of Syria, Cilicia, Cappadocia and Armenia with the
Imperial capital passed through it. The development of
North Galatia now proceeded with great rapidity. It became
one of the most important regions in the Eastern Empire.
Bishops of Ancyra played a great part in many Church
questions from 3 1 2 onwards : and the metropolitan Bishop
of Ancyra ranked second only to Caesareia in the Patri-
archate of Constantinople.^
The ecclesiastical system of North Galatia was still very
backward even in the fourth century ; and its cities, which
had been slowly growing during the third century out of
villages, had not as a rule bishops of their own. This is
made clear by a comparison of the ecclesiastical system of
^ The order of precedence was gradually becoming fixed even during
the fourth century ; but was not strictly determined before the sixth
century.
Section i^ : Influence of Christianity in Galatia. 171
the provinces of the south, where civilisation and cities had
been developed rapidly owing to their favourable position
on the former lines of communication. But during the
fifth and following centuries the number of Galatian cities
and bishops grew rapidly, and was more than doubled. In
the same time the known bishops of Lycaonia increased
only from fifteen to seventeen.
The failure of its bishop in a Council does not prove that
a city was not then a bishopric. But it was far easier for
North Galatian bishops to attend the fourth century
Councils of Ancyra, Nicaea and Constantinople than for
the Lycaonian and Pisidian bishops. Yet the ecclesiastical
system of Lycaonia and Pisidia was nearly complete at
those Councils, while that of Galatia was only in an embryo
form. See pp. 213, 221.
Even the praises given so cordially to the Galatians by
the rhetoricians of the fourth century — quoted so frequently
as proofs of the thorough Hellenisation of Galatia — are
really proofs that the Hellenic character was of quite recent
growth in the country.
Themistius ^ speaks of the Galatians as acute and clever,
and more docile than the thorough Hellenes : he evidently
contrasts the Galatians as beginners in the higher Hellenic
education with the thorough Greeks of Syrian Antioch and
other cities where Greek learning was long settled. He
also contrasts the cities of Galatia with Antioch as smaller
and unable to vie with it.
^Or. XXIII Sopk., p. 299 Petavius, koX ov Xeya to aarv tov 'Avtioxov
owSe oaois e»C6i crvvifii^a avhpaari to. efjLa (poprla fxai iv TT(bli,
TToKifTKiov XiTrdiTa Mayi/ijrtoi' ttoKlu.^
" I am a Magnesian from Phrygia ; and an unwedded
damsel, devoted to the service of the Scythian goddess,
nurtured me in the olive-bearing plain of the Anthios,
1 If the story relates to a mythic foundation in prehistoric times,
it may be dismissed as an invention.
■^ Kaibel, Inscr. Grace. Ital., No. 933, reads MavOiatL in 1. 2. irapOtvos
dyvTj has been conjectured, probably rightly, but Kaibel rejects it
because he has not found Scythia as a woman's name (a meaningless
reason). He takes Magnes as a personal name, and gets no sense
from this remarkable inscription.
202 Historical Introduction.
me who have left the deep-shaded city of the Magnetes."
It is uncertain whether the epigram was longer.
The Anatolian custom described on p. 40 is here alluded
to. Evidently the epithet Parthenos was given to the
goddess in this district : she was the Great Goddess Arte-
mis of the Limnai, into which the river Anthius flows ; and
she was succeeded there in Christian times by the Virgin
Theotokos. The epithet Parthenos in the cultus of Anatolia
had not the sense which we attribute to the word " virgin " :
it merely indicated that the goddess and her devotees were
not bound by the rite of marriage. She is terijied
" Scythian," as the Artemis whose seat was in the Tauric
Chersonese (the Crimea) ; she was also called Tauro or
Tauropolos.^
The character which this epigram reveals in the Antiochian
cultus is exactly what belonged everywhere to the native
religion of Phrygia ; but it is important to have an express
confirmation of it.
In the exoteric view, as shown in inscriptions, the Great
God in Antioch was Men Askainos,^ who was usually
expressed in Greek form as the " Very Manifest God
Dionysos," and in Latin as Aesculapius. These identifica-
tions with Western deities express one or other of the
many sides in the complete Phrygian idea of the God, as
the giver of wine and corn, the king, the healer, and so on.
The simple translation of the Phrygian name, viz.. Men in
Greek and Luna in Latin, was also used in the inscriptions.^
' Artemis Tauropolos at Metropolis, not far away.
''■ Such is Waddington's highly probable correction of Strabo's
reading Arkaios.
^ C. I. L., Ill 6829, Sterrett, Epigr.Journ., No. 135. These are really
mistranslations : the Phrygian Men or Manes was not the Moon,
Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, II, p. 636.
Section ig : Pisidian Antioch. 203
The goddess is never mentioned in inscriptions of the
Hellenised city, where the Phrygian element remained more
mystic and esoteric, as is stated on p. 42. But in inscrip-
tions of the less Hellenised neighbourhood, she alone is
named, and the male god is not made so prominent.
The first event known in the history of Antioch belongs
to the year 189, when the Romans made it a free city,
destroying the Seleucid power, but not subjecting the city
to the rule of the Pergamenian king Eumenes. Possibly,
their jealousy made them unwilling ^ to trust him with that
strong fortress and the command of one of the two great
Eastern routes.
From 189 to the formation of the Province of Cilicia in
80, nothing is known as to the fate of Antioch. Sheltered
behind the mountains, it was protected as well as possible
against the storms of that troubled time. Presumably it
remained a free city for that whole century, a city governing
itself by its own elected magistrates in the midst of a
Phrygian land, governing itself after the Greek fashion, and
called a Greek city, but by no means a city of Greeks. Its
story during that century would be an interesting one ; but
we must wait for further exploration and excavation.
In 39 Antioch and the rest of Pisidian Phrygia was
made into a kingdom and given to Amyntas ; and in 25 it
came back into Roman possession as part of the Province
Galatia.
At some time before B.C. 6 Augustus planted a Colonia —
apparently chiefly, or entirely, of veterans of the Legion V
Alauda — in Antioch, which now received a new constitution
and a new name, as Colonia Caesareia Antiocheia. The
^ See above, p. 61.
204 Historical Introduction.
population of the old Greek city still continued to dwell in
it ; but they now ranked only as dwellers {incolae) alongside
of the privileged Coloni.
Instead of tribes, the Colonia was divided into Vici, as a
Roman city. The modern town of Yalowatch is divided
into twelve quarters, and Professor Sterrett conjectures,
ingeniously and probably, that the division is an inheritance
from antiquity.^ It may be added that the supposed twelve
Vici were probably a Romanisation of the older twelve
Greek city tribes.
The names of only six Vici are known, Tuscus, Cermalus,
Aedilicius, Patricius^ Velabrus, Salutaris. The last of
these is probably an acknowledgment of the old Phrygian
cultus in Antioch, for the national God was now commonly
called Aesculapius. The other names show a strongly
marked Roman character.
Certain rights, summed up as Jus Italicum, were granted
to the Colonia, which consisted mainly of veterans of the
Fifth Legion Alauda. Those rights — which included free-
dom from direct taxation, freedom of constitutional
government, and the right to hold and convey land accord-
ing to Roman custom — of course, belonged in full only to
the coloni, and not to the incolae, the old inhabitants, who
still constituted the vast majority of the population. Only
persons who possessed as individuals the Roman citizenship
could rank as Coloni, and possess the full rights pertaining
to that position.
No evidence remains on which to found an account ot
the precise position and rights of the non-Roman population
of Antioch. We must for the present rernain in ignorance,
^ Turkish mahale translates vicus.
* PATRICVS in Sterrett's copy.
Section ig : Pisidian Antioch. 205
and hope for increase of knowledge through exploration
and excavation. But some general principles are certain.
In a general way, the non-Roman members of the Pro-
vince were in a state, so to say, of pupilage and training for
the high position of Roman citizens. The goal of the Empire
was universal citizenship among freemen ; but for the time
this was still distant, and the path of advancement was open
only to the few. In a Colonia, the non-Roman population
was indubitably in a much more favourable position as
regards Roman rights than in the mere Greek cities.
They had a certain secondary class of rights (including,
most probably, freedom from direct taxes) ; and the path
towards the full position of a civis Romanus was easier
for them.
This favoured and honourable position belonged to those
Greek incolae in virtue of the Roman Colonial rank of their
city. As members of the Roman Empire, i.e., of the Province
Galatia, they ranked above all the mere Greek cities around,
except their sister colonies, among whom they were primi
inter pares} Now in view of the intense spirit of rivalry
and jealousy between city and city, which was so marked
a feature of Asia Minor municipal life,^ the citizens would,
of course, pride thernselves especially on those features
which gave them their rank : they would be good and
enthusiastically loyal Roman citizens. The account of
Antioch given in the Acta of Paul and Thekla, with its
high priest and its great shows to which crowds from the
other cities of Galatia came, is instructive.^
In view of these circumstances it is an important fact
that, in Acts, the Gentiles who came to the Antiochian
^ See p. 224. ^ See below, p. 450 f.
' Church in the Rom. Emp., p. 396 ff.
2o6 Historical Introduction.
synagogue, "the believing proselytes," XIII 43, are not
called Greeks, as they are at cities of the Greek type like
Iconium, Ephesus, etc. This name of Greek would be
unsuitable in a Roman Colonia, among men who were
proud of their rank. That is one of the slight instances of
exactness in expression, hardly noticeable except under the
microscope, as it were, which make up the fabric of Luke's
History.
And yet the North Galatian Theorists maintain that
these Antiochians would have preferred to be called
" Phrygians " rather than " men of the Province Galatia ".
A horse, or a slave, was called " Phryx," not men who
prided themselves on being some steps nearer the Roman
citizenship than their merely Greek neighbours.
The process of acquiring the Roman citizenship evidently
went on rapidly during the first century. It appears pro-
bable that practically the entire free population had
acquired the Roman rights before the middle of the second
century, otherwise we should find more inscriptions con-
taining names of the Greek type. Almost every man who
is mentioned has the three names of the Roman citizen ;
and the freedmen who occur have the standing and the
three names of Roman libertini. Probably, when Hadrian
made Iconium a Colonia, 11 7- 138, Antioch was already a
body of Roman cives.
In the obscurity as to the exact position of the older
inhabitants in the Colonia, it is impossible to be certain as
to the law of family and inheritance among them. Though
the Roman Coloni, all doubtless Western born, whom
Augustus settled there, would preserve the principles and
forms of Roman law, it is entirely improbable that the
older inhabitants, already in possession of a settled and
Section ig : Pisidian Antioch. 207
developed legal system, were called upon to adopt a new
and strange system. It was not Roman method to destroy
an existing civilisation. One who was not a Roman citizen
was not even privileged to make a will of the Roman type :
he must follow hereditary and national custom. In the
gradual assimilation of law in the East, it would appear
that Greek law proved too strongly established, and that
it was not thoroughly Romanised for centuries, if at all.
The influence of the general atmosphere and intercourse
in Asia Minor was strong enough to Hellenise even Celtic-
Roman Galatia : much more was it able to preserve in
Colonia Antiocheia the existing type of Hellenic society,
even though the forms of municipal government were
Roman.
Even in municipal government the inscriptions show
some traces of Greek forms, while in regard to social cir-
cumstances and amusements many traces of the Greek
spirit are seen.
The government of Colonia Antiocheia was of the usual
Roman type. The inscriptions mention Duoviri Quin-
quennales, Duoviri, Quaestores, yEdiles : a senate called
Ordo^ whose members were styled Decuriones : the Ordo et
Populus concurring in the compliment to a citizen : the
Populus signifying its will by acclamation in the theatre,
and carrying its will into effect separately in each Viais.
There was a priesthood of Jupiter Optimus Maximus ;
and perhaps a municipal High priesthood in the Imperial
religion.^ '
But there are also traces of the Greek style of municipal
government creeping into that Roman organisation. The
1 Compare C. I. L., Ill 6820, with the Acta of Paul and Thekla
(see the Church in the Roman Empire, p. 396 f.
2o8 Historical Introduction.
office of Grammateus, so important in the Hellenistic cities
of the East/ is mentioned as an Antiochian office between
the Quaestorship and the Duumvirate. The title of Agono-
theta perpetuus of the quinquennial games is more Greek
than Latin. 2
There can be no doubt that the ordinary language of
society was Greek, and not Latin. Greek was the language
of trade and of education. It was only pride in their
Roman rank that led to the exclusive use of Latin in in-
scriptions during the first century, and its frequent use in
the second century. Similarly Colonia Lystra used the
Latinised form Lustra during the first century.
Two bilingual epitaphs show that the families of Roman
Coloni found it advisable to learn Greek ; and a number of
Greek inscriptions, some of persons with Greek names,
some with Roman names, some actually erected by Roman
citizens in honour of Roman citizens, point to the same
fact. The third century inscriptions and those of late date
are usually and almost exclusively Greek : even high Roman
imperial officials write in Greek and are honoured in Greek.
Instead of Colonia A ntiocheia, the pure Greek style " metro-
polis of the Antiochians" became common ; and there is even
a Greek inscription in which the Boule honours Secundus
on the occasion of his having filled the office of Strategos,
where the pure Greek terms are used in place of Ordo and
Duumvir.
The games which are mentioned are of the Greek rather
than the Roman bloody character : a certamen gymnicum,
and a certamen quinquennale talantiaeum. Rut these belong
to the second or even the third century.^ The Acta of
1 St. Paul the Trav., p. 281. ^ ayavodirrjs 8ta piov.
' Compare also Le Bas and Waddington, No. i620fl.
Section ig : Pisidian Antioch. 209
Paul and Thekla attest in the first century a more Roman
type of sports, gladiators and combats with beasts, showing
that the Roman spirit was stronger then and grew after-
wards weaker.
Antioch was not merely the metropolis of all Southern
Galatia. It was also, in a special sense, the centre of a
Regio, over which a Roman centurion had certain duties.^
That Regio was the Phrygian district attached to Galatia,
called Pisidian Phrygia or Galatic Phrygia^ — the former
title geographical, the latter political. It is called by the
Greek title xoapa. Acts XIII 49 : during Paul's residence in
Antioch, the entire Regio heard of the new faith. Antioch
was a centre of evangelic influence for the whole Regio,
just as Ephesus was for the whole Province of which
it was centre, Acts XIX 10. That Regio is afterwards
defined more precisely as the " region which was called
Phrygian (geographically) and Galatic (politically)," Acts
XVI 6, or, as the antithesis might be put, " Phrygian
(by the Greeks) and Galatic (by the Roman govern-
ment) ". More briefly it is summed up as " the Phrygian
region" in Acts XVIII 23, where some prefer to take
Phrygia as a noun (making, however, no difference to the
sense).
It is not at present possible to feel certainty whether
or not Antioch remained part of the Province Galatia down
to the provincial reorganisation by Diocletian about 295.^
The Pisidian martyrs Marcus, Alphius and others under
Diocletian are said to have been of the city Antioch,
1 Inscription mentioned on p. 199.
2 Opposed to Asiana Phrygia, Galen, vol. VI, p. 515, Kuhn.
* See p. 177 f.
14
2IO Historical Introduction.
belonging to the region of Galatic Phrygia : ^ the term
Regio is important and indicates a good ultimate authority,
as we have already seen.
There are several other good features in the account :
the village Kalytos or Katalytos, where the martyrs were
blacksmiths : the calling in of bronze- workers (;^a\yeoTU7rot) :
perhaps the mention of Claudiopolis as a Pisidian city, a
corruption of Claudioseleuceia. The account is late and
corrupt : the original Acta probably described martyrs
from several Pisidian towns, who were tried before the
governor of Galatia at Antioch during a progress through
his Province. If that occurred under Diocletian, it would
be established that Antioch was part of Galatia under his
reign ; but the Emperor's name is far from trustworthy ;
that detail was incorrectly added in late versions of many
Acta ; and in this case the probability is that it is a mere
guess of a late redactor, and did not occur in the original
Acta.
We thus conclude that the facts are as a whole true ; but
the date is probably false, being later than the truth.
Ptolemy mentions Antioch both as a city of Galatia and
as a city of the Province Pamphylia and district Pisidian
Phrygia. That suggests the mixing up of an earlier classi-
fication to Galatia, and a later (true in his time) to Pam-
phylia ; but it may be a mere blunder. At least it is
certain that Antioch was classed to Galatia as late as the
end of Trajan's reign.
Aelian mentions a kind of partridge (^vpoirepSi^), small,
very wild, black in colour, with red beak, the flesh well-
1 Menolog. SirUtianum quoted in Acta Sanctorum, 28th Sept., p.
563 : sub. Diocletiano Imp. in urbe Antiochiae Pisidiae ex regione
Phrygiae Galaticae (wrongly Galaciae) sub praeside Magna.
Section ig : Pisidian Antioch. 2 1 1
tasted, at Antioch of Pisidia : it ate stones {Hist. Anim.,
XVI 7).
We should be glad to know in what relation the old
sanctuary stood to the Colonia. The great estates which
once belonged to the temple are not likely to have been
left undisturbed by Greek kings or by the Greek autono-
mous government. In some similar cases there is evidence
to show that part or the whole of the vast temple properties
in Asia Minor had become imperial estates.^ In the case of
Antioch, it is probable that land for the Coloni was found,
not by depriving the older population of their property,
but by presenting temple lands to the Colonia.
This theory explains, and is confirmed by, the evidence
of Strabo, who states that the temple formerly possessed
much sacred land and a large body of temple slaves, but its
temporal power and wealth were put down after Amyntas
died. Such is the probable meaning of his expression : ^
the temple itself was not put down, for the hereditary god
Men and his priests for life are often mentioned in inscrip-
tions.
But there must have been certain property connected
with the temple, the management of which was entrusted
to an officer called " Curator of the Sanctuary Chest " : ^ it
is highly probable that the Colonia was charged with the
maintenance of the temple out of the revenues of the pro-
perty, which once had belonged to the temple and had been
presented by Augustus to the Colonia.
The circumstances of Antioch suggest that the temple
stood in relations to the city similar to those that existed
in Ephesus. The strength of the Asiatic spirit was always
^ Citu& and Bish. of Phrygia, I, p. 11. ^ KareXydr).
' Curator Arcac Sanctuariae.
212 Historical Introduction.
connected with the temple ; and the temple had consider-
able influence even while the Romanising spirit was most
vigorous.
A festival called Apollo's Birth,^ mentioned at Pisidian
Antioch, must certainly be understood as a festival of Men.
The story of the birth of the god was among the great
mysteries of the religion, as acted before the initiated.
The mystic ceremonies were everywhere associated with
a public festival.
No sure trace of the Jewish element can be detected in
inscriptions. The Antiochian Jews had apparently disused
Hebrew names completely (at least in public) ; but it is not
impossible that some of the characteristic Antiochian names,
such as Anicius, Caristanius, may hide Jews of high rank.
Few Christian inscriptions at Antioch are known. But
in the great cities, where Roman officials were numerous,
it was always expedient for the Christians to make little
public show, and to draw as little attention on themselves
as possible.^
One ends with the phrase " he shall have to reckon with
the might of God " ; another with " thou shalt not wrong
God " ; two others with " he shall have to reckon with God ".
These classes of inscriptions are more fully described else-
where.^ An epigram uses the expression dOavdrov yfrvxv'ij
which seems of Christian type.*
Le Quien mentions as bishops of Antioch (i) Eudoxius
about 290-300, (2) Optatus, (3) Anthimos, and (4) Cyprianus.
Of these Eudoxius is probably historical, for the account
given in a Greek menology under 23rd June seems taken
1 TfvedXia 'AnoKXavos, Acta SS. Trophimi, etc., 19th Sept., p. 12.
2 Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, II, p. 711. ^ Op. cit., II, ch. XII.
* See Sterrett, Epigr. Journ., 138, 142, 143 ; C. I. G., 3980.
Section ig: Pisidian Antioch. 213
from a trustworthy source : in it Eustochius of Ousada {i.e.,
Vasada), a Pagan priest, seeks baptism from Eudoxius of
x^ntioch ; and afterwards goes to Lystra, where he has
relatives ; finally he is sent for trial to Ancyra and con-
demned. There is so much correct detail in the story, that
a presumption is created in its favour.
But Optatus, Anthimos and Cyprianus, though accepted
by Le Quien and the Bollandists (26th Sept., VII, p. 189 f),
have little claim to be historical, much less to be classed to
Pisidian Antioch. The Acta of Justina, in which they are
mentioned, is a document of poor character ; and Syrian
Antioch is mentioned as the city of Justina by many
authorities.
In 314 Sergianos represented Antioch at the Council of
Ancyra, and in 325 Antonius at Nicaea.
A city Antioch is mentioned very often in the ancient
Syrian Martyrology, but the presumption is that Syrian
Antioch is meant.
Apollonia, the city most closely connected with Antioch,
and like it classed to Pisidian Phrygia, is said to have had
Mark, the nephew of Barnabas, as its evangelist and first
bishop ; see Acta Sanctorum, 21st June, V, p. 58; and not
far south of Apollonia, the church of Seleuceia is said to
have had a first century origin with Artemon as first bishop
(27th March).
Eighteen bishoprics of the Province Pisidia are recorded
in or before the fourth century. Six ^ more are added in
later records, mostly in the mountainous and least civilised
parts of Pisidia.
^ Bindaion is probably only another name for Eudoxiopolis, Cities
and Bish. of Phrygia, I, p. 326. Le Quien distinguishes them, and
makes seven late bishoprics.
SECTION 20.
ICpNIUM.
There is a remarkable resemblance between the beautiful
and impressive situation of Damascus and that of Iconium.
Both cities are situated near the western end of vast level
plains, which extend to the east far further than the eye
can see ; and mountains, rising like islands out of the level
plain, give character and variety to the wide view eastwards.
Within a few miles towards the west in each case rises a
great hilly, even mountainous region, from which issue
streams that make the immediate surroundings of. both
cities a perfect garden : the streams find no outlet to the
sea, but are merged in the marshy lakes that lie a little
way east in the open plains. Situated thus in an always
green and rich garden on the edge of the wilderness, each
of the two cities enjoys a permanent importance which no
political changes can destroy, however much misgovernment
may diminish their wealth and prosperity. Each is of
immemorial antiquity. Damascus is famed as the oldest
of cities. At Iconium King Nannakos or Annakos reigned
before the flood ; and, as there was a prophecy that " after
him came the deluge, when all must perish," his Phrygian
subjects mourned for him with a sorrow that became
proverbial.
The legend of Nannakos makes him a king of the Phry-
(214)
Section 20 : Iconium. 215
gians. Xenophon, who visited it during the Anabasis of
Cyrus, calls it the extremest city of Phrygia, Pliny quotes
it among a list of famous old Phrygian cities/ evidently
using some Greek authority ; though, where he describes
the political geography of Asia Minor, he makes Iconium
the capital of the Lycaonian Tetrarchy, which was added
to Galatia. In Acts XIV 6 Paul and Barnabas flee from
Iconium into Lycaonia, implying that it was not a city of
Lycaonia. In A.D. 163, at the trial of Justin Martyr, one
of his associates, a slave named Hierax, described himself
as coming from Iconium of Phrygia.^ About A.D, 250
Firmilian attended the Council of Iconium, and describes
it as a city of Phrygia. It does not on its coins name the
Koinon of Lycaonia. The Vita S. Arteniii (ascribed to
Joannes Damascius) mentions Iconium as the last city of
Phrygia (doubtless on some older authority).^
This forms a very complete chain of evidence, almost
entirely taken from persons who had seen the city. On
the other hand persons who thought only of political con-
nection and geography, always describe Iconium as a city
of Lycaonia : so e.g., Strabo, Pliny, Ptolemy, Cicero,
Stephanus,^ etc.
The contradiction is explained by the situation of Icon-
ium in the vast Lycaonian plain, while it was the extreme
point to which the Phryges had extended their conquest.
It was, in perfect truth, the last Phrygian city ; all beyond
it to the south and east was Lycaonian. At a frontier
^ Read Iconium for Conium, V 41, 145.
2 Ruinart alters the text of the MSS.
OifKdbiv To'ivvv Anacrav rqv ^pvyiav Koi irpos ttjv fa'^dTT/v avTrjs TroXiv
TO KaXnvfievop Ikoviov KaTavTT](Tas.
■• Yet he mentions Nannakos and his Phrygian subjects.
2i6 Historical Introduction.
city, the memory of diversity in race is sometimes preserved
most tenaciously, because it is kept vividly before the
minds of the people. So it was in Iconium. Usually in
Asia Minor boundaries between countries and races were
vague and uncertain. But the boundary between Phrygia
and Lycaonia was narrowly fixed at that one point. The
world in general spoke of Iconium as the chief city of
Lycaonia: nature and geography make it that. But the
Iconians distinguished themselves from the Lycaonians and
claimed to be of Phrygian stock, even in late Roman times.
The reason why the Iconians were always so clear and
positive as to their Phrygian origin must have lain in
something that was vividly brought before the minds of the
people ; and part of the cause was, beyond all doubt, difference
of language. That is revealed to us in Acts XIV 6 : when
Paul and Barnabas fled from Iconium to its near neighbour
Lystra, they crossed into Lycaonia (out of Phrygia) ; and
the Lystran rabble spoke in the Lycaonian tongue (p. 1 50).
Late authorities describe Iconium as a city of Pisidia.
That is due to the political arrangement according to which
western Lycaonia was part of a Province Pisidia, from A.D.
295-372.^ Iconium was a sort of secondary metropolis of
Pisidia Provincia.'^ When the new Province Lycaonia
was organised about 372, Iconium became its metropolis ;
and Amphilochius (375-circ. 400), a bishop of great vigour,
made it a highly important place in ecclesiastical history.
The tendency is often seen to take some prominent name
and extend it over several regions as title of a Roman
political division, in defiance of strict geographical truth :
so the names Asia, Galatia, Cilicia, Pisidia, were employed
^ Ammianus, XIV 2, Basil, Epist. 8, 393, 406.
^ fifTa TTjv fifyloTTjv T) irpaiTr], Basil, Epist. 8.
Section 20 : Iconium. 2 1 7
in a very wide way at different times, because each was
strong in the Roman mind at the time.
Iconium is about 3350 feet above sea-level : it is now
a railway station, and chief city of a vitayet or Turkish
province.
The extraordinary vicissitudes in the history of Iconium
during the last three centuries B.C. have been described in
sections 7-12.
It certainly ranked as a Hellenic city, i.e.^ a city in
which Hellenic order and municipal organisation had
been naturalised, and in which the official language was
Greek from the end of the fourth century. Hence, like
many other Hellenised Phrygian cities, it liked to connect
its origin with Greek legend : it derived its name either
from the image of Medusa, brought there by Perseus,^ or
from the clay images of men which Prometheus made there
after the flood to replace the drowned people. The latter
story shows an intention of giving to the Iconian legend of
the flood a Greek appearance.^
Thus we see that, though it claimed to be Phrygian in
contrast to Lycaonian, it also claimed to be of Greek origin
ultimately. That proves it to have taken on the Greek
character, with Greek forms of government and society.
Its people would be called in the customary sense Hellenes,
and that name is applied to them in Acts XIV i.
The North Galatian Theorists maintain that the Iconians
would have chosen to be called Phrygians (or Lycaonians) ; ^
^ ftico)!', Eustath., ad Dionys. Per., 856.
^ Steph. Byz. Compare the development of the native legend of
the flood at Kelainai-Apameia, Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, II, pp. 415
and 671.
■' Many of them have taken it as a city of Lycaonia.
2i8 Historical Introduction.
as if persons who claimed the rank of Hellenes would have
accepted that address as anything but an insult. Ethno-
logically, they were Phrygians ; but the title Hellenes
implied a certain standard of education, knowledge and
social elevation, inconsistent with the address " Phryges " :
pp. 129, 181 f, 230 f
During the period 37-72 the name Lycaones had a
peculiarly non-Roman innuendo, for it was regularly used
to designate the inhabitants of that part of Lycaonia which
was outside Roman bounds, and subject to King Antiochus.
On his coins the legend " Of the Lycaonians'' is engraved.
At that time the Iconian pride in their Roman connection
{i.e., in their belonging to the Province Galatia) was marked
by the title Claud-Iconium. That title is a real indication
of political feeling. To understand its significance, one
must try to imagine Dublin assuming and boasting in
public documents of the title Victorian Dublin. What a
change in Irish feeling that would indicate !
Little can be gathered from the Iconian inscriptions
about the city constitution. It was governed by Archons ;
but no decrees have been found earlier than the changes
introduced by Hadrian, except C. I. G., 3991, which is an
honorary decree of the Demos.
Hadrian conferred on Iconium the rank of a Colonia, with
the title Aelia Hadriana Iconiensium (see p. 123).
Doubtless this elevation gave the position and rights of
Romans to the whole body of Iconian citizens. It is
doubtful whether the ordinary colonial constitution was
instituted in Iconium ; but an inscription ^ might perhaps
be restored as T. 'ATrircovio^ Kpi(T7ro^7?$') P- 535-
2 Church in Rom. Emp., p. 55 ; St. Paul the Trav., p. 120.
* (f>povpt.ov 'laavpim (cat Xifirjv : many writers, taking Xififjv as a
" harbour," conjectured that Xipvrj was the true reading. Xip-rjv also
meant a " market " in Paphos, Crete, Thessaly (see Steph. Thesaurus) ;
the Limenes or customs stations of Asia are often mentioned in in-
scriptions. See Wilhelm in Arch. Epigr. Mitth. Oest., 1897, p. 76,
Rostowzew, ib., 1896, p. 127.
232 Historical Introduction.
to Cappadocia " : ^ that seems to be an allusion to the fact
that at one time it was the frontier town of the Eleventh
Strategia attached to Cappadocia : see section 7.
In the Galatic Province about A.D. 40-60 the importance
of Derbe lay mainly in its relation to the dependent
kingdom of Antiochus. Doubtless, there would arise
frontier questions calling for the decision of the Roman
governor ; and these questions would have their centre at
Derbe. Hence it probably was that the city was honoured
with the title Claudio-Derbe, which is practically equivalent
to Imperial Derbe : see p. 218. This occurred either in
41 or soon after ; and it was probably as a compensation
for the compliment to an inferior city that Iconium was
permitted a similar title Claud-Iconium by the same
Emperor,
In " Imperial Derbe " the feeling of superiority to the
non-Roman Lycaones across the frontier would be pecu-
liarly strong, because the city was in closer relations than
other Lycaonians with them.
Derbe was detached from Galatia and included in the
Triple Eparchy ^ about A.D. 137, and struck coins naming
the Koinon of the Lycaonians. From about 295 to 372 it
was part of the Province Isauria, as Stephanus says (pro-
bably on the authority of Ammianus).^ Thereafter it was
in the Province Lycaonia.
^ eiriiTfipvKOS Tfj KaTTTTaSoKiq. ^ See p. 177'
^ Compare p. 178.
SECTION 23.
SUMMARY.
The most important political and social facts to observe
in the central districts of Asia Minor, when Paul entered
it, are —
1. The vigour of Roman administration : it was after-
wards relaxed, but the Pauline history is true to the facts
of A.D. 40-60.
2. The steady spread, through natural causes, of a uniform
Hellenic form of civilisation and law throughout Asia
Minor, first in the cities, later in the villages and rustic
districts : as a rule, the villages on the south of the plateau
begin to be Hellenised only in the third century, in the
north only in the fourth and fifth centuries.
3. The alliance of Roman and Greek influence in diffus-
ing a mixed Graeco-Roman system of social and political
ideas.
4. The line along which this Graeco-Roman influence
moved : before A.D. 285 the southern route from inner Asia
through Ephesus to Rome, affecting the south side of the
plateau : after 285 the northern route from inner Asia
through Ancyra to Constantinople, placing North Galatia
in the van of progress.
5. The character and influence of the native religion and
social system in Asia Minor, fundamentally the same
(233)
234 Section 2^ : Summary.
everywhere, everywhere opposed to the Graeco-Roman
civilisation.
6. The struggle between East and West, Asia and
Europe, which is always going on in Asia Minor in forms
that change from century to century : in the time of Paul
it was mainly between the native religion and the Graeco-
Roman civilisation (Christianity, on the whole, being on the
side of the latter).
7. The contrast of the plateau and the western coast-
lands of Asia Minor, the former tending towards the
European type, the latter towards the Asiatic.
8. The essential continuity of character in the people of
Asia Minor from immemorial antiquity down to the present
day according to the two types, plateau and west coast-
lands : the people as they are now offer the best introduc-
tion to the study of the people as they were in A.D. 40-60.
HISTORICAL COMMENTARY
EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS.
THE INTRODUCTORY ADDRESS.^
In any judicious system of interpretation, great stress must
be laid on the introductory address of this Epistle. It
should be compared with the address prefixed to the
Epistle to the Romans, a letter which presents marked
analogies in sentiment and topics. In each case Paul puts
in his introduction the marrow of the whole letter. He
says at first in a few words what he is going to say at length
in the body of the letter, to repeat over and over, to em-
phasise from various points of view, and to drive home into
the minds of his correspondents.
The important fact, upon which the whole letter turns,
is that Paul had been a messenger straight from God to
the Galatians. His message, as delivered originally to
them, had been a message coming from God. No subse-
quent variation or change of message on the part of any
person, himself or others, could affect that fundamental
truth ; and that fact has to be made to live and burn in
their minds. Hence he begins by calling himself "an
1 In the first draft of this Commentary, reference was frequently
made to Lightfoot and to Zockler, as representatives of EngHsh and
German opinion. Subsequently, a few references have been added
to the latest edition of Meyer's Commentary by Professor Sieffert,
1899.
(237)
238 The Introductory Address.
apostle, not from men, neither through man, but through
Jesus Christ and God the father ".
Next he mentions those who join with him as the authors
of the Epistle. He often quotes one or two individuals as
joint-senders of a letter. Here, and here alone, he states
that all the brethren who are with him are sending the
letter to the Churches of Galatia. This important point
calls for special consideration in § H.
Thereafter he introduces the second leading thought of
the whole Epistle — that the action and person of Christ is
sufficient for salvation. And so he adds " who gave Himself
for our sins, that He might deliver us out of this present
evil world ".
II
THE EPISTLE AUTHORISED BY THE CHURCH IN ANTIOCH.
With regard to the persons who are mentioned in a letter
of Paul's as sending messages or salutations to the persons
addressed, a clear distinction must be drawn between those
who are mentioned at the beginning and those who are
mentioned at the end. Salutations at the end of a letter
are expressive of love, good-will, sympathy and interest.
Thus, hosts of well-wishers send greetings to the Romans,
to the Corinthians, to the Philippians, to Timothy (along
with whom must be included the Churches which he re-
presented), etc.
But persons who join in the address prefixed to a letter
are persons whose authorisation is required and conveyed
in it. They are indicated as joint-authors. The letter
(though composed by Paul) is the letter of Paul and those
named with him. These all stamp with their authority
Epistle Authorised by the Church in Antioch. 239
what is said in the letter. Accordingly, where Paul
associates any one with himself in the prefatory superscrip-
tion of his letters, it is always some person who stands in
a position of authority towards those addressed.
In Romans, Ephesians, Timothy, Titus, Paul speaks alone.
No person shares with him in the authoritative address.
It is obvious that in those cases it would be hard to find
any person whose name could authoritatively have been
conjoined with his own by Paul. To the Romans Aquila,
perhaps, but we cannot be sure. Moreover, Aquila pro-
bably was not with Paul in Corinth when he wrote.
It belongs to that fine courtesy which was part of the
fabric of St. Paul's mind, that he never omitted to recognise
in the fullest degree the authority that belonged to another.
When he writes to a community in the conversion and
organisation of which any of his coadjutors and subordin-
ates had played an important part, he desired to acknow-
ledge in his address the position which that person occupied
towards the young congregation. If the coadjutor was in
his company and could stamp with his authority the message
that has to be sent, Paul wrote in their joint name.
Thus Silas and Timothy had gone with him to Philippi
and to Thessalonica in the beginning. Both the letters
that were sent to the Church in Thessalonica begin " Paul
and Silvanus and Timothy ". Even the polite and more
dignified name Silvanus is used, not the familiar Silas.
The letter to the Philippians was sent in the name of
Paul and Timothy. From the omission of Silas we
might confidently infer that he was not with Paul when
the letter was written — an inference that accords with all
other evidence.
Timothy, who rejoined Paul in Corinth shortly after he
240 Epistle Authorised by the Church in Antioch.
went there (Acts XVIII 5), is associated with him in the
second Epistle. Silas, who was in company with Paul
and Timothy at Gorinth on the second journey, is never
mentioned on the third journey.^
Timothy was probably the leading messenger to Colossae
in the beginning.^ He joins in the letters to the Colos-
sians and to Philemon who resided at Colossae.
But in the circular letter, written probably at the same
time as Colossians to the other Asian Churches, Timothy
is not mentioned.^ He had not the same right to speak to
them, and his name could not carry the same weight to
them. Probably various coadjutors had been sent to the
great Asian cities ; and just as courtesy to Timothy seemed
to Paul to require his name in the address to the Colos-
sians, so courtesy towards the Smyrnaeans and the Sardians
prevented Paul from putting Timothy in a position of
authority towards them.
Sosthenes was evidently a leading member of the Cor-
inthian Church ; possibly he had formerly been a chief of
the synagogue. He was in Ephesus when Paul wrote
first to the Corinthians ; and the letter is from " Paul and
Sosthenes the brother". Timothy is not mentioned, be-
cause he was absent on a mission at the time.
The instances are not numerous enough to establish by
themselves a rule ; but the rule is obvious and necessary
from the nature of the situation, and the instances show
how the rule is worked out in practice.
1 Not that he had left Paul's association, but more probably that
he was detached on special service.
"^ St. Paul the Trav., p. 274. There is no direct evidence to that
effect.
3 Eph. I I.
Epistle Authorised by the Church in Antioch. 241
If other persons were this way associated by Paul with
himself, no one probably will imagine that their assent
was merely assumed by Paul. He, doubtless, communi-
cated to them what he was writing ; and their name
guarantees their full approval of the letter with all that it
contains.
Hence we may infer : —
(i) In some or in many cases the introductory address,
like the preface to a book, was the last thing composed.
(2) When a person who stood in a position of authority
to a Church is not named in the opening of a letter to the
Church, he was not in company with Paul at the time.
In the Epistle to the Galatians the authors are " Paul
and all the brethren which are with me ".
The phrase, " all the brethren which are with me," arrests
our attention. Paul wrote in some place where there was
a considerable body of Christians ; and we may confidently
say that that implies one or other of the cities where there
were churches. The words used by Dr. Zockler to describe
the situation in which Paul wrote are so good, that we
may leave it to him to express what is implied in this
phrase. As he has been so prominent an adversary of
the South Galatian theory, no one will be able to charge
me with straining Paul's words to suit my own view. He
says : " The whole body of fellow Christians who were
with him at the time in ^ (not merely his more promi-
nent helpers) are mentioned by St. Paul as those who join
with him in greeting the Galatians. He does this in order
to give the more emphasis to what he has to say to them.
^ Dr. Zockler names " Ephesus " here, without hesitation, con-
formably to his theory, which is the commonly received view among
North Galatian critics.
16
242 Epistle Authorised by the Church in Antioch.
He writes indeed with his own hand (VI 13), but in the
name of a whole great Christian community. The warn-
ings and exhortations which are to be addressed to the
Galatians go forth from a body whose authority cannot be
hghtly regarded." But on VI 13 see § LX.
The Church which here addresses the Galatians, there-
fore, is one which was closely connected with them, whose
opinion would be authoritative among them, one which
could add impressiveness even to a letter of Paul's. What
congregation stood in this relation to the Galatians ? Not
the Ephesians, nor the Corinthians, later converts, who
are not mentioned in the addresses of the letters that are
known to have been written among them (Rom., i Cor.).
Only two congregations could add weight to this particular
letter — Jerusalem and Antioch. The former is, for many
reasons, out of the question ; but Antioch is, from every
point of view, specially suitable and impressive. It was
the brethren at Antioch who chose out Barnabas and Saul
for the work, in the course of which the Galatians were
converted. To the Galatians Antioch was their Mother-
Church, and it would be specially effective among the
Galatians that all the brethren who were at Antioch joined
in the letter.
That Antioch was the place where the letter to the
Galatians was written is confirmed by another consideration.
It was probably there that Paul first received the news
about the Galatian defection. As is shown in St. Paul the
Traveller, p. 189 f, Paul's movements after his second visit
to Galatia were so strange, so perplexing, so entirely un-
foreseen and unintentional, that he is not likely to have
been able to communicate with the Galatians. Not until
he was, after a long period of uncertainty, ordered to remain
Epistle Authorised by the Church in Antioch. 243
in Corinth, had he any fixity. Among those who were
with him Timothy was the most natural messenger ; and
Timothy, who came to him some weeks after his first
entrance into Corinth, remained there long enough to take
the position implied by his being named as joint-author^
of the Second Epistle. It is therefore impossible that
Timothy could have gone to Galatia and returned to Corinth
with the news. Probably he sailed with Paul to Ephesus,
Acts XVIII 18, went thence up to Galatia, and met Paul
in Syrian Antioch with news.
The place of origin throws light on the Epistle as a
whole. In the first place, if the Church of Antioch shared
in it, the letter must have been publicly read and approved
— either before the whole Church, or more probably before
its representatives — before it was despatched. Few, I
imagine, will suppose that Paul merely assumed that all
who were with him agreed in his sentiments ^ without
^ Not implying that he helped to compose the letter.
"^ Thus, for example, the salutation of " all the Churches " in Rom.
XVI 16, means the salutation of the representatives enumerated,
Acts XX 4, who were in company with Paul as he wrote. Incident-
ally, it may be noted that this proves that the long list of greetings
in Rom. XVI was really addressed to the Roman. Church, and not,
according to a well-known theory, to the Church of Ephesus. It is
surely by a slip that Dr. Sanday and Mr. Headlam fail to notice the
meaning of this salutation, and say, "it is a habit of St. Paul to
speak on behalf of the Churches as a whole," quoting, in support of
this statement, Rom. XVI 4 ; i Cor. VII 17, XIV zi ; 2 Cor. VIII r8,
XI 28. In none of these places does Paul speak in the name of the
Churches, except Rom. XVI 4, where he has the same justification,
that representatives of the Churches were with him : in the other
cases he merely mentions facts about " all the Churches ". Further,
this shows that all the delegates assembled at Corinth, disproving
the view suggested in my St. Paul, p. 287 (abandoned in German
translation).
244 Epistle Authorised by the Church in Antioch.
consulting them : those who thus conceive the character of
Paul differ so radically from me that discussion of the point
between us would be unprofitable. Accordingly, we must
understand that the history as well as the sentiment con-
tained in this Epistle were guaranteed by the whole Church
of Antioch.
In the second place, this origin explains why it is that
Antioch, which was so closely associated with the evangeli-
sation of Galatia, is not formally alluded to in the body of
the letter. The Epistle is apt to produce on the modern
reader a certain painful impression, as not recognising the
right of Antioch to some share in the championship of
freedom. Antioch had taken a very prominent and honour-
able part in the struggle for freedom ; yet, on the ordinary
theory of origin, it is not alluded to in this letter, except
to point out that every Jew in Antioch betrayed on one
occasion the cause of freedom. Considering what Antioch
had done for Christianity and for Paul, every one who
follows the ordinary theory must, I think, feel a pang of
regret in Paul's interest that he did not by some word or
expression give more generous recognition to her services.
In a letter, in which he speaks so much about the actual
details of the struggle, he seems, on that view, to speak
only of his own services, and hardly at all to allude to the
services of others. But when all Antiochian Christians are
associated with the Apostle as issuing this authoritative
letter, we feel that the Church of Antioch is placed in the
honourable position which she had earned.
It is true that Paul does not mention Antioch in writing
to the Romans. But, in that Epistle, though the subject
and treatment are in some respects so similar, there is not
the same need or opening for mentioning Antioch, because
Epistle Authorised by the Church in Antioch. 245
the subject is handled in a general and philosophical way, not
in the personal and individual style which rules in Galatians.
What a flood of light does this origin throw on the his-
tory of Antioch and early Christianity ! It shows us the
congregation of Antioch standing side by side with Paul,
sharing in his views, his difficulties, and his struggles for
freedom. The Jewish Christians in Antioch had all ap-
parently become united by this time with the Gentiles in
sympathy with Paul, just as Barnabas and Peter had been.
This in itself is an anwer to those who ^ blame Paul entirely
for the separation between Jews and Christians. The
mingled conciliation (as in Acts XV 30, 31, and XVI 3, 4)
and firmness of Paul gradually produced a unity of Jewish
and Gentile Christians throughout Asia Minor ^ and the
Antiochian district.
The mischief caused by the North Galatian theory is not
merely that it produces erroneous ideas on many points,
but that it shuts the eyes to many other points. Here, for
example, it deprives us of all evidence in the New Testa-
ment for the feeling that existed between Paul and the
Antiochian Church after the events narrated in Acts XV
and Galatians II ff
It will hardly be advanced as an argument against
Antioch as the place of origin that Syria and Antioch are
mentioned in the letter by name, and that Paul does not
say "hither" in place of "to Antioch," II i r. In i Corin-
thians, which was written at Ephesus, he used the expression,
" at Ephesus," and mentions " Asia ".
^ For example, Mr. Baring Gould's interesting Study of St. Paul.
^ Reasons for this view are stated in chaps. XII, XV, XVII of my
Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, on the history of the Christians and
the Jews in Phrygia.
246 Epistle Authorised by the Church in Antioch.
Dr. Clemen has rightly recognised the force that lies in
the phrase, " all the brethren with me," and he explains it
by dating the composition of Galatians immediately after
Romans, when all the delegates of the Churches were with
Paul.^ It may be fully granted that this would explain
quite satisfactorily the use of the phrase ; but other con-
siderations prevent us from accepting so late a date for the
letter.
Ill
PERSONS MENTIONED IN THE EPISTLE.
The persons mentioned by name in the Epistle are Titus,
Cephas Peter, James, John and Barnabas.
Titus was evidently unknown to the Galatians. The
point of Paul's reference to him turns on his nationality.
He was a Greek, and this is carefully explained in II 3, so
that the readers may not fail to catch the drift of the
argument. Had the Galatians known Titus, had he accom-
panied Paul on a journey and been familiar to them, the
explanation would have been unnecessary ; and in this
Epistle there is not a single unnecessary word.
It is assumed that the Galatians know that Cephas and
Peter were the same person ; but we cannot suppose that
they were converted without learning who the Twelve
Apostles were ; and, even if Paul and Barnabas had not
made the Apostles known to them, the Judaising emissaries
would have done so, as the whole burden of their argument
was that James, Peter, etc., were superior in authority to
Paul. Yet, even as regards the three, James and Cephas
1 See footnote on p. 243.
Persons Mentioned in the Epistle. 247
and John, the point on which the argument turns — "they
who were reputed to be pillars " — is made clear and explicit.
Some knowledge about the Apostles is assumed ; but the
crucial point is expressed, and not merely assumed.
Barnabas, however, is mentioned simply by name, and
it is assumed that his personality was familiar to the
Galatians — " even Barnabas was carried away ". The whole
point in this expression lies in Barnabas's staunch champion-
ship of Gentile rights : it presupposes a knowledge of his
action and views. Paul, who even explains that James,
Peter and John were the leading Apostles, assumes that
Barnabas is so familiar, that his argument will be caught
without any explanation. There is only one set of con-
gregations among whom it could be assumed that Barnabas
was better known than Peter and James and John. Paul
was writing to the Galatians, whom Barnabas and he had
converted, and among whom Barnabas had spent many
months.
We must conclude that Barnabas was known to the
Galatians, while Titus was unknown to them.
Now it is argued in my St. Paul, p. 285, that Titus was
taken by Paul with him on his third journey (Acts XVIII
23). After that journey, when Titus had spent a good
many weeks among the Galatians, it would not have been
necessary to explain to them that he was a Greek. On
the other hand, it was a telling sequel to the Epistle that
Titus, who is quoted as an example to the Galatians, and
who was of course one of " the brethren which are with me "
and associated in the Epistle, should personally visit the
Galatians along with Paul on his next journey. There is
a natural connection between the prominence of Titus in
Paul's mind during this Galatian crisis and the selection of
248 Persons Mentioned in the Epistle.
him as companion among the Galatians. One might almost
be prepared to find that, when Paul went on to Ephesus,
Titus was left behind for a time in Galatia, confirming the
churches and organising the contribution ; and that there-
after he rejoined Paul at Ephesus in time to be sent on a
mission for a similar purpose to Corinth.
Now, glance for a moment at the North Galatian theory.
It is certain that, according to that view, Barnabas was
personally unknown to the North Galatians, while there
is a considerable probability that Titus (who was with Paul
in Ephesus) had accompanied him all the way from Ephesus,
and was therefore known to them. The North Galatian
view leaves the tone of the references an insoluble difficulty.
IV
RELATION OF PAUL TO BARNABAS.
It has often been said that Paul is very niggardly here
in recognition of Bamabas's work as a champion of Gentile
rights. But Paul was not writing a history for the igno-
rant ; he assumes throughout that the Galatians knew the
services of Barnabas. The single phrase " even Barnabas "
is a sufficient answer to that charge. The one word " even "
recalls the whole past to the interested readers ; it places
Barnabas above Peter in this respect. Peter had re-
cognised the apostolate to the Gentiles : Peter had eaten
with the Gentiles : but his dissembling, after all that, was
not so extraordinary a thing as that " even Barnabas was
carried away with the dissimulation " of the other Jews.
That one sentence places Barnabas on a pedestal as a
leading champion of the Gentiles ; and yet it does not
"/ MarveC 249
explicitly state that ; it merely assumes the knowledge of
his championship among the Galatians.
Further, where Paul speaks of his first journey, i.e., his
Gospel to the Galatians,^ he uses the plural pronoun : " any
Gospel other than that which we preached unto you " (I 8) ;
"as zve have said before, so say I now again " (I 9).
The Galatians caught the meaning of " we " in these
cases as " Barnabas and I ". On the other hand, where
the reference is to the division which had now come into
existence between the Galatians and their evangelist, Bar-
nabas is not included, and the singular pronoun is used
(IV 12 ff). There was no alienation between the Gala-
tians and Barnabas, for Barnabas had not returned to them ;
and, as we shall see, it was through perversion and through
real misunderstanding of Paul's conduct on his second
journey that the division arose.
" I MARVEL."
After the introductory address — the heading of the letter,
so to say — Paul usually begins the body of the letter with
an expression of thanks (so Rom., i Cor., Phil., Col., i and
2 Thess., 2 Tim., Philem.), or of blessing (so 2 Cor., Eph.)
— some acknowledgment of the Divine care and kindness
in respect of his correspondents and himself.
In so doing he was following the customary polite form
in ordinary Greek letters. In those letters, after the super-
^ It is important to observe that when Paul speaks of the Gospel
to the Galatians, he means the message which converted them, i.e..
on his first visit.
250 "/ Marvel:'
scription giving the names and titles of the writer and of
the person or persons addressed, there was usually added
some acknowledgment of the Divine power, such as : " if
you are well and successful, it would be in accordance with
my constant prayer to the Gods:" or "before all things I
pray that you may be in health ; " but in case of haste,
eagerness, excitement or anger, this conventional part of
the letter was often omitted. Now "courtesy of address
to all was valued by Paul as an element in the religious
life ; and he advised his pupils to learn from the surrounding
world everything that was worthy in it, ... ' whatsoever
is courteous, whatsoever is of fine expression, all excellence,
all merit, take account of these,' wherever you find these
qualities, notice them, imitate them "} So here, " it is
Paul's Greek environment and his Greek education that
are responsible for the expressions which he uses ".^ In all
his own life and words, and in all his teaching to others,
he takes up " the most gracious and polished tone of
educated society " ; but as all the forms of politeness and
courtesy in ordinary life had a religious tone and acknow-
ledged the gods, he changed them so far as to give them a
Christian turn (though sometimes the change might almost
have been adopted by an enlightened pagan), acknowledg-
ing God in place of the gods.
The exceptions are i Timothy and Titus (in which he
plunges at once into the important business of Church
order and teaching, the cause of the letters) , and the Gala-
^ Deissmann, Bibelstudien, p. 207 ff ; Rendel Harris, Expositor, Sept.,
1898, p. 163 fF; St. Paul the Trav., p. 149.
^ Harris, loc. cit., p. 165. So in St. Paul the Trav., p. 149, " it is the
educated citizen of the Roman world who speaks in these and many
other sentences ".
" Ve are so quickly Removing^^ 251
tian letter, which differs from all others. Not merely is
there no expression of thankfulness ; Paul goes at once to
the business in hand, " I marvel that ye are so quickly
removing," and then he pronounces a curse on any one,
man or angel from heaven, who preaches to the Galatians
" any gospel other than that which we preached unto you "
— ^" any gospel other than that which ye received ". The
reference, of course, is to the message which converted the
Galatians, the Gospel which originally called tKem from
darkness to light.
The intense feeling under which Paul was labouring is
shown by the unique character of the opening, and by the
strength — one might say, the violence — of the language.
Anything that is said in this first paragraph must be under-
stood as being of overwhelming importance. Paul here
touches the crucial point of the Galatian difficulty.
VI
"YE ARE SO QUICKLY REMOVING."
The position of these words in the opening of the letter
shows that we must lay the utmost stress on them. Paul
had evidently heard nothing of the steps by which the
Galatians had passed over to the Judaising side. We may
assume, of course, that there were steps : however rapidly,
from one point of view, it came about, time is required to
change so completely the religion of several cities so widely
separated. But Paul had heard nothing of the inter-
mediate steps. He heard suddenly that the Galatian
Churches are crossing over to the Judaistic side. This
point requires notice.
252 " Ve are so quickly Reiiioving^''
In the case of the Corinthian Church, we can trace in
the two Epistles the development of the Judaising ten-
dency. In the first Epistle it hardly appears. The diffi-
culties and errors which are there mentioned are rather
the effect of the tone and surroundings of Hellenic pagan-
ism : lax morality, and a low conception of purity and
duty, are more obvious than the tendency to follow Judais-
ing teachers. There is a marked tendency in Paul's tone
to make allowance for the Judaic point of view : the writer
is quite hopeful of maintaining union and friendly relations
with the Jewish community. We observe here much the
same stage as that on which the Galatian Churches stood
at Paul's second visit (Acts XVI 1-5) : then, also, Paul was
full of consideration for the Jews, hopeful of unity, ready
to go to the furthest possible point in conciliating them by
showing respect to their prejudices, delivering the Apostolic
Decree, and charging them to observe its prohibition of
meats offered to idols and of those indulgences which were
permitted by universal consent in pagan society. In i
Corinthians his instruction is to the same general effect,
though delivered with much greater insight into the prac-
tical bearing and the philosophic basis of the rules of life
which he lays down. He had learned in the case of the
Galatian Churches what mistaken conceptions the Apos-
tolic Decree was liable to rouse, if it were delivered to
his converts as a law for them to keep : he knew that, if
there were any opening left, the ordinary man would
understand that the Decree would be taken as a sort of
preparation for, and imperfect stage leading up to, the
whole Law. His instructions to the Corinthians are care-
fully framed so as to guard against the evils which had
been experienced in Galatia ; and yet the principles and
" Ye are so quickly Removing.'' 253
rules which he lays down represent exactly his conception
of the truth embodied in the Apostolic Decree.^ The theme
in I Corinthians is the statement of the moral and philoso-
phical basis on which rested the external and rather crude
rules embodied in that Decree.
On the other hand, in 2 Corinthians the old evils are
sensibly diminished, to Paul's great joy and thankfulness,
but a new evil is coming in, viz., the tendency to Judaism.
This, however, is not yet so far advanced in Corinth as it
was in Galatia when Galatians was written. It is only
beginning. It is a suggestive fact that Romans, written
six or nine months later than 2 Corinthians, speaks of
the Judaising tendency as a danger in a stage similiar to
Galatians ; and Dr. Drescher, in a most admirable article
in Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1897, p. i ff, remarks
that Paul, in writing to the Roman Church, with which he
had never come into personal relations, and about whose
position and difficulties he had only second-hand informa-
tion,^ was guided greatly by the circumstances of the
Corinthian congregation, in the midst of which he was
writing.'^ Dr. Sanday and Mr. Headlam are, on the whole,
of this opinion. Corinth, then, early in 57, was where
Galatia stood in 53.*
How, then, had Paul been ignorant of the steps in the
^ See Professor W. Lock's convincing paper in Expositor, July,
1897, p. 65.
^ Reports from Aquila and Priscilla would not be sufficient, though
they may perhaps have elicited the letter. Acts XXVIII shows that
the Judaistic difficulty had not yet become serious in Rome.
' Similarly his Ephesian experiences influence, to some extent, the
tone of I Corinthians and the early part of 2 Corinthians.
•*The dates given in St. Paul the Trav. are assumed, in order to
show the interval.
254 '' Ve are so quickly Removing.''
Galatian defection? That was natural, on the South
Galatian view. The rapid and unforeseeable changes of
his life after his second Galatian visit made it impossible
for exchange of letters and messages to take place.^ Even
after he went to Corinth he was still looking for the ex-
pected opening in Macedonia (which he understood to be
his appointed field), until the new message was given him
(Acts XVIII 9).
But on the North Galatian view, Paul was resident in
Ephesus for over two years after leaving Galatia, and this
residence was in accordance with his previous intention
(Acts XVIII 2i). Those who place the composition of
Galatians after Romans cannot explain Paul's ignorance, for
it is as certain as anything in that far away time can be
that there was almost daily communication between Ephesus
and Pisidian Antioch.^ The commoner view, v/hich places
Galatians as early as possible in the Ephesian residence,
reduces the difficulty ; but still leaves it unexplained why
Paul's news was so sudden and so completely disastrous,
why he had no preparation. Yet the tone of these opening
words is inexplicable, unless the news had come like a
thunderclap from a clear sky.
VII
CAUSE OF THE GALATIAN MOVEMENT.
In order to illustrate the Galatian situation, let us
suppose that at the present day a race, which had been
converted to Christianity by Protestant missionaries, was
1 See above, p. 242.
'^ Not so frequent between Ancyra and Ephesus; but even in that
case there was easy communication, see Lightfoot, p. 25.
Cause of the Galatian Movement. 255
soon afterwards visited by Roman Catholic missionaries,
and that it was as a whole strongly affected by the more
imposing ritual of that form of Christianity and " was
quickly removing " to it. Would any one be content to
explain the situation as an instance and a proof of the
" fickleness " of the race, which thus went over? One who
summed up the situation in that way would be at once
rebuked for his superficiality, and told that he must look
for some more deep-seated reason why the race was inclined
to prefer the more sensuous and imposing ritual of the
second form to the stern simplicity of their original Chris-
tianity.
So in the Galatian movement, we must regard it as
superficial, if any one explains that movement as caused
by the " fickleness " of the Galatians. A race does not
change its religion through fickleness : it changes, because
it believes the new form to be better or truer or more
advantageous than the old. We must try to understand
the reason of a notable religious movement in Galatia, and
not delude ourselves by misleading and superficial talk
about Galatian fickleness.
It is characteristic of the unscientific nature of the North
Galatian theory that it lays such stress on the " fickleness "
of the Galatians as the one great cause of their religious
nriovement.
Now what cause does Paul regard as lying at the bottom
of the Galatian movement ? There is not throughout the
whole Epistle a word or a sentence to suggest that he
attributed it to fickleness. The verse which we are con-
sidering merely states a fact — " you are so quickly removing
from him that called you in the grace of Christ unto a
different Gospel "-^-^nd there is not the slightest justification
256 Cause of the Galatian Movement.
for reading into it an explanation of the cause of removal.
See § XLII, pp. 193 ff, 323 f, 449.
Moreover, Paul shows throughout the Epistle that he
saw certain causes for the Galatian movement, and that
fickleness was not one of them. The causes will become
clear as we go over the ground. Here briefly it may be
said that they partly lay in misconceptions into which the
Galatians had fallen through false impressions and false
information conveyed to them by others, and partly in the
natural tendency to recur to certain religious forms to
which the Galatians had been accustomed as pagans, or,
as St. Paul puts it, to " turn back to the weak and beggarly
rudiments," IV 9.
In fact, the whole Epistle is the explanation of the
causes of removal, which it counteracts and undermines.
VIII
PAUL AS A JUDAISTIC PREACHER, I. 6-10.
We have remarked in § V. on the intense feeling shown
in this paragraph. Any topic that is touched on in these
verses must be taken as a point of transcendent importance
in the Galatian difficulty. Why, then, does Paul lay such
stress on the supposition that he ^ may begin to preach a
diflferent Gospel ? Can anything be more improbable ?
Why does he waste time on such a possibility ? What
part does that supposition play in the Galatian difficulty ?
We are bound to the view that the supposition here
1 ^/xelf, Paul and his companion in preaching,. As Lightfoot says,
" St. Paul seems never to use the plural when speaking of himself
alone " ; yet cp. 2 Cor. VI 11.
Paul as a Judaistic Preacher. 257
introduced in this emphatic position was really a serious
element in the Galatian trouble : i.e., the Galatians had
acquired the opinion that Paul had somehow been con-
veying a different message, a new Gospel/ contrary to the
Gospel which they received from him on the first visit.
This opinion, of course, had been instilled into them by
the Judaistic emissaries, who had been preaching in the
Galatian Churches since Paul's second visit. In V 1 1
Paul returns to the same topic. " If," he says, " I still
preach circumcision." Here there is an unmistakable
reference to an assertion made by the Judaistic preachers
that Paul himself had been preaching the Gospel of cir-
cumcision ; and it is noteworthy that here again Paul uses
an expression of the most vehement indignation, " I would
that they which unsettle you would even cut themselves
off.^ It was this accusation of having preached an anti-
Pauline Gospel that hurt Paul and made him use such
strong language in both places where he refers to it.
But was not the accusation too absurd ? It was, how-
ever, believed by the Galatians, for otherwise Paul would
have suffered it to " pass by him as the idle wind ". Its
danger and its sting lay in the fact that the Galatians were
misled by it. Now they could not have believed it merely
on the bare, uncorroborated assertion of the Judaisers
There must have been a certain appearance of difference
in Paul's teaching on his second visit, which gave some
support to the statements and arguments of the Judaistic
teachers, and so helped to mislead the Galatians.
We turn, therefore, to the history, as recorded by Luke,
and ask whether it can explain how the Gospel which the
^ So Lightfoot, and (I think) almost every one.
^ See below, § LII.
17
258 Paul as a Judaistic Preacher.
Galatians received on the former visit could seem to them
discordant with Paul's subsequent action and teaching on
his second visit. Then we see that in Acts XVI, Luke, as
always, is offeringus the means of understandingtheEpistles.
On the second journey Paul came delivering to the Galatians
(Acts XVI 4) the decree of the Apostles in Jerusalem.
That might fairly seem to be an acknowledgment that
those Apostles were the higher officials, and he was their
messenger. He circumcised Timothy. That might readily
be understood as an acknowledgment that the higher stages
of Christian life ^ were open only through obedience to the
whole Law of Moses : in other words, that, as a concession
to human weakness, the Gentiles were admitted by the
Apostolic Decree to the lower standard of the Church on
the performance of part of the Law, but that the perfecting
of their position as Christians could be attained only by
compliance with the whole Law. It is clear from Galatians
III 3 that this distinction between a lower and more
perfect stage of Christian life was in the minds of the
persons to whom Paul was writing. However different
Paul's real motive was in respect of Timothy, the view of
his action suggested by the Judaistic teachers was a very
plausible one, and evidently had been accepted by the
Galatians. The action, in truth, was one easy to misunder-
stand, and not easy to sympathise with.
Moreover, the Decree itself was quite open to this con-
struction. " It seemed good to lay upon you no greater
burden than these necessary things " — this expression can
plausibly be interpreted to imply the ellipsis, " but, if you
voluntarily undertake a heavier burden, we shall praise you
' On the predisposition of the Galatians to recognise two stages,
lower and higher, in religious knowledge, see § XXVII.
Paul as a Judaistic Preacher. 259
for your zeal in doing more than the necessary minimum,"
To zealous and enthusiastic devotees, such as the Asia
Minor races were,^ this interpretation was very seductive.
They doubtless had heard from Paul of Peter's speech
(Acts XV 10), in which he protested against putting on
them a yoke too heavy ; but, under the stimulus of en-
thusiasm, they responded to the Judaists that they could
and would support that yoke, however heavy.
Moreover, the Galatians had been used to a religion in
which such ritualistic acts {ja (noi^ela rov Koafiov, IV 3)
were a prominent part ; and it was natural that they
should again " turn to the weak and beggarly elements ".
The result of the whole series of events described in Acts
would naturally be that the Galatians were predisposed
to follow the Judaistic emissaries, and to think that Paul
on his second visit was preaching another Gospel, and
that this second Gospel was the true Gospel, as being
brought from the real Apostles, the pillars of the Church.
This misinterpretation of his conduct, with all the danger
it involved, Paul had to meet at the outset. It was funda-
mental ; and until it was put out of the way he could make
no progress in setting the Galatians right. He meets it,
not by mere denial and disproof (which is always rather
ineffective), but by the intense and vehement outburst :
" If Silas or I, or an angel from heaven, preach to you any
Gospel other than that which Barnabas and I preached
unto you, a curse on him ! "
On the South Galatian theory the language of Paul here
is quite naturally and probably explained. Now let us
compare the North Galatian view.
^ See pp. 36 ff, 196.
26o Paul as a Judaistic Preacher.
It is quite allowed by North Galatian theorists that
the foundation for the misrepresentation of Paul's teaching
alluded to in I 6-IO and V ii lay (as we also assume) in
his action on his second journey.^ Thus they are face to
face with a serious difficulty. Holding that the Galatian
Churches were converted on the second journey, they have
to show how Paul's teaching on the third journey (Acts
XVIII 23), could appear to the Galatians more Judaistic
than his teaching on the second (Acts XVIII 1-5). They
cannot do so, and they do not attempt it.
It does not seem permissible to think that Paul's
supposed teaching in the North Galatian cities could be
materially different in spirit from his action and preaching
in South Galatia a few weeks or months previously. The
words of Acts XVI 5 must be taken as a proof that through-
out the second journey Paul charged all his hearers to
observe the Apostles' Decree ; and, considering the ease
and frequency of communication between the various Jewish
settlements in Asia Minor, the North Galatian Jews must
have known from the first about Paul's action to Timothy :
in fact, the intention was that they should know. It
would therefore be absurd to suppose that it was only
after the third journey that their Galatian pagan neighbours
came to learn what Paul had been doing in South Galatia
on the second journey, and to draw their conclusions there-
from.
IX
ANOTHER GOSPEL, I 6-7.
According to the Revised Version Paul here says to the
Galatians, " I marvel that ye are so quickly removing from
^ See, t.g.y Lightfoot's note on Gal. II 3.
Another Gospel. 261
him that called you in the grace of Christ unto a different
gospel; which is not another gospel: only there are some
that trouble you and would pervert the Gospel of Christ ".
According to that rendering the force of the sentence
lies in the pointed antithesis between two Greek words,
€T€pov and aWo : the Galatians have gone over to a gospel
which is erepov and not aWo : this expression is taken to
mean a gospel which is essentially different, and is not
another gospel, i.e., is not a second example of the genus
gospel. But that rendering, though widely accepted, rests
on a mistaken idea of the meaning of the two Greek words,
when contrasted with one another.
We are forced here to enter on a technical point of
grammar, vis:, the exact signification of these two Greek
words, when their difference is brought emphatically before
the reader by close juxtaposition. Those who do not care
to read the grammatical discussion on this point may rest
assured that, before venturing to differ from so great a
scholar as Lightfoot on such a subject, the writer consulted
several excellent scholars ; and that, since the view here
stated as to the force of the two Greek words was first
published,^ it has been approved by several distinguished
authorities as undeniable.
It is clear that Lightfoot's usually accurate and thorough
sense for Greek language was here misled by a theological
theory : he thought that a certain meaning was necessary,
and he proceeded to find arguments in its support, de-
claring that erepooi describes
the two processes of teaching the converts and carrying
the good news to those who had not yet heard it.
In view of this difference it is highly probable that Paul's
second visit to Galatia was a brief one, in which he con-
^ See above, pp. 33, 195, and Impressions of Turkey, p. 27 ff.
270 The Gospel which ye received.
fined his attention to strengthening and instructing the
converts without seeking to carry on a further process of
evangelisation. That has been assumed on the authority
of Acts in the reckoning of time in my Church in the
Roman Empire, p. 85 ; and it seems to gather strength
from the language of Galatians. EvayyekiaafxeOa and
TrapeXd^ere refer to the single occasion when the Churches
were formed, the first journey ; and the instruction given
on the second journey is distinguished from it. Paul does
not trouble himself to prove that the second message was
consistent with the first. He merely says, " if the second
message was different, a curse be upon me : you must
cleave to the first, which came direct from God ".
The point, then, which Paul sets before himself is not to
show that he has always been consistent in his message,
but to show that the original message which he brought
to the Galatians came direct from God to him. If he
makes them feel that, then the other accusation of later
inconsistency on his part will disappear of itself.
This method is obviously far the most telling. Even if
Paul, by a lengthened proof (always difficult to grasp for
those who are not very eager to grasp it), had proved
that he had really been consistent, that did not show that
he was right or his message divine. On the other hand,
if he showed that his first message was divine, then the
Galatians would from their own mind and conscience
realise what was the inner nature and meaning of his
conduct on the second journey.
The line of proof is, first, an autobiographical record of
the facts bearing upon his original Gospel to the Galatians,
and thereafter an appeal to their own knowledge that
through this first Gospel they had received the Spirit.
Dates of the Autobiography. 271
That was the ultimate test of divine origin. Nothing
could give them the Spirit and the superhuman power
of the Spirit except a divine Gospel.
XIII
DATES OF THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY.
Paul in this retrospect mentions a number of events in
his past life. The question has been keenly debated
whether the dates which he prefixes to some of the events
are intended to mark the interval between each and the
preceding event, or the period that separates each from
his conversion. Let us put down the facts clearly. The
following events are mentioned : —
1. The conversion and call to the Gentiles (I 15, 16).
This is the starting-point, and is therefore introduced by
ore.
2. eudea)V fJi€pU}V KoX TU)V €771 dakaTTT] TOJVOiV, DlodorUS, I l"].
* Greek text in Joannes Theophili, Mvr]ii(la ' AyioXoyiKo, p. 394.
28o The Klimata of Syria and Cilicia.
paratively small geographical division : in that passage
the sense of " frontier district " is quite conceivable, as a
village on the upper Siberis near the Paphlagonian frontier
is there said to be utto to K\l\xa rf}^ Mvrj^Lvrj'^, " classed
under the district whose governing centre is Mnezos ".
XVI
THE VISITS TO JERUSALEM, I i8, II i ff,
"Then in the third year (after the epoch-making event) I
went up to Jerusalem. . . . Then, when the fourteenth year
(after the epoch) had come I went up again to Jerusalem."
It would open up too wide a subject to enter on the
relation between the narrative of Acts and the account
given here of the two visits. It is well known that the
reconciliation of this account with Acts presents great
difficulties. Some suppose that Luke has omitted a visit
which Paul describes, others that Paul has omitted a visit
which Luke describes. The overwhelming majority of
scholars are agreed that Paul here alludes to the visits
described in Acts IX 26 and XV i fif; but among them
there reigns the keenest controversy. Many hold that
Gal. II I ff is contradictory of Acts XV, and infer that the
latter is not a trustworthy account, but strongly coloured
and even distorted. Others, by an elaborate argumenta-
tion, prove that the one account is perfectly consistent with
the other.
We need not here enter on this large subject. It will be
more useful merely to try to construct from Paul's own
words the picture which he desired to place before his
Galatian readers. He describes a certain historical event.
The Visits to Jerusalem. 281
He paints it from a certain point of view. His object is to
rouse a certain idea of it in his Galatian correspondents.
It is admitted by all that the author of Acts paints from
a different point of view and with a different object. We
need not discuss the question whether the two accounts
can be harmonised. The Galatians had not before them
the book of Acts, and therefore could not proceed to con-
struct a picture by comparing that account with Paul's.
Some of them had certainly heard of the visits to Jerusalem
before they received this letter ; but Paul had been their
authority at first ; and now he repeats briefly to all what
he had said before to some at different times.
Let us then try simply to determine what is the fair and
natural interpretation of this sharp and emphatic account.
For a historian it would be necessary to add details that
Paul did not need for his purpose, but which Luke thought
necessary for his history. Each had to omit much from
his brief -account Our present purpose is not to write a
history ; but to study the relations between Paul and the
Galatians. What did Paul find it advisable to put before
them regarding these visits ?
As to the elements common to the two accounts, the
opening words — " I went up to Jerusalem," " I went up
again to Jerusalem " — naturally suggest that Paul is giving
an account of his successive visits to Jerusalem.
Apart from the desire to harmonise Luke with Paul,
no one would ever have inferred from these words that
Paul's intention was to give an account only of interviews
with Apostles, and that he omits visits to Jerusalem
on which he did not see Apostles. As we shall see
immediately, false accounts of his visits to Jerusalem were
current and were injuring his cause: it was declared that
282 The Visits to Jerusalein.
his object in going to Jerusalem was to get authority and
commission from the original and only real Apostles. He
therefore shows that on these visits he got no authority
or commission from the Apostles, and that his object in
going up was quite different. We should not naturally
expect that he would pass in silence over one of the visits
thus misrepresented, because the facts were very strongly
in his favour in that case. He mentions exactly whom he
saw on his first visit. He denies that he saw any other
Apostle but two. If on a second visit he saw no Apostle,
one would expect him to mention this.
Throughout the description of the visits, what is stated
is greatly determined by the current misrepresentations.
Paul is not giving a complete history of what occurred on
his visits, but simply tells enough to correct false impressions
or statements.
There is, however, no need to suppose that the
Judaistic emissaries who had troubled and perverted the
Galatians had deliberately falsified the narrative : the events
of which they spoke had occurred long ago, and it is quite
natural and probable that an incorrect account might have
grown up among the strongly prejudiced adherents of the
extreme Judaistic party in Jerusalem.
Especially, it is clear that they forgot how long an
interval had elapsed between the conversion and the first
visit. They spoke — and doubtlessly really thought — as if
Paul had gone up to Jerusalem immediately after that
epoch-making event. Hence Paul begins by denying this,
V. 16, "immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood,
neither went I to Jerusalem to them which were Apostles
before me : but I went away into Arabia ; and again I
returned unto Damascus".
The First Visit to Jertisatem. 283
XVII
THE FIRST VISIT TO JERUSALEM, I 18-20.
As to the first visit in the third year, there is little to
say. Paul tells that he was desirous of visiting Cephas ;
and he eniploys the word which was " used by those who
go to see great and famous cities ".^ He is careful to state
quite frankly his motive, even though it slightly tells against
his argument. It puts Peter on an elevation of importance
and dignity, and himself on the level of the tourist who
goes to see the great man. But also it makes the situa-
tion clear : he went to Jerusalem to see Peter specially, as
a distinguished and great man, whom a young convert like
himself regarded with peculiar respect, but not to seek
authority or commission from the Apostles as an official
body. He recognises fully and honourably a certain rank
and weight that belonged of right to Peter in the Church ;
and he desired to make acquaintance with him on that
account.
The visit was short. He continued in relations with
Peter fifteen days, z>., if he saw Peter for the first time on
the first day of the month, his last interview with him was
on the fifteenth. As his object was to see Peter, that
must be taken to imply that his stay in Jerusalem was
limited to that time : he repaired to Peter as soon as vv'as
convenient after his arrival, and left immediately after he
last saw him. Of the other Apostles he saw only James,
and the most natural explanation is that the rest were
absent on various duties. It is not a natural or in itself
probable inference that, though others were present in the
^ Lightfoot, from Chrysostom.
284 The First Visit to Jerusalem.
city, Paul was kept apart from them by Peter, or himself
avoided them. If he desired to meet Peter it would be
merely irrational to avoid the others, and would be rather
like a skulking criminal than a straightforward man.
Then follows the solemn oath : " Now, touching the things
which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not "
(I 20). The position of this solemn assurance at this point
implies that the truth about the first visit was particularly
important. But in the details that are mentioned, there is
nothing that seems in itself important. In fact the account
is tantalisingly empty ; it does not even assert positively
that Peter taught Paul no part of his Gospel at that time.
But the importance of the account lies in the preceding
events. The Judaising party had given a different account
of that visit. What their account was we cannot say pre-
cisely ; but clearly it slurred over the interval from the
conversion, and represented the first visit as being the
occasion when Paul received a commission and instructions
from the body of the Apostles ; and the brief statement
of years and hours and names disproved it without further
words. As to learning from Peter, Paul had probably
always openly affirmed — what is here tacitly implied in
the phrase "to visit Cephas" — that he had gained much
from Peter's knowledge and experience.
If there existed so much misapprehension — or even per-
haps falsification, though we personally see no reason to
think such had been practised — about the first visit, we
should naturally suppose that there was also misapprehen-
sion about Paul's other visits, as if these had been frequent
and had always the same object of getting instruction and
the solution of difficulties from the source of authority in
Jerusalem. Such had been the object of one visit, described
The Second Visit to Jerusalem. 285
in Acts XV : no one could deny that ; least of all would
Paul deny it. The Judaisers generalised from that visit,
which was recent and familiar to all. They represented
to the Galatians — doubtless they really believed — that the
other visits were undertaken from similar motives. Hence
Paul states so carefully in each case what his motive really
was. His statements are all intended to correct false
conceptions.
XVIII
THE SECOND VISIT TO JERUSALEM, II i-io.
This visit is described much more fully than the first visit.
The narrative is most difficult to understand. The Galatians
could understand it, because it to a considerable extent
merely recalled to them what they knew already. Modern
readers find it obscure, because they have no certainty as
to the facts that are alluded to. Every modern commen-
tator holds some theory as to the correspondence with
Acts ; he identifies the visit described by Paul with some
visit described by Luke, and reads into Paul's narrative the
spirit and even the incidents of Acts. Paul's narrative is
broken by the omission of words essential to strict gram-
matical construction. Each commentator naturally fills up
the gaps according to his own theory and his conception of
the events. Thus, for example, Lightfoot makes out of
Paul's words a story very like the account given in Acts
XV ; but most of the resemblances are inserted bodily to
complete Paul's broken clauses.
It is specially necessary in this case to carry out our
principle ; ^ to add nothing, to rigidly restrict ourselves to
1 See p. 280 f.
286 The Second Visit to Jerusalem.
the actual words of Paul, and to elicit from them only what
fairly and certainly lies in them. To do so, one must
exercise self-restraint — one must confess that in several
places want of knowledge of facts known to the Galatians
leaves us in uncertainty.
The following pages are written without a fixed theory.
Mr. Vernon Bartlet, in a paper now in type but unpublished,
has convinced me that there is a tenable hypothesis, which
in my previous discussion of the subject ^ was not taken
into account : we have no assurance that Luke describes
all Paul's visits to Jerusalem : he had to omit many things
from his very concise history : it is perfectly conceivable
that Paul and Barnabas may have been ordered by revela-
tion to go up to Jerusalem at some point such as Acts XI
26 or elsewhere, and that Luke left this visit unmentioned
(as he did the Arabian visit), because he considered it to
lie outside of the thread of his historical purpose. That is
a fair theory, which at present I dare neither reject nor
accept ; and therefore in the ensuing discussion there lurks
no identification with any visit described by Luke.
As to the general character of Paul's narrative, we must
bear always in mind that his intention is not to give a
history of his visit, or to tell why he made the visit and
how he carried his primary object into effect. The narrative
is introduced because of its bearing on the question now at
issue in the Galatian Churches. Paul's point in ch. I, II,
lies in this, that he is the Apostle charged by God to the
Gentiles, that he was accepted as such by the chief x'\postles,
that he gave a message direct from God to the Galatians,
and that he was not commissioned or instructed by the
1 In Expositor, August, 1895, p. 105 ff, also the papers in Expositor,
March, July, 1896.
The Second Visit to Jerusalem. 287
older Apostles to deliver any message to them at first,
though at a later stage he was commissioned to deliver
to them the Apostolic Decree.
In the account which we have now to study, the essential
and fundamental fact emerges clear to every reader that in
the fourteenth year from the epoch-making event ^ Paul
communicated in a certain way to certain Apostles in
Jerusalem the Gospel which he preaches, everywhere and
always, to the Gentiles, and that they approved his Gospel.
This communication was an event of the utmost importance.
We must lay the utmost stress on it, as Paul evidently did.
It is the essential proof of the vital harmony that existed
among the four great Christian leaders. Paul tells us of
the manner in which the communication was made, and
the cause that brought it about, and his intention in making
it, and the reception which the three chiefs gave to it.
Such fulness in this brief historical retrospect is proof of
the cardinal importance of the communication. The whole
history of the early stages of that first great controversy in
the Church lies before us in that sentence. When the
sentence is rightly understood, it disproves conclusively
many laboriously spun modern theories as to the dissensions
between the four leaders, " the discrepancies of Petrine and
Pauline tradition," and all the rest of those airy cobwebs.
Those theories all depend on misconstruction and mistrans-
lation. And many more theories will have to be abandoned
for the same reason, before the essential unity and perfection
of early Christian history is appreciated.
It is not our purpose, however, to touch on any of those
theories ; but simply to determine what Paul meant the
' The epoch, as we hold, § XIII, was his conversion.
The Second Visit to Jerusalem.
Galatians to gather. Only we must plead against the fixed
belief entertained by many that the interpretation is now
certain, and that discussion is closed. The Tubingen
scholars founded their theory on a false interpretation.
The present dominant interpretations are all founded on a
theory of identification with Luke, and differ in many
details from one another. We cannot see that the now
dominant theory is any more certain than the Tubingen
interpretation.^
In fact the dominant interpretations seem to be all
too much influenced by prepossessions derived from the
Tubingen theories. Those theories have deservedly and
rightly exercised a strong influence on all thinking minds.
There was a natural and healthy tendency even among
opponents (at least the best of them), not merely to assimi-
late the lofty and noble qualities of the Tubingen criticism,
but also to adopt as much as possible of its results. In
regard to this passage in Galatians, this prepossession has
had unfortunate results, which will last for some time yet.
Here once more, as in many other points, our first duty
is to protest against the closed door by which so many
scholars try to bar our investigations. History in all de-
partments is being rewritten in the present age. The most
important, and one of the most difficult, episodes in history
is the early stage in the growth of Christianity. Here of
all places it is unsuitable to assume certainty, and to refuse
to reconsider without prejudice dominant theories.
We, at any rate, shall try to write here without any theory
in the mind on this point.
What a sentence it is that we have to study ! Involved
1 It is not meant that all the " Tubingen School " agreed exactly,
but that there is a general agreement in character.
The Second Visit to Jerusalem. 289
and perplexed, taking up one point, abandoning it, resuming
it, explaining, correcting, returning on itself. Never was
such a sentence penned by mortal man before or since.
Never has so much been said in so few words ; and never
has it been said in such defiance of ordinary construction,
and yet on such a high intellectual level. The one thing
on which all commentators are agreed is the terrific, awe-
inspiring nature of that portentous sentence ; for though
one may thrust in a period here or there, it is really one
sentence that runs through the verses i-io.
But at least the spirit of the narrative is clear. The spirit
is unity, concord, hearty agreement between Paul and the
great Apostles, " the acknowledged leaders ", That is the
impression which any one who reads the words of Paul
without prepossession by Luke's accounts must derive.
Paul consulted them ; they heard : they gave the right
hand of fellowship to the two new Apostles to the Gentiles :
they made a formal partition of the work that lay before
the young Church — Barnabas and Paul to the Gentiles,
the older Apostles to the Jews.
That being so, is it permissible to suppose that Paul
succeeds in conveying that impression by omitting all the
facts which showed disagreement between himself and the
older Apostles? This question ought to be fairly faced
and answered by all commentators. But certainly some of
them do not face it ; they unconsciously hide it from them-
selves. Here on our principles we must answer " No ". It is
not open to us to think that Paul attained his effect by omit-
ting what told against him. His solemn oath before God
that he is telling the truth is not needed to convince us.
We know that he rested on the truth for his influence on
men's minds, that without the truth his moral power was lost.
19
290 The Second Visit to Jeritsalem.
In passing, we notice the really almost comic — were it
not almost tragic — argument in Meyer-Sieffert that Paul's
solemn oath, I 20, refers only to the preceding part of the
narrative.^ The apparent implication is that Paul was not
so careful to tell the truth in the rest of his narrative.
Hence they, and all who found their interpretation on the
theory that Paul is telling of the visit which Luke describes
in Acts XV, assume that Paul omits various incidents,
which were not so clearly in his favour as those that he
mentions. Hence they insert in the breaks of Paul's
hurried and disjointed narrative such facts as the disagree-
ment between Paul and the Three on the question whether
Titus should be circumcised : see below, p. 297.
Accordingly, our first principle in approaching Paul's
narrative is this : we must be slow to interpolate in the
breaks of his story facts contrary to the spirit of what he
explicitly relates.
Another essential preliminary to the right interpreting
of the narrative is to apprehend correctly the distinction
between the tenses. This is very subtle throughout the
whole historical retrospect, I ii-H 10. Paul distinguishes
carefully between those actions which belonged to a definite
point in the series of past events {aorist), those actions
which continued for a period but are not thought of as con-
tinuing at the moment of writing {imperfect), and those
actions which are marked as permanent and true down to
the moment of writing {present). This distinction is well
brought out in I 15 : "And when it seemed fit {aorist) to
God, who set me apart from my birth and called me through
^ Abschliessend nurauf das Vorige, vv. 18, 19. Lightfoot expresses no
opinion ; but his interpretation of I 20, " I declare to you that every
word I write is true," tells rather against Meyer-Sieffert.
The Second Visit to Jerusalem. 291
His grace (aorists) to reveal His Son in me {aorisf), so that
I preach Him {present) among the Gentiles". When the
due moment arrived, God revealed His will to Paul and
called him. These are two definite acts which produced
certain lasting consequences, but were themselves momen-
tary. But the purpose and the result of the call was that
Paul became, and continued until the moment of writing
to be, the preacher among the Gentiles. Again in I 22 : "I
continued unknown {imperfect) by face to the churches of
Judea " (this is not said to be true at the time of writing,
though it lasted for many years) ; " and they continued to
hear reports {imperfect) that * our persecutor ^ is now preach-
ing {present') the gospel which formerly he was attempting
to destroy ' {imperfect), and they continually expressed their
{imperfect) admiration of God's action in my case". Such
was their conduct for a number of years : the writer does
not indicate that they continue now to do so (partly,
such reports were no longer needed, and his conduct was
no longer a cause of wonder and special attention ; partly,
many in the Judaean churches were now opposed to him,
and would no longer praise or admire what he was doing
for the Church).
When we apply this principle to the hard passage H i-io,
several of the difficulties disappear, and some misconceptions
are cleared away.
A special contrast is indicated between a present and an
aorist in the following cases : —
V. 2," I laid before them {aorist) the gospel which I continue
preaching to the present day among the Gentiles {present) ".
^ The participle Stoxwj' permits no inference; present and imperfect
coincide in the participle. The only distinction in the participle is
between aorist II i, 7, 9, and present-imperfect.
292 The Second Visit to Jerusalem.
V. 2, " To prevent the work of my whole life {present), or
my work then {aorist), from being ineffectual ".
V. 10, " Only (they instructed me) to remember perma-
nently {present) the poor, which I then made it my object
to do {aorist) ".
A difficult contrast between present and imperfect occurs
in V. 6 : " it matters not in my estimation (now or then, or at
any time, present) by what conduct and character they were
marked out before the world for their dignified and in-
fluential position {imperfect)."
The necessity for the imperfect here becomes clearer if
we substitute the present, and observe that the change gives
an inadmissible sense. " What their permanent character
is matters not to me " {oiroloi irore elcrlv ovSiv fiot Siaipipei)
would be a sentiment unsuitable to the argument, and
hardly becoming in Paul's mouth. The sense of what he
says is, " I grant that their conduct had been noble and
their prominent position was deserved, but God, who re-
spects not persons, had chosen to communicate directly
with me and through me to the Gentiles ; and I could not
put myself under their directions ".
Still more clear does the necessity for the imperfect be-
come if we take the sense preferred by Lightfoot : he says,
" it does not mean ' what reputation they enjoyed,' but
' what was their position, what were their advantages, in
former times, referring to their personal intercourse with
the Lord ' ".
The many aorists of this passage are clear : each of them
denotes an act in the drama, which is described. They
need no elucidation or comment except the following in v.
5 : "we resisted them then that the truth of the Gospel
might continue {aorist) for you ". Here it may seem that
The Second Visit to Jerusalem. 293
the aorist expresses an action that continues to the moment
of writing. That, however, is not so : the action belonged
to the moment, though its result lasts down to the time of
writing ; and this becomes clear if we put the proposition
in another form, " we resisted them then that the truth
might not by our compliance be interrupted and prevented
from continuing for you ". The aorist is required to express
" might not be interrupted," and it is therefore required to
express " might continue ".
Now let us review successively the points that are clearly
stated in Paul's account of the visit, remembering always
that nothing is mentioned except what had a bearing on
the Galatian difficulty.
In company with him were Barnabas and Titus. The
mention of Barnabas as a companion is probably intended
to recall past events to his readers. Barnabas was well-
known to them.^ The companionship of Titus is mentioned,
because something important for Paul's purpose among
the Galatians was connected with him.
In what capacity did these two go up ? The expressions
used imply that the two did not stand on the same footing.
Barnabas and Paul are spoken of as if they were conjoined
and equal : " I went up with Barnabas ". Titus was only
a subordinate, "taking also Titus with us". This word,
" taking," in the three other cases ^ where it occurs in the
New Testament, is applied to a private companion or
minister, who is not sent forth on the mission as an envoy,
but is taken by the envoys on their own authority. Here
Barnabas and Paul were official messengers ; and Titus is
taken with them on their own responsibility.
^ See §§ III, IV. " (jvviva^aKa^iov, Acts XII 25, XV 37, 38.
294 ^^^ Second Visit to Jerusalem.
The translation "taking Titus with w^^" is unjustifiable,
and wrongly imputes to Paul an assumption of superiority
over Barnabas.^ The use of the participle in the singular
is necessitated by the form of the sentence : " I went up
with Barnabas, taking Titus ". The case is precisely ana-
logous to Acts XV 37, " Barnabas wished to take with them
John also " } It would be as reasonable there to translate,
" Barnabas wished to take John also with him" as it is here
to translate " Paul took Titus also with him ".
What is the force of " also Titus " ? In this detail, too,
Acts XV 37 furnishes a perfect analogy : " Barnabas wished
to take with them also John ". In that case there is no
other possible sense than " in addition to themselves " ; and
so it is in this case. Titus was taken in addition to the
official envoys.
The reason for the visit lay in revelation. This state-
ment must be taken as a denial that the visit was undertaken
for the reason alleged by the Judaisers, see p. 281 f. Paul
says nothing as to the recipient of the revelation. A Divine
revelation to one man was binding on all whom it con-
cerned.^ Of course the a priori presumption is in favour
of this revelation having been made to Paul himself: but
we cannot safely say more than this : a Divine revelation
was made, necessitating the journey of Paul and Barnabas
to Jerusalem, and the journey was not taken by Paul
through desire to get instruction or commission from the
Apostles.
^ Meyer-Sieffert explicitly claim that Paul is here assuming his
superiority to Barnabas.
'^ Galatians II 1, ai/i^rjv . . . a-wirapaXafiav Koi Titov, Acts XV
37, f^ovXfTo avvnapaXa^tlv Koi tov 'lo)dvvrfv.
3 Acts XI 28.
The Second Visit to Jerusalem. 295
Paul gives no hint as to the immediate purpose of that
visit. The incidents which he relates as occurring during
the visit are described as arising out of the circumstances
existing in Jerusalem,
Lightfoot connects closely, " I went up by revelation and
laid before them the Gospel which I preach," giving the
appearance that the setting forth of Paul's Gospel had been
the object of his journey. He agrees with the Authorised
Version, with Tischendorf and others. But the Revised
Version and the text of Westcott and Hort are right in
separating the two statements by a colon — " and I went up
by revelation : and I laid before them my gospel, but
privately ".
Paul laid his Gospel before them {i.e., those in Jerusalem),
but privately, before them of repute (whom afterwards he
names, Peter and James and John). " The wide assertion
is forthwith limited by the second clause " '(Alford), This
had an important bearing on the misrepresentations of the
Judaisers: he did not lay his Gospel officially before the
assembly of the Apostles, but privately before the Three.
It is merely unreasonable to understand with some that
Paul made both a public exposition before the whole Church,
and a private esoteric exposition before the Three.
The question which underlies this whole historical retro-
spect is whether or not Paul had sought official guidance
and official authorisation from the Apostles in regard to
his message to the Galatians. He maintains and asseverates
that it came from God alone, and was delivered to them
from God through himself. It would be absurd, and worse
than absurd, that Paul should assure the Galatians that he
consulted the Three privately, if he also laid it before them
in public in their official assembly. We must understand
296 The Second Visit to Jerusalem.
Paul to imply that he made no public consultation on this
subject.
The verb used, "laid before them," is interpreted by
Lightfoot as " related with a view to consulting ". He
quotes Acts XXV 14, " Festus laid Paul's case before the
king," and remarks that there the idea of consultation is
brought out very clearly by the context, vv. 20, 26. It is
unnecessary to quote corroborative examples from other
Greek literature : they are numerous.
Paul, therefore, asked the advice of the three great
Apostles as to the Gospel which he proposed to preach, or
was preaching, among the Gentiles. It is difficult to suppose
that he asked their advice about a Gospel which he had
already been preaching — that, after delivering the message
from God to the Gentiles, he asked the counsel of any man
about that message. When that Gospel was still hid in
his own mind, when he had not yet full confidence that he
fully comprehended it, he might consult the three leaders
about it. After it had fixed itself in his nature as the truth
of God, so that he had proclaimed it broadcast to the Gen-
tiles, he no longer " conferred with flesh and blood ".
We are therefore placed in this dilemma : either Paul
consulted the Three before he promulgated his Gospel in
its fully developed form, or there is no idea of "consultation"
in the verb which he here employs. The second alternative
seems to me excluded. All readers must judge for them-
selves.
That Paul's Gospel to the Gentiles was not fully matured
until shortly before the beginning of the first journey (Acts
XIII i) will be set forth more fully elsewhere. That it was
fully matured when he preached in South Galatia on that
journey will hardly be disputed by any unprejudiced reader.
The Second Visit to Jerusalem. 297
Accordingly, we conclude Paul consulted the three leaders
privately and apart, not in public council ; as friends, not
as authoritative guides. What a revelation is this as to the
forethought and statesmanship with which the diffusion of
the Gospel through the civilised, i.e., the Roman, world was
planned ! We cannot here dilate further on the immense
significance of that private ^ interview between the Four —
the head of the Church in Jerusalem, and the Three who
in succession controlled and counselled the Church in the
Roman world. I hope to do so elsewhere at an early date.
Next Paul states his object. " I consulted them — but
privately — to prevent my work as it continues now, or
my work then, from being ineffectual." ^ Does Paul mean
that he consulted them for that reason, or that he con-
sulted them privately for that reason ? Clearly the former :
he consulted them to avoid future misunderstanding, to
ensure unity, in the plans and views of the Church. But
he took care to do it privately, by reason of the false
brethren,^ as he explains in v. 4.
Now Paul diverges from the path of the proper topic.
It bears on the Galatian interest that not even Titus,
his companion, Greek as he was, was compelled to accept
circumcision.
The question here rises, was Titus's case made the subject
of an open discussion and decided in the negative ? Many
commentators assume that the extreme party formally con-
tended that Titus must submit to the rite, and that it was
decided that he should not be forced to submit. This seems
not to be the natural force of the passage, but rather to be
^ Meyer-Sieffert's rendering is abgesondert, privatim.
"^ On the tenses, see p. 290 f.
^ Meyer-Sieffert translates the clause ^rintos k.t.X. quite differently.
298 The Second Visit to Jerusalem.
forced- into it through the inclination to read into this
passage as much as possible out of Acts XV.
The plain meaning of the Greek words is that the ques-
tion was not formally raised, nor publicly decided : Titus
was left free and unconstrained: nobody compelled him:
he was let alone.
Had the question been raised formally, it would have
been a test case. Titus was distinctly a person of standing
in the Church ; and if the Apostles had solemnly and officially
decided, after the question had been formally raised and
discussed, that Titus need not accept the rite, that would
have practically decided the present case in Galatia. The
Apostolic Decree in Acts XV did not constitute a thorough
decision, for it was too general and was open to miscon-
struction ; ^ but the judgment about a person in the position
of Titus would have been decisive, and Paul could hardly
have avoided mentioning more clearly the judgment, if
there had been one.
But most entirely opposed to the plain sense of the Greek
is the interpretation that the question was raised ; that the
extremists contended that Titus must be circumcised ; that
" concession was even urged upon Paul in high quarters as
a measure of prudence to disarm opposition ; " but he " did
not for a moment yield to this pressure ".^ That sense is
got by bringing together statements which Paul keeps
separate. And how utterly does it sacrifice the unity of
feeling and thought and aim among the Four, which is the
plain implication of the passage, when read without the
purpose to squeeze it into conformity with Acts XV. The
whole harmony and beauty of the picture is destroyed by
the interpolated idea.
» See §§ VIII, XXVII. « Quotations from Lightfoot, p. 105.
The Second Visit to Jerusalem. 299
After the parenthetic remark about Titus, Paul again
takes up the thread, employing the particle Se to indicate
resumption of the topic after a digression. " Now it was
because of certain insinuating sham brethren, who crept
into our society, without avowing their real intentions, to
act the spy on our freedom, which we true Christians enjoy
in Christ Jesus, in order to enslave us {to their ritualistic
acts) : " Paul means, "It was because of them that I acted
thus," but he is led on away from the grammatical form
into an account of his relations with the false brethren : " to
whom we did not for a moment yield by complying with
their suggestions, our object being to ensure that the Gospel
in its truth should continue for you to enjoy ".
The interpretation seems clear. During the stay in Jeru-
salem, certain brethren came about them, and observed
with disapproval the relations of Paul and Barnabas to
Titus, and mentioned their opinion on the subject ; but the
two Apostles of the Gentiles firmly resisted them ; and,
warned by this experience, Paul (with or without Barnabas ^)
laid their whole scheme of a Gospel for the Gentiles
privately before the Three.
Paul's sense of right is shocked by the conduct of those
brethren : his words distinctly imply that they came to
visit as pretended friends, and used knowledge acquired
in private social intercourse to injure Paul among others.
The result of the communication follows : " but from the
recognised leaders — how distinguished soever was their
character matters not to me : God accepteth not man's
person ". Here once more Paul breaks the grammatical
1 In this passage Barnabas, assuredly, is to be assumed as through-
out united with Paul ; but the special purpose requires Paul to use
the singular.
300 The Second Visit to Jerusalem.
thread, and resumes with '^ap and a different grammatical
construction — *' the recognised leaders, I say, imparted no
new instruction to me ; but, on the contrary, perceiving
that I throughout my ministry have been charged specially
with the non-Jewish mission as Peter is with the Jewish
— for he that worked for Peter towards the apostolate of
the circumcision worked also for me towards the mission to
the Gentiles — and perceiving y>'o;/z the facts the grace that
had been given me, they, James and Cephas and John, the
recognised pillars of the Church, gave pledges to me and
to Barnabas of a joint scheme of work, ours towards the
Gentiles, and theirs towards the Jews. One charge alone
they gave us, to remember the poor, which duty as a matter
of fact I then made it a special object to perform."
The final words, on account of the aorist, must on the
principles laid down above, p. 290 f, be understood as "an
act in the drama which then occurred ". If Paul meant
that he subsequently was and still continued to be zealous
in that way, he would have used the present tense : the
aorist denotes something that was actually part of the
incidents in Jerusalem. Paul therefore was helping the
poor in Jerusalem — which we may take it as certain that
he did on every visit, as e.g., Acts XXI.
The analogy of Ephesians IV 3 ^ might lead us even
further. The same verb is there used to indicate the
prominent object, "giving diligence to keep the unity of
the spirit in the bond of peace ". Does it here indicate
that charity to the poor was the main object of the visit —
not merely an act in the drama, but the principal act ?
Some commentators attribute a depreciatory sense to
^ iTTrowSdfoi'rey rrjpe'iv rr}v ivorrjra, Eph. IV 3, o icai ((rnov^acra avTO
TOVTo TTOi^crai, Gal. II 10-
Limits and Purpose of the Autobiography. 301
hoKovvre^, "the so-called leaders". This is not justifi-
able. The Greek word means " the recognised or accepted
leaders". Lightfoot quotes examples of a depreciatory sense
for So/covi/re?, but in them all the depreciatory innuendo
comes from the context and not from the word. To
attribute such a meaning to it here is out of keeping with
Paul's courteous tone to the leaders, and is also opposed
to the spirit which we have recognised in this narrative
(see p. 289).
XIX
LIMITS AND PURPOSE OF THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY.
This autobiographical sketch — from I 12 to near the end
of II — entirely depends on I 11 : "I make known ^ to you,"
i.e., I proceed to show you, " as touching the Gospel which
was preached by me, that it is not after man". Then
follows the statement of the facts showing that the Gospel
which Paul preached came to him from God originally,
and, so far from having ever been suggested to him by the
Apostles, had on the contrary been stated by him to them
in Jerusalem, and approved by them without any reserva-
tion or addition or suggestion, except that he should
remember the poor (which, as a matter of fact, it was his
object then to do).
This autobiographical statement of facts falls into three
parts. First, the character of his life before his conversion
is briefly described, in order to bring out what an epoch it
was, what a complete reversal of his previous career.
1 This formula (confined to the group Rom., Cor., Gal.) "introduces
some statement on which the Apostle lays special emphasis" (Light-
foot).
302 Limits and Purpose of the Autobiography.
Secondly, he gives an outline of his movements, intended
to bring out how rare and short had been his opportunities
of learning from the older Apostles. When his visit to
Jerusalem was very short he counts even the days. Then
he contrasts these days with the years that elapsed between
the first and the second visit.
The effect of the contrast between fifteen days in Jeru-
salem and fourteen years in Syria-Cilicia is great ; and it
must have been greater to the Galatians, because they had
been listening to descriptions of Paul's indebtedness to the
older Apostles, his frequent consultation of them, and so
on. But the North Galatians insist that this telling fact —
fourteen days spent in Jerusalem during the first seventeen
years of his Christian life — is got by leaving out one visit
to Jerusalem : in fact, that it is obtained by suppression of
truth.
The outline of his movements stops, naturally and
necessarily, at the point where he delivered his Gospel to
the Galatians : his purpose is only to show that up to that
time he had not got any message from the Apostles. He
must, of course, assume that the Galatians will believe his
statements of fact : he assures them with the most solemn
oath that he speaks the truth. Surely, in such a case, he
would not expose himself to the charge, which the Judaistic
emissaries would at once bring against him, of omitting a
vital fact, viz., concealing a visit and thus incorrectly
making a long interval between the two which he '
mentions.
Now, on the North Galatian theory that limiting point is
on the second journey : Paul must show that he had never
received any message from the Apostles to the Gentiles up
to that time. According to Luke he had visited Jerusalem
Limits and Purpose of the Autobiography, 303
three times before that time. Therefore, if Luke is trust-
worthy, Paul has omitted a visit. It is not wonderful that
the inference should be drawn by many scholars that Paul
must be trusted and Luke must have made some blunder.
The discrepancy is explained away by the orthodox
theologians through a very elaborate process of delicate
reconciliation ; but the very elaborateness of the process is
a proof that they have not reached the ultimate truth.
Truth is simple. A scholar and a historian should recognise
that universal principle : until he has attained perfect
simplicity, he has not attained truth, and should struggle
on towards it. As the conclusion of that elaborate recon-
ciliation, many theological scholars deny that there is any
discrepancy ; but the plain fact that very many other
theologians — admittedly reasonable, learned, and bent on
seeking truth — see the discrepancy, is a proof that there is
one. The last proof of reason or unreason is that com-
petent human beings agree in their estimate. If a large
number of competent witnesses agree that there is a
discrepancy, it is vain to assert that there is none.
With his usual fairness and caution. Dr. Sanday admits
that in this question the difficulties " are no doubt great,"
but in the same breath refuses to " include them among
the serious difficulties "} If we define the word " serious "
as meaning " insuperable," I am quite ready to accept
the distinction.
The result is that on the North Galatian theory there
are great difficulties in reconciling Acts with Paul ; but on
the South Galatian theory these difficulties have no exist-
ence. As in the Epistle, so in Acts, when Paul delivered
* Bampton Lectures, p. 329.
304 Limits and Purpose of the Autobiography.
his Gospel to the Galatians he had only visited Jerusalem
twice since his conversion.^
Thirdly, in this autobiographical sketch Paul relates a
notable incident, in which the leading older Apostle, when
in the Gentile sphere, accepted the correction and rebuke
of Paul on the question of the relations between Jews and
Gentiles. Not merely did the older Apostles fully recognise
that the Gentile mission belonged to Paul and Barnabas, but
also they submitted to learn from Paul in that sphere.
This part of the autobiography constitutes a new section,
and is pointedly distinguished from the outline of Paul's
movements, and we shall therefore treat it under a special
heading.
XX
ST. PETER IN ANTIOCH.
This third part of the autobiography is marked as a new
departure. The second part began at his conversion as
the epoch in his life — "but when," ore Se euSoYT/o-ey, I 15.
The third part now resumes in the same way — " but when,"
oreSev^eeu, II II.
While the second part is necessarily arranged chrono-
logically in its parts, it does not follow that the third part
is later than the second. The third part begins a new
thought and makes a new departure, and its chronological
relation to the second must be determined by other
^ On the theory mentioned on p. 286 there had been three visits
before Paul's first missionary journey, but Paul mentions here the
first and second visits, and his numbers are therefore on that theory
right, though he interrupts his recital before reaching the visit de-
scribed in Acts XI and XII.
S^. Peter in Antioch. 305
considerations. Those who identify the second visit in
the Epistle with the third visit in Acts are perfectly
justified in maintaining (as Prof, Zahn and Mr. Turner are
inclined to do) that Peter's Antiochian visit took place
earlier than the incident described in II i-io.
It is possible that Peter was sent to Antioch in the
interval that elapsed between Acts XI 30 and XIII i.
On another occasion Peter and John were sent to inspect
and confirm a new departure, viz., the extension of the
Church to Samaria, Acts VIII 14. Similarly, it would be
natural that Peter should be sent to inspect the new de-
parture in Antioch shortly after the events in Acts XI 26.
Whether that was done or not we cannot say ; but Peter
may have visited Antioch more than once in so many
years, and the analysis in language and situation show that
probably the visit here described occurred about the time
of Acts XV I . The reasons are set forth in full in St.
Paul the Traveller^ pp. 158 ff, and need not be repeated
here. Nor is it necessary here to describe the incident.
It stands quite isolated, and few historical inferences are
clear from it.^
The most important part of the incident is Paul's address
to Peter II 14 ff This address turns into a general
review of the relation between Gentiles and Jews in the
Church. Gradually Paul diverges from the situation in
Antioch, and at last finds himself in the Galatian question ;
yet it is impossible to mark where he passes away from the
incident in Antioch. But the address is practically an
epitome of the theme which is set forth in the following
chapters; and the commentary on them is at the same
1 See, e.g., §§ IV, XXX.
20
3o6 Spirit of Chapters III, IV.
time an explanation of the address, and must take frequent
notice of it. After working through the rest of the Epistle,
one turns back to II 14 ff, and finds in those verses the
whole truth in embryo.
XXI
SPIRIT OF CHAPTERS III, IV.
Paul's aim now is to revivify among the Galatians the
memory of their first condition, before any contradictory
and confusing messages had affected them. He must
touch their hearts, and make them feel for themselves the
Divine word in their own souls. He reminds them, by
many subtle touches, of their original experience, how the
Divine message worked in them, raised them to a higher
nature, made them instinct with Divine life, implanted
marvellous powers in them. If he can work them up again
into that frame of mind in which he had left them fresh
from his first message, his immediate purpose will be gained.
Thereafter, other steps would be required. But, for the
moment, he must work on their nature and conscience : he
must appeal to their true selves : they had known in them-
selves how they had begun by simple faith, and whither it
had led them. Paul knew what Goethe knew when he
said : —
O ! never yet hath mortal drunk
A draught restorative.
That welled not from the depths of his own soul I
How utterly out of place in effecting this purpose would
laborious proofs of his own rectitude and consistency be !
" Timeserver " is he ? Think of the marks of Christ, his
owner, branded on his body ! ^ " Preacher of the Law " is
1 See below, § LXIII.
Spirit of Chapters III, IV. 307
he ? Then he is false to his own message, and the cross
which he " placarded " before their eyes is set aside by
him as no more needed ! But they know from their own
experience what has made them Christians ! If he has
been untrue to his message, he is accursed ; but let them
hold to what they have felt and known !
The letter is not logically argumentative. It is merely
futile in the critic to look in it for reasoning addressed to
the intellect, and to discuss the question whether it is or is
not intellectually convincing. Each new paragraph, each
fresh train of thought, is intended to quicken and reinvigorate
the early Christian experiences of his readers. Naturally,
we cannot fully appreciate the effect of every paragraph.
In many places we can see that Paul refers to facts in
the past relations between them and himself — facts otherwise
unknown to us, and guessed only from the brief, pregnant
words which he here uses, words full of reminiscence to
the Galatians, but sadly obscure to us. In other paragraphs
we can be sure he is referring to something which we can
hardly even guess at.
The effect of the letter depended to a great degree on
circumstances which are to us almost or quite unknown.
Here, if ever in this world, heart speaks to heart : the man
as he was appeals direct to the men as they were.
If feeling does not prompt, in vain you strive ;
If from the soul the language does not come
By its own impulse, to impel the hearts
Of hearers, with communicated power,
In vain you strive. . . .
Never hope to stir the hearts of men.
And mould the souls of many into one,
By words which come not native from the heart.
Thus Paul reiterates his blows, and heaps appeal on
3o8 The Address '' Galatians^\
appeal and illustration on illustration, all for the one sole
end. He must rekindle the flame of faith, languishing
for the moment, under misapprehension, doubt as to Paul's
purpose, doubt as to his character, suspicion as to the
witness and work of the other Apostles. If the flame leaps
up fresh and strong in their souls, it will melt all suspicions
and solve all doubts. They will once more know the
truth.
Such is the spirit in which we must try to interpret
chapters III and IV. I cannot do it. Probably no one
will ever do it completely. In some cases, I fancy, I can
^ in a small degree catch the tone in 'which the words ought
to be recited, if the meaning is to be brought out of
them ; and by the hope to contribute something to the
understanding of this, the most wonderful and enigmatical
self-revelation in literature, I have been driven to publish
these pages (many of which have been written long ago,
and kept back from consciousness of their inadequacy).
XXII
THE ADDRESS " GALATIANS," IN III i.
The opening three words of the chapter, " O foolish
Galatians," have in Paul's mouth, if I estimate him and
them correctly, a strongly pathetic effect. It is, I think,
customary to say that here his anger speaks, and he sharply
censures the senseless conduct of the Galatians.^ The most
^ Scharfrilgcnder Aiisdruck is Dr. Zockler's expression. Lightfoot,
in his edition, p. 64, evidently reckons this apostrophe among those
" outbursts of indignant remonstrance," by which " the argument is
interrupted every now and then. Rebuke may prevail where reason
The Address ^^ Gatatians" . 309
curious development of this idea is seen in Deissman,
Bibelstudien, p. 263 ff. After the harsh and angry tone of
the earlier pages of the letter, according to Deissmann,
Paul concludes, in VI 11, with a little joke, so that the
Galatians, " his dear silly children " (liebe unverstandige
Kinder), may understand that his anger has not been
lasting, and that it is no longer the severe schoolmaster
who is addressing them : he therefore makes the jocular
remark about " big letters," which are more impressive to
children than the smaller letters of the secretary who wrote
most of the Epistle : " When Paul spoke thus, the Gala-
tians knew that the last traces of the seriousness of the
punishing schoolmaster had vanished from his features ! "
Not anger, but pathos, on the contrary, seems to be the
prominent note in this apostrophe. The authoritative
tone, of course, is there ; but the feeling is that of love,
sorrow, and pathos, not anger.
It is only on rare occasions that Paul addresses his hearers,
as in this case, directly by the general appellation that em-
braces them all and sums them all up in one class. ^ But
in certain states of emotion the necessity comes upon him
to use this direct appeal, so that every individual shall feel
that he is personally addressed. The only other cases in
the Epistles of Paul are 2 Corinthians VI 11, and Philip-
pians IV 15. Let us compare the three.
will be powerless." That the tone is "severe" (in Lightfoot's previous
phrase) is quite true ; but to take " indignation " as its prominent
note seems to be a misreading of the purpose and drift. This
misconception is one of the many wrong consequences of the North
Galatian view.
^ The need for a comprehensive address, embracing all his readers,
and placing them all on a level, is illustrated from another point of
view in § LVI.
3IO The Address '' Gaiatzans'\
To show the tone of 2 Corinthians VI 11, it is only-
necessary to recall the intensely emotional words {vv. i-io)
describing Paul's life as an evangelist, and his prayer " that
ye receive not the grace of God in vain," and then to read
V. II, " Our mouth is open unto you, O Corinthians, our
heart is enlarged ". He goes on to address them as his
children. But though he is censuring them, it is not anger
that prompts the apostrophe ; deep, yearning affection
dictates the direct personal appeal.
So again in Philippians IV 15. Paul's feelings are
deeply moved as he recalls that Philippi was the one
Church which sent and forced on him money for his pressing
wants. Here again the apostrophe, " Philippians," follows
upon an autobiographical passage, describing how " I can
do all things in Him that strengtheneth me ".
Thus in all three cases we notice the same conditions
leading Paul up to the direct address. He has been for a
time putting forward prominently his own work and the
spirit in which he does it. Compare the words of Philippians
just quoted with Galatians II 20, "I have been crucified
with Christ; yet I live: and yet no longer I, but Christ
liveth in me," etc., and with 2 Corinthians VI 9, 10, "as
dying, and behold we live ; as chastened, not killed ; as
poor, yet making many rich," etc. Wrought up to a high
pitch of emotion in this retrospect of his life in death as a
servant and minister, he turns direct on his hearers, and
places them face to face with himself, " Galatians," or
" Philippians," or " Corinthians ". The man who reads
anger into this address as its prominent characteristic is
for the moment losing his comprehension of Paul's mind.
Pathos is the characteristic, not indignation.
It is not exactly the same situation, but is at least
The Address ^^ Galatians^' 311
analogous, when Paul directly appeals by name to a single
correspondent. This he only does in i Timothy I 18, VI
20. In the former case there is exactly the same movement
of thought and emotion as in the three cases just quoted.
He casts a glance over his own career as the " chief of
sinners," who " obtained mercy, that in me might Jesus
Christ show forth all His long-suffering, for an ensample of
them which should hereafter believe on Him unto eternal
life ", Here we find the same idea, life gained through the
Divine patience (though the idea of Paul's personal suffering
and affliction is not made so prominent here). Then he
continues, as in the other cases, " This charge I commit
unto thee, my child Timothy ".
Incidentally, we remark here that no one who trusts to
his literary sense, could attribute this passage in i Timothy,
with its deep feeling, to a forger, who put on the mask of
Paul in order to gain currency for his theological ideas.
If you permit your feeling for literature to guide you, you
know that the friend and spiritual father of Timothy is
speaking to him in these words.
The other passage in which Paul addresses Timothy by
name, VI 20, is different in type. Towards the end of a
long series of instructions to Timothy about his work,
Paul sums up earnestly, " O Timothy, guard that which is
committed unto thee ". Here it is the concluding sentence ;
and the letter ends, as it began, with the direct address to
Timothy.
But, it will be asked. Was Paul not expecting too much,
when he thought that the Galatians would understand
these delicate shades of feeling, which escape many modern
readers ? Are we not trying to read our own fancies into
the Epistle? I think not. Paul was a great orator, not
312 The Address '' Galatians".
in the sense of elaborate artistic composition — as to which
he felt with Goethe, who makes his Faust sneer at mere
" expression, graceful utterance " (which the silly pupil
considered " the first and best acquirement of the orator "),
because they
Are unrefreshing as the wind that whistles
In autumn 'mong the dry and wrinkled leaves —
but in the sense that he knew exactly what he could count
upon in his audience. He swept over their hearts as the
musician sweeps over the strings of his instrument, knowing
exactly what music he can bring from them, and what he
must not attempt with them. Let us read the letter to
the Galatians without the misconceptions and preconceived
theories which lead most commentators astray ; and let
us acquire beforehand some idea of the political and re-
ligious situation, and the character of the Galatians. Then
the meaning will strike us plainly between the eyes, and
we shall no longer talk of anger as influencing the expression
of the writer (except for the moment, and on a special point,
in I 8 f , V 12), You never understand Paul's motives or
purposes, unless you take them on the highest level possible :
when you read in them any mixture of poorer or smaller
feeling, you are merely misunderstanding Paul and losing
your grasp of him. But they who talk so much about his
indignation in Galatians are missing the real emotion that
drives him on : it is intense and overpowering love and
pity for specially beloved children.
In III I, then, the movement of feeling in the writer's
mind forces him to apostrophise his readers in one general
address. But by what appellation could he sum up the
whole body whom he addressed in Antioch, Iconium, Derbe
and Lystra? There was only one name common to them
The Address '''' Galatians'\ 313
all. They all belonged to the Roman province. The
Churches addressed had already been summed up as " the
Churches of Galatia ". The one title common to the hearers
was " men of (the province) Galatia," i.e., Galatae.
Here we find ourselves on ground that has been disputed.
Those who hold the North Galatian view have advanced
three separate arguments on this point, and each demands
a short consideration. They ask, in the first place, what
reason there was why Paul should have sought for some
common appellation for the people of the four cities : they
say that, if he were addressing Antioch, Iconium, Derbe
and Lystra, he might have contented himself with the
superscription (in I 2), as he does in many other letters.
In the second place, they say (or, at least, used to say) that
the name Galatia was not applied to the country in which
these four cities were situated. In the third place, even if
it be admitted that the four cities were in Galatia, they
maintain that their inhabitants could not be called Galatae,
for none who were not Gauls by race could be called
Galatae.
The first argument has already been answered, when we
showed how the march of emotion brought Paul to the
point where he must apostrophise his audience ; and a
further answer is given in § LVI. The whole Epistle, with
its intense personality and directness, demands such a
direct apostrophe.
The second and third arguments demand separate con-
sideration.
314 Galatia the Province.
XXIII
GALATIA THE PROVINCE.
The one decisive argument that Paul's " Galatia " must
be the province, and not simply the region inhabited by
the Gauls, is stated by Zahn. Paul never uses wide geogra-
phical names except those of Roman provinces. This has
been stated above, § XIV, where additional arguments are
given to strengthen Zahn's observation : ^ not merely did
Paul use the Roman provincial names, but he even used
them in the Latin form, transliterating them into Greek,
and in one case employing a Latin form which was avoided
by Greek writers. Paul writes as a Roman and a citizen
of the Empire.
Here we note that Paul is much more Roman in his tone
than the Greek Luke. The latter never uses the term
" Galatia," he mentions only the " Galatic territory ". Now,
if Paul and Luke had been speaking of North Galatia, the
country of the three Gallic tribes, it is impossible to under-
stand why they should differ as to the name. Among the
immense number of references to North Galatia made by
Greek and Latin writers,^ there seems to be not a single
case where any other name than Galatia is used for the
country. Why should Luke alone employ everywhere a
different name for the country, diverging from the universal
usage of Greek and Latin writers, and also from his master
Paul ? No possible reason can be given. It would simply
be an unintelligible freak of Luke's ; he chose to differ from
everybody, because — he chose to do so.
1 See also § XXV.
'^ Most are collected in Holder's Altceltischer Sprachschatz, s.v.
Galatia.
Galatia the Province. 315
But, on the South Galatian view, it was almost unavoid-
able that he should differ from Paul as to the name of the
country. The custom of naming the province varied ac-
cording as one wrote from the Roman or the Greek point
of view. Now it has been shown in page after page of St.
Paul the Traveller that Luke follows the Greek popular
and colloquial usage, as it was current among the more
educated half of society in the cities of the vEgean land.
So far as evidence goes, that class of persons never used
" Galatia" to denominate the Roman Province; only persons
who consciously and intentionally adopted the Roman
imperial point of view did so. The Greeks generally re-
peated the list of regions comprised in the Province (or, at
least, as many of the regions as served their immediate
purpose), thus: "Galatia {i.e.. North Galatia), Phrygia,
Lycaonia, Pisidia, Isauria, Pontus Paphlagonia : " but oc-
casionally they employed an expression like " the Galatic
Eparchy".^ This is exactly what Luke does. Sometimes
he speaks of the region or regions with which he is con-
cerned, Pisidia, Phrygia, Lycaonia ^ ; sometimes he employs
the expression, " the Galatic territory ".^
Further, take into consideration that the adjective
" Galatic " is frequently applied, in inscriptions and the
geographical writer Ptolem\', to countries like Pontus and
Phrygia, which were included in the Province, but that this
adjective is never used in a geographical way to designate
by a circumlocution North Galatia ; * and you can only
1 C. I. G., 3991, A.D. 54. The custom of enumerating parts began
before 80, and spread to other Provinces in the second century.
2 Acts XIII 49, XIV 6, 24. = Acts XVI 6, XVIII 23.
■* It is naturally used in such ways as tpya TakatiKa, deeds like those
of the Galatae ; iroXis FuXaTiKf], a Galatian city like Ancyra.
3i6 Galatia the Province.
marvel that scholars could ever conceal the facts from
themselves so far as to think that Luke meant " Galatic
territory" to indicate North Galatia.
A modern illustration will make this clearer. An Eng-
lishman who caught the words, " At this point they entered
British territory," would at once understand that a journey
was described, not in Great Britain, but in Africa or Asia
or America. A German, however, unless English was very
well and accurately known to him, might hesitate as to the
meaning. So a Greek of Paul's time would unhesitatingly
understand " Galatic territory " in the sense in which the
inscriptions and Ptolemy use it. A modern critic, however,
who has not made himself familiar with the ancient usage
in such matters, often mistakes the meaning.
It is a false translation on the part of the North Galatian
theorists to tal^e ^A'yKvpa^ t/"/? Ta\aTtKri]atos Koi) 8ia nis.
Accordingly, Rom. Ill 30 means, God will justify both
Jews and Gentiles from faith and through the continued
operation of their faith, BiKaicoaei Treptrofirjv eK Trtcrreax?
Kai uKpo ^ucTTiav Bia rr)? iricrreoi'i.
Finally the motive power in the process is expressed by
the dative, by grace, x^P^''''' (Rom. Ill 24, Eph. II 8), or
by what is practically the same idea, the Spirit, Truev/jban
(Gal. V 5).
As the distinction between an indispensable condition
and a source is very fine, the use of Sui and eV is hard to
keep apart. But it is noteworthy that we never find the
party names 01 8td, but only 01 ck irepnofirji,, 01 eK vounv, 01
€K 7rta-T6&)9. In most places e/e expresses the fundamental
thought; and hid is used much more rarely.
In the two passages quoted from Acts the Pauline ex-
pression has crystallised into a title and the badge of a
party. But in that case it is clear that the author of Acts
understood the two opposing parties to be already consti-
tuted when he applies to one of them the technical term.
They who hold the view that the author was a remarkably
accurate describer of events must conclude that he inten-
tionally chose the technical term in order to show that the
antithesis between the two views was already clear and
definite at the time of Acts XI 2}
^ Expositor, March, 1896, p. 198 f.
A Mans Will. 349
XXXIII
A MAN'S WILL, DIATHEKE, III 15-18.
An illustration from the ordinary facts of society, as it
existed in the Galatian cities, is here stated : " I speak after
the manner of men ". The will (SiaOrjKrj) of a human
being is irrevocable when once duly executed : hence the
Will of God, formally pledged to Abraham, that all nations
should be blessed in his seed, i.e., in Christ, cannot be
affected by the subsequent act of God executed centuries
later, vis., the giving of the Law. The inheritance of
blessing comes from the original Will, and cannot be
affected by the subsequent Law.
The sense of Diatheke in this passage has been much
debated ; and many excellent scholars declare that it does
not mean Will or Testament (as we have rendered it), but
either denotes a Covenant, Bund in German (so Calvin,
Beza, Flatt, Hilgenfeld, Meyer, Lightfoot), or has the
more vague and general sense of Determination, Willens-
verfiigung or Bestimmung (so Zockler, Philippi, Lipsius,
Hofmann, Schott, Winer).^
The question as to the sense of the Greek word Diatheke
in this passage must be carefully distinguished from the
far more important question as to its general Biblical
meaning. Here the word is used in allusion to every-day
life among ordinary men. The Biblical usage is a different
topic, and will be treated in the following sections. The
commentators have not been sufficiently careful to keep
those two questions separate from one another. That the
I Zockler's statistics.
350 A Mans Will.
word must in this passage be taken in the technical sense
of Will is shown by the following reasons.
In the first place the Diatheke is proved to indicate a
Will by the fact that an inheritance, Kkrjpovofiia, is deter-
mined by it, III 18.
Secondly, Paul says that he is speaking " after the
manner of men," III 15, He therefore is emplo3nng the
word in the sense in which it was commonly used as part of
the ordinary life of the cities of the East. What this sense
was there can be no doubt. The word is often found in
the inscriptions, and always in the same sense which it
bears in the classical Greek writers, Will or Testament.
But, if Paul is speaking about a Will, how can he say
that, after it is once made, it is irrevocable ? It is this
difficulty that has made the commentators on this passage
reject almost unanimously the sense of Will. They do not
try to determine what was the nature of a Will among the
Galatians, but assume that an ancient Will was pretty much
of the same nature as a modern Will. Our procedure must
be very different. We have to take the word Diatheke in
its ordinary sense " after the manner of men " : then we
observe what is the character attributed by Paul to the
Galatian Will : finally we investigate what relation the
Galatian Will bears to the known classes of Will in other
ancient nations, and so determine its origin.
In Hellenised Asia Minor, at the time when Paul was
writing, the Diatheke or Will was a provision to maintain
the continuity of the family with its religious obligations ;
and, though it included bequests of money to the State or
to individuals, these bequests seem to be always regarded
in the light of provisions for the honour and privileges of
the testator and his family.
A Mans Will. 351
It is here plainly stated that when the Will has been
properly executed with all legal formalities, no person can
make it ineffective or add any further clause or conditions.
It is not a correct explanation to say that " no person "
means " no other," for the argument is that a subsequent
document executed by the same person does not invalidate
the former. We are confronted with a legal idea that the
duly executed Will cannot be revoked by a subsequent act
of the testator.
Such irrevocability was a characteristic feature of Greek
law, according to which an heir outside the family must be
adopted into the family ; and the adoption was the Will-
making. Galatian procedure, evidently, was similar. The
appointment of an heir was the adoption of a son, and was
final and irrevocable. The testator, after adopting his heir,
could not subsequently take away from him his share in
the inheritance or impose new conditions on his succession.
That is a totally different conception of a Will from our
modern ideas. We think of a Will as secret and inoperative
during the life-time of the testator, as revocable by him at
pleasure, and as executed by him only with a view to his
own death. A Will of that kind could have no application
to God, and no such analogy could have been used by Paul.
But the Galatian Will, like God's Word, is irrevocable and
unalterable ; it comes into operation as soon as the con-
ditions are performed by the heir; it is public and open.
Such also was the original Roman Will ; ^ but that kind
of Will had become obsolete in Roman law. It could
have been familiar to no one except a legal antiquary ;
and neither Paul nor any other Provincial is likely to have
^ Maine, Ancient Law, ch. VI.
352 A Mans Will.
known anything about that ancient Roman idea. In
Rome a highly developed and simple form of Will, called
the Praetorian Testament, had become usual ; and it was
secret and revocable, and took effect only after the tes-
tator's death. But Greek law retained that ancient
character much longer, and in regard to Wills, Galatian
law was evidently of kindred spirit to Greek law and
unlike Roman, just as we found to be the case in regard to
adoption and heirship, § XXXI.
The exact sense of V 15 must be observed. Paul does
not say that a supplementary Will (eiriBiaOiJKr}) cannot be
made ; but that the new Will cannot interfere with or
invalidate the old Will. Nature may necessitate changes
in the details of the first Will : new children and heirs may
be born, and so on. A man can even adopt a second son
and heir by a subsequent Will. Then the two adopted
sons jointly carry on the family in its religious and social
aspect. Inheritance was not simply a claim to property,
as we now regard it. Inheritance was the right to take
the father's place in all his relations to the gods and the
State ; and two or more sons can take the father's place
jointly, each being heir. But in essence the second Will
must confirm the original Will, and cannot revoke or
add essentially novel conditions. One example of such
a supplementary Greek Will (eVtSia^r/zcT;) is known : ^ it
confirms and repeats the original Will.
The Roman-Syrian Law-Book — which we have already
quoted as an authority for the kind of legal ideas and
customs that obtained in an Eastern Province, where a for-
merly prevalent Greek law had persisted under the Roman
J Grenfell, Alexandrian Erotic Papyrus, No. 21.
A Mans Will. 353
Empire — well illustrates this passage of the Epistle.^ It
actually lays down the principle that a man can never
put away an adopted son, and that he cannot put away a
real son without good ground. It is remarkable that the
adopted son should have a stronger position than the son
by birth ; yet it was so. Mitteis illustrates this by a
passage of Lucian,^ where a son, who had been put away
by his father, then restored to favour, and then put away
a second time, complains that this second rejection is
illegal, inasmuch as his restoration to favour put him on
a level with an adopted son, who cannot be turned away
in that fashion.
In the Gortynian procedure, this principle of the Greek
law was relaxed, and the adoptive father could put away
his adoptive son by a public act, declared from the stone
in the market-place before the assembled citizens, but he
must give him two staters as a guest-gift. Evidently the
gift is a sort of substitute for the inheritance ; the adopted
son had an indefeasible claim to share the property, and
by a legal fiction, the testator gives him his inheritance
and sends him away.
The adopted son and heir was adopted by the will and
authority of the whole community, to keep up the exist-
ence of one of the families constituting the community.
The father, therefore, had less power over the adopted son
than over the born son ; the latter was subject to his
solitary will, the former had the will of the whole com-
munity on his side.
^The following remarks are taken from Mitteis' Reichsrecht und
Volksrechi, p. 213 ff., who does not notice the confirmation by Paul's
words of the view which he states.
'■^ Lucian, Abdic-, 12.
23
354 ^ Mans Will.
When Siad)]KT) is understood thus, the paragraph be-
comes full of meaning ; but this sense could hardly have
existed except in a country where Greek law had been
established for some considerable time. In Asia Minor or
Syria the Will could only be of the Greek or the Roman
type ; there was no third type, for in no other land had a
legal doctrine of Wills been elaborated. As the Galatian
Will is unlike the Roman and like the Greek, it is clear
that Greek law must have been established among the
people to whom Paul was writing.
To make this subject clear, we must look at the use of
hLaOrjKi) in Epistles addressed to readers among whom
Greek law had never exercised much, if any, influence, and
to whom the Will of the Roman type, as current in the
first century, alone was likely to be known. This requires
a special chapter, and some account of the Biblical use of
the term Diatheke.
The expression Mn v. 15, "when it hath been confirmed,"
must also be observed. Every Will had to be passed
through the Record Office of the city. It was not regarded
in the Greek law as a purely private document, which
might be kept anywhere and produced when the testator
died. It must be deposited, either in original or in a
properly certified copy, in the Record Office ; and the
officials there were bound to satisfy themselves that it was
a properly valid document before they accepted it. If
there was an earlier will, the later must not be accepted,
unless it was found not to interfere with the preceding one.
That is a Greek, not a Roman custom. There was no
such provision needed in Roman law, for the developed
K€Kvp(t)fi€i/rji/ diadrjKrjv.
A Mans Will. 355
Roman Will ^ might be revoked and changed as often as
the testator chose ; and the latest Will cancelled all others.
The passing through the Record Office took the place of
the primitive custom that the Will and Adoption must be
made before the whole people in the public assembly.^
" In the Record Office were preserved public documents of
all kinds, as well as copies of important private documents,
title-deeds, wills, records of the sale of real property,
mortgages, loans, etc. Before a copy of any such deed
was accepted in the office, its legality and validity were
verified ; and thus the official in charge of the office played
an important part in the business of the city. The
existence of a certified copy of a deed in the Record Office
was accepted as proof of legal right ; and this simple
guarantee facilitated the borrowing of money on the
security of property, besides making the transfer of
property and the verification of titles very simple." ^
In V. 16 Christ is called "the seed," i.e., the true seed in
contrast to other seed, and we note that the preference of
the " true seed," and the superior right of the " true seed " to
inherit, is characteristic both of Greek thought and philo-
sophy in general, and in particular of the late Syrian law
(which we take to be a survival of Seleucid law analogous
to that which prevailed in South Galatia).* The late
Roman-Syrian Law-Book, which has already been so often
quoted in these pages, justifies the preference of the male
^ See p. 366.
"^ Compare also the statements in Greek Egyptian Wills that the
Will was executed Iv ayviai or tVi ayopav6\x.ov : see next Section.
'Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, II, p. 368 f., and authorities there
quoted.
* See p. 374 f, 393.
356 The Use of Diatheke in the Pauline Epistles.
descendents over the female^ in the same degree on the
ground that the former are " sought after by the laws as
the true seed ".^ It is not to be supposed that Paul refers to
that precise doctrine ; but, when he distinguishes between
seed, and distinguishes one seed as the seed, more fully-
entitled to possession of the inheritance than other seed in
the same line and degree of descent, he is using a kind of
distinction which was customary in Greek thought centuries
before and centuries after the time when he wrote.^
XXXIV
THE USE OF DIATHEKE IN THE PAULINE EPISTLES.
The Biblical idea, which is usually rendered in the Eng-
lish Version by the word " Covenant," is an exceptionally
important one. It does not belong to our purpose to
discuss it from a theological point of view, or to describe
its origin and development in the religious life of the
Hebrews. Roughly speaking, Paul took the word Diatheke
to indicate a certain gracious act of God, in the exercise of
His own absolute power, towards His chosen people, con-
ferring certain privileges upon them on certain conditions
which they are expected to fulfil in their life and conduct :
His chosen people being first the Jews, and in due course
all nations, whom the Jews ought to train and instruct.
That original act of God may be called a Promise, or a
Covenant ; but no single word expresses fully its nature
^ See p. 367.
"^ Die Gesetze suchen den reinen Santen heraus : Rum-Syrisches Rechts-
buch, German translation p. 4.
' Mitteis, Reichsrecht, p. 326.
The Use of Diatheke in the Pauline Epistles. 357
and character ; every name leaves much to the imagination
and thought, the knowledge and experience, of individual
men, so that each man must make his own conception of
the thing which is meant. Every word has a misleading
connotation, due to its ordinary sense " after the manner of
men " ; and that ought to be stripped off when one applies
the word to the Divine act.
The Greek word Diatheke, which was most widely in
use to designate that Divine act, was frequently used in
ordinary society to indicate a certain common act of legal
character, viz., a Will or Testament. This connotation
was distinctly detrimental, when the Greeks attempted to
understand the Biblical idea, and to conceive in its purity
the character of the Divine act. We have to study the
action and language of Paul in the face of this difficulty.
He had to convey to his Greek-speaking converts from
Paganism as clear a conception as possible of the Divine
act ; and he was not entirely free to use whatever words he
chose, for there was already in existence a certain customary
series of terms, employed for centuries by Greek-speaking
Hebrews. The word Diatheke, which we have to study,
occurs nearly 300 times in the Septuagint Version of the
Old Testament, and thirty-three times in the New (chiefly
in Paul and in Hebrews).
Now the history and sense of the Greek Diatheke is ex-
ceedingly obscure. The Diatheke was a different thing at
different periods and in different parts of the Greek world.
Yet Paul in some cases is clearly trying to use the recog-
nised ordinary sense of Diatheke "after the manner of men,"
in order to aid his readers to picture to themselves the
Divine Diatheke, as we have seen that he is doing in Gala-
tians HI 15-17. In trying to grasp his meaning we find
358 The Use of Diatheke in the Pauline Epistles.
so little trustworthy information about the Greek usage,
that we must attempt to treat the subject a little more
accurately and less vaguely than the commentators. Most
writers on " Covenant " discuss the theological and philoso-
phical side very elaborately, and confine themselves to a
few vague and not very accurate words about the Greek
use of the word Diatheke.
I touch upon the subject with reluctance and diffidence.
It lies beyond the special sphere of my knowledge, among
the obscurest mysteries of Greek law and of theological
theory ; and I shall be grateful for any corrections of, or
useful additions to, the statements made in the following
paragraphs.
The Septuagint translators found themselves confronted
with a difficult problem, when they had to select a Greek
word to translate the Hebrew berith. The Hebrew word,,
denoting primarily an agreement, private or public, among
men, guaranteed and confirmed by weighty and solemn
oaths on both sides, had become almost a technical term
to denote the promises made, and confirmed by repetition,
by God to the ancestors of the Hebrew people, especially
Abraham, and, in a much less degree, Isaac and Jacob.
As Professor A. B. Davidson says,^ it "had become a
religious term in the sense of a one-sided engagement on
the part of God ". This sense was peculiar and unique.
Nothing like it was known to the Greeks, and therefore
there was no Greek word to correspond to it. Accordingly,
the translators were compelled to take some Greek word,
which hitherto had denoted something else, and apply it to
their purpose. The word selected must necessarily be
Mn Hastings' Diet, of the Bible, I, p. 514.
The Use of D lathe ke in the Pauline Epistles. 359 -
encumbered by associations connected with its recognised
meaning, and, therefore, must be to a certain degree un-
suitable. The problem was to find the least unsuitable
word.
A word which in some respects corresponded well to the
sense required was Syntheke, crvv6i]K7), which brought out
the binding force and legal solenmity of the idea. But it was
unsuitable, because it implied pointedly that the two persons
concerned in the Syntheke stand more or less on a footing
of equality (though not necessarily on perfect equality),
each joining in the act with a certain degree of power and
voluntary action. But in the Biblical idea the power and
the action lie entirely on one side. God gives the assur-
ance, binds Himself by the promise, and initiates alone the
whole agreement. The other side merely accepts the
agreement, and has simply to fulfil the conditions, which
are often unexpressed, for God foresees the course of events,
and knows how far the future action of the chosen reci-
pients will fulfil the conditions. The Biblical idea was
one-sided, but Syntheke was two-sided essentially.
Yet the history of the Greek rendering of the Old
Testament shows that Syntheke must have been felt to have
some claim, for the later translators, Aquila, Theodotion
and Symmachus, use that word in a number of cases, where
the Septuagint version has Diatheke} The reason for this
change, as we shall see, lies in the gradual development of
meaning and character in the ordinary use of Diatheke.
The word, as used in the early part of the third century
B.C., was a closer and better representative of the Biblical
1 The Septuagint version uses arwdrjKrj in a few cases to represent
other Greek words, and, in one case, 4 Kings XVII 15, one of the texts
uses it to represent berith-
360 The Use of Diatkeke in the Pauline Epistles.
term than it was in its later development. The develop-
ment was partly in the line of natural growth in Greek
Will-making (and that growth seems to have been more
rapid in Egypt than in Asia Minor and Syria), partly in
the way of assimilation of Roman ideas on Wills.
The word eira'^yeXia, Promise, might also have been
selected. It had the advantage of expressing strongly
that the action and the initiative proceeded solely from
one side in free grace. But it lacked entirely the idea of
bond, of solemn guarantee, of the binding force of oaths
and religious sanctity, which was absolutely indispensable.
It was used, for example, to indicate the public promises,
made by a candidate for public office, as to what he would
do when elected ; there was no binding force in those
promises beyond dread of the unpopularity likely to accrue,
if they were not carried out at least to some extent, and
they were recognised generally as the stock-in-trade of a
candidate, made to be broken as far as was safe. Hence
the word is very rarely used in the Old Testament, and
never to represent berith.
In the New Testament, on the other hand, it is rather
common. Paul seems to have liked it, as expressing the
perfect voluntariness of the act of God.^ It made the
" Covenant" an act of God's grace, wholly undeserved by
any previous conduct on the part of the recipients. Hence
he even speaks of "the covenants of the promise" (Eph.
II 12), i.e., the solemn, binding, holy engagement of God's
voluntary grace and kindness, where he requires the two
Greek words, when he desires to bring out very clearly
^ Paul uses BiadrjKT) nine times, (irayyiKia twenty-five times ; but in
Hebrews (which is more Hebraic in its form) 8iadrjKT] occurs severj-
teen times, enayyfXia fourteen times.
The Use of Diatheke in the Pauline Epistles. 361
and thoroughly the two sides in the Biblical ideas, the
binding force and the free grace.
It is characteristic of the change of spirit that the Old
Testament uses only the word indicating binding, inexor-
able legal force, the New Testament prefers the word
indicating free, undeserved kindness and grace.
The word Diatheke was fixed upon by the Septuagint
translators to represent berith. This resolve must have
been formed at the beginning of their work. They took
the word in spite of its associations with human business
on the ground of its character as a whole. Now the word
Diatheke went through a rapid course of development
during the period B.C. 300 to A.D. 100 or 200; but the
Septuagint translators, taking the word about B.C. 285,
found it without any of the connotation derived from
the changes that affected it after B.C. 3(X). It had such
marked advantages over any other word in Greek for
their purposes that their choice could hardly have been
doubtful.
In the first place, the ancient Diatheke was a solemn and
binding covenant, guaranteed by the authority of the whole
people and their gods. It was originally executed verb-
ally before the assembled people as a solemn religious act,
the people being parties to it ; and even in Greek-Egyptian
Wills of the late third or second centuries B.C., when the
Diatheke had become a private document, the reigning
sovereigns were made parties to it, and named executors
of it : ^ this was, of course, a mere form, a sort of legal
fiction, substituted for the old fact that the public authority
was actually a party to the Diatheke. The word was
^ I am indebted to Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt for much informa-
tion on the Wills executed by the Greek settlers in Egypt,
362 The Use of Diatheke in the Pauline Epistles.
therefore well suited to express the binding irrevocable
solemnity of the word uttered by God.
In the second place, the Diatheke was primarily an
arrangement for the devolution of religious duties and
rights, and not merely a bequeathing of money and
property.^ The heir by Diatheke was bound to carry on
the religion of the family, just as if he had been a son by
nature, and was placed there for that purpose. The term
was therefore well suited to describe God's promise of a
religious inheritance to His chosen people.
In the third place, the maker of the ordinary Diatheke
had full power in his hands ; and the party benefited by
the Diatheke exercised no authority in the making of it.
The latler had only to fulfil the conditions, and he
succeeded to the advantages of the Diatheke. The act of
God was of the same one-sided type.
In the fourth place, while the noun BiadiJKT] is confined
almost exclusively to the sense of the disposition of one's
property and duties by Will,'^ the verb hiarideadai, has a
^ See above, p. 341.
2 That such was the sense of diadrjKT] in ordinary Greek is attested
by the lexicons and by many inscriptions. The only exception where
biadrjKij seems to mean an agreement, is quoted from Aristoph., Av.
439, but is not clear. It contains a joke founded on some unknown
popular story of the ape and the woman (or his wife) : the story is
explained by the scholiasts in the usual Aristophanic style, but little
value attaches to their evidence, which has probably no real auth-
ority, but is merely gathered out of Aristophanes's own words : it does
not show why awdrjKt] (which would suit the metre) is not used rather
than diadrjKTi. Lightfoot says there are a few other examples of
8ia0fjKr] in that sense, but he quotes none, and they are unknown to
Steph. Thesaurus; and we must require exact quotations to support
so rare a use in prose. Hatch carries further the loose language
into which Lightfoot (a rare thing with him) has fallen, and speaks
of the Hellenistic usage of diadrjKTi as being similar to that of
the Septuagint.
The Use of Dial he ke in the Pauline Epistles. 363
wider sense, and is used in the sense of " to dispose of one's
property by sale," and in various other senses of the term
" dispose " or " arrange " ; but in every case the one single
party disposes with authority.
Finally, the central idea expressed in the word Diatheke
fairly represented one important side of the Biblical concep-
tion. The Diatheke was the concrete expression of indivi-
dual authority over property, and embodied the reaction
against the former system of family authority. In a more
primitive stage, property belonged to the family or the
tribe, and the individual had no right to dispose of it : the
development of Greek civilisation put ownership of property
more and more into the hands of the individual. The
tradition was that Solon passed the first law in Athens
permitting the owner of property to bequeath it by a
Diatheke, whereas previously the family to which the owner
belonged inherited in default of children. Solon, however,
gave the right of bequeathing only in default of male
children, only under the form of adoption, and with the
obligation that the adopted heir must marry the daughter,
if there was one. Gradually the freedom of making Dia-
theke was widened, the individual became more and more
master of his property, and its disposition and the claim
even of his children became weaker. He was permitted
to bequeath legacies to strangers without adoption ; but
these legacies seem to have been at first classed as presents
or gifts {BcopeaL), not as inheritances, and were restricted in
various ways : ^ by common Greek custom and the feeling
of society a son must inherit, and an heir was called a son.
In the cases which are most familiar to us in inscriptions
^ Mitteis, Reichsrecht, p. 336, quoting Caillemer, Annuaire de
I'Assoc. des Et. Gr., 1870, p. 34 f.
364 The Use of Diatheke in the Pauline Epistles.
legacies took, as a rule, the form of religious endowments
intended to perpetuate the cult and the memory of the
deceased ; they are exactly on the same footing as gifts
made by a living person to keep up the religion and the
worship of his deceased child or relative ; ^ and they are
often stated to be by consent of the heirs.
Hence the word Diatheke expressed strongly the absolute
authority of the disposer, who in the Biblical conception
was God Himself
Thus, even after the Greek Will had lost its original
character of being open and public, immediately effective,
and irrevocable, the word Diatheke still retained many
characteristics which fitted it to be used as the rendering for
berith. But, certainly, the change in the character of the
Greek Will tended to make the word less suitable.
To describe the steps in the development of the
Greek Will would require a treatise ; but some points
bearing on the New Testament usage of Diatheke may be
put together here. The new evidence gained from the
many Wills of Greek settlers found in Egypt, ^ from
inscriptions, and from the Roman-Syrian Law-Book ^ of
the fifth century after Christ, has never been thoroughly
collected and arranged.
1 A good example of this is given in Inscriptions d'Asie Mineure in
Rev. Et. Gr., i88g, p. 18.
''•See Professor Mahaffy^ The Flinders-Petrie Papyri, introduction,
p. 35 ff . ; Grenfell, Erotic Greek Papyrus; Grenfell and Hunt, The
Oxyrhynchus Papyri ; Griech. Urkunden aus den kon. Museen, Berlin ;
Kenyon, Greek Papyri of Brit. Mus. (contains only one very late Will) ;
I have seen some unpublished Wills copied by Mr. A. C. Hunt, but
have not access to other publications.
^ Bruns and Sachau, Bin Syrisch-romisches Rechtsbuch aus dem
fftn/ien Jahrhundert, 1880.
The Use of Diatkeke in the Pauline Epistles. 365
The obscurity in which the subject is involved may be
gathered from the words used by such a high authority as
Dr. W. E. Ball : ^ " It need hardly be said that St. Paul, in
any metaphor based upon Will-making, could only refer
to the Roman Will. The Romans were the inventors of
the Will." He speaks on the assumption that there was no
Greek system of Will-making. But, as soon as we realise
that in Tarsus, in Syria, in South Galatia, and at Ephesus,
Paul was in the region where Greek Wills had been a familiar
fact of ordinary life before a single Roman had set foot in
the Eastern land, and where Greek Wills were still custom-
ary when Paul was writing, the case assumes a different
aspect.
The case is complicated by the difference of custom and
law in different Greek countries, and by the way in which
Roman law affected Greek law in the Eastern Provinces.
For example, a Greek Will of-A.D. 189 in Egypt is ex-
pressed entirely in the Roman style and after Roman
custom,^ and the Roman-Syrian Law-Book, while retaining
many points of Greek law,^ uses various Roman terms,
and observes the rule of the Lex Falcidia, B.C. 40, that
three-fourths of the testator's property is at his own dis-
posal, but one-fourth must go to his children.*
In speaking of the Roman Will, we allude only to the
highly-developed " Praetorian " Will, which had become
practically universal in common life, and was the only
^ See p. 368.
^ Mommsen in Berlin Sitzungsber, 1894, P- 4^ ff-
3 See above p. 338.
* The form was that the heir inherited the whole, but was obliged
to pay out of the property such legacies as the testator ordered. The
Lex Falcidia restricted these legacies to three-quarters.
366 The Use of Diatheke in the Pauline Epistles.
form of Will likely to affect the Provinces. Now, whereas
the Greek Diatheke came in the third century B.C. or
earlier to the East with Greek settlers and soldiers and
colonies, and therefore with some of the associations of its
past history, the Roman Will came much later, as a
fact in the law of the conquerors, and without any associa-
tions from its past history : it appeared in the East as a
document which had no standing and no meaning until
after the testator's death, and was revocable by him at
pleasure. Therein lay the most striking difference be-
tween the Roman will and the Greek. I confess that
several high English authorities on Greek Wills in Egypt,
when consulted privately, expressed the opinion that these
Wills were revocable at the testator's desire ; but they
have not satisfied me that the evidence justifies that
opinion earlier than the Roman time and Roman influence.
The Greek Wills in Egypt went through a rapid develop-
ment. The soldiers who settled there were separated from
their family, and were sole masters of their fortune ; and
therefore the family influence on the Diatheke, and family
rights over the property of the individual, which were so
powerful from long-standing feeling in the surroundings of
their old home, had little force in Egypt. Everything
concurred to give the individual owner absolute right to
dispose of his property as he pleased. The development
would go on continuously through the centuries, for Egypt
was a battlefield for Greeks and Romans.
In the Wills in Egypt there is often contained the
provision that the testator is free to alter or invalidate.
Such a provision need not have been made, if Wills were
acknowledged to be revocable at the testator's pleasure :
he has to guard by a special provision against the
The Use of Diatheke in the Paulifie Epistles. 367
customary presumption that the Diatheke is irrevocable.
The step from the formal insertion of this provision to the
assumption that the provision is to be presumed in every
case, might probably be easily made as time passed ; but
whether the step was made before Roman influence came
in to facilitate it, seems not to be proved. The only
second Will known seems to repeat and confirm the first
(see p. 352).
Again, in a Will dated in the year B.C. 123 ^ the testator
leaves all his property away from his two sons, except two
beds : all the rest he bequeaths to his second wife. That
looks like " cutting off the son with a bed," a merely
formal recognition of his right to a share : we remember
that in Greek law the owner and father could disinherit
his son, but at first, and probably for a long time or
even permanently, the act of disinheritance must be per-
formed by the father publicly, during his lifetime, and for
good reasons.^ Even in the fifth century after Christ the
principle remained in force in Syria, persisting from Seleu-
cid custom and law, that the father could put away his son
on good grounds. The heir by Will and adoption had a
stronger legal position in Greek law than the son by nature,
as we saw on p. 353.
On the other hand in Greek law, a daughter was not
strictly an heiress. She had an indefeasible right to a
dowry, and this could be greatly increased according as
her father chose, but she was styled an iTriicXrjpo^, not a
K\7]pov6/xo<; (as a son or adopted son was) ; and her dowry
must not encroach seriously on the son's portion.
^ Gizeh Papyrus, No. 10,388, communicated by Messrs. Grenfell
and Hunt.
" Mitteis, Reichsrecht, p. 336.
368 The Use of Diatheke in the Pauline Epistles.
In an unpublished Greek Will, found in Egypt,^ of the
period of Trajan, a man leaves his property to his wife for
her lifetime, and thereafter to the children of his concubine,
who on their part are not free to alienate it, but must leave
it to their own family. This implies a much extended
power of the individual over the disposal of his property
for generations ; but it is probably due to the influence of
Jvoman customs and law.
Obviously, a people who had been used to think of a
Diatheke as a private document, which could be altered by
its maker as he pleased, and which was unknown to any
other until the maker died, when it was unsealed and
became effective, would see hardly any points of agreement
between that kind of act and the Promise of God to His
people. The analogy of the ordinary use of Diatheke
" after the manner of men " would tend to confuse their
ideas rather than help them to understand the nature of
God's act. The only way to attain clearness would be to
treat this word Diatheke as a technical term of the Greek
Bible, unconnected with the common Will or Testament.
That is the case with the Epistle to the Romans. The
word Diatheke occurs there twice, but only in strictly
Biblical and Hebraic surroundings.
Similarly, the Epistle to the Hebrews was written to a
people who knew only the Roman Will. " The Rabbini-
cal Will was unknown before the Roman Conquest of
Palestine, and was directly based upon the Roman model." ^
Under the rule of Herod in Palestine, as of Amyntas in
^ Communicated by Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt : to be published
in the Oxyrhynchos Papyri, II.
'^Dr. Ball in Contemp. Review, Aug., i8gi, p. 287. Compare above,
p. 341 f.
The Use of Dial he ke in the Pauline Epistles. 369
Galatia/ the new law introduced was almost certain to be
Roman, not Greek. The pleadings in Rome about the
comparative validity of Herod's last Will show the Roman
character : the last Will is tacitly acknowledged to be the
only one valid, unless it could be shown to have been
executed in a state of unsound mind.^
Even if the Epistle to the Hebrews had been addressed
(as some think) to the Church in Rome, not to that in
Jerusalem, that would only show more clearly how Roman
is the atmosphere in which it moves. But the writer of
the Epistle was a Jew, perhaps resident in Caesarea, on
the theory that it was written by the Church of Caesarea to
Jerusalem during Paul's imprisonment.^
In accordance with this the word Diatheke in that Epistle
is generally used in a purely Biblical and Hebraic way.
But in IX 15-17 the sense of Diatheke "after the manner
of men" moves in the writer's mind, "for where a Testament,
Diatheke, is, there must of necessity be the death of him
that made it. For a Diatheke is of force where there
hath been death ; for it doth never avail while he that
made it liveth."* This thought leads him into a quaint
and far-fetched train of reasoning, in order to show how
there was a death connected with every Divine Diatheke.
It is quite extraordinary to see how some theologians
torture these words in order to escape their plain and in-
evitable meaning (even plainer in the Greek than in the
English).
1 See Sections ii, 13.
2 Josephus, Ant. Jud., XVII 9, 5.
^Expositor, June, 1899, p. 401 ff.
* So R. V. in margin and the American Revisers in text. R. V.
in text puts the words as a question.
24
370 Greek Law in Galaiian Cities.
No thought of that kind can have troubled the minds of
the Septuagint translators. And Paul in writing to the
Galatians, does not feel it ; and he assumes that the Gala-
tians are familiar with the ordinary human Diatheke as
irrevocable from the moment when it was properly executed
and passed through the Record Office of the city.
XXXV
GREEK LAW IN GALATIAN CITIES.
We observe that in many places ^ Paul assumes among
his Galatian readers familiarity with a certain system and
state of legal procedure. They are expected to catch the
force of allusions to various legal facts ; and accordingly
laws of that type must have existed in their cities. Further,
those legal facts are not Roman, but are either distinctly
Greek in character or slightly modified from the Greek
type to suit the Graecised parts of Asia.
In the first place, those allusions presuppose a considerable
amount of education among the Galatians. Paul does not
address them as a mere set of ignorant and untutored
rustics : he addresses them as persons living amid the
organised administration of cities. That must be clear to
every thinking man ; but especially clear is it to those who
take the pains to familiarise themselves with the state of
inner Asia Minor in the century after Christ, when the
cities were to a certain extent civilised and Graecised, but
the country districts were still purely Anatolian in customs,
inhabited by a population almost wholly ignorant of Greek.
I See above, §§ XXXI, XXXIII : below, §§ XXXIX, XLI.
Greek Law in Galatian Cities. 371
Yet Dr. Zockler seriously maintains that the Epistle was
addressed to the people in the districts round Pessinus.
Apart from Pessinus itself, those districts were among the
most sparsely populated and the rudest in the whole of
Asia Minor. As regards districts of that kind, only the
most resolute ignoring of all knowledge can blind men to
the fact that Western manners and ideas can hardly have
even begun to penetrate there so early. Even in south-
western Phrygia, separated only by twenty miles of hill
country from the highly civilised and Hellenised Laodiceia,
but off the main route of trade, there were districts where
Greek was known only in the rudest and slightest way to
the mass of the population even in the second century.^
Yet these districts were far more open to Greek influence
than the remote parts round Pessinus ; and Pessinus was
still little affected by Greek manners,^ whereas Laodiceia
and the other cities of the Lycus valley were probably en-
tirely Hellenised long before the time of Christ.
Secondly, among the people whom Paul addressed
Roman manners had not been superimposed directly on
native ways. They were familiar with Greek rather than
with Roman procedure ; and Paul's illustration is drawn
from Greek legal expression. It is therefore obvious that,
as Greek law would not be introduced after the Romans
had occupied the country, there must have been a period
before the Roman conquest when Greek law ruled in the
Galatic territory.
Such would be the case with the country ruled by the
Seleucid.or the Pergamenian, or the Bithynian kings. All
of them, including even the Bithynian princes, had, beyond
^ Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, I, p. 131. ^ See p. 139 f.
372 Greek Law in Galatian Cities.
a doubt, established the Greek principles of society and
law in their dominions : these principles, of course, were
pretty much confined to the cities, and did not affect the
rural population. But in those countries it is clear from
the inscriptions that, before the time of Christ, the cities
possessed an organised municipal government of the Greek
type, cultivated Greek manners and education and used
the Greek language.
The Pontic and Cappadocian kings are more doubtful ;
but, in all probability, Greek civilisation was spread very
little by their influence in their dominions. It is true that
Greek was spoken at their courts to a certain (or uncertain)
extent, and their coins bore Greek legends ; but hardly the
slightest trace of Greek city organisation, except in the
Greek colonies of the coast, can be detected dating from
their time. Amasia is called a city by Strabo (about A.D.
19), and ci polls must be understood to have enjoyed some-
thing of a Greek organisation ; but this was probably due
rather to the natural expansion of Greek manners and
trade than to the intention of any king Mithridates.
Similarly, in Cappadocia, Mazaka and Tyana are called
cities by Strabo.
But as to Galatia Proper, the country of the Gauls, the
case is practically free from doubt. The sketch of Galatian
history given in our Introduction is conclusive that, after
a brief attempt to introduce Greek ways about the begin-
ning of the second century B.C. was quenched in blood,
the loose Celtic organisation and v/ays continued supreme
in the country, and there was the strongest opposition to
Greek manners and influence. The opinion of the best
historical and legal investigators has been quoted ^ that
^ See p. 131.
Greek Law in Galatian Cities. 373
North Galatia continued for centuries to be an Occidental
island amid the sea of Graeco-Asiatic peoples. Especially
as regards the law of family and the rights of children, we
have seen that, even in the second century after Christ,
Galatian custom was strongly antipathetic to Greek ideas.^
Further, there is strong probability — though only scanty
direct evidence exists — that, as North Galatia grew in
civilisation, it was not Greek, but Roman manners and
organisation that were introduced. During the century
B.C. the guiding spirits in the country had been first
Deiotaros and then Amyntas. Deiotaros was repeatedly
praised for his Roman spirit by Roman officials and the
Roman Senate : he drilled and armed his troops as Roman
legions : he spent much of his life fighting against Greeks
and in association with Romans. Amyntas was a creature
of Rome, raised from a humble position for the special pur-
pose of fitting the country to become a Roman Province.^
Roman amusements and Roman devices for government
were far more thoroughly naturalised in North Galatia
than in the Greek cities of Asia.^
All the evidence is that in North Galatia Roman ways
had been superimposed directly on barbarian and specially
Celtic manners. The religion of Galatia was indeed
hardly at all Celtic ; but neither was it Greek ; it was
mainly old Phrygian.* The language was the only Greek
factor that exercised any strong influence on North Galatia ;
and it did so to a great extent under Roman patronage
The Romans made little or no attempt to naturalise the
Latin language in the East ; they acquiesced in the fact
that Greek had the advantage there, and they accepted it
^ See p. 131. 2 See p. iii f. ^ See p. 132 f. * See p. 144.
374 Greek Law in Galatian Cities.
officially. But even the language is exceedingly unlikely
to have been much known outside of the cities in the time
of Paul, Sec. 14.
It is simply irrational to maintafn that Paul would have
attempted to make religious conceptions plain and clear to
North Galatian Christians by means of Greek ideas and legal
devices : he was careful to adapt his words and illustrations
to the needs and capacities of his congregations. His power
over his Churches lay in his sympathy with them. The
intense wish to be among them, IV 20, enabled him to
write as if he were beside them, seeing what they saw
around them.
But the South Galatian lands had been ruled by Greek
officers and kings from 334 onwards. For more than a
century they had been part of the Seleucid Empire, and
had been on the main route between the Seleucid capital,
Syrian Antioch, and the Lydian and Phrygian parts of that
Empire. Then in B.C. 189 they had been transferred to
the Pergamenian kings ; and, though Pergamenian rule
seems "never to have become a reality there, and part of
the country seems to have been annexed to Galatia and
part to Cappadocia during the second century B.C., yet the
position of its cities on or near one of the main thorough-
fares of Greek trade and of Jewish travel would maintain
Greek ways and civilisation among them. See Sec. 17-22.
Only in regard to the two Roman Coloniae, Antioch and
Lystra, it might be maintained that their new foundation
implied a Romanisation of society. To a certain extent
it did so ; actual Italian settlers would not abandon their
Occidental ideas of family and of inheritance. But it by
no means follows that the Greek population of the two
Coloniae abandoned Greek ways : on the contrary the
The Argument from Seed. 375
probability will be admitted by every historical investigator
that in many respects Greek customs persisted. The
surrounding sea of Greek manners would maintain the
Greek element in the Coloniae, as is shown in Sections 17 ff.
Finally, it is evident that Greek civilisation was estab-
lished strongly in the South Galatian cities in the fourth
century B.C., and that the form of government in the
country was not Greek after B.C. 189. So far as it goes,
this establishes a probability that the civilisation of those
cities had more of the older Seleucid type, and was not
open to the same continuous and rapid development as
among the Greek mercenaries in Egypt. An older type of
Greek Will is likely to have existed in Iconium and the
neighbouring cities ; and we see that Paul's references to
the law " after the manner of men " imply a law on the
whole of rather early type.
XXXVI
THE ARGUMENT FROM SEED, III i6.
He saith not " And to seeds," as of many ; but as of one,
" And to thy seed," which is Christ.
It is necessary for Paul's argument to show that all
nations, and tfbt Jews alone, have the right to share in the
blessings promised to Abraham. He finds the proof in
the fact that the various promises made to Abraham were
made equally to his seed.^ Now, as Lightfoot says, " with
a true spiritual instinct even the Rabbinical writers saw
that 'the Christ' was the true seed of Abraham : in Him
the race was summed up, as it were ; without Him its
^Gen. XIII 15, XVII 8.
'^']6 The Argument from Seed.
separate existence as a peculiar people had no meaning."
In " the seed of Abraham " all nations were to be blessed
(Gen. XXVI 8). It cannot be doubted by those who
regard the evolution of Hebraic religion and the coming of
Christ as a series of steps in the gradual working out of
the will of God, that this interpretation of the " seed of
Abraham" is justified.
But, instead of using this way of reasoning simply, Paul
seems to have been tempted to aim at the same result by
a verbal argument. The Greek philosophers were often
led astray by an idea that mere grammatical facts and
forms contained some deep philosophical or mystical truth :
Plato's Cratylus is sufficient evidence of this. Paul, there-
fore, argues that as the singular, "seed," is used, not the
plural, the single great descendant of Abraham is meant,
and not the many less important descendants. If we
rightly take the meaning, this is, obviously, a mere verbal
quibble, of no argumentative force. Paul sees clearly and
correctly the result to be aimed at, but he reaches the result
by a process of reasoning which has no more force in logic
than the poorest word-splitting of any old Greek philosopher
or Hebrew Rabbi.
The attempt which Lightfoot makes to defend the char-
acter of the reasoning from " seed " and " seeds " cannot be
pronounced successful. It amounts practically to this
" the theological result aimed at is right "' (as we fully
admit), " therefore the reasoning can hardly be wrong ".
If we set aside the verbal fallacy, the argument remains
complete and correct.
The promises were made to Abraham and to his
seed.
The true " seed of Abraham " is " the Christ ".
Function of the Law. ^jy
" The Christ " is the whole body of true Christians.
The promises were made to all Christians.
That is to say, the promises made to Abraham are the
heritage of the whole Church of Christ, the whole multitude
of those who are justified by faith in Christ.
The argument is one more of the many ways in which
Paul reiterates the fundamental truth that he has to drive
home into the minds of the Galatians, or rather to revivify
in their memory.^ It is specially obvious here that Paul
is appealing to familiar doctrines, already set forth to the
Galatians, and not arguing to a circle of readers on a topic
new to them.
XXXVII
FUNCTION OF THE LAW, III 19-22.
In this passage Paul guards against a possible misin-
terpretation of his words, which might be dangerous. It
might be said that he was representing the law as being in
opposition to the Promises made to Abraham and his
seed. He must therefore define clearly what he conceives
to be the function of the law. The same person, the one
God, gave both the Promises and the Law. The Promises
were to be fulfilled, not immediately, but after a long
interval, not to each individual of the human " Seed of
Abraham," but to and through the "the Seed," i.e., the
Christ. The Law is the preparation for the fulfilment of
the Promises. There must be a clear and peremptory for-
bidding of sin, before the sin is made emphatic and beyond
palliation or excuse. " The times of ignorance God might
1 See § XXI.
2,7 S Function ef the Law.
overlook," as Paul said to the Athenians ; but none who
sinned against the clear Law could try to shelter themselves
behind such a plea. Moreover, the Law was necessary (as
has been said, p. 336) in order that the overwhelming
consciousness of sin, which is a necessary preliminary to
true faith in Christ, might be produced in the minds of
men.
The Law would have been contrary to the Promises if it
had been intended to produce the same result as they by a
new way, and therefore had rendered them unnecessary.
The Promises are promises of life and salvation ; and if
a Law such as could produce life and salvation had been
given from Mount Sinai, then this Law would really have
interfered with and nullified the Promises.
But, on the contrary, the Scripture declares that the
effect of the Law is to " shut up everything under the
dominion of sin without means of escape " (Lightfoot), in
order that men might be forced to look forward to "the
Christ" as the only means of escape, the only hope of life
and salvation.
It is noteworthy that Paul makes only the vague
reference to "the Scripture," and does not quote a special
passage. His words are intelligible only on the supposition
that they are a brief summary of a more elaborate exposi-
tion of the combined effect of several passages, which he
had delivered in his earlier preaching to the Galatians.
The expression "by faith to them that believe," V 22,
lie TTiUTeoi^i Toi<; TTLaTevovaw, is rendered very strong by
the repetition. As has been pointed out on page 347, €k
TTio-Teco? must be understood as emphatically denying the
opposite doctrine of the Judaising Christians — the source
is €K 7rto-Te&)9, not ex vofiov.
The Medial 07^. 379
XXXVIII
THE MEDIATOR, III 20.
" The Law was ordained through angels by the hand of a
mediator. Now, a mediator is not of one, but God is one."
The precise meaning of the argument that lies in the
words of III 20 is very difficult to catch ; and I shall not
attempt to add one to the 250 or 300 interpretations that
have (according to Lightfoot) been proposed for this passage.
We have in § XXXVI found a case where Paul sees the
right result, and yet attains it by an argument founded
on the generally accepted, though mistaken, view of that
period, that grammatical forms had a deep philosophical
meaning (usually assigned on arbitrary and capricious
grounds to suit some individual instance). Is it not the
case here also, that he aims at a right result, but reaches it
by a bad process of reasoning ?
Paul is evidently emphasising a certain contrast that
exists between the free grace of the Promises and the
indirect character of the Law — the Law being merely a
means to an end beyond itself, and not being the sufficient
and ultimate gift of the grace of God. The distinction is
undeniable and of immense importance. In this paragraph,
therefore, he does not use the word Diatheke to indicate
the "covenant" made with Abraham. In accordance with
the distinction drawn in § XXXIV, it is necessary for
him to use the word " Promise," iirayyeXia, in order to
emphasise the character of freedom and grace in the
covenant made by God with Abraham and his seed. Ac-
cordingly, the words "Promised" or "Promises" occur
three times in the short paragraph {vv. 19, 21, 22) : the
380 The Mediator.
Greek text has the verb instead of the noun in 19, where
the English translation, if literal, would be "the Seed to
whom it hath been promised ".
The Law did not come immediately and directly from
God to men. It was conveyed from God by angels ; and a
mediator, viz., Moses, carried it down from the Mount to the
Hebrew people. This method is far less gracious and kind
than the direct communication from God to Abraham ; and
brings out the consciousness of an impassable gulf separat-
ing God from even the chosen people. The allusion to the
angels seemed founded more on Rabbinical interpretation
and later tradition than on the text of the Books of Moses ;
but the words of Stephen (Acts VII 53) and of Herod in«
Josephus,^ as quoted by Lightfoot and commentators
generally, seem to imply that the common belief of the
time supposed the ministry of angels.
A mediator implies one who goes between two parties to
an agreement, and therefore to a certain degree might
seem to diminish the absolute authority and completeness
of the one party in this case. Can this, then, be the sense
of the last words of v. 20, " but God is one ". So Lightfoot
thinks, and so it may be. But it seems an unsatisfactory
form of expression ; and I cannot avoid the suspicion that
Paul here is betrayed into a mistake, and is thinking of the
other and infinitely more important sense of the words,
"God is one" — as in Romans III 30. — " He is one and
the same God in all His acts, one God makes both the
Promises and the Law." The argument would then be a
fallacy, " a mediator implies (two parties), but God is one ".
I may probably be wrong ; but, if one speaks, one must say
i^«/./M^., XV5, 3-
Law the Child- Guardian. 381
what one thinks. Here, while Paul aims at a great truth,
he reaches it, I think, by a mistaken argument.
We have here, as recognised in the translation (repeated
by Zockler and others, and not disputed by Lightfoot, but,
seemingly, recognised by him as the obvious sense), a clear
and apparently undisputed example of a participle used in
the sense of /cat with a finite verb : " The Law was added
because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to
whom the Promise had been made, and it was ordained
through angels etc.," where the Greek has merely the
participle " being ordained ". But, distinctly, the giving of
the Law by God is the first step, and the carrying into
effect by means of angels is the following step. This is
one of the many examples justifying the construction BiP/Xdov
. . . KCdkvdevre^ in Acts XVI 6, in the sense which I have
pleaded for, " they traversed . . . and were prevented,"
That loose usage of the participle is common in the later
Greek and Latin.
XXXIX
LAW THE CHILD-GUARDIAN, III 23-25.
Before the age of Faith began, we of the Jewish race
were shut up and kept under the guard of the Law, in
preparation for (with a view to) the approaching revelation
of Faith. Thus the Law has played the part of " a servant,
responsible for our safety, and charged to keep us out of
bad company,"^ until the age of Christ arrived, so that we
might be made righteous by Faith. For that result could
^ The best way of explaining Paul's meaning is to imitate closely
the description of a Paidagogos given in the Dictionary of Antiquities
(Smith), II, p. 307.
382 Law the Child- Guardian.
not have been attained unless special care had been taken
of us during the interval. We could not safely be permitted
to be free at that time, for we could not then acquire Faith,
that vitalising and strengthening power, seated in our mind
and working itself out in our conduct, which enables those
who have seen and known Christ to be free and yet safe.
But now the age of Faith has begun, and we are set free
from the guard and the directing care of the Law.
When Paul compared the Law to a paidagogos, he in-
tended undoubtedly to describe it as having a good moral
character, and exercising a salutary, though a strict and
severe, effect on those who were placed under it. He
speaks no evil of the Law ; he represents it as subsidiary
and inferior to Faith, but still as a wholesome provision
given in God's kindness to the Jews.
Further, he chose an illustration which would make this
clear to his Galatian readers ; and they must, therefore,
have been familiar with that characteristic Greek institution,
the paidagogos, and considered it salutary and good. This
throws some light on the social organisation in the Galatian
cities, for it places us in the midst of Greek city life, as it
was in the better period of Greek history. "In the free
Greek cities the system of educatisn was organised as a
primary care of the State. The educational system was
the best side of the Greek city constitution. Literature,
music and athletics are all regulated in an interesting
inscription of Teos, the salaries of the teachers are fixed,
and special magistrates survey and direct the conduct of
teachers and pupils." ^
In that period it would appear that \h.& paidagogoi were
I Shortened from Cities and Bish. of Phrygia, II, p. 440.
Law the Child- Guardian. 383
trusted servants and faithful attendants, standing in a very-
close relation to the family (in which they were slaves).
Their duty was not to teach any child under their charge,
but simply to guard him. Among the Romans, who
adopted this institution from the Greeks, the paidagogos
gave some home instruction to the child : he was a Greek-
speaking slave, who looked after the child, and taught him
to use the Greek language. Though he also accompanied
the child to school, yet there was not the same kindly
feeling in the relationship of guardian and ward in Rome
as in Greek cities during the better period. Roman /<2/in order to show in
His own case how by dying to the Law a man rises
superior to it : thus His death was the purchase of men,
paid in order that they might be placed in a position to
avail themselves of the adoption as sons, open to them by
the Diatheke of the Father. He could show them the way
only by traversing it before them.
It is clear that the teaching, so briefly summed up in
this verse, is to be understood as already familiar to the
Galatians ; Paul is merely revivifying it in their memory.
And, in the discourse which Luke gives as typical of Paul's
teaching in Pisidian Antioch and elsewhere (Acts XHI
16-41), exactly the same teaching is set forth in very
simple language — language so simple that its full meaning
398 He sent forth His Son.
hardly impresses itself on the reader until he compares it
with the Epistle. Paul there quotes " Thou art My Son " ;
and he says "the Word of this salvation is sent forth to
us," using the same verb as in Galatians IV 4. The
context shows that " the Word " here is not to be taken in
the mere sense of news or spoken words, prjixara (as Meyer-
Wendt explain) : it is used in a more mystical sense, and
it forms the transition from the simpler expression of the
Synoptics to the language used about " the Word " in the
Fourth Gospel. That Luke employs this term in his brief
abstract of Paul's Galatian teaching, must be taken as a
proof that Paul intentionally expressed himself in mystic
language as to the relation between the Father and the
Son. That was not a subject about which he spoke
openly.
It has often seemed to me that this was the subject about
which he " heard unspeakable words which it is not lawful
for man to utter" in the vision described in 2 Corinthians
XII 4. Though it is vain to seek to know the contents of
a vision, which the seer pointedly refuses to speak about,
yet the mystic language which Paul uses on this subject
may justify, perhaps, a conjecture as to the subject.
The peroration of the address at Pisidian-Antioch insisted
on the marvellous and mysterious nature of God's action in
sending forth His Son : " I work a wonder in your days, a
work which you would not believe, if one should recount
it to you ".
The Address at Pisidian Antioch. 399
XLIV
THE ADDRESS AT PISIDIAN ANTIOCH.^
It is evident from the Epistle, that Paul must have in-
sisted orally to the Galatians on the preparatory character
of the Jewish Law ; and must have shown them in his first
preaching how the history of the Jews becomes intelligible
only as leading onward to a further development and to
a fuller stage. That is the whole burden of the address
reported in brief by Luke.^ The typical words, " the fulness
of time " (to irXrjpoy^a tov y^povov, Gal. IV 4), are echoed
in the words of that address : John was fulfilling his course
{eTrXrjpov TOV Spofiov) ; the Jews fulfilled the words of the
prophets by condemning Jesus {eirXrjpwaav Kpivavresi) ; God
hath fulfilled His Promise (iTrayyeXiav . . . eKireifkripoiKev).
Further, Paul must have previously laid special stress
in addressing the Galatian Churches on the fact that the
Promise made to the ancestors of the Jews cannot be per-
formed except through the coming of Christ ; that Christ's
coming is the fulfilment of the Promise ; that Christ is the
true seed of Abraham ; that men cannot be placed in a
position to receive the ratification of the Promise except
by being identified with Christ and becoming a part of
Christ ; and that in this way only do they become fully
the sons and heirs who actually succeed to the inheritance.
This, which is the burden of the Epistle, is also the
burden of the address : " ye could not be justified by the
Law," " through (the action of) Jesus every one that hath
faith is justified."^ That idea is urged and reiterated,
^ See § XLIII. This section was suggested by Mr. A. Souter.
2 Acts XIII 16-41.
3 Sia TovTov, i.e., Christ. This phrase is characteristically Pauline.
400 The Address at Pisidian Antioch.
time after time, in the Epistle ; it is specially emphasised
in the address ; the word in which it is expressed, hiKaiooy,
is never used in Acts except in the address ; it occurs with
extraordinary frequency in the Epistle and in the kindred
letter to the Romans, but is rarely used elsewhere by Paul.
The address twice declares that Jesus came as the fulfil-
ment of the Promise, vv. 23 and 32 f. It lays stress on
His being of the seed of David (therefore ultimately of
Abraham). It is plain what a decisive part in the con-
version of Paul, and in the message to the Galatians pre-
supposed in the Epistle (see § XXX), was played by his
coming to realise for himself, and his declaring to others,
that Jesus was not dead. In the address the same truth is
insisted on at length as fundamental in the message which
God has sent.
The word " inheritance " is not used in the address with
the same prominence as in the Epistle ; the more explana-
tory and the more Petrine ^ " remission of sins " appears
instead of it. " Inheritance " is used only of the Promised
Land {KareKKTjpovojxrja-ev) .
The Epistle points out how the hanging upon a tree was
necessary as a step in the working out of the duty for
which Christ was sent ; and the address describes how,
when the Jewish leaders " had fulfilled all things that were
written of Him, they took Him down from the tree". Paul
never uses this expression " the tree," ^vXov, in this sense
in any other Epistle. Peter uses it twice in Acts V 30 and
X 39, as well as in his first Epistle II 24.
We notice, in this connexion, that Peter also uses the
word "fulfil" (Acts III 18) in a way remarkably similar
1 Acts II 38, V 31, X 43 (Petrine) : Paul in Acts XXVI 18; Col. I
14; Eph. I 7.
Paul's Visits to Galatia in Acts. 401
to that which Paul emphasised to the Galatians, and that
his addresses there and in V 30 fif. are remarkably similar
to Paul's Galatian address. Is not the similarity in their
view the reason why Paul specially turned to Peter, and
why he went to Jerusalem at first with the single intention
of interviewing Peter (laTopijaai Kr)(f)dv, Gal. I 18)? Finally
the resemblance between their addresses at the beginning
of their career finds its confirmation at the end, when
Peter's Epistle is so instinct with Pauline feeling that
Lightfoot believes (as every one, surely, must believe) he
had read at least Rom. and Eph. Hence he inherited the
care of Paul's churches and the services of Paul's coadjutors
(i Peter I i ; V 12, 13).
The coincidences between the Epistle and the address at
Pisidian Antioch are so striking as to make each the best
commentary on the other. It may be said in explanation
that the topics common to them are those which are funda-
mental in Paul's Gospel and must appear in every address.
But there is no such close resemblance between the Epistle
and any other of Paul's addresses reported in Acts, and the
Antiochian address stands in closer relation to this than
to any other of Paul's Epistles.
XLV
PAUL'S VISITS TO GALATIA IN ACTS.
To study the Epistle properly, we must here briefly
note the account given in Acts of the visits to the Galatic
Province.
It is unnecessary to repeat the elaborate study of the
first visit given in the Church in the Roman Empire and
26
402 Paul's Visits to Galatia in Acts.
St. Paul the Traveller. We note merely that the visit
must have occupied a considerable time. No statements
of time are given in Acts, but the obvious necessities in the
evangelisation of four cities and a considerable region (Acts
XIII 49; XIV 6), as well as the example of the time
spent on later journeys, show that the estimate of twenty
months, given as a minimum in those works, if it is not
correct, should be increased rather than diminished.
The evangelisation of South Galatia was remarkably
successful. The whole of Antioch gathered to listen, and
the Word was spread throughout the whole region ; a great
multitude at Iconium believed ; at Derbe there were many
disciples, and at Lystra Paul was treated as the messenger-
god Hermes. This was the beginning of Paul's work among
the Gentiles on his own lines, and its brilliant success en-
couraged him much (Acts XIV 27 ; XV 3, 4, 12).
On the whole it was Gentile Churches that were founded
on that occasion. Many Iconian Jews believed ; but those
of Antioch were offended when they saw the Gentiles
trooping to hear Paul, and their opposition and pursuit
of him were relentless.
It has been used as an argument against the South
Galatian Theory that on this journey Luke makes no
reference to the Province Galatia. But he mentions its
parts — I, Pisidia, 2, the region of which Antioch was centre,
3, the region of which Derbe and Lystra were the leading
(practically the only) cities — just as in many inscriptions
from about a.d. 80 onwards the Province is mentioned by
enumerating the regions that composed it. Such was the
" custom of the country," and Luke always follows that.
The second visit to the South Galatian Churches was
deliberately planned in order to " see how they fared ".
Paul's Visits to Galatia in Acts. 403
We must understand that Paul was not free from appre-
hension lest the great conflict in Antioch and Jerusalem
might have roused some similar movement in the Churches
on the great highway from Syria to the Aegean Sea.
It is admitted on all hands that he visited Derbe, Lystra
and Iconium on that journey. The North Galatian theorists
say that Paul did not complete his intended visitation, and
turned away from Iconium north-eastwards. We, on the
contrary, hold that when Luke mentions the " Region
which is Phrygian and Galatic," he means the part of
Phrygia that belonged to the Province Galatia — that
being the most pragmatically accurate designation of the
region of which Antioch was the centre (already mentioned
on the first journey) — Paul carried out his intention of seeing
how all his Churches fared.
All " the Churches were strengthened in their ^ Faith ".
When Luke, after telling the purpose of the visit, described
so much more fully than usual its result,^ must we not
understand that Paul found need for strengthening them ?
Luke never wastes a word in that brief History. Already
some slight tendency towards error was developing, and
was corrected by Paul.
On that second visit Paul loyally carried out the
arrangement made in the Apostolic Decree. Though it
was nominally addressed only to the Province of Syria-
Cilicia, yet he treated it as of universal application. He
was eager to conciliate the Jews by conceding as much as
possible to their prejudices. He could not permit Gentiles
1 This seems probably the real meaning.
2 Contrast the second visit to Macedonia and Achaia, hit off in
such brief terms, though we know that Corinth at least had been
deeply moved.
404 Paufs Visits to Galatias in Acts.
to practise circumcision ; but Timothy, who was of Jewish
blood, he treated as a Jew in this respect, and he took
with him as companions only Jews. He spared no pains
to attain unity and concord ; and the Gentile Galatians
might well begin to think after his departure that the rite
performed on Timothy was the symbol of admission to the
honourable position of helping an Apostle.
The third visit (Acts XVIII 23) was devoted to a thorough
and systematic survey of the Churches in Central Asia Minor,
in order from first to last " stablishing all the disciples ".
Here again our principles of interpretation (reached in
previous studies of Acts) compel us to infer that the
stablishing of the Galatian Christians is mentioned because
it was an important fact. How well it suits the Epistle !
Paul wrote this letter to the Churches, and then at the
earliest opportunity visited them and stablished all the
disciples. The fight was ended, and Paul was victorious
But according to the North Galatian theory Paul did
not at this time visit South Galatia ; they leave it un-
explained why Luke should say so emphatically that Paul
" stablished all the disciples," if he left out the four cities
and the regions in which they were situated. In fact there
is no explanation ; they treat this as one of the many "gaps"
in Acts, whose existence they assume at the outset.
The inevitable meaning of the words used by Luke to
describe this third journey has been recognised by Dr.
Hort : see above, p. 10. Asterius, bishop of Amasia,
about A.D. 400, gives the same explanation of the route
" through Lycaonia and the cities of Phrygia ". Those
who study Asia Minor geography for its own sake must
recognise the overwhelming evidence that the term
" Galatic Region " {FaXaTiKr) x^P^) could not be used to
Pauts Visits to the Galatic Churches. 405
designate North Galatia, but only the territory of the en-
larged Galatia : see p. 478.
Thus we see that Paul visited the South Galatian cities
three times, and finally after long efforts stablished the
Churches permanently on the Paulinistic side.
XLVI.
PAUL'S VISITS TO THE GALATIC CHURCHES.
Nowhere are the immediate personal relations between
Paul and the Galatic Christians so minutely described as
in the verses IV 12 ff. Here, therefore, is the suitable
place to collect the evidence which the Epistle affords as
to the previous connection between them. The following
points have been generally accepted as naturally following
from the words used by the Apostle. It is better to
avoid disputed points as far as possible ; and therefore I
would concentrate attention chiefly on the facts on which
Lightfoot and Zockler are agreed ; for they may be
taken as specially good representatives of the general
opinion.
Paul had already visited the Galatic Churches twice,
and distinguishes between his first and his second visit,
IV 13, " I preached the Gospel to you the former time"
(marginal reading of Revised Version).
It might seem sufficient that Lightfoot and Zockler are
agreed in this interpretation. But the point is occasionally
disputed, and therefore is treated in a Note, 414.
Assuming, then, from IV 13 that Paul had twice visited
Galatia before he wrote to the Churches, we ask whether
any further references occur in the Epistle to the two visits
4o6 Paul's Visits to the Galatic Churches.
and to the relations between him and the Galatic Christians
on each occasion.
On the first visit the reception given the Apostle and
his Gospel by the Galatians was extraordinarily kind, cordial,
and even enthusiastic. " Ye received me as an angel of
God, even as Christ Jesus." They were hardly satisfied
with treating him as an ordinary human being : they re-
garded him as a special heaven-sent messenger. They
congratulated themselves on their happy lot in that Paul
had come among them (IV 15).
On the second visit the reception had not been so abso-
lutely cordial and enthusiastic. Twice in this letter^ he
refers to the fact that he is now repeating warnings and
reproofs which he had already given : " as we said before,
so say I now again " (I 9) : "I testify again to every man
that receiveth circumcision that he is a debtor to do the
whole Law" (V 3). These former warnings would not
have been given unless Paul had felt they were needed.
Moreover the words of IV 16, " Am I become your enemy
because I tell you the truth ?" must refer to free exhortation,
not unmingled with reproof, during the second visit. Paul
feels that there has already come into existence a feeling
among the Galatians that he has been holding them back
from what is best for them ; and he regards this as due to
former plain speaking on his part, which can only be the
language used by him during the second visit.
It is, however, also clear that, on the whole, the second
visit was a successful one. " Ye were running well " (V 7)
proves that ; and moreover the Epistle as a whole indubi-
tably implies (as all interpreters are agreed) that the bad
^ As Zockler, p. 73, points out.
Paul's Visits to the Galatic Churches. 407
news which eHcited the letter had come to Paul as a com-
plete surprise. He left them running, apparently, a good
race in the proper course ; and the first news that he
received was that disaffection and change were rapidly
spreading, and that his own Churches were moving
rapidly in a retrograde direction.^
A certain interval had elapsed between the second visit
and the Epistle, so that he can contrast their conduct in
his absence and in his presence.^ The length of interval
needed will be estimated variously by different persons
according to their conception of the possible scope of the
words " so quickly " in I 6? There came emissaries (doubt-
less from Jerusalem ultimately) not long after Paul's second
visit ; and these produced a marked effect, which spread
rapidly from congregation to congregation. But the change
began some time before Paul heard of it ; and he did not
learn about it till it was well advanced.
At the same time, while Paul, during his second visit,
was speaking very freely on a tendency towards Judaism
which was already perceptible in the Galatic Churches, he
also used words or performed acts which were taken by
some persons as equivalent to an admission (i) that he
regarded circumcision (implying of course, observance of
1 Lightfoot, p. 25 (who puts Gal. late, and near Rom.) admits
(as he was bound to do) that Paul at Ephesus was in regular corres-
pondence with the Galatic Churches. This would be quite inconsis-
tent with the idea that a schism had begun, and was progressing
shortly after he left Galatia, for he would have learned what was
going on in the Churches (see § VI, p. 254).
"^Doch scheint nach Gal. IV 18 sett des Apostel's Abreise aus Galatien
immerhin einige Zeit vergangen zu sdn ; Zockler, p. 72 ad fin.
' Lightfoot's view that the interval is to be measured from the
first visit seems not justifiable.
4o8 Paul's Visits to the Galatic Churches.
the Law as a whole) as incumbent either on Christians
generally, or at least on those who were to attain a position
of importance and responsibility in the Church ; (2) that
he was only a messenger and subordinate of the original
and leading Apostles in Jerusalem.
The former of these two misconceptions is clearly re-
ferred to in V II, " If I still preach circumcision, why do
the Judaistic party persecute me ? " and it led to the further
misrepresentation that Paul was insincere in these words
or acts, and used them only to curry favour with a party
which was so powerful that he shrank from offending it
openly (I 10).
The second misconception obviously underlies the whole
argument in chapters I and II, and has already been
considered in § VIII.
Probably no one will maintain that these misconceptions
were caused by Paul's words and acts during his first visit.
The Epistle, as a whole, from first to last, bears on its
face the plain intention to bring back the Galatic Chris-
tians to their first frame of mind. " They began spirit-
ually, they seek to complete their religious course by
physical ritual." On this see § VIII.
The historical inferences from the Epistle as to Paul's
relations to the Galatic Churches are, then, clear. His
first visit had been one of unclouded and brilliant success,
calculated to give extraordinary encouragement to the
non-Jewish Christians everywhere. A new step had been
taken, and it was entirely confirmed by the manifest signs
of God's favour. God had supplied to them the Spirit ;
He had " wrought miracles among them " ; and all this had
resulted, not from their " performing any part of the Jewish
ritual," but purely from " the willing hearing which comes
PanVs Visits to the Galatic Churches. 409
of Faith " ^ (III 2 and 5). That was the confirmation which
had defended Peter's action in the case of Cornelius : " The
Spirit fell on all them which heard the word : and the
champions of circumcision were amazed because that on
the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit "
(Acts X 44, 45).
Now at what point in the narrative of Acts does such a
stage of the great question naturally fall ? Here we have
a Gentile province, in the heart of Asia Minor, evangelised ;
and at once the Divine Spirit, by manifest, indubitable,
external signs — signs which were clearly displayed to the
senses of every onlooker — is imparted to them and recog-
nised generally as dwelling among them. It is obvious
that this is the precise stage which was made known by
Paul and Barnabas to the Christians of Phoenicia and
Samaria, when they "declared the conversion of the
Gentiles, and caused great joy to all the brethren " (Acts
XV 3). It was an epoch-making step ; and, if this step in
advance resulted soon afterwards in those Galatic Churches
retrogressing into Judaism, the blow to Paul's gospel would
have been most severe and probably fatal. The very
importance of the step, the joy that it caused to the non-
Hebrew Churches, made the possible defection of those
Galatic Churches a crisis of the gravest character. From
Acts we see what an epoch-making step was taken when
the South Galatian Churches were converted. From the
Epistle we gather what a serious crisis it was to Paul
when the Churches of Galatia showed symptoms of schism.
Why suppose that the Churches in South Galatia are not
" Churches of Galatia " ? Why try to make an artificial
^This is Lightfoot's rendering. Zockler similarly " Aufnahtne der
evangelischen Predigt im Glauben ".
4IO Paulas Visits to the Galatic Churches.
separation ? It is answered that Paul could not call his
Churches in South Galatia by the title of the " Churches
of Galatia ". Yet it is admitted that only a few years
later Peter summed up these Churches in South Galatia
among his Churches of Galatia. If Peter used about A.D.
64^ the Roman system of classifying these Pauline Churches
according to the Province in which they were situated — the
invariable method of the Church in all later time — why
could not Paul classify his own Churches in that way about
53-57? Whether is it more likely that Paul the Roman
would employ the Roman principle from the first, or that
Peter the Palestinian would substitute the Roman principle
for Paul's non-Roman system ? But this is a digression.
Now, as to the second visit, we have seen that during it
there were some signs of trouble : the ideal harmony that
reigned between Paul and his Galatian converts on the
first visit was not maintained on the second. At what
point in the narrative of Acts are the complications of
that visit most naturally to be placed ?
The answer cannot be for a moment doubtful. In Acts
we have a picture of the Church as it passed through the
stages of this struggle ; and the second Galatian visit clearly
harmonises with the stage described as resulting from the
apostolic council. Every feature of the second visit, shown
in the Epistle, is either expressly attested, or natural and
probable, in Paul's second journey through South Galatia
(XVI 1-5).
I. With the constant stream of communication between
Syria and the West that poured along the great route, it is
practically certain that the struggle in Antioch would rouse
1 Our argument here is directed against scholars who admit that
date : for my own part, I think that Peter wrote about 75-80.
Paul's Visits to the Galatic Churches. 4 1 1
some echo in the South Galatian Churches. There was a
considerable Jewish population in that country ; it was
influential, politically, socially, and, above all, as regards
religion ; ^ many of the pagans had long been to some
degree under the influence of Jewish ideas. There were
Jews in the new Churches, though the mass were converted
pagans.
Moreover, it is natural that some tendency towards
Judaic ceremonies should exist from beforehand among
many of the converts : indeed, it was inevitable that this
should be so. They had of old been influenced by the
impressive character of the Jewish faith ; they heard the
Gospel first in the synagogue; and Paul's arguments were
regularly drawn from the Jewish Prophets and Law. This
produced a tendency, which Paul had to warn them against
on his second visit ; and the man who had just come from
the conflict in Jerusalem and Antioch would not be slow to
warn them of the possible dangers of that tendency. The
Phrygians always tended to Judaism, pp. 193 ff", 449.
2. Paul's words and acts on the second visit had created
the impression that he regarded circumcision as a duty.
Lightfoot fully recognises ^ that this impression was due to
Paul's action at Lystra in his second journey. Acts XVI
2, and that this affords a distinct argument in favour of the
South Galatian theory. He circumcised Timothy. The
act was seized on by his enemies, and was certainly open
to misconstruction.
3. His words and acts on that second Galatian visit had
also been construed as an attempt to please men. Such,
1 On this point see Sec. i8 and Citi&s and, Bishoprics of Phrygia,
chap. XV, The Jews in Phrygia.
'^ See his note on V 11, p. 206. See also his remarks on p, 29.
412 Paul's Visits to the Galatic Churches.
too, was sure to be the case on his journey in South Galatia,
Acts XVI 1-5. It was natural that one who was loyally-
carrying out a compromise and going as far as possible in
the hope of conciliating the Jews should thus be misunder-
stood. His action to Timothy was easily set in that light.
The action can be defended ; but every one must feel that
it is one of those acts which need defence, not one whose
propriety is obvious and indisputable.
4. His conduct on the second visit further suggested that
he was merely a messenger and subordinate of the apostolic
leaders in Jerusalem. Similarly, on his journey in South
Galatia, he actually appeared as a messenger, and " de-
livered them the decrees for to keep, which had been
ordained of the apostles and elders that were at Jerusalem "
(Acts XVI 4) : the misinterpretation referred to in the
Epistle was quite natural as a corollary from that action.
5. The second visit was successful in its issue : Paul
seemed to have eradicated the dangerous tendencies.
That also was the case with the second journey through
the Churches in South Galatia ; " the Churches were
strengthened in the Faith" (Acts XVI 5). The words
read as if they were an explanatory note on the Epistle
to the Galatians. And that is the character of the narrative
of Acts as a whole, when the South Galatian theory is
applied. The facts recorded in the History fit the Epistle.
The Epistle is elucidated throughout by the History.
Now, let any one attempt to do this for the North
Galatian theory. It is admittedly impossible. The one
authority does not fit the other. The events and emotions
recorded in Acts XVI do not suit the first visit, those
recorded in Acts XVIII do not suit the second visit, as
these visits are alluded to in the Epistle. The North
Paul's Visits to the Galatic Churches. 413
Galatian theory ends in that pathetic conclusion, the
refuge of despair, that the most striking fact about the
History of Luke is " the gaps " in it. And the inevitable
inference from that theory — an inference drawn by all
its adherents — is that the author of that History, the
intimate friend and companion of Paul, did not know the
Epistles of Paul or the real facts about the Galatian
Churches, or concealed his knowledge of the facts.
He who judges from Acts must expect that the South
Galatian Churches would play an important part in the
struggle for freedom on one side or on the other ; and that
is so as the South Galatian theorists read the Epistles of
Paul.
But on the North Galatian theory, the Churches whose
foundation is heralded by Paul to the Phoenician and
Samarian Christians as so important a step towards
freedom disappear at once from history : they play no
part in subsequent events, except that Paul pays a passing
visit to some of them ^ in XVI 1-5 : though they lie on
the main track ^ of communication by land between East
and West, yet they participate in no further stage of
the great struggle : their action is never referred to by
Paul either as a pattern or an encouragement to his other
Churches : his first-born spiritual offspring,^ whose birth
was celebrated by him as an encouragement to distant
peoples, Acts XV 4, is never alluded to by him in writing
^ It is explicitly maintained by some North Galatian theorists (and
is obviously forced on any who try to work that theory into a
geographical possibility) that Paul went north from Iconium, with-
out going westwards as far as Pisidian Antioch.
2 Except Lystra, which was ten or twelve miles off the track in a
retired glen.
' Compare Gal. IV 19.
414 PcLurs Visits to the Galatic Churches.
any of the letters that have come down to us, except once
to tell what he suffered there. The place they might be
expected to fill is said to be taken by a different group of
Churches in the northern part of the same Province.
One further inference from the Epistle as to the relations
of Paul to the Galatians remains. It is evident (as Zockler,
p. 73, rightly points out) that, when Paul was writing, the
schism was not yet completed. It was only in process
(I 6). The whole of Paul's appeal in the Epistle is directed
to prevent a process which is going on, not to undo what
has already been completed. The "little leaven is leaven-
ing the whole " ; but it may be removed in time to prevent
the worst and irretrievable consequences. Especially (as
Zockler emphasises) the Galatians had not yet accepted
circumcision. Paul says : " If ye receive circumcision,
Christ will profit you nothing " (V 2). Contrast this with
IV 10, "ye are observing days and months"; and it is
clear that the latter step has been taken, and the Jewish
ceremonial is commonly observed, but the more serious
step has not yet been made.
Note. — TO irpoTepov. Prof. Blass^ has recently added his
weighty authority to the opposite view — viz., that to
Trporepov here merely means " at a former time ". Light-
foot's note seems to me to show beyond question the
fallacy of this view, which he carefully considers and
dismisses. His argument is elucidated and confirmed by
the two following considerations.
{a) On the opposite side i Timothy I 13 is quoted as
a case in which Paul uses ro irporepov in the sense of
1 Grammatik des N.T. Griech, p. 34.
Paul's Visits to the Galatic Churches, 415
" formerly ". Lightfoot, however, sees what escapes his
opponents — that this is not a parallel case. In i Timothy
I 13^ TO irpoTepov materially influences the meaning of the
whole sentence; it means "previously, but not at the
time in question " ; and the sentence would not be correct
if TO Trporepou were omitted. Thus the adverb expresses a
direct and emphatic contrast between the earlier and the
later time.
Now, it is impossible to understand that in Galatians
IV 13 TO Trporepov indicates such a contrast as in i Timothy
I 13. It would be absurd to translate " You know that it
was because of bodily disease that I preached the Gospel to
you at a former, but not at a later time ". This would be
meaningless except as distinguishing two visits.
Suppose now that Professor Blass is right, and that the
verse only means, " You know that it was because of disease
that I preached to you at a former time ". The adverb
here might be omitted, and the meaning would be as
perfect and complete as it is when the adverb is expressed.
Is this characteristic of Paul? Is it even permissible?
For my own part I cannot admit that in this letter a
single word is used in an otiose and useless way. To
irporepov must have a marked and distinct sense — all the
more so because it occupies the emphatic position at the
end of a clause. As Lightfoot says : " it is difficult to
explain the emphasis," except by interpreting "the former
of my two visits to Galatia ".
TTiCTTOv fie T]yrj(r(iTO de'/xevos fis SiaKOviav to nporepov ovra 0kd(T(f)rifiov :
" He counted me faithful, appointing me to His service, though I had
previously been a blasphemer ". Paul had ceased to be a blasphemer
before he was appointed. If to TxpoTepov were omitted, the meaning
would be that he was appointed while still a blasphemer.
41 6 PauPs Visits to the Galatic Churches.
The only objection to this is that it is true Greek ; and
some scholars have made up their mind that Paul and
Luke were quite unable to distinguish between a compara-
tive and a superlative.
(^) Again, if we take to irporepov here in the bare sense
of " formerly," we must infer that Paul had preached the
Gospel to the Galatic Churches only once. It would be
absurd in itself, and is wholly irreconcilable with the
historical narrative in Acts, that Paul should claim to have
preached twice by reason of bodily illness. Here he dis-
tinctly refers to one definite occasion, one definite visit, on
which sickness was the reason why it came about that he
evangelised.^ Therefore, either he had only once before
" preached the Gospel " to the Galatians,^ or he must make
some distinction between the two visits, and use words
referring only to one of them ; and the distinction can lie
only in the adverb to TrpoTepov. Sickness was the cause on
the former occasion, but not on the second.
We know from Acts, alike on the North and the South
Galatian theory, that Paul's words can only refer to the
first visit, for his second visit was planned with the firm
resolve and intention to preach to those Churches. Why
struggle to avoid the obvious truth, that to irpoTcpov has
its plain and natural sense of " the former of two occa-
sions ? "
^ Notice the aorist fvr]yyeKL(Ta}irfv.
2 Mr. Vernon Bartlett takes this view, placing the composition of
Galatians at Antioch in the interval between Paul's return from
Pamphylia and his visit to Jerusalem in Acts XV 3 ff. He thus
avoids one difficulty; but to rrpoTefioi/ remains idle and unnecessary.
According to Zockler, the same date was advocated by Calvin, and
by some German scholars.
Cause of the First Galatian Visit. 4 1 7
XLVII
CAUSE OF THE FIRST GALATIAN VISIT.
It was because of bodily disease, " infirmity of the flesh,"
that the Apostle had first preached the Gospel to the Gala-
tians. Taking this expression by itself, we see that two
explanations of it are possible : —
1. When I was in your country, but not intending to
preach there, a disease caused me to change my intention
and preach to you,
2. When 1 was not intending to enter your country, but
had other plans of work, a disease caused me to change
my plans, and thus led to my visiting you and preaching
to you.
No third explanation seems open.
I. The first of these explanations has been adopted by
all adherents of the North Galatian theory. It is perhaps
not absolutely necessary for them to have recourse to it ; but
as they have unanimously adopted it, we need not discuss
whether the other explanation would not be open to them.
Put in this bare and severely simple form, this explana-
tion seems awkward. It is not at first sight probable that
Paul would go across a country without any thought of
evangelising there, unless there were some distinct impedi-
ment. He twice crossed, evidently without preaching in it,
the land ruled by King Antiochus of Commagene and
Cilicia Tracheia. But that was not Roman territory, and
was therefore outside of his plans ; ^ and, moreover, on both
^ As Principal A. Robertson says in Expositor, Jan., i8gg, p. 2 : "I
assume that the evangeHsation of the Roman world as such was an
object consciously before his mind and deliberately planned ".
27
4 1 8 Cause of the First Galatian Visit.
occasions he was passing on to carry out a pressing work
among his own Churches (Acts XV 36, XVI i, XVIII 23).
Again, he crossed Asia without preaching in it, but his plan
of preaching there had been expressly prohibited by the
Spirit (Acts XVI 6).
But, it is said, when he was at Lystra or Iconium, and
found that his plan of preaching in Asia was prevented, he
fornned a new plan of preaching in Bithynia, and, as he
was going thither, while crossing North Galatia, he was
detained by illness, and to this detention " the Galatians
owed their knowledge of Christ " }
But the road from Iconium to Bithynia never touches
North Galatia. It lies in Phrygia as far as Dorylaion, and
then enters Bithynia. It is marked out by nature, and
by immemorial use : that is beyond dispute. If Paul
formed at Lystra or Iconium the plan of preaching in
Bithynia, he would not traverse North Galatia as he went
to his goal.
When this undeniable fact is pointed out, the reply is
that Paul was going to eastern Bithynia and Pontus — " the
east parts of Bithynia and of Pontus "?
But our one authority says only Bithynia, and we have
no right to add Pontus and to make Paul travel to Pontus,
dropping Bithynia out of notice. The obvious meaning of
our one authority is that Paul, prevented from his first aim
of evangelising Asia with his great and civilised cities, be-
^ Lightfoot, p. 22. He, however, holds (as I have always done)
that Paul traversed the Galatic region before he touched Asia or
learned that he was not to preach there : see p. 478. Other sup-
porters of the North Galatian theory, however, take the view stated
in the text.
'^Expositor, Dec., 1893, p. 415.
Cause of the First Galatian Visit. 419
thought himself of the nearest country to it — Bithynia, with
its great and civiHsed cities ; Nicomedia, Nicaea, Caesarea,
etc. He would never select second-rate remote places in
the far corner of the Roman Empire, such as Tion, Sinope,
and Amisos. There is no conceivable reason why he should
traverse and neglect North Galatia in order to reach unim-
portant towns like those.
The course of the second missionary journey is quite too
extraordinary on this supposition. First, Paul aims at
Asia ; then he aims at Pontus ; then he falls ill on the way,
and proceeds to evangelise North Galatia, founding there
several Churches — a process which requires long time and
much travel. Then he proceeds to carry out his previous
intention and goes on towards Pontus ; and in doing this
he finds himself Kara ttjv Mvaiav. Whether we trans-
late this " beside Mysia " or " over against Mysia," it is
a plain impossibility, for the traveller going from North
Galatia into "eastern Bithynia and Pontus" would be
going north-east, with his back turned towards Mysia.
But it is needless to proceed, as I might, in the enumera-
tion of the absurdities in which this hypothesis is involved.
Those who cling to the first explanation must be content
to recognise here one of those " gaps " in the narrative of
Luke which they so often find. They maintain that the
" gaps " are numerous and puzzling, and one more added
to the number will not be a serious addition.
2. On the second explanation there must have been
some occasion, during Paul's travels, when he changed his
plans of work under compulsion of illness. He twice
changed his plans on the second journey — first when he
entered Asia, and next when he was approaching Bithynia ;
but in both cases the reason is distinctly assigned by Luke
420 Cause of the First Galatian Visit.
as the Divine guidance and orders ; and we cannot admit,
with Lightfoot/ that the same action is sometimes attri-
buted to Divine command and sometimes to the pressure
of external conditions ; none of his examples will bear
examination {St. Paid the Trav., p. 154 f.).
On the first journey, however, there was an occasion
when Paul changed his plans. The scope of that journey,
as originally contemplated, embraced the lands which were
naturally in closest relation with Syrian Antioch, viz.,
Cyprus and the Pamphylian coast. So long as these were
the scene of work, John was a willing companion. But
when Paul and Barnabas resolved to abandon PamphyHa
and cross Taurus into the Galatic Province, John left
them, and left the work. Luke does not state the motives
of either party : he does not explain either why the two
Apostles resolved to go to Pisidian Antioch, or why John
refused to go. The reasons for his silence we can only con-
jecture ; but two causes, both of which might be combined
in his mind, seem both natural and adequate ; he is little
concerned with personal details, and he did not desire to
dwell on an occasion when John had played a part which
he probably afterwards regretted, and which deeply wounded
Paul.
With regard to the situation, we may regard the follow-
ing four statements as highly probable : —
I. There was no express Divine command, for we can
hardly believe that John would have disobeyed it ; and,
if he had disobeyed such a command, Barnabas would
not afterwards have urged so strongly that John was a
useful companion for a similar journey (Acts XV 37).
1 On Ga/., p. 125.
Cause of the First G a/at tan Visit. 421
(2) John considered the move into the Galatic Province
as a change of plan, and justified his refusal by this plea.
He was willing to go to Pamphylia, but not across the
mountains ; the former sphere of work had been contem-
plated from the first, the latter had not.
(3) The cause that made Paul and Barnabas change
their original plan must have appeared to them strong and
compelling. It was not that they simply began to con-
sider the north side of Taurus a better field than the south
side, for they had been sent forth by the Holy Spirit, and
given leave of absence by the Church, with an eye to a
distinct sphere of work ; and mere human calculation of
superior advantage would not have seemed to them a
sufficient reason for changing the sphere. It was not that
Pamphylia was found to be a hopeless district, because
when they returned they preached there. There was some
reason which made work in Pamphylia impossible at the
time, but which, afterwards, on their return, was not
operative.
Accordingly, we see what was the actual fact. They
changed their plan, and they entered the Galatic Province ;
but the reason was not simple desire to evangelise there,
it was some other compelling motive. Here the Epistle
clears away all doubt. In it Paul clearly intimates, as his
words must be interpreted, that his first visit had been
caused not by a desire to preach to the Galatians, but by
bodily disease. This cause satisfies all the conditions.
Thus, the way in which these two accounts mutually
supplement and explain one another is a most conclusive
proof of the honesty and direct simplicity of both.
Other points, as for example, that Paul's circumstances
in Pamphylia were such as to bring out any weakness of
42!^ The Thorn in the Flesh.
the system, do not directly arise out of the Epistle, and
have been sufficiently treated elsewhere.^
XLVIII
THE THORN IN THE FLESH.
From the Epistle we can gather something as to the
nature of the disease. Lightfoot's discussion of the subject
is excellent, and we adopt every one of his conclusions,
except his final opinion that the disease was epilepsy, and
his suggestion that " the meanness of his personal appear-
ance (2 Cor. X 10) was perhaps due to" the permanent
effects of his painful malady.
First, the disease was active during Paul's residence in
Galatia, and yet it was quite compatible with long journeys.
That is implied alike on the North and the South Galatian
theories. The disease was active, because the Galatians
saw it and did not despise the sufferer; it is implied that
the Galatian Churches in general, and not some single one
alone, witnessed the Apostle's condition. Yet he was able
to make long journeys ; on the North Galatian theory he
went about between Ancyra, Tavium and Pessinus, then
proceeded towards Bithynia (or, as some say, Pontus),
then went through Mysia to Troas; and all these journeys
must have been made very quickly, for no chronological
system leaves free a long period for this work. On the
South Galatian theory Paul went from Perga to Syrian
Antioch, and then to Iconium, etc. These journeys need
not have been performed with the speed and exertion im-
^ Church in Rom. Emp., p. 63 ; St. Paul the Trav., p. 194 ff.
The Thorn in the Flesh. 423
plied in the North Galatian theory, but still one of them
is very long.
It follows that the disease did not take the form of one
single attack of illness. It was intermittent. At one time
Paul was prostrated by an attack, at another he was able
for considerable exertion, both in travel and in preaching.
Second, the disease was such as to be naturally regarded
by the people of Asia Minor with contempt or loathing ;
but, far from so regarding him, they received him as an
angel of God. The verbal contrast is so pointed as to
suggest that the disease was one which the people ordinarily
regarded as due to the direct action and curse of God.
We need not understand that it caused any loathsome
external effect ; but a sufferer was usually regarded as one
under the Divine curse on account of some crime.
Now, the inscriptions show that one disease was regarded
in Asia Minor as due to the immediate action of God.
These show that, when a native of the country prayed to
the god or goddess to avenge him on his enemy, he asked
that his enemy should be " burnt up " with fever, " in which
strength wastes away without any visible affection of a.
part of the body. This kind of disease was understood to
be caused by fire sent from the world of death by direct
act of the god, which consumed the inner life and spirit of
the sufferer." ^ A full description of an attack of fever,
with its recurring paroxysms and characteristic symptoms,
is given in a late curse : " May he suffer fevers, chill, tor-
ments, pallors, sweatings, heats by day and by night " }
^ See Expository Times, Dec, 1898, p. no; comp. Wiinsch in Corp.
Inscr. Att., Appendix, p. XII.
^Wunch, Sethianische Verjluchungstafeln, 1898, p. 7. These were
found in Rome ; but embody magic of indubitably Oriental type.
424 The Thorn in the Flesh.
When Paul was among the Galatians, this disease was
"the thing that tried them in his body"; it tested the
reality of their love for him and their respect for him :
it constituted a temptation to regard him as a person
cursed by God, But they stood the test ; they resisted
the temptation ; and they regarded him as a messenger
come from God.
Every one who is familiar with the effect of the fevers
that infest especially the south coasts of Asia Minor, but
are found everywhere in the country, knows that they come
in recurring attacks, which prostrate the sufferer for the
time, and then, after exhausting themselves, pass off, leaving
him very weak ; that a common remedy familiar to all is
change to the higher lands ; and that, whenever any one
who has once suffered has his strength taxed, physically or
mentally, the old enemy prostrates him afresh, and makes
him for a time incapable of any work. Apart from the
weakness and ague, the most trying and painful accom-
paniment is severe headache.
Now, the tradition about Paul was, for some reason, far
more closely concerned with his personal appearance and
physical history than was the case with any other Apostle.
This must undoubtedly be due to the immense personal
influence that he exerted on Asia Minor, where the tradition
had best chance of being preserved owing to the very early
general adoption of the new religion in several parts of the
country.^ His personal appearance, his age, at conversion
and at death, are recorded in Asia Minor tradition, and, as
1 The Phrygian saint of the second century, Avircius Marcellus,
travelled " with Paul in his hands " ; he mentions no other
Apostle or teacher in his epitaph {Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia,
II, p. 722).
The Thorn in the Flesh. 425
I believe, with trustworthiness. The common opinion,
current as early as the second century, was that the extreme
physical pain, which he describes elsewhere as " the stake
in the flesh," the accompaniment of his disease, was severe
headache. Lightfoot rightly recognises that, if we give
any weight at all to ancient opinion, we must follow this
statement, which was current in the second century and
may confidently be taken as forming part of the unbroken
Asia Minor tradition.
In St. Paul the Traveller (p. 97 f.) an argument is
founded on the remarkable analogy between the expression
used by Paul himself to describe one specially prominent
accompaniment of his disease — " a stake in the flesh" —
and the words which rise to the lips of several persons
known to me, all innocent of Pauline prepossession in
describing their own experience of the headache that
accompanies each recurrence of chronic malaria fever —
" a red-hot bar thrust through the forehead ". In corrobo-
ration of this, we may quote the description of " a bad
attack of malarial neuralgia," given by the South African
author, A. Werner, on p. 236 of his collection of stories,
entitled The Captain of the Locusts, 1899. He speaks of
" the grinding, boring pain in one temple, like the dentist's
drill — the phantom wedge driven in between the jaws,"
and describes the acuteness of the suffering, in which every
minute the patient seems to have " reached the extreme
point of human endurance ".
Is it possible to have more convincing analogies than
this ? A similar metaphor rises to the lips of quite in-
dependent persons to describe the sensation. There are
perhaps some who may think it wrong procedure to
imagine that Paul was really describing with what they
426 The Thorn in the Flesh.
might brand as morbid anatomical detail the exact species
of pain that he suffered. I think Paul was not so different
from the ordinary human being that he must describe his
enemy in the flesh only by some general and vague ex-
pression. Every one who has to contend often with any
special enemy of this kind, if he speaks of it at all, tends
to use some phrase about it that reveals his own personal
experience. Commonly he is silent about it ; but if he is
deeply moved, and alludes to it while he is showing his
inmost soul under the stimulus of emotion, his expression
lights up by a flash the physical fact.
That is the case in 2 Corinthians XII 7. There is no
passage in all Paul's writings in which he is more deeply
moved. There is no other passage in which he shows so
much of his inner mind, or speaks so freely of his private
personal experiences. He alludes, among these experi-
ences, to his secret communing with the Divine nature ;
and he describes the counter-balancing evil at once an
extremely painful, almost unendurable, suffering, and a
serious impediment to his work. These are the two
features about this enemy in the flesh, on which the
human being is sure to insist. It is " a stake in the
flesh, — a messenger of Satan," the enemy of the truth.
When we take this striking realistic detail in conjunction
with the strong and very old tradition that Paul was in
this expression describing the fever-headache, it seems
to me that there is an exceedingly strong case, such as one
could hardly have expected about such a matter. And
this is clinched by the superstition current in Asia Minor
that fever was the special weapon hurled by the gods of
the underworld against criminals.
The theory that Paul's disease was epilepsy deserves a
The Thorn in the Flesh. 4^7
word. Appearances are, at first sight, in its favour — the
example of Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Cromwell, all epileptics
— the fact that the nervous system, when working at its
highest pressure, is nearest to breaking down. But if we
take epilepsy as Paul's trial, then we must accept the
medical inferences from it. It follows inexorably that his
visions were epileptic symptoms, no more real than the
dreams of epileptic insanity. In fact, it is the visions
which give probability to the theory of epilepsy : as a
distinguished pathologist says to me, you will find hundreds
of exact parallels to Paul's visions, if you want them : any
lunatic asylum in the country will furnish them in plenty.
The nerve-centres of sight and vision are close together,
and naturally affected together, when the system is on the
point of collapse. The temporary blindness that followed
the first vision is exactly what the pathologist expects as
the sequel of an epileptic vision.
The theory is seductive. But are we prepared to accept
the consequences ? Paul's visions have revolutionised the
world. Has the modern world, with all that is best and
truest in it, been built upon the dreams of epileptic in-
sanity? Is reason the result of unreason, truth of falsity?
Moreover, we do not find that Cssar or Napoleon
attributed their greatness to their epileptic seizures. But
Paul did so : he regarded his visions as the crowning glory
of his life, the sole source of his knowledge and his power :
he distinguished absolutely his visions from the " messenger
of Satan, the stake in the flesh ". Now the latter has much
less analogy to epileptic seizure. Lightfoot shows con-
clusively that " the stake in the flesh " must be some
" physical pain of a very acute kind " ; but pain is not a
feature of epileptic fits. The premonitory symptoms, the
428 The Thorn in the Flesh.
aura, sometimes include pain ; but on the epileptic theory
the visions were the aura, and the fit followed.
We cannot take Paul as an epileptic lunatic. The only
alternative seems to be to take him as afflicted by those
seizures which were regarded as the messengers of the
gods of the underworld.
XLIX
SEQUENCE OF THOUGHT IN IV 12-20.
The expression in this paragraph is rather disjointed
and awkward. It can be best explained on the supposition
that Paul is here catching up and turning to his own pur-
poses certain phrases used by the Galatians.
The meaning is : "I beseech you, brethren, set yourselves
free, as I am, from the slavery of ritual, for I made myself
as a Gentile ^ like you in order to preach to you ". He had
put himself on an equality with them ; and did not, like
the Judaistic preachers, claim to be on a superior level.
" You say with truth in your letter that you ' do not
wrong ^ me,' but are conscious how much you owe me,
even although you have to modify your attitude towards
my teaching." Paul repeats the word employed by them,
and dwells on the thought. " I bear you witness that you
did not in the past ' wrong me ' or act unkindly to me. On
the contrary, as you know well, you treated me more like
* a messenger of God,' though your inherited ways of
1 Compare II 14.
^ Lightfoot says of these words, " Possibly the true explanation
is hidden under some unknown circumstances to which St. Paul
alludes". Paul alludes to th,e use of the words by the Galatians.
Sequence of Thought. 429
thought would naturally have made you regard one
afflicted like me as accursed and consumed by the mes-
senger of the underworld. You would have put at my
disposal what was dearest to you, had it been possible to
benefit me thereby.
" But I do not admit your explanation that you * are
not wronging me ' now. You are indeed wronging me :
you are troubling me (VI 17). What is the reason?
Evidently you regard me as an enemy, that you treat
me so. Is it because I spoke the truth to you on my
second visit, and warned you of some faults among you,
that you now look on me as an enemy ? "
The Galatians also seem to have conveyed to Paul their
sense of the extreme zeal and interest that the Judaistic
missionaries had shown in their welfare, and to have used
the phrase " they take a keen interest in us " {)Cpr)\ovcnv) .
Hence Paul plays upon that word, " They ' take a lively
interest ' in you, as you say ; but they do it in no good
way. In reality they desire to make you think that you
are outside the pale of Jewish pride and birth and privilege
in order that you may * admire and envy ' them,^ who are
within the pale. It is not true zeal for your interest that
prompts their action. It is their deep-seated Jewish pride
which refuses to regard you as really their brethren (where-
as, as I said, I always regard you so) : they will not put
you on an equality with themselves (as I do) : they seek
to mislead you into the belief that they are a superior class
by right of birth (whereas you can become as truly sons of
God and sons of Abraham as they).
" I regret my absence and inability to show you face to
1 He repeats the word ^r\K6ia in a different sense.
430 Sequence of Thought.
face my interest in you ; and I siiould think it good if there
were always some one present with you to take such interest
in you (provided it be in a good way), so that you should
not be dependent on my presence for a true friend. My
own children, 1 would I were present with you now, and
speaking with the old tone of mutual affection, not in the
tone you have forced on me ; for I am troubled about
you."
When the last sentence is read rightly, it is seen not to
spring from some special cause, which makes it impossible
for him to come to the Galatians now. He is not explaining
that he cannot go to see them (as some commentators
imagine). He is merely regretting that he is writing far
away and in an unwonted tone. The messenger who
carried his letter would announce his coming visit.
Read thus, as catching up the words and excuses of
the Galatians, the paragraph ceases to be disjointed, and
becomes simple. But whether the Galatians' words were
reported by Paul's informant, or written in a letter by the
Churches, is difficult to determine (§ LIX). Only the word
"enemy" was evidently reported, not written, to Paul.
THE ALLEGORY OF HAGAR AND SARAH (IV 21, V).
This paragraph is one of the most difficult in the whole
Epistle to understand aright ; and it is the one which
would probably outrage Jewish prejudice more than any
other.
The children of Abraham are divided into two classes :
the descendants of Sarah free, and the descendants of
Hagar slave. The Jews, though Sarah's sons, are described
The Allegory of Hagar and Sarah. 431
as the offspring of Hagar, because they, like Ishmael, are
descendants by nature ; the Gentile Christians are described
as the offspring of Sarah, because they, like Isaac, are
descendants by promise of God.
It must be at once admitted that, if this passage were to
be taken simply in its relation to the preceding and follow-
ing parts of the Epistle, as rising spontaneously in Paul's
mind in the sequence of his own philosophic argument, it
would be unnecessarily insulting and offensive to the Jews,
weak as an argument, and not likely to advance his pur-
pose of changing the current of feeling among the Gala-
tians. But Lightfoot's interpretation of verse 21 is, " Will
ye not listen to the Law ? " — explained by him thus, " Ye
who vaunt your submission to the Law, listen while I
read you a lesson out of the Law" — and if we follow
this interpretation, we must regard the passage as arising
in the free development of Paul's argument within his own
mind.
The rival interpretation, adopted both in the Authorised
and the Revised Version, " Do ye riot hear the Law ? " i.e.,
" Is not the Law constantly read to you ? " (comp. Acts
XV 21 ; 2 Cor. Ill 14),^ must therefore be preferred. This
leaves it quite open to take the passage as forced on Paul
from the outside, i.e., as a reply to an argument either
used in Galatia by his opponents (and reported to him by
Timothy), or employed in a letter sent by the Churches to
Paul (§ LIX).
This opposition argument must have taken the following
1 1 quote verbatim Lightfoot's exposition of this interpretation.
Zockler's interpretation, '* Do ye not obey the Law ? " misses the
real point of the passage. All three interpretations are grammati-
cally possible.
432 The Allegory of Hagar and Sarah.
form : The Jews are the true sons of Abraham, descended
by birth from Sarah, and granted to her by a special pro-
mise of God, after hope of offspring in the natural course
had ceased ; Gentile Christians cannot be regarded as in
any way on an equal footing with the true sons, unless
they comply with all the obligations imposed on the true
sons. Further, this argument may perhaps have been
united with the anti-Pauline view (so often referred to in
the Epistle) that the Gentile Christians stood on an in-
ferior platform, but could rise to the higher platform of
perfection (III 3), as true sons, by accepting the law and
its prescribed ritual.
It may be doubted whether the Judaic emissaries in
Galatia were prepared to go quite so far as this argument
implies in the direction of admitting Gentiles to the full
rights of sons of Abraham. Hence it seems more probable
that this argument was actually stated in a letter by the
Churches, explaining their views and doubts.
Accordingly, the paragraph may perhaps be read best as
quoting from a letter : " Tell me, you who express to me
your desire^ to come under the Law, do you not know
what the Law says ? Do you not hear it read regularly
in your assembly ? You argue that the Jews are the true
sons, and you are outsiders ; and on this argument you
justify your desire to come under the Law ; but this reason-
ing is not supported by a correct understanding of the
Scripture as contained in the Law. Hagar, the Arabian
slave, and her son, the slave — when the allegory is properly
interpreted — belong to the same category with the present
Jerusalem and her children the Jews, all enslaved to the
^"eAoirfs desiring, and not merely being willing": q. XII 17.
Westcott's note on Hebrews XIII 18.
The Allegory of Hagar and Sarah. 433
Law as it was delivered from the Arabian mountain. You,
as free from the Law, inheriting through the free Diatheke
of God, are classed to the heavenly Jerusalem, your true
city and your true home,^ of which all we Christians are
the children. Thus you, my brothers, are children of
promise (not of mere natural, fleshly birth) like Isaac.
You are persecuted by the fleshly children now, just as
Isaac, the child of promise, was persecuted by the fleshly
child, Ishmael of old. And, just as the slave child Ishmael
was cast out and lost his inheritance, so now ^. We
Christians, all, Jew like me or Gentile like you, my brothers,
are sons of the free woman, not of the slave woman."
Thus, as we see, Paul was not voluntarily dragging into
his letter a gibe at the Jews. He was saying to the Gala-
tians, " The view you state that the Jews are the^true sons
of Abraham, and that you ought to make yourselves like
them, shows that you do not rightly read the Law. The
passages to which you refer are to be interpreted alle-
gorically, not verbally — by the spirit, not by the letter.
Literally, the Jews are the sons of Sarah ; but, in the
spiritual interpretation, you are become the free woman
Sarah's children, and the Jews are the sons of the slave
woman."
This paragraph, perhaps, assumes as a fact of law and
society that the status of the child follows the mother, not
the father. The illustration would be meaningless to the
Galatians, unless they regarded the son of the master of
^ The contrast between an earthly city, Derbe or Iconium, where
one is a citizen according to the world, and the heavenly city, the
real city of all Christians, is implicit here. Similarly it is implicit
(and disregarded by most scholars) in the epitaph of Avircius Mar-
cellus {Cities and Bishoprics, II p. 724).
^ Paul does not express the analogy fully.
28
434 '^^^ Allegory of Hagar and Sarah.
the house by a slave mother as a slave. Now that was
not Semitic custom, nor is it natural where polygamy
is practised. In Mohammedan sacred law such a son
ennobles the mother. Among the Hebrews it is evident
that Dan, Asher, Ishmael, etc., who were born in that
way, were not regarded as of servile station.
But among both Greeks and Romans the son follows the
mother.^ The inhuman custom prevailed that the offspring
of slave-women was like that of domestic animals : they
were all mere property. A similar principle probably
existed both in South and North Galatia, for both Galatian
and Phrygian fathers were in the habit of selling their
freeborn children, and are therefore not likely to have
regarded the son of a slave mother as anything but a
slave.
LI
THE CONCLUSION (V i).
Paul now sums up the argument of chapters III and
IV in the brief conclusion : " It was with a view to our
full freedom (an(^ not for any new kind of slavery) that
Christ has set us Christians free from the bondage of sin.^
^ The rule is familiar in Roman law. As to Greece see Mitteis
Reichsrecht und Volksr., p. 241. At Edessa or Salonika enfranchise-
ments occur in inscriptions of " my slave born of my maidservant,"
Berlin Phil. Woch., May, 1899, p. 635, A then. Mitth., 1893, p. 415.
^ The marginal reading in R.V. (preferred by the American
Revisers) is undoubtedly right. Lightfoot reads: "sons of her
who is free with the freedom with which Christ set us free. Stand
firm, then, etc." It is difficult to sympathise with Lightfoot in
discarding our text, preferred also by Tischendorf, Weiss, Zbckler,
etc., and in saying that that text " is so difficult as to be almost un-
intelligible ".
Personal Recapitulation. 435
Stand firm, then, and do not submit yourselves anew to
the yoke of slavery."
The rapid variation between " we " and " you " in the
passage IV 21-V i is full of meaning. The MSS. vary a
good deal on this point ; but the preponderance of evidence
is so clear that all the chief editors adopt the same text so
far as that variation is concerned ; and the Authorised and
Revised Versions agree with them.
At this point Paul would naturally proceed to the
warnings set forth in V 13 ff. ; but he turns away for the
moment to a digression, V 2-12.
LII
PERSONAL RECAPITULATION (V 2-12).
This paragraph is personal and parenthetical. The
allusion to the yoke of bondage which the Galatians
were about to put on themselves, leads Paul to insist once
more on the terrible danger of the step and the ruinous
consequences that must follow from it. The paragraph is
very closely akin to III 1-6.
You know, says Paul, that your salvation comes through
faith. The proof that you have faith lies — in having faith.
But, if you yield to their persuasion, and suffer yourselves
to be circumcised, you cease to have faith in Christ, you
cease to benefit by His grace, and Christ will no longer
profit you, as I protest and reiterate : in that case you
put your trust in the Law, and you must trust to it alone,
and be a slave to it in its entirety.^ In itself the act of
circumcision has no effect ; it is nought ; but your accept-
iQn this see § LIII.
43 6 Personal Recapitulation.
ing it now is a proof that you no longer trust to Christ,
that you no longer have faith.
Lightfoot is, indubitably, right in taking the emphatic
"I, I Paul," ^ as "an indirect refutation of calumnies".
" I, I Paul, who have myself preached circumcision forsooth,
who say smooth things to please men, who season my
doctrine to the taste of my hearers, I tell you, etc."
Verses 7-9. How has this awful change happened, when
you were running the race so excellently? Who has had
such influence over you ? Who has bewitched you ? I
marvel that you are so irrational and inconsistent with
yourselves (compare III i). You may be sure that no
person who has thus prevented your progress can be a
messenger of God (as you once thought that I was). It
is not a strong party that has thus acted ; but if they once
establish a footing among you, then, you know the proverb
— a little leaven !
Verse 10. But Paul then goes on to express his firm
confidence in the judgment and faith of the Galatians.
They have been momentarily deceived, but they assuredly
will not permanently entertain different views from those
which they recently had. Thus the doubt and perplexity
which he expressed, IV 20, the apprehension lest his work
among them had been in vain, IV 11, are dissipated. He
knows whom he is addressing ; he sees into their soul ; and,
as he looks, his doubts about the issue disappear.
Verse 10. Punishment must follow : he that has troubled
the Galatians has earned his reward, and must submit to
it : he has perverted the Gospel of Christ (I 7), and will
I'E-yo) navXoy is stronger than " I, Paul " ; to use eyw in Greek is
emphatic, but to use " I " in English is necessary, and carries no
emphasis.
Personal Recapitulation. 437
pay the penalty, however great and important a position
he occupies in the Church. This last expression favours
Lipsius' view that a single Jew of some standing had come
to Galatia and caused the whole trouble.
Verse 11. Being thus carried back to the same topic as
in the opening paragraph, I 6- 10 — the presence of the dis-
turber— Paul glances, as in that passage, at the charge which
had wounded him so deeply — viz., that in his conduct to
Timothy (Acts XVI 3) he had been a time-server, shifting
his principles to suit his surroundings, preaching circumcision
to some, though he refused it to others. As for me, he says,
if I preach it, why do they still continue to persecute me ?
Of course, if I am preaching it, then the cross which so
scandalises them, the cross which is their stumbling block,
has been done away, and they have nothing to complain of
in my preaching.
Does verse 10 point to punishment from man, and hint
that the offender should be dealt with publicly by the
Galatian Churches? Surely not. The judgment is left
to the hand of God. Then in V 12 Paul recurs to this
thought of the punishment awaiting the guilty party, " I
wish," he says, " that those who are turning your moral
constitution ^ topsy-turvy would inflict the proper penalty
on themselves, and cut themselves off."
In spite of the almost complete unanimity of the recent
authorities that V 12 refers to a dTfferent kind of self-
inflicted injury, viz., mutilation such as was practised in
the worship of the Phrygian goddess, 1 venture to recur
to the rendering of the Authorised Version.^ I doubt
^ 'Ai/aa-Tarowrfy carries a political metaphor, as Lightfoot rightly
sees.
^ So, too, the Revised Version in text.
43 8 Personal Recapitulation.
whether even on this point — the one about which alone
Paul shows real anger — he would have yielded so com-
pletely to pure ill-temper as to say what this favourite
interpretation attributes to him. It is true that the ancient
peoples, and many of the modern peoples in the same
regions, resort to foul language when they express anger,
in circumstances where Anglo-Saxons have recourse to
profane language.^ It would be mere affectation to try
to deny or conceal that, on the current interpretation, Paul
uses a piece of foul language in the ordinary style of the
enraged Oriental, who, regardless of the utter unsuitability
of the expression employed, heaps insult on his enemy,
animate or inanimate, man or brute, seeking only to be
foul and insulting, and all the better content the more
he attains this end.
There would be nothing suitable, nothing characteristic,
nothing that adds to the force of the passage, in the act
which, on the ordinary interpretation, Paul desires that
this grave Jew of high standing should perform on himself.
It was expressly forbidden by the Law of Moses. The
scornful expression would be a pure insult, as irrational as
it is disgusting.
But the Authorised Version gives an excellent sense,
^ The traveller in the East knows that the use of profane language,
objectionable as it is, constitutes a really great step in civilisation
and refinement, compared with the unutterable hatefulness of the
style of objurgation used by the angry Oriental. The same was the
case in ancient times; and it is almost amusing to observe how,
from ignorance of this fact, the commentators treat, for example,
Catullus's objurgations against those whom he disliked as sober
testimony to their moral character. Catullus would have said much
the same about his petorrita, if it broke a wheel, as he says about his
enemy, regardless of the meaninglessness of the expression.
Personal Recapitulation. 439
adding distinctly to the force of the paragraph. The
proper punishment for disturbing the Church was that the
offender should be cut off like a useless member : and the
wish is expressed that he would cut himself off. But the
objection is that this sense cannot be justifiably elicited in
Greek from airoKo-meaQai : the word in the middle voice
is quoted only in the sense of " mutilate oneself," or " cut
oneself (in mourning) i.e., mourn for".^
The objection has some ground, but is, I think, not con-
clusive. The word aKuvSakov in V 1 1 suggests ^ to Paul the
words of the Saviour (Mark IX 43) iav aKavSakiarj ere rj
')(e[p aov, (iTTOKo-yfrov avTrjv.^ He therefore continues in V
12 the thought of V 10 — I wish they would cut themselves
off. If he presses further than was customary the use of
the middle form of the verb, he is not out of harmony with
the spirit of the middle voice, and he perhaps trusted to the
Galatians also recognising the reference to the Saviour's
words.
But those who maintain the customary interpretation
must recognise what is the character of the thought and
language attributed to Paul, and should not try, with Light-
foot, to explain it away by saying that this mutilation
1 In the latter sense the simple Konrtadai is usual : the force of
ano is lost in it.
"^ The fact that the word is used in a different relation in the one
case and in the other furnishes no argument against the suggestion.
In V 10 the thought of the suitable punishment, severing from the
Church which the offender has wronged, is in Paul's mind. In V 11
the word aKavbakov comes in. The juxtaposition suggests that saying
of Jesus in which a-Kavbakov is in juxtaposition with cutting off.
* Compare V 45 (of the foot). Matt. XVIII 8 reports the same
saying, but uses iKKmreiv in place of anoKonretv. Paul thought of the
saying in Mark's form.
440 Personal Recapitulation.
" must at times have been mentioned by a Christian
preacher". Certainly, he sometimes mentioned it along
with other enormities in the pagan ritual ; but that does
not justify him in expressing the hope and wish that a
fellow-member of the Christian Church would voluntarily
commit this crime upon himself Dr. Sanday sees that
the expression would be indefensible, and can only be
regretted.
LIII
THE WHOLE LAW, V 2-4
It is remarkable with what emphasis Paul urges that,
" if ye receive circumcision, Christ will profit you nothing.
If you accept that part of the Law, you are bound to obey
the entire Law. You cannot accept part, and neglect
part. You cannot retain the Gospel of Faith, if you trust
to part of the Law." Compare this with III 10, where he
insists that a curse is pronounced against those who do not
continue in att things that are written in the Law.
This seems to point to some idea among the Galatians
that they might accept part of the Law, as being a useful
help to them in their difficult path (see p. 444 f ). Paul
would hardly urge that they who adopt part of the Law
are bound to adopt the whole Law, except in answer to a
plea of the Galatians that they wished to adopt only part.
They who are already bent on complete acceptance of the
Law will not be deterred by an argument that, if they
begin, they must go through to the end.
Probably, the Galatian idea was that it would be good
for them to cut themselves off from the heathen society
around them by a marked and irrevocable act, constituting
Freedom and Love. 441
an outward sign and symbol of their new profession ; and
they found such a sign in the Jewish rite. They may have
explained this, and added that they would not feel bound
to accept the whole Judaic Law. Unless there were some
such idea in their mind, it is hard to see any force in Paul's
emphatic assertion that, if they begin, they must go on to
the end.
Very often we conceive Paul's intention clearly only when
we picture to ourselves what he is denying or replying to.
This idea in the mind of the Galatians must either have
been explained to Paul in a letter, or reported to him by a
messenger (§ LIX).
LIV
FREEDOM AND LOVE, V 13-15.
Verse 13 resumes the subject of verse i.^ " Now, as I
was saying, you have been called to be free, but do not
misunderstand the word ! Do not misuse the freedom as
an opening for sensual enjoyment ! Rather serve one
another through love. You desire to be slaves of the Law.
Let this service to others be your slavery, and remember
that for you the Law is completely fulfilled in the observance
of the one principle, Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself.
Whereas, if you show malignity in word or deed to your
neighbour, the issue will be mutual destruction."
Very characteristic here is the recurrence to the word
Freedom ; the most remarkable feature^ in the whole
Epistle is the prominence given to the idea of Freedom.
1 The-particle yap, in 13, is not to be treated as giving a reason for
something said in the last verse. It indicates that the proper subject
is taken up again after a digression.
442 Freedom and Love.
An arithmetical statement will make this plain. The
words e\.evdepof;, eXevdepia, iXevdepoco, occur in this Epistle
eleven times ; but in Romans they occur only seven times,
in the two Corinthians eight times, and in all the rest of
Paul's Epistles twice.
It is not a sufficient explanation to say that the idea
was forced into prominence by the subject on which Paul
has to write. The same subject is treated at far greater
length in Romans, and the words occur much less frequently
there in proportion to the size of the two letters. The
idea of freedom is not the only form under which the
struggle against Judaism can be expressed ; one might also
look at it from other points of view. The prominence of
the idea is something special to this Epistle.
It may be said that Paul here appeals to a specially
strong feeling in the minds of his readers : that it is because
they were free in heart and in aspiration that he tries to
rouse this strong characteristic of theirs against the Judaistic
propaganda.
That argument does injustice to Paul. From that point
of view one will always misjudge him. If he simply de-
sired to win a victory over Judaism, he might appeal to
them in that way ; but he has a far wider view and aim.
He does not simply select such arguments as will weigh
most at the moment with his Galatian readers. He is
content with no victory that does not strengthen the whole
mind and character of the Galatians. As has been already
pointed out, his purpose in the Epistle is not to frame an
argument against Judaism : he tries to elevate and ennoble
the minds of the Galatians, so that they may look at the
question from a higher and truer point of view.
Therefore he does not seize on the more powerful eniQ-
Freedom and Love. 443
tions and passions of his readers, and try to harness these
against Judaism. He tries to strengthen their weakness,
and to make their minds harmonious and well-balanced,
so that they may judge truly and wisely. If Paul calls the
Galatians to freedom, and repeats the call, and presses home
the idea to them, it is not because they were already speci-
ally free in mind and thought. It is because they were a
people that needed to be roused to freedom — a people in
whom the aspiration after freedom was dormant, and must
be carefully fostered and fanned into flame.
In writing to the Churches of Asia and Achaia, he
could not safely speak too much about freedom : for the
Greek influence was strong among them, and an abuse of
freedom degenerating into licence was the besetting weak-
ness of the Greek race. He had to summon them to
obedience to rule and law, instead of calling them to
freedom. It was more important to insist on self-restraint,
on abnegation, on contentment, than to stir up aspirations
and longing after a new state of society.
The contrast between the insistence on rule and order to
the Ephesians or the Colossians, all strongly Hellenised,
and the preaching of freedom to the Phrygians and Lyca-
onians, still only half freed from native ritual, is very
characteristic of Paul's versatile sympathy.
It is obvious how appropriate and necessary this topic
was in addressing a people like the Phrygians and Lyca-
onians of the South Galatian Province, "just beginning
to rise from the torpor of Oriental peasant life, and to
appreciate the beauty of Greek thought and the splendour
of Roman power ". ^ Lack of the sense of individuality
and freedom characterises the Oriental mind as distin-
' 5^ Paul thi Traveller, p. 149.
444 Freedom and Love.
guished from the Western. That sense was peculiarly
lacking in the Phrygians, who were reckoned by the
ancients as pre-eminently the nation born and intended
for slaves ; but what is called the Phrygian character by
the ancients was really the character of the Anatolian
plateau as a whole (apart from the mountaineers of the
coastward rim), simple, easy-minded, contented, good-
humoured, submissive, yet capable of being roused to
extreme religious enthusiasm ; a people possessing many
of the fundamental virtues, but needing intermixture with
a more sprightly people in order to develop into a really
strong and good race. Mixture and intercourse and educa-
tion had planted the seeds of higher individual development
among them, but the young growth needed careful tending.
All that is said in Chapter VI of St. Paul the Traveller
on the situation in Antioch, Iconium, Derbe and Lystra
at the time of Paul's first visit, and on the spirit of his
work there, bears on this subject. The Epistle is a con-
tinuation of the work of the first journey.
So he leads them up towards freedom. But there is a
danger. Freedom may easily be misconstrued and abused,
and he points out the safeguard. It lies in Love ; and
he quotes the Saviour's epitome of the whole law of human
conduct.
It would add to the pointedness of this passage, if we
could suppose that the Galatians had pleaded ^ as a' sort
of apology for their defection to Judaism, that they felt the
need of some helper and guide as they struggled along the
difficult path towards Christian perfection ; and that they
found such a guide in the Law.
^ Whether actually in a letter addressed to Paul or through the
messenger who reported the situation to him : see § LIX,
The Spiritiial Life. 445
Paul may actually be quoting that plea, when he says in
V 21, "Tell me, ye that desire to be under the Law";
and it may have suggested to him the explanation of the
Law's true function as child-ward (§ XXXIX), He fully
sympathised with the difficulty which the Galatians felt ;
and he therefore shows how in practice the effect of Faith
was gradually perfected in the character, with Love as the
guide. It was true that the " lusts of the flesh " were strong
and dangerous, yet the Galatians ought not to look to the
Law to tell them what to do and what to avoid. Love
will eradicate these lusts by substituting for them new and
stronger motives of action. Paul has already shown in
III 2 ff. that it is unreasonable to look to the Law for help
in perfecting what has been begun by Faith.
A single enunciation of this so important warning, about
the danger and the safeguard, was not enough. Therefore
a special paragraph repeats and enlarges it (§ LV).
LV
THE SPIRITUAL LIFE, V 16-26,
" What I mean is this : if you make the Spirit your
guide, you will not live the sensual life. For, in the Divine
plan, the spirit and the flesh are ever in opposition within
your minds ; and in so far as you walk by the Spirit you
are freed from Law. You can see for yourselves what are
the results of the two opposing principles. Around you
in the Galatian cities you see ^ the vices that are the works
of the flesh ; and they who are guilty of those vices shall
^ ^avipa is in an emphatic position as first word of the sentence,
and must be pressed in translation.
446 The Spiritual Life.
never be the heirs of God, I warned you against those
evils, when I was last among you/ and I warn you now
again.
" The life of the Spirit matures in love and the kindred
virtues : where they rule, Law ceases. If you are of Jesus
Christ, you have nailed on the cross the flesh with its
passions and lust, and died to the life of sensuality. There-
fore, if you make the Spirit your guide, this must be seen
in your daily life. To take a special example of the general
rule, if you are jealous and censorious of your neighbours,
you are not living the spiritual life."
The prominent faults of South Galatian society are set
before the readers in vv. 19-21. These are the faults that
they saw everywhere round them, and these are the faults
to which they were themselves liable. Paul had seen this
on his second journey, and had already cautioned them.
His first journey was the period of conversion, followed by
organisation : on his second journey the dangers that beset
the young Churches were brought painfully home to him,
and he warned them against reproducing under a disguise
of Christianity the faults of their age and surroundings.
Now, once more he strives against them. He must strengthen
their whole nature and character, and then the Judaistic
evil will be corrected with their growing strength.
LVI
THE FAULTS OF THE SOUTH GALATIC CITIES.
In the list of fifteen faults, there are three groups, cor-
responding to three different kinds of influence likely to
1 See the last paragraph of this section.
The Faults of the South Galatic Cities. 447
affect recent South Galatian converts from paganism.
Such converts were liable to be led astray by habits and
ways of thought to which they had been brought up, owing
to (i) the national religion, (2) their position in a munici-
pality, (3) the customs of society in Hellenistic cities.^ We
take each group separately.
I. Faults fostered by the old Anatolian religion. These
are five : fornidation, impurity, wantonness, idolatry, sorcery
or magic. The first three are usually regarded by com-
mentators as springing from the character of the individuals
addressed, in whom sensual passion is assumed to have
been peculiarly strong. But more probably and more
naturally, Paul thinks here of the influence exerted by their
old religion in patronising vice, and treating it as part of
the Divine life.^ The subject is too unpleasant to enter on.
Yet to understand properly the position of the new religion
in Asia Minor, one must take into consideration that the
old religion had remained as a relic of a very primitive
state of society ; that it consecrated as the Divine life the
freedom of the beasts of the field ; that it exhibited to
the celebrants in the holiest Mysteries the relations of the
Divine personages, who are the emblems and representatives
and guarantees of that primitive social system amid which
the religion had taken form ; and that it regarded all moral
restraint and rules as interference with the Divine freedom.
The religion of the country was actually on a lower level
^ The list I Corinthians VI 9 ff., is not exactly parallel, but near
enough to be called by Steck the model after which this whole list
of fifteen faults in Galatians has been forged. The contrast between
them is remarkable. The Galatian list is narrowly defined : the
Corinthian list ranges over the various crimes of human nature.
2 Not so in Col. Ill 5 ff., where he is expressly speaking of the evil
tendencies that lie in human nature and character.
448 The Faults of the South Galatic Cities.
than the tone of ordinary pagan society. Vice was not
regarded as wrong in pagan society : it was regarded as
necessary — the only evil lying in excess. But in the old
religion it was inculcated as a duty ; and service at the
temple for a period in the practice of vice had once, appar-
ently, been universally required, and was still imposed as a
duty on individuals through special revelation of the Divine
will. This extreme was looked down upon with contempt,
but without serious moral condemnation, as mere supersti-
tion, by the more educated society of the cities. Yet even in
the cities it certainly was far from having lost its hold ; and
to obey the Divine command and live the Divine life at the
temple for a period caused no stigma on the individual, and
was actually recorded publicly in votive offerings with in-
scriptions. See pp. 40, 201 i.
From this point of view the third fault — aaeXyeca — is
illustrated. Lightfoot explains that it implies something
openly insolent, shocking public decency. The act which
was most characteristic of Phrygian religion in the eyes of
the world was the public self-mutilation practised some-
times by votaries in religious frenzy (p. 38). The word
daeXyeia is the strongest term of its kind in Pauline
usage ; and acts like that public mutilation, or those
alluded to in the last words of the preceding paragraph,
merit it.
It is unnecessary to say a word about the faults of
idolatry and magic. The latter stood in close relation to
the native religion ; and it is difficult to draw t|ie line
between religion and magic in the numerous class of
inscriptions in which curses and imprecations of evil or
death are invoked on personal foes and on wrong-doers.
We shall not rightly conceive the Asia Minor character.
The Faults of the South Galatic Cities. 449
unless we remember that the excesses of which it is capable
spring from religious enthusiasm. It is peculiarly subject
to religious excitement. A passage of Socrates, that careful
and unprejudiced historian, is valuable here, as illustrating
both the Anatolian character and the influence exerted on
it by Christianity. He says, IV 28, that Phrygians exercise
stronger self-restraint than other races, being less prone to
anger than Scythians and Thracians,^ and less given to
pleasure than the eastern peoples, not fond of circus and
theatre, and hating fornication as a monstrous crime.
These were the people that eagerly followed Nova-
tian in refusing the sacraments to those who had after
baptism been guilty of serious sin. Like Paul's Galatians,
the Phrygian Novatians were eager to go to the extreme
in religious matters ; and like them, they tended towards
Judaism,^ and made Easter agree with the Passover. It is
precisely the same tendency of mind that caused both
movements : not fickleness and changeableness, but en-
thusiasm, intense religious feeling, the tendency to extreme
severity, and the leaning towards the Oriental and the
Jewish forms.^ See p. 193 ff.
^ Taken as representatives of the northern barbarians.
^ Novatian himself showed no tendency to Judaism.
' One might trace the tendency of the Phrygians towards Judaistic
practices through the intermediate period, and in other parts of
Phrygia. At Colossae Paul had to correct the inclination to " a
feast-day, or a new moon, or a sabbath day "(Col. II i6), and to
point out wherein lay the true circumcision (Col. II ii). In an in-
scription of about A.D. 200, which is probably Jewish-Christian, the
nime Azyma is used to indicate Easter (see Cities and Bish. of
Phrygia, pt. II, p. 545 ff. ; and there is now more to say about this
inscription from recent discovery). On the Judaic-Christian inscrip-
tions of Phrygia, see Ciiies and Bish. of Phrygia, part II, pp. 566,
652, f., 674 f., 700.
29
450 The Faults of the South Galatic Cities.
2. Faults connected with the municipal life in the cities
of Asia Minor. Every one who reads this enumeration —
enmities, strife, rivalry (so Lightfoot), outbursts of wrath,
caballings, factions, parties, jealousies — eight out of fifteen
— must be struck with the importance attached by Paul to
one special tendency to error among the Galatians.
Partly, no doubt, the Judaizing tendency would lead to
division and strife, for we can well imagine that it was not
universal, and that there was at least a minority that con-
tinued faithful to Paul in the Galatian Churches. But it
would be a mistake to suppose that Paul was thinking of
that one fact only : that would not explain the striking
prominence of the idea. He is here viewing their life as a
whole, and is not thinking only of the Judaistic question.
First, the rivalry of city against city was one of the
most marked features of municipal life in Asia Minor. The
great cities of a province wrangled for precedence, until
even the Emperor had to be invoked to decide between
their rival claims for the first place. They invented titles
of honour for themselves so as to outshine their rivals, and
appropriated the titles that their rivals had invented. So
in the Province Asia, Smyrna and Pergamos vied with
Ephesus ; in Bithynia Nicomedia vied with Nicaea ; in
Cilicia Anazarbos vied with Tarsos ; and in Galatia we
maybe sure that Iconium vied with Antioch. See p. ii8 f.
As Mommsen says, " the spirit of faction here at once
takes possession of every association " ; and again, " the
urban rivalries belong to the general character of Hellenic
politics, but especially of the politics in Asia Minor." ^
But, if that was true of the unregenerate citizens, had the
^ Provinces of the Roman Empire, ch. VIII, vol. I, pp. 329, 357.
The Faults of the South Galatic Cities. 45 1
converts changed their nature ? Surely not ! The same
characteristics existed in them as before. They were still
citizens of Antioch or of Tconium. Throughout Paul's
Epistles we see that his converts had not changed their
nature, but were still liable to fall into the errors of their
pre-Christian life. We may feel very certain that there
were strife and wrangling and jealousy between the Antio-
chean Church and the Iconian Church about precedence
and comparative dignity.
Second, even within the cities there was room for jealousy
and strife. There was in Antioch and Lystra the great
division between Roman or Latin citizens of the Colonia
and the incolce or native dwellers : the burning subject of
inequality of rights was always close at hand. We may
be sure that there were both Roman and non-Roman
members of the Church. No list of Galatian Christians
has come down to us ; but the Colony Corinth, where
Latin names form so considerable a proportion ^ of the
known Christians, furnishes a pertinent illustration. In
Iconium and Derbe, where no Roman element of any
consequence existed, there was the other cause (not absent
in the Coloniae) of difference in race — the native element,
the Greek element, the Jewish element. Of these the
native element was probably the weaker in the Churches,
because the natives who were familiar with the Greek
language usually reckoned themselves Greek : in fact the
Greek element consisted mainly not of settlers from Greece,
but of those Phrygian and Lycaonian families that had
adopted Greek manners and education and dress.^
1 Achaicus, Crispus, Fortunatus, Gaius, Lucius, Quartus, Tertius,
Titius Justus. See Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, I, p. 480.
2 See pp. 129 f, 180 f, 230 f.
452 The Faults of the South Galatic Cities.
It is noteworthy that at Lystra those who are said to
have spoken in the Lycaonian tongue were not Christians,
but pagans (Acts XIV). It was among the more educated
classes that Christianity spread most rapidly {St. Paul the
Trav., p. 133 f.).
With these causes at work, it is easily seen how caballing
and jealousy should be a serious danger in the young
Churches.
As Mommsen says again of Asia Minor : " Rivalries
exist, as between town and town, so in every town between
the several circles and the several houses ". There were no
great political or patriotic interests to absorb the passions
and powers of man, and so they frittered away their
energies in petty jealousies and rivalries and factions.
Paul's words seem, beyond any question, written with an
eye to the ordinary Graeco- Asiatic city: "Let us not be
vainglorious, challenging one another, envying one another,
V 26". Vainglory and pride in petty distinctions was the
leading motive in municipal life ; the challenging of one
another to competition in this foolish strife was almost the
largest part of their history amid the peace and prosperity
of the Roman rule.
But that is not the type of the North Galatian tribes ;
the Gaulish element was an aristocratic one, and such are
not the faults of an aristocracy.
If the Churches were thus liable to import the old urban
rivalries into their mutual relations, what was Paul's part
likely to be ? Would he not impress on them the excel-
lence of unity, the criminality of faction and jealousy?
Would he not, even in small things, avoid anything and
any word likely to rouse their mutual rivalry ? Would he
not class them as one body of Churches, the Churches of
The Faults of the South Galatic Cities. 453
the Province, and appeal to them as " members of the
Province Galatia ". There was no other unity except that
of Christian by which he could designate them. They
lived in different countries, they sprang from different
races. The one thing in which they were united was as
members of the Empire, and their status in the Empire
was as members of the Province, i.e., Galatae.
But when I pointed out that this term Galatae was the
only common name by which Paul could address the four
Churches, some North Galatian critics replied that there
was no reason why Paul should sum up the four Churches
in a common name. Surely that argument misses the
character of the situation ; it was urgently needful to sum
them up as one body by one common name, recognised
equally by all the four Churches.
The word <^6voi, introduced in most MSS. after ^Qovoi,
has been rightly rejected by many modern editors relying
on its omission in the Vatican and Sinaitic and some less
important MSS. It spoils the picture, and is merely a
scribe's reminiscence of Romans I 29.
3. Faults connected with the society and manners of the
Graeco-Asiatic cities. These are two — drinkings, revellings.
No comment is needed. The remains of the later Greek
comedy, and the paintings on Greek vases, show how
characteristic and universal such revels were in the Greek
cities. Komos, the Revel, was made a god, and his rites
were carried on quite systematically, and yet with all the
ingenuity and inventiveness of the Greek mind, which lent
perpetual novelty and variety to the revellings. The Komos
was the most striking feature in Greek social life. Though
we are too absolutely ignorant of the Graeco-Phrygian
society to be able to assert that this Greek custom flourished
454 ^^^ Faults of the South Galatic Cities.
there, yet it is highly probable that those who adopted
Greek manners and civilisation adopted that characteristic
feature, the Komos. It is too often the case that the vices
of civilisation are the first elements in it to affect the less
civilised races when brought into contact with it.
Thus the second and third classes of faults belong
specially to the Hellenising section of Phrygian society,
springing from the too rapid and indiscriminate assimila-
tion of Greek ideas and Greek tone. The first class of faults
was most characteristic of the less progressive section of
society, the old native party. Both sections, doubtless,
were represented in the young Churches : at any rate the
faults were always blazoned before their eyes (p. 445, note),
and the customs of society are apt to exercise a strong
influence on all persons unless they are on their guard.
LVII
THE UNFORGIVING PHRYGIANS (VI 1-5).
The opening paragraph of chapter VI is occupied still
with the same subject as the last two. Paul is looking
quite away from the Judaic controversy. He is absorbed
in the development of his own Churches and the special
faults that they have to face. He saw one serious danger
in that Anatolian people, easy-tempered and orderly in
most things, but capable of going to any extreme in re-
ligious madness. Just as in later time, " that unpitying
Phrygian sect " was apt to cry : —
Him can no fount of fresh forgiveness lave
Who sins, once washed by the baptismal wave —
SO already Paul saw their tendency to unforgiving condem-
The Unforgiving Phrygians. 455
nation of him who had sinned, and warned them, " Brethren,
even if a man be overtaken in any trespass, restore such a
one in a spirit of meekness ". To continue the quotation : —
She sighed,
The infant Church ! Of love she felt the tide
Stream on her from her Lord's yet recent grave.
And so Paul's Epistle to the Galatians is an outline of
Phrygian Christian history : he saw what was the one safe-
guard for his young Churches, and he urges it on them, in
paragraph after paragraph — Love.
And what have the North Galatian theorists to say in
illustration of this most characteristically Phrygian passage?
Why, they are struck with the fact that a man in Corinth
had committed a grave offence ; Paul's appeal to the
Corinthian brethren to punish the offender " had been
promptly and zealously responded to " ; and " he had even
to interpose for the pardon of the guilty one ". And there-
fore " the remembrance of this incident still fresh on his
mind, may be supposed to have dictated the injunction "
to the Galatians here. Because the Corinthians had been
severe, therefore the Gauls must be warned not to be
severe !
But that is not Paul's method. When he warns the
Galatians against a fault, it is not because the Corinthians
had committed it, but because the Galatians were prone to
it. If in any of his Epistles Paul is wholly absorbed in
the needs of his first audience, it is in this to the Galatians.
But so it was in all, more or less, with the exception of
Romans ; he speaks to the Church in Rome, not from
personal knowledge, nor from report of their special cir-
cumstances (as to the Colossians), but in preparation for his
own visit and from his experience in the Eastern Churcheg.
456 The Unforgiving Phrygians.
In the first four and a half chapters Paul is occupied
specially in revivifying in the Galatians the impressions
and the teaching of the first journey; from V 13 onwards
he is repeating the warnings that we can imagine formed
the burden of his preaching on the second journey. But
everywhere he feels himself on Anatolian soil, and is speak-
ing to a typically Anatolian, and in particular a Phrygian,
people; and the best preparation for studying the adaptation
of his words to his readers is to study the typical peasant
of the present day, as he presents himself to the travellers
that have observed him with sympathy and affection. He
is called an Osmanli now — he does not call himself a Turk,
and rather resents the name — but he has much of the old
Phrygian character : pp. 33, 234.
LVIII
VOLUNTARY LIBERALITY TO TEACHERS (VI 6-10).
This paragraph continues the subject of the last : Paul is
still engaged with the dangers to which the Galatian
Churches are exposed through their proneness to certain
faults. He now urges them to treat with wise liberality
their religious teachers, to persevere and not to lose heart
in beneficence generally, to take advantage of every oppor-
tunity of doing good to all with whom they are brought
into contact, but more especially to their Christian brethren,
" the members of the household of the faith ".
This is only a further exposition of what is involved in
the "Whole Law for the Christian, Thou shalt love thy
neighbour as thyself". That "Whole Law " was quoted
in V 14 ; and the remaining verses have been devoted to
Voluntary Liberality to Teachers. 457
explaining its consequences and its meaning to the Gala-
tians in their special situation and with their special
temperament.
The duty of every congregation to support liberally the
ministers of the Word is mentioned, not merely to the
Galatians here, but also to the Corinthians (i Cor IX 11 ;
2 Cor. XI 7 f.), to the Philippians (IV 10 f.), to the Thes-
salonians (i Thess. 116, 9), to the Asian Churches (i Tim.
V 17, 18). Paul kept it before the attention of the Churches
of all the four Provinces — Achaia, Macedonia, Asia and
Galatia.
The duty was one that was quite novel in ancient society.
It was something that no convert from Paganism had been
accustomed to. Paul, who was never content simply to con-
vert, but was equally watchful to organise and to build up,
by subsequent care and watching, his young Churches,^ could
not safely neglect to provide for their permanent guidance
when he was absent, and the frequency of his references to
the subject attests the importance that he attached to it.
There was no system of instruction in the Pagan re-
ligions. The favour of the gods was gained by acts of
ritual, not by moral conduct. Every prayer for help was
a deliberate bargain ; the worshipper promised certain gifts
to the god, on condition that the god gave the help im-
plored. The priests had the right to certain dues, a sort
of percentage, on all sacrifices and offerings, and these dues
were paid in various ways. A fee had to be paid for
entrance into the temples ; ^ or a part of the victim offered
1 Compare Acts XIV 22 f, XV 41, XVI 5, XVIII 23, XX 2.
^ Mercedem pro aditu sacri, Tertullian Apologet. 13, and commen-
tators. In the Roman world generally, fees were imposed for
entering the temple, for approaching the place of sacrifice, for the
45 8 Voluntary Liberality to Teachers.
went to the priest ; or other methods were practised. In
one way or another, the priesthoods of the Pagan gods
were so lucrative in Asia Minor that they were put regularly
up to the auction by the State, and knocked down for a
term to the highest bidder ; and various inscriptions record
the exact prices paid for them in some cities.^ But all
these methods take the form of a tariff of dues upon rites
which the worshipper performs for his own advantage.
There were no instructors, and no voluntary contributions
for their support.
Hence the duty of supporting teachers or preachers had
to be continually impressed upon the attention of all Paul's
converts from Paganism. The tendency to fail in it was
practically universal ; it was connected with a universal
fact in contemporary society ; perhaps it was not uncon-
nected with a universal characteristic of human nature.
It is therefore quite unjustifiable in the North Galatian
theorists to find in this precept which Paul delivered to
the Galatians an indication of their Celtic nature and Celtic
blood ; and it is quite unfair to quote as an illustration the
Gaulish tendency to raid and plunder, or the Gaulish greed
for money. It would be more to the point if those theorists
were to quote in illustration of this passage the parsimony
presentation of gifts or the offering of sacrifice ; and the collecting
of the fees was farmed out by the State. Sometimes the right to
engage in worship and sacrifice without payment of fees was granted
to individuals {immunitas sacrum faciendorum, Corp. Inscr. Lat. VI
712). A tariff of charges is published, Corp. Inscr. Lat. VI 820,
Henzen 6113. This custom is hardly known in republican times,
except that Cicero, Leg. II 10, 25, says sumptu ad sacra addito dcorum
aditu arceamus.
^ See especially the great inscription of Erythrae of the second
century B.C.; it has been often published, see Michel Recudld' Inscr.
Gr. 839.
Voluntary Liberality to Teachers. 459
of King Deiotaros, whose presents were considered by his
friend and advocate, Cicero, to be rather mean.^ Here we
have a distinct analogy between Paul's Galatians and a
great North Galatian king. But parsimony is not by any
means confined to a single nation, and is at least as common
and characteristic a fault in Asia generally as in the Celtic
lands ; Armenians and Phoenicians and Jews are as pen-
urious and economical as Deiotaros or any other Celt.
One of the objects that Paul had most at heart was to
train his converts in voluntary liberality, as distinguished
from payments levied on ritual. He saw what a powerful,
educative influence such liberality exerts on the individual,
and what a strong unifying influence it might exert between
the scattered parts of the Church. The contribution in
Antioch for the relief of the sufferers from famine in
Judaea (Acts XI 29, XH 25), — the joint contribution of
the "Churches of the Four Provinces" for the benefit of
the poor congregation in Jerusalem, poor in comparison
with the duties and opportunities open to it^ — were devices
at once of a teacher training his pupils, and of a statesman
welding countries and peoples into an organic unity. ^
There is no bond so strong to hold men together as the
common performance of the same duties and acts. The
1 Cicero nc^ Fflw. IX 12,2. I do not remember any reference to
this passage in the North Galatian commentators, but should be
glad to accept correction on the point.
^On these opportunities, especially of showing hospitality to
Jewish or Jewish-Christian pilgrims, and thus promoting the sense
of brotherhood among the scattered Jewish communities, see Ex-
positor, June, 1899, p. 408 f.
'This has never been so well stated as by Rev. F. Rendal in
Expositor, Nov. 1893, p. 321 ff. See also St. Paul the Trav., pp.
287 f., 60 f.
460 Voluntary Liberality to Teachers.
skilful organisers of the Roman Empire, Augustus and his
early ministers, devoted themselves to fabricating such
bonds by uniting the parts of every Province with each
other, and the separate Provinces with their common head
— the Emperor — in the performance of the ritual of the
universal imperial religion of " Rome and Augustus ".
A common ritual is an immense power among men.^
Even the ritual of such a sham as the imperial religion
was a great bond of unity in the empire. But Paul, while
he was fashioning and elaborating the external forms of
organisation that should hold together the world in its
brotherhood, never made the mistake of trusting to a mere
unity of ritual. He saw clearly that, strong as is the
common performance of ritual among men, a stronger and
more educative power was needed, the voluntary common
performance of duties taken up and carried into effect by
the conscious deliberate purpose of individual men and
women — not of men alone (so he says to the Galatians
more emphatically^ than to any other people), for in the
perfected Divine unity of the Church, as it shall be, not
as it is, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be
no male and female.
It is an important point that Paul requires the benefi-
cence of the Galatians to be extended to all men, and not
confined " to them that are of the household of faith,"
though the latter have a special claim. Every opportunity
is to be seized of benefiting their Pagan neighbours. It
1 Compare, e.g., the power of the Greek Church in holding together
within the Turkish Empire, races divided by distance, by want of
communication, by diversity of blood and of language {Church in the
Rom. Enip., p. 467).
2 See § XL.
Was there a Letter from the Galatians ? 46 1
would be an interesting thing for all who study the state
of society in the Roman Empire to know how far this
precept was carried into effect in the Pauline Churches.
But evidence is at present miserably defective in regard
to such practical matters. The establishment of institu-
tions for the general benefit of orphans and exposed
children was certainly common in the Early Church.^
LIX
WAS THERE A LETTER FROM THE GALATIANS?
The question arises, how did Paul learn what was occurring
in Galatia ? Obviously, the news had just reached him, when
in the first excitement he wrote this Epistle. Some messenger
must have brought the news. But the messenger may have
merely brought letters from the Galatians, or he may have
given a report of his own observations, or he may have
done both. The last alternative seems most natural.
According to the theory already stated,^ the messenger
was probably Timothy, who, landing at Ephesus, had gone
up to Pisidian Antioch and his own home at Lystra, and
then rejoined Paul at Syrian Antioch, bringing with him
grave intelligence.
But, whoever the messenger was, there is certainly a
probability that he brought with him a letter, or a series
of letters, from the Galatian Churches : possibly, each
Church separately wrote to its founder. It is not probable
that any of Paul's Churches ever allowed a messenger to
go from them to himi without a letter.
1 See Lightfoot, Colossians and Phil., p. 324 ; Cities and Bish. of
Phrygia, II, p, 546.
2 See p. 243.
462 Was there a Letter from the Galatians ?
Yet the first three and a half chapters do not appear to
be couched in the form of a reply to a letter. These
chapters refer as a whole to subjects which one can hardly
fancy any of the Galatian Churches venturing to discuss
with their spiritual father in the controversial way that is
implied, for they are represented as dissenting from him
and almost as resisting him. See p. 430.
Moreover, the usual forms of a letter, after the address
which occupies the first five verses, are conspicuously
absent (see § V). Paul plunges at once into a matter
which we cannot imagine that any of the Galatians would
venture to state directly to him, viz., the charge that he
had been inconsistent with himself in the teaching im-
parted on his two visits, and that he was a time-server.
From this he is led into a historical retrospect, which
gradually changes into a series of vehement appeals
designed to revivify among his readers the feelings with
which they had received his first preaching to them.
But, in the last two and a half chapters, after Paul has
given vent to the strong and irrepressible emotions which
demanded instant expression, his writing assumes a tone
more like that of an ordinary letter, and he uses various
expressions which perhaps take up and reply to words or
explanations or questions addressed to him directly {i.e.,
in the form of a letter) by the Galatians.
In order to test the idea that Paul's expression in this
Epistle was influenced by the terms of a letter from the
Galatic Churches, we must suppose for the moment that
the idea is true, and bring together all that can be advanced
in its favour. To do so properly would require the quick,
sure, intuition of Professor Rendel Harris, who has traced
with singularly delicate perception the letters to which
Was there a Letter from the Galatians ? 463
Paul was replying when he wrote to the Colossians and
others ; ^ but it is not given to every one to " plough with
his heifer ". Possible traces of a Galatian letter to Paul
have been found already in §§ XXXVIII, XLIX, L,
LIII, LIV.
We may confidently say that the Galatian letter or
letters would take an apologetic and explanatory tone :
they needed some help and some guide as they struggled
along the difficult way towards Christian excellence (III 3,
cp.\\AN) \ they wanted an outward symbol to mark them
off from heathen society (§ LIII) ; in Paul's absence Jewish
missionaries had taken a lively interest in their welfare
(§ XLIX) ; they found help and a teacher in the Law
and the ceremonies recommended by those missionaries
(§ XXXVIII, to which Paul refers, "Ye that desire to
be under the Law," IV 21) ; but, in spite of this movement,
they retained their strong sense of duty to Paul, and they
were resolved not to wrong him, even when they looked to
others for help.
It has been shown that some of Paul's words should be
treated as echoes of Galatian statements. He appreciates
their need of some one to take interest in them when he is
far away (IV 18) ; but he desires that the interest should
be for their good. The project is here foreshadowed that
a trusty representative should be left among them at his
next visit (to which he points in IV 20). On the third
journey this project was surely carried out. May we not
guess that Silas was the representative? He was peculiarly
'^Expositor, Sept.-Dec, 1898. But when he reaches the result that
Eph. was not a circular letter, I begin to doubt : the reasons proving
that it was a circular letter seem too strong to be overthrown by an
argument, which is of so subjective a character.
464 IVas there a Letter fro7n the Galatians ?
suited to combat Judaism, as being at once Jew and Roman.
He does not appear in the rest of the third journey. Yet
he probably had great knowledge of Asia Minor, for he was
selected to carry the Epistle of Peter to the Churches of
that whole land.
Perhaps the fact that the first three and a half chapters
are obviously prompted by the report of a delegate, and
not by a letter of the Galatians, may seem to many to
constitute a proof that the whole Epistle should be taken
in the same way ; and it must be conceded that nothing in
the Epistle imperatively demands that a Galatian letter
lay before Paul as he wrote. The knowledge which he
shows of the Galatian desires and aims may have been
gained from the report of a trusty messenger like Timothy.
But, if Paul trusts here solely to the report of a messenger,
we may feel sure that the messenger was one in whose
knowledge, judgment, and sympathy with all parties Paul
had perfect confidence. He treats the messenger's report
of the catchwords of the Galatian movement as indubitably
correct ; and he feels as certain on this point as if he had
before him a formal statement in the Galatians' own words.
Such a messenger Timothy was.
LX
THE LARGE LETTERS (VI 11-17).
As in several other cases, Paul ends with a peculiarly
direct and personal appeal to his correspondents, summing
up afresh the critical points in his letter.
Habitually Paul employed a secretary, to whom he
dictated his letters ; but his custom was to add a parting
The Lai^ge Letters. 465
message with his own hand as a mark of authenticity,
" the salutation of me, Paul, with mine own hand, which is
the token in every Epistle" (2 Thess. Ill 17). He some-
times marks this concluding message as his own by the
words as well as by the handwriting, as in Colossians IV
18, I Corinthians XVI 21. Sometimes he trusts to the
handwriting alone, and we may confidently take such con-
cluding paragraphs as Romans XVI 25-37, Ephesians IV
23-24, as the parting messages in Paul's hand, though in
some cases it is difficult to detect the point of transition.
In no other case is the point where Paul takes the pen
marked so emphatically as here ; and in no other case is
the parting message so important. Paul returns to the
primary subject after having diverged from it in his eager-
ness to give counsel and advice to the Galatian Churches.
He adds with his own hand a brief and pointed resume of
the leading thoughts in the letter ; and he arrests attention
and concentrates it on the resume at ortce by the opening
words : " Look you in what big letters I wrote with my
own hand ".
The tense " I wrote " is an epistolary usage, especially
common in Latin, but also found in Greek : the writer
puts himself at the point of view of his readers, so that his
own action seems to him to lie in the past, as it must be
to them when they read it. Paul rarely employs this epis-
tolary tense, ^ but here it is forced on him by the opening
word " Look ". He imagines himself to be standing beside
his correspondents as they are reading his letter, and saying
to them, " Look what big letters Paul used here "
It has been inferred by many from this sentence that
^ A case in Philemon 19.
30
466 The Large Letters.
Paul's ordinary handwriting was very large. But if that
were so, it would be unnecessary for him to say both " with
my own hand " and " in big letters ". Moreover, those
who suppose that a trifling detail, such as the shape or
size of Paul's ordinary handwriting, could find room in his
mind as he wrote this letter, are mistaking his character.
The size of the letters must have some important bearing
on the parting message, or it would not have been men-
tioned. We must here look for the cause, not in any
personal trait, but in some principle of ancient life and
custom.
In modern times publicity for documents of importance
is attained by multiplication of copies. In ancient times
that method was impossible : anything that had to be
brought before the notice of the public must be exposed
in a prominent position before the eyes of all, engraved on
some lasting material such as bronze or marble. When a
document was thus exposed in public, attention was often
called to some specially important point, especially at the
beginning or end, by the use of larger letters.^
On this familiar analogy Paul calls attention to the
following sentences as containing the critical topics of
the letter, and being therefore in bold, striking lettering.
Lightfoot, who adopts this view,^ is probably right in taking
vyulv as an ethical dative, translating " how large, mark you ".
Dr. Deissmann's interpretation of the " large letters," as
belonging to the region of pure comedy, has been alluded
to in § XXII. It is rightly rejected by Meyer-Sieffert.
1 Examples at Pisidian Antioch in Sterrett's Epigr. Journey, Nos. 97,
99, loi, 102, 108, etc.; others are quoted by Meyer-Sieffert; others
may be found in Pompeian advertisements.
2 He does not, however, mention the epigraphic custom, but treats
the device as special to Paul.
The Parting Message. 467
LXI
THE PARTING MESSAGE.
What, then, are the points which are thus placarded, as
it were, before the eyes of the Galatians ? They may be
specified in a rough list as follows : —
1. The advocates of circumcision are persons who wish
" to make a pretentious display " in " external rites "
(without a thought about spiritual realities).
2. Their object is to avoid persecution for the cross of
Christ. There is here no thought of persecution by the
Roman State : it is solely persecution by the Jews that is
in the apostle's mind. The State, if it punished Christians
as such, would be equally ready to punish circumcised and
uncircumcised Christians. We are here carried back to a
time when persecution of Christians existed only in the
form of action originated by Jews, who on various pleas
iuduced cither imperial officials or city magistrates to inter-
fere against their personal enemies. This takes us back
to a very early stage in history : except in Palestine, such
persecution was very unlikely to last much later than the
decision of Gallio (Acts XVIII, 15), which constituted a
precedent. In Southern Phrygia and Lycaonia, along the
line of the great road between Ephesus and Syria, where
Jews were specially numerous and influential, persecution
of that kind was most likely to constitute a real danger.
3. The champions of circumcision, so far from being
eager that the Gentile converts should keep the whole
Law, were themselves far from keeping it completely ; but
they desired to subject the Galatians to that rite in order
that they might "gain credit with the Jews for proselytising"
468 The Parting Message.
successfully, and thus increasing the influence, wealth and
power of the nation (VI 13).
4. Paul personally desired no credit except in the cross.
He himself regarded circumcision as an external and in
itself valueless ceremony. We may gather that he con-
sidered the rite to have some symbolical value for the Jews,
but absolutely none for the Gentiles : to the latter it was
positively hurtful in so far as it tended to withdraw their
attention from the real spiritual fact, that a remaking and
regeneration of man's nature was essential.
The emphasis which is several times laid on the burden-
some nature of the Law, and the inability of the Jews
themselves to observe its provisions and requirements, is
one of the most remarkable features in the question that
was being fought out within the Christian Church about
A.D. 50.
Peter spoke of the Law as " a yoke which neither our
fathers nor we were able to bear" (Acts XV 10). Paul
assumes in this Epistle as a fundamental fact familiar to
the Galatians that no person can fulfil the law entirely,
but that all are liable to the curse pronounced against any
one who fails in any point of the Law (III 10, compare II
14) ; and it was certainly on this impossibility that Paul's
personal deep conviction of his own permanent sinful con-
dition had rested before his conversion.^
The assumption that this fundamental impossibility was
a familiar matter of knowledge to the Galatian Christians^
1 See § XXX..
2 It must be remembered that this Epistle does not move in the
line of new arguments that Paul was right and the judaisers wrong:
its power rests in its being a revivification in the Galatians of their
former thoughts and knowledge and experience. See § XXI.
The Parting Message. 469
can hardly rest only on a universal admission of such im-
possibility. It must rest on former teaching ; and if so,
the teaching must be that of the second journey, when the
frank and complete admission made by Peter, and the tacit
agreement of the apostolic decree in the practical truth of
his admission, were set forth to the Galatians. We cannot
doubt that, when Paul delivered this decree to the Galatian
congregations to keep (Acts XVI 4), he explained to them
fully the circumstances of its enactment, and the meaning
which they should attach to it.
Sufficient attention has hardly been given by the com-
mentators to this point. Peter's words to the Council
could not have carried much weight unless they had been
too obviously true for open dispute : there must have been
a belief among the more reasonable Jews, even among
those who were personally strict, that the Law was too
burdensome for practical life.
What was the reason for this belief? It must have lain
in the new circumstances of the Jews amidst the Roman
Empire. A Law, which had been possible in Palestine
only for the few most elevated spirits, became too obviously
impossible amid the wider society of the empire, when
every reasoning Jew perceived the magnificent prospects
that were open to his people, if they accomodated them-
selves in some degree to their situation in the Roman
world. Those prospects are both material and spiritual.
The Jews as a race have never been blind to prospects of
material success for the individual or the nation ; and the
peace, the order, the security of property, the ease and
certainty and regularity of intercourse in the Roman world,
with the consequent possibilities of trade and finance on
a vast scale, opened up a dazzling prospect of wealth and
470 The Parting Message.
power. Of old, wherever there was anything approaching
to free competition, the Semitic traders of Carthage had
beaten Rome in the open market; and the Romans ob-
tained command of the Mediterranean trade only by force
of arms. The Jews could now repeat the success of their
Carthaginian cousins.
There were also Jews whose vision was filled entirely
with the spiritual prospects of the race, the influence that
it was exerting, and might in a hundredfold greater degree
exercise, on thought and religion, especially among the
loftier minds of the Empire. But if they were to exercise
properly their legitimate influence in the Roman world,
they could not carry out completely the Law with its fully
developed ceremonial : they must distinguish in it between
that which was spiritually real and that which was mere
external and unessential ceremonial.
The question with regard to accommodation to their new
situation could not be evaded by the Jews. The Sadducees
answered it by perfect readiness to concede anything. The
Pharisees originally assumed the impossible attitude of a
firm resolve to concede nothing. Paul's position was that
nothing should be conceded that was spiritually real or
symbolically valuable, but that mere external and unessen-
tial ceremonial should be sacrificed ; and he held that this
was the attitude of the true Pharisee (Acts XXIII 6).
LXII
THE CONCLUDING BLESSING AND DENUNCIATION (VI. 16-17).
As the letter began in a style unique with Paul, and
unlike the ordinary epistolary forms, so it ends. Other
The Concluding Blessing and Denunciation. 471
letters, as a rule, end with a blessing or benediction. Here
the blessing is restricted, and in the restriction a negative
is implied : " and as many as shall walk by this rule, peace
be on them and mercy " ; then are added the more gracious
words, " and on the Israel of God " (though even here
there lurks a contrast to the Israel after the flesh).
But there follows a note of denunciation : " From hence-
forth let no man trouble me ; for I bear branded on my
body the marks of Jesus ". In i Corinthians XVI, 21-24,
where there is mingled with the blessing a cufse, " if any
man loveth not the Lord, let him be accursed," the more
emphatic final blessing and expression of love to all comes
after the curse, and swallows it up. But here after a
restricted benediction, comes a denunciation, combined
with a strong assertion of his authority as the servant of
Christ — too emphatic to be merged and forgotten in the
short blessing conveyed in the final verse.
What is the reason of this most marked characteristic ?
Is it merely due to indignation (which the commentators
make out to be one of the strongest features in the letter)?
Was the writer so angry that even his concluding blessing
is marred by a note of denunciation and self-assertion?
From V 13 onwards he has, apparently, forgotten his in-
dignation, and has impressed on the Galatians in successive
paragraphs, from various points of view, the supreme duty
of love, the evil of wrath, enmity, strife. Can we suppose
that immediately after this he gives the lie to his own
teaching by letting his indignation again get the upper
hand, and make itself felt in what are almost the last words
of the letter ?
It cannot be so. This paragraph is the crowning proof
that it is a mistake to read indignation as the chief feature
472 The Concluding Blessing and Denunciation.
of this letter, and that the interpretation advocated above
in § XXII is 'true : though "the authoritative tone, of
course, is there," yet the emotion that drives him on
throughout the letter "is intense and overpowering love
and pity for specially beloved children ".
But to deal with those children one must always use the
note of authority. Here, as everywhere throughout the
letter, one recognises, not the proud and sensitive Celtic
aristocracy, but the simple, slow, easy-going, obedient,
contented, good-tempered and rather stupid people of the
Phrygian country, the ground-stock of the Anatolian plateau.
LXIII
THE STIGMATA OF JESUS (VI 17).
The idea that these were marks similar to those inflicted
on the Saviour's body at the Crucifixion belongs to the
"Dark Ages" of scholarship. The marks are those cut
deep on Paul's body by the lictor's rods at Pisidian
Antioch ^ and the stones at Lystra, the scars that mark
him as the slave of Jesus. This custom to mark slaves by
scars — produced by cuts, prevented from closing as they
healed, so as to leave broad wounds — is familiar even yet
to the observant traveller,^ though since slavery was
brought to an end in Turkey cases are now few, and will
after a few years have ceased to exist.
The same custom existed in the country from ancient
times. It was practised on the temple slaves from time
1 St. Paul the Trav., pp. 107, 304-
- Mrs. Ramsay, Everyday Life iti Turkey, p. 7.
The Stigmata of Jesus. 473
immemorial ; ^ and the Galatian slave owners practised it
on their slaves, as Artemidorus mentions, having adopted
it from their predecessors in the land,^
The idea suggested by Dr. Deissmann, Bibelstudien^ p.
266 ff., that the marks of Jesus are prophylactic, guarding
the bearer of them against trouble and evil, is out of keep-
ing with the spirit of the letter and with the tone of this
passage. Meyer-Sieffert's latest edition discusses and re-
jects that interpretation (ninth edition, 1899, p. 364).
It is not easy for us in modern times to catch and
understand clearly the thought in VI 17 : yet it was to
Paul perfectly natural and simple. The nineteenth century
must often fail to understand fully the first. This sentence,
in its emphatic position, with its impressive language and
its tone of denunciation and warning, carries more meaning
" than meets the ear ". Obviously, it must appeal to
something that lay deep in the hearts and memories of the
Galatians. They knew, fully and absolutely, that Paul
was the servant of Jesus, or, as he says, how deeply
branded in his flesh are the marks that prove him Jesus'
slave (for in ancient times the slave was far more closely
bound by feeHng and affection to his master than a hired
servant — strange as that may seem to us). They have
only to make that fact clear in their minds, and they will
at once understand how completely Paul is the messenger
of Jesus, how entirely the Divine message has taken pos-
session of his nature and his whole being, how thoroughly
the Gospel that he brought them in the beginning was the
1 The evidence of Lucian, de dea Syria, 59, about the temple
slaves at Syrian Hierapolis, may be taken as proof of a general
custom.
■■* See p. 84.
474 '^^^ Stigmata of Jesus.
Divine Word, how necessary it is for them to come back to
that first Gospel.
To understand this verse you must grasp the Epistle in
its entirety. You must feel that it is not a carefully framed
series of sentences and paragraphs, but is an absolute unity,
a single expression, a crystallisation of Paul's mind at a
moment of intense feeling, or (to change the metaphor) a
volcanic flood of thought poured forth in one moment and
in one effort.
It was said above (p. 288 f ) that II i-io is really a single
sentence. One might almost say that the whole Epistle is
really a single sentence. You feel at the point we have
now reached that the Epistle is like a living organism, so
fully conscious that every part feels and vibrates to the
slightest touch on any other part. It is the word of Paul ;
and one remembers that, as Plato says, word is spoken
thought, thought unspoken word.
But, in order to approach to understanding VI 17, we
must hold together in our mind especially I 8-12, 15 f., II
19 f., IV 12-20.
LXIV
RESULT OF THE EPISTLE.
So ends this unique and marvellous letter, which em-
braces in its six short chapters such a variety of vehement
and intense emotions as could probably not be paralleled
in any other work. It lays bare and open in the most
extraordinary degree the nature both of the writer and of
the readers.
And this letter is pronounced by some of our friends in
Result of the Epistle. 475
Europe to be an accretion of scraps round and between
bits of genuine original Pauline writing. How blind and
dead to all sense of literature and to all knowledge of life
and human nature must the man be who so judges — a mere
pedant confined within the narrow walls and the close
atmosphere of a schoolroom and a study !
To argue with such critics — happily, for the credit of
modern scholarship, a hardly perceptible remnant — would
be as absurd as it would have been for Paul to employ to
the Galatians a series of arguments addressed to the intellect.
In such cases one must see and feel. Those who cannot
see and feel for themselves cannot be reached by argument.
You must kindle in them life and power. Paul could do
that for the Galatians. Who will do it in the present day ?
What was the result of the letter to the Galatians ? Was
it a success or a failure ?
It has been suggested by some North Galatian theorists,
in explanation of the silence of the historian Luke about
their supposed Churches of North Galatia, that the Epistle
was a failure, that the Churches of Galatia were lost to
Paulinistic Christianity, and that the painful episode was
passed over lightly by a historian whose sympathies were
so strongly on Paul's side.
That is the only serious and reasonable attempt to
explain the silence of Luke- as to the North Galatian
Churches. The customary explanation, that the silence
is merely one more of the strange gaps that seem to North
Galatian theorists to be. the most remarkable feature in
the Acts, is really an appeal to unreason. Almost all the
supposed gaps are the result of the North Galatian theory,
directly or indirectly, and have no existence when that
theory is discarded ; and the rest have been shown to be
47 6 Result of the Epistle.
due to some other misapprehension.^ The "Gap-theory"
first creates the gaps, and then infers that the historian
cannot be judged according to the ordinary rules because
his work is full of " gaps ". In regard to any other historian
of good rank and class, the principle is admitted that an
interpretation which rests on the supposition of an unin-
telligible gap must yield to an explanation which shows
order and method and purpose ruling in the work.
But the explanation quoted above is reasonable, and calls
for serious consideration. It does not, however, stand the
test of careful dispassionate examination.
The confidence that Paul expresses as to the issue, V lo,
is not a hasty and rash trust in his own power. It comes
out at the close of a careful weighing of the situation, in
which Paul looks into the hearts of his old converts, and
reaches the full certainty and knowledge that he has them
with him. His knowledge of human nature gives him the
confidence that he expresses.
Moreover, the history of Christianity in Asia Minor
during the immediately following period shows that the
victory was won once and for ever. The question never
again emerges. A few years later, we see what was the
state of another Phrygian Church, that of Colossae, in which
Judaic influence was very strong. But it is clear that the
Galatian difficulty never affected them. The Epistle to
the Colossians is " specially anti-Judaistic," ^ but there is
nothing in it to suggest that they had ever thought of the
Mosaic Law as binding on them, That point had been
definitely settled ; and the Judaistic tendency had taken
another and more subtle direction. The Judaic rules and
^ St. Paul the, Trav., passim.
^ Hort, Romans and Ephesians, p. 192.
Result of the Epistle. 477
prohibitions did not appear to the Colossians as imperative
commands of God which must be obeyed, but as philosophic
principles which appealed to their intellect and reason.
But if the first Pauline Churches that were attacked had
accepted and endorsed the principle that the Mosaic Law
was binding on them, their example would have been a
serious danger to the neighbouring Phrygian Churches of
the Lycus valley, and could hardly have failed to secure
at least careful attention for the view which they had
accepted.
Finally, to regard this letter as unsuccessful is to de-
spair of Paul. The letter, with its commanding and
almost autocratic tone — though I feel and confess that
these adjectives are too strong, and ignore the emotion,
and sympathy, and love which breathe through the words
and take much of the sting from them — is one that could
be justified only by success. If it failed, then it deserved
to fail. No man has any right to use such a tone to other
men, unless it is the suitable and best tone for their good ;
and the issue is the only test whether it was suitable and
best. Paul's knowledge of human nature in his converts is
staked on the success of the letter. See § XL
Is it not clear, then, that Paul's appeal succeeded ? The
letter fulfilled its purpose of rekindling the old feelings in
the Galatic Churches. Paul's confident expectation was
justified. Acts completes the natural result of the Epistle.
Soon after, the effect was confirmed by Paul's personal
presence ^ among these Galatians : he went through Galatic
Lycaonia and Galatic Phrygia in order from first to last,
"stablishing all the disciples" (Acts XVIII 23), see p. 404.
1 Accompanied, as I believe, by Titus : St. Paul the Trav., p. 285.
478 Result of the Epistle.
The great struggle was won ; the religion of the first
Roman province on the road to the West was determined
as free and non-Judaistic ; and that meant that the religion
of the Roman Empire was determined. Can we doubt
that this struggle was critical and decisive? If Paul had
been vanquished in the first Province that he entered, and
in the first Churches that he founded, he would have been
vanquished definitely ; but the first great victory made the
remaining stages easier. It is obvious that the Church irl
Corinth passed through a Judaic struggle, but that it
surmounted it far more easily. So with the Churches of
Asia. They were distinctively free and Pauline in character;
and it is evident that the Galatic struggle was practically
conclusive for them.
Taken in conjunction with later evidence, we can thus
make some steps towards a picture of Christian and Jewish-
Christian history in Asia Minor. But on the North Gala-
tian theory the issue of the Epistle remains as obscure as
the Churches to which it was addressed. The Churches
are created to receive the Epistle. After it is received they
vanish, and leave not a trace behind.
Note. — It was intended to add a discussion of some technical
points, especially the geographical sense of GalattcHS ; but the effects
of an accident in September, i8gg, made it impossible to complete
the notes. Some references forward to the intended notes remain
in the text. It is said that Mr. Askwith treats the phrase rfjv ^pvylav
Kai TaXaTiKTjv p^w^ai/ skilfully; but I have not seen his recent book.
Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library
1 1012 01054 8768