THE EXPOSITORY TIMES. 61

BY Srn. WILLIAM M. RAMSAY, LL.D., D.D., D.C.L., EMERITUS -PROFESSOR oF HuMANITY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN. II. I. THE ALTERNATIVE.-The general question has Yet, while OiE.\0liv never implies the foundation in the lapse of years narrowed itself down to of churches, it seems regularly to imply preaching this: Were the churches of Galatia, to which Paul and teaching in the country whose name is added wrote and which he mentioned as an example and to the accusative ; and the context sometimes model to the Corinthians (r Co 161), the four specifies what tooli: place. So, for example, in churches in South Galatia which were converted 15 3 the progress through Phrenice and Samaria and organized on his first journey (Ac 13 and 14), was a matter of some consequence, and its nature or certain other churches in the territory of the is described ; but the foundation of new churches three Gaulish tribes who dwelt around Ancyra, is excluded. Paul visited and taught the disciples Pessinus, and Tavium? If the latter view is who were already there; but he did not form new correct, then either the formation of those churches churches. Similarly in 1823• is not mentioned in the Acts, or it is briefly alluded The fact is that the foundation of a new to in Ac 166a, 'he traversed the Phrygian and church was a matter which needed time, teach­ Galatic region,' though the formation of churches ing and training of officials, proper organiza­ is there not described. The discussions from tion, etc. We are not justified by anything re­ many sides of this general question show indis­ corded in Acts in believing that the formation of putably that there is no other alternative. a church was the result of a whirlwind mission Zahn argues that these words do not imply, but and nothing else. The evangelization of Antioch actually exclude the supposition, that the forma­ was truly a whirlwind mission : Paul came, spoke, tion and organization of new churches took place ' and had the city at his feet, I failed in earlier on this part of the journey. It is difficult to find books to appreciate this fully; but the evidence fault with his reasoning. In order to estimate of Galatians and Acts is coincident and conclusive fairly the meaning of 166a take a parallel case. ( The Cities of St. Paul, p. 3 1 o ff.). The effect The same Greek expression occurs in 1424, 8t~.\0ov produced on the city was attained in a few days Tqv llunofuv. I have always been accustomed and two Sabbaths. That, however, did not make to infer that any preaching in this final stage of the church. Zahn seems to distinguish rightly the first journey was quite ineffective: th~re was the conversion of disciples from the formation of no 'open. door.' So far as I am aware, every a church. The church at Antioch was the result scholar and commentator -agrees. The contrast of a· much longer residence, during which the between the full description of the four new new disciples were taught and disciplined ; and churches and the brief allusion to the progress even then the sudden attack which was made on through Pisidia does away with all doubt. If a Paul and Barnabas expelled them before they had theory were proposed that Paul at this time properly organized the disciples, and they had to founded a gr~up of churches in Pisidia, and con­ return later ( 14 22r,) and corn plete the constitution tinued afterwards to take a warm interest in them, of the church (as described there, v. 22 'disciples,' and addressed to them the so-called letter to the v. 23 'church'). Ephesians (whose destination remains an enigma), We find, therefore, that in Ac r66a Luke can the suggestion would be regarded as ridiculous; hardly have attached any importance to churches and at the very least it would be obvious that the formed in this way and at this time ; for he does author of the Acts either esteemed the Pisidian not employ the term 'traversed' (Si£.\0£'i'v with churches as of no account or was ignorant of their accusative of the region) to describe the founda­ existence ; and therefore the same applies to tion of new churches, such as those which Paul churches whose foundation has been _supposed speaks about and to which he wrote. It is, of to fall under I 66• course, quite possible, by the supposition that the 62 THE EXPOSITORY TIMES.

author of the Acts wrote inaccurately, carelessly, but by Strabo probably as in Caria. The ex­ or ignorantly, to make his language in 166 com­ pression 'Phrygian Antioch,' therefore, would be patible with a prolonged and successful missionary obscure, because it might readily" be understood tour, but this can be done only at the sacrifice of as Antioch on the M[eander, close to the entrance the author;'s claim to be regarded as a good al}d from the west into the land of Phrygia.2 trustworthy narrator, whose language can be The testimony of the best authorities, Luke and pressed to the full limit of its natural force and Strabo, that Antioch the Pisidian was not in Pisidia meaning. but only a guard against Pisidia, is clear. Local But this negative argument is not likely to evidence, however, may reasonably be desiderated convince any one whose mind is swayed in the In an unpublished inscription found at Antioch in North-Galatian direction by other reasons. I pro­ 1911, Sagalassos is styled 'First of Pisidia.' That pose to collect and examine the geographical and title occurs on its coins about 260 A.D., and cor­ topographical evidence that can be gathered from responds to its importance at that period, 8 provided Luke and Paul, and to show that this is decisive. that Antioch be reckoned as outside of Pisidia. Historical evidence has been emphasized enough If, however, Antioch was in Pisidia, then beyond elsewhere by others, and I shall not devote any all doubt or question, Antio~h, not Sagalassos, was attention to it at present. 'First of Pisidia.' There were, of course, many II. THE REGION P1srn1A.-lt is clear from the cases in which several cities claimed the title of comparison of Ac 1424 with 1314 that Antioch 'First' in their province or region (see examples in the Pisidian-such is the best tex1 ~ ' Antioch of section vii.). But in such cases the rivalry was real Pisidia' is a corruption perhaps later than 295 and strong. Nicomedia would not have admitted A.D., 1 about which time Antioch was made the to a public place within its walls an inscription in capital of a newly instituted province Pisidia­ which Nic[ea claimed to be 'first of Bithynia.' was not a city of Pisidia. After leaving Antioch But here Antioch admits the claim of Sagalassos on his way home to Syria, Paul traversed Pisidia to be 'first of Pisidia,' and therefore was not a and came to Pamphylia. Luke therefore re­ claimant of that honour. garded Antioch as outside of a region which he Moreover, an important double inscription on calls Pisidia. His view agrees exactly with that two sides of one large basis at Antioch has long of Strabo, who in 19 A.D. describes Antioch as a been known, but the correct text was first pub­ city ' towards Pisidia,' but not in l'isidia ; compare lished in the present writer's First Christi'an Cen­ his words quoted above .about Phrygian Ancyra tury, p. 160. The inscription on one side calls 'towards Lydia.' In fact, Strabo treats it as a Antioch a metropolis, and implies that it was city of Phrygia. It is clear that both Luke and metropolis of a Regi'o. In the inscription on the Strabo regarded it as near, though outside of, the other side, the Region joins in honouring the same Pisidian frontier. The epithet 'Pisidian' was person ; and the name of the region is given as derived from this situation, and from the fact that Mygdonia, a poetic term for Phrygia. the city was a garrison to defend the plain from Marquardt rightly speaks of Antioch as a city the incursions of the mountaineers (Strabo, p. 576). of that Phrygian district which was included in Both these authorities knew a region Pisidia, and the province Galatia (Stadtsverwaltung, i. p. 359); outside of this region a city Antioch ' towards but G. Hirschfeld, in Pauly-Wissowa,Real,Encyclop., . Pisidia ' or ' the Pisidian.' wrongly describes it as a city of Pisidia.4 Some epithet was needed in common use to III. THE Two REGIONs.-From the text of distinguish this from the numerous other cities of Luke it is evident, as we shall now show, that on the same name ; but, if so, why not call it Phrygian 2 Cities and Bish. of Phryg-.:a, chap. i. 'The Gate of Antioch? That epithet was unsuitable, because Phrygia_' there was another Antioch on the south-west 3 According to Strabo, p. 569, Selge _was the greatest frontier of Phrygia, reckoned by some as Phrygian, Pisidian city about the time of Christ ; and it had a rich old coinage ; but it sank to secondary rank. 1 This is a mere obiter dictum, and has no bearing on the 4 Pto!emy (in one of his references) and Pliny speak of Galatian question. There is still much investigation to do Antioch as in Pisidia, They are inadequate authorities. regarding Pisidia, before an opinion can be safely stated After 74 A.D. there was a tendency to make the diminished about date. regions Phrygia and Pisidia into one. THE EXPOSITORY TIMES. this first journey Paul confined his personal work fancied. What ground there was for this thought to four cities -in two distinct regions, though he I do not remember. It seems, however, from the produced great effect also throughout the whole note in the second edition of his Mission und of the first or western region. He did not Ausbreitung, ii. p. 387, that he has not committed similarly affect the second region (the eastern) himself to a definite opinion, though he inclines outside its .two cities. The reason for this rather to the South-Galatian view : this footnote is narrower range of influence will become apparent different from and much longer than the footnote through the statement of the facts in the two cases. in the first edition.1 The plan on which the In the first region, besides the capital Antioch, following series of articles were written was, after there were several other cities ( of which Paul showing the true meaning of Luke's narrative in visited one, viz. Iconium). In the second or detail, to work from the principle laid down in Lycaonian region there were two cities, neither of sharp and explicit terms by Harnack (seep. 21 and which was a capital. Paul visited both cities ; section xii.) regarding Paul's use of the Roman but in the villages which composed the remainder provincial divisions. This principle, fundamental of the region there was no population suited to in the South-Galatian view, was treated in my comprehend his message : even in Lystra the rude argument as. accepted by the greatest of modern Lycaonian plebs seems to have been beyond his Church historians, even though he did not apply influence. It was in the more educated cities that it to the Galatian question. he found a large audience suited to hear him. Since, however, the principle is stated by one During the second journey Paul's visit to the who appears to be rather inclined to the South­ eastern region is described in some detail (161·5), Galatian view (though not at all committed to it), while his visit to the western or Antiochian or, as it loses its value for my present purpose, though Strabo says, Phrygian region is passed over in a its positive strength remains the same in the eyes word (166). of the world. I cannot, however, now rewrite On the third journey Paul visited both regions, the argument; but I will emphasize more than I and influenced all the disciples individually ( 1823); have done a remarkable fact. Three early Chris­ in this case the two regions are mentioned with tians speak about Iconium after having personally sharp brevity, and both with the same emphasis; visited it : the first is Paul through the mouth of and the fact that there are two, and only two, Luke; the second is Hierax the martyr in r 63, a regions, is now made perfectly clear. On the slave from Iconium; the third is Firmilian, bishop other two journeys it is only by careful reading of Cresarea, who was present at a Council held in that the division into two regions is observed, Iconium : witnesses respectively of the first, the though it becomes quite clear as soon as the second, and the third centuries. All of them regions are pointed out. speak of Iconium as being in Phrygia. This term Thus Luke ( 1314-1424a) describes a large district Luke defines more fully as the Phrygian region of containing three regions (xwpas): of these regions (the province) Ga!atia: the others knew that the Pisidia was twice traversed (Ac 1314 1424 ), butin it same was true in their time, and we now know no churches were founded; in each of the other two that positively this was so from 2 5 B.c. to about regions two churches were constituted. This is a 295 A.D. The full meaning of this testimony will matter of geography, and the facts will be reviewed appear in the sequel of the argument. and made definite in the following sections. 1 I no longer possess the first edition in German, which was the copy that I first read; hence, when I mention the first edition, it will be understood that I quote from Dr. Moffatt's CORRECTION. On p. 21 I have said that Har­ excellent translation. In this the footnote simply says that nack held the North-Galatian view. So I had the author will express no opinion on the Galatian question.