sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bithynia, Cappadocia, Isauria, Lycaonia, Pamphylia, Pontus (mythology)

471 What were the Churches of Balatía?

BY SIR WILLIAM M. RAMSAY, LL.D., D.D., D.C.L., EMERITUS PROFESSOR OF HUMANITY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN.

VIII.

IN two of the inscriptions, C-11. iii. 251 and curatorial arrangements, was grouped apart 6753, a procurator of is mentioned : this from the province Galatia: the procurator of title is to ’ of the I Galatia the Galatic or was evidently equivalent procurator I (ie. eparchy province) Galatic province’ ( C.I. G. 3991, E~r~rpo~ros raaaTVK~s procurator of the original province Galatia, includ- £7rapx£Íaç, referred to in i (I) of this section). I ing , , , and . Galatia,’ and ’ Galatic province’ are names of the i When Pontus was taken into this province, it was great composite province. Similarly in C.LL, iii. 1 for purposes of the fiscus grouped separately, and 6753, an official who had been procurator of Galatia placed under the procurator of -Pontus: is promoted to be procurator of the Imperial estab- this we learn, not only from iii. ~753~ but also lishment of gladiators (proc. fa11l. glad.) throughout from iii. 251, where a procurator of Galatia is said , Bithynia, Galatia, , , Pam- to have acted also as temporary governor of Galatia phylia, , and Cyprus. This list enumerates and Pontus (owing doubtless to the illness or death all the provinces of the whole of Asia Minor (to of the legate-governor) : this means that as pro- use the modern name for the entire Anatolian curator he administered only the original province peninsula) ; and Galatia must therefore mean the Galatia, but as vice~rcresr~li’s he governed Galatia great composite province, the sense which the along with Pontus. The same applies to Paphla- name bears in another part of the same inscription gonia. (as quoted above in this paragraph). ) Exceptional importance attaches to one example, To those who have not sufficiently appreciated which has been widely misinterpreted as belonging the extreme complexity of administrative divisions to the second type : see later under 3. in central some difficulty might be caused, 2. The Eastern Tye.-Much the commonest and a ground for making objection provided, by way of designating the province Galatia in the the fact that in C.7.Z. iii. 6753 Pontus 1 and Paph- local inscriptions is to enumerate the regiones of lagonia are mentioned in addition to Galatia: which it was composed. This is the method, these were parts of the complete vast province especially on provincial milestones of the period Galatia. Pontus and , however, were 72-107 A.D., when Galatia was united under one not in the original province Galatia, as that governor with Cappadocia. The enumeration then province was constituted in 25 u.c., but were sub- makes an imposing list, even though it is seldom sequent accretions, Paphlagonia in 5 B.C., Pontus quite complete, as one or even two of the parts are at various later times. In St. ’s time a large usually omitted in irregular and accidental fashion.3 part of Pontus was ruled by King Polemon n., and The custom of naming provinces in this way spread was outside the province: it was incorporated in widely in the East, and arose from a combination the province only in 63-64 A.D. As regards pro- of causes. The double province of Lycica et two under one 1 Pcarrr~hylica, provinces governor, Pontus here means Pontus Galaticus, Polemoniacus, Cappadocicus (all three being parts of Cappadocia prov.), That procuratorial spheres of administration differed in and not the Ora Pontica (which is included under Bithynia). extent from the provinces governed by legates is well known There was apparently an exceptionally large number of (see, for example, Brandis on Galatia, as quoted in this gladiators in those barbarous (where a sword stuck section under I (I) first paragraph). A procurator’s sphere in the ground was a god, or a symbol of god). More of administration was called his provincia, and this double thoroughly Greek regions did not love gladiators (Cit. and use of the same word increases the complexity. Provincia Bish. of Phr. i. p. 77). In Phrygia Galatica there were strictly means ’sphere of duty.’ gladiators, as is proved by an inscription (which Mr. 3 An example is given later in this section of two Anderson will soon publish in the Journal of Roman Studies) enumerations of the provinces governed by the same and by the Acta of Paul and Thekla. procurator, which complete one another. 472

each with distinct constitution, is regularly called in Ac 14~), and so on. Similarly, though no one by the double name ; but in one inscription it is can doubt that Cappadocia Provincia was regularly called Lycia--Isauria.1 This triple name called by that name, yet in one case of the pro- was due to the inclusion of some west-Isaurian curatorial class we find it described with all its towns in Pamphylia. It does not imply (as is by additions, provincia Cappcadocia item Pontus llTedi- some modern writers assumed) that the whole of terra?ieus et ll~li~zor et Lycaonia Anti- Isauria was detached from the province of the ochiana (about 166 A.D.), C.LL. v. 8660. Here Three Eparchial (Cilicia-Lycaonia-Isauria) and both ostentation and the desire to show clearly the incorporated for a few years in Lycia-Pamphylia, extent of the procuratorial administrative sphere for ’s list shows that several western towns are operative. of Cilicia Tracheia (i.e. Isauria) were included The chief cause, however, was the gradual from the beginning in the province Pamphylia. In change in the force of the Roman provincial con- this case mere ostentation of extensive power seems ception and idea. The idea which was in the to have been the motive ; and the same motive time of entertained about the nature and acted to some degree in other cases. In the function of a &dquo; province &dquo; in the East, is excellently second place, on milestones the mere geographical illustrated by the use of ~05 as the Greek transla- meaning of the names exercised some influence : tion of the term j~rovi~zcia : ~ Aala To ’EOi,o,; is used ’the Emperor remade the roads throughout by Dion Cassius Lm. 3o as equivalent to Asia Galatia-Cappadocia-Lycaonia-Pontus-Pisidia, etc.’ Provincia. The same usage appears in inscrip- These two motives readily combine. tions : the of Asia are ~yE~.ovEs 7&dquo;011 The correct order in designating the great Ë()V01J<; (Imcr. Br. Mus. 387 : cp. C.I. G. 2802, etc.). double province between 72 and Io7 A.D. was Yet Asia was quite as heterogeneous as Galatia: proz’i1lcia (less idiomatically prozli1lciae) Galatia it contained as many and as diverse nations and Cappadocia Pontus Pisidia PapIzIaJonia Lycaonia races. These, however, are all regarded by a sort Armenia Jlfillor; the unified names of the two of genealogical fiction as made into one stock by parts of the double province are placed first, then the fact that they are united as a single constituent follow the names of regions of Galatia, then part of the great Empire.5 Asia is a unit of the Armenia which was a part of Cappadocia.3 The Empire: so is Galatia. The province is the revival in official nomenclature of the names of Roman substitute for the old national unity, which parts of this huge province was facilitated by the was reckoned non-Roman. I may be allowed here fact mentioned above, that the national names of to quote in illustration a few sentences, written the parts probably remained in official use as from a very different point of view in my Cities designations of the Regiones into which the and Bish. of Plirigia, i. p. i z :- province was divided for administrative purposes, ’ The main aim of Roman policy was to foster e.g. Pisidia with metropolis Sagalassos, Phrygia the feeling of unity and the sense of patriotism. with metropolis Antioch, Lycaonia with no metro- It discouraged the old tribal and national divisions ; polis but two co-ordinate cities 4 (as stated correctly but it made the serious error of arranging its political divisions, both and sub-divisions 1 Bull. Corr. . xi. provinces p. 348 f. of provinces, in defiance of the lines of national The name Isauria was not originally used to designate demarcation.6 The boundaries of both the vast country of Tracheia. (p. 576) speaks of provinces Isaurica as a district round the two towns Isaura. In Asia and Galatia were purely accidental in origin. course of time the name Isauria grew wider in denotation, Yet for a time Roman policy partially succeeded and the name Cilicia Tracheia ceased to be used. in these new the of all 3 improving divisions : people Brandis in his article on Galatia (p. 551), regards Ar- the of the Asia the name as parts province accepted menia part of provincia Galatia. For this opinion I find no C.I.L. iii. justification : 291 (better 6818) seems to mention Laranda to Antiochus of Commagene, and became a Armenia as if it were part of prov. Galatia, but the frontier city and limen. probability seems to be that Cappadocia is omitted by a slip 5 The same is the case with Lycia: τò ∧Λυκíων ∈&thetas;νo&sfgr; is of the engraver, and that the inscription belongs to the age provincia Lycia (Le Bass Wadd. 1219, Bull. Corr. Hell. of the great double province Galatia-Cappadocia. One or 1886, p. 48, and frequently). Strictly speaking, ∈&thetas;νo&sfgr; implied more names often out of drop these long lists. tribal unity : the three Gaulish tribes of Galatia were τα τρíα 4 From 25 B.C. to 41 A.D. it is probable that Laranda was ∈&thetas;νη. 6 metropolis of Lycaonia; but in 41 Claudius, evidently, gave Compare Strabo, p. 629, as already referred to. 473

Asians. This was absolutely necessary where the seized it. The old nations broke up the provincial unity of several parts of these two great provinces idea. was not a Roman citizen had to be expressed: no single name for the A person who belonged people of and Phrygia and could to the Empire only as a provincial, i.e. member of be found except Asians. a province. It might be necessary to describe ‘ But the differences of national character were him by his nation; but to do so was to emphasize too great to be set aside so completely as the his non-Roman origin. Those who regarded him unifying policy of the first century tried to do. as a part of the Empire must regard him as a These differences lasted and survived the great provincial-i.e. they must designate him by his composite provinces. Roman Asia existed for province or by his city, for cities were the units out four centuries, but in the long run it produced no of which the province and the Empire were built real effect on the popular feeling; and the moment up. Provinces were, of course, generally designated that the common governmental unity ceased to by a national name, such as , Sicily, . exist, there remained no trace of a political fact Thus the word Syrian or Sicilian might be applied that had lasted so long. Yet the ultimate failure to a person in two totally different senses, denoting of the policy must not blind us to its importance, either the nation or the province to which he or to the earnestness and vigour with which it was belonged; and the context alone can determine carried out under the early Empire.’ which of the two senses was intended. But there In the early Imperial system the province was a were many national names which were not names powerful and vital idea. The old idea of separate of provinces; and they are unambiguous. nations was done away in the Roman unity. The It is due, probably, to the revival of the old very mention of a nation, except as a mere geo- national feeling that the word Ë(}VOI) in the plural graphical term, implied foreignness and exclusion came to be used in the third century to denote the from the Empire: slaves, auxiliary troops, and old national constituents of the province Asia, i.e. dassian’i (sailors, for the fleet was in origin non- , Caria, etc. Modestinus the jurist, comment- I Roman and servile, and always retained servile ing on a rescript of Pius, explains that the /~ytcn-a<. terminology 1) were Phryges, etc.: the occurrence of 7rÓÀ£LI) in Asia mentioned in that rescript are the the name AvKa6i,wv on implies that part of ~,~rpo~o~.e~s Tw E9vw : it is clear that these Lycaonia was non-Roman (as is proved also by EBIi’17 are the Lydian, Carian, and other races which other evidence). The possession and the enjoy- were all united in the province Asia. This ment of legal rights in the Empire came through revival of national feeling had its effect in 295 A.D., the enrolment in a province. Freeborn members when Asia provincia was broken up into the of the Empire were either cives Romani or Latini, provinces Hellespontus, Lydia, Caria, Phrygia, or provincials. A name for the provincial unity and Asia proper. was a necessity of the Roman idea, e.J., Asia, The province of Bithynia-Pontus is apparently Achaia, Macedonia, Galatia; and it follows as a an exception. I do not profess to explain the matter of course that the people of the province facts fully, but note that Ptolemy calls this province were summed up as Achaei, Asiani, Galatae, by the simple name Bithynia, and regards the Macedones, etc. ; they are the É8vo,; =provincia, and whole as a single province, whereas he treats an ethnos implies an ethnic. Lycia et Panaplzvlia as two distinct provinces Yet this Roman idea, though insisted on for a under one governor. If we knew fully the con- time, could not establish itself permanently ; and stitution of Bithynia, probably there would be no the old national idea ultimately proved stronger in difficulty; but, in any case, it is impossible here to the East. The Orient conquered Rome in the examine the scanty evidence that we possess. end; , Isaurians, , , sat Much difficulty has been caused by the common on the throne of the Caesars ; and finally Turks confusion between different senses of the term 1 Pontus.2 Mommsen in , 1884, p. 33 ff. This point is dis- cussed more fully in my article in Studia Biblica, iv. p. 37. 2 The various meanings of Pontus are explained in my It should be noted, as it makes the principle very clear. article in Hastings’ Dict. Bib.