Mr. W. H. Buckler, with his accustomed skill, restores an inscription of Ancyra well known to me. In one point, important for the history of Anatolia, I hold a different opinion; and it seems worth a footnote to his article. He takes ἐν Νεαπόλει as ἐν νέᾳ πόλει interpreting it of the enlarged Ancyra of the second century. The text seemed to me to read clearly ἐν Νεαπόλει τῶν [Πισιδῶν] It belongs to a great family of South Galatia. Neapolis of Pisidia was at Karagatch, near Antioch, where M. Ulpius Pudens Pompeianus made a dedication to Men or Mannes, the god of the Phrygo-Pisidian frontier lands, when he attained the civitas, and took the nomen of the reigning Emperor. Pompeianus as cognomen he adopted perhaps in memory of Pompeius Collega (to whom he was in some way indebted), governor of Galatia c. A.D. 75; but cognomina are often difficult to explain. His son was Ulpius Aelius Pompeianus, who was permitted by the Emperor Hadrian to add his own nomen, a special honour. This wealthy provincial could afford to do what is recorded in the inscription. The entertainment of the Techneitai was done by Ancyra acting as metropolis of the province Galatia, not as metropolis of the tribe Tektosages. The title μητρόπολις τῆς Γαλατίας cannot be explained as if it referred to the tribal Galatia alone.

The invention of Neapolis as name of a new quarter of the growing Ancyra can in no way be justified, so far as I can judge from the now rather voluminous evidence about Ancyra; on this point space precludes further statement. Mr. Buckler in his note on 1. 36 argues that there is no room for a fuller title of Neapolis, but his restoration is too long.