The interpretation timeline
Galatians 1:22 Douay-Rheims

And I was unknown by face to the churches of Judea, which were in Christ:

A.D. 407 – 1871 6 witnesses

Patristic

before A.D. 750
407
A.D.
John Chrysostom Patristic
A.D. 347–407
“"And I was still unknown by face unto the Churches of Judaea; but they only heard say, he that once persecuted us now preacheth the faith of which he once made havoc." What modesty in thus again mentioning the facts of his persecuting and laying waste the Church, and in thus making infamous his former life, while he passes over the illustrious deeds he was about to achieve! He might have told, had he wished it, all his successes, but he mentions none of these and stepping with one word over a vast expanse, he says merely, "I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia;" and, "they had heard, that he, which once persecuted us, now preacheth the faith of which he once made havoc." The purpose of the words, "I was unknown to the Churches of Judaea," is to show, that so far from preaching to them the necessity of circumcision, he was not known to them even by sight.”
Source
430
A.D.
Augustine of Hippo Patristic
A.D. 354–430
“It should be observed that Jews had believed in Christ not only in Jerusalem, nor were they so few that they had been absorbed into the Gentile churches, but they were so numerous that churches came into being from them.”

Scholastic

c. 1100 – 1500
1273
A.D.
Thomas Aquinas Catholic
1225–1274
“After the Apostle has above shown that he did not receive the Gospel from man before his conversion, nor at the time of his conversion, here he proves that he did not receive it from man even after his conversion; rather, here he shows how his teaching was approved by men. And concerning this he does two things. First, he shows how his teaching was approved by the apostles; second, he shows how it was approved by the other faithful, at the place then I came into the regions, etc. And first he narrates the fact; second he confirms the truth of what he has said, at the place behold, before God, etc. He says therefore: although I did not go to the apostles in order to be instructed by them concerning the beginning of my conversion, since I was already instructed by Christ, nevertheless, driven by an affection of charity, after three years — namely, of my conversion — I came to Jerusalem, since I had for a long time desired to see Peter, not in order to learn from him, but in order to visit him. Job 5:24: "visiting your beauty," etc. And I remained with him fifteen days, being found by him to be a truthful apostle. And he says fifteen days, because this number is composed of eight and seven. Now the number eight is the number of the New Testament, in which the eighth day of those who rise again is awaited; while the number seven is the number of the Old Testament, because it celebrates the seventh day. He remained with Peter fifteen days, conferring with him about the mysteries of the Old and New Testament. And lest it be believed that, although he was not instructed by Peter, he was nevertheless instructed by others, he adds that he was not instructed by others either. Hence he says but of the other apostles I saw none, that is, no one, by whom I might have been instructed, except James the brother of the Lord. For he saw him in Jerusalem. Concerning this James it should be known that he was bishop of Jerusalem, and was called James the Less, because he had been called after the other James. Many things are said about him at Acts 15:13ff. He also wrote a canonical epistle. But why he is called the brother of the Lord is said differently by different people. For Helvidius says that he is called brother of the Lord for this reason, that he was the son of the Blessed Virgin. For he says that the Blessed Virgin conceived and bore Christ, and after the birth of Christ conceived by Joseph, and bore other sons. But this error has been condemned and rejected. Likewise it is plainly false, because James was not the son of Joseph, but of Alphaeus. Others, however, say that Joseph, before the Blessed Virgin, had another wife, from whom he had a son James and others, and when she died, he took the Blessed Virgin as wife, from whom Christ was born, yet not known by Joseph, but by the Holy Spirit, as is said in the Gospel. Because, then, kinships are named from the father, and Joseph was thought to be the father of Christ, therefore this James, although he was not the son of the Virgin, was nevertheless called brother of the Lord. But this is false, because if the Lord did not wish his mother, a virgin, to be entrusted to the keeping of anyone but a virgin, how would he have permitted her spouse not to have been a virgin, and to have remained so? Therefore others say, and it is touched on in the Gloss, that this James was the son of Mary of Cleophas, who was the sister of the Virgin. For they say that Anna, the mother of the Blessed Virgin, married first Joachim, from whom she bore Mary, the mother of the Lord; when he died, she married Cleophas, the brother of Joachim, from whom she bore Mary of Cleophas, and from her was born James the Less, Jude, and Simon; when he died, it is said that she then married a certain third man, who was called Salome, from whom she conceived and bore another Mary, who was called Salome, and from her was born James the Greater, and John, his brother. But Jerome contradicts this opinion in two ways. First, because Salome is not the name of a man, as also appears in the Greek, but is the name of a woman, who was the sister of the Blessed Virgin, and by Zebedee bore James the Greater and John, just as Mary of Cleophas by Alphaeus bore James the Less, Jude, and Simon. Now this James is called brother of the Lord specially among his other cousins, and this for two reasons: first, on account of a likeness of appearance, because he was like Christ in face; and on account of a likeness of life, because he imitated Christ in his ways. Or because Alphaeus his father was of the kinship of Joseph; and therefore, since the Jews were accustomed to trace the line of kinship from the males, and Christ was thought to be the son of Joseph, as is said in Luke 3:23, therefore he in particular was called brother of the Lord, and not the others, who were joined to him only through the mother. Here, however, "brother" is taken in the sense of kinship. For in Scripture "brothers" are sometimes said by nature. Matthew 1:2: "and Jacob begot Judah and his brothers." By kinship, as all blood relations are brothers. Genesis 13:8: "let there be no quarrel, I beg, between me and you, for we are brothers." By people, and thus all of one language are called brothers. Deuteronomy 17:15: "you may not set a man of another people as king, who is not your brother." By affection, and thus all friends, and those who have the same affection, are called brothers. 2 Corinthians 2:13: "because I did not find Titus my brother," etc. By religion, and thus all Christians who have one rule of life are called brothers. Matthew 23:8: "you are brothers," etc. Psalm 132:1: "behold how good and how pleasant it is for brothers to dwell together," etc. And commonly all men are called brothers, because they are governed and brought up by the one God. Malachi 2:10: "have we not all one father," etc. Next, when he says but the things that I write to you, etc., he confirms by an oath what he had said, as if to say: these things which I now write to you about myself, behold, they are in the open, so that it is sufficiently established that I do not lie. And this I say, before God, that is, with God as witness. Now the Apostle swears here not out of levity, but out of the necessity of those for whom it was necessary that they believe. For unless he did this, they would not believe him. 2 Corinthians 2:17: "before God, in Christ, we speak." Romans 1:9: "God is my witness," etc. What, then, does the Lord say: "let your speech be, yes, yes; no, no; what is more than this is from evil"? It must be said that it is from the evil of him who does not believe, or from the evil of the punishment by which someone is compelled to swear. Next, when he says then I came, etc., he shows how he was approved by the other churches of Judea. Here he does three things. First he shows where he stayed, namely, in Cilicia. Hence he says then I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, namely, of his homeland; whence also he had been carried off — for it is said at Acts 22:3: "now Paul was from Tarsus of Cilicia," etc. Second, how he was known by them, namely, not by face, but only by hearing and report. Hence he says for I was unknown by face to the churches of Judea that were in Christ, that is, in the faith of Christ. 2 Corinthians 6:8: "as unknown, and known." Whence it is clear that the churches of Judea did not teach me. For they had only heard, namely, of me by report, that he who persecuted, etc. Third, how he was approved by them, because they glorified God in me, that is, in my conversion they approved as great him who by his grace converted me. Isaiah 43:20: "the beast shall glorify me," etc.”

Post-Reformation

c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“And was unknown by face,.... Or "in person". This is said to prevent what might be objected, that though the apostle had not received the Gospel he preached from any of the apostles at Jerusalem; yet he might have had it from the churches that were in the land of Judea, and from some of the principal men in them; but this was so far from being truth, that he was not so much as known unto the churches of Judea which were in Christ; for there was not only a famous church of believers in Christ at Jerusalem, the metropolis of the land, but there were several congregated churches in the several parts of that country: by Judea we are to understand that part of the land of Israel so called, which was distinct not only from Samaria; but from Galilee and Perea, or the country beyond Jordan; for according to the Jews (d), the land of Israel was divided into three parts, Judea, Perea, and Galilee. Judea again was divided into three parts, the hill country, the plain, and the valley; and the plain of Lydda is as the plain of the south, and its mountainous part as the king's mountain; from Bethhoron to the sea is one province: and elsewhere (e) it is said, that the hill country of Judea is the king's mountain, the plain of it is the plain of the south, and the valley is from Engedi to Jericho--from Bethhoron to Emmaus is mountainous, from Emmaus to Lydda is a plain, and from Lydda to the sea a valley; from which may be collected where this country lay, and where were these churches here spoken of; the foundation of which might be laid in the conversion of some in those parts, through the ministry of the disciples of Christ, who were appointed witnesses of him not only in Jerusalem, but in all Judea and Samaria, Act 1:8 and about the time of the Apostle Paul's conversion, and his being at Jerusalem, there were churches gathered in Judea, as distinct from Galilee and Samaria, Act 9:31 particularly at Caesarea, Lydda, Saron, and Joppa. It is very likely that all the apostles, when they first set out to preach the Gospel after the ascension of Christ and the effusion of the Spirit, began in Judea; though some might make a very short stay, and others a longer. The Apostle and Evangelist Matthew is generally thought to have exercised his ministry chiefly in Judea, and to have continued there long; here he wrote his Gospel for the sake of the Jews that believed (f); and that, as a very ancient writer says (g), when Peter and Paul preached at Rome, and founded the church there. Judas Thaddaeus is also said (h) to go through Judea, Galilee, Samaria, Arabia, Syria, and Mesopotamia; and certain it is, that Philip, after he had baptized the eunuch, preached in all the cities from Azotus to Caesarea, where he seems to have stayed awhile and preached, Act 8:40 and where afterwards was a Gospel church state, of which See Gill on Act 10:48 and at Lydda and Saron, which were both in Judea, there were saints who were visited by the Apostle Peter, and others converted by him, about the time that our apostle here refers to; of the church at Lydda; See Gill on Act 9:32 at Joppa also, which was in the tribe of Dan, there were disciples at the same time, and very likely a church there; See Gill on Act 9:38 and it may be observed that the Apostle Peter was the minister of the circumcision, he had the Gospel of the circumcision committed to him, and he continued with and preached much to the circumcised Jews; and so in all likelihood was the instrument of planting the churches in Judea here spoken of. These are said to be in Christ, as the church at Thessalonica, and that at Corinth are elsewhere said to be; because they professed to believe in Christ, were called by his name, and called upon his name; and though every individual member of them might not be in Christ, really united to him, and have communion with him; yet since they were all under a profession of him, they are considered as in him. The Arabic version reads it, "the churches of Judea which believe in Christ"; which though not a literal translation, gives the true sense of the passage, and distinguishes those churches from the synagogues or assemblies of the Jews which did not believe in Christ. (d) Misn. Sheviith, c. 9. sect. 2. (e) T. Hieros. Sheviith, fol. 38. 4. (f) Hieron. Catalog. Script. Ecclesiast. sect. 4. fol. 90. A. (g) Irenaeus adv. Haeres. l. 3. c. 1. (h) Hist. Eccles. Magdeburg. cent. 1. l. 2. c. 10. p. 449.”
Source
1832
A.D.
Adam Clarke Methodist
1762–1832
“And was unknown by face - I was not personally acquainted with any of the Churches of Judea; I was converted in another place, and had not preached the Gospel in any Christian congregation in that country; I knew only those at Jerusalem.”
1871
A.D.
1871
“So far was I from being a disciple of the apostles, that I was even unknown in the churches of Judea (excepting Jerusalem, Act 9:26-29), which were the chief scene of their labors.”
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.