The Erastus pavement inscription at Corinth

What it establishes

A Latin building inscription from Roman Corinth (Kent, Corinth VIII.3 no. 232; EDH HD025815) records that a man with the cognomen Erastus paved the area at his own expense (sua pecunia) in return for his aedileship (pro aedilitate). His praenomen and nomen are lost, and only the cuttings for the inlaid metal letters survive.

It shows that the Roman colony of Corinth, in the province of Achaia, had aediles, and that an office-holder could repay his election by paying for public paving.

It places an Erastus in Corinth's office-holding class at some point between the mid-first century and, on the latest proposal, the mid-second century or later. A Corinthian Erastus with a civic title (Romans 16:23) therefore fits the city's documented setting.

What it does not establish

It does not show that the aedile is the Erastus of Romans 16:23, Acts 19:22 or 2 Timothy 4:20. His praenomen and nomen are lost, it is disputed whether the civic title in Romans corresponds to an aedileship, and the date is contested.

It does not show that the Erastus named in Acts, Romans and 2 Timothy is one person; that question rests on the texts, not on this stone. Paley (1790) argued from Acts 19:22, Romans 16:23 and 2 Timothy 4:20 that Corinth was Erastus's home; that argument predates the stone and depends on the texts.

It does not show that Paul's Corinthian church included wealthy magistrates, or that a Christian held the aedileship; both depend on the disputed identification. Paul's remark that not many Corinthian believers were of high standing (1 Corinthians 1:26) neither excludes nor confirms an elite member.

Where interpreters differ

Three questions remain open. Date: Kent placed the pavement around the mid-first century, and EDH and EDCS catalogue it as AD 31-70. Gill reports the complete slab found in situ in 1929, but Friesen argues that the inscription lies in a secondary context and was probably not laid before the mid-second century. Office: some equate Erastus's civic title in Romans 16:23 with aedile (Kent, Gill), others with quaestor (Theissen, Goodrich), and others (Cadbury; Friesen) read it as a low-status city post, possibly held by a slave; Weiss denies that Corinth had municipal quaestors. Identity: Brookins finds the name rare, but a probable second-century Erastus at Corinth (Clarke 1991) shows the name was not unique there, and with the praenomen and nomen lost, identification stays possible rather than demonstrated.

Other readings

Same man, later career. Kent judged the identification with the Erastus of Romans sound, and Clarke keeps it a significant possibility. Theissen equated the Romans office with a junior post such as quaestor; Furnish, following him, proposed that Erastus was quaestor around the time of the letter and later aedile. Goodrich also argues for a quaestorship, which he regards as a high-ranking post held by the elite.

A different, later aedile. Friesen argues that the inscription lies in a secondary context and was probably not laid before the mid-second century. On this view it names a non-Christian member of the elite, not the Erastus of Romans, who was a low-status city functionary, possibly a slave; Friesen also doubts that the Erastus of Romans was a believer at all.

Undecidable on present evidence. Gill holds that the evidence permits neither a confident identification nor a confident rejection. The pavement adds a Corinthian Erastus to the record without settling whether he is the man Paul names.