--- title: "The Gallio inscription at Delphi" canonical: "https://paulineletters.com/explore/evidence/gallio-inscription" published: "2026-10-23" updated: "2026-10-23" license: "https://paulineletters.com/explore/license" source: "Pauline Letters" --- # The Gallio inscription at Delphi **What does this evidence establish about Acts and Paul’s letters?** Fragments of a letter of Claudius inscribed at Delphi name Gallio, restored as [L. Ju]nius Gallio, as the emperor's friend and proconsul. Claudius's 26th imperatorial acclamation dates the letter most probably to the first seven months of AD 52, so Gallio governed Achaia about 51/52, possibly 52/53. It anchors the hearing of Acts 18:12-17 in time, though it never mentions Paul or the hearing. - **Date:** Most probably the first seven months of AD 52 (before 1 August); a date at the very end of AD 51 is not wholly excluded. Inscribed copy of a letter of Claudius, dated by his 26th imperatorial acclamation. - **Where it is now:** Delphi (EDH). Deissmann (1912) reports Bourguet's four fragments in the Delphi Museum (Inv. 3883, 2178, 2271, 4001); present display not verified. - **Confidence:** High - **How it is supported:** Attested - **Catalogue references:** FD III 4, 286; SIG3 801 D; AE 2002, 1335; Oliver, Greek Constitutions 31; EDH HD043294; EDCS-66400014; PHI 240470; SEG 32, 546 (Deiana's reading of line 17; PHI 240472); TM 177226 - **Bears on:** Acts 18:12-17; Acts 18:1-11; Acts 18:18; 1 Corinthians 1:1 ## What it establishes A letter of Claudius inscribed at Delphi names Gallio as the emperor's friend and proconsul, in a passage about Delphi's lack of citizens that he evidently reported (the verb is restored). Of the name only '-nios Gallion' survives; 'Junius', 'friend' and 'proconsul' are restored from partial letters but generally accepted. Delphi lay in Achaia, so the letter confirms independently of Acts that Gallio governed Achaia (Acts 18:12). Claudius's titles keep the numeral 26 for his imperatorial acclamations. An inscription from Kys pairs the 26th with his 12th tribunician year; the Porta Maggiore aqueduct text (CIL VI 1256; EDR104278) pairs the 12th with the 27th. Since Dessau, followed by Deissmann (1912), dated that aqueduct to 1 August 52, the letter most probably falls in the first seven months of 52; late 51 is not wholly excluded. Proconsuls normally served for about a year, so Gallio's term overlapped the first half of 52: most likely 51/52, possibly 52/53. If Acts 18:12-17 places the hearing correctly, it falls within about 51-53. Deissmann (1912) argued for 51/52; Ramsay, as Deissmann reports, preferred 52/53. Tacitus (Ann. 15.73) names Gallio as Seneca's brother; Seneca (Ep. 104.1) recalls him leaving Achaia by ship when fever began, so his term may have been cut short (an inference). Dio (60.24.1) says Claudius returned Achaia to governors chosen by lot in AD 44, which fits the title proconsul in Acts 18:12. ## What it does not establish It does not mention Paul, the Jews of Corinth, or any hearing. It confirms the governor named in Acts 18:12, not that the scene in Acts 18:12-17 happened as narrated. It gives no start or end date for Gallio's term. Choosing between 51/52 and 52/53 depends on the normal one-year tenure, on when terms began, and on whether the letter treats Gallio as the sitting proconsul. It cannot show where in Paul's eighteen months or more at Corinth the hearing fell (Acts 18:11 and Acts 18:18). Paul's arrival date in Corinth is therefore a further inference. It does not show that Acts 18:1-18 describes a single continuous visit. ## Where interpreters differ The AD 52 date rests on the acclamation numeral that survives on the stone; the open questions come after it. The 1 August limit holds only if the Porta Maggiore text reflects the aqueduct's dedication date (EDR dates it only to 52/53), and Dessau allowed, while thinking it improbable, that the 26th acclamation fell at the very end of 51. Gallio's year could be 51/52 or 52/53. Dio (60.17.3) says that in AD 43 Claudius ordered governors chosen by lot to leave Rome before mid-April, which suggests a spring or early-summer start (an inference); Deissmann, following Mommsen, assumed a nominal 1 July. Plassart's second-person reading of line 17, known here as reported by Oliver (1971), makes the recipient Gallio's successor. Oliver preferred a community as recipient, and others divide line 17 as the verb εἴασε, which removes the pronoun (Deiana, SEG 32.546; PHI 240472). Placing the hearing early in Gallio's term, as Deissmann did, is an inference, and whether the scene happened is a separate historical judgment. ## Other readings Gallio's year was 52/53. Gallio may have taken office in spring or early summer 52, with Claudius writing before 1 August 52. The hearing would then fall in 52 or early 53 and Paul's arrival in Corinth about 51. Deissmann reports that Ramsay (1909) put the proconsulship from April 52 to April 53 and Paul's arrival in October 51, and that Babut (1911) preferred a similar range. The letter was sent after Gallio's term. Plassart, as reported by Oliver (1971), divided line 17 to give a second-person singular pronoun, making the recipient an individual, probably Gallio's successor, who is told what Gallio had reported. That would put Gallio's year at 51/52 and the hearing in 51 or early 52. Oliver doubted the reading because Claudius still calls Gallio proconsul, and Deiana's division of the line removes the pronoun. Acts 18 combines two visits. Donfried, Lüdemann and Hurd (as reported by Fellows 2005) take Acts 18 to combine two visits to Corinth, placing the Gallio incident on the later one; the inscription would then date the hearing, not Paul's arrival. Fellows replies that the incident probably belongs to the first visit: if the Sosthenes of Acts 18:17 co-sent 1 Corinthians (1 Corinthians 1:1), the incident is hard to date after that letter. Office confirmed, scene unproven. A sceptical reader can grant that Gallio governed Achaia at about this time and still treat Acts 18:12-17 as Luke's framing of the Corinth story. Deissmann reports that Loisy dated the hearing, if historical, to 52 or early 53. The inscription settles the office and the approximate date; whether the event happened needs a separate assessment of Acts. ## Bibliography and sources - Epigraphic Database Heidelberg (record last updated by Cowey), Epigraphic Database Heidelberg: public legal inscription from Delphi (Achaia) — EDH HD043294 - Epigraphik-Datenbank Clauss/Slaby (references FDelphes 286; AE 2002, 1335; dated 52; Delphoi, Achaia) — EDCS-66400014 - Trismegistos Texts, text-relations service (links EDH HD043294, EDCS 66400014, PHI 240470-240472) — TM 177226 - Wikidata: Delphi Inscription — Q5254406 - Seneca, Seneca, Moral Letters to Lucilius (Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales), vol. 3 (Richard Mott Gummere, 1925) — Ep. 104.1 - Tacitus, Tacitus, Annals, Book 15 (Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb (Wikisource text based on their translation), 1876) — Ann. 15.73 - Cassius Dio, Cassius Dio, Roman History, Book 60 (Loeb vol. VII) (Earnest Cary, 1924) — 60.24.1 - Cassius Dio, Cassius Dio, Roman History, Book 60 (Loeb vol. VII) (Earnest Cary, 1924) — 60.17.3 - Epigraphik-Datenbank Clauss/Slaby: CIL 06, 01256 (p 3129, 3798, 4365) = ILS 218a — EDCS-17800159 (CIL 06, 01256 (p 3129, 3798, 4365) = ILS 218a) --- Canonical: https://paulineletters.com/explore/evidence/gallio-inscription