Contrary to the law (para ton nomon). They did not accuse Paul of treason as in Thessalonica, perhaps Paul had been more careful in his language here. They bring the same charge here that the owners of the slave-girl brought in Philippi (Act 16:21) Perhaps they fear to go too far with Gallio, for they are dealing with a Roman proconsul, not with the politarchs of Thessalonica. The Jewish religion was a religio licita and they were allowed to make proselytes, but not among Roman citizens. To prove that Paul was acting contrary to Roman law (for Jewish law had no standing with Gallio though the phrase has a double meaning) these Jews had to show that Paul was making converts in ways that violated the Roman regulations on that subject. The accusation as made did not show it nor did they produce any evidence to do it. The verb used anapeithei means to stir up by persuasion (old verb here only in the N.T.), a thing that he had a right to do.