Bibliographical Note: This article is another in a series about conversion and intermarriage in antiquity, and is based in part on research supported by an NEH grant for Independent Research. The following studies of mine are cited by title: “Alexander the Great and Jaddus the High Priest According to Josephus,” AJSRev 7–8 (1982–1983) 41–68Google Scholar (on the veneration of the Jewish god by gentile dignitaries); “The Prohibition of Intermarriage: From the Bible to the Talmud,” Hebrew Annual Review 7 (1983) = Essays in Honor of Robert Gordis, 23–39Google Scholar; “The Origins of the Matrilineal Principle in Rabbinic Law,” AJSRev 10 (1985) 19–53Google Scholar; “Was Timothy Jewish (Acts 16:1–3)? Patristic Exegesis, Rabbinic Law, and Matrilineal Descent,” JBL 105 (1986) 251–68Google Scholar; “Respect for Judaism by Gentiles in the Writings of Josephus,” HTR 80 (1987) 409–30.Google ScholarStern, Menahem, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (3 vols.; Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences, 1974–1984), is cited throughout as “Stern, Authors.” I am grateful to the HTR editorial board for permitting me to cite the English titles of the works of Philo, Josephus, and other Greek and Latin writers.Google Scholar I am grateful to Professor George W. E. Nickelsburg for his helpful suggestions and criticisms.

¹ Stern, Authors, #72 (Varro) and # 148 (On the Sublime). Cf. too Stern, Authors, # 115 (Strabo). On the figure of Moses, see Gager, John, Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism (SBLMS 16; Nashville: Abingdon, 1972).Google Scholar For a brief survey of the image of Judaism in classical authors, see Stern, Menahem, “The Jews in Greek and Latin Literature,” in Safrai, Samuel et al., eds., Compendia Rerum Judaicarum ad Novum Testamentum Section I: The Jewish People in the First Century (2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976) 2. 1101–59.Google Scholar

² Robert, Louis, “Malédictions funéraires grecques,” CRA1BL (1978) 241–89Google Scholar, esp. 244–52. I am not convinced by Robert's argument that the orator, one Flavius Amphicles, was a monotheist. It is possible that the curse inscriptions from Rheneia were written by a pagan who, like Amphicles, used the language of the Septuagint to make his curse effective; this possibility is not sufficiently appreciated by Deissmann, Adolf, Light from the Ancient East: The New Testament Illustrated by Recently Discovered Texts of the Graeco-Roman World (New York: Doran, 1927) 413–24.Google Scholar

³ See “Alexander the Great,” 56–60, and “Respect for Judaism,” 412–15.

⁴ The passage in Chronicles is an expansion of 1 Kgs 5:21 (Hebrew verse numeration).

⁵ See “Alexander the Great,” 46 n. 13 and 58 n. 48; “Respect for Judaism,” 413 n. 14.

⁶ Stern, Authors, #518, 522.

⁷ Ibid., ## 363–69.

⁸ Identification with Zeus: Letter of Aristeas §§ 15–16; cf. Celsus in Origen Against Celsus 5.41 = Stern, Authors, #375 (p. 256 in the Greek, p. 286 in the English). Identification with Dionysus: Plutarch in Stern, Authors, #258 and Tacitus Histories 5.5.5 = Stern, Authors, #281. Anonymous god: see Lucan and Numenius in Stern, Authors, ## 191, 367.

⁹ The City of God 18.45.2.

¹⁰ High priest with Alexander: see my “Alexander the Great.” The bibliography on Yohanan ben Zakkai and Vespasian is immense; see, e.g., Neusner, Jacob, Development of a Legend: Studies on the Traditions Concerning Yohanan ben Zakkai (Leiden: Brill, 1970).Google Scholar The fullest collection of the Antoninus material remains Hoffman, David Z., “Die Antoninus-Agadot im Talmud und Midrasch,” Magazin für die Wissenschaft des Judenthums 19 (1892) 33–55Google Scholar, 245–55; see too Bamberger, Bernard J., Proselytism in the Talmudic Period (1939; reprinted New York: Ktav, 1968) 248–50Google Scholar, and Lieberman, Saul, Greek in Jewish Palestine: Studies in the Life and Manners of Jewish Palestine in the II–1V Centuries C.E. (1942; reprinted New York: Feldheim, 1965) 78–80.Google Scholar On Shapur see Wewers, G., “Israel zwischen den Mächten: Die rabbinischen Traditionen über König Schabhor,” Kairos 22 (1980) 77–100.Google Scholar On the motif in general see Herr, Moshe D., “The Historical Significance of the Dialogue between Jewish Sages and Roman Dignitaries,” in Heinemann, Joseph, ed., Scripta Hierosolymitana 22: Studies in Aggadah and Folk Literature (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1971) 123–50 (who seems not to realize that he is studying not history but a literary motif).Google Scholar

¹¹ Lüderitz, Gert, Corpus jüdischer Zeugnisse aus der Cyrenaika (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1983) #71Google Scholar; for discussion see Bowsky, Martha W. B., “M. Tittius Sex. F. Aem. and the Jews of Berenice,” AJP 108 (1987) 495–510.Google Scholar

¹² See CIJ 2. 766 = Lifshitz, Baruch, Donateurs et fondateurs dans les synagogues juives (Paris: Gabalda, 1967) #33 (a synagogue erected by Julia Severa for the Jewish community of Akmonia in Phrygia). See too Lifshitz # 18 and Luke 7:5.Google Scholar

¹³ A. Thomas Kraabel correctly notes that the donation of a synagogue does not necessarily make Julia Severa a “God-fearer”; see his “The Roman Diaspora: Six Questionable Assumptions,” JJS 33 (1982) 447–64Google Scholar, esp. 456. Here is a parallel from a much later time. At some point prior to 1611 (perhaps in the fifteenth century) a Christian woman donated a vegetable garden to the Jewish community of Worms. Obviously this woman did not have any animosity towards the Jews, but her gift was the result more of her own charitable inclinations (she also donated a pond to the Christian poor of the town) than of any “judaizing.” See Hamburger, Benjamin and Zimmer, Erich, eds., Wormser Minhagbuch des R. Jousep (Juspa) Schammes (Jerusalem: Mifal Torat Chachme Aschkenas, 1988) § 192 (p. 228Google Scholar with n. 6).

¹⁴ Tcherikover, Victor, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicorum (3 vols.; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957–1964) 2. #156d line 12 and #157 lines 42–50. Numerous modem analogies suggest themselves. Alexander Severus was vilified by his opponents as “a Syrian archisynagogue,” perhaps because of his pro-Jewish leanings (Stern, Authors, #521).Google Scholar

¹⁵ Of course, it is possible that the Hebrew version of the Cyrus decree in Ezra 1:2–4 is inspired by propaganda issued directly by Cyrus's court. In either case, the author of Ezra 1 chose to believe not only that Cyrus was working under divine direction but also that Cyrus himself recognized this fact.

¹⁶ Some scholars seem to accept Philo's suggestion; see Smallwood's commentary and Stern's commentary on Authors, #435. Contrast the cautious doubts of Siegert, Folker, “Gottesfürchtige und Sympathisanten,” JSJ 4 (1973) 109–64, esp. 149.Google Scholar

¹⁷ On the conversion of Alexander to Judaism (or is it Christianity?), see my “Alexander the Great,” 59–60, and esp. Delling, Gerhard, “Alexander der Grosse als Bekenner des jüdischen Gottesglaubens” JSJ 12 (1981) 1–51.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Philo Life of Moses 2.4 §§ 17–24 and Hypothetica; Josephus Against Apion 1.22 §§ 162–67 and 2.39 §§281–84.

¹⁹ Stern, Authors, #186.

²⁰ Tcherikover, Corpus, 3. 43–87.

²¹ Stern, Authors, #263.

²² Ibid., #406.

²³ Abraham as model proselyte: Philo On the Virtues 39 § 219; p. Bik. 1.4 64a. Abraham destroys his father's idols and believes in the one god: Jubilees 12; Apocalypse of Abraham 1–8; cf. Testament of Job 2–5; and numerous other versions. Abraham's “philosophic” recognition of god: Philo On the Virtues 39 §§212–18; Josephus Jewish Antiquities 1.7.1 §§154–57. For a discussion of these passages see Knox, W. L., “Abraham and the Quest for God,” HTR 28 (1935) 55–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Feldman, Louis H., “Abraham the Greek Philosopher in Josephus,” TAPA 99 (1968) 143–56Google Scholar; and Georgi, Dieter, The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 49–60.Google Scholar

²⁴ B. Meg. 13a (“is called a Jew”); p. Ned. 3.4 38a and b. Ned. 25a (and parallels); Sifre Numbers § 111 p. 116 (ed. Horovitz); Sifre Deuteronomy §54 p. 122 (ed. Finkelstein); cf. Mekilta Shirah §8 on Exod 15:11, p. 142 (ed. Horovitz-Rabin).

²⁵ P. Yeb. 8.1 8d and b. Abod. Zar. 64b.

²⁶ T. Abod. Zar. 8.4; b. Sanh. 56b; Novak, David, The Image of the Non-Jew in Judaism (Lewiston: Mellen, 1983) esp. 3–51, 107–65.Google Scholar

²⁷ Polemic against idolatry: see esp. Sibylline Oracles 3.8–45 and 545–72; 5.484–500; 12.291–92; and Wisdom of Solomon 12:23–15:19, with the commentary of Winston, David, The Wisdom of Solomon (AB; Garden City: Doubleday, 1979); and the Abraham traditions listed in n. 23 above. The problems raised by the “apostolic decree” in Acts 15, by Paul's concept of “law” and “justification,” and by the ethical maxims of Ps.-Phocylides and the Sibylline Oracles, cannot be discussed here.Google Scholar

²⁸ Peder Borgen suggests that the Philonic passage quoted above is answering the question, “When does a person receive status as a proselyte in the Jewish community and cease to be a heathen? … Philo uses an ethical criterion for deciding who has the status of a proselyte within the Jewish community. This ethical conversion of the heathen also meant a sociological change from a pagan context to a Jewish one.” I see none of this in the text of the Questions on Exodus. Elsewhere Philo does discuss the sociological aspect of conversion (see below), but not here. See Borgen, , “The Early Church and the Hellenistic Synagogue,” ST 37 (1983) 55–78Google Scholar, esp. 66–67 (with bibliography on the passage) = Philo, John and Paul (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987) 207–32, esp. 219–20.Google Scholar

²⁹ For the Greek text see Ziegler, Joseph, Susanna, Daniel, Bel et Draco (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1954) 220Google Scholar, and Geissen, Angelo, Der Septuaginta Text des Buches Daniel Kap. 5–12 zusammen mit Susanna, Bel et Draco (Bonn: Habelt, 1968) 274. I am grateful to George Nickelsburg for reminding me of this passage from Bel and the Dragon.Google Scholar

³⁰ See “Respect for Judaism,” 420 n. 34, and Reynolds, Joyce and Tannenbaum, Robert, Jews and God-fearers at Aphrodisias (Cambridge, England: Cambridge Philological Society, 1987) 50.Google Scholar

³¹ Delling, Gerhard, “Die Altarinschrift eines Gottesfürchtigen in Pergamon,” NovT 7 (1964) 73–80. See the discussion in Siegert, “Gottesfürchtige und Sympathisanten,” 143–44.Google Scholar

³² E.g., many rabbis in the midrash argue that Jethro was a proselyte; see Bamberger, Proselytism in the Talmudic Period, 182–91, and Baskin, Judith R., Pharaoh's Counsellors: Job, Jethro, and Balaam in Rabbinic and Patristic Tradition (BJS 47; Chico: Scholars Press, 1983) 45–74. The same opinion was occasionally advanced regarding Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus.Google Scholar

³³ See “Josephus,” 427.

³⁴ Meeks, Wayne, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983) 75–77.Google Scholar

³⁵ Baron, Salo W., A Social and Religious History of the Jews (New York: Columbia University Press, 1957) 3. 63–72Google Scholar, 196–206, 323–30. Aryeh Kasher suggests a parallel in the conversion of the Itureans, but this is conjectural; see Kasher, , “Jews and Itureans in the Hasmonean Period,” Cathedra 33 (1984) 18–41, esp. 30–31 (in Hebrew).Google Scholar

³⁶ Mekilta Pisha 15 on Exod 12:48, p. 57 (ed. Horovitz-Rabin) and parallels. See Bamberger, Proselytism in the Talmudic Period, 104 n. 193, 234.

³⁷ See Stern's commentary on Authors, #511, and Linder, Amnon, The Jews in Roman Imperial Legislation (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1987) 80–82.Google Scholar

³⁸ In contrast Syllaeus the Nabatean (Jewish Antiquities 16.7.6 § 225) and Epiphanes the son of the king of Commagene (Jewish Antiquities 19.9.1 § 355, 20.7.1 § 139) refused circumcision and therefore were denied permission to marry princesses of the Herodian house.

³⁹ Dio Cassius reports that in the war of 66–70 some Roman soldiers went over to the Jewish side and were received kindly by the Jews, and that in the war of 132–35 many foreigners joined the Jews “through eagerness for gain” (Dio Cassius 66.5.4 and 69.13.2 = Stern, Authors, ##430, 440), but there is no indication that conversion is meant.

⁴⁰ See “Respect for Judaism,” 422–24.

⁴¹ For evidence and discussion, see “Origins of the Matrilineal Principle,” and “Was Timothy Jewish?” A particularly obscure point is the status of women who converted to Judaism but remained married to their gentile husbands. See my brief discussion in “Respect for Judaism,” 430.

⁴² Histories 5.5.2 = Stern, Authors, # 281.

⁴³ Satires 14.96–106 = Stern, Authors, #301.

⁴⁴ On the Virtues 20–21 §§102–8; 34 § 182; 39 §§212–19; On the Special Laws 1.9 §§ 51–55; 4.34 § 178.

⁴⁵ Contrast the passage cited above from the Questions on Exodus, which explicitly says that the proselyte is not circumcised and says nothing about abandoning his previous family and integration into the community. As always in Philo, it is difficult to determine when Philo is giving exegesis and when he is reflecting the practices of Alexandrian Jewry.

⁴⁶ For further references see “Respect for Judaism,” 419–21.

⁴⁷ For discussions of the meaning of circumcision see Philo On the Special Laws 1.1–2 §§ 1–11, and b. Ned. 31b-32a (and parallels). On the Philonic passage see Hecht, Richard, “The Exegetical Contexts of Philo's Interpretation of Circumcision,” in Greenspahn, Frederick E., Hilgert, Earle, and Mack, Burton L., eds., Nourished with Peace: Studies in Hellenistic Judaism in Memory of Samuel Sandmel (Chico: Scholars Press, 1984) 51–79.Google Scholar On the place of circumcision in the conversion process see Josephus Jewish Antiquities 20.2.5 §§ 39–46 and b. Yeb. 47a-b (and parallels). These texts (with Philo's piece on proselytes in the Questions on Exodus) have suggested to some modern scholars that some proselytes might have been allowed to remain uncircumcised. I am not convinced. For a partial rebuttal of McEleney, Neil, “Conversion, Circumcision, and the Law,” NTS 20 (1974) 328–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar, see Nolland, John, “Uncircumcised Proselytes?” JSJ 12 (1981) 173–94Google Scholar, and Räisänen, Heikki, Paul and the Law (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 40–41Google Scholar. The importance of circumcision is highlighted in a remarkable way by Petronius (Stern, Authors, # 195). In general see Collins, John J., “A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvation in the First Century,” in Neusner, Jacob and Frerichs, Ernest S., eds., ”To See Ourselves as Others See Us”: Christians, Jews, “Others” in Late Antiquity (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985) 163–86.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Two imperial laws of the fourth century see conversion primarily in terms of social integration. See Theodosian Code 16.8.1 (18 October 315): si quis vero ex populo ad eorum [i.e., ludaeorum] nefariam sectam accesserit et conciliabulis eorum se adplicaverit, and Theodosian Code 16.8.7 (3 July 357[?]): si quis … ex Christiano ludaeus effectus sacrilegis coetibus adgregetur. See Linder, Jews in Imperial Legislation, ##8, 12.

⁴⁹ Josephus Jewish Antiquities 14.10.8 §§ 215–16. See Schürer, Emil, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (3 vols.; rev. Vermes, Geza, Millar, Fergus, et al.; Edinburgh: T. & T.Clark, 1973–1986) 3. 145.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Mandell, Sara asks an excellent question in her article, “Who Paid the Temple Tax When the Jews Were Under Roman Rule?” HTR 77 (1984) 223–32. Unfortunately she makes many unwarranted assumptions (e.g., she assumes that only Pharisees and rabbis observed the ancestral laws) and does not appreciate the social dynamics of the question.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵¹ Acts of Pilate 2.1–4. For the Greek text see Tischendorf, Constantinus, Evangelia Apocrypha (Leipzig: Avenarius et Mendelssohn, 1853) 214–16.Google Scholar For a translation NTApoc 1. 453–54; cf. too James, Montague Rhodes, The Apocryphal New Testament (1924; Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) 98–99.Google Scholar

⁵² Stern, Authors, #515. Ps.-Augustine Questions on the Old and New Testament 81 (CSEL 50. 137). On the identity of Ps.-Augustine with Ambrosiaster, see my “Was Timothy Jewish,” 259. Cf. Tertullian Apology 18: fiunt non nascuntur Christiani (“Christians are made, not born”).

⁵³ Stern, Authors, #254.

⁵⁴ In Esth 8:17 the verb mityahadim means not “became Jews” but “pretended to be Jews” or “played the Jew.” The Septuagint translates perietemnonto kai ioudaizon, “they were circumcised and they judaized,” but this translation is ambiguous. (“They judaized” might mean “they followed Jewish practices,” or “they supported the Jews”; it might, but need not, mean “they converted to Judaism.” The two verbs are also juxtaposed by Eusebius Preparation for the Gospel 9.22.5, but that text is similarly ambiguous and does not necesarily preserve the language of Eusebius's ultimate source, the Jewish author Theodotus.)

⁵⁵ See above, n. 44. Love for incomers is also endorsed by Ps.-Phocylides 39; see the discussion of Horst, Peter van der, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides (Leiden: Brill, 1978) 139–40. For a survey of rabbinic attitudes towards proselytes see Bamberger, Proselytism in the Talmudic Period, 149–73.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ B. Yeb. 47b.

⁵⁷ The Aphrodisias inscription lists three proselytes; Harry J. Leon, The Jews of Ancient Rome, ## 21, 68, 202, 222, 256, 462, 523 (Rome); CIJ, 576 (Venosa); Lüderitz, Corpus, # 12 (Cyrene); Figueras, Pau, Decorated Jewish Ossuaries (Leiden: Brill, 1983) 16 nn. 135–36Google Scholar (Jerusalem); Dura: Naveh, Joseph, On Stone and Mosaic: The Aramaic and Hebrew Inscriptions from Ancient Synagogues (Jerusalem: Carta, 1978) #88.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ John M. Allegro, Discoveries in the Judaean Desert of Jordan V: Qumran Cave 4, 53–57 # 174 and Temple Scroll 39.5; 40.6; see “Prohibition of Intermarriage,” 32.

⁵⁹ Damascus Covenant 14.3–6; cf. m. Qid. 4.1 and Sifre Deuteronomy 247, p. 276 (ed. Finkelstein).

⁶⁰ The fact that the Palestinian Talmud reverses the Mishnah here does not affect my point.

⁶¹ See Bamberger, Proselytism in the Talmudic Period, 60–123. A new, methodologically sophisticated discussion is needed.

⁶² Explicit evidence for change of name: Leon, Jews of Ancient Rome, #462 (Felicitas becomes Peregrina) and #523 (Veturia Paulla becomes Sarra). Implicit evidence is provided by the inscriptions that commemorate a proselyte with a Jewish name; in all likelihood the proselyte received the Jewish name after conversion. See the inscriptions from Aphrodisias, Cyrene, and Jerusalem listed in n. 57 above.

⁶³ Nock, Arthur Darby, Conversion: The Old and the New in Religion from Alexander the Great to Augustine of Hippo (1933; London: Oxford University Press, 1972) 6–7. Nock's term is “adhesion”; see “Respect for Judaism,” 410.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Solmsen, Friedrich, Isis among the Greeks and Romans (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1979) 83: “There is an acceptance of the cult of Isis which falls short of conversion. For want of a better name we may think of it as an emotional conquest.”CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶⁵ Veyne, Paul, A History of Private Life, vol. 1: From Pagan Rome to Byzantium (trans. A. Goldhammer; Cambridge: Belknap, 1987) 225–26. For the phrase “to become a Pythagorean” (pythagoreios genesthai), see Diodorus of Sicily 10.11.1.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ For a full collection of material see Siegert, “Gottesfürchtige und Sympathisanten,” and Reynolds and Tannenbaum, Jews and God-fearers, esp. 48–66. A comparable use of the Latin term metuens is poorly attested. Christians too could use the term theosebes; see Diehl, Ernest, Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae Veteres (Berlin: Weidmann, 1961) #2953.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Hommel, Hildebrecht, “Juden und Christen im kaiserzeitlichen Milet,” Mitteilungen des deutschen archäeologischen Instituts zu Istanbul 25 (1975) 167–95, esp. 184–87. The exact rendering of the inscription is debated; see Reynolds and Tannenbaum, Jews and God-fearers, 54.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Bellen, Heinz, ”Synagoge ton loudaion kai theosebon: Die Aussage einer bosporanischen Freilassungsinschrift,” JAC 8/9 (1965–1966) 171–76.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Donati, A., Epigraphica 39 (1977) 27–40Google Scholar = L'année épigraphique (1977) #265.

⁷⁰ Neither Philo nor any of the Jewish works commonly ascribed to Alexandrian provenance is able to name a specific individual who was a “god-fearer,” a “judaizer,” or a proselyte. I do not discuss here the relative numbers of “god-fearers” or the role of “god-fearers” in the book of Acts.

⁷¹ See “Respect for Judaism,” 416, 418, and n. 54 above.

⁷² The exact force of sun humin eludes me. For the text see n. 51 above.

⁷³ Contrast the discussion of Tannenbaum in Reynolds and Tannenbaum, Jews and God-fearers, 48–66 and the conclusion of Siegert, “Gottesfürchtige und Sympathisanten,” 163.