¹ Kraabel, A. T., “The Disappearance of the ‘God-fearers,’” Numen 28 (1981) 113–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also idem, “The Roman Diaspora: Six Questionable Assumptions,” JJS 33 (1982) 445–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and idem, “Greeks, Jews, and Lutherans in the Middle Half of Acts,” in this volume.

² Idem, “Disappearance,” 120.

³ It must be noted that the phrase σεβόμενοι θεòν ὕψιστον appears in three inscriptions from Tanais, northeast of the Black Sea. They are discussed by Schürer, E. in “Die Juden im bosporischen Reiche und die Genossenschaften der σεβόμενοι θεòν ὕψιστον ebendaselbst,” SPAW (Berlin, 1897) 200–25.Google Scholar Whether these inscriptions have anything to do with Judaism is another matter. The presence of terms like σεβόμενοι, θεν ὔψι στον, and πρεσβύτερον point toward a positive answer.

⁴ See, however, the texts cited in the previous note.

⁵ That the phrase, σεβόμενος τòν θεόν, is not a Lukan invention is made plain by Josephus Ant 14.110, where it also appears to designate Gentiles: πάντων τ⋯ν κατ⋯ τ⋯ν οἰκουμένην Ἰουδαίων κα σεβομένων τòν θεόν.

⁶ “Du nouveau sur les ‘sympathisants,’” JSJ 1 (1970) 82–83.Google Scholar For other works of Lifshitz on the Jewish inscriptions see his Prolegomenon to CII (New York: Ktav, 1975) 1.Google Scholar 21–107 and idem, Donateurs et fondateurs dans les synagogues juives (Paris: Gabalda, 1967).Google Scholar

⁷ Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1980) 2.Google Scholar 103–7.

⁸ The use of metuens in Juvenal Sat. 14.96 is particularly interesting, for it refers specifically to a father who observed some Jewish customs and beliefs, whereas his son becomes a full convert and undergoes circumcision. Cf. also the famous account of Izates of Adiabene who eventually became a full convert to Judaism but was originally advised that it was possible τ θεῖον σέβειν without circumcision (Josephus Ant. 20.41).

⁹ Among others, Gager, J. G., The Origins of Anti-Semitism: Attitudes toward Judaism in Pagan and Christian Antiquity (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985).Google Scholar

¹⁰ So Goodenough, E. R., in his Introduction to Philo Judaeus (New York: Barnes & Noble, 1962) 33–34Google Scholar with respect to certain treatises of Philo; and Collins, John J., Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983)Google Scholar with respect to a broad range of Hellenistic Jewish literature.

¹¹ Kraabel, “Disappearance,” 117.

¹² Kraabel, A. T., “Impact of the Discovery of the Sardis Synagogue,” in Hanfmann, George M. A., ed., Sardis from Prehistoric to Roman Times: Results of the Archaeological Exploration of Sardis, 1958–1975 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1983) 184.Google Scholar

¹³ ibid., 188.

¹⁴ Josephus Ant. 20.34–48.

¹⁵ Kraabel (“Disappearance,” 123) rather implausibly dismisses the passage due to its polemical tone.

¹⁶ Sat. 6.542–47.

¹⁷ See the discussion in Meeks, Wayne and Wilken, Robert, Jews and Christians in Antioch in the First Four Centuries of the Common Era (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1978) 25–36.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Kraabel, “Disappearance,” 117.

¹⁹ Kraabel refers to Lifshitz, Donateurs, although it must be said that Lifshitz's views regarding the reference of these terms are antithetical to Kraabel's.

²⁰ See his article, “Jewish ‘Sympathizers’ in Classical Literature and Inscriptions,” TAPA 81 (1950) 200ff.Google Scholar

²¹ The Jews of Ancient Rome (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society 1960) esp. 247, 251ff.

²² Nouvelles Inscriptions de Sardes (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1964).

²³ CII 754.

²⁴ CII 748; see the discussion in Lifshitz, Donateurs, 25–26; and Robert, Nouvelles, 41–42.

²⁵ CII 228 and 619a.

²⁶ So Siegert, F. (“Gottesfürchtige und Sympathisten,” JSJ 4 [1973] 157)Google Scholar who adopts a skeptical stance toward the evidence of the θεοσεβής inscriptions but is otherwise inclined to the view that Gentile sympathizers were a regular feature of synagogues.

²⁷ It must be noted that Robert is inclined to connect all epigraphic occurrences of the adjectival θεοσεβής with synagogues; so Nouvelles, 44. In his “θεοσεβής” (TDNT 3 [1965] 124–25) G. Bertram lists a number of Greek Jewish texts where the adjective is applied to Jewish and biblical figures. In general, he notes, its usage in Jewish literary texts is rare.

²⁸ Robert, Nouvelles, 45.

²⁹ Hengel, Martin, Judaism and Hellenism (2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1.Google Scholar 313.

³⁰ Kraabel, “Impact,” 178, 185.

³¹ In his original edition of the CII (Rome, 1936) passim.

³² “Jewish ‘Sympathizers,’” esp. 208.

³³ Ancient Rome, 251ff.

³⁴ “Du nouveau,” 77ff., where he discusses previous interpretations.

³⁵ CII 766; discussed by Lifshitz in Donateurs, 35–36.

³⁶ CII 754; discussed by Lifshitz in Donateurs, 31.

³⁷ See Lifshitz, Prolegomenon to CII, 65–66.

³⁸ ibid., 65.

³⁹ See Lifshitz, “Du nouveau,” 81–82; Donateurs, 25–26; and Siegert, “Gottesfürchtige,” 159–60. The emendation was first proposed by Frey, CII 748.

⁴⁰ I am indebted to the editors of the Aphrodisias synagogue inscriptions, Joyce Reynolds and Robert Tannenbaum, both for their permission to make use of their contents and for their openness in discussing them with me. I am also grateful to G. W. Bowersock for providing me with a copy of a public lecture in which he discusses the inscriptions at some length.