Religious Diversity 509
other important ways. Another example drawn from the Gelasian corpus is
that of the vir clarissimus Telesinus. Gelasius wrote a letter of recommenda-
tion on behalf of Antonius, a relative of Telesinus, to another bishop named
Quinigeius. In this letter Gelasius states that although Telesinus seems to be
Jewish, he has “endeavoured to prove himself to us to such an extent that we
ought to rightly call him one of us”.34 The Latin is ambiguous and the improb-
able relationship between a Roman bishop and a Jewish senator prompted
Andreas Thiel, the 19th-century editor of Gelasius’ letters, to interpret it as
an indication that Telesinus had converted to Christianity.35 This reading
is certainly conceivable although perhaps not definitive. Telesinus’ relative
Antonius, who is referred to by Gelasius as frater, most likely had converted
to Christianity.36 However, it is possible to read Gelasius’ statement about
Telesinus as a backhanded compliment (he only seemed to be Jewish). Without
additional evidence it is impossible to say with any degree of certainty if
Telesinus was in fact a convert. Conversion was the most obvious way for Jews
to gain access to professions and patronage that might otherwise be unattain-
able. Antonius is an excellent example of this fact. On the other hand, the
existence of a Jew of senatorial rank is unusual although not unprecedented.37
There is epigraphic evidence from southern Italy for Jews holding municipal
offices in the Ostrogothic kingdom. An early 6th-century funerary inscription
in Latin and Hebrew from Venosa commemorates Faustina, granddaughter of
Vitus and Asellus who are described as maiores civitatis, “leaders of the com-
munity”, although it is unclear whether this was a term of general appreciation
rather than an indication that they held a particular office.38 Also from Venosa
we have a Latin and Hebrew epitaph from 521 for a certain Augusta, wife of
34 Gelasius frag. 45, ed. Thiel, p. 508. “Vir clarissimus Telesinus, quamvis Judaicae credulita-
tis esse videbatur, talem se nobis approbare contendit, ut eum merito nostrum appellare
debeamus.”
35 Thiel added as a subtitle to this letter, “Judaeorum quemdam conversum probalae fidei et
integritatis episcopo commendat.”
36 Gelasius frag. 45, ed. Thiel, p. 508. “et ideo fratrem supradictum [sc. Antonius] voluntatis
nostrae mandatorumque respectu ita te habere convenit, ut non solum in nullo penitus
opprimatur, verum etiam in quo ei opus fuerit tuae se gaudeat dilectionis adiutum.”
37 A vir clarissimus and comes named Cham is known from a funerary inscription from the
late 4th or early 5th century. See Chastagnol/Gagé/Leglay/Pflaum, L’Année épigraphique,
p. 67. Ruggini, “Ebrei e Orientali nell’Italia”, p. 225, n. 95.
38 Noy, Jewish Inscriptions, vol. 1, no. 86, pp. 114–15 and commentary on pp. 116–19. The his-
tory of this family, including their involvement in municipal politics and their gradual
acculturation is reconstructed from the epigraphic evidence in Williams, “Jews of Early
Byzantine Venusia”.