cemetery, social pressures may have encouraged converts to assimilate to
the group as quickly as possible and not advertise their new status. More-
over, conversion was a capital crime from Hadrian’s time onward (van der
Horst 1991, 72), the period from which most of these inscriptions come. Sec-
ond, we may indeed have other proselytes behind such epithets as Ioudaios
andHebraios,and in the statement that a woman lived both well and “in
Judaism” (Leon 1960, 129). Third, the surviving family members who
proudly recorded their loved one’s conversion may well have been prose-
lytes as well. In view of these mitigating factors, it is impressive enough that
the Judean inscriptions of Rome preserve any physical evidence of con-
version.
Although most converts would not have become famous, we also know
from the surviving literature the names of a few high-profile Roman pros-
elytes. Josephus mentions a prominent senator’s wife, during the reign of
Tiberius, named Fulvia. Having embraced the Judean ordinances (nomimois
proselêlythuian tois Ioudaikois, A.J.18.81), Fulvia was reportedly defrauded of
gifts intended for the temple in Jerusalem. Josephus further alleges that
Nero’s consort and wife, Poppea Sabina, was a God-fearer (A.J.20.195),
who twice intervened on behalf of Judean interests. Josephus had no evi-
dent reason to claim Poppea’s sympathies so long after Nero’s rule, when
the memories of both husband and wife were odious. Finally, Dio claims that
Domitian executed the consul Flavius Clemens (95 CE) and exiled his wife
Flavia Domitilla, although she was a relative of Domitian, on charges of
“atheism” (Hist. Rom.67.14.2). Dio immediately explains that this was the
charge Domitian levelled also against “others who had drifted into Judean
customs” (es ta tôn Ioudaiôn ethê echokellontes). The nautical verb “to drift” per-
haps implies that there was a current of proselytes at the time. That there
was at least significant interest in Judaism, is also suggested by Sueto-
nius, who claims that Domitian collected the Judean tax with the utmost
severity, even from “those who lived as Judeans without professing
Judaism” (Dom.12: inprofessi Iudaicam viverent vitam).
Because Suetonius and Dio indicate that Domitian eliminated ene-
mies on mere pretexts, and because another version of the story has Domi-
tilla embracing Christianity (Eusebius, Hist. eccl.3.18; cf. P. Lampe 1989,
166–72), we should not insist upon the real conversion of Clemens and
Domitilla. Nevertheless, Dio’s incidental notice about the others who
adopted Judean ways must point to some kind of real condition at that
time, because he goes on to say (Hist. Rom.68.1.2) that one of Nerva’s first
policies was to stop admitting accusations of either impiety or adopting a
Judean life (oute asebeias oute Ioudaikou biou). Since Dio has already mentioned
TheContra Apionemin Social and Literary Context 143