44 BrADLey C. GreGOry unique elements of the Latin version are analyzed holistically, a strong emphasis on certain vices and virtues prominent in ethical discussions of late antiquity emerges. in order to explore this, i will examine the presence of the vices of pride, desire (which in subsequent tradition was subdivided into lust and gluttony), and avarice and their corre- sponding virtues of humility, temperance, and charity. For complete- ness, i will then briefly consider the relatively minor role played by envy, anger, and sloth. Since the purpose is to assess the distinctive features of the Latin version (even if many of these were already in the Latin’s Vorlage), this analysis will focus mainly on additions and alterations not found in the surviving Greek manuscripts. After ana- lyzing these themes independently, we will be in a position to synthe- size the results to show a general consistency of thinking regarding these vices and their corresponding virtues and a confluence between such thinking and broader trends within the Latin version. However, any analysis of the Latin version is beset by method- ological difficulties stemming from the immensely complicated textu- al history of the Latin translation. in fact, rather than presenting one critical text (as in Ziegler’s critical edition of the Greek), Thiele’s edition sorts the readings into nine textforms, which have fluid bound- aries 14. The earliest and best textform is designated k, but unfortu- nately it is extant only for small portions of the book. The next in importance is that of the Vulgate (V). Because Jerome did not judge Sirach to be canonical he did not make a fresh translation of the book, instead adopting a Vetus Latina text originating in north Africa and quite close to readings found in k 15. Because of its selection by Jerome, this textform is by far the best attested and historically the most influential. For substantial portions of the book it is the only textform to survive. Therefore, due to the antiquity, completeness, and historical importance of the Vulgate, this study will work from V while noting places where other textforms are extant 16. 14 THieLe, Sirach, 99-146. 15 THieLe, Sirach, 117-130. 16 Since Thiele’s critical edition covers only chapters 1–24, citations from chapters 25–51 are from the Benedictine critical edition of the roman Vulgate: Biblia Sacra iuxta latinam vulgatam versionem, XII: Sapientia Salomonis, Liber Hiesu filii Sirach (rome 1964). For citations from chapters 1–24, if no other textform is referenced for a reading, it is because V is the only one extant for the citation. After k and V, the next most important form is D whose primary textual witness is the early 5th century Pseudo-Augustine’s Speculum (THieLe, Sirach, 131-134). The other six textforms are i, Z, J, m, A, and S (see THieLe, Sirach, 134-146).