Bradley C. Gregory, «Vice and Virtue in the Moral Vision of the Latin of Sirach.», Vol. 97 (2016) 41-61
Beginning in the Second Temple period some Jewish literature begins to reflect an increased influence from Hellenistic conceptions of virtue and vice. This paper analyzes the expansions and alterations found in the Latin version of Ben Sira to show how the vices of pride, desire, and avarice are elevated in importance and integrated into the larger contours of the moral theology of the book. Their content, amount, and distribution suggest that their piecemeal production arose from attempts to integrate the virtue/vice thinking prominent in late antiquity into the teaching already found in the Book of Sirach.
46 BrADLey C. GreGOry
At the end of 10,13b (15), the Latin agrees with some Lucianic
manuscripts in adding “and it will ruin them in the end” (et subvertet
eos in finem) 21. The addition in the Lucianic manuscripts may have
originated as a doublet of 10,13d; the Latin has possibly jumped from
10,13b to 10,13d. This emphasis on punishment corresponds to two
additions in the surrounding context. in 10,10 (11) the Latin prefaces
the observation that a king can die overnight, which implies a swift-
ness of judgment, with the claim that “all power is short lived” (omnis
potentatus brevis vita). Likewise, after the claim in 10,17 (20) that
God has made some nations wither away and eradicated their memory
from the earth, the Latin duplicates the second half of the verse but
changes the referent to the proud: “God has destroyed the memory
of the proud” (perdidit deus memoriam superborum) 22. Following
this the Latin adds a contrasting statement: “and allows to remain
the memory of the humble in mind” (et reliquit memoriam humilium
sensu) 23. The overall effect of these changes in Sirach 10 is to heighten
the importance of pride while also adding greater emphasis to the in-
ability of the proud and powerful to escape divine judgment. For those
who are arrogant, the loss of any lasting memory of their greatness
would be a particularly acute and fitting punishment.
in several places the Latin introduces pride into the thought of a
passage. For example, in 4,9 the Greek exhorts the reader to deliver
the wronged from the wrongdoer. However, in place of “wrongdoer”
(avdikou/ntoj) the Latin has “the proud” (superbi), which implies that
oppressors are prideful. Similarly, in 13,22 (26) the Greek notes that
when a rich person speaks “improper things” (avpo,rrhta) others do not
judge him negatively. The Latin translates “improper things” with
“prideful things” (superba), which was likely prompted by the men-
tion of the “humble person” in the immediate context. in relation to
in Sirach 13 where a minority of manuscripts add to 13,7 (8) the admonition to be
humble before God and to wait on God’s help (humiliare deo et expecta manu eius).
See THieLe, Sirach, 419.
21
Z lacks this addition. See THieLe, Sirach, 370; cf. ZieGLer, Sirach, 170.
22
k: perdidit deus memoriam superborum; D: perdidit dominus memoriam
superborum. See THieLe, Sirach, 373.
23
Similarly, D; strangely k inserts a negation: et non relinquit memoriam
humilium. A minority of V manuscripts also attest a doublet involving pride in
21,4 (5). Prior to the claim that the house of the arrogant will be uprooted, some
manuscripts read et domus quae nimie [or nimium or nimis] locuples est adnul-
labitur superbia (“and the house which is excessively rich is desolated by pride”).
See THieLe, Sirach, 586.