326 ilaria l. e. ramelli
more competence and subtlety to reproduce such details.23 if one takes
these details into account, those that appear to be odd and incorrect syn-
tactical constructs, typical of late Latin,24 in fact prove to be Greek con-
structs, which seem to have been transposed into Latin by a person who
thought in greek. again, it is striking that these are all concentrated in
Paul’s letters.
Let me offer some examples. in Letter ii, which claims to have been
authored by Paul, in addition to the lexical graecism sophista, which i
have already mentioned, there is the following problematic expression: si
praesentiam iuvenis [.. .] habuissem. one would expect, in Latin, a clause
such as si iuvenis adfuisset; therefore, commentators are uncomfortable
and speak of a post-classical or late construction. For instance, alfons
Fürst, in one of the most excellent contributions available on the corre-
spondence, observes with perplexity: “die unbeholfene Formulierung si
praesentiam iuvenis [.. .] habuissem statt klassisch etwa si iuvenis adfuis-
set ist nachklassisch und singular.”25 however, praesentiam habere is in
fact nothing but a syntactical graecism: it reproduces in Latin the typical
greek construct παρουσίαν ἔχειν, which is very well attested in classical
and hellenistic greek, including hellenistic Judaism. in addition, it was
almost always followed by a genitive.26
moreover, Paul himself, in his new Testament letters, clearly prefers
the formula παρουσία + genitive of a person, for example in Phil 2:12 ἐν τῇ
παρουσίᾳ μου, “during my presence,” instead of “when i am there” or “when
i am with you.” The Vulgate renders precisely in praesentia mei. now, in
Letter iV of our correspondence, too, Paul uses this identical construct:
praesentiam tui. The very use of the genitive of the personal pronoun
instead of the possessive adjective is itself a syntactical graecism. what
is more, it appears also in Letter Vi of our correspondence, with paeniten-
tiam sui. This is another syntactical graecism, this too in a letter by Paul.
in Paul’s certainly authentic letters in the new Testament, there are many
examples of παρουσία + genitive of person; indeed, all occurrences of this
23 see ilaria ramelli, “The apocryphal correspondence between seneca and st. Paul,”
in Tobias nicklas and Jean michel roessli (eds.), Novum Testamentum Patristicum—
Apokryphensonderband (göttingen: Vandenhoeck & ruprecht, 2013).
24 K. Versteegh, “dead or alive? The status of the standard Language,” in adams, Janse,
and swain (eds.), Bilingualism in Ancient Society, 53, rightly warns that we have no idea
about the development of non-literary language; our records are written and “always
affected by the norm of a written standard.”
25 Fürst, Der apokryphe Briefwechsel, 39 n.58. of the whole, very good volume see my
review in Gnomon 80 (2008): 307–11.
26 see ramelli, “The apocryphal correspondence.”