In the Hebrew, the LORD begins by referring to himself in the third person. Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version have changed this to the first person “I, the LORD” right at the beginning to fit in with the first person references in the Hebrew in verses 3 and 6. In some languages this phrase will be rendered as “I, who am the LORD.”

Was very angry: The Bible does not hesitate to speak of the LORD feeling anger like a human being. However, the LORD’s anger is not unpredictable or emotionally based. It is directed against his people who have broken his covenant and disobeyed his law, as verses 4-6 make clear. Angry in many languages is expressed in physical terms; for example, “to have a hot heart/stomach/liver toward someone.”

With your fathers: The reference is not just to the generation immediately before Zechariah’s but to the people of Judah and Israel who lived before the exile. This meaning is given clearly by the term “ancestors” in Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version, but in some other languages, the word “fathers” may be used in this sense (compare “forefathers” in New English Bible/ Revised English Bible and New International Version). In some languages one may translate this word as “fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers,” or in others, “all the people who lived before you [or, us].”

Jerusalem Bible transposes verse 2 to the middle of verse 6, but there is no manuscript support for this, and translators should not do it. The transposition has been dropped in New Jerusalem Bible.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Good News Translation marks the beginning of a new section by including the introductory words “In another vision…” (compare 1.18; 2.1). On the translation of “vision,” see 1.7.

Then he showed me: It is not certain who he refers to. Some scholars (Petersen, New Living Translation) think it refers to the interpreting angel. However, most take it to refer to the LORD, especially as a similar clause occurs in 1.20 with the LORD as subject. According to Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, some manuscripts of both the ancient Greek and Latin versions actually mention the LORD at this point. Likewise some translations, such as Good News Translation, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, include “the LORD” in the text here. This is perhaps the best course for translators to take as it removes the ambiguity of literal translations such as Revised Standard Version, New International Version, and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh. Other versions such as Bible de Jérusalem and Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible indicate in a footnote that they regard the LORD as the subject, and this is another valid way to solve the problem.

Joshua the high priest: See the comments on Hag 1.1.

Standing before the angel of the LORD: This expression suggests standing in the manner in which a defendant stands before a judge in court. The Hebrew does not state an exact location for this scene. Some commentators understand this to be simply heaven (Mason); others think in more detail of a heavenly court (Baldwin, R. L. Smith, Meyers & Meyers, Stuhlmueller [1988], Merrill) or even the gate of heaven (Bible de Jérusalem and Jerusalem Bible/ New Jerusalem Bible in footnotes). Fortunately translators do not need to state such details. For comments on the angel of the LORD, see 1.8, 11.

Satan standing at his right hand: Satan is literally “the Satan,” as in Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, that is “the accuser” or “the adversary.” In the Old Testament this label refers to the role of an angelic accuser rather than to a personal tempter as in the New Testament. Here “the Satan” is a kind of counsel for the prosecution, and as such, is under God’s control. Compare Job 1.6-12; Job 2.1-7. Some modern versions translate Satan as “the Adversary” (Moffatt, New English Bible, New Revised Standard Version footnote) or “the Accuser” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) while others retain the more traditional “Satan” (New Jerusalem Bible, Revised English Bible, New Revised Standard Version, Contemporary English Version, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Biblen: Det Gamle og Det Nye Testamente). In cultures where Christianity has only recently arrived, the Christian community may not yet have agreed upon a suitable term for Satan. Translators (in consultation with the churches) should carefully select a term that adequately translates the idea of Satan, as in this context. It will be necessary, however, to have an item in the glossary or a footnote (as do Good News Translation and others) explaining who Satan is, especially in his role as the opponent of God’s people. In A Handbook on the Book of Job, Reyburn offers the following advice on translation possibilities for Satan:
(1) transliteration with translation; for example, “Satan the accuser”;
(2) translation only; for example, “the accuser, the tester.” Bible en français courant employs (1) on the first occurrence … and then drops the name “Satan” in subsequent verses. SPCL and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible use solution (2) throughout.

In the phrase standing at his right hand, his refers to Joshua the high priest, not to the angel of the LORD. The right hand of the defendant was the traditional place in court for an accuser to stand (compare Psa 109.6). Since this will not be familiar to many readers, Good News Translation does not mention the right hand but makes its significance clear by saying, “ready to bring an accusation.” It may be helpful for translators in other languages to make this meaning clear, but they can include “at his right hand” as well, as Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, and Contemporary English Version do.

To accuse him: In Hebrew the verb translated to accuse is a form of the same root that the name Satan comes from. Him refers of course to Joshua. Alternative ways of expressing this phrase are “ready to accuse him of doing wrong,” “ready to say that he has done wrong,” or even idiomatically, for example, “ready to break words on him.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

And again I lifted my eyes and saw, and behold: Compare with 1.18; 2.1; 5.1, and see the comments on 1.18.

Four chariots came out: The number four suggests the four main points of the compass, that is to say, it stands for completeness. Compare the four horns and four smiths in the second vision (1.18-21) and the four winds in the third (2.6). People normally used chariots for military rather than civil purposes and their appearance here suggests some aggressive intention. No drivers are mentioned, but if necessary, translators may assume that each chariot had a driver (see the notes on Hag 2.22). In some languages it may be helpful to state the number of horses pulling each chariot, normally two (see the discussion on the next verse). A possible model, then, is the following: “I saw four chariots, each pulled by two horses, coming.”

From between two mountains: As in the case of the first vision, some scholars have suggested that the setting is to be found somewhere near Jerusalem, so that the two mountains may be Mount Zion and the Mount of Olives. However, in a vision we do not necessarily expect to find exact geographical descriptions and translators should not try to identify the mountains. Other scholars have linked the two mountains with traditional pictures of the entrance to heaven in Babylonian mythology. This may be true, but it is better not to express it in the translation as Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch has done. (Compare the comments on the “myrtle trees” in 1.8.)

The mountains were mountains of bronze: This description suggests that they are not meant to be identified with any particular mountains in the Jerusalem area. On the other hand, it may support the idea that the vision draws on popular mythology. In Hebrew this statement forms a separate clause, but if it is translated as a separate clause in other languages, it may become too prominent. The fact that the mountains are of bronze is a background detail that is not mentioned again. Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version have therefore incorporated this clause into the previous one, and say simply “from between two bronze mountains” (similarly Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). This may be the best approach in some other languages also.

The Hebrew word translated bronze in Revised Standard Version is “brass” in King James Version and Revised Version, and “copper” in New English Bible/ Revised English Bible and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh. In languages that do not have many words for different metals, this may be a problem. Translators should remember that it is not the exact composition of the metal that is in focus, but the fact that the mountains were not just ordinary mountains. If suitable terms for “bronze” or “copper” are not available, a general term like “made of metal” would be adequate.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

And the streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing in its streets: Revised Standard Version here follows the sentence pattern of the Hebrew in a way that is very unnatural in English. Good News Translation uses a much more normal structure and says, “And the streets will again be full of boys and girls playing.” The word that Good News Translation here renders as “streets” is the same word that it rendered as “squares” in the previous verse. There is no need for this change, and indeed it would be better to use “squares” both times, as Jerusalem Bible and New Jerusalem Bible do, since there is more room to play in a square than in the streets. But translators should try to select a term describing a place in the culture where children are normally expected to play. In situations where there is no such suitable term, it may be easier just to say “The towns will be full of boys and girls playing outdoors.”

Boys and girls may be translated with a single term for “children” if this is more natural. The emphasis is on the playing rather than on the sex of the children.

Verses 4 and 5 together give a picture of a situation that was very different from the reality of Zechariah’s own day. The community in which he lived was small and probably consisted mostly of people of working age. Such old people and children as there were had neither the leisure nor the peace to enjoy sitting at ease or playing.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The LORD of hosts will protect them: The Hebrew word translated protect is related to the word for a shield, so some versions say “The LORD of Hosts will be their shield” (New English Bible; compare New American Bible) or “the LORD Almighty will shield them” (New International Version; similarly Beck). Them is identified by Good News Translation as “his people.” For The LORD of hosts, see the notes on Hag 1.2.

They shall devour and tread down the slingers: As the Revised Standard Version footnote makes clear, it is translating an altered text. The Hebrew literally says, “they will devour and tread down the slingstones” (similarly New American Bible, Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible/ Revised English Bible).

This is a somewhat unexpected expression, but it makes adequate sense, and there is no need to suggest a change in the traditional text (compare Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament). This is a poetic way of saying that the LORD’s people “will destroy their enemies” (Good News Translation), though the loss of the figure of speech destroys the poetic impact.

There are other ways of interpreting the text. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh takes the slingstones as the subject, and says, “[His] slingstones shall devour and conquer” (similarly Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, 1. Edition). Some scholars understand God’s slingstones to be a reference to hailstones. New International Version has “They will destroy and overcome with slingstones” (similarly New Living Translation), though it is not certain whether the Hebrew can really be understood that way. The verbs devour and tread down are a figurative exaggeration. If such terms would be misunderstood, translators could say something clearer, such as “they will withstand and defeat their enemies who attack them by slinging stones.” Such a rendering is close to the meaning of Revised Standard Version, but it arrives at this interpretation by recognizing that the stones stand for the people who sling them. This is a translational adjustment rather than a textual alteration. Slings for hurling stones at the enemy were a recognized form of armament in ancient times, and skilled slingers could be very accurate (Jdg 20.16). It was with a sling and a stone that David defeated Goliath (1 Sam 17.48-50).

They shall drink their blood like wine: The words their blood are taken from the ancient Greek translation. Although New American Bible, Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, and New Revised Standard Version also follow the Greek here, this text is not to be recommended (Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, Hebrew Old Testament Text Project). The Revised Standard Version rendering raises various problems. Nowhere in the Old Testament are victorious soldiers described as drinking the blood of their enemies, and for Israelites to do this would be doubly abhorrent, since the Law forbad them to drink even animal blood (see the comments on verse 7). The Hebrew text as it stands means “They will drink and roar as with wine” (New International Version); that is, “… shout as drunks do.” This is a satisfactory meaning in the context of a victorious army and can be retained. The text does not say they will actually be drunk, but that they will shout in celebration as if they were. Good News Translation has “They will shout in battle like drunk men” (British edition “… drunken men”; Australian edition “… men who are drunk”), or translators may say something like “As they fight they will shout like drunk men [or, men who have drunk too much wine].” Note that Good News Translation also tries to follow the Greek text with “and will shed the blood of their enemies,” but translators should not follow this example. New English Bible and Revised English Bible translate with a colloquial expression “they shall/will be roaring drunk as if with wine,” but this is not satisfactory, because if people were “roaring drunk,” then actual alcohol is involved and the “as if” is not appropriate. Wine is a fermented drink made from grapes (see Hag 1.6). If it is unknown in a culture, something like “intoxicating drink” may be used.

And be full like a bowl, drenched like the corners of the altar: This is a reference to the way in which sacrificial ritual was carried out. The blood of the sacrificed animal was collected in a bowl and splashed on the altar, including on the projecting corners of the altar (sometimes referred to as “horns,” as in 1 Kgs 1.50; 1 Kgs 2.28), which were regarded as its most sacred parts. The bowls (or, basins) are mentioned in Exo 38.3 and Num 4.14. The splashing of the altar with blood is described in Exo 29.10-21; Lev 1.11; Lev 3.8; Lev 4.7, 18; Lev 8.15; Lev 16.18. Any bowl used to catch the blood of a large animal like a goat or a bull would quickly become full, and the altar that was regularly used in sacrifices could well be described as drenched or “soaked” (Jerusalem Bible).

To sum up, then, the verse as a whole can be taken in two ways. In the first, it describes a situation in which the people of God are victorious in battle, drinking the blood of their defeated enemies until they are soaked in it, and so to speak drunk with it. This interpretation is represented in Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, New American Bible, Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible, and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, but it has two problems. One is that it depends on following the Greek text rather than the Hebrew, and the other is that to speak of the LORD’s people drinking human blood would have been totally repugnant to the original audience. This interpretation cannot be recommended.

The second way of taking the verse is to see it as describing the LORD’s people as being victorious through his protection, and then celebrating with a banquet that will be as noisy as if the participants were drunk. This view is represented in New English Bible/ Revised English Bible, New International Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Contemporary English Version, and Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament. It also has the support of such scholars as Lamarche, Baldwin, and R. L. Smith. It avoids both the problems of the other view and is to be preferred. However, the reference to drunkenness must be handled in a sensitive way so that it will not be misunderstood.

It is hard to determine how Good News Translation arrived at its translation. Good News Translation seems to have followed the Greek text in reading “blood” but has avoided having the LORD’s people drinking blood. It seems to be an uncomfortable compromise between the two views described above, and is not a good example to follow.

A possible translation model for the verse is:

• The LORD Almighty will protect his people like a shield. They will withstand and conquer those who attack them by slinging stones. Then they will drink in celebration, and shout like people who are drunk [or, drunk with wine]. They will be as full as a bowl used to hold the blood of sacrificed animals. They will be drenched like the corners of the altar itself.

As the Good News Translation footnote suggests, no rendering of this verse can be entirely free from uncertainties.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Here begins the direct quotation of the LORD’s words, which extends to the end of 13.6. The quotation starts with the Hebrew word hinneh (Revised Standard Version Lo), which functions as a discourse unit opening marker. The word translated Lo here is rendered as “Behold” in 14.1, where it occurs with the same function. If their language has a suitable term, translators should try to use it consistently in both places to show its function as a discourse opening marker. New Revised Standard Version translates the term as “See” in both places, and New Jerusalem Bible has “Look” in both places. Another possibility is “Listen,” though a verb of seeing seems more appropriate than a verb of hearing. Several modern English versions have no equivalent term in either place (New English Bible/ Revised English Bible, Good News Translation, New International Version, Contemporary English Version) and there may be other languages that have no convenient equivalent. If this is the case, translators should try to use some other rhetorical device to show that a major unit is beginning here. In certain languages it may be possible to use an ideophone to mark this particular unit of discourse. See also the notes on 14.1.

I am about to make Jerusalem a cup of reeling to all the peoples round about: The form translated am about to make is a present participle, and thus carries a sense of imminent action. A cup of reeling means “a cup filled with a drink that will cause anyone who drinks it to reel or stagger.” The contents of the cup would normally be strong wine (compare Good News Translation “cup of wine”). This is a picture of God’s anger and punishment, and occurs frequently in the Old Testament (see also Isa 51.17, 21-23; Jer 25.15-29; Hab 2.15-16). Jerusalem will become a source of punishment to all the peoples round about (compare Jer 25.19-26), that is, the neighboring nations. The meaning is expressed more fully and clearly in Good News Translation “I will make Jerusalem like a cup of wine; the nations around her will drink and stagger like drunks” (“drunken men” in the British edition). In some languages “a cup of wine” will be expressed as “a cup containing [or, full of] wine.” For a comment on “wine,” see 9.15.

The word translated cup here is not the usual word, but another word that can also mean “threshold.” It appears that the ancient Greek and Latin versions have understood it this way, and some modern scholars also support this view. The only available modern version that seems to have incorporated it is New English Bible, which says “I am making the steep approaches to Jerusalem slippery for all the nations pressing round her.” There is no advantage in this rendering, and Revised English Bible has abandoned it, saying instead, “I am about to make Jerusalem an intoxicating cup….” Translators are advised to take the meaning “cup.”

It will be against Judah also in the siege against Jerusalem: This sentence is obscure in more than one way, and the problems in interpreting it go back to the ancient versions. First, it is not clear what the subject of It will be is. As translated in Revised Standard Version, it would be the cup of reeling, and the overall meaning would be that Judah will join with the enemies who were besieging Jerusalem, and will share in their punishment. Second, there seem to be too many prepositions. Among ancient versions, the Greek and Syriac apparently translated a Hebrew text that said “in Judah there will be a siege,” with no preposition before “siege.” On the other hand, the Latin version and the Aramaic Targum apparently translated a Hebrew text that said “Judah will be in a siege,” with no preposition before “Judah.” It makes sense to speak of a city like Jerusalem being under siege, but it is much harder to envisage a siege against a whole region like Judah (unless this statement is taken as a deliberate exaggeration for rhetorical effect). Both of these ancient traditions also contain the final words “against Jerusalem,” which do nothing to make the situation clearer.

Some modern scholars propose shifting the words against Judah also to verse 1 to form part of the introduction to the section. Thus New Jerusalem Bible has in verse 1 “The word of Yahweh about Israel (and also about Judah)” with a footnote to explain the change. Such a change is pure conjecture, however. It has no support in the textual tradition and cannot be recommended. Other modern scholars suggest deleting some or all of this sentence, as Jerusalem Bible has done. Some translations try to avoid the problems with a vague rendering like “Judah will be caught up in the siege of Jerusalem” (New English Bible/ Revised English Bible) or “Judah will be besieged as well as Jerusalem” (New International Version; compare Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version).

The traditional Jewish interpretation of this passage is that the people of Judah will indeed be involved in the siege of Jerusalem on the side of the enemy, but only because they are forced to join that side. During the course of the battle, they will change sides, as described in verse 4. Judah, it should be noted, is also pictured as fighting against Jerusalem in 14.4. This interpretation takes the existing Hebrew text seriously and yields a sense that is compatible with the context. None of the modern suggestions offers a more satisfactory solution, so translators are advised to follow the rendering of Revised Standard Version, and to interpret it along the lines of Jewish tradition (compare Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament and Hebrew Old Testament Text Project). A translation model for this verse is:

• See, I am going to make Jerusalem like a cup of wine. All the peoples around her will drink from it, and then begin to stagger. The people of Judah will drink from it too, when they are compelled to help the enemy besiege [or, surround and attack] Jerusalem.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Even Judah will fight against Jerusalem: There is disagreement going back to ancient times about the meaning of the preposition that Revised Standard Version translates against. The Septuagint and Syriac versions translate it as “in,” and many modern versions and commentators prefer a sense of place, “in” or “at.” The Vulgate translates it as “against,” and the Targum also understands the preposition in a hostile sense. Modern versions and commentators following this interpretation include Revised Version, Moffatt, Revised Standard Version, New American Bible, Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible, Contemporary English Version, G. A. Smith, Mitchell, Cashdan, and Mason. Advocates of the first view argue that the context does not suggest any likelihood of conflict between Judah and Jerusalem. Advocates of the second view point to the use of the same preposition with the same verb in the sense of “against” in verse 3, and to the mention of Judah opposing Jerusalem in 12.2-5 (see the notes on 12.2).

None of the available commentaries pay attention to the Hebrew particle gam at the beginning of the verse (Revised Standard Version even). Its presence here puts focus on the following noun Judah in a way that prepares the reader for a statement that is contrary to expectation. It seems therefore that the meaning against is more probable because it is surprising (though not unprecedented) for Judah to be involved in fighting against Jerusalem. However, if the text is punctuated as in Revised Standard Version, with this clause forming the concluding part of the sentence that began in verse 13, then the strife between Judah and Jerusalem can be seen as a result of the general panic and confusion. Contemporary English Version expresses this well with “until even the people of Judah turn against those in Jerusalem.” Compare Lacocque and New English Bible “Judah too shall join in the fray in Jerusalem.”

Since both translation options are fully valid, translators are advised to put one in their text and the other in a footnote. The preference of this Handbook is for against in the text and “in” or “at” in the footnote, as in Revised Version. Good News Translation “The men of Judah will fight to defend Jerusalem” does not seem to be justified.

The wealth of all the nations round about shall be collected: The picture here is that the LORD’s people, now victorious because of his intervention, will collect booty from their defeated enemies. This will include what was originally taken from them in verse 1, and will demonstrate that the situation described in verses 1-2 has been permanently reversed (compare Ezek 39.10). All the nations round about are the same people as those mentioned in verse 12. Their wealth is defined more fully in the following phrase as gold, silver, and garments in great abundance.

In some languages it will be helpful, or even necessary, to express the verb collected as an active form. Possible restructurings are “The people of Jerusalem will collect all the riches of the surrounding nations, vast amounts of gold, silver, and clothing” and “The victors will gather up all the wealth of the enemy nations around. This will include huge quantities of gold, silver, and clothes.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .