The long noun phrases every one of the people and all the people of the Tower of Shechem mark the end of this short episode.

So every one of the people cut down his bundle: So is a good rendering of the Hebrew waw conjunction here, since it introduces the consequence of Abimelech’s order. This clause reads literally “And they cut off also all of the people [each] man a branch.” Revised Standard Version and most other versions omit the word “also,” but it should be kept if possible, since “also all” forms an inclusio around this verse. For example, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “So each of the troops also lopped off a bough.” Every one of the people again ironically refers to the troops or men who were with Abimelech. There is emphasis here in Hebrew on the fact that everyone did as he was told, so we might say “each one of his men” or simply “each one.” For cut down his bundle, see verse 9.48.

And following Abimelech is literally “and they went after Abimelech,” meaning either Abimelech’s men followed him down the mountain, or they did as he did in the text that follows. Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh think his men marched down the mountain behind him, while Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, and Revised English Bible think they followed his example by propping the branches against the temple stronghold in Shechem. Translators will have to decide which interpretation to follow here. However, we note there is a considerable gap in the event line, so having the men come down the mountain behind Abimelech seems more natural here.

Put it against the stronghold is literally “and they put against the stronghold.” The pronoun “they” refers to Abimelech’s men. But it is clear they are watching him and doing what he does. So it may be a better to say “Then Abimelech and his men put….” Once again the Hebrew word for put is a prominent feature of the Abimelech story (see verse 9.48, where it is rendered “laid”). Here it may be rendered “piled” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version), “propped,” or “leaned.” The pronoun it is not in the Hebrew text, but Revised Standard Version supplies it for naturalness. A better pronoun here is “them” (New International Version), since multiple branches are in view. Contemporary English Version says “the branches.” For the stronghold, see verse 9.46. The text does not say what the stronghold itself was made of. If it was built out of rock or stone, it would be hard to burn, so it is possible that it was made out of wood and brick. If it was a stone structure, then the branches would have probably been set at the door (compare verse 9.52).

And they set the stronghold on fire over them: The pronoun they refers to Abimelech and his men. Set … on fire is an expression that should be easy to translate. However, it is difficult to understand exactly what happened here. If the stronghold was made out of wood, then the men would have set fire to the branches leaning against it, and the building itself would have eventually caught fire and burned. However, the Hebrew preposition rendered over causes a problem here. This preposition can also mean “against,” as in against the stronghold. If the leaders of the tower were hiding in a tunnel or crypt below the temple, then the fire could have been set over them. Then presumably they would have died from the heat and smoke, or they could have actually burned to death as that bottom structure caught fire and burned. New International Version takes this approach by saying “and set it [the stronghold] on fire over the people inside.” Good News Translation takes a more general approach with “They set it [the stronghold] on fire, with the people inside.”

So that all the people of the Tower of Shechem also died, about a thousand men and women: This verse ends on a sad and solemn note in Hebrew, which is literally “and they too died, all the men of the Tower of Shechem, around 1,000, man and woman.” If possible, translators should try to imitate this tone. So that renders the Hebrew waw conjunction. It is probably better to find a connector in the target language which is used to signal the end of an episode, such as “Thus” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or “And so.” The Hebrew word rendered people is not the word used throughout this passage, which normally refers to the people of Israel. Here the term is ʾish, the generic word for “man,” which forms an inclusio around this verse. The final phrase of this verse makes it clear that these people were both male and female. For the Tower of Shechem, see verse 9.46. All the people of the Tower of Shechem may be translated “all the people who had gathered in the Tower of Shechem,” “all the people who were in the fort at Shechem,” or “all the people who lived in Migdal-Shechem.” Also died means that the people in the Tower of Shechem also died like the rest of the people of Shechem.

About a thousand men and women died in the fire. In the book of Judges round and sometimes symbolic numbers are often cited, especially the numbers one, seventy, and ten thousand. Most languages will have an expression for a thousand.

A translation model for this verse is:

• So each man also cut off a branch and followed Abimelech down the mountain. Each one laid his branch against the temple stronghold. Then they set fire to it with the people inside. So everyone inside the fort of Shechem also died. Around a thousand people died that day, both men and women.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

So Jephthah went with the elders of Gilead: The promise of the elders convinces Jephthah to go with them. He leaves the land of Tob and goes back to Gilead to live. As this episode closes, Jephthah and the elders of Gilead again appear in full noun form, which is typical in Hebrew narrative and in many other languages. Translators should use forms that are appropriate in their language.

And the people made him head and leader over them: According to Jephthah’s agreement with the elders, if he was successful in his military campaign, he would become the leader of Gilead. However, this happens even before the battle begins. Significantly it is not just the elders, but the people who make Jephthah their leader. The Hebrew term rendered people (ʿam) is the common one used to refer to the Israelites, the LORD’s people (see verse 2.4). Made renders the key Hebrew verb meaning “put” (sim), which played an important role in the story of Abimelech (see verse 9.25). In verse 10.18 the leaders of Gilead speak of their need for a head, while later in verse 11.6 they speak of the need for a military commander or leader. The use of these two words shows that Jephthah is not assuming a temporary role of leadership. Being the head implies he will lead Israel after the war is won.

And Jephthah spoke all his words before the LORD at Mizpah: This clause seems to refer to an official ceremony or solemn occasion marking the time when Jephthah became the leader. No such ceremony is mentioned in relation to the other judges. Jephthah spoke all his words may refer to vows he made or to a repetition of the agreement between him and the elders (verse 11.9-10). The text does not specify what words are in view, but he pronounced them before the LORD at Mizpah. Before the LORD means “in the LORD’s presence,” which might indicate that they were in a sanctuary or holy place at Mizpah (see verse 10.17). Good News Translation says “Jephthah stated his terms at Mizpah in the presence of the LORD,” and Revised English Bible has “And at Mizpah, in the presence of the LORD, Jephthah repeated the terms he had laid down.” We may also say “Then at the sacred place in Mizpah, Jephthah repeated what he had promised in the presence of the LORD.” As noted in these models, the Hebrew waw conjunction at the beginning of this clause may be rendered “And” or “Then,” or be omitted.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Some time may have passed since the events recorded in verse 13.1-24, but in Hebrew this verse begins only with the waw conjunction (literally “And”). Revised Standard Version does not render this conjunction. However, Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version say “One day,” while New Revised Standard Version and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh begin with “Once,” both good models. Translators should look for an expression that can begin a new episode.

Samson went down to Timnah: Names rather than pronouns are often used in Hebrew at the beginning of episodes and paragraphs, thus Samson is mentioned by name. The Hebrew verb rendered went down (yarad) is a keyword in this section. Though Samson probably descended to Timnah, the direction is not very relevant to the story, so translators may use any verb that fits the context, for example, “went” (Contemporary English Version). Timnah was a Philistine town probably located between Zorah and Ekron, not far from Beth-shemesh (see verse 19.43). Since this is the first time this town is mentioned, translators may say “a town called Timnah” if necessary. Both this clause and the next one are independent clauses in Hebrew, but some translators may prefer to cast the first one as a dependent temporal clause, for example, “One day when Samson went to Timnah….”

And at Timnah he saw one of the daughters of the Philistines is literally “and he saw a woman in Timnah from the daughters of the Philistines.” Revised Standard Version places the phrase at Timnah at the beginning of this clause. However, in Hebrew it is not in this emphatic position. The repetition of Timnah gives a folktale-like style to the story, but also puts emphasis on the fact that Samson is looking for a wife where he should not be looking. If the repetition is acceptable, translators can keep it. If not, at Timnah may be rendered “there” (New International Version, Revised English Bible). Here the verb saw means not just that Samson saw this woman, but that he “noticed” (Good News Translation) her. He found her attractive. Revised English Bible changes the order of this clause, saying “and there a woman, one of the Philistines, caught his notice.” More idiomatically in English, we might say she “caught his eye.” The narrator does not say whether Samson actually met her or whether he noticed her from a distance. One of the daughters of the Philistines is literally “a woman … from the daughters of the Philistines,” which is an idiomatic way of referring to a Philistine woman, who here is a young woman of marriageable age. Translators can refer to “a young Philistine woman” or “a Philistine girl,” according to uses in the target language. For the Philistines, see verse 3.3.

Translation models for this verse are:

• Once Samson went down to Timnah. There he saw a young Philistine woman.

• One day, when Samson went to the town of Timnah, a Philistine girl caught his eye.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

When he came to Lehi: Though in reality, some men of Judah are bringing Samson bound to the Philistine camp, the narrator presents the scene as if Samson is coming of his own free will. Lehi is where the Philistines were camped in Judah (see verse 15.8). The town’s name means “jawbone,” and now this meaning will come into special focus as it occurs eight times in verse 15.14-20. Later in this episode the narrator will explain how this town got its name. Here it is best rendered Lehi, as in verse 15.8. Since there is a change in location here, Good News Translation inserts a paragraph break. If translators follow this model, it will be helpful to use Samson’s name instead of the pronoun he, for example, “And as Samson approached Lehi.”

The Philistines came shouting to meet him is literally “and the Philistines shouted to meet him.” As the Philistines saw Samson approaching, they became agitated. Good News Translation says “the Philistines came running toward him, shouting at him,” but it is far more likely that they shouted in triumph, as their enemy was brought bound before them (compare Jer 50.15). To meet him describes the Philistines and the people of Judah moving toward each other. The Philistines were coming from their camp near Lehi, and the people of Judah were coming with Samson from the cave at Etam Rock. However, the text specifies him, since the main object of interest is Samson himself. Revised English Bible renders this clause as “the Philistines met him with shouts of triumph,” and New Jerusalem Bible has “the Philistines came running towards him with triumphant shouts.” These are good models to follow.

And the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him: This is a high point in this episode. When Samson is seemingly at his weakest, the LORD empowers him. See the comments on verse 14.6.

And the ropes which were on his arms …: This clause makes it clear that the ropes tying Samson were on his arms. The Hebrew word for arms can refer to a person’s arms, wrists, or hands. Since there were two ropes, one could have tied his wrists and the other could have encircled his upper arms and torso.

Became as flax that has caught fire: This simile says the strong new ropes became weak and ineffective. Flax is a small plant whose stalks are dried, split and combed to produce fibers that can be woven to make linen cloth. These stalks are quite inflammable, so they burn easily. That has caught fire is literally “that they have burned in the fire” (see comments on verse 12.1 for this redundant expression). The point of this comparison is that the ropes became weak or even dissolved under Samson’s mighty strength that came from the LORD’s Spirit. Translators will have to reflect on how to best present the comparison, especially if flax is unknown. A related but common term can be used. For example, Contemporary English Version says “as though they were pieces of burnt cloth.” Good News Translation is similar with “as if they were burnt thread.”

And his bonds melted off his hands: This clause continues the imagery of fire. The verb melted describes the effect of fire. The Hebrew root for melted is used elsewhere in the Bible to speak of snow melting (Psalm 147.18) and manna dissolving (Exo 16.21). Here it is used figuratively to describe the weakening or falling away of Samson’s bonds. Off his hands is literally “from on his hands.” The narrator only speaks of hands here even though Samson’s arms may have been bound also. The use of this word is very appropriate at this high point in the story. If the figurative language of this clause is not effective, translators may say “and the ties on his hands fell away [or, dropped].” Contemporary English Version‘s rendering is quite effective: “and Samson broke the ropes, as though they were pieces of burnt cloth.” However this rendering says more than the text. A better model is “and the ropes that bound his arms and hands fell away like pieces of burnt cloth.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• When Samson reached Lehi, the Philistines came out to meet him with shouts of triumph. Then Yahweh’s power suddenly took hold of him. The ropes that bound his hands fell off like pieces of cloth burned by fire.

• When the people of Judah brought Samson to Lehi, the Philistines came running, shouting with joy. But then the spirit of the LORD seized him and the ropes that bound him became like dust and fell off his hands.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The “one-two” wordplay continues here as Samson grasps two pillars, one with his right hand and the other with his left.

And Samson grasped the two middle pillars upon which the house rested: And, which renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, may be translated “Then” (New International Version) or “So” (Good News Translation). Some versions omit this connector (Contemporary English Version), but translators should use a transition that fits this high point in the narrative. The Hebrew verb rendered grasped usually includes the idea of turning and twisting something. Indeed, there are two possible interpretations of this verb here, one being that Samson “embraced” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) the two pillars to pull them inward and bring them down. Revised English Bible follows this interpretation with “put his arms round.” The other possibility is that Samson “put his hands on” (New Living Translation) both the columns to push them outward and thus bring them down. The translation of grasped will depend on which view is taken. A more neutral rendering would be “took hold of” (Good News Translation, New Jerusalem Bible) or “grabbed.”

Clearly there were more than two pillars holding up the roof of Dagon’s temple, but Samson grabs the two middle pillars upon which the house rested. See verse 16.26. Obviously the two middle pillars are the crucial ones. New International Version calls them “the two central pillars,” and Good News Translation, “the two middle columns.”

And he leaned his weight upon them: This rendering seems to confirm the idea that probably Samson pushed out rather in. Samson pushed against the two central pillars to bring down the temple. See the discussion on verse 16.26. However, the Hebrew verb rendered leaned his weight is different from the one translated “lean” there. It may be expressed as “braced himself” (New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible) or “pushed” (similarly New Living Translation).

His right hand on the one and his left hand on the other is literally “one in/by his right and one in/by his left.” Somewhat surprisingly, the word for hand does not occur in Hebrew at this high point, but usually the Hebrew words for right and left are understood to refer to the right and left hands. Sometimes these words are used to refer to directions, as in a move “to/toward the right and to/toward the left,” but that does not seem the meaning here. Right and left are important notions in this book (see verse 3.15), and in the Old Testament they often express the notion of totality. While this may be the case here, with Samson going all out to destroy Israel’s enemies, from a practical point of view, it is clear that Samson has figured out the best way to knock out the support of the large roof and kill the largest number of Philistines he possibly can.

Translation models for this verse are:

• Then Samson reached out to the two central pillars supporting the temple and pushed toward his right and toward his left.

• Samson put his hands on the two middle columns supporting the roof of the building. Then with his right hand, he pushed one side, and with his left, the other.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The irony continues here since the Levite forgets what Micah has done for him and willingly goes off with the Danites.

And the priest’s heart was glad: This is the Levite’s reaction to the proposal of the Danites. It pleases him, so he immediately accepts it. And renders well the Hebrew waw conjunction, which introduces the Levite’s reaction here. However, in many languages it may be necessary to begin with “At this proposal” or “Hearing this.” The priest’s heart was glad is literally “the heart of the priest was good,” so this clause links back to the Danites’ question at the end of 18.19, where the Hebrew root meaning “good” is rendered “better.” The narrator again calls the Levite a priest, continuing the irony. In Hebrew the heart is the seat of thought, will, and emotions (see verse 5.9). In this context, however, it is used as the seat of emotions. Translators can use any idiomatic expression to describe the Levite’s joy. We might say “the priest was [very] happy” or “the priest was overjoyed.” If at one point the Levite feared for his life, he is now happy to learn that he will not be killed. Many scholars note how quickly his decision was made. Obviously he is an opportunist, as his loyalty to Micah quickly fades.

He took the ephod, and the teraphim, and the graven image: This clause begins with the Hebrew waw conjunction, omitted by Revised Standard Version, but which some languages may prefer to express. For example, Good News Translation uses the connector “so.” Once again the verb took is in focus (see verse 18.17). However, now it is not the Danites who are removing the sacred items but the priest! If possible, the same verb took should be used throughout this passage. To convey some of the irony, we might say “the priest himself took [or, picked up]….” For the ephod, and the teraphim, and the graven image, see verse 17.3, verse 5. Note that here “the molten image” is missing, but this does not seem to have great significance.

And went in the midst of the people is literally “and he came in the middle of the people,” that is, the Levite joined the Danites. The Hebrew word for people (ʿam) is often used to refer to all the people of Israel (see verse 2.4), but here it refers to a part of the tribe of Dan, intent on stealing from a fellow Israelite. Translators will have to decide whether they can keep this ironic reference to the people, or whether they have to specify “the Danites.” New Jerusalem Bible says “and went off among the people,” but New International Version expresses a slightly different nuance: “and went along with the people.” In any case, this clause underlines the Levite’s willingness to leave Micah to now serve the Danites.

Translation models for this verse are:

• Hearing this, the priest was very happy, and he took the ephod, the household gods and the carved image, and joined the Danites.

• At this, the priest was overjoyed, so he took the ephod, the household gods and the carved image, and left with the Danites.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

But the men would not listen to him: But is a good rendering of the Hebrew waw conjunction here, since the men of Gibeah refused to accept the old man’s suggestion. Presumably they refused because they wanted the Levite and not the women. The Hebrew verb for listen (shamaʿ) has the sense of “obey” or “do as asked” here (see verse 2.2). The pronoun him refers to the old man. We might say “But the men refused to listen [or, accept his offer].”

So the man seized his concubine: Who is the man in this clause? In this passage this expression is used to refer both to the Levite and to the old man, though usually the old man is referred to by a longer or different expression (see verse 19.23). The last masculine singular form refers to the old man, and he has already offered the Levite’s concubine to the men, seemingly without any discussion with her husband. However, it is also possible and perhaps more likely that it is the Levite who seized his concubine. Seeing that the old man was willing to offer his own virgin daughter, the Levite may have impulsively forced his wife outside. Many versions accept this latter interpretation by rendering the man as “the Levite” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible) or “the husband” (New American Bible). Like Revised Standard Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh preserves the ambiguity here, but it may be better to simply make a choice and follow through with it in the next clause. Seized renders the same Hebrew verb translated “made … stay” in verse 19.4 (see comments there), coming from a root meaning “strength.” Good News Translation and New International Version use the verb “took,” which seems too weak in this context. A better rendering is “grabbed” (Contemporary English Version).

And put her out to them: Put … out renders the same Hebrew verb translated “bring out” in verse 19.22 (see comments there). The subject here would be the same as in the previous clause, either the old man or the Levite. The pronoun her refers to the Levite’s concubine. Even though the old man also offered his daughter, evidently only the concubine was put outside. The pronoun them refers to the men who surrounded the old man’s house. This clause may be rendered “and pushed her outside to them.”

And they knew her: Even though the men refused the offer of the old man, once the concubine was outside, they forgot about her husband and attacked her. The Hebrew verb rendered knew appears in verse 19.22, where it refers to a homosexual act. Here it refers to the gang-rape of the concubine by the men of Gibeah. Contemporary English Version is very direct: “The men raped her.”

And abused her all night until the morning: The Hebrew verb rendered abused means “deal ruthlessly” or “treat badly,” but in this context it implies sexual abuse. Translators will have to find a term that will imply sexual mistreatment. All night until the morning is an emphatic temporal expression, stressing the continuous abuse of this woman. We might say “all night long until the morning.”

And as the dawn began to break, they let her go is literally “and they sent her away when the dawn came up.” Revised Standard Version reverses the order of these two clauses in Hebrew, which other languages may prefer to do as well.

As the dawn began to break adds a note of sadness to the story. Usually a new day is a sign of hope. Here it signals the end of a life. Thus this may be yet another touch of irony added by the storyteller. The Hebrew word for dawn refers to the very early time in the morning when the first light can be seen. Some languages will say “when the sun came up” or “when morning came.”

They let her go renders the key Hebrew verb meaning “send” (shalach), which is often used at the beginning or end of important conflicts (see verse 1.25). The text here really means “they sent her away,” but as will become evident, she is in no state to go very far. We might even say “they threw her aside.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• But the men didn’t listen to the old man. So the Levite grabbed his concubine and pushed her out to them. They gang-raped her and abused her all night. Then in the morning, as the sun came up, they let her go.

• But the men rejected the old man’s offer, and the Levite seized his concubine and shoved her outside to them. They raped and abused her all night long. Then early in the morning as the dawn was breaking, they abandoned her.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .