And he said to them: The young Levite responds to the Danites. The general verb said may be rendered “answered” (Good News Translation) or “replied” (Contemporary English Version).

Thus and thus has Micah dealt with me is literally “Like this and like this Micah did to me.” It is hard to know if the Levite really spoke these words (a kind of vague summary) or if he enumerated his benefits (see verse 17.10). A similar Hebrew idiom occurs in verse 2 Sam 17.15 and verse 1 Kgs 14.5. We might say “Oh, Micah has done several things for me” or “Micah has done quite a few things for me.” Good News Translation‘s “I have an arrangement with Micah” does not render the text well. Another way of handling this clause would be to use indirect speech: “The Levite told them what Micah had done for him.”

He has hired me: The first thing the Levite notes is that Micah provided him with employment. For the Hebrew verb rendered hired, see verse 9.4. Translators can find a natural equivalent in their language, for example, “he employs me” or “he pays me.”

And I have become his priest: The Levite makes it clear that Micah has hired him as a priest (see verse 17.12). We could say “he took me on as his priest” or “he hired me to serve him as his priest.” Some commentators note that the Levites were not truly priests, but more like assistants, so this answer may be yet another indication that something is not right with the system that Micah and the Levite have put in place.

Translation models for this verse are:

• So the Levite told them what Micah had done, that he had hired him to become his priest.

• And he replied, “Oh, Micah has done a number of things for me, and he has given me a job as his priest.”

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 .

And on the fifth day he arose early in the morning to depart is literally “And he arose early in the morning on the fifth day to go.” Once again the Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And can be omitted, with the temporal information on the fifth day being moved to the front of the sentence. The pronoun he refers to the Levite, but his whole group is in view here, so it may be rendered “the Levite and his group” or “the Levite and his concubine.” For arose early in the morning, see verse 19.5.

And the girl’s father said: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered and can be translated “but” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version), as everyone is hoping that the father-in-law will let them leave. This, however, is not the case. For the girl’s father, see verse 19.3.

Strengthen your heart is literally “Sustain your heart please” (see verse 19.5). Good News Translation says “Eat something, please.”

And tarry until the day declines: For the Hebrew verb rendered tarry, see verse 3.26, where it is translated “delayed.” Here the verb is imperative, which in some cultures may sound harsh, while quite acceptable in others. We might say “Stay on,” “Wait” (Good News Translation), or “Please wait.” New Revised Standard Version emends the Hebrew text to read “they lingered” (similarly New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), changing the imperative verb to an indicative one, but according to Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, this change is not necessary.

Until the day declines is literally “until the day stretches out [or, bends],” an idiomatic expression for the sun going down. In many cultures journeys in midday with overhead sun is not advisable. The journey would be too hot. We might say “until a little later in the day” or “until the sun goes down a little.”

So they ate, both of them: Here the Hebrew waw conjunction is well rendered So. The pronouns they and them refer to the Levite and his father-in-law. As in verse 19.6, the focus is once again on these two major characters and their good relationship. It does not mean that nobody else ate. Some ver Septuagintver* manuscripts add “and they drank” here (so also New Revised Standard Version and Revised English Bible; compare verse 19.4, 6), but Hebrew Old Testament Text Project does not recommend this addition.

A translation model for this verse is:

• On the fifth morning the Levite got up early in the morning to get ready to go. But the woman’s father said to him, “You should have something to eat. Stay until later in the day.” So the two of them ate together.

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 Israelites demand justice, asking that the tribe of Benjamin hand over the men of Gibeah responsible for the crime.

Now therefore, which is literally “And now,” renders the same introductory Hebrew expression as at the beginning of verse 20.9. On the basis of the charges just mentioned, the people of Israel want to see justice done. We might say “So now.”

Give up the men: Give up may be rendered “hand over” (New Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation), “surrender” (New International Version), or “deliver.” Once again the word men comes to the forefront, as it has throughout this story.

The base fellows in Gibe-ah: This phrase describes the men the Benjaminites are to surrender. For base fellows (literally “sons of Belial”), see verse 19.22.

That we may put them to death: In Old Testament times the community was responsible for carrying out justice. According to God’s Law, these men deserved to die. The pronoun we refers to the Israelites, not including the Benjaminites, so it is an exclusive pronoun. Put … to death renders a causative form of the Hebrew verb meaning “die,” so we might say “so we can kill them” (similarly Good News Translation) or “so we can execute them” (New Living Translation). This is the same sentence structure as the words spoken by the evil men of Gibeah, who said, “Bring him out the man who came into your house, that we may know him” (verse 19.22). This similar structure might be a coincidence, but is probably yet another stylistic feature the narrator uses to bring irony to the story.

And put away evil from Israel: The Old Testament views murder as an act that pollutes the entire community as well as the land. Removing the offender is an act of cleansing and removes guilt from that community. Examples of this are Achan in verse 7 and the Gibeonites in verse 2 Sam 21. Put away renders a Hebrew verb meaning “burn,” but here it is used figuratively to mean “remove completely.” For the Hebrew word rendered evil, see verse 20.3, where it is translated “wickedness.” In this context it refers to immorality. If possible, it is good to maintain the same rendering within this passage. Israel may refer to the people as a whole or to the land. Both are possible interpretations. So translators may say “remove this evil from the nation/people of Israel” or “… from the entire land of Israel.”

But the Benjaminites would not listen to the voice of their brethren, the people of Israel: Here is yet another very sad comment that has great significance as the story here unfolds. Though clearly related by blood, the Benjaminites would not listen to the rest of the Israelites, their own brothers. There is an interesting shift here. In verse 20.12 the narrator mentions “the tribes of Israel” and “the tribes of Benjamin,” but here he uses the expressions “the sons [or, children] of Benjamin” (the Benjaminites) and “the sons [or, children] of Israel” (the people of Israel). Certainly these phrases underline the fact that these tribes were all “children” of the same ancestor, Jacob (see Gen 29.1–30.24). But renders well the Hebrew waw conjunction, since the Benjaminites did not respond as expected. They were obviously guilty of a wrongdoing, but they would not admit it. Would not listen renders two verbs in Hebrew, literally “were not willing to listen.” The Hebrew verb rendered listen (shamaʿ) can also mean “obey” (see verse 2.2), and here it means the Benjaminites refused to hand over the criminals from the town of Gibeah. Listen to the voice of is a very strong expression in Hebrew (see verse 2.20), here meaning they refused or rejected the Israelites’ request.

For the Hebrew word rendered brethren (ʾach), see verse 18.8. As in many languages and cultures, this term can refer to cousins, and more widely to any relatives, no matter how distant the relation. Even though these tribes had been in existence for centuries, still their origins went back to the same ancestor, Jacob. Thus these tribes were brethren. The use of this term foreshadows and underlines the tragedy of the bloody civil war to follow. Here their brethren is parallel to the people of Israel (literally “the sons [or, children] of Israel”). The use of the word “children” certainly emphasizes the fact that all the Israelites were children of the same ancestor. The Hebrew word for brethren is a general term, which can include females, so translators might use a wider term, such as “kinsfolk” (New Revised Standard Version) or “relatives.” New International Version and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh speak of “fellow Israelites,” but this rendering does not communicate the strong message behind the word brethren.

The narrator tells this story from the viewpoint of the rest of Israelites, so he strongly condemns the Benjaminites for what they did. Translators should try to convey the sad and solemn tone here.

Translation models for this verse are:

• So now, hand over those evil men from Gibeah so we can execute them and wipe away this evil from our land!” But the Benjaminites refused to listen to their brothers, the Israelites.

• Now then, hand over those wicked men to us, so we can put them to death and get rid of this evil in Israel.” However, the Benjaminites rejected this request of their [own] blood relatives, the [other] Israelites.

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 six hundred men turned and fled toward the wilderness to the rock of Rimmon: This clause seems to be a repetition of what is reported in verse 20.45, but in reality it tells the audience that 600 Benjaminite soldiers were able to escape. But renders well the Hebrew waw conjunction here, since it introduces the contrast between the Benjaminites who were killed and those who managed to escape. We might say “However, 600 men were able to escape to Rimmon Rock in the desert.”

And abode at the rock of Rimmon four months: These 600 men were able to hide in the rocky area at Rimmon and avoid death, as is clear from verse 21.13. Abode renders a Hebrew word (yashab) that simply means “live,” “inhabit,” or “stay” in a location (see verse 1.9, where it is translated “dwelt”). However, in this context it might be rendered “hid.” The rock of Rimmon is repeated here, but in many languages it will be better to say simply “there” (Good News Translation). The Hebrew word for month refers to the new moon. In many languages there is a similar connection (see verse 19.2). We might say “and they stayed there for four moons.”

A translation model for this verse is:

• But 600 men escaped and ran to Rimmon Rock in the desert, where they hid out for four months.

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 general statement in verse 1.9 is now followed by details of an attack on Hebron, a town that plays an important role throughout the Old Testament. There is another break in the Hebrew text here, which leads some versions (for example, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) to begin a new paragraph. And renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, which many versions omit, probably because here it does not introduce the next event, but gives details of what precedes.

Judah went against the Canaanites: Went renders the general Hebrew verb meaning “go,” rather than the ones for “going up” and “going down.” However, combined with the preposition against, it has the meaning “attack” or “engage in a battle with.” The same verb appears in verse 1.11. For the Canaanites, see verse 1.1.

Who dwelt in Hebron: For dwelt see verse 1.9. Hebron is a town in the central mountain region, which eventually became part of Judah’s territory. It is mentioned again in verse 1.20 and later in the Samson story (verse 16.3). It is here King David was later crowned and where he set up his capital before moving to Jerusalem (verse 2 Sam 2.1-4; verse 5.5).

(Now the name of Hebron was formerly Kiriath-arba): The narrator provides this historical note, which Revised Standard Version and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh put in parentheses. New Jerusalem Bible separates this material off by long dashes. Contemporary English Version chooses to put this information at the end of the verse: “At that time, Hebron was called Kiriath-Arba.” Translators can decide how to best present this background material. Revised Standard Version translates the Hebrew waw conjunction here as Now, which is a good transition.

The name of Hebron was formerly … reflects the Hebrew structure and many languages will be able to follow this model. However, several versions prefer to shorten the independent sentence and say “Hebron was formerly called….” Good News Translation says Hebron “used to be called….” Formerly is literally “to faces,” which New Jerusalem Bible renders as “in olden days.”

Kiriath-arba or “town of Arba” was the former name of Hebron. According to verse 15.13, “Arba” is the name of Anak’s father, that is, the ancestor of the people known as “Anakim,” who were so tall they were sometimes called “giants.” Thus the town had been named after the “giants” who inhabited it. To the Israelites, capturing such a town represented a great victory, which may be one of the reasons this town is mentioned here.

And they defeated Sheshai and Ahiman and Talmai: The initial Hebrew waw conjunction rendered and introduces the results of the attack. The pronoun they refers to the people of Judah, also accompanied by the soldiers from the tribe of Simeon, though not overtly mentioned. For defeated see verse 1.4.

Sheshai and Ahiman and Talmai are three men who were descendants of Anak (see verse 1.20, and verse 15.14), and here their names represent their descendants. Thus Good News Translation makes explicit “the clans of…” (similarly Contemporary English Version). Revised Standard Version respects the Hebrew structure by translating and each time there is a waw conjunction. However, in many languages commas may replace some of the conjunctions. For example, we might say “Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai.”

Translation examples for this verse are:

• They attacked the Canaanites who lived in the town of Hebron, formerly known as “the town of Arba”* and they defeated the clans of Sheshai and Ahiman and Talmai.
* Arba was the name of Anak’s father, and Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai were Anak’s sons. The people of Anak or the “Anakim” were called “giants” because they were so tall (Num 13.33).

• They fought the Canaanites who lived in Hebron. This town was formerly called Kiriath-arba. There they defeated the descendants of Anak: Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai.

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 .

Unlike Moses, who was buried outside the Promised Land, Joshua’s resting place was within the territory allotted to his clan. In Israelite culture, as in many cultures around the world, the place of burial is very significant. Gen 23 recounts how Abraham bought a cave to serve as a burial place for his family, where he eventually buried his wife Sarah. He himself was laid to rest next to her (Gen 25.10). Thus there were often family tombs, where bodies of the same family were placed together. To not have a recognized burial place was considered a terrible fate.

And they buried him: This verse is very closely linked to the preceding one by the Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And. New Revised Standard Version has “So.” The impersonal pronoun they refers to the Israelite community. The Hebrew verb translated buried (qabar) is a general word, meaning to put the body of the deceased in a designated place, without specifying what kind of place that was. In Israel people buried their kin often in rocks and caves—not always underground as in many cultures. Translators should thus try to use a general verb here. Some languages opt for a passive verb here, for example, “He was buried” (Good News Translation).

Within the bounds of his inheritance means that Joshua was buried inside the borders of the land his clan had been given. Bounds renders the same Hebrew word translated “border” in verse 1.36 to indicate a boundary line. Many take the word inheritance to refer here not to the land given to his tribe but to the land accorded to him personally (verse 19.49-50). The word inheritance forms an inclusio here (verse 2.6, 9), appearing again at the end of the book, where it is part of another inclusio. Thus it would be helpful to use the same expression throughout the book.

In Timnath-heres, in the hill country of Ephraim, north of the mountain of Gaash: Joshua was one of the descendants of Ephraim, and the narrator takes great care to tell where he was buried. This specification parallels the later detailed accounts of where Gideon and Samson were buried (verse 8.32; verse 16.31).

Timnath-heres was the name of a town in Ephraim. Joshua had settled there some time before his death (verse 19.50). There is a minor textual problem here since the text of verse 19.50 and verse 24.30 gives the name as Timnath-serah, reversing the consonants of the second half of the name. Good News Translation makes this change here for consistency. Contemporary English Version keeps the Hebrew form without a footnote, but Bible en français courant adds a footnote that says, “Timnath-Heres is also called Timnath-Serah. See Josh 19.50; 24.30.” Note that some versions insert a hyphen between the two words, while others do not. Some capitalize the second term, while others do not. Translators can decide how to handle these issues that have little impact on the story.

In the hill country of Ephraim, north of the mountain of Gaash defines the location of the town more precisely. For the hill country, see verse 1.9. Ephraim is cited in verse 1.29 as an Israelite tribe, but some readers may not yet know that a certain region also bears this name. If so, we might speak of “the hill country promised [or, allotted] to [the descendants of] Ephraim.”

For north see verse 1.9. The exact location of the mountain of Gaash is unknown, but some believe Joshua was buried around 30 kilometers (19 miles) southwest of Shechem. Mountain renders the same Hebrew word (har) as hill country. This term can refer to a range of hills, or to a single big hill or mountain.

Some translation examples for this verse are:

• They buried Joshua within the land he inherited [from the LORD] at Timnath Heres, in the mountains of Ephraim, north of Mount Gaash.

• Joshua was buried in Timnath-serah, in the mountains of Ephraim, north of Mount Gaash, in the land he had inherited [or, the land God gave him].

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 .

Even though Good News Translation begins a new paragraph here, most versions see rather a series of quick, linked actions. The story is now at its climax, where two important words are emphasized: God and arose. The hero Ehud is also named twice.

And Ehud came to him means Ehud approached the king in order to speak privately with him. The Hebrew waw conjunction can be rendered And or “Then” (Good News Translation), depending on the language.

As he was sitting alone in his cool roof chamber: In Hebrew this is an independent clause, literally “and he [was] sitting in the roof chamber of the coolness to him by himself.” This clause slows down the action, as the villain is being “set up for the kill.” Some languages will prefer to reverse the order of the first two clauses, saying “The king was sitting alone … and Ehud came to him.” He was sitting renders an independent Hebrew pronoun followed by a participle. The participle here is used in Hebrew not just to describe the act of sitting, but can also imply “sitting on a throne.” The word rendered alone (lebaddo, literally “by himself”) occurs at the end of the sentence in Hebrew, but translators may place it wherever appropriate in their language.

In his cool roof chamber is the setting. This scene probably takes place in a palace by the Jordan River near Jericho. The coolest part of the house is the sheltered roof or terrace that catches the cool breeze. Cool roof chamber renders two Hebrew words, one referring to an upper room and the second referring to the coolness of this location. This might be an open room, giving protection from the sun, but allowing the breeze to flow through. However, this place does seem to have walls with a door that could be locked. In Israel and nearby countries, houses had flat roofs which served as terraces, especially during hot weather. On the outside of the house there was a stairway leading up to the roof. Translators need to think how best to describe this place, adding a footnote or perhaps an illustration, especially if this kind of structure is unknown. We might say “where it was cool, in the room on the roof of his house.”

And Ehud said, “I have a message from God for you”: Ehud’s words here are almost identical to those in verse 3.19, but slightly more specific. This time Ehud has not just “a hidden message/thing,” but a message from God (debar ʾelohim in Hebrew) for the king! Again there is irony and a play on words here, as the listener knows what the king does not know. The secret message, the divine word, will be delivered by Ehud’s hidden sword! It may be made even more explicit, saying “a hidden message from God.” Most readers will understand what this means, once Ehud accomplishes his act. Otherwise, a footnote may be added that says, “In fact, the ‘secret message/thing’ and the ‘divine message/thing’ both refer to the sword that Ehud carries secretly and uses to kill the Moabite king.”

The Hebrew word translated God (ʾelohim) is generic and not the personal name of God, Yahweh. Using this word may have been part of Ehud’s plan to keep Eglon’s defenses down.

And he arose from his seat: This is a key clause leading up to the climax of the story. The pronoun he refers to the king who was sitting on his throne. In the introductory comments about the judges’ period and in the episode concerning Othniel, the Hebrew verb translated arose (qum) plays a very special role. In times of great oppression, Yahweh “raises up” deliverers for Israel. Here there is a parody of that experience as the enemy king “arises”—but to his death! Here the verb has its primary meaning of “get up” from a lower position or seat, in all likelihood to hear the message or receive this additional gift.

From his seat could also be rendered “from his throne.” Several versions omit this phrase. Good News Translation has simply “The king stood up.” However, there is certainly a humorous link between the word seat or “throne” and the place the king’s attendants will later imagine him to be.

A possible model for this verse is:

• Ehud approached the king as he was sitting alone in the cool room on the roof of his house. He said, “[O king,] I have a message from God for you.” So the king rose up from his chair [to hear the message from God].

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 .

This general statement at the end of the episode underlines God’s role in the victory over King Jabin. At this point neither Deborah, nor Barak, nor Jael, and not even Sisera is cited. This verse is very similar to the first half of verse 3.30 (see comments there).

So on that day God subdued Jabin the king of Canaan: Sisera’s death at the hands of Jael signals that Jabin himself is defeated. This clause is literally “And God humbled on that day Jabin….” Like Revised Standard Version, many languages will prefer to put the time phrase on that day at the beginning of the verse. God renders the generic Hebrew word ʾelohim (see verse 1.7). There is a play on words here since the Hebrew verb rendered subdued (kanaʿ) resembles the word for Canaan. For this verb see the comments on verse 3.30.

The expression Jabin the king of Canaan occurs once here and two more times in the next verse. This is in line with the stylistic device mentioned earlier whereby the name of the defeated villain is repeated often at the end of the story. This is a common technique, not just in Hebrew, but in many languages around the world. The mention of Jabin also forms an inclusio around the story as a whole (verse 4.2, 23, 24). For the king of Canaan, see verse 4.2.

Before the people of Israel (literally “before the faces of the sons/children of Israel”) might give the impression that the Israelites stood by and watched. This is not the case. The Israelites participated in the battle, but the ultimate victory came from God. This phrase is similar to the one in verse 4.15, where the LORD routed Sisera’s army “before Barak.” The preposition before suggests that God went ahead of the Israelites, destroying their enemies on their behalf. We can also say “God allowed [or, helped] Israel to subdue Jabin….” For some reason Contemporary English Version credits this victory to Israel alone by beginning the verse with “That same day the Israelites defeated the Canaanite King Jabin….” Translators should take care to include God as the key participant here.

Some translation examples for this verse are:

• So on that day God permitted the Israelites to defeat Jabin the king of Canaan.

• So that day God subjugated* the Canaanite king Jabin [and his army] and the people of Israel were victorious over them.
* The words for “subjugate” and “Canaan” sound alike in Hebrew.

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 .