At this climax of the episode, pronouns are used in Hebrew instead of full nouns to refer to Samson. This is typical of such high points. Also there is a series of short clauses describing the action. Many languages will use similar stylistic devices to mark a climax. Much is implicit in this narration between 15.14 and this verse. Samson breaks free of his bonds and certainly must have moved about before the next action.

And he found a fresh jawbone of an ass: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And may also be translated “Then” (Good News Translation) or omitted (Contemporary English Version, New International Version). Here it introduces the first thing Samson did after he was free of his bonds. He saw a donkey jawbone lying on the ground. He found may be rendered “he happened to see” (similarly NET Bible) or “he noticed.” A fresh jawbone of an ass refers to the jawbone of a recently killed donkey. Such a jawbone is a triangular-shaped bone, which would have made a good weapon in the hand of a strong person. Most languages will have a word for this body part of a domestic animal. Fresh renders a rare word in Hebrew, occurring elsewhere only in Isa 1.6, where it is translated “bleeding.” This detail is crucial to the narrative since rather than being a dried-out bone, this one was raw and probably full of blood. Once again Samson openly breaks his Nazirite vow by touching part of a dead body. For ass see verse 1.14.

And put out his hand: Put out renders the Hebrew verb meaning “send” (shalach), which is used often in the judges’ stories, especially at moments of victory over Israel’s enemies (see, for example, verse 4.6; verse 6.35; verse 7.24). The reference to his hand is yet another occurrence of this key term. Here it reinforces the idea that Samson is breaking his vow by touching a part of a dead body.

And seized it: Samson grabbed the jawbone with his hand. Seized is an important word, since it puts special emphasis on how Samson violated his Nazirite vow. This short clause and the previous one are typical of story climaxes in Hebrew. They slow down the action before the high point. In some languages these clauses may not be appreciated, but translators should still look for means to emphasize Samson’s act of picking up the jawbone. Good News Translation says “He reached down and picked it up,” which is acceptable but somewhat flat. A word such as “grabbed” (Contemporary English Version) might be more effective here.

And with it he slew a thousand men is literally “and he struck with it a thousand man.” For the Hebrew verb rendered slew (nakah), see the comments on verse 1.4. There it is translated “defeated,” but here it certainly means “killed” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version) or “slaughtered.” A thousand men refers to Philistine men rather than men of Judah, despite the fact that the latter were the ones who handed him over to the enemy. New Living Translation says “1,000 Philistines” for clarity.

Translation models for this verse are:

• He noticed nearby the jawbone of a donkey that had recently died. He picked it up in his hand and beat to death a thousand men with it.

• Then Samson found a jawbone of a donkey that was not yet dried out. He reached out and grabbed it in his hand and with it slaughtered a thousand Philistine men.

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 story reaches its climax here with Samson’s death. The Hebrew root for “die” occurs five times in this verse. Samson’s death was foreshadowed in verse 13.7, when the angel of the LORD told Samson’s mother that her child would be a Nazirite “from birth to the day of his death.” Thus the word “death” forms an inclusio around this entire story.

And Samson said: Though this verse begins with the Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And, many versions omit it (New International Version, New Living Translation). Translators should read their translation and decide if a transition word is needed here. In this context the general verb said might be rendered “shouted” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, New Jerusalem Bible) or “cried” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

Let me die with the Philistines is literally “Let it my nefesh die with the Philistines.” The Hebrew word nefesh, originally meaning “throat,” is often used to refer to one’s life or even spirit, thus one’s “person.” Revised Standard Version renders it well here with a simple me. This is a bold and courageous prayer, which Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version end with an exclamation mark. Some might imagine Samson saying “I’m going to die and I’m taking these Philistines with me!” but here Samson is asking God to allow him to die, even as he causes the death of thousands.

Then he bowed with all his might is literally “And he stretched/reached out with strength.” The Hebrew word for might (koach) is the same one rendered “strength” in the Delilah incidents (verse 16.5-6, 9, 15, 17, 19). Revised Standard Version‘s translation of this clause may give the false impression that Samson was bending over. New Revised Standard Version has changed it to read “He strained with all his might,” and New Jerusalem Bible is similar: “He then heaved with all his might.” Contemporary English Version is very dynamic, saying “He pushed against the columns as hard as he could.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh sees Samson with his arms around the pillars, so it has “and he pulled with all his might.”

And the house fell upon the lords and upon all the people that were in it: After Samson pushed over the two central pillars of the temple, its roof collapsed on all the people who were inside. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered and introduces a consequence and translators should use a transition appropriate to this high point in the story. For the house, see verse 16.27. Fell renders a key Hebrew verb (nafal) in this book, which often appears when the enemy lies fallen, slain on the ground (see verse 3.25; verse 4.22; verse 5.27). Though it here refers to the collapse of a building, it also underlines the defeat of Israel’s enemies. We can say “the building fell down” (Good News Translation) or “the temple collapsed” (Contemporary English Version). The lords and all the people refer to the victims of this catastrophe. For the lords, see verse 16.23. Once again Good News Translation overstates the case, speaking of “the five kings,” and thus in this regard should not be followed. All the people refers to the Philistine men and women who had gathered to worship Dagon. Some of these people were inside the building (that were in it), while others were on the roof. The Hebrew word for people (ʿam) usually refers to the people of Israel (see verse 2.4), so here there is yet another touch of irony as the narrator uses it to refer to Israel’s enemies, the Philistines.

So the dead whom he slew at his death were more than those whom he had slain during his life is literally “And the dead he caused to die in his death were more than those he caused to die in his life.” This summary statement uses the Hebrew root for “die” four times. The narrator refers to Samson’s death indirectly with the phrase at his death. So renders well the Hebrew waw conjunction here, though other connectors can be used, such as “Thus” (New International Version). The dead whom he slew may be translated “the people he killed.” At his death may be rendered “in dying,” “by dying,” “by his death” (New Jerusalem Bible), or even “when he died” (Contemporary English Version). During his life may be expressed as “during his [entire] lifetime,” “when he was [still] living,” or “when he was alive.” We might say “So the number of people [or, enemies] he killed when he died surpassed the number of people he killed when he was alive” or “When he died, he killed more people than when he lived.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• Samson shouted, “Let me die with these Philistines!” Then he pushed the pillars as hard as he could, and the roof collapsed on all who were in the building, including the Philistine leaders. Thus those Samson killed in his death outnumbered those he had killed during his life.

• Samson said, “May I die along with these Philistines!” Then he pushed hard against the pillars, and the building collapsed on the Philistine leaders and all the other people there. In this way Samson killed more people at his own death than he had ever killed while he was alive.

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 they turned and departed: There is a change in scene here, so some versions insert a paragraph break here (Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). However, many other versions let the story flow (Contemporary English Version, Revised English Bible). In Hebrew there is little to indicate a break. So renders the Hebrew waw conjunction here, but we could also say “Then” (Contemporary English Version).

They turned and departed means the Danites left Micah’s compound and continued their journey. The pronoun they designates the 600 soldiers, the five spies, and the young Levite. Some languages may prefer to say “the Danites” for clarity. Turned does not render the same Hebrew verb translated “turned aside” in verse 18.3, 15. The verb here means “turn away” or “turn around.” Departed renders the Hebrew verb meaning “go.” This clause may be translated “Then they turned and left” (Contemporary English Version) or “They set out again” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

Putting the little ones and the cattle and the goods in front of them: Once again the author’s irony and mockery are clear here. Up till now the readers or listeners have only heard about the Danite soldiers, but suddenly here is the whole population, organizing their group just as the Israelites did in the past (see, for example, Gen 33.2). In many cultures worldwide, when groups are moving across large distances, they organize themselves into a certain pattern with the weaker members (women, children, old and sick) in the front and the stronger members in the back. This clause is an independent one in Hebrew, literally “and they put the little ones, the livestock, and the heavy things before them.” Though some versions mention “the women and children,” Hebrew Old Testament Text Project gives an {A} rating to the Hebrew text. But scholars agree that the Hebrew word rendered little ones (taf) does not refer just to children, but to all who are defenseless, that is, children, women, and elderly people. While many versions render little ones as “children” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, NET Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), it would be good to use a broader term if one exists in the target language, such as “weaker ones” or “defenseless ones.” The Hebrew noun for cattle is a generic one, including various types of domesticated animals (see verse 6.5). Some languages make a distinction between “animals of the village” (domesticated animals) and “animals of the bush” (wild animals), and here it is the former that is in view. The goods (literally “the heavy things”) refers to their property, including their tents, cooking utensils, and other personal belongings. These things were often loaded on carts pulled by oxen. We might use a generic term here, such as “belongings” (Good News Translation), “possessions” (New International Version), or “property.” In front of them means this group moved out first in front of the Danite soldiers, as in Good News Translation: “with their children, their livestock, and their belongings going ahead.” We might also say “they sent ahead all the children, women, elderly, livestock, and possessions [and followed after them].” In many Western cultures, in dangerous situations, the stronger often go first to lead the way, but in many parts of the world, it is the opposite. If this needs an explanation, a footnote can be added.

Translations models for this verse are:

• Then they left and continued on their journey, with the weaker members, cattle and belongings taking the lead.

• And they set out again, with their children, women, elderly, cattle and goods going ahead.

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 verse presents a very dramatic and sad scene.

And as morning appeared, the woman came is literally “And the woman came at the turning of the morning.” The idiomatic Hebrew phrase “at the turning of the morning” means the sun was beginning to rise. We may say “As the day was breaking” or “By the time it was morning.” The Hebrew word for morning is the same one used in verse 19.25 and verse 19.27. This is the first time the Levite’s concubine is called a woman (Hebrew ʾishshah), which would stand out in contrast to the repetitive Hebrew word for “man” (ʾish). The Hebrew verb rendered came (boʾ) is used often in the book of Judges. Here it describes how the woman moved from the place where the men left her to the house of the old man. Despite the abuse, she was able to make her way back to his house.

And fell down at the door of the man’s house: This is yet another poignant clause, using many words that evoke the previous judges’ stories. The Hebrew verb rendered fell down (nafal) is a keyword, very often used to describe the defeated enemy (see verse 3.25; verse 4.22; verse 5.27). Here instead of Israel’s enemies being sprawled dead on the floor, it is a helpless and innocent Israelite woman who has “fallen.” If possible, it would be good to use the same expression as elsewhere. If this is not possible, the verb “collapsed” (Contemporary English Version) fits well here. The woman made it to the door of their host. This recalls Jael standing at the door of her tent as the enemy Sisera arrived (verse 3.18). That day was a day of courageous acts, while this one is filled with shame. The door may be rendered “the entrance,” especially in cultures that do not have doors that close. The man’s house refers to the home of the old man.

Where her master was: This is a heavily loaded statement. For the first time the concubine’s husband is referred to as her master. The Hebrew word for master is ʾadon, which is used in verse 19.11 in relation to the Levite, who is the master of his servant. Sarah uses the same word when speaking of her husband Abraham in a reference to sexual pleasure (see Gen 18.12, where it is translated “husband”). Again irony is high here as a master is supposed to care for and protect others, but here the Levite sacrificed his wife to save himself. The word master forms an inclusio around this book (verse 1.5; 19.26), since it refers first to a pagan king and here to a heartless Israelite. The verb was is not in the Hebrew text but is implied. Translators may supply any appropriate verb, for example, “where her master was staying.”

Till it was light is literally “until the light.” This phrase appearing at the end of the verse seems to form an inclusio with as morning appeared. The woman was lying at the doorstep till it was light. There is a subtle contrast throughout this episode between night and morning, between dark and light. In many languages it will be necessary to make explicit “she was there until it was day” or “she lay there till it became day.” There is something extremely ironic about the woman lying outside the house dying while her husband is inside sleeping.

Translation models for this verse are:

• As the day began to break, the woman fell at the doorstep of the old man’s house where her husband, her master was, and she lay there until it was day.

• The woman made it to the old man’s house as the first light of day appeared. She fell at the entrance of the house where her master was and lay there until it became day.

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 battle began as the other battles, but this encounter was different, since the Israelites used a new strategy. They attempted to draw the Benjaminites away from the security of their city, as they awaited in ambush.

And the Benjaminites went out against the people: This clause, introduced by the Hebrew waw conjunction (And), tells what happened next. But in many languages this clause might be translated as a dependent clause, for example “When the Benjaminites came out against the Israelites.” Went out against is literally “went out to meet,” meaning “came out to attack” (see comments on verse 20.25). As was their custom (verse 20.21), the Benjaminites emerged from the city of Gibeah to attack the Israelite soldiers. The people refers to the Israelites, which may be made clear by saying “the other tribes of Israel.”

And were drawn away from the city: This scene is similar to the one described in verse 8.16, with the Benjaminites emerging and getting further and further from their city. This time, however, when they saw the Benjaminites come out of the city, instead of rushing forward into battle, the Israelites dropped back and withdrew. Given the Israelites’ previous heavy losses, the Benjaminites must have assumed they were retreating. So they advanced even further to attack and chase them. Thus the Benjaminites were enticed to leave the safety of their town, leaving them in a vulnerable position. The conjunction and is added by Revised Standard Version to introduce a new sequence in the action and can be maintained in most languages. Were drawn away renders a passive verb in Hebrew, showing that the Benjaminites were falling into the Israelites’ trap. The city is Gibeah. Good News Translation says the Benjaminites “were led away from the city,” but this is not exactly the case. Rather, they “allowed themselves to be drawn [or, pulled] away from the city.”

And as at other times they began to smite and kill some of the people … is literally “and they began to strike down from the people pierced as footstep by footstep….” The narrator informs the audience that, as before, the Benjaminites first appear to have the upper hand and they begin to kill some of the Israelites (verse 20.21, 25). For as at other times (literally “as footstep by footstep”), see the comments on verse 16.20 and verse 20.30. The pronoun they refers to the Benjaminites. In this context the Hebrew verb for smite (nakah) does not refer to hitting, but to actual killing (see verse 1.8). In Hebrew there is emphasis on the word rendered kill (literally “pierced”), which is sometimes used to refer to sexual acts. Indeed, there may be an ironic reference to the initial act that provoked this war (verse 19.25). However, here it clearly refers to those killed in battle (see verse 9.40), who are “pierced through.” There is a wordplay here in Hebrew, since the words for began and kill have the same consonants (ch-l-l).

In the highways, one of which goes up to Bethel and the other to Gibe-ah is literally “in the roads that one went up to Bethel and one to Gibeah.” The word highways could be misleading to modern readers, since the Hebrew word here does not refer to large highways, but rather to well-traveled roads. One road went to Bethel and the other to Gibe-ah. The repetition of the number one is an ironic reminder that the Israelites were not one! The Hebrew verb rendered goes up (ʿalah) is the same one often used to mean “attack” (see verse 1.1). Here it seems to heighten the irony. In some languages it will be better to translate goes up to as “going to” or “leading to” (New International Version). For Bethel see verse 1.22 and verse 20.18. Revised Standard Version follows the Hebrew by leaving the verb goes up implied in the phrase and the other to Gibe-ah, but in many languages it will be better to be explicit, for example, “and one leading to Gibeah.” The two roads mentioned here may have connected Bethel and Gibeah. Some commentators think Gibe-ah is incorrect and should be “Gibeon” (Revised English Bible, New American Bible), a small town nearby. However, the mention of these two towns, Bethel and Gibe-ah, marks an important contrast, since Bethel was the town where the Israelites worshiped the LORD, and Gibe-ah was where evil men carried out evil deeds. So it seems best to follow the Hebrew text here, as recommended by Hebrew Old Testament Text Project.

And in the open country is literally “in the field.” The Hebrew text does not have the connector and, so the phrase in the open country could modify highways. For example, Good News Translation says “As they had before, they began killing some Israelites in the open country, on the road to Bethel and on the road to Gibeah. They killed about thirty Israelites” (similarly Revised English Bible). However, some versions link this phrase to what follows. For example, New International Version has “They began to inflict casualties on the Israelites as before, so that about thirty men fell in the open field and on the roads—the one leading to Bethel and the other to Gibeah” (similarly New Living Translation). The text is open to either interpretation. The Hebrew word for open country refers to a flat open stretch of land here.

About thirty men of Israel refers to the number of Israelites killed in this early attack. These men probably knew they were likely to die as they drew the Benjaminites into the Israelite trap. The number thirty is a common one in Judges, especially in the Samson story. The Hebrew expression rendered of Israel can also mean “in Israel.” This phrase is the object for the verb smite, so it might be helpful to say “about 30 Israelites died” or “killing about thirty men of Israel” (New Revised Standard Version).

This verse is quite long and to ensure ease of comprehension, can be divided into three or more shorter sentences. Possible models are:

• The Benjaminites charged out after the Israelites and were drawn away from the town. They began their attack along the roads leading to Bethel and Gibeah, fighting and killing [the Israelites] as they had done before. Around thirty Israelites lay dead in the open field.

• The Benjaminites came out to attack the Israelites, but they drew them away from the town. As before, the Benjaminites began attacking and killing the Israelites. In the fields along the two roads that led to Bethel and Gibeah, around thirty Israelites lay dead.

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 .

Then the elders of the congregation said: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered Then introduces the next action or the result of the Israelites’ feelings of pity, thus it may be translated “So” (Good News Translation). The elders of the congregation were the leaders of the Israelites who had gathered at Bethel. For elders see verse 2.7, and for congregation, see verse 21.10. The general verb said may be rendered “asked” (New Living Translation, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), since it introduces a question.

What shall we do for wives for those who are left…?: See verse 21.7. When the Israelites first attempted to find wives for the 600 surviving Benjaminite men, they found only 400. They now think about how they might find an additional 200 young women. If possible, the same wording should be used here as in verse 21.7.

Since the women are destroyed out of Benjamin: This is a new piece of information that has been assumed but not made explicit. Apparently, during the battles most of the Benjaminite women were also killed. The Hebrew says literally “for she is destroyed from Benjamin the woman.” The singular word “woman” has a collective sense here, so it is correctly rendered women, referring to the older or married Benjaminite women who were killed. The Hebrew verb rendered are destroyed is a very strong word meaning “exterminate” or “annihilate.” The passive form are destroyed is used purposely, and if possible, it should be maintained. The Israelites themselves were responsible for this state of affairs, but they do not want to claim responsibility. If passive forms do not exist, an impersonal form may be substituted, for example, “since they killed all the women in the tribe of Benjamin.” Other possible models are “since there are no more Benjaminite women left” and “since all the Benjaminite women have been killed.”

In Hebrew this quote of the Israelite leaders is marked by important sound effects, including repetitions of the consonants m, n, and sh, as well as alternations of the vowels a and i. This seems yet another stylistic device used by the narrator to mock the Israelites for their “compassion” for their brothers and their attempts to “right” their wrongs. In most languages it will be impossible to imitate this style, but translators could try to express the irony here. In some languages an interjection such as “Oh!” “Oh, no!” or “How sad!” might show that the narrator is not entirely convinced of the good intentions of those speaking.

Translation models for this verse are:

• Then the leaders of the Israelites asked what they could do to find more wives for the remaining Benjaminite men since [pity!] there were no more Benjaminite women left.

• Then the Israelite leaders said, “Oh no! Where can we find wives for the remaining Benjaminite men since all their women have been killed?”

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 Israel grew strong: This verse begins with two key Hebrew expressions wayehi ki (“And it was that when”), which show a possible time lapse, as well as a new paragraph. Translators can look for an appropriate transition, for example, “Later on” or “But some time later.” We might also say “And when” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “But when” or “As.” For Israel see verse 1.1. This verse seems to be a summary statement applying to all of the tribes.

The Hebrew verb rendered grew strong has various meanings but here refers to the Israelites gaining strength militarily or becoming stronger in number. Many versions say “grew stronger” (New American Bible; similarly Good News Translation, New Jerusalem Bible). Contemporary English Version‘s “grew more powerful” correctly implies that at first they were not strong enough to subjugate the Canaanites, but later became so. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh’s “gained the upper hand” is possible but seems to put too much emphasis on political power. At this point in their history, the tribes of Israel seem to be loosely connected, joined by alliances. Some believe the tribes of Israel formed a kind of federation, but certainly there were no formal structures to speak of during that time period.

They put the Canaanites to forced labor indicates an important change in the relationship between the Israelites and the Canaanite population. This expression follows the Hebrew quite literally and is repeated throughout the section (verse 1.28, 30, 33, 35).

Forced labor refers to work that people are obliged to carry out by the authorities in control. Though in some situations forced labor is considered a contribution toward the payment of taxes, while in other cases it borders on slavery. The notion of forced labor will be known in many cultures around the world, especially where colonial powers once ruled, and thus there will be idiomatic expressions to express this reality. If not, we can simply say “they forced the Canaanites to work for them.” New International Version says “they pressed the Canaanites into forced labor,” while New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh translates “they subjected … to forced labor,” which are both good models. Contemporary English Version‘s “they made slaves of the Canaanites” may be too specific. Translators need to be cautious using the word “slave” here and elsewhere in translation, as types of forced labor and slavery may differ considerably throughout the world.

For the first two clauses of this verse, we might say:

• Later when the Israelites became more powerful, they obliged the Canaanites to work for them.

• But later on, the Israelites grew stronger, so they pushed the Canaanites into forced labor.

But did not utterly drive them out: Here and elsewhere the text does not say whether the Israelites were unable to drive out these peoples or whether they simply chose not to do it. As they became stronger, they may have been able to drive them out, but perhaps chose not to do so. Certainly the Canaanites had now become a source of cheap labor and the two cultures may have also begun to merge.

But (Hebrew waw conjunction) introduces an unexpected event. Even though the Israelites became strong, they did not obey the LORD by removing the Canaanites. We might say “nevertheless,” “still,” or “however.”

The Hebrew expression rendered did not utterly drive them out is a forceful one, using a compound verb construction that is literally “driving out, they did not drive them out.” There is heavy emphasis on the fact that the people of Israel failed to do what Yahweh had requested of them. This is the theological justification for the fact that other peoples dominated Israel during the Judges period. Translators need to find a very strong expression, such as “they never did completely drive them out” or “they never did completely remove the Canaanites from the land.” For drive … out, see verse 1.19.

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 .

These are the nations: This clause is not part of the original Hebrew text, but some versions repeat it from verse 3.1 in order to provide an appropriate link. Most translations will need a transition clause here, such as “Here are the peoples the LORD left” or “Those left in the land were” (Good News Translation).

The five lords of the Philistines: This phrase refers to the leaders of the five major Philistine towns, which were Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron, and Gath (see verse 1.18 for three of them). Lords renders the word seren borrowed from the Philistines. Some say “tyrants,” but a better rendering is “rulers” (Contemporary English Version, New International Version) or “chiefs” (New Jerusalem Bible). Translators should use a word here that is distinct from the key terms “king” and “judge” in this book. The Philistines were located on the Mediterranean coast in what is known today as Palestine. Good News Translation has simply “the five Philistine cities,” but this is incomplete. Contemporary English Version is better with “the Philistines and their five rulers.” The rest of the groups are presented without mentioning their lords or leaders. They are linked together in each case by the Hebrew waw conjunction rendered throughout as and.

And all the Canaanites: In chapter 1 the text says that at least some of the Canaanites were driven out (verse 1.5, 17). In other books of the Old Testament, Canaanite territory is described more narrowly, referring to peoples living on the coast and in the Jordan Valley (Num 13.29), but in this book the Canaanites seems to be a cover term for many different groups (see comments on verse 1.1). The phrase all the Canaanites is probably a reference to all these groups. The word all may modify not just the Canaanites, but the following groups as well.

And the Sidonians refers to people who lived in the coastal town of Sidon and the surrounding area. This was a Phoenician town on the coast in what today is Lebanon.

And the Hivites who dwelt on Mount Lebanon: There is little certainty concerning the identity of the Hivites. Appearing first in Gen 10.17, they are presented as the descendants of Ham, through Canaan. Thus they seem to be part of the wider Canaanite group. Hivites is the name of a people, as the English “-ite” suffix shows, and not the name of a country or region. There is a textual problem here, however, since Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia suggests changing Hivites to “Hittites,” a non-Semitic group originally from much further north, and this reading is followed by some versions (New Jerusalem Bible, Bible de Jérusalem). Hebrew Old Testament Text Project gives Hivites an {A} rating, so it should be followed here. Mount Lebanon may not to refer to one mountain peak, but rather to the chain of mountains running parallel to the coast in the region that is modern-day Lebanon. Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version have “the Lebanon Mountains,” which is a good model to follow. Many languages will prefer to say “the mountain region of [or, in] Lebanon.” Dwelt on Mount Lebanon means the Hivites inhabited these mountains.

From Mount Baal-hermon as far as the entrance of Hamath describes in more detail the area in which the Hivites lived. This phrase indicates the boundaries of the Hivite territory. Translators may need to begin a new sentence to introduce these details, for example, “Their territory ran from [or, started at] Mount Baal-hermon….” Mount Baal-hermon (literally “mountain of the lord of Hermon”) was one of the high mountains in what is known as the Anti-Lebanon range. The entrance of Hamath renders the Hebrew words leboʾ hamath, which New Revised Standard Version and Revised English Bible transliterate as “Lebo-hamath.” According to Num 34.7-9, this place marks the northern boundary of the Promised Land. Some scholars take leboʾ to be the infinitive meaning “to enter,” so they propose the entrance of Hamath, that is, the entrance to the city of Hamath. Others speak of “Hamath Pass” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version), that is, the mountain pass to the south of Hamath. Translators can choose between these different options, but normally translations are preferred over transliterations.

Translation suggestions for this verse are:

• The peoples remaining in the land included the Philistines with their five chiefs and all the Canaanites, including the Sidonians, along with the Hivites who lived in the mountains of Lebanon between Baal-hermon and Lebo-hamath.

• Those remaining in the land were the Philistines, governed by five lords, all the Canaanites, the Sidonians, and the Hivites who occupied the Lebanon Mountains in the territory beginning at the mountain of Baal-hermon and ending at Hamath’s Pass.

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 .