And Micah said to him: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And is omitted in several versions (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version). Many languages may prefer to begin this verse with a linking clause, such as “When he arrived.” The general verb said may be rendered “asked” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version), since Micah asks the Levite a question.

From where do you come? renders the Hebrew question quite literally. The question is probably asking about who the Levite is, rather than from where he was coming. Many languages have a similar kind of question to find out more about a person. For example, English may say “Where are you from?”

And he said to him: The pronoun he refers to the Levite, and the pronoun him to Micah, which will probably be clear in most languages. In this context the general verb said may be rendered “replied” (New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible) or “answered” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version).

I am a Levite of Bethlehem in Judah: The young man responds, first telling Micah that he is a Levite, and later adding where he is from. I am a Levite renders an emphatic expression in Hebrew, literally “A Levite I [am],” so obviously this man sees his role as a priest as crucial. Of Bethlehem in Judah repeats once again the place name, which is crucial to this story (see verse 17.7). We might say “I’m a Levite and I come from Bethlehem in Judah.”

And I am going to sojourn where I may find a place: This clause repeats the words of verse 17.8 (see comments there). The Levites had no territory of their own, so they moved around and served the people throughout the land, whatever their tribe. The pronoun for I is emphatic in Hebrew, which shows the Levite’s determination. New Jerusalem Bible gives a good rendering for this clause, saying “I am travelling, and am going to settle wherever I can find a home.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh is similar: “and I am traveling to take up residence wherever I can find a place.” Another possible model is “Wherever I find a place, I’ll stay there [to work].”

Translation models for this verse are:

• Micah asked him, “Where are you from?”
And the man replied, “I am a Levite. I’ve come from Bethlehem in Judah and I’m looking for a new place to live and work.”

• Micah asked the man where he had come from, and the man replied, “I am a Levite from Bethlehem in Judah, but I will stay wherever I find a place [to work].”

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 .

Many versions take this verse to be the conclusion of the first appendix. However, verse 19.1a Revised Standard Version can also serve as a conclusion. The first half of this verse repeats part of verse 18.30, which shows that the story of Micah and the Danites is drawing to a close, all the while putting emphasis on the sad spiritual state of the people of Dan. Their first act of worship was unholy. This is part of the downward spiral that characterizes Israel’s story as told in the appendices of this book.

So they set up Micah’s graven image which he made: See verse 18.30. The repetition here is purposeful and should not be removed. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered So may be omitted here, as in Good News Translation and New International Version. The pronoun they refers to the Danites, which may be made explicit. Set up renders a different Hebrew verb than the one translated “set up” in verse 18.30. The verb here means “put” or “place.” In this conclusion it can be rendered “maintained” (New Revised Standard Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or “continued to use” (New International Version). For Micah’s graven image which he made, see verse 17.3. It is important to keep the name Micah here, since like Hebrew, many languages make overt reference to the main characters in the concluding remarks of a literary unit.

As long as the house of God was at Shiloh is literally “all the days [that] the house of God was in Shiloh.” Like the clause at the end of 18.30, this one indicates that the Danites carried out their idolatrous worship for a very long time. The house of God refers to a “place of worship” (Contemporary English Version) or “sanctuary.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh capitalizes the word house to indicate this. Good News Translation has “the Tent where God was worshiped” (see verse 18.1), since during this time period there was no Temple. However, the text does not specify this, and in most languages a literal rendering of the house of God will be easily understood. Keeping the house of God preserves the literary flavor of the text as well as the irony expressed here. The Hebrew term for God (ʾelohim) instead of “Yahweh” conveys irony, since this word is elsewhere used in this book by non-Israelites (verse 1.7) or when speaking to non-Israelites (verse 3.20). Though it certainly can refer to Yahweh (see, for example, verse 3.7; verse 6.8), it is also often used to refer to pagan gods (verse 2.3, 12, 17, 19; verse 3.6). The use of this word here may imply that the people were in fact no longer worshiping Yahweh. Shiloh was an important town between Bethel and Shechem, and served over a long period of time as a center of Israelite worship. We might say “as long as the worship place was in Shiloh” or “the whole time the worship center was at Shiloh.” The text does not say exactly how long this time period was, though it seems to have been quite long (see verse 1 Sam 1.3).

Possible translation models for this verse are:

• Thus the Danites set up the carved image that Micah had made and worshiped it. It remained there throughout the time there was a house of God in Shiloh.

• Thus the Danites continued to worship Micah’s idol during the entire time the worship place was at Shiloh.

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 .

Though the question in verse 20.3 is addressed to a group, it is the Levite who responds.

And the Levite, the husband of the woman who was murdered, answered and said: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And may be translated “Then” or “So” (New International Version). Here the identification of the Levite is very detailed, literally “the man, the Levite, the man of the woman the murdered.” The repeated Hebrew word for “man” (ʾish) and the related word for woman (ʾishshah) add emphasis, indicating a high point in the story. The woman who was murdered refers to the Levite’s concubine. The passive verb here may be made active by saying “the woman they murdered.” In some languages it may be necessary to introduce her first by saying “So the woman they killed, her husband, the Levite….” The literal expression answered and said may be shortened to “answered” (New Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation) or “replied” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

I came to Gibe-ah that belongs to Benjamin is literally “[To] Gibeah that [belongs] to Benjamin, I came.” The Levite focuses immediately on the guilty party, as he mentions the town of Gibe-ah and the tribe of Benjamin (see verse 19.12). Revised Standard Version begins with I came for naturalness in English. Gibe-ah that belongs to Benjamin means that this town was in the territory of Benjamin.

I and my concubine renders an emphatic expression in Hebrew, specifying that the Levite came together with his concubine. Good News Translation‘s “My concubine and I went to Gibeah…” seems rather flat. Another possibility is “I, along with my concubine, came to Gibeah….” Some scholars see in these words a lack of concern for the concubine, but it is hard to know if this is the case. For concubine see verse 19.1.

To spend the night gives the reason the Levite found himself in this place. Gibeah was not his final destination. For the Hebrew verb rendered spend the night (lin), see verse 19.4, where it is translated “lodged.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• Then the Levite, the husband of the murdered woman, said, “I, along with my concubine, went to Gibeah in Benjamin to stay overnight.

• So the Levite, the murdered woman’s husband, answered, “It was in the Benjaminite town of Gibeah that I stopped to spend the night, I and my wife.

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 .

As noted above, the narrator is going back over all the details of the battle. This verse repeats information presented earlier. It begins with the Hebrew waw conjunction, which New International Version renders as “and then,” but which can also be omitted as Revised Standard Version does here.

The men of Israel should turn in battle: The men of Israel refers to the main group of Israelite soldiers who drew out the Benjaminites. Should turn in battle means they “should turn and attack the Benjaminites” after pretending to flee from them. The Hebrew verb for turn is the same used in verse 7.13 when the tent of the Midianites overturned. Here the meaning is obviously “turn round.” This clause and the previous verse may be rendered as follows:

• 38 Now the Israelite armies had an agreed signal—the ambushers would send up a smoke signal from the city. 39 Then the main army would turn and attack the Benjaminites.

Now Benjamin had begun to smite and kill about thirty men of Israel: The narrator is trying to describe multiple scenes. His focus now turns to the Benjaminites who were unaware of the ambush and had begun to slaughter the Israelites. Now renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, introducing further background information. Revised Standard Version uses the past perfect tense (had begun) again. For begun to smite and kill about thirty men of Israel, see verse 20.31. About thirty men does not seem like many men compared to the thousands who have already been killed. The number thirty is a common number in this book, used often in the Samson story. This clause may be rendered “The Benjaminites had begun to inflict casualties on the Israelites, killing about thirty of them.”

They said: This clause begins with the Hebrew particle ki, which might be rendered “Indeed,” “so” (New Revised Standard Version), or “and” (New International Version). Revised Standard Version and most other versions omit it. As noted at verse 20.32, the verb said could introduce a quote here, but it is more likely introducing what the Benjaminites were thinking or saying to themselves. Thus New Revised Standard Version says “so they thought,” and Good News Translation has “They told themselves.”

Surely they are smitten down before us, as in the first battle: This statement of the Benjaminites is similar to the one in verse 20.32, but with some important differences. The statement here is much more emphatic than the one there. First, the Hebrew interjection ʾak (Surely) is added. Second, they are smitten down renders an emphatic construction in Hebrew, literally “struck he is struck.” These expressions add liveliness and suspense to the story, as they describe how sure the Benjaminites were of themselves. Of course, the surer they were, the greater their defeat, and the greater the Israelites’ victory. The pronoun they refers to the main group of Israelite soldiers who had the job of drawing out the Benjaminites. For the Hebrew verb rendered smitten down, see verse 20.32, where it is translated “routed.” As in the first battle may also be rendered “as in the past.” The Benjaminites killed the most Israelites in the first battle, so a literal rendering here may be the best choice.

Two translation models for the last half of this verse are:

• The Benjaminites had begun attacking them and had already killed about thirty Israelite soldiers. They were thinking they would surely defeat them, as they had done previously.

• The Benjaminites began to inflict casualties on the Israelite troops, killing about thirty men. They said to themselves, “Victory is sure! We’ll slaughter them, just as we did in the first battle.”

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 concludes the set of episodes that began at 21.1. It forms an inclusio with verse 2.6 and is also very similar to verse 24.28.

And the people of Israel departed from there at that time: The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And introduces a kind of summary statement or concluding remark. Translators should find a good transition here, for example, “So” (New Revised Standard Version). In some languages the time phrase at that time may be moved to the front, in which case, the conjunction could be omitted (New International Version). The people of Israel is literally “the sons [or, children] of Israel” (see verse 1.1). In 21.1-23 this phrase refers to all the tribes of Israel except Benjamin, but here it may point to all twelve tribes. Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, and Parole de Vie think it excludes the Benjaminites, so they refer to “the rest of the Israelites,” but many versions have simply “the Israelites” (New International Version, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Since this verse gives concluding remarks, the latter interpretation may be more correct. Departed renders a form of the Hebrew verb meaning “go” that suggests the people went off in different directions. Revised English Bible and New Jerusalem Bible use the verb “dispersed.” From there seems to refer to Shiloh (see verse 20.12), but it may possibly refer to Bethel, the place of the assembly. We might say “from that town” or “from that place.” As noted above, the temporal phrase at that time may be placed near the beginning of the verse, for example, “So at that point [the rest of] the Israelites left that place.”

Every man to his tribe and family: Every man refers to all the Israelites present at the meeting. The Hebrew word for man (ʾish) can refer to men and women. As noted in verse 18.19, a tribe is a grouping larger than a family. In some languages where it is impossible to distinguish these two terms, translators might say “and each went back to his clan,” “and each returned to his own people,” or “and each went home.”

And they went out from there every man to his inheritance: This sentence repeats known information from 21.23. It does not signal a new step on the event line, but emphasizes what occurred. Thus translators need to find a transitional expression for and that does not insinuate a temporal sequence. The Hebrew verb rendered went out (yatsaʾ) again adds irony, since it is the same verb used by the men of Gibeah when they told the man from Ephraim to “Bring out” the Levite so they could have sex with him (verse 19.22), when Jephthah’s doomed daughter “came out” (verse 11.34), and when the dancers came out of the town of Shiloh (verse 21.21). Once again the mention of inheritance expresses bitter irony. At the beginning of the book the Israelites went to conquer the land, their inheritance (verse 2.6). Here at the end of the book, after a horrendous civil war and thousands of deaths on all sides, every person returns to his inheritance. Translators should attempt to convey this irony as best they can. For example, we might say “Yes, each man left that place and returned to the land he had inherited [from the LORD].”

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 LORD said: This clause begins with waw, the most common conjunction in Hebrew. Here, most English versions do not translate this word, though it is possible to say “And” (New Jerusalem Bible) or “Then.”

The Hebrew verb rendered said is a very general one, so some languages may prefer to say “replied” or “answered” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version). However, the text does not say how the Israelites discovered what the LORD said. This clause introduces a direct quote, but if indirect speech is required, we could say “The LORD told Judah to….” Translators should be especially careful when dealing with quotes from the LORD to ensure that they communicate the content precisely and preserve the emphasis of the original.

Judah shall go up indicates what the divine decision was. Judah refers here to the tribe descended from Judah, one of the sons of Jacob (Gen 29.35). Since this is a context of war, the meaning is even more restricted, referring to the men who were capable of fighting, the warriors of the tribe of Judah. It is not surprising that Judah is picked as a leader. In the book of Genesis Judah’s father, Jacob, already “prophesied” this about his son (Gen 49.8, 10):

Judah, your brothers shall praise you;
your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies …
The scepter shall not depart from Judah,
nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet….

Shall go up translates a Hebrew verb form that could be rendered as a future, but in many languages another verb form will be needed, for example, “should go” or “is to go” (New International Version). New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “Let [the tribe of] Judah go up,” which may not be forceful enough. Contemporary English Version reduces the clause, with the LORD responding simply, “Judah!” which may be appropriate in some languages. However, in others a more explicit answer will be needed, for example, “The men from Judah are to go into battle first” or “The tribe of Judah should be the first to wage war against Canaan.”

Behold, I have given the land into his hand: This is the LORD’s promise as he tells the soldiers of Judah to go to battle. Behold renders the Hebrew introductory word hinneh, which is often used to express emphasis or emotions such as joy or surprise. Here it introduces the news that God will give victory to the tribe of Judah. Many languages will have particles or words to express such a notion. Some versions omit this word (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, New International Version), but if possible, it should be included. Some languages use a word such as “Look!” or “Listen!” NET Bible says “Be sure of this!” which may be too explicit, but it does convey the strong emotion here.

I is the LORD referring to himself. He is the one who is responsible for the outcome of the battle the people of Judah are about to wage.

The Hebrew perfect verb form rendered have given indicates a completed action. Thus this verb phrase could refer back to the time the LORD promised the ancestors of Israel that he would give them the land. However, this same verbal aspect can refer to an event that is sure to happen or is considered to have happened already. Many languages have a perfect aspect that is used in a similar way to Hebrew. However, if this is not the case, other solutions must be found. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “I now deliver the land into their hands.” Good News Translation is quite effective with a present progressive form, “I am giving them control of the land.” Contemporary English Version makes it explicit that God will help them in the future: “I’ll help them take the land.” However, this gives a slightly different meaning from the original text. Along with expressing the idea that God is handing over the authority for the land to his people, it is good if this event can be viewed as accomplished or “as good as done.”

“Give … into someone’s hand” is a very common Hebrew expression used throughout the book of Judges. In other contexts it means to give victory over an enemy army. But here, where the object is the land, it means God will give control of the land to the people of Judah or give them possession of it. We could also say “I will allow/help them conquer/take over the land.”

The land (Hebrew ha-ʾerets) is a very important key term in the books of Joshua and Judges, as well as throughout the rest of the Old Testament. This is the land God promised to Abraham (Gen 12.7) and to Moses (Exo 3.17). If necessary, translators can make explicit “the land that I have promised [to you, my people].” Land may be rendered with any natural equivalent, for example, “country” or “territory.” Translators should try to render this key term consistently throughout this book and the rest of the Old Testament.

This is the first time the keyword hand (yad in Hebrew) is used in this book. It occurs in many idiomatic expressions throughout these stories, and comes into special focus when the various judges or heroes win victories over the enemies of Israel. Here into his hand means “into his control” or “into his possession.” God’s message is that Judah will occupy the land. It will be “under Judah’s control.” In many African languages a similar expression using “hand” in its singular or plural form exists and can be used here. If not, another idiomatic expression can be substituted. The pronoun his refers to the tribe of Judah, though most languages will use a plural: “into their control.”

Translation examples for this verse are:

• The LORD replied: “Judah should go [first]. I have given the land into their control [or, into their hands].”

• The LORD said that the tribe of Judah should lead the battle. He had already given them authority to take the land.

The direct quote gives a much more powerful rendering than the indirect speech form. Translators will have to decide which speech style communicates the message most effectively in this context.

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 .

Following victory, there is always a period of rest. So renders the initial Hebrew waw conjunction, which may also be translated “Then.” Contemporary English Version and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh link this verse to what precedes with a simple “and,” while Revised English Bible has “Thus.” Good News Translation omits the connector altogether.

The land had rest forty years: Throughout Deuteronomy and much of the rest of the Old Testament the land is central. In most contexts it refers to the Promised Land, the land the Israelites were to inherit. Here this expression seems to designate all Israel, or at least the tribes concerned (see comments on verse 1.2). Saying the land had rest means the people in the land had rest. Contemporary English Version translates the land as “Israel,” but if possible, it is good to preserve the word land because of its literary and theological importance.

Had rest renders a Hebrew verb (shaqat) that occurs at key points in this book, especially at the end of certain episodes (verse 3.30; verse 5.31; verse 8.28). This Hebrew verb, meaning “keep quiet, be at peace,” is also used to describe “the land” in verse 11.23. A land at rest was no longer plundered by its enemies. In most languages it will not be possible to say that the land was resting or had rest. Alternative expressions might be “there was peace,” “was at peace,” and “there was no war.” But it is better to use a positive expression if possible. Translators should choose one expression here and use it consistently throughout the book to preserve the literary ties in the text.

Forty years is the time that the people enjoyed peace. The number forty occurs frequently in this book, where it refers to a long period of time ( verse 5.31; verse 8.28; verse 13.1). It is also a very important number throughout Scripture, as it rained for forty days and forty nights during the Flood, the Israelites walked forty years in the desert, and so on. Multiples and factors of the number forty occur throughout the book of Judges (“ten” in verse 12.11, “twenty” in verse 16.31, and “eighty” in verse 3.30). While in the Old Testament many numbers are symbolic, the translator will not always be able to identify the importance of each one, but will need to render each text as it stands.

Then Othni-el the son of Kenaz died: This sentence sets the pattern for all the judges’ episodes to come. Once rest or peace is attained, the leader eventually dies. Following the death of each judge, Israel lapses back into sin. Thus the mention of the judge’s death not only ends one judge’s story, but also prepares the reader for the next step in the drama of Israel’s life in Canaan. The Hebrew is careful to repeat that Othni-el is the son of Kenaz. In many languages the mention of the full name of a character rounds out the story and is the proper way to end an episode. It is also appropriate that a person’s full name be mentioned at his or her death. Thus this long expression should be maintained if possible. Otherwise, the translator may prefer Good News Translation‘s rendering for this clause, which is simply “and then Othniel died.”

We can translate this verse as follows:

• There was peace throughout the land for forty years. Then Othniel, son of Kenaz, died.

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 .