But the Danite soldiers are not to be bullied. They threaten Micah with death if he does not keep quiet. Translators need to find expressions that carry this menacing tone. The Hebrew word nefesh (“life”) occurs three times here, as Micah’s life and that of his family are threatened.

And the Danites said to him may be rendered “Then the Danites threatened him, [saying].”

Do not let your voice be heard among us is a rather literal rendering of the Hebrew. The Danites tell Micah to keep his mouth shut and say nothing further. This is the second time the Danites tell someone to be quiet (see verse 18.19). We might say “Quiet,” “Stop talking,” or even “Shut up!” Revised English Bible says “Not another word from you!” which is a good model.

Lest angry fellows fall upon you: The conjunction lest introduces a consequence that might happen if Micah keeps talking. Angry people might attack him and his family and kill them. New Revised Standard Version uses the connector “or else,” while New International Version has simply “or.” Many languages will use a conditional clause, for example, “If you keep this up” or “If you keep talking like this.” Angry fellows is literally “men of bitter life,” which refers to men who are easily provoked and unable to control their reactions. This expression ironically uses the Hebrew word nefesh (“life”) before the Danites tell Micah he could lose his life. New Revised Standard Version says “hot-tempered fellows,” and New Jerusalem Bible has “quick-tempered men,” both good models. Since the Danites are speaking of men in their company, some languages may prefer to say “some of these quick-tempered men.” Fall upon you is a figurative expression meaning “attack you,” but the Hebrew verb for fall (pagaʿ) is not the typical one used throughout this book. Here the root means “meet” or “encounter” (see comments on verse 8.21). The Hebrew pronoun for you is masculine plural, so it refers not just to Micah but also to the group of men accompanying him. We might say “If you don’t stop talking, these hot-tempered men will attack you.”

And you lose your life with the lives of your household is literally “and you will gather up your life and the life of your house.” This is another consequence if Micah does not stop talking. The Danites threaten him and his family with death. The Hebrew word nefesh is now repeated two more times, rendered life and lives. Originally meaning “throat,” this word often refers to the “breath” or “life” of a person, depending on the context (see verse 5.21, where it is translated “soul”). Idiomatic expressions can be used to express lose your life, for example, “lose your nose.” In this context your household (literally “your house”) does not refer to Micah’s house, but to his family. Contemporary English Version gives a very dynamic rendering here, saying “you’ll only get yourself and your family killed.” We may also say “you will cause your own death and the death of your family.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• The Danites responded, “Shut up! If you don’t, some of these angry men will attack you, and kill you and your family.”

• The Danites told Micah to keep quiet and say nothing more: “Do you want to make these hot-tempered men so angry they end up killing you and your family?”

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 .

No details are given of the Levite’s journey back home and there is still no mention of the death of his concubine. This is assumed. Instead, the narrator quickly gives the gruesome details of what happened when the Levite returned home. Since there is a change in location, some languages will mark a paragraph here (New Living Translation). In this verse there are five verbs linked together with the Hebrew waw conjunction and no overt subject nouns, giving the impression of swift actions, one following the other.

And when he entered his house renders an independent clause in Hebrew, literally “And he came to his house.” Revised Standard Version and many other English versions express it as a dependent temporal clause, as a way of framing the following important actions to follow. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And can be omitted (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version). Some languages might want to clarify that the pronoun he refers to “the Levite.” We might say “When he reached home” (New International Version) or “When he got home” (Contemporary English Version).

He took a knife: Took renders the same Hebrew verb translated “put” in verse 19.28 (see comments there). Here it may be rendered “picked up” (Revised English Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). The word knife should not pose any translation problems, but the word should refer to a knife sufficiently big to carry out the task mentioned here. Contemporary English Version says “butcher knife,” which seems too specific.

And laying hold of his concubine renders an independent clause in Hebrew, literally “and he grabbed his concubine.” Revised Standard Version renders it as a subordinate clause, since the main action seems to appear in the next clause. Laying hold of renders the same verb translated “seized” in verse 19.25 (see comments there). Here it may be rendered “grasped” (similarly New Revised Standard Version) or “grabbed” ( NET Bible). For clarity it may be necessary to render his concubine as “the body of his concubine” or “her dead body,” though the text never announces her death explicitly. It is unthinkable that the Levite would have killed her by cutting her up. Many versions omit this clause (Contemporary English Version, New International Version, New Living Translation), perhaps because it seems too detailed and gruesome. However, in Hebrew narrative, actions portray character. This description shows the Levite to be both determined and brutal. There seems to be no justification for omitting this clause. Some languages may prefer to reverse this clause and the previous one, saying “he grabbed his concubine and took a big knife.”

He divided her, limb by limb, into twelve pieces: Compare verse 1 Sam 11.7 and verse 1 Kgs 11.30. This clause is literally “and he cut her up to her bones to two [plus] ten pieces.” The Hebrew verb rendered divided is often used to describe cutting up an animal for sacrifice. In most languages the verb “cut” (Good News Translation) can be used. Revised Standard Version renders “to the bone” as limb by limb, but this changes what the text says. Some versions omit this phrase (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version), but again the narrator purposely includes this gruesome detail. The Levite cut his concubine into twelve pieces because he had a plan to send one piece to each of the twelve tribes of Israel. Again this is an important fact, which must be kept in the translation.

And sent her throughout all the territory of Israel: Sent renders the Hebrew verb shalach, which occurs throughout the book, often in contexts of battle and victory. Its use here is ironic. When the text says the Levite sent her, it clearly means he sent the twelve pieces of her body, a fact that can be made explicit here. Good News Translation says specifically “and sent one piece to each….” The Hebrew word for territory usually refers to a “border,” more often in connection with other nations than with Israel (see, for example, verse 11.18, 20, 22). Revised English Bible thinks throughout all the territory of Israel implies “through the length and breadth of Israel.” New International Version says “into all the areas of Israel,” but Good News Translation expresses another nuance with “to each of the twelve tribes of Israel.” Translators will have to decide on a meaning and find an appropriate expression. The purpose of this act was evidently to announce to each tribe the crime perpetuated by the Benjaminites, to provoke some kind of moral indignation that would lead to some reaction. It is unlikely the Levite delivered each piece personally. However, Contemporary English Version may be going too far by saying “Then he told some messengers, ‘Take one piece to each tribe of Israel.’ ” Translators should try to follow the Hebrew text, for example, “Then he had one piece sent to each tribe of Israel.”

Translation models for this verse are:

• Reaching home, the Levite took a knife, grabbed the concubine’s body, and cut it into twelve pieces. Then he sent the pieces throughout the whole land of Israel.

• When he reached home, he took hold of the woman’s body, took a knife and butchered her, dividing her into twelve pieces. Then he had these pieces sent to each of the tribes of Israel.

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 there came against Gibe-ah ten thousand picked men out of all Israel is literally “And they came against Gibeah 10,000 man chosen from all Israel.” This unusual word order conveys a climax. Translators can use stylistic features in their language that would be appropriate for this high point in the story. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And may be translated “Then” (New International Version) or omitted (Good News Translation). The Hebrew preposition rendered against can also mean “in front of” or “opposite.” For came against, New International Version says “made a frontal attack,” and Good News Translation says simply “attacked.”

Ten thousand picked men out of all Israel refers to the Israelite soldiers who hid in ambush, not those who took battle positions at Baal-tamar. The Hebrew expression for ten thousand can mean “ten companies” (see verse 1.4). This was an incredible number of troops to be in hiding. For picked men, see verse 20.15. The Israelites put their most qualified soldiers in ambush to ensure victory. The phrase all Israel is typical of Deuteronomy, Joshua, and 1-2 Samuel (see verse 8.27). Contemporary English Version‘s “Ten thousand of Israel’s best soldiers” is a good model here.

And the battle was hard is literally “and the battle was heavy.” In many languages the Hebrew waw conjunction (and) can be omitted, as in New International Version. Most languages will have a special idiomatic expression to describe a battle that is intense. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “and the battle was furious.” Another possibility is “and both sides fought hard/intensely.”

But the Benjaminites did not know that disaster was close upon them: The Benjaminites had been tricked into leaving their town behind and venturing forth into the open. They had no idea that they were falling into a trap. The Israelite soldiers who were lying in ambush came out and positioned themselves between this army and their town of refuge. This sentence in Hebrew is full of emotion, as it describes, almost with sadness, that the Benjaminites were totally unaware of their fate. It reads literally “and they, they did not know that was reaching upon them the evil.” But renders the Hebrew waw conjunction. Translators can try to capture some of the tone here by saying “But, as for the Benjaminites, they did not know…” or “In the meantime, the Benjaminites had no idea….” The general verb know may also be rendered “realize” (New Revised Standard Version, New International Version).

Disaster was close upon them is an important clause, since it uses the Hebrew key term raʿah (disaster), elsewhere translated “evil” (see verse 2.15). In Hebrew this word occurs at the end of sentence, which seems to heighten the suspense. Was close renders a Hebrew verb that means “reach” or “touch.” While the general meaning here is that the Benjaminites will soon be defeated, translators should try to preserve some of the flavor of the original text for effect, for example, “defeat/disaster would soon be upon them.”

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 said: This quote frame introduces more of the Israelite leaders’ speech. They are still thinking about how to solve their problem of providing wives for the surviving Benjaminites. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered So may be translated “Then” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version) or “So then” in this context. The general verb said may be rendered “suggested” (Contemporary English Version) or “recalled” here.

Behold, there is the yearly feast of the LORD at Shiloh: A new idea has occurred to the Israelite leaders, introduced by Hebrew word hinneh (Behold). Some versions leave this word untranslated (Good News Translation, Revised English Bible), but it serves an important function here, calling the people’s attention to a particular opportunity. New Revised Standard Version says “Look,” but Contemporary English Version seems more effective with “What about…?”

There is the yearly feast of the LORD at Shiloh is literally “the feast of the LORD at Shiloh from days to days.” Revised Standard Version adds the words there is for naturalness in English. We might begin with “Remember! We hold the yearly festival….” The yearly feast of the LORD refers to the annual grape harvest festival that drew crowds from all over the country. Yearly may be rendered “each year” (Contemporary English Version) or “every year” (New Jerusalem Bible). The Hebrew word for feast usually refers to a “pilgrimage” (Revised English Bible), but most versions say “feast” (New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or “festival” (New Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation). Most languages will have a word for such a religious celebration. Feast of the LORD means it was a festival to honor Yahweh. For Shiloh see verse 18.31 and verse 21.12.

Which is north of Bethel, on the east of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah It seems unlikely that this long description of Shiloh’s location was part of the Israelites’ speech, but Contemporary English Version and New International Version include it within the quote. Good News Translation and New Jerusalem Bible put it in parentheses, since they conclude that these are comments from the narrator. Translators will simply have to make a choice between these two interpretations. If this is considered the narrator’s explanation, we might begin with a word like “Now” or “Indeed,” as in the models below.

Shiloh was to the north of Bethel, another important religious center (see verse 1.22 and verse 20.18). For north see verse 1.9.

On the east of the highway is literally “from the rising of the sun on [the] road.” Many languages have problems with terms for the points of the compass, but most will have a way to express the notion of east (see verse 1.9 and verse 11.18). The word highway is better rendered “road” (Good News Translation, New International Version) or “big road” (see verse 20.31). Contemporary English Version renders this whole phrase as “just east of the road.”

That goes up from Bethel to Shechem renders the Hebrew literally. The use of the Hebrew verb for goes up (ʿalah) is significant, since it is yet another occurrence of this keyword in the book. In other contexts it refers to going to battle (verse 1.1) or offering sacrifices (verse 6.26). People are also said to “go up” to religious festivals. Though that may be part of the sense here, it most likely means “go north” in this context. However, once again there may be irony here, since the Benjaminites who went to Shiloh did not go on a “holy” mission! For the city of Shechem, see verse 8.31.

And south of Lebonah is literally “and from the Negeb to Lebonah.” The Hebrew word for south is not the typical expression meaning “the right hand side,” but rather the word negeb, which was the name of the desert region in the southern part of Israel (see verse 1.9). Quite early, this word began to be used as a direction rather than a place name. Lebonah was a town just north of Shiloh. It is only mentioned here in the Old Testament.

Translation models for this verse are:

• Then they recalled that each year pilgrims came to a festival for Yahweh in Shiloh. Now, Shiloh is north of the town of Bethel, on the east of the road to Shechem, and south of Lebonah.

• Then they suggested, “What about the annual Yahweh festival at Shiloh?” Indeed, Shiloh lies north of Bethel, east of the big road to Shechem, and south of the town of Lebonah.

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 .

Asher did not drive out the inhabitants …: As in the previous verse, there is no Hebrew waw conjunction to begin this verse. A new paragraph can begin here with “As for the tribe of Asher, they did not…,” “The tribe of Asher, too, did not…,” or “Neither were the people of Asher able to….” Asher was Jacob’s eighth son, born to Leah’s servant Zilpah (Gen 30.12-13). The territory assigned to the descendants of Asher was located to the northwest of Zebulun, on the coastal plain extending from Mount Carmel north toward present-day. For did not drive out, see verse 1.19; for inhabitants see verse 1.11.

Though the warriors from the tribe of Asher attacked a number of towns (seven are listed here), they were not able to drive out the inhabitants from any of them. It is possible that they were not as capable in battle as the local people (verse 1.19). Interestingly, in this verse the typical Hebrew repetition is absent, since inhabitants is only mentioned twice with the first two cities, rather than all of them.

The seven towns joined together by the Hebrew waw conjunction are:

Acco: a coastal town a few kilometers north of Carmel
Sidon: another coastal town 40 kilometers (25 miles) north of Tyre
Ahlab: a town in Asherite territory also mentioned in verse 19.29
Achzib: a town 13 kilometers (8 miles) north of Acco
Helbah: an unknown town
Aphik: a town thought to be near present-day Haifa
Rehob: an unknown town

Translators will have to transliterate each of these names. There is a textual problem concerning the name Ahlab. In verse 19.29 the Hebrew has “Meheleb,” but Revised Standard Version writes “Mahalab.” Here Hebrew Old Testament Text Project recommends “Mahlab,” so translators will have to decide which form to follow.

Translators should use a natural way of conjoining names in their language. Some languages will say “and” while others will prefer “or,” as in Revised Standard Version. In some languages it may be better to begin this verse with the names of the towns as follows:

• Not in Acco, not in Sidon, nor Mahlab, Achzib, Helbah, Aphik or Rehob, in none of these places were the people of Asher able to drive out any of the inhabitants.

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 final verse of the section is a kind of climax of the introductory material and a very important point is being made. Because the Israelites were unable to drive out the Canaanites and ended up living with them side by side, they intermarried with them. This inevitably led to their abandoning Yahweh, as they turned to worship the gods of the Canaanites.

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 this unit comes to an end, full nouns appear: Deborah appears once here and at the end of 4.9, and so does Barak. The full name reference of all the story participants in this verse (Naphtali and Zebulun also) is once again a Hebrew way of closing out this subunit. Translators should read their translations and use nouns and pronouns as are appropriate in their language.

And Barak summoned Zebulun and Naphtali to Kedesh: Though summoned renders a different Hebrew verb than the one in verse 4.6, it means Barak “called” or “brought together” his troops. Some versions say “mustered,” which gives a more military flavor. Zebulun and Naphtali occur in a reverse order here from verse 4.6, forming a kind of chiastic or X structure, which is also a typical Hebrew way of closing a literary unit (4.6-10). Indeed, the following verse is a kind of aside. Bible en français courant puts these tribes’ names back in the order “Naphtali and Zebulun,” and translators can do so if necessary. Here again Zebulun and Naphtali can be rendered “soldiers [or, warriors] from the tribes of Zebulun and Naphtali.” Kedesh is the same town mentioned in verse 4.6.

And ten thousand men went up at his heels: For ten thousand men, see the comments at verse 1.4; verse 3.29; verse 4.6. Went up translates the typical Hebrew expression for going into battle and occurs twice in this verse (see verse 1.1). At his heels is literally “at his feet.” This Hebrew idiom describes how the men follow closely behind Barak. However, there may be some irony here, since the same word for “feet” is used when King Eglon was thought to be “covering his feet” (verse 3.24). This may be a veiled way to express disapproval of Barak here. Most translations will not be able to preserve this hidden irony. This clause may be rendered simply “and ten thousand soldiers followed him into battle.”

And Deborah went up with him shows that she is going to battle. That she went up with him means she is keeping her promise to go with Barak. In studying the passage as a whole, what is striking is that though Deborah went up and the soldiers of Naphtali and Zebulun also went up, the same is not said about Barak. This may again indicate Barak’s reluctance to go to battle. Certainly, by adding this clause about Deborah at the end of the unit, Barak’s lack of courage is being underlined. Later, Gideon will need even more convincing than Barak before he goes to battle (verse 6.15-40).

Examples for translating this verse are:

• And Barak summoned the warriors of Zebulun and Naphtali to come to Kedesh. Altogether there were ten military units who went into battle with him, and Deborah also went out to battle with Barak.

• Barak called the soldiers of the Zebulun and Naphtali tribes to gather in Kedesh, and ten thousand followed him into battle. And Deborah went with him too.

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 song now takes another turn, as others who were brave enough to move out to help their brothers are congratulated. Here in Hebrew there is no conjunction to show this abrupt contrast, but it is precisely the absence of such a word that shows there is a break here. Some languages may be like Hebrew, but many others will need to mark this turning point by using a strong contrastive conjunction such as “But” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version).

Zebulun is a people that jeoparded their lives to the death: The people of Zebulun risked their lives to protect and defend their brothers. For Zebulun see verse 1.30 and verse 5.14. Hebrew does not have the verb is, but in translation adding it is certainly justified. The reference to people seems significant since the Hebrew term here (ʿam) is one that often speaks of Israel as a whole (see comments on verse 2.4). But several versions render this word in context as “soldiers” (Contemporary English Version) or “men” ( NET Bible). We might begin this line with “But as for the tribe of Zebulun, here is a people who….” Jeoparded their lives to the death is an unusual phrase in English, rendering a Hebrew idiom that is literally “reproached his life to die.” The soldiers from Zebulun were willing to risk death in order to support Deborah and the other Israelites who went out to fight. Many languages will have a fixed expression to describe this level of bravery and commitment: “risked their lives” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version), “risked death,” or “braved death” (New Jerusalem Bible). New Revised Standard Version says “scorned death,” and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh has “mocked at death.” Translators can use idiomatic expressions in their language to express the idea here.

Naphtali too, on the heights of the field: This line has an ellipsis, since the verb phrase jeoparded their lives to the death in the previous line is to be understood here. Naphtali too is literally “and Naphtali.” We could begin with “The people of Naphtali also risked their lives….” For Naphtali see verse 1.33. On the heights of the field tells where the action happened. This phrase may refer to the location of the battle for Naphtali alone or for both Zebulun and Naphtali. The Hebrew phrase rendered on the heights refers to a high place, possibly on top of mountains. In battles it is advantageous to be on a higher place to see and ward off attacks. Higher places are also easier to defend. The further specification of the field is somewhat odd, since fields are usually not located on the heights. The Hebrew word for field usually refers to an open space, but here it seems to refer to the battleground. New American Bible and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh render this whole phrase as “on the open heights,” and Good News Translation says “on the battlefield.” If the battle were in the open, as several versions suggest (New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), this would demand great courage, as the Israelites would be exposed to great danger. Contemporary English Version omits this phrase, but it should be included in the translation.

Some versions combine the two lines of this verse as in Good News Translation: “But the people of Zebulun and Naphtali risked their lives on the battlefield.” However, this rendering robs the lines of their rhythm. We might say:

• But the people of Zebulun risked their very lives.
The warriors of Naphtali too,
battling on the open heights.

• The warriors of Zebulun and Naphtali risked death,
on the towering heights of the battlefield.

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 .