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 .

So perish all thine enemies, O LORD! expresses a wish on the part of the singers. Contemporary English Version casts it in the form of a prayer by beginning with “O LORD, we pray that….” However, this rendering sounds more like a formal prayer and less like a song. So does not render the Hebrew waw conjunction, but a stronger word, ken, which means “in the same manner.” It refers back to the destruction of Sisera. The poet is expressing the hope that in the same way Sisera was killed, so will all the enemies of God be put to death. The Hebrew verb form for perish is jussive, which is often rendered in English as “may … perish!” Perish does not render the same Hebrew word as the one for “die,” but means “be destroyed” or “be put to death.” Thine enemies (Good News Translation “your enemies”) comes from the understanding that the enemies of Israel are actually God’s enemies. By attacking Israel, Sisera was thought to be attacking God himself. God is called upon here to defend himself. For enemies see verse 2.14. The vocative expression O LORD can be placed at the beginning of the line if this is more natural.

But thy friends be like the sun as he rises in his might: But, which renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, introduces a contrasting wish that those who love God may be like the rising sun. Thy friends renders a Hebrew participle, literally “those loving him.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh follows the Hebrew closely by saying “His friends,” but Revised Standard Version and almost all other English versions turn the third person reference to God into second person, in accordance with the vocative address to the LORD in the preceding line. Revised Standard Version probably chose the word friends so that there would be a clear contrast with God’s enemies. The Hebrew verb for “love” (ʾahav) is part of the covenant language of Deuteronomy, where Israel is told to demonstrate its love for God by obeying his commandments. Thus a better rendering would be “those who love you” or “those who are faithful to you.”

The singers pray that those who love God will be like the sun as he rises in his might. The sun’s rising is seen as a powerful and victorious act. So the singers express the desire that God’s people will always be strong and victorious. He rises is literally “he goes out,” which is the way Hebrew speaks about the sun rising. Translators should use natural expressions in their languages, including the proper pronoun for the sun, which may be “she” or “it.” The Hebrew word for might comes from the root gibor (“warrior”), referring to power and victory. However, Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version see this might as brightness, and thus Contemporary English Version says “But let everyone who loves you shine brightly like the sun at dawn.” Though this may be part of the meaning, it is better to focus on the sun’s power rather than its brightness. New International Version offers a good model: “But may they who love you be like the sun when it rises in its strength.” This last clause is extremely poetic and translators should look for ways to give an appropriate conclusion to an outstanding poem.

Translation models for the last two lines of this poem are:

• “O LORD, may your enemies be destroyed like Sisera.
But may those that love you rise in strength,
like the ever-rising sun!”

• “So too may your enemies perish, O LORD!
But may those faithful to you,
like the sun rise up in victory.”

And the land had rest for forty years: See the comments on verse 3.11. This narrative conclusion is not part of Deborah’s song, but serves as the ending for both the narrative (verse 4.1-24) and the song (verse 5.1-31a Revised Standard Version). As noted above, it should be separated by a blank line from the end of the song and be presented as prose.

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 .

In this verse Gideon seems to be negotiating with the LORD. He wants to carry out an experiment to find out if what the LORD says will really happen. Theologians are divided as to how to interpret Gideon’s attitude and act here. Is he showing his faith or doubting the LORD’s word? It is better if translators can render this episode on a neutral note, so readers and listeners can draw their own conclusions. Gideon first states what he will do and then the conditions under which he will decide whether to believe the LORD. He will carry out his experiment twice, to make sure he is drawing the right conclusion.

Behold, I am laying a fleece of wool on the threshing floor: The word behold (hinneh in Hebrew) calls God’s attention to the request Gideon has been building up to throughout the previous verse. This word may be rendered “Look” or by longer expressions, such as “OK, this is what I am asking,” “This is what I want,” or “LORD, here it is.” Translators should look for natural ways in their language to introduce this special request. I renders an emphatic pronoun in Hebrew. The Hebrew participle translated am laying is an unusual word, here meaning “put” or “place.” The Hebrew word for behold often occurs with participles, and we might say “Look, LORD, I am setting down here…” or “Look, I am laying….”

Fleece refers to the fur of an animal, while the longer expression a fleece of wool makes it clear that this is the fur of a sheep. In some parts of the world, sheep have lots of wool, and when the wool is sheared or shaved away from the skin, it remains largely in one piece since the fibers are intertwined. This whole piece is called a fleece. Because of the oils in the fibers of the wool, such a fleece would repel water. In languages not familiar with sheep and not having a word for wool, translators may speak of “this animal fur/hair.” If wool is known, we could say simply “this wool.” In terms of story development, the fleece is considered a “prop,” that is, a non-living object that plays an important role in the story. In many languages props occur in full noun form and are only rarely referred to by pronouns. Since the word fleece is repeated often in this episode, translators should check to see that references to it are natural and in conformity with storytelling practices in their language.

The threshing floor was generally a flat open place exposed to the wind. Here the wheat or other grain was beaten, then tossed into the air to allow the wind to blow away the chaff. Good News Translation renders the threshing floor as “the ground where we thresh the wheat.” However, translators must be careful not to give the impression that Gideon is giving information to God about what a threshing floor is. A natural way of speaking of this place might be “down here where we beat the grain.” Contemporary English Version has “the stone floor of that threshing-place over there.”

If there is dew on the fleece alone, and it is dry on all the ground: This first test involves two conditions. They are what linguists call true conditions or “real world conditions.” They do not express doubt as in some conditional clauses (verse 6.36). Nevertheless, Gideon is asking for a supernatural sign to prove that God will deliver Israel through him.

If there is dew on the fleece alone is Gideon’s first condition. Dew is the condensation caused by a change in temperature during the night. In the dry and desert-like land in parts of Israel, dew is what maintains the life of all vegetation. This moisture forms during the night, covering plants and whole surfaces. It remains only for a short time during the early hours of the morning before the sun dries it up. All languages should have a way to express this phenomenon. With this request Gideon is asking for God to make the dew appear only in one spot, on the fleece alone. In other words, Gideon is asking God to go against the law of nature by which, in any given area, dew would be spread everywhere uniformly. We might say “if only the fleece is wet with dew” or “if there is only moisture on the fleece.” Good News Translation adds the phrase “in the morning,” which is not in Hebrew, and does not need to appear, unless it aids in comprehension.

And it is dry on all the ground is Gideon’s second condition. To prove that God is really speaking, Gideon wants not only the fleece to be wet with dew, he also asks that the ground around the fleece stay dry. In many languages the conditional marker if will need to be repeated here: “and if it is dry….” This request contrasts with the previous one, so the Hebrew waw conjunction rendered and may be better translated “but” (Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation). It is dry means the dew has not touched the ground. Some languages will prefer to say “is not wet.” All the ground refers to the parts of the threshing floor that surround the fleece. The word all emphasizes how badly Gideon wants absolute proof. All around the fleece must be dry. Ground renders the key Hebrew term ʾerets that often refers to the Promised Land throughout the Old Testament. Contemporary English Version expresses these two requests as wishes, saying “tomorrow morning let there be dew on the wool, but let the stone floor be dry,” which in some languages will be a good model to follow.

Then I shall know that thou wilt deliver Israel by my hand expresses the consequence of the conditions. If the conditions are fulfilled, then the result is predictable: Gideon will know that God will really use him to save the Israelites. The connector then, which renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, is part of the condition-consequence formula in English, if … then. Translators should use the forms usually accompanying this kind of statement in their language. I shall know means Gideon will then be certain. The Hebrew verb rendered know (yadaʿ) is used in a variety of ways in the Old Testament: God “knows” his people, and as part of his covenant, his people “know” him (see comments on verse 2.10). So the verb know here may imply that Gideon has had some encounter with God. It would be good to preserve this key term and concept here, but if this is not possible, I shall know may be rendered “I will really believe” or “I will be certain.” For thou wilt deliver Israel by my hand, see verse 6.36.

As thou hast said: See the comments on verse 6.36.

Translation models for this verse are:

• Look, I am setting this sheep’s fleece on the ground here where we beat the grain. If [in the morning] only the fleece is wet and if all the ground around it is dry, then I will know for sure that you will use me to save Israel, as you promised.”

• Now, I am going to put this animal hide on the ground where we separate the chaff from the grain. Tomorrow morning, if only the hide is wet and all around it is dry, then I will know you really want to use me to deliver the people of Israel, just like you said.”

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 from there he went up to Penuel: Gideon leaves Succoth and goes to the town of Penuel. The Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And may be better translated “Then,” “Next,” or “After that.” The adverb there refers to Succoth, so Contemporary English Version begins this verse with “After leaving Succoth….” The Hebrew verb rendered went up (ʿalah) can refer to upward movement, but it can also mean “attack” or “fight against” (see comments on verse 1.1). Here it simply means “went” (Contemporary English Version). However, the use of this verb seems to prefigure the final chapters of the book, which describe a civil war between the tribes of Israel. According to Gen 32.22-32, Penuel was another town on the Jabbok River like Succoth, but further from the Jordan River. Penuel is spelled “Peniel” in Gen 32.30, so New International Version has “Peniel” here. It is better to use a single spelling for the name of this town throughout the Old Testament, either Penuel (so Bible en français courant) or “Peniel.”

And spoke to them in the same way: The subject of the verb spoke is Gideon. It renders the same Hebrew verb (dabar) translated “said” in verse 8.3. Because Gideon is asking for food, here it may be rendered “asked” or “requested.” The pronoun them refers to the inhabitants of Penuel, who have not been mentioned before. Spoke to them in the same way means Gideon first politely asked the people for food (see verse 8.5). Good News Translation says “made the same request of the people there.” Another possible model is “also asked the people there for some food.”

And the men of Penuel answered him as the men of Succoth had answered: There is much repetition in these clauses, since the words men and answered occur twice. Like the people of Succoth, the people of Penuel also refused to help Gideon. The men of Penuel refers to the inhabitants of Penuel, not just its males (see comments on “the men of Succoth” at verse 8.5). However, this phrase could refer to the leaders of the town, as in Contemporary English Version. Answered does not render the generic Hebrew verb meaning “say,” but the more specific one meaning “answer” or “reply.” This whole sentence may be rendered “But the people of Penuel refused to give him and his men food, just as the people of Succoth had done” or “But just as the people of Succoth had done, the people of Penuel refused to give Gideon and his troops anything to eat.”

New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh gives a good model for this verse:

• From there he went up to Penuel and made the same request of them, but the people of Penuel gave him the same reply as the people of Succoth.

Another possible model is:

• Then Gideon went to the town of Penuel and asked the people there to give him and his troops food, but like the people of Succoth, they too refused.

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 the trees said to the fig tree: Because the olive tree refuses, the trees turn to the fig tree. And is a rather weak rendering of the Hebrew waw conjunction here. In this literary genre a connector such as “So” (Revised English Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) would be more appropriate. The fig tree, like the olive tree, plays an important part of the life in Israel and is important part of the diet. Its fresh fruit is appreciated for its sweetness, but it can also be easily dried and preserved. The large leaves of the fig tree are also often used to wrap things. Fig trees may not be known in the target culture, but since they play such an important role in biblical texts, some equivalent must be found. A transliterated expression such as “figi-tree” would be better in this context of a fable than a phrase such as “tree that produces sweet fruits called ‘figs.’ ” Explanations can be given in the glossary. In some parts of Africa there are trees that resemble fig trees, but such equivalents should only be used where such trees are known to produce edible sweet fruit.

Come you, and reign over us: This request to the fig tree is similar to the one to the olive tree. Here the fig tree is addressed more directly with Come you, which is slightly unnatural in English. In Hebrew the pronoun for you is emphatic. For reign over us, see verse 9.8. This sentence may be rendered “You come be our king,” “Come, you reign over us,” or even, “You! You come and be our king.”

A translation model for this verse is:

• So the trees turned to Fig Tree and said, ‘You! Come be our king.’

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 .