The information concerning the ancestry of Elkanah is rearranged in Good News Translation to follow the more natural English order, giving the name first and then other details about the person. Translators should present this information in an order that is logical and natural in their own language rather than following the order of any particular English version.

The words There was are literally “And there was.” Other books begin in the same way (Ruth, Jonah, Esther), where the word “And” does not indicate a connection to the previous book. So nearly all translations omit it. Some languages have devices that must appear at the beginning of a story to indicate whether it is considered historical or imaginary. If this is the case, the account that follows should be introduced in such a way as to indicate that the writer considered it historical.

Ramathaim-zophim: the Hebrew is literally “Ha-Ramathaim-zophim,” which means “the two heights.” As the next paragraph will show, the word zophim should be read as “Zuphite,” meaning that the city of Ramathaim is in the district of Zuph. According to 1 Sam 1.19; 2.11; 7.17; 15.34; 19.18, and certain other passages, the name of this town is Ramah. It is probably located about forty kilometers (twenty-five miles) northwest of Jerusalem. This Ramah in the hill country (New Jerusalem Bible [New Jerusalem Bible] “highlands”) of Ephraim should not be confused with the Ramah of Benjamin, about nine kilometers (six miles) north of Jerusalem on the border of Israel and Judah. Possibly Ramah of Ephraim (called “Armathaim” in the Septuagint) is to be identified with the New Testament city of Arimathea (Matt 27.57). Translators are encouraged to translate this place name the same here as in other verses, where it is called Ramah (so Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, and the French common language translation [Bible en français courant]).

Though some modern translations maintain the name Ramathaim-zophim (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible), most follow the Greek text and say “a Zuphite” (New Revised Standard Version [New Revised Standard Version], Revised English Bible [Revised English Bible], New American Bible [New American Bible], New International Version [New International Version]) or “of the Zuphites” (New Jewish Publication Society version, or TANAKH [New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh]), meaning that he belonged to the Zuphite clan (see 1 Chr 6.34-35), that is, he was a descendant of Zuph, who is mentioned at the end of this verse. Such a translation requires only a slight change of one vowel in the Hebrew tsofim plus the assumption that the final letter (m) has been incorrectly repeated from the next Hebrew word. The Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (Hebrew Old Testament Text Project) recommends this change, though giving it only a {C} rating, as does Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament (Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament), the final report of Hebrew Old Testament Text Project.

The descendants of Zuph apparently named a district in his honor, and Ramah was located in this district. So the word “Zuphite” may refer to the area or district in which the city of Ramatha was located (see 1 Sam 9.5). The French common language version (Bible en français courant), following this understanding, says “in the district of Zuph.”

The hill country of Ephraim refers to the central mountainous area of Palestine where the tribe of Ephraim had settled (see Josh 17.15). Since expressions where two nouns are joined by the word of can often be understood in several different ways, it will be necessary in certain languages to say something like “the mountainous area belonging to the tribe of Ephraim” or “the region of hills where the Ephraimites lived.”

Jeroham: though other men in the Old Testament have this same name, Jeroham the father of Elkanah is mentioned only here and in 1 Chr 6.27, 34.

Tohu is called “Toah” in 1 Chr 6.34 and “Nahath” in 1 Chr 6.26. Since these three are all variants of the same name, the same spelling should probably be used in each case.

Zuph is identified in this verse as a member of the tribe of Ephraim. According to 1 Chr 6.25, however, he is a Levite, that is, a descendant of Levi’s son Kohath. Various attempts have been made by scholars to explain this difference, but this is a difficulty for interpreters and not for translators, who should translate the text as it stands.

An Ephraimite: this Hebrew word may be understood as referring either (1) to an Ephrathite, that is, a member of the Judahite clan of Ephrathah, as in 1 Sam 17.12, or (2) to an Ephraimite, that is, a member of the tribe of Ephraim, as in Judges 12.5. The note in Traduction œcuménique de la Bible says “either the Judean clan of Ephrathah, or the tribe of Ephraim.” Ephrathah is identified with the city of Bethlehem in Gen 35.19 and 48.7. The two terms are used together in Micah 5.2 and in parallel in Ruth 4.11. Most likely this Hebrew word here means an Ephraimite, that is, “a member of the tribe of Ephraim.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He had two wives: the pronoun He refers to Elkanah. Since Elkanah is not the only man mentioned in verse 1, translators need to be sure that the referent of the pronoun He is clear. The text does not indicate which wife was Elkanah’s first wife, and Hannah is perhaps mentioned first because she plays a more important role than Peninnah in the story that follows. In languages that have different words for “a wife who has children” and “a wife who does not have children,” it will not be possible to say simply “he had two wives,” and some translations may have to say “he had married two women.”

The name Hannah means “grace” or “gracious.” The meaning of the name Peninnah is uncertain. Most likely it is the feminine singular form of a plural noun meaning something like “rubies,” “coral,” or “pearls.” The original readers may have understood verses 4 and 5 at two different levels. On the one level, Elkanah loved Hannah more than he loved Peninnah. On the other level, he loved “grace/gracious” more than he loved his wife “Ruby” or “Pearl.” Fox translates the first part of verse 2 “now he had two wives—the name of the one was Hannah/Grace, and the name of the second was Peninna/Pearl.” Perhaps the writer of the deuterocanonical book Ecclesiasticus 7.19 had this passage in 1 Samuel in mind when he wrote “Dismiss not a sensible wife; a gracious wife is more precious than corals” (New American Bible).

The other: literally “the second.” But the Hebrew does not necessarily mean that Elkanah had married Peninnah after having married Hannah; it may mean only that she is the second to be named in this story. But she probably was Elkanah’s second wife. It is possible that Elkanah took her as a second wife when Hannah was unable to give him a child. Most translations are similar to either Revised Standard Version or Good News Translation, indicating only that Peninnah was the “other” wife. It is perhaps preferable to follow the model of those translations that say that Peninnah was “the second” wife (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). The less specific translation at least keeps open the possibility that the writer intends for Peninnah to be identified as the second wife and not simply as the second to be named.

In order to avoid misunderstanding, some translators may find it necessary to add a footnote explaining that in Old Testament times it was a common and accepted practice to have more than one wife.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This man refers to Elkanah, who is last mentioned by name in the Hebrew text in 1.1. In some languages this will be clearly understood, following the wording of the Hebrew text as reflected by Revised Standard Version, but in others it will be necessary to translate using the proper noun “Elkanah” in place of this man.

The verb to go up reflects travel across the hills and valleys of Palestine. To make the approximately twenty-eight-kilometer (about eighteen-mile) trip east to Shiloh, one ascended from the foothills into the mountains. Most common language translations (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, Bible en français courant, Spanish common language translation [Biblia Dios Habla Hoy]) leave out any reference to Elkanah’s upward movement. In some languages translators may find it natural to express the fact that Elkanah went higher up into the mountains to get to Shiloh. But in other cases, depending on the degree of difference in elevation, it may be unnatural to do so. Although the words “to go up” in some languages may mean “to go north,” that is not the meaning of the Hebrew.

Some languages may prefer to use a specific verb or expression for making regular trips to a sacred place. New American Bible says, for example, that Elkanah regularly “went on pilgrimage.”

Year by year: literally “from days to day.” This Hebrew expression is found also in 2.19; Exo 13.10; Judges 11.40; 21.19; it is best translated in English as “yearly” or “every year.” A translation such as “[he] regularly went” (New American Bible) may suggest that Elkanah made several trips each year, but the intended meaning is more likely that he went once each year. In certain languages this information will come more naturally at the beginning of the sentence rather than after the verb as in Revised Standard Version.

As verses 1.1, 19 indicate, his city refers to the city of Ramah, as Good News Translation makes explicit (also the Septuagint). However, the focus of the text may be on the fact that Elkanah left “his hometown” in order to fulfill his religious duties in Shiloh. In some languages it may be desirable to use the name of the town and at the same time indicate that it was Elkanah’s village of origin: “Ramah, his hometown.”

To worship: literally “to bow down.” The same verb occurs in verses 19 and 28 of this chapter. The person worshiping touched not only his or her knees to the ground but also the head. Fox says “to prostrate-himself.”

To sacrifice: in some languages it will be necessary to translate this verb by a more general verb plus a noun in a way similar to Good News Translation: “to offer sacrifices.” In such cases translators will have to decide whether to use the singular or plural of the noun “sacrifice.” In those cases it is recommended that the plural be used as in Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, New Century Version, Nouvelle version Segond révisée, and La Bible du Semeur.

The expression the LORD of hosts occurs for the first time here in the Old Testament. The Hebrew is literally “Yahweh Sabaoth” (New Jerusalem Bible). The precise meaning of this title is not certain. “Sabaoth,” traditionally translated as “hosts,” may refer to (1) the armies of Israel (as in 17.45), (2) angelic beings (as in Psa 103.21; 148.2), or (3) heavenly bodies, that is, the stars (as in Isa 40.26). The general meaning of this title is clear, however. It designates the LORD as one who is an all-powerful ruler. Hence some translations use the expression “LORD Almighty” (Good News Translation, New International Version, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible) or “the LORD All-Powerful” (New Century Version and Contemporary English Version). Others use the qualifier “of armies” (La Sainte Bible: Nouvelle version Segond révisée says “l’Éternel des armées,” and Nueva Biblia Española says “al Señor de los ejércitos”). Following interpretation (1) above, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente reads “LORD of the armies of Israel.” Following interpretation (2), Fox says “YHWH of the Heavenly-Armies.” Others have LORD of hosts (Revised English Bible, New Revised Standard Version, New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), though the word “host” is no longer used in contemporary English to mean “army.” Translators should probably try to use a word or expression with wider meaning, like “Almighty” or “All Powerful,” rather than one with a narrower meaning like “armies.”

The city of Shiloh, located about thirty kilometers (less than twenty miles) north of Jerusalem in the territory of Ephraim, was a center for administrative affairs (see references to Shiloh in Josh 18; 19; 22; Judges 21) as well as for religious matters (see Josh 18.1) for the tribes of Israel. The tabernacle and the ark of the covenant were located here at the time when Elkanah and Hannah lived.

It is here that Eli, Hophni and Phinehas are first introduced in the Old Testament. Hophni and Phinehas are simply named without indicating which son is the elder. The following verses make clear that Eli himself is still functioning as a priest along with his two sons (see verse 9). The Septuagint says “where Eli and his two sons Hophni and Phinehas were priests of the Lord.” Translators should follow the Masoretic text (Masoretic Text), which states only that the sons of Eli were priests in Shiloh. This has the advantage of properly maintaining the focus on the two sons.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The sense of the Hebrew verbs in verse 4 seems to be not that Elkanah sacrificed and gave portions one time only, but rather that this is what he did “each time” he went to Shiloh to offer sacrifices.

On the day when Elkanah sacrificed: literally “and it was the day and Elkanah sacrificed.” This may be legitimately translated “Whenever the day came for Elkanah to sacrifice, he would….” (New International Version).

He would give: as indicated above, the verb form here indicates a repeated or habitual action. In languages that have special forms for such actions, those forms should be used here. Others may wish to follow one of these models: “had the habit of giving” (Bible en français courant) or “had the custom of giving” (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible).

Portions refers to the pieces of meat that the worshiper was allowed to eat from the animal that had been sacrificed (see the laws in Lev 7.11-19). For the fellowship offerings, part of the sacrifice was burned for God, and the rest of the animal was eaten by the people. The Hebrew does not state specifically that Elkanah gave only one share of the meat to Peninnah and one share to each of her children, but that is probably the intended meaning (so Good News Translation and New American Bible). If he gave Hannah one share only (as stated in the Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation renderings of the following verse), then it is unlikely that he gave his other wife and each of her children more than he gave Hannah.

Though the Hebrew says Peninnah his wife, Good News Translation omits the words his wife, since that information has just been given in verse 2, and in English narrative it is not natural to repeat it so soon.

The Hebrew says her sons and daughters. Though the Good News Translation translation “her children” allows for the possibility of both male and female children, it does not state it clearly, as the Hebrew does.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The meaning of the Hebrew expression translated as only one portion is not clear. The Hebrew is literally “one portion two-faced.” There are several possible interpretations of the Hebrew: (1) a double portion, (2) a single portion, and (3) a large portion. To further complicate the matter, the Septuagint translation seems to require a slight change in both the spelling and punctuation of the Hebrew text, to read “one portion, although.” The Revised Standard Version translation is based on the Septuagint. New Jerusalem Bible likewise follows the Septuagint in reading “to Hannah, however, he would give only one portion: for, although he loved Hannah more, Yahweh had made her barren” (similarly Revised English Bible). Note that, according to the Septuagint, he gave Hannah one portion although (or despite the fact that) he loved her more. That is, Elkanah gave Hannah one portion only, not because he loved her less but rather because she had no children and therefore needed only one portion for herself. According to the Hebrew, however, he gave her a special (or, double) portion because he loved her more.

Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testamentk (Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament) gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text and recommends that it be followed. Some interpreters understand the Hebrew to mean “a double portion.” This is the basis for translations such as “but to Hannah he gave a double portion because he loved her” (New Revised Standard Version, New International Version, Fox, and La Sainte Bible: La version Etablie par les moines de Maredsous). Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, however, states that the Hebrew expression most likely does not mean “double.” It therefore recommends that the Hebrew refers to a part which was particularly large and honorable for the person receiving it. This understanding is the basis for translations such as “but to Hannah he gave a portion twice as large, because he loved her very much” (Bible en français courant), “an honorable part” (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible), and “a special share” (New Century Version). Translators should follow the Masoretic Text here and not the Septuagint. The difference in meaning is small between “a double portion” and “a special portion.” Either of these two translations may be followed.

On the word portion see the comments on 1.4.

The Hebrew says literally that the LORD had closed her womb. This is figurative language meaning that God “had kept her from having children” or “had not granted her children” (Revised English Bible). Some languages will prefer a more technical term, saying that the LORD had made her “barren” (New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible).

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Good News Translation makes explicit the fact that Hannah’s rival is Peninnah, who was last mentioned in verse 4 in the Hebrew text. The Revised Standard Version translation of this term has the meaning of someone who causes distress or adversity, but certain versions choose to translate it just as “the other wife” (Bible en français courant) or simply repeat the name “Peninnah” (New Century Version). Many African languages have a special term for “co-wife” that is perfectly appropriate here.

Used to provoke her: as in the previous verse the verb form here implies something that was done repeatedly. This emphasis should be retained in translation. The idea of the adverb sorely (New Revised Standard Version, “severely”) is actually contained in the verb in Hebrew. Its presence in the Revised Standard Version rendering is an indication that the verb is a very strong one. English versions use verbs like “torment” (Revised English Bible) and “taunt” (New Jerusalem Bible). And New American Bible attempts to show the habitual nature of the taunts by translating “turned it into a constant reproach.”

The precise meaning of the Hebrew word translated to irritate is disputed. Though usually understood as “to irritate” (New Revised Standard Version, New International Version), the Hebrew word may be related to an Aramaic word meaning “to humiliate” (so Good News Translation, Revised English Bible, Bible en français courant, Osty-Trinquet, Septuagint). In this context the meanings of the two words are not too different. A constant reminder of her barrenness would have been both an irritation and a humiliation to Hannah. Humiliation would be a way to “provoke her to anger” (Anchor Bible).

Another Hebrew verb with the same root consonants as irritate means “to thunder.” The causative form of this verb occurs in 1 Sam 2.10 and is translated as “he will thunder” (Revised Standard Version). Since the causative form of the verb occurs here also in 1.6, La Bible Pléiade translates the verb as “to cause her to rage.”

The Hebrew conjunction ki is rendered because in most translations, explaining why Peninnah tormented Hannah. But this word may also be translated “that.” This second meaning is found in New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, which says “her rival … would taunt her that the LORD had closed her womb.” If this interpretation is followed, the last part of this verse tells what the content of Peninnah’s words were, rather than why she taunted Hannah (as in Revised Standard Version). In this context the meaning is basically the same, whether one takes the Hebrew word as introducing the cause (Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation) or the content (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

Anchor Bible understands this first verb to mean “to thunder” and renders it “complain aloud.” Anchor Bible also takes Hannah to be the subject of the second verb. Following this interpretation the preposition preceding the verb is understood to express result, instead of purpose as in Revised Standard Version, and the conjunction is rendered “that” instead of because. Anchor Bible says “Moreover her rival used to provoke her to anger, so that she would complain aloud that Yahweh had closed her womb.” This interpretation does not, however, seem probable and is not recommended.

On the meaning of closed her womb, see the comments on 1.5. Her womb refers to Hannah’s womb. If there is any danger that the pronoun may be understood as referring to Peninnah, then adjustments should be made in translation.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

In some languages it may be necessary to avoid confusion by using the names “Peninnah” and “Hannah,” as in Good News Translation.

So it went on is literally “Thus he [or, it] did.” In certain languages this will be better translated “these things happened [habitually].” And in some cases the words year by year will have to be shifted to the beginning of the sentence.

As … she went up: the Hebrew verb form here is feminine singular, which is reflected in many translations (Revised Standard Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). The first occurrence of the pronoun she apparently refers to Hannah. Bible en français courant makes this explicit: “when Hannah went to the house of the Lord.” The second she (she used to provoke) refers to Peninnah. Some translations such as Good News Translation, New American Bible, and Revised English Bible translate the sense, that is, “they went,” since clearly both Hannah and Peninnah went to Shiloh each year. If there is any danger that the reader or hearer will think that Hannah went alone, then the Good News Translation model should be followed.

The house of the LORD (see the same phrase in 3.15) is called “the temple of the LORD” in verse 9. The ark was no longer kept in a tent as it had been during the years that the Israelites wandered in the wilderness. It was now kept in a building with a doorpost (verse 9) and at least two doors (3.15). The large temple in Jerusalem, however, was not yet in existence. It was not built until the reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 6).

Provoke: the same word as in verse 6.

Hannah wept is literally “she wept.” But for clarity it will probably be necessary to replace the pronoun with the name.

Though the Hebrew verb eat has no direct object, some languages require that one be supplied. In these cases it will be necessary to specify what was eaten, probably “the meat of the sacrifices,” although in some languages the more general expression “eat food” will be quite acceptable. This applies also to verses 8, 9, and 18.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .