On the shifting back and forth between the second person and third person in this song, see above on verse 1.

The threefold use of the negative particle in Hebrew in this verse is a powerful poetic device and should be imitated in translation where possible.

There is none holy like the LORD: God is said to be a “holy God” in 6.20. The translation of the word holy is particularly difficult in some languages. It is used throughout the Old Testament to qualify more than fifty different nouns. In most cases the primary component of meaning is “set apart from ordinary use” or “dedicated to God.” The idea of moral purity is a secondary component in some contexts. When God is said to be holy, the focus is on the separateness, the absolute difference, and the remoteness of God from all that is part of normal human experience (see Psa 113.4-6). Translators should try to avoid using terms meaning physically “clean” or “white” to express the idea of holiness.

There is none besides thee; there is no rock like our God: in place of these two clauses found in the Masoretic Text, the Septuagint has “There is no righteous one like our God; there is none holy except you.” One Septuagint manuscript, followed by Revised English Bible, reverses lines two and three of the Septuagint text: “none holy but you and none as righteous as our God.” Some interpreters consider this second line in the Masoretic Text, there is none besides thee, to be a later scribal addition, since it addresses God in the second person and breaks the parallelism between lines one and three (so New American Bible: “There is no Holy One like the LORD; // there is no Rock like our God”).

There is no rock like our God: God is frequently called a rock in the Old Testament (2 Sam 23.3; Psa 18.2, 31, 46; 28.1). This image evokes the idea of God as the source of protection and security for his people. When the meaning of the image will not be understood, translators may choose to follow the model of Good News Translation, “no protector like our God.”

Translators should follow the Masoretic Text here. In languages that have inclusive and exclusive first person plural pronouns, our should be inclusive, that is, including the Israelites to whom Hannah is singing this song.

The structure of the three elements in this verse may have to be altered because of the nature of certain receptor languages. A possible model is:
The LORD is holy;
no one can compare with him.
He alone is God.
God protects us like a rock;
no one can compare with him.

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 .

At that time: literally “And it happened on that day.” The Hebrew word often translated “day” has a wide range of meanings, including “daylight hours,” “a time period of twenty-four hours,” and a general indication of an extended period of time. As the following verses indicate (see especially verse 15), these events occurred at night, as Good News Translation makes explicit (so also New International Version, Revised English Bible, and New Century Version). In some languages it may even be misleading and contradictory to use the word “day” (New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) at this point and then talk about “night” later on.

Whose eyesight had begun to grow dim, so that he could not see: Revised Standard Version translates literally, but Good News Translation compresses the two actions into one: “who was now almost blind.” But it will be better in some languages to make a separate sentence of this relative clause. New American Bible, for example, has “His eyes had lately grown so weak that he could not see.”

His own place, that is “his room,” as in verse 9 also.

Some languages may find it more natural to imitate the restructuring of New Century Version, which uses two separate sentences and reorders some of the elements in this verse: “Eli’s eyes were so weak he was almost blind. One night he was lying in bed.”

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 .

Because Eli was blind, the messenger had to identify himself verbally.

He who has come from the battle: the Septuagint says “he who has come from the camp,” and this is followed by New Jerusalem Bible and Osty-Trinquet. While the difference in meaning between these two readings is minimal, there is no good reason to abandon the Hebrew text at this point. Translators should therefore translate from the battle.

It may be wise to use the name “Eli” rather than the pronoun he in the last sentence of this verse, if the antecedent in unlikely to be clear in the receptor language. Eli addresses the messenger in terms of endearment as my son (compare 3.6, 16).

The direct quotations of this verse may be rendered as indirect discourse if it is more natural to do so in the receptor language. A possible model for this is as follows:

• The man told Eli that he had just come from the scene of the battle and that he had run all the way that day. So Eli asked him what had happened at the battle scene.

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 temporal relationship of this verse to the preceding verse is not clear in Hebrew, nor in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation. Indeed, some interpreters suggest that verse 15 is a later addition to the text. The difficulty is this: how could the Levites take down the ark from the cart (verse 15) if the people of Beth-shemesh had already torn apart the wooden cart and used the wood for making a fire (verse 14)? In other words, the events in verse 15 seem to precede those in verse 14. For this reason it may be necessary to use the pluperfect and say that “the Levites had taken down the ark” (so Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). New American Bible provides another good model: “The Levites, meanwhile, had taken down the ark … and had placed them….” Another possibility may be to combine verses 14 and 15, putting things in proper chronological order. Contemporary English Version actually combines verses 13-15 in this way:
The people of Beth-Shemesh were harvesting their wheat in the valley. When they looked up and saw the chest, they were so happy that they stopped working and started celebrating.
The cows left the road and pulled the cart into a field that belonged to Joshua from Beth-Shemesh, and they stopped beside a huge rock. Some men from the tribe of Levi were there. So they took the chest off the cart and placed it on the rock, and then they did the same thing with the bag of gold rats and sores. A few other people chopped up the cart and made a fire. They killed the cows and burned them as sacrifices to the LORD. After that, they offered more sacrifices.

Levites: it is debated whether Levitical priests were functioning at this early period in Israelite history. Perhaps this detail was inserted here by a later writer, since Beth-Shemesh was one of the cities of the Levites (Josh 21.13-16), and since only Levites were permitted to carry the Covenant Box (1 Chr 15.11-15). In any case, these words are part of the text and must be translated. A glossary entry on this word will be essential. The only other place in the books of Samuel where the term is used is in 2 Sam 15.24.

The box: see the comments on verse 8.

Golden figures: the word translated figures here is the same as the general term used in verse 8. See the comments at that point.

The men of Beth-shemesh: New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, New International Version, and Good News Translation all say “the people,” since the Hebrew term for men here may include women as well.

Burnt offerings and sacrifices: see verse 14.

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 structure of the initial sentence of Samuel’s explanation may need to be reordered in some languages. The sentence serves as an introduction to the more detailed list of royal rights that continues through verse 17. Some other ways of translating it are “Here is a list of things that your king will do,” “If you have a king, this is how he will treat you” (Contemporary English Version), or “the rights of the king who will rule you will be as follows:…” (New American Bible).

The word translated ways is the same as in verses 3 and 9. It is elsewhere translated “custom” (2.13), “rights,” (10.25), and “ordinance” (30.25). In this context the idea of “habit” or “custom” probably fits best.

He will take: these are keywords in verses 11-18, occurring six times (verses 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17). If possible the receptor language should preserve the repetition of this verb, which expresses a negative attitude toward the future king’s actions. The sense in each of these six statements is that the king will act without regard for the desires of the people. Good News Translation‘s “He will make soldiers of your sons” does not adequately capture the negative force of the Hebrew. It may be better expressed “he will take your sons and make them serve as soldiers.”

In this context chariots and horsemen must be understood as military terms (as also in 1 Kgs 9.22 and 1 Sam 13.5). For this reason Good News Translation and Bible en français courant speak of “war chariots” and “cavalry.” See also Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, which also say “cavalry.” The law of Deuteronomy (17.16) prohibited kings from having chariots and cavalry forces.

To run before his chariots: in some languages this may be misunderstood to mean that the young men would eventually be run down by the chariots and killed. Since this is not the case, translators should seek to clarify the meaning by translating something like “to serve as bodyguards running ahead of his chariots” or “to clear the way for his chariots.” See the fulfillment of these words during the time of David’s sons Absalom (2 Sam 15.1) and Adonijah (1 Kgs 1.5). These “runners” were royal guards who protected the doors of the palace and the room where the king’s treasures were kept. In 1 Kgs 14.27-28, Revised Standard Version calls them “the guard” (literally “the runners”).

The word chariots itself may present problems for translators in cultures where such vehicles are unknown. A chariot of the type depicted in the Old Testament is a light, open, two-wheeled vehicle pulled by one or more horses and used in battle. It is distinguished from the “cart,” or “wagon,” used in the transportation of the Covenant Box (6.7-12), which was a heavier vehicle with four wheels.

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 .

Took up the leg: the translation took up fails to capture the cultic significance of the cook’s action. Here, as in 10.4, Saul is being given food that should be eaten only by priests, according to the law of Moses. Saul is being given “the thigh that is raised.” See Lev 10.14-15 in New Revised Standard Version, which refers to the “thigh that is raised.” In this same passage Revised Standard Version says the “thigh that is offered.” It may be wise to state in a footnote that, because Saul is given the thigh in this verse and the two loaves of bread in 10.4, which only priests are supposed to eat, it is shown that his kingship is considered to be holy, or sacred. The Hebrew word translated leg in Revised Standard Version is better translated “thigh” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Fox) in languages which make such distinctions.

The upper portion: this represents a single word in Hebrew. It is rare but apparently means “what was on it” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or “what went with it” (New Revised Standard Version and New American Bible). Various corrections have been proposed, which result in translations such as “the whole haunch and leg” (Revised English Bible), “the leg and the tail” (New Jerusalem Bible, Osty-Trinquet, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible), and “the fat-tail” (Fox). Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {C} rating to the word in the Masoretic Text and suggests a translation similar to that found in New Revised Standard Version.

As the note in Good News Translation indicates, there is some question about whether the Masoretic Text says that it was the cook or Samuel who spoke to Saul. The Hebrew says “the cook set them before Saul and he said.” The most natural reading of the Hebrew is to assume that the cook is the subject of both verbs, set and said (so New Jerusalem Bible). Yet it is difficult to think that the cook, and not Samuel, would have spoken such words to Saul. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “And [Samuel] said,” showing by the use of brackets that the name “Samuel” is not in the Hebrew text. New Revised Standard Version, like Revised Standard Version, says “Samuel said.” New Jerusalem Bible, however, translates as follows: “This is for you. This is what was left. Make a good meal.” If this is the correct sense of the Hebrew, then one can more easily understand the cook speaking them, as indeed he does in New Jerusalem Bible. It is difficult to decide here, but since it is grammatically possible that the pronoun “he” refers to Samuel, this seems to be the better interpretation.

That you might eat with the guests: the Masoretic Text says “saying the people I have invited.” Revised Standard Version (also New Revised Standard Version) is based on a suggested correction. Revised English Bible (“to which I have invited the people”) is based on a different correction of the Hebrew text. New Jerusalem Bible does not even translate these words.

Part of the difficulty is that the meaning of the words “saying the people I have invited” is not clear in Hebrew. Is it Samuel or Saul who says “I have invited the people”? Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text and proposes the following translation: “so that you [Saul] may say, ‘It is I who have invited the people.’ ” On the other hand New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, like Good News Translation, retains Samuel as the speaker: “And [Samuel] said, ‘What has been reserved is set before you. Eat; it has been kept for you for this occasion, when I said I was inviting the people.’ ”

The variety of interpretations and suggested changes show that this is a difficult verse to understand in Hebrew. The following translation reflects the interpretation proposed in this Handbook (though some languages may need to avoid the embedded quotation at the end of the verse):

• So the cook lifted up the thigh and what went with it, which are to be eaten by the priests, and set them before Saul. And Samuel said to Saul, “See, what was kept is set before you. Eat, because it was kept for you until the hour appointed so that you may say ‘It is I who have invited the people.’ ”

Such a translation will probably require a footnote stating that Lev 10.14-15 says that the thigh belongs to the priests, and that this action suggests that Saul’s kingship is considered to be holy, that is, that God has chosen him.

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 .