On the third day: literally “it happened on the third day” (as explained on page 19). In the context of the previous verse, which mentions staying in Ziklag for two days, it may be more natural in many languages to say simply “The next day” as Good News Translation has done. David had been in Ziklag for two days prior to the events recounted in this verse. It was on the following day that these events occurred.

Behold: the Hebrew particle translated in this way is often used to heighten the emotional impact of a narrative. Here it introduces a new, unexpected event. Most modern English versions leave it untranslated, but in those languages where such a device exists and is natural, it may be used here to increase the intensity of the events described in the following words. See page 18.

A man: later in the story we learn that this person was “a young man,” or a warrior, and that he was an Amalekite. But this additional information is introduced only gradually by the writer, who reserves the surprise until verse 8. While it may be necessary in some languages to introduce some of this information earlier, if at all possible it will be a good idea to respect the style of the author. The writer does, however, indicate immediately that this man was from Saul’s camp. This has been translated “a man from Saul’s army,” showing that the messenger was a member of Saul’s fighting force.

With his clothes rent and earth upon his head: (see 1 Sam 4.12) the text gives no explicit indication of who tore this man’s clothing and put earth on his head. A literal translation such as that in Revised Standard Version may give the incorrect impression that the man’s clothes had been torn accidentally. Revised English Bible renders the words earth upon his head as “and there was dust on his head.” The English word “dust” will suggest to most readers that he was accidentally covered with dust from running on a dirt road. It was, however, common practice for Jewish persons to do these things to themselves in order to show their sadness about something that had happened, particularly after a death. For this reason Good News Translation makes clear two facts that are only implied in the original: (1) the man had torn his own clothes and had put the dirt on his own head, and (2) the purpose of this action was “to show his grief.” Translators will do well to follow this example in most cases.

He fell to the ground and did obeisance: this is not intended to indicate two separate actions (see the comments on a similar phrase in 1 Sam 24.8 [Masoretic Text 24.9]). Rather the purpose of his bowing to the ground was to show his great respect for David. Instead of the coordinating conjunction and, it will be better in many languages to say something like New International Version, “fell to the ground to pay him honor.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He made him king: the use of the two pronouns may make it unclear which of the two characters is made king and which is the kingmaker. We know, of course, that it was Abner who made Ishbosheth king, so this may be made clear in translation, as has been done in Good News Translation.

Gilead: readers are unlikely to know whether this term refers to a town, a region, or some other geographical entity. For this reason it may be necessary for translators to add a classifier term showing that it was a region. It was located in the country that is now called Jordan, and the borders were the Yarmuk and the Arnon rivers. Note that Good News Translation indicates that Gilead was one of several territories.

Ashurites: the meaning of the name here is uncertain. This uncertainty is reflected in the variety of renderings in English versions. New Revised Standard Version retains the reading of Revised Standard Version, which possibly refers to the Assyrians; but Moffatt, New Jerusalem Bible, and Revised English Bible have “Asherites,” that is, members of the tribe of Asher (see Judges 1.32). This second understanding follows the ancient Jewish Targum. The same meaning is conveyed by Good News Translation‘s “Asher.” New International Version has “Ashuri” in the text, with a footnote saying “Or Asher.”

Anchor Bible and Fox read “Geshurites,” and similarly Knox has “Gessuri,” while Biblia Dios Habla Hoy has “Gesuri.” This reading comes from the Syriac and Vulgate and is justified on the basis that Geshur would be more logical in a geographical list between the names Gilead and Jezreel. The majority of modern versions, however, seem to prefer “Asher.”

Jezreel: while the name Jezreel refers to a town as in verse 2, it is also used to include the surrounding territory between Galilee and Samaria. It is this sense that is intended here.

Ephraim and Benjamin: these were originally names of individuals, but in this context the terms are used to refer to the geographical territory where the descendants of these individuals lived. This should be made clear in translation by saying something like “the territories of Ephraim and Benjamin” or by using other grammatical devices showing that they are not the names of individuals but of geographical areas.

And all Israel: this is not intended as another name in the list, as if to say “the remainder of Israel.” Rather it is a comprehensive expression referring to the places already mentioned. Good News Translation reflects this by adding the word “indeed” or “that is to say.” Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente says “in short, of all Israel.” The name Israel is sometimes used to refer to the ten northern tribes but excluding the tribes of Simeon and Judah. This more restricted meaning is almost certainly what is intended here (see the comments on section head title at the beginning of verse 1).

Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch offers a possible model for restructuring the verse as a whole in other languages: “There he made him king over Israel. His rule extended to the regions of Gilead, Asher, Jezreel, Ephraim and Benjamin.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He said: in order to avoid ambiguity it may be better to begin this verse with “David replied” or something similar, as Good News Translation has done. The initial word of David’s reply, Good, is intended to show his agreement with Abner’s proposal of a military alliance. It may be better translated in some languages by a complete sentence, such as “It is good” or “I agree.”

The personal pronoun I [will make a covenant] is emphatic in the Hebrew. Such a use of personal pronouns is common in Hebrew in reply to an invitation or to a question, especially in the case of a solemn promise, as here. Chouraqui preserves the emphatic pronoun here in his very literal translation, but other translations do not.

One thing: the use of the word thing does not mean that David is asking for a physical object. The idea is rather that “one action” will be required, that of bringing Michal to David. The story of David’s winning the right to marry Michal is told in 1 Sam 18.

The word unless introduces the condition required before Abner could meet with David. Certain languages may require considerable restructuring in order to convey the meaning. One possibility is to say something like “I am asking you to do one thing: Bring to me my wife, Michal, the daughter of Saul; only then will you be able to meet with me.”

When you come to see my face: that is, “when you come into my presence” or “when you come before me.” Some languages will more naturally say “when you come before my eyes.” “To see the face of the king” is an idiom that means “to be allowed to enter into the king’s court for an official visit.” This idiom occurs again in chapter 14 regarding Absalom’s return to Jerusalem. Nueva Biblia Española says “I will not receive you.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The Masoretic Text has the name Ish-bosheth twice in this verse. Some manuscripts of the Septuagint read “Mephibosheth,” but Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives an {A} rating to the names in the Masoretic Text. The name used in the receptor language should be consistent with previous choices of the name used (see the comments on verses 4 and 5).

Who sought your life: it should be made clear in the receptor language that it was not Ishbosheth but Saul who was the enemy of David and who had tried to kill him.

Has avenged: literally “has given revenge.” The same expression is rendered “gave [me] vengeance” in 22.48. It includes the idea of punishment or repayment for a wrong. The whole phrase may be translated “has repaid Saul and his descendants for what they did to you, our master and king.”

My lord the king: since the two men are speaking directly to King David, it will be more natural in many languages to say something like “[avenged] you, our master and our king.” See 3.21. Although these words come in the middle of the discourse of the two men, in some languages the very first words a person says to a king are extremely important. So these men would have to begin with “Your Majesty” or some other formal title, since their approach may be considered impertinent and too direct otherwise.

On Saul and on his offspring: the term translated offspring involves not only the children of Saul, but all his descendants. New American Bible uses the word “posterity.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Threshing floor: since the word floor in English may make the reader think of something made of wood, Good News Translation uses the more general word “place.” For a full explanation of this high, hard, and flat area where grain was beaten, see 1 Sam 23.1, and compare also Ruth 3.2.

The Hebrew text, followed by Revised Standard Version, first relates the fact that Uzzah touched the ark and then gives the reason for his doing so. This has been reversed in Good News Translation. In quite a few languages the order of Good News Translation will be preferred. The fact that the ox stumbled, thus causing Uzzah to put his hand on the ark, will come first.

In comparing the parallel passage in 1 Chr 13.9, it will be noted that the threshing floor is said to belong to “Chidon” instead of Nacon as here. One of the Dead Sea Scrolls actually has yet another name, “Nodan” (so Anderson and New American Bible). Some interpreters have suggested that the Hebrew word is not a name at all but is rather a participle from a verb meaning “to stand firm.” New English Bible and Revised English Bible are based on this interpretation that the word is a participle, and they translate “a certain threshing floor.” But this interpretation is not widely held and is not recommended to translators. Since there is no textual evidence to harmonize this detail of the two accounts, translators should probably maintain the distinction found in the traditional Hebrew texts and keep Nacon here. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {C} evaluation to the reading in the Masoretic Text.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The word house here does not refer to the Temple as it did in verse 11, but to the family or dynasty of David. For this reason Good News Translation translates “You will always have descendants,” while New Century Version has “Your family … will continue forever.”

Before me: most Hebrew manuscripts have “before you” at this point. But many scholars think that this is a scribal error caused by the fact that the previous verse contains the expression “before you.” The ancient Greek translation and a few Hebrew manuscripts have “before me.” Although Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {C} rating to the Masoretic Text and recommends that translators follow the reading “before you,” of all the versions consulted, only New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, and Bible de Jérusalem (1998 edition) do so. These words have been completely omitted by Good News Translation. If the MT is followed, the sense is that God promises David that David’s throne will be secure during David’s lifetime, that is, that David will live to see his kingdom well established. If the Septuagint reading “before me” is followed, these words have a messianic sense, that is, that there will always be rulers of the Davidic dynasty “before God,” even after David dies. Either understanding makes sense in the context, so translators may follow either the text of the Hebrew or the text of the Greek.

Your throne shall be established …: see verse 13, where the word throne is similarly used to speak of the dynasty of David.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The transition conjunction at the beginning of this verse may be rendered in some languages by something like “It so happened that….”

A servant of the house of Saul: that is, of the family of Saul. In this context the word servant refers to a domestic servant of relatively high status. Verse 10 below indicates that this man himself had servants. And in view of the destruction of Saul’s household, this remaining servant appears to have been in charge of what was left of Saul’s inheritance.

Ziba is introduced to the reader for the first time and reappears in 16.1-4 and 19.16-30.

They called him: the subject pronoun has no antecedent and is merely a vague way of saying that some unknown person ordered him to appear before King David. The king had somehow made his thoughts known to members of his court, and someone who knew of Ziba’s existence responded by summoning him to appear before David. In languages that use the passive form in such a context, translators may choose to say “he was called….” In other cases it will be better to say “someone called him….”

Your servant is he: this is translated by “Yes, Your Majesty, I am” in Contemporary English Version. It can be made into indirect speech and may be much more natural as such in some languages. But the wording should somehow indicate that his response showed great respect for David and submission to his orders. This seems to be the purpose of the Good News Translation statement.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

It happened: this verse begins as the previous one with a form of the verb “to be” that is traditionally translated “And it came to pass” (King James Version). This form, however, simply serves as a kind of transition marker and may be translated using the natural transition devices of the receptor language, indicating the passage of a certain amount of time since David had sent his troops into battle against the Ammonites.

Late one afternoon: literally “at the time of the evening.” The use of the expression “one evening” (Anchor Bible, New American Bible, Revised English Bible, and New International Version) may make the reader think of a time after dark. It was, however, more likely “towards evening” (New Jerusalem Bible) or late in the afternoon just toward the setting of the sun. Compare 1.12 as well as 1 Sam 14.24 and Ruth 2.17.

Arose from his couch: probably David was getting up from his afternoon siesta before his evening meal. Translations should therefore avoid giving the impression that he had already gone to bed for the night. New American Bible makes this quite specific with “rose from his siesta,” and New Jerusalem Bible has “got up from resting.” The thought is similar to that in 4.5, where it is said that Ishbosheth was taking his noonday rest. Couch translates a noun that is rather literally “a place of lying.” The noun may refer to a simple mat, a royal sofa or lounge, or even a stand on which a corpse or a coffin is placed. In this context the general word “couch” probably expresses the correct meaning in English. Certain versions say simply “bed” (New International Version, New Century Version). Several translations avoid representing the object by using words like “nap” (Contemporary English Version), “siesta” (New American Bible), or “resting” (New Jerusalem Bible) to describe what David had been doing there.

Walking on the roof: this may sound strange indeed in languages where people do not have flat roofs and never go up on the roof of a house except to make repairs. But it does reflect the biblical culture and should not be made to fit the culture of the receptor language. In some languages an explanatory footnote may be required. But it will also be legitimate to translate “flat roof” (Contemporary English Version) instead of simply “roof.” Compare also Josh 2.6-8 and 1 Sam 9.25-26.

The king’s house: in some languages it will be more natural to say “his house” or “the palace.”

A woman bathing: Good News Translation “taking a bath in her house” may be misleading. Probably she was not inside a building where David was able to see her through a window, but in the courtyard of her house and plainly visible to David, whose palace was at a higher elevation. As is suggested in verse 4, this bathing probably included the ritual purification required by Lev 15.19-24 following a woman’s monthly menstrual flow of blood. Contemporary English Version attempts to bring out this aspect in translation by saying “bathing as her religion required.”

The woman was very beautiful: the idea rendered “very beautiful” is more literally “of very good appearance” or “very good to look at.” While this is taken as a separate sentence in most versions, it may be necessary in some languages to combine it with the previous sentence and say something like “saw a very good-looking woman bathing” or “watched a woman who was very beautiful while she was taking a bath.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .