4He said to Jehoshaphat, “Will you go with me to battle at Ramoth-gilead?” Jehoshaphat replied to the king of Israel, “I am as you are; my people are your people; my horses are your horses.”
The Hebrew and Greek that is transliterated as “Jehoshaphat” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with the signs for “king” and “mixup” referring to the fateful alliance with king Ahab of Israel in 1 Kings 22 and 2 Chronicles 18. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
In Malay, the pronoun beta for the royal “I” (or “my” or “me”) that is used by royals when speaking to people of lower rank, subordinates or commoners to refer to themselves in these verses. This reflects the “language of the court because the monarchy and sultanate in Malaysia are still alive and well. All oral and printed literature (including newspapers and magazines) preserve and glorify the language of the court. Considering that the language of the court is part of the Malaysian language, court language is used sparingly where appropriate, specifically with texts relating to palace life.” (Source: Daud Soesilo in The Bible Translator 2025, p. 263ff.)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 1 Kings 22:4:
Kupsabiny: “Then Ahab said to Jehoshaphat, ‘Will you help us to go to war over at Ramoth-gilead? Jehoshaphat replied, ‘We are together, my people and your people are one, and my horses are yours.’” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “Ahab asked Jehoshaphat, "How would it be if you were to go with me to attack Ramoth-gilead?” Jehoshaphat replied to the King of Israel, "I am as you, my people are as your people, my horses are as your horses."” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “So Ahab asked Jehoshafat, ‘Will you go with us (excl.) to fight-against Ramot Gilead?’ Jehoshafat answered Ahab, ‘I am ready to go with you, and I am ready to have you use my soldiers and horses.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “Then he turned to Jehoshaphat and asked, ‘Will your army join my army to fight against the people of Ramoth and retake that city?’ Jehoshaphat replied, ‘Certainly I will do whatever you want, and you may command my troops. You may take my horses into battle, also.’” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as “king” in English. Here are some (back-) translations:
Ninia Yali: “big brother with the uplifted name” (source: Daud Soesilio in Noss 2007, p. 175)
Nyamwezi: mutemi: generic word for ruler, by specifying the city or nation it becomes clear what kind of ruler (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Ghomála’: Fo (“The word Fo refers to the paramount ruler in the kingdoms of West Cameroon. He holds administrative, political, and religious power over his own people, who are divided into two categories: princes (descendants of royalty) and servants (everyone else).” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn))
Faye Edgerton retells how the term in Navajo (Dinė) was determined:
“[This term was] easily expressed in the language of Biblical culture, which had kings and noblemen with their brilliant trappings and their position of honor and praise. But leadership among the Navajos is not accompanied by any such titles or distinctions of dress. Those most respected, especially in earlier days, were their headmen, who were the leaders in raids, and the shaman, who was able to serve the people by appealing for them to the gods, or by exorcising evil spirits. Neither of these made any outward show. Neither held his position by political intrigue or heredity. If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior. If the shaman failed many times in his healing ceremonies, it was considered that he was making mistakes in the chants, or had lost favor with the gods, and another was sought. The term Navajos use for headman is derived from a verb meaning ‘to move the head from side to side as in making an oration.’ The headman must be a good orator, able to move the people to go to war, or to follow him in any important decision. This word is naat’áanii which now means ‘one who rules or bosses.’ It is employed now for a foreman or boss of any kind of labor, as well as for the chairman of the tribal council. So in order to show that the king is not just a common boss but the highest ruler, the word ‘aláahgo, which expresses the superlative degree, was put before naat’áanii, and so ‘aláahgo naat’áanii ‘anyone-more-than-being around-he-moves-his-head-the-one-who’ means ‘the highest ruler.’ Naat’áanii was used for governor as the context usually shows that the person was a ruler of a country or associated with kings.”
He said to Jehoshaphat: The pronoun he refers to King Ahab. Since the verb said introduces a question, it may be better in some languages to translate it “asked,” as in New International Version, New American Bible, and other modern versions.
Will you go with me to battle at Ramoth-gilead?: This question implies more than merely accompanying Ahab’s army to the place where the battle would take place. Rather, Ahab is requesting military assistance. For this reason some may prefer to translate “Will you go with me to fight…?” (New International Version) or “Will you help me to attack…?” The purpose of attacking Ramoth was to take it back from Syrian rule. Bible en français courant, therefore, says “Will you come fight with me to retake Ramoth of Gilead?”
Jehoshaphat said to the king of Israel: Here the verb said may be rendered “answered” (New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or “replied” (New Jerusalem Bible, New Revised Standard Version) in the context of this dialogue.
I am as you are, my people as your people, my horses as your horses: The reply of Jehoshaphat indicates that the people in the southern kingdom of Judah are one with the people of the northern kingdom of Israel. Whatever Ahab wishes to do, the people of Judah will join with him. Compare Moffatt: “I am one with you, my men are one with your men, my horses with your horses.” The Good News Translation translation “I am ready … and so are my soldiers…” (similarly New Century Version) takes the Hebrew noun for people in the specific sense of “military troops,” which is a common meaning in 1 Kings. In this context a translation such as “soldiers” or “forces” (Anchor Bible) most likely expresses the intended meaning. Good News Translation also renders the Hebrew word for horses with a military expression here by saying “cavalry.” However, some languages may lack such a technical term. In such cases horses is certainly an adequate translation. Jehoshaphat will give the same response to King Jehoram of Israel in 2 Kgs 3.7.
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
22:4a So he asked Jehoshaphat, “Will you go with me to fight against Ramoth-gilead?”
Then he asked Jehoshaphat, “Will you (sing) go/come with me to the battle at Ramoth Gilead?” -or-
Then Ahab said to King Jehoshaphat, “Please come with me to attack Ramoth Gilead.” -or-
He asked Jehoshaphat to help him attack Ramoth Gilead.
22:4b Jehoshaphat answered the king of Israel,
And Jehoshaphat said to the king of Israel, -or-
King Jehoshaphat replied, -or-
Jehoshaphat replied that
22:4c “I am like you, my people are your people, and my horses are your horses.”
“⌊Of course.⌋ I am one/united with you. (sing) ⌊Consider⌋ my people to be your people, and my horses to be your horses.” -or-
“I am ready to support you. My men/soldiers and my ⌊war⌋ horses are at your (sing) ⌊service/command⌋.” -or-
he would go/be with him. His men and horses would be/go with him.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.