king

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:

(Click or tap here to see details)

  • Piro: “a great one”
  • Highland Totonac: “the big boss”
  • Huichol: “the one who commanded” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Ekari: “the one who holds the country” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
  • Una: weik sienyi: “big headman” (source: Kroneman 2004, p. 407)
  • Pass Valley Yali: “Big Man” (source: Daud Soesilo)
  • 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 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 If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior.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.”

(Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )

See also king (Japanese honorifics).

Translation commentary on 1 Maccabees 1:10

The writer now focuses his attention on Antiochus Epiphanes, so translators should begin a new paragraph at this point.

From them came forth a sinful root: The word root is a figurative expression for a person of royal lineage, of royal stock. The image is used sometimes of a righteous king (see Isa 11.1; Sir 47.22); but here sinful root refers to a “wicked ruler” (Good News Bible; compare Isa 14.29). This whole clause may be rendered “There was a wicked ruler who was a descendant of one of Alexander’s generals” (similarly Good News Bible).

Antiochus Epiphanes, son of Antiochus the king: Antiochus Epiphanes is Antiochus~IV, the character whom the narrative will follow. The other Antiochus is Antiochus~III, his father. Good News Bible adds “the Third” as a way of distinguishing the two men. Antiochus~III is also known as Antiochus the Great, and this title could be used as well. Antiochus~the Great ruled over the Seleucid kingdom in Syria 223–187 b.c., and Antiochus Ephiphanes ruled 175–164 b.c. An alternative model for the first half of this verse is “A descendant of one of Alexander’s generals was the wicked ruler [or, chief] Antiochus Epiphanes. He was the son of Antiochus the Great.” Good News Bible provides a helpful model with “The wicked ruler Antiochus Epiphanes, son of King Antiochus the Third of Syria, was a descendant of one of Alexander’s generals.”

It is necessary to discuss a problem at this point in order to help clarify something that will be mentioned in 1Macc 7.1-4. When Antiochus the Great died, he was followed by his older son Seleucus~IV who ruled 187–175 b.c. He was assassinated, and his brother Antiochus Epiphanes followed him. Seleucus~IV is not involved in the narrative of 1-2Maccabees, but his son Demetrius~I will be.

He had been a hostage in Rome: Rome was a city in Italy that rose to a position of world power during Hellenistic times. Rome defeated Antiochus~III in 190 b.c., and demanded that he send several members of his family to Rome as hostages. The future Antiochus~IV was one of those sent there and held as security to ensure the loyalty of his father to Rome. He stayed there about twelve years. At this point the mention of Rome seems irrelevant, but it lets the reader know that during the events described in the next few chapters, Rome was an active participant on the world scene. In chapter 8 Rome will be brought directly into the narrative. In some languages it may be necessary to make the meaning of hostage clear by rendering this clause as “He had once been imprisoned in the city of Rome to ensure the loyalty of his father to the Romans” or “The Romans had once imprisoned him in the city of Rome to ensure that his father would be loyal to them.”

He began to reign in the one hundred and thirty-seventh year of the kingdom of the Greeks: The author of 1Maccabees uses a system of dating that begins with the first year of the Seleucid kingdom in Syria. The Seleucid kingdom began in 312 b.c., which means that the one hundred and thirty-seventh year of the kingdom of the Greeks refers to 175 b.c. Translating these dates (and there are many in 1Maccabees) is a problem for the translator, and there is no fully satisfactory solution. We suggest that translators follow a course similar to the one Good News Bible has taken. In the text Good News Bible follows the dating system of the author, but in footnotes it provides the equivalent b.c. dates. At this first instance of dating translators should also indicate in the text (rather than in the footnote as in Good News Bible) that this is “the year 137 of Greek rule in Syria.” The phrase “of Greek rule in Syria” may be placed in parentheses if so desired as shown in the following model for verse 10:

• Eventually, in the year 137*(of Greek rule in Syria), the wicked Antiochus Epiphanes began to rule [or, became king]. He was the son of King Antiochus the Great, and he had once lived in Rome as a hostage [or, he had once been imprisoned in Rome to ensure that his father remained loyal to the Romans].
* The year 137 corresponds to 175 b.c.

Quoted with permission from Bullard, Roger A. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on 1-2 Maccabees. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2011. For this and other handbooks for translators see here.