complete verse (1 Samuel 15:8)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 1 Samuel 15:8:

  • Kupsabiny: “All the people of that leader/king were killed with swords and the king of the Amalekites called Agag was captured alive.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “They killed all the Amaleknon, but Agag their king on-the-other-hand they did- not -kill but-instead they just captured (him). They also did- not -kill the best sheep and cows, including their calves/lambs. Everything that (was) good they did- not -destroy, but the ones who were-frail/feeble/weak and not of-value they destroyed.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “Saul’s army captured Agag, the king of the Amalek people-group, but they killed everyone else.” (Source: Translation for Translators)

king

Click here to view graphically

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 (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.”

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

See also king (Japanese honorifics).

Translation commentary on 1 Samuel 15:8

Agag is usually understood as a proper noun, but some consider it to be a title for Amalekite kings, just as “Pharaoh” was a title for kings of Egypt.

Utterly destroyed: for the technical meaning of this verb, see the comments on verse 3. If possible, translators may wish to follow the models of New American Bible and New Jerusalem Bible and express the idea of the “ban” both here and in verse 9. New American Bible says “but on the rest of the people he put into effect the ban of destruction by the sword.” New Jerusalem Bible is similar: “and, executing the curse of destruction, put all the people to the sword.” The translation in Traduction œcuménique de la Bible is comparable. Moffatt says that he “massacred all the people, giving no quarter.”

With the edge of the sword: Good News Translation says simply that he “killed” the people, but translators are urged to keep the specific method stated in the Hebrew, “putting them to the sword” (Revised English Bible). While it is important to retain the mention of the instrument used (the sword), it will be unwise in most languages to emphasize the edge of the sword (literally “the mouth of the sword” [so Chouraqui, Fox]).

In some languages it will be more natural to reverse the order of the elements in this verse by stating that “Saul and his army killed all the Amalekites except King Agag,” instead of talking about Agag first and then saying that all the Amalekites were killed.

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 .