17They came up against Judah, invaded it, and carried away all the possessions they found that belonged to the king’s house, along with his sons and his wives, so that no son was left to him except Jehoahaz, his youngest son.
The name that is transliterated as “Judah” or “Judea” in English (referring to the son of Jacob, the tribe, and the territory) is translated in Spanish Sign Language as “lion” (referring to Genesis 49:9 and Revelation 5:5). This sign for lion is reserved for regions and kingdoms. (Source: John Elwode in The Bible Translator 2008, p. 78ff. and Steve Parkhurst)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 2 Chronicles 21:17:
Kupsabiny: “Those people went to war against the land of Judah and they plundered all the things that were in the home of Jehoram, and then they took with them all his wives and his children. But those people left the small son of Jehoram who was called Ahaziah.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “They plundered all the wealth in the king’s royal palace. And except for his youngest son, Ahazia they took away his wives and his other sons.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “They attacked Juda, and (they) took the possessions/goods in the palace of the king, including his wives and children. Only his youngest son Ahazia (was) the-(one-that) was- not -taken-(away).” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “Their army invaded Judah and took away from Jerusalem all the valuable things that they found in the king’s palace, and even his sons and wives. His youngest son, Ahaziah, was the only one of his sons whom they did not take away.” (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.”
And they came up against Judah, and invaded it: Since the action described in this verse is the result of God having stirred up the anger of the Philistines and Arabs, An American Translation begins this verse with the connector “so that” to translate the common Hebrew conjunction rendered And. The Hebrew verb translated came up against may be rendered “attacked” (New International Version) or “invaded” (Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible) in this context. Judah refers to “the kingdom of Judah” (Bible en français courant). The Hebrew verb translated invaded is more literally “split” or “broke up.” It is used of making a breech in a city wall in order to overrun the city. By extension it is used of the penetration into a land or territory as here. Jewish Publication Version translates invaded it as “broke into it.” For these two clauses New Jerusalem Bible has “They invaded Judah, forcing their way into it.” Compare also “They marched against Judah, breached its defenses” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).
And carried away all the possessions they found that belonged to the king’s house …: The king’s house is “the royal palace” (Good News Translation, NET Bible).
So that no son was left to him except Jehoahaz, his youngest son: Jehoahaz is called “Ahaziah” in 2 Chr 22.1 and throughout 2 Kings. Both these Hebrew names, Jehoahaz and “Ahaziah,” consist of the name “Ahaz” plus a form of the divine name, so they have the same meaning, which is “Yahweh has seized.” In the case of Jehoahaz, the divine name comes at the beginning of the name, and in the case of “Ahaziah,” the divine name comes at the end of the name. Some translations use the name “Ahaziah” here in 2 Chronicles also as in 2 Kings in order to not confuse readers by using two different names in the Old Testament for the same person (so Good News Translation, New International Version, Bible en français courant). If this is not done, an explanatory footnote will be essential. New Living Translation translates was left as “was spared,” but such passive verbs may have to be expressed in some languages with an active verb such as “remained” (Osty-Trinquet). In other languages this whole clause may be restructured by saying “Jehoahaz, his youngest son, was the only one that they did not kill.”
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.