This verse introduces another major theme of this episode and the next one: the people of Israel had compassion for Benjamin. It is hard to know if the narrator is being ironic here. The Israelites nearly wiped out the Benjaminites, and now the text says they had sympathy for them. However, even if their compassion was well-founded and sincere, their means of solving the problem was unholy, as the following verses will show.

And the people of Israel had compassion for Benjamin their brother: And renders the Hebrew waw conjunction, but in this context it may be translated “But” (New Revised Standard Version) or “Now” (New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible). Once again the people of Israel is literally “the sons [or, children] of Israel,” which seems appropriate since the focus here is on the fact that each tribe had descended from the same ancestor. For the Hebrew verb rendered had compassion (nacham), see verse 2.18, where it is translated “moved to pity.” Though versions give varying renderings for this verb, such as “grieved” (New International Version), “felt remorse” (Revised English Bible), “were sad” (Contemporary English Version), and “felt sorry” (Good News Translation, New Living Translation), it refers to compassion in this context. Once again the phrase their brother evokes strong emotion (see verse 20.13, verse 23, verse 28). However, these words seem ironic here, and perhaps bordering on hypocritical. The people who nearly wiped out an entire tribe now feel pity. Some scholars suggest that perhaps the Israelites were not sorry for their brothers, but rather for the nation, which had been considerably weakened by the civil war. But the text is specific, and the future decisions taken show they are thinking how to repair the damage done to their brothers, the Benjaminites. So we might say “But the people of Israel felt sorry/pity for the Benjaminites, who were their brothers.”

And said, “One tribe is cut off from Israel this day: The Israelites begin their reflection by regretting the fact that the number of tribes in Israel is reduced. When the tribe of Levi was given special responsibilities for Israel’s religious life and denied land, the tribe of Joseph was divided into two, Ephraim and Manasseh, to preserve the number of tribes at twelve, a number that clearly had a special significance. Here the Israelites are upset at having reduced the number of tribes and want to do something to restore that number.

One tribe is a key phrase in this subsection (see verse 21.3). The passive Hebrew verb rendered is cut off means “has been destroyed.” The use of a passive verb is not surprising, since the Israelites are clearly avoiding admitting their own responsibility for what has happened. It is the Israelites themselves who cut off the tribe of Benjamin, almost to the point of extinction. Translators should try to render the force of the verb is cut off. We might say “One tribe has been wiped out…” (similarly Contemporary English Version). Many languages may prefer an active form here, but they should keep the evasive style by using an impersonal subject, for example, “They have cut off a tribe of Israel today” or “Someone has cut off….” Since the people of Israel are talking about themselves, it may be more natural to say “One tribe has been cut off from us today.” This day refers to the time of the Israelites’ speaking and not to the time of the narrator’s writing. In Hebrew this expression comes in the middle of the clause, but translators may place it wherever it is natural, for example, “Now one [entire] tribe in Israel has been wiped out.”

A translation model for this verse is:

• But the people of Israel felt sorry for their brothers, the Benjaminites, and said, “One of our tribes is now destroyed.

Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .