Now: the Hebrew has only the common conjunction that is most often translated “And.” But the context may require a different transition word in some languages. Good News Translation and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch say “One day” and make a paragraph break at the beginning of this verse.

Saul had: at this point in the story Saul has been dead for some time. Knowledge of this fact may affect the verb form used in this case. Anchor Bible, Revised English Bible, New American Bible, and New International Version use the English pluperfect tense, “Saul had had a concubine” (so also Bible en français courant, La Bible du Semeur). Knox, on the other hand, conveys the idea of Saul’s departure, with the words “Saul had left a concubine.”

Concubine: the exact status of a concubine in Israelite culture is not absolutely certain, but most probably such a woman was a legitimate wife of lower status. These included slaves and women captured during wars. Her standing was therefore less than that of the principal wife or wives, but she should not be thought of as a prostitute, and her status was not temporary. The term is also found in Gen 22.24 and frequently in the book of Judges, as well as in this book. Some languages have had to translate this term as “spouse of second rank” (Bible en français courant) or “second-level wife.” Translators are advised not to follow New Century Version‘s rendering of this term, “slave woman.”

Ish-bosheth: or “Ishbaal” (New Jerusalem Bible and New American Bible). See the comments at 2.8. The Masoretic Text of this verse says literally “and he said.” Most translations add the name Ish-bosheth, either following the Septuagint, which has the name Memphibosthe, or simply making the name explicit as the context requires. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, following the Septuagint, and a manuscript from Qumran recommend the following corrected text: “And Ishbosheth son of Saul said.” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {C} evaluation to this corrected text, but for reasons of style it may be unnecessary in receptor languages to repeat the information that Ishbosheth is “the son of Saul.”

Gone in to: this is a euphemistic expression for having sexual relations with a woman. Compare Gen 16.2; Psa 51.1; and Ezek 23.44. Many English versions use the English euphemism “sleep with” (Good News Translation, New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible) or “lie with” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). New American Bible has “Why have you been intimate with…?” while New Century Version is more direct, “Why did you have sexual relations with…?” It is possible to understand the Hebrew verb as referring to a regular practice rather than to a one-time affair (so Anchor Bible, “why have you been sleeping with…?”).

The direct quotation of Revised Standard Version may be made indirect as in Good News Translation, if this will be more natural in the receptor language.

The Masoretic Text never states directly that Abner had been sleeping with one of Saul’s concubines. All that is stated is Ishbosheth’s accusation that Abner had done so. Some Greek manuscripts, however, have the words “And Abner took [or, went in to] her,” and this is the basis for the translation in several versions (New Jerusalem Bible, Osty-Trinquet). New Jerusalem Bible, for example, says “Now, there was a concubine of Saul’s called Rizpah daughter of Aiah, and Abner took her.” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text, as reflected in Revised Standard Version.

Rizpah appears again in 21.8-11. Though the Hebrew does not state explicitly that Aiah was the father of Rizpah, the name Aiah is a man’s name in Gen 36. Almost all Bible dictionaries agree that Aiah was the father (not the mother) of Rizpah.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Very angry over the words: New International Version states that he was “very angry because of what Ish-Bosheth said.” Other languages may have to say something like “Abner heard those words and became greatly annoyed.”

Am I a dog’s head of Judah? The words so translated are very difficult and have resulted in a wide variety of renderings. Some scholars think that the reference to Judah was not a part of the original question. The words translated of Judah are not in the ancient Greek translation. And so they are omitted by Moffatt, An American Translation, New Jerusalem Bible, Osty-Trinquet, Anchor Bible, and Anderson. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, however, gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text and recommends that the words of Judah be translated. Because of the similarity between the Hebrew word for “dog” and the name “Caleb,” some interpreters have suggested that the meaning of the rest of the question is “am I a Calebite chief?” (The word for “head” may mean “chief” in some contexts.) Others have suggested that the reference is to a “dog-faced baboon” (see New English Bible). But both of these interpretations are unlikely.

The most probable meaning to be translated (although far from certain) involves disloyalty of a person who would stoop to deception and trickery to betray a trusting person, as a dog might turn on someone who feeds him. This seems to be supported by the words that follow this controversial question. In view of the context the most probable meaning of this expression is “Do you think I am a traitor?” If translators wish to retain something of the image of the original, they may be able to say something like “Do you think I am a dog in the service of the Judeans?” or “Am I like a dog following the Judeans around?” Translators may wish to refer to the discussion on the words Calebite and Caleb in 1 Sam 25.3 and 30.14.

Loyalty: see 2.5-6 as well as 1 Sam 15.6.

His brothers: in view of the fact that Abner is speaking to Ishbosheth, the son of Saul, it may be more natural in some languages here to say “your uncles.” However, the Hebrew term translated brothers is sometimes used in a broader sense to include one’s relatives. For this reason Anchor Bible and Anderson translate this as “his kinsmen” rather than “his brothers,” and this probably is the intended meaning.

Have not given you into the hand of David: Revised Standard Version understands the Hebrew verb to mean that Abner has not turned Ishbosheth over to David. Similar is Revised English Bible, “I have not betrayed you into David’s hands.” Good News Translation, on the other hand, understands the meaning to be that Abner has continued to protect Ishbosheth from military defeat by David. New American Bible is similar to Good News Translation: “by keeping you out of David’s clutches.” Either meaning is possible and translators must simply choose.

A fault concerning a woman: literally “an offense of the woman.” The presence of the definite article is not reflected in Revised Standard Version or Good News Translation, but it seems to be important because it is a reference to the particular woman already mentioned. New Revised Standard Version, New International Version, and Contemporary English Version speak of “this woman,” clearly referring back to Rizpah, who was introduced in verse 7.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse may be restructured as in Good News Translation, if it is more natural to provide the reason for Ishbosheth’s fear before indicating that he was speechless. But instead of stating that it was impossible for Ishbosheth to speak, some languages may prefer to say something like “dared not answer” or “did not presume to respond.”

He feared him: that is, Ishbosheth was afraid of Abner, and this should be made clear.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The transition word And in Revised Standard Version will be unnecessary in many languages, but a transition word such as “Then” (New Living Translation) or “Thereupon” (Bible en français courant) better express the relationship to the preceding verses.

There are a couple of textual problems in this verse, but Hebrew Old Testament Text Project gives a {C} rating to the MT, and this Handbook recommends that the Masoretic Text be followed. The words at Hebron come from the ancient Greek version and are not in the original Hebrew. The meaning of the preposition tachtaw in the Hebrew text is the subject of much speculation. The footnotes in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation both translate it “where he was.” Neither Revised Standard Version nor Good News Translation follows the MT here. The preposition often means “under” or “beneath,” but it may also mean “instead of.” Some possible translations are: “on his own behalf” (New Jerusalem Bible and similarly New International Version and Revised English Bible); “immediately” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh); “in Telam” (New American Bible, and see the comments on “Telem” is the discussion of 1 Sam 27.8). The interpretation of Anchor Bible is essentially the same as that of New Jerusalem Bible and others: “as his representatives.” This solution is perhaps the least unattractive of the possibilities that have been proposed. Hebrew Old Testament Text Project suggests that this preposition be translated “where he was,” as in 2.23.

To whom does the land belong? The Hebrew words that Revised Standard Version attempts to translate in this way are so difficult that New Jerusalem Bible leaves a blank space in the text and notes only that “a few words are corrupt.” They are also omitted by An American Translation, Moffatt, and Anchor Bible. While the words are difficult, the most probable meaning is something like the following: Abner did not consider Ishbosheth to be the real ruler of Saul’s kingdom (see verses 6, 11, and 2.8). Abner considered himself to be the ruler, that is, the one to whom the land belonged, but he was willing to make a covenant with David by which David would become king. Some possible renderings are “who is going to rule the land?” (New Century Version) or “who is to control the land?” (Revised English Bible). Contemporary English Version, however, takes it to mean “You should be the ruler of the whole nation.”

Make your covenant with me: the word for covenant is first found in Gen 6.18 (see also 1 Sam 4.3). Here the idea is that of a military alliance. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Moffatt, and Anchor Bible use the word “pact,” while Revised English Bible translates “let us come to terms.”

Behold: see the comments on 1.2 (and 1 Sam 4.3).

My hand: the hand represents the power of the person to whom it belongs. Abner is promising that all the political and military might in his power will be committed to David and his cause. Some possible models are “I will give you my support” (New Revised Standard Version) or “I will help you” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He said: in order to avoid ambiguity it may be better to begin this verse with “David replied” or something similar, as Good News Translation has done. The initial word of David’s reply, Good, is intended to show his agreement with Abner’s proposal of a military alliance. It may be better translated in some languages by a complete sentence, such as “It is good” or “I agree.”

The personal pronoun I [will make a covenant] is emphatic in the Hebrew. Such a use of personal pronouns is common in Hebrew in reply to an invitation or to a question, especially in the case of a solemn promise, as here. Chouraqui preserves the emphatic pronoun here in his very literal translation, but other translations do not.

One thing: the use of the word thing does not mean that David is asking for a physical object. The idea is rather that “one action” will be required, that of bringing Michal to David. The story of David’s winning the right to marry Michal is told in 1 Sam 18.

The word unless introduces the condition required before Abner could meet with David. Certain languages may require considerable restructuring in order to convey the meaning. One possibility is to say something like “I am asking you to do one thing: Bring to me my wife, Michal, the daughter of Saul; only then will you be able to meet with me.”

When you come to see my face: that is, “when you come into my presence” or “when you come before me.” Some languages will more naturally say “when you come before my eyes.” “To see the face of the king” is an idiom that means “to be allowed to enter into the king’s court for an official visit.” This idiom occurs again in chapter 14 regarding Absalom’s return to Jerusalem. Nueva Biblia Española says “I will not receive you.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Saul’s son: this information has been given several times already (2.8, 10, 12, and 15). The Good News Translation translators did not think it was necessary to repeat it here.

Give me: since David and Michal had actually lived together as husband and wife (see, for example, 1 Sam 19.11), it will perhaps be better to translate this verb something like “Give me back” or “Return to me.”

My wife … whom I betrothed: this may sound unnecessarily repetitious in some languages. If so, it may be translated “the woman … whom I married” or simply “my wife.”

At the price of a hundred foreskins: this refers to the story in 1 Sam 18.20-27. New Century Version completely drops the reference to foreskins: “I killed 100 Philistines to get her.” But it is possible to say something like “I had to kill a hundred Philistines and present their foreskins to Saul as proof of victory in order to marry her” or “In order to marry her, I had to kill a hundred Philistines and prove that I had done so by showing their foreskins to Saul.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

And: it is as a result of the message from David that Ishbosheth took this action. For this reason a stronger transition word may be required. Revised English Bible uses the less common language word “Thereupon,” while New Jerusalem Bible and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, like Good News Translation, have “So.”

Sent, and took: the idea behind the two verbs is that Ishbosheth made the decision that resulted in Michal’s being taken from her present husband. It does not mean that he performed the action himself. This is made clear in Contemporary English Version, “sent some of his men to take Michal away from her new husband….”

Her husband Palti-el: this man’s name is given as “Palti” in 1 Sam 25.44. But since the reference is obviously to the same person, it will be legitimate to harmonize the two different forms of the name as is done in New Century Version. Instead of saying “her husband” it may be necessary in some cases to say something like “the man she was living with at the time” or “her current husband.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .