How much more: instead of beginning with this interrogative-sounding introduction, it will be preferable in quite a few languages to say something like “It will be much worse for the evil people who have killed an innocent man while he was sleeping.” Note also that in this verse the wicked men are contrasted with the person they killed, who is described as a righteous man. This contrast should be maintained in translation if possible.

Shall I not…? What follows is in the form of a question, but the answer is obvious. For this reason the question may be transformed into an emphatic statement beginning with something like “I will certainly….”

Require his blood at your hand: a literal translation of this expression will almost certainly be unnatural or misleading in most languages. The idea to be translated is “hold you responsible for his death” or “consider you accountable for killing him.”

The conjunction and between the last two clauses in this verse may be misleading if translated literally. The relationship between considering these men guilty of murder and their eventual destruction is that of cause and effect. The last part of the verse may therefore be translated “I will now destroy you from the earth because you are guilty of murdering him.”

Destroy you from the earth: this can mean either “purge you from the land [of Israel]” (Anchor Bible) or “rid the earth of you” (New International Version). In either case the guilty men are to be killed.

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: while many English versions leave the transition word untranslated, it may be better to show the connection with the previous verses by using something like “So” (New American Bible, Knox, New International Version) or “Then” (An American Translation and Moffatt).

His young men: that is, “his soldiers.” See 1.15 and 2.14.

Hanged them: the referent of the pronoun them is unclear. Was it the bodies of these men or only their hands and feet that had been severed from their bodies that were put on display to others? Good News Translation and Revised English Bible seem to take it as referring to the hands and feet (so also the footnote in La Bible Pléiade), but New Revised Standard Version says clearly “hung their bodies” (similarly New International Version). While either is possible grammatically, it is more probable that the bodies of the guilty men were hung up as a public display (1 Sam 31.10; Deut 21.22).

The pool at Hebron: the pool referred to was probably the most public place in Hebron and was chosen in order to give maximum exposure to the fact that those who committed such deeds could expect swift punishment. Compare the “pool of Gibeon” in 2.13.

Tomb: as in 2.32 and 3.32, this word may be translated “burying place” or something similar.

The Masoretic Text here reads simply Abner. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, however, suggests that the words “son of Ner” have been accidentally omitted from the text and recommends that translators include “son of Ner,” following the Septuagint and a manuscript from Qumran. But see the comments above on 3.23.

At Hebron: the burial of Ishbosheth’s head took place in the same place where David was when the sons of Rimmon brought it to him, that is, in Hebron. The wording of the translation should not give the impression that Hebron was some distance from where the events took place.

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 .

Tribes: on the meaning of the word “tribe,” see 1 Sam 2.28. Note that Moffatt has “clans.” Here it may be better to say “the people of all the tribes [or, clans]” in some languages. This undoubtedly means that representatives from each of the groups that were descendants of Israel (Jacob) presented themselves to David. Verse 3, in fact, makes the idea of representatives explicit by speaking of “the elders of Israel.” By changing the vowels of the word translated tribes in this verse, some experts suggest translations like “staff-bearers” (Anchor Bible) or “chiefs” (Anderson). But most English versions retain the word “tribes.”

Hebron: see 2.8.

Behold: see 1.2 and 1 Sam 2.31.

Your bone and flesh: expressions such as this are found in a number of places in the Old Testament (Gen 29.14; Judges 9.2 as well as 2 Sam 19.12-13). It is a way of expressing close kinship based on physical relationship. The same kind of idea is expressed by Adam on the creation of Eve (Gen 2.23), who is said to have been taken from his side. Languages have a wide variety of ways of expressing the idea of a common parentage or ancestry. The English idiom speaks of “flesh and blood.” Some other languages may say “we are your people,” “we are the same people,” “we have the same blood,” or possibly “we have the same ancestor(s).”

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 .

In times past: literally “yesterday and the day-before-yesterday” (see 3.17 and 1 Sam 19.7).

It was you: the pronoun here is emphatic. The representatives seem to be expressing an idea that is somewhat contrary to normal expectations, since the king was expected to be the leader in fighting the enemy. This may be expressed by something like “While Saul was still king over us, you were the one who led us in fighting” or “Even when Saul was king, you were our leader in battle” (compare Anchor Bible and Contemporary English Version).

Led out and brought in: see the comments on “going out” and “coming in” at 3.25. Here the reference is certainly a military one. Fox shows this by adding the words “in battle” in parentheses. It was David who led Saul’s forces to victory (note the chant comparing Saul and David found in 1 Sam 18.7; 21.11; and 29.5). So it will be better in most languages to use a verb that indicates leadership and direction in times of combat. And the form of the verb should show that this was something that occurred repeatedly or habitually in the past.

You shall be shepherd: see also 7.7. This actually translates a single verb meaning “do the work of a shepherd.” In Old Testament times kings were frequently said to “shepherd” their people because the image of sheep and shepherds was so familiar to the people in that part of the world. In the receptor language, however, this image may be completely foreign. If this is the case, this verb may have to be translated “You will be the one who will guide and protect [my people].” Or, if the image is retained, it should be made clear that this is a figure of speech: “You will care for my people as a shepherd watches over his sheep….”

Prince: see the comments on 1 Sam 9.16. The word so translated probably means “the designated one” or “the one proclaimed.” It may therefore be rendered “chosen leader” or “designated ruler.” And since this is a part of a direct quotation from the LORD, it is possible to say “the leader whom I have chosen for my people.”

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 .

So all the elders of Israel came to the king at Hebron: this does not represent a different encounter between the leaders of Israel and David. It is rather a continuation and elaboration of the scene already set in verses 1 and 2. A literal rendering of this passage may therefore give the reader or hearer a false impression. Contemporary English Version avoids this by translating the whole first part of the verse “During the meeting….” Another possible model is to begin the verse with a temporal clause like “When the elders of Israel had come in this way to King David at Hebron….” On the word elders see 3.17 and the discussion in 1 Sam 4.3. Instead of using only the title the king in the first case, and the name plus the title King David in the second, it may be better in a number of languages to reverse this, or possibly to substitute a pronoun in the second case.

Covenant: see 3.12.

Before the LORD: the idea contained in these words is translated by the adjective “sacred” in Good News Translation. See the comments on 1 Sam 1.12 and 2 Sam 3.28, where the same expression is used.

Anointed: see 1.14 and discussion in 1 Sam 2.10.

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 is the usual formula for describing the reign of a king in Israel. It occurs more than thirty times in the Old Testament. Here the reference is to David’s total reign, including the seven years in Judah and the subsequent years over all Israel. This is made clear in the following verse. Compare 2.10 and 1 Sam 13.1.

Although this is not done by Revised Standard Version or Good News Translation, a new paragraph should probably begin here, since the account of the capture of Zion breaks the continuity of the story, which is continued in verse 17. Such a break is made in New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New Jerusalem Bible, Revised English Bible, and Anchor Bible.

The words began to reign are intended to mark the time when David first became king.

The number forty is often used in the Old Testament as a round number to indicate a long period of time rather than a precise length of time. Israel wandered in the wilderness for forty years (Deut 2.7; Josh 5.6). Othniel (Judges 3.11), Gideon (Judges 8.28), Samuel (1 Sam 4.18), Saul (Acts 13.21), David, Solomon (1 Kgs 11.42), and Joash (2 Kgs 12.1) ruled for forty years (see also Judges 5.31). The Philistines ruled Israel for forty years (Judges 13.1), and God promised to punish Egypt for forty years (Ezek 29.11-13). Translators should keep the number forty in the text, but they may wish to state in a footnote that this may be a round number in Hebrew, indicating a long period of time.

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 .

Many languages may require the same kind of restructuring as found in Good News Translation, where the verb phrase he reigned or “he ruled” comes before the location of his capital, At Hebron and at Jerusalem.

Six months: as in 2.11 it may be better in some languages to say “half a year,” as has been done by Good News Translation, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, and Contemporary English Version.

And at Jerusalem …: it will be important in some languages to clarify the fact that the thirty-three years in Jerusalem were in addition to the seven and a half years in Hebron. This may mean introducing the second part of the verse with words like “after that” instead of simply saying “and.”

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 .

Many versions begin a new section here, dividing verses 1-16 into two separate sections at this point (New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, and Biblia Dios Habla Hoy). If translators decide to add a section heading here, it should probably say something like “David captures Jerusalem.”

The king: it may be important to repeat the name here in order to make it clear which king is being talked about. There are, in fact, some manuscripts which have the name “David” here. But in some languages this may be quite clear without repeating the name, which is unquestionably mentioned in verse 3.

Went to Jerusalem: while the verb used here is the general term for “go,” the context makes it clear that this was not a neighborly visit. It was rather a military attack. The verb used in translation should probably make this clear. Revised English Bible has “went to Jerusalem to attack….”

The Jebusites were among the descendants of Canaan (Gen 10.16) who were not expelled during the Israelite conquest of the land of Canaan. They are particularly associated with the city of Jerusalem (Josh 15.63). Jerusalem is, in fact, identified with “Jebus” in three different passages (Josh 15.8; 18.28; and Judges 19.10). The Hebrew noun translated land sometimes refers to the whole of the earth and sometimes to a specific territory or region (compare 1 Sam 27.8). Here the reference is clearly to the region around Jerusalem. Bible en français courant and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente say “The Jebusites, who lived in this region” (New American Bible and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh are similar). New International Version “who lived there” is less exact.

Said: in view of the circumstances it may more natural in some languages to use a verb like “yelled” or “shouted.”

The blind and the lame will ward you off: this statement serves to reinforce the stated belief that it would be impossible for David’s army to capture the city. The verb tense, will, in Revised Standard Version should probably be understood in the sense of “could,” rather than an indication that only these handicapped people would actually be defending Jerusalem. A slightly different interpretation is that the inhabitants of Jerusalem could fight off David and his men even if the inhabitants were blind and lame. Contemporary English Version, for example, says “We could run you off, even if we couldn’t see or walk.” Some interpreters, however, take these words as a declaration by the Jebusites of their intention to fight to the last man. Anchor Bible, on the other hand, translates parenthetically “For the blind and the lame had incited them, saying, ‘David shall not come in here’ ” (so also Fox). This translation takes into account new information provided by the Dead Sea Scrolls, in which the verb “incited” (hesit) is read instead of “removed” or “ward off” (hesir).

Thinking: the thoughts of the Jebusites, on which their actual words to David and his men are based, are presented after the statement itself. But in many cases it will be considered more natural to introduce this before the quotation You will not come in here.

The structure of this verse in Hebrew, as reflected in Revised Standard Version, is complex and is composed of a single sentence made up of three main elements: (1) a statement about what David and his army did, (2) a statement about what the Jebusites said, and (3) a statement about what the Jebusites thought. It may be better to make three separate sentences in the receptor language. And in many cases the third element will be more naturally placed before the second, as in Good News Translation.

A possible model for the whole verse is the following:

• One day King David and his army went to attack the city of Jerusalem. The Jebusites, who lived there, thought that David and his men could not defeat them. So they shouted to David, “You will never be able to get in our city. Even the blind and crippled people could keep you from coming in.”

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 .