That the cows went straight … turned neither to the right nor to the left is a sign that God was leading them (see verse 9). Compare Num 20.17; Deut 2.27; 5.32; 17.11; Josh 1.7, where the same sort of expression is used.

Along one highway: the word highway has the potential for being misunderstood in some languages. The Hebrew term refers to a road made with layers of stone or gravel and not just dirt. But this is not to be thought of as a modern, paved superhighway. Rather the expression simply means that “they kept to the road” (Revised English Bible).

Lowing as they went: the cry is one of female cattle whose nursing calves had been taken from them. Knox, in fact, translates “lowing for their calves.” Languages have a variety of ways of expressing such sounds. Some English versions use the word “mooing” (New Century Version, New American Bible, and Good News Translation). But many languages will utilize a more general word for “crying.” The Hebrew term found here is used elsewhere only in Job 6.5.

The lords of the Philistines: see the comments on 5.8.

The idea of a border may have to be translated in some languages as in Contemporary English Version, “until they got close to Beth-Shemesh.” The idea is that of a boundary line marking the limits of a town or region. This does not mean up to the very buildings of the city of Beth-Shemesh, but rather to the area around the city where its inhabitants had their fields.

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 .

Now the people of Beth-shemesh: literally “And Beth-shemesh.” It will be necessary in most languages to say the people of Beth-shemesh. Now translates the common Hebrew conjunction waw, which serves here to introduce a new scene in the story.

The word reaping may be rendered “harvesting” (Revised English Bible), “gathering” (Anchor Bible). But some languages may have a special word for “cutting [grain].”

Wheat harvest: the wheat harvest took place in the spring of the year, between April and June (see also comments on 12.17).

In the valley: in some languages there is no specific word for valley, so this may have to be translated “in the low places” or “the place where hills meet.”

The expression lifted up their eyes is a Hebrew idiom that means simply “they looked up” from the work that they had been doing. In many cases it is wise to avoid a literal rendering of this expression. Compare Exo 14.10; Matt 17.8.

They rejoiced to see it: New Revised Standard Version follows the Septuagint here: “they went with rejoicing to meet it” (so also New Jerusalem Bible). But translators are advised to translate the traditional text as represented in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation. The problem is not mentioned in Hebrew Old Testament Text Project.

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 .

This is the first mention of Joshua of Beth-shemesh. Beth-Shemesh (verse 9) was the place where he lived. The fact that the animals stopped beside a large rock was understood as meaning that this is where God intended for a sacrifice to be made.

The Hebrew text provides no antecedent for the pronoun they, but the most likely referent is “[some of] the people who lived in Beth Shemesh.”

Though the Hebrew states that the people split up the wood of the cart, it leaves implicit the fact that this wood was the material used to build the fire. If it is necessary to make this information explicit, translators may say something like “chopped up the wooden cart to make a fire for the offering.”

Unlike other kinds of offerings, in a burnt offering the entire animal was burned on the altar. See Lev 1.1-17. This does not mean that the animal was burned without being cut up into smaller pieces. Rather, after being cut up, the entire animal was burned. Compare 7.9.

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 .

The temporal relationship of this verse to the preceding verse is not clear in Hebrew, nor in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation. Indeed, some interpreters suggest that verse 15 is a later addition to the text. The difficulty is this: how could the Levites take down the ark from the cart (verse 15) if the people of Beth-shemesh had already torn apart the wooden cart and used the wood for making a fire (verse 14)? In other words, the events in verse 15 seem to precede those in verse 14. For this reason it may be necessary to use the pluperfect and say that “the Levites had taken down the ark” (so Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). New American Bible provides another good model: “The Levites, meanwhile, had taken down the ark … and had placed them….” Another possibility may be to combine verses 14 and 15, putting things in proper chronological order. Contemporary English Version actually combines verses 13-15 in this way:
The people of Beth-Shemesh were harvesting their wheat in the valley. When they looked up and saw the chest, they were so happy that they stopped working and started celebrating.
The cows left the road and pulled the cart into a field that belonged to Joshua from Beth-Shemesh, and they stopped beside a huge rock. Some men from the tribe of Levi were there. So they took the chest off the cart and placed it on the rock, and then they did the same thing with the bag of gold rats and sores. A few other people chopped up the cart and made a fire. They killed the cows and burned them as sacrifices to the LORD. After that, they offered more sacrifices.

Levites: it is debated whether Levitical priests were functioning at this early period in Israelite history. Perhaps this detail was inserted here by a later writer, since Beth-Shemesh was one of the cities of the Levites (Josh 21.13-16), and since only Levites were permitted to carry the Covenant Box (1 Chr 15.11-15). In any case, these words are part of the text and must be translated. A glossary entry on this word will be essential. The only other place in the books of Samuel where the term is used is in 2 Sam 15.24.

The box: see the comments on verse 8.

Golden figures: the word translated figures here is the same as the general term used in verse 8. See the comments at that point.

The men of Beth-shemesh: New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, New International Version, and Good News Translation all say “the people,” since the Hebrew term for men here may include women as well.

Burnt offerings and sacrifices: see verse 14.

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 .

The five lords of the Philistines: see verse 12 and also the comments on 5.8. Apparently the Philistine chieftains followed the wagon carrying the Covenant Box.

Ekron: see 5.10.

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 .

Golden tumors: see verse 4. On tumors, see 5.6.

A guilt offering: see the comments on verse 3 above.

Ashdod … Gaza … Ashkelon … Gath … Ekron: see the comments on 5.8. Good News Translation adds the qualifier “cities” before the names of these five Philistine cities.

The wording of Revised Standard Version reflects the Hebrew, although there is no verb “to be” at the beginning. However, in many cases it will be wise to restructure this verse to some extent, since it stands along with verse 18 as a kind of summary statement about the restitution given. So instead of beginning These are the golden tumors, it may be wise to follow the restructuring of Good News Translation.

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 .

The wording of this verse seems to imply that the number of golden mice was greater than the number of golden tumors, since there would have been more than five fortified cities and unwalled villages. See also comments on 5.8 concerning all the cities of the Philistines belonging to the five lords.

Fortified cities and unwalled villages: similar terms occur in Deut 3.5. Since verse 4 states that five golden mice were to be made, it is strange to read in this verse that a golden mouse was sent for each of the five fortified cities and one also for each of the unwalled villages associated with the fortified cities. In some versions unwalled villages are called “open settlements” (Revised English Bible) or “open villages” (New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible).

The great stone, that is, “the large rock in the field of Joshua of Beth Shemesh” (see verse 14). The Hebrew text, however, has “the great ʾAbel” (meaning “meadow”), to which King James Version added in italics “the great stone in Abel.”

The Hebrew preposition translated beside in Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version is translated “on” in Good News Translation, New American Bible, and New Jerusalem Bible. This would mean that the rock in question was a rather flat and low in form and not a tall, pointed one. Both translations are possible, and since there is no way to know which is correct, translators must simply choose one or the other interpretation.

To this day: see the comments on 5.5.

The great stone … is a witness: two textual matters require discussion in this verse.
(1) In Hebrew the words “stone” and “meadow” each have three consonants, and only the final consonant is different. The Hebrew word for “meadow” may also be a proper noun, “Abel.” The Septuagint has the word “stone,” but the Masoretic Text has the word ʾabel, which may be rendered either “as far as the great meadow on which the ark of the LORD was set down” or “as far as Greater Abel, where the ark of the LORD was set down.”
(2) The adverb “as far as” and the noun “witness” have the same two consonants in Hebrew and differ only in the vowel. The Masoretic Text contains the word “as far as.”

Translations reflect a number of different solutions to these difficulties:
(a) some follow the Septuagint in translating the great stone and in correcting the Hebrew text to say “witness” rather than “as far as” (so Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, Good News Translation, New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible).
(b) some follow the Septuagint in reading the great stone, but follow the Masoretic Text “as far as” and do not change the Hebrew to say “witness.” Nouvelle version Segond révisée, for example, says “as far as the large stone on which they placed the ark of the LORD and which is still today in the field of Joshua of Beth Shemesh.” Compare the similar rendering in New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh: “as far as the great stone on which the Ark of the LORD was set down, to this day, in the field of Joshua of Beth-shemesh.” This solution is recommended by Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, which gives a {B} rating to this reading.
(c) some follow the Masoretic Text and understand ʾabel to be a place name; but they insert the word “stone” in italics, indicating that the word is not in the Hebrew but should be so understood. King James Version, for example, says “even unto the great stone of Abel” (so also Almeida).
(d) some, following the Masoretic Text in reading “as far as,” understand ʾabel to mean “meadow” and the word “stone” to be implicit in the adjective great and required as something that remained a long time in the field. Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, for example, says “and to the meadow of the great stone.”

The authors of this handbook recommend that the text established in Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament be followed instead of the texts followed by Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation. Beth-shemesh was near Philistine territory, and the sense is that these unwalled Philistine villages extended “as far as” the town of Beth-shemesh, where the stone was. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh represents the recommended interpretation to be followed:

• As for the golden mice, their number accorded with all the Philistine towns that belonged to the five lords—both the fortified towns and unwalled villages as far as the great stone on which the Ark of the LORD was set down, to this day, in the field of Joshua of Beth-Shemesh.

In the New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh translation just cited, the words to this day seem to suggest that the covenant box was still sitting on the great stone at the time this book was written. The correct meaning is clearly expressed in Contemporary English Version: “The huge stone where the Levites set the chest is still there in Joshua’s field as a reminder of what happened.”

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 .

And he slew, that is, Yahweh, or the God of Israel. The archaic-sounding verb slew really means “killed” (New Revised Standard Version) and should be translated by an ordinary verb.

Beth-shemesh: see verse 9. Although New Revised Standard Version says “people of Beth-shemesh,” most versions don’t consider it necessary to use inclusive language at this point.

The Hebrew says that God slew some of the men of Beth-shemesh, because they looked into the ark of the LORD. The Septuagint, however, says that the sons [meaning descendants] of Jeconiah were killed because they did not rejoice with the [other] people of Beth Shemesh when they looked at the ark. The Septuagint is the basis for a number of translations (Revised English Bible, New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, Osty-Trinquet), including New Revised Standard Version, which says “The descendants of Jeconiah did not rejoice with the people of Beth-shemesh when they greeted the ark of the LORD; and he killed seventy men of them.” Nothing more is known about the sons of Jeconiah. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament recommends that translators follow the Masoretic Text here, though it gives only a {C} rating to the Masoretic Text and admits that there is considerable doubt about whether the text should read “and he slew some of the men of Beth Shemesh” or “and the sons of Jeconiah did not rejoice among the men of Beth Shemesh.”

They looked into the ark: the Septuagint says only that these men “looked at the ark,” and this reading is the basis for the translation of Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, which, however, follows the Masoretic Text at the beginning of this verse. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives an {A} rating to the Masoretic Text, that is, “they looked into the ark.”

Seventy men: the translation in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation is a conjecture. Most Hebrew manuscripts and the Septuagint say “of the people seventy men, fifty thousand men,” which may be interpreted as meaning 50,070 men, but the Hebrew text is awkward. Such a large number is highly improbable, since the total population of Beth Shemesh was very likely much smaller than this number. Most translations, including New International Version (which usually follows the Masoretic Text), follow the few Hebrew manuscripts that say seventy men.

Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, however, gives a {C} rating to the Masoretic Text and proposes the following translation: “and he struck, among the people, seventy men of [or, out of] fifty thousand men,” which is in fact the rendering in La Bible Pléiade.

Modern versions attempting to follow the traditional Hebrew text are New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, New American Standard Bible, and Fox. But none of these accept the interpretation of Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament. Fox, for example, has “he struck-down of the people seventy men and fifty thousand men.” Translators are advised to follow Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation at this point.

The people who mourned are the people of Beth-shemesh. Contemporary English Version makes this clear: “This made the people of Beth-Shemesh very sad.”

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 .