Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 20:22

The Septuagint says at the beginning of this verse “And the woman went to all the people and spoke to all the city in her wisdom.” This version is the basis for translations that have two verbs here, “went” and “spoke.” New Jerusalem Bible, for example, says “The woman went and spoke to all the people….” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, however, gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text and states that the Hebrew words here are an idiom meaning “she confronted all the people, armed with her wisdom.”

Then: the woman’s action apparently followed more or less immediately after her promise to Joab. The conjunction serves to make this connection.

At the beginning of this verse, it may be more natural in some languages to use the pronoun “she” in place of the noun the woman. But this may not be the case in those languages that do not make a distinction between the masculine and feminine pronouns.

All the people: this refers to the people of the city, and this may need to be clarified in some languages.

Her wisdom: that is, her strategy for saving their city from attack by Joab and his forces. This scheme was, of course, the execution of Sheba. New Revised Standard Version says “with her wise plan,” and New American Bible says “with her advice.”

So: the common Hebrew conjunction serves here as a logical connector, showing that Joab’s dismissal of his troops came as a direct result of the preceding action of the inhabitants of the city.

Blew the trumpet: see verse 1, where the blowing of the trumpet by Sheba started the whole affair.

Every man to his home: in Hebrew this is exactly the same expression as that translated “every man to his tents” in verse 1. Together with the statement about the blowing of the trumpet, this serves as a signal that the story begun in verse 1 has now reached its conclusion.

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 .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 20:24

Adoram: the ancient Greek and Syriac translations suggest the name “Adoniram.” Also in 1 Kgs 4.6 and 5.14, the person holding this position under King Solomon is called Adoniram. Probably Adoram is simply a variant of the name Adoniram, so it is permissible to use the same name here as in 1 Kings.

In charge of the forced labor: this office is not mentioned in the list in chapter 8. The function may be expressed in some languages as “captain of those who worked against their will” or “chief of those who compelled other people to work.”

Recorder: see 8.16, where the same name is given for this office.

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 .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 20:25

Sheva: in some languages there is no distinction between the b and v sounds. So translators will have to be careful in transliterating this name so that there is adequate distinction between “Sheba,” who is a central character earlier in this chapter, and Sheva. It will be misleading to the reader to have the same form for these two names.

Secretary: in 8.17 the name of the person holding this office was “Seraiah.” Either there had been a change in this position since that time, or else the different names refer to the same person, as many interpreters think. As in chapter 8, some languages may have a difficult time making a distinction between the functions of a secretary and “the recorder” mentioned in the previous verse. See the discussion at 8.17.

Zadok and Abiathar are frequently mentioned together in this book (see, for example, 15.29, 35; 17.15; 19.11).

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 .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 20:26

The Jairite: while Good News Translation seems to suggest that Jair was a town, it may be that this term is used to describe the ancestry of Ira. Bible en français courant translates, perhaps more accurately, “descendant of Jair.” It is quite possible that this is the intended meaning. Jair was a son of Manasseh (compare Num 32.41; Deut 3.14; 1 Kgs 4.13).

David’s priest: as the Hebrew adverb translated also indicates, David had more than one priest. Abiathar and Zadok were certainly considered priests in his service. For this reason it may be better in many languages to follow the model of Good News Translation in translating “one of David’s priests” in this case. On the word for priest see 8.17 and 1 Sam 1.3.

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 .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 21:1

Since this is the beginning of the supplementary section of 2 Samuel, the transition term or expression used here will be important. The text itself indicates that the events described in this chapter happened in the days of David. Contemporary English Version begins “While David was king….” But some languages have special words or expressions to introduce events that are presented out of their normal, chronological order. Something like this may be used at the beginning of this chapter.

Famine: this word is used to describe a time during which there is insufficient food for a population. The result is extreme hunger and sometimes death by starvation. This is often seen in the Old Testament as divine punishment for some act or condition of unfaithfulness to God. The term is found frequently in Genesis and also in Ruth 1.1. The rendering of New Century Version, “a time of hunger,” is very much like the expression used in many other languages, except that in some cases the adjective “great” is added: “time of great hunger.”

In the days of David: the use of the word days may be troublesome in some languages. It is used here of a general time reference and has nothing to do with a twenty-four-hour period. The idea is “during the time when David ruled.”

Year after year: the use of this expression immediately after the three-year period already mentioned adds emphasis. It was a matter of three consecutive years and covered the three-year period completely. Knox translates “three years continuously,” and New American Bible and New International Version have “for three successive years.”

Sought the face of the LORD: similar expressions are used elsewhere in the Old Testament to refer in general to praying to God, to ask his advice (2 Chr 7.14; Psa 27.8), or to going to the Temple to worship Yahweh (Psa 24.6). Here the idea is clearly that of communion with God through prayer, but there is probably no implication of going to a particular place to do so.

Bloodguilt: this actually represents the Hebrew plural “bloods.” The term is used to refer to guilt that comes as a result of killing or “shedding of blood” of other persons. Compare Lev 17.4 as well as 1 Sam 25.26 and 33. Saul had apparently killed many Gibeonites (although this is not recorded elsewhere in the Bible) and was therefore considered guilty and deserving of punishment. Since he was no longer living, his guilt was transferred to his descendants.

The Gibeonites were the people who lived in the Benjaminite city of Gibeon, about eight kilometers (five miles) northwest of Jerusalem.

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 .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 21:2

Most of this verse constitutes a parenthetical explanation of the status of the Gibeonites and their relationship to the people of Israel. The first sentence of this verse is shifted to the beginning of verse 3 in Good News Translation, so that the entire verse is enclosed in parentheses in that version. If this is done in other languages, the verse numbering should probably be adjusted to show that verses 2 and 3 are combined. Or translators may prefer to follow the model of New Century Version, which places the first sentence of Revised Standard Version at the end of verse 2 rather than at the beginning of verse 3. In this way the integrity of verse 2 is maintained.

Between the first and second sentences in the Revised Standard Version translation, the Hebrew text has the words “and he said to them.” Since David’s words do not immediately follow, and the same words are repeated at the beginning of verse 3, following the parenthetical statement of verse 2, most modern translations do not translate these words. But compare New International Version, which says “The king summoned the Gibeonites and spoke to them.”

So: the common Hebrew conjunction is so translated in Revised Standard Version because David’s action in summoning the Gibeonites is seen as a result of the situation described in verse 1.

Of the remnant of the Amorites: the Amorites were one of the tribes of people who lived in the land of Palestine before the Israelites took it over. In the process of taking the land, the Hebrews killed many of the former inhabitants, but those who remained are called a remnant. These remaining people were allowed to stay in the land, but they became servants to the Israelites (Josh 9.23, 27). Some possible translation models for this expression are “some of the remaining descendants of the Amorites” or “a group of Amorites who were still in the land.”

Had sworn to spare them: in the person of Joshua, the people of Israel had made an agreement with the Amorites to allow them to live (see Josh 9.3-27). Saul’s violation of this peace treaty was considered to be murder that defiled the land (see Num 35.33-34).

The verb tenses in this parenthetical explanation (had sworn and had sought) may present a problem to some translators. It is a kind of flashback to an earlier time when Saul was still alive and struggling against other people who still lived in Canaan. Translators should ensure that their readers understand this as referring to events that had occurred some time in the past and not at the time when David was dealing with the problem. One way of handling this problem may be to add a word or phrase showing clearly that what is said refers to something that had happened earlier. Translators may insert in the middle of the parenthetical explanation, at the point where Revised Standard Version has although, words like “some time before…” or “long ago….”

In his zeal for the people of Israel and Judah: the words in his zeal translate a verb form in Hebrew. The text does not specify the nature of Saul’s zeal, but La Bible du Semeur is probably correct in rendering this “in his nationalist zeal for the Israelites and the Judeans.” It will probably be better in many languages to restructure this clause. New Century Version, for example, says “But Saul was very eager to help the people of Israel and Judah. So he tried to kill all the Gibeonites.” Contemporary English Version expresses the meaning more clearly, “but Saul had tried to kill them because he wanted Israel and Judah to control all the land.”

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 .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 21:3

The question how shall I make expiation…? is parallel to What shall I do for you? although the second question is more detailed than the first. Translators should therefore be careful not to give the impression that these are totally separate questions. Instead of the conjunction and, it will be better in many languages to use a different kind of connecting word indicating that the second question is an amplification of the first. Or in some languages the conjunction may be omitted altogether.

Make expiation: the verb used here is sometimes rendered “cover” or “make atonement” (New American Bible). Atonement or expiation is usually made in the Old Testament by the shedding of blood in the context of animal sacrifice. But as the next verse shows, the Gibeonites will be content only with the taking of human life in revenge for Saul’s actions. In some languages this verb may be translated in such a way as to give the idea of “removing sin” or “making up for wrongdoing.” The question will then say something like “What can I do to take away Israel’s sin” (New Century Version) or “How can I make amends” (New Jerusalem Bible).

That you may bless …: the purpose of David’s action is to make the Gibeonites once again favorably disposed toward the Israelites.

The heritage of the LORD: one’s heritage is that which belongs to the person as a birthright or by inheritance. Here the people of Israel are called God’s heritage, as they are also in Deut 9.26, 29; 32.9. The same Hebrew word rendered heritage occurs in 1 Sam 10.1, where the people themselves are the heritage, and in 1 Sam 26.19, where the heritage is the land of Israel. Here it refers to the Israelites, or the people of God. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh translates “the LORD’s own people,” while Knox has “the LORD’s chosen 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 .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 21:4

In the context of the conversation between David and the Gibeonite leaders, the verb twice repeated, said, may be better translated “responded” or “answered” in the first case and “asked” in the second. Compare Good News Translation.

The Hebrew says “Not to me of silver or gold.” The margin of the Masoretic Text, however, indicates that the pronoun “us” should be read, that is, “Not to us of silver or gold.”

Not a matter of silver or gold: the Gibeonites made it very clear that their problem with Saul and his family could not be solved by money. In those languages where the names of the two metals are problematic, it is possible to translate the sense of the text by using a more general term for “money.” Some may say, for example, “Money is not sufficient to solve the matter” or “The problem cannot be settled by giving us any amount of money [no matter how great].”

Between us and Saul or his house: that is, between the Gibeonites and the family or descendants of Saul. Since Saul himself was already dead, members of his family were held responsible for what he did.

Neither is it for us to put any man to death: this has been understood by some to mean either that the death of any single individual in Israel would be inadequate to atone for the wrong, or that the death of an Israelite not from Saul’s family would be inadequate. This interpretation is found in New Jerusalem Bible, “nor by putting to death one man in Israel,” and Revised English Bible, “and there is no other man in Israel whose death would content us.” Bible en français courant similarly says “Our difference with Saul and his family can’t be settled with silver or gold nor in putting to death an Israelite.” But other interpreters take it to mean that the Gibeonites were saying that they had no right to kill any Israelites unless David gave his permission, and this is probably the intended meaning. This interpretation is found in New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, which reads “we have no claim on the life of any other man in Israel,” and Contemporary English Version, “we don’t have the right to put any Israelite to death.” The Gibeonites had no right to execute any of David’s subjects without his permission, but they were suggesting that the only solution to the problem would be found in the taking of life. The responsibility was thereby placed squarely on David. The translation in Good News Translation says that the Gibeonites did not want to kill any Israelite, but the meaning is more likely that found in New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh and Contemporary English Version.

The response of David, What do you say…? allows the Gibeonites to define the terms that they would consider an acceptable way of resolving the problem. In effect he was saying “Whatever you say I will do for you” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), or “I’ll do whatever you ask” (Contemporary English Version). Others may prefer to translate “What do you think I should do?” or “What would you like for me to do?”

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 .