In certain languages the verb said may be more naturally rendered “answered” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), since this is a part of an ongoing conversation.

The land refers to the land of the Israelites. New Jerusalem Bible says “has brought trouble on the country.” But in some languages it may sound unnatural to focus on the land. The real trouble is for the people of the land. For this reason it is legitimate to translate “My father has made trouble for our people.” Revised English Bible says “the people,” but since Jonathan is included among the people, it may be better in some languages to say “our people,” as in Good News Translation.

See how: neither Revised Standard Version nor Good News Translation nor most other translations reflect the fact that the Hebrew has a particle of entreaty here. Fox says “Pray see: indeed, my eyes are brightened.”

My eyes have become bright: or “already I feel strong and alert” (Contemporary English Version). See the comments on verse 27.

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 .

1Sam 14.:30

The wording of the first part of this verse may sound quite awkward if translators attempt to render it literally. A better way to word it may be “I wish the troops had eaten the food left behind by the Philistines when we defeated them. If our soldiers had done that, then we would have been able to kill many more of them.”

The translation if the people had eaten does not quite capture the force of the emphatic expression in Hebrew. A better rendering is “if only the people had eaten.” Fox attempts to express this in English by saying “if the people had eaten, yes, eaten today.”

Spoil refers to anything taken from a defeated enemy following the victory won. It was considered the right of the victorious army to take whatever they wanted. In this case the reference seems to be to food. But the word spoil has a much broader meaning.

On the word slaughter see 4.10 and 6.19.

The second half of this verse is stated in a negative form, that is, has not been great. Good News Translation rewords to make the statement positive. See also New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, “the defeat of the Philistines would have been greater still!”

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 .

In this context the verb translated struck down may be rendered “routed” (New American Bible) or “killing” (Contemporary English Version). In either case the subduing of the Philistines is clearly indicated.

Moffatt has “from noon to nightfall” instead of from Michmash to Aijalon (which seems to be based on a conjecture). And Anchor Bible has simply “at Michmash.” This latter rendering is based on the Septuagint reading, but the longer reading seems more likely precisely because it is the more difficult one. Most major translations adopt the reading followed by Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation.

Michmash: as in verse 5.

Aijalon was located in the territory of Dan, about twenty-five kilometers (about twenty miles) west of Michmash, that is, toward the land of the Philistines, who were in retreat. The name Aijalon means “deer-field.”

The people, that is, the Israelite troops, were very faint. The verb form is unusual but almost certainly means “to be weary” or “to be tired” (see the comments on verse 28).

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 text does not state that it was now evening and that the oath of verse 24 had expired. But the writer appears to assume that it was evening, and verse 34 indicates that it was nighttime. However, see on verse 33.

Flew upon: some commentators consider the Hebrew word used here to be incomprehensible in this context. It is literally the ordinary verb meaning “to do” or “to make.” A marginal note in the Hebrew text suggests that the correct reading is “wrapped,” or “enveloped themselves” in, which modern versions take to mean “pounced on” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New International Version, Anchor Bible) or “flung themselves on” (New Jerusalem Bible).

The spoil refers here to all the things that the Israelites had taken from their defeated enemies. This would not have been limited to the animals mentioned later in this verse, but they would certainly have been included. See verse 30.

Slew them on the ground: that is, they killed the animals immediately at the spot where they were taken. This was contrary to the usual practice of taking the animal to an altar (Exo 29.11; Lev 1.5).

Eating meat with the blood still in it was prohibited by the Mosaic Law (see Gen 9.4; Lev 7.26-27; 17.10-14; 19.26). The blood was supposed to be poured out on the ground (Deut 12.16, 24). By not draining off the blood, these soldiers were violating the law.

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 .

They: the subject of the verb is indefinite, since the writer has no one in particular in mind. This indefiniteness is captured in Good News Translation by the use of a passive construction. French versions use the indefinite pronoun on, “one,” to accomplish the same purpose (Bible en français courant, Nouvelle version Segond révisée, La Bible du Semeur, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). In other languages translators may have to say “someone told Saul” (Revised English Bible).

Behold: see the comments on page 18 and following.

Eating with the blood, as explained in the comment on verse 32, was forbidden by the law.

Some manuscript evidence has “and Saul said” where the Hebrew text has And he said. But the presence of the pronoun or the proper noun will have to be determined by what is natural and clearly understood in the receptor language.

You have dealt treacherously is an accusation that the soldiers had acted in a deceitful and unfaithful way. But in some languages it will be impossible to convey this meaning without saying what they had betrayed. Contemporary English Version makes this quite clear by speaking of their “being unfaithful to the LORD.” Knox takes a different approach but conveys the same essential meaning, “you have broken the law.”

Here: in place of the word “today” in the Masoretic Text, the Septuagint reads “here.” The Septuagint is the basis for many translations (New Revised Standard Version, New American Bible, and New Jerusalem Bible as well as Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation). Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, however, gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text and suggests that the word “today” here means “during daytime.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh translates literally “Roll a large stone over to me today.” Since then a contrast would arise between “daytime” and nighttime (see verse 34), it may be better to say “roll a large stone to me right away!” (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible; so also Revised English Bible and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente).

The stone was to be used as an altar (see verse 35). By killing the animals on the stone instead of on the ground (verse 32), the people could ensure that the blood would run out of the meat.

If translators need to avoid direct quotation, a possible model for the verse may be as follows:

• Someone reported to Saul that the soldiers were sinning against the LORD by eating meat with the blood still in it. So Saul called them traitors against the LORD and ordered them to roll a big stone over to him immediately.

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 .

Good News Translation translates the verb said at the beginning of this verse as “gave another order.” This is fitting for the context and may be a good model for other languages. This order is apparently given to a limited group of messengers. They, in turn, will spread the news to all the people of Israel.

This verse contains an embedded quotation within the words of Saul. That is, he gives the messengers the precise words that they are to say to the rest of the Israelites. Good News Translation is a good model for avoiding the quotation within another larger quotation.

Disperse yourselves among the people: or “Spread out among the troops” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).

Do not sin … by eating with the blood: see the comments on verse 32. Good News Translation makes explicit that they are not to eat “meat with blood in it.”

At the end of the verse, the writer reports that every one … brought his ox. But the beginning of the verse states that the people were to bring sheep also. Because of this apparent contradiction, some interpreters follow the Septuagint and change the Hebrew from “his ox” to “that which.” New Jerusalem Bible, for example, says “Each individual brought what he happened to have that night.”

Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {C} rating to the Masoretic Text and suggests that the Hebrew is elliptical; that is, though it mentions only the ox, it includes both ox and sheep.

With him: literally “in [or, by] his hand” (so Fox). Probably the intended meaning is that the people led their animals by hand. Revised English Bible says “each man came, driving his own ox.”

That night: some follow the Septuagint in omitting these words (so Klein), or they change the text slightly to read “to the LORD” in place of that night (so New American Bible). But neither of these changes is recommended.

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 Saul built an altar: the Hebrew conjunction is better rendered “Thus” (so Revised English Bible and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), since the altar that Saul built is made of the stone mentioned in verse 33. To translate And as in Revised Standard Version may incorrectly suggest that the building of the altar was something different and later in time from the events of verses 33-34. Revised English Bible and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh attempt to show that this is a summary statement rather than an additional event, by using the word “thus.” Compare Revised English Bible, “Thus Saul came to erect an altar to the LORD, and this was the first altar to the LORD that he erected.” An even better model may be Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, “This was the first time that Saul erected an altar to the LORD.” Some languages may even say “Saul set that stone up as an altar to the LORD.”

It was the first altar that he built to the LORD: the translation in New International Version (“it was the first time he had done this”) may perhaps suggest a negative evaluation of Saul’s actions, but there is no basis in the text to suggest that the writer intended to criticize Saul. While the wording of the text suggests the building of other altars, the Old Testament does not elsewhere record that Saul built others.

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 .

Go down: the battles had been fought in the hill country, and now the Israelite army was going to go down toward the lower land where the Philistines were at this point in the story. See also verse 46 below, where Saul “went up” from pursuing the Philistines.

Despoil them until the morning light: the verb used here normally means “to take plunder.” But in this context it is clear that there would be fighting that would result in the death of all the enemies.

The direct quotation of what Saul said may be made indirect by saying “Then Saul ordered his soldiers to go down with him during the night to attack the Philistines and take … until there was no one left alive.”

Do whatever seems good to you: literally “All (that is) good in your eyes, do!” Most translations express this in more natural idiomatic English, such as “Do what you think best” (Revised English Bible and New American Bible). The same expression occurs in verse 40 also.

Let us draw near hither to God: the priest, probably Ahijah, advises Saul and his men to seek the will of God, to determine whether God approves or disapproves (see 30.8; Num 27.21; Judges 18.5). See earlier verse 19. A literal translation of the end of this verse may give the wrong impression that the priest was suggesting that the troops should consult God instead of attacking the Philistines. Good News Translation adds the word “first” (also Revised English Bible and Fox, in parentheses) in order to show that the suggestion to consult God was not an alternative to attacking the Philistines, but rather should be the first thing done.

The direct quotation of the priest may be made indirect by saying “But the priest insisted that they should ask God before doing anything.”

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: the common conjunction here is much more likely to have the force of a logical connector, since Saul’s inquiring of God comes as a direct result of the priest’s insistence. New Revised Standard Version, like Good News Translation, begins this verse with “So.”

Inquired of God: see the comments on 10.20 and 22.

Into the hand of Israel: on the metaphorical use of hand, see the comments on 4.8.

In those languages where a direct quotation is not appropriate, translators may consider the following model:

• So Saul asked God whether he should go down and fight against the Philistines. He wanted to know if God would cause the Israelites to be victorious.

But he did not … that day: that God did not answer Saul’s question was understood as an indication that someone had sinned against God (compare the similar thought in Isa 59.2).

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 .