Servants: Good News Translation refers to them as “they,” meaning the people just mentioned.

In the ears of David is a literal translation of the Hebrew. The precise meaning is not clear. Most translations say “to David,” but others include “within earshot of David” (that is, the men spoke close enough for David to overhear them; so Klein), and “in private” (New Revised Standard Version, Contemporary English Version). In addition, New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh all include the idea of privacy in different ways in their translations.

The form of David’s response is a question in Hebrew. Good News Translation apparently takes this to be a rhetorical question and therefore expresses David’s words in the form of a statement. It is likely, however, that David’s question does more than affirm his insignificance. To marry the daughter of a king will require that he pay a large bride price, too large for a poor man like David.

Does it seem a little thing: the Hebrew participle comes from a verb meaning “to appear to be insignificant” and is similar in meaning to of no repute below. But here David is asking whether the officials think that the status of one hoping to become the king’s son-in-law could be that of someone unimportant. Some languages may say “Do you [plural] think it is nothing…?”

To you: literally “in your [plural] eyes.” David was speaking to the king’s officials and not to the king himself. Therefore it may be better to introduce the quotation with “He said to them” (Bible en français courant).

On the expression become the king’s son-in-law, see the comments on verse 22.

Seeing that I: literally “and I.” But the common Hebrew conjunction seems to convey the idea “since” or “because” in this context.

Of no repute: this is a translation of a Hebrew participle meaning “to be light,” “to be considered of little value,” or in some cases “to be dishonored,” as in Isa 23.9. Here it is generally taken to mean “unimportant” or “insignificant” (New American Bible). Contemporary English Version makes both qualities into negatives, saying “I’m not rich or famous enough….”

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 .

Servants: see verse 22.

Thus and so did David speak: literally “In these words David spoke.” The Hebrew does not actually give the exact words that David spoke. Rather the writer has used a form of shorthand, allowing the context to suggest to the reader what David actually said. A literal translation such as that found in Revised Standard Version will be meaningless in many languages. See also the similar type of “pseudoquotation” in 21.2; 2 Sam 15.2; 17.15, 21; 1 Kgs 1.6; and 2 Kgs 5.4; 6.8; 9.12.

New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh renders this verse as “This is what David answered.” But such a translation, like that in Revised Standard Version, leads the reader to expect a quotation of what David actually said. It may be better to turn the servants’ words into an indirect quotation as in Good News Translation (so also Revised English Bible, New American Bible, Bible en français courant, and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

A useful article for the translator to read is Ellington, 1994a, “Pseudo-quotations in Translation” (see the Bibliography).

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 beginning of this verse contains yet another quotation within a quotation. Good News Translation restructures and makes the first quotation Thus shall you say to David an indirect quotation. This will be a helpful model in many other languages.

Saul’s message is in direct response to David’s objection that he was not rich enough to marry into the royal family. Normally the dowry required to marry a king’s daughter consisted of a great deal of money. But here Saul asks only proof that David had defeated and killed a hundred of the enemies of Israel.

Marriage present: many languages will have a technical term such as “bride price” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Fox) to translate this term. The fiancé was required to pay something to the father of the bride (see Gen 34.12; Exo 22.16).

A hundred foreskins of the Philistines: see the comment on 14.6. Unlike the Israelites, the Philistines were not circumcised. Good News Translation makes explicit that Saul wanted David to kill the Philistines: “the foreskins of a hundred dead Philistines.” On the word foreskins compare Gen 17.11; Exo 4.25; Lev 12.3. In languages where circumcision is not known, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente may provide a useful model: “Go tell David that I do not demand the traditional payment in use for the marriage; I only want the proof of the death of a hundred Philistines” (see also the Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente translation of verse 27, quoted below).

That he may be avenged of the king’s enemies: literally, “to be avenged of the enemies of the king.” Revised Standard Version adds the pronoun he, referring to Saul, for reasons of English style. Revised English Bible says “by way of vengeance on his enemies.” The meaning of avenged is clearly expressed in Contemporary English Version: “He only wants to get even with his enemies.” Another possible model is “he will be content with a hundred Philistine foreskins, to extract vengeance from his enemies” (Bible en français courant). In some languages the idea of vengeance or revenge may be more naturally expressed as “he will return to his enemies the evil which they have done.”

Fall by the hand of the Philistines: by the hand of is a Hebrew expression indicating agency (see the comments on the same expression in 11.7). Saul devises a plan that is supposed to result in David being killed by the Philistines. To make … fall in this context clearly means “to cause someone to die” or simply “to kill.” See also 2 Kgs 19.7, where God says that he will “cause him [the Assyrian emperor] to fall by the sword.”

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 .

Servants: as in verse 22.

These words, that is, that Saul wanted no bride price except a hundred foreskins.

The expression it pleased David well will have to be restructured in many languages to make David the subject of the sentence: “David was well pleased” or, perhaps more naturally, “David was very happy.” The Hebrew is literally “the matter was right in David’s eyes” (so Fox, Chouraqui).

To be the king’s son-in-law: as in verses 22 and 23.

Before the time had expired: literally “and the days were not full.” This Hebrew idiom is found also in Gen 25.24; Lev 8.33; Jer 25.12, and elsewhere. These words are lacking in the Septuagint and are therefore placed in brackets in New American Bible. The text has not earlier stated that King Saul had set a time limit during which David was to kill the one hundred Philistines, but this seems to be the sense of these words (so Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Revised English Bible says “before the appointed time.” New Jerusalem Bible expresses a slightly different understanding: “And no time was lost.” Either way, the text indicates that David went about the task quickly. The Good News Translation rendering “Before the day set for the wedding” is an attempt to express the same idea, but it seems too explicit by suggesting that the king had actually planned a wedding and had set a wedding date.

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 .

Arose and went: that is, David moved into action. See the comments at 9.3 and in “Translating the Books of Samuel,” page 20 and following, on the use of the verb “arise” in series with other verbs.

Versions differ on whether the number of Philistines killed by David and his men was two hundred (Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Revised English Bible, New American Bible, and New Jerusalem Bible) or “one hundred” (New Revised Standard Version, Moffatt, and Klein). The number “one hundred” is found in an important Septuagint manuscript. It is also the number required by Saul in verse 25 and is the number that David later says he paid (2 Sam 3.14). The number two hundred suggests that David not only went about the task more quickly than Saul had required (verse 26), but also that he killed more Philistines than necessary.

Which were given in full number: literally “they completed them.” The precise meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain, though the general sense seems clear enough. These words translate a Hebrew verb meaning “to fill” or “to complete.” Here this verb is often rendered “he counted them out” (Revised English Bible, New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or, perhaps better, “he counted them out completely” (Klein).

In those languages where circumcision is not known, or where it is inappropriate to talk about it, the Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente translation may provide a model here, as also in verse 25. Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente says “David, with his men, made an expedition against the Philistines and killed two hundred of them. David gave to Saul the proof of their death so that he might become his son-in-law.”

Become the king’s son-in-law: see the comments at verse 18.

Gave him his daughter: in the context of the whole story, Good News Translation takes this to mean “had to give his daughter.” Perhaps a more natural model for some languages is Contemporary English Version: “Saul agreed to let David marry Michal.”

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 two verbs saw and knew serve to reinforce each other, and together they show that there was no doubt at all in the mind of Saul. He “came to recognize” (New American Bible) or “saw clearly” (Revised English Bible) that Yahweh was with David.

The LORD was with David: see the comments on 16.18.

The footnote in Revised Standard Version indicates that there is a textual problem in this verse. Good News Translation follows the Masoretic Text, which states that Saul’s daughter Michal loved David (so also New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, and New American Bible). The Septuagint, however, says that all Israel loved him (so New Jerusalem Bible and Klein, in addition to Revised Standard Version).

Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text, recommending that this clause be rendered “and that Michal, Saul’s daughter, loved him.” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament further suggests that the verb form of the similar words in verse 20 should be rendered “Michal had fallen in love with David.”

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 .

Was still more afraid: literally “increased [or, added to] fear.” Saul was already afraid of David (see verse 12) but, after having seen his success against the Philistines, his fear increased. La Bible du Semeur restructures the first sentence of this verse, translating “His [Saul’s] fear with regard to David redoubled.”

So: Good News Translation shifts this element to the beginning of the verse, but the common Hebrew conjunction seems to express result here, that is, Saul was more afraid of David, with the result that he remained David’s enemy.

Continually: literally “all the days,” meaning “all the days of his [Saul’s] life,” or “for the rest of his life” (Contemporary English Version).

The second half of this verse and all of verse 30 are missing in one important manuscript of the Septuagint. Some interpreters think that the Masoretic Text contains a later addition that was intended to intensify the conflict between Saul and David. New American Bible places verses 29b-30 in brackets, indicating that the translators consider these words to be a later scribal addition to the original text. See the comments under the heading to this section.

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 verse is a summary statement of the preceding verses (see verses 14-15) rather than an addition of new information. It is connected to the preceding verses by the common conjunction waw. Moffatt says “The Philistine leaders used to make sallies….” Use of the expression “used to make” shows that this is a summary statement. Another possible way of indicating to the reader that this is a summary statement is to begin this verse “And so it was that the Philistine leaders….”

As often as they came out: that is, “every time they came to fight” or “each time they took the field” (New American Bible). Other translations use technical military terms such as “continued to make forays” (Revised English Bible) and “kept mounting their campaigns” (New Jerusalem Bible). The Hebrew says only that the Philistines came out. But this Hebrew verb is often used of “going out to battle.” In this context Revised Standard Version correctly supplies the words to battle. Some translations place the words “to battle” in brackets (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or in parentheses (Fox) to show that they are not written in the Hebrew, but such words provide implicit information, and translators do not need to use brackets or parentheses.

The princes of the Philistines: the English word “prince” refers to a son of a king. The Hebrew word here rendered princes, however, refers to military leaders. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “The Philistine chiefs” (so also New American Bible and New Jerusalem Bible). A better translation is “the commanders of the Philistines” (New Revised Standard Version and similarly Revised English Bible). Compare the expression “lords of the Philistines” in 6.4.

All the servants of Saul: what is implied in this expression is “all the other servants [officers] of Saul.” Since David was certainly a servant of Saul at this time (see 16.21), the addition of the word “other” will be essential in some languages and highly recommended in others.

The servants: see the comments on 8.14.

The words so that indicate a relationship of cause and effect, although the Hebrew text has only the common conjunction. The result of David’s extraordinary victories was that he became increasingly well known and loved.

His name was highly esteemed: the verb means “to be valued,” “to be precious,” “to be honored.” In Hebrew thought, one’s name is an expression of one’s nature. The sense of these words is expressed in various ways in English: “his fame became very great” (New Revised Standard Version), “[he] acquired great fame” (New American Bible), and “His reputation soared” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). The Hebrew does not mean simply that everyone knew who David was, as the New International Version translation may suggest: “his name became well known.” This clause seems to be an intentional contrast with the words having the opposite meaning in verse 23.

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 .