בַּיָּמִ֣ים הָהֵ֔ם אֵ֥ין מֶ֖לֶךְ בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וּבַיָּמִ֣ים הָהֵ֗ם שֵׁ֤בֶט הַדָּנִי֙ מְבַקֶּשׁ־ל֤וֹ נַחֲלָה֙ לָשֶׁ֔בֶת כִּ֣י לֹֽא־נָפְלָ֥ה ל֛וֹ עַד־הַיּ֥וֹם הַה֖וּא בְּת֥וֹךְ שִׁבְטֵ֛י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל בְּנַחֲלָֽה׃
In those days, there was no king in Israel. And in those days, the tribe of Dan was looking for territory to settle in, because up to that point no allotment had fallen to them among the tribes of Israel as a permanent inheritance.
KJV In those days there was no king in Israel: and in those days the tribe of the Danites sought them an inheritance to dwell in; for unto that day all their inheritance had not fallen unto them among the tribes of Israel.
Notes & Key Terms
Translator Notes
- The half-refrain ein melekh be-Yisra'el ('there was no king in Israel') opens this chapter, linking it to the theological framework established in 17:6. The Danites' search for nachalah ('inheritance, territorial allotment') contradicts Joshua 19:40-48, which records Dan receiving an allotment — the issue was their inability to conquer it (cf. Judges 1:34, where the Amorites pressed Dan back into the hill country). The narrator's phrasing lo nafelah lo ('it had not fallen to them') uses the language of lot-casting (the verb n-p-l, 'to fall,' is the technical term for territorial assignment by lot), suggesting Dan's allotment never materialized in practice.