At the 2014 International Bible Contest for Adults (חידון התנ"ך הבינלאומי למבוגרים תשע"ה) televised finals¹, celebrated grammarian² Dr. Avshalom Kor (אבשלום קור) posed this question among a series of short vignettes about "Ma'oz Tzur" that he presented while the next contestant was getting into place. He answered that the 'ו' preceding "his possessions" is an example of a "ו' שמסבירה" - a "vav that explains."³ So, this 'ו' is more of a dash than an "and."

Dr. Kor provided, as a Scriptural example of this construct, Shmuel I 28:3, which says, of Shmuel:

...  וַיִּקְבְּרֻהוּ בָרָמָה וּ‏בְעִירוֹ ...

... and buried him in Ramah, וּ‏ in his own city ...

The 'וּ' here doesn't mean that they buried him twice, in Ramah and in his own city, but that they buried him in Ramah, which was his own city.⁴

Similarly, here, the song says that they hung up Haman's sons, who were his possessions, not as well as his possessions. This explains the translation choices of siddurim documented in Yosef's answer.

^{1. In which one Alexander Heppenheimer, 42, of Crown Heights, took second place.}

^{2. Yes, according to Wikipedia, Israel has such a thing: "עקב קנאותו לשפה העברית וסלידתו משגיאות כתיב וטעויות דקדוקיות בדיבור הפך שמו לשם נרדף ליודע השפה העברית והלצות רבות על הדקדוק בעברית נקשרו בשמו."}

^{3. Or, as seen in footnote 1(b) to Gesenius, §154a, wāw explicativum. (Thanks to msh210 for the reference.)}

^{4. It appears that this interpretation could be consistent with that of Metzudat David, but not that of Rashi.}

At the 2014 International Bible Contest for Adults (חידון התנ"ך הבינלאומי למבוגרים תשע"ה) televised finals¹, celebrated grammarian² Dr. Avshalom Kor (אבשלום קור) posed this question among a series of short vignettes about "Ma'oz Tzur" that he presented while the next contestant was getting into place. He answered that the 'ו' preceding "his possessions" is an example of a "ו' שמסבירה" - a "vav that explains."³ So, this 'ו' is more of a dash than an "and."

Dr. Kor provided, as a Scriptural example of this construct, Shmuel I 28:3, which says, of Shmuel:

...  וַיִּקְבְּרֻהוּ בָרָמָה וּ‏בְעִירוֹ ...

... and buried him in Ramah, וּ‏ in his own city ...

The 'וּ' here doesn't mean that they buried him twice, in Ramah and in his own city, but that they buried him in Ramah, which was his own city.⁴

Similarly, here, the song says that they hung up Haman's sons, who were his possessions, not as well as his possessions. This explains the translation choices of siddurim documented in Yosef's answer.

^{1. In which one Alexander Heppenheimer, 42, of Crown Heights, took second place.}

^{2. Yes, according to Wikipedia, Israel has such a thing: "עקב קנאותו לשפה העברית וסלידתו משגיאות כתיב וטעויות דקדוקיות בדיבור הפך שמו לשם נרדף ליודע השפה העברית והלצות רבות על הדקדוק בעברית נקשרו בשמו."}

^{3. Or, as seen in footnote 1(b) to Gesenius, §154a, wāw explicativum. (Thanks to msh210 for the reference.)}

^{4. It appears that this interpretation could be consistent with that of Metzudat David, but not that of Rashi.}

At the 2014 International Bible Contest for Adults (חידון התנ"ך הבינלאומי למבוגרים תשע"ה) televised finals¹, celebrated grammarian² Dr. Avshalom Kor (אבשלום קור) posed this question among a series of short vignettes about "Ma'oz Tzur" that he presented while the next contestant was getting into place. He answered that the 'ו' preceding "his possessions" is an example of a "ו' שמסבירה" - a "vav that explains." So, this 'ו' is more of a dash than an "and."

Dr. Kor provided, as a Scriptural example of this construct, Shmuel I 28:3, which says, of Shmuel:

...  וַיִּקְבְּרֻהוּ בָרָמָה וּ‏בְעִירוֹ ...

... and buried him in Ramah, וּ‏ in his own city ...

The 'וּ' here doesn't mean that they buried him twice, in Ramah and in his own city, but that they buried him in Ramah, which was his own city.³

Similarly, here, the song says that they hung up Haman's sons, who were his possessions, not as well as his possessions. This explains the translation choices of siddurim documented in Yosef's answer.

^{1. In which one Alexander Heppenheimer, 42, of Crown Heights, took second place.}

^{2. Yes, according to Wikipedia, Israel has such a thing: "עקב קנאותו לשפה העברית וסלידתו משגיאות כתיב וטעויות דקדוקיות בדיבור הפך שמו לשם נרדף ליודע השפה העברית והלצות רבות על הדקדוק בעברית נקשרו בשמו."}

^{3. It appears that this interpretation could be consistent with that of Metzudat David, but not that of Rashi.}

At the 2014 International Bible Contest for Adults (חידון התנ"ך הבינלאומי למבוגרים תשע"ה) televised finals¹, celebrated grammarian² Dr. Avshalom Kor (אבשלום קור) posed this question among a series of short vignettes about "Ma'oz Tzur" that he presented while the next contestant was getting into place. He answered that the 'ו' preceding "his possessions" is an example of a "ו' שמסבירה" - a "vav that explains."³ So, this 'ו' is more of a dash than an "and."

Dr. Kor provided, as a Scriptural example of this construct, Shmuel I 28:3, which says, of Shmuel:

...  וַיִּקְבְּרֻהוּ בָרָמָה וּ‏בְעִירוֹ ...

... and buried him in Ramah, וּ‏ in his own city ...

The 'וּ' here doesn't mean that they buried him twice, in Ramah and in his own city, but that they buried him in Ramah, which was his own city.⁴

Similarly, here, the song says that they hung up Haman's sons, who were his possessions, not as well as his possessions. This explains the translation choices of siddurim documented in Yosef's answer.

^{1. In which one Alexander Heppenheimer, 42, of Crown Heights, took second place.}

^{2. Yes, according to Wikipedia, Israel has such a thing: "עקב קנאותו לשפה העברית וסלידתו משגיאות כתיב וטעויות דקדוקיות בדיבור הפך שמו לשם נרדף ליודע השפה העברית והלצות רבות על הדקדוק בעברית נקשרו בשמו."}

^{3. Or, as seen in footnote 1(b) to Gesenius, §154a, wāw explicativum. (Thanks to msh210 for the reference.)}

^{4. It appears that this interpretation could be consistent with that of Metzudat David, but not that of Rashi.}