Now the rest of the acts of Uzziah, from first to last, Isaiah the prophet … wrote: The usual formula is used here to summarize the reign of Uzziah. It sums up the remainder of his reign and tells where other information about him may be found. See the comments on 1 Chr 29.29 and 2 Chr 9.29. In some languages it may be more natural to follow the restructuring of Good News Translation by moving the verb wrote from the end of the verse to a position closer to the beginning. This writing by Isaiah the prophet is unknown today. This is definitely not a reference to the book of the prophet Isaiah which is found in modern Bibles. That book mentions Uzziah only three times (Isa 1.1; 6.1; 7.1). This text in 2 Chronicles suggests that Isaiah may have been the author of another book in which he wrote extensively about Uzziah, but which is no longer available today.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The men of Israel took captive two hundred thousand of their kinsfolk, women, sons, and daughters: The men of Israel (literally “the children/sons of Israel”) refers to the army of the northern kingdom, Israel. Some translate simply “The Israelites” (New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), but it is probably better to specify “The Israelite troops” (Contemporary English Version) or “the soldiers of the northern kingdom” (Bible en français courant). All twelve tribes of Israel were descended from Jacob, so the people of the northern kingdom were kinsfolk (that is, relatives) to the people in the southern kingdom. Good News Translation makes explicit the identity of their kinsfolk (literally “their brothers”) by saying “the Judeans were their own relatives,” and Parole de Vie is similar with “their brothers and sisters of Judah.” The 200,000 relatives they took as prisoners were women, sons, and daughters. In some languages sons, and daughters is more naturally expressed as “children” (Good News Translation). A possible model for this whole clause is “The Israelites soldiers took captive 200,000 women and children from their relatives the Judeans.”

They also took much spoil from them and brought the spoil to Samaria: For the word spoil, see the comments on 1 Chr 20.2 and 2 Chr 15.11. In this context Samaria refers to the capital city of Israel, which Contemporary English Version makes explicit by saying “their capital city of Samaria.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The account of Uzziah’s reign is concluded here by another common formula used to summarize the reign of most of the kings of Israel and Judah. It refers to his death, burial, and successor.

And Uzziah slept with his fathers: In the year that Uzziah died, Isaiah received his call to be a prophet (see Isa 1.1; 6.1). For slept with his fathers, see the comments on 2 Chr 9.31.

And they buried him with his fathers in the burial field which belonged to the kings …: Uzziah was not buried in the royal cemetery because of his disease, but he was buried nearby. The words and they buried him with his fathers are absent from a few Hebrew manuscripts. The New English Bible translators incorrectly thought that only the words with his fathers were omitted in some Hebrew manuscripts, so New English Bible says “and was buried in a burial-ground.” Moreover, New English Bible follows the Syriac in reading “he was not buried in the royal tombs” instead of the Hebrew, which says “which belonged to the kings.” Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives an {A} rating to the Masoretic Text here, and notes that the author is stating that the king was indeed buried in land which belonged to the kings but he was not buried in the same tombs as the other kings because of his disease. The meaning is correctly expressed by Revised English Bible, which begins this verse with “He rested with his forefathers and was buried with them, but in the field adjoining the royal tombs….” Moffatt says “Uzziah slept with his fathers and was buried with his fathers—but only in the burial-field belonging to the kings.”

For they said, “He is a leper”: A literal translation here may leave too much information implied for readers today. Since Uzziah had a severe skin disease, he was considered unclean and could not be buried in the royal tombs without making them impure. It is not important to know the identity of the people who spoke here. The writer is simply indicating why Uzziah could not be buried in the royal tombs. Good News Translation does not keep the direct quotation and says simply “because of his disease” (similarly Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), which other languages may find helpful.

And Jotham his son reigned in his stead: For reigned in his stead, see the comments on 1 Chr 19.1 and 2 Chr 9.31.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

And now you intend to subjugate the people of Judah and Jerusalem, male and female, as your slaves: The Law of Moses prohibited making slaves of other Israelites (see Lev 25.39-55). Making slaves of the people of Judah would only add to the Israelites’ sins against God. The Hebrew verb rendered subjugate is sometimes translated “subdue” (see the comments on 1 Chr 22.18), but in this context the meaning is clearly “to make slaves of” (compare Jer 34.11, 16). The people is literally “the sons” or “the children” (Bible de Jérusalem). But such a literal translation may be misleading and should be avoided in most languages. For the expression Judah and Jerusalem, see the comments on 1 Chr 6.15 and 2 Chr 2.7. Male and female may be combined with the people as in Good News Translation, which says simply “the men and women.”

Have you not sins of your own against the LORD your God?: This rhetorical question has no verb in the Hebrew text and may be understood in two different ways as follows:

(1) It may mean that the people of the northern kingdom have also committed sins against God in the past, so they should be less severe in their judgment against the people of the southern kingdom. This interpretation is followed in both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation.
(2) Or it may mean that the people of the northern kingdom are now committing a sin against God by making slaves of the people of the southern kingdom. Bible en français courant follows this second interpretation by saying “Is not this to make you guilty before the Lord your God?” (similarly New American Bible). Contemporary English Version also follows this interpretation, but it changes the rhetorical question into a statement, saying “you will be as guilty as they are of sinning against the LORD” (similarly Parole de Vie, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente).

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse follows the common formula that is used to summarize the reign of a ruler of Israel or Judah by stating Jotham’s age when he took over (twenty-five years old), the length of his reign (sixteen years), his capital (Jerusalem), and the name of his mother (Jerushah). His grandfather was Zadok. It is uncertain exactly which Zadok is intended here since at least ten people mentioned in the Old Testament had that name. Possibly he was the son of Ahitub (1 Chr 6.12) or the son of Meraioth (1 Chr 9.11). But his identity should not affect the translation.

It is not possible to establish an exact chronology for Jotham’s reign since the information given in this verse is contradicted by 2 Kgs 15.30 and 17.1. The sixteen years probably include the time when he ruled with his father Uzziah (about 750–742 B.C.) as well as when he ruled alone after his father’s death (about 742–735 B.C.). See 2 Chr 26.21.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

And he did what was right in the eyes of the LORD according to all that his father Uzziah had done: See the comments on 2 Chr 14.2 and 26.4.

Only he did not invade the temple of the LORD: The precise meaning of this clause is uncertain. There is some ambiguity about (a) whether the writer was praising Jotham for not entering the Temple as his father had done to burn incense (see 2 Chr 26.16-20), since only priests were to enter the Temple, or (b) whether he was criticizing him for not worshiping God. The first interpretation seems to fit the context better. God’s Word expresses this sense clearly with “But unlike his father, he didn’t illegally enter the LORD’s temple,” and so does Good News Translation with “but unlike his father he did not sin by burning incense in the Temple.”

It is also possible to understand that the writer is stating one area in which Jotham did not do what was pleasing to the LORD: he did not go to the Temple. This second interpretation is expressed in the alternative translation in Bible en français courant, which renders the last half of this verse as “Nevertheless he did not frequent the temple of the Lord, and the people did not improve their conduct.” Peregrino is similar with “But he wasn’t going to the temple, and the people continued to do wrong.”

Temple translates the Hebrew noun that often refers specifically to the central room of the Temple, but here it may refer to the whole Temple (see the comments on 2 Chr 4.7, 22).

But the people still followed corrupt practices: The common Hebrew conjunction here is correctly translated But to mark contrast since the behavior of the people of Judah who were corrupt contrasts with that of King Jotham who avoided such wrongdoing. Instead of followed corrupt practices, the parallel text of 2 Kgs 15.35 has “sacrificed and burned incense on the high places.” But it is better to retain a more general statement here rather than harmonizing the two passages. New Jerusalem Bible says simply “continued to do wrong.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He built the upper gate of the house of the LORD: The Hebrew pronoun for He is emphatic, so some versions begin this verse with “It was he who…” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Nouvelle Bible Segond, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). Since the previous verse mentions both Jotham and his father, Good News Translation and Bible en français courant say “It was Jotham who…” to avoid any ambiguity. The verb built must be taken here in the sense of rebuilding or restoration since the Temple gate in view here was already there long before the time of Jotham. For this reason several modern versions say “rebuilt” (Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation, New Century Version, La Bible du Semeur). Since he did not rebuild the gate himself, it is even better to say “had [it] rebuilt.” The upper gate is probably the same gate as the one called “the upper Benjamin Gate” in Jer 20.2. According to Ezek 9.2, it was located on the north side of the Temple area. Ezekiel refers to it as “the north gate” (Ezek 8.14; 40.35, 40, 44; 44.4; 46.9; 47.2), so Good News Translation says “the North Gate.” However, some interpreters think the upper gate was located south of the Temple. 2 Chr 23.20 seems to indicate this. Possibly the upper gate is the same as the New Gate mentioned in Jer 26.10 and 36.10, since the New Gate seems to have been located south of the Temple, although the location of the New Gate is not certain.

And did much building on the wall of Ophel: The exact sense of this clause in Hebrew is not clear. Jotham may have made extensive repairs on the wall in view here or he may have added to it. New Living Translation says “He also did extensive rebuilding on the wall at the hill of Ophel,” and Revised English Bible has “and [he] built extensions on the wall at Ophel.” Ophel was the section of Jerusalem located on a hill south of the Temple and of the royal palace. Since Ophel refers to a part of the city, Good News Translation renders the wall of Ophel as “the city wall in the area of Jerusalem called Ophel” (similarly Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Other ways of expressing this phrase include “the wall of the quarter of [town called] Ophel” (Bible en français courant) and “the wall in the area known as Ophel” ( NET Bible).

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Moreover translates the common Hebrew conjunction, but many modern versions choose to ignore it here (so Good News Translation).

He built cities in the hill country of Judah, and forts and towers on the wooded hills: As in the previous verse, some languages will need to use a causative verb form for built to show that Jotham himself did not build the cities, forts and towers (so Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). For the hill country of Judah, see the comments on 2 Chr 21.11. For the Hebrew noun rendered forts, see the comments on 2 Chr 17.12, where it is translated “fortresses.” For the sense of towers in this context, see the comments on 1 Chr 27.25 and 2 Chr 26.10. The Hebrew noun rendered the wooded hills may be translated simply “the forests” (Good News Translation, An American Translation, Moffatt, Bible en français courant) since the hill country is already in view.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .