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 .

And he built towers in the wilderness, and hewed out many cisterns: Since King Uzziah did not build the towers and dig out the cisterns himself, it will be appropriate to say that he had them built and dug out (so Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). The Hebrew word for towers is the same one as in the previous verse, but these structures were different since they were not a part of a city wall, but free standing (see the comments on 1 Chr 27.25). They were isolated observation towers where soldiers could watch in the distance for any possible assault by enemy troops. In some languages a different term may be required. The wilderness refers to an area where people did not normally live, so Good News Translation and Moffatt say “the open country” (see the comments on 1 Chr 12.8). Here it included areas in the western foothills and on the coastal plain of Judah.

Cisterns were water storage areas that had to be dug or carved out of solid rock (see the comments on 1 Chr 11.17). Some were open pits, but they had to be covered (Exo 21.33). More often they were hollowed out underground. Such cisterns could be as large as 6 meters (20 feet) square. Since these cisterns were often cut out of porous rock, they had to be lined with a lime plaster. For a fuller discussion on cisterns, see WTH, pages 159-160|fig:WTH.Cistern.159-160.html. In some languages hewed out many cisterns may be rendered “hollowed many places in rock for storing rain water.” New Century Version says “dug many wells,” but this rendering does not accurately reflect the meaning of the Hebrew here since wells collect underground water from the immediate area. Cisterns collect rainwater that flows into them. Contemporary English Version provides a good model here, saying “he had cisterns dug there to catch the rainwater.”

For he had large herds, both in the Shephelah and in the plain …: The conjunction for introduces why Uzziah had towers and cisterns built. The animals and the people working the land needed protection and water. The Hebrew word translated herds is sometimes used of possessions in general, but here and in most other passages it refers to “livestock” (Contemporary English Version). The same term is translated “cattle” in 1 Chr 5.9 (see the comments there).

The Shephelah refers to the western foothills of Judah (see the comments on 1 Chr 27.28 and 2 Chr 1.15). The exact reference intended by the plain is not clear. It probably refers to the coastal plain of Judah (so La Bible du Semeur), or it may be the high plateau east of the Jordan River and south of the city of Heshbon in northern Moab (called “the tableland” in New Jerusalem Bible).

And he had farmers and vinedressers in the hills and in the fertile lands: Vinedressers are people who take care of the vines that produce grapes. Their work involves pruning the vines as well as harvesting the grapes (see the comments on 1 Chr 27.27). The hills refers to the hill country of Judah. Fertile lands (also New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible) translates a Hebrew noun that sometimes refers to orchards with fruit trees. Here it simply means productive farmland. But the Hebrew noun may also be understood as the name of a town south of Hebron as in Josh 15.55. This is the basis for the rendering “Carmel” (King James Version, NET Bible, Nouvelle Bible Segond, Luther). A literal translation of the Hebrew clause here may suggest that there were farmers and vinedressers on both the hills and fertile fields. More likely, Good News Translation expresses the intended sense, that is, that the vineyards were planted on the hills and the fertile fields were used for the other crops.

For he loved the soil is a literal translation of the Hebrew. The sense is more clearly expressed in English as “Because he loved farming” (Good News Translation) or “for he was a lover of agriculture” (Moffatt).

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 again. As in 2Chr 26.9, it may be expressed by beginning a new paragraph (so Good News Translation).

Uzziah had an army of soldiers is literally “it was to Uzziah an army doing battle.” This clause may be expressed as “Uzziah had an army of professional soldiers” (God’s Word) or “Uzziah had a standing army” (similarly Complete Jewish Bible). According to verse 12, this army was commanded by 2,600 officers. According to verse 13, there were 307,500 soldiers under their command. So the army consisted of 310,100 soldiers, counting the commanders and the troops.

Fit for war is literally “going out for service.” See the comments on 1 Chr 5.18, where this expression is rendered “ready for service.” Here it may be translated “ready for battle” (Good News Translation) or “ready to go to war” (God’s Word).

In divisions according to the numbers in the muster made by Je-iel the secretary and Ma-aseiah the officer: Jeiel and Maaseiah had taken a census of Uzziah’s troops, and the troops were organized in military units according to this census (so Bible en français courant). The passive expression made by Je-iel … (literally “by the hand of Jeiel…”) may be made active where necessary by saying “which Jeiel … had made.” Je-iel is called the secretary, which means he kept the records for the army (see the comments on 1 Chr 18.16). Ma-aseiah is called the officer. His exact function is not clear. He may have been the person who had authority to muster the troops. For the Hebrew word rendered officer, see the comments on 1 Chr 23.4. Other renderings here for this word include “clerk” (Revised English Bible), “recorder” (New American Bible), “staff-officer” (New Jerusalem Bible), “comptroller” (Moffatt), and “administrator” (Bible en français courant). Good News Translation and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente include both Je-iel and Ma-aseiah as secretaries without distinguishing their functions. But this is not advisable since the text uses two different terms.

Under the direction of Hananiah is literally “under the hand of Hananiah,” but the meaning is expressed well by Revised Standard Version. New Century Version says “Hananiah … was their leader.”

One of the king’s commanders may be rendered “a member of the king’s staff” (Good News Translation) or “one of the royal generals” (Moffatt).

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 whole number of the heads of fathers’ houses of mighty men of valor was two thousand six hundred: The army was commanded by 2,600 officers. The whole number is literally “All the number.” Several versions say “The total number” (New International Version, Revised English Bible, Nouvelle Bible Segond). These officers were the heads of fathers’ houses (see the comments on 1 Chr 5.24), which may be rendered “clan leaders” (New Living Translation) or “family leaders” (New International Version, Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Good News Translation omits this phrase, but it should be kept. For mighty men of valor, see the comments on 1 Chr 12.21. This whole verse may be rendered “There were a total of 2,600 clan leaders who were in charge of the mighty fighting men” or “2,600 chiefs of family groups commanded the valiant warriors” (La Bible du Semeur).

Revised English Bible interprets this verse to mean that the 2,600 family leaders were not actually commanders but rather suppliers of the mighty soldiers. Its translation reads “The total number of heads of families which supplied seasoned warriors was two thousand six hundred.” But the difficulty with the Revised English Bible translation is that verse 13 says the army was under the command of these family leaders.

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 .

Under their command was an army … is literally “And under their hand was an army force….” The pronoun their refers to the family leaders mentioned in the previous verse. They commanded Uzziah’s army.

Who could make war with mighty power: The Judean soldiers were an effective fighting force. Moffatt calls them “sturdy fighters,” and God’s Word says “They were a powerful force.”

To help the king against the enemy: The Hebrew word rendered the enemy is singular but the reference is not to a single specific enemy. Rather, the sense is “the persons or nations who are enemies of the king.” For this reason Good News Translation says “his enemies” (similarly Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente).

The structure of this verse may be awkward if translated literally into other languages because it begins with a prepositional phrase. An alternative model is:

• The army they commanded included 307,500 men, all of them choice troops. They were available to help the king against all his enemies.

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 Uzziah prepared for all the army …: In this context the Hebrew verb translated prepared is better rendered “provided” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “distributed” (La Bible du Semeur), or simply “gave” (New Century Version). The Hebrew does not mean that Uzziah made the military items listed here.

The Hebrew word for shields refers to smaller shields, as in 1 Chr 5.18 and 2 Chr 9.16 (see the comments there).

For spears see the comments on 1 Chr 11.11.

Helmets were worn to protect the heads of soldiers and were often made of leather but some were also made of metal.

Coats of mail, also called “coats of armor” (Good News Translation), were made of small metal plates that were sewn or tied together in fishlike scales. They covered the chests and backs of soldiers. They were heavy and awkward, but they protected soldiers against enemy arrows.

Bows were about 1-2 meters (3-6 feet) long and were usually made of wood, animal horn, and sinew. Wooden arrows with stone or metal arrowheads could be shot a distance of 160-180 meters (175-200 yards). For a good discussion on bows and arrows, see WTH, pages 106-108|fig:WTH.Bow.106-108.html.

And stones for slinging is literally “and for stones of slinging.” Most versions omit the preposition “for” since it makes no sense in this context. Such stones were round and about 5-7 centimeters (2-3 inches) in diameter. The sling was a long string with a leather or woven cloth pouch in the middle to hold the stone. The warrior would spin the sling around over his head and then let go of one end of the sling, releasing the stone at a speed of more than 160 kilometers (100 miles) per hour.

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 .

From the time when he turned away from the LORD: See verses 14 and 20. The Hebrew literally says “From the time when Amazyahu turned away from the LORD,” but both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation have replaced the name “Amazyahu” with the pronoun he for reasons of English style.

They made a conspiracy against him in Jerusalem is literally “they conspired a conspiracy….” The Hebrew word translated conspiracy is the same one rendered “treason” in 2 Chr 23.13 (see the comments there). The subject of the Hebrew verb here is indefinite. In languages that use passive forms, the meaning of this clause may be expressed as “a conspiracy was formed against him” (Revised English Bible, New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Where the passive is not possible, the following model of Contemporary English Version might be helpful: “some people in Jerusalem plotted against Amaziah.”

And he fled to Lachish: Lachish was an important city, strategically located about 45 kilometers (28 miles) southwest of Jerusalem (see the comments on 2 Chr 11.9). It would have been a possible place of refuge for the king in the face of an uprising against him in his capital city. It will be important in most languages to add a classifier word like “city.”

But they sent after him to Lachish: The pronoun they refers to the same indefinite enemies as in the beginning of the verse. Revised English Bible has “the conspirators” as the subject of this clause. For they sent after him, Good News Translation has “his enemies followed him,” and New American Bible says “they pursued him.” Other possible renderings are “he was pursued” and “he was followed” if the passive form is a realistic option. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “they sent men after him,” indicating that the leaders of the coup did not make the journey themselves, but rather sent their subordinates. To Lachish may be rendered “there” (Good News Translation) since this city has just been mentioned.

And slew him there: The archaic verb slew is replaced by “killed” in New Revised Standard Version.

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 .