Then: The transition word in Hebrew is not the ordinary conjunction in this case. Here it is an adverb that does not have chronological meaning; rather it is an adverb marking a new stage in the narrative (see the comments at 1 Kgs 3.16). The story moves from the building and furnishing of the Temple to an account about the bringing of the Covenant Box into the Temple.
Solomon assembled the elders of Israel … in Jerusalem: At the beginning of this new section, it may also be appropriate to give the title of Solomon as well as his name. Compare “King Solomon” (Good News Translation, New Century Version, Bible en français courant, Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje). The Masoretic Text says only Solomon, but one important manuscript of the Septuagint says “King Solomon.”
A literal translation of the Hebrew, as in Revised Standard Version, seems to give the impression that when Solomon called for the leaders to assemble before him, they were in their own towns and cities at that moment. Indeed, the Good News Translation rendering “summoned all the leaders … to come to him in Jerusalem” seems to suggest that they were not yet at that moment in Jerusalem. But when verses 1-2 are taken together, the picture seems to be this: the people of Israel were in Jerusalem for the Festival of Shelters; and while the people were there, Solomon called for the leaders, who were already in Jerusalem, to come to his palace. Compare Peregrino: “Solomon summoned to his palace in Jerusalem….”
Contemporary English Version combines and restructures verses 1-2 as follows:
• The sacred chest had been kept on Mount Zion, also known as the city of David. But Solomon decided to have the chest moved to the temple while everyone was in Jerusalem, celebrating the Festival of Shelters during Ethanim,* the seventh month of the year.
Solomon called together the important leaders of Israel.
* Ethanim: The seventh month of the Hebrew calendar, from about mid-September to mid-October.
A first reading of verse 1 may give the impression that Solomon called together three separate groups of leaders. But neither the interpretation nor the text of the words the elders of Israel and all the heads of the tribes, the leaders of the fathers’ houses of the people of Israel is clear. First, as regards the text, the Septuagint omits the words and all the heads of the tribes, the leaders of the fathers’ houses of the people of Israel. Some translators consider these words to be a later addition to the text and follow the Septuagint (so New Jerusalem Bible). The shorter text is probably correct, but translators should translate the Masoretic Text as it now stands and should not attempt to translate some supposed original text.
If the Masoretic Text is followed, translators must decide how many groups are mentioned here. Since verse 3 mentions only the elders, it may be argued that only one group is intended here in verse 1. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, for example, says “the elders of Israel—all the heads of the tribes and the ancestral chieftains of the Israelites.” This New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh rendering indicates that the elders consisted of both the heads of the tribes and the leaders of the fathers’ houses. The Hebrew may also be understood to mean that these three expressions all refer to the same people. Anchor Bible is based on this interpretation as follows: “the elders of Israel—all the heads of the tribes, the ancestral chieftains of the Israelites.” Revised English Bible is similar with “the elders of Israel, all the heads of the tribes who were chiefs of families in Israel.”
Contemporary English Version combines all of this into the phrase “the important leaders of Israel,” but this translation oversimplifies the text and does not indicate that among the ancient Israelites the leaders were the heads of families and tribal groups.
Revised Standard Version seems to refer to two groups: the elders and the heads of the tribes, with the words the leaders of the fathers’ houses of the people of Israel being in apposition either to both groups or to the second group only. This way of understanding the text, which is found also in New Revised Standard Version and New American Bible, seems to be the most natural reading of the Hebrew.
The terms elders, tribes, and fathers’ houses are important, so translators should consider carefully how to render them. The elders of Israel refers to the male heads of clans or families who were the leaders of the people of Israel (Josh 7.6; Ruth 4.2). The Hebrew noun rendered elders comes from another noun meaning “beard.” However, old age is only one semantic component of the word elders. New Century Version preserves both the component of age and of leadership by saying “older leaders.” Regarding the word tribes, various cultures have different ways of dividing the units within ethnic groups. In some cases there are basically three: (1) the nuclear family, (2) the extended family, which is sometimes referred to as the “clan,” and (3) the tribe or nation as a whole. While English translations typically refer to the “twelve tribes of Israel,” in some cultures it is more accurate to speak of twelve clans since all twelve of these groups spoke the same language. The expression fathers’ houses is translated “Israelite families” in New International Version, but in some languages it will be more accurate to speak of them as “clans” (Good News Translation).
To bring up the ark of the covenant of the LORD …: Some translators consider it unnecessary to focus on the upward movement in the Hebrew verb translated bring up. While there was probably a difference in elevation in moving the ark from the older part of the city of Jerusalem to its new location in the Temple, this is not important in the story. For this reason Good News Translation uses the verb “take,” while Contemporary English Version speaks of having “the chest moved.” For the ark of the covenant of the LORD, see the comments on 1 Kgs 2.26 and 3.15.
In the Old Testament, the city of David refers to a specific part of what later became the larger city of Jerusalem. This same expression is used in 1 Kgs 2.10 and 3.1 (see the comments there). The city of David refers to the long, narrow, triangular-shaped ridge located below the Temple mount on the southern end of the eastern ridge (see, for example, Neh 3.15). The eastern ridge and the western ridge of Jerusalem are divided by the Tyropoeon Valley.
Zion is mentioned only three times in 1–2 Kings, but it is used frequently in Psalms and several of the prophets. The exact meaning of the Hebrew word is uncertain, but it may mean “fortress” or “citadel” and always refers to the city of Jerusalem or to a part of it. As used here, it refers to the southeast hill of Jerusalem (the location of the city of David). The name Zion is used in the New Testament in quotations from the Old Testament (for example, John 12.15; Rom 9.33) or in a figurative sense (Heb 12.22; Rev 14.1).
In the Hebrew text the reader does not learn until verse 6 where the ark is taken. New Living Translation brings this information into verse 1 by saying “… from its location in the City of David, also known as Zion, to its new place in the Temple.” Other functionally equivalent translations also add “to the Temple” here (so Good News Translation, Bible en français courant, Parole de Vie).
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .