Translation commentary on 1 Chronicles 7:17

The sons of Ulam: Bedan: The Masoretic Text says sons of Ulam even though only one son is listed. Perhaps a scribe mistakenly changed the singular “son” to the plural sons or possibly a scribe accidentally omitted other names. The Vulgate reads the singular “son” here.

These were the sons of Gilead the son of Machir, son of Manasseh: The demonstrative pronoun These may refer only to Asriel and Zelophehad in verses 14 and 15 (but see the comments on those two verses). According to Good News Translation, the pronoun apparently refers to all the people named in the preceding verses.

Gilead was “the son of Machir and grandson of Manasseh” (Good News Translation, Bible en français courant, La Bible du Semeur, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Another way of saying the same thing in some languages is “Gilead, the son of Machir, who was the son of Manasseh.” Compare New Century Version, which has two separate sentences at the end of this verse: “These were the sons of Gilead, who was the son of Makir. Makir was Manasseh’s son.”

The major difficulty in understanding this verse is the following: Ulam was the son of Peresh or Sheresh, and Peresh and Sheresh were both sons of Machir and Maacah, according to verse 16. But if Ulam and Bedan were descendants of Machir through his son Peresh or his son Sheresh, how can these people be said to be sons of Gilead, Machir’s other son? Perhaps sons of Gilead should be understood to mean “members of the family of Gilead” (Parole de Vie) or “Gileadites” (Braun). That is, they are not biological descendants of Gilead but rather belong to the same clan as Gilead. More likely, though, the Masoretic Text contains an error here in the text, so the translations in Parole de Vie and Braun should not be followed.

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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Chronicles 8:12

The sons of Elpaal: Eber, Misham, and Shemed: See also verses 17-18. As stated in the comments on the previous verse, a literal translation such as Revised Standard Version may not be clear to the person who only hears the text read. The listener may think the text here says “The sons of Elpaal, Eber, Misham, and Shemed,” when, in fact, the last three persons named are the sons of Elpaal. Good News Translation is more easily understood since it says “Elpaal had three sons….”

Who built Ono and Lod with its towns is literally “he built Ono and Lod and its daughters.” It is not entirely clear whether the pronoun “he” refers to Elpaal or to his son Shemed. The most natural reading of the Hebrew text is that the reference is to Shemed, which some translations make explicit (so Good News Translation, New Century Version, Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje). However, Knoppers claims that Elpaal is the subject, and he translates the whole verse as follows: “These were the sons of Elpaal: Eber, Misham, and Shemer. He built Ono and Lud, along with its dependencies.”

Ono and Lod were “cities,” as Good News Translation and Bible en français courant make explicit. They were located in the northwest of the Shephelah, that is, the lowlands between the Judean hill country to the east and the coastal plain on the west. Both cities are mentioned in Ezra and Nehemiah, and in Neh 11.35 they are identified with the Valley of Craftsmen (see 1 Chr 4.14). Since ancient Egyptian records show that these two cities existed long before this time, some interpreters suggest that the Hebrew verb for built should be translated “rebuilt” or “fortified” here. For towns (literally “daughters,” so Osty-Trinquet), see the comments on 1 Chr 7.28. Its towns may be rendered “their surrounding villages” or “the villages around them” (New Century Version) since the pronoun its refers to Ono and Lod.

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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Chronicles 9:21

Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah was gatekeeper …: Meshelemiah and his family are spoken of in greater detail in chapter 26. It is possible that Meshelemiah refers to the same person as Shallum in verses 17 and 19 and as Shelemiah in 1 Chr 26.14. But because this is not certain, translators should not harmonize these different verses.

The tent of meeting: Normally this expression refers to the Tabernacle used in the wilderness period at the time of Moses (see the comments on 1 Chr 6.32). But as verse 23 shows, the writer uses it here as a synonym for the Temple (so Contemporary English Version, New Century 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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Chronicles 10:11

But when all Jabesh-gilead heard …: But renders the common Hebrew conjunction. New Revised Standard Version, New Living Translation, and English Standard Version also have “But,” while King James Version and the New King James Version [New King James Version ] use “And.” Either connector is appropriate in this context. However, most other modern versions omit this conjunction since it serves only to connect verse 11 with what goes before it.

Instead of all Jabesh-gilead, the parallel text in 1 Sam 31.11 reads “the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead.” New Jerusalem Bible corrects the Hebrew here to follow the parallel in 1 Samuel by saying “the inhabitants of Jabesh in Gilead.” But there is no reason to change the Hebrew, since the text may be rendered “the people of Jabesh in Gilead” for translational reasons (so Good News Translation, Bible en français courant). According to 1 Sam 11, Saul had rescued the people of Jabesh from the Ammonites at the beginning of his reign. The name Jabesh-gilead is better translated “Jabesh in Gilead” or “the city of Jabesh in the region of Gilead.” Jabesh was one of the main Israelite cities east of the Jordan River. It was located on the eastern side of the Jordan River, about 70 kilometers (44 miles) from Jerusalem.

Both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation treat verse 11 as a temporal clause. In some languages it may be better to make this verse a complete sentence; for example, Bible en français courant says “The people of Jabesh, in Gilead, learned all that the Philistines had done to Saul” (similarly 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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Chronicles 11:8

And he built the city round about from the Millo in complete circuit: The pronoun he refers to David, which New Century Version makes explicit. The city had existed previously although much of it was likely damaged by the battle. For this reason some versions render built as “rebuilt” (Good News Translation, New Century Version, New American Bible). In order to show that David himself did not actually do all the work of rebuilding, Contemporary English Version begins this verse with “He had the city rebuilt….”

The Millo is referred to also in 1 Kgs 9.15, 24; 11.27; 2 Kgs 12.20; and 2 Chr 32.5, as well as in the parallel passage of 2 Sam 5.9. The meaning of the Hebrew word transliterated Millo is uncertain, though most scholars connect it to a verb meaning “to be full.” Several commentaries and translations suggest that the Millo refers to some kind of landfill (so Good News Translation). It may have been a rampart or platform created by filling a ravine. Or it may have been a system of man-made terraces that were supported by retaining walls with leveled filling (so New International Version with “the supporting terraces”). According to 1 Kgs 9.15, 23 and 11.27, Solomon “built” the Millo, but those references may be understood in the sense of “rebuilt” or perhaps “enlarged.”

Even if the Millo does refer to a landfill of some kind, archaeologists do not agree on the location of this fill. Some believe it refers to stepped-stone terraces built on the east side of the east ridge of Jerusalem, which is probably the basis for the Good News Translation translation “on the east side of the hill.” Others consider it to be a landfill south of the Temple mount on the southeast hill or to be a landfill connecting the City of David to the high fortified area to the north.

As the above discussion indicates, there is no firm agreement by specialists on the precise meaning of the Millo. Nevertheless, translators must make a decision. Recent archaeological studies point most strongly to understanding this as referring to the terraces on the steep east side of the southeast ridge of Jerusalem. At the time when David captured the city, the wall on the east side was about 48 meters (158 feet) down from the top of the ridge. Therefore the Good News Translation rendering has much to commend it.

So how should the Millo be translated? Versions that tend to be more literal simply transliterate the Hebrew term as “the Millo” (Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, Nouvelle Bible Segond), but others attempt to explain what the Hebrew term refers to (so Good News Translation, New International Version). In many cases it will be preferable to translate the probable meaning rather than retaining the transliteration, which would be meaningless to most readers. However, an explanatory footnote is also advisable. Another possibility is to transliterate the term and then give the probable meaning in brackets as in Complete Jewish Bible, which says “the Millo [earth rampart].”

In complete circuit translates two Hebrew words that are literally “unto the surrounding.” Their exact meaning is not clear. Rather than attempt to translate the Hebrew here, Braun simply uses an ellipsis, indicating that something is missing. Many understand these two words to mean that the repair work on the City of David was carried out on all sides of the city. For the first half of this verse American Bible says “He built the city from around the Millo to the surrounding wall,” adding the word “wall” as the grammar and context seem to require.

And Joab repaired the rest of the city: The Hebrew verb translated repaired is literally “kept alive.” The same verb is used in Neh 4.2 (3.34 in the Masoretic Text) for rebuilding the wall of Jerusalem. Some may prefer to translate this clause as “and Joab brought the rest of the city back to life.” Compare Nouvelle version Segond révisée, which reads “and Joab restored life to the rest of the city.” The sense is probably that he fixed up the rest of the buildings in the city, apart from the citadel. New Living Translation says “while Joab rebuilt the rest of Jerusalem,” and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh is similar with “and Joab rebuilt the rest of the city.” Since it is not likely that Joab himself did the repair work, Contemporary English Version says “Meanwhile, Joab supervised the repairs to the rest of the city.”

Some interpreters think this last sentence makes little sense in the context since the first part of the verse seems to say that David had rebuilt the entire city. Therefore they understand the last sentence to mean that Joab kept the inhabitants alive rather than killing them, that is, he killed people in the fortress when he attacked the city (verse 6), but he left the people in the rest of the city alive. This interpretation is possible, but is not widely accepted. Klein keeps both interpretations in his rendering “while Joab repaired/kept alive the rest of the city.” But this solution is not recommended. It is better to put one interpretation in the text and the other in a footnote.

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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Chronicles 11:41

Uriah the Hittite (verse 41): The parallel passage in 2 Sam 23 ends with this warrior, saying the total number of warriors was thirty-seven. However, the Chronicler continues with several other names that are not found in 2 Samuel.

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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Chronicles 13:7

And they carried the ark of God upon a new cart: Since there is a reference to the cherubim at the end of the previous verse, it is possible that there could be some confusion in certain languages regarding the referent for the pronoun they at the beginning of this verse. This pronoun clearly refers to “David and all Israel” mentioned at the beginning of verse 6. Contemporary English Version makes this explicit by saying “David and the crowd,” and New Century Version has “The people.” In light of what follows in the next chapters, the pronoun does not refer specifically to the priests and Levites.

Carried is literally “caused to ride.” Revised English Bible uses two verbs, “mounted … and conveyed,” while several modern versions have the more logical verb “transported” (New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). When the Covenant Box was moved from Ekron to Beth Shemesh it was also transported on a new cart (see 1 Sam 6.7). It was probably out of respect for the Box that the people of Israel wanted to use a cart that would not have been ritually contaminated by any other load. Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje says more precisely “new ox cart.” For a good description of a cart, see WTH, pages 366-367|fig:WTH.cart, wagon.366-367.html.

From the house of Abinadab, and Uzzah and Ahio were driving the cart: According to 1 Sam 7.1, the Covenant Box had been left at the house of Abinadab. Abinadab had two sons named Uzzah and Ahio, who helped with the moving of the Box. The Hebrew word rendered Ahio may be understood as a person’s name (so Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, Bible en français courant, and most other versions) or it may be understood as the Hebrew word for “brother” plus the third person singular masculine suffix “his” (so Luther, Braun). As the parallel passage in 2 Sam 6.3-4 makes clear, Uzzah and Ahio were not seated on the cart, but were walking in front of it and steering it along the way. Translators should take care to select a verb for were driving that conveys this meaning rather than one that would give the impression that the men were seated on the cart; for example, Good News Translation and several other modern versions say they “guided” the cart. It is not clear from the Hebrew here whether they were walking in front of the cart or beside the cart.

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 .

Translation commentary on 1 Chronicles 16:21

This verse and the following one seem to refer to the incidents with the king of Egypt (Gen 12.10-20) and with Abimelech, king of Gerar (Gen 20.1-8), both involving Sarah, Abraham’s wife. But here these incidents are made more general.

He allowed no one to oppress them; he rebuked kings on their account: Following the form of the Hebrew, Revised Standard Version continues the sentence begun in verse 19 and has no transition word here. However, several modern versions mark the contrast between verse 20, where the Israelites are described as not being in a safe and secure situation, and this verse, where God’s protection over them is emphasized. Like Good News Translation, some versions use the conjunction “But” (New Century Version, Revised English Bible, Bible en français courant, Nouvelle version Segond révisée, La Bible du Semeur, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). Other possible connectors are “Yet” (New Living Translation) and “However” (Parole de Vie).

The pronoun he refers to God, but if this is not clear, then it should be made explicit as in Good News Translation (so also Bible en français courant, La Bible du Semeur, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy). As is evident from the reading of the two passages in Genesis mentioned above, the meaning of he rebuked kings on their account is that God warned foreign kings not to harm his servants. On their account may be translated “on their behalf” or “in order to defend them.”

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 .