And the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites is literally “and the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgashite” (similarly King James Version [King James Version], Bible de Jérusalem, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). But the singular forms in Hebrew here are obviously collective in meaning and should therefore be translated by plurals in most languages.

The Jebusites were inhabitants of the hill country in Israel and were the inhabitants of Jerusalem before King David took control of it (2 Sam 5.6-9).

The Amorites were one of the major peoples in the land of Canaan before the Israelites took control of the land. They lived on the east side of the Jordan River between Moab to the south and Ammon to the north.

The Girgashites are sometimes identified with the Gergesenes in the New Testament (see Matt 8.28), who lived on the east side of the Jordan River, but this identification is not certain.

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 Ethan’s son was Azariah is literally “and the sons of Ethan: Azariah” (similarly New American Bible). As in the case of Carmi and Achar in the previous verse, the plural word “sons” is difficult to understand. The Old Testament does not indicate elsewhere whether Ethan had other sons, so it will be better not to say as directly as Good News Translation does that Ethan had “one” son. It is probably best to follow the example of Revised Standard Version and say Ethan’s son (also New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Ethan was named in verse 6 as one of Zerah’s sons, which makes him a grandson of Judah. Nothing more is known of Azariah. The name Azariah occurs frequently in the Old Testament and refers to twenty-seven different people.

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 sons of Jahdai: Jahdai appears without any connection to the preceding verses, so Good News Translation places this verse in parentheses. What was his (or, her) relationship to Caleb’s descendants? The following answers have been suggested:

• (1) Jahdai, not Gazez, was the son of Haran, who was mentioned in the previous verse (so Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Einheitsübersetzung).

• (2) Jahdai is not a part of the genealogical line in which his name and those of his children have been inserted. So Good News Translation places this verse in parentheses and introduces Jahdai as “A man named Jahdai.”

• (3) Jahdai and Gazez (verse 46) are the same person who is called by two different names. Translators may wish to add a footnote explaining this possibility.

• (4) There is no way to know what, if any, relationship Jahdai had to Caleb’s descendants. Therefore Revised Standard Version and most other versions translate the Hebrew literally without any attempt to identify Jahdai’s relationship to the people named in the preceding verses.

• (5) The name Jahdai was a woman’s name, so she may have been a daughter of Caleb, or another concubine of Caleb, in addition to Ephah (verse 46) and Maacah (verse 48).

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 .

Re-aiah the son of Shobal was the father of Jahath, and Jahath was the father of Ahumai and Lahad: Good News Translation restructures the literal phrase Reaiah the son of Shobal, saying “Shobal was the father of Reaiah.” This seems more natural since the remainder of the verse focuses on fathers rather than sons.

These were the families of the Zorathites: In some versions families is translated “clans” (Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible) or “family groups” (New Century Version). Good News Translation says “ancestors,” which fits this context well. For Zorathites see the comments on 1 Chr 2.53. Zorah was a town located in the Sorek Valley, about 3 kilometers (2 miles) north of Beth Shemesh. Helpful renderings for the Zorathites are “the Zorathite clan” (Contemporary English Version), “the people who lived in Zorah” (Good News Translation, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch), and “the people who came from the town of Zorah.”

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 .

Where they found is literally “and they found.” As indicated in the discussion on the previous verse, it will be better in most languages to begin a new sentence here.

Rich, good pasture is literally “pasture fat and good” (similarly King James Version, American Standard Version). In this context the word “fat” speaks of pasture land that is rich and fertile. New Living Translation translates “lush pastures.” New Century Version has “good pastures with plenty of grass.”

And the land was very broad, quiet, and peaceful: The Hebrew phrase rendered very broad is an idiomatic expression that is literally “wide as [two] hands.” Most French versions translate it “vast,” while New International Version uses the word “spacious” and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “ample.” Revised English Bible expresses the first half of this verse well by saying “They found rich and good pasture in a wide stretch of open country where everything was quiet and peaceful” (similarly Good News Translation).

For the former inhabitants there belonged to Ham: The connector for translates a Hebrew particle that often introduces a cause. But in this context it is difficult to understand why the land was quiet and peaceful because the Hamites had lived there. Some interpreters suggest that perhaps some words have accidentally been omitted from the text. Many translations simply do not translate this word, therefore making no direct causal connection between what is stated in the two parts of this verse (so Good News Translation, Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente).

The former inhabitants there belonged to Ham may mean that the Hamites had lived there prior to the arrival of the families of the tribe of Simeon, but that they had already moved elsewhere by the time that these Israelites arrived. Or this statement may be from the point of view of the writer who is looking back and stating that from his point of view, the Hamites, that is, the Canaanites, were the former inhabitants of the land and were there when the tribe of Simeon arrived. The following verses clearly show that the second interpretation is correct. Belonged to Ham is literally “from Ham”; that is, they were descendants of Ham. Since some readers will not know who Ham was, it may be helpful to say that the former inhabitants “were descendants of Noah’s son Ham” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). The last half of this verse may be rendered as a separate sentence by saying “Before they arrived, there were some of the descendants of Ham living there.”

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 .

To the sons of Aaron they gave the cities of refuge …: Once again, the sons of Aaron refers to “the descendants of Aaron” (New International Version, New American Bible) and should be so translated. For the impersonal expression they gave, see the comments on the previous verse. The Hebrew here has the plural the cities of refuge while the parallel text in Josh 21.13 has the singular “the city of refuge.” Since only Hebron in the list of cities here in verses 57-59 was a city of refuge, some versions translate the cities of refuge as “a city of refuge” (Good News Translation, New International Version, New Living Translation; similarly Revised English Bible), “a city of asylum” (New American Bible), or “one of the cities of safety” (New Century Version). But the Masoretic Text clearly has the plural, so translators should keep the plural in the text and explain the problem in a footnote. As the Good News Translation explains, cities of refuge were cities a person could go to for protection and a fair trial if that person accidentally killed someone (see Deut 19.1-13).

Some interpreters think that the phrase “with its pasture lands” was accidentally omitted after Hebron and add it here in agreement with the parallel passage in Josh 21.13 (so Knoppers).

Good News Translation places Jattir before Libnah in order to group the six towns that include pasture lands. The sixfold repetition of with its pasture lands is unnatural in English style, so Good News Translation and several other modern versions reduce this repetition. The same phrase is repeated three more times in verse 60. Receptor language considerations will determine the rendering and the number of times that this phrase is found in translation.

It is surprising that the Masoretic Text does not have the words “with its pasture lands” after the city of Jattir. It may well be that these words have been omitted accidentally from the Masoretic Text. New American Bible and Knoppers add them on the basis of Josh 21.14, which says “Jattir with its pasture lands.”

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 their enrollment by genealogies, according to their generations, as heads of their fathers’ houses, mighty warriors, was twenty thousand two hundred: See the comments on verses 2, 5, and 7. Compare “they were reckoned in the genealogies as mighty warriors, chiefs of their families, which numbered twenty thousand two hundred men” (Moffatt) and “Their official genealogy according to the descendants of the chiefs of their families included twenty thousand two hundred warriors” (American Bible). The official military register apparently listed both heads of families and the men available for military duty. New International Version, therefore, says “Their genealogical record listed the heads of families and 20,200 fighting men.” As in previous verses, Good News Translation makes it clear that the number refers specifically to “men eligible for military duty.”

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 .