And the sons of Shime-i: Jahath, Zina, and Jeush, and Beriah. These four were the sons of Shime-i: The Shime-i named here was the son of Gershon (see verse 7). It seems strange that four sons of Shimei are listed since the preceding verse listed the sons of Shimei as three, and with different names from the four named here. On the assumption that Shime-i is incorrectly written for the name “Shelomoth” (Shimei’s first son according to verse 9), Moffatt corrects the Hebrew text to read “Shelomoth had four sons, Jahath, Ziza, Jeush, and Beriah.” There is no manuscript basis for this correction, but it does eliminate an exegetical difficulty.

The name Zina in verse 10 occurs only here in the Masoretic Text. The Septuagint and the Vulgate change this name to read “Ziza” in agreement with the spelling of the same person’s name in verse 11. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {C} rating to the name Zina and suggests that translators should not change the spelling to agree with that in verse 11. However, a number of translations follow the Septuagint in reading “Ziza” or “Zizah” here (so New International Version, New Living Translation, Revised English Bible, New American Bible, El libro del Pueblo de Dios, Nueva Versión Internacional). Other translations apparently read “Ziza” in order to harmonize the spelling with the next verse, that is, it is a translation decision rather than a textual decision (so New Century Version, La Bible du Semeur, La Bible Pléiade). Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version avoid the textual difficulty by restructuring and combining verses 10 and 11.

Jahath was the chief: For the Hebrew noun rendered chief, see the comments on 1 Chr 23.8. In verses 8, 11 and 16-20, New Living Translation translates this noun as “family leader,” and this may be a good model for other languages.

But Jeush and Beriah had not many sons: The Hebrew probably refers specifically to sons, but it is possible to translate sons as “children” (Revised English Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or “descendants” (Good News Translation). Menge gives the two possibilities in the translation itself, saying “sons (or: children).” But if translators want to show that two possible renderings exist, it is better to put one rendering in the text and the other in a footnote.

Therefore they became a father’s house in one reckoning: Therefore renders the common Hebrew conjunction, which is literally “and.” Here it introduces the result of Jeush and Beriah having so few sons. It is because they were few in number that they were considered as a single clan. Others translate this conjunction as “so” (New International Version, New Century Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). The context seems to require a logical connector of this type. They became a father’s house in one reckoning means the descendants of Jeush and Beriah were considered equivalent to one clan instead of two. Apparently the two families were merged into one. New Revised Standard Version says “they were enrolled as a single family,” El libro del Pueblo de Dios reads “they were registered in the census as a single family,” and NET Bible has “they were considered one family with one responsibility” (similarly Revised English Bible). New Living Translation provides a possible model that restructures the last half of verse 11 as follows: “Jeush and Beriah were counted as a single family because neither had many sons.”

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 .