The structure of these two verses has been significantly altered by Good News Translation (also in the same way by Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje, Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). The names of the primary conspirators are shifted forward in order to place them closer to the expression His servants at the beginning of verse 20. Also, the meaning of the pronoun His is made clearer by rendering it as “King Joash’s”. The word servants does not refer to household or domestic servants, but to high officials in the court of King Joash (see the comments at 1 Kgs 1.2). Other modern versions call them “courtiers” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “retainers” (New Jerusalem Bible), or “officers” (New Century Version). The words his servants also occur in verse 21 when the two main conspirators (Jozacar and Jehozabad) are named. But a restructuring of verses 20-21 may make it unnecessary to repeat this information.

As in 2 Kgs 10.12, the verb arose is used to introduce the course of action indicated by the second verb in the series. The same double verb construction is used in 2 Kgs 1.3; 4.30; 8.1-2 and 11.1. Together with the second verb in this context, it is legitimate to translate “entered into a plot” (New American Bible).

Made a conspiracy is literally “conspired a conspiracy.” See 1 Kgs 16.20, where this expression is discussed in detail. The Hebrew word rendered conspiracy is used in the cry of Athaliah in 11.14, where it is translated “Treason! Treason!” Compare also 2 Sam 15.12. The author of 2 Kings does not tell why these men killed the king, but according to 2 Chr 24.25, they killed him because he had participated in the killing of the son of the priest Jehoiada.

Slew: This archaic verb is rendered “killed” in New Revised Standard Version.

In the house of Millo: The wording of Revised Standard Version makes it sound as if the location of the assassination was the home of a person named Millo. This, however, is almost certainly not the case. See the detailed comments on Millo at 1 Kgs 9.15. Translators should ensure that the translation of the term Millo here is in keeping with what has been done elsewhere in the Old Testament.

On the way that goes down to Silla renders two words in Hebrew. The exact sense of these two words in Hebrew is not clear. New Jerusalem Bible and Osty-Trinquet, in fact, replace them with three dots in the text and then explain in a footnote that these two Hebrew words are a scribal error (New Jerusalem Bible) or are not understandable (Osty-Trinquet). Some modern translations (Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente) do not even attempt to translate these words, but they do explain in a footnote that the Hebrew has two words that are not understandable. The most likely meaning, however, seems to be something like “on the road that goes toward a place called Silla.” The name Silla occurs only here in the Old Testament. It is perhaps the name of a neighborhood or district (or possibly of a street) in Jerusalem but not of another town or region. Translators should therefore avoid using affixes or classifier terms that lead the reader to believe that another town is intended. It will be better to say “the district called Silla” or “the area of town known as Silla.”

It is questionable whether the name Jozacar represents the form that was found in the original text. Many Hebrew manuscripts have the name Jozacar here (followed by Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, La Bible Pléiade), but other Hebrew manuscripts have the name “Jozabad.” In Hebrew the letters for “b” and “c” are similar in shape, and the letters for “d” and “r” are similar in shape, so the difference in spelling between Jozacar and “Jozabad” is probably the result of a scribal error. The difficulty is in knowing which form of the name was original here. The Hebrew Old Testament Text Project committee was equally divided between these two names in its preliminary report and gave a {D} rating to both names. In its final report, however, Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to Jozacar, which it considers to be the harder reading and therefore the likely original text. “Jozabad” is the reading adopted by two important modern commentaries (American Bible and Hobbs). The parallel passage in 2 Chr 24.26 clearly has “Zabad,” which is a shortened form of the name Jozabad. Since the name in 2 Chronicles has the same final consonants as the name Jozabad, and since the text is uncertain at this point, some modern versions (New International Version, New Century Version, Bible en français courant, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Peregrino) follow those Hebrew manuscripts that read “Jozabad” here.

Who struck him down, so that he died: See the comments at 1 Kgs 2.25.

They buried him: The pronoun they does not refer to the two conspirators, but to certain unnamed and unknown persons. Some may have to translate “some people buried him.” Or, if the passive form is an option in the receptor language, it will be possible to say “he was buried.”

For buried … with his fathers, see the comments on 1 Kgs 14.31.

For the city of David, see the comments at 1 Kgs 2.10.

The reign of Amaziah is described in 2 Kgs 14.1-22.

His son reigned in his stead: See the comments at 1 Kgs 11.43 and 2 Kgs 8.24.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .