And he had brethren the sons of Josaphat, Azarias, and Jahiel, and Zacharias, and Azaria, and Michael, and Saphatias, all these were the sons of Josaphat king of Juda.

And he had brethren the sons of Jehoshaphat, Azariah, and Jehiel, and Zechariah, and Azariahu, and Michael, and Shephatiah; all these were the sons of Jehoshaphat king of Israel.

And he had brothers, sons of Jehoshaphat: Azariah, and Jehiel, and Zechariah, and Azariah, and Michael, and Shephatiah. All these were sons of Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah.

And he had brethren - the sons of Jehoshaphat, king of Israel. - Jehoshaphat certainly was not king of Israel, but king of Judah. ישראל Yisrael must be a corruption in the text, for יהודה Yehudah; which is the reading of the Syriac, Arabic, Septuagint, and Vulgate: the Chaldee, only agrees with the Hebrew text. And the reading of the versions is supported by thirty-eight of Kennicott's and De Rossi's MSS. The word Judah should therefore be restored to the text.

And he had brethren the sons of Jehoshaphat, Azariah, and Jehiel, and Zechariah, and Azariah, and Michael, and Shephatiah: all these [were] the sons of Jehoshaphat king of (a) Israel.
(a) Read (2-Chronicles 15:17) how by Israel he meant Judah.

And he had brethren, the sons of Jehoshaphat,.... That is, Jehoram had, who succeeded him: their names follow:
Azariah, and Jehiel, and Zechariah, and Azariah, and Michael, and Shephatiah; two of them were of the same name; though it may be observed, that in the Hebrew text they are somewhat distinguished, the latter is called Azariah; Jehiel is said, by the Jews (x), to be the same with Hiel that rebuilt Jericho; indeed it was rebuilt in the times of Jehoshaphat, and was a city of the tribe of Benjamin, Joshua 18:21 which was under his jurisdiction; but it can never be thought that he would ever suffer a son of his to rebuild it; besides, he is expressly said to be a Bethelite, 1-Kings 16:34,
all these were the sons of Jehoshaphat king of Israel; which generally, since the division of the kingdom, designs the ten tribes, but cannot be the meaning here, because Jehoshaphat was only king of two tribes, Judah and Benjamin; they were tribes of Israel indeed, and so he was king of a part of Israel; and besides, many out of the ten tribes came and settled in his kingdom, and were under his government; though some think he is so called, because he concerned himself so much for the kingdom of Israel, and more than for his own; but the Vulgate Latin, Septuagint, Syriac, and Arabic versions, all read king of Judah; wherefore some are of opinion that Israel is a mistake of the transcriber; but this need not be supposed, since he was of right king of Israel, and was in fact king of two tribes that belonged to Israel.
(x) T. Hieros. Sanhedrin, fol. 29. 4.

Azariah - Two sons called by the same name, though doubtless distinguished by some additional title: which is not mentioned here, because it did not concern succeeding ages to know it. Of Israel - So he is called either, Because he was so by right: or Because he was king not only of Judah and Benjamin, but of a great number of Israelites, who had come and settled in his kingdom.