And the rest of the acts of Joas, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the words of the days of the kings of Juda?

And the rest of the matters of Joash, and all that he did, are they not written on the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah?

Now the rest of the acts of Joash, and all he did, are they not recorded in the book of the history of the kings of Israel?

Now the rest of the words of Jehoash, and all that he did, have these not been written in the book of the words of the days of the kings of Judah?

The rest of the acts of Joash - We have already seen that this man, so promising in the beginning of his reign, apostatized, became an idolater, encouraged idolatry among his subjects, and put the high priest Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada his benefactor, to death; and now God visited that blood upon him by the hands of the tyrannous king of Syria, and by his own servants.

And the rest of the acts of Jehoash, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? In the registers and annals of those princes; some of them are to be met with in 2-Chronicles 24:1.

Conspiracy against Joash. - Not long after the departure of the Syrians, who had left Joash, according to 2-Chronicles 24:25, with many wounds, his servants formed a conspiracy against him and slew him upon his bed in the house Millo, which goeth down to Silla. This description of the locality is perfectly obscure for us. The conjecture that בּית־מלּא was the house in the castle of Millo which is so frequently mentioned (see at 1-Kings 9:15 and 2-Samuel 5:9), is precluded by the fact that this castle is always called המּלּא (with the article). סלּא is regarded by many as an abbreviation of מסלּה, "which goes down by the road;" and Thenius supposes that the reference is to the road which ran diagonally through the city from the Joppa gate to the Haram-area, corresponding to the present David's road. Others regard סלּא as the proper name of a place in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. It is impossible to get any certain meaning out of it, unless we alter the text according to arbitrary assumptions, as Thenius has done. The conspirators were Jozachar the son of Shimeath, and Jehozabad the son of Shomer, according to 2-Kings 12:21; but according to the Chronicles (v. 26), they were Zabad the son of Shimeath the Ammonitess, and Jehozabad the son of Shimrith the Moabitess. The identity of the first names is perfectly obvious. זבד is a copyist's error for זכר, and this is the contracted form of יוזכר. The difference in the second: son of Shomer according to our text, and son of the Shimrith according to the Chronicles, has probably also arisen from a slip of the pen, since שׁמר might easily be occasioned by the dropping out of the ת from the defectively written שׁמרת, although it is also possible that Shomer may be the name of the grandfather. Joash was buried with his father sin the city of David; but according to v. 25 of the Chronicles he was not buried in the graves of the kings. The two statements are not irreconcilable; and there may be good historical ground for the account in the Chronicles, as Bertheau acknowledges with perfect justice, in spite of the suspicion which has been cast upon it by Thenius.