But the rest of the acts of Jeroboam, and all that he did, and his velour, where- with he fought, and how he restored Damascus, and Emath to Juda in Israel, are they not written in the book of the words of the days of the kings of Israel?

And the rest of the matters of Jeroboam, and all that he did, and his might with which he fought, and with which he brought back Damascus, and Hamath of Judah, into Israel, are they not written on the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel?

Now the rest of the acts of Jeroboam, and all he did, and his power, and how he went to war with Damascus, causing the wrath of the Lord to be turned away from Israel, are they not recorded in the book of the history of the kings of Israel?

Now the rest of the acts of Jeroboam, and all that he did, and his might, how he warred, and how he recovered Damascus, and Hamath, for Judah in Israel, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?

But the rest of the words of Jeroboam, and all that he did, and his strength, with which he went to battle, and the manner in which he restored Damascus and Hamath to Judah, in Israel, have these not been written in the book of the words of the days of the kings of Israel?

He recovered Damascus - Jeroboam probably gained certain advantages over Benhadad, which induced the latter to make his submission and consent to such terms as those extorted by Ahab 1-Kings 20:34.
Hamath was probably among the actual conquests of Jeroboam. It was brought so low in his reign, as to have become almost a by-word for calamity (compare Amos 6:2).
Which belonged to Judah, for Israel - i. e. these cities were recovered to Judah, i. e. to the people of God generally, through or by means of being added to Israel, i. e. to the northern kingdom.
A few further facts in the history of Jeroboam II are recorded by the prophet Amos (compare Amos 7:10, etc.).

How he warred, and - recovered Damascus - We learn from 1-Chronicles 18:3-11, that David had conquered all Syria, and put garrisons in Damascus and other places, and laid all the Syrians under tribute; but this yoke they had not only shaken off, but they had conquered a considerable portion of the Israelitish territory, and added it to Syria. These latter Jeroboam now recovered; and thus the places which anciently belonged to Judah by David's conquests, and were repossessed by Syria, he now conquered, and added to Israel.

Now the rest of the acts of Jeroboam, and all that he did, and his might, how he warred, and how he recovered Damascus, and (n) Hamath, [which belonged] to Judah, for Israel, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?
(n) Which was also called Antiochia of Syria or Riblah.

Now the rest of the acts of Jeroboam, and all that he did, and his might, how he warred,.... His valiant acts and warlike exploits:
and how he recovered Damascus and Hamath, which belonged to Judah, for Israel; which cities, in the times of David and Solomon, were tributary to Judah, but afterwards fell into the hands of the Syrians, from whom Jeroboam recovered them, and annexed them to the kingdom of Israel; or, as Kimchi, though Jeroboam was king of Israel, yet, having taken them, he restored them to the king of Judah, to whom they belonged:
are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel? where all events of any moment were registered.

Of the rest of the history of Jeroboam we have nothing more than an intimation that he brought back Damascus and Hamath of Judah to Israel, i.e., subjugated it again to the kingdom of Israel. ליהוּדה is a periphrastic form for the genitive, as proper names do not admit of any form of the construct state, and in this case the simple genitive would not have answered so well to the fact. For the meaning is: "whatever in the two kingdoms of Damascus and Hamath had formerly belonged to Judah in the times of David and Solomon." By Damascus and Hamath we are not to understand the cities, but the kingdoms; for not only did the city of Hamath never belong to the kingdom of Israel, but it was situated outside the boundaries laid down by Moses for Israel (see at Numbers 34:8). It cannot, therefore, have been re-conquered (השׁיב) by Jeroboam. It was different with the city of Damascus, which David had conquered and even Solomon had not permanently lost (see at 1-Kings 11:24). Consequently in the case of Damascus the capital is included in the kingdom.