I probably have referred to their origin ; but as it had I become almost extinct, the wiser policy was to make j no allusion to descent. The very fact, however, of their I application for admission to tiie national worship of the [ Jews, and all their subsequent history in connection j with this people, imply an Israelitish element in their origin. Had they been of pure heathen descent, what propriety was there in the application? What had they to do with Jewish worship, on the supposition that they were mere heathens? How is it that the Samaritans always claimed descent from Ephraim and IManasseh? Have they been continuous liars in mak- ing this pretension ? If so, their history proves an un- accountable imposture. Was there ever before a hea- then people so desirous to unite with the worshippers of the true Jehovah as to become implacable enemies to their recusants? Moreover, the writers of the New Test., with the Jews of that jjeriod, looked upon them in the light of a schismatical community from them- selves, rather than a distinct nation. Though the Sav- iour calls the Samaritan leper whom he healed a stran- ger, dXXoyevtjc, lie used the expression more for the purpose of contrasting the unthankfulness of the nine Jews with the gratitude of the Samaritan, than of ethnological distinction (Luke xvii, 11-19). For it is certain that he did not class the Samaritans with the Gentiles, but made a marked distinction between them (Matt, x, 5). Notwithstanding the animosity of the two peoples, there are some few circumstances on record which indicate that they felt themselves to be in truth brethren and coreligionists. Thus, during tlie feasts they were admitted like the Jews to the Temple (Jose- phus, Ant, xviii, 2, 2). Their food also was by the Jew deemed cosher, or lawful (John iv, 8-40). Circumcision performed by a Samaritan was held to be valid. Down to the time of the iNIishnic authors a Samaritan was re- garded as a brother; nor did the Talmudists all agree in his condemnation, for while some looked upon him as a heathen, others treated him in every respect as an Israelite.
II. IJisiori/. — As already seen, the new inhabitants of Samaria carried along with them their idolatrous worshiji. In the early period of their settlement they were attacked by lions, which they regarded as a judg- ment inflicted by the deity of the land, whom they did not worship. Accordingly, they applied to the Assyr- ian king Esar-haddon for an Israelitish priest to teach them the proper worship of the local god. The request was granted. One of the transported priests was de- spatched to them, who came and dwelt at Bethel, and instructed them in the worship of Jehovah. He was not a Levitical priest, but an Israelitish priest of the calves; because there had been no Leviticfil ones in the kingdom when the inhabitants were carried away, and because Bethel, where he settled, was the chief seat of the calf-worship.
On the return of the Jews from the Babylonian cap- tivity, the Samaritans wished to join them in rebuild- ing the Temple at Jerusalem, saying, "Let us build with you: for we seek your God as ye do; and we do sacrifice unto him since the days of Esar-haddon, king of Assur, which brought us up hither" (Ezra iv, 2). It is curious, and perhaps indicative of the treacherous character of their designs, to find them even then call- ed, by anticipation, " the adversaries of Judah and Ben- jamin" (Ezra iv, 1), a title which the}' afterwards fully justified. But, so far as professions go, they are not enemies; they are most anxious to be friends. Their religion, they assert, is the same as that of the two tribes; therefore they have a right to share in that great religious undertaking. But they do not call it a national undertaking. They advance no pretensions to Jewish blood. They confess their Assyrian descent, and even put it forward ostentatiously, perhaps to en- hance the merit of their partial conversion to God. Tliat it was but partial they give no hint. It may have become purer alrcad}-, but we have no information
SAMARITAN
286
SAMARITAN
that it had. But the proffered assistance was declined. Tlicnceforward they threw all obstacles in the way of the returned exiles. Nor were tlieir efforts to frustrate the operations of the Jews entirely inisucccssful. Two Persian kings were induced to hinder the Jews in their rebuilding ; and their o]iposition was not finally over- come till the reign of Darius Ilystaspis, B.C. 519.