Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 17.djvu/564

SAMARITAN LANGUAGE. 506 SAMARITANS. TAS PD.NTAriCfcii), it consists of cliionicles, litur- gies, Hiiil lijiniis. Tile eluouieles inehicle: (1) 'J'lie iidwariiuH Hook of Jusliud, an Arabic eluon- iole, nsoribod by critics to tbc thirteenth century, taken in part from tlic canonical 13ook of Joshua, with legendary additions, that charge the Jews ■with being oppressors of the Samaritans, and, after the time of Eli, apostates from the faith. The narrative is continued to a.d. .'S.iO, when it abruptly ends. (2) The Chronicle of the Gen- erations, professedly written by Eleazer ben Amrani, 1142, and afterwards continued by many hands; it gives a calculation of sacred times, the age of patriarchs, and a list of high priests. (3) The Chronicle of .bulfath. written about the midclle of the fourteenth century, is drawn from the two previous works, with additional legen- dary matter. The liturgies and liynms belong to diO'erent periods. The Samaritans have also produced a number of commentaries, theological tracts, and grannuatical works, written in Arabic. Consult: Peternuinn, lirctis [jiiu/iKe Snmiiritaiia' (Inimmatica (Berlin. 1S73) ; Kohn, Zur Sprachc, Litlrriiltir und Dorjmntik der Saiiiaritaner (Leip- zig, 1870) ; id., Sdinaritanische litudien (Breslau, 1868) _; Ntitt, Frdfimeiils of a Samaritan Penta- icuch (London, 1874). SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. A recen- sion of the commonl.y received Hebrew text of the Pentateuch, used by the Samaritans, and their only canonical book of the Old Testament. None of the manuscripts that have reached Europe is older than the tenth century. The variants which it presents from the JIasoretic text are mostly of a trifling nature, representing chiefly diflerent fashions of spelling. There are. how- ever, more important diflferences. such as the oc- currence of Gerizim. (See Eb.l and Gekizim.) In the figures of Genesis v. and xi. are likewise discrepancies between the Masoretic and the Samaritan recension, which appear to be due to varying traditions. There is also one essential alteration respecting the Pentateuchal ordinances. Exodus xiii. 6. where the Samaritan Pentateuch has "six days shalt thou eat unleavened bread," instead of "seven." The Samaritan Pentateuch was printed in the Paris and London polyglots, and an edition in square Hebrew cliaracters was published by Blayney (Oxford. 1700), but a critical edition is still a desideratum. In the absence of such an edition it is difficult to do more than to speculate on the age and origin of the work, but there is no reason to suppose that it is earlier than the fourth centurv- B.C.. and it may even belong to the third. The translation of the Samaritan Pentateuch into the Samaritan idiom above referred to (the Samaritan Targitm) is ascribed by the Samaritans to their high priest Nathaniel, who died twenty years before Christ, but it can hardly be older than the fourth century a.d. It follows the Hebrew original very closely. A critical edition of it was pub- lished by Petermann and Vollers (Berlin. 1872- 91). Consult: Gesenius, De Penfdfeiichi Sdnw- ritnni Orifiine. Indole, ct Avctoritafe (Halle. 1815) ; Nutt, Frdr/ments of a Samaritan Penta- teuch (London, 1874). SAMARITANS. A term used to designate the iidiabitaiits of the Province of Samaria after the Assyrian conquest, and in later times the members of a religious community having its centre in Shechem (Nabulus) and the neighbor- ing ilount Gerizim. The teiritory of Samaria became f(n- tlu' first time a distinct political or- ganization after Gilead and (ialilee had been cap- tured by the Assyrians in n.c. 734. In B.C. 722 the independence of this State wag lost. The city of Samaria was probably taken by Shalma- neser IV., but .Sargon claims the victory and un- doubtedly carried awa.v a part of the population, according to his own account 27.2!iO persons. The bulk of the Israelitish populatiun remained in the land subject to the same tribute as before (Disptdu Iiisciijition. 24). In B.C. 720 Samaria united with H:imath. Arpad, Simyra, and Damas- cus in an unsuccessful rebellion. A number of Arabian tribes such as the Tamudi. Ibadidi. ilar- samani, and Hayapa were settled in the district of Samaria by Sargon in B.C. 715. According to II. Kings xvii. 24, the King of Assyria brought men from Babylon and from Cuthah and from Ava and from Hamath and .Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria. It is prob- able that this King of Assyria was Assluirljaniiial (B.C. 6(58-626). This is undoid:)tedh' the King meant by "the great and noble Asnapper," who, according to Ezra iv. 9-10. brought a number of Elamitish and Babylonian peoples into the Prov- ince of Abar Nahara. or Trans-Euphratenc. Such deportations would be natural after the con- quest of Elam in B.C. 645, and the quelling of Shamash-shum-ukin's insurrection in Babylon, Cutha, and Sippara in B.C. 648. The statement in Ezra iv. 2 that the people of the land had been brought up by Esarhaddon is from the hand of the chronicler and deeuu'd by some scholars unhistorical. The inhabitants of the Province of Samaria in the Chaldean and Persian periods were consequentl.v made up of the descendants of the Israelites, who had never been deported, and of the Arabs, Babylonians, and Elamites set- tled there by Sargon and Asshurbanipal. The Israelites naturally continued the worship of Yahweh and retained the local traditions and the household gods honored by their fathers. The others added the worship of 'the god of the land' to their veneration of the gods of their fathers. But the gradual assimilation of the foreigners to the native stock involved the ascendenc,y of the Yahweh cult. It has been supposed, on the ground of the chronicler's statement in Ezra iv. 1-5, that the Samaritans desired to participate in the build- ing of the temple in .Jerusalem, but were refised permission to do so, and therefore conceived a hatred of the .Jews. There is no mention, how- ever, of the Samaritans, and the historical nar- rative is subject to grave doubts. In order to show that the completion of the temple was pre- vented by enemies until the second year of Darius, the chronicler refers to a letter sent to Xer.xes and another sent to Artaxerxes by Tabeel, neither of which is given, but produces in ex- trnso the text of letters written by Pichum and Shimshai to Artaxerxes. by Tatnai and Shethar- boznai to Darius, by Cyrus, and by Darius. These letters, found in Ezra iii.-vi., are written in Aramaic. There js no indication in them which of the several kings who bore the names XeiTces. Artaxerxes. and Darius is intended, and even the most platisible construction leaves the impression that these documents should be con- sidered in the same light as the numerous spurious decrees and official documents in Daniel, Esther, Maccabees, Aristeas, and Josephus. The