cheenc03a.pdf

SAMARITANS
that eighty men came 'from Shechem, from Shiioh, and was joined by other Jcns i~ho h-i,l foreign \river or were
from Samaria' to make theirofferings there(cpS~~c~~~,
discontented with the rehrms at Jerusalem, and the
$ z. SHILOH. 9 2). It is unlikely thvt these wereaporlate rival temple was uilimately built in 332 under the
Tews : the" can onlv have been Samaritans.
After another period of nearly a century, during
sanction of Alexander the Great.
however be received with caution.
This acc?unt must
which we have no information about the Samaritans, Where Jarephur differs from Nehemiah we so often find him
the" are mentioned in the account of a return of , Tews -
from Babylonia under Cyrur, when they mk to he
allowed a share in the building of the new templea
request which was refused (Ezra4 s). It is usually
considered thvt this refusal was the caure of a mutual
estrangement and an implacable hatred between the two
peoples. There can be little doubt, however, that the
real cause was something deeper and went back farther
than this mere incident. If we admit the presence of a
strong Irraelitirh element in the Samaritan people, u,e
shall not be far wrong in seeing here the old spirit of
opposition between Israel and Judah, always ready to
break out, which definitely asserted itself under ]embeam.-the
refusal to reognire Judnh's claim to a
hegemony, the revolt against centralisation. It was
based on a difference of race, an incompatibility between
N. and S.. and was more oolitical than relieious. " Nn
rearon is assigned far the reflual: the Jews do not charge
their ,adversaries' with idolatry, laor even with heres