Tent Work in Palestine: A Record of Discovery and Adventure

by C. R. Conder

By the time of our Lord the hatred of the two people had become greater than their aversion to the heathen. Wine for the Temple passing through Samaria became unfit for use, a Jew was forbidden to help a wounded Samaritan or a Samaritan woman in trouble. On the other hand, murder and treachery are charged against the Cuthim; they lighted false beacons in order to confuse the Jewish calendar depending on the appearance of the new moon; they betrayed the Jews to the Romans; they polluted the Temple with bones. Such crimes could never be forgiven, and the Jews in contempt cast them out as heathen and foreigners.

The later history of the Samaritans has been often told; under Pilate they raised a tumult, headed by a leader who (probably assuming the character of Messiah) promised to show them the golden vessels said to have been buried by Moses on Gerizim. The cruelty with which this revolt was repressed led to Pilate’s final disgrace.

In the time of Vespasian they again rebelled, and were again repressed. Under Hadrian they assisted the Romans against the Pharisees led by Bar Cocheba, but under Severus they took part in rebellion with the Jews.

The greatest revolt appears to have been, however, in the time of Justinian, when the whole race rose, in May 529 A.D., attacked the Christians, put the Bishop of Neapolis to death, and crowned a certain Julian. Their punishment was cruel, and henceforward they disappear from history, having probably been almost exterminated.

The Emperor Zeno had in 474 A.D. erected a church on Gerizim. This church Justinian converted into a sort of fortress by building a second wall round it. He also caused five churches (possibly all now represented by mosques) to be rebuilt in Neapolis.

In the fifth century the Samaritans had begun to spread over Egypt and southern Palestine, in 493 A.D. they had a synagogue in Rome. In the seventh century, according to their own records, they occupied the whole of Palestine except the Judean hills. Up to some fifty years ago they had a synagogue in Gaza, the last of their communities, which in the seventeenth century also existed in Cairo and Damascus. At the present day they are found only in the town of Nablus, and appear to have become extinct in other towns about the year 1820 A.D.

In the middle ages they seem to have been undistinguished from the Jews, and thus it is only in the writings of a Jew (R. Benjamin of Tudela) that they are described. He speaks of about one hundred Cutheans “who observe the law of Moses only,” that is to say, do not recognise the later books. Though writing with the usual Pharisaic prejudice, the Rabbi admits the priestly family to be descendants of Aaron.

The existence of an ancient roll of the law, in possession of the Samaritans, was known to Scaliger; a copy was obtained by Pietro Della Valle in 1616 A.D., and this brought the Samaritans again into notice. They became a sort of pet people among learned men, and long correspondences were held with them. Thus, although the ancient copy at Shechem has never been collated, the value of the Samaritan version of the Pentateuch is well known to students.

The most striking peculiarity of the Samaritan text is its close resemblance to the Septuagint version. This caused a most exaggerated estimate of its value to be at one time formed. It was supposed that the Masoretic text, from which our English version has been taken, was corrupt, and the Samaritan and Greek the more ancient. The labours of the great scholar Gesenius have, however, almost placed these questions at rest. He points out that though the Samaritan and Greek agree against the Masoretic text in about one thousand passages, there are numerous instances where Greek and Hebrew agree against the Samaritan. He further holds that the archaic forms of the Hebrew have been modernised in the Samaritan, and numerous corruptions introduced from purely theological reasons. The variations of the text he divided into three classes: first, Samaritan forms of words; secondly, blunders and emendations in the text; thirdly, alterations for the glorification of Gerizim and of the Samaritans. It cannot be doubted that in some cases, however, the Samaritan and Greek preserve the sense which has been lost in the Jewish version. Gesenius’s conclusion will commend itself to all by its moderation and impartiality. He holds that Samaritan and Greek are both derived from ancient codices, differing among themselves and also from the text which became received later by the Jews. Kennicott goes yet further in saying that the authority of both the versions should be recognised. The antiquity of the text from which our English version is derived, is however established by the comparison, and unless the oldest Samaritan roll differs very materially from all other copies as yet collated, we cannot expect to get much of any permanent value or interest from its examination.

The Rolls of the Law, or Five Books of Moses (considered by the Samaritans to form a single work), now found in the Synagogue at Nablus are three in number. I have twice been enabled to see them; at Jerusalem also I was shown another manuscript, not a roll but in the form of a book, which is called “The Fire-Tried,” as it claims to be one of Sanballat’s copies before noticed. These venerable documents may now be briefly described.