descendants of successive layers of immigrants, planted in the empty
territory by successive Assyrian and Babylonian kings. Esar-haddon was
the first who had sent colonists, about one hundred and thirty years
before the return. The writer calls the Samaritans 'the adversaries,'
though they began by offers of friendship and alliance. The name
implies that these offers were perfidious, and a move in the struggle.

One can easily understand that the Samaritans looked with suspicion on
the new arrivals, the ancient possessors of the land, coming under the
auspices of the new dynasty, and likely to interfere with their
position if not reduced to inferiority or neutralised somehow. The
proposal to unite in building the Temple was a political move; for, in
old-world ideas, co-operation in Temple-building was incorporation in
national unity. The calculation, no doubt, was that if the returning
exiles could be united with the much more numerous Samaritans, they
would soon be absorbed in them. The only chance for the smaller body
was to keep itself apart, and to run the risk of its isolation.

The insincere request was based on an untruth, for the Samaritans did
not worship Jehovah as the Jews, but along with their own gods (2
Kings xvii. 25-41). To divide His dominion with others was to dethrone
Him altogether. It therefore became an act of faithfulness to Jehovah
to reject the entangling alliance. To have accepted it would have been
tantamount to frustrating the very purpose of the return, and
consenting to be muzzled about the sin of idolatry. But the chief
lesson which exile had burned in on the Jewish mind was a loathing of
idolatry, which is in remarkable contrast to the inclination to it
that had marked their previous history. So one answer only was
possible, and it was given with unwelcome plainness of speech, which
might have been more courteous, and not less firm. It flatly denied