WI/AHC/PC - Surviving Samaritan Diaspora

What if a significant Samaritan diaspora population managed to survive up to the present day roughly paralleling the OTL Jewish diaspora in reach (if not in numbers)?

How could this be accomplished in a plausible manner with a POD of either during the Roman-Jewish Wars or during one of the Samaritan Revolts and what other effects would a Samaritan diaspora have on history up to the present?

Would also be interesting to speculate how the ATL Samaritan diaspora fares in places like Europe compared to the Jewish diaspora or possibly further out (in South Asia, Central Asia, East Asia, etc).
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure it is possible without some dramatic change to the religion. One idea that is pretty fundamental is that it is they, rather than the Jews who carried on the true path, the Jews having strayed from it when they left for Babylon.
 
I don`t have the answers to the OP questions, but I´d sure be interested in them.
I don`t think that they`re impossible to construct and infer. After all, the Jews weren´t driven into exile by force, too. If the Romans had done the same to the Samaritans, I doubt that their faith would have prevented them from living in a diaspora and adapting to it - if it´s "be relocated or die", few will choose death. There is, of course, the possibility that, in a diaspora situation, the Samaritan faith would simply have evaporated and its bearers assimilated into other groups - but I don`t think that is the inevitable or even the most likely option.
I´d sure be interested in the development of this faith and groups.
 
Interesting topic.

I'm not sure it is possible without some dramatic change to the religion. One idea that is pretty fundamental is that it is they, rather than the Jews who carried on the true path, the Jews having strayed from it when they left for Babylon.

That is my understanding as well.

Recognizing that the Babylonian exile was forced it would be understandable that they may resist any deportation for fear of losing their heritage. If the choice is convert/leave/die could there be a portion that nominally converts to Christianity or Islam but keeps practicing their religion? How long could they keep that going?

I think if there is a secure, substantial "base" population around Mount Gerizim then maybe more outward-looking Samaritans can leave the area but still feel like they are upholding the tenents of their faith.
 
There is, of course, the possibility that, in a diaspora situation, the Samaritan faith would simply have evaporated and its bearers assimilated into other groups - but I don`t think that is the inevitable or even the most likely option.

It kinda does seem like the most likely option to me. By the time that Samaritans are theologically distinct from the Hebrews so much of their identity has been built up around the idea that they are closer to god through keeping to their very strict orthodoxy as opposed to the Hebrews who through leaving the land lost their way.

The religion would have to change to the point where it would be hard to call it Samaritan any more.
 
It kinda does seem like the most likely option to me. By the time that Samaritans are theologically distinct from the Hebrews so much of their identity has been built up around the idea that they are closer to god through keeping to their very strict orthodoxy as opposed to the Hebrews who through leaving the land lost their way.

The religion would have to change to the point where it would be hard to call it Samaritan any more.
Did it really boil down for the Samaritans themselves to a "we stayed here, therefore we`re right", or did they rather conceive of more concrete differences (and similarities) between their religio-cultural traditions and those of their Jewish neighbours? Is the abstraction "Samaritans = those who stayed in Canaan and forged their identity around that" perhaps an ex post construction of a more recent date, which has both the far-reaching historical knowledge at our disposal and the history of the unique Jewish diaspora as a counter-example at its base?

Also, tons of cultures saw themselves as intricately linked to some geographical region: think of the Old Turks and their Holy Mountain, or the Indian relationship to the Ganges - yet, Turkic groups migrated all over Eurasia, and so did Indians from the Gangetic plain, without immediately abandoning their culture (although, in the latter case, the home was never abandoned of course). (They did, of course, at some point; culture always develops.)
 
Did it really boil down for the Samaritans themselves to a "we stayed here, therefore we`re right", or did they rather conceive of more concrete differences (and similarities) between their religio-cultural traditions and those of their Jewish neighbours? Is the abstraction "Samaritans = those who stayed in Canaan and forged their identity around that" perhaps an ex post construction of a more recent date, which has both the far-reaching historical knowledge at our disposal and the history of the unique Jewish diaspora as a counter-example at its base?
it's an oversimplification, but in short, yeah the idea of "we stayed here so we are right" is a big part of Samaritan theology. In short, the idea is that at one point the Jews and the Samaritans shared a common theology which was then corrupted as the Jews went to Babylon. It isn't so much "ha ha we are right" more than "by staying close we keep ourselves pure to the way, those who left having shown us that the word can be corrupted by foreign lands.

Also, tons of cultures saw themselves as intricately linked to some geographical region: think of the Old Turks and their Holy Mountain, or the Indian relationship to the Ganges - yet, Turkic groups migrated all over Eurasia, and so did Indians from the Gangetic plain, without immediately abandoning their culture (although, in the latter case, the home was never abandoned of course). (They did, of course, at some point; culture always develops.)

in none of the cases above is the holy place and the absence from the holy place a defining theological point though. I could see some form of Mohammad esque reformer make a Samaritan inspired religion that involves regular pilgrimage though.
 
]By the time that Samaritans are theologically distinct from the Hebrews so much of their identity has been built up around the idea that they are closer to god through keeping to their very strict orthodoxy as opposed to the Hebrews who through leaving the land lost their way.

Point of order: the Samaritan consider themselves to be Hebrews and are considered by Jews to be Hebrews as well; you should be using the word "Jew" (or, if you really don't want to for some reason, "Judean")

Did it really boil down for the Samaritans themselves to a "we stayed here, therefore we`re right", or did they rather conceive of more concrete differences (and similarities) between their religio-cultural traditions and those of their Jewish neighbours? Is the abstraction "Samaritans = those who stayed in Canaan and forged their identity around that" perhaps an ex post construction of a more recent date, which has both the far-reaching historical knowledge at our disposal and the history of the unique Jewish diaspora as a counter-example at its base?

Also, tons of cultures saw themselves as intricately linked to some geographical region: think of the Old Turks and their Holy Mountain, or the Indian relationship to the Ganges - yet, Turkic groups migrated all over Eurasia, and so did Indians from the Gangetic plain, without immediately abandoning their culture (although, in the latter case, the home was never abandoned of course). (They did, of course, at some point; culture always develops.)

No, actually! There seem to be more differences. It's a difficult topic to study, because it's basically "Biblical history", and thus fairly controversial, but the Samaritans claim descent from the Kingdom of Israel (in contrast to the Kingdom of Judea whose theology characterizes modern Judaism - at least, in theory). There's a lot of evidence that the religion practiced by the "Israelis" was subtly different from that practiced by the Judeans, placing the holy site on Mount Gerizim near Nablus instead of Mount Zion near Jerusalem; placing much less emphasis on the Cohen hereditary priest cast, possibly being a little less centralized, stuff like that. So if this is true, then the Samaritans would have had significant religious differences with what are now mainstream Jews even before developing their "we stayed here, we're practicing the pure religion" attitude (which is definitely also true and shouldn't be dismissed).
 
Last edited:
Another point of order: the Babylonian Exile wasn't ALL the Judaeans, simply the more important families (the royals, the high aristocracy, the Levites (the lower priests stayed behind AFAIK) etc). So, then you would have three groups after the Return from Babylon: the Samaritans; the Judaeans who stuck around, and the returning Babylonic Jews.
 
I feel like this is kind of saying something like "What if the Edomites/Phillistines/etc had a diaspora?" While it is remotely possible, the groups all had things that didn't bind them together as well as the Israelis do.
 
I feel like this is kind of saying something like "What if the Edomites/Phillistines/etc had a diaspora?" While it is remotely possible, the groups all had things that didn't bind them together as well as the Israelis do.

Not quite because during the Roman period up to the last Samaritan Revolt of 572 AD in Byzantine era, the Samaritan population was said to be nearly a million (or even slightly over a million) only to decline up to the present day numbering approximately 800 people (though allegedly a significant number of non-Jews in the Levant are thought to be of Samaritan origin).
 
While in OTL Samaritans were persecuted by both the Byzantines and under Islam (living in an area stretching between Egypt, Syria and Iran), assuming Samaritans are able to form diaspora communities in the WRE (later non-Byzantine Europe) would they likely be seen more favorably as a tolerated non-Christian minority living among Latin rite Christian peoples given they had been mentioned positively in the New Testament (as was allegedly the case during the OTL Crusades)?
 
Point of order: the Samaritan consider themselves to be Hebrews and are considered by Jews to be Hebrews as well; you should be using the word "Jew" (or, if you really don't want to for some reason, "Judean")

Just a slip on my end. Elsewhere I was sure to use the term Jew.
 
As few Samaritan revolts as possible would help. Maybe one Samaritan revolt that's successful enough to make the Samaritans think they'll win, followed by decisive setbacks that in reality were basically to be expected. Hopefully there will be a repeated argument develop amongst Samaritans that "we shouldn't try because we won't win and just get massacred" that makes all later revolts local in scale. On the part of the Byzantines/Muslims, they'll hopefully stick to punishing local populations and not the Samaritan community as a whole. And any Messianic figures might fail to gain a large following. If a major revolt must happen again, then it occurs centuries after the first, allowing the Samaritan population signficant time to recover. This keeps the community at a healthy size into the 21st century.

Is this plausible?
 
As few Samaritan revolts as possible would help. Maybe one Samaritan revolt that's successful enough to make the Samaritans think they'll win, followed by decisive setbacks that in reality were basically to be expected. Hopefully there will be a repeated argument develop amongst Samaritans that "we shouldn't try because we won't win and just get massacred" that makes all later revolts local in scale. On the part of the Byzantines/Muslims, they'll hopefully stick to punishing local populations and not the Samaritan community as a whole. And any Messianic figures might fail to gain a large following. If a major revolt must happen again, then it occurs centuries after the first, allowing the Samaritan population signficant time to recover. This keeps the community at a healthy size into the 21st century.

Is this plausible?
Plausible, but it would not fulfill the OP´s demand for a surviving Samaritan DIASPORA yet.
 
Top