The geology of Samara is not yet fully known. Carboniferous limestones (Upper?) occupy large tracts in the north-east and east. When approaching the Volga the zechstein appears in wide islands surrounded by the (probably Triassic) variegated marls and sands. Some Jurassic deposits are mentioned about the Samarskaya Luka. Cretaceous deposits, which cover large tracts on the right bank of the Volga, appear on the left bank only in the south-east of Samara, older Tertiary deposits appear also in the very south of Samara; while Pliocene limestones and sandy clays, which cover the obshchiy Syrt and Ust-Urt, protrude north as a narrow strip, reaching the bend of the Volga. The Glacial boulder-clay of middle Russia does not extend as far south-east as Samara, and the Post-Glacial deposits, not yet fully investigated, are represented by loess, black earth, and lacustrine formations. It is now established that during Post-Glacial times the Aral-Caspian sea extended in a wide gulf occupying the broad depression of the Volga as far north as the Samarskaya Luka, Caspian mussels having been traced as far as Samara. The soil is on the whole very fertile. All the northern part of the government is covered with a thick sheet of black earth; this becomes thinner towards the south, clays—mostly fertile—appearing from beneath; salt clays appear in the south-east.

Samara is inadequately watered, especially in the south. The Volga flows for 550 miles along its western border. Its tributaries the Great Tclieremshan (220 miles), the Sok (l95 miles), the Samara (340 miles), with its sub-tributaries, and the smaller tributaries the Motcha, Elan-Irghiz or Tchagra, and Little Irghiz are not navigable, partly on account of their shallowness, and partly because of water-mills. When the water is high, boats can enter some of them to a distance of 15 to 30 miles. The Great Irghiz alone, which has an exceedingly winding course of 335 miles, is navigated to Kutchum, and rafts are floated from Nikolaevsk. The banks of both Karamans are densely peopled. The Great and Little Uzeñ water south-eastern Samara and lose themselves in the Kamysh sands before reaching the Caspian. A few lakes and marshes occur in the river-valleys, and salt marshes in the south-east.

The whole of the region is rapidly drying up. The forests, which are disappearing, are extensive only in the north. Altogether they still cover an area of 3,043,000 acres, or 8 per cent. of the whole surface; prairie and grazing land occupies 11,495,000 acres, and only 4,193,000 acres are uncultivable.

The climate is one of extremes, especially in the steppes, where the depressing heat and drought of summer are followed in the winter by severe frosts, often accompanied by snow-storms. The average temperature at Samara (53° 11' N. lat.) is only 39°·2 (January, 9°·3; July, 70°·4).

The population, which was only 1,388,500 in 1853, has almost doubled since then, mostly in consequence of immigration; it reached 2,224,093 in 1882, and must now (1886) be about 2,250,000. Only 139,300 of these live in towns, the remainder being distributed over 4,470 villages, which are often very large, no fewer than 150 ranging in population from 2000 to 6000. The Great Russians, who have immigrated in compact masses, now constitute 65 per cent. of the population; the Little Russians, who were settled by the Government about the salt lakes, number about 30,000; and the White Russians, also sent to Samara from West Russia, may number about 15,000. A special feature of Samara is its population of German colonists, from Wúrtemberg, Baden, Switzerland, and partly also from Holland and the Palatinate, whose immigration dates from the invitation of Catherine II. in 1762. Protected as they were by free and extensive grants of land, by exemption from military service, and by self-government, they have developed rich colonies of Catholics, Protestants, Unitarians, Anabaptists, Moravians, and Mennonites, most of which have adopted the Russian village-community system, slowly modified by the existence of a special capital reserved for the purchase of land for the increasing population. They now constitute 40 per cent. of the population of the district of Novo-Uzeñ, and 9 per cent. of that of Nikolaevsk, their aggregate number reaching 150,000. The Moksha and Erzya Mordvinians, now nearly quite Russified, gathered in Samara during the reign of Peter I., when they abandoned in great numbers the left bank of the Volga; they constitute about 10 per cent, of the population. Some 70,000 Tchuvashes and 1500 Votyaks may be added to the above. The Turkish stem is represented by some 100,000 Tartars, 70,000 Bashkirs, and a few Kirghizes. Some baptized Kalmucks were settled in 1730 at Stavropol; and about 600 Adyghe Circassians, settled at Novo-Uzeñ, may still be found there. All these varied elements, living in close juxtaposition, nevertheless continue to maintain their own ethnographical features; the Mordvinians alone have lost their ethnological individuality and rapidly undergo a modification of type as they adopt the life of Russian peasants. As regards religion, the great bulk of the population are Orthodox Greeks; the Nonconformists, who still retain their numerous and widely celebrated communities and monasteries on both the rivers Uzeñ, number several hundred thousands (officially 100,000); next come Mohammedans, 12 per cent.; a variety of Protestant sects, 5 per cent.; Roman Catholics, about 2 per cent.; and, lastly, some 4000 pagans.

The chief occupation is agriculture,—summer wheat, rye, oats, millet, oil-yielding plants, and tobacco being the principal crops, Owing to its great fertility, Samara usually has a surplus of grain for export, varying from 1½ to 4 million quarters (exclusive of oats) annually. In 1883, which was an average year for summer wheat, but under the average for winter rye, the total crops were—wheat, 3,219,600 quarters; rye, 717,800; oats, 1,800,000; barley, 127,300; and other grains, 1,310,000. Notwithstanding this production, varying from 5,000,000 to 9,000,000 quarters of grain (exclusive of oats) for a population of only 2¼ millions, Samara is periodically liable to famine to such an extent that men die by thousands of hunger-typhus, are compelled to send (as in 1879) to adjoining provinces to purchase orach as food, or are forced to go by hundreds of thousands in search of employment on the Volga, while millions of quarters of corn are nevertheless exported. The population have no store of corn, or reserve capital for years of scarcity (there were in 1882 only 245,100 quarters of com in the public granaries, and 503,022 roubles of capital for that purpose), and some 210,000 males have in all only 845,000 acres of arable and pasture land. But even this soil, although all taxed as arable, is often of such quality that only 50 to 55 per cent. of it is under crops, while the peasants are compelled to rent from two to two and a half million acres for tillage from large proprietors. At present 8,549,000 acres, or about one-quarter of the total area of Samara, purchased from the crown or from the Bashkirs at nominal prices—very often a few copecks per acre—are in the hands of no more than 1704 persons. The aggregate taxes exacted from the peasants amounting to 5,782,870 roubles (1879), that is to say, from 8 to 10 roubles per male, they are, when account is taken of the advances received during scarcity, reduced to absolute destitution whenever the crops are short, so as to be compelled to sell their last horse and cow. In 1880 the arrears reached 7,000,000 roubles, to which must be added about 8,000,000 roubles of advances, and in 1882, out of the 1,196,646 roubles proposed to be levied by the zemstvos, 376,643 remained in arrears. The general impoverishment may be judged from the death-rate, which for several years has ranged from 46 to 48 per thousand. In 1879 61,488 families were compelled to abandon their homes and disperse throughout Russia in search of employment; while 100,000 families were left wholly destitute of cattle in 1880. Notwithstanding an increase of population by nearly one-third during the last twenty years the numbers of sheep and cattle decreased by about one-half from 1863 to 1882.

The manufactures of Samara are unimportant, the aggregate production (chiefly from tanneries, flour-mills, tallow-melting houses, and distilleries) in 1882 reaching only 7,671,000 roubles (£767,100). Petty trades, especially the weaving of woollen cloth, are making progress in the south. The culture of oil-yielding plants is developed in several districts, as is also that of tobacco (10,690 acres, yielding 101,980 cwts., in 1884). Trade is very active—corn, tallow, potash, salt, and some woollen cloth being exported; the imports of raw cotton from Central Asia by the Orenburg railway to be forwarded to the interior of Russia are increasing. The aggregate value of merchandise shipped on the Volga and its tributaries within the government reached 27,025,000 roubles in 1882; while 9,100,000 cwts. of merchandise were carried in both directions on the Orenburg railway. The chief loading places are Samara, Stavropol, Bałakova, and Pokrovsk on the Volga, Staro-Mainsk on the Maina, and Ekaterininsk on the Bezentchuk.

The government is divided into seven districts, the chief towns of which, with population as estimated in 1879, are—Samara (63,400 inhabitants), Bugulma (13,000), Bugurusłan (18,000), Buzułuk (10,500), Nikolaevsk (9,900), Novo-Uzeñ (9700), and Stavropol (4265). Serghievsk (1000) also has municipal institutions; its mineral waters are becoming more and more frequented. Pokrovskaya Słoboda (20,000), Ekaterinenstadt, Głushitza, and Alexandroff Gay, each with more than 5000 inhabitants, the loading place of Bałakova (2500), and several others, although still but villages, have more importance than most of the above towns.

The territory now occupied by Samara was until last century the abode of nomads. The Bulgarians who occupied it until the 13th century were followed by Mongols of the Golden Horde. The Russians penetrated thus far in the 16th century, after the defeat of the principalities of Kazañ and Astrakhan. To secure communication between these two cities, the fort of Samara was erected in 1586, as well as Saratoff, Tsaritsyn, and the first line of Russian forts, which extended from Byełyi Yar to the neighbourhood of Menzelinsk near the Kama. A few settlers began to gather under its protection. In 1670 it was taken by the insurgent leader Stenka Razin, whose name is still remembered in the province. In 1732 the line of forts was removed a little farther east, so as to include Krasnyi Yar and parts of what is now the district of Bugurustan. The Russian colonists also advanced eastwards as the forts were pushed forwards and increased in number. The southern part of the territory, however, remained still exposed to the raids of the nomads. In 1762 Catherine II. invited foreigners, especially Germans, and Nonconformists who had left Russia, to settle within the newly-annexed territory. Emigrants from various parts of Germany responded to the call, as also did the Raskolniks, whose communities on the Irghiz soon became the centre of a formidable insurrection of the peasantry which broke out in 1775 under Pugatcheff and was supported by the Kalmucks and the Bashkirs. After the insurrection, in 1787, a new line of forts from Uzefi to the Volga and the Urals was erected to protect the southern part of the territory. At the end of the 18th century Samara became an important centre for trade. As soon as the southern part of the territory became quiet, great numbers of Great and Little Russians began to settle there—the latter by order of Government for the transport of salt obtained in the salt lakes. In the first half of the present century the region was rapidly colonized. In 1847-50 the Government introduced about 120 Polish families; in 1857-59 Mennonites from Dantzic also founded settlements; and in 1859 a few Circassians were brought hither by Government; while an influx of Great Russian peasants continued and still goes on. The territory of Samara remained long under Kazan, or Astrakhan, or Simbirsk and Orenburg. The separate government dates from 1851.

SAMARA, capital of the above government, is situated on the slopes of the left bank of the Volga, 743 miles to the south-east of Moscow, at the mouth of the Samara and opposite the hills of Zheguleff. It is one of the most important towns of the lower Volga for its trade, and its importance cannot fail to increase as the railway to Central Asia advances eastwards. Its population rose from 34,500 in 1869 to 63,400 in 1879. Samara is built mostly of wood, and large spaces remain vacant on both sides of its broad unpaved streets. Its few public buildings are insignificant. A number of the inhabitants support themselves by agriculture and gardening, for which they rent large areas in the vicinity of the town. The remainder are engaged at the harbour, one of the most important on the Volga. Three fairs are held annually, with aggregate returns exceeding 2,000,000 roubles. Samara is becoming more and more a resort for consumptives on account of its koumiss establishments (see vol. xvi. pp. 305-6).

The foundation of the new capital was speedily followed by the wars with Damascus, in which repeated ineffectual sieges by the Syrians proved the value of the stronghold; and even the Assyrians, as has been mentioned, reduced the place with difficulty. During part of the struggle with Damascus the kings of Israel often resided at Jezreel, which was nearer the seat of war; but Omri’s city never lost its pre-eminence. While it stood, Samaria and not Jerusalem was the centre of Hebrew life, and the prophets sometimes speak of it as also the centre of corrupt Jehovah-worship and idolatry (Hos. viii. 5, Mic. i. 5, Isa. x. 10). The ashera of Samaria, which was not removed by the house of Jehu, is mentioned in 2 Kings xiii. 6; and Hos. viii. 5 seems to speak of calf-idols there, unless the prophet is already using the name of Samaria for tho kingdom as a whole, as later writers often do. Ultimately, in the Greek period, the name of Samaria or Samaritis was applied to the whole tract of which it is the centre—the region between Judaea and Galilee, the country of the Samaritans (q.v); and the New Testament uses Samaria in this sense. The city of Samaria was Hellenized by Alexander, who settled Macedonian colonists in it It became a fortress and was twice taken by siege in the wars of the Diadochi (by Ptolemy I. in 312 and by Demetrius Poliorcetes about 296). Under the Ptolemies Samaria was the head of a separate province, and it continued to be a strong city till John Hyrcanus took and utterly destroyed it after a year’s siege (c . 110 b.c .; see Jos., Ant., xiii. 10, 2 sq.). Taken from the Jews by Pompey, Samaria was one of the ruined cities which Gabinius ordered to be restored (Jos., Ant., xiv. 5, 3); then given by Augustus to Herod the Great, it was refounded by him on a splendid scale probably in 27 b.c., the autumn of which year, according to Schürer’s calculations, is the probable epoch of the new city of Sebaste, as it was now called in honour of Augustus. Many remains of Herod's buildings, described by Josephus {Ant., xv. 8, 5; B. J., i. 21, 2), still remain; the most notable belong to a long colonnade just above the line of Herod’s wall and those of the great temple of Caesar. The tombs of John the Baptist, Elisha, and obadiah were visited at Samaria in the time of Jerome (see O badiah), and that of St John must have been shown there still earlier, for it was violated by Julian. The old crusading church, now a mosque, was built over the tomb of the Baptist, who is reverenced as a prophet by the Moslems. A view and plan of the church, with details, are given in the Survey of W. Pah (Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 211 sq.), where also there is a plan of the city.

SAMARIA, the capital city of the kingdom of the ten tribes that revolted from the house of David. It was built by Omri, king of Israel, who began to reign A. M. 3079, and who died 3086. He bought the hill Samaria of Shemer for two talents of silver, or for the sum of 684l. 7_s._ 6_d._ It took the name of Samaria from Shemer, the owner of the hill, 1 Kings xvi, 24. Some think, however, that there were before this some beginnings of a city in that place, because, antecedent to the reign of Omri, there is mention made of Samaria, 1 Kings xiii, 32, A. M. 3030. But others take this for a prolepsis, or an anticipation, in the discourse of the man of God. However this may be, it is certain that Samaria was no considerable place, and did not become the capital of the kingdom, till after the reign of Omri. Before him, the kings of Israel dwelt at Shechem or at Tirzah. Samaria was advantageously situated upon an agreeable and fruitful hill, twelve miles from Dothaim, twelve from Merrom, and four from Atharath. Josephus says it was a day’s journey from Jerusalem. The kings of Samaria omitted nothing to make this city the strongest, the finest, and the richest that was possible. Ahab built there a palace of ivory, 1 Kings xxii, 39; that is, in which there were many ivory ornaments; and, according to Amos, iii, 15; iv, 1, 2, it became the seat of luxury and effeminacy. Benhadad, king of Syria, built public places, called “streets,” in Samaria, 1 Kings xx, 34; probably bazaars for trade, and quarters where his people dwelt to pursue commerce. His son Benhadad besieged this place under the reign of Ahab, 1 Kings xx, A. M. 3103. It was besieged by Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, in the ninth year of the reign of Hoshea, king of Israel, 2 Kings xvii, 6, &c, which was the fourth of Hezekiah, king of Judah. It was taken three years after, A. M. 3283. The Prophet Hosea, x, 4, 8, 9, speaks of the cruelties exercised by Shalmaneser against the besieged; and Micah, i, 6, says that the city was reduced to a heap of stones. The Cuthites that were sent by Esar-haddon to inhabit the country of Samaria did not think it worth their while to repair the ruined city: they dwelt at Shechem, which they made the capital city of their state. They were in this condition when Alexander the Great came into Phenicia and Judea. However, the Cuthites had rebuilt some of the houses of Samaria, even from the time of the return of the Jews from the captivity, since the inhabitants of Samaria are spoken of, Ezra iv, 17; Neh. iv, 2. And the Samaritans, being jealous of the Jews, on account of the favours that Alexander the Great had conferred on them, revolted from him, while he was in Egypt, and burned Andromachus alive, whom he had left governor of Syria. Alexander soon marched against them, took Samaria, and appointed Macedonians to inhabit it, giving the country round it to the Jews; and to encourage them in the cultivation, he exempted them from tribute. The kings of Egypt and Syria, who succeeded Alexander, deprived them of the property of this country. But Alexander Balas, king of Syria, restored to Jonathan Maccabæus the cities of Lydda, Ephrem, and Ramatha, which he cut off from the country of Samaria, 1 Macc. x, 30, 38; xi, 28, 34. Lastly, the Jews reëntered into the full possession of this whole country under John Hircanus, the Asmonean, who took Samaria, and, according to Josephus, made the river run through its ruins. It continued in this state till A. M. 3947, when Aulus Gabinius, the proconsul of Syria, rebuilt it, and gave it the name of Gabiniana. Yet it remained very inconsiderable till Herod the Great restored it to its ancient splendour. The sacred authors of the New Testament speak but little of Samaria; and when they do mention it, the country is rather to be understood than the city, Luke xvii, 11; John iv, 4, 5. After the death of Stephen, Acts viii, 1, 2, 3, when the disciples were dispersed through the cities of Judea and Samaria, Philip made several converts in this city. There it was that Simon Magus resided, and thither Peter and John went to communicate the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Travellers give the following account of its present state:--Sebaste is the name which Herod gave to the name of the ancient Samaria, the imperial city of the ten tribes, in honour of Augustus (Sebastos) Cæsar, when he rebuilt and fortified it, converting the greater part of it into a citadel, and erecting here a noble temple. “The situation,” says Dr. Richardson, “is extremely beautiful, and strong by nature; more so, I think, than Jerusalem. It stands on a fine, large, insulated hill, compassed all around by a broad deep valley; and when fortified, as it is stated to have been by Herod, one would have imagined that, in the ancient system of warfare, nothing but famine could have reduced such a place. The valley is surrounded by four hills, one on each side, which are cultivated in terraces up to the top, sown with grain, and planted with fig and olive trees, as is also the valley. The hill of Samaria likewise rises in terraces to a height equal to any of the adjoining mountains. The present village is small and poor, and, after passing the valley, the ascent to it is very steep. Viewed from the station of our tents, it is extremely interesting, both from its natural situation, and from the picturesque remains of a ruined convent, of good Gothic architecture. Having passed the village, toward the middle of the first terrace, there is a number of columns still standing. I counted twelve in one row, beside several that stood apart, the brotherless remains of other rows. The situation is extremely delightful, and my guide informed me, that they belonged to the serai, or palace. On the next terrace there are no remains of solid building, but heaps of stone and lime and rubbish mixed with the soil in great profusion. Ascending to the third or highest terrace, the traces of former building were not so numerous, but we enjoyed a delightful view of the surrounding country. The eye passed over the deep valley that encompasses the hill of Sebaste, and rested on the mountains beyond, that retreated as they rose with a gentle slope, and met the view in every direction, like a book laid out for perusal on a reading desk. This was the seat of the capital of the short-lived and wicked kingdom of Israel; and on the face of these mountains the eye surveys the scene of many bloody conflicts and many memorable events. Here those holy men of God, Elijah and Elisha, spoke their tremendous warnings in the ears of their incorrigible rulers, and wrought their miracles in the sight of all the people. From this lofty eminence we descended to the south side of the hill, where we saw the remains of a stately colonnade that stretches along this beautiful exposure from east to west. Sixty columns are still standing in one row. The shafts are plain; and fragments of Ionic volutes, that lie scattered about, testify the order to which they belonged. These are probably the relics of some of the magnificent structures with which Herod the Great adorned Samaria. None of the walls remain.” Mr. Buckingham mentions a current tradition, that the avenue of columns formed a part of Herod’s palace. According to his account, there were eighty-three of these columns erect in 1816, beside others prostrate; all without capitals. Josephus states, that, about the middle of the city, Herod built “a sacred place, of a furlong and a half in circuit, and adorned it with all sorts of decorations; and therein erected a temple, illustrious for both its largeness and beauty.” It is probable that these columns belonged to it. On the eastern side of the same summit are the remains, Mr. Buckingham states, of another building, “of which eight large and eight small columns are still standing, with many others fallen near them. These also are without capitals, and are of a smaller size and of an inferior stone to the others.” “In the walls of the humble dwellings forming the modern village, portions of sculptured blocks of stone are perceived, and even fragments of granite pillars have been worked into the masonry.”

When we consider what difficulties were met with in the introduction of Pentateuchal orthodoxy even at Jerusalem, the foundation of a community of the Law in the Samaritan country, among the mixed populations whom the Judaean leaders did not venture to receive into fellowship, must appear a very remarkable exploit. The Samaritan religion was built on the Pentateuch alone; and the fact that they did not receive even those prophetic books and historical narratives which originated in Northern Israel (all which have been preserved to us only by the Jews) shows that, before they received the Pentateuch, their Jehovah-worship was a mere affair of traditional practice, uninspired by prophetic ideas and unsupported by written record of the great deeds of Jehovah in time past. It can hardly in any respect have risen above the level of the popular religion of North Israel as described and condemned by Hosea and Amos. In Judaea the duty of conformity to the Pentateuch was enforced by appeal to the prophets and to the history of the nation’s sins and chastisements, and the acceptance of a vast and rigid body of ordinances was more easy because they came as the consolidation and logical development of a movement that had been in progress from the days of Isaiah. Among the Samaritans, on the other hand, the acceptance of the Pentateuch implied a tremendous breach of continuity. They must indeed have felt that they had fallen behind the Judaeans in religious matters, and the opportunity of putting themselves on a par with them by securing a copy of the institutes of Moses and the services of a Judaean priest would naturally be grasped at. But what is remarkable is that, having got the Pentateuch, they followed it with a fidelity as loyal and exact as the Jews themselves, save in the one matter of the change of the sanctuary. No concessions were made to heathenism or to the old lax Jehovah-worship; the text of the sacred book was transmitted with as much conscientiousness as was practised by Jewish scribes in the first centuries after Ezra; and even from the unwilling witness of their enemies the Jews we can gather that they fulfilled all righteousness with scrupulous punctiliousness so far as the letter of the written law was concerned, though of course they did not share in the later developments of the oral law, and so were heretics in the eyes of the Pharisees.

That it was possible to establish such a community on such a soil is a remarkable evidence that in that age the tendency to a legal religion was favoured by general causes, not confined to Judsea alone; it must be remembered that elaborate hierocracies sprang up after the fall of the old nationalities in many parts of western Asia (comp. Priest, vol. xix. p. 729). At the same time it must be remembered that, as Ezra could not have succeeded without Nehemiah, Manasseh had Sanballat’s civil authority to back him. It is probable, too, that Josephus is right in assuming that he was strengthened by a considerable secession of Judaeans, and it is not to be supposed that the “Samaritans” ever embraced anything like the whole population of the Samaritan country. Samaria itself was Hellenized in the time of Alexander; and in Ecclus. 1. 26 the foolish people that dwell at Shechem are distinguished from the inhabitants of the Samaritan hill-country in general. The Samaritans, like the Jews, throve and multiplied under the discipline of the law, but at no time in their history do they appear to have had the political importance that would have accrued to so closely knit a religious body if it had held all the fertile Samaritan district.

Jews and Samaritans were separated by bitter jealousies and open feuds (Jos., Ant., xii. 4, 1), but their internal development and external history ran closely parallel courses till the Jewish state took a new departure under the

Maccabees. The religious resemblance between the two bodies was increased by the adoption of the institution of the synagogue, and from the synagogue there certainly grew up a Samaritan theology and an exegetical tradition. The latter is embodied in the Samaritan Targum or Aramaic version of the Pentateuch, which in its present form is, according to Nöldeke’s investigations, not earlier than the fourth Christian century, but in general agrees with the readings of Origen’s to Σαμαρειτιόν. For the dogmatic views of the Samaritans our sources are all late; they embrace hymns and other books of little general interest, and mainly at least of mediaeval origin. Like the Jews, too, the Samaritans had a haggada; indeed the Arabic books they still possess under the name of chronicles are almost entirely haggadic fable with very little admixture of true tradition. The recent date of all this literature seems to show that the old Samaritans had not nearly so vigorous an intellectual life as the Jews, though what life they had moved in similar lines; indeed, having no sacred book but the Pentateuch, and having passed through no such national revival as that of the Maccabees, they lacked two of the most potent influences that shaped the development of Judaism. On the other hand, they shared with the Jews the influence of a third great intellectual stimulus, that of Hellenism. Samaritans as well as Jews were carried to Egypt by Ptolemy Lagi; the rivalry of the two sects was continued in Alexandria (Jos., Ant., xii. 1, 1), and Hellenized Samaritans wrote histories and epic poems in Greek with exactly the same patriotic mendacity which characterizes Jewish Hellenism Of this, the oldest surviving Samaritan literature, some fragments have been preserved in the remains of Alexander Polyhistor.

The troubles that fell on the Jews for their fidelity to the law, under Antiochus Epiphanes, were not escaped by the Samaritans (2 Mac. v. 23, vi. 2); the account in Josephus (Ant., xii. 5, 5) which makes them voluntarily exchange their religion for the worship of the Grecian Zeus is certainly a malignant falsehood.

Under the Maccabees their relations with Judaea became very bitter, and they were severely chastised by Hyrcanus, who destroyed their temple. Hostilities between the two nations recurred from time to time; and in the New Testament, in Josephus, and in Jewish tradition we see how deep-seated was their mutual abhorrence. But, with all this, the sects were too nearly alike not to have much in common. The Roman yoke galled both in the same way; the Samaritan false prophet whose movement Pilate put down with cruel slaughter (Jos., Ant., xviii. 4, 1), and probably also Simon Magus and Dositheus (Orig., Cont. Cels., i. p. 44), are parallel phenomena to the false Messiahs that arose among the Jews. The original views of the Samaritans were like those of the Sadducees, and they did not believe in a resurrection or a Messiah; but it was impossible for their faith to survive under the cruel pressure of foreign bondage without absorbing something from Jewish eschatology. And so too, in the struggle of the Jews with Vespasian, perhaps also in that with Hadrian, the Samaritans forgot their old feud, and took part against the Romans. They seem also to have shared in great measure in the subsequent dispersion, for in later times we hear of Samaritans and Samaritan synagogues not only in Egypt but in Rome, and in other parts of the empire. The Christian emperors made hard edicts against them as well as the Jews, and at length excluded them from the public service. Under these circumstances they naturally came to be mainly traders and merchants’ clerks; in Constantinople “a Samaritan” meant “a banker’s clerk.” In their old homes they still remained numerous enough to make a serious insurrection under Justinian (529 a.d.). Its suppression was followed by very stern decrees against the whole sect, and Europe heard little more of the Samaritans till, towards the close of the 16th century, Western scholars took an interest in the few congregations that still remained in the East, at Cairo and Damascus as well as at Nábulus. It was found that during the Middle Ages they had formed an Arabic literature of considerable size but of little intrinsic worth, and had continued faithfully to preserve their scriptures. Since then their numbers have been constantly on the wane, and they have almost lost their old learning, which was never very considerable.

Samaritan Literature.— Of this a full account is given, along with a sketch of Samaritan history, in the introduction to Nutt’s Fragments of a Samaritan Targum (1874). The following list confines itself to what has been printed, (a ) The Hebrew-Sainaritan Pentateuch, i.e., the Hebrew text in Samaritan recension and character, was first printed in the Paris polyglott. O11 the nature of this recension, see Gesenius, De Pent. Sam. origine, &c . (1815). A list of variations from the Massoretic text is given by Petermann, Hebr. Formenlehre nach der Aussprache der Samaritancr (1868). (b) Targum, also in the Paris and London polyglotts, but in very corrupt form. A critical edition of the whole is still lacking; the best text of part is that given by Nutt from a Bodleian MS. The dialect, apart from the corruptions of the text, differs little from other Palestinian Aramaic, (c ) Aramaic having been supplanted in Palestine by Arabic, an Arabic version of the Pentateuch was made by Abû Sa'îd about 1100 a.d. The first three books have been edited by Kuenen (1851-54). On this version, see especially De Sacy in Mini. Acad. Inscr. et Belles-Lettres, vol. xlix. (d ) The so-called Samaritan book of Joshua is an Arabic chronicle going down to Roman times, but of almost no historical use. It may date from the 13th century. Juynboll edited it in 1848 from a Leyden MS.; there are other MSS. in the British Museum and in Trinity College, Cambridge, (e ) Another short chronicle, El-Tolidoth, published by Neubauer in Jour. As. ( 1869), seems to have used the Jewish Book of Jubilees. Both (d ) and (e ) with some other sources were used by—(f ) The Chronicle of Abulfatḥ, written in 1355, and continued by later hands; edited by Vilmar (Gotha, 1865). (g) A collection of hymns was published by Gesenius (Carmina Samaritana, 1824). other liturgical pieces have been published by Heidenheim. (h) Specimens of Samaritan writings on Hebrew grammar were published by Nöldeke in the Göttinger Nachrichten (1862).

For the Samaritans in general, see Nutt, op. cit.; Juynboll, Comm. in Bist. Gentis Samar., Leyden, 1846; Appel, De Rebus Samaritanorum sub imperio Romano peractis. De Sacy published in the Notices et Extraits, xii. (1831), ail the correspondence of the Samaritans with European scholars, and other material about the modern Samaritans. For the modern Samaritans see also Petermann's Reisen, vol. i. (1860). For Maḳrîzî’s account of the Samaritans, see De Sacy, direst. Ar., vol. i.. other literature in Nutt and very fully in Kautzsch's article in Herzog-Plitt, vol. xiii. (W. r. s.)

90 stadia, was destroyed by Alexander the Great. It reappears as Samarkand at the time of the conquests of the Arabs, when it was finally reduced by Kotaiba ibn Moslim in 93 a.h. (711—712 a.d.). Under the Sámánids it became a brilliant seat of Arabian civilization. Its schools, its savants, were widely renowned; it was so populous that, when besieged by Jenghiz Khan in 1219, it is reported to have been defended by an army of 110,000 men. Destroyed and pillaged by the great conqueror, its population was reduced to one-quarter of what it had been, but it still reckoned 25,000 families within its walls. The great conqueror Timur made it his residence, and the inhabitants rose to 150,000. The magnificent buildings of the epoch of the successors of Timur, which still remain, testify to its former wealth. But new invaders again reduced it to ruin, so that at the beginning of last century it is reported to have been almost without inhabitants. It fell under Chinese dominion, and subsequently under that of the emir of Bokhara, suffering again and again from wars which were fought for it and around it. But no follower of Islam enters it without feeling that he is on holy ground, although the venerated mosques and beautiful colleges of Samarkand are falling into ruins, its high influence as a seat of learning has vanished, and its very soil is profaned by infidels. It was not without a struggle that the Mohammedans permitted the Russians to take possession of their holy city; and, while other cities of Central Asia submitted almost without striking a blow, Samarkand revolted in 1868, the Russian garrison shut up in the citadel being rescued only by the timely arrival of a corps despatched from Tashkend.

The present city, which is but a wreck of its former self, is quadrangular in shape and is enclosed by a low wall 9 miles long. The citadel rises in the west, and to the westward of this again the Russians have laid out their new town, with broad streets and boulevards radiating from the citadel, while a pretty public garden, carefully irrigated, occupies the centre.

The central part of Samarkand is the Righistan—a square limited by the three madrasahs (colleges) of Ulug-beg, Shir-dar, and Tilla-kari; in its architectural symmetry and beauty this is rivalled only by some of the squares of Italian cities. Though differing in detail, the great lines of the three colleges are the same. An immense doorway decorates the front of each of these large quadrilateral buildings. A high and deep-pointed porch, whose summit almost reaches the top of the lofty façade, is flanked on each side by a broad quadrilateral pillar of the same height, subdivided into three sections, each of which has its own style of decoration. Two fine columns, profusely decorated, in turn flank these broad pillars, On each side of the high doorway are two lower archways connecting it with two elegant towers, narrowing towards their tops and slightly inclined. The whole of the façade and also the interior courts are profusely decorated with enamelled bricks, whose colours —blue, green, pink, or golden, but chiefly turquoise-blue—are wrought into the most fascinating designs, in striking harmony with the whole and with each part of the building. In the recess of the deep doorway is the wide door, with proportions of remarkable elegance, and above it are the broad decorations filling up the upper part of the arch. Over the interior are bulbed or melon-like domes, perhaps too heavy for the façade. The cool and shady courts are surrounded by three stories of small rooms, each having only one opening—the door. The majestic buildings are now merely the dwellings of mollahs, who live on the revenues of the Wakf lands at Katty-kurgan.

The college of Shir-dar (built in 1601) takes its name from the two lions, or rather tigers, figured on the top of its doorway, which is richly decorated with green, blue, red, and white enamelled bricks. It is the most spacious of the three, and 128 mollahs inhabit its 64 apartments. The Tilla-kari (“dressed in gold”), built in 1618, has 56 rooms. But the most renowned of the three madrasahs is that of Ulug-beg, built in 1420 or 1434, by Timur, the grandson of the great conqueror. It is smaller than the others, but it was to its school of mathematics and astronomy that Samarkand owed its wide renown in the 15th century.

A winding street running north-east from the Righistan leads to a much larger square having the college of Bibi-khanym on the west, the graves of Timur’s wives on the south, and a clean bazaar on the east. The college was erected in 1888 by a Chinese wife of Timur, and is said to have once sheltered as many as a thousand students. It covers a large area, and has three mosques connected by a quadrangular building containing the students’ rooms. The archway and towers of its façade are considered by Vambéry as a model for such buildings, and its decorations resist the destructive influences alike of time and of man. One of its mosques still raises its high bulbed dome above the outer walls, which are falling into ruins, and now give accommodation to the carts and the bazaar of traders in cotton. The lofty ruins of the grave of Timur’s wives are really grand.

To the north, outside the walls of Samarkand, but close at hand, is the Hazreti Shah-Zindeh—the summer-palace of Timur; and near this is the grave of Sliah-Zindeh, or, more precisely, Ḳotliam ibn al-'Abbás ibn 'Abd al-Moṭṭalib, a famous companion of the Prophet. This was already a famous shrine in the 14th century (Ibn Batuta, iii. 52); it is believed that the saint still lives in the mosque, and will one day rise for the defence of his religion. The Hazreti Shah-Zindeh covers a wide area on a terrace reached by forty marble steps. A series of galleries and rooms lead to the hall containing the relics of the saint. The decoration of the interior halls is marvellous.

Another street running south-west from the Righistan leads to the Gur-Emir—the grave of Timur. This consists of a chapel crowned with an elegant dome, enclosed by a wall and fronted by an archway. Time and earthquakes have greatly injured this fine building; one of the minarets is already in ruins. The interior consists of two apartments paved with white marble, the walls being covered with elegant turquoise arabesques and inscriptions in gold. The chief room is of great beauty, and its decorations, of a bolder style than the others, are in strict harmony with the impression it is designed to produce. A large pyramidal piece of jade broken into two covers the grave of Timur, which has by its side that of his teacher, Mir Seid Berke, and those of several members of his family, all enclosed by a marble railing. A dark and narrow flight of steps leads down to the crypt, also ornamented with arabesques, where the graves are placed in the same order as in the upper hall.

The citadel is situated on the west of the city, upon a hill whose steep slopes render it one of the strongest in Central Asia. Its walls, 3000 yards in circuit and about 10 feet high, enclose a space of about 4 square miles. It contained the palace of the emir of Bokhara,—a vulgar modern building now transformed into a hospital,—and the audience hall of Timur,—a long narrow court, surrounded by a colonnade, and containing the Keuk-tash, a grey stone 10 feet long, 4 feet broad, and 4½ feet high, reported to have been brought from Brussa. On it Timur used to take his seat, surrounded by his numerous vassals; from it more recently the emirs of Bokhara also were wont to dispense their terrible justice.

Ruins of former buildings—heaps of plain and enamelled bricks, among which Graeco-Bactrian coins have been found—cover a wide area all around the present city, and especially on the west and north. The name of Aphrosiab is usually given to these ruins, which extend for nearly three miles to the westward of the present Russian town; this suburb of Samarkand was enclosed by a wall, the ruins of which can be traced for seven or eight miles. Five miles to the south-west of Samarkand is the college Khodja Akrar; its flower ornamentation in enamelled brick is one of the most beautiful of Samarkand. Rye is now grown in its courts, and its artistic ornamentation is going to ruin. To the north-north-east are the Tchupan-ata Hills, the chief of which has on its summit the grave of Daniar Polvan. On the right bank of the Zerafshan stands the village of Dehbid, peopled by descendants of Mahkdum Aazam (died in 1542), who possess a beautiful khanka (monastery), with pretty avenues of trees planted by Nezr Divabeghi in 1632. As for the famous Baghitchi-naran (the garden of plane trees), only the ruins of its palace now mark its former position; the trees have disappeared. Of the Graeco-Armenian library said to have been brought to Samarkand by Timur no traces have been discovered, and Vambéry regards the whole legend as a fable invented by Armenians. Every trace of the renowned high school Kalinder-kliany has also disappeared.

The present Moslem city is an intricate labyrinth of narrow winding streets, having on both sides clay walls concealing dirty court-yards and miserable houses. The population was estimated at 36,000 in 1879; it consists of Tajiks (Iranians) and Sarts or Uzbegs. The Europeans numbered 5380. Some 300 Jews occupy a separate quarter, remarkable for its filth. Numbers of Arabs, Persians, Afghans, Hindus, Kiptchaks, and Tsigans (Gipsies) may be met with in the streets. The chief occupation of the inhabitants is gardening; the gardens beyond the walls are extensive and very well kept. There is also a certain amount of manufacturing industry; the workshops, which are small, are thus enumerated by

M. Kostenko :—for metallic wares, 12; for tallow and soap, 34; tanneries, 30; potteries, 37; for various tissues, 246. Those for dyeing and the manufacture of harness, boots, and silver and gold wares are also numerous. The best harness, ornamented with turquoises, and the finer products of the goldsmith’s art, are imported from Bokhara or Afghanistan. The products of local potteries are very fine.

The bazaars of Samarkand, the chief of which is in the centre of the town, close by the Righistan, are more animated and kept with much greater cleanliness than those of Tashkend or Namangan. The trade carried on by local or Bokhara merchants is very brisk, the chief items being cotton, silk, wheat and rice, horses, asses, fruits, and cutlery. Wheat, rice, and silk are exported chiefly to Bokhara; cotton to Russia, via Tashkend. Silk-wares and excellent fruits are imported from Shahri-Syabs, and rock-salt from Hissar.