www.alphadictionary.com

• diaspora •

Pronunciation: dai-æs-pê-rê • Hear it!

Part of Speech: Noun

Meaning: 1. The dispersal of a people outside their homeland. 2. A people, collectively, that lives in dispersed areas outside its homeland. If capitalized, Diaspora refers specifically to the Jewish community living outside Israel.

Notes: We have not yet decided which adjective should accompany today's Good Word, diasporic or diasporal. Until that decision is reached, we are free to use either.

In Play: Diasporas are usually caused by some calamity in the homeland of a nation or people. The Jewish Diaspora began with the deportation of Judeans to Babylonia by Nebuchadnezzar in 597 and 586 BCE, following his victories over them. In addition to the Jewish Diaspora, it is reasonable to speak of the Afro-American diaspora caused by the slave trade, particularly in West Africa. William Saroyan and Peter Balakian represent writers of the Armenian diaspora, caused by the Turkish genocide of 1915-1923. The cause of the Roma (Gypsy) diaspora is unknown, though most scholars agree that the Roma originated in northern India.

Word History: Today's Good Word is simply the word diaspora "dispersion" transliterated from the Greek. Greek diaspora is the noun of the verb diaspeirein "to disperse, spread out", made up of dia "through, apart" + speirein "to sow, scatter". Speirein is also the source of the noun sperma "seed", now used in English without the A. The Indo-European root sper- "spread, sprinkle" came directly to English in a variety of forms: spray, spread, sprawl, and sprinkle, to mention just four. In Latin the root turns up in the verb spargere "to sprinkle, scatter" which, with the prefix dis-, produced the noun dispersio(n) "scattering". (We are grateful that, when Helen Barrett disperses her thoughts on words like this one, she remembers us.)

The Assyrian capture of Israel in 740 BC resulted in a diaspora. They constitute the Lost Tribes of Israel and lost their identity as tribes as a result of that conquest. Why aren't they part of “The Diaspora” along with the Diaspora of the Southern Kingdom of Judah? The people who remained or moved into what was Israel became Samaratins. They were considered second class Israelites by the Jews who returned to Judah after their captivity.

I believe the LDS church believes they got on boats
and went to Peru.

Most historians belive the "ten lost tribes" wer amalgamated into Assyria and disappeared. That's far more normal than the return to Judah described in Ezra/Nehemiah. The returnees thought the Samaritans unworthy because they had escaped captivity and had probably contaminated the blood lines over seventy years by conmingling with the "people of the land."

In today's world, the pre-eminent usage refers to Jews scattered all over the world. It includes your local synagogue and any other Jew not living in Israel. I'm told a common refrain in homes after the observance of Passover is "next year in Israel."

According to the best scientific evidence available, modern humans first trekked "out of Africa" between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago in the original diaspora, well before the ten lost tribes scattered into Assyria, or took a boat ride to Peru, as the case may be.

Depending on how loosely "diasporas" are defined, their numbers require an alphabetical index. Take the Wikipedia article on the subject with a grain of salt if it does not exceed your daily intake.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diasporas)

We seem to keep dispersing.

Perry Lassiter: The precise phrase said in Jewish homes during Passover is 'Next year in Jerusalem'. This is also said at the conclusion of the holiday of Yom Kippur. Concerning the Samaritans, they were never fully accepted because their conversion to Judaism was considered insincere (due to the attack of wild beasts when they entered the land of Israel -- rather than a whole-hearted, altruistic acceptance of the religion).

Thanks for the clarification. What is the attack of wild beasts reference. I'm not familiar with it.

Pepshort: You are surely right about the use of "Next Year in Jerusalem".

I am confused about your discussion of the Samaritans. Samaritans were Israelites of the Northern Kingdom who had no doubt heavily intermarried with non-Israelites. According the NT they practiced a monotheistic religion that did not depend on the Temple in Jerusalem and, to the Jews, had other defects. Before the break up of the Kingdom of Israel after Solomon's death, Israel was the name of the Kingdom and the people were Israelites. After the division, the tribes of Judah and Benjamin became known as the kingdom of Judah. From Judah we get the name Jew.

The Northern Kingdom was conquered earlier than Judah and the people were not totally dispersed, but they were dispersed to some degree. They never regained their earlier status as a nation. These are the so-called lost tribes of Israel. I do not believe they were so much lost as assimilated. Many cults have been formed claiming to be the "Lost Tribes". There has been a long stint of "British Israel" claims which I totalloy discount. Many Judeans were taken captive when they were finally defeated. Note that I am not naming the defeating Nations. That is because they seem to have been constantly changing and I cannot get them all straight in my mind.

I'm sure not all Jews returned to Judah. However, there was a return to Judah, after which Jerusalem was rebuilt and Judah became an independent nation. The independence was interrupted more than once and finally the Romans destroyed the Jewish nation. At that time Jews were living in many places of the world and, while some assimilated, many of them did not. These are Jews that we know today, many of whom are citizens of the USA and other nations as well as the modern Nation of Israel. The Jews have suffered much misguided and just plain inhuman treatment. They also have made immeasurable contributions to Europe, America and all of modern civilization.

Now, where does "the attack of wild beasts when they entered the land of Israel" come into the picture? It is certainly not recorded in the Jewish Bible or in the Christian Bible. Have you been talking to some of the Cabala or reading their literature? I am interested in your reply.

Perry Lassiter and Phillip Hudson: Thank you for your replies. The 'attack of the beasts' that I can referenced can be found in
2 Kings 17:25 . See the beginning of that chapter that describes the exile of the Jews from Shomron (Samaria), and their replacement with populations from Bavel (Babylonia), Kusa (Kuth) and other lands. Verse 25: "And at the beginning of their dwelling there, they did not fear the Lord: therefore the Lord sent lions among them, which slew some of them."

Phillip: the original Samaritans were the Israelites of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, as your correctly asserted. Indeed, they were exiled to north, with their whereabouts uncertain even today. Israelites from Judea were exiled to Babylonia. When permission to return was granted by the Persian king Koresh (Cyrus), most of the exiles remained in Babylonia, and maintained a thriving community for some 800 years. The version of the Talmud that is primarily studied today is the 'Babylonian Talmud' - a product of that exiled Jewish community.

Finally: regarding the use of the term 'Samaritan': It refers to the population living in the northern area of Israel. Before the exile, the Samaritans were Jews. Following the diaspora, the Samaritans (that I referred to in my original post) were the replacement populations brought from Babylonia.

Thanks for the reply Pepshort. I would have never thought to look in 2 Kings 17:25. I was thinking of Exodus. You have proved yourself a Bible scholar. Conquering nations have had a habit of taking the brightest and best from the conquered nation and removing them to be of service to them. We should not imagine that all the peasants were removed but many were. Moving strangers into a region weakened the region and made it easier to manage. I am glad you weren't quoting from the writings of the Cabala, which I totally discount. Please comment regularly on the Agora.

The Samaritans also incidentally helped with our understanding of the OT canon and text. Their Bible is limited to the Torah, and their text of those first five books is somewhat different from two other basic streams of text. One likely conclusion is that the Penteteuch had been considered Scripture by 722, but no other books.