Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Herberto, post: 2785197, member: 74222"]This thread will deal about the destruction of the famous library of Alexandria. It will contain some laaarge texts, so in case you are not interested in this history part but only in coins I will suggest you to jump down directly to post number 4 (now number 6). Be aware that English is not my mother tongue and neither my second language, so bear with me. I am doing this because I experience that some users in cointalk sporadically and unintentionally are spreading some hoary myths that have nothing to do with actual history. A little disclaimer: there might be one or two details I might get wrong but the overall conclusion is solid and academically accepted by the vast historians. With regard to this history lesson about the library I will answer 6 relevant questions and at the end I will give an overall conclusion to summarize the whole picture. Question number 7 in post number 2 is optional to read as it is completely off topic and deals about other things but perhaps some might find it informative as I am only presenting what the academia is suggesting these days in the 21th century. Here is my disposition: (1)What was the background for the establishment of the Library in Alexandria? (2)How is the map of Alexandria and where is the Library located? (3)Did Caesar destroy the Library in Alexandria in 47 BCE? (4)Was the Library rebuilt after the death of Caesar? (5)Did Theophilus destroy the Library in Alexandria in 391 CE? (6)Did Caliph Umar destroy the Library in Alexandria in 641 CE? OPTIONAL: (7)Did Roman Empire collapse because of Christianity, and did Christians have a habit of destroying classical works and libraries in Late Antiquity and Middle Ages? (1)What was the background for the establishment of the Library in Alexandria? Alexander the Great inherited the army of his father, and started a successful campaign against the Persians with that result that he created a vast empire. The city Alexandria was indeed founded and named after Alexander the Great. However, Alexander the Great died very young and it was not clear who should be the successor. After the death of Alexander the Great a civil war broke up and the empire was shattered between his generals. One of Alexander’s general, Ptolemy(don’t confuse with the astronomer), entrenched himself in Egypt and created an Egyptian-Mecedonian Kingdom in Egypt called the Ptolemaic Kingdom. Ptolemy also did something remarkable: he hijacked the corpse of Alexander the Great and brought it to Alexandria, and made a mausoleum for him in order to attracts people to his kingdom. It was in Ptolemaic Egypt that the famous library was created. [ATTACH=full]645392[/ATTACH] However the Library was destroyed later by someone. In popular culture, there are 3 suspects who are said to have destroyed it: [ATTACH=full]645393[/ATTACH] 1 of these 3 persons is guilty in the destruction of the Library, and 2 are obviously innocents. (2)How is the map of Alexandria and where is the Library located? I have made a very simple map over Alexandria for you: [ATTACH=full]645399[/ATTACH]The anchor is the harbor of the city. Close to the harbor is the Bruchion which is a district in Alexandria pretty much as Manhattan in New York. In Bruchion in the left side you will find the famous Library. A distant place long away from the Library you will find Serapeum, which is a Pagan temple, in the south-eastern part of the city. Be aware that the Library and the Serapeum are NOT the same building. I repeat once again: the Library(house with books) and the Serapeum(a Pagan temple) are NOT the same building. A lot of people often confuse it, so be aware. (3)Did Caesar destroy the Library in Alexandria in 47 BCE? Yes he did. The source materials suggest that he was in trouble when he intended to conquer Alexandria, and thus ordered to set a fire on the harbor. However, the harbor is close to the Bruchion where the Library is located. So the fire spread from the harbor into Bruchion and ultimately reached to the Library and destroyed it: [ATTACH=full]645394[/ATTACH] We know it because the sources materials say so both indirectly and directly. Let’s see here: Caesar: In one of his works he is saying that he was in trouble and thus set fire to the harbor. The Library is close to harbor, so whether the fire reached the Library Caesar is silence about it. He is silence because he is ashamed of it and don’t want to admit it. Hirtius(death 43 BCE): He is a friend and a subordinate of Caesar. He confirms that Caesar burnt the harbor. But otherwise he mentions nothing of a burning Library. He does not because he wants to portray his friend Caesar in good light. But we still don’t have evidence that Caesar burnt the library yet. Strabo(death after 24 CE): He is a geographer and visited Alexandria after the death of Caesar, and gave an elaborated description of the city and mentioned the various buildings. However, he mentions nothing of a Library. It is disturbing. It is like I should go to New York and grab a tourist brochure where the Statue of Liberty is not mentioned. Why does Strabo not mention a famous library? Was it a overlook?. The best explanation for his omission is because the Library is gone now. However, a close relative of Caesar, Tiberius, is an Emperor. So Strabo cannot write that Caesar destroyed a great Library. He is risking his life if he does so. Seneca(death 65 CE): He is saying that the books and the Library was destroyed by a fire and that it was done by Julius Caesar due to the harbor-fire. Nero is the emperor now, and since he is not a close relative of Caesar, Seneca can safely state who burnt the Library unlike Strabo. But is Seneca alone with his view? If one person can confirm Seneca’s assertion we would be more safe that Caesar was to blame. Plutarch(death 120 CE): He confirms the assertion of Seneca. Plutarch is also saying that Caesar was to blame for the destruction of Library. Hadrian is the Emperor now, just like Nero, he is not a close relative of Caesar. That is the reason why Seneca and Plutarch could state freely that Caesar brunt it while Strabo could not. Now we have sufficient source materials that suggest that Caesar burnt the Library. Ammianus(death around 400 CE): He is a very late source, and is confirming that Caesar was the one who burnt the Library. It is a late source, and tells nothing new and is what we may call a “secondhand source” since he probably has his information from Seneca/Plutarch. But Ammianus shows us that people around year 400 CE knew that Caesar was the man who burnt a legendary Library in Alexandria. CONCLUSION: Caesar burnt the famous library by an accident. He set fire to the harbor, and the fire spread to the Library and destroyed it. He was ashamed of it, that is the reason why he and his friend Hirtus do not mention anything about a burning library. After the death of Caesar a geographer named Strabo visited Alexandria and wrote about the city but he mentioned nothing of library. Probably because it was gone but the family of Caesar occupied the throne so Strabo could not blame it on Caesar yet. Later when the close relatives of Caesar were no longer emperors it became common knowledge that it was Caesar who was to blame for the destruction of the Library as Seneca and Plutarch suggested. We can safely state that Julius Caesar destroyed the famous Library. (4)Was the Library rebuilt after the death of Caesar? That is indeed a good question. Because even if Caesar destroyed the Library it could had been rebuilt. It is complicated to answer that question as the source materials don’t give much information. Let me tell you why: [ATTACH=full]645395[/ATTACH] Plutarch(death 120 CE) is telling us a story that the Roman general Mark Antony gave his girlfriend Cleopatra many books as a gift and that the Library was thus rebuilt. But Strabo(death after 24 CE) is contradicting Plutarch’s account indirectly: As mentioned earlier he visited Alexandria after the death of Caesar(and as well of Antony and Cleoptra), but Strabo mentions nothing of a (rebuilt) Library. It is basically only from the writing of Plutarch that we hear that the Library was rebuilt. For that reason, it is not convincing since no other sources are backing him up. If Colosseum was destroyed in year 500 CE we would still know today that it has existed because MANY sources from DIFFERENT persons are mentioning that famous amphitheatre in Rome. But a rebuilt Library in Alexandria is ONLY mentioned by Plutarch. So it is very unlikely that the library was rebuilt after the death of Caesar, but we cannot be 100% sure. But IF the fantastic romantic story of Plutarch is true then the library was certainly destroyed BEFORE the event of Theophilus because two things happened: [ATTACH=full]645396[/ATTACH] 215 CE: The maniacal rule of Emperor Caracalla where he punished Alexandria and its population after an insult from the population of the city. 272 CE: Empress Zenobia of Palmyra rebelled against the Roman Empire and created the Palmyrene Empire. Emperor Aurelian fought back and conquered Alexandria in a very bloody war where the city was destroyed. Ammianus(death around 400 CE) is stating that a library no longer existed in Alexandria and that it was Caesar who destroyed it. He stated it BEFORE the event of Theophilus in 391 CE. CONCLUSION: We do not know whether the famous Library was rebuilt or not after the death of Caesar. It is ONLY from Plutarch we hear that it was rebuilt, but he is contradicted by Strabo. We have NONE sources from other persons who are backing up the assertion of Plutarch. So the story that the library was rebuilt is unlikely, but not impossible. But IF the library was rebuilt it was certainly destroyed BEFORE 391 CE giving the reign of Caracalla and giving Aurelian’s war with Zenobia over Alexandria. Ammianus is stating that it was Caesar who destroyed it and that it no longer existed. That was BEFORE 391 CE. (5)Did Theophilus destroy the Library in Alexandria in 391 CE? No, he did not. The library was already gone, so how could he destroy it? Furthermore we have whole 7 sources and they are not mentioning anything about a burning library as what they are referring to is the destruction of Serapeum which is NOT the famous library: [ATTACH=full]645397[/ATTACH] Let see what the 7 sources are stating: Ammianua (death around 400 CE): He is Pagan. BEFORE 391 CE he is stating that a famous Library was destroyed by Caesar and that it did not exist anymore due to Caesar. Ask a very logic question: “How can Theophilus destroy a library that did not exist in 391 CE?” Sophronius(death 638 CE), Socrates of Constantinople(death around 415 CE), Sezemen(death around 415 CE), Theodoret(death around 415 CE) and Oresius(death after 415 CE.): We have 5 church fathers here and all lived during the event of 391 CE apart from the first mentioned Sophronius who lived over 200 years later. Each of these 5 are mentioning something about the event of 391 CE. They mention nothing about a burning library as what they are referring to is the destruction of Serapeum. They only mention that Pagan temples were destroyed and Pagan statues were demolished. They mention nothing about a burning Library or burning books. But these 5 church fathers are Christians, and perhaps they are ashamed to admit that their co-religionists burnt a library, so it will be worth to listen to what a Pagan is saying, and this bring us Eunapius of Sardis. Eunapius of Sardis(death after 400 CE): He is Pagan and witnessed the event in 391CE. He is very very very Anti-Christian in his work. He is literally saying something like “Christians are crazy sons of bitches, and their religion so stupid”. If a great famous Library filled with precious scrolls was burnt down by an angry mob of Christians then the Anti-Christian Eunapius 100% definitely would have mentioned it to give his argument more impact. Right?. – But he does not. The bottom line is that we have whole 7 (SEVEN!) sources, both from Christians and from Pagans so the event in 391 CE is one of these events we have best sources about in Late Antiquity, and NONE of them are mentioning anything about a burning library or burning books as what they are saying is that there were persecution of the Pagans and that their temples were destroyed no more different from what earlier Pagan rulers did towards others. They are not saying that a great library was destroyed. Not at all. One certain person with a dishonest agenda who lived in the 18th century have distorted the 7 sources above and forged a myth in order to pursue his agenda. I am of course talking about Edward Gibbon who is author to some (with today’s eyes now outdated) historical works, “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”. It is in this work that we find the story that an angry Christian mob guided by Theophilus destroyed a famous Library of Alexandria. Gibbon has exactly used the same sources as the above but came to a different conclusion. This happened because of two things: (1)Firstly Gibbon disliked organized religion and a story about an angry Christian mob destroying a legendary library fitted well with his agenda, so with abysmal source interpretation he managed to spun a myth despite the sources are not suggesting it. (2) The profession of history as we know it today did not exist during Gibbon’s time so there was no academia who could have scrutinized his suspicious work. Gibbon’s works are from the 18th century, and are outdated as his theories and explanations have been soundly refuted by the scholars these days, and his works are not used to teach the students of history these days in the 21th century. But many casual readers outside the faculty of history in English-speaking countries do often that classic mistake of reading Gibbon without realizing his works are outdated. One who did it was Carl Sagan who made some TV-programs about astronomy in 1980’s and spread that myth in TV and exhibited his historical ignorance as he confused it even more in which I will address it in the section 7 in my post number 2 which is optional. CONCLUSION: Theophilus did not destroy a library in 391 CE as it did not exist during this time as Caesar had already done that job and destroyed it 4-5 centuries earlier. We have whole 7 sources, both from Christians and from Pagans, and none of them are saying that a great library was destroyed. They only state that there was persecutions of the Pagans and that their temples were destroyed inclusive Serapeum which is a pagan temple, NOT a library. The whole myth of the destruction of a library in 391 CE was forged by Gibbon and his dishonest approach. Gibbon’s works are from the late 1700’s and outdated, but not all casual readers do think: “Hey hey, this work was made in 1776 in a time when the hair fashion was to have a wig filled with louse, so perhaps I should learn my history from modern scholars.”. One of them who read Gibbon uncritically was Carl Sagan. He spread that myth in some TV program in 1980’s… that was supposed to deal about…reason. What can we learn about the historical ignorance of Carl Sagan? - Confine yourself into modern scholarships instead of learning your history from Gibbon, Voltaire or any other persons with louse on their wigs. (6)Did Caliph Umar destroy the Library in Alexandria 641 CE? No, it is extremely unlikely. The famous Library have already been destroyed by Julius Caesar for about 700 years when Caliph Umar conquered Alexandria, so how could he destroy it?. The source materials are only suggesting that some people around year 1200 CE held a belief that Caliph Umar had destroyed it. But they were wrong.[ATTACH=full]645398[/ATTACH]Let see what the source materials are saying: Abd al-Latif (death 1231 CE): He is a Muslim and a scholar. He is saying that Caliph Umar ordered the destruction of the Library. He states that the source for his information was a rumor he heard. Also the source pops up 600 years after the alleged event found place so we have to be cautious. Bar Hebraeus(death 1286 CE): One Bishop who live under the rule of Muslims. He confirms the assertion of Abd al-Latif and blame the destruction of Library on Caliph Umar. Once again: the source came first after about 600 years after the alleged event happened, so we have to be cautious as well here. In the profession of history we are taught in a subject called “Source criticism”. One basic tenet of source criticism is that if a source pops up many centuries after an event have occurred then take it with caution. It is the same principle as if you find an article in New York Time from year 1990 that asserts that Christopher Columbus was a Devil-worshipper in secret, it would be suspicious. What the two sources basically are telling us is that some people around year 1200 thought that Caliph Umar had destroyed a Library in 641 CE. It is not the same as it really happened. CONCLUSION: Caliph Umar has not destroyed the Library in 641 CE as it was already destroyed many centuries earlier due to Julius Caesar. The two sources also pop up first 600 years later after the alleged event found place, so it is suspicious. It only shows that some people in 1200 CE believed that Caliph Umar did it. But he has not done it. OVERRALL CONCLUSION: Alexander the Great defeated the Persians and founded the city of Alexandria, and created a vast empire. He died very young and as result his generals squabbled, and one of his general named Ptolemy took resort in Egypt and created the Ptolemaic Empire. It was there that The Great Library was founded. It was destroyed later. In the popular culture there have been 3 culprits: Julius Caesar in 47 BCE, Theophilus in 391 CE, or Caliph Umar in 641 CE. The real culprit was Julius Caesar as he in 47 BCE intended to conquer Alexandria, and set fire to the harbor, and the fire reached the Library and burnt it. However, Plutarch is telling us an incredible story about a romance between Marc Antony and Cleopatra, and state that the Library was rebuilt, but it is extremely unlikely as the evidence is not strong. But if it was rebuilt it was certainly gone before 391 CE. In 391 CE Theophilus destroyed Serapeum which is not the library but a pagan temple. But some outdated work of a historian named Gibbon have clearly misinterpreted the source to pursue a dishonest agenda and confused Serapeum with the Library. In 1980’s a guy named Carl Sagan spread that myth in TV unintentionally without realizing he had consulted outdated materials. Caliph Umar has certainly not destroyed the library in 641 CE, but some people around year 1200 CE began to speculate that Caliph Umar did it, but in reality there are no source materials to believe so.[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches