Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Herberto, post: 2785199, member: 74222"](7)(Optional)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? The vast scholars of Roman Empire and Middle Ages would easily refute it as these two thoughts are disproven myths with origin in a time when the profession of history was not established yet. About Christianity being the reason for the fall of Roman Empire and why it is refuted by the scholars: The idea that Roman Empire collapse because of Christianity was popularized in 1700’s by some intellectuals because it would serve their agenda. In the Age of Enlightenment many people began to question the authority of the Church, and the idea that (Western) Roman Empire collapsed because of Christianity was perfect tailored for their agenda. For example the massage in Gibbon’s work in a nutshell is as following: Pagan Roman Empire was smart and rational and loved science so much. But one day a military hero named Constantine the Great decided to convert into Christianity in which corrupted his mind and the Empire. The Christians did not care for the state affair of Rome as they were only interested in theological stuff, and the Christians hated science so much and were some crazy book-burners and thus Roman Empire collapsed and Europe went into a dark age. This narrative above is no longer accepted in the academia among the scholars today. The reason for the collapse of The (Western) Roman Empire was related to that fact that the “Barbarians” in Germania somehow united around 200 CE and increased the amount of attacks toward the Roman cities to plunder its wealth, and then escaped into the dense forest of Germania in which the Roman legions could not do much. At the same time the weak Parthian Empire was succeeded by the more vigorous Sassanid Empire which used siege equipment in a way its predecessor state did not do, and thus attacked Roman Empire more effective in Middle East. Now Roman Empire was attacked both from barbarians from Germania and from the Persians. If an emperor dealt with the Sassanids for long time he had to hurry back close to Germania if a problem popped up there. And if an emperor dealt with the Barbarians for a long time he had to hurry back to the eastern front to solve a Persian problem. That was the reason why Diocletian decided to split the empire into two as he realized it was too big to be ruled by a single person. All this started around year 200 CE, that is 100 years BEFORE Constantine the Great and his Christianity so he and his religion cannot be the reason for the decline of the empire. There is also another reason why the vast historians don’t believe that Christianity caused the Roman Empire to collapse: When Roman Empire was split into two states for the last time in 395 CE the two parts were not equally Christian. Eastern Roman Empire(Byzantine) was almost fully Christian while its Western counterpart was not. If Christianity really was to blame for the collapse of the empire then the Eastern part should have collapsed early and Western part should have flourished for 1000 years. That did not happen as it was the reverse: the lesser Christian Western part collapsed after just 70-80 years while the fully or almost fully Christian Eastern Byzantium part survived for 1000 years. And flourished. That is the main reason why the vast scholars of Roman history today do not believe that Christianity was to blame for the collapse of (Western) Roman Empire. About the supposed habit of destroying classical works and library and why it is flawed: The classical works we have access to today such of Aristoteles’s philosophy or Galen’s medical works, have survived today simple because they were studied and recopied throughout Middle Ages by monasteries and Byzantine libraries. Papyrus is very fragile and it will not survive the moisture of Europe. So if a papyrus was left it would be destroyed by the nature of Europe. An exception is the dry sand of Egypt in which some papyrus actually can survive for many centuries with some damage but still legible. Aristotle’s “The Constitution of the Athenians” was indeed discovered in the sand of Egypt. But that was exception rather than the rule: the vast majority of the classical texts we have access to today is as result of the efforts of the monks who used energy and ink in studying and recopying classical texts for generation for generation…until Gutenberg’s invention of printing press in the 1400’s was invented. The cost of producing books sunk dramatically and onwards it became cheap to mass produce the classical works and thus were saved for the posterity. In Pagan Roman Empire the classical works were preserved by being studied and recopied. After Constantine the Great and Christianity the habit of preserving classical works still continued. But in the 400’s the Western Roman Empire collapsed as it was overrun by (Pagan) barbarians: many Roman institutions collapsed, and the barbarians saw no interest in classical texts. In 500’s a philosopher named Boethius intended to translate Classical Greek texts into Latin but he was killed by Theodoric the Great who suspected him of collaborating with the Byzantine Emperor. So a lot damaged was done in the aftermath of the collapse of Western Roman Empire. But across the western Europe laid various Christian monasteries who studied and recopied some classical texts, but a lot of damage was done by the Barbarians. The Christian monasteries functioned as learning centers and had the ability of written system(important if wanting an effective state) and access to Greco-Romano features. Ultimately the various Barbarian Kings would convert into Christianity and by doing this they would gain access to Greco-Romano features they otherwise might not have received. It peaked under Charlemagne and his court when he initiated the Carolingian Renaissance around year 800 CE. In the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire the things were completely different: They repelled the barbarians successfully and a vibrant Greco-Romano world persisted where classical texts were studied. In the second half of 600’s Byzantine’s Middle East was lost to the Arabs, and the Arabs showed interest in the classical works. In the House of Wisdom in Baghdad(capital of Abbasid Caliphate) a translation from Greek into Arabic occurred. The majority of the translators in the House of Wisdom that translated from Greek into Arabic were carried out by Christians whose ancestors had lived under Byzantium for about 250 years. Later the Arabic texts were transmitted into Spain. Under the reign of Alfonso X in Spain in 1200’s a process of translation of Arabic texts into Latin found place in Toledo and was later canalized in Western Europe. But not only from Arabic texts, as the Byzantines also contributed to it around year 1000-1200 or so. Before or after the Fall of Constantinople in 1453 many Greek scholars flee to North Italia and with them they brought more classical texts, and thus fueled The Renaissance. So the classical texts never ever went into oblivion as it was always preserved by Byzantines, and the Arabs also gained access to it from Byzantines, so the popular misconception that classical works went into oblivion in Europe and the Arabs saved them from getting into oblivion is false. There are very few things that the Byzantines have not preserved that the Arabs have preserved. Without the Arabic texts, not much would be gone today as Byzantium already had preserved them in Greek. So the bottom line is that the classical works were preserved by Monasteries in western part of Europe and by the Byzantines in the eastern part. They certainly did not destroy classical works. However, there are some element of truth in asserting that classical works were destroyed, but not in the way as propagated by Gibbon. Philosophical works that attacked Christianity would not be tolerated. Let me give you an example: Plato’s idealistic philosophy argued that the knowledge was in the heaven and that when we die our soul went up and became one with the truth. The Christians liked it very much because it resembled very much Christianity, and that was the reason why Plato was admired by the Christians. But one another philosopher named Epicurus had a different philosophy where he emphasized materialism and denounced life after death and suggested that people should enjoy the earthly pleasure. Obviously the Christians did not like it. So his works were destroyed, If not then they were neglected and the monks did not use energy and ink on preserving his works. That was nothing new as the Pagans rulers also did it if they did not like some certain philosophical doctrine, so it is not like the censorship was invented by the Christian rulers. Works that dealt with magic, or pagan religious chants were destroyed, but it was impractical works that was destroyed. Let me provide some examples: Hippocrates’ and Galen’s medical works was practical so they were preserved, but the healing cult such of Asclepius was destroyed. Ptolemy’s astronomic work was also preserved as the Christians were interested in it, but other magical astrology part such of mathessis that contained magic was destroyed. - So it was specific magic works, astrology(mathesis), Pagan chant songs, and specific materialistic philosophy that attacked Christianity that was destroyed. No more different from when Diocletian persecuted the Christians and Manicheans and destroyed their religious works, but we don’t say that Diocletian destroyed science. Another classic myth that sporadically is repeated is that the Byzantine emperor Justinian closed down Plato’s school in Athene. That was not what actually happened: Plato’s school was already destroyed in the first century BCE by the Roman general and later dictator, Sulla. However, it was “rebuilt” 500 years later by Neo-Platonists whose philosophy attacked Christianity. There is no institutional connection between the school of Plato and this new “rebuilt” Neo-Platonic school 500 years later. So the idea that a school of Plato outside the wall of Athene existed throughout 800 years and survived various wars, plagues and pillages, and then just to be shut down by Justinian is simple not correct. What Justinian shut down was Neo-platonic philosophy that attacked Christianity. Other philosophical schools in Constantinople, Antioch and Alexandria, that did not attack Christianity continued to exist. It is also from John Malalas that we hear Justinian closed down that Neo-Platonist activity and he is not saying that Justinian closed down the entire philosophy and all schools. Euclid’s geometry, Hippocrates’ and Galen’s medical works, Ptolemy’s astronomical works, Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, Thucydides’ historical works, Demosthene’s rhetorical speeches, Plato’s and Aristotle’s philosophical and natural philosophical works were studied and recopied throughout whole Byzantine timeline inclusive during Justinian’s reign. Note that closing down institution or thoughts that were subversive or attacked the morale of the state is nothing new indeed: Socrates was killed by the Athenians who felt the goods might have punish them if they did not take actions towards Socrates since he questioned their morale. Augustus ordered the destruction of the Sibylline Books because he realized they could be dangerous for his reign. Emperor Kangxi of China expelled the Christian Jesuits because some of them began to criticize the concept of Chinese ancestor veneration where people honored their death forefather. Emperor Justinian did not do anything wrong in shutting down an institution that made subversive thoughts. If you went to a Pagan Roman Emperor and questioned the imperial cult and said that it was crap, then the rulers surely would kill you too. There is also the legend about Hypatia. This story was popularized by an astronomer named Carl Sagan who made some TV about astronomy and science in 1980’s. People who are 40 years most likely have heard about him and his program I assume. I did not as I was not born yet, but the only reason I have heard about him is because I have realized that he was responsible for spreading hoary myths on television. In that program called “Cosmos”, Sagan told a story about a famous library in Alexandria named after the God Serapis labelled like Serapeum being destroyed in 415 CE and within one year a female scientist associated to the library was murdered because she taught science, in which the early Church did not like because it was linked with Paganism Sagan asserted. Sagan then portrayed Hypatia as a martyr for science who was killed by Bishop Cyril and his followers who hated science according to Sagan. “Cyril was made a Saint“ Sagan stated at the end, and thought he had made a valid point. But actually, poor Carl Sagan exhibited his historical ignorance on TV and got everything wrong: Serapeum is not the famous Library of Alexandria. It was a pagan temple. And the famous Library was already destroyed by Julius Caesar in 47 BCE. And it was not Cyril who destroyed Serapeum, but Theophilus. To make it easier: It was Theophilus who destroyed a pagan temple called “Serapeum” in 391 CE. In 415 CE, 24 years later, Cyril killed Hypatia due to some pollical squabbling with the prefect Orestes. Carl Sagan intermingled these two different events with a gap of 24 years into one single event, and confused it even more: Hypatia was not killed because she was a philosopher and loved science, but because she made an alliance with Orestes and thus came in conflict with Cyril. She was killed because of political reason, not because she was a scientist. Athenians killed Socrates and expelled Aristotle, that does not mean Athenians hate philosophy. Roman soldiers killed Archimedes, that does not mean the Romans hate science. Marc Antony was responsible for the death of Cicero, that does not mean the Romans hate rhetorical art. British Empire killed indirectly Alan Turing because of his sexual preference, that does not mean the Britons hate mathematic and logic. Carl Sagan have once stated a beautiful quote: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. If the early Christians really destroyed a great library filled scrolls and killed a woman because she was a scientist as Sagan asserted then he really needs extraordinary evidence. And a person with a wig filled with lousy on his head who had a dishonest agenda and obviously misinterpreted the sources and wrote some suspicious materials in 1700’s named Edward Gibbon is hardly an extraordinary evidence as his works and theories are rejected by the scholars. But the historical ignorance of Carl Sagan where he relied on such outdated work without doubt should serve a perfect reminder to the rest of people why they should stick to modern scholarships. CONCLUSION: The ideas that Roman Empire and science collapsed because of Christianity is a long dead outdated teaching and a discourse made in 1700’s in a time when the profession of history did not exist as we know it today. It is debunked and rejected by vast scholars of Roman history, Middle Ages and History of science across the wide universities. The (Western) Roman Empire collapsed to some structural issues dated around 200 CE over 100 years before Constantine and his Christianity. The church fathers and monasteries in western Europe, and the Byzantines in Eastern Europe preserved the science and legacy of classical civilization just as best as they could. It was rather the Pagan barbarians who was to blame for the collapsed. In 1980’s an astronomer named Carl Sagan did that mistake of reading some outdated materials and thought he had gained insight in actual history, and unintentionally spread that myth in a TV program.[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches