godfry n. glad

Buried in another thread, "Mithras and christian apologetics", Bede & I had an exchange of posts regarding the fate of the Great (or Royal) Library in Alexandria. Here are the last two of the posts:

I did post:
To which Bede did respond:

The "bun fight" was indeed very enlightening. And yes, I knew you were AC. No irony at all; I was just trying to nudge you that you shouldn't be so condemnatory of others' approach on these boards, for you have not been above reproach yourself (Matt 7:3-5/Luke 6:41-42).

I haven't seen any follow-up on the French source and would like to know what you found.

Re: The Daughter Library, I would add this to the pile...

Mustafa El-Abbadi, author of _The life and fate of the ancient library of Alexandria_ (UNESCO/UNDP) offers up a bit more balanced presentation and analysis of the ancient sources regarding the "Daughter Library" located within the Serapeum than you have provided. El-Abbadi offers up this synopsis of the events of 391:

"After the destruction of the royal Library in 48 B.C., the Daughter Library became the principal library in Alexandria. Located as it was, withing the precinct of the Serapeum, it continued to enjoy protection, so long as pagan temples were sacred and secure. However, after the proclamation of Christianity as the official religion of the empire, the sanctity of the temples began to be threatened. The situation became critical under the reign of Emperor Theodosius (379-95) who launched a widespread campaign against paganism and its temples throughout the Empire. At one stage of the implementation of this policy, Theophilus, the fanatic bishop of Alexandria, was able to obtain the Emperor's approval to transform the Temple of Dionysus into a church. His drastic methods frightened many of the inhabitants who were still pagan and, filled with anguish and foreboding, they sought refuge in the formidable compound of the Sarapeum. It was massively built on raised ground, more like a stronghold, and historians repeatedly described it as the 'acropolis of Alexandria"
"Theophilis resorted for assistance to the Prefect of Egypt and the commander of the Roman occupation army, but they refused to lend military support he required to storm the Sarapeum unless they had explicit authorization from the Emperor. This was soon forthcoming and Emperor Theodosius, in 391, issued a decree sanctioning the demolition of the temples of Alexandria. Fortified by the imperial decree, Theophilus led his fanatic mob to the entrance of the Sarapeum where he read aloud the words of the Emperor to a terrified crowd. In great alarm, they took flight, while Theophilus walked up the the temple and himself gave the first blow to the cult statue of Sarapis; his frenzied Christian followers emulated his example and ran amok in the temple, destroying, demolishing and plundering. When the devastation was complete, Theophilus ordered a church set up in its place."
"One can safely assume that the library of the Sarapeum met its fate with the temple. Yet some sceptical scholars discredit the extent of the destruction. The reason for the disagreement lies once more in the different interpretations of the sources at our disposal. We are fortunate that in this connection we possess several testimonies written by contemporary or near-contemporary eye-witnesses who all testify to the fact that the devastation was extensive....Yet apologists continue to resent the implications of such a total destruction and argue that the purpose of Theophilus was not to destroy a building but a worship. They argue that he zealously sought only to destroy paganism and that there was no reason to believe that he was bent on obliterating all writings of the past."

Against such arguments, El-Abbadi presents the clues within Aphthonius, supported by the writings of Rufinus, and the presence of extremist factions within the Christian power structure who held grave suspicions about classical literature and philosopy. To this end, he cites St. Jerome's troubled conscience about having surreptitiously read a text of Cicero and ends his section on the fate of the Serapeum with, "We can understand the trepidation felt by St. Jerome when we realize that the extremists waged war upon the pagan books and learning, not only in Alexandria, but throughout the Empire. In 364, we are told, Emperor Jovianus put to the fire the library of the Trajanum temple in Antioch. It is no coincidence that Ammianus Marcellinus, almost at the same time, speaks of certain people in Rome who 'hated learning like poison' and that 'libraries were closed for ever like the tomb.' Finally, the Christian historian Orosius, who visited Alexandria in 415, records with sorrow, 'There are temples nowadays, which we have seen, whose book-cases have been emptied by our men. And this is a matter that admits no doubt.'"
El-Abbadi ends the section with, "It is clear from the above discussion that the war against pagan worship did not spare pagan books; and in the light of Aphthonius' account, there can be no doubt that the attack on the Sarapeum in 391, put an end to the temple as well as the Library."
Dr. El-Abbadi offers citations at the end of each paragraph which are too extensive to add into this discussion without hindering it significantly. I will happily provide the sources he has provided, as long as I have the book I borrowed via interlibrary loan in my hands.
Otherwise, it is available to you to borrow through your university sources.

I trust you won't mind if I lean towards the analysis of Dr. El-Abbadi on this matter, as you are an admitted Christian apologist on these matters and I am...

godfry n. glad

[ July 30, 2002: Message edited by: godfry n. glad ]</p>

Bede

Godfry,

"I trust you won't mind if I lean towards the analysis of Dr. El-Abbadi on this matter, as you are an admitted Christian apologist on these matters and I am... a Moslem apologist?" The good Dr El-Abbadi is most concerned to ensure no blame attaches to the Omar in the seventh century. No worries there as I agree with him.

I found his book helpful especially as he agrees with me that Caesar's accidently destruction of the Royal Library was probably total.

I'm sorry I haven't had a chance to check out the French source and can't promise I will for a while but it is on my to do list.

Anyway, please send me your email address to bede@bede.org.uk and I'll send you my full 10,000 word paper on the foundation, life, contents and destruction of the Libraries. That way you'll be able to get the full picture including from books you probably won't have access to.

As El-Abbadi admits, despite the many sources for the destruction of the Serapeum (including the rabid anti-Christian Eunapius), not one mentions a library. If only sceptics would believe the existence of Jesus on such flimsy evidence! If the library was so celebrated this is really odd and I believe (for other reasons too) that the this is because the library was either insignificant or had already been removed.

Yours

Bede

<a href="http://www.bede.org.uk" target="_blank">Bede's Library - faith and reason</a>

Peter Kirby

Alexandria was a big and important city, with many scholars and philosophers such as Philo. What did people do for books after the argued total destruction of the Great Library at Alexandria by Caesar? Were there any other libraries sponsored by aristocrats, or perhaps libraries run for profit?

best,
Peter Kirby

Bede

Yes, Peter. We know about a library in the Caesarion (mentioned by Philo), there was one at the Serapeum at some point, and we can certainly assume there were more - maybe including the Claudian and Museum itself.

B

godfry n. glad

Peter:

This according to El-Abbadi, in the aforementioned text (pgs 156-158):

"Yet Alexandria was rich in its libraries; the hall of the Mouseion must have had a fair collection of books; the Daughter Library, safe in the precinct of the Sarapeum was now the principal library in Roman Alexandria; and the Caesareion also had its own considerable amount of books. We may furthermore add the reported gift of 200,000 books from the Pergamum, presented by Mark Antony to Cleopatra perhaps as compensation for the loss of the Royal Library"

El-Abbadi then lists the depredations brought upon Alexandria due to various uprisings, rebellions and military incursions, including Caracalla's vengence in 215, Galienus' campaign against an upstart prefect in 265, Aurelain's campaign against the Palmyran occupation in 272 and Diocletian's crushing of a rebellion in 297/298, all of which, in his estimation, probably left everything in the former royal quarter in ruins. Yet, citing Ammianus Marcellinus, Alexandria is described as a bustling center of intellectual activity through the end of the fourth century. He ends the section on the Mouseion stating, "...it is likely that the Mouseion did not long survive the promulgation of Theodosius' decree in 391, to destroy all pagan temples in the city."

So, my understanding is that despite the depredations that fell upon the Alexandrian community during its time under Roman rule, it remained an active intellectual community _until_ the full impact of the Theodosian suppressions.

It seems that Bede's purpose in claiming that the Royal Library was destroyed in 48 BCE, is an attempt to exonerate the Christian fanatics who seemingly brought an end to Alexandria as a teeming intellectual center. If I understand aright, his spin seems to be that there were no books destroyed in the destruction of the temples of Alexandria, because there is no explicit statement to the effect that Christian fanatics destroyed books. I'm not clear exactly what Bede thinks happened to the books which were described as being present in all these libraries.

I'd be curious as to what claims exist for the continuation of intellectual activity in Alexandria (as versus other possible centers in the empire) from the beginning of the fifth to the end of the Hejira (say, mid-seventh century).

godfry n. glad

godfry n. glad

The quoted sections are from Bede:

And so he's a "Moslem apologist"? Are you sure? Upon what do you base that analysis? Does he have a web-site that adverstises his "Muslim Reason and Apologetics"? Your apologetic status is well-advertised. Dr. El-Abbadi's treatment in his published book is far more "objective" than anything you've presented here, citing both sides of various arguments and acknowledging difference of opinion within the scholastic community. I recognized that you needn't do that, but I'll still lean with the good doctor on this one.

That depends upon what you think the "Royal Library" was. What happened to the 200,000 books Antony pillaged from the Pergamum to gift to Cleopatra? Not part of the "royal library"? You obviously don't think the Museion nor the "Daughter Library" at the Serapeum were part of the "Royal Library". Was the "Royal Library" a structure, or a collection? If the latter, was that collection kept in one place or divided amongst many? It looks to me as if you're playing games with semantics. I'll agree that a major portion of the holdings of intellectual capital most probably went up in flames during the Ceasarean incident. I've never challenged that. But, that did not bring an end to the thriving intellectual atmosphere of Alexandria... that took Christian fanaticism allied with imperial stupidity.

I won't hold my breath.

Naw...I'll wait until you have it published. If it's so all-fired incisive, it should be hitting the booksellers soon, right? Sending emails to apologist sites has garnered me no end of pestiferous follow-ups from sanctimonious proselytizers, so I avoid it.

Oh...well....I guess the the comment by Orosius isn't an acceptable source, or those emptied book-cases were for the pagan equivalent of hymnals, or "our men" (being good Christians) "emptied them" by carefully moving them to safe-keeping. C'mon.... spin it for me, Bede.

godfry n. glad

Bede

You disappoint me, godfry. I thought for a moment you were interested in this subject but all you really want to do is keep your prejudices intact.

No matter. For your info, Richard Carrier demonstrated that Alexandria remained a hub of intellectual activity right up to the Persian invasion in the seventh century. He's right and you are wrong (as is El-Abbadi).

The Plutarch reference, as Plutarch admits, was a rumour intended to smear Antony. It is totally unacceptable as historican evidence (not least because the Pergamon library has been excavated and only has room for 30,000 odd scrolls).

Also, the Museum was in the Royal quarter so if that was destroyed in the third century as we know it was, it couldn't have survived to be closed by Christians. Also, again, no source even hints at this happening. Odd that no sources are required for something that panders to your prejudices.

I do apologetics. I also do history. I call admitting to doing apologetics, rather than pretending to be objective, honesty. My Alexandria paper was described as solid and well written by my supervisor at a wholly secular university. Even my work on the historical Jesus got a distinction when marked by two non-Christians.

As for your belief that I'd sell your email address or some such - that's too insulting even to be worthy of comment. But it neatly gets you out of having to look at the evidence I have gathered and demonstrates you are not really interested in seeing me address all the issues. If it was published (which my supervisor is urging) it would be in a scholary journal so, alas, you'd never see it anyway.

Yours

Bede

<a href="http://www.bede.org.uk" target="_blank">Bede's Library - faith and reason</a>

Bede

On Orosius:

Does he mention the Serapeum? No, and he can't mean it. The sources are clear that the building was destroyed and replaced by a church. I suppose after all that they left some books cases (actually chests) lying around for Orosius to find twenty five years later. Use your head.

Does he say the books were destroyed? No. If I found my flat burgled and my volumes of Churchill missing would I assume they were destroyed? No, I'd assume that they were stolen and sold on. Why is it that you assume (without any evidence but your prejudices) that the Orosius case when the books were far more valuable, is any different? Again, try to think.

How come you are all so sceptical about the historical Jesus and downright gullable about everything else?

Yours

Bede

<a href="http://www.bede.org.uk" target="_blank">Bede's Library - faith and reason</a>