The Fate of the Library of Alexandria

American Thinker ^ | May 02, 2010 | John O'Neill

[neverdem]

The great Library of Alexandria, established by Ptolemy II (circa 280 BC), has come to symbolize the receptacle of knowledge of Classical civilization. This great repository was barbarously razed in the Middle Ages.

At its height, the Library contained an estimated forty thousand volumes on a wide variety of topics. It held works on astronomy, mathematics, physics, medicine, and philosophy -- many of which were copied from the hieroglyphic and cuneiform texts of the Egyptians and Babylonians. It also stored histories of all the countries of the known world: histories of Egypt, of Babylonia, of Persia, of the lands of North Africa, of the lands of Western Europe, etc.

Although it was the greatest bibliographic collection in the ancient world, the Library probably held few books that were unique to it; almost all of the documents were copies of manuscripts held in other libraries or institutes of learning. Nonetheless, the Alexandria Library was celebrated as the most important treasury of information in the world at the time. Its disappearance is rightly seen as a catastrophe and symbolic of the loss of respect for knowledge that followed the collapse of Classical civilization.

Of the volumes held by the Library, as well as the other libraries of the time, it has been estimated that something like 95% were lost. What remains of the writings of antiquity is but a tiny relic of what once existed.

A story, apparently first appearing in the thirteenth century (mentioned first by Abd al Latif, who died in 1231, and later by Gregory Bar Hebraeus, who died in 1286), says that the Arabs, under Caliph Umar, destroyed the Alexandria Library shortly after the conquest of Egypt in 639 AD. The account states that the caliph, when informed about the institution, declared that if the books it contained agreed with the Koran, then they were superfluous, and if they disagreed, then they were heretical. In either event, they were worthless and should be obliterated. The books of the Library were put to the torch -- used to heat the palace baths.

For centuries, Europeans had little cause to doubt this story. There were very good reasons indeed, as we shall see, for believing it to be true. Yet by the late nineteenth century, historians were having second thoughts. Evidence, they said, showed that the early Arabs had great respect for learning, and the period between the seventh and eleventh centuries was coming to be regarded as an Islamic Golden Age, when Muslim societies led the world in science and medicine.

Indeed, it was argued that the Arabs were the saviors, rather than the destroyers, of Classical learning. A prime example of this genre of thinking is Robert Briffault's 1919 book, The Making of Humanity, which argued that the real Renaissance, or rebirth, of Classical learning actually occurred in eleventh-century Islamic Spain rather than fifteenth-century Italy.

Briffault's thinking, with its negative view of Christianity and European culture, may be regarded as an early form of political correctness. His thesis has become the default mode of thought in much of academia. And this is reflected in theories about the fate of the Library at Alexandria. A prime example of this may be seen in the Wikipedia page dealing with the Library. Here we encounter a lengthy discussion of the destruction of the institution. The accidental destruction caused by Julius Caesar is given pride of place, as are other real or apparent destructions which occurred at later periods of the Roman Empire. The final destruction, which must surely be the most important -- that carried out by the Arabs -- is mentioned rather briefly at the end, only to be dismissed "as a hoax or propaganda."

But if the destruction carried out by the Arabs was a hoax, then what happened to the Library? Even the authors of the Wikipedia page admit that following the earlier destruction by Caesar, the Library was rebuilt and restocked. This needs to be stressed: Until the disappearance of Classical civilization (apparently in the seventh century), the Library could be restocked and recreated -- for the great majority of the volumes it contained were not unique to it. They were copies of books also available in the other libraries and institutes of learning that dotted the Mediterranean world. It was only with the disappearance of Classical civilization as a whole -- along with the cultural, social, and economic infrastructure that underpinned it -- that the restocking and re-endowing of the Library became impossible. The lost volumes could not then be replaced because all other copies, in the other libraries and academies, were also gone.

Leaving aside the assertions of the Wikipedia authors, there is irrefutable proof that the wider dissolution of Classical culture occurred in the seventh century, and that this was a direct consequence of the Arab conquests. Furthermore, there is clear evidence that this dissolution and destruction was the result of a deliberate act of policy on the part of the Arabs.

This is seen most clearly in the sudden rupture, in the seventh century (in the lands conquered and controlled by the Muslims), of all cultural links to the past.

Until the first quarter of the seventh century, Classical civilization was alive and well in the Mediterranean world. City life flourished, as did the economy and the arts. Literacy was widespread, and the works of the Classical historians, as well as the philosophers, mathematicians, and physicians, were readily available and discussed in the academies and libraries located throughout the Near East, North Africa, and Europe.

In Egypt during the sixth century, renowned philosophers such as Olympiodorus (died 570) presided over the academy that presumably had, if not the original Library, then at least a well-stocked and well-funded library of some sort. The Alexandrian academy of this time was regarded as the most illustrious institute of learning in the known world, and it is virtually beyond doubt that its library matched, if indeed it did not surpass, the original Library founded by Ptolemy II.

The writings of Olympiodorus and his contemporaries demonstrate intimate familiarity with the great works of classical antiquity -- very often quoting obscure philosophers and historians whose works have long since disappeared. Among the general population of the time, literacy was the norm, and the appetite for reading was fed by a large class of professional writers who composed plays, poems, and short stories -- these last taking the form of mini-novels.

In Egypt, the works of Greek writers such as Herodotus and Diodorus were familiar and widely quoted. Both the latter and such native Egyptian writers as Manetho had composed extensive histories of Egypt of the time of the pharaohs. These works provided, for the citizens of Egypt and other parts of the Empire, a direct link with the pharaohnic past. Here the educated citizen encountered the name of the pharaoh (Kheops) who built the Great Pyramid, as well as that of his son (Khephren), who built the second pyramid at Giza, and that of his grandson Mykerinos, who raised the third and smallest structure. These Hellenized versions of the names were extremely accurate transcriptions of the actual Egyptian names (Khufu, Khafre, and Menkaure). In the history of the country written by Manetho, the educated citizen of the Empire would have had a detailed description of Egypt's past, complete with an in-depth account of the deeds of the pharaohs as well as descriptions of the various monuments and the kings who built them.

The change that came over Egypt following the Arab Conquest can be described only as catastrophic. All knowledge of the country's past disappears, and it does so almost overnight. Consider the account of the Giza Pyramids and their construction written by the Arab historian Al Masudi (regarded as the "Arab Herodotus"), apparently in the tenth century (though there are good grounds for believing substantially earlier):

Surid, Ben Shaluk, Ben Sermuni, Ben Termidun, Ben Tedresan, Ben Sal, one of the kings of Egypt before the flood, built two great pyramids; and, notwithstanding, they were subsequently named after a person called Shaddad Ben Ad ... they were not built by the Adites, who could not conquer Egypt, on account of their powers, which the Egyptians possessed by means of enchantment ... the reason for the building of the pyramids was the following dream, which happened to Surid three hundred years previous to the flood. It appeared to him that the earth was overthrown, and that the inhabitants were laid prostrate upon it, that the stars wandered confusedly from their courses, and clashed together with tremendous noise. The king though greatly affected by this vision, did not disclose it to any person, but was conscious that some great event was about to take place. (From L. Cottrell, The Mountains of Pharaoh, London, 1956.)

This was what passed for "history" in Egypt after the Arab conquest -- little more than a collection of Arab fables. Egypt, effectively, had lost her history.

Other Arab writers display the same ignorance. Take for example the comments of Ibn Jubayr, who worked as a secretary to the Moorish governor of Granada, and who visited Cairo in 1182. He commented on "the ancient pyramids, of miraculous construction and wonderful to look upon, [which looked] like huge pavilions rearing to the skies; two in particular shock the firmament[.]" He wondered whether they might be the tombs of early prophets mentioned in the Koran, or whether they were granaries of the biblical patriarch Joseph, but in the end came to the conclusion, "To be short, none but the Great and Glorious God can know their story." (Andrew Beattie, Cairo: A Cultural History, Oxford University Press, 2005, p. 50.)

We should not imagine that this loss of connection with the past occurred gradually. From the very beginning, the Arabs displayed absolute contempt for the culture and history of both Egypt and the other countries of the region they conquered. Immediately upon the invasion of Egypt, the caliph established a commission whose purpose was to discover and plunder the pharaohnic tombs. We know that Christian churches and monasteries -- many of the latter possessing well-stocked libraries -- suffered the same fate.

The larger monuments of Roman and pharaohnic times were similarly plundered for their cut-stone, and Saladin, the Muslim hero lionized in so much politically correct literature and art, began the process by the exploitation of the smaller Giza monuments. From these, he constructed the citadel at Cairo (between 1193 and 1198). His son and successor, Al-Aziz Uthman, went further, and made a determined effort to demolish the Great Pyramid itself. (Ibid.) He succeeded in stripping the outer casing of smooth limestone blocks from the structure (covered with historically invaluable inscriptions) but eventually canceled the project owing to its cost.

The loss of contact with the past occurred in all the lands conquered by the Muslims. Here we need only point to the fact that the Persian poet and mathematician Omar Khayyam, at the end of the eleventh century, was largely ignorant of his own country's illustrious history and imagined that the great palaces built by the Achaemenid Emperors Darius and Xerxes, as Persepolis and Susa, were raised by a genie-king named Jamshid.

What then of the much-vaunted Arab respect for learning and science that we hear so much of in modern academic literature? That the Arabs did permit some of the science and learning they encountered in the great cities of Egypt, Syria, Babylonia, and Persia to survive -- for a while -- is beyond doubt. Yet the learning they tolerated was entirely of a practical or utilitarian nature -- and this is a fact admitted even by Islamophiles such as Briffault. Thus, for a while, the Arabs patronized physicists, mathematicians, and physicians. Yet the very fact that knowledge had to plead its usefulness in order to be permitted to survive at all speaks volumes in itself. Even this utilitarian learning was soon to be snuffed out under the weight of an Islamic theocracy (promulgated by Al Ghazali in the eleventh century) that regarded the very concept of scientific laws as an affront to Allah and an infringement of Allah's freedom to act.

The crushing of all science occurred far earlier than is generally believed. As I explain in some detail in my Holy Warriors, the entire concept of an Islamic Golden Age, the three centuries between the seventh and tenth centuries during which the Muslim world enjoyed an altogether higher level of culture than Europe, is little more than a myth. The Golden Age of Islam, as archaeologists have found to their astonishment, has no archaeological confirmation.

Not a trace of the supposedly fabulous, wealthy Baghdad of Harun al Rashid in the ninth century has been found. The first Muslim remains in Baghdad, as everywhere else in the Muslim world, date from the first half of the tenth century. (A few monuments dated to the seventh century also occur, with nothing in between.) The lack of archaeological evidence is also true for Cordoba in Spain, supposedly a metropolis of half a million souls during the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries. The earliest Islamic remains for Cordoba are also dated to the mid-tenth century. All of this suggests that the appearance of Islam on the world stage has been seriously misdated and somehow placed three centuries in the past. This means, among other things, that the destruction of native cultures in the lands conquered by the Muslims occurred quicker than is generally taught and believed. Thus, Al Masudi would have displayed his complete ignorance of the pyramids and of Egyptian history not three centuries after the Muslim conquest, but only a few decades after.

Admittedly, the question of chronology is still extremely controversial. Further excavation throughout the Near East is necessary to confirm what actually happened in the three missing centuries. Nevertheless, it appears that the entire Islamic Golden Age is a phenomenon that existed only on paper and in the imagination of the storytellers of the Arabian Nights.

What, then, of the destruction of the Alexandrian Library? Were the Arabs responsible? The evidence indicates overwhelmingly that not only did the Arabs destroy the library or libraries of Alexandria, but they simultaneously put to the torch all secular learning (with the exception of the sciences) throughout the entire Middle and Near East.

Thus the Arabs, as I show in Holy Warriors, destroyed Classical civilization in Europe through an economic blockade, but in the Middle East, they destroyed it deliberately and methodically.

Holy Warriors: Islam and the Demise of Classical Civilization is published by Felibri. 

[Sherman Logan]

Sure had.

Considering the fact that the Roman Empire lasted much longer than any other great empire, 700 to 1700 years, depending on how you figure it, a more logical question might be to ask how it was able to last so long before it finally fell.

As stated, my personal opinion is the lack of an ideology to establish who had the right to be the next emperor. This had horrible consequences not only at each accession, but in between.

Most Roman emperors who founded a dynasty came to power by coup or civil war. Every reigning emperor therefore could never fully trust truly competent and ambitious generals, as he had to always remember their potential to displace and kill him.

This is in considerable contrast to the primogeniture monarchies of early modern times. Louis X or Henry VIII never had to worry that one of his generals would replace him on the throne, as nobody would follow such a usurper. When the King died, with rare exceptions everybody knew who the next king was and loyalty usually went to him without a pause.

This didn’t prevent dynastic conspiracy and civil war, but even then it was limited to members of the royal family, not a total free-for-all as in the Roman Empire.

[lentulusgracchus]

The Wiki article said that historian Ammianus Marcellinus, who traveled there, spoke about the Serapis Temple library in the past tense, meaning it was gone already by about 350-360, although the temple itself was in great shape. Which leaves the Caesarion Temple library ...... if the author's right and Constantine and Constantius (his son) cleared the Serapis Library out and sent its contents to Constantinople, then they'd have probably cleaned out the Caesarion one as well.

Of course, the royal library, the really big one, will have been the collection destroyed in the 3rd century, 60 years earlier.

[Eternal_Bear]

Yes it sure was. The Emperor Constantine built it to be the capital of the Eastern Empire and it ended up being capital of the Byzantine Empire which was the successor state to Rome. It has fallen only twice by storm to foreign powers: to the Franks of the Fourth Crusade and the Ottoman Turks who both did tremendous damage to the cultural legacy of the city.

[afraidfortherepublic]

These communities had to pay a tax (called a Jizzya in Arabic) that was, in effect, a penalty for being non-Muslim, and that was typically 80% in times of tolerance and up to 150% in times of oppression. This tax forced many of these communities to convert to Islam, as it was designed to do.

Hmmmmm. That sounds a lot like some of Obama's plans for us...

[samtheman]

The post of Fred Nerks #34 is as important to read as the main article itself. Thanks, Fred.

[pepsionice]

What’s curious here...is that libraries in general...whether in Egypt, or Syria, or the Mayan civilization, or the Inca civilization...all were destroyed for some reason (usually invented out of thin air).

People fear the past. There are too many lessons to be learned and information is a terrible thing in the hands of anyone.

In some way, even WIKI today is destroying history...likely because they fear it.

[wildandcrazyrussian]

Brigitte Gabriel's book mentioned that the Muslims have (so far) massacred 80,000,000 Hindus, 60,000,000 Christians, and another 270,000,000 in Africa. And that's just the first 1,400 years.

Islam is easily the worst disaster the world has ever seen, and the guiding principle behind Hitler, who openly wished that Europe were Islamic instead of Christian.

[Fred Nerks]

IT’S NOT JUST THE TAX! THIS ‘PACT’ DATES FROM 637 AD.

Pact of Umar - islam
Muslims always try to downplay the the ‘Pact of Umar’. Read this from tafsir.com regarding it:

Do not initiate the Salam to the Jews and Christians, and if you meet any of them in a road, force them to its narrowest alley.) This is why the Leader of the faithful `Umar bin Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, demanded his well-known conditions be met by the Christians, these conditions that ensured their continued humiliation, degradation and disgrace. (source)

http://www.annaqed.com/english/is/pact_of_umar.html -

http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/newsletter/2002/jul26.html

The pact of Umar is an agreement between the Christians of Syria (whom fell under the occupation of the Muslim invaders) and Umar Ibn Al-Khattab the second successor (khalifa) of Muhammad.

In this pact, Umar agreed to allow the Christians to keep practicing their faith with several conditions. Muslims claim that this pact shows how tolerant Islam was in dealing with non-Muslims in newly invaded territories.

Contrary to that claim, this pact was very humiliating to Christians, clearly showing how arrogant and oppressive the Muslims were in dealing with non-Muslims who fell under their rule. Although the pact was written to seem like the Christians themselves had drafted it, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the terms were actually dictated on them!

Sadly, there are some naïve Christians who reiterate the Muslims’ propaganda without ever bothering to read the details of the pact. In fact, some Christians are so stupid that they brag about it more than the Muslims do! A recently elected Christian Orthodox patriarch praised the pact in his speech during a reception held in his honor in Jordan!

The “Pact of Umar” reflects the general teaching of Islam concerning non-Muslims, and accordingly, millions of Christians continue to live as second class citizens in Islamic countries.

The following is a translation of the pact:

***************

The Status of Non-Muslims Under Muslim Rule We heard from ‘Abdul-Rahman Ibn Ghanam [died in year 78 H. 697 AD.] as follows: When Umar Ibn Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, accorded a peace to the Christians of Syria, we wrote to him as follows:

In the name of Allah, the Merciful and Compassionate. This is a letter to the servant of Allah Umar [ibn al-Khattab], Commander of the Faithful, from the Christians of such-and-such a city. When you came against us, we asked you for safe-conduct (aman) for ourselves, our descendants, our property, and the people of our community, and we undertook the following obligations toward you:

ARTICLES OF THE PACT OF UMAR
We Christians:
1 - We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries,
2 - churches,
3 - convents,
4 - or monks’ cells,
5 - nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins
6 - or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims. . . .
7- We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy,
8 - nor hide him from the Muslims. We shall not teach the Quran to our children.
9 - We shall not manifest our religion publicly
10 - nor convert anyone to it.
11 - We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.
12 - We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and
13 - we shall rise from our seats if they wish to sit.
14 - We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the headgear, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair.
15 - We shall not speak as they do,
16 - nor shall we adopt their honorific names.
17 - We shall not mount on saddles,
18- nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our persons.
19 - We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.
20 - We shall not sell fermented drinks. . . .
21 - We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims.
22 - We shall only use clappers in our churches very softly.
23 - We shall not raise our voices in our church services or in the presence of Muslims,
24 - nor shall we raise our voices when following our dead.
25 - We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets.
26 - We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims.
27 - We shall not take slave who have been allotted to the Muslims.
28 - We shall not build houses over-topping the houses of the Muslims. . . .
(When I brought the letter to Umar, he added, “And we shall not strike a Muslim. We accept these conditions for ourselves and for the people of our community, and in return we receive safe-conduct.

If we in any way violate these undertakings for which we ourselves stand surety, we forfeit our covenant [dhimma], and we become liable to the penalties for contumacy and sedition.

Umar Ibn Al-Khittab replied: Sign what they ask, but add two clauses and impose them in addition to those which they have undertaken. They are: “They shall not buy anyone made prisoner by the Muslims,” and “Whoever strikes a Muslim with deliberate intent shall forfeit the protection of this pact.”

http://islamreview.blogspot.com/2006/05/pact-of-umar-islam.html

[samtheman]

Thanks again, Fred.

[Chuckster]

bttt

[jpsb]

If true, they set the whole world back possibly a century or more.

More like a 800 years. 700AD-1500AD, 800 years. What a waste, once the Egypt and the Middle East were the jewls of western civiliztaion. Now, not so much.

[Boiler Plate]

As screwed up as the Ptolemys were they certainly understood that “Knowledge is Power”. What was intersting about Alexandria is that a lot of the amazing Greek ideas, inventions and science actually came from Alexandia.

[jpsb]

Every time I start to think maybe Carly Fiorina isn't all that terrible I come across something like this and I want to puke. Boxer is horrible but so is Carly.

[Cronos]

it’s true. I give you as proof 5 places that were the centres of civilisation but whose importance in the world, culturally, socially, philosophically, economically, in innovation etc. disappeared as the % of Mooselimbs increased = Egypt, Yemen, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Yemen was once a flourishing land with a history dating back to at least 6000 BC, with people smart enough to build a massive dam of earthernworks at Marib that made their desert bloom, where they became rich due to myrrh and frankincense. But now where is Yemen? It’s a cesspit. And it’s been a cesspit since the 7th century when the Christians and Jews were chased out.

[colorado tanker]

Thanks for a very interesting thread.

[SunkenCiv]

:’) My pleasure.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

Gee now I know where the liberals got their ideas.

[Citizen Tom Paine]

Anyone out there have an estimate of what the literacy rate was in the ancient and Medieval world? I consider it to be very low.

[GOPJ]

Nice picture - save it for the 20th.

[GOPJ]

Arabs/Muslims are engaged in an explicit campaign of destruction and expropriation of cultures and communities, identities and ideas. Wherever Arab/Muslim civilization encounters a non-Arab/Muslim one, it attempts to destroy it (as the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan were destroyed, as Persepolis was destroyed by the Ayotollah Khomeini). This is a pattern that has been recurring since the advent of Islam, 1400 years ago, and is amply substantiated by the historical record. If the "foreign" culture cannot be destroyed, then it is expropriated, and revisionist historians claim that it is and was Arab, as is the case of most of the Arab "accomplishments" you cited in your speech.

Fred, you have a way of finding the interesting stuff - thanks so much for sharing it with me.