Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ  permalink

Who destroyed the Bibliotheca Alexandrina?

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Saturday, 5th July 2008

  From a discussion on a French messageboard about Algerians, who claimed that the Renaissance wouldn't have existed without the Arab contribution, we came on someone who said that the library was destroyed during the reprisals against the Arians. Another one said diplomatically that the latest mention in date was the Arab destruction...
  
  I did some research on internet:
  
  
  
  
  Obviously is the Arab version brought by an Arab an hoax?
  
  I remember I think lol beeble, who mentioned to me the anti-Arian riots as the real cause of destruction. BTW: LOL BEEBLE my esteemed contributor: WHERE ARE YOU? If you still follow the threads...?
  
  If some more knowledgeable contributors can add something to the discussion?
  
  Warm regards to all,
  
  Paul.

  Link to this forum: Who destroyed the Bibliotheca Alexandrina?

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Friday, 11th July 2008

  Hmmm, Alexandreia like other cities (Pergamos, Seleukeia) of the Hellenistic world, had more than one libraries (in Alexandreia there was the royal library but also the that of the Serapeio). The word bibliothiki is general and refers to any library hence your average not very knowledgeable Roman but even a more sophisticated Greek could often make the mistake when reading a more ancient text referring to a burning of a library in Alexandreia.
  
  Ceasar's fire possibly occured and since the bulk of the international rumble that constituted the Roman army were not always the finest of men that could realise the value of certain things, I can easily imagine Roman soldiers trying to set fire there. However, based on the fact that the buildings of the complex were mostly made of stone, the people working there would have some time if not pressed by soldiers to evacuate a large part of the library. In case the fire was ignited/transmitted there, if anything a large part must had been saved cos a bit later the library was again working full time and with tons of books. Visitors like Strabo (I think it was him?) never mentioned any burnings on the building or any great catastrophe. The fire during the wars with the queen of Palmyra Zenobia was more likely than that of Ceasar and might had destroyed a larger part of the books but then I would equate it to the story of Ceasar - some books lost others saved.
  
  However, in my opinion it was the expansion of the christian religion that gave the library a fatal blow: earlier, even if books were burned you could at least find here and there copies and re-copy them, there was a system and a methodology working, some nice archivation - hence the responsibles would probably know what was lost what could be re-found. I guess they would even had some B plan at times of great risk. However with the advent of christian Emperors and the increased animosity of mainly those illiterate and fanatic christians against anything pagan, then the lack of financial/political support from the christian state, that meant that the working system of the library had stopped or at least deteriorated to a considerable level. I bet scenes with low-class christians enterring on will inside and taking out books that went against their beliefs and burning them on bonfires would had been a common thing from times to times... say 2-3 times a year for some 150 years between 400 and 530, at a time when Justinian - one of the worst Emperors alongside with common-criminal Theodocius - personal opinion... well you library would be a phantom of its past... if anything it would contain less of science and real history and more of christian and para-christian mumbo-jumbo.
  
  The destruction by Arabs is most possible also - it gave anyway the last blow. Back in those times Arabs were not any specially civilised being still the beduins. Afterall the conquest of the very civilised Syria was very fresh and its culture had not yet been assimilated by them. For the vast majority of them the Koran was the first and last book they had read. It was also the first close contact of Arabs with the Greek culture (when we talk about cities like Alexandria we talk relatively more about Greek culture than about the Egyptian - despite that the Alexandrian culture was cosmopolitan for many centuries then). Hence, it is all natural that those early muslim leaders did not pay much attention to the decomposition of the remnants of the library. There are stories about Jewish merchants that saved a lot of works having bought cheaply from muslims tons of books on their way to north Africa (well that could explain the availability of some works in Arabic Spain where the Jewish community was very active!). However the majority of the books found could had been destroyed. A lot of books obviously would had been instantly thrown to the fire simply for having pictures.
  
  However, "Arabs" of Egypt (most of them by then Arabophone Koptic people of muslim religion) very soon realised the value of ancient works and their utility and became avid readers - a trend that back then existed generally throughout the Arabic world (depending of course on the type of rulers - there had been the odd ones also).
  
  However, to finish, the claim that Renaissance would not had happened without the contribution of Arabs is partly true partly false: true that 100s of ancient books were translated by Arabic. However, a large part of that work was actually made by Jewish of Spain as Arabs were never interested in learning other people's language while on the other hand few Europeans ever dared to learn Arabic (a language with negative connotations with them - by the time they showed some interest, the Renaissance had already happened). In anyway, Arabs lived in Spain for centuries and alongside their wonderfull culture there there happened no Renaissance in northern Spain or in neighbouring France!!!
  
  What kickstarted the westerners was their contact with Byzantium - a single visit to Konstantinople would be enough! - and what pushed the Renaissance was obviously the conquest of this magnificent city for which Crusaders needed 4 decades in order to plunder it (finally reducing it to a city of 50,000 people... still 5 times bigger than any other european city). You cannot imagine what was been lost for ever during those horrible times, what was burned where could we be nowadays. You cannot also know for much of the scientific work that occured during the Renaissance if it is really an original or a copy.

  Link to this forum: Who destroyed the Bibliotheca Alexandrina?

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Friday, 11th July 2008

  Paul, so far as I was aware libraries in the ancient world were usually part of larger religious complexes rather than the separate secular building that we understand today. Note that the collection of Alexandria was split between the Museum and the Serapeum, religious buildings devoted to the Muses and the God Serapis respectively. There again the Museum, home to the bulk of the collection, was within the Ptolemy's Palace complex and hosted a symposium or dining club for intellectuals. Salaries and tax exemptions were given to members in order to attract talent to the Court of Alexandria. The Museum began to collect books for the benefit of these intellectuals, a model later employed at the court of Pergamum where the library was attached to the temple of Athena. Ptolemy I Sotor also left the Museum a significant endowment that enabled the institution to flourish long after his death.
  
  The destruction of parts of the Library complex in 48BC was by no means total however as there is evidence for the library continuing to function after this date. Didymus Chalkenteros (Bronze Guts), head librarian at this time, was active until the late 30s BC when Egypt passed into Augustus' power. On top of his prodigious literary work Didymus also had to sort through the contents of the library of Pergamum that Marc Anthony had donated to Cleopatra as a gift, possibly to replace the material lost to the fire. The losses were not easily replaced however as it has been suggested that Strabo's work implies he had a more limited access to works on geography than earlier Hellenistic scholars when he visited the library in the 20s BC. Whatever the case it is likely that with the end of the Ptolemaic dynasty the incentives designed to attract intellectuals to Alexandria lapsed. Certainly Athenaeus of Naucratis suggests that the kind of environment the Museum was famous for had ceased to exist by the late second century AD. Given that these libraries were established as a resource for the benefit of the Royal court I would state that the biggest factor in their decline was the changing politics of the Hellenistic world. The major collections of books were located in the capitals of the Hellenistic successor Kingdoms and as the dynasties came to an end and their territories ceased to be independent entities so the level of investment in such collections, both in terms of new acquisitions and the copying of old worn scrolls, began to decline and one can imagine that this would have resulted in a contraction in the size of Alexandria's collection over time. Also the end of the Hellenistic Royal dynasties would certainly explain why the collection in the Museum was no longer referred to as the Royal library.
  
  Those Emperors interested in a literary heritage, Claudius and Hadrian for example, established new temple complexes with attached libraries in Alexandria rather than adding to the collection of the Royal library. Roman Libraries were designed in a different manner to their Greek counterparts with less area given over to storage space although there was more room for readers to read the texts. this may represent a greater degree of public accessibility to the Libraries compared with the Museum's collection within the confines of Royal palace. The former Royal library may have suffered a slow decline with the removal of its special privileges and the establishment of rival institutions in Alexandria but it would seem the final physical destruction of the complex and its collection dates to the late third century when the Royal palace area was laid waste during Aurelian's reconquest of the Eastern Mediterranean.

  Link to this forum: Who destroyed the Bibliotheca Alexandrina?

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Sunday, 13th July 2008

  Lol, it was such a pleasure to see your most interesting contribution to this site. I first joined it to learn more and I recall your many contributions at the time when the discussions were in more depth on such topics than most are today.
  
  Thanks to Paul for raising - and E.Nik too,
  
  Regards, P.

  Link to this forum: Who destroyed the Bibliotheca Alexandrina?

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Monday, 21st July 2008

  Re: Message 2.
  
  Nik,
  
  thank you for this interesting contribution.
  
  Warm regards,
  
  Paul.

  Link to this forum: Who destroyed the Bibliotheca Alexandrina?

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Monday, 21st July 2008

  Re: Message 3.
  
  lol beeble,
  
  how happy I am to see you once more contribute to these boards and thank you very much for your in depth approach.
  
  If I understand you well it was with the end of the Ptolemaic dynasty that there were less incentives to attract intellectuals and os the kind of environement the Museum was famous ofr had ceased to excist by the late second century AD.
  
  While there was no Royal court anymore, one od the reasons of existence of the library was lost?
  
  Later emperors added new Roman libraries...and then you said: from then on a slow decline of the former Royal library.
  
  Up to you again as I understand it well: The final physical destruction of the library "would seem" the Auralian's reconquest of the Eastern Mediterranean. (third century AD). I think that was then the Palmyra revolt?
  
  It seems that one of my favourites Sir John Julius Norwich (I read "A kingdom in the sun" from him) dated the final destruction in 391 with the anti-Arian riots. And the famous Edward Gibbon seems to do the same in his "The decline and fall of the Roman Empire"...?
  
  lol have to stop already 1 o'clock overhere and closing time of the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ boards...
  
  Warm regards,
  
  Paul.
  
  PS: no time to correct my "utterings"...

  Link to this forum: Who destroyed the Bibliotheca Alexandrina?

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 6.

  Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Sunday, 27th July 2008

  Paul, that is more or less what I intended to say although none of the sources are entirely clear. Athenaseus of Naucratis suggestion that "concerning the number of books and the establishment of libraries and the collection in the Museum, why need I even speak when they are all the memory of men." Of course it may be that his character is suggesting that the collections are the combined memories of those who had composed them as opposed to mourning the passing of the environment that produced the library. However one cannot discount the tendency of commentators to compare their own age unfavourably to the distant past. Alexandria did have a turbulent history under Roman rule with frequent bouts of civil unrest not to mention official punishment by some Emperors. Arthenaseus lived through the reign of Caracalla who had many of Alexandria's population executed over a perceived insult and that cannot have helped matters.
  
  With regard to the building's final destruction, Ammianus Marcellinus notes the devastation of the Bruchion region of the city during Aurelian's campaign against Zenobia, taking time to highight some of the more illustrious inhabitants of the area, suggesting the Museum was based there. The latest figure he mentions is Didymus Chalkenteros and that would support the idea that the imposition of Roman rule meant there was no longer any specific incentives to attract talent to Alexandria now it was only a provincial city. It is Ammianus who stated that the Serapeum was home to a collection of books, leading to its identification as the daughter library of the Museum, but then suggests it was this collection that was destroyed in 48BC although the complex was still standing in AD391 when Theophilus was Patriarch of Alexandria. However Ammianus suggests that the Serapeum was no longer used to store books and no mention is made of the temple's use as a book repository by writers like Eunapius of Antioch and Rufinus Tyrranius in the early fifth century when they recorded its destruction at the hands of a Christian mob. It is possible that the libraries founded by Claudius and Hadrian were stocked with what was left of the Ptolemaic collection.

  Link to this forum: Who destroyed the Bibliotheca Alexandrina?

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 7.

  Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Wednesday, 30th July 2008

  lol,
  
  excuse me very much for the delay. Reached! only for the first time in days the "Ancients" section.
  
  Thank you for your further explanation. I read it very carefully and learned again from it.
  
  Proud that we have such erudite contributors on these Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ messageboards and proud that I, as a humble chemist, can take part in the discussions and learn from these erudites.
  
  Warm regards,
  
  Paul.

  Link to this forum: Who destroyed the Bibliotheca Alexandrina?

  Report message8

Back to top