Argument

Christians Destroyed Ancient Learning Objection Defeater

Intro

The objection goes like this: "Christians burned the Library of Alexandria. Most of the knowledge of the ancient world went up in smoke. The only reason Baghdad got a head start in science is that some of the books had been copied and carried there before the Christians could destroy them."

Part of this is true, and it should be said first. In the year 391, a Christian crowd led by Bishop Theophilus of Alexandria tore down the Serapeum, a great pagan temple in the city. Some historians think the temple still held a library, and that the books were lost with it. That was a real act of destruction, and Christians did it.

But the rest of the story falls apart when you check it.

First, there were two libraries, and the famous one was in decline long before 391. The great royal library stood in the palace quarter. A fire during Julius Caesar's war in the city in 48 BC burned books by the tens of thousands. The palace quarter was wrecked again in fighting under the emperor Aurelian in the 270s. The temple library Christians destroyed was a smaller, separate collection.

Second, most ancient books were not burned at all. They rotted. Books were written on papyrus scrolls, which wear out in a century or two. A book survived only if someone kept copying it. Most books were never copied again, and they slowly disappeared. That was happening long before Christians had any power.

Third, the books that did survive mostly survived because Christians copied them. Almost every ancient Greek book we can read today comes down to us through copies made by Christian scribes in the Byzantine Empire.

Fourth, Baghdad's head start came largely through Christians. Many of the men who translated Greek science and medicine into Arabic were Christians. The most famous, Hunayn ibn Ishaq, was a Christian of the Church of the East. So the Baghdad story is part of the answer to the objection, not proof of it.

Even the story that a Muslim caliph ordered the library burned is a legend, first written down about six hundred years after the event. Blaming one villain for the loss of ancient learning gets the history wrong, whichever villain you pick.

◎ See this page's graph and discover linked topics →

In full

Defeater for the objection in three connected forms. (A) The library form: "Christians burned the Library of Alexandria." (B) The loss form: "The majority of ancient writing is lost, and Christians are to blame." (C) The Baghdad form: "Baghdad's scientific head start shows the books survived only where Christians could not reach them."

This page divides the labor with a neighbor. Hypatia Murder Objection Defeater answers the murder of the philosopher Hypatia in 415 and the claim that her death ended classical learning; it treats the library only in passing. This page takes the library and the loss of ancient literature directly, as a question of evidence: what was destroyed, when, by whom, and what explains the survival of what we still have.

The defeat structure has five steps. (1) Separate the libraries: the great Palace Library and the Serapeum's "daughter" library are different collections with different histories, and the ancient sources place the famous burning under Caesar in 48 BC. (2) Concede the Serapeum: Christians destroyed the temple in 391; whether a working library was still inside is disputed between Dirk Rohmann (Klio, 2022, yes) and others, following Roger Bagnall (2002), who find the evidence too thin to say. (3) Retire the other legend too: the story that Caliph Umar ordered the books burned in 642 first appears in the thirteenth century and is rejected by historians, so the honest answer blames no single villain. (4) Name the real causes of loss: papyrus decay, failure to recopy, the fourth-century change from scroll to codex, and the end of the patronage that kept a great library going, which Bagnall argues decided the library's fate whatever happened to the building. (5) Ask who preserved what survives: on the judgment of the Cambridge Intellectual History of Byzantium, Byzantine scribes preserved almost all the ancient Greek literature we have, and Christian translators from Syriac-speaking churches carried much of Greek science into Arabic.

What the page does not claim. It does not claim Christians never destroyed books or temples. They did, and Rudolf Blum names Christian disapproval as one cause of loss. It does not claim the Serapeum held no books in 391; that is an open question. The claim is narrower: the popular story, in which a Christian mob burned the great storehouse of ancient knowledge and plunged the world into darkness, is not what the evidence shows.

Argument structure

Form

Defensive (a defeater). P1 is a disambiguation: it fixes which library the objection means, because the claim usually borrows the size and fame of the Palace Library and pins it on the Serapeum. P2 is a concession, stated as strongly as the evidence allows. P3 is a consistency test: the method that rejects the Umar legend also rejects the simple Christian-mob legend. P4 is a causal account of the loss, drawn mainly from Bagnall. P5 is a counter-evidence step: it shows the objection's own example, Baghdad, depends on Christian translators. Soundness is contemporary: it rests on the surviving ancient testimony, which is thin and late, and on current scholarship that openly disagrees on the Serapeum.

Cheatsheet

The 30-second reply (read aloud). You're right that Christians destroyed the Serapeum in 391, and I won't defend that. But that wasn't the great library. The ancient writers say the big burning was in Caesar's war in 48 BC, and the palace quarter was wrecked again in the 270s. And most ancient books weren't burned at all. Papyrus rots in a century or two, and a book survived only if someone kept copying it. So who copied the ones we still have? Almost all of them come to us through Christian scribes in Byzantium. And Baghdad? Its most famous translator of Greek medicine, Hunayn ibn Ishaq, was a Christian. So Christians wrecked one temple, and saved most of what we have left. Which part of that do you want to talk about?

The 5 fast facts:

1. Caesar's fire, 48 BC. Seneca says 40,000 books were burned at Alexandria (On Tranquility of Mind 9.5). Plutarch says a fire from the dockyards destroyed the great library (Life of Caesar 49). Ammianus Marcellinus, writing in the fourth century, says 700,000 volumes "were burned in the Alexandrine war" (22.16.13).
2. Aurelian, 270s. Ammianus says that under Aurelian the city "lost the greater part of the district called Bruchion" (22.16.15), the palace quarter. Bagnall reports a forming consensus that 273 is the likeliest date for the Palace Library's major destruction, while noting no ancient source says so directly.
3. The Serapeum, 391. Christians under Bishop Theophilus destroyed the temple. Rohmann (Klio 104, 2022, pp. 334-362) argues its library was destroyed with it. Bagnall notes the library's place in the precinct is unknown.
4. How much is lost. Blum estimates "perhaps only one percent" of pagan Greek literature survives (Kallimachos, p. 8). Sophocles wrote 123 plays and seven survive in full. Euripides wrote 92, and about 19 survive.
5. Who saved what's left. The Cambridge Intellectual History of Byzantium (2017) says the Byzantines were "responsible for preserving almost all ancient Greek literature that we have today." Hunayn ibn Ishaq (808-873), a Christian of the Church of the East, translated Galen and others for Baghdad's scholars.

The 3 strongest counter-moves:

• "Which library, and when?" Ask the objector to date the burning. If the answer is "391," point out that the ancient writers place the famous burning in Caesar's war, more than four centuries earlier.
• "Why did papyrus survive in the desert but not in Alexandria?" Bagnall notes that no papyri survive from Alexandria's humid climate at all. The books did not need a mob to disappear.
• "Who copied the Plato on your shelf?" Every complete Plato we have descends from medieval manuscripts made in a Christian empire.

Reciprocal concessions (grant the small point, then collect a bigger one):

• Grant: Christians destroyed the Serapeum in 391, and a serious scholar argues a library was lost with it. Now collect: then you have one temple library at the end of its life, not the great Ptolemaic collection, and not the cause of the loss of most ancient literature.
• Grant: Blum names Christian disapproval as one cause of loss, and a thirteenth-century monk scraped Archimedes' Method to reuse the parchment for a prayer book. Now collect: that copy was made in the tenth century, almost certainly in Constantinople, by Christian scribes, and it is the only surviving source of the Method. The same culture that sometimes neglected a book is the reason any copy existed at all.
• Grant: Baghdad did become a great center of learning. Now collect: its translators worked largely from Greek manuscripts kept in Christian lands and from Syriac versions made in Christian cities, and many were Christians themselves.

The closing line. The fire that matters most was the slow one: papyrus rotting on the shelf. Against that fire, the scribes who kept copying were mostly Christians.

P1, Which library, and when?

Affirmative case

1. There were at least two libraries. The great library stood in the royal palace quarter, alongside the Museum, the scholars' institute founded by the early Ptolemies. A second library was associated with the Serapeum, the temple of Serapis. Bagnall notes that modern scholars rely on Epiphanius of Salamis for the "daughter" library at the Serapeum, and that its age is unknown (Bagnall, "Alexandria: Library of Dreams", 2002, p. 358).
2. The ancient writers put the famous burning in 48 BC. Seneca, writing in the first century, says "forty thousand books were burned at Alexandria" (De Tranquillitate Animi 9.5). Plutarch says the fire Caesar set to save himself spread from the dockyards and destroyed the great library (Life of Caesar 49). Ammianus Marcellinus, a fourth-century pagan historian, says the Ptolemies' 700,000 volumes "were burned in the Alexandrine war, when the city was sacked under the dictator Caesar" (22.16.13).
3. The palace quarter was wrecked again in the 270s. Ammianus says that under Aurelian the city's walls were destroyed and it "lost the greater part of the district called Bruchion" (22.16.15). Bagnall reports signs of a consensus that 273 is the most likely date for the Palace Library's major destruction, while stressing there is no direct ancient evidence for it (p. 358).
4. The library had already declined before either Christian power or the Serapeum episode. Bagnall argues that a library of rolls survives only by constant recopying, and that there is no evidence anyone did this at Alexandria under Rome (pp. 358-359).

Anticipated objections

1. "Caesar's fire only burned warehouses by the docks, not the library."
2. "The figures of 400,000 or 700,000 books prove what a disaster the loss was."

Rebuttals

1. Possibly, and that helps the point. Bagnall notes that a substantial library clearly existed in Roman Alexandria: the Museum kept operating, and Domitian later sent scribes there to copy books lost in fires at Rome (Suetonius, Domitian 20; Bagnall p. 357). Either way, the great library was not destroyed by Christians: if it survived Caesar, its decline came through the Roman centuries, long before 391.
2. The ancient figures are not reliable. Bagnall shows that the ancient numbers conflict (Seneca's 40,000, Aulus Gellius's 700,000, Tzetzes's 400,000 "mixed" and 90,000 "unmixed" rolls) and concludes that "the ancient sources thought the libraries were enormous but had no good figures to work with" (pp. 351-352). A loss can be real without the numbers being trustworthy.

P2, Concede the Serapeum, and state the dispute fairly

Affirmative case

1. The destruction happened. In 391, after the imperial laws against pagan sacrifice, Christians led by Bishop Theophilus of Alexandria attacked and destroyed the Serapeum and its cult statue of Serapis. This is not in dispute, and Christians should say so plainly. The same city produced the murder of Hypatia a generation later (Hypatia Murder Objection Defeater).
2. The strongest case that books were lost. Dirk Rohmann ("The Destruction of the Serapeum of Alexandria, Its Library, and the Immediate Reactions", Klio 104, 2022, pp. 334-362) argues that the Christian crowd destroyed the library as well as the temple, that this library was the successor of the original Ptolemaic collection, and that Orosius, writing in the early fifth century, is the key witness. He also argues that Ammianus, Aphthonius and Epiphanius knew of the library's destruction.
3. The case for caution. Bagnall notes that the colonnaded spaces usually proposed for the library were destroyed in the early Roman period, so the later library's location "remains unknown" (p. 358, citing Rodziewicz), and that a library could have survived at the Serapeum until the temple fell, though nothing proves it did. Ammianus, describing the Serapeum around the same time, speaks of its books as burned in Caesar's war, in the past tense (22.16.13); Rohmann argues Ammianus was aware of the 391 destruction when he wrote.

Anticipated objections

1. "So you admit Christians burned a library."
2. "The dispute is just Christians trying to minimize it."

Rebuttals

1. I admit it may have happened, and that the temple was destroyed. If Rohmann is right, a library at the end of a long decline was lost with the temple. That is a real loss. It is still not the burning of the great Ptolemaic collection at its height, which is what the popular story describes.
2. The cautious view comes from secular historians. Bagnall is a papyrologist writing for the American Philosophical Society, and his article is skeptical of every villain in the story, Christian or Muslim. Rohmann, who argues for the library's destruction, is cited here too. The page presents both.

P3, The other legend fails too

Affirmative case

1. The Umar story is late. The story that the Arab general Amr ibn al-As burned the library on the order of Caliph Umar after the conquest of 642 first appears in a brief remark by the physician Abd al-Latif al-Baghdadi, who visited Egypt about 1203, and in a fuller form in the thirteenth-century historian Ibn al-Qifti, followed by Bar Hebraeus (Roger Pearse, 2010, summarizing the sources).
2. Historians reject it. A. J. Butler pronounced it a fable in The Arab Conquest of Egypt (1902), and Bagnall agrees it should be set aside (p. 357 n. 37).
3. The lesson cuts both ways. A story first told six centuries after the event, with a single dramatic villain, deserves suspicion. The popular Christian-mob version of the library's end has the same shape and comes from the same impulse that Bagnall calls "dreams about placing the blame" (p. 348).

Anticipated objections

1. "Bringing up the Muslim story is just changing the subject."

Rebuttals

1. It is a consistency test. Many objectors who blame Christians would reject the Umar story on the grounds that it is late and convenient. The same standard applied to the Christian version leaves one well-attested event, the Serapeum, and a long, mostly undocumented decline.

P4, What actually destroyed most ancient books

Affirmative case

1. Papyrus wears out. Bagnall notes that papyrus can last for centuries in ideal conditions, but Alexandria's humid Mediterranean climate was not ideal, and "no papyri have survived there from antiquity to the present day." Even in drier parts of Egypt, the evidence shows rolls in use for about a century and occasionally two or three centuries, "but that is about the limit" (pp. 358-359).
2. Books survived only by recopying. Bagnall concludes that by the reign of Tiberius relatively little of what the first three Ptolemies collected was still usable, and that "even without hostile action" the libraries of Alexandria would not have survived antiquity unless constantly recopied (p. 359). He finds no evidence of such recopying at Alexandria, unlike the library at Caesarea, which Jerome says was restored in the fourth century by copying its books onto parchment.
3. The fourth-century change of format was a bottleneck. Blum names three causes of the loss of Greek literature: many works were already forgotten by the third century; others perished because "they were not deemed worthy to be copied" when the codex replaced the scroll in the fourth century; and others because they were "undesirable literature" in the opinion of certain Christian groups (Kallimachos, 1991, p. 8).
4. Bagnall's verdict. "It is hard to give up villains," he writes, but the library's disappearance was "the inevitable result" of the end of the interest that created it and the lack of sustained maintenance. In his words: "An unburned building full of decaying books would not have made a particle's worth of difference" (p. 359).
5. The scale of the loss is real, and its measure is soft. Blum's "perhaps only one percent" rests on older counts of known authors and works (his footnote 34 cites Hans Gerstinger, 1948), and Roger Pearse traces versions of the figure back to the Renaissance scholar Pietro Bembo. The playwrights give a firmer sense of scale: Sophocles wrote 123 plays and seven survive in full; Euripides wrote 92 and about 19 survive.

Anticipated objections

1. "Blum himself blames Christians."
2. "Christians chose what to copy, so the selection was Christian censorship."

Rebuttals

1. He names Christians as one cause among three, and the first two are not about Christianity. Works forgotten by the third century were lost before Christians held any power. Works not recopied in the change to the codex were lost through a choice every reading culture makes: which books are worth the cost of copying. The honest summary is that Christian disapproval contributed, and the larger forces did not depend on it.
2. Selection is real, and it was not mainly religious. The Cambridge Intellectual History of Byzantium stresses that Byzantine survival was selective and shaped by its priorities. But what Byzantium chose to keep included pagan Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, Homer and the tragedians, which no censoring culture would have copied for a thousand years.

P5, Who preserved what survives

Affirmative case

1. Byzantine scribes preserved almost all of it. The introduction to The Cambridge Intellectual History of Byzantium (eds. Anthony Kaldellis and Niketas Siniossoglou, 2017) states that the Byzantines were "responsible for preserving almost all ancient Greek literature that we have today," and that texts surviving by other routes, such as translations, inscriptions or papyri, are a tiny minority. The Byzantine Empire was a Christian state (Byzantine Church).
2. A patriarch summarized hundreds of books, many otherwise lost. Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople (858-867 and 877-886), compiled his Bibliotheca, notices of 279 books he had read, Christian and pagan alike. For many of the pagan works, such as Ctesias and the lost books of Diodorus Siculus, his summary is now most of what we know.
3. The Archimedes Palimpsest shows both sides. The only surviving copy of Archimedes' Method of Mechanical Theorems was written in the tenth century, almost certainly in Constantinople, and was scraped and overwritten as a prayer book completed in 1229. Christians nearly lost it, and Christians had copied it in the first place.
4. Christians carried Greek science into Arabic. Scott L. Montgomery describes the Abbasid translation movement of the eighth to eleventh centuries as drawing on Greek (from Byzantium), Syriac (from Eastern Christian cities), Pahlavi and Sanskrit sources ("Mobilities of Science: The Era of Translation into Arabic", Isis 109, 2018). Dimitri Gutas's standard study describes how almost all non-literary and non-historical secular Greek works were rendered into Arabic in this period (Greek Thought, Arabic Culture, 1998).
5. The leading translator was a Christian. Hunayn ibn Ishaq (808-873) was a Christian of the Church of the East from al-Hira. He translated Greek into Syriac, which his nephew Hubaysh then rendered into Arabic, and by the usual count he translated 129 works of Galen. MacTutor calls him the leading translator of his day in Baghdad, and the caliph al-Mutawakkil made him chief physician in 847.
6. The church read pagan books on purpose. Basil the Great wrote an address to young men on how to profit from Greek literature, and Paul himself quoted pagan poets (Acts 17:28; Titus 1:12).

Anticipated objections

1. "Byzantium preserved the books by accident of survival, not by any love of learning."
2. "Baghdad was Muslim, so the credit belongs to Islam."

Rebuttals

1. Nobody copies Euclid for a thousand years by accident. Copying by hand was slow and costly. A culture that kept Homer, Plato and Euclid in circulation across the Middle Ages valued them, whatever else it neglected.
2. The credit is shared, and that is the point. Abbasid patrons paid for the movement and Muslim scholars built on it brilliantly; Gutas's book explains the political and social reasons the caliphs funded it. But the objection claimed that Baghdad's head start proves Christians destroyed the books. The translators' own churches and manuscripts show the opposite.

Cross-examination

Four rounds, asked in order. The aim is to let the objector see what the sources show.

Round 1, Which library?

1. Question: "When you say Christians burned the Library of Alexandria, which year do you mean?"
2. Expected answer: "When the Christians took over. Around 391."
3. Follow-up: "That's the Serapeum, a temple, and I'll grant Christians destroyed it. But Seneca, Plutarch and Ammianus all describe books burned in Caesar's war in 48 BC. Were those the same books?"
4. Expected answer: "Some of the library survived Caesar."
5. Follow-up: "Maybe. Then it survived another four centuries under pagan Rome, through the wrecking of the palace quarter in the 270s. What happened to it in all that time?"

Round 2, How do books disappear?

1. Question: "How long does a papyrus scroll last?"
2. Expected answer: "I don't know. A long time?"
3. Follow-up: "Bagnall, a papyrologist, says rolls stayed in use about a century, sometimes two or three, and none survive from Alexandria at all. So what happens to a library nobody recopies?"
4. Expected answer: "It falls apart."
5. Follow-up: "Then most of the loss didn't need a fire, did it?"

Round 3, Who copied what we have?

1. Question: "Where does your copy of Plato or Aristotle come from?"
2. Expected answer: "From the ancient Greeks."
3. Follow-up: "Through what? The Cambridge history of Byzantium says the Byzantines preserved almost all the Greek literature we have. Who ran Byzantium?"
4. Expected answer: "Christians."
5. Follow-up: "So the people you say destroyed ancient learning are the people who handed it to you."

Round 4, Baghdad

1. Question: "Who translated Greek medicine into Arabic in Baghdad?"
2. Expected answer: "Muslim scholars."
3. Follow-up: "Many were. The most famous translator of Galen, Hunayn ibn Ishaq, was a Christian of the Church of the East, working through Syriac. Where did he get his Greek manuscripts and his training?"
4. Expected answer: "From the Christian world, I suppose."
5. Follow-up: "Then Baghdad's head start is evidence that Christians kept the books, not that they burned them."

Dodge table

Opening. You're right that Christians destroyed the Serapeum, and I won't defend it. But can we check the rest of the story, which library, when, and what happened to the books? If the evidence backs you, I'll grant it.

Closing. Here's what the sources say. The famous burning was in Caesar's war. The palace quarter was wrecked again in the 270s. Christians destroyed the Serapeum in 391, and maybe its books with it. But most ancient writing was lost slowly, because papyrus rots and nobody recopied it. And almost everything that survived came to us through Christian scribes, and much of the Greek science Baghdad built on came through Christian translators. Christians wrecked a temple. They also saved most of the library we have left.

Live-cite kit

Scripture:

• Acts 17:28, "for in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain even of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring." (ASV)
• Titus 1:12, "One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, idle gluttons." (ASV)
• 1 Corinthians 15:33, "Be not deceived: Evil companionships corrupt good morals." (ASV)
• 2 Timothy 4:13, "The cloak that I left at Troas with Carpus, bring when thou comest, and the books, especially the parchments." (ASV)
• 1 Thessalonians 5:21, "prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (ASV)

Ancient sources:

• Seneca, De Tranquillitate Animi 9.5: forty thousand books burned at Alexandria.
• Plutarch, Life of Caesar 49: the fire from the dockyards destroyed the great library.
• Ammianus Marcellinus, Res Gestae 22.16.13 and 22.16.15: books "burned in the Alexandrine war"; under Aurelian the city lost most of the Bruchion.

Scholarly (the objection, stated fairly): Dirk Rohmann, Klio 104 (2022), on the Serapeum library's destruction in 391; Rudolf Blum, Kallimachos, p. 8, on Christian disapproval as one cause of loss.

Scholarly (the reply): Roger S. Bagnall, "Alexandria: Library of Dreams," Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 146 (2002), pp. 348-362; Kaldellis and Siniossoglou, The Cambridge Intellectual History of Byzantium (2017); Dimitri Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture (1998); Scott L. Montgomery, Isis 109 (2018).

Aphorism: "Papyrus burns once. It rots every year."

Aphorism: "The people accused of burning the books are the people who copied the ones you've read."

Connection to Scripture

• Acts 17:28 and Titus 1:12, Paul quotes pagan poets by name and with approval of their insight.
• 1 Corinthians 15:33, a line Paul shares with the Greek comic poet Menander.
• 2 Timothy 4:13, the apostle in prison asks for his books.
• Philippians 4:8, whatever is true, honorable and lovely is worth thinking on.
• 1 Thessalonians 5:21, test everything and keep what is good.
• Acts 19:19, converts at Ephesus burned their own books of magic. Objectors cite it; the text describes people destroying their own property, not seizing anyone else's library.

Scholarship

Published academic works this page draws on, each matched to a publisher, index or library catalog record.

• Alfred J. Butler, The Arab Conquest of Egypt (1902). Open Library
• Dimitri Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture: The Graeco-Arabic Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early ‛Abbāsid Society (2nd-4th/8th-10th centuries) (Taylor & Francis, 1998). doi:10.4324/9780203316276
• Anthony Kaldellis and Niketas Siniossoglou, Cambridge Intellectual History of Byzantium (Cambridge University Press, 2017). Open Library
• Scott L. Montgomery, "Mobilities of Science: The Era of Translation into Arabic," Isis 109 (2018). doi:10.1086/698236
• Dirk Rohmann, "The Destruction of the Serapeum of Alexandria, Its Library, and the Immediate Reactions," Klio 104 (2022). doi:10.1515/klio-2021-0021

See also

• Hypatia Murder Objection Defeater, the murder of Hypatia in 415 and the myth that it ended classical learning.
• Hypatia, the philosopher, her teaching and her students.
• Church at Alexandria, the city's church from Mark to Cyril.
• Cyril of Alexandria, the patriarch of the period after Theophilus.
• Byzantine Church, the Christian empire whose scribes copied the classics.
• Basil the Great, who taught young Christians how to profit from pagan literature.
• Christians Destroyed Pagan Temples Objection Defeater, the wider record of temple destruction and anti-pagan laws after 380, of which the Serapeum is one case.
• Christianity Spread Only by the Sword Objection Defeater, the companion charge that force explains Christianity's spread.
• Religion Causes Violence Objection, the general charge this one illustrates.
• Christians Behaving Badly Defeater, when believers fail their own faith.
• Genetic Fallacy and Tu Quoque, two fallacies the debate invites on both sides.
• Atheism, the master hub.