The Great Library of Alexandria was a center of math, science, and new ideas. It contained books from many different cultures and encouraged the copying of books to spread education. However, religion caused the destruction of the Great Library. The first phase of destruction was caused by the spread of Christianity. Monotheistic religions such as Christianity and Judaism became popular in Alexandria, which was primarily polytheistic. Monotheistic religions are particularly dangerous because they are likely to regard gods of other religions as demons. In other words, the Jews and Christians of Alexandria were not accepting of the pagans. The Christian leader Theophilus, as well as his posterity, used his influence to attempt to drive out the pagans. As a result, battles broke out and the Great Library was caught in the crossfire. Many years later, the rest of the library was destroyed because it opposed the Quran.
Religion is dangerous when applied to large groups. While it draws people together, it can cause heated conflicts. It is acceptable for issues surrounding religion to get blown way out of proportion because a criticism of a religion is the criticism of how one views the world. Religion can easily be used to control a large group of people. If a government uses religion effectively, it can greatly influence its people. This causes religion and its ideas to become twisted and lose meaning. Religion can also be a great enemy of science. It is a system of beliefs that relies on faith. Science relies on evidence. If one can believe in a religion, then why should they trust the real evidence that science provides? Religion can cause a way on thinking that halts scientific progress.
Thursday, October 31, 2013
Swerve Extension: Omitted Books and Teachings
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/jesus.html
In Stephen Greenblatt's The Swerve, the fourth chapter explains how in the newly Christianized Roman Empire, Christians started getting rid of certain books. Specifically, Greenblatt writes about Christian officials trying to remove Pagan books and literature. Through more research I have found that not only were Pagan books removed, but also parts of the original story of Christ were omitted. Roman officials modified the stories and gospels to their own benefits and to make the new religion acceptable. In one instance to please the public, officials tried to cover up the crucification of Jesus because the Romans were the ones who actually crucified Jesus. To distract the public, the officials tried to focus the religion on over exaggerated miracles of Jesus and the preachings of his disciples and their students. By hiding the fact that the Romans had killed Jesus, Roman officials were able to maintain their power. In fact, Christianization of the empire actually became a tool for officials to grab more power. Roman officials and high priests also tweaked the image of Christ from a citizen who stood up against injustice and corruption to a divine being superior to humans. Romans authorities manipulated this idea in a carrot and stick fashion to convince the public to follow them. A Roman historian known as Irenaeus also supported officials by claiming that gospels that were not in their favor were created by the devil. The Roman public were fooled because they themselves were taught Christianity by Paul and Peter. Since most of their knowledge of Christianity didn't come directly from Jesus, the Romans easily accepted the officials' version of Christianity. Furthermore, Paul's version of Christianity was very similar to the Roman official religion, adding to the illusion. In conclusion, Roman officials and higher ups omitted books and modified Christianity to gain power for themselves.
In Stephen Greenblatt's The Swerve, the fourth chapter explains how in the newly Christianized Roman Empire, Christians started getting rid of certain books. Specifically, Greenblatt writes about Christian officials trying to remove Pagan books and literature. Through more research I have found that not only were Pagan books removed, but also parts of the original story of Christ were omitted. Roman officials modified the stories and gospels to their own benefits and to make the new religion acceptable. In one instance to please the public, officials tried to cover up the crucification of Jesus because the Romans were the ones who actually crucified Jesus. To distract the public, the officials tried to focus the religion on over exaggerated miracles of Jesus and the preachings of his disciples and their students. By hiding the fact that the Romans had killed Jesus, Roman officials were able to maintain their power. In fact, Christianization of the empire actually became a tool for officials to grab more power. Roman officials and high priests also tweaked the image of Christ from a citizen who stood up against injustice and corruption to a divine being superior to humans. Romans authorities manipulated this idea in a carrot and stick fashion to convince the public to follow them. A Roman historian known as Irenaeus also supported officials by claiming that gospels that were not in their favor were created by the devil. The Roman public were fooled because they themselves were taught Christianity by Paul and Peter. Since most of their knowledge of Christianity didn't come directly from Jesus, the Romans easily accepted the officials' version of Christianity. Furthermore, Paul's version of Christianity was very similar to the Roman official religion, adding to the illusion. In conclusion, Roman officials and higher ups omitted books and modified Christianity to gain power for themselves.
Swerve Chapter 4 Analysis: An End to Reason
Through the last have of chapter four of his book "The Swerve", Stephen Greenblatt makes the fascinating analysis of the ultimate battle between the embracement of pain and the embracement of pleasure, embodied by the philosophies of Epicurus and the Catholic Church. Epicureanism holds true the belief that the world is made of atoms, tiny particles that cannot be any further broken down. From there they reach the key assumptions that the soul is mortal, the divine is minimal if present at all, the essential pursuit in life is pleasure. This heavily contrasts with the beliefs of the Catholic Church, who firmly sustained the beliefs that the soul was mortal, that the divine was all present, and that pain and suffering were the key stepping stones to achieving paradise. These contrasting philosophies were so divided that both could not functionally exist without any friction. Eventually, the teachings of Epicurus, which at a glance appears to be far more rational than the beliefs of the Church, were essentially eradicated by the efforts of the Catholic institution. This symbolic struggle between pleasure and pain, and the surprising victory of suffering, reveals a lot about Roman culture at the time. By using slanderous tactics and false accusations the church was able to stamp out the rational and practical, the Church managed to install a theological system that took suffering as the essence of holiness. This reflected the mindset of the general population at the time: a mindset shaped by endless war, poor living conditions, and constant violence that made suffering more understandable than pleasure, and made hopeful promises of paradise in the future more bearable than accepting that this life was all, that death was infinite, and that God didn't care.
Life After Death: Greenblatt Swerve Analysis
In Chapter 4 of his
book, Stephen Greenblatt mentions Christians being ridiculed for believing in a
life after death. For many years now, people have been following the teachings
of Epicurus. This includes his teachings on how everything in life is made up
of atoms, and that once you die, your body goes through the same
transformations as everything else in life, and decomposes. This is why
Epicureans would ridicule the Christians. Father Tertullian maintained the fact
that in the afterlife, your body would return to you. This brought up many
questions about whether one would you have all of the same body parts and the
question of what somebody would do. Father Tertullian replied that on the Day
of Judgment, everybody would be brought before a heavenly tribunal in the same
physical position that they walked on earth. This argument is rather
interesting, because Greenblatt’s argument throughout this book is that
Epicurean teachings shaped modern thought in the Mediterranean. This point even
further proves the actual impact of his teachings, in the way that they could have people second-guessing even the most popular religions.
In Greenblatt's book The Swerve, Chapter 4, he talks about the rapid increase of the production of books during the hight of the book trade, which soon led to the plummeting number of copies being made.The Roman book trade centered around the librarii, the copyists, and the scribae, the scribes. The librarii were slaves or paid laborer who worked for booksellers. The scribae were free citizens who often had stable economic standings. The system of copying in the ancient Roman empire was actually very intricate. There was an "anagnost" which was the corrector who would read the manuscript aloud while the scribes around him would write what was being dictated. The book trade also protected the readers by making sure all of the books were copied exactly the same by having sixteen or fifteen symbols after the concluding words which would indicate whether the book was incomplete or not based on the location on the page. Although at first glance the scribing and copying system during the Roman book trade seems inefficient with flaws, the system of copying was very intricate in order to produce identical copies of books for the purchaser.
Reichmann, Felix, The Book Trade at the Time of the Roman Empire. The University of Chicago
Press. JSTOR. (accessed October 31, 2013)
Reichmann, Felix, The Book Trade at the Time of the Roman Empire. The University of Chicago
Press. JSTOR. (accessed October 31, 2013)
Bookworms
Bookworms
The one detail that really stuck in my head after reading this chapter was the mention of the bookworm. Book-eating insects, of course, are relatively unheard of in today's world, but apparently in the libraries of the ancient past they were a major problem. And although recent advances in bookmaking have all but eliminated readers' worries, the amount of texts that were gnawed into oblivion by these pests must have given historians major headaches.
When I was researching the first thing all sites informed me that the bookworm was not actually one species, thank you very much. Instead the word "bookworm" refers to any sort of insects that eat books. Robert Hooke's description (p. 83) was probably describing a silverfish, although according to the Encyclopedia Britannica booklice are also very common, along with roaches and termites. These species all feed on paper or the glue used to bind a book together, and can cause major damage. New chemical techniques in bookbinding render them irrelevant, although old books may display wear and tear from these book-eating insects.
Bookworms, silverfish, booklice, or whatever you want to call them, all link to Greenblatt's argument of how unlikely it was that Lucretius' manuscript survived the tide of time. Surviving the purges of Christianity itself was highly lucky, but to have been preserved for centuries and avoiding major damage from these voracious insects is truly a miracle—a swerve, as Lucretius would say.
The one detail that really stuck in my head after reading this chapter was the mention of the bookworm. Book-eating insects, of course, are relatively unheard of in today's world, but apparently in the libraries of the ancient past they were a major problem. And although recent advances in bookmaking have all but eliminated readers' worries, the amount of texts that were gnawed into oblivion by these pests must have given historians major headaches.
When I was researching the first thing all sites informed me that the bookworm was not actually one species, thank you very much. Instead the word "bookworm" refers to any sort of insects that eat books. Robert Hooke's description (p. 83) was probably describing a silverfish, although according to the Encyclopedia Britannica booklice are also very common, along with roaches and termites. These species all feed on paper or the glue used to bind a book together, and can cause major damage. New chemical techniques in bookbinding render them irrelevant, although old books may display wear and tear from these book-eating insects.
Bookworms, silverfish, booklice, or whatever you want to call them, all link to Greenblatt's argument of how unlikely it was that Lucretius' manuscript survived the tide of time. Surviving the purges of Christianity itself was highly lucky, but to have been preserved for centuries and avoiding major damage from these voracious insects is truly a miracle—a swerve, as Lucretius would say.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)