<\/p>\n
I just saw the movie Agora, and I <\/p>\n I will do a quick over view of the The Temple of Serapis<\/a> at the time of its destruction was not the library of Alexandria. <\/span>It may or may not have had the largest There is no clear evidence that More disturbingly to my view, there There is also no sense of just why many people were initially attracted to Christianity. <\/span>Pagan antiquity was a brutal and in may ways oppressive society, and ironically, until their misogyny came to the fore after taking power, Christianity often seemed a better bet for women because becoming a nun beat losing all power to a husband. <\/span>The Hypatias were the exception, not the rule. <\/span><\/p>\n Ironically, many Pagans and My biggest problem<\/b> with the movie’s I am dictating this letter to you from my bed, but may you receive it in good health, mother, sister, teacher, and withal benefactress, and whatever is honored in name and deed.<\/p>\n For my bodily weakness has followed in the wake of mental sufferings. The remembrance of my departed children is consuming my forces, little by little. Only so long should Synesius have lived as he was still without experience of the evils of life. It as if a torment long pent up had burst upon me in full volume, and as if the sweetness of life had vanished. May I either cease to live, or cease to think of the tomb of my sons!<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n But may you preserve your health \n \n \n Apparently Synesius did not know of Hypatia’s murder, and I think the movie seeks to Second, Hypatia and Synesius These are significant flaws in the Finally, the information that has And yet, it was powerful movie that The Rise of Totalitarianism<\/b><\/p>\n Cyril was a thug, and his street Agora depicts a crucial stage in First, unlike authoritarian systems Secondly, in totalitarianism there Third, there is a party, a mass Fourth, totalitarianism seeks to Fifth, the ideology sought to be Some people who look back on these
\nbelieve every Pagan would be well advised to see this account of the life and
\ndeath of Hypatia<\/a>. She was the greatest of Classical women philosophers, and apparently a great philosopher
\nby any standards, given the Pagan and Christian men who were her students. Her works have not come down to us, but her story has. <\/span>I
\nthink every American who cares about their country should also see it. <\/span>The sets are wonderful and the acting
\ngood, particularly that of Rachel Weicz, who plays Hypatia’s part. <\/span>While the movie is not a completely
\nreliable historical account of Hypatia’s life and death, it is a very
\ninsightful account of the impact a radically new and authoritarian religion had
\non the ancient world. <\/span>And it gets
\nalmost<\/i> all the big questions right.<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\n
\nhistorical flaws, to get them behind us.
\n<\/span>They are significant and I believe with one exception they are
\nultimately irrelevant.<\/p>\n
\nlocation of classical texts still extant, the evidence is not conclusive<\/a>. No single disaster destroyed a unparalleled collection of ancient
\nlearning. <\/span>Julius Caesar had burned
\nthe first collection, accidentally, when he captured the city from Cleopatra
\nand Marc Antony. <\/span>Subsequent
\ninvasions destroyed other collections.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n
\nHypatia herself was closely connected to the Temple, as she was in the
\nmovie. <\/span>She may have been. <\/span>We do not know. <\/span>In my understanding NeoPlatonists were
\nnot devotees of any particular polytheistic deity, but in general honored them
\nall as emanations of the One.<\/p>\n
\nis no sense in the movie that Hypatia was a Pagan rather than a rationalist
\nphilosopher. <\/span>In reading reviews I
\nwas struck by the number of atheists who praised her atheism. <\/span>She was not. NeoPlatonism was a deeply
\nPagan monistic philosophy that honored the Gods as well as reason. <\/span>In fact, the movie gives a relatively
\ninsipid account of Pagan belief in general. Nothing much could be learned
\nabout it, let alone NeoPlatonism, by watching the movie.<\/p>\n
\nChristians’ admiration for Hypatia was even stronger than the movie gives a
\ntestimony to. <\/span>Some suggested
\njealousy was one of Cyril’s motives for his “final solution” to his Hypatia
\nproblem. Others that it was really a part of his quest for power. She was very influential and th<\/span>ese motives are hardly mutually exclusive. <\/span><\/p>\n
\nmessage concerns the relationship between Hypatia and her former student
\nSynesius<\/a>, who became Bishop \u00ad\u00ad\u00ad\u00adof Ptolemais (NOT Cyrene). <\/span>In reality Synesius remained an admirer
\nof Hypatia to the end and was not the rigorous doctrinal fanatic that the movie
\nsuggests. <\/span>In fact in his
\nletters <\/span>he called her a “divine
\nguide” and “the most holy and revered philosopher.” His surviving correspondence
\nremains our main source of information about her and the last letter he wrote
\nin his life was to her. <\/span>It reads<\/p>\n\n
\n
\nand give my salutations to your happy comrades in turn, beginning with
\nfather Theotecnus and brother Athanasius, and so to all! And if any one has
\nbeen added to these, so long as he is dear to you, I must owe him gratitude
\nbecause he is dear to you, and to that man give my greetings as to my own
\ndearest friend. If any of my affairs interests you, you do well, and if any of
\nthem does not so interest you, neither does it me.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\nfor this reason historians believe he probably died before she did, although
\nnot by much. Synesius was very unfairly painted in the movie, and I think this
\nis a serious shortcoming for two reasons.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n
\nexaggerate the distinction between philosophy and religion. <\/span>People such as Hypatia and Synesius
\nindicated that this need not be so, even when the religions were
\ndifferent. <\/span>So the gulf between
\nthem was made far greater than it really was among people of good will, with Hypatia made arguably into a noble
\natheist (at least that’s how many atheists interpreted her in the movie
\nreviews) and Synesius was turned into someone dominated by a crude
\nliteralism. <\/span>I think this
\nartificial simplification is the movie’s biggest weakness.<\/p>\n
\ndemonstrated that spiritually wise men and women could see the underlying
\ntruths beneath seemingly opposed spiritual positions, and respect and honor one
\nanother for it. <\/span>(I am NOT an
\nadvocate of the so-called “perennial tradition” in saying this, but that’s
\nanther story.) <\/span>Today, when
\nreligious fanaticism again afflicts civilized life from many quarters a better
\ndescription of the true relations between these two people would have been a
\ngreat service.<\/p>\n
\nmovie’s depiction of the time. <\/span>A
\nvery good historical discussion <\/a>of the movie can be found in Faith and Justice<\/a> . (I recommend reading all the parts.) <\/p>\n
\ncome down to us from that time is so incomplete that while the major events in
\nHypatia’s life are recounted, they are too sketchy to comprise a movie, and so
\ncreative linking was employed. <\/span>It could<\/i> have happened more or less that way, but probably
\nnot. <\/span>I am very grateful that Hypatia’s
\ndeath was handled delicately, for I knew her story before seeing the movie, and Weicz’s acting was superb. It had been emotionally wrenching enough even before the final moments. <\/span>The sad
\ntruth is that her murder was almost certainly far more bestial than depicted because she probably had no one such as Davus at the end. <\/span>At best she was stoned alive, and at worst
\nher skin was scraped from her body by oyster shells held in the hands of
\ndepraved monks. These are not mutually exclusive. Either way she was dismembered and her body dragged through the
\nstreets of Alexandria.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nI hope Pagans will watch. <\/span><\/p>\n
\ntoughs, “monks,” were every bit as nasty as the movie indicates, constituting a
\ngenuine Christian Taliban, a preview for what the religious right has in mind
\nfor us if they get the opportunity. That Cyril was later made a “saint” tells us all we need to know about the
\ninherent worth of that <\/i>religious <\/i>title. <\/span>But there is something far more serious
\nthat the movie depicts very successfully, something important today.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nthe rise of the West’s first totalitarian system of power. <\/span>Now some might say I go too far. <\/span>But let’s look at the traditional
\ndescriptions of totalitarianism as described by studies inspired by Nazi
\nGermany and Stalin’s Russia. <\/span><\/p>\n
\n(like Rome under the Pagan Caesars), in totalitarian systems your thoughts
\nmatter. <\/span>Thinking the wrong
\nthoughts is a crime. <\/span>Going through
\nthe motions is not enough. <\/span>The
\nmovie depicts this growing strain in Christianity as it comes to power.<\/p>\n
\nis terror. <\/span>The threat of violence
\nis always present if someone comes to the attention of the authorities. <\/span>The sanctioned terrorists are given
\nspecial privileges that both make their violence easier and help separate
\nthemselves from people in general.
\n<\/span>Cryil’s violent monks are the Brownshirts and Red Guards of the time.<\/p>\n
\norganization that is separate from the government. <\/span>In Germany there were the Nazis and in Russia the Communists. <\/span>In Agora<\/i>, and historically, this was
\nthe crowds of zealots who provided the mass foundation for Cryil’s rule. <\/span>(The movie briefly alludes to his
\nultimately becoming ruler of Alexandria. And even Christian apologists concede
\nhe was too brutal.) <\/span><\/p>\n
\nradically transform a society, demolishing older ways of life. <\/span>This is certainly the case with the
\nperiod covered in Agora.<\/p>\n
\nall encompassing. <\/span>Monopolistic
\nmonotheism gave us thought crime. <\/span>Thinking
\nthe wrong thoughts was illegal, and Authority prescribed what thoughts to
\nthink. As power shifted different interpretations of the ‘Word of God’ came to the fore or were destroyed. Students of 20th century totalitarianism will feel at home.<\/span><\/p>\n
\ntimes call them “integral,” where all of life is seen to be integrated into one
\noverarching and meaningful way.
\n<\/span>Well, sort of, in the same way a Soviet era election where everyone
\nvoted was democratic. H<\/span>unting and gathering times, and many Pagan agricultural societies truly were integral. However the “integral” character of the Christian empire was
\nnot rooted in people’s ways of life and spiritual experience, it was rooted in imperial power enforcing a
\ncommon set of beliefs on everyone.
\n<\/span>Its integral character was manufactured and imposed. <\/span>There have been integral societies, but
\nthe real ones did not need the force of arms to be such.<\/p>\n