2 ms·
You're missing the point. Moslem chronicles attribute this to Caliph Omar: "If those books are in agreement with the Quran, we have no need of them; and if the
by mkempe 9y ago
You're missing the point.
Moslem chronicles attribute this to Caliph Omar: "If those books are in agreement with the Quran, we have no need of them; and if these are opposed to the Quran, destroy them."
Whether the Library was destroyed in stages, and by a variety of earlier parties, is completely irrelevant.
- Nomentatus 9y agoThe library of Alexandria was a uniquely expansive collection of ancient books, a vast literature vanished with it. No subsequent library, to my knowledge, held so many unique volumes. Which is the point you're missing. The loss not of a copy, but the last copy, of so many books of such age.
- mkempe 9y agoYou're still missing the point, in the context of the severe deficit of book translations in the modern Arab world: The Caliph's order --as chronicled-- reveals a certain attitude towards books other than the Koran.
- Nomentatus 9y agoWhich point is true and has nothing to do with the question of whether your claim re the library of Alexandria was false. You could have replied, earlier, that you didn't care one way or another about which library was burnt, and regretted if you had inadvertently spread misinformation about something you were not primarily concerned about. You didn't do that. I take it you are doing that now, just in a far less than civil manner. Please note that I do not use italics, here. If you are defended "final", last destruction of a rebuilt library intended to be as grand - I am unaware of support for this, but would be interested.