![\"myth](\"https:\/\/www.uccronline.it\/eng\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Myth-of-Hypatia.webp\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The legend of Hypatia of Alexandria<\/strong>. The Byzantine scholar (feminist) Silvia Ronchey<\/strong> speaks of the \u201csecular martyr,\u201d praises her science, her killing in the name of Christianity<\/strong>, and blames Bishop Cyril. All false.<\/i><\/p>\n <\/p>\n For years, Silvia Ronchey<\/strong><\/mark> has been talking to us about Hypatia of Alexandria<\/strong>. Or, more precisely, about the myth of Hypatia.<\/p>\n In her latest article in “Repubblica”<\/a><\/em><\/strong> (also here<\/em><\/a>), the noted Byzantine scholar and professor at the University of Roma Tre restates a suggestive but unfounded thesis: that Saint Catherine of Alexandria<\/strong> is a kind of Christian transfiguration of the pagan philosopher Hypatia.<\/p>\n Following the interpretation of Anna Jameson<\/strong> \u2014 a self-taught, nineteenth-century art historian and pioneer of female studies<\/em> \u2014 Ronchey presents Catherine as a \u201cghost-saint\u201d<\/strong> and Hypatia of Alexandria<\/b><\/mark> as the usual martyr of rationalism, victim of Christian brutality.<\/p>\n But behind this narrative lie historical distortions<\/strong> and a careless use of sources that deserve to be examined.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The thesis of the \u201chagiographic transfer\u201d<\/strong> between Catherine and Hypatia is well-known: it was born precisely with Jameson, who reinterpreted many historical and legendary figures in a proto-feminist<\/strong> light.<\/p>\n Certainly, the issues surrounding the historicity of Saint Catherine<\/strong> are known \u2014 one need only recall her temporary removal from the liturgical calendar in 1969, later reinstated in 2002 for her symbolic value. Some modern scholars have suggested affinities between the two figures<\/strong>, based on shared narrative traits: culture, virginity, violent death.<\/p>\n Christine Walsh<\/strong>, however, while recognizing some parallels, concludes that there is insufficient evidence<\/strong> to support the claim that Catherine is a creation based on Hypatia1<\/a><\/sup>C. Walsh<\/b>, The Cult of St Katherine of Alexandria in Early Medieval Europe<\/i>, Aldershot 2007, p. 143<\/span>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Ronchey\u2019s long-standing effort \u2014 always sensitive to feminist themes \u2014 on Hypatia<\/strong> rests on a distorted image<\/strong> of the events. Proudly transformed into a proto-feminist and, while we\u2019re at it, into a \u201csecular saint\u201d<\/strong>, martyr of scientific thought and persecuted by Christianity.<\/p>\n Ronchey writes that Hypatia, daughter of Theon<\/strong>, \u201ca famous mathematician\u201d<\/em>, studied philosophy and science from childhood, soon directing one of Alexandria\u2019s main schools.<\/p>\n She is described as an expert on Plato, Euclid, and Apollonius of Perga, author of \u201cscientific books\u201d<\/i><\/strong>, beautiful<\/strong> (could she ever have been ugly?!), pure and indifferent to vanity. Silvia Ronchey also tells us she was determined to \u201cdeclare herself Christian\u201d<\/i> and was a friend of Alexandria\u2019s governor, Orestes.<\/p>\n Thus, the scholar continues, \u201ca band of those miserable fanatics\u201d<\/i> murdered her<\/strong> \u201cwith revolting barbarity\u201d<\/i>. A \u201csecular saint, virgin and secular martyr\u201d<\/i>, Ronchey specifies, massacred not by the emperor but \u201cby the \u2018pharaoh\u2019 of Egyptian Monophysitism, Cyril<\/strong>\u201d<\/i>, that is, the city\u2019s bishop.<\/p>\n The legendary concoction<\/strong> of Hypatia of Alexandria is served up once again, shamelessly.<\/p>\n Fortunately, the Italian scholar avoids some of the classic details<\/strong> used to further emphasize the Hypatia myth: false quotations, scientific inventions (astrolabe, heliocentrism, etc.) and the infamous scraping of bones with oyster shells (see Edward Gibbon).<\/p>\n Still, one fact remains: what Ronchey writes is, at best, selective and inaccurate<\/strong>. We are not quite at the level of Alejandro Amen\u00e1bar\u2019s film Agora<\/i> (2009), but not far off.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Let\u2019s start with the myth of the \u201cscientist\u201d<\/strong>, perhaps even a rationalist.<\/p>\n It is true that she was introduced to studies by her father Theon, but Ronchey omits that he wrote extensively on divination<\/strong> and omens<\/strong> readable from birds\u2019 behavior. Not exactly hallmarks of an irreproachable rationalist.<\/p>\n Hypatia herself invented nothing<\/strong> and left no original works: she merely commented on previous authors. According to Wilbur Knorr<\/strong>, historian of mathematics at Stanford, her work on Diofantes\u2019 Arithmetica<\/em> is of a \u201cso low level<\/strong> as not to require any real mathematical understanding\u201d<\/em>2<\/a><\/sup>W. Knorr<\/b>, “Textual Studies in Ancient and Medieval Geometry”<\/i>, Birkh\u00e4user 1990<\/span>.<\/p>\n The exaggerated emphasis<\/strong> on Hypatia\u2019s \u201cscientific vision\u201d clearly serves only to bolster the historical myth of the \u201cmartyr of science\u201d killed by religious ignorance\u201d<\/strong>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n According to sources, Hypatia was instead a great teacher<\/strong> \u2014 a quality overlooked by Ronchey \u2014 who gave lessons in her home to a select group of students.<\/p>\n Philosophically, she adhered to Plotinus\u2019 Neoplatonism<\/strong>, with its metaphysical vision of the One, Intellect and Soul: a system much closer to Christian thought<\/strong> than commonly believed. Plotinus himself was a student of the Christian Ammonius Sacca and influenced Christian thinkers such as Origen, Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory Nazianzen.<\/p>\n Another omitted detail is that among her students were Christians like Synesius of Cyrene<\/strong>, a future bishop.<\/p>\n Following in her father\u2019s footsteps, Hypatia also discussed the Chaldean Oracles<\/strong> linked to Egyptian wisdom, and a commentary on Ptolemy\u2019s Almagest<\/em> is known, addressing what we would today call astrology<\/strong>. Like other Neoplatonists of the time, she believed in many deities<\/strong> and angelic beings, and modern readers would find her teachings quite bizarre.<\/p>\n This is also why Silvia Ronchey makes no mention of all this.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Regarding her exuberant beauty<\/strong>, the only source that mentions it is Damascio<\/strong>, author of the Life of Isidore<\/em> (a lost work cited in the 10th century).<\/p>\n Unfortunately, Damascio never actually saw Hypatia, having been born half a century after<\/strong> her death. He is also the one who calls her a virgin<\/strong>, information not confirmed by older sources such as Socrates Scholasticus<\/strong>, although it aligns with Neoplatonic ethics.<\/p>\n There would be nothing wrong in Hypatia\u2019s beauty, but it is overlooked that at the time of her death, the woman was probably around 65-70 years old<\/strong>. A fact hardly compatible with the myth of the young beautiful martyr.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Finally, her murder.<\/p>\n It was indeed a barbaric crime<\/strong>, committed by Christian fanatics known as parabalani<\/em>. But Ronchey misunderstands the motive: it was not a rejection of Christianity that caused her death, but rather the tragic outcome of a tumultuous political clash<\/strong>, typical of the city of Alexandria.<\/p>\n There was no rivalry between Hypatia\u2019s thought and that of Alexandria\u2019s Christians; the various Christian students who came to her are proof. Synesius of Cyrene<\/strong> remained in contact with her even after his election as bishop.<\/p>\n The aforementioned Socrates Scholasticus<\/strong>, the only source close to the events, clearly speaks of a \u201cpolitical jealousy\u201d<\/em> as the cause of the murder and, although he favors governor Orestes and opposes Bishop Cyril<\/strong>, does not accuse the latter, but rather a group led by \u201cthe reader Peter\u201d<\/i>. If he had evidence against Cyril, he certainly would have written it down.<\/p>\n For all the details and to consult the bibliography supporting these claims, we refer you to the thorough dossier<\/a><\/em><\/strong> we dedicated to Hypatia of Alexandria and her tragic death.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n It is regrettable that a scholar of the caliber of Silvia Ronchey<\/strong>, known for her erudition, yields to mythology<\/b> when discussing Hypatia. She has done so repeatedly, including in her books.<\/p>\n It is also regrettable that she never devotes the same attention to analogous cases<\/strong>, such as the Christian virgins<\/a><\/em><\/strong> of Heliopolis, stripped, dismembered, and killed during the reign of the pagan emperor Julian for refusing to practice sacred prostitution.<\/p>\n Perhaps Christian martyrs count for less?<\/p>\n
\nSaint Catherine modelled on Hypatia?<\/h2>\n
Ronchey revives the Hypatia myth<\/h2>\n
Hypatia, a celebrated scientist?<\/h2>\n
Hypatia, astrology and the Chaldean Oracles<\/h2>\n
The Disarming Beauty of Young Hypatia<\/h2>\n
Hypatia of Alexandria, Christian Martyr?<\/h2>\n
Hypatia Deserves Respect<\/h2>\n