Near the end of this essay, I think you somewhat overstate the case for Christianity as the destroyer of all things pagan:
"Unlike when paganism was the dominant belief system, once Christians became the majority they engaged in vicious persecution and suppression of all other non-Christian beliefs and practices which became more severe as time went on. Pagan temples were desecrated, statues were melted down, and altars were vandalized. Any sign of earlier pagan beliefs was obliterated. That is, it was Christianity—not paganism—which was intolerant of other religions. It was an early example of the Paradox of Tolerance in action."
Thanks for that info. Unfortunately, I do not have the book in front of me any longer. But those two incidents are mentioned almost in passing--I probably should have omitted them but they were the easiest to remember.
The two articles you linked seem to focus mainly on the alleged loss of ancient learning caused by these two incidents in particular, and the arguments made by some that this somehow "set back" the course of civilization.
But Ehrman does not talk about any of that. Instead, Ehrman's chapter focuses on the destruction of pagan temples, shrines, sacred groves, and other religious sites, along with the destruction of pagan relics like statues, frescoes, amulets and other material evidence of worship (again, going from memory here). We have plenty of evidence from ancient sources and from archaeology that this occurred. Ehrman really isn't concerned at all with the arguments made by the "new atheists" or what the effects on science and learning were, only that Christians were actively hostile to other belief systems which did not conform to Christian doctrine once they became the dominant majority in the Roman world.
Sorry, but your claims wildly overstate the active suppression of paganism and the destruction of temples etc. Most temples were simply abandoned or converted to other uses as their former devotees drifted to Christianity. Active destruction by intolerant Christian fanatics happened occassionally, but was very much the exception. Luke A. Lavan and Michael Mulryan, (eds.) *The Archaeology of Late Antique ‘Paganism’* (Brill, 2011) is the standard modern study of the evidence here and the authors are very clear on what it shows:
"“As a result of recent work, it can be stated with confidence that temples were neither widely converted into churches nor widely demolished in Late Antiquity. …. In his Empire-wide study, Bayliss located only 43 cases [of desacralisation or active architectural destruction of temples] of which a mere 4 were archaeologically confirmed.” (Lavan, “The End of the Temples: Toward a New Narrative?” in Lavan and Mulryan, p. xxiv).
Near the end of this essay, I think you somewhat overstate the case for Christianity as the destroyer of all things pagan:
"Unlike when paganism was the dominant belief system, once Christians became the majority they engaged in vicious persecution and suppression of all other non-Christian beliefs and practices which became more severe as time went on. Pagan temples were desecrated, statues were melted down, and altars were vandalized. Any sign of earlier pagan beliefs was obliterated. That is, it was Christianity—not paganism—which was intolerant of other religions. It was an early example of the Paradox of Tolerance in action."
For a lengthy, alternative view of this controversial and fascinating topic, let me refer you and your readers to this post: https://historyforatheists.com/2020/03/the-great-myths-8-the-loss-of-ancient-learning/
The same author also writes this about Hypatia of Alexandria and all the myths and legends that have grown up around her: https://historyforatheists.com/2020/07/the-great-myths-9-hypatia-of-alexandria/
Thanks for that info. Unfortunately, I do not have the book in front of me any longer. But those two incidents are mentioned almost in passing--I probably should have omitted them but they were the easiest to remember.
The two articles you linked seem to focus mainly on the alleged loss of ancient learning caused by these two incidents in particular, and the arguments made by some that this somehow "set back" the course of civilization.
But Ehrman does not talk about any of that. Instead, Ehrman's chapter focuses on the destruction of pagan temples, shrines, sacred groves, and other religious sites, along with the destruction of pagan relics like statues, frescoes, amulets and other material evidence of worship (again, going from memory here). We have plenty of evidence from ancient sources and from archaeology that this occurred. Ehrman really isn't concerned at all with the arguments made by the "new atheists" or what the effects on science and learning were, only that Christians were actively hostile to other belief systems which did not conform to Christian doctrine once they became the dominant majority in the Roman world.
Sorry, but your claims wildly overstate the active suppression of paganism and the destruction of temples etc. Most temples were simply abandoned or converted to other uses as their former devotees drifted to Christianity. Active destruction by intolerant Christian fanatics happened occassionally, but was very much the exception. Luke A. Lavan and Michael Mulryan, (eds.) *The Archaeology of Late Antique ‘Paganism’* (Brill, 2011) is the standard modern study of the evidence here and the authors are very clear on what it shows:
"“As a result of recent work, it can be stated with confidence that temples were neither widely converted into churches nor widely demolished in Late Antiquity. …. In his Empire-wide study, Bayliss located only 43 cases [of desacralisation or active architectural destruction of temples] of which a mere 4 were archaeologically confirmed.” (Lavan, “The End of the Temples: Toward a New Narrative?” in Lavan and Mulryan, p. xxiv).