intended to supersede Naucratis (q.v.) as a Greek centre in
Egypt, and to be the link between Macedonia and the rich Nile
Valley. If such a city was to be on the Egyptian coast, there
was only one possible site, behind the screen of the Pharos
island and removed from the silt thrown out by Nile mouths.
An Egyptian townlet, Rhacotis, already stood on the shore and
was a resort of fishermen and pirates. Behind it (according
to the Alexandrian treatise, known as pseudo-Callisthenes)
were five native villages scattered along the strip between
Lake Mareotis and the sea. Alexander occupied Pharos, and
had a walled city marked out by Deinocrates on the mainland
to include Rhacotis. A few months later he left Egypt for
the East and never returned to his city; but his corpse was
ultimately entombed there. His viceroy, Cleomenes, continued
the creation of Alexandria. The Heptastadium, however, and
the mainland quarters seem to have been mainly Ptolemaic
work. Inheriting the trade of ruined Tyre and becoming the
centre of the new commerce between Europe and the Arabian
and Indian East, the city grew in less than a century to be
larger than Carthage; and for some centuries more it had to
acknowledge no superior but Rome. It was a centre not only of
Hellenism but of Semitism, and the greatest Jewish city in the
world. There the Septuagint was produced. The early Ptolemies
kept it in order and fostered the development of its museum
into the leading Greek university; but they were careful
to maintain the distinction of its population into three
nations, ``Macedonian'' (i.e. Greek), Jew and Egyptian.
From this division arose much of the later turbulence which
began to manifest itself under Ptolemy Philopater. Nominally
a free Greek city, Alexandria retained its senate to Roman
times; and indeed the judicial functions of that body were
restored by Septimius Severus, after temporary abolition by
Augustus. The city passed formally under Roman jurisdiction
in 80 B.C., according to the will of Ptolemy Alexander: but
it had been under Roman influence for more than a hundred years
previously. There Julius Caesar dallied with Cleopatra in
47 B.C. and was mobbed by the rabble; there his example
was followed by Antony, for whose favour the city paid dear
to Octavian, who placed over it a prefect from the imperial
household. Alexandria seems from this time to have regained its
old prosperity, commanding, as it did, an important granary of
Rome. This latter fact, doubtless, was one of the chief
reasons which induced Augustus to place it directly under
the imperial power. In A.D. 215 the emperor Caracalla
visited the city; and, in order to repay some insulting
satires that the inhabitants had made upon him, he commanded
his troops to put to death all youths capable of bearing
arms. This brutal order seems to have been carried out
even beyond the letter, for a general massacre was the
result. Notwithstanding this terrible disaster, Alexandria
soon recovered its former splendour, and for some time longer
was esteemed the first city of the world after Rome. Even as
its main historical importance had formerly sprung from pagan
learning, so now it acquired fresh importance as a centre of
Christian theology and church government. There Arianism was
formulated and there Athanasius, the great opponent of both
heresy and pagan rcaction, worked and triumphed. As native
influences, however, began to reassert themselves in the Nile
valley, Alexandria gradually became an alien city, more and
more detached from Egypt; and, losing much of its commerce
as the peace of the empire broke up during the 3rd century
A.D., it declined fast in population and splendour. The
Brucheum, and Jewish quarters were desolate in the 5th century,
and the central monuments, the Soma and Museum, fallen to
ruin. On the mainland life seems to have centred in the
vicinity of the Serapeum and Caesareum, both become Christian
churches: but the Pharos and Heptastadium quarters remained
populous and intact. In 616 it was taken by Chosroes, king
of Persia; and in 640 by the Arabians, under `Amr, after a
siege that lasted fourteen months, during which Heraclius, the
emperor of Constantinople, did not send a single ship to its
assistance. Notwithstanding the losses that the city had
sustained, `Amr was able to write to his master, the caliph
Omar, that he had taken a city containing ``4000 palaces, 4000
baths, 12,000 dealers in fresh oil, 12,000 gardeners, 40,000
Jews who pay tribute, 400 theatres or places of amusement."
The story of the destruction of the library by the Arabs is
first told by Bar-hebraeus (Abulfaragius), a Christian writer
who lived six centuries later; and it is of very doubtful
authority. It is highly improbable that many of the 700,000
volumes collected by the Ptolemies remained at the time of the
Arab conquest, when the various calamities of Alexandria from the
time of Caesar to that of Diocletian are considered, together with
the disgraceful pillage of the library in A.D. 389 under the
rule of the Christian bishop, Theophilus, acting on Theodosius'
decree concerning pagan monumcnts (see LIBRARIES: Ancient
History). The story of Abulfaragius runs as follows:--
John the Grammarian, a famous Peripatetic philosopher,
being in Alexandria at the time of its capture, and in high
favour with `Amr, begged that he would give him the royal
library. `Amr told him that it was not in his power to grant
such a request, but promised to write to the caliph for his
consent. Omar, on hearing the request of his general, is
said to have replied that if those books contained the same
doctrine with the Koran, they could be of no use, since the
Koran contained all necessary truths; but if they contained
anything contrary to that book, they ought to be destroyed; and
therefore, whatever their contents were, he ordered them to be
burnt. Pursuant to this order, they were distributed among
the public baths, of which there was a large number in the
city, where, for six months, they served to supply the fires.
Shortly after its capture Alexandria again fell into the hands
of the Greeks, who took advantage of `Amr's absence with the
greater portion of his army. On hearing what had happened,
however, `Amr returned, and quickly regained possession of the
city. About the year 646 `Amr was deprived of his government
by the caliph Othman. The Egyptians, by whom `Amr was greatly
beloved, were so much dissatisfied by this act, and even
showed such a tendency to revolt, that the Greek emperor
determined to make an effort to reduce Alexandria. The attempt
proved perfectly successful. The caliph, perceiving his
mistake, immediately restored `Amr, who, on his arrival in
Egypt, drove the Greeks within the walls of Alexandria, but
was only able to capture the city after a most obstinate
resistance by the defenders. This so exasperated him that
he completely demolished its fortifications, although he
seems to have spared the lives of the inhabitants as far
as lay in his power. Alexandria now rapidly declined in
importance. The building of Cairo in 969, and, above all,
the discovery of the route to the East by the Cape of Good
Hope in 1498, nearly ruined its commerce; the canal, which
supplied it with Nile water, became blocked; and although it
remained a principal Egyptian port, at which most European
visitors in the Mameluke and Ottoman periods landed, we hear
little of it until about the beginning of the 19th century.
[Alexandria figured prominently in the military operations
of Napoleon's Egyptian expedition of 1798. The French troops
stormed the city on the 2nd of July 1798, and it remained in
their hands until the arrival of the British expedition of 1801.
The battle of Alexandria, fought on the 21st of March of that
year, between the French army under General Menou and the
British expeditionary corps under Sir Ralph Abercromby,
took place near the ruins of Nicopohs, on the narrow spit
of land between the sea and Lake Aboukir, along which the
British troops had advanced towards Alexandria after the
actions of Aboukir on the 8th and Mandora on the 13th.
Battle of 1801.
The British position on the night of the 20th extended across
the isthmus, the right resting upon the ruins of Nicopolis and
the sea, the left on the lake of Aboukir and the Alexandria
canal. The line faced generally south-west towards the
city, the reserve division under Major-General (Sir) John
Moore on the right, the Guards brigade in the centre, and
three other brigades on the left. In second line were two
brigades and the cavalry (dismounted). On the 21st the
troops were under arms at 3 A.M., and at 3.30 the French
attacked and drove in the outposts. The French army now
moved forward with great rapidity in their usual formation of
columns. The brunt of the attack fell upon the command of
Moore, and in particular upon the 28th (Gloucestershire
Regiment). The first shock was repulsed, but a French column
penetrated in the dark between two regiments of the British
and a confused fight ensued in the ruins, in which the 42nd
(Black Watch) captured a colour. The front and rear ranks
of the 28th were simultaneously engaged, and the conduct of
the regiment won for it the distinction of wearing badges
both at the front and at the back of their head-dress.
Other regiments which assisted in the overthrow of the French
column were the 23rd, 40th and 58th. In a second attack the
enemy's cavalry inflicted severe losses on the 42nd. Sir
Ralph Abercromby was here engaged in personal conflict with
some French dragoons, and about this time received a mortal
wound, though he remained on the field and in command to the
end. The attack on the centre was repulsed by the cool and
steady fire of the Guards, and the left wing maintained its
position with ease, but the French cavalry for the second time
came to close quarters with the reserve. About half-past eight
the combat began to wane, and the last shots were fired at
ten. The real attack had been pressed home on the British
right, and the History of the Queen's Royal West Surrey
Regiment gives no undue praise to the regiments of the
reserve in saying that ``the determined attack would have been
successful against almost any other troops.'' Technically,
the details of the action show that, while not markedly better
in a melee than the war-seasoned French, the British
infantry had in its volleys a power which no other troops
then existing possessed, and it was these volleys that decided
the day even more than the individual stubbornness of the
men. The 42nd, twice charged by cavalry, had but thirteen
men wounded by the sabre. Part of the French losses, which
were disproportionately heavy, were caused by the gunboats
which lay close inshore and cannonaded the left flank of the
French columns, and by a heavy naval gun which was placed in
battery near the position of the 28th. The forces engaged
on this day mere approximately 14,000 British to about 20,000
French, and the losses were:-- British, 1468 killed, wounded
and missing, including Abercromby (who died on the 28th),
Moore and three other generals wounded; French, 1160 killed
and (?) 3000 wounded. The British subsequently advanced upon
Alexandria, which surrendered on the 31st of August. (C. F. A.)
Modern city.
During the anarchy which accompanied Ottoman rule in Egypt
from first to last, Alexandria sank to a small town of about
4000 inhabitants; and it owed its modern renascence solely to
Mehemet Ali, who wanted a deep port and naval station for his
