The daughter of Theon the geometer, the Alexandrian philosopher,[1] she was herself a philosopher and well-known to many. [She was] the wife of Isidore the philosopher.[2] She flourished in the reign of Arcadius.[3] She wrote a commentary on Diophantos,[4] the Astronomical Canon, and a commentary on the Conics of Apollonios. She was torn to pieces by the Alexandrians, and her body was violated and scattered over the whole city. She suffered this because of envy and her exceptional wisdom, especially in regard to astronomy. According to some, [this was the fault of] Cyril,[5] but according to others, [it resulted] from the inveterate insolence and rebelliousness of the Alexandrians. For they did this also to many of their own bishops: consider George and Proterios.[6]
Concerning Hypatia the philosopher, proof that the Alexandrians [were] rebellious. She was born and raised and educated in Alexandria. Having a nobler nature than her father's, she was not satisfied with his mathematical instruction, but she also embraced the rest of philosophy with diligence. Putting on the philosopher's cloak although a woman and advancing through the middle of the city, she explained publicly to those who wished to hear either Plato or Aristotle or any other of the philosophers. In addition to her teaching, attaining the height of practical virtue, becoming just and prudent, she remained a virgin. She was so very beautiful and attractive that one of those who attended her lectures fell in love with her. He was not able to contain his desire, but he informed her of his condition. Ignorant reports say that Hypatia relieved him of his disease by music; but truth proclaims that music failed to have any effect. She brought some of her female rags[7] and threw them before him, showing him the signs of her unclean origin, and said, "You love this, o youth, and there is nothing beautiful about it." His soul was turned away by shame and surprise at the unpleasant sight, and he was brought to his right mind. Such was Hypatia, both skillful and eloquent in words and prudent and civil in deeds. The rest of the city loved and honored her exceptionally, and those who were appointed at each time as rulers of the city at first attended her lectures, as also it used to happen at Athens. For if the reality had perished, yet the name of philosophy still seemed magnificent and admirable to those who held the highest offices in the community. So then once it happened that Cyril who was bishop of the opposing faction, passing by the house of Hypatia, saw that there was a great pushing and shoving against the doors, "of men and horses together,"[8] some approaching, some departing, and some standing by. When he asked what crowd this was and what the tumult at the house was, he heard from those who followed that the philosopher Hypatia was now speaking and that it was her house. When he learned this, his soul was bitten [with envy], so that he immediately plotted her death, a most unholy of all deaths. For as she came out as usual many close-packed ferocious men, truly despicable, fearing neither the eye of the gods nor the vengeance of men, killed the philosopher,[9] inflicting this very great pollution and shame on their homeland. And the emperor would have been angry at this, if Aidesios had not been bribed. He remitted the penalty for the murders, but drew this on himself and his family, and his offspring paid the price.
The memory of these [events] still preserved among the Alexandrians reduced very little the honor and zeal of the Alexandrians for Isidore: and although such a threat was impending, nevertheless each strove to keep company with him frequently and to hear the words which came from his wise mouth. As many as excelled in rhetorical or poetic pursuits also welcomed regular association with the philosopher. For even if he was ill-trained in such matters, yet through his philosophical acumen he contributed to these men some greater diligence in their own skills. For he discussed everything with precision and he criticized more judiciously than others the speeches and poems presented. Therefore also in the performance of some literary show he praised sparingly what was presented. His praise was very modest, nevertheless timely and appropriate. Hence all the audience, so to speak, used his judgment as a guide for who spoke better or worse. I know three critics of my time who are able to judge what is said [both with] and without meter. The same man's judgment is recognized for both poems and prose compositions. But I judge the same man to be a creator of both only if equal practice is devoted to both and equal eagerness. I do not say that Isidore was one of these, but was even far inferior to the three. The judges [were] Agapios, Severianus, Nomos. Nomos [is] a contemporary of ours.[10]