Hypatia as bad history

The story of Hypatia is one of those strange tales from history.  First, many have never heard of it.  Had I not been a history major, I don't know that I would have known of it apart from my studies.  It's not like the story of Julius Caesar being assassinated or Abraham Lincoln visiting the theater.  It's not on that scale.

Second, the version known is typically that version used in anti-Catholic/anti-Christian polemics.  Most who have heard of it know it as one more example of the Church hating women, smart people, learning, books, schools, puppies, and anything else we can imagine.

File that under psuedo-history.  That's when people believe they know something because they've been told, and yet they have been told part of, half of, or none of the actual truth.  Mark Shea calls it psuedo-knowledge, but psuedo-history is more accurate in this case.  It's also better since no other subject suffers from the tendency more than history.  It's easy to get the past wrong, since we already have to rely on others for our knowledge, and often lack many of the pieces of the whole puzzle.

Here, Mike Flynn does what Mike Flynn does best, and that's look at the facts we know and the data we possess.  Like a person seeking truth, he's looking at as much of the data as possible.  Just as he does with things like gun control or climate change, he accounts for as much as he can, rather than take all that pesky inconvenient information and put it in a closet somewhere.

By the time you're done with the post, you'll understand why the story of Hypatia is one that is worthy studying.  It's just that too few have bothered to do so, preferring to use it as a club with which to beat a religion they do not like in the first place.