Hypatia’s Lessons
A X Post by philosopher Daisy Dixon quotes a user named Vittorio who claims to have “never heard of any female philosopher”, to which she responds by criticizing such individuals as being "allergic to reading," highlighting their apparent ignorance or unwillingness to engage with well-known female thinkers in philosophy. The sentiment isn’t new. In another viral clip, far-right commentator Nick Fuentes asserted that women can only be "mothers, whores, or nuns" and denied the existence of female philosophers, inventors, generals, or billionaires, framing women solely in terms of sexual or reproductive roles. Ironically, one ancient woman philosopher would have instantly recognised the online world of misogyny and historical erasure where claims of ignorance about women's intellectual contributions echo broader prevalent views similar to those espoused by Nick Fuentes, who reduces women to reductive archetypes devoid of agency or achievement. Dixon's response highlights how such statements often stem from a deliberate avoidance of education and diverse perspectives, while Fuentes' rhetoric exemplifies how these ideas are weaponized to perpetuate gender hierarchies, ignoring trailblazers in philosophy, invention, and leadership.
Both of those instincts would have been recognisable to Hypatia of Alexandria.
Hypatia, a polymath, lived during the late 4th and early 5th centuries. Her ability to influence and persuade both sides of a deep political and religious divide in Alexandria still offer profound lessons. Hypatia’s inclusive approach to education, welcoming students from diverse backgrounds, and her reputation for impartiality and openness, contributed to fostering dialogue and understanding among differing ideologies. Hypatia lived during a period of significant religious and philosophical tensions in Alexandria, marked by clashes between the Pagans, Christians and Jews. The tensions between the Pagans and Christians in Alexandria during Hypatia’s time, were complex and multifaceted reflecting the conflicting dynamics of religious, social and political ideology within the city and the broader Roman Empire. The political climate was characterized by power struggles, sectarian violence, and the suppression of dissenting voices - a landscape which is very similar to our current environment. This suppression extended to women in particular. In a world where female intellectual authority was treated with suspicion or hostility, Hypatia's rise to prominence was a political act. The same forces that seek to erase women’s contributions from history today were alive and operative in Alexandria.
While Hypatia was not a diplomat in the traditional sense, her influence in Alexandria's intellectual and political circles shaped relations between the city's competing factions in ways that few of her contemporaries could claim. To understand how extraordinary this was, it is worth considering the world most women of her era inhabited. In late antiquity Alexandria, women were largely confined to the domestic sphere, excluded from public life, formal education, and political discourse. Elite women might exercise limited influence through their husbands or sons, but independent female authority in intellectual or civic life was virtually unthinkable. Against this backdrop, Hypatia's position was not merely unusual; it was unprecedented. She lectured publicly, advised the Roman prefect Orestes directly, and her counsel was sought by some of the most powerful men in the city (Watts). Her teachings, which emphasized reason, logic and intellectual inquiry, permeated the decision-making of Alexandria's political elite, representing a remarkably modern model of influence, one built not on birth, wealth or male patronage, but entirely on the force of her intellect (Dzielska). That a woman achieved this in 4th century Alexandria makes her not just a historical curiosity, but a direct challenge to anyone who claims women have never held intellectual or political authority.
Her wisdom and impartiality made her a trusted figure among both Pagans and Christians, and she often used her influence to promote dialogue and understanding between the differing ideologies. Hypatia’s school in Alexandria was known for its inclusivity, welcoming students from diverse religious and philosophical backgrounds. Her school stood out for its commitment to fostering dialogue and understanding among students with diverse belief systems, creating an environment where students could exchange ideals and debate without regard to religious affiliation (Watts). Her willingness to teach both Pagans and Christians reflects her dedication to the pursuit of knowledge and her belief in the importance of intellectual exchange across religious and political divides. Her school became a beacon of hope in a city marked by religious tensions. A woman holding this position of intellectual authority, commanding the respect of men across competing religious and political factions in a deeply patriarchal society, was itself remarkable. This is precisely the kind of historical reality that gets erased when influencers today claim women have never been philosophers, leaders or thinkers worthy of recognition. Hypatia was not an anomaly tolerated at the margins of Alexandrian intellectual life, she was at its center, sought out and revered by the most powerful men of her city. Her existence alone is a direct refutation of the narratives that continue to deny women’s intellectual legacy.
In 415ad, Hypatia was brutally murdered by a Christian mob led by fanatical Christian monks. Hypatia’s death was the culmination of years of growing animosity between the Pagans and Christians. Her status as a prominent Pagan philosopher had made her a target for Christian’s who saw her as a symbol of intellectual resistance to their growing ideological dominance. The consequences were immediate and far-reaching. Her death sparked outrage and condemnation both in Alexandria and beyond, while politically it destabilized the relationships she had worked hard to maintain. Orestes, the Roman prefect, found himself isolated, facing mounting pressure from the Christian faction emboldened by her murder. Without Hypatia’s influence as a mediating force, the fragile equilibrium she had helped sustain collapsed. Her murder did not achieve what her killers had intended. Instead of silencing her, it immortalized her, memorializing Hypatia as a testament to the power of reason against the forces of oppression, dogma and fear.
Hypatia's ability to navigate the tensions between Pagans and Christians in Alexandria positioned her as a bridge-builder and mediator, fostering dialogue and understanding across communities with diverse backgrounds. Hypatia was, in every meaningful sense, a diplomat, not in any official capacity, but in the way that matters most: she changed minds. Her emphasis on rationality, critical thinking, and ethical conduct permeated Alexandria's intellectual elite, shaping the political attitudes and decisions of those who governed the city. The outcry and condemnation of her death marked a turning point in Alexandria's political climate, bringing international attention to the rising religious tensions and political instability of the city, prompting political fallout for Orestes and the overall governance of the city (Watts). That her murder prompted condemnation beyond Alexandria's borders speaks to the reach of the bridge she had built. She had made herself indispensable to the idea of a city capable of holding its contradictions together, and her absence proved it.
Hypatia's story resonates with particular urgency in our current moment. In an era where online misogyny has found new platforms and audiences, where influencers like Nick Fuentes can command millions of followers while denying the very existence of women's intellectual contributions, Hypatia stands as a reminder. She did not merely exist as a female philosopher; she was one of the most influential thinkers of her age, shaping the governance of a major city, bridging irreconcilable divides, and earning the respect of powerful men across competing factions. The ignorance that Daisy Dixon identifies as "allergic to reading" is not simply laziness, it is a willful erasure of women like Hypatia, whose lives directly contradict the reductive narratives that incels and far-right commentators depend on to shape their worldview.
What makes Hypatia's legacy so enduring is not only what she achieved, but how she achieved it. In a city fracturing along religious and political lines, she chose inclusion over tribalism, reason over dogma, and dialogue over dominance. These are not merely ancient virtues; they are radical acts in any era defined by polarization and ideological extremism. Her murder did not silence her ideas; it immortalized them. Today, as women philosophers, scientists, leaders, and thinkers continue to have their contributions minimized or outright denied, Hypatia's life offers both inspiration and a warning. Societies that silence their most capable and principled voices in service of rigid hierarchies do not just lose those individuals; they lose the possibility of the bridge they represent. And a bridge not crossed is one that eventually crumbles, taking with it every connection it might have made. Leaving behind only silence where understanding once stood.
This is why history matters and why the erasure of figures like Hypatia is never merely an academic oversight; it is a political act designed to narrow our sense of what is possible. When we forget women like Hypatia, we forget that bridges can be built at all. And in an era of deepening division, where voices like Fuentes’ would have us believe that women have never contributed, never led, never thought, remembering Hypatia is not just an act of historical accuracy. It is an act of resistance in a time when the world is still choosing, as Alexandria once did, between the peace of understanding and the chaos of those who fear it.
Notes:
Dzielska, M. (1995). Hypatia of Alexandria (F. Lyra, Trans.). Harvard University Press.
Watts, E. J. (2017). Hypatia: The Life and legend of an ancient philosopher. Oxford University Press.
