Hypatia of Alexandria is presented every 8th of March as a symbol: sometimes as a “martyr of science,” sometimes as a pretext for sweeping condemnations of the Church. Yet beyond fixed ideas and myths, who was Hypatia—and what is the truth about her horrific death according to the historical sources?

The historical Hypatia (late 4th–early 5th century) was a distinguished philosopher in Alexandria, the daughter of the mathematician Theon. She is associated with the Neoplatonic tradition and appears to have taught mathematics and philosophy to a circle of students that included Christians. A characteristic case is Synesius of Cyrene, who later became a bishop and who, in his letters, speaks with respect of his teacher and of her role as a trusted adviser.

As for her written or scientific work, we know less than some people on social media often claim: none of her works have survived, and the picture that emerges from modern scholarship is that her contribution was primarily pedagogical and interpretive, through commentaries and explanations of the Hellenistic mathematical and astronomical tradition. This does not diminish her; in that period, teaching and the formation of students were a central way of practising philosophy.

Her horrific death in 415 CE is described by Socrates Scholasticus, a Christian historian close to the events, who in fact presents the killing as something that disgraced the city and brought shame. According to this account, Hypatia was murdered by a mob amid a climate of political conflict: she had a close relationship with the prefect Orestes, and some believed she was “preventing” reconciliation between Orestes and Bishop Cyril. Alexandria was a city with frequent outbreaks of violence and mob rule, where crowds at different moments turned against different targets—even against bishops, such as George and Proterius. This does not make the crime any less abhorrent, but it helps us see that the context was profoundly political and social.

Still, caution is needed regarding a claim that is often repeated: the historical sources do not provide documented evidence of an explicit “order” by Cyril to have Hypatia killed. In several modern retellings Cyril appears as the direct organizer, but this does not follow clearly from the main testimonies about the events. Moreover, more recent scholarship mentions that on the day the crime occurred Cyril was not in the city. In any case, there does not seem to be any record of an official charge or procedure that would make him personally responsible for the murder. This does not erase the violent climate and the conflicts of the period; it simply keeps us away from hasty conclusions that are not adequately supported by the sources.

The figure responsible for Hypatia’s “second career” in the modern public sphere is the English scholar John Toland. At the dawn of the Enlightenment, he used Hypatia less as the subject of a calm historical reconstruction and more as a rhetorical example serving a specific narrative: that free thought, classical learning, and philosophical discussion can be crushed when religious authority becomes a political force and fuels intolerance. In his work Hypatia (1720) he describes her as exemplary in virtue, modest, and exceptionally learned, so that she functions as an “innocent martyr” of reason, while at the same time he shifts the center of the story to the violence of the clergy and the Alexandrian mob. Thus Hypatia’s story becomes a tool of early Enlightenment polemic in favor of toleration and against ecclesiastical influence: an event from late antiquity is reshaped into a didactic example for the dilemmas of his own time, with more absolute contrasts and with far less historical reliability.

Voltaire builds on this early Enlightenment use of Hypatia and makes it even more effective for his audience: he takes an episode from late antiquity and turns it into a clear illustration of the conflict between intellectual cultivation and the fanaticism produced when religious authority and political power intertwine. Where Toland has already “staged” Hypatia as a virtuous, modest, and highly educated figure to support the argument for toleration, Voltaire incorporates her story into a broader program of critique against intolerance and ecclesiastical influence, aiming to provoke moral outrage and to strengthen the Enlightenment demand for reason, moderation, and freedom of thought. In this way Hypatia—who in the ancient sources appears bound up with the political rivalries of Alexandria—moves into the modern public sphere as an emblematic “case”: less a complex historical personality and more a symbol of the Enlightenment’s confrontation with intolerance and dogmatism.

Finally, it is worth remembering that the modern image of Hypatia has been loaded with the desires and symbols of other eras: she is often presented as a “proto-feminist,” as a “martyr of rationality,” or as a pioneering scientist credited with discoveries that are not documented. The historical Hypatia, however, is already significant enough without turning her into a character made to fit our contemporary slogans. If we want to honor her, we should do so with respect for the evidence: as a remarkable teacher and intellectual who was caught in a struggle for power, in a city where mob violence could destroy lives—and where history is more complex than a convenient myth.