The surrender of all Egypt followed the capture of its capital.  A tribute of two ducats was laid on every male of mature age, besides a tax on all lands in proportion to their value, and the revenue which resulted to the Caliph is estimated at twelve millions of ducats.

It is well known that Amru was a poet in his youth; and throughout all his campaigns he manifested an intelligent and inquiring spirit, if not more highly informed, at least more liberal and extended in its views than was usual among the early Moslem conquerors.  He delighted, in his hours of leisure, to converse with learned men, and acquire through their means such knowledge as had been denied to him by the deficiency of his education.  Such a companion he found at Alexandria in a native of the place, a Christian of the sect of the Jacobites, eminent for his philological researches, his commentaries on Moses and Aristotle, and his laborious treatises of various kinds, surnamed Philoponus, from his love of study, but commonly known by the name of John the Grammarian.

An intimacy soon arose between the Arab conqueror and the Christian philologist; an intimacy honorable to Amru, but destined to be lamentable in its result to the cause of letters.  In an evil hour, John the Grammarian, being encouraged by the favor shown him by the Arab general, revealed to him a treasure hitherto unnoticed, or rather unvalued, by the Moslem conquerors.  This was a vast collection of books or manuscripts, since renowned in history as the Alexandrian Library.  Perceiving that in taking an account of everything valuable in the city, and sealing up all its treasures, Amru had taken no notice of the books, John solicited that they might be given to him.  Unfortunately the learned zeal of the Grammarian gave a consequence to the books in the eyes of Amru, and made him scrupulous of giving them away without permission of the Caliph.  He forthwith wrote to Omar, stating the merits of John, and requesting to know whether the books might be given to him.  The reply of Omar was laconic, but fatal.  “The contents of those books,” said he, “are in conformity with the Koran, or they are not.  If they are, the Koran is sufficient without them; if they are not, they are pernicious.  Let them, therefore, be destroyed.”

Amru, it is said, obeyed the order punctually.  The books and manuscripts were distributed as fuel among the five thousand baths of the city; but so numerous were they that it took six months to consume them.  This act of barbarism, recorded by Abulpharagius, is considered somewhat doubtful by Gibbon, in consequence of its not being mentioned by two of the most ancient chroniclers, Elmacin in his Saracenic history, and Eutychius in his annals, the latter of whom was patriarch of Alexandria and has detailed the conquest of that city.  It is inconsistent, too, with the character of Amru as a poet and a man of superior intelligence; and it has recently been reported, we know not on what authority, that many of the literary treasures thus said to have been destroyed do actually exist in Constantinople.  Their destruction, however, is generally credited and deeply deplored by historians.  Amru, as a man of genius and intelligence, may have grieved at the order of the Caliph, while, as a loyal subject and faithful soldier, he felt bound to obey it.