It is not an uncommon view among scholars that humidity and age caused more papyri to be lost than the burning down of the library of Alexandria did. Many of which would have survived by being repeatedly copied and disseminated throughout the region.

Evidence for this common myth is lacking.

https://www.thearchaeologist.org/blog/the-great-library-of-a...

This is a common refrain but in reality I'm not sure it made much difference. Papyrus just doesn't age well and most manuscripts from this era would've been on papyrus.

What really decided what texts survived and what didn't was monastic traditions in in the Dark Ages and Middle Ages [1]. At this time, a monk might spend their entire life transcribing a particularly long manuscript. The materials were also expensive. So monasteries were selective in what got retain and unsurprisingly it skewed heavily to texts of religious significance and then to texts of significance to, say, Roman and Greek tradition and history given that monasteries were European.

[1]: https://spokenpast.com/articles/medieval-monks-erased-preser...

It probably held a bunch of relatively boring local administrative records as far as "documents found only in the Library of Alexandria" from what I've read. Of course some scholars of the boring administrative history of the world would be thrilled though.

Everybody knows it's under Uncle Scrooge's money bin. Spoiler alert.

For some reason, there is a gigantic and ancient monastery on Mount Sinai with a commensurate collection of ancient manuscripts and papyri. Totally coincidence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Catherine%27s_Monastery#...

How did all that stuff get up there? It was holy angels. #itsalwaysangels