Quotes by Alexander the Great

Theseus · Post by **Theseus** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:30 pm

I happened across a site that has a few of Alexander's more famous quotes and thought I'd post them here and hope that you will post your favorites that are not listed
http://quotes.zaadz.com/Alexander_the_Great

I am indebted to my father for living , but to my teacher for living well

There is nothing impossible to him who will try.

Do you not think it a matter worthy of lamentation that when there is such a vast multitude of them [worlds], we have not yet conquered one?

I assure you I had rather excel others in the knowledge of what is excellent, than in the extent of my power and dominion.

At Achilles tomb, O fortunate youth, to have found Homer as the herald of your glory!

I send you a kaffis of mustard seed, that you may taste and acknowledge the bitterness of my victory

I will not steal a victory. The end and perfection of our victories is to avoid the vices and infirmities of those whom we subdue.

If I were not Alexander, I would be Diogenes.

Two of my favorites are listed already, the I will not steal my victory and Nothing is imposible to him who try. Another I like that is not listed is when Parmenio was trying to convince Alexander to take the conditions of a treaty and Parmenio said I would accept these terms if I were Alexander or something like that and Alexander replied "I too if I were Parminio".

jasonxx · Post by **jasonxx** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:43 pm

I dont think we can be at all sure if any of the Quotes were really Alexanders. It relies on where we place our own thoughts and romantic notions.

I doubt anyone know what Alexander Actually did let alone what he said.

My favourite quote has probably nothing to do with Alexander.

I love the Richard Burton Alexander Quote.

"What I am is on my face and What I see is on my face"

Maybe thats the quote I like to live upto and live by although it may not be liked by others.

Or I like my own funny one.

"Clietus I warned you about tripping onto the point of my spear"

kenny

Kit · Post by **Kit** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:11 pm

I have to agree with Kenny. It is difficult to trust any of the 'quotes' attributed to Alexander directly given that the only surviving written records of him are dated to centuries after his death. It would be a bit like trusting a tabloid newspapers 'quote' from a celebrity today.

I fear that much like Diogenes I am a bit of a cynic!

Theseus · Post by **Theseus** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:34 pm

Okay, how about supposed quotes of Alexander the Great?

Vergina Sun · Post by **Vergina Sun** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 9:21 pm

I personally would like to believe many of the great quotes atributed to Alexander are true. I always imagine him as a very well-spoken, strong man, and some of the quotes fit him perfectly. I understand that the historians were also great writers, and could have been a bit creative with some of his quotes to make him appear better to the reader. Some of his quotes could certainly have been made up, but in my humble opinion at least a few of them should be true, or close to true.

Efstathios · Post by **Efstathios** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:42 pm

You are wrong about the sources being centuries after Alexander. They were based on the original sources by Ptolemy, Aristovoulos, and others. Surely they didnt change quotes that were included in these mens' works, because they were still available for anyone to see. That assuming that in the original sources there were quotes.

Theseus · Post by **Theseus** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:47 pm

Efstathios wrote:You are wrong about the sources being centuries after Alexander. They were based on the original sources by Ptolemy, Aristovoulos, and others. Surely they didnt change quotes that were included in these mens' works, because they were still available for anyone to see. That assuming that in the original sources there were quotes.

These are my beliefs as well. As I hopefully recall correctly

Plutarch and Arrian had the original sources in their hands when they wrote about Alexander.

Paralus · Post by **Paralus** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:40 pm

Efstathios wrote:You are wrong about the sources being centuries after Alexander. They were based on the original sources by Ptolemy, Aristovoulos, and others. Surely they didnt change quotes that were included in these mens' works, because they were still available for anyone to see. That assuming that in the original sources there were quotes.

And Ptolemy, because he was a king, didn't lie.

Our secondary sources indeed repeated and rewrote that which was in the primary sources. And, if that which was in the primary sources took any amount of artistic licence, then - a fortiori - so did the latter writers.

The later writers did not slavishly copy. Even Diodorus added his own colour. Arrian, quite openly, states that he chooses what he will include and what he might not. He will report that which suits his picture of his hero and not always that which does not. When he does (such as the murders of Philotas, Parmenion, Clietus and Callisthenes) he telescopes them together (out of the chronological order of the narrative) so as to be "done with the nasty stuff" and leave it behind.

Plutarch, fitting with his stated aim, is far more interested in the interesting anecdote than hard history. He has chosen accordingly too.

It is extremely doubtful to assert that because the secondary writers had access to the primary sources, all they report - quotes, stories etc - must therefore be true. That relies on the primary sources being word for word correct. Unlikely in the extreme.

Efstathios · Post by **Efstathios** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:14 am

Michael, i think the key here is if anone from the era right after Alexander's death, would try to exault him more, and for what purpose. And i mean, his friends, comrades, and also all these people who wrote history about him, or included something about Alexander in their works. Cleitarhos, Nearhos, and others.

Let's discuss about that. I'll get back on this.

Paralus · Post by **Paralus** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:14 pm

Of course Stathi. That is the entire point: it was those in a position to "write" that had a barrow to push. Particularly Ptolemy and Antigonus. The latter even more so as Alexander left him "stranded", guarding his supply lines in Phrygia, whilst the grand cavalcade carried on. It was no mean feat of generalship, by the way, as Antigonus was to demonstrate later.

Either way, Ptolemy (Clietarchus), and the Antigonids - particularly, one suspects, Gonatas with Hieronymus - bulk large in Alexander "history" and the propaganda of the Diadoch struggles.

marcus · Post by **marcus** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:36 pm

Paralus wrote:
Efstathios wrote:You are wrong about the sources being centuries after Alexander. They were based on the original sources by Ptolemy, Aristovoulos, and others. Surely they didnt change quotes that were included in these mens' works, because they were still available for anyone to see. That assuming that in the original sources there were quotes.
And Ptolemy, because he was a king, didn't lie.

Our secondary sources indeed repeated and rewrote that which was in the primary sources. And, if that which was in the primary sources took any amount of artistic licence, then - a fortiori - so did the latter writers.

The later writers did not slavishly copy. Even Diodorus added his own colour. Arrian, quite openly, states that he chooses what he will include and what he might not. He will report that which suits his picture of his hero and not always that which does not. When he does (such as the murders of Philotas, Parmenion, Clietus and Callisthenes) he telescopes them together (out of the chronological order of the narrative) so as to be "done with the nasty stuff" and leave it behind.

Plutarch, fitting with his stated aim, is far more interested in the interesting anecdote than hard history. He has chosen accordingly too.

It is extremely doubtful to assert that because the secondary writers had access to the primary sources, all they report - quotes, stories etc - must therefore be true. That relies on the primary sources being word for word correct. Unlikely in the extreme.

Also, later writers were quite possibly more desirous of including rhetorical niceties than the earlier writers. Therefore, while Ptolemy might have written what Alexander said, writers such as Arrian, Plutarch and Curtius most definitely took the opportunity to "turn a nice phrase" so that, even if the sentiment was the same, the words were more refined.

It's by no means certain, but I agree that, just because Ptolemy knew Alexander, it doesn't follow that (a) what he wrote reflected the exact words of the king, or (b) that the later writers felt in any way obliged to copy those same words.

ATB

Taphoi · Post by **Taphoi** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:24 pm

Sometimes it is possible to be fairly sure that quotes of Alexander are accurate.

For example:

Arrian, Anabasis 7.14.6 wrote:Alexander gave them a votive offering to take back to Asclepius, adding: "Yet Asclepius has not been kind to me, in failing to save for me the comrade whom I valued as much as my life."

Homer, Iliad 18.81-82, quoting Achilles wrote:...Patroclus, the comrade whom I valued above all others and as much as my life.

This is either Alexander paraphrasing Homer or it is invented by Arrian or one of the primary sources, which he used. Of these only Alexander is attested (Dio Chrysostom, 4th Discourse on Kingship) to have known the Iliad by heart. Furthermore, neither Arrian nor anyone else seems to have noticed that this is a paraphrase of the Iliad (it uses the same Greek words). This makes it overwhelmingly likely that Alexander truly spoke these words.

If the quotes in Arrian are accurate enough for us to recognise paraphrases of Homer in them, then perhaps they are more accurate than some believe.

Best wishes,

Andrew

amyntoros · Post by **amyntoros** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:13 pm

Taphoi wrote:... only Alexander is attested (Dio Chrysostom, 4th Discourse on Kingship) to have known the Iliad by heart. Furthermore, neither Arrian nor anyone else seems to have noticed that this is a paraphrase of the Iliad (it uses the same Greek words). This makes it overwhelmingly likely that Alexander truly spoke these words.

If the quotes in Arrian are accurate enough for us to recognise paraphrases of Homer in them, then perhaps they are more accurate than some believe.

Ah, but it not being mentioned about Ptolemy or Aristobulus doesn't mean that they were unable to quote Homer - just that nothing has survived to tell us if they could. After all, even Cassander was said to be "so fond of Homer that he had the greater part of the epics at his tongue's end. He had even made copies of the Iliad and Odyssey with his own hand." (Athenaeus Book 14. 620 a - b) Given their backgrounds and the strong Homeric influence on Macedonia I suspect that many of those at court could quote freely from the Iliad even if they didn't have the whole book memorized.

Best regards,

Taphoi · Post by **Taphoi** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:22 pm

But it isn't a quotation of Homer: just an allusion to a phrase in Homer in a parallel context. If the early sources had wished to put Homer's words into Alexander's mouth, then I think they would have been more obvious about it. This case is sufficiently subtle that neither ancient nor modern writers seem to have even noticed it. Why would a forger employ an allusion that was too subtle to be recognised? This is Alexander himself, as Arrian says.

Best wishes,

Andrew

amyntoros · Post by **amyntoros** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 8:04 pm

Taphoi wrote:But it isn't a quotation of Homer: just an allusion to a phrase in Homer in a parallel context. If the early sources had wished to put Homer's words into Alexander's mouth, then I think they would have been more obvious about it. This case is sufficiently subtle that neither ancient nor modern writers seem to have even noticed it. Why would a forger employ an allusion that was too subtle to be recognised? This is Alexander himself, as Arrian says.

Well, I must begin by saying that I wouldn't use the word forgery to describe quotes from Alexander which originated with one of the original sources or with Arrian – this, of course, if the words were never actually Alexander's. Forgery implies intent and I doubt that was always the case. (See below for further explanation.) Also, I'm not convinced that Ptolemy, Aristobulus and/or Arrian were incapable of subtle allusions.

Taphoi wrote:
Arrian, Anabasis 7.14.6 wrote:Alexander gave them a votive offering to take back to Asclepius, adding: "Yet Asclepius has not been kind to me, in failing to save for me the comrade whom I valued as much as my life."

Having said all that, I ought to stress that I would have no difficulty believing that the words you quoted above DID originate with Alexander himself. It sounds like something Alexander would have said based on what we know about him (and I believe he would have recalled praying to Asclepius when Hephaistion was sick). On the other hand, although I could accept the above quote as accurate it doesn't follow that I accept the following:

Taphoi wrote: If the quotes in Arrian are accurate enough for us to recognise paraphrases of Homer in them, then perhaps they are more accurate than some believe.

Just because Arrian may have had a reliable source in this instance doesn't mean that ALL his quotes are accurate representations of Alexander's words. First of all much depends on whether his sources can be considered reliable for all recorded remarks and speeches of Alexander. I don't think that they can be. Some words probably were recorded for posterity, depending on the circumstances, while some were probably dependent on memory which is always fallible. I mean, I can tell you the gist of many conversations I've overheard, but would have trouble remembering them word for word. And I also agree with others here who suspect artistic license in many an instance, whether in the original or secondary sources. As discussed in the Opis thread, I'm convinced that Arrian added his own rhetorical flourishes to Alexander's speech here. Some of the things Arrian records Alexander as having said at Opis border on the absurd when examined in context. And that's what I believe we should always do – examine every quote in context when it is possible. One probable true quote does not validate all the others, IMO.

Best regards,