Quotology 101 

Home ► Written ramblings ► Quotological Treatment of Historic Events and Persons ►

Quotological Treatment of Historic Events and Persons

By Panayis Fourniotis-Pavlatos, PhD.

The theory is based on three main and generally accepted points:

1. The cultural greatness of a people and the mental capacity of its leaders determines its importance during its history.

2. The level of a people's or person's mental capacity is determined (for lack of other evidence) from historic works and ideas they (he) have (has) left to future generations.

3. The most complete image of the culture of a people/person is therefore given by the quotes they/he leave(s) behind them.

Thus we see, the more important and the higher the quality of the quotes, the more important and successful is the people/person who create(s) them. The history of human-kind is full of examples supporting this theory and here are some of them.

Our historical analysis seems to indicate that the best quotes are these that consist of 3 words (3w); these are followed by the one word quotes (1w) whereas the two word (2w) quotes are definitely inferior. Quotes with more than three words are succesful only when the maker has no opponents able to create worthwhile quotes. A very good example showing this is Caesar's return to Rome: the Romans told him that crossing Rubicon (the river outside Rome where supposedly all Roman armies had to be disbanded) without disbanding his army would be ‘Casus Belli’ (2w, a cause of war). Thus Caesar only needed to say ‘Allea Jacta Est’ (3w) to win the argument. Caesar is renowned in history as one of the most important quote makers (Veni, Vidi, Vici (3w) and lots more). His last words (you too Brutus, (3w)) were nothing but an attempt to avoid his tragic fate. Had he managed to say it before being stabbed by Brutus he would have escaped the assassination*.

The Romans were a people who, due to their laconic language, created lots of quotes (thus being renowned in history as one of the most important people). Other examples are the succesful defence of Rome against Hannibal with a wisely created 3w quote ‘Hannibal Ante Portas’ and the destruction of Carthagene (is that how the English spell it?) (who only needed a 2w quote as it was already exhausted) with the quote ‘Delenta Cartago’. The Romans established their language and philosophy with ‘Regina Rosas Amat’ and ‘Dum Spiro Spero’ and their laws with ‘Dura Lex, Sed Lex’ which is, however, 4w resulting in the Roman laws being doubted some recently.

Going on to Byzantium, we see that this state did not have such a big historic importance because they created very few quotes: Constantine the Great became great using ‘En touto Nika’ (bloody Christian quote meaning ‘win with this’ sort of, this being the cross), and the Christian Orthodox Church spread to eastern Europe with ‘Kyrie Eleison’ (Lord have mercy) and ‘Doxasoi o Theos’ (Glorious be God) and the advance of the Muslims was stopped because of the hymn ‘Ti Hypermacho Stratego’ (the beyond-battle** general referring to the mother of Jesus, bloody horrid translations but they'll have to do).

The Greeks maintained their nationality during Turkish occupation with ‘feggaraki mou labro’ (my bright moon, that's supposed to be a nursery rhyme sung by Greek kids as they went to school at night as Greeks were banned from education). When the time came for the revolution it was obvious that the Turks had no hope of suppressing them because not only did the leaders create quotes in huge quantities (`area area na fainomaste kammia saradarea' (leader's urge to his men to spread out so that they appear numerous), ‘gia des kairo pou dialexe o charos na me parei’ (see what time death chose to take me) and lots more like the memoirs of Makrygiannis written after the war but helping it through time) but also because the revolution received the blessing of Palaeon Patron Germanos whose name is a 3w quote by itself.

In the Second World War the situation is much clearer. Hitler, armed from the start with two 2w quotes (`Sieg Heil’ and ‘Heil Hitler') had of course some triumphs at the start but didn't make it along to Britain since Churchill stopped him with ‘Their Finest Hour’ and the longer but quite high quality ‘we shall fight them on the beaches’. The Greeks stopped the Italians with ‘Ochi’ and ‘Aera’ (the first being the government's reply to the Italian demand of surrender (No) and the second being the battle-cry used by Greek troops on the mountains of Greece and Albania). The Japanese thrashed the Americans in Pearl Harbor with ‘Tora tora tora’ until general MacArthur quoted ‘I shall return’.

As far as ancient Greeks are concerned, not much needs to be said. Everybody knows the splendour of their quotes and (hence) their civilisation. Heraclitus created natural philosophy with ‘Ta panta rhei’*** (everything flows); other quotes like ‘kalos k'agathos’ (good and thingy, don't know how to translate) **** ‘ouk en to pollo to eu’ (not in plenty [the many] the quality) and ‘kai outo kath’ exis’ (et cetera, this is a quote as well, as you see quotology is applied everywhere) established ancient Greek ideas. It is worth noticing that most ancient Greek quotes are longer than 3w since the ancient Greeks had no quoteworthy opponents. Unfortunate is the example of Leonidas who, vastly outnumbered needed a 3w quote to win. The fact that his quote ‘Molon Lave’ (come and get it, punk, dirty Harry of antiquity) was only 2w led to Ephialtes' treachery and Leonidas' defeat. However, the existence of this single quote was enough to hold back the Persians long enough for the rest of the Greeks to get ready.

A very interesting case is that of the Spartans. Even though many quotes have been lost, the Spartans, based on the meta-quote '[to] Laconizein esti philosophein' (being laconic ― laconic meaning spartan as well as what it means nowadays ― is being philosophical) had converted their very speech to a continuous flow of quotes (a phenomenon known as quotologism). This is why they won the Peloponesian war.

Epilogue - Conclusions

Even though quotologic treatment of history is a new, radical, theory, it has started to have followers among the researchers of the past. Up to now, no conflicting evidence has been found ― apart from that of Mr. Sartzetakis (ex President of the Republic in Greece) who, even though he quoted ‘eimetha ethnos anadelphon’ (we are a brother-less nation), cannot be thought of as a worthwhile historic person. This being, however, the only exception and according to the ‘exception that justifies the rule’ (this being an important meta-quotologic law, covered by the theory) this example in the end is shown to support the theory.

Thus we can see that this theory is worth more careful study from historians. Maybe it would be a good move to found some quotology departments at universities so that funding will be possible for research purposes.

The fathers of quotology now work on the development of an expanded form of the theory that will cover not only past but future events as well.

* Original editor's (i.e. Andreas Gazis') note: I'm not sure but I think his exact words in Latin were ‘et tu que-something-or-other fili’, ‘you too beloved son’ or something like that. If that is so we can guess that his wounds confused him so that he used a 4w quote and hence not powerful enough to prevent Brutus's strike. If however his words were just ‘et tu fili’ then we can only admire Brutus's will-power who withstood the onslaught of a well formulated 3w quote. An indication of the latter being the case is Brutus's later madness who led him to think Caesar's ghost appeared to him in his tent and eventual defeat by Octavian wasn't it? Or was Octavian a second in command then? Anyway, he was defeated, that's for sure. A good example of a 3w quote slowly but surely destroying the mental balance of the man it was directed against.

** Editor's note: in fact, the true translation of ‘hypermacho’ (hypermacho, dative feminine adjective; it ends with an omega) is ‘champion’ in the sense of protector.

*** Editor's note: a very interesting point about the evolution of quotes can be made here. First I have to specify that the complete quote attributed to Heraclitus was ‘Ta panta rei kai ouden menei’, meaning ‘all flows [or is fluid], and nothing stays [constant]’. In the end the redundant trailing clarification was dumped (to use CS terminology), and it became a 3w quote.

Also note Julius Caesar's last quote*, which was longer than 3w in its original form, but, through the years, reverted to the ‘ground’ state of 3w.

Another interesting example is the Spartan quote ‘to lakonizein esti philosophein’, mentioned elsewhere in this paper. Over a number of years I've been using a joke version of this as a tag-line in Greek-speaking computer systems: ‘to laconizein’ (just a pun on how short ancient Greek quotes can be in relation to their content; to be laconic is be Spartan, but also to use language in a spartan way, i.e. not talk much). It struck me as strange when I noticed that this tag-line was becoming more and more famous and was being used in daily conversation.

There is a reason for this: quotes seem to gravitate towards 3w or 2w forms (little did I know that when I cut the laconizein quote). This proving that 2 or 3-word quotes are a ‘perfect’ form, the whole concept becomes an argument for quotation.

**** Editor's note: agathos stands for decent or honest in ancient Greek (came to mean naive or innocent in modern Greek). Kalos means ‘good’ in modern Greek; the ancient meaning is something between pretty/beautiful and good (the two being considered quite related).