“Now that the wars are coming to an end, I wish you to prosper in peace. May all mortals from now on live like one people in concord and for mutual advancement. Consider the world as your country, with laws common to all and where the best will govern irrespective of tribe. I do not distinguish among men, as the narrow-minded do, both among Greeks and Barbarians. I am not interested in the descendance of the citizens or their racial origins. I classify them using one criterion: their virtue. For me every virtuous foreigner is a Greek and every evil Greek worse than a Barbarian. If differences ever develop between you never have recourse to arms, but solve them peacefully. If necessary, I should be your arbitrator. You must not consider God like an autocratic despot, but as a common Father of all; so your behavior may resemble the life siblings have in a family. On my part I should consider all equals, white or blacks, and wish you all to be not only subjects of the Commonwealth, but participants and partners. As much as this depends on me, I should try to bring about what I promised. The oath we made over tonight’s libations hold onto as a Contract of Love.”
Alexander’s ideas as expressed in the            oath given at Opis can be traced in the four following passages:
[1]  in ARRIAN VII, the scene at Opis and Alexander’s            prayer –  the greatest part is from Ptolemy, who had Alexander’s diary             in his possession and two items are from a λόγος.
[2] in a fragment of ERATOSTHENES – part is quoted in            STRABO 1,4,9 (66) and part in PLUTARCH, de Alexandri Fortuna.
[3] in a passage in PLUTARCH. ib. 330E, possibly from            ERATOSTHENES.
[4] in PLUTARCH Alex. XXVII, source unknown.
PLUTARCH (Alex. XXVII) begins by telling the story            of Alexander’s visit to Ammon and the priest hailing him as son of the            God.
He  continues that Alexander had been pleased with some            things  said by Psammon, a philosopher in Egypt, and especially by his             saying that God was King of all men (ότι πάντες οι άνθρωποι βασιλεύονται υπό Θεού). 
He,  considering these matters, reached a more philosophic             conclusion and said that God was the common father of all mankind, but             that he made the best ones peculiarly his own (αυτός περί τούτων φιλοσοφώτερον δόξάζειν και λέγειν, ως πάντων μεν όντα κοινόν ανθρώπων πατέρα τον Θεόν, ιδίους δε ποιούμενον εαυτού τους αρίστους).
A variation somehow of Homer’s phrase that Zeus was the            father of Gods and men (πατήρ ανδρών τε Θεών τε); bearing in mind that Alexander            knew his Homer.
With  regard to the unity of mankind, whilst STRABO does            not  indicate who advised Alexander to treat Greeks as friends and Barbarians             as enemies, PLUTARCH states it was Aristotle who, as we  know, in the            Politics had criticized some who  had said that good men            were really free and bad men were  really slaves whom he equated with            barbarians – barbarians  meaning in ancient Greece those who did not            speak Greek. 
ERATOSTHENES  mentions that Alexander disagreed with Aristotle            and he  banned the distinction of Greek and barbarian asserting that             the real distinction between men was not race, but virtue. It is known             that Aristotle had advised Alexander to behave to Greeks as a  leader            and to barbarians as a master, had Alexander done  this, his leadership            would have come to nothing, but wars and  banishments and internal conflicts            Alexander knew better and  said that the real distinction between men            was one of race,  but whether they were good or bad in every race. For            he  believed that he had a mission from God to harmonize men generally             and to be the reconciler of the world by bringing men from  everywhere            into a unity and mixing their lives and customs,  their marriages and            social lives, as in a loving-cup (αλλά κοινός ήκειν θεόθεν αρμοστής και διαλλακτής των όλων νομίζων,... εις ταυτό συνενεγκών τα πανταχόθεν, ώσπερ εν κρατήρι φιλοτασίω μίξας τους βίους και τα ήθη και τους γάμους και τας δίαιτας).
The  loving-cup being actually the great crater on Alexander’s             table at Opis where he gave a vast banquet of 9000 people, according             to a λόγος  in ARRIAN, to emphasize that the long war was now over            and  that the world with which he was concerned was at peace. The banquet             concluded with all the guests making a libation together, which  led            up to and was followed by his prayer. ARRIAN’s account of  the scene            and the prayer is taken from PTOLEMY, Alexander’s  closest school friend            and general who followed him faithfully  in his campaign and to whom            his diary he entrusted.
ERATOSTHENES’  references go back to some eyewitnesses            who were very young  at the time. The great number of guests, all of            whom were  seated, necessitated many tables; Alexander’s own was the             largest and most prominent and on it stood the crater Ptolemy mentions,             which contained the wine for the libation. There is a  description of            this enormous crater, which had originally  belonged to the Great king            and was found at Susa. It was used  by Alexander (εν τω μεγάλω δείπνω, ότε την θυσίαν εποιησάμεθα των Σωτηρίων) i.e. the conclusion of peace.
PTOLEMY  says that at Alexander’s own table were seated            Macedonians,  Persians, some Greek seers, some Magi (Medes) and representatives             of the other peoples. All those at his table drew for themselves  wine            from the crater on his table; those at the other tables  did the same            from their craters, thus the whole assembly  making one libation at the            same time led, as PTOLEMY says, by  the Greek seers and the Magi. The            occasion culminating in  Alexander’s prayer found in ARRIAN from Ptolemy,            who heard  it, and in reference to it in PLUTARCH’s de Alexandri Fortuna,            I330E (πάσιν ανθρώποις ομόνοιαν και ειρήνην και κοινωνίαν προς αλλήλους παρασκευάσαι διανοηθέντα).
In addition to that, ERATOSTHENES’ passage quotes: Alexander’s            intention (διανοηθέντα) was to bring about for all            men Homonoia (concord) and peace and partnership with one another (την κοινωνίαν προς αλλήλους).  That the Homonoia for which            Alexander prayed was meant to  include more than Macedonians and Persians            and all the people  under his rule seems certain enough for ERATOSTHENES            calls  the people mixed in the loving-cup (τα πανταχόθεν) people from everywhere; and            again (πάσιν ανθρώποις) all men. The same meaning            one gets from ARRIAN-PTOLEMY.
Homonoia  had been a growing preoccupation among the Greeks            for some  time. XENOPHON’s statement that Homonoia was the greatest virtue             inside a City was only one aspect of it. Similar meaning came to  have            ISOCRATES’ use of the word who went further and urged  Philip of Macedonia,            a descendant of Heracles, to unite the  Greeks against the barbarians.            A role that his son,  Alexander, was destined to play and improve by            universalizing  the meaning of the word.
Alexander  was the first man known to us to regard all            men as brothers  before One God and that they should live together in             Homonoia, that is in unity of mind and heart, and as equal partners.             This was his vision and his dream. An Homonoia, a concord, which  for            centuries mankind has been longing for.
                                       http://www.helleniccomserve.com/historical_sources_alexander.html
