Dr. Graham Wrightson

So it's a strange concept to think about primary sources as not being connected directly to their period. But Alexander is comparatively very well resourced that we have these five sources. After Alexander, we hardly have any sources at all that tell us what's going on with the successors. We have Diodorus, and we have to rely on him because he's pretty much our only one.

So it's a strange concept to think about primary sources as not being connected directly to their period. But Alexander is comparatively very well resourced that we have these five sources. After Alexander, we hardly have any sources at all that tell us what's going on with the successors. We have Diodorus, and we have to rely on him because he's pretty much our only one.

So it's a strange concept to think about primary sources as not being connected directly to their period. But Alexander is comparatively very well resourced that we have these five sources. After Alexander, we hardly have any sources at all that tell us what's going on with the successors. We have Diodorus, and we have to rely on him because he's pretty much our only one.

and we have the fragmentary history of Arian successes, and we get Plutarch's lives of a few of these famous generals, like Demetrius and Eumenes, but he unfortunately doesn't give us lives of all of the generals, which would be helpful, right?

and we have the fragmentary history of Arian successes, and we get Plutarch's lives of a few of these famous generals, like Demetrius and Eumenes, but he unfortunately doesn't give us lives of all of the generals, which would be helpful, right?

and we have the fragmentary history of Arian successes, and we get Plutarch's lives of a few of these famous generals, like Demetrius and Eumenes, but he unfortunately doesn't give us lives of all of the generals, which would be helpful, right?

If we had a life of Perdiccas, or a life of Craterus, or a life of Antipater even, or a life of Cassander, we could fit all these different people into the place. But because we have these, just Diodorus, who gets things wrong, and misses things out, it's hard pieced together.

If we had a life of Perdiccas, or a life of Craterus, or a life of Antipater even, or a life of Cassander, we could fit all these different people into the place. But because we have these, just Diodorus, who gets things wrong, and misses things out, it's hard pieced together.

If we had a life of Perdiccas, or a life of Craterus, or a life of Antipater even, or a life of Cassander, we could fit all these different people into the place. But because we have these, just Diodorus, who gets things wrong, and misses things out, it's hard pieced together.

So I became an ancient historian because I like jigsaw puzzle with history, that you have some aspects of the knowledge and you have to piece together and interpret what it actually says in terms of where... and when we put all these things together. And so that's interesting.

So I became an ancient historian because I like jigsaw puzzle with history, that you have some aspects of the knowledge and you have to piece together and interpret what it actually says in terms of where... and when we put all these things together. And so that's interesting.

So I became an ancient historian because I like jigsaw puzzle with history, that you have some aspects of the knowledge and you have to piece together and interpret what it actually says in terms of where... and when we put all these things together. And so that's interesting.

Diodorus, for example, there's this concept of high chronology and low chronology in the successors that he might have missed an entire year of history that he's describing in his text, and that our dating for stuff is completely off because he's messed things around. So our sources for the successors in particular is very problematic. And we don't really get useful sources again until...

Diodorus, for example, there's this concept of high chronology and low chronology in the successors that he might have missed an entire year of history that he's describing in his text, and that our dating for stuff is completely off because he's messed things around. So our sources for the successors in particular is very problematic. And we don't really get useful sources again until...

Diodorus, for example, there's this concept of high chronology and low chronology in the successors that he might have missed an entire year of history that he's describing in his text, and that our dating for stuff is completely off because he's messed things around. So our sources for the successors in particular is very problematic. And we don't really get useful sources again until...

well, two twenties, really, when you get into the Roman historians of the Seleucids and the Ptolemies. So we have this sort of almost a century of stuff where we don't really know what's going on. And with the successes, that's an interesting aspect.

well, two twenties, really, when you get into the Roman historians of the Seleucids and the Ptolemies. So we have this sort of almost a century of stuff where we don't really know what's going on. And with the successes, that's an interesting aspect.

well, two twenties, really, when you get into the Roman historians of the Seleucids and the Ptolemies. So we have this sort of almost a century of stuff where we don't really know what's going on. And with the successes, that's an interesting aspect.

So we have to not only those written sources, but we have to piece together inscriptions and other archaeology from areas that these people are conquering that allow us to sort of figure things out slowly or papyri evidence comes in and letters and so on. So our sources are very difficult to

So we have to not only those written sources, but we have to piece together inscriptions and other archaeology from areas that these people are conquering that allow us to sort of figure things out slowly or papyri evidence comes in and letters and so on. So our sources are very difficult to