Talk:Wars of the Diadochi

Classical Greece and Rome High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Greece High‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Classical

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

Phoenicia Mid‑importance

	Phoenicia portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Phoenicia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Phoenicia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.PhoeniciaWikipedia:WikiProject PhoeniciaTemplate:WikiProject PhoeniciaPhoenicia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Satrapies Picture too small

Hi everyone, i was checking the article and i liked it a lot, but when i tried to see the map of the satrapies i could barely see what the largest letters say, i know that there might be some people that can read it all, but most of us can't if somehow, somebody, could increase the image or font size, i'd be deeply grateful

--189.145.41.139 (talk) 00:39, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Locations??

Link to Cambodia/China is surely wrong! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.5.201 (talk) 10:26, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Wars of the Diadochi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120920055617/http://www.ancientlibrary.com/wcd/Category:Successors to http://www.ancientlibrary.com/wcd/Category:Successors

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:38, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

THIS MAP SHOULD BE ADDED TO 3RD DIADOCH WAR http://www.historyofwar.org/Maps/maps_Diadoch3.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A000:1407:C095:B7D8:60EC:5BF0:1AB4 (talk) 15:46, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Belligerents at the head?!

There is a flaw in the article. Instead of putting the the "Belligerents and Leaders" sections at each war separately, they have been put (incorrectly) at the head of the article. That is highly inaccurate, as the belligerents kept changing in each war, as indicated in the article itself - so in the current setup, Perdiccas and Ptolemy are shown together, along with Seleucus and Lysimachus (they did fight each other at the end), etc. It is a bit like creating a page called "European wars of succession" and putting France and Britain on the same side. I didn't feel like going through such a radical change without discussion, so I propose creating separate belligerents sections for each war in the article, rather than a unified list at the top. HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 02:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dates of Third War - Chronology controversy

The article does not mention the on-going high/low chronology controversy, which mars the dating of the Third Diadochi War. Some historians date it 315, other from 314. This has been a long-running controversy, which has led to conflicting dates for various events here. There is no reason to choose one over the other, as no consensus has been formed among historians, so both possibilities should be mentioned in the article. In summary:

The High chronology is the "traditional" dating (found in older books), which places the start of the Third War in 315. This is defended by Pat Wheatley (1998) "The Chronology of the Third Diadoch War, 315-311 B.C.", Phoenix. High chron dates the death of Perdiccas in 321, deaths of Eumenes & Olympia in 317/6, start of Third War in 315, and battle of Gaza in early 312.
The Low chronology was first proposed in Errington (1977), which would place the start of the Third War in 314. This is defended by Edward M. Anson (2006) "The Chronology of the Third Diadoch War", Phoenix, and Alexander's Heirs (2014). Low chron dates death of Perdiccas in 320, Eumenes & Olympia's in 316/5, start of Third War in 314, battle of Gaza at end of 312.
The Mixed chronology takes elements of both High & Low. There are various versions proposed (e.g. Stylianou, Boyi, Meeus), but all of the mixed chronologies date the start of the Third War in 315. This is defended in Tom Boiy (2007) Between High and Low. A Chronology of the Early Hellenistic Period and Meeus (2012) "Diodorus and the Chronology of the Third Diadoch War", Phoenix.

e.g. the Mixed Chron of Meeus (2012) accepts and follows the Low Chron from 323 to Spring 318, then switches to High Chron which is followed until mid-313, then constructs a new chron between mid-313 to Spring 312 (deeming both High & Low wrong), and then returns to Low Chron from Summer of 312.

This Wikipedia article (and related child articles) seems to take the Low Chronology at face value. Given the on-going controversy, it seem to me essential that some note on the chronology controversy should be made in the section on the Third Diadoch war. If nothing else, to at least alert readers why the dating in Wikipedia conflicts with the dating on most other websites and resources. Walrasiad (talk) 13:04, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The death of Ptolemy Ceranus.

in this article I find "The eldest Ptolemy died peacefully in his bed in 282 BC, and Philadelphus succeeded him." Then later in this article I find that he was killed in Gallic invasions later than 280. 174.247.240.209 (talk) 17:01, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The first reference is fairly clearly to Ptolemy I Soter, not Ptolemy Ceraunus. Ptolemy Ceraunus was Ptolemy Soter's son, and thus younger than him. Jfruh (talk) 18:45, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perdiccas was assassinated not executed.

He was literally killed during nightfall by 3 of his generals, I wouldn't call that a ''capital punishment'' 2A02:587:9E03:3551:2042:7BFE:F18A:A822 (talk) 14:20, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]