Editing Ptolemy I Soter (section)

==Historian==
Ptolemy himself wrote an eyewitness history of Alexander's campaigns (now lost).<ref>{{Cite book|title=Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, Teil 2, Zeitgeschichte. – B. Spezialgeschichten, Autobiographien und Memoiren, Zeittafeln [Nr. 106-261]|last=Jacoby|first=Felix|publisher=Weidmann|year=1926|oclc=769308142|location=Berlin|pages=752–769, no. 138, "Ptolemaios Lagu"}}</ref> In the second century AD, Ptolemy's history was used by [[Arrian]] of Nicomedia as one of his two main primary sources (alongside the history of [[Aristobulus of Cassandreia]]) for his own extant ''[[The Anabasis of Alexander|Anabasis]]'' of Alexander, and hence large parts of Ptolemy's history can be assumed to survive in paraphrase or précis in Arrian's work.<ref>{{Cite book|title=From Arrian to Alexander: Studies in Historical Interpretation|last=Bosworth|first=A. B.|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1988|isbn=978-0198148630|location=Oxford|pages=13–14}}</ref> Arrian cites Ptolemy by name on only a few occasions, but it is likely that large stretches of Arrian's ''Anabasis'' reflect Ptolemy's version of events. Arrian once names Ptolemy as the author "whom I chiefly follow",<ref>''Anabasis'' [[s:The Anabasis of Alexander/Book VI/Chapter II|6.2.4]]</ref> and in his Preface writes that Ptolemy seemed to him to be a particularly trustworthy source, "not only because he was present with Alexander on campaign, but also because he was himself a king, and hence lying would be more dishonourable for him than for anyone else".<ref>''Anabasis'', [[s:The Anabasis of Alexander#6|Prologue]]</ref>

Ptolemy's lost history was long considered an objective work, distinguished by its straightforward honesty and sobriety,{{sfn|Chisholm|1911|p=617}} but more recent work has called this assessment into question. R. M. Errington argued that Ptolemy's history was characterised by persistent bias and self-aggrandisement, and by systematic blackening of the reputation of [[Perdiccas]], one of Ptolemy's chief dynastic rivals after Alexander's death.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Errington|first=R. M.|date=1969-01-01|title=Bias in Ptolemy's History of Alexander|jstor=637545|journal=The Classical Quarterly|volume=19|issue=2|pages=233–242|doi=10.1017/S0009838800024642|s2cid=170128227 }}</ref> For example, Arrian's account of the fall of [[Thebes, Greece|Thebes]] in 335 BC (''Anabasis'' [[s:The Anabasis of Alexander/Book I/Chapter VIII|1.8.1–1.8.8]], a rare section of narrative explicitly attributed to Ptolemy by Arrian) shows several significant variations from the parallel account preserved in [[Diodorus Siculus]] ([https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Diodorus_Siculus/17A*.html#8.3 17.11–12]), most notably in attributing a distinctly unheroic role in proceedings to Perdiccas. More recently, J. Roisman has argued that the case for Ptolemy's blackening of Perdiccas and others has been much exaggerated.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Roisman|first=Joseph|date=1984-01-01|title=Ptolemy and His Rivals in His History of Alexander|jstor=638295|journal=The Classical Quarterly|volume=34|issue=2|pages=373–385|doi=10.1017/S0009838800031001|s2cid=163042651 }}</ref>