Ear - Springtime for Arrian...and Diodoros

[Paralus]

I may not be able to reply tomorrow, nor indeed rise before noon, RWC is here Why is there no 'hung over' emoticon?

Yes, well, doing the form for Royal Randwick. Off to the members for the day. Will likely be in a similar position.

You'd be surprised to learn I disagree. Yes the conclave was after Kassandros had disappeared to Asia. And Yes the diagramma was aimed mostly at Athens (for her harbour). The disagreement then commences but that is for later. Randwick ahoy....

[agesilaos]

I am not surprised, your position, and that of other scholars, is clear and at variance with this suggested reconstruction; both cannot be right, but both can be borne by the evidence we have, hence the longevity of the debate. I certainly do not expect to convince, only to have it conceded that the alternative is possible or, equally valuably, have its impossibility demonstrated

Disappointingly unhungover, though, judging by their performance the same was not true of England last night, still the result is all that counts. Cannot say I am a fan of continually going to the TMO.

[amyntoros]

Totally off topic ... but are you guys talking rugby? Only asking 'cause my twitter feeds have something about Japan beating South Africa which is apparently huge!

[Paralus]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Unheard of!!

[agesilaos]

34-32 watched it all! All I need now on my accumulator is Donald Trump to become President!

[Paralus]

And Georgia does Tonga.

[agesilaos]

Back to the point (until Japan does Scotland )

Perhaps things become clearer if we start from a different fixed point, namely Polyperchon's presence in Phokis, which can be dated securely to the beginning of Mounychion/Xanthikos 318 by the execution of Phokion which came hard upon it.

We agree that this is after Kassandros had left Macedonia for the Hellespont and ultimately Antigonos. Considering whom we must pay attention to Diodoros' statement that he was 'tarrying at Kelenai' when he heard news of Arrhidaios' attack on Kyzikos (which shows it was not his response to this that was delayed but his leaving winter quarters). As I tried to demonstrate at the very start of this thread, it was Artemisios which saw the beginning of spring and the campaigning season; Artemisios follows Xanthikos, which must put Kassandros defection and Polyperchon's counter before Antigonos was openly in rebellion.

Given that Kassandros was hardly likely to appeal to Antigonos unless he had intelligence of his new stance, they had been at loggerheads after Triparadeisos according to Arrian TMA, this must mean he knew Antigonos' plans before Antigonos knew anyone outside his conspiracy knew them, as he had not shown his hand. Alternatively, Antigonos did not have the plans ascribed to him but was bounced into rebellion by the paranoia of Kleitos and Polyperchon's instability (a Badianesque, if you like, but possible). It would be logical if Kleitos had gone to denounce Antigonos before Kassandros left and was the source of Kassandros' intelligence.

Kleitos could have slipped away unnoticed since, unlike for Arrhidaios, the cities of Lydia had passively accepted their garrisons. It was the resistance of Kyzikos which alerted Antigonos and he responded, not as a rebel but a servant of the monarchy, accusing Arrhidaios of, 'daring to besiege a Greek city and an ally, innocent of any offence; secondly of clearly intending to rebel and lastly of converting his satrapy into a personal domain.' The punishment is also not that of a rebel, Arrhidaios is to 'retire to a city of his choice and remain peaceful', presumably to await the judgement of the central authority.


Whether his stance was honest or a smoke-screen having moved to the aid of Kyzikos, Antigonos then moves not against Arrhidaios but into Lydia, surely because Kassandros has told him of Kleitos' charges. It is with the expropriation of the treasure ships and their 600 Talents (maybe two months’ pay for Antigonos' stated forces) that Diodoros says Antigonos came out in open rebellion.

In this sequence, we can put Kassandros' flight in the month before Xanthikos, Dystros which will also have seen Kleitos' leaving Lydia and reporting to Polyperchon

Winter 319/18
Death of Antipatros
Plotting of Kassandros envoys to Ptolemy and cities
Consilium of Antigonos

Dystros 318
Kleitos informs on Antigonos
Kassandros' hunt and absconding
Polyperchon's consilium

Xanthikos
Polyperchon moves to Phokis Diagramma published
Radical Democracy at Athens executes Phokion and other oligarchs.
Kassandros travels to Kelenai
Arrhidaios garrisons cities and moves on Kyzikos

Artemisios
Kyzikos appeals to Antigonos he moves in second week (say)
Kyzikos sees off Arrhidaios
Antigonos upbraids Arrhidaios and after defiant letter sends a column while moving on Ephesos himself

End of Artemisios/early Daisios
Kassandros enters Peireios
Polyperchon to Attika
Shortage of provisions drive Polyperchon to move to Peloponnese
Eumenes leaves Nora

Daisios
Kassandros takes Aegina and attacks Salamis
Polyperchon returns to thwart him
Antigonos consolidating in Asia Minor coast
Eumenes in Kilikia

Panamos
Promulgation of Diagramma in Peloponnese
Polyperchon at Argos
Antigonos deals with Arrhidaios who retires to Kios
Eumenes recruiting

Loos
Revolutions in Peloponnese
Propaganda offensive against Eumenes (Phoney 3rd Diadoch War)
Eumenes moves to Phoenicia

Gorpiaios
Winter quarters
Antigonos – Kelenai
Kassandros – Athens
Polyperchon – Argos
Eumenes – Phoenicia
Alexander - Attika (possibly on land of the deme of Aixonia, which is singled out as having benefitted from Demetrios of Phaleron bringing about the alliance with Kassandros; either Kassander’s men were billeted on the Aixionians to face Alexander, or Alexander was encamped on their fields, maybe SIG 318/IG2 1201)

[Paralus]

There is no need to push the death of Antipatros back into the winter of 319/18. That Demades is still in Athens in June of 319 is no reason to suppose his embassy was in the late autumn/early winter. I can see how this dating suits a promulgation of the diagramma in Xanthikos (March) but there is a fatal flaw in that line. The diagramma as we have it (and it is widely agreed that the text is not that of Diodorus but of his source and indicates an official document) states explicitly that the exiles are to be restored "by the thirteenth day of Xanthikos" (18.56.5). It is not possible that Polypercon moved into Phokis and produced this diagramma in Xanthikos which demanded conpliance with all its provisions in the self same month. At 18.57.1 Diodorus notes that the published diagramma was then sent to all the cities. It is to be remembered that Antipatros exiled 12,000 Athenians to Thrace in the wash up of the Lamina war. This diagramma, with Athens at its heart, was clearly aimed at undoing the former regent's work and must have included these exiles. I cannot see how Athens (and the other cities) could comply by thirteen Xanthikos is the diagramma was announced in Xanthikos.

Given that Kassandros was hardly likely to appeal to Antigonos unless he had intelligence of his new stance, they had been at loggerheads after Triparadeisos according to Arrian TMA, this must mean he knew Antigonos' plans before Antigonos knew anyone outside his conspiracy knew them, as he had not shown his hand.

Kassandros already realised Antigonos' ambitions during his time as chiliarch. Kassandros is unlikely to think the One Eyed's ambition was any less following Antipatros' death and the appointment of Polyperchon. Even so, why must Antigonos be "in rebellion" before Kassandros can seek alliance and aid from him? Nothing indicates that Ptolemy was rebelling against Polyperchon and the kings at the time of Antipatros' death yet this does not stop Kassandros seeking alliance and aid.

It is a far more logical reading of events that Antipatros died late summer 319 and that Polyperchon's diagramma dates from the autumn of 319. This will have followed Polyperchon's discovery of Kassandros' departure (in autumn 319) and plans. A publication and distribution to the cities in the autumn of 319 allows sufficient time for the poleis to comply by thirteen Xanthikos in 318. Such also provides your time for Kassandros' message to Ptolemy.

More to come. Meantime relief that the Fijians have been defeated - if in a not too convincing fashion and minus a bonus point

[agesilaos]

The simple solution to the Xanthikos problem is that it was the Xanthikos of the next year, 317. It is not only the cities but also the exiles that require time; if one looks at the provisions which survive in other restoration decrees, exiles have a time limit during which they may claim a share of the state land and property, theirs having been forfeit at their exile. Nor do all the cities get informed initially only those who have 'presbeutoi' at whatever gathering (apologies for calling them 'proedroi' above), this is shown by the meeting that Plod called at Argos which sparked the Peloponnesian revolutions, are we to believe that having leave to return the exiles waited almost a year (it is certainly late summer when Plod moves to Argos) before overthrowing their oppressors? Things seem to have been much more rapid and violent.

I totally agree that Demades' being in Athens provides only a terminus post quem, it is the narrative that suggest a death out of the active season. There is a delay between the news being received and any action, instead all the players set about sending messages and having meetings; I do not see the Diadochoi as People's Front of Judaea

The bonus point is irrelevant, if we beat you you'll be second in the group and vice versa, sadly the Welsh have been crippled by injuries which is a great shame for the competition, but probably good news for both of our teams

[Paralus]

The simple solution to the Xanthikos problem is that it was the Xanthikos of the next year, 317.

I can't see that either. The text as we have it simply refers to a specific date and the natural reading is of the year in which the proclamation is made. The diagramma produced a tumult in Athens but it is not until Plod moves in the spring that we have confirmation of the democratic revolution it spawned. It is because of the urging of the new regime for aid that Plod sends Alexander to Athens. The last reference to the office of the anangrapheus is in July 318. The democratic revolution took place in the early spring of 318 and was led by Hagonides and other radical democrats. These are exactly the types that Antipatros will have exiled in 322. Plod's actions in early spring 318 and the summer of the same year all relate to enforcement of the diagramma (as this provided legitimacy for his carrying on of the war). There is hardly a point to Plod enforcing a deadline that was as yet, up to a year away. All this argues far more strongly for the diagramma to have been issued in 319.

It is also to be remembered that Kassandros wrote to all his father's oligarchies immediately following the Old Rope's appointment of Plod and consequent death. In fact, he replaced Antipatros' man in Piraeus with his own as part of that. Plod might have been a little slow on the uptake at times but he can hardly have failed to comprehend that action. Supporters of the 'low' version of events here have to see Plod's seige of Piraeus commence in spring 318 and last until the following year. This is totally unnecessary as the city itself and its democratic government was already in Plod's hands, only the harbour held out and hence Plod moves off to Megalopolis leaving only the forces required (and able to be supplied) to deal with it.

[agesilaos]

But Polyperchon did not move to enforce the diagramma at Athens he moved to counter Kassandros’ arrival, just as he issued the diagramma was in reaction to his defection. XVIII 55 ii

It was clear that Cassander, reinforced by Antigonus, would hold the Greek cities against them, since some of the cities were guarded by his father's garrisons and others, dominated by Antipater's friends and mercenaries, were ruled by oligarchies, and since Cassander would also gain as allies both Ptolemy the ruler of Egypt, and Antigonus, who had already openly rebelled against the kings, and each of them possessed great armies and abundant wealth and was master of many nations and cities of consequence. After the question how to fight against these had been laid before them and many shrewd suggestions had been made about the war, it was decided to free the cities throughout Greece and to overthrow the oligarchies established in them by Antipater;

Ptolemy’s open rebellion is the seizure of Phoenicia from Laomedon and its incorporation into his own satrapy, this also has Antigonos in open rebellion when Kassandros left, though I would argue about the ‘open’ φανερός, though the Greek means that (manifestly or openly) it might only mean that Antigonos had been reported and news of his conclave was ‘manifestation’ enough.


But let us consider Athens, by my reckoning there is the diagramma, the return of the exiles and the institution of DemRad, the two embassies to Plod in Phokis and the return and execution of Phokion all in a month or less.


You would have the diagramma published soon after Antipatros’ death which you place in Dios ? September/October which leaves the Athenian oligarchs six months to send their embassy, the Radical Democracy condemned Phokion almost as its first act and that is set at Mounychion 19 by Plutarch, one also has to ignore the explicit timeline of Antigonos’ rebellion, which is why I think my way is better.


I like the point about Nikanor but I think you have erred. There are two events before Antipatros dies and while Kassandros has control he substitutes Nikanor for Menyllos; this may have been Antipatros’ own move, nothing suggests that Nikanor was not loyal to Antipatros and Menyllos was over friendly with Phokion and given the fate of the Athenian embassy a more distanced phrouarch might have seemed appropriate. It may only be Nikanor’s later loyalty to Kassandros that gave the impression he was already his man. It may have been the mailshot after Antipatros’ death and appointment of Polyperchon that drew the ambitious Nikanor into the ambitious Kassandros’ camp.


If Kassandros went to Antigonos when you have it then there would be no need for Kleitos to inform on him, and his presence with Polyperchon in Phokis, he it is that takes Phokion and gang back to Athens, suggests that he had arrived quite recently. The rapidity of the revolution at Athens can be explained by Polyperchon taking the exiles that Antipatros had settled in Thrace (Plutarch ‘Phokion’) south with him. The ruin of Phokion was part of Plod’s design we are told.

The anagrapheus argument is something of a canard, Errington ignored some decrees as I showed in the previous thread in a table, there was no diminution of status although it does seem that the post ceased with the archonship of 318/17 we do not have many decrees from these years. Despite Diodoros' claim that the Democrats dismissed every magistrate (patently untrue in the case of the eponymous archon) which seems more trope than fact.

[Paralus]

Ptolemy did indeed seize Phoinikia. He did so in the wake of Triparadeisos and this was most definitely prior to the Old Rope's death. Just how that was seen by the regent, Antipatros, our sources do not bother to tell us though Laomedon's landing up with the Perdikkan generals might be a telling point. In any case, if this is 'rebellion', it is against Antipatros and all he represents but no source describes that.

It needs stressing that Diodorus narrates the activities of all the major actors individually for the great part. This means that events for one actor do not necessarily follow the events described for the preceding character; Diodorus goes back and begins again. Allied to this is his habit of dealing with a campaigning season under the archon who took office in the summer of the season he is narrating (though not alaways). This will be shown below.

You have a need to see the democratic revolution in Athens as an immediate consequence of the diagramma; hence this diagramma must be promulgated in Xanthikos (approx March/April) of 318. The Athenians, though, were rather well disposed toward Plod earlier than this date. Syll_315, to which you referred earlier, indicates that Athens (the city not the harbour) was already a fan of Plod. The seventh prytany (very roughly month) places this in February, though very early March is just possible given we have no day of that prytany. Plod is not placed in Phokis until just prior to Phokion's embassy and consequent death. This means Xanthikos and, given the seemingly fast nature of events, later in that month for Phokion's death is in early May. But there are more serious problems with your position.

Diodorus is clear that Pold called his synhedrion in Macedonia (“Meanwhile in Macedonia, Polyperchon, the guardian of the kings[…] called together all the commanders and the most important of the other Macedonians” 18.55.1). He is not in Phokis when this consilium takes place. Also in Macedonia at this time are the envoys from the Greek states for Diodorus explicitly states this when noting that immediately after this synhedrion had decided on a course of action that Plod addressed them (55.4). What he announced was the diagramma of Philip III and this was aimed squarely at Kassandros by blaming all the ills on Antipatros. Philip III will restore matters as they were under his father and the envoys were sent to their cities.

The envoys having returned to their cities, Polyperchon then wrote to “Argos and the other cities ordering them to exile those who had been leaders of the governments in the time of Antipater” (56.1). This is not the diagramma but specific follow up instructions as a result of it. At the same time Diodorus writes that Plod also wrote to Eumenes in Asia urging him to keep the faith with the kings (18.57.3-4). There is no timeframe for these actions and given Diodorus summarising, it would be a mistake to infer they followed immediately on the envoys leaving Macedonia. Indeed Plod could have given these letters to the envoys were that the case. They were written and dispatched at some time following the promulgation of the diagramma. In any case, Diodorus states that Eumenes received these letters “just after he had made good his retreat from the fortress” (18.58.1) and so in the spring of 318 (defeated and locked up early spring 319: 40.1 & 41.1; released after a year 53.5) . Now we note that although Diodorus has inserted the archon for July 318 – July 317 the Sicilian is narrating events beginning in the early spring of 318 following hard on Eumenes’ release. Again, Diodorus notes Eumenes’ activities from what would normally be moving out of winter quarters 319/18, those winter quarters being Nora for Eumenes (53.5). The arrival of these letters is likely when Polyperchon is in Phokis – March/April. Given there not being airmail, let alone email, in 318 BCE and the sending of the letters comes sometime after the promulgation of the diagramma, one wonders how Polypercon managed to get these letters to Eumenes if he actually promulgated the diagramma in Phokis in Xanthikos of 318.

On the Democratic revolution, I can find no evidence that Plod brought any exiles from Thrace with him into Phokis nor that Alexander did so. What we do know is that the democratic government's default leader was one Hagonides. It is he that drives the entire case against Phokion. We are explicitly told by Plutarch (29.4) that Hagonides was resident in the Peloponnese. At 32.1 Plutarch tells us that Polyperchon wrote to the Athenians "that the king restored to all Athenians their ancient and democratic form of government". Now this may be Plutarch's single sentence view of the diagramma but it more likely reflects a response from Plod to the appeals from Athens for aid in removing Nikanor and in enforcing the diagramma. Plutarch actually writes that Polyperchon sent this to trap Phokion. This implies strongly that the revolution was yet to occur. Plod thus moved south in the spring to affect enforcement of his political manifesto and Athens was top of the list

To remove Phokian Polyperchon required a hostile democratic government. This was not in place until Plod sent his son Alexander to Athens in the early spring of 318. Plutarch provides the detail that Diodorus summarises out. Plutarch says that Hagonides was in exile in the Peloponnese (Phoc. 29.4). When Alexander arrives he does so with “exiles who entered the town with him”. Following upon this Hagonides accuses Phokian of treason. It is a fair bet that these exiles have gathered with Alexander and that Hagonides is one of them – there is no record of him before this and he surely could have made the accusation before had he returned earlier.

The replacement of Menyllos was not at the behest of Antipatros, it was entirely Kassandros’ doing:

Antipater, a little before his death, had appointed Polyperchon general, and made Cassander a chiliarch. But Cassander, far from being satisfied with such an appointment, hastened to seize the supreme power, and immediately sent Nicanor to take the command of the garrison from Menyllus, and to secure Munychia before the news of his father's death got abroad.

Menyllus was clearly the Old Rope’s man and Kassandros was ensuring that Athens would be loyal to himself. Were this an appointment ordered by Antipatros, there is no need for the replacement to be carried out before news of the Old Rope’s death was known.

To the matter of Kleitos. Diodorus tells us that once Antigonos had news of the Old Rope’s death he decided to pursue his own ambitions. The first thing he does is to send Hieronymus, returned from his mission to Antipatros (42.1), to the besieged Eumenes to try and co-opt him. Hieronymus may have been with Antigonos though 50.4 places him in Nora ("he summoned Hieronymus the historian, a friend and fellow citizen of Eumenes of Cardia, who had taken refuge in the stronghold called Nora"). Either way, it is clear that Eumenes is still in Nora. He then calls a synhedrion of his philoi and lays out his future plans (18.50). At exactly the same time as this (“While Antigonus was engaged in these matters” – 51.1) Arrhidaios (the satrap) sets out to besiege Kyzikos. Antigonos at this time happened to be “tarrying in Kelainai”(52.1) and sets out to deal with Arrhidaios. Now, Antigonos is still exactly where he had convened his synhedrion as Diodorus has made plain. At 52.4 Arrhidaios sends a part of his army to relieve Eumenes. This is the second clear notice that these events are taking place while he still in Nora and thus before his release in the spring of 318.

Some conclusions can be drawn. Antigonos had retired to Kelainai after his successful summer campaigns against the Perdikkan generals via a meeting with Aristodemos in Kretopolis on the way in 319 (with his “with all his forces” – 47.4). While here he confers with his philoi about his coming campaigns and learns of Arrhidaios’ move on Kyzikos. He is clearly in winter quarters as is plainly indicated by Eumenes still being locked away in Nora. The events narrated by Diodorus are taking place over the winter of 319/18. Thus, after marching to Kyzikos and then back, Antigonos drives Kleitos from his satrapy. This is clearly prior to Polyperchon arriving in Phokis for Kleitos does not escape to Phokis, he escapes to Macedonia (52.6) and then travels south with Plod in the spring

You’ve made a valiant attempt to push matters back but the argument is unconvincing and the evidence does not support you. The diagramma was promulgated last quarter of 319. The actions of Arrhidaios take place over winter 319/18 when the One Eyed is in winter quarters in Kelainai and Eumenes firmly locked in Nora. Plod moves in the spring of 318 to take control of Athens which is struggling with the implementation of Plod’s plans and Euemnes receives the letters Plodyperchon wrote to him subsequent to the announcement of the diagramma.

I’m sure that readers are likely taking on the 1,000 stare at the minutiae of this debate!

[Paralus]

Oooppps... The LLewelyns, Phillips and Joneses have defeated the Prats (er, English)!! A stumble of biblical proportions. The leaving out of Henry Slade seems telling. A try each in an otherwise penalty fest. The English prop boring in will also come under the microscope (if not "spidercam")

That said, we're yet to play England or the Three Coal Miners.

[agesilaos]

I’ll try to address your points under sub-headings in the interest of imposing some order on the material.

Ptolemy as a rebel.
It is fairly simple to demonstrate that Ptolemy’s seizure of Phoenicia was an act of rebellion he has committed the same crimes with which Antigonos charges Arrhidaios (XVIII 52 iii), although Ptolemy has ousted a legally appointed satrap rather than attacked an allied city he is certainly making a private domain. There is nothing else that would justify Diodoros’ comment at 55 ii that he had ‘openly rebelled against the kings’; Antipatros was the representative of the kings not a power in his own right in the legal fiction of the times.

No action was taken against him for several reasons, Antipatros was back in Europe and Antigonos had his hands full with Eumenes and the Perdikkan rump; Laomedon’s flight to the Perdikkans will have fudged matters too, though I doubt anyone would relish attacking Egypt in the light of Perdikkas’ fate and the troops had been wooed by Ptolemy and unpaid by Antipatros. By the new campaigning season in 318 Antigonos, the only force which might intervene was also in rebellion and allied to him.

Polyperchon and Athens
Syll 315 is dated either to the seventh or the tenth prytanny, the latter is Skirophorion May/June so after the start of the Radical Democracy which executed Phokion in Mounychion c 9 th April the start of the ninth prytanny. The seventh prytanny in fact divides almost equally between late Dystros and early Xandikos, so does not demonstrate any early enthusiasm for Polyperchon.

Plod’s synhedrion
True there was a meeting of Plod’s friends and the Macedonian commanders in Macedon, this decided on the course of action. No Greeks are summoned to this nor did the ancients maintain permanent embassies. Note that the rebellion of all three Kassandros, Ptolemy and Antigonos are considered and the latter did not show his colours until 318. Then ‘at once’, they call together the city envoys that are present; this, I would say is an artefact of compression as there was no reason for envoys to be present in Macedonia and demonstrates how close the first synhedrion was to the logical place for the announcement which is the Amphykionic Council at Thermopylai (Herakleia).

This all fits with the evidence. Now I must fly to the Northern Marches where the internet is but a rumour, back to rejoice or despair on Saturday

[Paralus]

To keep to your subheadings...

Ptolemy as a rebel.
The translation of Diodorus is as follows:

...and since Cassander would also gain as allies both Ptolemy the ruler of Egypt, and Antigonus, who had already openly rebelled against the kings, and each of them possessed great armies and abundant wealth and was master of many nations and cities of consequence.

Now I had always taken that as it naturally reads: Ptolemy the ruler of Egypt and Antigonos, who had already openly rebelled against the kings. The italicised phrases referring to the individuals preceding them. I can see how it might be read the other way though it is telling that Diodorus has already referred to Antigonos as rebelling whereas he has not noted this about Ptolemy at all - especially at 18.43 where he describes Ptolemy's annexation of Phoinikia. Further, Diodorus, to my knowledge, does not refer to Ptolemy as a rebel against the kings anywhere else. That, to my mind, indicates "who had openly rebelled" at 55.2 refers to Antigonos who Didodorus has already told us was rebelling.

Again, how Antipatros saw the annexation of Phoinikia we are not told.You are wrong, though, in claiming that Antipatros "was the representative of the kings not a power in his own right in the legal fiction of the times". His position was no different to that of Perdikkas: the kings were essentially mute; the regent was the power. It is precisely why Perdikkas sought it and why others worked against him getting it. That said, what you say about Antigonos being engaged elsewhere and Antipatros being on his way to Macedonia (Gaza was likely not Ptolemy's first early winter foray into Coele-Syria) will have applied and afterwards it was a fait accompli. Still, even though Diodorus describes Ptolemy as holding Egypt as spear won land, he does not describe this action as a rebellion against the kings.

Polyperchon at Athens
I can only go on the Greek of Syll 315 where, if it is produced as per the inscription, it is difficult to see [...]μης other than 'seventh' (ἕβδομης).

Plod's synhedrion.
The rebellion matter is dealt with above. While I agree that Diodorus' summarising can result in compression which results in actions seemingly following on when they do not, I do not see this as such a case. "At once, therefore, they called" can only refer to the members Diodorus has just described as attending Plod's synherdrion. "They" can hardly refer to any other group here and Diodorus can hardly have skipped over his source to then refer to the same group calling the envoys to the Amphyktionic Council together. The narrative flows perfectly as it is and the natural reading is that the envoys are clearly present where this synhedrion was held - in Macedonia.

Antigonos' ambitions were clearly known to Kassandros and, so, Antipatros - the precise reason the kings were taken to Macedonia. While it is speculation it is entirely possible that Antipatros warned Plod of the One Eyed's ambition when he appointed him. Antigonos had by far the greatest concentration of forces after Eumenes' defeat: means plus the will is a powerful combination. Antigonos will thus have appealed to Kassandros simply because Kassandros, having witnessed Antigonos' ambition as his chiliarch, knew Antigonos would not accept Polyperchon.

All that aside, your position still has manifest problems with its timeline in relation to Eumenes' incarceration in Nora. All the actions discussed - especially Plod's synhedrion and, at sometime later, his sending of letters to the cities and to Eumenes - took place during that incarceration.