Diodorus' liberal use of earlier historians underlies the harsh opinion of the author of the
1911 Encyclopædia Britannica article on
Bibliotheca historica :
:The faults of Diodorus arise partly from the nature of the undertaking, and the awkward form of annals into which he has thrown the historical portion of his narrative. He shows none of the critical faculties of the historian, merely setting down a number of unconnected details. His narrative contains frequent repetitions and contradictions, is without colouring, and monotonous; and his simple diction, which stands intermediate between pure
Attic and the colloquial Greek of his time, enables us to detect in the narrative the undigested fragments of the materials which he employed.
As damaging as this sounds other more contemporary classical scholars are likely to go even further. Diodorus has become infamous particularly for adapting his tales
ad maiorem Graecorum gloriam, leading one prominent author to refer to him as one of the "two most accomplished liars of antiquity"(the other being
Ctesias.)
Far more sympathetic is the estimate of C.H. Oldfather, who wrote in the introduction to his translation of Diodorus:
:While characteristics such as these exclude Diodorus from a place among the abler historians of the ancient world, there is every reason to believe that he used the best sources and that he reproduced them faithfully. His First Book, which deals almost exclusively with Egypt, is the fullest literary account of the history and customs of that country after
Herodotus. Books II-V cover a wide range, and because of their inclusion of much mythological material are of much less value. In the period from 480 to 301 BC, which he treats in annalistic fashion and in which his main source was the
Universal History of Ephorus, his importance varies according as he is the sole continuous source, or again as he is paralleled by superior writers. To the fifty years from 480 to 430 BC
Thucydides devotes only a little more than thirty chapters; Diodorus covers it more fully (11.37-12.38) and his is the only consecutive literary account for the chronology of the period. ... For the years 362-302 BC Diodorus is again the only consecutive literary account, and ... Diodorus offers the only chronological survey of the period of
Philip, and supplements the writers mentioned and contemporary sources in many matters. For the period of the Successors to Alexander, 323-302 BC (Books XVIII-XX), he is the chief literary authority and his history of this period assumes, therefore, an importance which it does not possess for the other years.
Diodorus is mentioned briefly in
Pliny the Elder as being singular among the Greek historians for the simple manner in which he named his work.