reign of Heliogabalus, Dio was not in Rome and his account was therefore based on stories that he heard afterwards. This must be kept in mind when one judges Dio's credibility, and most modern scholars agree that his account of the reign of Heliogabalus is not the best part of his Roman History.

Several aspects must be noticed while reading Cassius Dio's account. First of all, there is hardly a chronology in his narrative, with two exceptions: when he describes Heliogabalus' coup, and when he describes the fall of the emperor. On the second place, Dio's account contains much criticism. The emperor's appearance and conduct are assaulted. This is the typical approach in an emperor's biography; immoral behavior and appearance are characteristics of a bad emperor.

The emperor's cruelty isproved by naming all who had been murdered in his name. Dio also stresses the perversity and lust of the monarch. Quite remarkable is the emperor's tendency to imitate women with a special liking towards prostitutes. This effeminacy of the emperor is stressed in other passages as well. Cassius Dio is disgusted by this conduct. In his view, the boy's effeminacy proves that he was unfit to rule. Dio is also offended by the religious reforms, which resulted in a neglect of state affairs. Not only is this incomprehensible to Dio, who was proud to be a loyal servant of the state, but he is also angry because the religious reforms were violations of everything the Romans held sacred.

In a famous remark, he had said that

...our history now