Editing Elagabalus (section)

===Cassius Dio===
[[File:INC-2961-a Ауреус. Элагабал. Ок. 218—219 гг. (аверс).png|thumb|An ''[[Aureus]]'' of Elagabalus, marked: {{Smallcaps|{{abbr|imp·caes·|IMPERATOR CAESAR}} {{abbr|m·aur·|MARCUS AURELIUS}} antoninus {{abbr|aug·|AUGUSTUS}}}}]]
The historian [[Cassius Dio]], who lived from the second half of the second century until sometime after 229, wrote a contemporary account of Elagabalus. Born into a [[Patrician (ancient Rome)|patrician]] family, Dio spent the greater part of his life in public service. He was a senator under emperor [[Commodus]] and governor of [[Smyrna]] after the death of [[Septimius Severus]], and then he served as suffect consul around 205, and as proconsul in [[Africa province|Africa]] and [[Pannonia]].{{sfn|Dio|loc=Book 80.18}}

Dio's ''Roman History'' spans nearly a [[millennium]], from the arrival of [[Aeneas]] in Italy until the year 229. His contemporaneous account of Elagabalus's reign is generally considered more reliable than the ''Augustan History'' or other accounts for this general time period,<ref>Maggie L. Popkin, ''The Architecture of the Roman Triumph'' (2016), p. 170: "[of] Cassius Dio, Herodian, and the ''Historian Augusta''[,] Dio is generally considered our most reliable source for this period [the Severan era]"</ref><ref>Martin M. Winkler, ''The Fall of the Roman Empire: Film and History'' (2012), p. 63: "Dio, a close contemporary [of Aurelius] and generally considered the most reliable source for his own time"</ref> though by his own admission Dio spent the greater part of the relevant period outside of Rome and had to rely on second-hand information.{{sfn|Dio|loc=Book 80.18}}

Furthermore, the political climate in the aftermath of Elagabalus's reign, as well as Dio's own position within the government of Severus Alexander, who held him in high esteem and made him consul again, likely influenced the truth of this part of his history for the worse. Dio regularly refers to Elagabalus as [[Sardanapalus]], partly to distinguish him from his divine namesake,{{sfn|Dio|loc=Book 80.11–12}} but chiefly to do his part in maintaining the ''[[damnatio memoriae]]'' and to associate him with another autocrat notorious for a dissolute life.{{sfn|Syme|1971|pp=145–146}}

Historian Clare Rowan calls Dio's account a mixture of reliable information and "literary exaggeration", noting that Elagabalus's marriages and time as consul are confirmed by numismatic and epigraphic records.{{sfn|Rowan|2012|p=169}} In other instances, Dio's account is inaccurate, such as when he says Elagabalus appointed entirely unqualified officials and that Comazon had no military experience before being named to head the Praetorian Guard,{{sfn|Dio|loc=[https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/80*.html#79-4 book 80.4]}} when in fact Comazon had commanded the Third Legion.{{sfn|Southern|2003|p=301}}{{sfn|Icks|2011|p=20}} Dio also gives different accounts in different places of when and by whom Diadumenian (whose forces Elagabalus fought) was given imperial names and titles.{{sfn|Scott|2018|p=62}} Martin Icks has written that "It is clear that Dio was not attempting an accurate portrayal of the emperor", an assessment endorsed by Josiah Osgood, who described it as "put[ting] it mildly".<ref name=":0" />