paid no heed to culture, since he had never even heard the name of it.
Still, his language was not bad, nor did he lack judgment, but he showed
in almost everything a keen appreciation and talked very readily. For
through his authority and recklessness and his habit of saying right out
without reflection anything at all that occurred to him, and not being
ashamed to air his thoughts, he often stumbled upon some felicitous
expression. [But the same Antoninus made many mistakes through his
headstrong opinions. It was not enough for him to know everything: he
wanted to be the only one who knew anything. It was not enough for him
to have all power: he would be the only one with any power. Hence it
was that he employed no counselor and was jealous of such men as knew
something worth while. He never loved a single person and he hated all
those who excelled in anything; and most did he hate those whom he
affected most to love. Many of these he destroyed in some way or other.
Of course he had many men murdered openly, but others he would send to
provinces not suited to them, fatal to their physical condition, having
an unwholesome climate; thus, while pretending to honor them
excessively, he quietly got rid of them, exposing such as he did not
like to excessive heat or cold. Hence, though he spared some in so far
as not to put them to death, yet he subjected them to such hardships
that the stain [Footnote: This is very likely an incorrect translation of
an incorrect reading. The various editors of Dio have a few substitutes
to propose, but as all the interpretations seem to me extremely
lumbering I have turned the MS. [Greek] chêlidoysthai (taken as a
passive) in a way that may be not quite beyond the bounds of
possibility. The noun [Greek] chêlhist like the English "stain," often
passes from its original sense of "blemish" to that of the consequent
"disgrace."] of murder still rested on him.

The above describes him in general terms.