ABSTRACT
Only after analysing the texture of Procopius’ work in general, therefore, and especially that of the Wars, is it possible to move with confidence to the question which has in fact dominated most of the earlier discussion-the deceptively simple one of Procopius’ credibility. In practice this must be the hardest issue of all to face adequately, since so little of his information can be checked directly against other sources. Yet here we have a writer who gives us voluminous material on Realien, geography, topography and the recent history of little known areas outside the empire. It is impossible not to use Procopius and impossible not to rely on him. But at least now we can avoid the trap of assuming for him a blanket accuracy and reliability which he may well not have in individual instances.
