Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1870) - Volume 2.djvu/250

236 GELLIUS. of his successor, by whom, as well as by Plutarch, he seems to have been altogether neglected, al- though occasionally cited by Dionysius, and appa- rently both an accurate chronologer and a diligent invf^stigator of ancient usages. Krause, in his Vitae et Fragmenta Historicorum Jiomanorum, has enumerated no less than three Gellii, Cnaeus, Sextus, and Aulus ; but although " Gellius" is frequently named as •'n annalist with- out any distinguishing praenomen, the two latter personages are in all probability imaginary. The only direct testimony to the existence of Sextus is contained in the tract De Oriyine gentis Romanae (c. 16), which is a modern forgery ; the argument derived from the use of the plural TiXXioi by Dio- nysius (i. 7) will be found, upon consulting the passage, to be altogether inconclusive (Niebuhr, Bom. Hist. vol. ii. note 11); and the word (Jellii adduced from Cicero {de Leg. i. 2 ) is a conjectural emendation. As to Aulus, we find in Nonius, it is true [s. v. Bubo)., a reference to " A. Gellius historiarum libr. prime;" and in Vopiscus {Prob. sub init.) some MSS. have " M. Cato Agellius quoque," instead of the received reading, *' M. Cato et Gellius historici ;" but it is clear that such evidence cannot be admitted with any confidence. (Cic. de Divin. i. 26 ; comp. de Ixq. i. 2 ; Dionys. i. 7, ii. 31,72, 76, iv. 6, vi. 11, vii. 1; Plin. //. A, vii. 56 ; Solin. Polyli. 2, where one of the best MSS. has Gellim for Caelius; Gell. xiii. 22, xviii. 12; Censorin. de Die Nat. 17; Macrob. Sat i. 8, 16, ii. 13 ; Charisius, pp. 39, 40, SO, 55 ; Serv. ad Virg. Aen. iv. 390, viii. 638 ; Marius Victorin. p. 2468.) [W. R.] GE'LLIUS EGNATIUS. [Egnatius, No. 1.] GELLIUS FUSCUS. [Fuscus.] GE'LLIUS, PUBLl'CIUS, a jurist, one of the disciples of Servius Sulpicius. [T. Caesius.] From the unusual combination of two apparently gentile names, conjectural alterations of the passage in the Digest where Publicius Gellius is mentioned by Pomponius (Dig. 1. tit. 2. s, 2. § 44) have been attempted by several critics. Rutilius ( Vi- tae ICtorwn^ c. 45) reads Publius C'aecilius, and Hotomann reads Publicola Gellius. Accordingly, the jurist has been attempted to be identified with the L. Gellius Publicola who is spoken of by Cicero {Brut. 47) as a second-rate orator, contemporary with L. Crassus and M. Anto- nius ; but the disciple of Servius must have been of rather later date. Maiansius makes Pub- licius and Gellius distinct jurists, and alters the text of Pomponius by reading duodecim instead of decern, as the number of the disciples of Servius. There is no necessity for alteration, for Publicius is used as a Jictitiotts praenornen by Paulus, in Dig. 36. tit. 2. s. 24 ; and the jurist Publicius is cited, along with Africanus, by Ulpian (Dig. 38. tit. 17. 8. 2. $ 8) ; and is also cited by Modestinus (Dig. 35. tit. 1. 8. 51. $ 1), and by Marcellus (Dig. 31. B. 50. § 2). There was a praetor Publicius, who introduced into the edict a celebrated clause (Dig. 6. tit, 2. s. 1. pr.), which gave origin to the Fvhliciana in rem actio. By this action a bona fide possessor was enabled, by the fiction of usncaption, to re- cover the lost possession of a thing, although he was not dominus ex jure Quiritium. (Inst. 4. tit. 6. § 45.) It is not unlikely that this Publicius was the jurist cited in the Digest ; and there is some ground for identifying hiin with Q. Publicius, who GELON. was praetor peregrinus in b. c. Qd. (Cic. pro Cluent. 45). (Bertrandus, de Jurisp. ii. 16 ; Guil. Grotius, Vitae Jurisc. i. 11, § 15 — 18 ; Maiansius, ac? aocx ICtorum Frag. Comment., vol. ii. p. 154 — 161; Zimmern, R. R. G. vol. i. § 79 ; Hugo, /,". R. G. ed. 1832, p. 535.) [ J. T. G.] GE'LLIUS STATIUS. [Gellia Gens.] GELON (reAwi/). 1. Son of Deinomenes ty- rant of Gela, and afterwards of Syracuse. He was descended from one of the most illustrious families in his native city, his ancestors having been among the original founders of Gela, and having subse- quently held an important hereditary priesthood. (Herod, vii. J 53.) Gelon himself is first mentioned as one of the body-guards in the service of Hippo- crates, at that time tyrant of Gela, and distin- guished himself greatly in the wars carried on by that monarch, so as to be promoted to the chief command of his cavalry. On the death of Hippo- crates, the people of Gela rose in revolt against his sons, and attempted to throw off their yoke. Gelon espoused the cause of the young princes, and defeated the insurgents ; but took advantage of his victory to set aside the sons of Hippocrates, and retain the chief power for himself, B. c. 491. (Herod, vii. 154, 155 ; Schol. ad Find. Nem. ix. 95.) He appears to have held undisturbed rule over Gela for some years, until the internal dissensions of Syracuse afforded him an opportunity to inter- fere in the concerns of that city. The oligarchical party (called the Geomori, or Gamori) had been expelled from Syracuse by the populace, and taken refuge at Casmenae. Gelon espoused their cause, and proceeded to restore them by force of arms. On his approach the popular party opened the gates to him, and submitted without opposition to his power (b. c. 485). From this time he neglected Gela, and bent all his efforts to the aggrandisement of his new sovereignty ; he even destro3'ed Cama- rina (which had been rebuilt by Hippocrates not long before), in order to remove the inhabitants to Syracuse, whither he also transferred above half of those of Gela. In like manner, having taken the cities of Euboea and the Hyblaean Megara, he settled all the wealthier citizens of them at Syra- cuse, while he sold the lower classes into slavery. (Herod, vii. 155, 156 ; Thuc. vi. 4, 5.) By these means Syracuse was raised to an unexampled height of wealth and prosperity, and Gelon found himself possessed of such power as no Greek had previously held, when his assistance was requested by the Lacedaemonians and Athenians against the impending danger from the invasion of Xerxes. He offered to support them with a fleet of 200 tri- remes, and a land force of 28,000 men, on con- dition of being entrusted with the chief command of the allied forces, or at least with that of their fleet. But both these proposals being rejected, he dismissed the envoys with the remark, that the Greeks had lost the spring out of their year. (Herod, vii. 157—162 ; Timaeus, Frag. 87, ed. Paris, 1841.) There is some uncertainty with regard to the conduct that he actually pursued. According to Herodotus, he sent Cadmus of Cos with a sum of money to await at Delphi the issue of the ap- proaching contest, and should it prove unfavourable to the Greeks, to make offers of submission to the Persian monarch. But the same historian adds, that the Sicilian Greeks asserted him to have been