Gellius Maximus
Roman usurper of the imperial throne (died 219)
Gellius Maximus was a Roman usurper, who, in 219 AD, revolted against Emperor Elagabalus. His rebellion was swiftly crushed, and he himself was executed.
History
Gellius Maximus was the son of Lucius Gellius Maximus, who had served as a doctor to Emperor Caracalla's doctor. For his services, Lucius Gellius Maximus received the rank of provincial procurator, making him the chief financial officer of his province. He himself did not achieve senatorial rank, but only the equestrian rank of procurator.
In the year of Gellius Maximus' revolt, 219 AD, several other usurpers arose as well, using a variety of justifications for their legitimacy. Among them were Seius Carus, by virtue of aristocratic heritage; Alexianus, and Castinus, by virtue of their relationship (or claimed relationship) to an imperial family; and Verus, by virtue of his military strength. Gellius Maximus likewise used his military strength as a justification for imperial legitimacy.
Before his revolt, Gellius Maximus was a senatorial tribune (second-in-command of the legion) of Legio IV Scythica legion. During his command of IV Scythica, his troops captured Diadumenian, the son of the previous emperor, Macrinus.
“Gellius Maximus” enters the record as roman usurper of the imperial throne (died 219). Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Gellius, Maximus and Roman can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Gellius Maximus” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Gellius, Maximus and Roman provides the most credible route into that argument.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Dec 2, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q259083. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Gellius Maximus”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Gellius Maximus primary sources, Gellius Maximus archive and Gellius research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Gellius Maximus”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Gellius Maximus” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.