Titus Livius (Livy), The History of Rome, Book 24
Frank Gardener Moore, Professor Emeritus in Columbia University, Ed.

5. It would have been difficult for any king, even a good one and self-controlled, to find favour with the Syracusans as successor to Hiero, so beloved. [2] But certainly Hieronymus at his very first appearance showed how different everything was, just as if he wished by his vices to make them regret his grandfather. [3] For, though through so many years they had seen Hiero and his son Gelo¹ not differing from the rest of the citizens in garb or in any other distinction, they beheld purple and a diadem and armed attendants and a man who came forth from the [4??] palace sometimes even in a chariot with four white horses after the manner of Dionysius the tyrant. [5] This haughty state and costume were suitably attended by contempt shown towards everyone, by haughty ears, insulting words, infrequent access, not only for outsiders but even for his guardians, by unheard of lusts, by inhuman cruelty.² [6] Consequently such alarm had laid hold of all that some of the guardians anticipated the dreaded punishments either by suicide or by flight. [7] Three of them, who alone had more intimate access to the palace, Adranodorus and Zoippus, the sons-in-law of Hiero, and a certain Thraso, were not indeed much listened to on other matters; [8] but as two of them were inclining to the Carthaginians, Thraso to alliance with Rome, by their partisan rivalry they were occasionally attracting the young man's attention, when a conspiracy [p. 191]formed against the life of the tyrant was revealed³ by one Callo, of the same age as Hieronymus and from boyhood accustomed to all the rights of intimacy. [9] The informer was able to name but one of the conspirators, Theodotus, by whom he had himself been approached. [10] And Theodotus, at once seized and handed over for torture to Adranodorus,⁴ confessed without hesitation in regard to himself, but did not reveal his accomplices. [11] Finally, racked by all the tortures which pass human endurance, pretending to be mastered by his sufferings, he turned informer against the innocent instead of against his accomplices, and falsely stated that Thraso was responsible for the plan: that they would not have ventured upon such an undertaking if they had not relied upon so powerful a leader. [12] He also named attendants of the tyrant as associates, men whose lives, it occurred to him, as he was fabricating between pains and groans, were of the least account. [13] His mentioning Thraso made the information particularly credible to the mind of the tyrant. Accordingly Thraso was forthwith handed over for execution, and the rest, equally innocent, shared his punishment. [14] Not one of the accomplices either hid himself or fled, though their partner in the plot was long under torture. Such confidence was theirs in the courage and loyalty of Theodotus, and such will-power to keep secrets did Theodotus himself possess.