HOSPĬTĬUM

( ξενία , προξενία ), hospitality, was in Greece, as well as at Rome, of a two-fold nature, either private or public, in so far as it was either established between individuals, or between two states. ( Hospitium privatum and hospitium publicum , ξενία and προξενία .) In ancient Greece the stranger, as such ( ξένος and host is ), was looked upon as an enemy; but whenever he appeared among another tribe or nation without any sign of hostile intentions, he was considered not only as one who required aid, but as a suppliant, and Zeus was the protecting deity of strangers and suppliants ( Ζεὺς ξένιος ). On his arrival, therefore, the stranger was kindly received, and provided with every thing nece ary to make him comfortable. It seems to have been customary for the host, on the departure of the stranger, to break a die ( ἀστράγαλος ) in two, one half of which he himself retained, while the other half was given to the stranger; and when at any future time they or their descendants met, they had a means of recognising each other, and the hospitable connection was renewed. Hospitality thus not only existed between the persons who had originally formed it, but was transferred as an inheritance from father to son. What has been said hitherto, only refers to hospitium privatum ; but of far greater importance was the hospitium publicum ( προξενία , sometimes simply ξενία ) or public hospitality, which existed between two states, or between an individual or a family on the one hand, and a whole state on the other. Of the latter kind of public hospitality many instances are recorded, such as that between the Peisistratids and Sparta, in which the people of Athens had no share. The hospitium publicum among the Greeks arose undoubtedly from the hospitium privatum, and it may have originated in two ways. When the Greek tribes were governed by chieftains or kings, the private hospitality existing between the ruling families of two tribes may have produced similar relations between their subjects, which, after the abolition of the kingly power, continued to exist between the new republics as a kind of political inheritance of former times. Or a person belonging to one state might have either extensive connections with the citizens of another state, or entertain great partiality for the other state itself, and thus offer to receive all those who came from that state either on private or public busine , and to act as their patron in his own city. This he at first did merely as a private individual, but the state to which he offered this kind service would naturally soon recognise and reward him for it. When two states established public hospitality, and no individuals came forward to act as the representatives of their state, it was nece ary that in each state persons should be appointed to show hospitality to, and watch over the interests of, all persons who came from the state connected by hospitality. The persons who were appointed to this office as the recognised agents of the state for which they acted were called proxeni ( πρόξενοι ), but those who undertook it voluntarily etheloproxeni ( ἐθελοπρόξενοι ). The office of proxenus , which bears great resemblance to that of a modern consul or minister-resident, was in some cases hereditary in a particular family. When a state appointed a proxenus, it either sent out one of its own citizens to reside in the other state, or it selected one of the citizens of this state, and conferred upon him the honour of proxenus. The former was, in early times, the custom of Sparta, where the kings had the right of selecting from among the Spartan citizens those whom they wished to send out as proxeni to other states. But in subsequent times this custom seems to have been given up, for we find that at Athens the family of Call i as were the proxeni of Sparta, and at Argos, the Argive Alciphron. The principal duties of a proxenus were to receive those persons, especially amba adors, who came from the state which he represented; to procure for them admi ion to the a embly, and seats in the theatre; to act as the patron of the strangers, and to mediate between the two states if any disputes arose. If a stranger died in the state, the proxenus of his country had to take care of the property of the deceased.—The hospitality of the Romans was, as in Greece, either hospitium privatum or publicum. Private hospitality with the Romans, however, seems to have been more accurately and legally defined than in Greece. The character of a hospes , i.e. a person connected with a Roman by ties of hospitality, was deemed even more sacred, and to have greater claims upon the host, than that of a person connected by blood or affinity. The relation of a hospes to his Roman friend was next in importance to that of a cliens. The obligations which the connection of hospitality with a foreigner imposed upon a Roman, were to receive in his house his hospes when travelling; and to protect, and, in case of need, to represent him as his patron in the courts of justice. Private hospitality thus gave to the hospes the claims upon his host which the client had on his patron, but without any degree of the dependence implied in the clientele. Private hospitality was established between individuals by mutual presents, or by the mediation of a third person, and hallowed by religion; for Jupiter hospital is was thought to watch over the jus hospitii, as Zeus xenios did with the Greeks, and the violation of it was as great a crime and impiety at Rome as in Greece. When hospitality was formed, the two friends used to divide between themselves a te era hospital is , by which, afterwards, they themselves or their descendants—for the connection was hereditary as in Greece—might recognise one another. Hospitality, when thus once established, could not be di olved except by a formal declaration ( renuntiatio ), and in this case the te era hospital is was broken to pieces. Public hospitality seems likewise to have existed at a very early period among the nations of Italy; but the first direct mention of public hospitality being established between Rome and another city, is after the Gauls had departed from Rome, when it was decreed that Caere should be rewarded for its good services by the establishment of public hospitality between the two cities. The public hospitality after the war with the Gauls gave to the Caerites the right of isopolity with Rome, that is, the civitas without the suffragium and the honores. [ Coloni a . ] In the later times of the republic we no longer find public hospitality established between Rome and a foreign state; but a relation which amounted to the same thing was introduced in its stead, that is, towns were raised to the rank of municipia, and thus obtained the civitas without the suffragium and the honores; and when a town was desirous of forming a similar relation with Rome, it entered into clientela to some distinguished Roman, who then acted as patron of the client-town. But the custom of granting the honour of hospes public us to a distinguished foreigner by a decree of the senate, seems to have existed down to the end of the republic. His privileges were the same as those of a municeps, that is, he had the civitas, but not the suffragium or the honores. Public hospitality was, like the hospitium privatum, hereditary in the family of the person to whom it had been granted. HỸĂCINTHĬA ( ὑακίνθια ), a great national festival, celebrated every year at Amyclae by the Amyclaeans and Spartans, probably in honour of the Amyclaean Apollo and Hyacinth us together. This Amyclaean Apollo, however, with whom Hyacinth us was a imilated in later times, must not be confounded with Apollo, the national divinity of the Dorians. The festival was called after the youthful hero Hyacinth us, who evidently derived his name from the flower hyacinth (the emblem of death among the ancient Greeks), and whom Apollo accidentally struck dead with a quoit. The Hyacinth i a lasted for three days, and began on the longest day of the Spartan month Hecatombeus, at the time when the tender flowers, oppre ed by the heat of the sun, drooped their languid heads. On the first and last day of the Hyacinth i a sacrifices were offered to the dead, and the death of Hyacinth us was lamented. During these two days, nobody wore any garlands at the repasts, nor took bread, but only cakes and similar things, and when the solemn repasts were over, everybody went home in the greatest quiet and order. The second day, however, was wholly spent in public rejoicings and amusements, such as horse-races, dances, proce ions, . The great importance attached to this festival by the Amyclaeans and Lace daemon i ans is seen from the fact, that the Amyclaeans, even when they had taken the field against an enemy, always returned home on the approach of the season of the Hyacinth i a, that they might not be obliged to neglect its celebration; and that in a treaty with Sparta, B.C. 421, the A then i ans, in order to show their good-will towards Sparta, promised every year to attend the celebration of this festival.