The Ancient Library

Scanned text contains errors.



tomary among ourselves, and was chiefly shown towards friends or persons of distinction and merit, whose presence was an honour to the house wherein they stayed. (Xen. Oecon. 2. 5 ; Plato, Protag. p. 315 ; Becker, Charikle-s, vol. i. p. 134.) In the houses of the wealthier Greeks a separate part (hos­pitium or hospitalia and ^tv&vzs} with a separate entrance, was destined for the reception and habi­tation of strangers, and was provided with all the necessary comforts for the temporary occupants. On the first day after their arrival they were gene­rally invited to the table of their host ; but after­wards their provisions (£evmj, consisting of fowl, eggs, and fruit, were either sent to them, or they had to purchase them themselves. (Vitruv. vi. 7. 4 ; Apul. Metam. ii. p. 19.)

What has been said hitherto, onlv refers to hos-

v */

pitium privatum, that is, the hospitality existing between two individuals or families of different states. Of far greater importance, however, was the hospitium publicum (irpo^evia, sometimes simply l^m), 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 business, and 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 ne­cessary 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 irpo-|6j/ot, but those who undertook it voluntarily e'0e/\o-irp6%€voi. (Pollux, iii. 59 ; compare Thucyd. ii. 29 with Arnold's note, and iii. 70 with Goller's.)

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 to select from among the Spartan citizens those whom they wished to send out as proxeni to other states. (Herod, vi. 57.) But in subsequent times this custom seems to have been given up, for we find


that at Athens the family of Callias were the xeni of Sparta (Xen. Hellen. v. 4. § 22, vi. 3. § 4, &c.) ; at Elis, the Elean Xenias (Paus. iii. 8. § 2) ; and at Argos, the Argive Alciphron. (Thucyd. v. 59.) A Spartan sent out as proxenus was some­times also entrusted with the power of harmostes, as Clearchus at Byzantium. (Xen. Hellen. i. 1. § 35, i. 3. § 15.)

The custom of conferring the honour of proxenus upon a citizen of the state with which public hospi­tality existed, seems in later times to have been universally adopted by the Greeks. Thus we find besides the instances of Spartan proxeni mentioned above, Nicias the Athenian, as proxenus of Syra­cuse at Athens (Diodor. xiii. 27), and Arthmius, of Zeleia, as the proxenus of Athens at Zeleia. (Aeschin. c. Ciesiph. p. 647: compare Plato, de Leg. i. p. 642.) The common mode of appointing a proxenus was, with the exception of Sparta, by show of hands. ( Ulpian, ad Demosth. Mid. p. 374.) The principal duties of a proxenus were to receive those persons, especially ambassadors, who came from the state which he represented ; to procure for them the admission to the assembly, and seats in the theatre (Pollux, /. c.) ; to act as the patron of the strangers, and to mediate between the two states if any disputes arose. (Xen. Hellen. vi. 3. § 4.) If a stranger died in the state, the proxenus of his country had to take care of the property of the deceased. (Demosth. c. Callip. p. 1237, &c.)

Regarding the honours and privileges which a proxenus enjoyed from the state which he repre­sented, the various Greek states followed different principles : some honoured their proxenus with the full civic franchise, and other distinctions besides. (Bb'ckh, Corp. Inscript. n. 1691—93, and ii. p. 79 ; Demosth. de Cor. p. 256 ; Xen. Hellen. i. 1. § 26.) But the right of acquiring property in the state of which he thus became a citizen seems not to have been included in his privileges; for we find that where this right was granted, it was done by an especial document. (Bockh, Publ. Econ.^p. 140.) A foreigner who was appointed in his own country as proxenus of Athens, enjoyed for his own person the right of hospitality at Athens whenever he visited this city, and all the other privileges that a foreigner could possess without becoming a real Athenian citizen. Among these privileges, though they were not necessarily included in the proxeny, but were granted by special decrees, we may mention, 1. 'Eiriya/Ai'a, which, in cases when it was granted by the more powerful state, generally became mu­tual (Platner's Process, ii. p. 73 ; Xen. Hellen. v. 2. §19); 2. The right to acquire property at Athens (eyKTriffis, ejuTracm, €7r7ra<rjs) ; 3. The exemption from paying taxes (areAeta or dreAeta airdvrow, Demosth. c. Leptin. p. 475, compare p. 498) ; and 4. Inviolability in times of peace and war, both by sea and by land. (Bockh, Corp. Inscrip. i. p. 725.) Some of these privileges were granted to indivi­duals as well as to whole states ; but we have no instance of a whole state having received all of them, with the exception of those cases where the civic franchise or isopolity was granted to a whole state ; and in this case the practical consequences could not become manifest, unless a citizen of the pri­vileged state actually took up his residence at Athens. (Compare F. W. Ullrich, de Proxenia, Berlin, 1822 ; Wachsnrath, Hellen. Alterth. vol. i. p. 168, &c. ; Hermann, Polit. Ant. § 116.)

iAX Romans was,

About | First | English Index | Classified Index | Latin Index | Greek Index



page #  
Search this site
All non-public domain material, including introductions, markup, and OCR © 2005 Tim Spalding.
Ancient Library was developed and hosted by Tim Spalding of