Because among the disciplines of the ancient Olympics if it were not contemplated I swim it was a reason for debate among many expert historians of theAncient GreeceThe ancient Olympic Games included disciplines such as wrestling and boxing, but not swimming, which was admitted among the Olympic disciplines only in 1896. Over the years, some new techniques have been developed theories to explain this lack: according to some, swimming it was not considered a useful activityand therefore was not worthy of being included in the Olympic Games, while other historians believe that since the sports of the ancient Olympics were based on military activities water activities had no place. Upon closer inspection, these theories they are not entirely convincing. Let’s try to understand why and if there could be a more strictly personal reason for the absence of swimming. socio-cultural.
First of all, the fact that swimming was not considered a useful activity It is not true. Ancient authors tell us that knowing how to swim was considered part of the cultural baggage basis of any young Greek (male, of course). Secondly, the “military” hypothesis would not be satisfactory either. Although it was true that ancient Olympic sports were closely linked to military activities, some Greek authors emphasize how the knowing how to swim proved useful in several war contextsmostly of naval warfarein a military world like the Hellenic one where these techniques were of primary importance.
Second Edward Claytonof Central Michigan University, the reasons for the absence of swimming are strictly socio-cultural. In an article published in theAthens Journal of SportsClayton highlights how the mentality of the ancient Greeks had a decisive influence on the exclusion of aquatic activities. The ancient Olympic Games were, in theory, open to everyone free Greek males. In reality, things were very different. In a world where professionalism in sports did not yet existthe only ones who could afford to dedicate themselves completely to training and the various disciplines were those who came from the most affluent and aristocratic social classes.
This found a deep connection with the spirit of the Olympics. For the Greeks, sport was a way to demonstrate their arete (virtue), which did not reside solely in the performance sporty, but also in the beauty of one’s body (that’s why the athletes competed completely nudes) and of its own soul. Athletes participating in the Olympic Games had to be kalòi kagathòi (beautiful and good), and these were the values which reflected the mentality of the ancient Hellenic aristocracy.
And so for what reason? to exclude swimming from sports activities? According to Clayton, the answer to this question is to be found in the possible competition from those who swam professionallylike the fishermen hey oyster diggers. Those who carried out these jobs belonged to the lower social classesWell yes they earned a living precisely thanks to their swimming ability. The fact that a physical activity entailed an economic gain in a world where professional sports did not exist was prejudicial from the start the dignity of swimming compared to other Olympic sports.
As useful as it was, swimming was perceived by the Greeks as a highly linked to the popular social classes. To allow humble fishermen to participate in the games would have been against the values of physical and moral excellence that characterized the ancient Olympics. Clayton also highlights another cultural element that would have compromised the presence of aquatic activities, namely the erotic dimension of sports. In a society of appearance like the Greek one, in all activities there was competition nudesjust to demonstrate their own physical value regardless of athletic performance. All of this was an integral part of Greek culture itself. Water activities, by their very nature, they would not have allowed the public to fully enjoy the beauty of bodies of athletes engaged in sports such as running or javelin throwing.
