The Biggest Differences between the Ancient Olympics and Pierre de Coubertin’s Modern Olympic Movement
Dating back to 776 BCE in Greece, the ancient Olympics were deeply intertwined with religious rituals and traditions, serving as a sacred occasion in honor of Zeus, the chief deity of the Greek pantheon. Participation was reserved for freeborn Greek men. The battle evoked the battlefield, emphasizing physical endurance and martial skills, which characterized the military society back then. Beyond sports, the ancient Olympics’ competitions were mainly made up of different categories of displays and performances, from music to poetry to visual arts. This heightened the cultural significance of the festivities in the Olympic year. Although the Olympics had become such a crucial cultural factor, they continued to be seen only as elite events typically held to demonstrate the power and fame of the participating city-states. Access was tightly controlled, leaving only a few opportunities for the wealthy classes of Greek society.
While the nineteenth-century Olympic movement sought to transfer the splendor of the ancient Olympic competitions, Pierre de Coubertin started a modern Olympic movement in 1896 to update the spirit of the ancient games following contemporary values and objectives. The historical overview of Coubertin’s thought provided by Llewellyn Smith takes this idea further, identifying the modern Olympics as a vehicle for conveying and strengthening this sense of understanding and peace through athletic competition. Unlike their predecessors, the latter opened the scope of participation for athletes from all over the globe, irrespective of their nations and social backgrounds, consequently sponsoring inclusivity and the awareness of involvement. Going beyond the elite, Coubertin looked to bring a democratization of sports into the Olympic context, therefore making it possible to be involved in the Olympic Games by athletes of all social classes and backgrounds. It was initially intended as an international brotherhood for peace through sport, expanding the accessibility and impact of Olympic ideas worldwide.
Promotion of the “Human Spirit”
In the context of the ancient Olympics, such things as zeal, courage, and competition inherent in physical excellence were considered perfect embodiments of the ‘human spirit.’ According to Golden, these were often conceived as complementary and built around the Greek ideal of strength and heroism specific to manliness. Athletic competition was a form the Greek gods worshipped, which they used to display their skills and abilities in physical strength, agility, and alertness. Though both actors were included purposely to pursue excellence and celebrate the human spirit, participation in these games was restricted particularly to male citizens; thus, the scope of these games was subsequently limited by excluding women and foreigners. On the other hand, Pierre de Coubertin’s contemporary Olympic movement was all about unity and how the human spirit can be expanded to cover international cooperation, sportsmanship, and fair play. The skeptical approach to sports in peacemaking is illustrated by showing where the Olympic Games were affected by international tensions and conflicts. Despite those pitfalls, the ancient Olympics aimed to strengthen bonds between people, regardless of their differences. They emphasize the values of unity, diversity, and solidarity among nations worldwide.
Evaluation of Coubertin’s Vision of Olympism
Coubertin’s vision of Olympism transcended the boundaries of mere athletic competition; it sought to encompass the holistic development of individuals, integrating physical, mental, and spiritual aspects through the medium of sport. Elites’ health promotion vision went beyond bodybuilding and included cultivating teamwork, sportsmanship, and determination, highly valuable traits for personal and social development. He believed that considering that sport is the only language seen to be universal, the Olympics would then be a powerful tool for building peace, understanding, and harmony amongst nations, hence the differences in cultures, politics, or social classes. Thus, sports, which are exactly what they denote, erase those differences and bring people together. Besides, he understood that, as well as professional sports, athletic competition can break down cultural barriers and create a feeling of friendship and mutual respect among people who live in different cultures, so it would contribute to developing and spreading cooperation as the main global trade and commonwealth.
However, the early modern Olympics faced numerous challenges in realizing Coubertin’s ambitious vision. Drozdiak illustrated the political nature underlying the Olympic Games and the use of them for propaganda or preferably pursuing national goals instead of the true Olympic concept of ”unity and sportsmanship” that Coubertin had. Another problem was the rise of controversies over amateurs and race, which plundered the principle of fair play and universal participation and destroyed Barbe’s dream of a modern Olympics. Although Olympism has been confronted with serious challenges as it calls for cooperation and unity among the international sports movement based on Coubertin’s ideals, this ideology remains a ‘holy grail’ that inspires many people for its preaching. The Inception of the Olympic Charter by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is the one that serves the Olympic movement as a guideline and, at the same time, remains consistent with the beginnings of Coubertin in which they foster peace and understanding through sports. Through the Olympic Charter, and thus keeping to its principles, the International Olympic Committee aims to maintain a sense of ethical purity concerning Olympic sport, ensuring that they remain at the core of positive change in the world and cooperation and harmony between nations. Through constant renewal and Coubertin’s principles, the Olympic movement tries to develop with it as time progresses, the world’s problems arise, and it fights for its founding map of ideas.
Despite the obstacles upon which Greece is based, the principle of Olympism, promulgated by Coubertin, still stands out, providing unity and cooperation to the Olympists of the moment. The International Olympic Committee, which wrote the Olympic Charter, created the Olympic movement, providing the guidelines for Coubertin’s vision that Olympism would bring peace and appeasement to the world. Through strict adherence to the Olympic Charter, the IOC ensures that the general philosophy and the Olympic Games’ core position remain intact, maintaining their unifying function as an agent for a better world. By utilizing reformation repeatedly and following Coubertin’s principles, the Olympic movement struggles to become better and cater to these new situations of the modern world without forgetting the reason behind it.
Bibliography
Drozdiak, William. (1996). “Tens of Thousands Gather as Park Makes Comeback.” Washington Post.
Golden, Mark. (2011). “War and Peace in the Ancient and Modern Olympics.” Greece & Rome, 58(1), 1-13.
Guttmann, Allen. (1978). From Ritual to Record: The Nature of Modern Sport. Columbia University Press.
Hoberman, John. (2011). “The Myth of Sports as a Peace-Promoting Political Force.” SAIS Review of International Affairs, 31(1), 17-29.
Llewellyn Smith, Michael. (2004). Olympics in Athens 1896: The Invention of the Modern Olympic Games. Profile Books.
International Olympic Committee. Olympic Charter, 2023.
write