Ancient Greece and 'honor' in the Olympics.

[Ozone]

I look at the Olympics in recent years and see examples of cheating and how people react to finding out a person cheated.

- Was cheating a problem in Ancient Olympic games?

- How was it viewed and dealt with in that culture?

- Was 'honor' and 'don't lie or cheat' equally emphasized in all aspects of life?

 

[carlton_bach]

Well, there were far fewer opportunities for cheating, but they were used enthusiastically (look up "curse tablets" for the contemporary analogue to doping). The idea was, of course, that the Olympic games were held as a forem of divine worship and thus any instance of being found cheating would be sacrilegous, but by the time we have good data for, that is so much pious hogwash. People were in it to win, spent enormous amounts on it and got great returns on victories. I don't think there are instances of anyone being retroactively caught, though, so that part does not really apply. You were either thrown out by the hellanodikoi on the spot, or the victory counted. I can't see any city meekly accepting their victory being retroactively awarded another.

For an idea of the reaction to obvvious cherating later on, look at the comments on Nero's victory in the chariot race (though IIRC that was the Isthmian games). People did not take it kindly.

 

[Flying Dutchman]

Cheating was blasphemous, but probably did happen. On the other hand, the Greeks where pretty strict with the rules, and took them quite likeral:

There is one report of a pancration match betwen a heavy but slow fighter and an agile but weak boxer, that ended in a tiebreak, meaning each of the boxers could deliver one puch, the man standing being the winner.

The big fighter took the other mans hit, the struck with the other man with stretched fingers, piercing his abdomen and pulled out his guts. The big fighter was then disqualified. Not for killing his opponent, as the rules didn't forbid that, but because the pulling of the guts was considered a second strike. The dead man was declared champion.

Long story short, their sense of honor still allowed for loopholes.

 

[mats]

"Lying" or "Cheating" were not inherently bad in Ancient greece, and good liars were sometimes even admired, as was the case with odysseus.

I don't know much about cheating in the ancient olympics, but I think it is fair to say that it definitly happend, since it is the Human nature do so. Though it didn't happen a lot according to ancient sources, we know of some:


http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/olympics/tp/073008OlympicCheats.htm

 

[cimon]

Well, there were far fewer opportunities for cheating, but they were used enthusiastically (look up "curse tablets" for the contemporary analogue to doping). The idea was, of course, that the Olympic games were held as a forem of divine worship and thus any instance of being found cheating would be sacrilegous, but by the time we have good data for, that is so much pious hogwash. People were in it to win, spent enormous amounts on it and got great returns on victories. I don't think there are instances of anyone being retroactively caught, though, so that part does not really apply. You were either thrown out by the hellanodikoi on the spot, or the victory counted. I can't see any city meekly accepting their victory being retroactively awarded another.

For an idea of the reaction to obvious cherating later on, look at the comments on Nero's victory in the chariot race (though IIRC that was the Isthmian games). People did not take it kindly.

I will stand at the word "sacrilege";murder was punished by death in ancient Greece not because of the killing but because spilling blood was an offence to the gods therefore punishable by death.Any form of sacrilege had the same penalty,carried out by the city the wrongdoer belonged to in order to"wash out" the shame that was attached to the city.Athenian criminal law is enlightening with regard to the extend sacrilege was applicable.