THE 776 B.C. DATE AND SOME PROBLEMS CONNECTED WITH I T

John Mouratidis Univers i ty o f Thrace,

Komotini, Greece

Very ear ly i n the f i f t h century B.C. the Olympic Games became a panhellenic f e s t i v a l and thus people from every p a r t o f the Greek world v i s i t e d Olympia. The evidence from mater ia l and l i t e r a r y sources indicates tha t Olympia was a sacred place where a t h l e t i c events and f e s t i v a l s were held long before the t r a d i t i o n a l date o f the beginning o f the Games. The date 776 B.C. can no longer be accepted f o r the beginning of the Games a t Olympia. The o r i g i n o f the Olympic fes t iva l , i n ac tua l i ty , i s l o s t i n the dark mists o f time. One th ing which i s ce r ta in i s t ha t games were pract iced a t Olympia long before the t r a d i t i o n a l date o f 776 B.C. I t i s the purpose o f t h i s paper t o demonstrate the existence o f such contests a t Olympia before 776 B.C. and thus t o question the r e l i a b i l i t y o f the Olympic reg i s te r o f Hippias o f E l i s as we l l as the genuineness o f the so-called discuss of Iphi tos.

For the l a s t f i f t y years research on the h i s to ry o f Greek sports, games and fes t i va l s has been concentrated i n the Olympic Games o f the c lass i ca l period. Most o f the books and a r t i c l e s w r i t t en on Greek a th le t i cs have neglected t o inves t iga te the 776 B.C. date as the beginning o f the Olympic Games, and qu i te understandbly so. The lack o f mater ia l evidence and the c o n f l i c t i n g t r a d i t i o n a l sources make such an inves t iga t ion a very d i f f i c u l t undertaking. I n addit ion, i n order t o undertake such a d i f f i c u l t task, contr ibutory assistance from d isc ip l ines such as history, archaeology, r e l i g i o n and anthropology i s absolutely essent ia l for such an invest igat ion.

I t becomes c lear from Pausanias tha t the 776 B.C. Games were the r e v i v a l o f previous games.1 Strabo was more cautious, f o r he said tha t a t the time o f the Trojan war e i t he r there were no games i n which a crown was the pr ize o r i f there were they were not f a m o u ~ . ~ This be l ie f i n the existence of games a t Olympia before 776 B.C. was shared by Gardiner as well :

The existence o f the games i n pre-Dorian times agrees en t i r e l y w i th the a t h l e t i c character o f the Achaeans i n the Peloponnese as described i n Homer; and i f we f i n d i n the poet no mention o f Olympia, h i s s i lence i s eas i ly explained by the simple, l o c a l character o f the f e s t i v a l a t t h i s time.3

That the Olympic f e s t i v a l during the time o f Homer was a Peloponnesian a f f a i r i s confirmed also by the mater ia l evidence, since the

* Most o f the ideas expressed i n t h i s paper regarding the 776 B.C. date and the problems connected w i th i t have been also advanced i n my dissertat ion.

bronze offerings at the sanctuary in the 8th century are of Spartan, Argive and Corinthian ~t~les.4 Homer, however, did mention games in Elis when he said:

.... for indeed a great debt was owing to him in shining Elis. It was four horses, race-competitors with their own chariot, who were on their way to a race and were to run for a tripod, but Augeias the lord of men took these, and kept them and sent away their driver who was vexed for the sake of the horses?

Two propositions may be regarded as fairly established: first, that Olympia was a sacred place before the Achaean invasion and second, the games started before the coming of the Dorians but probably after the arrival of the ~chaeans.~ The primitive terra-cotta and bronze figurines found at Olympia are many and point to a Dark Age period. Among the votive offerings found at Olympia and dated by some archaeologists in the 10th century7 and by others not later than 800 B.c.~ are figurines depicting horses, chariots and charioteers. There is a general consensus that these bronze and terra-cotta figurines were the thank-offerings of the victorious athletes of noble birth who took part in the games.9 These votive offerings indicate not only the existence of a cultlo but also the fact that games, particularly races, were held in Olympia at this early date.ll If these assumptions are correct, then we should doubt the validity of one tradition which sa s that the only contest for the first thirteen Olympiads was the foot-race1$ and that chariot races were introduced almost one hundred years later in the 33rd Olympiad. ~indar s13 statement, that f rom the very beginning the contests were many, including chariot races, is rather closer to the truth. Even the most cautious archaeologists date sane of the bronze and terra-cotta finds of Olympia not later than 800 B.C. The most probable conclusion which suggests itself from a review of the material evidence is that at Olympia before 800 B.C. and possibly during the Dark Ages existed competitive games.

The 776 B.C. as the beginning of the Games at Olympia was fixed by the Elean sophist Hippias who lived ca. 400 B.C. In his attempt to fix the precise date for the beginning of the Games the Elean sophist, apparently, did some research but since antiquity there has been a lot of controversy concerning the acceptance of 776 B.C. as the beginning of the Olympic Games. Plutarch believed that Hippias had based his list of the Olympic victors on very doubtful evidence. In his opening chapter of the life of Numa he said:

Chronology, however, is hard to fix, and especially that which is based on the names of the victors in the Olympic Games, the list which is said to have been published at a late period by Hippias of Elis, who had no fully authoritative basis for his work.14

Plu ta rch was not alone i n doubting t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y of t h e v i c t o r s * st e d i t e d by Hippias. Some bel ieved t h a t it was extremely unl ikely t h a t ~ c h a n i s o l a t e d place a s E l i s had been, should have a r e g i s t e r of v i c t o r s f o r f e s t i v a l which was unimportant and l o c a l , a hundred years before t h e

:henians had t h e i r own l is t of Archons o r t h e Spartans a list of irneionikai.15 Those who did not be l ieve i n t h e exis tence of a v i c t o r s * ist s ince 776 B.C. agreed t h a t a f t e r t h e 50 th Olympiad records may have been s p t and thus Hip i a s from about Olympiad 50 used h i s t o r i c a l evidence t o m p i l e h i s list.P6 A f u r t h e r proof t h a t the list of t h e Olympic v i c t o r s a s o f l a t e reconstruct ion is t h e f a c t t h a t t h e Anolympiads 8 and 34 recorded iy ~ a u s a n i a s l 7 and t h e Anolympiad of Olympiad 104 a l l appear i n t h e list of Julius Africanus who brought t h e Olympic r e g i s t e r down t o 217 A . D . ~ ~

Just a s t h e r e a r e those who deny t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y of t h e Olympic r e g i s t e r , t h e r e a r e o thers who defend it. The most vigorous defence of t h e Olympic r e g i s t e r came from A. ~r inkmannl9 whose bas ic arguments are: t h e f a c t t h a t i n t h e v i c t o r s p list t h e Messenians f lour i shed f o r a while a s Olympic v i c t o r s and then disappeared from t h e list, whereupon t h e Spartans became prominent, can only be explained a s due t o a p o l i t i c a l d i s a s t e r . One s t a t e , Brinkmann believed, must have been destroyed and t h e o ther r a i s e d t o prominence. The war between Sparta and Messenia, which l a s t e d twenty years , must have happened i n t h i s period and t h e v i c t o r s following t h e l a s t Messenian victory came from c i t i e s t h a t did not t ake p a r t i n t h e war. Brinkmann was of t h e opinion t h a t such agreement between h i s t o r i c a l events and t h e Olympic r e g i s t e r of v i c t o r s was not merely a h i s t o r i c a l i n s i g h t and f i n e judgment by t h Elean sophist . Gardiner took a middle ground on t h e controversy concerning t h e Olympic r e g i s t e r of v ic to rs . He believed t h a t although Hippias1 list was imperfect and inaccurate , it is unl ike ly t h a t he "could have imposed a purely f i c t i t i o u s list of v i c t o r s on t h e c r i t i c a l Greek world a t t h e end of t h e f i f t h

o r t h a t A r i s t o t l e would have rev ised it without some evidence f o r h i s iz%:t3a The same point of view was expressed by John Forsdyke, who believed t h a t Plutarch 's statement t h a t Hippias did not base h i s l ist on convincing evidence may well be t rue ; but a l s o some mater ia l evidence concerning t h e Olympic v i c t o r s was ava i lab le , because i f the beginning of t h e list, t h a t Hippias compiled, had been t o t a l 1 f i c t i t i o u s , he then could have taken t h e list back t o a much e a r l i e r date.zr Mahaffy made an i n t e r e s t i n g statement which may lead us i n t o t h e persona l i ty of Hippias. Mahaffy sa id t h a t i f t h e r e was r e a l l y a trustworthy and genuine Olympic v i c t o r s ' list, then a l l t h a t Hippias had t o do was copy it. But h i s is not cons i s ten t , he argued, with Plutarch 's statement which "implies a t a s k of d i f f i c u l t y , requ i r ing research and judgment. And t h i s no doubt, was what t h e sophist wanted t o supply."22 What emerges from t h e above observat ion is a question r e l a t e d t o Hippias' a b i l i t y t o w r i t e an au then t ic list. Was t h e sophist r e a l l y capable of undertaking such an important task? A s f a r a s we know Hippias was t h e only one who d id not question h i s a b i l i t y on anything. We think here appropriate t o c i t e a p a r t of P l a t o 9 s dialogue bearing t h e name of the sophist (Greater Hippias). I n t h e dialogue, which is not a verbatim repor t , only Socrates and Hlpplas took par t .

S . Hippias, b e a u t i f u l and wise, what a long time it is since you have put i n a t t h e por t of Athens!

I am too busy, Socrates. For whenever E l i s needs t o have any business t ransacted with any of t h e s t a t e s , she always comes t o me f i r s t of her c i t i z e n s and chooses me a s envoy, thinking t h a t I am t h e a b l e s t judge and messenger of the words t h a t a r e spoken by the severa l s ta tes . . . That's what it is, Hippias, t o be a t r u l y wise and per fec t man!.....Then f o r Heaven's sake j u s t a s t h e o ther a r t s have progressed, and t h e anc ien ts a r e of no account i n comparison with t h e a r t i s a n s of today, s h a l l we say t h a t your a r t a l s o has progressed and those of t h e anc ien ts who were concerned with wisdom a r e of no account i n comparison with you?

Yes, you a r e q u i t e r i g h t .

That is a prodigious marvel t h a t you tell, Hippias; and say now: is not your wisdom such a s t o make those who a r e i n contact with it and l e a r n it, b e t t e r men i n respec t t o v i r tue?

Yes, much b e t t e r , Socrates.

And i n well-governed s t a t e s v i r t u e is most highly honoured.

Certainly.

And you know bes t of a l l men how t o t ransmit t h a t t o another.

Much bes t , Socrates.

But then what a r e t h e th ings about which they l i k e t o l i s t e n t o you and which they applaud? T e l l me yourself , f o r I cannot discover them.

They a r e very fond of hearing about t h e genealogies of heroes and men, Socrates , and t h e foundations of c i t i e s i n ancient times and, i n shor t , about a n t i q u i t y i n general , s o t h a t f o r t h e i r sake I have been obl iged t o l e a r n a l l t h a t s o r t of th ing by h e a r t and p r a c t i c e it thoroughly.

S. By Zeus, Hippias, i t is lucky f o r you t h a t t h e Lacedaemonians do not enjoy hearing one r e c i t e t h e list of our archons from Solon's times; i f they d id , you would have t rouble i n l ea rn ing it by hear t .

H. How so, Socrates? After hearing them once, I can remember f i f t y names.

S . True, but I d i d not understand t h a t you possess t h e sc ience of memory; and s o I understand t h a t t h e Lacedaemonians na tura l ly enjoy you a s one who knows many things, and they make use of you a s ch i ld ren make use of old women, t o t e l l s t o r i e s agreeably.

H. And by Zeus, Socrates , I have j u s t l a t e l y gained reputa t ion t h e r e by t e l l i n g about noble o r b e a u t i f u l pursu i t s , recounting what those of a young man should be. For I have a very b e a u t i f u l discourse composed about them, well arranged i n its words and a l s o i n o ther respects . And t h e plan of t h e discourse, and its beginning is something l i k e t h i s : After t h e f a l l of Troy, t h e s t o r y goes t h a t Neoptolemus asked Nestor what....

S. However, my f r iend , l e t us not ye t give i t up, f o r I still have hopes t h a t what t h e beau t i fu l is w i l l be made c l e a r .

H. Cer ta in ly , t o be sure , Socrates , f o r i t is not hard t o f ind. Now I know t h a t i f I should go away i n t o s o l i t u d e and meditate alone by myself, I could t e l l it t o you with t h e most per fec t accuracy.

S. ... But f o r Heaven's sake, f i n d it i n my presence,....

H. Not a t t h e moment, but a s I s a i d j u s t now, I am s u r e I s h a l l f i n d it a f t e r meditation.23

I n t h e Lesser Hippias another of P l a t o l s dialogue, Socrates again challenged t h e sophist who accepted t h e f a c t t h a t he was always na tura l ly i n a s t a t e of blessedness and t h a t s ince he began t o contend a t t h e Olympic Games he had never met anyone b e t t e r than himself i n anything.Z4

From t h e above P la ton ic dialogues some suggestions can be made which may throw a l i t t le more l i g h t on t h e a c t i o n s and personal i ty of Hippias. It becomes c l e a r from t h e Greater Hippias t h a t t h e sophist himself was not

interested in genealogies of heroes, men or in antiquity in general; he simply was obliged to do "that sort of thingrr because his audience was fond of hearing such stories. Socrates greatly doubted Hippiasr ability to remember genealogies and the latter assured Socrates that he can remember fifty names after hearing them once. But a little later under the Sacratic pressure he admitted that he composed and well arranged a story for the Lacedaemonians who made use of him "as children make use of old women, to tell stories agreeably." From the beginning of the dialogue emerges the fact that the Eleans used rather extensively their sophist for a variety of reason. This fact naturally raises the question: did they also employ him to compile an Olympic victorsB list? If they did, then one should expect that they also supplied him with some sort of information concerning the victors of the early Olympiads. The availability, reliability and the amount of such information can, of course, be endlessly disputed. One thing, however, is certain: that even if some relevant information existed about the early stages of the games and their victors, no doubt the contribution of Hippias was absolutely necessary and essential for the completion of the list. Thus it may be inferred that the Olympic register reflects to a degree the personality of the sophist who was reduced to foolishness by Socrates.

There are other points as well, connected with the 776 B.C. date that are in dispute: tradition told us that for the first thirteen Olympiads the only contest was the stadion (foot-ra~e)~~ and this fact gave rise to the widely accepted assumption that the winner of the stadion gave his name to the Olympiad. We also learn from pausaniasZ6 that a s m l y m p i c truce was established by Iphitos of Elis at the same time when the games first started. Pausanias also mentioned that among the dedications at Olympia was the so-called Iphitosrs discus on which were written the terms of the truce which the Eleans proclaim for the Olympic Games .27

A number of writers found Pausaniasl statement not very convincing, for they doubted that the foot-race was the only event for 52 years. Since the Elean nobility was a cavalier nobilit it seems unlikely that a hippic event was introduced as late as 680 B.C.28' Pindar in his Tenth Olympian M e gave the names of five heroes who won the five events in the first contest, and there was no indication that there was any change in the program, or that the five events mentioned by Pindar had not been part of the program since their introducti~n.~~ In fact pindar30 mentioned that the pentathlon as well as the pancratium were introduced later, thus making it evident that the five first events were, in his mind, the original events of the program of the Games. 31 Gardiner called Pausaniasl statement "an improbable storyw and he believed with Pindar that. from the beginning the events were those described by the poet.32 Other scholars in favour of Pindarls statement believed that the chariot-race was rather the first and most important event.33 This opinion found support from archaeological evidence not only from Olympia but frCm other places as well. Among the votive offerings by the victorious athletes at Olympia during and before the 8th century B.C. are many horses of clay and bronze charioteers as well as yokes belonging to horse chariots. If we accept Pausaniasr statement that for the first thirteen Olympiads the only event was the stadion and that the chariot-race was introduced at Olympia as late as 680 B.- we will be in a difficult position to explain the

presence of horses and c h a r i o t s among t h e vot ive of fe r ings a t Olympia. It is unlikely t h a t t h e v i c t o r s i n t h e s tad ion during t h e f i r s t Olympiads dedicated horses, c h a r i o t s and c h a r i o t e e r s a s thank-offerings t o t h e sanctuary of Olympia. Another ind ica t ion of t h e popular i ty of c h a r i o t races during t h e 8 t h century is t h e f a c t t h a t numerous scenes dep ic t ing t h e game appeared i n t h e a r t of t h i s age.34 Thus Pausaniasl statement t h a t men remembered t h e events one by one and then added them t o t h e program is not i n agreement with the mater ia l evidence.

There a r e a l s o a few writers who accepted Pausanias' account a s cor rec t . Weniger believed t h a t t h e foot-race was t h e only event during t h e peiod mentioned by Pausanias and t h a t t h e f e s t i v a l l a s t e d , f o r t h e f i r s t t h i r t e e n Olympiads, only two days. Other days, Weniger s a i d , were added a s t h e number of t h e games was increased.35 L. Orees is t h e only o ther author , a s f a r a s we know, who did not accept Pindar1s account of t h e ex i s tence of many events a t t h e time of t h e beginning of t h e games. Drees accepted Pausanias* s tatement t h a t it was only gradually t h a t t h e games were extended t o cover many contests;36 but he brought no evidence whatsoever t o support Pausanias* account o r disprove Pindar 's .

The Greek soc ie ty of t h e n in th and e igh th cen tur ies B.C. was a r i s t o c r a t i c and s o were t h e games i n general and t h e chariot-races i n par t i cu la r . The games, during t h i s period, were c lose ly , i f not t o t a l l y l inked with t h e a r i s tocracy . It is impossible t h a t t h e a r i s t o c r a t s of t h e n in th and e igh th cen tur ies B.C. should have given up such a p r i v i l e g e which, i n f a c t , connected them with t h e hero ic pas t of which they were s o proud and which they were eager t o imi ta te . We must there fore r e j e c t a s improbable t h e t r a d i t i o n a l s t o r y t h a t i n 776 B.C. t h e winner of t h e foot-race was a cook from E l i s who gave h i s name t o the f i r s t Olympiad and t h a t chariot-races were not included i n t h e Olympic program u n t i l 680 B.C. The mate r ia l evidence from Olympia, a s we have already seen, i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e e a r l y ded ica t ions of c h a r i o t s , horses and c h a r i o t e e r s were dedicat ions by the winning a t h l e t e s of noble b i r t h . We have good reason t o be l ieve t h a t Olympia, from t h e very beginning, was a place f o r competitive a r i s t o c r a t i c con tes t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y chariot-races. It becomes c l e a r from t h e I l i a d t h a t Olympia, o r Buprasion a s it was known t o Homer, served such a purpose. It was t h e r e t h a t Nestor King of Pyles competed i n t h e f u n e r a l games of ~ m a r ~ n ~ k e u s . 3 ~ It is c e r t a i n t h a t t h e games i n general and the Olympic Games i n p a r t i c u l a r remained a r i s t o c r a t i c f o r a long time and t h a t they changed a s t h e a r i s tocracy changed. It is reasonable t o assume t h a t t h e power of t h e a r i s t o c r a t s down t o t h e c los ing of t h e eighth century res ted not only i n t h e i r monopoly of t h e p o l i t i c a l organizat ion but a l s o i n t h e i r s o c i a l pos i t ion i n t h e s t a t e . It is unl ikely t h a t they could r e t a i n t h e i r s o c i a l pos i t ion without physical prowess, s k i l l i n c h a r i o t s and horses and courage i n b a t t l e . In f a c t , t h e importance and t h e n o b i l i t y of a person could not be understood without possession of horses and s k i l l i n horsemanship. I n a r i s t o c r a t i c s o c i e t i e s physical t r a i n i n g and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n games were p a r t of a noble 's everyday l i f e . I n add i t ion , i t is known t h a t t h e warfare of t h i s period was fought between these nobles who were t h e wealthy a r i s t o c r a t i c owners of horses and char io t s . When t h e Greeks changed their s t y l e of conducting t h e wars and introduced t h e mass formation, t h e so-called h o p l i t e formation, then t h e common people s t a r t e d t o claim its

share o f power i n the state. Even then the noble famil ies, who once contro l led the state, were the only ones r i c h enough t o breed horses and maintain chariots. Even though they d i d not themselves pa r t i c i pa te i n the chariot-races, they claimed t o be the v i c to rs when t h e i r horses won i n the races, an i nd i ca t i on o f t h e i r t r a d i t i o n a l monopoly over char io t races which they never los t .

Greek t r a d i t i o n was not unanimous about the o r i g i n o f the Olympic t ruce and i t s inventors. Lysias made Heracles the or ig ina tor o f the Olym i c t ruce and he h igh ly praised the Greek hero f o r t h i s c i v i l i z e d invention. 3g I n Pausaniasg account I ph i t os alone re-established the Olympic f es t i va l and the Olympic truce,39 while Plutarch added the name o f ~ycurgos,40 the lawgiver o f Sparta, who was a contemporary o f Iphi tos. F ina l ly , Phlegon o f Tra l les introduced i n add i t ion t o the names o f I ph i t os and Lycurgos, t ha t o f Cleosthenes, King o f ~ i s a . ~ z Support f o r a h ' s t o r i c a l I ph i t os i s no t very strong. He was rather '*a shadowy figurew." The i n s c r i p t i o n on the discus a t Olympia claimed tha t I ph i t os was son o f Haimon, but down t o the time o f Pausanias many believed he was the son o f Praxonidis, whi le the ancient records o f E l i s trace Iph i t os t o a father w i th the same name as himself .44 The Olympiad o f Iphitos, which according t o t r a d i t i o n must be tha t o f 776 B.C. when Coroibos was winner o f the stadion "was placed by Eratosthenes 108 years before the Olympiad o f Coroib0s.~~4-' When, i f ever, I ph i t os l i v e d and i f he had anything t o do w i th the establishment o f the Olympic f e s t i v a l and t ruce i s not clear. Neither was the h i s t o r i c a l existence o f Lycurgos confirmed. As t o h i s ac tua l date and h i s actions, ancient and modern authors were not i n agreement. Some believed tha t he was an o l d Laconian od46 whi le others believed he was a h i s t o r i c a l person47, and a lawgiver.28 I t was a c o m n b e l i e f i n ancient Greece tha t Lycurgos was a lawgiver who gave h i s famous laws t o Sparta. Plutarch, however, said t ha t Sparta d i d not have wr i t t en laws,49 and Tyrtaios, our ea r l i es t author i ty , mentioned tha t the Spartan lgrhetragl was given by Apollo, the god a t Delphi, and nothing was said about L ~ c u ~ ~ o s ' connection w i th it, nor was he mentioned as a l a ~ ~ i v e r . 5 0 It appears from the evidence tha t the s tor ies about the o r i g i n o f the Olympic t ruce and the discus o f I ph i t os rather r e f l e c t d i f f e r e n t t r ad i t i ons and claims which are not w e l l founded. By making Iph i t os the only one who invented the t ruce and wrote the terms o f i t on a discus, Pausanias ref lected the Elean t r a d i t i o n which, apparently, was the only one he had heard from the p r i es t s o f E l i s . LyCUrgOs' connection w i th the truce and the discus o f I ph i t os simply indicates tha t Sparta was a prominent power and an a l l y o f E l i s . The predominance o f Laconian bronze f inds a t Olympia gives some colour t o the t r a d i t i o n o f any ear ly a l l i ance between Sparta and E l is , an a l l iance which f i n a l l y controled the power o f Pheidon, King o f ~ r ~ o s . ~ l The omission o f the name o f Cleosthenes, King o f Pisa, by Pausanias i s another i nd i ca t i on tha t h i s account was Elean altogether. One should only remember t ha t Olympia and i t s games belonged o r i g i n a l l y t o Pisatans and not t o the Eleans and tha t the struggle between the two c i t i e s over the con t ro l o f the sanctuary continued down t o the 5 th century when the Pisatans wer crushed by the Eleans. I t has been pointed out t ha t the story o f the re-establishment o f the Olympic f e s t i v a l by I ph i t os and Lycurgos "seems t o have been invented t o support the claims o f E l i s t o cont ro l the f e s t i v a l and o f Sparta t o cont ro l ~ l i s . ~ ~ ~ ~ The legend recorded on the discus o f I ph i t os making Lycurgos and Iph i t os the founders o f the

festival amy have also been invented.53 This view found support among modern authors, who believed that the names of Iphitos and Lycurgos were inscribed on the discus to support the tradition that both were the founders of the f e ~ t i v a l . ~ ~

As for the terms of the Olympic truce wfitten on the discus of Iphitos it becomes clear from the available evidence that in 776 B.C. when according to tradition the terms of the Olympic truce were written on the discus, it is very unlikely that writing was in existence. We, of course, assume that the system of writing was not that of Linear B, but that of the adopted and modified Phoenician alphabet. That Linear B was not in existence in historical times is clear since the Greeks preserved no memory at all of that system of writing.55 It is known from ancient sources that "the Greeks did, on occasion, find and puzzle over relics of an unknown script in their own country, which were presumably relics of the old Mycenaean Linear B ~~stem.~'56 Plutarch mentioned that when a structure known as t8Alcmena*s tombtt in Boeotia was opened, there were found two amphorae, a necklace and a bronze tablet inscribed in Ivvery old barbaricw letters like the ~ ~ ~ ~ t i a n . 5 ~ It is rather evident that the old barbaric characters inscribed on the bronze tablet mentioned by Plutarch was the Mycenaean Linear B script. We have every reason to believe that the terms of the truce written on the discus of Iphitos were in the adopted Phoenician alphabet since we learn from ~lutarch5~ that Aristotle the philosopher had seen the discus at Olympia with the name Lycurgos still readable upon it. If Aristotle had seen the discus at Olympia with the name of Lycurgos on it then: first it was written in the adopted Phoenician alphabet and second it could not have been as old as 776 B.C. since the art of this writing was not in existence at such an early date. Writers are in ayreernent that the earliest surviving Greek inscriptions or the new Phoenician form of writing did not come into use until the late part of the eighth century.S9 Some even believed that there was probably no writing before 700 B.C. at the earliestY6O and that the Greek world of the 8th and 7th centuries B.C. "was deeply unlettered despite the introduction of the alphabet .lt61 On the basis of these considerations it may be inferred that the so-called discus of Iphitos was rather a forgery, which best served the interests of both Sparta and Elis by making Lycurgos and Iphitos the founders of the Olympic festival and the Olympic truce. It may be stated without grave impropiety that certain parts of the early Greek tradition concerning the founding of the Olympic Games and their early history, were rather intentional inventions of rival tribes who wanted to claim the great antiquity of the festival once it had gained popularity and importance.

CONCLUSION

Extreme caution must be used regarding the 776 B.C. date as the beginning of the Olympic festival as well as the Olympic register of the boastful and pompous sophist of Elis. Both the date of 776 B.C. and the register are unsuitable to accept as the basis for sound arguments and conclusions reaardina the earlv historv of the Games. An adeauate examination of the 776 B.C: date-as the bebinning bf the festival and of the Olympic register can only be undertaken when a picture of the periods preceding the seventh century has been constructed from archaeological and early literary sources. The picture that we have from the material evidence indicates that games were held at Olympia before and after 776 B.C. and that these games were aristocratic in nature. It can be safely stated that the world of Olympia during the eighth century and before was certainly not democratic.

Tradition holds that the foot-race was the only event for the first thirteen Olympiads and a cook from Elis was the winner who gave his name to the first Olympiad; but this is in sharp contradiction with the existing archaeological evidence. Chariot-races were held at Olympia, as the evidence shows, during and before the eighth century. It would be bold to insist on any intepretation which excludes chariot-races from the early history of the Olympic Games and thereafter and which denies the fact that competition at Olympia during the ninth and eighth centuries was limited to the noble classes. The nobles of this period needed the skill in horses and chariots as well as the physical prowess, strength and courage in order to conduct the wars of the state. It is unlikely that the aristocrats of the transition period from kingship to aristocracy, who claimed the heroic past as theirs and took pride in nobility and honour, did not practice or enter the chariot competitions which in fact connected them with the lost past. If one denies this fact, then he must be able to explain the chariots, charioteers and horses dated before and after 800 B.C. which were the votive offerings at Olympia by the victorious athletes of noble birth. In addition, one also should be able to explain the chariots and chariot-races depicted on many geometric rases which clearly show aristocrats in action. It appears that neither the 776 B.C. date as the beginning of the games at Olympia nor the Olympic register of Hippias of Elis are to be trusted. The eighth is not the beginning of the Olympic Games; it is simply a period of increase in competitive games as it becomes clear from the increase in the volume of the dedications which are evident not only at Olympia but in other parts of the mainland as well. As for the terms of the Olympic truce written on the discus of Iphitos it becomes clear from the material and literary sources that in 776 B.C. when according to tradition these terms were written, writing was not in existence. We can, therefore, conclude that the Olympic truce written on the so called discus of Iphitos was rather a forgery which best served the interests of Sparta and Elis.

The games at Olympia changed their aristocratic character only with the change of the aristocracy. The common people were eligible to enter athletic contests when their services for war were badly needed. Thus,the change which took place in the games at Olympia simply reflects the gradual change which appeared in Greek society.

- 11 -

FOOTNOTES

4 ~ e e J. N. Coldstream Geometric Greece (New York, 1977), p. 181.

51liad 11. 697-701 (Trans. by R. Lattimore) Homer (Odys. 24.347) re fe r red t m s a s whorse-pasturingfl.

7 ~ b i d . AAJ, p. 33; Olympia .... pp. 78, 79. For Proto-geometric po t te ry t h a t has been discovered i n anc ien t E l i s see: V.R.D.'A. Desborough he ~ast Mycenaeans and Their Successors (Oxford, 1964), pp. 39, 92, 234; - A . Snodgrass The Dark Age of Greece (Edinburgh, 1971), p. 65; Pete r P. Kahane, "The Cesnola Krater from Kourion i n t h e Metropolitan Museum of A r t w , i n N. Robertson, The Archaeology of Cyprus: ~ e c e n t ' Developments (N. Je rsey , 19751, p. 184. Kahane sa id t h a t t h e e a r l i e s t bronze and te r ra -co t ta f i g u r i n e s found a t Olympia and associated with t h e c u l t go back t o t h e proto-geometric period.

8 ~ . ~ . Coldstream, geometric...^. 335.

9 ~ b i d , pp. 181, 335. For more references s e e Kahane "The Censnola ...", p. 175 n. 63.

low. Ridington "The Minoan-Mycenaean Bacground of Greek Aht le t i csw Doctoral Diss. University of Pennsylvania, 1935, p. 88.

14plutarch, 1. 4 Trans. by B. P e r r i n (The Loeb C l a s s i c a l Library, 1914).

1 5 ~ o r references see: H. C. Montgomery, "The Controversy about t h e o r i g i n of the Olympic Games. Did they o r i g i n a t e i n 776 B.C.?" The Class ica l Weekly 22 (1936), p. 171.

165. P. Mahaffy, "On t h e Authent ici ty of t h e Olympia Registern, JHS 2 (1881), pp. 175-6. Also s e e H. C. Montgomery, The Class ica l Weekly 22 (1956), pp. 170, 174.

17paus. 6.22.2 Also see 6.4.2; 6.8.3.

18~. Korte i n Montgomery, The Class ica l Weekly 22 (19361, p. 171. The Olympic Register compiled by Hippias was revised and brought up t o da te by writers such a s Ar i s to t le , Phlegon of T r a l l e s and J u l i u s Africanus.

19~. Brinkmann i n Montgomery, The Classicaly Weekly 22 (19361, p. 172.

2 0 ~ a r d i n e r , E, p. 50.

21~ohn Forsdyke, Greece Before Homer (London, 19561, p. 39.

225. P. Mahaffy, JHS 2 (1881) p. 170.

2 3 ~ l a t o Greater Hippias. Trans. by H. N. Fowler (Loeb Class ica l Library, 1917).

2 4 ~ l a t o n , Lesser Hippias, 364 A.

25~aus . 5.8.6.

2 7 ~ b i d . 5.20.1. For t h e d i scus of Iph i tos a l s o see: Plutarch Lycurgos 1; A r i s t o t l e -533; Phlegon of Tra l les , g1. 4.

2 8 ~ . Busolt i n H. C. Montgomery, The Class ica l Weekly 22 (19361, p. 170.

295. P. Mahaf f y , JHS 2 (1881), p. 168. Pindar i n h i s w. 1 0 a c t u a l l y s a i d t h a t the program from the beginning included s i x events; t h e chariot-race, foot-race, j ave l in , discus, boxing and wrestling.

3 0 ~ i n d a r , E. 1.26.

315. P. Mahaffy, JHS2 (18811, p. 168.

3 2 ~ a r d i n e r AAW 35; GASF, pp. 51-52; Olympia.. .p. 88, Tzetzes, Lycophronis Alexandra 12 m e n E e d t h a t Heracles i n s t i t u t e d t h e games which included pentathlon and o ther events.

3 3 ~ o r references see Montgomery The Class ica l Weekly 22 (19361, pp. 170-171. Also s e e Gardiner, GASF, p. 52; W. Hyde, 01 m i c Victor Monuments and Greek Ath le t ic Art, p. 2 5 r ~ a r d i n e r r i g h t l y be1:e:ed t h a t the char io t s , horses and c h a r i o t e e r s found a t Olympia a r e a c l e a r ind ica t ion t h a t c h a r i o t races were held t h e r e before t h e d a t e of 680 B.C. ( see Olympia, p. 82. ) .

3 4 ~ o r references see Lynn E. Roller , A J A 8 5 (1981), p. 114. Also see P. Kahane "The Cesnola.. .Ig i n Robertson ( ~ r ~ r c h a e o l o g y . . .pp. 151-195.

3 5 ~ e n i g e r i n Montgomery, The C l a s s i c a l Weekly 22 (19361, p. 171.

3 6 ~ . Orees, Olympia: Gods, Artists and Athletes. Trans. by Gerald Onn (New York-Washington, 19681, p. 34.

37= 23. 630-631.

3 8 ~ ~ s i a s , Olymp. 33. 1-2.

3 9 ~ e e Paus. 5.4.5-6.

4 0 ~ l u t a r c h , Lyc. 1.

4 l ~ a u s . 5.4.5.

42~hlegon of T r a l l e s 1.3.

4 3 ~ . Fontenrose, The Delphic Oracle (Berkeley, 1978), p. 39.

4 4 ~ a u s . 5.4.6.

45~ohn Forsdyke, Greece Before.. .p. 39.

4 6 ~ e e Herod. 1.66; Strabo 8.5.5; Plut . L c. 1; Paus. 3.16.6; a l s o 3 see A.H.M. Jones Sparta (Oxford, 1967), pp. 5-7; C 1256, 1341, 1362.

4 7 ~ . Michell, Sparta (Cambridge, 19521, pp. 18-25; G.L. Huxley, Early Sparta (Cambridge, Mass. 1962), pp. 40-43. For references t h a t doubted t h e h i s t o r i c a l ex i s tence of Lycurgos see: Frazer , Pausanias, 3.16.6.

4 8 ~ e e Pausanias 3.16.6; 5.4.5. For more on Lycurgos see: Tyrtaios % 4; Plato, 632d, 634a; A r i s t o t l e Frg 335, 544; Didoros Sic. 1.20.2; 3.55.10; 3.65.4-6; 4.3.4; 7.12.1; 7.12.2; 7.12.6; Strabo 8.5.5.; 16.2.38; Plutarch Mar 403c 789E, 1098a, 1103a; P h i l o s t r a t o s , L i fe of Apollonios, 8.7; Plutarch &. 29; Xenophon, Lac Rep. 8.5; Ael. 2 14.29; Ovid Met. 4.22; Prop. 2.;7.23; Hyg. s. 34.

4 9 ~ l u t a r c h &. 13, 16.

5 0 ~ ~ r t a i o s , Frag 3a. T.A. Boring, Li teracy i n Ancient Sparta (Leiden, 1979), pp. 17-24, doubted t h e ex i s tence of any wr i t t en documents i n Sparta before t h e end of t h e seventh century.

51~. N. Coldstream, Geometric.. .p.l63.

5 2 ~ o h n Forsdyke, Greece Before.. .p. 39. That P i sa was i n c o n t r o l of t h e games and t h e sanctuary of Olympia has been pointed out by many: s e e Xenophon, m. 3.2.31; Gardiner, Olympia.. .pp. 59, 61, 83; 45; Bernard Sergent "Sur l e s Fron t ie res de l n E l i d e aux Hautes Epoques", Revue des Etudes Anciennes 80 (1978), p. 25.

5 3 ~ a r d i n e r , Olympia.. .p. 90.

5 4 ~ . Fontenrose, The Delphic Oracle (Berkeley, 19781, P- 115-

5 5 ~ h e Linear B. Scr ip t disappeared a t the end o f the Mycenaean per iod and d i d not survive the Dark Ages. So f a r nothing has been found t o ind ica te the existence o f Linear B s c r i p t a f t e r 1200 B.C. For more concerning the disa~~eaC3nce o f Linear B s c r i o t a f t e r 1200 B.C. see: C.M. Bowra, "The Meaning i f a Heroic Age: i n G.S. k i r k (Ed). The Language and ~ackground of Homer (Cambridge, 19641, pp. 36-37; John Forsdyke, Greece Before.. .p. 43; J. Chadwick, Documents i n Mycenaean Greek Second Ed i t ion (Cambridge, 1973), p. 3; Lord W. Taylour, The Mycenaeans (London, 19641, p 32; C. M. Bowra Homer (London, 1972), p. 2; Denys L. Page, History and the Homeric I l i a d (Berkeley, 19761, p. 157; Mlchael Ventris and J. Chadwick Documents i n Mycenaean Greek, pp. 60, 110; L. H. Jeffrey, "Writing" i n Wace and Stubbings, A Companion t o Homer (London, 19621, p. 551. For an a l t e rna t i ve po in t o f view see: A.J.B. Wace i n a foreword t o John Chadwick, Docurnents...p . xxx i i . Wace stated: "It i s more orobable t ha t the Linear B s c r i o t continued i n use, and perhaps even ovelapped the f i r s t appearance o f the Greek adaptation o f the ~hoen ic ian alphabet." Also see R. F. Wi l le t ts , The C i v i l i z a t i o n o f Ancient Crete (London, 1977), p. 156 who said: We cannot exclude the p o s s i b i l i t y t ha t w r i t i ng continued t o be done on such perishable mater ia ls as leather, wood or payrus, but t h i s i s a matter o f conjecture."

ML. H. Jeffery, "Writing" i n Wace and Stubbings, A Companion. .. p. 546. Also see John Forsdyke, Greece Before...pp . 40, 43.

57~ lu tarch , De Gen. Soc. 5.

5 8 ~ l u t . & 1. Pausanias also saw a discus, probably the same, i n the temple o f Hera. This discus Pausanias (5.20.1) sald was not inscr ibed i n a s t ra igh t l i ne , but the l e t t e r s run around t o make a c i r c l e .

5 9 ~ o r references see Denys L. Page, History and the Homeric.. .p. 157; E.R. Dodds, "Homer as Oral Poetry" i n G.S. K i r k (Ed.) The Language and ...p. 14; L.H. Jeffery, vfWriting*q i n Wace and Stubbings, A Companion...p. 554.

6 0 ~ . Fontenrose, The Delphic Oracle.. .p. 115.

611ul.1. Finley, The World o f Odysseus, revised e d i t i o n (New York, 1965), p. 29. Finely as we l l as t. R. Dodds "Homer a..." i n G. S. Ki rk, The Lan ua e...p. 14 believed tha t Greek l i t e r a t u r e continued t o be o r a l fo r a re9 ong tlme a f t e r the in t roduct ion o f the alphabet.