From ceremonial battles, through the games in ancient Greece and the mass spectacles in Rome, to the World Cup in soccer: since its beginning, sport has embodied the tension between power and restraint, between nationalism and brotherhood, and between the desire to win and the obligation to respect the rules of the game.
The World Cup currently being held in North America is an opportunity to examine sport not just as an entertainment event or a competition for a trophy, but as a profound historical and social phenomenon. Behind the games, the anthems, the flags, the victories and losses lies a very ancient tension: between the human urge to overcome the opponent and the attempt to restrain the conflict through agreed-upon rules, rituals, and values.
The Roman playwright Plautus coined the phrase that later became the expression "man is a wolf to man" more than two thousand years ago - A wolf is a human beingThe law has become, over the generations, a symbol of the aggressive side of man, even though originally it dealt mainly with suspicion towards a stranger and unfamiliar person.
Sports express this duality well. On one side are competition, power, the desire to defeat the opponent, and the desire for victory. On the other side stand restraint, fairness, rules, and the recognition that the opponent is not an enemy to be destroyed, but a partner without whom competition is not possible.
Before Sports: Survival, War, and Worship
Physical activity predates what we today define as sport by thousands of years. Early humans had to run, climb, swim, throw, wrestle, and carry loads in order to hunt, escape predators, and protect themselves and their group.
There were no records, medals, or paying audiences back then. Physical prowess was first and foremost a condition for survival. However, as humans began to train in hunting and the use of weapons, it gradually became possible to compare their abilities: who was faster, who was more accurate, who could lift heavier weights, and who stood the test of courage better.
From the training of hunters and warriors came tests, competitions, and fighting games. In many cases, the line between competition and actual combat remained very blurred.
In the biblical accounts, we can find several examples of representative battles in which one or more warriors were chosen to compete in front of both camps. The battle between David and Goliath is the most famous case. The encounter between the men of Abner ben Ner and the men of Joab ben Zeruiah at the pool in Gibeon also began with the cry: “Let the young men arise and play before us.”
The word “play” should not be misleading. It was not a game in the modern sense, but a violent and deadly duel. However, it is possible to identify some of the elements that would later appear in sports: selected contestants, spectators, a defined arena, and an attempt to decide a conflict through limited competition.
The body as part of worship
Religion and worship also played an important role in the development of physical activity. Ancient rituals included dances, jumps, rhythmic movements, games, and displays of strength and agility. Participants trained to achieve precision, coordination, and an emotional impact on the audience.
Physical activity was not separated from religion, social status, or group identity. It was part of rites of passage, fertility rituals, burial rites, and celebrations in honor of the gods.
Paintings and reliefs from ancient Egypt depict wrestlers, dancers, acrobats, and ballplayers. This does not mean that the Egyptians practiced modern sports, but it is clear that Egyptian society valued physical prowess, public performance, and systematic practice.
Among traditional societies, there were also tests of courage designed to mark the transition from childhood to adulthood. The young man was required to demonstrate control over his body, endurance of pain, courage, and the ability to act under pressure. Here too, elements emerged that would later be carried over into the world of sports, although the purpose of the ceremony was social and religious, not solely competitive.
Ancient Greece: Competition as a Social Institution
ancient Greece It was the civilization that made physical competition a central institution of culture. The Greeks called the competitive struggle Agon – a concept that was not limited to sports, but also included music, poetry, drama, and speech competitions.
The Greek athlete did not only represent himself. He brought honor to his family, his city, and the gods. Victory in the competition was a personal achievement, but also a political and social asset to the community from which the winner came.
The Olympic Games They were part of a wider system of Panhellenic games. They were held in a religious context in honor of Zeus, and included running, wrestling, boxing, pentathlon, chariot racing, and other events.
The Games did not transform ancient Greece into a peaceful society. The city-states fought each other repeatedly. The Olympic Truce was not a general truce, but a sacred arrangement designed to ensure the safety of athletes, judges, and spectators. Safe transit to and from Olympia.
In this sense, the Greeks created a temporary alternative to the battlefield. Rivalry between cities did not disappear, but it took on a different form: instead of conquering territory or destroying an enemy, representatives competed for victory, glory, and prestige.
Strength, refinement and discipline
The Greek ideal sought to combine physical strength, beauty, discipline, and education. The gymnasium was not only a place for training. It also served as a social and educational institution where citizens met, held discussions, and acquired knowledge.
However, the democracy of Greek sports should not be overstated. Participation was limited primarily to free men, and status, wealth, and citizenship greatly influenced the ability to train and compete.
In Greece, too, there was no pure world of sportsmanship. There were attempts at bribery, rule-breaking, politicization of victories, and the transformation of champions into tools of urban propaganda. The ideal was important, but reality did not always match it.
It is precisely this gap between the ideal and the act that has accompanied sports ever since.
Rome: Sport as a show of strength
Rome adopted many aspects of Greek physical culture, but gave them different dimensions. The Romans admired Greek athletics, but often preferred mass, more dramatic, and violent performances.
Chariot races, gladiator fights, and animal hunts in the arena were not just entertainment. They were used by the government to demonstrate power, maintain the support of the masses, and demonstrate the emperor's ability to provide food, entertainment, and public order.
The Colosseum and other arenas were therefore also political institutions. The audience was not just a passive spectator. It demanded, encouraged, whistled, protested, and sometimes even influenced the fate of the participants.
In the Roman arena, the tension between play and violence reached its peak. Participants displayed strength, agility, and courage, but the show could end in serious injury or death.
Rome teaches us that sport can be used not only to curb violence, but also to transform it into a controlled and socially acceptable spectacle. While the audience did not fight themselves, they consumed the violence and gave it political and cultural meaning.
What is the origin of the word "sport"?
It is sometimes accepted to attribute the word "sport" to a Latin phrase meaning "outside the city gates," but this has no accepted linguistic basis.
The word originates from Old French. sport, which means recreation, amusement, or a break from work. The word passed into English in the form sport, and later shortened tosport. Only gradually did it take on its modern meaning of competitive physical activity. ([Wikipedia][2])
This etymology reminds us that sport did not necessarily begin as an organized competition. It grew out of a broad world of entertainment, play, leisure, hunting, display, and social customs.
From the joust to modern sport
In the Middle Ages, the close connection between physical activity, military training, and social status was maintained. Knightly tournaments allowed warriors to demonstrate mastery of horsemanship, weapons, and tactics. They included rules and rituals, but were still dangerous and sometimes deadly.
In modern times, and especially in the 18th and 19th centuries, sport changed fundamentally. Urbanization, schools, clubs, the press, railroads, and the rise of nation states made it possible to hold competitions between distant communities.
Uniform rules were formulated, associations were founded, and leagues and tournaments were created. Competition was gradually separated from war and worship and became an independent institution.
Modern sports haven't eliminated aggression. They've tried to frame it.
player football A boxer may try to stop his opponent, but not by any means. A boxer may strike, but only in places and ways permitted by the rules. A hockey player may use force, but the referee is to determine when a legitimate struggle has become a foul.
In this sense, sport is not the opposite of violence, but a social mechanism designed to refine, restrain, and manage it.
Olympism and the gap between the ideal and reality
Pierre de Coubertin and his associates, who initiated the renewal of the Olympic Games at the end of the 19th century, presented sports as a means of education, brotherhood, and the meeting of peoples.
The first modern Olympic Games were held in Athens in 1896. However, they too were unable to detach themselves from politics, nationalism, and the struggle for prestige.
The 1936 Berlin Olympics are the most egregious example. The Nazi regime sought to turn the games into a propaganda spectacle, but the success of black American athlete Jesse Evans, who won four gold medals, contradicted the perception of racial superiority that the regime sought to portray.
But Evans also encountered racism and segregation in the United States. Sport allowed him to undermine racist ideology in the international arena, but victory did not eliminate discrimination in the society to which he returned.
The World Cup as a modern arena
The World Cup in soccer was first held in 1930. It grew out of the same idea of a regulated international competition: teams represent countries, but the conflict is supposed to be conducted according to common rules and not by means of weapons.
The World Cup is one of the most powerful expressions of the connection between sport and national identity. Players wear the national colors, national anthems are played before the game, and victory is often presented as the achievement of an entire nation.
Loss can be experienced as humiliation, and victory can spark huge celebrations. In some cases, the rivalry goes beyond the field and incites nationalism, racism, and violence.
Still, the mere agreement to compete under the same rules is a cultural achievement. Two teams may represent countries with a history of conflict, but for ninety minutes they are subject to the same referee, the same field, and the same set of rules.
The World Cup is not world peace, but it demonstrates the possibility of a conflict that does not have to end in destruction, conquest, or death.
Between “Let’s go fight” and regulated play
At the heart of sports competition is the childish challenge: Let's see who is stronger, faster, or more talented.
The statement "Let's go fight" sounds brutal, but sometimes even that contains an initial agreement on a framework: where to fight, what not to do, and when to stop.
Modern sports have transformed this initial consensus into a vast system of rules, referees, coaches, technologies, associations, and international institutions.
But even in professional play, the line remains thin. A tackle in soccer can be a great move, and a similar move at a different angle can cause injury and result in a red card. A game of water polo may look elegant above the surface, while underneath it is a fierce physical struggle. Ice hockey and rugby also display a clear combination of skill, strength, and restraint.
It's the same ancient dualism: play on one hand and aggression on the other, competition on the other and the duty to control impulses on the other.
World Cup 2026: Sports, History and Politics
The 2026 World Cup, taking place in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, clearly illustrates that sport does not take place in a vacuum.
The quarter-final match between France and Morocco on July 9 ended in a 2-0 French victory. Behind the match were not only the sporting rivalry, but also France's colonial past in North Africa, migration movements, and family and cultural ties between the two countries. Despite the historical charge, the match itself was decided on the pitch and France qualified for the semi-finals.
Another incident at the tournament illustrated the danger of political interference. After American striker Polarin Balogun was sent off in a match against Bosnia and Herzegovina, US President Donald Trump reached out to FIFA President Gianni Infantino and asked for the punishment to be reconsidered.
FIFA did not overturn the red card itself, but suspended the ban and allowed Balogun to play in the next match. The decision drew criticism from UEFA, football officials and former referees, who said it undermined the consistency and appearance of the independence of sports institutions.
Even if the decision was officially made by a disciplinary committee, the very fact that the host country's president addressed the head of FIFA raised a difficult question: Are all participants really subject to the same set of rules?
When a powerful politician seeks to change a punishment imposed on a player on his national team, the ancient tension between power and law, and between rule and fair play, returns in full force.
Sports as a reflection of society
Sport reflects the society in which it exists. It carries with it nationalism, class, money, racism, politics and media, but also hope, identification and the ability to create a shared experience.
The transformation of sport into a global spectacle has given it immense power. It encourages physical activity, creates role models, and allows people from different countries to come together around a common language of rules and achievements.
Along with this, commercialization has brought with it gambling, corruption, the use of banned substances, high ticket prices, the exploitation of athletes, and fan violence.
Media networks bring the field to every home, but they are also capable of turning a referee's mistake or a team's loss into a global campaign of hatred, humiliation, and racism within minutes.
Is it possible otherwise?
Despite everything, there is no reason to give up on the ideal of sportsmanship. The fact that it is violated again and again does not prove that it has no value. On the contrary: it emphasizes how much we need it.
Every time a player helps a fallen opponent, an audience applauds an impressive performance by the other team, or teams from rival countries respect the rules of the game, another possibility for conducting a competition emerges.
Sports don't bring out the "wolf" within us. They try to set limits for it.
The World Cup is therefore a parable for human society. It presents the desire to belong, to win, and to be proud, but also the need for common rules, respect for the opponent, and the ability to accept defeat.
From the ancient arenas to the giant stadiums of today, human nature has not fundamentally changed. What has changed is the effort to create institutions that will curb its power and aggression.
When the rules are respected, sports allow us to compete without destroying each other. When political power, money, or violence overwhelm them, we quickly return from the field to the arena.
Still, the very possibility of fair play – even if it does not always materialize – leaves some room for optimism.
Dr. Yechiam Sorek is a historian of theSports in ancient timesHe taught for years at Kibbutzim Seminary College and Wingate College, and is the author of the book “History of Physical Education, Physical Culture and Sports – Among the Nations and in Israel,” which was published in 1988.
The article is dedicated to the memory of Emmanuel Gil, one of the central figures in the "Hapoel" association and the newspaper "Hachinuch Hagufni", and of Dr. Uriel Zimri, a researcher and lecturer in the field of sports history. May their memory be blessed.
Questions and Answers
Was sport in ancient times intended to promote peace?
Not necessarily. The Games were held within warring societies, but they created a limited framework in which some of the rivalries could be converted into regulated competition. The Olympic truce was primarily intended to allow a safe transition to Olympia.
What is the difference between Greek sports and Roman sports?
Greek sports were linked to education, religion, the prestige of the polis, and the ideal of the athlete. In Rome, alongside athletics, more violent mass spectacles developed, including gladiatorial combat and chariot races, which also served as political tools.
Did the word "sport" originate in ancient Rome?
No. Its accepted origin is in the Old French word sport, which means entertainment, amusement, or leisure.
Why is the World Cup a political event?
The teams represent countries and nations, the games are accompanied by flags and anthems, and sometimes historical conflicts, national identities, and political power also penetrate the field.
Does sport reduce violence?
Sports do not eliminate the competitive or aggressive urge, but they may curb them through rules, referees, clear boundaries, and a shared agreement on ways to cope.
