The story of the first Olympics.

DNF. The author's stylistic quirks to show we are in a semi-legendary period just got on my nerves. ( )

I think what this author is telling us is that the Olympics originated boringly. Or, at least, before the age of mass entertainment everything percolated through at a very slow pace.

As I understand it, before this and from this, the first sporting contests (e.g. wrestling) were only the accompaniment of funerary practices. The Greeks probably started it, then the Romans took sports one stage further by forcing gladiators to fight to their death at funerals, thus triggering more funerals.

The first Greek Olympic games, we hear, was essentially a religious gathering (like the Athenian Mysteries, but on an island) over the course of a few days which happened to have a single running race (in full armour and carrying a shield) at the very end of it. It was about honouring the gods and sport happened to be added on at the end. The fact that sport became all it was about, later, was a modern transformation.

Just as the original Olympics was not about sport, this book is not about the Olympics taking place; it’s really a narrative around the people involved in its creation, touring all the islands and provinces to gather the diverse competitors. I like this aspect, although some readers will be frustrated by the wistful travelogue when they may have assumed they would be hearing about javelins, records and stuff.

Only in the classical ages could you go looking for an heroic sportsman, only to discover that he died 200 years previously and lots of people have since appeared under his name at funeral sports, thus increasing his legend. The word of mouth storytelling tradition helped to boost his reputation and provided more incentive to continue the pretence into the next generation. Is this how Hercules/Herakles became the legend he is, set amongst the stars? It’s like when the longest-lived goldfish in the world (a school mascot) was explained as a series of goldfish that had died when taken home by pupils in the holidays and which had been replaced many times over. How many encores do you get?

It’s a good book, charming occasionally and worth reading. It is very drifty and conversational though, to the point where the plot goes missing for large sections. Still, it makes you feel good and passes on a bit of real history on the region, culture and low-key origin of the games. ( )

Combining a solid knowledge of ancient history with dry, tongue-in-cheek humour, Tom Holt's "Olympiad" is perfect light reading. It follows the (mis)adventures of two brothers in the 8th Century BC, Cleander and Cratus, who set out with the blessing of their king Leon to promote a new concept: games-where-nobody's-died. Trekking across the Peloponnese from Sparta to Mycenae, Megara, Argos and Corinth, this conjures up a real sense of the lives and customs of the people who might have been involved in the first Olympic Games. As Holt explains in the prologue, the Games are important not only for their significance as a sporting event but also because the Greeks came to define their very history in terms of 'Olympiads'. The previous reviewer noted how Holt uses this theme of memory and history to very good effect as a framing device for the larger story. Highly recommended as the kind of easy, chatty book that's perfect for summer or holiday reading.

To see a longer review, please visit my blog here: http://theidlewoman.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/olympiad-tom-holt.html ( )

Olympiad was fun. The games finally happen - well, sort of - but both the way they are brought about, and the way the story is told are fun.

I suppose you could read the book without the Prologue. But with it, the whole thing is a sort of meta-history. ( )