STUDIES IN PHYSICAL CULTURE AND TOURISM

Vol. 12, No. 2, 2005

The present paper discusses ancient traditions of different sports and games and their contemporary continuations in Tunisia, in particular in the Kerkennah area. Ancient mosaics were used for the purpose of reconstruction of ancient games. The study concentrates on games from two different historical periods. The findings provide evidence of the existence of significant differences between two corpora of Tunisian games, i.e. ancient and modern: 1) divergence in historic temporality, 2) divergence in social functions; and 3) divergence in the number of participants.

The present study concerns traditional games played by children, teenagers and adults, during two periods of Tunisian history, i.e. in Roman Tunisia, between the 2^nd and 4^th century AD, and in the present times, in the isles of Kerkennah.

We have chosen to study traditional games and sports because they are, as much as music and other leisure pursuits, an important part of human life, cultural heritage and community. They also constitute an important aspect of body postures and gestures. Traditional games represent human play activities, characterized by specific behavioral attitudes.

In Tunisia, traditional play activities have not been subject to serious scientific research so far. Games and sports represent, as noted by Pierre Parlebas, “the blind spot of socio-historical research activity.”

We have chosen to study ancient Tunisian mosaics which are representative of life during the Roman period, and of the local community in the Isles of Kerkennah in south-eastern Tunisia. On the basis on the correlation between culture and play, the following research hypothesis was formulated: The characteristics of games reflect the characteristics of the community where they are played. In other words, the internal logic of games partly reflects characteristics at large of the community they belong to. An important question is whether in this perspective, it would be possible to derive distinctive features of two play cultures of children, teenagers and adults. What would these features reveal to us in terms of their cultural context? What are the difference between these two cultures? Is there continuity in the distinctive features of games throughout the centuries, in relation to natural characteristics, such as space, time, type of games, objects, participants and nature of interactions? The present study attempts to answer these questions.

Our methodology included description and analysis of the games, by way of filling a standardized form. 480 special forms were filled by the subjects, and then treated as if they were answers to a sociological survey.

At a later stage the obtained results were interpreted in light of specific cultural features of the period the games belonged. The interpretation was based on an analysis model known as motor praxeology in view of the relationship: motor play practices with culture. This type of correlation requires two types of analyses: intracultural and intercultural.

Data for research was collected with regard to places of origins of individual games represented on particular mosaics. The selected mosaics were, in our view, a remarkably important source as their authors (mosaics makers of that period) tried to present, in an artistic manner, an inventory of play situations of their time.

Following a field study, we obtained a reference sample of 480 games, including 240 play situations from the Isles of Kerkennah, which, if not an exhaustive sample, were fairly representative of all the games played by the people of Kerkennah in modern times; and 240 games featured on 170 mosaics of various origin from Roman Tunisia, considered to be an exhaustive sample. However, despite the long period of time separating the two major components of the sample, we were certain that we had obtained a broad reference sample, representing traditional play practices of the two concerned populations. In consideration of the entire number of games, time and space factors were involved in order to draw proper conclusions.

Table 1. Distribution of games according to places of origin of mosaics

On the basis of the obtained results, we may conclude that in different civilisations, people do not play games in the same way. It is obvious that over the period of nearly twenty centuries separating Roman Tunisia and present-day Tunisia, numerous changes and challenges took place, which in turn generated convergences and divergences in the distinctive features of the internal logic of traditional games pertaining to the two civilizations under study.

Generally speaking, our findings, based on a comparison of the internal logic structures of the two play cultures, allow us to point to four major differences and divergences between the two collected corpora of games:

A - Divergences resulting from the games’ historical character and temporal nature: a stretch of 15 to 20 centuries separates the two corpora;

B - Divergences in geographical space: the games come from different geographical locations;

C - Social divergence: the first corpus of games included traditional games of the Kerkennah population – basically insular and made up of a low income farming community of Arab and Muslim cultural background; the second group consisted of games and shows of Roman Tunisia, with participants including people of note, hostlers, athletes, professionals, slaves and wild animals, all of them well rooted in African Roman culture;^{[ 1]}

D - Divergence in the number of participants: 700 performers participating in corporal entertainment activities of Roman Tunisia, versus 1689 players in present-day Kerkennah.

These discrepancies are undoubtedly a source of many cultural variations. Games, as noted by Callois, are different in their form and symbolism, as they are products of a specified time, place, culture and ideology. But they are also convergent by their form, types of motor interactions, contents and mode of refereeing.

Let us consider some of the results of the intercultural analysis related to the convergences and divergences of the characteristics of the internal logic of the games, which we consider most significant in our traditional play world.

Figure 1. Roman mosaic representing a children’s game

Types of games

According to the results of our investigation, we noted that both cultures put an emphasis on sports games: Romans 91%, present-day Kerkennians 65%. Among the sports games of both civilizations, it should be pointed out that sociomotor games clearly outnumbered psychomotor games which involved motor communications between participants. Both cultures are similar in emphasizing contact and exchange with others.

A significant difference (42 %) can be noted between both corpora of games.

Figure 2. Distribution of games according to physical energy expenses

Table 2. Distribution of play situations of the two cultures, according to different types of games

Table 3. Distribution of games in both cultures, according to their major characteristics

Figure 3. Talh mosaic (Gafsa. IVèm S. av. J.-C)

Games involving both sexes

In the games depicted in the mosaics, we can notice a clear-cut separation between sexes. It appears that the low participation of women in the games (4%) can be explained by the brutal character of physical play activities. On the other hand, in 33% of the Kerkennah games, females and males accept mutual participation. This leads to more equality between the two sexes. It appears here that the human and religious value of granting supremacy to men was replaced by another “ideological” and universal value, i.e. equal opportunities for both sexes.

Figure 4. A Kerkenneh children’s game

Figure 5. Distribution of games according to participants

Figure 6. A drawing of a game played by the people of Kerkennah in modern times

Figure 7. Distribution of traditional games of both cultures, according to participation of males and females

Figure 8. Distribution of games of both cultures according to the type of clothing worn by the participants

Partcipants’ clothing

According to the findings of our investigation, the players participated naked in 49% of the games featured in the mosaics. It appears that nakedness was adopted for aesthetic reasons and as a means of protection against evil. On the other hand, in 78% of leisure games played by the population of Kerkennah, the participants wore their everyday clothes. It should also be noted that Islam imposes some restrictions on exhibition of some body parts, as well as clothing constraints for both men and women.

Figure 9. Distribution of games according to equipment

Games space

We can notice that the games in both cultures are mostly outdoor games (87% of games in the mosaics, 76% of present-day Kerkennah). Therefore, these play activities are closely linked to the natural and domestic environment. More than two thirds of play practices of both cultures take place on unmarked grounds (69% of games in the mosaics, and 65% of present-day Kerkennah games).

The circus and the amphitheatre in Roman Tunisia were venues where governors offered spectacles and contests to the members of the public, in exchange for their passivity and obedience. In the Isles of Kerkennah the use of traditional venues can serve the purpose of preserving the play heritage and furthering the survival of motor behaviour associated with such venues.

Figure 10. Roman athletes

Figure 11. Distribution in percentage of games according to the space of performance

Figure 12. A Roman Circus game

Figure 13. A Kerkennah children’s game

Communication structure

The obtained results have yielded the following conclusions:

1. In both play cultures, traditional game structures are divided into three categories in regard of the number of participants, i.e. duel structure, cooperative structure and original structure. The latter outnumbers the two former structures in both cultures (60% of games in the mosaics and 39% of present-day Kerkennah games).

2. The duel structure is less represented in both cultures.

3. During the Roman period no duels were fought between symmetrical teams, due to the fact that the principle of equal opportunity was totally absent. On the contrary, this distinctive character of the games’ internal logic can be traced in 10% of games recorded in the Kerkennah Isles.

Figure 14. Distribution of the games according to the games structures

Aggressiveness in games

The nature of bodily contacts and aggressiveness during the play differ substantially when we compare the games featured in the mosaics and present-day Kerkennah games.

While in Roman Tunisia marked aggressiveness was recorded in 65% of the games, reflecting a remarkably sustained cultural feature, which can be equated to a “social demand”; marked aggressiveness in the games of present-day Kerkennah is present in 31% of cases. The following conclusions can be drawn:

• Harshness in traditional entertaining bodily games of both cultures is, in fact, a reflection of the habits and customs of the population of a given era;

• “Harshness in games”, as noted by P. Parlebas, “is a preparation for the harshness of life” [24, p. 16];

• Play is at the same time the produce of a culture and the producer of collective sense.

The findings of our research regarding types of games, symmetrical duel structure of cooperative games, original networked games, search for a physical feat, degree of physical aggressiveness, codification of motor confrontation (i.e. guard distance, charging distance) reflect the major features of the motor-play culture in Roman Africa and present-day Tunisia. Every culture has its own entertaining games.

Table 4. Distribution of games according to the degree of aggressiveness

In the course of our study, several research prospects opened up. We strongly believe it is appropriate to study the matter more thoroughly, as this would enrich the data bank on the heritage of traditional games in Tunisia, in particular, and in the Mediterranean in general. Among the possible research perspectives we suggest the following projects:

Errakasa from the isles of Kerkennah (Tunisia)

Game Space: A circle (6 m in diameter) is drawn on the ground, inside which two crossing lanes and a zone along the edge are marked.

Participants: Two teams of 8 players each.

Play equipment: chronometer; white lime powder.

Game procedure: Team A members deploy inside the circle (Errakassa) and must remain within the lanes, while a hunter from team B stands at the junction of the two lanes. The remaining players keep out of the circle. At the referee’s signal, the hunter starts chasing members of Team A, and can be replaced by another hunter from the same team, once he gets tired. Every ten minutes, the teams change sides. Any player who walks off the lanes is banned from the game.

Evaluation:After 10 minutes from the start of the game, the number of players who remain inside the circle is counted. The team which succeeds in maintaining the highest number of participants inside the circle wins. Two points are granted to the winning team and naught to the opposing team. In the case of tie each team is granted one point.

This game is from the Isles of Kerkennah (Tunisia)

Ugla or Tlaga

Characteristics and history: It is also called “tagga”, meaning “knocking” or “hitting” a small stick with a big stick. Competition is held between two players or between two teams of two players each aged eight or more. The game can be played either in fall, winter, or spring, on a large plot, free of obstacles, on which a small circle called khuta (40 to 50 cm in diameter) is drawn. This circle is used as a goal or the starting point for the game.

In Cheninni Tataouine (southern Tunisia) this game is known as ‘Uma ‘uma; in the north, in Sfax, it is known as Tlaga. The external space surrounding the khuta is not defined, but is determined by the ability of performers to hurl the smaller stick.

Each player holds a stick (0.5 m long or slightly longer) made of olive tree wood. Usually the stick is limited in width; however, it can be occasionally thicker and shorter. In addition, every player also holds a small olive tree stick (approximately 10cm long) with pointed ends, which is used in similar games in France, Portugal and some Arab countries such as Libya and Morocco.

Playing method: One player stands up on the circle (khuta) edge and flings up the small stick within his reach, and once it starts falling down, he intercepts and hits it with the large stick held in the other hand, with the aim of sending it away from the khuta. Should he fail in his attempt, he is given another go, then a third one; if he is successful, he carries on playing; the other player would then retrieve the small stick, and hurl it from the spot it has fallen on towards the interior of the khuta (circle), guarded by the hitting player who attempts to:

a. The first unit of measurement is the small stick, which is equal to one point only;

b. The second unit of measurement is the large stick, which is measured by the small stick; i.e. if the large stick length is three times the small stick length then the large stick equals three points.

For instance, if the distance between the khuta and the falling point of the small stick (following the third attempt) is, say, 20 times the length of the large stick, the player would obtain 60 points (20 times the large stick length, which is equivalent to three small sticks). The game is over when one of the players attains the score of 3000 points.

Educational dimension

Playing this game requires three skills: catching, hurling and knocking. The game allows a player to develop skills of observation, precise targeting and moving within a designated space. In addition, children can also learn how to calculate distances and how to use natural measurement units.