I understand that the five Olympic rings represent the five major continents, and that this symbol has been used for many, many decades. What I don’t understand is why, of the seven continents, with Antarctica having no citizenry, was Australia excluded. Unless it relates somehow to the geopolitical status of Australia that existed at the time of the symbol’s inception, it doesn’t make sense by today’s standards. With the inclusion of the Australian continent as a sixth ring, the Olympic symbol would truly be representative of the entire world’s participating nations.
I may be wrong, but I believe the “5” continents are Asia. Europe, Africa, Australia and… America.
Europeans commonly refer to America (North and South) as if it were one big continent.
Then we can update the rings with a 6th one when North and South break apart. 
(a guess at future continental drift below)
http://www.historyoftheuniverse.co.uk/cf100.html
This is a neat site, btw. I’m adding it to my bookmarks…
Astorian, you may be right. I hadn’t thought of that. Last time I heard, however, there were seven continents, which recognizes a distinction between North and South America. In any event, I think there needs to be some re-thinking by the IOC that incorporates the recognition of seven continents and a revision of the five rings.
Astorian, you may be right. I hadn’t thought of that. Last time I heard, however, there were seven continents, which recognizes a distinction between North and South America (there is the isthmus of Panama separating them). In any event, I think there needs to be some re-thinking by the IOC that incorporates the recognition of seven continents and a revision of the five rings.
Astorian, you are probably right. I hadn’t thought of that. Last time I heard, however, there were seven continents, which recognizes a distinction between North and South America (there IS the isthmus of Panama separating them). I’ve always felt that the separation of Europe and Asia was a fuzzy one, and not in keeping with any known geological criteria for the division (the Urals? Hardly). In any event, I think there needs to be some re-thinking by the IOC that incorporates the modern recognition of seven continents and, accordingly, a revision of the five rings.
I had trouble getting the posts entered, thinking each time it wasn’t going through. Forgive the multiple posts (although it got better each time!).
Well, you are right. Altho N&S America are 2 continents, Eurasia is one. Then we have Africa & Australia, for a total of 5 inhabited continents.
The number and identity of the continents very much depends on the definitions one decides to use. The assumption that there are five of them doesn’t derive from strict geographical criteria. The ancient world knew three continents - Europe, Asia and Africa. The discovery of the New World added a fourth - America. Iconographic representations of the continents in art from the sixteenth century onwards always depict just four of them. The discovery of Australia added a fifth. It is this artistic/iconographic definition (Europe, Asia, Africa, America, Australia), rather than alternative ‘scientific’ ones, which presumably influenced the IOC.
The other question is whether the Olympic flag originally represented the ‘five continents’. I have a vague recollection that it was chosen because it seemed a striking and memorable design, and the ‘continents’ explanation was invented later.
I’ll just add that in my grade school one textbook named a “continent” Oceania, and it included Australia, New Zealand, and the small Pacific Islands.