The combination of boxing and wrestling known as the pankration was a development of the primitive rough and tumble. To get his opponent down, and by throttling, pummelling, biting, and kicking, to reduce him to submission, is the natural instinct of the savage or the child. But this rough and tumble was too undisciplined for athletic competition. Competitions require law, and in the growth of law the simpler precedes the more complex. Hence it was only natural that particular forms of fighting such as boxing and wrestling should be systematized first, and so made suitable for competition, before any attempt was made to reduce to law the more complicated rough and tumble of which they both formed part. Wrestling and boxing were known to Homer, but not the pankration, and Greek tradition was following the natural order of development in assigning the introduction at Olympia of wrestling to the 18th, of boxing to the 23rd, and of the pankration to the 33rd Olympiad. In the pankration as in boxing the contest continued till one or other of the parties held up his hand in sign of defeat. At Sparta, where for this reason the laws of Lycurgus forbade citizens to compete in these events, the primitive rough and tumble unrestricted by law and unrefined by science was allowed and encouraged as a test of endurance and a training for war. The pankration at the great festivals was something quite different; it was governed by the law of the games (???? ??a??????), and was, at all events in the best period, a contest no less of skill than of strength.

Modern writers turn up their eyes in holy horror at the brutality of the pankration, and marvel that a race so refined as the Greeks could have tolerated so brutal a sport. Undoubtedly the pankration might degenerate into brutality, and perhaps sometimes actually did. So may football, boxing, wrestling, unless they are controlled by rules, and unless the rules are enforced. But the pankration was controlled by rules, and the rules were enforced in the wrestling school and in the games by trainers and officials under public control, and enforced with the rod in a practical way which the modern umpire or referee may well envy, and the rod was certainly not spared. Further, the rules were enforced by a public opinion and tradition that in the best times certainly placed skill and grace far above brute strength in all athletics. No branch of athletics was more popular than the pankration. Philostratus describes it as the fairest of all contests.^[742] Mythology ascribed its invention to Heracles and Theseus,^[743] the typical representatives of science as opposed to brute strength. What the pankration was in the fifth century we can learn from Pindar. No less than eight of his odes are in praise of pankratiasts, and from these odes can be illustrated every feature of the poet’s athletic ideal. There was, of course, an element of danger, but danger does not make a sport brutal. Serious injuries, even loss of life, sometimes occurred, but these accidents were rare, rarer probably than in football or in the hunting-field, and the Greeks certainly regarded the pankration as less dangerous than boxing.^[744] Finally, the example of jiujitzu proves that such contests may be conducted without any brutality as contests of pure skill.

The fullest account of the pankration occurs in Philostratus’ description of the death of Arrhichion, a famous pankratiast of the sixth century, who expired at the very moment when his opponent acknowledged himself beaten.^[745] After describing the scene and the excitement of the spectators, Philostratus adds a characteristic account of the pankration. “Pankratiasts,” he says, “practise a hazardous style of wrestling (?e???d??e???? t? p???). They must employ falls backward (?pt?as??) which are not safe for the wrestler, and grips in which victory must be obtained by falling (???? p?pt??ta). They must have skill in various methods of strangling (???e??); they must also wrestle with an opponent's ankle (sf??? p??spa?a???s?) and twist his arm (st?e???s?), besides hitting and jumping on him, for all these practices belong to the pankration, only biting and gouging (???tte??) being excepted. The Spartans admit even these practices, but the Eleans and the laws of the games exclude them, though they commend strangling.”

It would be difficult to give a more concise description. Wrestling, hitting, and kicking are employed; the style of wrestling is hazardous; victory is usually obtained by strangling; biting and gouging are alone prohibited. The prohibition of gouging and biting is evidently a quotation from the actual rules of Olympia. It is twice quoted by Aristophanes.^[746] Biting needs no comment. The meaning of the word translated “gouging” is clear from Aristophanes. It means digging the hand or fingers into the eyes, mouth, and other tender parts of the body. A vivid illustration of “gouging” occurs on a British Museum kylix (Fig. 151). One of the pankratiasts has inserted his thumb and finger into his opponent’s eye as if to gouge it out, and the official is hastening up with his rod uplifted to interfere and punish such foul play. A somewhat similar scene is represented on a kylix in Baltimore (Fig. 152), where a pankratiast inserts his thumb into the mouth of an opponent whom he has thrown head over heels.

The pankration naturally divides itself into two parts, the standing pankration (t? ??? pa????t???) and the struggle on the ground (t? ??t? pa????t???). In the former the opponents endeavoured to throw one another heavily to the ground, by wrestling or kicking or hitting. There was much preliminary sparring, appropriately described as ?????e???s??.^[747] The hands were unprotected by thongs or other covering, and, as is natural in a combination of wrestling and boxing, the open hand and the fist were both used. Both are represented on the fragment of a kylix in Berlin (Fig. 153). The fallen youth bleeds freely from the nose, and bears on his back the imprint of his opponent’s fingers. At the same time, his fist is clenched ready to strike. The relative importance of wrestling and boxing in the pankration depended much on the individual. The man with a long reach naturally preferred to utilize his advantage in hitting; the short, thickset boxer generally depended for victory on his wrestling.^[748] The struggle was usually decided on the ground. It is commonly stated that when one or other opponent had fallen, hitting was no longer allowed. This purely modern idea is conclusively disproved by such vases as the one just quoted. Neither in boxing nor in the pankration was it forbidden to strike a man who was down. As a rule, when both men were down hitting was of little use, and the contest was usually decided by wrestling, especially by twisting a limb, or by strangling. If, however, one opponent had been knocked down by a heavy blow, he was usually at his opponent’s mercy, and he commonly holds up his hand in sign of defeat, or else the official is represented interfering to stop the contest.

The epithet “hazardous” by which Philostratus characterizes the wrestling of the pankration is appropriate to such throws as “the flying mare” and the various foot and leg holds which, though too risky for the wrestler proper, were freely employed in the pankration, where it was not sufficient only to throw an opponent, but he must be thrown heavily. The use of the flying mare is illustrated on the Baltimore kylix (Fig. 152), where the left-hand wrestler proceeds to pummel his fallen opponent. A much mutilated group on the kylix illustrated in Fig. 54 represents a throw from a leg-hold. A wrestler kneeling on one knee has seized his opponent between the legs and lifts him up, bending forwards as if to hurl him on to the ground. The scene is described by Anacharsis in Lucian.^[749] “Look,” he cries, “that fellow has picked up the other by the legs and flung him to the ground, and falling on him, will not suffer him to rise, but forces him into the mud, and at last, winding his legs round his stomach, with his arm placed under his throat, he strangles the poor wretch.”

A favourite trick of the pankratiast was to catch his opponent by the foot, and lifting it up, to tilt him backwards. Antaeus is frequently depicted grabbing thus at the foot of Heracles, but without success.^[750] The manoeuvre is excellently illustrated on two Panathenaic vases (Figs. 154, 155), and on the coins of Aspendus (Fig. 109). On a gem in the British Museum (Fig. 162) a somewhat similar hold is adopted by way of defence by a wrestler who has his head in chancery.

Sometimes a wrestler, having thrown his opponent, would lift him up by the legs, and the other, to save himself from a heavy fall, would balance himself on his hands and head. Philostratus, speaking of the short, thickset athletes, whom he calls ?? ?? ???? e?????^[751]—the type of the “pocket Hercules”—says, “They are quick and active, and able to extricate themselves from the most hopeless grips, standing on their heads as on a pedestal.” This manoeuvre, quite familiar in modern wrestling, is not represented in Greek art, but occurs on the wall paintings of Beni-Hassan.

A wrestler who was thrown on his back was defeated. But a pankratiast might intentionally throw himself on his back in order to throw his opponent more heavily, or to throw him in a worse position. A manoeuvre of this sort called t? ?p?pte????e?? was invented, according to Philostratus,^[752] by a Cilician pankratiast, nicknamed for the smallness of his stature, Halter or the Dumbbell. On his way to compete at Delphi, he stopped at the shrine of the hero Protesilaus to ask him how he should conquer his opponents. The hero replied, “By being trampled upon” (pat??e???). At first he was disconcerted by this ambiguous answer, but after a little thought he understood that the hero’s advice meant “that he was not to let go the foot of his opponent; for the man who wrestles with the opponent’s foot must be constantly trampled on and be underneath his opponent.” So he devised the “heel trick,” by means of which he remained undefeated and won great renown. This is probably the same method as that described in the passage of Philostratus already quoted as “wrestling with the ankle.” Such a hold ensures a heavy fall; but the peculiarity of the “Dumbbell’s” method was, that instead of releasing the foot after throwing his opponent, he preserved his hold, and by twisting or bending the foot forced him to yield. This use of the ankle hold is well known in Japanese wrestling. Arrhichion, we are told, forced his opponent to succumb by twisting his foot out of its socket.

Another throw in which the thrower throws himself on his back is the “stomach throw.” A wrestler seizes his opponent by the shoulders or arms and throws himself backward, at the same time planting his foot in the other’s stomach and thus throwing him heavily clean over his head, while he himself falls lightly. This favourite throw of the Japanese is depicted on the tombs of Beni-Hassan. It is accurately described by Dio Cassius in his account of a fight between the Romans and Iazyges:^[753] “Whenever any of them fell backwards, he would drag his opponent after him, and with his feet hurl him backwards as in wrestling.” Pindar in his third Isthmian Ode is referring to tactics of this sort when he says of Melissus: “In craft he is as the fox that spreadeth out her feet and preventeth the swoop of the eagle.” The only representation which I know of such a throw is on a black-figured hydria in Munich (Fig. 156), where Antaeus lies on his back with his right hand grasping Heracles’ left foot and his left leg kicking him in the stomach. As usual, Antaeus has failed to execute the throw and Heracles has regained the advantage.

The throws described in the last two paragraphs sufficiently illustrate those “backward falls unsafe for the wrestler, and grips in which victory must be obtained by falling,” which made the wrestling of the pankration particularly hazardous.

Wrestling and boxing combined are depicted in a highly conventional manner on two Panathenaic vases in the British Museum (Figs. 157, 158) representing respectively the contest for youths and for men. On B 604 a pankratiast has rushed in head down, allowing his opponent to catch his head in the bend of his arm. It is not quite clear what the latter intends to do, whether to complete the neck hold or to pummel him. In B 610 there is no doubt: the left-hand wrestler lifts his fist to pummel the other’s head, which he still holds in the bend of his arm. Why he allows his head to remain unnecessarily in such a position is not quite clear. Perhaps he has really had his head in chancery, and unable to break the grip, has bitten the other’s arm. A favourite Greek story told by Plutarch of Alcibiades, and in another place of a Spartan wrestler, illustrates this suggestion.^[754] Being hard pressed and about to be thrown, he bit his opponent’s hand. Letting go his hold, the latter exclaimed, “You bite, Alcibiades, like a woman.” “No,” he replied, “like a lion.” Biting, as we know, was strictly forbidden, and some confirmation of the explanation of the vase may be found in the attitude of the official on the right, who seems to be awarding the palm to the other pankratiast. Other examples of biting in the pankration, whether standing or on the ground, will be found in our illustrations.

Kicking was also a distinctive feature of the pankration. In Theocritus,^[755] Polydeuces being challenged to fight by Amycus, inquires if it is to be a boxing match or whether kicking too was allowed; and Galen,^[756] in his skit on the Olympic games, awards the prize for the pankration to the donkey, as the best of all animals in kicking. A combination of kicking and boxing is represented on the two Panathenaic vases in Figs. 154, 155. At least it seems to me probable that the pankratiast on the left has caught his opponent’s foot in mid-air as he was trying to kick him in the stomach. Kicking in the stomach (?ast???e??)^[757] appears to have been a favourite trick in the pankration, as it is in the French savate. It is depicted in one of the groups in the Tusculan mosaic (Fig. 22), and in a relief in the Louvre. On another Panathenaic vase (Fig. 159) one pankratiast appears in the act of catching the other’s leg as he lifts it in his onset. The action of the latter rather resembles that described as jumping on an opponent (?????es?a?) than of kicking. A better illustration of this term is seen in Fig. 153, where one pankratiast is jumping on his fallen opponent.

Twisting an opponent’s arm or fingers (st?e????) and strangling him (???e??) are tricks belonging principally to the later stage of the contest, when both opponents are on the ground, but opportunities for them also occurred in standing wrestling. Twisting the arm has already been illustrated in our chapter on wrestling (Figs. 129-131). Similarly in the Uffizi group (Fig. 163) the upper wrestler twists his opponent’s arm across his back, and the same motive occurs in one of the groups on the frieze of Lysicrates’ monument. Pausanias tells us of one Sostratus, a pankratiast of Sicyon, who, like Leontiscus in wrestling, forced his opponents to yield by twisting and breaking their fingers.^[758] At first sight we are apt to condemn such practices as brutal and unsportsmanlike, but the principle of twisting an opponent’s limb so as to incapacitate him has been reduced to a science in Japanese wrestling. The same may be said of “strangling,” the method of finishing a contest of which the Eleans much approved. Almost any neck hold can be used to throttle an opponent. Reference has already been made to the familiar hold known as “getting the head in chancery,” illustrated on the gems in Fig. 162. The most effective and favourite method of strangling an opponent is that known as ???a??s??,^[759] which consists in mounting on an opponent’s back, winding the legs round his stomach, and the arms round his neck. The klimakismos can be employed both in the standing pankration and on the ground. On the Tusculan mosaic both types are represented (Fig. 22), and we have references to both types in literature. It is the favourite method of attack employed by Heracles in his contests with the Triton and Achelous (Fig. 160), and is best known to scholars from the account of the latter contest given in the chorus of the Trachiniae, 407-530. In the standing pankration, in order to execute the klimakismos it was necessary to get behind one’s opponent either by making him turn round or by springing round him. This may be illustrated from the humorous picture which Anacharsis draws of the Greeks advancing to meet their foe like boxers with clenched fists.^[760] “And the enemy,” he says, “naturally cower before you and take to flight for fear lest, as they stand gaping, you fill their mouth with sand, or jumping round to get on their backs, twist your legs round their bellies and strangle them to death, placing your arm beneath their helmets.” A similar description of the klimakismos on the ground has already been quoted.

Ground wrestling must have been the most distinctive, as it certainly was the most decisive, part of the pankration. It was probably as complicated if not as long as it is at the present day, the combatants sometimes sprawling at full length, sometimes on their knees,^[761] sometimes on the top of one another. It is this part of the pankration to which Plato objected and which led him to exclude it from his ideal state as useless for military training, because it did not teach men to keep their feet.^[762] Perhaps in Plato’s time the pankratiast, like the modern Graeco-Roman wrestler, was apt to neglect the preliminary contest and go down on the ground at once. Such grovelling, if it existed, was a sign of the decay of these antagonistic sports, which, as we have seen, had set in before Plato’s time; it was unknown to Pindar, who specially emphasizes the importance of boxing in the pankration.^[763] Ground wrestling is seldom represented on the vases, except in the contest of Heracles and Antaeus (Fig. 161); but groups of the kneeling type are frequent on later gems, being particularly suitable for oblong or oval spaces. The examples given in Fig. 162 from gems in the British Museum explain themselves.

The most important and interesting of all the monuments connected with the pankration is the group of wrestlers in the Uffizi gallery in Florence (Fig. 163). Unfortunately, it is considerably restored, but in spite of recent criticism there seems to be no reason for doubting the general correctness of the restoration.^[764] The underneath wrestler supports himself on his left arm, and his opponent’s immediate object is to break down this support. This can be effected by a blow. For the underneath wrestler’s right arm being secured, he can only guard his head with his left. The situation can be illustrated by the description in Heliodorus of the match between Theagenes and the Aethiopian champion.^[765] Theagenes forces the latter on to his knees, twines his legs round him, and then knocks away his wrists, with which he is keeping his chest off the ground. Having broken down this support, he forces him down on his stomach on the ground. While a wrestler is supporting himself on his hands and knees, his position is far from hopeless, and he may by a quick and vigorous movement often overturn his adversary and reverse matters. Such is the moment selected by the sculptor; the victory is still undecided, the uppermost wrestler is anxious to make sure of victory, the other is eagerly watching to take advantage of any carelessness on his opponent’s part. How fatal any such carelessness may be we learn from the story of Arrhichion.^[766] Arrhichion was being strangled by his opponent, who was on the top with arms and legs entwined round him; but even as he was expiring he took advantage of a momentary relaxation of the grip to kick his right leg free, and rolling over so as to crush his opponent’s left side, he seized his right foot and twisted it out of its socket with such violence as to force him to yield, and so even with his last breath he secured the victory.

There are numerous technical terms of wrestling and the pankration known to us only from scholiasts and lexicographers. These are of very doubtful interpretation and of no practical importance, and it is therefore unnecessary to discuss them here.^[767]