Chapter
7
8
9
10
11
12
|
|
Page
82
88
94
102
105
114
116
152
157
|
|
A technique of empty hand combat was referred to as πάλαισμα—palaesma. The name was used to connote techniques also in wrestling and, possibly, in boxing. The Scholiast of Pindar mentions that the techniques of pankration were set (or codified) by Leukaros from Akarnania—a mountainous region in southern mainland Greece with a Doric population in antiquity. Actually, the natives of that region of Greece were considered to be good pankratiasts by tradition, and were referred to by Plato as “Akarnanians the pankratiasts.” This and subsequent chapters are devoted to the description of techniques this study has identified from the ancient sources (visual arts or literature). Any counters to these techniques that were identified are also provided. As mentioned in Chapter 1, the set of techniques provided in this book should not be seen as the only techniques used in pankration—they are just the ones for which I have identified a reference.
The present chapter provides the evidence identified on the technical foundations of pankration, including with regard to the pankration fighting stance, the relative positioning of fighters, defensive movements, attack setups, breathing in fighting, and the use of pressure points.
Fighting Stance
The fighting stance of the pankratiast is shown in a number of art objects. The most detailed and reliable depiction is from the funeral tombstone of a pankratiast named Agaklēs from Attica, where he is shown (in advanced middle age) in his fighting stance. He is facing the imaginary opponent with a nearly frontal stance—only slightly turned sideways. This is an intermediate directional positioning, between the wrestler’s more frontal positioning and the boxer’s more sideways stance and is consistent with the need to preserve both the option of using striking and protecting the center line of the body and the option of applying grappling techniques. Thus, the left side of the body is slightly forward of the right side of the body and the left hand is more forward than the right one. Both hands are held high so that the tips of the fingers are at the level of the hairline or just below the top of the head. The hands are partially open, the fingers are relaxed, and the palms are facing naturally forward, down, and slightly towards each other. The front arm is nearly fully extended but not entirely so; the rear arm is more cambered than the front arm, but more extended than a modern-day boxer’s rear arm. The back of the athlete is somewhat rounded, but not as much as a wrestler’s would be. The body is only slightly leaning forward.
The weight is virtually all on the back (right) foot with the front (left) foot touching the ground with the ball of the foot. It is a stance in which the athlete is ready at the same time to give a kick with the front leg as well as defend against the opponent’s low level kicks by lifting the front knee and blocking. The back leg is bent for stability and power and is facing slightly to the side, to go with the slightly sideways body position. The head and torso are behind the protecting two upper limbs and front leg.
|
|
Strikes with the Legs
Strikes delivered with the legs was an integral part of pankration and one of its most characteristic features as was discussed above. Therefore, kicking well was a great advantage to the pankratiast. Epictetus is making a reference—albeit derogatory in the context of Epictetus’ discussion—to a compliment one may give another: “μεγάλα λακτίζεις” (you kick great). Moreover, in an accolade to the fighting prowess of the pankratiast Glykon from Pergamo, the athlete is described as “wide foot.” The characterization comes actually before the reference to his “unbeatable hands,” implying at least as crucial a role for strikes with the feet as with the hands in pankration. That proficiency in kicking could carry the pankratiast to victory is indicated in a—albeit sarcastic—passage of Galen, where he awards the winning prize in pankration to a donkey because of its excellence in kicking. Below are the striking techniques with the legs that I have identified from the ancient sources (visual arts or literature). Any counters to these techniques that I managed to identify in my research of the sources are also provided. This is followed by the identified strikes with the arms and with the head, respectively.
1. Straight kick to the stomach
The straight kick with the bottom of the foot to the stomach (λάκτισμα είς γαστέραν—laktisma is gasteran) was apparently a common technique, given the number of depictions of such kicks on vases. For example, it is shown being practiced by a dwarf/caricatured pankratiast against a large kōrikos now in St. Petersburg. This type of kick is mentioned by Lucian.
Counter : The athlete sidesteps to the outside of the oncoming kick but grasps the inside of the kicking leg from behind the knee with his front hand (overhand grip) and pulls up, which tends to unbalance the opponent so that he falls backward as the athlete advances. The back hand can be used for striking the opponent while he is preoccupied maintaining his balance. This counter is shown on a Panathenaic amphora now in Leiden. In another counter, the athlete sidesteps the oncoming kick, but now to the inside of the opponent’s leg. He catches and lift s the heel/foot of the kicking leg with his rear hand and with the front arm goes under the knee of the kicking leg, hooks it with the nook of his elbow, and lift s while advancing to throw the opponent backward. The athlete executing the counter has to lean forward to avoid hand strikes by the opponent. This is depicted on a Greek vase now at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York (it is reproduced on the cover of Volume I).
|
|
Arm locks
1. Single shoulder lock (overextension)
The athlete is behind the opponent and has him leaning down, with the right knee of the opponent on the ground. The athlete has the opponent’s right arm straightened out and extended maximally backward at the shoulder joint. With the opponent’s right arm across his own torso, the athlete uses his left hand to keep the pressure on the opponent’s right arm by grabbing and pressing down on it just above the wrist. The right hand of the athlete is pressing down at the (side of) the head of the opponent, thus not permitting him to rotate to his right to relieve the pressure on his shoulder. As the opponent could escape by lowering himself closer to the ground and rolling, the athlete steps with his left leg over the left leg of the opponent and wraps his foot around the ankle of the opponent stepping on his instep, while pushing his body weight on the back of the opponent. This submission technique and its variations were particularly popular in artistic representations of Hellenistic times. The technique is shown in a Greek bronze figurine in the National Archaeological Museum in Athens. Virtually the same technique is depicted in a figurine from Alexandria now in Baltimore.
2. Single arm bar (elbow lock)
In this technique, the position of the bodies is very similar to the one described just above. The athlete executing the technique is standing over his opponent’s back, while the latter is down on his right knee. The left leg of the athlete is straddling the left thigh of the opponent—the left knee of the opponent is not on the floor—and is trapping the left foot of the opponent by stepping on it. The athlete uses his left hand to push down on the side/back of the head of the opponent while with his right hand he pulls the opponent’s right arm back, against his midsection. This creates an arm bar on the right arm with the pressure now being mostly on the elbow. The fallen opponent cannot relieve it, because his head is being shoved the opposite way by the left hand of the athlete executing the technique. This technique is seen on a bronze figurine now in St. Petersburg.
3. Arm bar - shoulder lock combination
In this technique, the athlete is again behind his opponent, has the left arm of his opponent trapped, and is pulling back on his right arm. The trapped left arm is bent, with the fingers and palm trapped inside the armpit of the athlete. To trap the left arm, the athlete has pushed (from outside) his own left arm underneath the left elbow of the opponent. The athlete’s left hand ends up pressing down on the scapula region of his opponent’s back. This position does not permit the opponent to pull out his hand from the athlete’s armpit and puts pressure on the left shoulder. The right arm of the athlete is pulling back at the opponent’s right wrist (or forearm). In this way, the athlete keeps the right arm of his opponent straightened and tightly pulled against his right hip/lower abdomen area, which results in an arm bar putting pressure on the right elbow. The athlete is in full contact with—and on top of—the opponent, with his right leg in front of the right leg of the opponent to block him from escaping by rolling forward. This submission hold is shown in a Greek bronze of the Hellenistic era (it is reproduced on the cover of this Volume).
|
|
1. Tracheal grip choke
In executing this choking technique (άγχειν—anchein), the athlete grabs the tracheal area (windpipe and “Adam’s apple”) between his thumb and his four fingers and squeezes. This technique is shown on a Greek vase in Villa Giulia (Figure 40) , and on another vase now in the British Museum (Figure 39). Yet another example of a tracheal grip choke is depicted on a fragment from a Greek vase now in Berlin (Figure 41). This type of choke can be applied with the athlete being in front or behind his opponent, as the representations mentioned above demonstrate. Regarding the hand grip to be used with this choke, the version of the grip shown on the vase in Villa Giulia is quite interesting: the web area between the thumb and the index finger appears to be quite high up the neck and the thumb is bent inward and downward, “reaching” behind the Adam’s apple of the opponent. As discussed earlier, it is unclear if such a grip would have been considered gouging and thus illegal in the Panhellenic Games.
2. Tracheal dig using the thumb
The athlete grabs the throat of the opponent with the four fingers on the outside of the throat and the tip of the thumb pressing in and down the hollow of the throat, putting pressure on the trachea. The technique is displayed by a sculpture of a Centaur fighting a Lapith from the west pediment of the temple of Zeus in Olympia.
3. Choke from behind with the forearm
The athlete has put himself behind his opponent, who is either in the standing, prone, or prostrate position. The choke is applied by placing the forearm against the trachea (i.e. the forearm is parallel to the clavicles of the opponent) and pulling back, with the other hand of the athlete possibly assisting the pull by gripping the hand of the choking arm. The pressure on the trachea is painful and causes a reduction of air flow to the lungs. An alternative way of applying this choke is to bend the choking arm in a “V” shape and put pressure with the biceps and the forearm on the two sides of the neck, respectively. This is a circulatory choke, which puts pressure on the arteries taking blood to the brain and thus deprives the latter of oxygen. The chokes from behind were usually accompanied with a grapevine body lock (άγχειν μετά κλιμακισμού—anchein meta klimakismou), as the resulting stretch of the body of the opponent accentuated the effect of the choke. There are few representations of this type of choke in surviving art objects, but there are a number of references to it in the ancient literature.
Counter :
A counter to the choke from behind involves the twisting of one of the fingers of the choking arm. This counter is mentioned by Philostratus. In case the choke was set together with a grapevine body lock, another counter was the one applied against that lock; by causing enough pain to the ankle of the opponent, the latter could give up his choke.
|
|
1. Heave from a reverse waist lock
From a reverse waist lock set from the front, and staying with hips close to the opponent, the athlete lift s and rotates his opponent using the strength of his hips and legs (αναβαστάσαι είς ύψος—anabastasae eis ypsos). Depending on the torque the athlete imparts, the opponent becomes more or less vertically inverted, facing the body of the athlete. If however the reverse waist lock is set from the back of the opponent, then the latter would face away from the athlete in the inverted position. An example of such an inverted position is shown in a Hellenistic era (first or second century BCE) bronze figurine in the Archaeological Museum in Athens.
To finish the attack, the athlete has the option of either dropping his opponent head-first to the ground, or driving him into the ground while retaining the hold. To execute the latter option, the athlete bends one of his legs and goes down on that knee while the other leg remains only partially bent; this is presumably to allow for greater mobility in case the “pile driver” does not work. An example of the “pile driver,” as a concluding technique after this type of a heave is shown on a Greek vase of about 530 BCE. Another approach emphasizes less putting the opponent in an inverted vertical position and more the throw; it is shown in a sculpture in the metopē of the Hephaesteion in Athens, where Theseus is depicted heaving Kerkyōn .
2. Heave from a waist lock following a sprawl
The opponents are facing in opposite directions with the athlete at a higher level, over the back of his opponent. The athlete can get in this position after making a shallow sprawl to counter a tackle attempt. From here the athlete sets a waist lock by encircling, from the back, the torso of the opponent with his arms and securing a “handshake” grip close to the abdomen of the opponent. He then heaves the opponent back and up, using the muscles of his legs and his back, so that the opponent’s feet rise in the air and he ends up inverted, perpendicular to the ground, and facing away from the athlete. The throw finishes with a “pile driver” or, alternatively, with a simple release of the opponent so that he falls to the ground. The initiation of the heave is shown on a Greek vase now at the British Museum (Figure 88). An example of the inverted position that follows this heave is depicted in the Hellenistic-era bronze figurine mentioned above (Figure 75).
3. Heave from a waist lock from behind
The athlete passes to the back of his opponent, secures a regular waist lock, lifts and throws/ drops the opponent backwards and sideways. As a result of these moves, the opponent would tend to land on his side or face down. The athlete can follow the opponent to the ground and place himself on his back, where he could strike him or choke him from behind while holding him in the “grapevine” body lock (see above), stretching him face down on the ground. This technique is described by the Roman poet Statius in his account of a match between the hero Tydeus of Thebes and an opponent in the Thebaid. Tydeus is described to have followed this takedown with a choke while applying the “grapevine” body lock on the prone opponent.
|
|
Positioning in the Skamma
As the pankration competitions were held outside and in the afternoon, appropriately positioning one’s face vis-a-vis the low sun was a major tactical objective. The pankratiast, as well as the boxer, did not want to have to face the ever-present Greek sun, as this would partly blind him to the blows of the opponent and make accurate delivery of strikes to specific targets difficult. Theocritus, in his narration of the (boxing) match between Polydeukēs and Amykos, noted that the two opponents struggled a lot, vying to see who would get the sun’s rays on his back. In the end, with skill and cunning, Polydeukēs managed so that Amykos’ face was struck with sunlight while his own was in the shade.
While this positioning was of paramount importance in boxing, which involved only upright striking (with the eyes facing straight), it was also important in pankration, especially in the beginning of the competition and as long as the athletes remained standing.
Remaining Standing Versus Going to the Ground
The decision to remain standing or go to the ground obviously depended on the relative strengths of the athlete in anō pankration and katō pankration, respectively. However, there are indications that staying on one’s feet was generally considered a positive thing, while touching the knee(s) to the ground or being put to the ground was overall considered disadvantageous. In fact, in antiquity as today, falling to one’s knee(s) was a metaphor for coming to a disadvantage and putting oneself at risk of loosing the fight, as argued persuasively by Poliakoff.
Offensive Versus Reactive Fighting
Regarding the choice of attacking into the attack of the opponent versus defending and retreating, there are indications—from boxing—that it was preferable to attack. Dio Chrysostom notes that retreat under fear tends to result in even greater injuries, while attacking before the opponent strikes is less injurious and could very well end in victory.
Identifying and Exploiting the Weak Side of the Opponent
As indicated by Plato in his Laws, an important element of strategy was to understand if the opponent had a weak or untrained side and to force him to operate on that side and generally take advantage of that weakness. For example, if the athlete recognizes that the opponent is strictly right-handed, he could circle away from the right hand of the opponent and towards the left side of the opponent. Moreover, if the opponent is weak in his left –side throws, the athlete could aim to position himself accordingly. Training in ambidexterity was instrumental in both applying this strategy and not falling victim to it.
|
Completion of a heave from a reverse frontal waist lock set from the back. Hellenistic
bronze sculpture. National Archaeological Museum (ΑΙΓ 2548), Athens. Photo Credit: National
Archaeological Museum, Athens.
|
|
|
