Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Indy 500: Coverage of the 'Greatest Spectacle In Racing'

MMA Origins: Exploring Fight Sport's Ancient Roots

Tpankration_medium

The sport of Mixed Martial Arts has exploded in the previous twenty years and has attracted countless new fans. And as the sport evolves it is very easy to lose sight of even the recent past of the sport much less its far reaching roots. So this series will bring will recount the history of Mixed Martial Arts, from the earliest forerunners to the modern sport of MMA focusing on pivotal fighters, styles, fights, rivalries and events.

To start off we are going to travel back to Ancient times to give the modern sport proper context. We start with the Ancient Greeks and the sport of Pankration, also called Pancratium.

In the 600s BC, the major empires in the Middle East favored larger armies centered around archery, chariots and quick moving light infantry that worked well on large open battlefields. The Greeks however lived in a mountainous country, were battles were fought in ravines, valleys and mountain passes with heavy infantry at close quarters. With military service being obligatory for citizenship in the Greek polis, the average Greek man was well-versed in close combat.

Out of the clash of phalanxes came a combat art based on real combat experiences that combined wrestling and striking. This art, Pankration, was practiced in varying forms from Greek city-state to Greek city-state, and included joint locks, chokes and neck cranks.

Star-divide

To fill the time during years of peace, Greeks had sporting contests, mostly based around preparing Greek men for war. Pankration was a natural addition and appeared in the Olympic games. Rules varied from city to city and there is evidence that Spartans were outlawed from most competitions for their unfortunate tendency to kill their opponent and that they were encouraged by their teachers to bite and scratch in matches.

Matches, in general, were fought naked and combatants coated themselves with sand to create friction for grips. Fighters then could strike or grapple, depending on their own personal style and matches ended when one contestant was unable to continue or signaled defeat by raising an index finger on one hand (an ancient tapout). Death was a fairly common occurrence in these matches.

P0012_medium

Some historians have theorized that when Alexander the Great unified the Greek people with the Macedonians and they conquered the Persian Empire and entered India they spread Pankration east influencing the development of martial arts there. While this sounds all well and good, there is no evidence to support this assertion.

Alexander's death mark the decline of the Greeks as an international power and the small, warlike city of Rome rose to fill that power vacuum. The Romans did practice both wrestling and boxing, Pankriation was adopted into these existing Roman sports. True Pankraation existed in small pockets around the Empire until the Emperor Thedosius forbade it. I want there to be no confusion, there is no clear connection between Ancient Pankration and modern MMA, but it is a clear pioneer art in combat.

In recent years there has been a resurgence of Pankration as Greek martial artists recreate the techniques based on paintings and statues. This resurgence gives us a better understanding and insight into what may have been the first formally practiced martial art.

The Discovery Channel show Human Weapon did a pretty decent feature on this recreation of Pankration.

Sources:

Ancient Olympics

Pancratium

Comment 163 comments  |  2 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Around SB Nation

News Roundup

Aug 2008 from Villarreal USA - 4 comments

Rossi's Back Pain

Aug 2008 from Villarreal USA - 2 comments

International Activities

Aug 2008 from Villarreal USA - 1 comment

Olympic Update

Aug 2008 from Villarreal USA - 0 comments

Comments

Display:

Good article, some of the Pankration vids on youtube are awesome.

When I first clicked over for a second I thought Seth Petruzelli had tricked me with a mat battle link again.

"Now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb."

by menckenstein on Dec 1, 2011 10:23 AM EST reply actions  

Those pictures

make fighting look very homosexual.

by PelvicThrust on Dec 1, 2011 10:23 AM EST reply actions  

Crushed trachea

AFAIK, crushed trachea. Since gouging was legal in most matches, they would strangle a guy by hooking their thumbs on either side of a dude’s trachea – you know, wrapping your hands around his throat but digging your thumbs on either side of the trachea – and squeezing and tearing.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 10:29 AM EST up reply actions  

Hell yes

Rambo 4 style

"Now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb."

by menckenstein on Dec 1, 2011 10:31 AM EST up reply actions  

thanks.

A nasty way to go out, in more ways than one. A naked dude sitting on top of you crushing your throat.

by I_Mad on Dec 1, 2011 10:34 AM EST via mobile up reply actions  

On the Deadliest Warrior episode with Alexander the Great...

Rashad Evans was used to demonstrate pankration. He threw and elbow into the throat of a gel dummy, crushing the windpipe. Also used knees to the top of the head, breaking the crown. Nasty.

@scb0212
The Machiavellian.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett

by Scott C. Broussard on Dec 1, 2011 10:44 AM EST via mobile up reply actions  

Rashadiclese, Shatterer of Skulls

"Now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb."

by menckenstein on Dec 1, 2011 10:47 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

If I had gifs, I'd post them. Kicking myself for never making them.

The episode is on Netflix streaming, though.

@scb0212
The Machiavellian.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett

by Scott C. Broussard on Dec 1, 2011 11:09 AM EST via mobile up reply actions  

Found a video clip:

http://www.spike.com/video-clips/pfcmcm/deadliest-warrior-rashad-evans

@scb0212
The Machiavellian.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett

by Scott C. Broussard on Dec 1, 2011 11:33 AM EST up reply actions  

Speculation

Of all the injuries in MMA, anything other than cracked skulls is purely speculation. Tracheas do not preserve in the archaeological record so there is no physical evidence to even test that hypothesis.

To figure out how these people died with what can physically preserve, first, you would need to find/identify burials or sites where there may be remains of fighters. Assuming you can find this and the bones are preserved well enough you would have to look for musculoskeletal markers that indicate what activities they did that cannot be associated with the daily activities of those people in that day or time. Again, assuming you actually have a sample size big enough to be meaningful. Then, if you could find fractures or evidence of trauma that hasn’t had a chance to heal (they didn’t live long enough after the injury for bone to begin healing) AND were able to compare it to other sources of information for exactly what moves they did that typically resulted in that kind of fracture- maybe, maybe could you say something about how fatal pankration is.. It’s not a lot to go on.

I watched that episode of human weapon.. the vases and archaeological sources from which they Greek recreated the sport looks more like yet another means to propagate a nationalist/Eurocentric idea of everything of importance in the world today starting in ancient Greece than reliable research. There is simply not enough evidence.

by OK USA! on Dec 1, 2011 5:51 PM EST up reply actions  

I watched that episode of human weapon.. the vases and archaeological sources from which they Greek recreated the sport looks more like yet another means to propagate a nationalist/Eurocentric idea of everything of importance in the world today starting in ancient Greece than reliable research. There is simply not enough evidence.

the martial art existed, there are just too many references to say it didn’t. I do agree with you that the idea that it spread to india and then china and created all martial arts is just silly speculation.

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 6:21 PM EST up reply actions  

That's a theory? That's just stupid.

What I’ve always been told was traditional Indian martial arts – Kalaripayattu – looks nothing like what the Greeks did.

@scb0212
The Machiavellian.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett

by Scott C. Broussard on Dec 1, 2011 6:26 PM EST up reply actions  

yeah it is a theory but mostly

it comes from guys like this^

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 6:43 PM EST up reply actions  

Watch that episode of human weapon- it will make more sense.

Of course martial arts existed everywhere. People fought everywhere. One thing I love about the early UFC is that it showed that eg kung fu is not very useful in a real life situation.

by OK USA! on Dec 1, 2011 6:44 PM EST up reply actions  

PS> They have a Kalaripayattu episode too. The one I thought looked the most like present day MMA is Bokator. AND the styles are named after animals- could it be any cooler?

by OK USA! on Dec 1, 2011 6:45 PM EST up reply actions  

I have seen it - I didn't remember that part, though.

I’m a sucker for shows like this – Human Weapon, Fight Quest, I mentioned Conquest farther down the page…

@scb0212
The Machiavellian.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett

by Scott C. Broussard on Dec 1, 2011 6:47 PM EST up reply actions  

+1

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 6:49 PM EST up reply actions  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yemV8pQYIlE Watched Fight Quest too! WIll check out Conquest.

by OK USA! on Dec 1, 2011 6:50 PM EST up reply actions  

It's mostly on Youtube & Bittorrents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_%28TV_series%29

My favorite episode of it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmDER4qovS8

@scb0212
The Machiavellian.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett

by Scott C. Broussard on Dec 1, 2011 6:56 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm a sucker for these kinds of articles.

I’ve read a bit on the ancient Greek style of boxing, where the combatants were strapped to large vertical slabs of stones about 2ft apart. They were free from the waist up, so they could punch and make minor defensive moves, but pretty much they just bludgeoned one another to death. Not sure of the validity of this, but it supposedly inspired my favorite sculpture of all time: “The Pugilist at rest.”

"Hi. I don't know you." - me

"Cigano punch my face...all the time." - Anderson Silva

by POW on Dec 1, 2011 10:35 AM EST reply actions   1 recs

That's the Boxer of Quirinal

I think it’s more likely that the subject was a pankratist because of the cauliflower ear.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 2:31 PM EST up reply actions  

Looking at the

Ground and Pound photo, its worst enough getting pounded but even worse with a naked guy on your back like the photo shows.

by Coeman on Dec 1, 2011 10:43 AM EST reply actions  

I guess I'm kinda creepy

For nodding in approval at the one-armed hammerlock the striker looked to be working.

"Release man from the shackles of flesh and flesh misery and then he's no longer a poor, petty little man afraid to dream because he knows his frail body stands between him and the fulfillment of dreams, then he's ready to wage war, the only war worth waging-- the conflict of man reborn and the whole confounded universe!"

by Dallas Winston on Dec 1, 2011 10:51 AM EST up reply actions  

Haha well done

What we can’t see: two Condom Depot logos mashed together

"Now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb."

by menckenstein on Dec 1, 2011 11:59 AM EST up reply actions  

Looks like he's setting up a wrestler's guillotine / twister

The top fighter may be doing some striking, but it looks like his main goal is a position wrestler’s guillotine which can be used to submit (ADCC rules) or pin the opponent (folk wrestling). It is also known as the twister thanks to Eddie Bravo, although usual Eddie’s setup is not the cross body ride, but rather his “twister side control.”

The top fighter is in a position called a cross body ride. You can see his left leg hooked around his opponent’s left leg, and his hips pushing into his opponent’s back to keep him from standing up. If you’ve never seen a wrestler’s guillotine, there are plenty of competition videos on Youtube that show the setup from a cross body ride..

Strikes can be executed from this position, but in order to generate rotational power for a strong strike, the top fighter would need to let go of the right arm. Hammerlocks are also an option, but it’s more efficient to change his gripping hand to his right momentarily to get better leverage. Finally, the top fighter could also go for a calf slicer by hooking his left instep behind his opponent’s left calf (right now his left foot is below his opponent’s left shin instead), let go of the right arm, sit down and pull on the opponent’s left foot. Note that all of these (except for weak strikes) require the top fighter to let go of the right arm.

by kyo20 on Dec 15, 2011 11:52 AM EST up reply actions  

I dug up ancient combat images for my Three Phase Scoring System

"Release man from the shackles of flesh and flesh misery and then he's no longer a poor, petty little man afraid to dream because he knows his frail body stands between him and the fulfillment of dreams, then he's ready to wage war, the only war worth waging-- the conflict of man reborn and the whole confounded universe!"

by Dallas Winston on Dec 1, 2011 10:47 AM EST reply actions  

pfff

no cage control? clearly we have evolved as a society…

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 2, 2011 8:47 AM EST up reply actions  

The History Channel show Conquest also did an episode about unarmed Greek combat:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMyv-XHBvv4

@scb0212
The Machiavellian.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett

by Scott C. Broussard on Dec 1, 2011 10:50 AM EST via mobile reply actions  

nice!

I was a fan of that show but forgot all about this episode!

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 10:52 AM EST up reply actions  

Many episodes are on Youtube or torrents now.

“Weird Weapons of the Middle Ages” is still my favorite.

@scb0212
The Machiavellian.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett

by Scott C. Broussard on Dec 1, 2011 11:07 AM EST via mobile up reply actions  

Why fight naked, tough?

I mean, I can understand the sand bit, but… …what exactly is the functionality of it all? Weren’t there a bunch of dick infections given that they kept getting dirty on the ground and shit (also: fucking sand)?

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:03 AM EST reply actions  

the Greeks though the human body was nature perfected

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 11:09 AM EST up reply actions  

That sounds like bureaucratic B.S to me.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:10 AM EST up reply actions  

it is why Greek art

features naked figures so frequently. the Greeks believed the human body to be something to be admired, not all that differently from modern western culture.

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 11:13 AM EST up reply actions  

Doubt it, somewhat.

Back then art as well as history had a heavy slant towards idealism and forced context. hell, history to them had to have a moral and a meaning, not meant to be “just” a mererecollection of factual data.

Now, imagine art…

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:20 AM EST up reply actions  

History writing, especially for popular audiences (i.e. non-specialists). hasn’t changed all that much as far as writing with a moral and a meaning. Most historians would say that factual data is pretty hard to come by, too — everything we have is mediated by the viewpoints of the authors who wrote the texts we have.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 2:34 PM EST up reply actions  

This is certainly true

The Greeks and Romans didn’t have a lot of boggles with nudity and did think the human body was perfect beauty – or at least the idealized forms that made it into sculpture. ;)

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 11:22 AM EST up reply actions  

The Romans did not fight naked though.

I am free because I choose to be so-Me

by Kefka on Dec 1, 2011 1:20 PM EST up reply actions  

Poverty

It’s really hard to make clothing with Bronze Age technology, so athletic competitions — which tended to be rough on clothes – were held naked.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 11:09 AM EST up reply actions  

This makes sense.

Also: :(

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:10 AM EST up reply actions  

The Bronze Age sucked

Civilization was a disaster for humans until recently. The average age of survival for a dude in the Bronze Age was about 19 years old. Until the modern world, civilized life was a struggle against brutal poverty – as a historian, I think that history makes sense only when viewed through the lens of this disturbing level of poverty.

As contrast, in classical antiquity when Greeks and Romans were living to be twenty-two or less, Indians in the Caribbean islands were living to the average age of 54 . . . and 18 over in the Aztec Empire! Early civilization SUCKED.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 11:13 AM EST up reply actions  

Early civilization SUCKED.

agreed. unless that is you were one of the wealthy. Then life was pretty damn good.

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 11:16 AM EST up reply actions  

It was better

But still sucked. Would I rather be a lower middle class dude in modern America or a Roman patrician at the height of the Republic? I’ll stick with what I’ve got, thanks. ;)

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 11:18 AM EST up reply actions  

well yeah

I’d much prefer to live now, but I take a Crassus-level of wealth with me?

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 11:19 AM EST up reply actions  

We’re still no better, in mny aspects.

Wait…we have nuclear weapons!

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:22 AM EST up reply actions  

I mostly disagree with this

More people are freer now, both as an absolute number and a percentage, ever. People are healthier, better fed, better educated, slavery has been almost entirely destroyed, so forth and so on. We are hardly a perfect society, but, man, most of history is just a litany of horrors even compared to messes like WWII.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 11:24 AM EST up reply actions  

Free in what definition?

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:25 AM EST up reply actions  

In the sense

Of not being literally owned, in the sense of your owner having absolute powers of life and death over you.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 11:26 AM EST up reply actions  

You mean in a constitutional context, right?

’Cause slavery is not gone at all. It just changed names.

We live in a culture where it is very much in practice, still. It is just considered either illegal, or it went on to form part of the systematized exploitation of impoverished communities or illegal immigrants by large corporations (yes, I went there).

In the end, the semantics or the legality matter little b/c the practice is still alive and well.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:30 AM EST up reply actions  

systematized exploitation of impoverished communities or illegal immigrants by large corporations

today’s world can’t hold a candle to the systematized exploitation of the past.

Creditors could literally come to own those in their debts as sudo-slaves, in theory they could work off the debt but there was no oversight for such a thing.

The Roman nobleman Crassus came to own a huge % of Rome because he commissioned a firefighting squad. When your house was on fire Crassus would arrive with his squad and offer to put out the fire if you sold him the house at a fraction of its cost. If you didn’t he let the house burn and then offered you less for the land. If you accepted he put the fire out and then would either evict you or charge you rent to live in your burned house.

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 11:37 AM EST up reply actions  

Um...

Who these days gets to fully own a perfectly insured house?

Shift that same example to this day and age and change Crassus to some bank with draconian insurance policies.

But still, those are not the troubles of the underprivileged. They weren’t back then and they aren’t today, yes?

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:50 AM EST up reply actions  

I think you don't really understand how bad it was

I mean in real practice. The most viciously exploited immigrant worker is unlikely to be tortured to death by his master – a right that slaveowners have traditionally had.

There are, of course, places in the world where literal slavery exists – like the young boys used to pick the nuts that eventually become chocolate – but even cruelly exploited modern workers have it much better off as a slave in the pre-modern world.

Which is not to say there is not an abundance of cruelty in the world – I believe there is – but what was condoned, even praised, in the pre-modern world is difficult for us to fathom, nowadays.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 11:37 AM EST up reply actions  

Define master and define torture, then. These days the lines seem rather blurred on what one thing is and isn’t, no? I’m calling slavery forced servitude.

An immigrant worker gets exploited and conditioned to do as it is told lets its situation worsens, which in turn facilitates the exploitation. I’m arguing for the loss of quality of life here, and how that benefits the exploiter—it is a relationship where there’s not much of a choice b/c disadvantaged people under constant search of welfare will turn to it anyways as they are out of options.

The mechanisms are not exactly the same but the end result is, if not the same, frighteningly similar.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:47 AM EST up reply actions  

*lest the situation gets worse* ...my bad.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:53 AM EST up reply actions  

No, not really

In general, a conversation has come to an end when people start quibbling over definitions.

The end result is the same only if we ignore the fact that the overwhelming number of workers enjoy a much higher standard of living, and enjoy it much longer, than people in previous epochs of civilization. Are there kinds of exploitation that are tantamount to torture? Yes, but workers nowadays are rarely flogged and denied medical treatment – something that was common in the US as little as two hundred years ago. And while there are places where that sort of thing still happens, they are far, far fewer.

Overwhelmingly, people are better off now than in previous times. We have more opportunities, we’re better fed, we live longer, we have more rights, so forth and so on. Not just de jure, but de facto.

And if you don’t see that, it’s simply because you are ignorant of how incredibly awful civilization was before the modern day. This is not to say our civilization isn’t awful, but it is less awful by any reasonable standard anyone would care to put forth.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 12:33 PM EST up reply actions  

What *exactly* do you think I'm arguing about?

I assume we were discussing “freedom” and having a forced workforce. That’s what we were arguig about. Or at last I thought so but…

In general, a conversation has come to an end when people start quibbling over definitions.

Shyeah…if we cannot even establish a proper context over what it is that we are arguing about exactly, then fuck it. You’re right, let’s end this thing.

Have a nice one.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 12:43 PM EST up reply actions  

Ironically

It is precisely that we can’t establish a common context. Because you don’t know anything about the history of pre-modern labor! You’re projecting your ignorance on to me rather than, I dunno, listening or at least shutting up and, I dunno, go and education yourself on the subject.

You’re the one who brought up quibbling definitions, not I. I think the word “torture” is pretty clear – I even gave an example, with the flogging of slaves. Y’know, actual, easily discernable torture as opposed to exploitation – which is certainly awful but not the same as being whipped until you die. Which anyone who wasn’t quibbling would have immediately conceded.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 12:55 PM EST up reply actions  

No, the word torture is *not* clear. At least no in modern times, it isn't.

Especially considering the pre approved notions of what is legal and not legal means of treating someone whose residence legal status is either against the law of the land or unspecified (i.e. illegal combatants, or just people of interest picked up illegaly and sent to a detention center). That then brings up the argument of willful privation and witholding of services that negatively impact the way someone can live their lives so as to maximize personal profits over sustained periods of time. Or even just basic personal exploitation as documented in the standards of safety hazards like in Chinese sweat shops where some apple products are (were?) assembled.

So, yes, we have to quibble about these things b/c we do not live in antiquity anymore. Or at least I do…or thought I did with you. Now I do not, for obvious fucking reasons.

But, hey, apparently I’m a fucking ignorant unintellectual buffoon bent on projecting my own ignorance onto you.

I yield, to your supperior intellectual prowess, then. Live long and prosper.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 1:09 PM EST up reply actions  

You are ignorant

Yeah, that’s exactly it. Which isn’t a problem. I certainly don’t claim to know everything, but it’s so incredibly clear that you know very little about history and are arguing things you simply do not know anything about.

I mean, you didn’t even know why Greeks competed naked! You knew NONE of the reasons, even though the two arguments for it (lack of shame over their bodies and the cost of cloth) are well known.

But, hey, suddenly, you know enough about the history of labor to say that modern labor practices are the equivalent of chattel slavery. But . . . if you don’t know any history, on what POSSIBLE grounds could you make that claim?

So, yeah, you’re ignorant, and, yeah, today my intellectual prowess is superior to yours. Because I know what I’m talking about.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 1:13 PM EST up reply actions  

Seriously?

You make a broad statement of character based on so little information. If anything that tells more about your intellectual prowess than mine.

Again; I knew none of the reasons for what, functional nakedness? I asked a question, remember? got an answer and replied that it made sense. I don’t see how you get to throw that in my face, especially when my query pertained functionality and not necessity.

Then from there you grossly extrapolate to, what, my ignorance about the history of labor? Seriously, those are your premises? Ignorance of functional nakedness and your disagreement of what does and does not constitute torture?

At least you are motivated, though. But sadly you are making an ass of yourself in the process, with this silly scorched earth tactic in which yo are going to great lengths to personally vilify me, which is rather fun, I won’t lie to you, but also rather obvious and needless.

had you come down from your totem pole this could have been a somewhat fruitful conversation had you not gone full prideful psycho and decided against it.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 1:29 PM EST up reply actions  

Physicist.

Exact specifications matter to me for obvious reasons.

But now I know you’re not an expert historian and that you can be kind of an ass when you really set your mind into it.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 1:32 PM EST up reply actions  

Oh, I agree

I can be a dick when I set my mind to it. But, okay, what do you know about history?

I mean, part of my assholery about this is the intellectual nihilism inherent in your position – this ridiculous idea that nothing gets better. Which is so obviously in error with even superficial inspection of the subject.

So, for instance, my position is that modern people live longer, eat better, have better educations, have more rights, more opportunities in general than people in previous eras.

Part of this is the near global elimination of chattel slavery.

You are taking the notion that exploitation is the same as chattel slavery. For a person to do that, to me, signifies that they know very, very little about the history of slavery, even though plenty of examples of it abound in the US (and probably wherever you’re from if you’re not from the US).

I mean, you read about the lives that slaves lived in the US in the 19th century and earlier and you compare that to work conditions of migrant workers, you will find that the migrant workers have it way, WAY better off than the slaves. Yes, they are exploited, without a doubt, but their bosses can’t flog them until they’re dead, their bosses can’t break up their families, their bosses can’t rape their wives and daughters with total impunity, their bosses can’t stop them from leaving their place of employment. So, which would you rather be? Likewise, those migrant workers are living longer and are better educated (after all, they’re allowed to learn to read, a right that slaves in the South did NOT have). The idea that those migrant workers are the same as those slaves is . . . daft. Just daft.

That’s just an example. Work conditions have improved virtually everywhere on earth compared to even the relatively recent past.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 1:42 PM EST up reply actions  

Dood...

You are, again, coming from a misconception of what I’m saying.

I said we’re still no better in many aspects, yes? That you take that as a jump point for your rants is not my fault. Never did I once say that things weren’t on average getting better at all at any point in time—the overall rise of life expectancy and literacy is enough of an obvious factor to not even go that route unless one wants to demagogue the shit out of an argument. Why would I even do this?

Then, I was talking about what “freedom” was supposed to be and about the notion of forced lavor and how it related to slavery. Then there was, what, torture? Yes, what is torture and why can’t we relate it to the way exploited workforces or the society in general get treated at large? Because we cannot draw parallels between the mechanisms of oppression or the overall scales of its comparative consequences, at all, apparently?

And, I left leeway in the event that you’d come up with a better counter example but you decided to spit this at me: “FUCK YOU! THIS IS OBVIOUS LOOK AT ALL THE SUFFERING BEFORE. THE OUTRAGE!”

Let’s call it a day, bud. This poor foetus of an argument went herp-derp very quickly and miscarried.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 1:57 PM EST up reply actions  

But even that is farcical

It makes no sense, again, to say that people’s level of freedom has not also dramatically improved. Same example as before – compare the lives of those chattel slaves to that of immigrant workers. In short, one group is clearly and substantially more free than the other – the migrant workers are free to, for instance, leave their place of employment, but also free from being legally killed by their boss. That’s . . . a really huge, incredible improvement of freedom.

But you have no examples, because your point depends entirely on reasonably bizarre interpretations of words.

While I will concede that words like “freedom” and “torture” have some blurry ground (all words do), I haven’t been anywhere near those blurry grounds. I’m not arguing if waterboarding is “really” torture, which isn’t, legally speaking, in the US. I’m talking about things that everyone, everywhere consider torture – like flogging a slave. Which is, in fact, the precise example I mentioned above. Whereas, it is not current linguistic convention to regard exploitation of workers as torture.

Whether or not it SHOULD be is something that simply was not anywhere near any point I was trying to make. My point is, and continues to be, the past really sucked and, more narrowly, to say that while I can draw comparisons in the mechanisms of oppression – and have done so, bringing up chattel slavery time and again, relative to modern work practices – I don’t think YOU can. YOU have consistently demonstrated ignorance about the actual work conditions of pre-modern people, likening historical apples to modern oranges.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 4:01 PM EST up reply actions  

You somewhat amuse me.

You attack the lack of examples or incoming rationalizations but yet at the same time consume what could be valuable space in the conversation throwing backhanded slaps reinforcing your point, and continue to do so even now…when the conversation is all but done thanks to you stunting it with your silly macho posturing, and yet you still feel compelled to press on even when there is no more possibility for discussion or meaningful discourse. What useful exchange can there be when one of the parties is just not interested?

Whatever point you or I were trying to make got lost the moment the mischaracterizations started, which you chose to blatantly brow beat around so that you could continue fighting me, which didn’t get much of a response.

Why are you still arguing about a null point? I’m actually more interested in this.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 5:06 PM EST up reply actions  

Oh, you'll exhaust me

But you’ll still be wrong. And silly. ;)

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 5:07 PM EST up reply actions  

Maybe. I don't get into arguments expecting to "win."

But we can’t tell given how the conversation got sidefucked pretty well thanks to you and your annoying habits.

Not trying to be a dick, just pointing the obvious.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 5:10 PM EST up reply actions  

Except you clearly do!

And you have a burning urge to get the last word in, too. I mean, you quit this argument how many times? But I spoke and you KEEP SPEAKING.

Yeah, you’re trying to win this argument, at any rate.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 5:13 PM EST up reply actions  

I quit *that* interesting argument we were on, already.

Now we are hanging about what you wanted, I guess, which is the personal tendency to stick around these parts and be a dick, which also interests me. You can just say “No, I’m not interested in discussing this with you,” and I’ll be gone, but I’m actually curious hence this.

Also, I’m keeping tabs on the other historical discussion you guys are having about mortality rates, which interests me.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 5:18 PM EST up reply actions  

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904106704576583203589408180.html

It were not best that we should all think alike; it is difference of opinion that makes horse races. - Mark Twain

by The Ghost of Spike Owen on Dec 1, 2011 11:32 AM EST up reply actions  

That's an interpretation of the data.

And I care little for it given that we’re headed to two big crises in the future: the depletion of oil, and the growing number of humans populating the planet.

Also, we now have the technology to allow little fuckups to have far greater consequence than before.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:37 AM EST up reply actions  

Holy cow...

I just re-read the article and it is a load of crap.

I’d rather just be spat with the raw number data than have to read his nuclear deterrence endorsing, interventionist, misleading historical interpretations.

This guy, Steven Pinker, frightens me.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 12:04 PM EST up reply actions  

That is none sense. The lift expectancy of a the avg Roman was not 22.

I am free because I choose to be so-Me

by Kefka on Dec 1, 2011 1:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Between 22 and 25

It’s really easy to research online. I suggest you try it!

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 1:29 PM EST up reply actions  

Classical Rome At age 15, life expectancy an additional 37 years (total age 52).

Off of Wikipedia.

I am free because I choose to be so-Me

by Kefka on Dec 1, 2011 1:47 PM EST up reply actions  

This is a common error in general, when you read that people in the past live to be only 30 or some other absurdly low number. Mortality rates were high which creates a false impression when you do averages.

I am free because I choose to be so-Me

by Kefka on Dec 1, 2011 1:29 PM EST up reply actions  

It's not just infant mortality

But also child mortality, which IS generally included. If you made it to, say, 18 you had a great shot of getting to 50, which compares pretty favorably with any modern society up until the last seventy years or so.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 3:04 PM EST up reply actions  

So, uh . . .

A person who is fourteen years old literally doesn’t count? That’s . . . bizarre. Why should teenagers and preteens not be counted in those averages?

Sure, you can construct an average by narrowly defining the criteria – for instance, you could add a few years on to it by ignoring women who died in childbirth! – but that doesn’t reflect the reality of the situation. The truth is most people, through history, have died VERY young. Which was precisely my point, BTW.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 4:06 PM EST up reply actions  

Of course they "count"

But it has to be acknowledged that the massive differences in life expectancy between the pre-modern and postmodern worlds are largely to be found in infant and child mortality. Saying that the average life expectancy was in the early 20s makes the reader think that everybody died young, which distorts the overall demographic picture far more than setting reasonable parameters for comparison by excluding infant mortality (which a great many modern studies exclude, btw).

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 4:49 PM EST up reply actions  

This makes no sense

Because the image of people dying young is, in fact, the correct image. When half the population dies before the they’re out of their early twenties, that means that a whole lot of people died young. It creates the correct impression, I feel. That people died young in great numbers.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 5:12 PM EST up reply actions  

Ah ok

We’re coming from fundamentally different places here. You’re absolutely, indubitably correct — a much higher proportion of the population died at a young age than do so today. What I’m trying to say is that if you were fortunate enough to make it to physical maturity you were likely to live to an age that compares favorably with any other society prior to the last seventy or so years.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 5:24 PM EST up reply actions  

And by that I meant the maximum median age, maybe. It’d depend.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 5:36 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah

I don’t know enough about statistical terminology to be sure, but that sounds right.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 10:43 PM EST up reply actions  

Because it give a false impression. You were not consider old at 25. Most people were not dying between 22-25.

I am free because I choose to be so-Me

by Kefka on Dec 1, 2011 7:33 PM EST up reply actions  

They are talking about different things.

One is talking about averages of the whole of the population and the other about a maximum age which might well be calculated from a median or an average of maximum ages, or something else.

The number being as low as it is means that a bunch of kids kept dying, completely skewing the average for everyone. Totally fucked up, yes, but that’s what it was.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 8:01 PM EST up reply actions  

The exception bias

Is the misrepresentation of people in historical documents. Almost all histories are written about very wealthy people. But if you go into an ancient graveyard and measure the age at which people died, taking out infant mortality, they did not live very long as a group. But no one wrote down when some “nobody” died.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 1:33 PM EST up reply actions  

I don’t want to have a long draw out argument. The simple truth is that child mortality rates give a false impression of how long people lived in the past.

Here is a quote off of Wikapedia about life expectancy:
During the early 1600s in England, life expectancy was only about 35 years, largely because two-thirds of all children died before the age of four

I am free because I choose to be so-Me

by Kefka on Dec 1, 2011 1:37 PM EST up reply actions  

According to Britannica it was 28.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 1:38 PM EST up reply actions  

*REPLY FAIL.*

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 1:40 PM EST up reply actions  

Cemeteries aren't a simple corrective to that problem

Especially for Romans of the imperial period, since you’re generally getting a slice of the poorest people in society (i.e. couldn’t afford cremation burial), who were more likely to die in childhood and generally die earlier.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 3:06 PM EST up reply actions  

I wasn't trying to suggest that it was a solution

Yeah, measuring how long people lived presented a number of difficulties. At one point, I almost talked more about the process where historians got these numbers – stuff like census rolls, ancient commentaries, archaeological skeletal evidence – but I’m finding I’m loosing my will to argue the subject. The idea that a five year old who dies ought not drag down the average life expectancy in the population group baffles me so much that I am retreating into sarcasm.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 4:14 PM EST up reply actions  

See above

And I’m well aware of the various methodologies by which historians assemble demographic data.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 4:51 PM EST up reply actions  

That came off a lot more hostile than I intended it to

Sorry about that.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 4:59 PM EST up reply actions  

this is a valid point

does that average count the high infantry mortality or is that the average that only counts past the age of 5?

because Roman men didn’t marry normally until their late 20s early 30s and then started having kids, so clearly a good number or Romans lived into their 30s and beyond.

Republican-era Legions divided by age, the early 20s and mid-to-late 20s men making up the bulk of the army. This might be the reason for the low average age of death, if you survived military service and owned land your chances of living to (relative) old age weren’t bad

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 1:35 PM EST up reply actions  

If the people died at 22, how were kids raise? The human species would die out!

I am free because I choose to be so-Me

by Kefka on Dec 1, 2011 1:45 PM EST up reply actions  

well more often than not the Romans won

so a good chunk of the army would come home, and the Romans absorbed conquered people into its manpower pool.

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 1:47 PM EST up reply actions  

Romans live into there early 50’s later if they were well off. The age 22 number is nonsense. Baby’s and young kids dying skew the avg.

I was just pointing out that you can tell the 22-25 number is silly just by thinking about it a little, because if that was true no one would be around to raise kids, and most kids will die without being looked after, thus human species dies out.

I am free because I choose to be so-Me

by Kefka on Dec 1, 2011 1:52 PM EST up reply actions  

gotcha

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 1:54 PM EST up reply actions  

This is so stupid

I mean, seriously. Do you even know what an average is? Obviously, the people who lived older than 22 did. Duh.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 4:12 PM EST up reply actions  

It's a contentious subject

I mean, why would one want to exclude anyone who died from such an average? The medians are also pretty awful, for the same reason – most people died very young. That was kinna my, y’know, point. The Roman population’s average age was very young because people had a lot of kids that died. I believe the median age of the Roman period was considerably lower than average, furthermore. Most of the people were children who did not live. That’s horrible! Which is kinna my point, y’know? The past sucked really, really hard.

By saying stuff like, “If they lived to be fifteen they would live to be forty-one”, to me, that is itself a pretty bizarre thing to say. Sure, if you ignored all the people who died young, the average will, in fact, go up. But then it’s not very useful as an average, is it? At that point, what does it accurately represent? Not very much, IMO.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 4:11 PM EST up reply actions  

on this point

have you read Nathan Rosenstien’s Rome at War Farms, Families, and Death in the Middle Republic?

he addresses a lot of these issues from many different angles.

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 4:20 PM EST up reply actions  

Nope

But I’m fairly familiar with the arguments presented in the book. I have thought about reading it now and again, because it’s the patient zero of studies about how Rome’s constant wars lead to Empire and fall. But it’s always, like, sixty bucks to buy. ;)

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 4:24 PM EST up reply actions  

yeah Rosenstein was my academic advisor

so I got a lot of his theories. Great at lectures but the man’s writing is dry at best, but he can pack information into pages.

it is really interesting because he addresses a lot of what we are talking about and more so.

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 4:26 PM EST up reply actions  

If you can't handle dry writing

History is not the field for you. ;)

Though it’s not like I do anything with my history “education”. ;)

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 4:30 PM EST up reply actions  

haha yeah I know

I got a copy when I was in his class, but I also saw it for pretty cheap on Audible also

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 4:33 PM EST up reply actions  

That’s not true, thats just bad writing.

I am free because I choose to be so-Me

by Kefka on Dec 1, 2011 7:40 PM EST up reply actions  

As major history buff I have come across quite a few dry reads, which I then ignore the author afterwords.

I am free because I choose to be so-Me

by Kefka on Dec 1, 2011 7:44 PM EST up reply actions  

well there is a difference

between stuff historians write for mass publication and things they write for academic discourse.

Rosenstein pretty only writes for academic discourse, so it is matter of fact, loaded with evidence and proofs.

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 8:21 PM EST up reply actions  

You can do both, David Hackett Fisher is a great example of author that does this.

Same with a good editor(for primary sources) the Landmark series(Herodotus histories, Thucydides Peloponesian war,etc) is a great example of this.

I am free because I choose to be so-Me

by Kefka on Dec 1, 2011 11:17 PM EST up reply actions  

They weren't a prudish civilization founded by Puritans?

It were not best that we should all think alike; it is difference of opinion that makes horse races. - Mark Twain

by The Ghost of Spike Owen on Dec 1, 2011 11:21 AM EST up reply actions  

That's what the U.S was supposedly for, no?

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 11:22 AM EST up reply actions  

Yes

We have that angle covered.

At least with regards to sex. All too happy to show a movie with people getting shot or beaten half to death at 2 in the afternoon on a Sunday.

It were not best that we should all think alike; it is difference of opinion that makes horse races. - Mark Twain

by The Ghost of Spike Owen on Dec 1, 2011 11:31 AM EST up reply actions  

Man

he wasn’t even trying to kick the legs..

by Dootch on Dec 1, 2011 12:47 PM EST up reply actions  

I figure because for a tournament winner to win by a DQ would cast doubts on Prindle’s victory. That’s my guess.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 1:30 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, that's reasonable

I kind of hope the rematch ends with three officials trying to peel Prindle off Santos, though. But based on what I’ve seen, he’s such a nice guy I bet he’s already forgiven Big Monster.

I'm all out of bubblegum

by some schmuck in texas on Dec 1, 2011 1:34 PM EST up reply actions  

There’s a saying where I’m from “The only thing forgivable is the unforgivable.”

Makes total sense, no?

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 1:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Romans most certainly did practice pankration!

I’ll be briefly critical. The Romans most certainly practiced pancratium – they even Latinized the word (if for no other reason than the Greeks kept doing it while being part of the Roman Republic and then Empire – they were Romans, too, after all). Pankration was part of the Olympics, after all. Pankration ended because of the Christianization of the Roman Empire, specifically by the Emperor Theodosius in the 4th century of the current era by Imperial Edict. But until the late 4th century, Greeks and Romans practiced pankration. I believe (but don’t have it on hand) that at least some Roman legions had pankration leagues.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 11:08 AM EST reply actions  

ok that I did not know!

I know the Romans wrestled but I was not aware they fully adopted Pankration.

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 11:10 AM EST up reply actions  

I guess it matters how you define "fully adopted"

It wasn’t as popular in Rome as it was in Greece, certainly. But since Greece became part of Rome and they still did pankration until Theodosius forbade it, at least some Romans (if only the Greek ones) were still doing pankration. Like I said, I don’t have any sources, but I believe that at least some legions some of the time had pankration leagues. Roman legions really liked sports. I can only imagine how mind bogglingly boring it was to be stationed on some frontier fort. Having nothing to do, they did a LOT of sports.

I also think pankration made it into several gladitorial games, but I’m between permanent housing right now and most of my research material is boxed up in storage. :p

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 11:16 AM EST up reply actions  

would it be fairer to say

that pankriation was adopted into existing Roman sports for the most part and existed in pockets until Thedosius forbade it?

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 11:25 AM EST up reply actions  

I don't know enough to say

That’s a surprisingly contentious subject, too. There are still pretty violent historical disputes about the extent to which Greek culture captured Roman culture. I’d say that’s a possible intepretation, myself, but I don’t have a horse in that race. ;)

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 11:27 AM EST up reply actions  

oh I'm aware

I tend to fall more on the side of Roman culture absorbing than being absorbed, but to say for certain we would have to actually know who the people were that founded Rome, where they came from and what cultural influences were present.

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 11:32 AM EST up reply actions  

And without that time machine

That ain’t gonna happen. So, a lot of history is obviously speculation. And, specifically, the history of sports isn’t as well preserved as military and political history

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 11:39 AM EST up reply actions  

yep

so I’ve gathered you study Antiquely?

My background is more in Rome than Greece, and more on the mid-Republic to Early Empire than anything else.

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 11:41 AM EST up reply actions  

Historiography, actually

I’m more interested in the formation of historical documents than the history, itself. To the extent that I know about stuff like pankration is because, uh, I like MMA and MMA is pretty much the spiritual successor to pankration. So, my interest in sports history is marginal to what I’ve studied.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 12:36 PM EST up reply actions  

What period do you work on?

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 10:44 PM EST up reply actions  

Jeez, I love BE

All you smart fuckers hanging around here. I learn so much just from reading others’ discusions

K-1 Level Predictions Team

"What do you know about my vision? My vision will turn your world upside down, tear asunder your illusions and send the sanctuary of your own ignorance crashing down around you. Now ask yourself: Are you really ready to see that vision?"
-Huey Freeman

by dgonz on Dec 1, 2011 12:55 PM EST up reply actions  

Most of our evidence for Pankration

Comes from Roman-era sources. It’s important to distinguish between the Greek-speaking East and the Latin-speaking West in terms of the later popularity of Pankration — it was extremely popular in the East, not so much in the West. Functionally it differed as well, having more in common with gladiatorial bloodsport in the West and more with other athletic competition (wrestling, running, etc.) in the East.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 2:40 PM EST up reply actions  

again did not know that

thank you FH!

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 2:42 PM EST up reply actions  

Fine work Mr. Grant

I really enjoyed the piece. Nottheface is working on a pankration piece as well (I’m doing a little research for him) that should be posted in the next few weeks.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 2:43 PM EST reply actions  

oh man am I about to be overshadowed!

I can’t wait to read it!

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 2:44 PM EST up reply actions  

Hahaha

I wouldn’t worry about that, it’s just going to be a longer take on the topic. I’m working on an article on the metaphorical language of pankration seeping into Late Antique religious culture at the moment, and I hope a little of that makes it into nottheface’s piece.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 2:46 PM EST up reply actions  

wow when will you piece be published?

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 2:48 PM EST up reply actions  

Well

I have to finish it, pass it around to my friends to edit, and then send it off for publication assuming it doesn’t suck (which I’m not convinced it won’t). Best case scenario probably fall of 2012 or spring of 2013. If it doesn’t end up working for whatever reason, I may re-write it and post it here.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 2:59 PM EST up reply actions  

Where will it be published?

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 5:19 PM EST up reply actions  

Haven't decided on the journal yet

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 5:27 PM EST up reply actions  

Hum. That stuff always gives headaches.

Best of luck.

The waiting period between them telling you “Yes, it is accepted,” and then you having to either “modify, adjust, or whatever,” until it is published is real annoying and takes longer than one would expect at first.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 5:29 PM EST up reply actions  

Thanks

Humanities publishing is such a mess, especially because of the time lag — concepts and approaches are almost out of date by the time they actually appear in print. I’d much prefer to just find peer reviewers and post it on a blog, but I need to start building a record of publications.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 6:25 PM EST up reply actions  

I get what you mean, but from a slightly different context.

Again, best of luck and kick that ass.

The Internets: Where there are no girls and men become children.

by Unabomberman on Dec 1, 2011 8:40 PM EST up reply actions  

If it doesn't

I’d like to see it, anyway. That sounds really fascinating.

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 4:19 PM EST up reply actions  

Thanks

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 5:26 PM EST up reply actions  

I’ll let you know.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 5:26 PM EST up reply actions  

you seem to UNDER-emphisize ancient Greek contribution

Not mentioned is the fact Greeks had 3 forms of combat sports in their games: striking only, wrestling only, and pankration. These sports were not just an out-crop from the military, they were always part of the games (track, field, combat sports) which were INDEPENDANT of the military. Academics, such as Plato competed in pankration. This is part of what separated the Greek games from the rest of the world. From what I’ve read, the ancient Greeks loved sports competition and held it in much higher regard than any of the ancients or perhaps even moder era. Organized competions were so numerous, consistant and important, they became an intregral part of life for centuries. You can currently read detailed descriptions of championship matches that took place 2500 years ago. There were even public training facilities for the combat sports, you did not have to be a soldier to train or compete. Unfortunately , the Romans did not continue the same ideal as the Greeks. Roman society enjoyed the gladitorial blood sports more than the true “games”. Jim Arvanitis has written some very good books on this subject.

by Enosis on Dec 1, 2011 3:26 PM EST reply actions  

This is a lot more complicated than you're making it out to be

The Greeks loved athletic competitions that fit neatly into our modern conception of what sports are supposed to look like. This is largely because our sense of how sports are supposed to operate is a conscious re-adoption (dating back to the late 19th and early 20th century) of ancient Greek forms of competition (wrestling, running, etc.) and its organizational structures, most notably the Olympic Games.
A note on the military: ancient Greek poleis (with the exceptions of Sparta, whose citizens were banned from competing in pankration, and to some extent Thebes) didn’t have a military in the sense that we understand the term, they had citizen militias. Any dichotomy between the civilian and “military” is simply false.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 3:35 PM EST up reply actions  

It always is more complex

How can one even begin to generalize, say, fifteen hundred years of Greco-Roman athletics spread from North Africa to Western Asia in a couple of paragraphs?

by Christopher Bradley on Dec 1, 2011 4:27 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying

But generalizations themselves aren’t ipso facto incorrect. I was attempting to make a more accurate generalization about our cultural conceptions of sports and their relationship to those of the ancient Greeks.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 4:56 PM EST up reply actions  

Roman society enjoyed the gladitorial blood sports more than the true "games"

two words: Chariot racing

aka BuckeyedBear34

Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte
To have a Cannae you must have a Varo
-George Patton
"The complete man must work, study and wrestle."
-Aristotle

by T.P. Grant on Dec 1, 2011 4:22 PM EST up reply actions  

By far

The most popular spectator sport in the ancient world.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 4:56 PM EST up reply actions  

not sure what you mean...

Your statement regarding our "modern conception of what sports are supposed to look like " is part of my point. A casual reader of this article might not appreciate that fact.

by Enosis on Dec 1, 2011 4:04 PM EST reply actions  

Apologies

I should have picked up on that.

"Denique nullumst iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius."-- Terence
"By doubting we come to inquiry and by inquiry we perceive the truth." -- Abelard

by Patrick Wyman on Dec 1, 2011 4:57 PM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

"I'm working on the intricacies of details of maneuvers that he still doesn't even know the names of." - Frank Mir

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Chilli_pickle_283g_hot_small
Junior Dos Santos' Worst UFC Win is Stefan Struve
Wario_small
BECW3 UFC 146 Recap & Live Post discussion
Wario_small
BECW3 UFC 146 Live Post
Madmen_icon_small
Dan Hardy: The Outlaw (Short documentary film)
Me_2_small
Farewell Frank Mir

Recent FanPosts

Small
The Most Valuable Non-UFC Fighters
Small
USA chants during ufc fights!?!?!?!?!?
220px-johnnycash1969_small
Fighters you aren't sold on ?
Small
Duane Ludwig's chasm...ouch
Rousimar-palhares-picture_small
An Appeal to SBNation
Lebowski_excited_grin_small
Top 5 Potential Replacements for Vitor Belfort Against Wanderlei Silva
Obp_small
Help me get a job

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

MMA Rankings

USA Today / SB Nation Consensus MMA Rankings