The pankration (παγκράτιον)[1733] was a combination of boxing and wrestling, in which the contestants fought either standing, or prone on the ground. While the wrestler merely tried to throw his opponent in a series of bouts, the pancratiast continued the fight on the ground until one or the other acknowledged defeat. The etymology of the word shows that it was a contest in which every power of the contestants was exerted to the utmost.[1734] Strangling, pummeling, kicking, and, in fact, everything but biting and gouging were allowed. Both Lucian[1735] and Philostratos[1736] speak of the prohibition against biting and gouging, which statements Gardiner thinks are quotations from the rules governing the contest at Olympia, as they are twice quoted by Aristophanes.[1737] Philostratos, however, says that the Spartans allowed both biting and gouging, but that the Eleans allowed only strangling. A case of gouging the eye of an opponent with the thumb is seen on the r.-f. kylix in the British Museum, already mentioned (Fig. 55).[1738] Here the official is rushing up with his rod to punish such a breach of the rules. Philostratos calls the men’s pankration the “fairest” of contests at Olympia, probably in reference to the impression made on the spectators by the various positions of the contestants, who had to rely quite as much on skill as on strength. Pindar wrote eight odes in praise of this contest.[1739] However, even though it was carefully regulated at Olympia by rules, it was a dangerous sport—τὸ δεινὸν ἄεθλον ὅ παγκράτιον καλέουσιν, in the words of the protesting philosopher Xenophanes.[1740] But it was never the brutal sport which some modern writers have pictured it.[1741] Plato, to be sure, kept it out of his ideal State,[1742] not, however, because of its brutality, but merely because its distinctive feature, the struggle on the ground, was of no service in training a soldier. The Greeks themselves considered the boxing match far more dangerous. Inasmuch as gloves were not used in the pankration, this seems reasonable.[1743] We have in the preceding section mentioned the epithets applied to boxing. Pausanias, in speaking of the boxing match between Theagenes and Euthymos, says that the former was too much wearied by that contest to enter the pankration, and was in consequence compelled to pay a talent to the god and another to Euthymos.[1744] In speaking of another contest, between Kapros and Kleitomachos, he records that the latter told the umpires that the pankration should be brought on before he had received hurts from boxing.[1745] Artemidoros states that no wounds resulted from the pankration.[1746] However, death by strangulation was often the result of the bout. Thus the pancratiast Arrhachion was crowned after he had been throttled by his adversary, for just before expiring he was able to put one of the toes of his opponent out of joint and the pain caused the latter to let go