Body Bruising Question

(Cross-posted and expanded from UG)

Maybe you guys can help settle an argument on the History Forum (in the "Pankration Vs. MMA" thread).
The following article looks at marks on fighters in a Greek vase painting, compares them with the bruises Don Frye caused to Mark Hall when in his guard at UFC 10, and assumes from this that the two competitors must have been using the guard.

Assuming for argument's sake that the marks shown on the Greek vase are definitely meant to be bruises which have resulted from punches, I would argue that this only proves that the two fighters have been hitting each other in those places - not that they've been using the guard.

One of the posters on the History Forum, however, contends that such marks can only be inflicted via punches from the guard.

Obviously it would be useful for my argument if there was pictorial evidence of people's ribs being heavily and visibly bruised in boxing matches - in which the marks could not have come from the guard position.

I appreciate that such sharp marks are perhaps less likely in modern matches due to the size and nature of the gloves. However, I figured that someone here might have access to pictures of bare-knuckled matches, or perhaps after shots of Dempsey/Willard (since I've heard that the latter's body was heavily marked afterwards - I've seen the fight, but the footage I saw wasn't helpful for this).

Even if such pictorial evidence is unavailable, you guys presumably know something about delivering punches and the nature of the damage which can result from them. Do you agree that such markings are possible from stand-up striking? I think you can see something similar in Frye/Shamrock, as a result of the former's shots from the clinch.


Looks more like it is supposed to represent stomach muscles to me


They look like they're supposed to represent the ribs to me.