English Champions: Robert "The Pugilist" Whittaker

Honestly I didn't think the name was that big a thing, spelling variations of names for the same people seem to have been pretty common in the past, and the first name could have been personal vs a fighting name or something.

It just seems out with him getting launched off the stage being a big part of the story, and not getting mentioned at all, saying he didn't even go down. The other thing was the newspaper made the size difference seem a lot less, and mostly just height. The ending sounds fairly different too to me, submitting in the seemingly normal way, whereas later accounts it's the whole thing of him feeling like cheated by these English bodyshots.

The other thing I found a bit interesting was the lack of mention of Peartree, but that's much more minor.

I'm just sharing what I find ATM. I'm ok at digging stuff up, but really lack a lot of expertise, it seems almost blasphamous to question such a respected work, especially from just some guy, but it always seems a bit suspicious to me when you have a contempory report of something more normal and more fantastical ones years later.

I kinda got the impression the source was Godfrey's writings, and Boxiana etc. used that, just my somewhat uninformed opinion though.

It's certainly not enough to make conclusions from, maybe it is the newspaper that is wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. I just find it odd.

 

"batted" = "basted"

The bout was held on Jan 20, 1725. Three years later, in January 1728, Whitaker killed John Gretton in boxing bout held at Stokes' amphitheatre, Gretton being Gretting who's mentioned by Godfrey as Pipes' leading antagonist. Gretton had previously beaten Whitaker.

 

Also, Pipes was a nickname, that boxer's actual name was Thomas Allen.

1734-11-26 The London Daily Advertiser (page 1)
At SIBBLIS's Amphitheatre,
(Late Mr. FIGG's)
In Oxford-Road, Marybon-Fields,

THIS present Tuesday, being the 26th Inst. will be a Trial of Manhood between the two following Champions, viz.
Thomas Allen, commonly call'd Pipes,
And
John Broughton.

Gentlemen are desir'd to be there soon, by Reason of the Shortest of the Days, and Sums of Money depending on both sides.

The Doors to be open'd at One, and the Champions mount at Three.

 

Boxrec is not listing LPR bouts, so they are not meant to cover them. Mr. Tracy Callis at CBZ has been doing the best he can compiling these old fighters' records, he's not to blame either, can't verify everything on his own. Few historians could afford looking up 18th century sources until recently, anyway, and, when these sources appeared online, few cared to search through them. Bad quality scans and old English syntax make it not so easy to find anything useful, you have to spell words multiple different ways, including intentionally wrong spelling, when searching, sometimes you have to manually go through hundreds of scans, page by page, if you have approximate date of some event, with no guarantee of finding anything. So 99.9% of historians chose to research more recent times, much easier to do.

Egan quotes some other sources, on several occasions, incidentally, quoting the only referrence to date (that I've seen) of Figg participating in boxing exhibition, all other references being to him using weapons.

"... To conclude With a GRAND PARADE by the Valiant FIG, who will exhibit his knowledge in various Combats--with the Foil, Backsword, Cudgel, and Fist." (name of source or date not listed though, for this quote)

 

Well I guess a big thing is in what other area would the cutting edge be books written well over a hundred years ago? There seems to have been very little else found since that's actually conisdered legit.

It's also worth noting that the CBZ stuff from this time isn't done by Callis but other people who I think are IBRO, they are probably the ones to focus on.

On Figg, I have noticed he is refered to as a prize-fighter, as are several other people who fought with swords, and even sword contests were refered to as prize-fights. I fear this may have caused confusion once prize-fighter meant boxer

 

If you mean sources that talk about boxing in 18th century, there was a series of articles on that in first issues of The Sporting Magazine (originated in Oct 1792), author name not given, but may be the editor himself, Robert Smith Surtees. If I recall correctly it contained some notes that are lacking in Pancratia, Boxiana and Pugilistica, which appeared two decades or more later.

There was "Boxing Reviewed" by Thomas Fewtrell, printed in 1790, with notes about several old timers.

The Complete Art of Boxing, printed in 1788, author unknown, had some recollections as well.

Several other books from around the same time are listed by Magriel, but I don't have them, so don't know whether they contain something significant. He also lists memoirs of Buckhorse from 1756, which might contain information originating from people who had seen Figg, I suppose.

A Few Observations Upon the Fighting for Prizes in the Bear Gardens, by HB, printed in 1715, gives some insights about Figg's time (preceding him by several years).

Mr. Callis was responsible for keeping old-timers records at CBZ, at least thus it was several years ago, when I last exchanged mails with him.

Term "prize fighting" was a modified version of "prize playing", and thus precedes Figg by at least a couple of centuries.

 

They haven't been particularly interested in researching the bareknuckle era overall, and those who were, mostly limited their "research" to reading Boxiana and Pugilistica (secondary or ternary sources). If you looked up a couple of dozens of clippings from London newspapers from first-half of 18th century, consider yourself better educated about that era than any boxing historian in the last 200 years, other than a couple of people (myself included, even if that doesn't sound very modest).

 

Caledonian Mercury - Monday 25 January 1725
A certain English Gentleman who wagered lately with a Foreigner at Slaughter's Coffee-house in St. Martins Lan (as mentioned in our last) that he would find one of his Countreymen who should beat an Italian in Town, famous for Boxing and Victories that Way (on whose Side the foreign Gentleman made his Wager; ) as soon as the Articles were signed, applied himself for a Man to the celebrated Mr. Fig, who has procured him a Grazier, known far and near for a stout Boxer; and he is now entertained at Mr Fig's House for Instruction and proper Diet till the Day of Battle. We are assured that some thousand Pounds have been laid on this Occasion, and that a great Body of Butchers, who have been Witnesses of the Grazier's Dexterity, have waited on the Gentleman, his Patron, with a Request, that he would let each of them go a Guinea with him : but the Gentleman is so satisfied with his Man, that their Request was not granted. The Combatants have had an Enterview, when the English Champion took the Italian by the Hand, and invited him to one Bout for Love (as he termed it) before hand ; but he declined it. In a Word, the Publick daily enter into this Affair with so much Passion for the Event, and Gentlemen are so warm on both Sides, that it looks like a National Concern.

Stamford Mercury - Thursday 28 January 1725
Yesterday was fought at Figg's Amphitheatre, a famous Boxing Match between a Venetian Gonalier, or Waterman, and one Whitaker an English Drover. The Wager was Twenty Guineas of a side, but the Betts amounting to many Hundred Pounds. The battle lasted 18 or 20 minutes, in the Presence of several English and Foreign Lords and a great Concourse of Gentlemen, and the Englishman beat his Adversary in a terrible manner.

Ipswich Journal - Saturday 18 November 1727
One Gretton was last monday kill'd by one Whitaker, his Antagonist, at a boxing Match, where great Numbers of People were assembled for the Diversion.

 

The notice of Gretton's death as the result of his bout with Whitaker, wasn't true, as far as I can tell.

 

Why?

Could it be another Gretton?

 

See the advertisement in another thread of his bout with Pipes in 1729. No, I don't think there could be another Gretton/Gretting.