For those who don't know, I decided to make a sister series to my champions threads featuring debates about points of interests in those threads to keep the threads about the champions ,about the champion rather than one instance or our opinions of his status. That said, I felt best to start at the beginning and if memory serves the first thing I ever spoke about that's been contested here is the legitimacy of James Figg. The argument centers around the repeated claim by respect authors of Cyber Boxing Zone and the International Boxing Research Organization that there is no surviving verifiable proof that James ever actually fought a pugilistic match. Some have found sources that would seem on the surface of things reliable or at least as reliable as any other part of the Figg story, but without a bonafide educated historian to review and judge your guess is as good as anys as to whether or not those fights are truth or fables. For me, it doesn't matter if James Figg ever boxed or not, what matters is the legacy that Figg left behind would later progress into the sport we know today. I see him as champion. However, when John Gritton was fighting James Figg publicized his views on that matter and called John champion. So, I don't necessarily agree with the idea that James Figg had to retire or be beaten to lose his title. He simply relinquished it. In my mind this happened when Bob defended English honor from the foreign invader. Bob loses to Nat, Nat to John, and Figg makes it official by letting England know John is the man now. That's why you see Figg on my list but do not see that dates reflected at CBZ or most publications. Personally I feel people cling to hard to the term champion. This in an era when that word had a different meaning. Champion just meant back or in honor of. You had champions of the day, champions of the city, champions of aspects of sports, champions of damn near everything and none of them were meant to be the best. When Figg fought Sutton they called both champion, not champion and challenger. So James was a champion in his day and the closest thing to a champion by days standards. As far as the others, I guess that's a different thread, but for interest's sake; I don't see anyone pre Broughton as all that legitimate in the first place, all of them can be disputed using semantics around the term champion alone, and the one thing that is for certain he's the first champion to risk his title outside of his own stable. One could argue without me taking issue that Slack is the first true champion while the other are neither champion nor not but rather something that used to be and is no more.
The only source we have of Figg intending to do any boxing was the advertisement quoted in Boxiana: "With a grand parade by the Valiant FIG, who will exhibit his knowledge in various Combats--with the Foil, Backsword, Cudgel, and Fist." Which was scheduled for Saturday, September 18, at Fig's Great Til'd Booth. That day was Saturday in 1725 and 1731.
There was a book with an account of him boxing, but from much later, and I don't know where that account was from. https://archive.org/details/fightsforchampio01hennuoft?q=james+figg IIRC the guy that did the Mendoza video referred to some accounts of Figg boxing, might be worth messaging him. The other issue is just because he boxed doesn't make him a boxing champion, because even if he did he seems to have been first and foremost someone that fought with weapons.
Henning made that up. In their third meeting they fought with swords and quarterstaves, there was no boxing in between.
**** .... I was wrong. My very first issue had nothing to do with any champion per se, which is why I forgot it for this series, but rather verification in general.
1725-10-30 The London Journal (page 2) LONDON. The following Copy of Verses was written Extempore, last Wednesday Se'nnight, by a Gentleman who was a Spectator of the famous Tryal of Skill between the Two Great Masters of the Noble Science of Defence, Messieurs Figg and Sutton; but came much too late to be inserted in that Week's Journal. I. Long was the great Figg, by the Prize fighting Swains, Sole Monarch Acknowledg'd, of Marrowbone Plains; To the Towns, far and near, did his Valour extend, And swam down the River from Thame to Gravesend; There liv'd Mr. Sutton, Pipe-maker by Trade; Who hearing that Figg was thought such a stout Blade, Resolv'd to put in for a Share of his Fame, And so sent to challenge the Champion of Thame. II. With alternate Advantage two Trials had past, When they fought out of the Rubbers on Wednesday last. To see such a Contest, the House was so full, There hardly was room left to thrust in your Skull. With a Prelude of Cudgels we first were saluted, And two or three Shoulders most handsomely fluted; Till wearied at last with inferior Disasters, All the Company cry'd, Come, The Masters, The Masters. III. Whereupon the bold Sutton first mounted the Stage, Made his Honours, as usual, and yearn'd to engage; Then Figg with a Visage so fierce and sedate, Came and enter'd the List with his fresh shaven Pate; Their Arms were encircled by Armigers Two, With a red Ribbon Sutton's, and Figg's with a Blue. Thus adorn'd, the two Heroes 'twixt Shoulder and Elbow, Shook Hands, and went to't, and the Word it was Bilboe. IV. Sure such a Concern in the Eyes of Spectators, Was never yet seen in our Amphitheatres; Our Commons and Peers from their several Places To half an Inch distance all pointed their Faces, While the Rays of old Phoebus, that shot thro' the Sky-light, Seem'd to make on the Stage a new kind of Twilight, And the Gods, without doubt, if one could but have seen 'em, Were peeping there thro' to do Justice between 'em. V. Figg struck the first Stroke, and with such a vast Fury, That he broke his huge Weapon in Twain I assure you; And if his brave Rival this Blow had not warded, His Head from his Shoulders had quite been discarded; Figg arm'd him again, and they took t'other Tilt, And then Sutton's Blade run away from its Hilt. The Weapon's were frighted, but as for the Men, In truth they ne'er minded, but at it again. VI. Such a Force in their Blows, you'd have thought it a Wonder, Every Stroke they receiv'd, did not cleave them asunder; Yet so great was their Courage, so equal their Skill, That the both seem'd as safe as a Thief in a Mill. While in doubtful Attention Dame Victory stood, And which Side to take could not tell for her Blood But remain'd like the Ass 'twixt the two Bottles of Hay, Without ever moving an Inch either way. VII. Till Jove, to the Gods, signify'd his Intention In a Speech that he made them too tedious to mention; But the Upshot on't was, that at that very Bout, From a Wound in Figg's Side the hot Blood spouted out. Her Ladiship then seem'd to think the Case plain; But Figg stepping forth with a sullen Disdain, Shew'd the Gash and appeal'd to the Company round, If his own broken Sword had not given him the Wound. VIII. That Bruises and Wounds a Man's Spirit should touch, With Danger so little, with Honour so much! Well, they both took a Dram and return'd to the Battle, And with a fresh Fury they made the Swords rattle; While Sutton's Right Arm was observed to bleed, By a Touch from his Rival, so Jove had decreed; Just enough for to show that his Blood was not Icor, But made up like Figg's of the common red Liquor. IX. Again they both rush'd with as equal a Fire on, That the Company cry'd, Hold, enough of cold iron, To the Quarter Staff, now Lads; so first having dram'd it; They took to their Wood, and I'faith never sham'd it, The first Bout they had was so fair and so handsome, That to make a fair Bargain, it was worth a King's Ransom; And Sutton such Bangs to his Neighbour imparted, Wou'd have made any Fibres, but Figg's to have smarted. X. Then after that Bout they went on to another, But the Matter must end on some fashion or other; So Jove told the Gods he had made a Decree, That Figg shou'd hit Sutton a Stroke on the Knee. Tho' Sutton disabled, as soon as it hit him, Wou'd still have fought on, but Jove wou'd not permit him; 'Twas his Fate, not his Fault, that constrain'd him to yield, And thus the Great Figg became Lord of the Field.
Alternative source that dates that meeting as having taken place on June 6, 1727? Their June 1727 bout ended in Sutton's favor: 1727-06-10 - 1727-06-17 The Ipswich Journal, or The Weekly-Mercury (page 3) LONDON, June 13. The Company at Mr. Figg's Amphitheatre was agreeably entertain'd this Week; and pretty much at his own Expense; for there having been some private Disputes between him and Mr. Sutton, the Gravesend Champion; the last was determined to end them, in that publick Manner; so to it they went in Earnest; The Hero of the Day was Mr. Sutton, who came off Victorious; and his Opponent 'tis thought will not be fit for Action for some time, being wounded in the Belly, and, to use their own Term, made a Devil of; that is, Cloven in the Foot.
I was just about to post to say the dates are different, the book says June 6th 1927. Actually the account in the book appears to be of the same sword fight as the Byron one from 1926 (posted in the Sutton thread).
The verses were attributed to Dr. John (or James) Byrom. Not to be confused with well known Lord Byron.
OCR always goes to Byron so unless you do it yourself, like if you're reading an OCR'd text that google's bots handled, it will come up as Byron. I even thought Dr John Byron was Lord Byron for a short period. I think it was when CSJ released Bare Knuckle I realized his name was Byrom not Byron. Archives like archive.org, or googlebooks, amazon, etc. that feature picture to text documents can be very misleading. I actually found out what OCR is and how to use it by trying to understand why these documents are so messed up. Anyway, my only point is good on ya for pointing that out and for anyone reading that just got into reading old prints online don't feel too silly about making mistakes like that, it's a minefield of computer generated texts even museums are too lazy to put human eyes to and fix these days. Most of the work I put into my threads is fixing the computer generated text.
Britain was to all intents and purposes the world power at that time, so Figg with backing of the nobility and others got the title of champ, this was added too of course by his fight academy. That is my take on Mr Figg being the champ, folk a few countries away probably not even aware of Figg, such was the dearth of any spread of news, especially sporting.
