Tom Johnson (bareknuckle Boxer) - Background To 18th-century Prizefighting

Background To 18th-century Prizefighting

Prizefighting in early 18th-century England took many forms rather than just pugilism, which was referred to by noted swordsman and then boxing champion James Figg as "the noble science of defence". But by the middle of the century the term was generally used to denote boxing fights only. The appeal of prizefighting at that time has been compared to that of duelling; historian Adrian Harvey says that:

Patriotic writers often extolled the manly sports of the British, claiming that they reflected a courageous, robust, individualism in which the nation could take pride. Pugilism was regarded as humane and fair and its practice was presented in chivalrous terms. It was also a symbol of national courage, embodying the worth which Englishmen placed upon their own individual honour. The French, it was argued, did not like pugilism because they were not a free people and relied on the authorities to resolve their disputes. By contrast, the British dealt with their own problems in a straightforward manner, according to established rules of fair play.

From a legal standpoint prizefights ran the risk of being classified as disorderly assemblies, but in practice the authorities were mainly concerned about the number of criminals congregating there. Historian Bohun Lynch has been quoted as saying that pickpocketing was rife, and that fights between the various supporters were common. However, the patronage of the aristocracy and the wealthy ensured that any legal scrutiny was generally benign, in particular because fights could take place on private estates. This patronage also explains why London was the centre for the sport; people of wealth tended to congregate in the city during the winter months and in the summer dispersed to their country estates. From 1786, just as Johnson was rising to prominence, there was increased support for the sport because of the interest shown in it by the Prince of Wales (later King George IV) and his brothers, the future King William IV and Duke of Kent. This renewed interest followed a period of malaise which had in large part been due to corruption in the form of "fixing" the fights.

Jack Broughton, a celebrated boxing champion (and another who was also a swordsman), had gone some way to defining the rules of prizefighting in 1743, based on earlier work by Figg, but by Johnson's time the rules were still interpreted very loosely. The style of fighting was also very different to modern boxing; the contestants stood facing each other squarely with their feet in line and their fists raised level in front of them, rather than the present-day stance of generally having one foot slightly in front of the other and one fist leading. Brute strength was the primary factor for success and knock-downs were frequent, a consequence of the instability inherent in the positioning of the fighters' feet. Rounds were not timed but instead lasted until a man was knocked down, with fighters permitted to wrestle each other to the ground. Moving around the ring, known as shifting, was deprecated and sometimes explicitly prohibited by the rules for a fight; going to ground without being hit could lead to claims that the man still standing had won. The fighters usually each provided an umpire of their choice, and there might also be a third, independent umpire present, to adjudicate between them.