Feel like punching something/someone? This Herstory is for you…
If you Google ‘Greatest boxers of all time’ you get names like Tyson, Eubank, Lewis, Cooper etc. This page for example https://bleacherreport.com/articles/661141-the-top-20-british-boxers-of-all-time highlights the ‘top’ british boxers in history.
But do you notice something about it? Yep, no women. We don’t tend to associate boxing with women though, do we? It’s a violent, masculine sport. American wrestling on the other hand, is slightly more women-friendly, because it’s theatrical, fairly camp, and women fighters can be sexed up and made to look appealing.
But that doesn’t mean there aren’t women boxers. And it doesn’t mean throughout history, there’s never been women boxing champions. In fact, women have always competed in fighting sports. And one of the most famous female boxers was one Elizabeth Stokes / Wilkinson, who became one of the most famous prizefighters of the early 18th century. But hardly anyone’s heard of her. So this month’s HERSTORY is devoted to her.
Attributed to John Collet, 1770 (Museum of London)
In the 18th century pugilists would issue ‘challenges’ to fight them in the press. These were invitations, and usually insulting or confrontational to bait potential opponents to respond to the challenges. Kind of like an early form of Twitter, I guess! It was Elizabeth’s challenges in the press that give us information about her and her career. The rest of her life, and her origins, remain an enigma. Though it’s very likely she came from a working class background, as most fighters did.
There’s been speculation that Elizabeth might have been related to another namesake prizefighter, Robert Wilkinson, who was executed for murder around the same time Elizabeth became famous herself as a fighter. was she continuing his legacy? Possibly. Or she might simply have adopted his name to evoke his fame and esteem.
Around 1720, Elizabeth became the student of the champion fighter of the day James Figg. Figg had set up a fighting training academy entitled ‘The School for the Manly Art of Self Defense’ in 1719 in Marylebone. It might seem surprising that he would admit a female student, (espcially given the name of the school!) but there weren’t as many gender limitations on working class women as there were the elite classes in the 1700’s. What’s more, boxing was considered a uniquely ‘British’ cultural institution, rather than being gender specific, it was nation specific. Sports journalist Pierce Egan even noted in his books about English boxing:
“even HEROINES panted for the honours of pugilistic glory!”
Attributed to William Hogarth, 1790’s. Figg’s business card.
Elizabeth’s first recorded prizefight was in 1722, She challenged a ‘Hannah Hyfield’ to a fight for 3 guinea prize and won after just 22 minutes. Elizbaeth continued to remain undefeated at Figg’s ring until she met and married another boxer, James Stokes, who also had a boxing ring. and they competed often as couples, which wasn’t unusual. The wives fought the wives, the husbands fought the husbands!
Over the next decade, Elizabeth’s career went from strength to strength and she earned the right to confidently describe herself thus:
“I, Elizabeth Stokes, of the famous City of London, being well known by the Name of the Invicible City Championess for my Abilities and Judgement”
(British Gazeteer 1726)
In 1728 Elizabeth was challenged to perhaps her most high stakes fight. An Ass-Driver from Stoke Newington called Ann Field bravely challenged Elizabeth to a fight for the huge sum of 10 pounds. Elizabeth’s cocky response has been widely quoted ever since:
…as the famous Stowe Newington ass-woman dares me to fight her for the 10 pounds, I do assure her that I will not fail meeting her for the said sum, and doubt not that the blows which I shall present her with will be more difficult for her to digest than any she ever gave her asses.
Proving that Elizabeth wasnt just a good fighter, but she had a witty sense of humour too!
After a decade of being the ‘Championess of Europe’, winning some 45 high profile matches, Elizabeth disappears from the newspapers (and history) after 1733.
19th Century, unknown
It’s worth pointing out that boxing back then wasn’t what it is today. It was bare knuckle, and often fighters used weapons such as daggers, swords and quarterstaffs. Elizabeth was said to be skilled in the use of all of these. Women fighters, thanks to the inherent voyeuristic element in a majority male audience watching women fight, were usually topless. Becaue Elizabeth was considered a respected and serious fighter, she and her opponents were always clothed. They are described as wearing jackets, petticoats, stockings. More respectful, yes. But not very practical, particularly when their male counterparts could fight unencumbered, clad in only underwear, like today! Fighters would also sometimes hold a coin in their fists whilst fighting, to discourage them from gouging or scratching at each others eyes. Yep, 18th Century boxing was NOT for the faint hearted!
Elizabeth wasn’t only a fighter. She was also a teacher/trainer. There are articles detailing her ‘scholars’ which means she had students. We dont know the gender of her students, but I like to think she trained up fellow women. Boxing, as brutal and dangerous as it might have been, must have offered women a rare degree of independent success and fame at a time when men controlled and dominated.
As the 19th Century rolled in, long after Elizabeth’s time, she slowly started to be erased from the history books. Victorian attitudes beame increasingly puritannical and much more restrictive ideas of women and their inherent abilities, as well as what women should and shouldnt participate in, started to take hold. Of course the Georgian era was also rampant with misogyny, but in the Victorian era, there was a lot of emphasis on women being the ‘weaker’ sex, fit for only acceptable ‘feminine’ pursuits, and fighting certainly wasnt one of them! And so, women's boxing was officially outlawed in 1880.
This explains why James Figg, Elizabeth’s former trainer and contemporary, is cited as the ‘Father of Boxing’ and why we have so many more books and articles on him than on Elizabeth from the late 19th Century onwards. When Elizabeth is acknowledged, her story is either dismissed as a curiosity or as an example of the barbarism of the 18th Century.
But evidence shows that during the 18th Century, Elizabeth seemed to be the more popular. There are many more newspaper articles lauding Elizabeth than James in the 1700’s. Not only that, Figg was never called a ‘champion’ in his lifetime, while Elizabeth frequently was.
It’s a real shame, because Elizabeth was extroadinary. she defied gender roles, even by today’s standards, and appears to have been as well respected and celebrated as her male peers. She was not only the most venerated female British boxer, but one of the first ‘influencers’, successfully using the media to advertise her work!
Nicola Adams, Wikipedia (Richard Gillan)
But Elizabeth’s achievements were followed by years of women’s exclusion from the sport. After 1880, women’s boxing didn’t become officially sanctioned again until the late 1990’s in this country. The first professional fight between women was in 1998, the first European Cup in 1999 and the first World Championship competition in 2001. Brit Nicola Adams was the world’s first woman gold medallist, winning her title in the 2012 Olympics.
Even today, women’s boxing remains controversial. top male fighters have openly opposed women fighting. Naseem Hamed for example, said that the female organs were too delicate for boxing, while Lennox Lewis described women’s boxing as ‘slapping and hair pulling….like a circus’. And female athletes are often questioned over the veracity of their gender, if they are perceived to look ‘not feminine enough’.
The male gatekeeping of this sport continues, it seems.
Stay tuned next month for another Herstory. I hope you enjoyed this one. Feel free to share if you liked it and follow the social media channels too.
Herstorical Tours…x
Comentarios