History of the APBT part one

[Marty]

Part One: History
Complete text copyright ©Marji Beach.

The modern American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT) can trace its roots back to England and the early 19th century. Crosses between “bully” type dogs and terriers eventually produced the modern APBT. Although not recognized as a “breed” and much smaller than the modern APBT, the early “bulldogs” were used as working dogs, controlling unruly bulls for butchers as well as farmers.
These “bulldogs” resembled, phenotypically, the modern APBT but were considerably smaller, weighing in at 15-30lbs. The courage and tenacity that made these dogs good at corralling dangerous bulls made them great at the blood sport of bull baiting.

The year 1835 saw the end of deadly bull baiting (countless thousands of dogs lost their lives to this “sport”) and the emergence of an even more sinister blood sport - dog fighting.

To understand the American Pit Bull Terrier, it is imperative to understand the breed’s fighting origins.

The lower class had used blood sports as an outlet for their frustration and aggression towards the monarchy - pit fighting was, in essence, an outcry and an outlet for that aggression. Dogs were bred to be courageous, utterly devoid of pain sensations (they, no doubt, felt pain but were bred and encouraged not to express that pain), tenacious and determined.

A quality that was never bred into them was human aggression. Human “aggressive” (aggression may not be the most appropriate term, it is more likely that these dogs simply had a lower bite threshold) dogs were undesirable as these dogs required extensive handling prior and during their fights - most of theses dogs were also family pets so no human “aggression” was ever tolerated.

Dogs that exhibited human “aggression” were typically killed, meaning that only human friendly lines were perpetuated and desired. It is highly unlikely, however, that these culled dogs were naturally more aggressive towards humans than their bred counterparts but their bite threshold may have been much lower meaning that it did not take much for them to turn around and bite their handler. Animals were bred for an increased bite threshold, as far as humans and only humans were concerned, which decreased the likelihood of humans becoming victims of dog bites.

In 1898, Chauncy Bennet formed the UKC, a breed registry aimed solely at the registration and acceptance of pitbulls. The AKC had wanted nothing to do with pitbulls, so Bennet sought to create an organization that would represent the breed as performance dogs. Mr. Bennet added “American” and initially dropped “Pit” from the APBT’s name but public outcry let to “Pit” being added back to the name - thus the American Pit Bull Terrier.

For a pitbull to be accepted into the UKC the dog had to have won three fights - a requirement that was later dropped. Another registry that was started solely for APBT’s, the American Dog Breeders Association was born in 1909. The ADBA was started by Guy McCord who was a close friend of one of the founding fathers of the modern APBT, John P. Colby. The ADBA was created to test the performance quality of a APBT without actual pit fighting; the ADBA’s main focus was on weight pulling competitions with a spattering of conformation shows.The AKC decided to register Pit Bulls but under a different name - the Staffordshire Terrier, which was later changed to the American Staffordshire Terrier in 1972, or AST. Up until 1936, Pit Bulls and AST’s were physically identical. After 1936, AST’s were bred solely for conformation and their breed requirements became much more stringent. APBT’s were being bred for both performance (fighting) as well as conformation shows and the breed’s standard became much more lenient. The AST’s, phenotypically, became “flashier” with blockier heads, larger chests and a thicker jaw while the APBT’s varied phenotypically from lanky to stocky. Although the phenotypic expression varied in the APBT, relative weight, size and proportion remained constant and dogs over 60lbs were rarely seen. Both AST’s and APBT’s were bred to be exceptionally sturdy and extremely human friendly, not to mention athletic, courageous, and tenacious.

[pappasmurf]

The lower class had used blood sports as an outlet for their frustration and aggression towards the monarchy - pit fighting was, in essence, an outcry and an outlet for that aggression. Dogs were bred to be courageous, utterly devoid of pain sensations (they, no doubt, felt pain but were bred and encouraged not to express that pain), tenacious and determined.
I would like to see your sources for this claim. rather, I would say the blood sports dog fighting in particular after the banning of bull baiting fits better into the Stratton mold. That a hard rutal life bred a tendancy towards hard brutal sports. Pugalism was popular at the same time. In fact the first orgainized set of boxing rules dates from 1743. Althought the first person to wear the title of heavy weight was James Figg from 1719-1730.
Infact, the populace of England at the time show very little inclination towards an anti-monarchy stance ( at least in England) Politcal currents at the time were aimed more at ending privilage of the aristocracy, the purchase of titles by succesful merchants, and the unequal policy of virtual representation.
Not trying to rain on your parade but any history should be accurate.

[Marty]

[I] In fact the first orgainized set of boxing rules dates from 1743. Althought the first person to wear the title of heavy weight was James Figg from 1719-1730.

Not trying to rain on your parade but any history should be accurate.

Are you talking about the american pitbull terrier or boxing?

[pappasmurf]

I was talking about boxing. It's rise in England parralels the height of bull baiting and rise of dog fighting. All (boxing, bull baiting, dog fighting) existed at the same time and in the same social conditions and presumably attracted the same type of spectators. The gernal popularuty of boxing without any overt anti-royalist sentiment would seem to indicate a similar lack of anti-royalist sentiment among those who went to bull baiitng and dog fighting matches.

[Roland64]

"The gernal popularuty of boxing without any overt anti-royalist sentiment would seem to indicate a similar lack of anti-royalist sentiment among those who went to bull baiitng and dog fighting matches."
That's making an assumption. Not picking a fight, but any documentation would be great. After all you did ask for Martys. Thanks

[pappasmurf]

A quick google search fails to show any real lower class anti-royalist sentiment. In fact with conditons as hard as they were we would expect to see 4 possible options. 1 as suggested by marty would be dissastifaction with the ruling class in the form of antiroyalist sentiment/ 2) Anti-virtual representation outcries. This is a well documented fact. In fact in protest of the virtual representation system that nearly excluded London the biggest city in England from any membeship in parliament led the mayor of London to declare his support for our own war of independance. yet we have no indication that this anti-virtual representation sentiment was carried on to it's extreme in blaming the royal family. 3) Imigration to escape the oppression. This is also clearly evident in the historical rolls. A simple check of imigration information will show this. 4) Any real anti-royalsim would be reflected in a lack of partriotism yet as the linK I am providing will show it was not until 1850 that the Royal Army suffered recruitment problems. http://www.nuff.ox.ac.uk/economics/h...paper9/Conj.ps.


Warning the refrence is buried deep in a pdf document so i have pulled up the pertinent parts here,

The rural surplus in turn helped to keep down urban wages, and this pressure was exacerbated in many sectors as skilled male craftsmen were displaced or challenged by the introduction of machinery, by the employment of female workers in traditional male occupations such as the weaving of woollen cloth, and by changes in the organisation of production, for example in the manufacture of clothing and footwear, which undermined the traditional position and organization of the skilled male journeymen.The very modest progress revealed by the present estimates is also consistent with other indicators of an abundant supply of unskilled labour; for instance, the ease and speed with which the huge number of navies wasobtained to construct the railways in the 1840s (Mitchell, 1964, 322-3; Hawke, 1970, 327); or the fact that it was not the 1850s that the Army began to experience serious problems of recruitment and initiated a succession ofmeasures to improve the infantryman's basic gross pay of 13d. per day which had prevailed since 1797 (Skelley, 1977).

[Marty]

The lower class had used blood sports as an outlet for their frustration and aggression towards the monarchy - pit fighting was, in essence, an outcry and an outlet for that aggression. Dogs were bred to be courageous, utterly devoid of pain sensations (they, no doubt, felt pain but were bred and encouraged not to express that pain), tenacious and determined.
I would like to see your sources for this claim. rather, I would say the blood sports dog fighting in particular after the banning of bull baiting fits better into the Stratton mold. That a hard rutal life bred a tendancy towards hard brutal sports. Pugalism was popular at the same time. In fact the first orgainized set of boxing rules dates from 1743. Althought the first person to wear the title of heavy weight was James Figg from 1719-1730.
Infact, the populace of England at the time show very little inclination towards an anti-monarchy stance ( at least in England) Politcal currents at the time were aimed more at ending privilage of the aristocracy, the purchase of titles by succesful merchants, and the unequal policy of virtual representation.
Not trying to rain on your parade but any history should be accurate.

Here is the link
http://dogs.about.com/cs/breedprofil...ll_history.htm

[Marty]

And here is the link to part two


http://dogs.about.com/cs/breedprofil...bull_today.htm


Check it out!!!!!!!!!


Please note copy write...Complete text copyright ©Marji Beach.

[pappasmurf]

I wish About.com published source material. All I have been able to find on her is that she is a 22yo student at UC Davis majoring in Animal Science and psycology. I am tryign to find numbers for the number of executions at Tyburn Prison for sedition or other supporting or disproving information.