6.0. Bull-baiting
At http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bullbaiting, the Free Dictionary defines bull-baiting as,
“the action or sport of setting dogs upon a bull in a pen or arena.”
At http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/english/bull-baiting, the Oxford Dictionaries defines bull-baiting as,
“The practice of setting dogs to harass a bull, popular as an entertainment in medieval.”
A definition of bull-baiting was not found at the MacMillan Dictionary.
At http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bullbaiting, the Merriam-Webster defines bull-baiting as,
“the former practice of baiting bulls with dogs”
“Bull-baiting” was an event where a bull and dog were placed in an arena. The object was for the dog to “pin” the bull or for the bull to get the dog. In my opinion, this was not a “dogfighting” event.
Some accounts indicate that the bull was tethered to a stake. Others state that the dog was supposed to pull the bull around the arena two times to be declared a winner. Still others claimed that the dog was required to pin and hold the bull by the nose and then not to let go of the hold. As the bull’s nose was his most tender part, he was allegedly rendered helpless when seized by it.
Some or all of these and other accounts may be true, but as with so much history, it is difficult to reconcile all of the inconsistencies in the accounts, and consequently, if it doesn’t make sense, it probably isn’t true. Nevertheless, it would seem that if the object of bull-baiting was entertainment, then the following would be much more entertaining, and is probably closer to the truth.
The following YouTube video is of an event that occurred in 1997 in Aragón, Spain. This was NOT A BULL-BAITING event, but a spontaneous, unscheduled possible example of bull-baiting.
The dog in the video is approximately 14 inches tall, and probably, less than 50 pounds. It is a Bull Terrier: NOT A “PIT BULL”, even though it is frequently and incorrectly referred to as a “Pit Bull”. Remember Spuz McKenzie of the beer commercials?
Note the orientation of the bull’s horns in the following video versus the preceding sign as they are different. The bull in this video was intended for a “running of the bulls” type event where the intent was not to injure participants. Consequently, it was going to be much more difficult for this bull’s horns to injure anyone. That was not the case with bull-baiting.
Some of the spectators at this “running of the bull” type event brought their pets, that were allowed to run at large at the event. The dog in the video was one of those dogs. This particular breed is renowned for being very playful, and apparently, at times, was playing chase with the bull. Neither the dog nor bull sustained any serious injuries.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFwkc2qE35s
There is no question that some Staffies were used for bull-baiting and may have been involved in dogfights: however, many breeds, mixed-breeds and mongrels have been used for dogfighting, but that doesn’t mean they were bred for dogfighting nor does it mean that they are naturally aggressive.
As for bull-baiting, it definitely was not a dogfight. Was it even a “fight”? Different persons would probably have different opinions.
Nevertheless, I found no objective, reliable evidence that the Staffordshire Bull Terriers were bred for bull-baiting and/or dogfighting. They were very successful bull-baiters, and they may have been used for dogfighting. However, the accounts of “bull dogs”, i.e., dogs used for bull-baiting, are in agreement that “bull dogs” were not good fighting dogs. This is why some “bull dogs” were cross-bred with other aggressive dogs to create the dogs that were used for dogfighting.
Athletes, whether human or animal, must be born with talent, and then that talent has to be developed with training. Consequently, very few examples of humans or animals are going to have the necessary talent to be successful in their athletic endeavors. The vast majority will not have the necessary talent, and of the ones who possess the talent, few will develop it to its full potential.
Consider how many people play baseball, football, basketball, etc. and of those how many have any talent. Of the ones that have the necessary talent, how many develop the talent to the point where they can compete and make money at it. Of those that do, how many are top athletes in their sport?
In the National Football League (“NFL”) there are thirty-two (32) teams. Each team has a maximum of fifty-three (53) players. That means that at any one time there is a maximum of one-thousand-six-hundred-fifty-six (1,656) players earning money by being professional NFL players.
How many millions of kids are thinking they are going to be one of those NFL players? The reality is that at any one time there will be a MAXIMUM of one-thousand-six-hundred–fifty-six (1,656): not very good odds. Of those one-thousand-six-hundred-fifty-six (1,656), very few will be at the top of their game. The same odds apply to animals, including dogs. Just because a dog is of a particular breed, and dogs of that breed were used for dogfights does not mean that all dogs of that breed are fighting dogs.
It defies logic to say that a breed of dogs was created for dogfighting since the number of dogs used for dogfighting would be very small in relation to the total dog population. In addition, the motivation for creating a new breed would most likely involve making money. Consequently, it would seem logical that if someone embarks upon the task of creating a new breed of dogs it would be likely that the dog would have to have an appeal to the largest possible number of potential purchasers. Certainly that would not be people engaged in dogfighting since their numbers are relatively few. However, for utilitarian purposes on a farm like hunting, killing rats in the barn, herding farm animals, etc. there would be a larger demand.
Therefore, making a statement and/or believing that any dog breed was developed for dogfighting is as ludicrous as saying and/or believing that all African-American males are heavyweight boxers, professional football players, criminals, etc. or stereotyping anyone or anything. Such statements and/or beliefs defy logic, are at best ignorant and at worst stupid.
