Thomas Chatterton Manuscript Project
Bristowe Tragedie or the Dethe of Syr Charles Bawdin (1)
All of the Main Versions
​The Control Page
COMMEMORATING CHATTERTON’S BIRTHDAY 20th November 1752 - 2024
.jpg)
On this page we compare the different versions of Chatterton's poem, Bristowe Tragedie, with the hope that one of our readers might have something new to add to our current knowledge - you never know!
But, before we start on Bristowe Tragedie, I thought it worth asking if any of our readers have any information regarding the discovery of yet another portrait claiming to be of Chatterton. This one is a little different, as it is a 'Silhouette' or 'Shadow' portrait - see images above.
​
​The image with the large eyes has commonly been called the ‘Goggle-eyed’ Chatterton, it dates from 1797 and is possibly the earliest attempt at a representation of Chatterton. Whereas the 'silhouette' image appeared for the first time in 2024 (at a Cheffin’s auction in the UK), although it quite clearly dates to the late 18th or early 19th Cs.
Both images have a ruff - is that where the similarity ends? If you know anything interesting about any of the supposed portraits of Chatterton, do let me know. To read more about the numerous spurious portraits of Chatterton, click the link.
​​​​
Ok, back to Bristowe Tragedie :​
​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
Bristowe Tragedie or the Dethe of Syr Charles Bawdin (1)
"I Found the Argument and Versified it"
(Chatterton's sister, Mary, quoting Chatterton)
By all accounts, Chatterton wanted his name blown about; in other words he wanted to be famous down all the years. To help fulfil his wishes and to commemorate his birthday, I posted a piece about his poem Bristowe Tragedie on Facebook.
​
The next step was to integrate the Facebook post into this Control Page, which reminded me that it is easier and quicker to build a new house, than it is to refurbish an old one, anyway, this change brings with it the chance for all interested readers and grockles, to examine and compare the various versions of one of Chatterton's most famous and admired poems ; if you are just surfing or passing through you are a grockle, which might sound like a word invented by Chatterton, but is actually a term of 'endearment' in Cornwall - honestly.
'Bristowe Tragedie...' was written by Chatterton in 1768, while he was a 15-year-old apprentice scrivener at the office of John Lambert, The Attorney. It is one of his most famous and admired poems.
So, where did Chatterton get his idea for his poem ? Chatterton's sister, Mary, quoting Chatterton, on the origin of this poem, states that he said :
​
"I Found the Argument and Versified it"
​​
The question then is, where did he find the 'argument'; Meyerstein suggests Stowe, and Howe. Donald Taylor suggests Ricart, and Adams. The images below show the entry in Adams's Chronicle of Bristol, 1910, which contains selections from the 1625 original - is this the argument Chatterton found, and is it all he needed to create his poem of 392 lines ?
​
'King Edward in September 1462 came to Bristol, where he beheaded
Sir John Bawdin, Fulford, Bright and John Haysant, esquires.'​​​​​​​​
You have got to feel for the scribe of the original 1625 edition, who was obviously writing from the heart :
"I never wrote upon paper so full of hairs as this is, which puts me to much trouble, but especially in the night."
​
A page from the actual 1625 book is shown below, with the scribe's handwriting
Control Panel for All Versions
Chatterton's Bristowe Tragedie has gained variations to its title, as well as to the poem itself ; this is caused by various factors, such as the varied spellings of many words in the Rowley works ; George Catcott's propensity for adding extra letters to give the words more of a feel of a bygone age, as well as choosing to call the poem The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin in the first printed edition of 1772. And where would we be without the dreaded transcription errors.
​
​Whichever of the titles you prefer (see below), it is actually the version of the poem behind the title that counts or, rather, which of the versions is the original manuscript by the hand of Chatterton himself, or which is a direct transcript from Chatterton's original Ms.
​
Why does this matter? Well, if you are not reading the original, then you will not, necessarily, be getting the intended meaning. Instead you might be getting 'send three and fourpence, we are going to a dance,' rather than 'send reinforcements, we are going to advance!' Yes, I know it's an old catch, but it makes my point, don't you think!
​​
I suggest reading this whole yellow panel before clicking any links - it's a bit of a complicated layout but truly the best that I can do!
​
The two main contenders vying to be called the original Ms., or a direct transcript of it, are :
The Mysterious Perceval Transcript (1), and The Bristol Library Manuscript 'Original' (2), but I have also included the other important versions for comparison - so, the links next to items (1) - (4) are to sections on this page, whereas the links in item (5) will take you to a Google doc where you can investigate and compare the various editions listed below:
​
​(1) Bristowe Tragedie or the Dethe of Syr Charles Bawdin
The Mysterious Perceval Transcript : View C53-25 this page
The full Perceval article in Bristol Times and Mirror, 1904 : View my doc
​​
(2) Bristows Tragedy, or The Death of Sr Charles Bawdin
The Bristol Library 'Original' Manuscript, B20928, date ? : View C53-21 this page​
​​
​(3) The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin
(3a) George Symes Catcott Transcript, B5344 : View C53-22 this page
(3b) First Printing 1772 : View​ C53-24 this page
(3c) The Bristol School of Printing, 1932 : View C53-26 this page​​
​
​(4) The Bristow Tragedy; or Dethe of Syr Charles Bawdin
The Dr Thomas Fry transcript, 1772, B6493 : View C53-23 this page​​​
​
(5) Special Feature for Comparison & Research : ​
I have taken the copies listed above and chopped-them-up into their separate verses. This allows the versions to be compared easily, verse by verse. Every clue, indeed any clue, is a little diamond waiting to be polished to bring out its facets.
​
Please feel free to search for 'clues' in the three versions of the poem in (5a), below.
The Bristol Library Ms., truly benefits from being presented in this way, as it is quite difficult to read thanks to the amount of bleed through of ink from recto to verso and vice versa, and with too many verses squeezed onto each of the seven pages.
​
When you read (5b), which is also presented with three versions of the poem, it is clear that the printed edition from 1772, was taken from Catcott's transcript.
​
Finally, we have (5c), again with three versions of the poem; Dr Fry's Transcript, derives from a Catcott Transcript, the question is, was it from this one?
Remember that Catcott had asked Dr Fry to punctuate some of the Rowley works, so my guess is that Bristowe Tragedie would be the first to undergo his skills, so when you see the punctuation in the Printed Edition (3b), think Dr Fry. This is why they are shown together, along with my Transcript of the Bristol Library Manuscript (2).
​
(5a) Bristol Library Manuscript (2) with each verse followed by my Transcript of it, and then by the Perceval transcript (1) : View it here
I should add that my own transcripts, allowing for a few educated guesses, are verbatim. The whole process took more than two weeks to pull together, so I do hope that you Chatterton aficionados find the results useful.
​
(5b) Catcott Transcript (3a) each verse followed by the Printed edition (3b) and then by my Transcript of the Bristol Library Manuscript (2) : View it here
​
(5c) Dr Fry Transcript (4) each verse followed by the Catcott Transcript (3a), and then by my Transcript of the Bristol Library Manuscript (2) : View it here (not ready yet)
There are various difficulties with all versions of this work, read on to discover more.​​
The Mysterious Perceval Transcript C53-25
The Mysterious Perceval Letter with Transcript in full : View
Perceval Transcript of Bristowe Tragedie..., C53-25 : View
​
We are fortunate to have Perceval’s transcript of his mysteriously missing ‘original’ manuscript, or rather, the first 42 verses of it - there are actually 98 verses in the Bristol Library ‘original’.
According to Perceval, the six pages he discovered were once a part of a notebook written by Chatterton. Perceval’s attribution is, apparently, supported by John Taylor, the Bristol City Librarian at the time, however, when Perceval made his claim in ‘The Bristol Times and Mirror', 1904, John Taylor was dead and therefore not available to confirm his corroboration.
​
We could resolve this question if John Taylor’s letter, and Perceval’s missing Ms., which has not been seen since it was printed in ‘The Bristol Times and Mirror’ in 1904, resurfaced for inspection. It is assumed to rest on a shelf somewhere in a Perceval family library; I believe that one glance would tell us if it is the original or perhaps just a transcript of a transcript, written by George Catcott or Dr Thomas Fry.
​​​
​When I compared Perceval's copy (C53-25), to Catcott’s handwritten copy (C53-22), the very minor differences indicate to me that they were both transcribed from the same copy, or the Perceval copy could easily be a transcript of C53-22. It is also possible that the 'original', from which the Perceval copy was transcribed, was a Fry transcript of a Catcott transcript. I wonder if the Perceval copy 'disappeared' after Perceval realised he had gone to press too quickly with a transcript rather than an original - in any case, it has not been seen since the day it was published.
​
The minor differences between C53-22 & C53-25 are as follows: Verse 8 the word ‘Sayde’; Verse 36 the word ‘and’ / ‘but if tis nott’; Verse 39: ‘blest shall be’ (words in a different order). Plus the addition of opinions and puffs, in C53-22 at the end of verses 1 & 11, and after verse 42.
​
Spenser George Perceval, 1838-1922, was, among other things, an antiquarian and geologist. He entered Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1858. He lived at Severn House (now demolished), Henbury, nr Bristol, and Longwitton Hall, Northumberland : View Wiki or View Cambridge mini-bio
The Bristol Library 'Original' Manuscript
Ref : B20928 - C53-21
Bristows Tragedy (1 of 7 pages)
This manuscript, C53-21 (B20928), has a great look and I use it as the backdrop to this website.
It is available to view at Bristol Library, where it is listed as the original in Chatterton's handwriting. Meyerstein agrees, but Donald Taylor is sure that it is copied by an unknown scribe, from an unknown original by Chatterton, possibly the mysteriously missing Perceval manuscript.
However, as Donald Taylor points out, the handwriting is clearly in an 18th century hand, and it certainly looks like Chatterton's, but there are issues with some of the letters and lettering, which we do not see in any of Chatterton's other manuscripts. There are also issues with the sense of some of the lines, which is resolved in the other versions of the poem. ​​​​​
​​​​​And then there is the word ‘Shanglynge’, is this all the proof we need that B20928 is a transcript of a Catcott Transcript? - see the third line of verse 67, below :
​This one word ‘shanglynge’, the meaning of which is unknown, has me wondering if the whole Manuscript is a lackadaisical transcript - or is that the message it was meant to give when Chatterton presented it to Catcott or Barrett, thus allowing either of them the chance to show their 'superior' knowledge and correct his pretended transcription errors - Chatterton would then produce a new manuscript, with the pretended typos replaced with the intended words and meanings. After all, he was a clever & crafty Divil !
​
Chatterton reserves the right to create words to suit his poetic needs. However, in this case the reason might be more to do with the handwriting styles of the day. For example, consider Catcott’s ‘Spanglynge’. In his transcript of the poem C53-22 (shown below), the loop of his ‘p’ is open and not like our modern 'p'. ​
​Catcott Transcript B5344 C53-22​
Was this is a rare case of the quill running out of ink and the faded text being overwritten. Or were the last two line partially erased because they were incorrectly written ? When was it overwritten? Is it a simple coincidence that the line containing the word 'shanglynge' or 'spanglynge is in the midst of the overwriting ? Was this the copy that was used as the copytext for the Bristol Library Chatterton 'original' B20928 ?
I can confirm that the original text and overwriting are both in Catcott's hand. The question is ; was it 'shanglynge' with an 'h' but without the downstroke before the overwriting, and therefore potentially the copytext for B20928. OK, I admit there are too many differences with the spelling ; blame Catcott for that.
​
So, investigate it for yourself using the link in (5b) in the Control Panel above. It has Catcott's transcript (3a) interspersed with the Printed Edition (3b) and then by my Transcript of the Bristol Library Manuscript (2) : No need to go to the Control Panel, here's the link : View it here
​
Catcott made a number of transcripts of Bristowe Tragedie, including B6489, below. It shows the 'p/h' in line 3 of verse 67.
​Catcott Transcript B6489​
My reasoning is that a lower case ‘p’ is often written as an ‘h’ with a long back downstroke and can sometimes be taken as an ‘h’. When a ‘p’ is written in the Bristol Library ‘original’, B20928, below, it has a closed loop or is formed in such a way as leaves no doubt that it is a ‘p’, until you get to ‘Shanglynge’ in verse 67, where a tired Scribe has written ‘h’ instead of ‘p’. ​
​Bristol Library B20928 ‘Original’ Manuscript C53-23​
Verse 67
Before him went the Counsel-men,
In scarlet robes and gold ;
And tassels shanglynge in the Sunn
Much glorious to behold.
.jpg)
.jpg)
George Catcott was the man with the power. He held copies of Chatterton's works and had a plan to get the works published.
​
But why did he choose The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin (C53-22), which was published in 1772, for such an early printing? Well, as far back as 30th November, 1770 (only 14 weeks after Chatterton had died), George Catcott received a letter from Dr Francis Woodward, requesting a transcript of “ the Tragedy of Bristowe, [or]…The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin” adding that he would “gladly pay for the transcribing [of] them.” Woodward was a friend of Catcott’s and had read the transcripts that Dr Fry had in his possession, he is also named in the list of subscribers for the printed edition. It seems that the general interest in this particular poem and then the request from someone ready to pay for a copy, was enough to convince Catcott that he should go ahead and plan for a printed edition.
The motto Durat Opus Vatum, is from Ovid, it was adopted by Thomas Percy for use on the title pages of his famous Reliques of Ancient English Poetry, which was printed in 1765. Seven years later George Catcott added the same motto to the title page of The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin. The layout and wording to Catcott’s handwritten title page, above, is identical to the 1772 printed edition, although the editor, Thomas Eagles, never went for the elaborate penmanship of Catcott’s copy. Catcott’s handwritten title page (C53-22) does not contain the details of Newbery or Goldsmith (the booksellers), which was obviously still to be decided.
​
Some would say that Catcott had pretensions to grandeur, but I reckon he saw the success of Reliques and was attempting to grab a share of it by appealing to its wide readership. Surely anyone who bought the Reliques would also buy The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin, and, in due course, they would also buy any future editions of Rowley’s works? However, it seems that the 1772 edition didn't sell well ; hence it is quite a rare and expensive edition.
As to Catcott's use of the motto, my guess is he was thinking that if it was good enough for Percy's Reliques, it was good enough for his 1772 printed edition of The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin.
​​
(4) The Bristow Tragedy; or Dethe of Syr Charles Bawdin
The Dr. Fry Transcript C53-23
Towards the end of August 1770, Dr Thomas Fry visited Bristol specifically to learn more about Rowley and Chatterton. Herbert Croft, in his book Love and Madness, which was published eight years after the death of Dr Fry, has it as follows:
"Chatterton might, now (distracting reflexion !) ; might, nine years ago ; might, before he was twice nine years
old ; have been considered as the most extraordinary prodigy of genius the world ever saw.
Nay, had he continued at Bristol only a few weeks longer, had he continued in the world only a few days longer, he might have been preserved. For, oh my M. I have been assured that the late amiable Dr. Fry, head of St. John's in Oxford, went to Bristol the latter end of August 1770, in order to search into the history of of Rowley and Chatterton, and to patronize the latter if he turned out to be the former, or to deserve assistance — when, alas ! all the intelligence he could pick up about either was that Chatterton had, within a few days destroyed himself. "
Dr Thomas Fry's transcript, with his own punctuation, dates to before November 1772. It is a direct transcript of a Catcott transcript. ​​As well as making the transcript, Fry was also doing Catcott’s bidding and adding punctuation to some of Chatterton’s works. So the change from ‘Bristows’ or ‘Bristowes’ to ‘The Bristow’ makes sense - in Fry’s eyes.
​​
The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin
First Printed Edition 1772
(C53-24)
The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin
Read the volume online at archive.org : View
The above title page of the famous edition printed in 1772 (C53-24), is one of the earliest printings of one of Chatterton's works in book form and has, apparently, many differences to the various copies listed on this page. The question is, how does it compare to Catcott's transcript (C53-22), from which it was copied? Well, now you can check to the source - "the reward of a thing well done is to have done it yourself" (R. W .Emerson)​
Bristol School of Printing 1932
(C53-26)
I've included this version as a treat. It's a rather rare copy of the poem 'translated' into English by A.H.Russell. The fact that he chose to 'translate' the work into English is a little surprising, when you consider that he was the Secretary of the Chatterton Society at the time. I would have preferred this ‘special’ edition to have been as written by Chatterton, perhaps along with a translation - a win, win thing! I guess his aim was to bring Chatterton’s work to a wider audience? I must add that the simplicity of it makes it a favourite of mine.
​
He also manages to give the poem two titles. On the front cover he has it as The Bristowe Tragedy by Thomas Chatterton, and as The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin at the head of the poem.