Thomas Chatterton Manuscript Project
Bristows Tragedy, or
The Death of Sr Charles Bawdin
(Also known as The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin)​
Control Page
Bristows Tragedy (1 of 7 pages)
(C53-21 :) Chatterton's Manuscript? B20928
This is one of Chatterton's most famous and admired poems. There is no doubt that it was written by him in 1768 while he was an apprentice scrivener at Lambert's the Attorney. He was 15 years of age at the time.
​
However, there is a question mark over which of the various copies or transcripts is the original, or at least which was copied directly from the original. 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!' If we accept that C53-21 is the original then the rest is irrelevant.
I prefer to use the title from what I perceive to be the original in Chatterton's handwriting, which was accepted as such by Meyerstein (eventually), but not by Taylor. So, in my view, the original manuscript (and therefore the correct title for the piece) is, Bristows Tragedy, or the Death of Sr Charles Bawdin, as per the Bristol Library original, ref: B20928, (TCMP reference C53-21)
When it was first published in 1772, it was given the title you see in the Catcott transcript (C53-22). Why, you might ask? Well, I believe that including the word 'Execution' makes it that much more dramatic and would draw in more readers. And then there is the title of the other potential 'original' from which the mysterious Perceval transcript (C53-25) was copied. Perceval has the title as; Bristowe Tragedie or the Dethe of Syr Charles Bawdin, which is also the title preferred by Taylor.
So, for the first time anywhere in our universe (there's hyperbole for you) you can now compare all of the copies below, via the Control Panel. However the two main contenders are as follows :
​​​
-
C53-21 : The Bristol Library MS., B20928 . If this is not Chatterton's writing then who is the scribe?
​
-
C53-25 : The 'Perceval manuscript', which is missing, but we do have Perceval's transcript of it.
​
The above could be resolved if we were fortunate enough to find the missing 'Perceval' notebook. I believe that one glance would tell us if it is the original, or perhaps just a copy written by Catcott or Fry.
​
Bristows Tragedy, or
The Death of Sr Charles Bawdin
Control Panel
Original Manuscript :
-
In Chatterton's hand, B20928 : View C53-21
Transcript Ms :
-
In Catcott's hand : View C53-22
Transcript Ms :
-
In Dr Fry's hand : View C53-23
First Printing :
-
The Execution of Sir Charles Bawdin : 1772 : View C53-24
Later Printing (partial) :
-
by Perceval, 1904 : View C53-25
Later Printing :
Chatterton's Handwritten Manuscript
B20928 (C53-21)​
Bristows Tragedy (part of page 1)
(C53-21 :) Chatterton's Manuscript? B20928
Bristol library holds and lists the B20928 manuscript as in Chatterton's own handwriting. Meyerstein agrees that it is in Chatterton's hand. However, Taylor is sure that it is copied by an unknown scribe, from an unknown original by Chatterton. I have chosen to use this manuscript as the backdrop to this website, which demonstrates my faith in it.
(C53-22)​
.jpg)
.jpg)
Why did Catcott 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.
Note the Latin motto on both title pages. 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 foot of 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 something to be decided upon at a later time.
​
Some would say that dear old George 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? Unfortunately, it seems that the 1772 edition was a failure and didn't sell well at all ; hence it is quite a rare and expensive edition.
I have tried to research the motto online and have got a rough translation from Google. Unfortunately the translation makes no sense and, although I was an altar boy in the days when the Mass was in Latin, I have no grasp of it these days. So, you clever clogs out there, what did the motto mean when Ovid used it, and what when Percy used it for the Reliques, assuming that the motto can be read to suit different usages.
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 edition of The Execution.
​
And yes, if you were wondering, I do now have a good idea of what the motto means; but I am not saying until I hear the views of my readers.
C53-23
Dr Fry's role in the Chatterton story
​
Towards the end of August 1770, Dr Thomas Fry visited bristol to investigate Rowley and Chatterton, with a view to patronizing Chatterton - if he deserved it. Unfortunately Dr Fry arrived too late, as Chatterton had died a few days earlier - so goes the story, which was first printed in Herbert Croft's Love and Madness, eight years after the death of Dr. Fry.
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 extant copies. The question is, how does it compare to Catcott's transcript (C53-22), from which it was copied?
C53-25
Perceval wrote about his discovery of the manuscript in the Bristol Times and Mirror, 1904.
​
Perceval claimed that the printed copy of 168 lines, 42 verses (C53-25) was a transcript of the original poem in Chatterton's handwriting, which Perceval claimed he had in his possession. Taylor agrees with Perceval.
​
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. When Perceval discovered his error and realised that he had gone to press too quickly, the Perceval 'original' disappeared and 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.
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.
Links to Chatterton's Works & Correspondence
Call it what you will, authentic, doubtful, lost, or plainly wrong - if it was linked with Chatterton it will be included in Chatterton's Works & Correspondence. This will be the base point from which we can examine every piece of work, and add notes and links accordingly.