Thomas Chatterton Manuscript Project
More
Maurice Toby's 'Chronicles of Bristol to 1565'
Aka : The 'Fust' manuscript
&
The naming of the ship ‘Matthew’
(A Chatterton Fabrication ?)​
Contents of this Page
-
​​The Aim - To determine the truth of it!
​Maurice Toby’s Chronicles of Bristol, to 1565, is actually known as the ‘Fust’ manuscript. The Fust family were the owners of the manuscript when it was, in 1849, brought to the notice of the world at large.
​
I must point out that most of what can be said about this mysterious manuscript has been said by Dr Evan Jones : View online​ , however, the Chatterton Manuscript Project is focused specifically on any role Chatterton may have had in the production of the Fust Ms, and the 'naming' of Cabot's ship, the "Matthew."
​
The image below, with the heading [Copy Entry], is part of page116 of George Edward Weare's book, Cabot's Discovery of North America, published 1897. George introduces it as follows :
​
"According to an entry which was copied many years ago from a MS. chronicle, formerly in the possession of the Fust family of Hill Court, Gloucestershire, the Mathew sailed from the port of Bristol on the 2nd day of May [1497]. "​​
So, if the 'Fust' manuscript is genuine, it can lay claim to being the first to record the discovery of North America in 1497, by the men of Bristol, in a ship named the Mathew, with John Cabot as the intrepid Captain.
​And, as Dr Evan Jones says, "The importance of this entry is that it is the only surviving document to give the date of the departure of the expedition, the date of the landfall and the date of the expedition's return. It is also the only pre-seventeenth century document to give the name of the expedition ship."
​​​​
The following two snippets come from the Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1876, ninth edition.
It is important to note that William George had the two volumes of "Collations" and not the original 'Fust' Ms. : View online or see below
​
Adams' Chronicle of Bristol
Until the appearance of the Fust Manuscript at the 1849 auction by Messrs. English and Son, our knowledge that Cabot's Ship was named 'Matthew' came from a small paragraph in William Barrett's book The History and Antiquities of the City of Bristol, published in 1789. However, it is assumed that Barrett got his information not from the Fust Ms., but instead from Adams' Chronicle of Bristol, which was written sometime before 1625.
Francis Fox's 1910 transcript of Adams’ Chronicle, does not contain a reference to Cabot or his ship the Matthew. I believe this is because the transcriber was told to include only references which do not appear in extant histories of Bristol - watch this space as the 1625 manuscript (once kept at the ‘Red Lodge’), which does contain the reference, will appear here when it comes to hand; it is currently kept by Bristol Archives at the Record Office. Update to the foregoing paragraph:
​
I can now share a photographic image of the original 1625 edition, as follows :
​
The annotation to the margin of the key page from the autograph manuscript of Adams' Chronicle of Bristol (to 1625), is shown below (courtesy of Bristol Archives, photo by Frank Drake).
Allowing that some words are hard to make out (for me at least), my loose transcript is as follows :
​
Anno Domini
On the 24th of
June 1496, was
Newfoundland
found by Bristol
men in the Kings
Galleon the mathew
​
In September 1752 the Gregorian calendar was finally adopted in England. Oooh, such a simple thing to say, but such changes create huge confusion. Even as I write this I am doubting myself. I have read in a few places that Bristol's Civic year started on the 15th September each year.
Anyway, the date given for the landfall in 'Newfoundland' in the manuscript below, is, I presume, June 24, 1496. Back in those days the year started on March 25th, so it is easy to see how the dates can be confused these days.
So, assuming that the year in question runs like this, 1496 ended on March 24th, with 1497 starting on March 25th. This means that June 24th would be in 1497, as would the whole of the journey from Bristol to Newfoundland and back again. This is irrefutably backed up by Raimondo de Raimondi de Soncino's letter to the Duke of Milan.
​
The Wiki link for John Cabot : View
This may be Sebas :
tian Caboza which
is mentioned in
Anno 1499.
The History and Antiquities of...Bristol...1789
William Barrett
Much of the extra interest for those of us researching the story of Chatterton, is the possibility that the Fust Ms., is a forgery of Chatterton’s. The suspicion starts with a statement by William Barrett, on page 172 of his book, The History & Antiquities of the City of Bristol, 1789 : see below
Barrett's statement can be read in the last paragraph of the actual page below : "In the year 1497, 24th June on St. John’s day, as it is in a manuscript in my possession, “was Newfoundland found by Bristol men in a ship called the Matthew.” "
The Naming of Cabot's Ship The Matthew
P.172, The History and Antiquities of Bristol
(Read all Chatterton pages in the book : View )
Barrett was considered to be the first to state, in his History of Bristol, 1789, that Cabot’s ship was named the ‘Matthew.’ Although, it is claimed by some, that the ‘Fust’ manuscript (which is missing), purportedly written in 1565 ish, by Maurice Toby, Gent., was first to name the ship. Call it semantics, but the first public 'knowledge' of the 'Fust' MS., was when it was put up for sale in 1849
​
I can now add, after communicating with Dr. Evan T. Jones, who was exceedingly kind and helpful to me, that Adams’ Chronicle of Bristol appears to have been Barrett’s source for his statement - which sounds straightforward enough, however, the question I ask is how did this all transpire?
It is highly likely that Barrett would have had access to the Red Lodge and, as a result, Chatterton would have had access too. You might consider this ; if Chatterton had access to Adams, it would give him the tools to create the Fust Ms. - all possibilities must be considered to arrive at the truth!
So, it seems possible, indeed probable, that the Red Lodge must have lent Barrett the Chronicle while he was writing his History of Bristol. Did Barrett then use Chatterton as his amanuensis to read Adams’ Chronicle and gather anything that might be useful for his book - we must keep an open mind on this and QE! (question everything).
The following images face page 637 in Barrett’s History of Bristol. They are facsimiles of the Chatterton manuscript The Storie of Wyllyam Canynge (now in the British Library). To me the penmanship of the script is reminiscent of Adams’ Chronicle? I wonder, was Chatterton attempting to copy Adams’ Chronicle for style of penmanship?
The below image seems to be a compilation of parts from Rowley's Heraldic Account of Bristol Artists and Writers as Taylor has titled it, and as shown in volume 1 of his book, The Complete Works of Thomas Chatterton.
For those of you that have access to Taylor's two volumes, go to page 236 where the transcript is available to read.
Here's a breakdown : for the script above the Arms in the transcript (shown below), see the last paragraph on page 236 of Taylor's volume 1. For the script either side of the arms and the rest of the script on the page, go to page 241 where it starts at the 4th paragraph.​
​
You might also like to read Catcott's transcript of the same work : View
Facsimile of Chatterton's Original MS.
The Storie of Wyllyam Canynge (now in the British Library).
William Barrett's Transcript of
Chatterton's Original MS.
The Storie of Wyllyam Canynge (now in the British Library).
Here’s a link to Cabot and Bristol’s Age of Discovery, 2016, by Dr Evan Jones and Margaret Condon, it is only 100 pages long and well worth the read.
The Fust manuscript certainly stirred things up. It caused a serious disagreement between two authors, George Weare (and others), on the one side, and the wonderfully named Henry Harrisse on the other; well he certainly ‘harrissed’ George Weare. The argument began after Weare’s book, Cabot's Discovery of North America, was published, wherein George Weare mentions and pays compliment to Harrisse’s earlier work.
​
Henry Harrisse, author of John Cabot, the Discoverer of North-America and Sebastian, his Son: A Chapter of the Maritime History of England under the Tudors, 1496-1557‘ was the originator of the idea that Chatterton had first named Cabot’s ship, the ‘Matthew,’ and was likely to have created the ‘Fust’ manuscript.
As an aside: I am irked (often irked these days) when a book or manuscript becomes known by the name of the wealthy owner, rather than the name of the author, fair enough when talking about numerous Shakespeare Folios, but in this case it all seems a little unfair! Poor Maurice Toby (or Tovy).
The following links will take you to the open correspondence in sequence, 1 to 6, between the warring parties, which were published in Notes & Queries in 1897 :
​
-
Henry Harrisse - Replies, August. (Henry Harrisse's reply is a separate publication, reprinted from Notes & Queries, with the title : The Date of Cabot’s Discovery of the American Continent and an alleged forgery of Chatterton.)
The Fust manuscript is a mystery upon a mystery, and is mysterious too, to boot - don’t you just love a good mystery? It is true that we have enough problems with obfuscation regarding Chatterton without adding to it with the infamous Fust manuscript, don’t you think? Nope, I can’t resist it, I have to diverge and investigate it all!
​
So, the question is:- did Chatterton create or produce manuscripts that gave Barrett his information regarding Cabot’s discovery of the American continent and, more importantly, it would seem, did he name the ship ‘Matthew' ?
​
When Barrett quotes from a manuscript that he owns or has a loan of, he often adds the phrase penes me. Does the lack of penes me, in this instance, indicate that he is quoting from a manuscript owned by someone else and being inspected in situ at the library of the owner? Or, did Barrett borrow the Fust manuscript for transcription purposes and did he give it to Chatterton for his assessment? And, if so, would Chatterton be able to resist adding something of his own, such as the name ‘Matthew.’? I leave the reader to judge (as Barrett would say).
​
It is also worth noting the mention of William Cannings and Thomas Rowly on page 70 of Adams's Chronicle, along with the story of Cannings taking holy orders to avoid a marriage being forced upon him by the king - is this where Chatterton got the basis for the fabulous partnership of Canynges and Rowley?​
​I must add that Barrett does reference Lord Verulam’s ‘Life of Henry VII’ as a source.
Lord Verulam is actually Francis Bacon.
QE! I need to read the 1625? edition of his ‘Life of Henry VII’, as the later editions all seem to be ‘edited,’ however, I do have some other priorities, so this will have to wait.
​
In the meantime, here's a link to the 1778 edition of the works of Francis Bacon, which, I have noticed, contains letters written by a man named Tobie Matthew (I know, I know, look for coincidences and you will find them). But it is reminiscent of Maurice Toby, Gent., supposed writer of the Fust manuscript, and of the name of the 'bobbing cork' (ship) the ‘Matthew.’ And, of course, Tobie Matthew would appear in any early edition of Bacon's Works.
It seems that Barrett was struggling to get information for his History of Bristol and surely would have visited all of the churches and great houses in and around the city - for that is where history is to be found! Especially in Great houses with vast libraries, and not many, if any, were vaster than the Fust library.
The Fust family estate was in Thornbury, which is within easy reach of central Bristol. Barrett would have been aware of the great library it contained, making it a prime destination for any antiquary. This is where he would reasonably expect to uncover ‘new’ information for his book.
However, it should be noted that Barrett doesn’t mention Fust anywhere in The History & Antiquities of the City of Bristol…, it could be that he had no knowledge of it, or forgot to mark in his working papers where he got the information from (I suffer from that problem myself from time to time), afterall he was working on his book for upwards of 30 years, and when it came to including it he simply ignored the lack of reference - although the phrase ‘in my possession’ would seem to negate this; unless, of course, it was a manuscript supplied by Chatterton. There was so much contention regarding the Rowley Ms., you can see why Barrett would choose not to reference Chatterton as the source of a non-Rowley piece.
The provenance of the ‘Fust’ manuscript proves that it existed:
It was in the possession of the Fust family until sometime after 1841, when it was sold to William Strong, bookseller. Apparently, Strong had his assistant compare the Fust manuscript with the histories of Barrett and Seyer, and to make two volumes of detailed notes of everything in the Fust that was not in the two histories of Bristol. Then sometime before 1849 the book was sold to Sir Hugh Smyth-Pigott of Brockley Court, Somerset. A telling phrase in the description of the lot for sale was ‘a very curious MS., containing many facts not recorded by the historians of Bristol,’ does this mean that the Fust manuscript was unknown before the death of the last member of the Fust family, in 1841? Surely something as important as the Fust manuscript would have been shared with local antiquarians - just to show off the discovery!
The mystery deepens when the Fust manuscript. burns in the horrendous fire in Kerslake’s bookshop in 1859 How is it that Kerslake was able to save the two books of transcripts but not the Fust manuscript itself? Or did Kerslake actually have replacement transcripts made after the fire and from memory, or indeed enhanced it wherever it suited him.
The 'Fust' Ms. was certainly unknown to Samuel Seyer, as there was no mention of it in Volume 1, of his Memorials of Bristol, or Volume 2, which was published in 1823. The links above take you to the title page of each volume. The following link takes you to the section in volume 2 dealing directly with Cabot’s voyage.
​
The numerous engravings in Seyer's two volumes are truly wonderful, especially the one of Sebastian Cabot, shown below.
In Henry Harrisse's opinion Sebastian is a proven charlatan and a scoundrel, and you can appreciate why people were convinced by him as he certainly looks the part he was portraying. It is now accepted that Sebastian did actually carry out some of the expeditions he claimed for himself.
Timeline Fust Ms. Location
Owners and Dealers
Timeline of the ‘Fust Ms.’ Owners / Dealers
Rough notes at the moment. Some names might go and others arrive, arrangement might change.
-
Poyntz Family (previous owner of Hill Court)
-
Henry Fleetwood (relation of the Fust family)
-
Richard Fust (d.1613). Acquired house from Fleetwood.
-
Sir Edward Fust, 1st Baronet (1606–1674). Owner to 1674.
-
Sir John Fust, 2nd Baronet (1637–1699). Owner to 1699.
-
Sir Edward Fust, 3rd Baronet (1667–1713). Owner to 1713.
-
Sir Edward Fust, 4th Baronet (1693–1728). Owner to 1728.
-
Sir Francis Fust, 5th Baronet (1705 - 1769). Bibliophile; assumed first known owner of the MS. 1728-1769.
-
Sir John Fust, 6th Baronet. Owner 1769 to 1779.
-
Dame Philippa Hamilton Fust (d.1803) - wife to Sir John 6th. Owner 1779 to 1803?
-
Fanny Fust (1764 - 1827) - Daughter to Denton Fust. Owner 1803 - ?/
-
Flora Fust (Sir Francis's daughter, later Flora Langley Fust, 1745 -1806)
-
Flora Langley Fust (1768 - 1841) - Granddaughter to Sir Francis, daughter to Flora Fust Langley.
-
William Strong, Book Dealer 1841. Transcribed part of the Ms into two volumes.
-
John Hugh Smyth Pigott. Owner of the two transcripts (also two original Chatterton letters)
-
Thomas Kerslake, Book dealer - A fire in his shop in 1860 destroyed most of his stock, including the original Fust Ms. but not the two transcript volumes. It might be assumed that the two volumes were matched transcripts of the original, however, this is not the case (providing I understand the auction description - I am checking this) as one volume has 64 folios, the other 32 folios.
-
William George, Bookdealer and Bristol Historian. Owned, in 1876, the two "Collation" volumes.
​​
-
Note: It was Sir Francis Fust's practice to put his bookplate in every book he owned, which he did with the Ms. of Maurice Toby's Bristol Chronicle (now known as the 'Fust Ms.'). Is this enough to indicate that he was the first 'Fust' to own the Ms. If Sir Francis Fust was truly the first known owner, his final years 1767-69, are a fair match for Chatterton at his peak, 1767-70, and for Barrett’s need for information to pad out his projected History of Bristol, published in 1789.
-
Sir Francis, by some accounts, was a bit of a trickster, and is supposed to have invented some of the names in his Coat of Arms (see top of this section) which has forty quarterings? Was he also having fun with the history of Bristol? However, the general opinion is that the Fust Ms. was genuine - and fires are all to common when it comes to books and manuscripts.
​
Working on this - pinch of salt is always required when dealing with history! I am having a great time researching this subject, however, it is sidetracking me and so I will have to leave it for a while.
​​
John Hugh Smyth Pigott
John Hugh Smyth Pigott, of Brockley Hall, Somerset, d.1849? Is this the same Pigott as the JHSP who died in 1853? Also, not to be confused with the later John Hugh Smyth Pigott, 1852-1927.
​
It seems that the Smyth-Pigott's were relatives of the Smyth’s of Ashton Court. An interesting fact here is that William Barrett was the family doctor of the Ashton Court Smyths, which must have given Barrett an introduction to both branches of the family, and their libraries, although the transcripts of the Fust Ms., was not in the possession of the Smyth Pigott's during Barrett's time.
In 1849 the auction sale of the library of John Hugh Smyth Pigott, lasted 22 days. It contained an amazing range of important books and manuscripts (and the odd cow or two) : View online. A few of the interesting lots in the auction (basic listings) are shown below:
Lot 1632 : A parchment 24ft long, containing records of Bristol, 1463 - 1689 : View
Lot 1631: Chattertoniana, a vast collection : View
Lot 1609: A Chatterton collection - collected by Walpole with his signature : View
​
Lot 1558: The Fust Ms. [not the Chronicles] on astrology and Magic, possibly by Dr Fust the inventor of printing,
sent to prison for being in league with the devil : View
​
Lot 1554: A Brief Chronicle, conteyninge the accompte of the reigns [This is the ‘Fust’ Ms] : View
​
Lot 42: Chatterton's Two Letters to Dodsley - the originals in Chatterton's handwriting : View
[Published in 1813 by Britton : View]
Lot 1471: Memorandum for a history of Bristol 1216 - 1790, with miscellaneous information : View
Lot 321 Bacon’s Henry VII : View
According to Dr. Evan T. Jones, the Fust Ms., listed in the catalogue for the 1849 auction (Lot 1554), was bought in by Smyth Pigott at £27.6s. This is borne out by the later sale in 1853, where it fetched only £11.5s. The following listing is taken verbatim from the 1849 catalogue.
​
" [£] 27.6 -
1554 A Brief Chronicle, conteyninge the accompte of the Reignes of all the Kings in this Realme of Englande, from the entering of Brutus untill this present yeere, with all the notable acts done by dyvers of them, and wherein is also conteyned the names of all the Mayors, Stewardes, Bayliffes, and Sheriffes, of the laudable town of Bristowe, nowe at this time called ye worshippfull city of Bristowe, with all the notable acts done in those days, from the firste yeere of King Henry ye 3rd, A.D., 1217, untill the present yeere, 1565, a very curious MS., containing many facts not recorded by the historians of Bristol, from Sir Francis Fust's library, folio."​
Chatterton, the Fust Manuscript
&
The Naming of the Matthew
Did Chatterton forge the 'Fust' Manuscript ? Did he name the ship 'Matthew' ?
​
Everything to do with St Mary Redcliffe looms large in the life and works of Chatterton, and he was obviously aware that the church had links to the 'New World'. Admiral Sir William Penn, father of the founder of Pennsylvania, is buried in its graveyard; and the famous bone of the mysterious Dun Cow, which, it is claimed, was brought back to Bristol on one of Cabot’s return voyages to Bristol, is displayed in the church.
Which brings some interesting questions :
Did Chatterton find the information about the Cabot expedition, including the name of the ship 'Matthew,' in Canynges' coffer, which was stored in the famous muniment room of St Mary Redcliffe? Did he create or enhance a story to please Barrett and help him with his History of Bristol?
It is worth remembering that St Mary's was also a sailors' church, where merchants, such as Canynge, and ordinary sailors alike, would congregate before departure to ask for blessings for the journey ahead, and upon return to give thanks for their safe return.
​
Did the Fust manuscript really have important historic information not mentioned anywhere else ? Where did the mysterious Maurice Toby, Gent, get his information - and who was he?​ I also note that it is stated in an auction catalogue that the two 'transcripts' of the Fust, were of differing lengths ; one transcript is x folios, the other xx.
​
​The last question, or perhaps it should be the first question: Where are the two volumes of transcripts today? According to Evan Jones of Bristol University, the whereabouts of the two volumes is unknown, although enquiries in the 1960s concluded that they may have been bought by an American library or a collector, see: David B. Quinn, 'John Cabot's Matthew', Times Literary Supplement, 8 June 1967, 517.
​
QE! : Sources and Links to further reading:
My interest was first raised by Harrise and after a little online research, was whetted further by Evan Jones’ ‘Fust Manuscript: The Chronicle of Maurice Toby, 1565’:
Adams’ Chronicle of Bristol : View
​
Note: The above is an initial gathering of information, so please do not quote me, instead allow the dust to settle and do your own research. And please let me know of anything I should add or change on this page.
Memoirs Historical and Topographical of Bristol...:
Samuel Seyer
Samuel Seyer has a section on this page because his work is mentioned as one of the two important 'Histories of Bristol' that were used to compare against and discover any new information about Bristol in the Fust Ms.
Henry Harrisse & Other Commentators
​Henry Harrisse (1829-1910) is an amazing man with many strings to his bow (see Wikipedia).
He has a lot to say on Chatterton and the Fust Manuscript, which is what interests this part of the Chatterton Manuscript Project.
So, to whet your appetite and to save my readers clicking a link, here is his article in Notes & Queries, 1897. This is the article that started the argument between, Harrisse on the one side and G. E. Weare and G. R. F. Prowse on the other.
