ransom to build a Castle here, similar to his own in France, in consequence of which agreement, this Castle was erected at his expence. The battle of Agincourt was fought on the 25th of October, 1415; and supposing the Castle to have been begun three or four years after that event, it will place it among the oldest brick buildings in the kingdom. The mansion enclosed a court, in figure a rectangled parallelogram, whose south and north sides were larger than those on the east and west. At the north-west angle is the tower; the grand entrance was over a drawbridge on the west side. A manuscript in St. Bennet's college, Cambridge, written by William De Worcester, (who was officer of arms, or herald to Sir John Fastolf) says, that "on the right hand, on entering the great hall, which measured forty-nine feet in length, and ters of the battle of Pataie, in the fourth act of King Henry VI., where we find Talbot speaking to Sir John thus, Talbot.-"Shame to the Duke of Burgundy and thee! I vow'd, base Knight, when I did meet thee next, But this is wholly without reference to the character of Falstaff. Hollinshed mentions the fact of his deprivation of the garter, and says, (speaking of Pataie,) “that fromthis battle, departed without anie stroke stricken, Sir John Fastolfe, the same year by his valiantnesse, elected into the order of the garter. But for doubt of misdealing at this brunt, the Duke of Bedford tooke from him the image of St. George and his garter." Monstrelet, the French historian, also mentions this circumstance. It is probable that Sir John was thought to have been too severely, if not unjustly punished by the Duke of Bedford, for his part in the battle; for that prince, it appears, soon afterwards received him again into his favour, restored him the garter, and appointed him to a military office of great honour and emolument. Sir John was twice married, having for his second wife, Margaret Howard, a daughter of Sir John Howard. twenty-eight in breadth, adjoining to the tower, was the dining room," the great fireplace of which is still visible. Directly east of this, communicating by a drawbridge, stood the college, encompassed by three sides of a square, whose area was larger than that enclosed in the walls of the mansion. The west side was bounded by a moat, having two round towers at the north-east and south-east angles, and towards the west end of the north side ran the great avenue. The Castle was surrounded by a moat, that is said to have once communicated with the ocean by a navigable creek, which is extremely probable. A little south-west of the mansion, is shown the crown of an arch, eight feet in diameter, which retains the name of the barge-house. At present, the northwest and north walls only, with the tower, are standing; the latter is upwards of one hundred feet in height, and was ascended by a winding flight of stone stairs, now removed. The interior of the tower had several floors, and the fireplaces and chimney apertures remain perfect, ranged one above the other, in circular apartments, lighted by narrow windows securely grated. The external parts of the tower, the arched entrance, and the principal front of the Castle, are in excellent preservation, the face of the brickwork retaining much of its original beauty; the south-east walls are levelled, and nearly destroyed. The spandril of an ancient chimney piece, formerly within the ruins, contained the armorial bearings of Sir John Fastolf, finely sculptured, and encircled by the garter; and as by the negligence of a girl, who in making a bed, set fire to and did it considerable damage. John Mowbray, the Duke of Norfolk, next claimed it, under pretence of having purchased the castle and lands of William Yelverton, ("that cursed Norfolk justice," as Worcester terms him) one of Sir John Fastolf's executors; but this act of the Duke's was illegal, and contrary to the will of the founder, who had ordered it not to be sold, but to be kept as a college for priests, and an hospital for poor men. John Paston, Jun. Esq., (acting as governor of the Castle, on behalf of his brother, Sir John Paston, who was absent) refused to surrender the possession, and the Duke in consequence appeared before the walls with three thousand men, armed with guns, culverins, and other artillery, and immediately besieged it. The names of the principal persons at this siege were— John Duke of Norfolk, Sir Humphrey Talbot, Sir William Calthorpe, Sir John Heveningham, Sir Gilbert Debenham, Sir Thomas Wingfield, Sir William Brandon, Thomas and William Wingefeld, Esqs. Swansey, Esq. Hugh Auston, Esq. Sir John Waldgrave, William Debenham, Jun. Esq. Robert Debenham, Esq. - son of Sir Laurence Rayneford, James Ratcliffe, Esq. Black John de Ratcliff, Stafford, Esq. Sir Philip Wentworth, Simon Fitz-Simon, of Essex, Esq. Timperley, Esq. Richard Southwell, Esq. Gilbert Debenham, Sen. Esq. Brook, Esq. son of the Lord Cobham; - Bardwell of Herling, Herward, of Cromer, Esq. John Ratcliff, of Attleburgh, Letham, Esq Esq. Esq. son of Plumestede. The castle was surrendered to these gentlemen and their retainers in about a fortnight's time. |