Rutland is represented as a boy, aged twelve years, a spectator, not a combatant, and accompanied by his tutor, Aspall. Clifford overtook him, and demanded his name. "The young gentleman dismayed, had not a word to speak, but kneeled on his knees, craving mercy and desiring grace, both with holding up his hands and making a dolorous countenance--for his speech was gone for fear." "Save him," cried Aspall, "he is a prince's son, and peradventure may do you good hereafter." Said Clifford, "By God's blood thy father slew mine, and so will I thee and all thy kin," and so smote him to the heart with his dagger, and bade the chaplain, "Go, bear him to his mother, and tell her what thou hast seen and heard." Doubtless Clifford was as red-handed a sinner as any of the barons, but probably no worse. He is said to have cut off the Duke's head, crowned it with paper, and carried it upon a pole to the Queen, exclaiming, "Madam, your war is done: here I bring your King's ransom." Such are some popular errors, perpetuated by historians who have followed the romantic versions of Grafton and Hall. Margaret did not lure York to his fate, for she was in Scotland when the battle was fought, and he did not sally out to fight a battle, but to rescue his foragers. The execution of Yorkist prisoners was simply a retaliation for the treason and blood-guiltiness of the Yorkists, and was carried out without the Queen's knowledge. Clifford may have vowed to avenge his father's death upon the house of York, and Rutland may have fallen to his sword: but the duke was in his eighteenth year, and no doubt an approved man-at-arms. As recorded, he had been attainted of treason a few months prior to his death. We may safely conclude that there were no schoolboys on Wakefield-Green on the 30th of December, 1460, and the only tutors there were tutors in arms. William of Wyrcester's account of the battle may be considered the most probable, and best authenticated:--