1. The princess is number one to blame for her own death by leaving the castle; subsequently, she was killed just as the king inferred. Next if the madman were not at the drawbridge, the princess may have gotten away with sneaking off; however, he was ultimately her cause of death and is second most responsible after herself. These two characters could switch, but the princess was given orders to not leave or her punishment would be death, yet she disobeys and the end result is death. Requesting the princess to not leave for six months is harsh, after knowing the pain of being lonely the king decides to put the same burden on her. If the king did not put that limitation on the princess, she would have not been pressured into crossing the bridge once more. Seeing the lumber jack attracted the princess to cross the bridge and break the kings request; furthermore, when asked to help he coward and was not of any aid to the princess. Which was a not a minor nor major reason for the princess’s death, but he is …show more content…
Criteria used to order them greatest to least responsible would be their involvement and actions with the princess during the crisis. If there was no involvement with the princess then there would have not been a penalty of death. But from every characters involvement throughout the story, little by little caused the horrific incident. Actions speak better than words, which is demonstrated greatly in this short story. Without the madman’s excessive blood thirst, the princess may have lived without the king knowing a single detail. If the lumber jack decided to be a fighter, the two possibly could have made it through the madman. Yet he decides to be a coward and let the princess handle the situation. Stubborn, the fisherman has an act of greed instead of generosity to the princess, without his boat she incapable of getting passed the moat. The loyal nursemaid, was of no help in lending money, yet the princess should have not left the castle without any