#who just loves books and his brother
One of the most interesting textual inconsistencies in Captive Prince is who died first–Aleron or Auguste. In book 1, when Damen is reflecting on Marlas he recalls how Auguste was able to hold the army together after his father’s death. In book three, though, Paschal suggests that Aleron’s death was caused, in part, by carelessness in the wake of Auguste’s death.
And this is interesting because each scenario has cool implications, and I kind of like it both ways. On the one hand, the idea of Auguste, king-for-an-afternoon, putting aside his grief to defend his country is really poignant. The fact that the army had such utter confidence in the crown prince that Aleron’s death didn’t break them speaks to just how strong a leader Auguste was. And if Aleron died first, surely Damen knew that the king of Vere was dead when he went to the front lines to challenge Auguste. He would have known that killing Auguste would not only break the Veretian lines but also win the battle, win the war, leave Vere kingless. It’s not just a military move, it’s a political one.
On the other hand, the idea of Auguste dying first and Aleron basically ignoring Laurent and taking stupid risks adds an interesting perspective on all three characters and on Laurent’s childhood. I mean, it’s heartbreaking, and while we already know that Aleron and Laurent were never close, this suggests an even more distant relationship than I would have assumed. (My personal take is that Laurent wasn’t surprised, at his trial, by the idea that his father thought he had nothing to live for after Auguste died, but he is surprised that it was obvious to a comparative outsider like Paschal.) But to discuss this more charitably, it’s hard to act rationally in the immediate wake of losing a loved one, and it seems like Aleron reacts to pain by pushing people away and making ill-thought-out choices–which is, of course, what Laurent does as well.
Finally, either scenario makes me wonder about the regent’s plans. Had he been planning to kill both Aleron and Auguste in one battle? Was there another archer waiting to kill Auguste and make it look like an accident? My sense is no, that both king and crown prince being killed by stray arrows would have looked too suspicious. So if Aleron died first, had the regent resigned himself to a power struggle with Auguste until he’s able to kill him later? On the other hand, if Auguste dies first–well, he was probably closer to the front lines than Aleron and more likely to be killed in battle. Did the regent’s assassin have orders to only shoot the king if Auguste had already been killed in the fighting?
There is also the possibility of false information
Imagine the Regent knowing Aleron just enough to know he’d show weakness if he thought his heir was dead. We know all three of the royals were fighting. Laurent said he fought at Marlas, and Aleron had to remove a helmet. But they were probably in different places ! Informations in battles like those are always slower than we’d like. Laurent saw his brother die. That’s how he knew Damen’s face. So they weren’t that far. But what if, even before Auguste was dead, the Regent sent news of his death to his father ? Struck by grief, he removes his helmet and the Regent can send the arrow. If Auguste didn’t die and questions about how he thought his son was dead should arise, the regent would just brush it off as chaos of battle and misinformation.
So Laurent came back to camp after watching his brother fall, knowing they lost the battle, and comes face to face to a triumphant uncle who announce the death of his father. Timing of information in the heart of a battle wouldn’t even be questionned.
