# Dynastic battle where both claimants die **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 18, 2016, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599 "2016-04-18T22:39:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2016, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/1 "2016-04-18T22:39:44Z")
Dynatic battles are common in European history. The old king dies, two relatives (soms, brothers, nephews, whatever) raise armies and battle for the throne. The two most famous in English history are probably the Battle of Hastings and Bosworth Field. In each of those, one claimant died and the other became king. Has there ever been such a battle where both claimants died? ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/2 "2016-04-19T00:17:36Z")
I’m almost _sure_ it must have happened at some level ( maybe not king vs. king, but at some other level of contested title ). But I’m blanking on any instances for the moment. I can think of battles were both commanders died ( i.e. Lazar and Murad I at Kosovo in 1389 ), but that wasn’t in the context of a dynastic dispute. And I can think of ones where the rival dynast won a key battle, only to die immediately afterwards of his wounds and render his victory moot ( i.e. anti-king Rudolf of Rheinfelden vs. HRE Henry IV in 1080 ). But obviously neither of those scenarios meet your criteria. ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/3 "2016-04-19T03:33:33Z")
Dying of wounds sustained in the battle would count, but Henry survived that battle, so it’s not what I’m looking for. I’m mostly wondering what would happen if both claimants die before the dispute is resolved. I wonder what they do in that situation. I suppose new claimants would come out of the woodwork to fill the power vacuum. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/4 "2016-04-19T03:55:30Z")
> [@dtilque](#): > > Dying of wounds sustained in the battle would count, but Henry survived that battle, so it’s not what I’m looking for. > > I’m mostly wondering what would happen if both claimants die before the dispute is resolved. I wonder what they do in that situation. I suppose new claimants would come out of the woodwork to fill the power vacuum. You’d expect each of the claimants to have an heir/successor, so in theory the quarrel could be further prosecuted by their respective successors. In practice, of course, it will depend on the outcome of the battle. If the battle resulted not only in the deaths of the claimants but also in a decisive victory for one side over the other, the successor on the vanquished side may decide that it would be prudent not to pursue the claim. So instead he will submit, and marry the other successor’s sister or daughter or something. It wasn’t strictly speaking a dynastic squabble, but the Battle of Clontarf was fought in 1014 between forces under Brian Boru, High King of Ireland, on the one hand and a alliance between the Norse Dubliners under Sitric Silkbeard and Irish forces under Máel Mórda mac Murchada, king of Leinster, on the other. At stake was the question of whether Dublin and Leinster would be subject to Brian, or not. The outcome was a decisive victory for Brian’s forces, but both Brian and Máel Mórda died. Sitric survived, and remained King of Dublin, but having lost the battle he was very much a secondary power from then on, and Dublin never achieved the independence for which Sitric had fought. As I say, not a dynastic squabble, but I think the principle holds good. Individuals are dispensible; what matters in a battle is not which leaders died and which survived, but which side won and which side lost. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/5 "2016-04-19T06:26:02Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > You’d expect each of the claimants to have an heir/successor, so in theory the quarrel could be further prosecuted by their respective successors. The Wars of the Roses are an extended example of this. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 6:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/6 "2016-04-19T06:32:40Z")
Which kind of makes the point that dynastic wars are not really wars between different individuals, but wars between different families/tribes/interest groups. Thus the death of a leader on one side or other doesn’t automatically end the war. ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/7 "2016-04-19T07:10:20Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > Which kind of makes the point that dynastic wars are not really wars between different individuals, but wars between different families/tribes/interest groups. And nature abhors a [power] vacuum. Think Mafia “families”… ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 8:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/8 "2016-04-19T08:51:04Z")
Some pre-modern cultures believed in exile/shunning instead of retribution. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 10:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/9 "2016-04-19T10:30:30Z")
> [@PastTense](#): > > Some pre-modern cultures believed in exile/shunning instead of retribution. Exile is a form of retribution and one which is still extant. ---
**Author:** ![bob\_2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bob_2/32/3341_2.png) [@bob\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bob_2)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/10 "2016-04-19T11:19:46Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > You’d expect each of the claimants to have an heir/successor, so in theory the quarrel could be further prosecuted by their respective successors. > > In practice, of course, it will depend on the outcome of the battle. If the battle resulted not only in the deaths of the claimants but also in a decisive victory for one side over the other, the successor on the vanquished side may decide that it would be prudent not to pursue the claim. So instead he will submit, and marry the other successor’s sister or daughter or something. After William Stanley betrayed Richard at Bosworth, Henry married Elizabeth of York (daughter of Edward IV) and in doing so he united the houses of Lancaster and York. (sort of…) ---
**Author:** ![Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/d9b06d/32.png) [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boozahol_Squid_P.I)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/11 "2016-04-19T11:47:44Z")
> [@bob\_2](#): > > After William Stanley betrayed Richard at Bosworth, Henry married Elizabeth of York (daughter of Edward IV) and in doing so he united the houses of Lancaster and York. (sort of…) There really wasn’t any House of Lancaster left at that point, was there? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/12 "2016-04-19T12:30:49Z")
Well, there was Henry. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/13 "2016-04-19T13:45:15Z")
> [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](#): > > There really wasn’t any House of Lancaster left at that point, was there? King John II of Portugal, who was actually the legitimate Lancaster claimant (though John didn’t seem to have any interest in it). ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/14 "2016-04-19T13:58:11Z")
Not the same battle, but Harald Godwinson and Harald Hardrada were killed days apart at the Battles of Stamford Bridge and Hastings. Of course, that left a third claimant alive - William the Conqueror. ---
**Author:** ![Doyle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doyle/32/439_2.png) [@Doyle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doyle)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/15 "2016-04-19T17:37:49Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > It wasn’t strictly speaking a dynastic squabble, but the Battle of Clontarf was fought in 1014 between forces under Brian Boru, High King of Ireland, on the one hand and a alliance between the Norse Dubliners under Sitric Silkbeard and Irish forces under Máel Mórda mac Murchada, king of Leinster, on the other. At stake was the question of whether Dublin and Leinster would be subject to Brian, or not. The outcome was a decisive victory for Brian’s forces, but both Brian and Máel Mórda died. Sitric survived, and remained King of Dublin, but having lost the battle he was very much a secondary power from then on, and Dublin never achieved the independence for which Sitric had fought. Not dynastic, but the fleeing viking that killed Brian was supposedly of some note. > **[Lion of Ireland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_of_Ireland)** > > Lion of Ireland, by the American-Irish author Morgan Llywelyn, is a novel about the life of the Irish hero and High King Brian Boru. > The story begins with Brian as a child of around 8 or 9 and it ends with him as an 88-year-old man. The book shows his rise to power and his struggle to maintain it. His personal life is an important part of the plot, because Brian's war against Máel Mórda (leader of the Leinstermen) and Sihtric (king of Dublin) was to be inextricably connected with his complicat... Fun reading on the subject. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2016, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dynastic-battle-where-both-claimants-die/752599/16 "2016-04-20T01:12:57Z")
> [@Doyle](#): > > Not dynastic, but the fleeing viking that killed Brian was supposedly of some note. > > [Lion of Ireland - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_of_Ireland) > > Fun reading on the subject. Fun, but not necessarily accurate. Icelandic sources say that Brian was killed by Brodir of Man who, yes, was a figure of some note. But other sources say that it was Brian who killed Brodir. All that can be said with confidence is that both of them died at the Battle of Clontarf.