A war of succession or succession war is a
war prompted by a
succession crisis in which two or more individuals claim the right of successor to a
deceased or
deposedmonarch. The rivals are typically supported by factions within the royal court. Foreign powers sometimes intervene, allying themselves with a faction. This may widen the war into one between those powers.
Analysis
Terminology
In historiography and literature, a war of succession may also be referred to as a succession dispute, dynastic struggle, internecine conflict, fratricidal war, or any combination of these terms. Not all of these are necessarily describing armed conflict, however, and the dispute may be resolved without escalating into open warfare. Wars of succession are also often referred to as a civil war, when in fact it was a conflict within the royalty, or broader aristocracy, that civilians were dragged into,[1] and may therefore be a misnomer, or at least a misleading characterisation.
Elements
A war of succession is a type of
intrastate war concerning struggle for the throne: a conflict about supreme power in a
monarchy. It may become an interstate war if foreign powers intervene. A succession war may arise after (or sometimes even before) a universally recognised ruler over a certain territory passes away (sometimes without leaving behind any (legal) offspring), or is declared insane or otherwise incapable to govern, and is deposed. Next, several
pretenders step forward, who are either related to the previous ruler and therefore claim to have a right to their possessions based on the
hereditary principle, or have concluded a treaty to that effect. They will seek allies within the nobility and/or abroad to support their claims to the throne. After all options for a diplomatic solution –such as a sharing of power, or a financial deal– or a quick elimination –e.g. by assassination or arrest– have been exhausted, a military confrontation will follow.[3] Quite often such succession disputes can lead to long-lasting wars.
Some wars of succession are about women's
right to inherit. This does not exist in some countries (a "sword
fief", where the
Salic law applies, for example), but it does in others (a "spindle fief").[4] Often a ruler who has no sons, but does have one or more daughters, will try to change the
succession laws so that a daughter can succeed him. Such amendements will then be declared invalid by opponents, invoking the local
tradition.
In some cases, wars of succession could also be centred around the reign in
prince-bishoprics. Although these were formally
elective monarchies without hereditary succession, the election of the prince-bishop could be strongly intertwined with the dynastic interests of the noble families involved, each of whom would put forward their own candidates. In case of disagreement over the election result, waging war was a possible way of settling the conflict.
It can sometimes be difficult to determine whether a war was purely or primarily a war of succession, or that other interests were at play as well that shaped the conflict in an equally or more important manner, such
ideologies (
religions,
secularism,
nationalism,
liberalism,
conservatism etcetera),
economy,
territory and so on. Many wars are not called 'war of succession' because hereditary succession was not the most important element, or despite the fact that it was. Similarly, wars can always be unjustly branded a 'war of succession' whilst the succession was actually not the most important issue hanging in the balance.
Polemology
The origins of succession wars lie in
feudal or
absolutist systems of government, in which the decisions on war and peace could be made by a single
sovereign without the population's consent. The politics of the respective rulers was mainly driven by dynastic interests. German historian Johannes Kunisch (1937–2015) ascertained: "The all-driving power was the dynasties' law of the prestige of power, the expansion of power, and the desire to maintain themselves."[1] Moreover, the legal and political coherence of the various provinces of a 'state territory' often consisted merely in nothing more than having a common ruler. Early government systems were therefore based on dynasties, the extinction of which immediately brought on a state crisis. The composition of the governmental instutitutions of the various provinces and territories also eased their partitioning in case of a conflict, just like the status of claims on individual parts of the country by foreign monarchs.[5]
To wage a war, a justification is needed (Jus ad bellum). These arguments may be put forward in a
declaration of war, to indicate that one is justly taking up arms. As the Dutch lawyer
Hugo Grotius (1583–1645) noted, these must make clear that one is unable to pursue their rightful claims in any other way.[6] The claims to legal titles from the dynasic sphere were a strong reason for war, because international relations primarily consisted of inheritance and marriage policies until the end of the
Ancien Régime. These were often so intertwined that it had to lead to conflict. Treaties that led to hereditary linkages,
pawning and transfers, made various relations more complicated, and could be utilised for claims as well. That claims were made at all is due to the permanent struggle for competition and prestige between the respective ruling houses. On top of that came the urge of contemporary princes to achieve "
glory" for themselves.[5]
After numerous familial conflicts, the principle of
primogeniture originated in
Western Europe the 11th century, spreading to the rest of Europe (with the exception of Russia) in the 12th and 13th century; it has never evolved outside
Europe.[7] However, it has not prevented the outbreak of wars of succession. A true deluge of succession wars occurred in Europa between the
Thirty Years' War (1618–1648) and the
Coalition Wars (1792–1815).[8] According to German historian Heinz Duchhardt (1943) the outbreak of wars of succession in the
early modern period was stimulated on the one hand by the uncertainty about the degree to which regulations and agreements on hereditary succession were to be considered a respectable part of emerging
international law. On the other hand, there was also a lack of effective means to provide them recognition and validation.[9]
According to British statesman
Henry Brougham (
Lord Chancellor 1830–34), there were more and longer wars of succession in Europe between
1066 and the
French Revolution (1789–99) than all other wars put together. "A war of succession is the most lasting of wars. The hereditary principle keeps it in perpetual life – [whereas] a war of
election is always short, and never revives," he opined, arguing for elective monarchy to solve the problem.[10]
In the
Mughal Empire, there was no tradition of primogeniture.[11] Instead it was customary for sons to overthrow their father and for brothers to war to the death among themselves.[12]
List of wars of succession
Note: Wars of succession in
transcontinental states are mentioned under the continents where their capital city was located. Names of wars that have been given names by historians are capitalised; the others, whose existence has been proven but not given a specific name, are provisionally written in lowercase letters (except for the first word, geographical and personal names).
Numidian war of succession (118–112 BCE), after the death of king
Micipsa of
Numidia; this spilled over into the Roman–Numidian
Jugurthine War (112–106 BCE)
(legendary) War of
David against
Ish-bosheth (c. 1007–1005 BCE), after the death of king
Saul of the
united Kingdom of Israel. It is uncertain whether this event actually occurred as narrated in the
Hebrew Bible. It allegedly began as a war of secession, namely of Judah (David) from Israel (Ish-bosheth), but eventually the conflict was about the succession of Saul in both Israel and Judah
Jin wars of succession (8th century–376 BCE), a series of wars over control of the Chinese feudal
state of Jin (part of the increasingly powerless
Zhou Dynasty)
Jin–Quwo wars (739–678 BCE), dynastic struggles between two branches of Jin's ruling house
War of the Zhou succession (635 BCE), where Jin assisted
King Xiang of Zhou against his brother, Prince Dai, who claimed the Zhou throne
Partition of Jin (c. 481–403 BCE), a series of wars between rival noble families of Jin, who eventually sought to divide the state's territory amongst themselves at the expense of Jin's ruling house. The state was definitively carved up between the successor states of
Zhao,
Wei and
Han in 376 BCE.
Warring States period (c. 403–221 BCE), a series of dynastic interstate and intrastate wars during the
Eastern Zhou dynasty of China over succession and territory
War of the Wei succession (370–367 BCE), after the death of
Marquess Wu of Wei
Qin's wars of unification (230–221 BCE), to enforce Qin's claim to succeeding the Zhou dynasty (which during the
Western Zhou period ruled all the Chinese states), that Qin had ended in 256 BCE
Seleucid Dynastic Wars (157–63 BCE), a series of wars of succession that were fought between competing branches of the Seleucid Royal household for control of the
Seleucid Empire
Mughal war of succession (1540–1552), between the brothers
Humayun and
Kamran Mirza about the succession of their already 10 years earlier deceased father, emperor
Babur of the Mughal Empire[27]
Safavid war of succession (1576–1578), after the death of shah
Tahmasp I of Persia[28]
Mughal war of succession (1601–1605), in advance of the death of emperor
Akbar of the Mughal Empire[29]
Mughal war of succession (1627–1628), after the death of emperor
Nuruddin Salim Jahangir of the Mughal Empire
Mughal war of succession (1657–1661),[30] after grave illness of emperor
Shah Jahan of the Mughal Empire[12]
Second Anglo-Maratha War (1803–1805), pretender
Baji Rao II, son van Raghunath Rao, triumphed with British help and became peshwa, but had to surrender much power and territory to the British
Third Anglo-Maratha War, also Pindari War (1816–1819), peshwa Baji Rao II revolted against the British in vain; the Maratha Empire was annexed
In the war of the Bone succession (1858–1860), the Dutch supported pretender Ahmad Sinkkaru' Rukka against queen Besse Arung Kajuara after the death of her husband, king Aru Pugi[36][37]
In the War of the Wajo Succession (1858–1861), the Dutch supported pretender Pata Hassim after the death of raja Tulla[38]
War of the Northumbrian succession (865–867), between king
Osberht and king
Ælla of
Northumbria; their infighting was interrupted when the
Great Heathen Army invaded, against which they vainly joined forces
Fourth Crusade (1202–1204), was redirected to Constantinople to intervene in a Byzantine succession dispute after the deposition of emperor
Isaac II Angelos
First Barons' War (1215–1217). The war began as a Barons' revolt over king
John Lackland's violation of the
Magna Carta, but quickly turned into a dynastic war for the throne of England when French
crownprince Louis became their champion, and John Lackland unexpectedly passed away
First War of Scottish Independence (1296–1328), after Scottish opposition to Edward's interference reached the point of rebellion, Edward marched against Scotland, defeating and imprisoning John Balliol, stripping him off the kingship, and effectively annexing Scotland. However,
William Wallace and
Andrew Moray rose up against Edward and assumed the title of "guardians of Scotland" on behalf of John Balliol, passing this title on to
Robert the Bruce (one of the claimants during the Great Cause) and
John III Comyn in 1298. The former killed the latter in 1306, and was crowned king of Scots shortly after, in opposition to both Edward and the still imprisoned John Balliol.[42]
Henry IV of France's succession (1589–1594). King Henry of Navarre became king
Henry IV of France after the death of both duke
Henry of Guise and king
Henry III of France. Spain continued to intervene, claiming the French throne for infanta
Isabella Clara Eugenia instead.[44] To appease Catholics, Henry IV converted to Catholicism in 1593, under the condition that Protestants be tolerated; his kingship was increasingly recognised in France.
Franco-Spanish War (1595–1598). King Henry IV of France, uniting French Protestants and Catholics, declared war on Spain directly to counter Spanish infanta
Isabella Clara Eugenia's claim to the French throne.
Russian interregnum of 1825 (1825–1826), after the death of tsar
Alexander I of Russia, who had secretly changed the order of succession from his brother
Constantine in favour of his younger brother
Nicholas, neither of which wanted to rule. Two related but different rebel movements arose to offer their solution to the succession crisis: the aristocratic Petersburg-based group favoured a constitutional monarchy under Constantine, the democratic Kiev-based group of
Pavel Pestel called for the establishment of a republic.[47]
Decembrist revolt (December 1825), by the aristocratic Decembrists in Saint Petersburg
Spanish Civil War (1936–1939), in which both Carlist and Bourbonist monarchists vied to restore the monachy (abolished in 1931) in favour of their own dynasty
Tepanec war of succession (1426–1428), after the death of king
Tezozomoc of
Azcapotzalco; this led to the formation of the anti-Tepanec Triple Alliance, better known as the
Aztec Empire[48]
^In the strict sense, the Three Kingdoms Period didn't begin until 220, when the last Han emperor
Xian was forced to abdicate by
Cao Pi, who proclaimed himself emperor of the
Wei dynasty. This claim was soon challenged by
Liu Bei, who pretended to be the rightful successor to Xian, and crowned himself emperor of "
Shu-Han" (221), and
Sun Quan, who first received the title of "king of
Wu" by Cao Pi before becoming the third claimant to the imperial title in 229. However, the dismemberment of the Chinese Empire by infighting warlords had already begun in 184, when the
Yellow Turban Rebellion and the
Liang Province Rebellion broke out. Although the former was put down, the latter was maintained, and the rebels continued to form a de facto autonomous state in Liang for two more decades. The emperorship itself was already in danger in 189 when, after the death of emperor Ling first the
eunuchs and later
Dong Zhuo seized control at the imperial court, against which the governors and nobility rose fruitlessly, before getting into combat with each other and setting up rival warlord states.
References
^
ab(in German)Johannes Kunisch, Staatsverfassung und Mächtepolitik - Zur Genese von Staatenkonflikten im Zeitalter des Absolutismus (Berlin 1979), p. 16.
^
ab(in German)Johannes Kunisch, La guerre - c’est moi! - Zum Problem der Staatenkonflikte im Zeitalter des Absolutismus, in: ders.: Fürst, Gesellschaft, Krieg - Studien zur bellizistischen Disposition des absoluten Fürstenstaates (Cologne/Weimar/Vienna 1992), p. 21–27.
^(in German)Heinz Duchhardt, Krieg und Frieden im Zeitalter Ludwigs XIV. (Düsseldorf 1987), p. 20.
^Robert I. Moore, The First European Revolution: 970-1215 (2000), p. 66. Wiley-Blackwell.
^(in German)Gerhard Papke, Von der Miliz zum Stehenden Heer - Wehrwesen im Absolutismus, in: Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (publisher) Deutsche Militärgeschichte 1648–1939, Vol.1 (Munich 1983), p. 186f.
^(in German)Heinz Duchhardt, Krieg und Frieden im Zeitalter Ludwigs XIV. (Düsseldorf 1987), p. 17.
A war of succession or succession war is a
war prompted by a
succession crisis in which two or more individuals claim the right of successor to a
deceased or
deposedmonarch. The rivals are typically supported by factions within the royal court. Foreign powers sometimes intervene, allying themselves with a faction. This may widen the war into one between those powers.
Analysis
Terminology
In historiography and literature, a war of succession may also be referred to as a succession dispute, dynastic struggle, internecine conflict, fratricidal war, or any combination of these terms. Not all of these are necessarily describing armed conflict, however, and the dispute may be resolved without escalating into open warfare. Wars of succession are also often referred to as a civil war, when in fact it was a conflict within the royalty, or broader aristocracy, that civilians were dragged into,[1] and may therefore be a misnomer, or at least a misleading characterisation.
Elements
A war of succession is a type of
intrastate war concerning struggle for the throne: a conflict about supreme power in a
monarchy. It may become an interstate war if foreign powers intervene. A succession war may arise after (or sometimes even before) a universally recognised ruler over a certain territory passes away (sometimes without leaving behind any (legal) offspring), or is declared insane or otherwise incapable to govern, and is deposed. Next, several
pretenders step forward, who are either related to the previous ruler and therefore claim to have a right to their possessions based on the
hereditary principle, or have concluded a treaty to that effect. They will seek allies within the nobility and/or abroad to support their claims to the throne. After all options for a diplomatic solution –such as a sharing of power, or a financial deal– or a quick elimination –e.g. by assassination or arrest– have been exhausted, a military confrontation will follow.[3] Quite often such succession disputes can lead to long-lasting wars.
Some wars of succession are about women's
right to inherit. This does not exist in some countries (a "sword
fief", where the
Salic law applies, for example), but it does in others (a "spindle fief").[4] Often a ruler who has no sons, but does have one or more daughters, will try to change the
succession laws so that a daughter can succeed him. Such amendements will then be declared invalid by opponents, invoking the local
tradition.
In some cases, wars of succession could also be centred around the reign in
prince-bishoprics. Although these were formally
elective monarchies without hereditary succession, the election of the prince-bishop could be strongly intertwined with the dynastic interests of the noble families involved, each of whom would put forward their own candidates. In case of disagreement over the election result, waging war was a possible way of settling the conflict.
It can sometimes be difficult to determine whether a war was purely or primarily a war of succession, or that other interests were at play as well that shaped the conflict in an equally or more important manner, such
ideologies (
religions,
secularism,
nationalism,
liberalism,
conservatism etcetera),
economy,
territory and so on. Many wars are not called 'war of succession' because hereditary succession was not the most important element, or despite the fact that it was. Similarly, wars can always be unjustly branded a 'war of succession' whilst the succession was actually not the most important issue hanging in the balance.
Polemology
The origins of succession wars lie in
feudal or
absolutist systems of government, in which the decisions on war and peace could be made by a single
sovereign without the population's consent. The politics of the respective rulers was mainly driven by dynastic interests. German historian Johannes Kunisch (1937–2015) ascertained: "The all-driving power was the dynasties' law of the prestige of power, the expansion of power, and the desire to maintain themselves."[1] Moreover, the legal and political coherence of the various provinces of a 'state territory' often consisted merely in nothing more than having a common ruler. Early government systems were therefore based on dynasties, the extinction of which immediately brought on a state crisis. The composition of the governmental instutitutions of the various provinces and territories also eased their partitioning in case of a conflict, just like the status of claims on individual parts of the country by foreign monarchs.[5]
To wage a war, a justification is needed (Jus ad bellum). These arguments may be put forward in a
declaration of war, to indicate that one is justly taking up arms. As the Dutch lawyer
Hugo Grotius (1583–1645) noted, these must make clear that one is unable to pursue their rightful claims in any other way.[6] The claims to legal titles from the dynasic sphere were a strong reason for war, because international relations primarily consisted of inheritance and marriage policies until the end of the
Ancien Régime. These were often so intertwined that it had to lead to conflict. Treaties that led to hereditary linkages,
pawning and transfers, made various relations more complicated, and could be utilised for claims as well. That claims were made at all is due to the permanent struggle for competition and prestige between the respective ruling houses. On top of that came the urge of contemporary princes to achieve "
glory" for themselves.[5]
After numerous familial conflicts, the principle of
primogeniture originated in
Western Europe the 11th century, spreading to the rest of Europe (with the exception of Russia) in the 12th and 13th century; it has never evolved outside
Europe.[7] However, it has not prevented the outbreak of wars of succession. A true deluge of succession wars occurred in Europa between the
Thirty Years' War (1618–1648) and the
Coalition Wars (1792–1815).[8] According to German historian Heinz Duchhardt (1943) the outbreak of wars of succession in the
early modern period was stimulated on the one hand by the uncertainty about the degree to which regulations and agreements on hereditary succession were to be considered a respectable part of emerging
international law. On the other hand, there was also a lack of effective means to provide them recognition and validation.[9]
According to British statesman
Henry Brougham (
Lord Chancellor 1830–34), there were more and longer wars of succession in Europe between
1066 and the
French Revolution (1789–99) than all other wars put together. "A war of succession is the most lasting of wars. The hereditary principle keeps it in perpetual life – [whereas] a war of
election is always short, and never revives," he opined, arguing for elective monarchy to solve the problem.[10]
In the
Mughal Empire, there was no tradition of primogeniture.[11] Instead it was customary for sons to overthrow their father and for brothers to war to the death among themselves.[12]
List of wars of succession
Note: Wars of succession in
transcontinental states are mentioned under the continents where their capital city was located. Names of wars that have been given names by historians are capitalised; the others, whose existence has been proven but not given a specific name, are provisionally written in lowercase letters (except for the first word, geographical and personal names).
Numidian war of succession (118–112 BCE), after the death of king
Micipsa of
Numidia; this spilled over into the Roman–Numidian
Jugurthine War (112–106 BCE)
(legendary) War of
David against
Ish-bosheth (c. 1007–1005 BCE), after the death of king
Saul of the
united Kingdom of Israel. It is uncertain whether this event actually occurred as narrated in the
Hebrew Bible. It allegedly began as a war of secession, namely of Judah (David) from Israel (Ish-bosheth), but eventually the conflict was about the succession of Saul in both Israel and Judah
Jin wars of succession (8th century–376 BCE), a series of wars over control of the Chinese feudal
state of Jin (part of the increasingly powerless
Zhou Dynasty)
Jin–Quwo wars (739–678 BCE), dynastic struggles between two branches of Jin's ruling house
War of the Zhou succession (635 BCE), where Jin assisted
King Xiang of Zhou against his brother, Prince Dai, who claimed the Zhou throne
Partition of Jin (c. 481–403 BCE), a series of wars between rival noble families of Jin, who eventually sought to divide the state's territory amongst themselves at the expense of Jin's ruling house. The state was definitively carved up between the successor states of
Zhao,
Wei and
Han in 376 BCE.
Warring States period (c. 403–221 BCE), a series of dynastic interstate and intrastate wars during the
Eastern Zhou dynasty of China over succession and territory
War of the Wei succession (370–367 BCE), after the death of
Marquess Wu of Wei
Qin's wars of unification (230–221 BCE), to enforce Qin's claim to succeeding the Zhou dynasty (which during the
Western Zhou period ruled all the Chinese states), that Qin had ended in 256 BCE
Seleucid Dynastic Wars (157–63 BCE), a series of wars of succession that were fought between competing branches of the Seleucid Royal household for control of the
Seleucid Empire
Mughal war of succession (1540–1552), between the brothers
Humayun and
Kamran Mirza about the succession of their already 10 years earlier deceased father, emperor
Babur of the Mughal Empire[27]
Safavid war of succession (1576–1578), after the death of shah
Tahmasp I of Persia[28]
Mughal war of succession (1601–1605), in advance of the death of emperor
Akbar of the Mughal Empire[29]
Mughal war of succession (1627–1628), after the death of emperor
Nuruddin Salim Jahangir of the Mughal Empire
Mughal war of succession (1657–1661),[30] after grave illness of emperor
Shah Jahan of the Mughal Empire[12]
Second Anglo-Maratha War (1803–1805), pretender
Baji Rao II, son van Raghunath Rao, triumphed with British help and became peshwa, but had to surrender much power and territory to the British
Third Anglo-Maratha War, also Pindari War (1816–1819), peshwa Baji Rao II revolted against the British in vain; the Maratha Empire was annexed
In the war of the Bone succession (1858–1860), the Dutch supported pretender Ahmad Sinkkaru' Rukka against queen Besse Arung Kajuara after the death of her husband, king Aru Pugi[36][37]
In the War of the Wajo Succession (1858–1861), the Dutch supported pretender Pata Hassim after the death of raja Tulla[38]
War of the Northumbrian succession (865–867), between king
Osberht and king
Ælla of
Northumbria; their infighting was interrupted when the
Great Heathen Army invaded, against which they vainly joined forces
Fourth Crusade (1202–1204), was redirected to Constantinople to intervene in a Byzantine succession dispute after the deposition of emperor
Isaac II Angelos
First Barons' War (1215–1217). The war began as a Barons' revolt over king
John Lackland's violation of the
Magna Carta, but quickly turned into a dynastic war for the throne of England when French
crownprince Louis became their champion, and John Lackland unexpectedly passed away
First War of Scottish Independence (1296–1328), after Scottish opposition to Edward's interference reached the point of rebellion, Edward marched against Scotland, defeating and imprisoning John Balliol, stripping him off the kingship, and effectively annexing Scotland. However,
William Wallace and
Andrew Moray rose up against Edward and assumed the title of "guardians of Scotland" on behalf of John Balliol, passing this title on to
Robert the Bruce (one of the claimants during the Great Cause) and
John III Comyn in 1298. The former killed the latter in 1306, and was crowned king of Scots shortly after, in opposition to both Edward and the still imprisoned John Balliol.[42]
Henry IV of France's succession (1589–1594). King Henry of Navarre became king
Henry IV of France after the death of both duke
Henry of Guise and king
Henry III of France. Spain continued to intervene, claiming the French throne for infanta
Isabella Clara Eugenia instead.[44] To appease Catholics, Henry IV converted to Catholicism in 1593, under the condition that Protestants be tolerated; his kingship was increasingly recognised in France.
Franco-Spanish War (1595–1598). King Henry IV of France, uniting French Protestants and Catholics, declared war on Spain directly to counter Spanish infanta
Isabella Clara Eugenia's claim to the French throne.
Russian interregnum of 1825 (1825–1826), after the death of tsar
Alexander I of Russia, who had secretly changed the order of succession from his brother
Constantine in favour of his younger brother
Nicholas, neither of which wanted to rule. Two related but different rebel movements arose to offer their solution to the succession crisis: the aristocratic Petersburg-based group favoured a constitutional monarchy under Constantine, the democratic Kiev-based group of
Pavel Pestel called for the establishment of a republic.[47]
Decembrist revolt (December 1825), by the aristocratic Decembrists in Saint Petersburg
Spanish Civil War (1936–1939), in which both Carlist and Bourbonist monarchists vied to restore the monachy (abolished in 1931) in favour of their own dynasty
Tepanec war of succession (1426–1428), after the death of king
Tezozomoc of
Azcapotzalco; this led to the formation of the anti-Tepanec Triple Alliance, better known as the
Aztec Empire[48]
^In the strict sense, the Three Kingdoms Period didn't begin until 220, when the last Han emperor
Xian was forced to abdicate by
Cao Pi, who proclaimed himself emperor of the
Wei dynasty. This claim was soon challenged by
Liu Bei, who pretended to be the rightful successor to Xian, and crowned himself emperor of "
Shu-Han" (221), and
Sun Quan, who first received the title of "king of
Wu" by Cao Pi before becoming the third claimant to the imperial title in 229. However, the dismemberment of the Chinese Empire by infighting warlords had already begun in 184, when the
Yellow Turban Rebellion and the
Liang Province Rebellion broke out. Although the former was put down, the latter was maintained, and the rebels continued to form a de facto autonomous state in Liang for two more decades. The emperorship itself was already in danger in 189 when, after the death of emperor Ling first the
eunuchs and later
Dong Zhuo seized control at the imperial court, against which the governors and nobility rose fruitlessly, before getting into combat with each other and setting up rival warlord states.
References
^
ab(in German)Johannes Kunisch, Staatsverfassung und Mächtepolitik - Zur Genese von Staatenkonflikten im Zeitalter des Absolutismus (Berlin 1979), p. 16.
^
ab(in German)Johannes Kunisch, La guerre - c’est moi! - Zum Problem der Staatenkonflikte im Zeitalter des Absolutismus, in: ders.: Fürst, Gesellschaft, Krieg - Studien zur bellizistischen Disposition des absoluten Fürstenstaates (Cologne/Weimar/Vienna 1992), p. 21–27.
^(in German)Heinz Duchhardt, Krieg und Frieden im Zeitalter Ludwigs XIV. (Düsseldorf 1987), p. 20.
^Robert I. Moore, The First European Revolution: 970-1215 (2000), p. 66. Wiley-Blackwell.
^(in German)Gerhard Papke, Von der Miliz zum Stehenden Heer - Wehrwesen im Absolutismus, in: Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (publisher) Deutsche Militärgeschichte 1648–1939, Vol.1 (Munich 1983), p. 186f.
^(in German)Heinz Duchhardt, Krieg und Frieden im Zeitalter Ludwigs XIV. (Düsseldorf 1987), p. 17.