In what sense can both Laertes and Hamlet be regarded as victors in Hamlet?

This is a really interesting question to consider, and the
way to approach it, in my opinion, is to think about how, although both Laertes and
Hamlet obviously die, in their deaths they achieve peace with themselves and revenge
against their common enemy: Claudius.

Laertes seems to
undergo a kind of epiphany before he dies, when he realises how he has been used and
manipulated by Claudius. His confession of their plot and then the way that he is able
to see Claudius being punished and killed for his transgressions enable him to die
"victorious" in a sense, because he recognises who the real villain is and exchanges
forgiveness with Hamlet:

readability="9">

Exchange forgiveness with me, noble
Hamlet;

Mine and my father's death come not upon
thee,

Nor thine on
me.

Thus having made peace
with Hamlet and with himself, Laertes could be argued to die
victorious.

Hamlet, too, can be argued to be victorious by
the kind of death he achieves. He dies having avenged his father, relinquishing his
kingdom to Fortinbrass whom he identifies as his natural heir and also ensures that
Horatio will not kill himself so he can stay to tell Hamlet's story. His last line, "The
rest is silence," can finally indicate a victory over the conflict that dogs Hamlet
throughout the play, when he can embrace death because he has done what the Ghost asked
of him. The sense of peace that Hamlet has at the beginning of the final scene in his
conversation with Horatio is now fulfilled, and he can do what he has always wanted to
do: to die and leave this "harsh world," as he tells Horatio.