Free Custom «Methods of Control for Han China and Mauryan» Essay Paper

The Han Empire began in 206BC after the defeat of the Qin army by Prince Liu Bang. It arose after people were profoundly dissatisfied with the autocratic rule under the Qin leaders. The prince continued ruling the people in the same traditional ways as was under the Qin leaders but gradually incorporated Confucian ideals in their legalist form of government. The Mauryan/Gupta India Empire came up in 320BC uniting many different groups with after the agreement by leaders from both sides of the independent empires. The methods of control in the Han Empire and Mauryan/Gupta had both similarities and differences. They were similar since they were both had a central ruler; both had distributed uniform code of laws, and, leaders in both systems exercised bureaucracy. On the other hand, the Han used Confucian ideas in leadership while the Mauryan/Gupta India employed Hinduism. In addition, the political system in the Mauryan/Gupta Empire was weak and unclear while that in Hans Empire had a strong politically controlled leadership.

 

Type of service

Type of assignment

Title of your paper *

Academic level

Pages

Timeframe

Spacing

Currency

  Order now

This essay explicates compares and contrasts the methods of control between these two Empires.

Both of these empires had central rulers to whom issues were addressed. The Han had an emperor as their central leader, and the Mauryan/Gupta India had a King as its central leader. The leadership system ensured that decisions were made at a central place for the general control of the empires. The leaders were respected and had people who reported to the on goings of the empire. The centralized rulers ensured that all systems were unified and decisions made were uniform. Central leaders were assisted by other regional leaders who paid allegiance to them and reported to them. The centralized system expanded the empires’ borders since many traditions had been brought together from vast places. The expansion of borders exposed the empires to many risks of attack since the leadership was widely spread. The borders weakened more and were more exposed to enemies. As time went by, the leaders tried to avert the exposure to enemies by peacefully negotiating and giving gifts to the neighboring empires, this was more evident in the Han China Empire.

The forms of leadership in both empires had elements of bureaucracy. The leadership in both Dynasties developed harsh rules to govern the people. Leaders imposed harsh rules to bring the society in line with the desired quality of leadership. Bureaucracy was witnessed in taxation matters where all the people in the empire were required the necessary taxes required for the running of the government. In addition, punishments were set enacted within the society for correcting the offenders. Most people did not approve the harsh punishment as they were put to suffering. Bureaucracy was also witnessed as the rulers spent a lot of money in ceremonies at the expense of their citizens. Dogmatism and forceful practices were imposed on people and everyone was to follow in order to avert harsh punishment. A compulsory education system was set up in and those successful given jobs in the government. Bureaucracy was put in place, to govern strict behavior among people in the entire society.

Both Dynasties had a clear outline of laws on which leadership was based. The laws to govern the coexistence of citizens had to follow the laws keenly. For instance, in both dynasties, the order of reporting issues was set in place, and they had to be keenly observed. The Han China Empire was divided in small divisions under lords who were to report to the central ruler and Mauryan/Gupta Empire was divided into provinces led by royal families. In addition, laws governing taxation and entrance into leadership positions were clearly stated under their leadership systems. The laws governing the leadership were only to be set in place through thorough discussions reached upon by the different systems set up to offer leadership to the people. The laws defined the scheme of leadership to be used by leaders in the execution of their duties. The code of laws formed the constitution that was to be followed in the society.

Stay Connected

Live Chat Order now

On the other hand, Han China employed Confucian ideas in leadership while Mauryan/Gupta employed Hinduism. The political system in the Hans Empire was shaped by Confucian political and traditional ideas. The Confucian ideas had a stronger political impact than Hinduism, which was limited to culture. In fact, Confucian system was inculcated into the system as a mode of education where those who were successful directly got jobs into the political system. The political laws and guidelines were shaped by the Confucian laws and formed the basis of leadership among the entire society. On the other, Hinduism hand was a traditional worship system that formed the basis of tradition and worship. The Confucian rules used introduced some form of dogmas that were to be followed by everyone. This was due to the linkage of politics and religion. Hinduism focused on developing religion in the dynasty because it came up under a Buddha who wanted Indian religion upheld and not closely associated with politics.

The Mauryan/Gupta Empire was weaker with undefined leadership while the Hans China Empire was well structured politically. Leadership in the Mauryan/Gupta Empire was subdivided into many smaller units that weakened the Empire further; the leaders lacked the influence to exert authority on their people since they did not understand the order of leadership clearly. In the Han China Empire, the system was uninvolved with straightforward divisions and centralized decision-making where all matters were discussed under a common leader. In addition, the system of leadership in Mauryan/Gupta further weakened due to the social classes the society was comprised. The divisions further weakened the leadership quality. The defined and well-structured political system in Han China Empire formed a stronger basis for leadership in the empire compared to the Mauryan/Gupta Empire. The weaker system further exposed the Empire to enemies who easily invaded it. Negotiations experienced in Han China made it stronger as the effect of enemies was eliminated. The Hans China Empire carried out many consultations before getting to the final decision on any matter, this promoted acceptability of the dynasty making it stronger.

In conclusion, Han China Empire came up after a long spell of dictatorship from Qin leaders. The Prince, Liu Bang engaged the brutal leaders in a way eventually emerging victorious and taking over the leadership. He continued with the traditional system while gradually transforming the political system by inculcating religious matters. The Mauryan/Gupta Empire came up after a few traditions and communities merged from the former independent Mauryan and Gupta empires. Han China and Mauryan/Gupta empires were similar as they had central rulers, involved some form of bureaucracy, and, clearly stated the codes of leadership laws. On the other hand, Mauryan/Gupta Empire had a weaker and unclearly stated political system while Han China had a strong centralized political system. In addition, Han China used Confucian laws in leadership while Mauryan/Gupta used Hinduism. Hinduism lacked political authority unlike the Confucian laws that exerted political authority on the people. Both of these empires came in place, to replace the harsh dynasties that had been in place in the past.