Ancient Rulers: Comparison - Report Example

Rulers: Comparison Inasmuch as there have been various developments in leadership styles from the ancient kingships and lordships, there are a few areas of similarities. The ancient leadership styles were mainly founded on dictatorship terms, in which the royal houses ruled the commons as the subjects. It is in this light that a comparative analysis is carried out by the ancient leaders and a current leader. The ancient leaders chosen are Shi Huang-Di (Qin emperor), Emperor Justinian of Byzantine and emperor Ashoka of India. The recent leader chosen is President George W. Bush of America. Shi Huang Di, whose name at birth was Cheng, established quite an interesting leadership within China. Even though he was crowned as the king of Qin at the age of thirteen, it only became official at the Age of twenty-one. The very first achievements he made were the capturing and brought under his rule the rest of the seven states of China. In taking control of the states he deemed their enemies, he more often than not, made very ruthless and inhuman decisions. As a leader, he exuded much confidence, changing his name to Shi Huang Di, to mean ‘the first emperor’. I fact, he assured his subjects that the dynasty he had built would last over 10,000 generations (Frances 13). Under his leadership, he managed to make several achievements. Firstly, the construction of the Great Wall of China was built under his orders as a way of protecting China from the clans of the north that posed a threat. However, the construction led to the death of so many who acted as the laborers as they were subjected to too much work. He also adopted a single form of currency to be used in the dynasty, which helped unify the people. Secondly, under his rule, he initiated and accomplished various developments projects such as irrigation and road constructions all over the emperor. However, as a leader, he had several failures, for instance, his inability to pay the workers who helped in the construction of the roads, irrigation canals, as well as the high wall. Towards his death in 210BC, he had to stay in his palace for fear of being killed. Justinian, who ruled the Byzantine Empire between 527AD to 565AD, also portrays a series of good leadership skills, even though he faces various challenges in the course of his reign. As a dictator, he made a series of laws that only he interpreted, called the Justinian Code. Under the code, it was only him to make the laws as well as interpret them. Indeed, several of the modern laws are traced back to the Code. His main cause of failure, however, stemmed from the high taxes he charged that got the subjects angered. This was mainly as a result of his urge to take control over the expansive area, hence, having to maintain a large army in that effect. This shows how he failed to consult with his subjects in the running of the state. His marriage to Theodora was an even nightmare to him as she was from a commoner class, a circus performer (Sarah 31). Eventually, his reign ended very mercilessly by him having to flee after a riot between the Blues and the Greens, the two teams that participated in the chariot races he organized. Asoka succeeded his father, Bindusara, in 273BC as the ruler of Mauryan Empire. His father, dubbed “the slayer of enemies” , was a very merciless leader who involved in the war occasionally reinforcing his authority in India. As a leader, he did what was expected of him; conquering more states and extending his territory to the south (Seneviratne 21). The emperor was, however, disturbed by the sufferings that the war at Kalinga brought to the people, both the civilians and the soldiers. From this he managed to learn a great lesson, and actually changed his system of leadership. He adopted Buddhism, which made him develop very different values. He was a very kind leader from then henceforth; he even changed his leadership system from that founded on conquering and expansion to a very peaceful coexistence. Due to the peace that he managed to instill, he was able to prosper economically. He is the only leader that ruled with a profound sense of religion; Buddhism (Mookerji 116). Under his leadership, he spread messages throughout the kingdom in what was called edicts, which helped tie the people together. The command system of George Bush, unlike the previous leaders, takes a more recent approach to leadership. He became the 46th governor of Texas and managed to serve a consecutive four-year term. This made him the first to be the first governor to be elected twice consecutively. His major achievement as a leader was the ability to bring to an end the rising terrorist attacks in America on September 2001. He was a magnificent orator, who managed to move people with just his speech successfully. He was very decisive, and once he had made up his mind on something, there was not a thing that could get him change his mind on the same. For instance, he is recognized as the very first president in history who refused the inspection by the United Nations over elections in 2002 (Milkis and Nelson 1781). Under his leadership, he successfully reduced taxation imposed on the citizens; the 2001 $1.3 trillion “Bush tax cuts” . Under his reign, he signed the “No child left behind” Act whereby he authorized the elementary and secondary education. He also managed to sign several treaties and trade agreements with the neighboring states and the world as a whole. In 2001, he boldly sent soldiers to Afghanistan with the aim of overthrowing the Taliban, destroying the Al-Qaeda and the capturing of Osama Bin Laden. As a compassionate leader, he advanced the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), under which he devoted $15 billion towards eradicating AIDS in a period of five years (Milkis and Nelson 1785). In comparison, the leaderships of the aforementioned leaders have several similarities and differences. For instance, just as Ashok was concerned about the welfare of his subjects, George W. Bush also devoted to the eradication of AIDS, more so in Africa. When deeply analyzed, Ashok, however, stands out to be the most celebrated leader as he managed to live in peace with the people to a point when he died a very peaceful death. During his reign, he fostered relationships even with the neighboring empires through the slogan of coexistence rather than expansion. This is something that not even George Bush managed to foster, since rather than forging peace with the Afghans, he resorted to armed combat. Shi Huang Di, however, is portrayed as the worst leader of all the three. This may be seen from the manner in which he mistreated his subjects. For instance, he subjected the commons to the development of the dynasty yet did not pay them. Even the king of the end to the leadership that he receives an open portrayal of failure. He got to a point when he had to remain inside his palace due to threats, yet he was the leader. Works Cited Brooks, Sarah. "The Byzantine State under Justinian I (Justinian the Great)". In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/just/hd_just.htm (originally published October 2001, last revised April 2009) Duiker, William J. & al. World History: Volume I: To 1800, 5th ed., p. 78. Thomson Higher Education Publishing, 2006. ISBN 0-495-05053-9. King G., The Methodology of Presidential Research [w] In Researching the Presidency: Vital Questions, New Approaches.ed. G. C. Edwards III, J. H. Kessel, B. A. Rockman. Pittsburgh 1993, s. 387-412. Milkis S., Nelson M., The American Presidency: Origins and Development, 1776-2007, wyd. V, Washington 2008. Mookerji R. Asoka, 1962. Seneviratna (editor). King Asoka and Buddhism. Kandy Scheduled for 1993. Wood, Frances, Chinas First Emperor and His Terracotta Warriors, pp. 2–33. Macmillan Publishing, 2008. ISBN 0-312-38112-3. Read More