Related questions with answers
Some scholars have made a distinction between "power," the ability of rulers to coerce their subjects into some required behavior, and "authority," the ability of those rulers to persuade their subjects to obey voluntarily by convincing them that it is proper, right, or natural to do so. What appeals to "power" and "authority" can you find in these documents? How does the balance between them differ among these documents?
Solution
VerifiedThe power of the Indian rulers, such as Ashoka himself at the beginning of his reign, entails trouble, war, people's aversion to the ruler, fear among the people, but it is also indisputable that under the influence of the ruler's power the rule of law is achieved. After a while, Ashoka himself realized that showing power was wrong and that the people would not follow you if you showed them power, but authority, which we find in the Chinese document. Rulers who showed authority to the people, not power, found respect for the people, where the people, out of that respect for the ruler, respected the law, which is natural. If the ruler is good, and does not use force against the people, of course the people will voluntarily respect the rules in that state.
Create a free account to view solutions
Create a free account to view solutions
Recommended textbook solutions


Impact California Social Studies World History, Culture, and Geography The Modern World
ISBN: 9780076755769Jackson J. Spielvogel
Ways of the World: A Brief Global History with Sources, High School Edition
1st Edition•ISBN: 9780312644666Robert W. Strayer
World History: Patterns of Interaction
1st Edition•ISBN: 9780547491127Dahia Ibo Shabaka, Larry S. Krieger, Linda Black, Phillip C. Naylor, Roger B. BeckMore related questions
1/4
1/7