Compare And Contrast The Leadership Of Chandragupta And Ashoka

Soft power was the secret of the leaders of the Mauryan Empire to maintaining legitimacy, because people wanted to live in a nation under a leader that cared about the quality of their lives in the empire, which led the people to view them as gracious leaders of their community. Chandragupta, under the guidance of his adoptive father Kautilya, overthrew the Nanda dynasty to create the Mauryan Empire (322-185 B.C.E.). Chandragupta was a strong advocate for military expansion, whereas Ashoka, his grandson, learned the lesson of morality from his military conquests of Kalinga. In an attempt to establish legitimacy Ashoka invaded Kalinga and succeeded, yet he felt sorrow for causing the slaughter and separation of people who have done no wrongdoing.

In Book IV of the Arthasastra that Chandragupta followed, it dictated that during famine he would provide his people with seeds and provisions of his own or redistribute the hoarded wealth of the rich among his people. The Arthasastra shows that Chandragupta was willing to sacrifice part of what he could very easily keep for himself during times of hardship. The fact that their king, when under the same hardships of famine as his people, would take initiative and think for the people first made him an admirable leader. Chandragupta’s caring and selflessness, not his military might and prowess, led his people to realize the legitimacy he had as their leader. Having a leader that puts the people first especially in times of hardship keep them at ease living in the empire under their rule. In Ashoka’s Rock Edict 2, Ashoka exercised soft power by establishing medical care for humans and animals. When medical herbs, roots, or fruits weren’t available, he had them imported and grown. Ashoka’s willingness to go out of his way to establish medical care showed how highly he valued the health of his