Reflections on the Evidence of State Building in the Early Modern Era

Reading the source documents included at the end of Chapter 13 of Strayer’s Ways of the World was interesting, and I wanted to draw attention to certain elements of two source documents.

The first one, Document 13.1, contains Reflections of the Chinese Emperor Kangxi (KAHNG-shee) on his period of rule from 1671-1722.  Generally, I harbor suspicions that those in power are often most concerned with their own self-interests and maintaining power rather than the interests of the people they rule.  I admit this is likely a personal bias.  While the reflections of Kangxi only cover about one textbook page, they seem to provide an in-depth view of his struggles and frustrations as a ruler.

He makes it clear, while he has the power to order executions, it is the most distasteful part of his job. He gives the impression he only does so when the crimes have been particularly heinous and the execution of the criminal may serve as a deterrent to others who may consider committing the same crime.  Even though his reflection is from 300 years earlier, that particular facet struck me as not unlike a United States Governor’s responsibility to sign an execution warrant for a criminal sentenced with the death penalty.

Other frustrations Kangxi mentioned seem to arise from problems not unlike some that exist today.  For example, his statement that “we’d be better off with less talk of moral principles and more practice of it….This is one of the worst habits of the great officials, that if they are not recommending their teachers or their friends for high office, then they recommend their relatives….”  He then explains how the Emperor cannot possibly keep track of everything in a vast kingdom and must rely on the reports of officials from other areas.  If those officials are corrupt, it undermines his ability to rule the people justly.  In the U.S., we continue to see evidence of this same type of problem wreaking havoc on large groups of citizens.  The lead poisoning of residents of Flint Michigan through their water delivery system is just one recent example.

Kangxi also expressed frustration over the way examinations were administered, particularly for the military.  He pointed out that most of the candidates who passed the examinations were mainly from two specific areas in China and had done nothing more than memorize old examination booklets.  Their riding and archery skills were not assessed.  He also noted that corrupt examiners placed candidates from their own regions at the “top of the list.”  These types of practices weakened the strength of the military and placed officials in power who lacked the knowledge and skills necessary to properly lead the people in their areas.

Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq’s description of his encounter with Suleiman I, the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, sometime during the years 1555-1562 contains some interesting contrasts to the reflections of Kangxi;  particularly, Ogier’s observation during his audience with the Sultan, that all those present in the large assembly were their because of valor and merit.  Ogier notes, “In making his appointments the Sultan pays no regard to any pretensions on the score of wealth or rank, nor does he take into consideration recommendations or popularity…. It is by merit that men rise in the service, a system which ensures posts should only be assigned to the competent….”  This practice is one of the factors that enabled the Ottoman Empire to expand and maintain its rule over such a wide territory for such a long period.  Perhaps we should consider using a similar type of system to select our politicians.