{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01272984441301273, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.9, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The King in Two Lands Perspectives on Power: India and China

expense of her sister states. Further, one also witnesses in both instances the growth of a literature of real-politik which justifies and provides a methodology for the attainment of centralizing policies: the Arthasastra genre in India and the work of the Legalist school in China. It is the endeavour of this piece to determine whether this congruity of historical patterns derives from shared attitudes towards political power or whether they are in the main fortuitous. In order to pierce the veil constituted by seeming political affinities, it is necessary to seek an answer to this question through an analysis of the theoretical litera-