In Turkey and Bolivia, long-serving leaders who should have been term-limited have used the extension of their reigns to construct new executive mansions. Why? It seems an odd thing considering that the greatest republic in history, the United States, has had the same presidential palace since 1800, only enlarging it as necessary. But Evo Morales saw fit to build a huge presidential skyscraper that violated the height ordinances of Nuestra Señora de La Paz, the Bolivian capital. He had to hold a vote to overrule the height restrictions to build the 29-level Casa Grande del Pueblo. But what was the purpose, why did the Bolivian presidency require it? The same could be asked of Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, whose palace of 1100 rooms opened in 2014, in the capital of Ankara. The Cumhurbaşkanlığı Külliyesi or Presidential Complex cost over half-a-billion dollars. Is it odd that long-ruling leaders of republics are building great palaces like the monarchs of the past? In neither case is it a response to an apparent deficiency with the old residence. While both presidents trumpeted themselves as the herald of a new era, the projects appear to differ in historical direction. In Bolivia, Morales demolished the historic 1821 Casa Alencastre, an old residence of the Catholic archbishop, breaking with the past and pushing toward a secular Bolivian modernity. In Turkey, however, the use of the term Külliyesi is a curious one because it means a “complex” which is centered on a mosque, a clear nod to the Ottoman past and a break with the secular history of modern Turkey. Again, like old hereditary monarchs, these long-ruling authoritarian presidents have used palaces to cement their legacies. But should we be surprised? Vanity of vanities.