Roman Technology Dbq
Although both the Han and Roman Empire were advanced one was more complex than the other. Both the Han China and the Roman Empire were highly sophisticated and contemporary in the evolution of their technology. Both Empires had very efficient, formulated and solid mechanized skills, yet the Romans cherished their technology only for its beauty, elegance and aesthetics. whereas the Hans valued their technology for its advantages and uses. This explains how these two, classical civilizations had very different perspectives towards technology.
Evidence was presented to support the idea that the Romans utilized their technology only for its beauty and aesthetics which embodies some negatives and positives . Almost all of the documents had positive …show more content…
Han Guan (document 2) a government official is describing the bad conditions of technology due to the quantity of the workers and the quality of labor. He also says that the lack of using technology causes an increase in the iron and salt prices, causing the lack of seasoning for other countries and the insufficiency of strong tools for farming, building, etc. As Seneca , a Roman philosopher said that "I do not believe that tools for the crafts were invented by wise men. The question of whether the hammer or the tongs came first does not seem important to me. Both were invented by someone with a mind that was nimble and sharp, but not great or elevated" and Cicero (document 5), an upper class roman political said "Vulgar and unbecoming to a gentleman are all the jobs hired workers take on, whose labor is purchased rather than their skill. All craftsmen spend their time in vulgar occupations; no workshop can have anything enlightening about it." This clearly show that these two Roman upper class man were against technology because they believed that inventors and craftsmen have a lack of wisdom and enlightenment. Lastly, Document 6 shows Plutarch, a high government official, writing about how Gaius Gracchus created roads that helped the mobility of horses without requiring a groom to help.
One of the major uses of technology was the pestle and the mortar. Later on, the pestle and the mortar were cleverly improved in such a way
Evidence was presented to support the idea that the Romans utilized their technology only for its beauty and aesthetics which embodies some negatives and positives . Almost all of the documents had positive …show more content…
Han Guan (document 2) a government official is describing the bad conditions of technology due to the quantity of the workers and the quality of labor. He also says that the lack of using technology causes an increase in the iron and salt prices, causing the lack of seasoning for other countries and the insufficiency of strong tools for farming, building, etc. As Seneca , a Roman philosopher said that "I do not believe that tools for the crafts were invented by wise men. The question of whether the hammer or the tongs came first does not seem important to me. Both were invented by someone with a mind that was nimble and sharp, but not great or elevated" and Cicero (document 5), an upper class roman political said "Vulgar and unbecoming to a gentleman are all the jobs hired workers take on, whose labor is purchased rather than their skill. All craftsmen spend their time in vulgar occupations; no workshop can have anything enlightening about it." This clearly show that these two Roman upper class man were against technology because they believed that inventors and craftsmen have a lack of wisdom and enlightenment. Lastly, Document 6 shows Plutarch, a high government official, writing about how Gaius Gracchus created roads that helped the mobility of horses without requiring a groom to help.
One of the major uses of technology was the pestle and the mortar. Later on, the pestle and the mortar were cleverly improved in such a way