The Han Dynasty is well known for the imperial expansions of China. This allowed many trades and communications, such as technology, with other classical empires, more importantly the Roman Empire. During the Classical Period (600 B.C.E- 600 C.E) the Han Dynasty and Roman Empire possessed different attitudes towards technology. The Han, who were more optimistic about technology focused on the outlook, craftsmanship and advancement of technology, while the Romans concept clarified and organized technology models and types of government interventions which divided the social classes.
For centuries, nations have been innovating ways for a better life. The progress of technology is a vital key for a society to move forward at the same time making …show more content…
The Han and Roman had to use two different types of technology to suit the needs of their people and their environment. In the Roman Empire, an invention that Plutarch, a Greek born Roman citizen and high official, was anxious about making an input was road building (1st century B.C.E). His ideal vision was that he was mindful to help travelers by placing columns every road mile and using them as, “distance indicators.” The document shows the Plutarch has an appreciative and optimistic attitude towards technology is because he reflects off of the work of Gaius Gracchus, a Roman political leader, who had a knack for practical architecture. Furthermore, because of his work, Plutarch perceives architecture as a masterpiece. A well-known invention from the Roman Empire is the aqueducts. They were an efficient, safe and pleasurable ways that the public could receive water from. Frontinus, a Roman general, governor of Britain, and water commissioner for the city of Rome, monitors the progress of waterways and near geography of it so that he could compare it to other unstable structures such as the Greek or Egyptians (1st century B.C.E.). His perspective was that he intellectually emphasized the practical being of Roman technology over Egyptian or Greek. To conclude it pairs with document #1 were it encourages technology while being the …show more content…
The outlook of technology for both Han and Roman was seen as an opportunity, but for the Roman it was instead looked down upon by the crafters regardless of their necessity for it. Vulgar was the term an upper class Roman used to describe corpsman whose labor was only purchased and not their skill. Cicero, an upper-class Roman political leader, set to view that he was above social class and that technology was indeed necessary but not the key to enlightenment (1st century B.C.E.). This position caused craftsmen and hired workers unfit livings for gentlemen, because as Cicero said, “…unbecoming to a gentleman...” This meant that those who work with their hands were considered unrefined people without an occupation. Furthermore, this outlook caused societies to lag behind both India and Chinas production in technology, which then resulted in an unfavorable balance of trade with East Asia. On the other hand the strongest men dissent need to be the most civilized or enlightened, but needed for his wittiness and resourcefulness. Seneca, an upper-class Roman philosopher and advisor to Emperor Nero, in the first century agreed that technology is necessary and does take the intelligence to create something new (1st century B.C.E.). In general, this document contradicts the ideas Cicero had towards the crafters and
For centuries, nations have been innovating ways for a better life. The progress of technology is a vital key for a society to move forward at the same time making …show more content…
The Han and Roman had to use two different types of technology to suit the needs of their people and their environment. In the Roman Empire, an invention that Plutarch, a Greek born Roman citizen and high official, was anxious about making an input was road building (1st century B.C.E). His ideal vision was that he was mindful to help travelers by placing columns every road mile and using them as, “distance indicators.” The document shows the Plutarch has an appreciative and optimistic attitude towards technology is because he reflects off of the work of Gaius Gracchus, a Roman political leader, who had a knack for practical architecture. Furthermore, because of his work, Plutarch perceives architecture as a masterpiece. A well-known invention from the Roman Empire is the aqueducts. They were an efficient, safe and pleasurable ways that the public could receive water from. Frontinus, a Roman general, governor of Britain, and water commissioner for the city of Rome, monitors the progress of waterways and near geography of it so that he could compare it to other unstable structures such as the Greek or Egyptians (1st century B.C.E.). His perspective was that he intellectually emphasized the practical being of Roman technology over Egyptian or Greek. To conclude it pairs with document #1 were it encourages technology while being the …show more content…
The outlook of technology for both Han and Roman was seen as an opportunity, but for the Roman it was instead looked down upon by the crafters regardless of their necessity for it. Vulgar was the term an upper class Roman used to describe corpsman whose labor was only purchased and not their skill. Cicero, an upper-class Roman political leader, set to view that he was above social class and that technology was indeed necessary but not the key to enlightenment (1st century B.C.E.). This position caused craftsmen and hired workers unfit livings for gentlemen, because as Cicero said, “…unbecoming to a gentleman...” This meant that those who work with their hands were considered unrefined people without an occupation. Furthermore, this outlook caused societies to lag behind both India and Chinas production in technology, which then resulted in an unfavorable balance of trade with East Asia. On the other hand the strongest men dissent need to be the most civilized or enlightened, but needed for his wittiness and resourcefulness. Seneca, an upper-class Roman philosopher and advisor to Emperor Nero, in the first century agreed that technology is necessary and does take the intelligence to create something new (1st century B.C.E.). In general, this document contradicts the ideas Cicero had towards the crafters and