DBQ 1 Han And Roman View Of Tools

Samantha Libler

APWH Mr. Maifield

23 September 2014
Technology Use

The Han Dynasty and Roman Empire were two of the most powerful civilizations of their era. From a few centuries B.C.E. to a couple centuries after C.E., these empires significantly enhanced their cultures with advancements in technology, but differed in their views of technologies importance and how it was valued. The Han Empire was much more worried about how technology could be advanced to ease the workload of the common man while increasing efficiency, where as the Roman Empire viewed technology as something they were happy to benefit from, but not to be exalted. Even though both civilizations had great technological achievements, they differed greatly in their attitudes toward these achievements and their effects on the laborer, the environment, and manufacturing. The Hans had an overwhelmingly positive view of technology. They saw it as a way to improve the lives of their people and innovate their way of life. In the early second century B.C.E. a Han government official wrote “Order inspections of the waterways, the walls of the cities and their suburbs, the dikes and rivers, canals and pools, and government buildings and cottages, and supply enough workers to those who are to carry out the repair work in each district” (Doc. 1). This shows that the government valued technology. Workers and supplies were given to inspect and repair their waterways. This was a time much before the twentieth century. Innovations like this were in their infancy, not developed like the technologies of today. Putting workers, time, money, and supplies into the waterways shows the society's push for innovation. Positive views of technology are sometimes overshadowed, which is shown in Document Two with Huan Guan. He was a government official who wrote “Tools manufactured by individual families to do this work were well-made. Today the iron tools that workers are required to use are produced by the state using convict labor; these tools are often very crude and not very functional” (Doc. 2). He demonstrates the importance of quality tools and doing a job well. Huan Guan was a government official and had a first hand account of the on goings of tool production and the outcomes. Some might confuse his negative view of the government with a negative view of tools. It was not the tools themselves that Han Guan did not agree with. The Hans, having realized the value of technology, found ways to expand upon it. An upperclass philosopher by the name of Huan Tan, who lived in 20 C.E., stated, “In time, the power of animals – donkeys, mules, oxen and horses – was added. Later, water power was also applied, and the benefit was increased a hundredfold” (Doc. 3). The government finally saw that they had to stop giving their workers tools that were too brittle to function. Having combined the power of animals, water, and tools, they revolutionized the world of technology. Tu Shih, a government official in the year of 31 C.E., “loved the people and intended to save their labor” (Doc. 4). In order to “save their labor” he intended on giving them technology to make their workload easier. Tu Shih was known for being a generous man with peaceful politics. He wanted to gift technology to his workers as a saving grace. “He invented a water-powered blowing-engine for the casting of iron agricultural implements that allowed people to enjoy great benefit for little labor.” This is another innovation that is credited to the Han. This invention has been adapted and used to this day. The Romans had a very different opinion of technology. They saw it as something that was degrading, not for anyone of stature because there were slaves for that kind of work. Cicero, an upper-class Roman political leader in the first century B.C.E., stated “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” (Doc. 5). The Romans did not see technology as the Hans did; as something to be used to improve the lives and ease the workload of their people. They saw technology as something that is for the lower class society, slave labor. Before Cicero's time, however, we see that the Romans value architecture and construction. A man by the name of Plutarch documented the Roman political leader Gaius Gracchus as he conducts the building of roads. “He was especially anxious about road building, paying attention to utility as well as to that which is beneficial to grace and beauty” (Doc. 6). The Romans were known for their architectural feats, and this road was something that would be a staple in history. This love of architecture would lead one to believe that the Romans hold their workers and their technology in the highest regard. However, this thinking was not the truth. Unlike the Chinese, the Romans did not value workers or technology. They valued the outcome, but believed that the laborers were below them. This belief was shown very clearly by the upper-class philosopher Seneca who stated “I do not believe that tools for the crafts were made by wise men.... Both [hammer and thongs] were invented by someone with a mind that was nimble and sharp, but not great or elevated” (Doc. 7). This is one similarity that stood out between the Hans and the Romans. Document two shows that the Han government did not see the value of technology; they gave them tools that were not usable because they were so brittle. That negative view of technology is reflected in the Roman government. The Romans see technology as something that should only be called upon when it is functional and beneficial. Frontinus, a Roman general and governor of Britain, said “Compare such numerous and indispensable structures (aqueducts) carrying so much water with the idle pyramids, or the useless famous works of the Greeks.” (Doc. 8). They did not see structures as valuable if they were just used for aesthetics. Their opinions were positive, but only if the innovations were used to benefit the public. Overall, the difference in the Han and Roman opinion of technology were at two different sides of the spectrum. The Romans saw the necessity for it but believed it to be so below them that they never reached their potential. If they had utilized and expanded technology as the Hans had, they could have made better advances. The Hans, however, made incredible strides in the field of technology. They opened the door for future generations. The Romans made incredible strides as well, like in the case of making a flat, straight road with nothing more than stones and sand (Doc. 6) but never reached potential such as that of the Huns. These documents can be grouped into two different groups – manufacturing; and environment, construction, and architecture. Documents 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 can be lumped into the manufacturing category. These deal directly with the tools themselves, the opinions on the technology, and how they were utilized/created. Documents 1, 6, and 8 go into the environment / construction / and architecture category. These deal with construction projects and how the tools were being used. In these passages you see how each side thought the tools ought to be used. The Romans did not change at all over time. They were lagging behind due to their closed minded opinions on technology and all it offers. The Romans overall had a pretty negative view of technology, and that view took different forms but never morphed, matured, or changed. The Hans, however, valued technology. They spent time and money to improve their technological resources. This put them at a definite advantage when it came to strides in the field of technology. The Han view of technology morphed over time. The second century B.C.E. saw a ruler who put money and effort into his waterways, which were innovative for their time. The first century B.C.E. took a turn for worse, with a government that supplied their people with tools, but didn't value those tools enough to make them to a quality that had become standard in the past. The government can be compared to the Romans in this time period because they show a similar opinion of tools. By 20 C.E. - 200 C.E., the government had totally changed its views on technology, valuing it and expanding on it. This was also a time that we saw incredible strides in this field. The Romans had times similar to this, but never in their technological field. The Romans would make incredible advances in architecture. This compilation of documents would be more rounded if we had the opinion of a Roman slave. All of these documents come from the point-of-view of political officials or people high up in society. We could hear how they think better tools could revolutionize the way the Romans built things, or maybe they think the same of tools as all the political officials, that tools are made by simpletons. Since these documents are not at our disposal, we have no way of knowing. Technology, whether it was embraced or resisted, was an incredible part of history. Without it society would not would not be as developed as it is today. The Han and Roman civilizations recognized that technology had incredible value, but found different uses for tools and other innovations. The Han and Roman empires both achieved astounding architectural feats.