Han and Roman attitudes towards technology both changed over time for the better. The Han attitude toward manufacturing and labor of technology was more open and positive than the Romans, which had a more organized and class divided society. Documents 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 8 are all from government officials’ points of view. Documents 3 and 7 are from a philosopher’s point of view. In short, in the documents 1, 2, 3, and 4, the Han people share attitudes in advancement in technology and its effect on the common people, documents 6 and 8 believed in the use of resources to make remarkable public work projects, and finally 5 and 7 describe that inventors of technology are lesser members of society and that they were taken for granted.
The Han people had well thought out communication that effectively advanced their technology to positively evolve, this can be shown in documents 1, 2, 3 and 4. Document 2 was written by Haun Guan, a government official in the 1st century BCE. He focuses on an analytical comparison between how technology actually devolved. The state became involved and stopped caring about the people, due to them monopolizing the salt and iron trades. In earlier times, families put their heart into making high quality tools. Overtime as the state wanted to gain control and dominate the production of tools, they made the decision to have unmotivated and uneducated convicts produce poor quality and ineffective tools at a much higher price. As a result of poor communication on behalf of the state, the quality of services and products decreased as prices increased. This also had a negative impact on the common people and their faith in the state. Huan Guan is a government official who is opposed to how the state monopolizes and shows a lack of concern for the commoners’ complaints. Document 1 was written by a Han government official in the 2nd century BCE, it urges the importance of waterways and engineering, and how the government should regulate the transition of water to prevent floods. This request was made to organize the system more efficiently and reduce the hard labor of lower class men. This will increase job opportunities and increase the protection of the city. This letter provided a great action plan that properly informed everyone that needed to know what needs to be done and how in order to prevent floods. This demonstrates how communication is essential to improving technology and the importance of government support for it. This government official feels responsible for the disunity of the water ways because he was the one in charge of it. Document 3 is written by Huan Tan, a philosopher. He is listing the progress of technology after the emperor’s first invention. He somewhat over exaggerates the use of the pestle and mortar and how well water power has helped by saying the, “benefit was increased a hundredfold.” However, it actually shows how much the Han focus on the effectiveness of their technology. There is a possibility of bias in Document 4 because the history is sponsored by the government, the general trend would be to glorify an empire, and not to mention that glorification of an emperor was a promotion of Buddhism. It is during the same time the Han lost their Mandate of Heaven. An additional document from a commoner would be helpful in determining Document 4’s validity. Roman government