Essay on Hans and Romans on Technology and Manufacturing

Submitted By aleighsells
Words: 972
Pages: 4

Han and Roman Use of Technology and Manufacturing

The Hans and Romans had very different perspectives over the use of technology and manufacturing. On the subject of technology, the Hans and Romans seem to agree that it was very positive. However, on the subject of manufacturing the Hans thought that it was positive but the Romans saw it as a negative. Although the Hans and Romans are similar, they differ in their reasonings for they way they look at technology and manufacturing. To the Hans technology was a very big deal and helped shape them in many ways. A Han government official says “order inspections of the waterways, the walls of the cities and their suburbs, the dikes and rivers, canals and pools, the government buildings and cottages, and supply enough workers to those who are to carry out the repair work in each district.” (Doc.1) this is a positive, third person view on architecture and environment. The government official as saying that with improvements in architecture and environment, the flood prevention system can be changed in a big way. The Romans also had a positive view on technology. Plutarch, a Roman citizen and high official states that, “he was especially anxious about road building, paying attention to utility as well as that to which was beneficial to grace and beauty.” (Doc.6) this is another positive view in third person on architecture. To Plutarch Road building was very important because, the roads were carried on throughout the country. This shows that the Romans depended highly on the road system. Another positive view on technology from the Romans, came from Frontinus, a Roman general, the governor of Britain, and water Commissioner for the city of Rome, who said “compare such numerous and indispensable structures carrying so much water with idle pyramids, or the useless but famous works of the Greeks.”(Doc.8) this is another positive view said in third person including architecture. Here, Frontinus is saying that the construction of aqueducts is just as, if not more important as the work of the Greeks. Documents 1, 6, and 8 show the Han and Roman perspectives on architecture These three examples show just how important technology really wants to the Hans and Romans. Manufacturing, on the other hand, did not seem to be as important. The Hans, for the most part, thought positively of manufacturing. Huan Tan, an upper class Han philosopher states “in time, the power of animals-donkeys, mules, oxen and horses-was added. Later, waterpower was also applied, and the benefit was increased a hundredfold.”(Doc.3) in this document, Huan Tan shows us that he has a positive view on manufacturing. Technological improvements using animal power and water power, it made it much easier to use the pestle and the mortar. This is in third person. Another positive view of manufacturing comes from The History of the Early Han Dynasty. The author says “he invented a water powered blowing-engine for the casting of iron agriculture implements that allowed people to enjoy great benefit for little labor” (Doc.4). The author is talking about Tu Shih, who was appointed governor of Nanyang. Tu Shih wanted to save the common people’s labor. He was trying to phase out slavery and replace it with free labor. This is written in third person. The Hans also had a negative view on manufacturing. Coming from Huan Guan, a Han government official “most of the tools provided to the workers are hard and brittle and the responsible government officials are often not available to take complaints.”(Doc.2) this shows, in third person, that the Hans did not value manufactural improvements. Most of the labor forces