Ancient Rome Essay Example for Free (#2)

quaint capital of Italy analyse During the Han conglomerate of mainland mainland China and the papist Empire of the Mediterranean globe were twain had corking engineering for their time. Han Chinas military capability toward manu situationuring and dig up was to a greater extent positive than the papisticals who had a to a greater extent manikin divided society, thereof ca use attitudes toward boil and engineering to be attended agglomerate upon. The Hans attentiveness engineering science and the mountain who handling it. In China, 2nd coke B. C. E. a disposal functionary declargond that he treasured to organize their grate force with the use of applied science so they could divine service to proceed a chance from occurring when and if a drench takes place. This could facilitate the concourse from getting stick out and their property from getting destroyed (Doc. 1). Huan Guan, a Han political relation official during the first blow B. C. E. was pertain just almost the lack of engineering and poor giving medication policy that is bear upon the batch. Haun Guan was trying to plead to the Han politics that using convict labor to make tools and monopoly on salt and straighten out is causing devastate affects towards the race and feels that the presidency can exonerate this problem by using the visible(prenominal) technologies.Even though Haun Guan is a governwork forcet official himself, he shows inte stay on in helping the pile and is very exact towards the current government policies that atomic number 18 in place (Doc. 2). Huan Tan, a hurrying categorise Han philosopher during 20 C. E. is expressing his apprehension of the progress that technology has had since the emperors first finesse . Huan Tan homogeneouswise expresses how technology has emolumented the Chinese people and feels that technology is a apply from the enlightened emperors (Doc. 3).A Han government sponsored verbalizer, approx imately 200 C. E. states how a Han governor, Tu Shih, cared deeply for the Chinese people and utilise the advanced technology to help win them. This government sponsored speaker emphasizes how a great deal the inventions helped disparage the amount of valet labor that the people did (Doc. 4). This is interesting because he was hired by the government to conference to people who cleverness be losing doctrine in the Han Dynasty and he essentially laud the information air to a greater extent(prenominal) than it rattling was.On the otherwise hand, the papistics felt that on the job(p) with your men was crude and bumpmed to heavily look down upon technology and whoever used it. Cicero, an upper mob Roman political loss leader from Italy during the inaugural hundred B. C. E. states that eachone who disciplines with their hands are earthy and looks enceintely down upon craftsmen and hired workers. Cicero hence goes on stating that gentlemen do not work with t heir hands. (Doc. 5) It seems that Cicero lacks a broad respect for inventions and inventors and feels like technology is therefore necessary, solely not for the enlightened minds.Plutarch, a Greek innate(p) roman citizen during the inaugural coulomb Roman Empire, expresses Gaius Gracchus road building enterprises and continues to explain how the Roman upper kinsfolk does appreciate technology that benefits the upper division (Doc. 6). Plutarch does show detainment towards technology, but barely because it benefits himself, as sanitary as the rest of the upper class. He does not go on to summon how it helped the commoners in whatever way, because it most credibly didnt help anyone but the upper class.Seneca, an upper class philosopher and advisor to emperor moth Nero, from the 1st century Roman Empire, states that it takes mortal nimble and abrupt to make inventions but craftsmen dont lay down great minds. Seneca goes on to imagine that he does not believe that tools and crafts were invented by wise men (Doc. 7). Seneca lacks respect for craftsmen and is basically saying that they are not as smart as he is, and degrades their achievements and abilities that they attain.He isnt concerned close to any of the tools or inventions that are make by these craftsmen because he feels since he is an upperclassmen, he would neer use them for the fact that they would be contaminating to his specific class in society. Frontinus, a Roman general, governor of Britain, and water commissioner from the 1st century C. E. of the Roman Empire discusses how he praises the Roman aqueducts and their uses in Rome. He dialogue about how level-headed the designs are and how much it benefits the public (Doc. 8). It was preferably interesting how exceedingly was talking about the aqueducts.He talked about how amazing they were to the other Roman officials so they could see he was doing a good job as water commissioner, which is wherefore he talked so highly of the aqueducts, because thats his job. A exhibit of watch that is lacking(p) from these documents that could further help to the discussion of the Han and Rome attitudes towards technology would be the commoners. All 8 of these documents were of the point of view from government officials or other upperclassmen. It wouldve helped to see an tune made by the commoners from nearly(prenominal) empires because thats who the technology is affecting-the commoners.Although the technology is also affecting the upperclassmen, it would have made a better argument to have person who is more undefended to the technology in their everyday lives. The people of the Han Empire did have a more optimistic approaching towards technology, while the Roman Empire looked at technology as a more negative thing. The Hans took more into consideration of how it would benefit the commoners, unlike the Romans who didnt mention the commoners in any of their arguments. Although both Empires did use technolog y, some thought more highly of it than others. antediluvian patriarch Rome. (2017, Jan 01).