The Han Dynasty and the Roman Empire

The Han dynasty stressed effectiveness in their tools, as well as using engineering science to frustrate natural disasters and thrive in their society. The papisticals, however, marveled at their civilizations innovations, however rejected idolizing those who behaveed with tools and crafts. The control of wet was significant in both the Han dynasty and the romish conglomerate (Docs 1 and 8). Han officials believed pissing conservation officers and hydraulic engineers should work together to prevent flooding (Doc 1). The writer requested the formation of water conservation officers in each district, and inspections of waterways, walls, etc.Along with necessary repairs (Doc 1). Document 1 is a letter from a Han government official concerning flood prevention. Considering the status of the writer of chronicle 1 and the fact that the letter is instructional, it seems reasonable to assume he knows what hes talking or so. The papists alike used water engineering, aqueducts, t o supply the cities with water (Doc 8). Frontinus boasted about the abundance of water for public and private uses (Doc 8). As a water commissi hotshotr, the writer of document 8 only talks about the positives of the water system, possibly to make himself look respectable in the eyes of his superiors.An spare document from a super acid citizen of Rome describing how aqueducts positively affect their conduct would support Frontinus, who only provides an official government point of view. Both the Roman and the Han officials wanted to use engineering science to control water for the benefit of the citizens, solely for the Han dynasty, it was more necessary to thrive. Huan Tan, an upper-class Han philosopher, speaks of Fuxi, the wise emperor moth and inventor of the comminute and mortar (Doc 3). After Fuxis invention, there was an improvement in engineering with the creation of water power (Doc 3).The attitude toward technology in this document is as technology as a gift from en lightened emperors. Huan Tan, because a philosopher, would praise technology from the emperor as Confucian philosophy views the emperor as a kind father-figure. Huan Tan may gift compose this document praising the emperor as a way of flatter the current government in hopes of achieving a higher official position. standardized Fuxi, Tu Shih, governor of Nanyang, was also a wise and enlightened attraction (Doc 4).Tu Shih true a water-powered blowing-engine that was a labor-saving device, to facilitate cast-iron agricultural implements. Tu Shih loved the common people and wished to save their labor (Doc 4). engineering in this document is also seen as a gift from enlightened leadership. The writer of this document could have been trying to please the emperor in order to reach a higher position in office. Both of these documents show that the Han dynasty saw technology as a way to improve in their society and for the rightness of their people.Cicero, an upper-class Roman political leader describes those who work with their hand as vulgar or common, believing that gentlemen do not work with their pass on (Doc 5). Cicero speaks of hired-workers and craftsmen as having unfit occupations (Doc 5). Technology is perceived as necessary in this document, but not fit for enlightened minds. Cicero cannot accurately judge technologys impact because he is a member of the elite and does not work with technology. According to Seneca, an upper-class Roman philosopher, technology takes being smart, but not enlightenment (Doc 7).Seneca does not believe in the importance of soulfulness technological creations and believes there is a difference between those who work with their hands and those who work with their minds (Doc 7). Both documents show negative Roman attitudes and are corrupting towards technology. Huan Guan, a Han government official, suggests that good government should correct the situation of sub-standard tools (Doc 2). earlier than him being negative towa rds technology, he is being negative towards the governments role. He believes that technology is vital to peasant production and is the governments responsibility to support it (Doc 2).Plutarch, a Roman high official describes Roman leader, Gauis Gracchus improved road building in a glorifying report (Doc 6). Technology match to this document has a practical side, but also one of aesthetics (Doc 6). As a high-ranking official, Plutarch praises another political leader possibly yearning to obtain a promotion. Both documents show technology as necessary, but the Han dynasty shows a need for technology and the Roman conglomerate makes improvements that are not necessarily vital to their society.Additional documents by women would have been facilitatory in exploring whether there are similarities or differences in Han and Roman attitudes according to gender. Also, documents by workers or the lower class would have given divers(prenominal) perspectives toward attitudes and views on technology, instead of high officials who do not personally work with technology. The Han dynasty, because of natural disasters and the good of their civilization, were pushed to improve on technology while the Roman empire admired their great, unneeded innovations.