Roman and Han Attitudes Towards Technology

While technology use was popular in both countries, Han China Philosophers saw technology as efficient and their government officials saw it as monopolizing while the Roman
Empire’s philosophers saw it as distasteful and their government officials saw it as beautiful.
Romans in favor of technology praised it for its beauty and usefulness. Hans in favor of technology praised it for its efficiency and protection. However, there were members of both
Han China and the Roman Empire who disliked technology because it could monopolize industries and its users were seen as dull and unskilled.
Romans that had a positive attitude towards technology were very passionate about it.
Not only were roads appreciated for their usefulness but they were described as having grace and beauty (Doc 6). Roads were not the only things that Romans cherished, they also became very proud of their aqueducts. One Roman general raved about the abundance of water they had due to aqueducts, and even compared them to the pyramids of egypt, however this general may have been biased due to the fact that he was the water commissioner of Rome and most likely described the aqueducts as better than they really were in order to make himself look better as a professional (Doc 8). Both of these Romans sharing their excitement about new technology shows their positive attitude towards it. Han China citizens that had a positive attitude toward technology loved its efficiency and the protection it could offer to their country. Han government officials ordered that staffed water conservation offices should be made in order to prevent floods (Doc 1). Han China had decided that their solution to a flood natural disaster was to be equipped with the proper technology to avoid it. A Han philosopher discussed the evolution of technology in his writing, explaining how it has gotten more efficient over time (Doc 3). He saw technology as a good thing that would benefit society. In a history text explaining the rise of technology, it was said that governor Tu
Shih created items like a water­powered blowing­engine so he could save his common people labor, however this document may be unreliable due to the fact that this text was a government­sponsored history made for the citizens of China, most likely to make the Han
Dynasty appear good (Doc 4). Some of Han China saw technology as a useful and efficient.
They thought everyone would benefit from it.
There were also members from the Roman Empire and Han China that did not find technology to be as great as others thought. Roman philosophers thought that laborers using technology were degrading themselves and had no skill (Doc 5). They also believed that a smart mind was far more important than technology and tools (Doc 7). On top of this, a Han government official believed that the revolution of technology was monopolizing industries, leading to high prices and low quality in goods (Doc 2). Both Roman Philosophers and Han government officials disliked technology, the philosophers saw technology as a tool laborers used to slack off and government officials thought that technology was monopolizing the economy. A document that would have been useful would be a perspective from a laborer in Han
China or the Roman Empire. All of the documents given were written by high up government

officials, or high class philosophers. Most people actually using technology at that time were lower class laborers. Their view would be the most accurate on how efficient or terrible technology was.
Romans who liked technology adored its beauty and practicality. Chinese who liked technology boasted about its efficiency and usefulness. Those who didn’t approve of technology saw it as disgraceful and bad towards the economy. Despite its popular use in both countries,
Han China’s opinion on teachnology was mixed in the way that philosophers found it to be extremely efficient and government officials found it to be monopolizing, and the Roman
Empire’s opinion was split between the government officials who thought it was beautiful and the philosophers who thought it was distasteful.

DBQ Essay Scoring Rubric
(20pts per Rubric point)
This list is abbreviated. For more complete scoring rubric details, see the handout from class.
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
Basic Core:
1.

Has acceptable thesis – 1 of 1
2.

Addresses all documents (or all but one) – 1 of 1
3.

Supports thesis with evidence for all (or all but one) document – 2 of 2
4.

Analyzes point of views in at least two documents – 1 of 1
5.

Analyzes documents by grouping them in two or three ways – 1 of 1
6.

Identifies and explains the need for an additional document – 1 of 1
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
Total: 7 of 7 (x20 = 140 out of 140)