Rome Dbq Analysis

Water and Rice
While both the Romans and the Hans appreciated the technology used to power their cities’ water systems, the Romans were more intent on more “elite” advancements such as science and law, while looking down upon the more practical farming inventions that were appreciated by the Hans. As the Romans increased their slave labor via the conquering of territories, society’s elite cared little about making the work easier for their slaves. This led them to focus more on abstract advancements such as science and law. The Hans, however, relied heavily on agriculture and had a higher respect for its farmers, which promoted technological advancement in tools that would increase production.
Documents 2 and 4 can be coupled because they both show the appreciation the Hans had towards the technology used in the agricultural sector. Document 2 shows how valuable tools were to the workers, and how farmers rich and poor relied on them. Document 2 was written with a bias towards the workers since the man who wrote the document, Huan Guan, described the workers’ tools favorably and the state’s tools poorly. Document 4 stated that the agricultural technological advancements made by Tu Shih were appreciated by the laborers, providing them with more free time as well as a higher harvest yield. Document 4 has a bias towards the

Documents 5 and 7 both described work of the mind to be better than menial physical labor, promoting the theory that the Romans valued intellect over any sort of labor. Document 8, which describes the technology behind aqueducts, states aqueducts to be superior to the Egyptian and Greek monuments of old, since aqueducts were actually functional and served a practical purpose. The author was a Roman general, which shows a bias towards Roman practicality over the gaudy landmarks of Rome’s enemies such as Egypt and