In the chapter titled “China, Technology, and Change,” Lynda Shaffer analyzes the following questions: why did China—which invented block printing, compass, and gunpowder—not use these inventions to jump-start a scientific and industrial revolution? Why were the inventions not revolutionary at home? Shaffer argues these questions are based on the false assumption that China did not change as a result of these inventions. In reality, China changed a great deal, but Eurocentric histories often ignore this fact.
Write a brief paragraph analyzing Matteo Ricci and Père du Halde’s perspectives on technology in China. Which reading corroborates Shaffer’s argument? How are Matteo and Père’s accounts different? More importantly, why are they different? Using this week’s lectures (and, if you’re feeling ambitious, your textbook) provide historical context and speculate what changed for China or Europe in the 80-year interval between these two accounts. In your response include at least 1 in-text citation per primary source and at least 1 in-text citation referencing one or more of Dr. Wood’s lectures from this week.
Part II
Connect Will Adam’s account and the Sakoku Edict (Closing of the Country) with John Nelson’s article. Adam’s account is from 1611 and the edict was issued in 1636—only 25 years later. Write a short paragraph addressing the following: 1. summarize the two primary sources; 2. analyze why Japan’s policy toward foreigners changed so drastically in such a short period of time. In your response include at least 1 in-text citation per primary source and at least 1 in-text citation referencing one or more of Dr. Wood’s lectures from this week.
