The nature of the tool determines the job that is done. We choose tools based onm the job we need done but both of these sciences were chosen for us. Modern science produces technology very readily because experiment can be utilized in the real world. Ancient science was more complicated but it didn't cast off much technology.
What people need to understand is we can look right at the ruins of ancient technology and not see it because we see through eyes honed by experiment rather than logic. You have to have some understanding of the ancient science to see any technology. It's really quite certain they didn't have dynamos and volt meters not only because they aren't in evidence but because the technology that would lead to these aren't in evidence. But this doesn't mean they lacked knowledge of electricity, simply they understood it from another perspective. There are countless ways they coyuld have observed this in nature and countless ways they could harness it for their own uses without leaving tell tale evidence or artefacts that obviously were used for genberation, transmission, and usage of the power. If they observed that electricity accumulated on things under specific conditions then they could reproduce these conditions. They could use this power to fascilitate chemical reactions or to split water to fill underground caverns with hydrogen. This gas could be very important to light their cities or for heat.
The possibilities are virtually endless. Ancient people were very keen observers and extrapolated and built on their knowledge with further observation and using natural logic as expressed in their language. Humans had 40,000 years to observe nature and learn about it. They invented agriculture and cities not through superstition or trial and error but through knowledge and genius.
If anyone's interested it is quite obvious from the PT that they not only understood the nature of electricity but knew that the same thing was occuring in the nerves of animals.
These people are grossly misunderstood.