I think the Roman Empire was better for the Roman people but I think it kind of depended on the Emperor some were just crazy and cruel and others were nice, cared about the needs of people in Rome, helped improve Rome, helped the poor, and helped orphanes
I agree with Kelsey, the Roman empire was good, when there is a decent emperors that isnt self centered.
I think it depended on who was the emperor. I think this because some were great leaders and others were very cruel and selfish.
I do not agree because the roman republic did not fall it was ended the
roman empire fell and it wasn't pretty
I think it all depended on who was leading. Like if it was a bad emperor than it would me bad for the people,but if it was a good emperor than it would be good for the people so it all depends, but I think the republic would be good all the time
I totally agree with Marissa because it depends if the people like the emperor they have. Like she said there are good ,and bad emperors .Also the republic is always good .
I agree it does depend on who is leading. If its a bad emperor, like Nero, he did nothing but make Rome fall apart by setting it on fire. Or if its a good emperor it would make Rome better like Agustus.
I agree with Logan. It depends on who leader is. If it is a bad emperor that nobody likes it will tear Rome apart and Rome will fall but if it is a emperor that cares about the peoples needs than it would make rome better.
I agree with Marissa it all depends on the Emperor, but I still think the Roman empire was just slightly better then the Republic. In my opinion The senate just had to many problems with caeser and everyone in the Republic.
I agree with Kelsey K. and Marissa C. because, Rome had handful of great emperors but more than it's fair share of bad emperors. The empire was better than the senate. They either didn't like the consuls, or they were becoming to rich, and not conquering new land.
The Senate was always were making things wrong in Rome or making themselves to powerful and rich. The empire was way better because even though they had a lot of bad emperors Rome also had some pretty good ones. The good emperors were either making past emperors wrongs right, or conquering new land and territories. These reasons prove that the empire was definitely better then the republic.
I agree with Daniel. The good emperors were righting the wrongs of the bad. The difference with the Republic and Senate is that no one ever fixed what they did wrong.
I agree with Daniel because the Senate was very selfish and only cared about the patricians. This was a complaint the plebeians had in the struggle of the orders. I also agree with Haley because many emperors first issue was to correct the wrongs of the emperor before them. This was a bigger issue to some emperors than others.
Daniel I don't agree with you. I think because of the bad emperors it made it worse. But the empire also had its good moments.
I believe that the Republic and the Empire both had good and bad moments but, in the long run the Empire was probably better for the people of Rome. It also depended on the emperor. Some emperors wanted the best for Rome as a whole. Others were cruel and corrupted and only wanted riches for themselves. The Republic was bad because the Senate wanted the land their army conquered to themselves. They didn't appreciate what they had and always wanted more.
I agree with you Haley. The Empire was better but it did depend on who the emperor was. Whether the emperor wanted the best for Rome of if they were cruel and wanted riches for themselves.
I agree with Haley M. that the Republic and the Empire were both good and bad but had some ups and some downs. Which it's ups were usually good for the people and most times for the government too.
I agree with Haley completely! I think both the Republic and the empire had bad moments but the empire was probably better. The empire caused Pax Romana which caused new knowledge and that made Rome so amazing.
I agree 100% with you Haley. If there was a good leader then the empire was better than the republic. But, sometimes Rome had bad leaders who only cared about themselves, which would make the republic better than the empire.
I think that the empire was a better government for the roman people. With only one person controlling everyone and everything, the emperor, there were less arguments against and in the government. So the less protests equaled a time of peace. And among the empire's time arose Pax Romana, a time of no wars when Rome was very calm.
I think that the Roman empire was better. Even though the empire did have some bad emperors there were still good emperors of Rome that could've fixed what the bad emperors did and made everything right. With the empire there was Pax Romana where Rome was at peace. There were no wars and Rome was very calm.
I agree with Emma and how I think that the Roman empire was better than the Roman republic. I think that because it made a big improvement in the roman society. Yeah the Roman empire had a few bad emperors but it still made progress in the Roman empire.
I think that the empire was better than the republic overall because of how much better Rome was with an empire. But, with a cruel ruler the empire will have troubles. Then, you would rather have a republic. So it would depend on who the leader was.
I agree with you Alex about it depending on the emperor. Also I like how you said about it depending if it was a good or bad emperor.
Alex great job responding while on Vacation. Hope your football team did well!
Unfortunately. I disagree with you. I think an empire would be worse because all of the power rests in one persons hands. If it is a bad emperor he can do some serious damage to the country. For example, raising taxes, going to wars, and passing unfair laws. In a republic at least you have the power in the hands of many. I understand that not always govt. officials in a Republic has your best needs in mind. But at least decisions have to be agreed upon by many not just one person.
I think it is the roman empire because it depends on the emperor .Some of them are bad,but some of them are good. So it really depends on what type of emperor it is . In which the republic is more ruling then the empire.
I agree that it depends on the leader. if theirs a good leader then it was a great time for Rome, if their was a bad leader then not so great. But I also think it was still more controlled then the Roman Republic
I think the roman empire was better in the first couple centuries because of PAX ROMANA. If it is Overall I think the roman republic was better. They had won a lot more battles like the Punic wars.
I agree and disagree with you Cole. I think the Roman Empire was better but it depended on who was ruling. Some emperors like Caligula were bad but others like Marcus Aurelius were amazing.
I also agree with Cole. The Republic had won a lot more wars. But the Empire was good with PAX ROMANA.
I totally agree with you cole because PAX ROMANA was a time in Rome where it was peaceful and good. So if you were an emperor then, then you were a good emperor
I think the Empire was better. The empire had emperors, which could be awesome or lame. So overall the empire had a decent chance of a decent emperor.
I agree with rylee because I liked the empire better mainly because who knows what the next emperor might be like awesome or lame.
I think that the Roman empire was better than the Roman Republic. I think that because how much progress that the Roman empire had made. The Roman empire did have some really bad emperors, but they also had some very good emperors that picked up the slack of the bad emperors.
Overall, I think that the Roman Empire did a better job than the Roman Republic. Even though there were tough times for the empire, I still believe that they made the most growth. It started the Pax Ramana.
I agree with you Conner about the good and bad emperors, but one thing that I somewhat disagree is because there was mostly bad emperors. So I think it was twice as hard for good emperors to fix things. But overall I agree with you
I totally agree with you Connor! There was more progress in the Empire.Like the Pax Romana. There was also lots of bad decisions by emperors including Domitian, Nero, and Caligula.
I think they are really the same because the republic was for the people of Rome. But the Empire had good and bad emperors. The good ones had a good impact on Rome while the bad ones had a very bad impact on Rome.
I think the Empire because Rome had Rulers, plus I just watched Gladiator today and I think I liked it better with the emperors. Rome would be good with the republic too I guess mainly because you wouldn't have 1 person rule for a long period of time.Rome would be cool too if they switched it up every 2 years from republic to Empire
I think the Roman Empire was better because it was more controlled. Their was only 1 person ruling so their was less arguing, it was easier to make decisions. With less arguing their was more peace, therefor leading to the Pax Romana.
I think the Roman Empire was better for the people of Rome because only one person ruling and during the republic they had two people rule. And there was a lot of argument of what to do. Then there was dictators, that was better. But during the Empire the people who argued were really only the Emperor and the Senate.
I think that the Roman empire was better for the people. It was helpful because mostly good emperors who helped the people of Rome. Also when their were two councils they would argue if they were in a war but with only one person ruling it made the decisions a lot easier.
I agree with Madison.Like how she said the republic was always good. I think this is right, the republic is always good. So I would rather take a chance with that because you never know what the emperor is going to be like.
I beileve the empire would have been better IF they had mostly good empeors, with a few bad one. But they had a ton of bad empires! This makes me believe that the republic is better because there was multiple rulers you could vote for, so if you didnt like one than you could vote for the other. With the occasion of there only being bad candidates.
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.