Was Rome better off as an 'empire' than as a republic?
Rome was better as an empire and as a republic. The people in Rome were used to being an empire and having set rulers and just following whatever they say that it would probably be had for them to adjust to becoming a republic. This would probably also cause many arguments, people would not be able to decide what to vote for. When a new rule comes out to be voted on, there will be mixed emotions for everyone, and I don’t think that the senate would be ready for this kind of chaos. On the other hand, it would be good for Rome to try this and see how it helps and what effect it has on their society. I think since there were many emperors who cared so much about being powerful, that this would be hard for Rome. They would not want the power taken from them and given to the people. Everyone saw how the senate and higher titles reacted when Julius Caesar went out to the poor people and asked for their votes. What if the senate had to do that? Plain and simple: they would not. In conclusion, there are many pluses and minuses but we know that Rome would be a completely different place if it was an empire rather than a republic.
I really like how you left the reader with questions. You might want to make it more clear what side you are on. It is kind of confusing. Here is also a source that might help show you both sides.I used it and it was helpful.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.historum.com/ancient-history/4266-roman-republic-vs-roman-empire.html