Julius Caesar Good Or Bad

699 Words2 Pages

Rome experienced periods of great power and periods of downfall when it came to the emperors that conquered the land. It takes many positive traits and confidence to rule a land as great as Rome. There were a variety of different emperors that ruled the land but they were exceedingly divergent. A healthy Roman emperor should possess traits such as courageousness, being a strong leader, and having exceedingly amounts of patience. Julius and Augustus Caesar are examples of successful emperors that ruled over Rome. They contained positive traits that allowed them to excel Rome into being a country of great improvement and triumph. On the other hand Tiberius and Nero, also Roman emperors, were terrible leaders that rather than being a leader, they were an enemy to Rome. Many leaders have different ways of running a country and they expressed through different actions and the growth of Rome over the years. …show more content…

Julius Caesar contained positive traits that a leader should encompass, he was generous, intelligent, and energetic. Through his actions, Rome was in a period of development where new inventions were being made such as the Aqueduct, a concrete pipe that helped cleanse water that flowed through the city. Julius was responsible for being triumphant over all the battles he was in, being a dictator of Rome, never leading his army into an ambush, and becoming Governor of cisalpine and transalpine. Despite having all these sucessess he has some failures such as invading Britain and never annexing it, letting too many political enemies live and being responsible for his own death by not listening to the assassination

More about Julius Caesar Good Or Bad

Open Document