0
1.Caligula (37-41) 1.Nevra (96-98)
2.Elagabalus (218-224) 2.Trajan (98-117)
3.Commodus (180-192) 3.Hadrian (117-138)
4.Nero (54-68) 4.Antoninus Pius (138-161)
5.Domitian (81-96) 5.Marcus Aurelius (161-180)
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoSome emperors were good and some were what we could consider bad. Emperors such as Augustus, Vespasian, the so-called five good emperors, they were all good people and the empire prospered under them. Other emperors had no political or governmental training and made bad decisions. They could be considered bad as the empire suffered under them. In other words, the legacy of the individual emperor would determine whether he was good or bad.
Wiki User
∙ 11y agoRome had many good men for emperors, beginning with Augustus and there are too many to mention by name. If you mean the so-called "five good emperors" which were a string of men who ruled consecutively and brought or kept the empire running smoothly, they were Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius. Some other good emperors were Claudius, Vespasian and Titus.
Rome had many good men for emperors, beginning with Augustus and there are too many to mention by name. If you mean the so-called "five good emperors" which were a string of men who ruled consecutively and brought or kept the empire running smoothly, they were Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius. Some other good emperors were Claudius, Vespasian and Titus.
Rome had many good men for emperors, beginning with Augustus and there are too many to mention by name. If you mean the so-called "five good emperors" which were a string of men who ruled consecutively and brought or kept the empire running smoothly, they were Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius. Some other good emperors were Claudius, Vespasian and Titus.
Rome had many good men for emperors, beginning with Augustus and there are too many to mention by name. If you mean the so-called "five good emperors" which were a string of men who ruled consecutively and brought or kept the empire running smoothly, they were Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius. Some other good emperors were Claudius, Vespasian and Titus.
Rome had many good men for emperors, beginning with Augustus and there are too many to mention by name. If you mean the so-called "five good emperors" which were a string of men who ruled consecutively and brought or kept the empire running smoothly, they were Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius. Some other good emperors were Claudius, Vespasian and Titus.
Rome had many good men for emperors, beginning with Augustus and there are too many to mention by name. If you mean the so-called "five good emperors" which were a string of men who ruled consecutively and brought or kept the empire running smoothly, they were Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius. Some other good emperors were Claudius, Vespasian and Titus.
Rome had many good men for emperors, beginning with Augustus and there are too many to mention by name. If you mean the so-called "five good emperors" which were a string of men who ruled consecutively and brought or kept the empire running smoothly, they were Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius. Some other good emperors were Claudius, Vespasian and Titus.
Rome had many good men for emperors, beginning with Augustus and there are too many to mention by name. If you mean the so-called "five good emperors" which were a string of men who ruled consecutively and brought or kept the empire running smoothly, they were Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius. Some other good emperors were Claudius, Vespasian and Titus.
Rome had many good men for emperors, beginning with Augustus and there are too many to mention by name. If you mean the so-called "five good emperors" which were a string of men who ruled consecutively and brought or kept the empire running smoothly, they were Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius. Some other good emperors were Claudius, Vespasian and Titus.
Wiki User
∙ 11y agoRome had many good men for emperors, beginning with Augustus and there are too many to mention by name. If you mean the so-called "five good emperors" which were a string of men who ruled consecutively and brought or kept the empire running smoothly, they were Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pius and Marcus Aurelius. Some other good emperors were Claudius, Vespasian and Titus.
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoit was a good thing. because with out their architecture and art most of the thing we have like buildings and our alphabet would not exist. (:
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why do people have different views about the roman empire?
The Roman Empire was a large, historically influential empire that lasted for about a thousand years (longer, if we include the Eastern Roman Empire, or the subsequent Holy Roman Empire) and it did many different things, some good, and some bad, and some which might have been either good or bad, depending upon how you look at them. In other words, it is a complicated subject. It is therefore understandable that people have different views about it.
Was the empire a good or bad thing?
it was a good thing. because with out their architecture and art most of the thing we have like buildings and our alphabet would not exist. (:
Did the roman empire have a bad leadership?
yes it did
How was plague introduced into the roman empire?
Romans weren't very good at keeping a good hygiene level, so bad hygiene = plague.
Who are the two emperors that wasted money in the roman empire?
The first emperor that wasted money in the roman empire was Marcus Aurelius because the economy was bad by the inflation of prices.
Was the roman army a good thing or a bad thing?
rome need an army
Why do people have different views about the roman empire?
The Roman Empire was a large, historically influential empire that lasted for about a thousand years (longer, if we include the Eastern Roman Empire, or the subsequent Holy Roman Empire) and it did many different things, some good, and some bad, and some which might have been either good or bad, depending upon how you look at them. In other words, it is a complicated subject. It is therefore understandable that people have different views about it.
Was the empire a good or bad thing?
it was a good thing. because with out their architecture and art most of the thing we have like buildings and our alphabet would not exist. (:
Why was Henry III a bad king?
Which Henry III - of France, England or the Holy Roman Empire. Each one had good points and bad points. None could be considered bad.
Did the roman empire have a bad leadership?
yes it did
How was plague introduced into the roman empire?
Romans weren't very good at keeping a good hygiene level, so bad hygiene = plague.
Why was the roman empire a BAD place to live?
yes
Why is an empire good?
an empire is good because you will be ruling over more land, have more people, and over time you can dominate a huge area of land! the only bad thing is that sometimes one of the states or nations that you are ruling over will become strong and conquer you and then they will become the rulers of the empire. but overall an empire is a good thing.
What was not a reason for the decline of the roman empire?
The ability to engineer great buildings and infrastructure was a Roman ideal. It was not a reason why the Roman Empire declined.
Is the benefit a good thing or a bad thing?
Benefit is good thing. Its good compared to bad.
Is A positive thing good or bad?
A positive thing is good and a negative thing is bad .
What was the holy roman empire like during the rule of Charlemagne?
bad
