Which do you like better - the Roman Republic or the Roman Empire?

>hurr durr it all went downhill after they crossed the rubicon
go home plebs.

File: 1448320575889.jpg (174KB, 600x709px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 600x709px

>>311993
Shut the fuck up

>>311980
Personally, I think both eras have interesting events, people, and conflicts.
Both also had political corruption up the ass so it's hard to denounce one underneath the other.

Kingdom best

>>311980
Only a true pleb would prefer the Empire over the Republic.

>>312020
>personally I think both eras have interesting events
you love that fence post just slowly sliding up your ass, don't you pleb.

E M P I R E
M
P
I
R
E

>thread full of atavistic republicunts
you're all shills for the gauls

>>311980
I like the republic best because of the original concept of Romanity, that in large part was lost with the internationalization and monarchization of
the empire. It's true that Rome was an ideal all the way to the end of the western empire, but I feel like the loss of the concept of citizenship and the introduction of christianity marked a distinct shift within the idea of Romanity that I don't like.

>>311980

I'm in a real bind. I prefer the Republic but two of my favourite historical figures are Julius and Augustus.

reminder that the roman empire includes the byzantines

>>312027
Tarquin please go

>>312042
>who is Scipio Africanus?

>>311993
God damn it, this. Fans of the Republic are hipsters who try to be contrarian by saying that the Empire was a time of monolithic boredom and sucking up to the emperor.

>>312065
This anon
The Republic was the original "Rome, bitch!"
Empire did conquer everything though

>>311980

>Not liking the Roman Kingdom best.

Numa says you're a pleb.

It's hip to like the Republic nowadays but the difference between it and the empire really aren't that great, apart from politics in the city of Rome itself. Regional government stayed largely the same, the military structure changed independently from the political structure, and Life in Rome itself was going to become more decadent anyways.
Before the empire, a small group of ex-consuls ran the senate, the number of people in power just went down from around 8-10 to 2-3.

>>311980
According to Appian, the senator Cato the Elder usually finished his speeches on any subject in the Senate with the phrase ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam, which means "Furthermore, it is my opinion that Carthage must be destroyed".

File: augustus6.jpg (154KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 768x1024px

The Augustan principate was still a Republic ;)

The Roman Republic should have been called the Roman Aristocracy. Far closer to what it actually was.

>>312208
>>312208
It was literally the first Republic, you fucking retard.

>>311993
That's silly. Plebians loved Caesar.

>>312225
Athens was the first republic by that definiton.
>BUT IT WAS A DEMOGRASSY
no

>>312208

Aristocracy is not a form of government. Do you mean it was an oligarchy?

File: 1448609579290.jpg (78KB, 480x780px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 480x780px

>>312157
This guy

>>312238
Aristocracy is a form of government, by Ancient definitions. Oligarchy would be the shit version of Aristocracy.

>>312242
Well, the consuls got to speak first, then the ex-consuls, then the Praetors. Debate barely ever got beyond that.

>>312256
>>312020

File: goy.png (141KB, 293x263px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 293x263px

>>312157
>decadent

>>311980

Kingdom

Lucius Tarquinius Superbus did nothing wrong.

>>312157
This is true, but you have to admit a huge portion of the Roman's traditional culture was lost when they adopted Christian ways; for this reason I prefer the Republic over the Empire.

>>312238
No, oligarchy is rule by the few. If you have a bunch of aristocrats then its not an oligarchy