Vespasian was a good emperor. He is sometimes referred to as "the man who saved Rome". The treasury was depleted when he came into power due to Nero's extravagance and the previous civil war. Vespasian, consequently, was forced to tax just about everything--even urine. Fortunately for Rome, Titus was able to conquer Jerusalem and bring back the temple treasure to enrich the Roman state. After this Vespasian was able to embark on his building program of his temple and the Colosseum.
Chat with our AI personalities
Diocletian did both good and bad things for Rome. But he is a good emperor because for one, he wasn't crazy for power. He also changed taxation and max prices to be fair for the people and changed the military. So yes, he was not a bad emperor, more of leaning towards good/decent.
No. Constantine defeated a rival general named Severus to become Emperor of Rome. In fact, Diocletian was the first emperor to abdicate, and he lived out the rest of his life quietly.
Diocletian
Diocletian
To start with, Diocletian's co-emperor was Maximian. Then he appointed two junior emperors (Caesars) subordinated to himself and Maximian, who became senior emperors (Augusti). The two Caesars were Galerius and Constantius Chorus.
Diocletian is not a what HE is a who. Diocletian was one of the Roman Emperors of the Roman Empire. He ruled around the year 300 for 20 years. He was a warrior emperor who was born poor but made his way up in military ranks. He had to fight the dead last emperors son before he became emperor. He won and became the emperor. He did alot during his riegn. one of the things he did was persecute Christianity. Hope that helps you!!<3333