We have read the two source documents, which were written by Aelius and Tacitus. They had contrasting different points of view on the period of Pax Romana in the Roman Empire.
             First, they felt different about the emperor of Roman Empire. Aelius discussed everyone in the Empire respected for the great ruler emperor as god because he administered all things better than anyone. Since he appointed and trained some intelligent governors to protect and provide for the governed, he just stayed in his place and managed the world through letters, which was successful. Furthermore, he tried to maintain an orderly "world" community, which had and open conception of citizenship among different groups of people. So his subjects submitted to his rule and adored him. On the other hand, Tacitus described Briton felt the Roman's emperor is a greedy tyrant because he imposed tyranny on them. For instance, the emperor commanded his army to butchery innocent common people in Britain, and indiscriminate plunder their land and wealth. Moreover, the emperor drafted Briton children to slave on other lands. Therefore, Briton hated Roman emperor.
             Second, they had conflicting opinion about the army of the Roman Empire. Aelius pictured the Roman army was very strong because soldiers and officers prevailed not only over the enemy but over themselves after training. They lived under discipline daily, and none ever desert the post. However, Tacitus believed the Roman's army was not strong because they had nothing in reserve only forts without garrisons, and they only had displeased slaves and old, town sick people to defend them.
             Next, they discussed dissimilar point about the Roman Empire's public work, such as new road and sewage systems. Aelius indicated the Roman Empire improved their ports, cut roads through mountains, emptied swamps, measured out the world, bridged rivers and built sewage systems to dispose of their waste. Th...