Was the fall of the roman republic good/bad to Rome ?

Question

so after the republic the empire started was that good to rome??

Answer 1

It depends on the group of Romans you're talking about. The start of the Empire diminished the patricians and the Senate's powers.

For the poor, life improved. They were able to get free food. This is because, starting as Rome got unstable, if emperors got unpopular with normal people, they would be murdered... horribly. Nero committed suicide rather then face his would-be murderers.

However, on the whole, Rome got more power and wealth. The large Roman empire wouldn't have happened with the Republic, only with the emperors.

Answer 2

Are you kidding me? The Republic was way better than the Empire, as once a bad emperor got in, like Nero and Vespasian, then it would hurt Rome as they had all the power to start uneeded wars and ignore the poor so they could build lavish palaces. The Republic was vulnerable to powerful individuals, who bribed and threatened to get there way, so I guess the Republic wasn't perfect. The Empire did amazing things but also began the downfall of Rome.....

Answer 3

Both good and bad for Rome.

Depends who is writing that particular bit of history. Depends who is doing the interpretation.

Depends on who was affected adversely or positively.

Incidentally, without the passing away of old, no new things can emerge.

Answer 4

Entire libraries have been filled debating this question.  In the short-term, the effects were positive.  It put to an end over a century of civil war in which greedy generals and politicians were able to abuse the Replican system to get power for themselves at the expense of the citizens of Rome.  In the long-term, it didn't make a difference.  Bad leaders crept up among the imperial class and caused as much misery as those leaders in the dying days of the Republic.  As for the "empire", it had come into existence long before the imperial period itself through the process of conquest, and was technically seperate from the system that administered it, whether by a senate or a single emperor.

Answer 5

What we now think of as Rome - Buildings like the Colesseum, monuments like Trajan's Column - were the result of the Empire. The Rome of the Republic would not have been grand, as in 'The Grandeur that was Rome', the name of a famous text on the subject from 50 or more years ago. The Rome of the Republic was a nasty, grubby place.The infighting that one answer refers to only happened in the the civil wars of the last 100 years or so of the Republic, caused, I would suggest, by the very system itself. Once the Empire began to grow, was it really feasible for it to be run without a clear leader at its head?  Remember the Republican system did not allow for anyone to hold office for any lengthy period of time, the idea of anyone being able to set themselves up as a 'King' being absolute anathema. The system had within itself the seeds of its own destruction. The Emperors were a pretty nasty lot - but then, so were the Chinese Emperors, the Japenese Shoguns, the Aztec and Incan Emperors. It's only within the last 200 years that we've been able to rein in out politicians  from their worst excesses and to make them realise that it is possible to have civilised debate without having to kill opponents. It's only within the last 20 or 30 years that we've been able to control thier sexual appetites - iagine what the outcry would e now if a president of the USA behaved sexually like JFK did?

So, yes, I think the Empire was probably, on balance, inevitable, and to that extent a 'good thing' for Rome.

Answer 6

The time of the Empire meant the end of the Empire.  Under the Republic, the consuls ruled for a year, and then went away to be proconsul in some outlying area.  

Once there was an empire, you had either a strong one or a weak one.  If a strong one, a great general would be held back so not to become to popular, which meant the empire stopped growing.  Under a weak Emperor the Great general would look to the purple rather than conquest, as the greater glory.

Answer 7

Definitely, a good thing.  All of the abuses that Rome inflicted on others happened during the time of the Republic.  (eg, a famous Briton said that the Romans make a desert and call it peace)The other provinces (outside Italy) were there basically to make senators rich, and they would kill anyone who dared interfere with this - eg, the Grachhi, Julius Caesar.

Based on how wicked and rapacious the senators were, it was definitely a good thing that they were dethroned - in other words, the Republic replaced by the Empire.