Was the living standard of a king in the middle ages, better than the living standard of the average Joe in modern times?

Was the living standard of a king in the middle ages, better than the living standard of the average Joe in modern times?

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not really. Maybe in some aspects but not overall.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The average person in medieval times was taller than today. A modern billionaire has lower living standards than a medieval peasant.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I live way better than a king in regards to comfort and luxury but the king is still a king so there's all the stuff that comes with that.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I'd rather be a king and just bring my understanding of modern geopolitics to BTFO everyone and revolutionize the music scene by bringing modern beats so I have something good to listen to while conquering shit.

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    obviously not. The life of a random western man today is perhaps 100 better than a king's in the middle ages. Think about. We have so many amenities; hot water, shampoo, razors, moisturizing cream, clean fine clothes, cars, food delivery services, drive through, super markets, air conditioning, TVs, internet, fresh fruit all-year-round, infinite amounts of music, amusement parks, and so much more.
    Our biggest problems are obesity (too much food), boredom (too much free time), and suicide (too much good life).

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >yes goyim, we can cosoom more

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Cause as we all know, kings and their nobles never engaged in conspicuous consumption

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          They did but it was not nearly as destructive as it is today

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Fundamentally, yes. Owning more crap and having running water is nothing compared to the power to rule men.

          There's a certain difference between commissioning great works of art to one-up Lord Ted next door, and buying the latest iPhone because the man in the telly told you to

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >eating sugar slop and having access to pornography is way better than having your word literally be law.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >hot water
      Kings had this
      >shampoo
      and this
      >razors
      and this
      >moisturizing cream
      yup
      >clean fine clothes
      lots of them
      >cars
      carriages
      >food delivery services
      private chef
      >drive through
      servants that travel with him and cook on his command
      >super markets
      Royal garden
      >air conditioning
      Surprisingly they actually had some pretty good methods of this.
      >TVs
      Books, Music, Board games, Plays, Sporting Events
      >internet
      court gossip
      >fresh fruit all-year-round
      I'll give you this one
      >infinite amounts of music
      and this one
      >amusement parks
      You're the frickin King you've got a whole country.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      TPBP. Retards-le heckin traditionalists are fucking seething in the replies

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes because he could kill anyone who bullies him. What would happen to someone that told a medieval king that fried sliced flatbread was "too good for him" or that he "doesn't deserve it". As a poor person right now in modern times I get terrorized, harassed, threatened, etc for eating or even thinking about eating things like plain corn chips, regular cheezies, instant noodles, snickers, hamburger helper, salt and vinegar potato chips, doritos, popcorn chicken, tacos, etc basically anything they don't consider "peasant food" and they believe certain foods like chilli or cheddar jalapeno cheetos would justify violence or murder against me if I eat them.

    A medieval king would have access to anything that was available in his society, it doesn't matter if there were overall less things available in his society, the fact that he had unrestricted access to it made his life infinitely better than someone who has common things in his society violently gatekept from him on the grounds that "he's a peasant", especially when the amount of things being gatekept result in his food options being literally the same or worse than an actual poor medieval person. Even in this case retards will still try to pretend that because he lives in a society where overall more things are available than in the past that that somehow makes his life better than people in the past whose societies had less things even if this person doesn't have access to the vast majority of these things.

    The fact that medieval kings had control over the lives and the ability to prevent others from violently imposing their will on them or gatekeeping things from them makes their life infinitely better than a modern person who has no agency and who has common, affordable good things violently gatekept from him.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      anon what the fuck are you talking about kek

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        He's saying a king has power and average joe does not despite in theory living better, therefore the king wins. Makes sense I probably rather be a king with wealth in middle ages than some average joe living comfortably.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Yes because he could kill anyone who bullies him. What would happen to someone that told a medieval king that fried sliced flatbread was "too good for him" or that he "doesn't deserve it". As a poor person right now in modern times I get terrorized, harassed, threatened, etc for eating or even thinking about eating things like plain corn chips, regular cheezies, instant noodles, snickers, hamburger helper, salt and vinegar potato chips, doritos, popcorn chicken, tacos, etc basically anything they don't consider "peasant food" and they believe certain foods like chilli or cheddar jalapeno cheetos would justify violence or murder against me if I eat them.

          A medieval king would have access to anything that was available in his society, it doesn't matter if there were overall less things available in his society, the fact that he had unrestricted access to it made his life infinitely better than someone who has common things in his society violently gatekept from him on the grounds that "he's a peasant", especially when the amount of things being gatekept result in his food options being literally the same or worse than an actual poor medieval person. Even in this case retards will still try to pretend that because he lives in a society where overall more things are available than in the past that that somehow makes his life better than people in the past whose societies had less things even if this person doesn't have access to the vast majority of these things.

          The fact that medieval kings had control over the lives and the ability to prevent others from violently imposing their will on them or gatekeeping things from them makes their life infinitely better than a modern person who has no agency and who has common, affordable good things violently gatekept from him.

          hold the fuck up
          we're not just going pretend any of that made any sense

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >modern man
            >has hot water and commodities, but no power
            >medieval king
            >has fewer commodities, but can tell anyone in the kingdom to do whatever the fuck he wants. What he says, happens.
            >this results in an overall better life for the king

            It's that simple.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              medieval kings could have servants heat water and pour it in a tub, kings wouldn't need to do shit, the moment they see the king returning from hunting they'd get pales of hot water to get it to the right temperature and one of his mistresses would be ready to scrub his back

              the only disadvantages would be lack of new world crops, modern healthcare, automobiles, aircraft and electronic entertainment

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >anon what the fuck are you talking about kek
        Some body told him that his diet of fatty and sugary junk food was bad for his health which is white genocide

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Meds. Now.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >As a poor person right now in modern times I get terrorized, harassed, threatened, etc for eating or even thinking about eating things like plain corn chips, regular cheezies, instant noodles, snickers, hamburger helper, salt and vinegar potato chips, doritos, popcorn chicken, tacos, etc basically anything they don't consider "peasant food" and they believe certain foods like chilli or cheddar jalapeno cheetos would justify violence or murder against me if I eat them.
      maybe you are 500 lbs and they are just concerned for your health

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >As a poor person right now in modern times I get terrorized, harassed, threatened, etc for eating or even thinking about eating things like plain corn chips, regular cheezies, instant noodles, snickers, hamburger helper, salt and vinegar potato chips, doritos, popcorn chicken, tacos, etc basically anything they don't consider "peasant food" and they believe certain foods like chilli or cheddar jalapeno cheetos would justify violence or murder against me if I eat them.
      who's beating you if you eat french fries anon

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I do

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >whiny schizo with a persecution complex who is also an enormous pussy easily cowed by peer pressure dreams of having the power to kill all those who insult him
      Checks out I guess.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Consume product and get excited for new product bugmen hated him because he spoke the truth.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Literally his entire complaint is that he can't consoom as much garbage food as he wants because some imaginary vigilantes would beat him up or something

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Funniest post I've seen all day kek. Holy shit

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The living standards of a medieval peasant were better than the average Joe in modern times.

      If you love middle age so much, why don't you marry it?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Take A Shower
      Hit The Weights
      Get A Clue

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >As a poor person right now in modern times I get terrorized, harassed, threatened, etc for eating or even thinking about eating things like plain corn chips, regular cheezies, instant noodles, snickers, hamburger helper, salt and vinegar potato chips, doritos, popcorn chicken, tacos, etc basically anything they don't consider "peasant food" and they believe certain foods like chilli or cheddar jalapeno cheetos would justify violence or murder against me if I eat them.

      Did mom yell at you for eating junk food again? Seethe more fatass

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Also not to mention this question becomes extremely retarded when you consider that many "average joes" work very shitty jobs. Would you rather be a medieval king or a mine/factory worker right now in modern times? You're a retard if you'd rather work in a factory right now than be a king in the medieval era. There's nothing about the modern world that makes it worth it to work a shitty blue collar job if you had the choice to be a medieval king instead.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The fact of the matter is that most people don’t have what it takes to be a good chief executive and the required people management skillset required would have been essentially the same. Most people would rather not be dependent upon the good graces of others and would rather just be handed work and be told to do it right every single time. They don’t want to hustle to find the work even though they could easily drop out of the factory and make a lot more money as a salesman, and lack the utter ruthless devotion to analytics and ability to hold people accountable in order to crawl up the ladder of management. The average person would be abjectly miserable dealing with the bullshit that a king has to put up with because the lifestyle requires at least some level of sociopathy and willingness to tolerate the company of other sociopaths who conspire in secret against you. Compare that to living simply and honestly in a high-trust farming community.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        what the fuck is this thread
        am I high

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous
      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        This post is completely delusional.

        >The average person would be abjectly miserable dealing with the bullshit that a king has to put up with because the lifestyle requires at least some level of sociopathy and willingness to tolerate the company of other sociopaths who conspire in secret against you. Compare that to living simply and honestly in a high-trust farming community.

        Would you rather work in a factory run by a sociopathic sadist who conspires against you, whose side the cops are on, and be forced to be around other sociopaths who plot against you in general, including conspiring to cause you brain damage, assault or otherwise harm you for things like refusing to get married or eating "spicy chicken sandwiches" from Wendy's, or for saying you're not irish, or would you rather be the one in a position of power over these people, with the ability to kill them with your bare hands and get away with it, with a literal army under your command. There's no such thing as a "high trust community". Working a shitty job being abused and dominated by sadists is the failure condition that a king would have to be "dependent on the good graces of others" to avoid. Would you rather be "dependent on the good graces of others" to not lose your position of king and be forced into a horrific life of slavery, or would you rather live a horrific life of slavery where you're dependent on the good graces of others to not beat the shit out of you because they feel like it "to affirm dominance hierarchies".

        You're completely delusional if you think people can "drop out of the factory and make a lot more money as a salesman."

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          > harm you for things like refusing to get married or eating "spicy chicken sandwiches" from Wendy's, or for saying you're not irish,

          Lol brah what shithole do you live in where this is the case?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >The average person would be abjectly miserable dealing with the bullshit that a king has to put up with because the lifestyle requires at least some level of sociopathy and willingness to tolerate the company of other sociopaths who conspire in secret against you
        In the case of Donald Trump, conspire openly against you

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Ain’t no business like show business

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes because they could fuck any pussy they wanted. That alone makes it a million times better than not being able to score nowadays if you are a sub-8 male.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Average Joe:
    +instant hot water and heating
    +if you are sick, actual medicine is available
    +more entertrainment options
    +possibility to travel
    -have to spend most of his time working to pay for that, no autonomy
    -tiny house
    -still has to do chores, no servants

    King:
    +home is a giant palace
    +can ask servants to do most things
    +more free time, no work or financial obligations
    +day job is largely recreational activities i.e. going on hunts with noblemen, attending balls etc.
    -if you get sick, you are fucked
    -you are guaranteed to lose most of your teeth before age 55 and constantly suffer from dental problems
    -comforts like heating, bathing etc. are handled by servants, but you still have to wait for them to chop wood, prepare jugs etc.
    -even if you are a royal, your family probably still beats and mistreats you as a child

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      What's a whipping boy for?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Kings traveled all the time and they had actual medicine to treat symptoms. If you ever read any history outside of Buzzfeed, you would see how much time they spent away from their keep/palace hunting, traveling the kingdom, traveling outside it, etc.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >-tiny house
      +a lot more public buildings you can enter at any time and utilize for free or very cheaply. Public library, pool, cinema, malls, etc. Those are "your" spaces as a modern person.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >+more free time, no work or financial obligations
      That's bullshit
      There were plenty of historical kings who bankrupted royal treasury
      and if you were lazy fag the country would fall down to aristocracy and you would be killed if you stepped out of line

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >There were plenty of historical kings who bankrupted royal treasury
        Which you're more likely to do by being very active as a king rather than by being lazy.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    king gets servants to do everything for him and lots of land for hunting and recreation

    average joe gets modern technology but has to do everything himself

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    the king gets access to all the sex he wants, so...

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The living standards of a medieval peasant were better than the average Joe in modern times.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >be peasant
      >have no access to any modern amenities--electricity, motor vehicles, running water, medicine
      >dress in rags with no shoes
      >die at 40 from untreatable illness or malnutrition
      >eat one bread crust and a spoonful of beans a day while the fat nobleman sits in his chateau eating roasted boar with every meal
      >the nobleman can just take your wife and daughter and have sex with them any time he feels like
      >be unable to leave the estate without permission
      >war happens
      >enemy troops invade burn your village down and rape your daughter in front of you
      >your brother got burned at the stake for joining an secret illegal religious order
      no fuck that shit

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        You toil the fields or shut the fuck up.

        Peasants had more vacation days than modern wage slaves.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          wrong

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          What stopped you from getting an education to become a valuable specialist rather than a wageslave?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I have a college degree and I am a specialist, I still work for a wage though.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Literally false

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Peasants only had to work 120 days a year.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          And yet I can do so much more with my vacation compared to the random peasant who would spend all that "vacation time" doing house work

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            "Work", as in "toil in the fields". The reality of pre-industrial agriculture work is that there is ALWAYS something that needs to be done, whether it's maintenance or preparation. Just because every other day was a nominal "Saints day" or something doesn't mean they were sitting at home jacking off half the week

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Meant for

              Peasants only had to work 120 days a year.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              The women and children would handle the housework.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                And the men.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                No, that was women's work. If your wife tried to make you do any housework you'd just give her a firm slap.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Medieval Europe was not 1600s Puritan America anon.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Correct, women knew their place back then.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Wrong. You’d be handling all the dirty hard work like patching the roof or mucking the animal pens. Put your hands on your wife and everyone in your tiny hamlet finds out about it and the priest browbeats you for sinning while her father and brothers physically beat the shit out of you for putting your hands on their family.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Wrong. The priest would support me and would slap the wife for daring to come into his church without a head veil and speaking when she's supposed to remain quiet.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                > 25 (A)Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and (B)gave Himself for her, 26 that He might [a]sanctify and cleanse her (C)with the washing of water (D)by the word, 27 (E)that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, (F)not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. 28 So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church. 30 For (G)we are members of His body, [b]of His flesh and of His bones. 31 (H)“For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the (I)two shall become one flesh.” 32 This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. 33 Nevertheless (J)let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she (K)respects her husband.
                No priest is ever going to condone domestic violence. You’re delusional

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You're arguing with a tradlarp nagger

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                The Bible also says for the wife to submit to her husband and to not spare the rod.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                > 19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be bitter toward them
                The Bible is actually quite clear about this.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                It's not bitter to beat your wife for being disobedient

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Passing off all the housework on her isn’t disobedience, the priest will accuse you of being slothful and wrathful

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                There aren't any exceptions to the wife being obedient, if I tell her to do all the housework she's obligated to do it. I already work 120 days a year, the least she can do is handle the lady's work.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Wrong. There’s too much to get done and the children’s asses aren’t going to wipe themselves so while she’s washing the diapers you can go out and repair the roof.

                Farmers share their chores. You’d know this if you actually knew any farmers

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Modern farmers are different from medieval farmers, modern farmers have to work very hard to farm as many crops as possible to turn a profit, medieval farmers only had to support themselves.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Retarded take. As far back as the Bronze Age farmers have sold their produce to centralized distributors and bought their groceries at the marketplace. The only time that doesn’t apply is when you’re a sharecropper renting the land, in which case you’re no better than a wagecuck whose assembly line grows out of the ground. The biggest difference is that the modern farmer doesn’t have to give 120 days worth of labor to his landlord for no compensation

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You want so badly to believe medieval peasants had to work less hard than your minimum wage ass, lmao
                You are an embarrassment, I can't imagine what your father must be like
                >what father?
                Exacrly

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                It also says that we live on an earthly plane floating in massive firmament of water lmao

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Where does it say that?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                It's the Hebrew cosmology described in Genesis

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              There wasn't always something that needed done that took a full day of work equivalent to the modern 9-5 job. There were off-days and days where only a little work was needed. They had extra time leftover from their basic subsistence tasks, where there was little to no work to do unless they went looking for it. This spare time is also what made it possible in the first place for lords to demand labor services from peasants in the early Middle Ages.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                #
                >They had extra time leftover from their basic subsistence tasks, where there was little to no work to do unless they went looking for it. This spare time is also what made it possible in the first place for lords to demand labor services from peasants in the early Middle Ages.
                yeah all the peasants did was to go to the nearest tavern because they were all alcoholics

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          And? Everyone with half a brain knows that but it's also the case that their love styles were shit compared to ours in terms of amenities, pleasure, and care.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >the nobleman can just take your wife and daughter and have sex with them any time he feels like
        This "point" alone invalidates this entire post. Ius prima noctae was made up by Victorian historians who wanted to rub one out over their rape fantasies. It has exactly zero historical grounding

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          The amount of antiquarian fetish writing that's still believed to be history is truly horrifying

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You toil the fields or shut the fuck up.

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Probably not. But funny story:
    In the english middle ages a few monks requested audience with the king to plead to him to overturn the local bishop's policy of changing the number of monastery meals per day from 16 to 12. The king informed them that he subsisted on 3 meals a day and toñd them from now on they would too. Assumedly seething.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes wagecucks live so much better because they have the internet and microwaves

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The levels of historical illiteracy in this thread is fucking painful

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Kings got to have more sex and children than the average person's alongside having many people loyal to them. For that reason alone, a king's living standard is far above the average modern man's.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, because you're better than everyone around you, which is a much better feeling than material comfort.

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    That one anon is right. Life today is shit because people won't let me eat Hamburger Helper or regular cheezies because I'm quote "not good enough" and "a peasant." I am upset about this, and understandably so.
    So yeah, the king would win hands down.

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    A king like that probably has more stability than the average modern day wagie.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah cool Seneca quote but money gets you pussy unfortunately

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        just jerk off until you stop caring about women

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Society tells me I am a loser for doing that

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            you know what to do.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          jerking off doesnt cure loneliness

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            works on my machine

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous
  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    At least a king doesn't have to worry about his long lineage that his ancestors worked and fought hard for coming to an end just because he got stuck with the idea that cartoon women are hotter than the real ones.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      and why should someone even care about muh lineage ?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        because you do care about it like organisms in general do, unless you're defective.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          so, no arguments or any reason at all

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Another person here.
          Imagine materialism is true and there is no afterlife, you die - it's over, why would you care about your lineage?
          Or imagine materialism is false and there is an afterlife, so you can continue existing there, why would you care about your lineage on earth?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        It just feels unfair and selfish to me that after countless of generations who worked and fought hard so they and their children survived through famines and wars, there would be someone living in these comfortable times who just says "Nah, I don't feel like it, I'll rather only play vidya and drink sugar water".

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Lazy children are the price of peace

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    By the only metric that matters, i.e. leisure time, then yes.

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Often worse, and he had little privacy.
    Modern medicine would make middle age a lot more bearable.

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    no because only meaningful thing in existence is knowledge and knowledge is much more accesible today to an average joe than to a medieval lord or king

  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Was the living standard of a king in the middle ages, better than the living standard of the average Joe in modern times?
    Always better only poeple who will tell you otherwise are fucking redditors and leftists.Medicine was worse than but lifestyle way better corresponding with other nobles having any woman you like .Hunting having maximum freedom doing meaningful tasks .Engaging in Diplomacy leading an army .Also having a bunch of free time.You want something exotic no problem send an expedition. Actual ability to change the world.
    Comparing this to some wageslave coorporate cog bombarded with ads and watching porn at home its not even a contest.Only a porn addicted idiot would prefer the second option.Someone even posted a few days ago how roman emperor had it worse poeple are delusional as fuck.

  24. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Modern times blows medieval kings out of the water
    >Medieval table etiquette were extreme
    >Failure to observe proper table manners lowered your regard to vassals
    >Every woman obviously just wants your land and power, willing to betray/divorce you for a better man
    >Wife might think you're honestly better off dying after you sire a son since she can rule as regent until your son comes of age
    >Nobles constantly judging you
    >They'd totally rebel if they could get away with it
    >Priests want more rights and money
    >Don't appease them, get excommunicated
    >Neighbors want your land and castles
    >Show weakness, and you'll get attacked
    >Medicine was shit, doctors were quacks
    >Church was mandatory and way longer
    >Have to remember every random ass cousin and noble and remember to send your well wishes and shit
    >Bathe rarely, so you smelled like shit most of the time, or shitty perfume
    >Everything smells of shit because of chamber pots
    >Only shit to read are ancient ass books
    >Pre-Shakespeare stuff haven't figured out the 5-act structure
    >Your clothes might be nice, or silk, but cost a fuckton
    >Fuck with the peasantry enough and they'll rebel
    >Oh? Famine? Well guess your kingdom is starving and people getting a bit riot-y and your neighbors rallying the banners
    >Oh? Some distant relative died? Better press your rights for more land and spend most of your life marching to siege another castle or raid undefended farmland (pitched battles were extremely rare)

    Average modern Joe can enjoy a lot more comforts with a much less stressful job. Medieval King is a lot of fucking work just to be able to be a boss, but today you can just own a company and get the same effect with much less risk of dying. Hell, you can even fuck your secretary if you tried hard enough. It's not like mistresses really went away.

  25. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    kings did not have real power but the court did. He could claim the best animals and clothes, limitless entertainment and even have been protected from threats like conspirations.
    But in most kingdoms the courts were dominant over the king, if he was not necessary or had personal interests, they could order his execution. Modern Joe can be replaced million times but he still. Without talking about king´s responsibilities with his nation the throne was a dangerous position. Modern governments spents as much as posible in protection service and they dont care how son of a bitch is the man they are working for.

  26. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I don't know
    were kings allowed to sex his maids and peasants women?
    I would be willing to give up a lot of technology for that

Your email address will not be published.