Would you rather …

being anti-slavery is fedora now?

Well if I'm a filthy rich aristocrat, then I can pretty much do whatever the fuck I want, now can't I?

This, plus the other two require you to have done military service.

>The american south is too hot.
Only the Deep South. Upper South like Maryland and Virginia just have an issue of humidity.

>Maryland and Virginia just have an issue of humidity
which makes the heat 100x times worse. I'll take 120 degrees in Arizona before 90 in Maryland.

1) for poets, philosophers and romantics
2) for warriors, adventurers and sadist
3) either for cool guys, or douches that like to "free" slaves

America. I'd start by selling my slaves and plantation and moving with all my delicious cash to somewhere comfy, like Bermuda or Crete.

>Bermuda or Crete.
Bermuda is a Royal Navy Garisson and Crete is part of the Osman Empire
>at least you did sell the slaves and not free them.

Eh Bermuda then. There are hundreds of islands there, if I have enough cash I'll buy one and have a house built on it.
>at least you did sell the slaves and not free them.
This would depend on how much cash I have. If my wealth is all in slaves and land then I'll sell them, if I have cash on top of slaves and land, I'd probably turn the slaves into sharecroppers.

If you fucked your servants they'd most likely get pregnant. If they were white people would more easily consider them yours. With blacks however, you can pretend it was just another slave who knocked little Jezebel up.

>Osman

Albonigger detected.

I would choose to just live now. Like it or not, we in the modern world life exponentially better lives than even the richest of people 200 years ago. Sure we can't eat or drink or fuck like crazy, but we have access to infinitely better medical care as well as insane creature comforts.

>but we have access to infinitely better medical care as well as insane creature comforts.
We still don't live much longer than elites that got to enjoy the incredibly high quality of life back then.
Hell, cancer might be killing us faster than ever.

I would be tempted to say the first, but, since latifundi fucked up Italy's economic future in the South... I will pick the second.

>since latifundi fucked up Italy's economic future in the South
That was 1600 years later. nice trips btw

>no option for being a 21st century buzzillionaire who controls the fate of millions of lives with his investment opportunites

Your poll is inavlid

>Be a highborn nobleman in western Europe in the 15th century, complete with own castle, lands, serfs and subjects
having own troops
having your own private dungeons
practise ius primae noctis
kill your neighbors if they disagree

>2.
>sadists

The depravities you could pull of in rome were far greater then in renaissance europe, witch places of romantic with sadist and you are done.

>The depravities you could pull of in rome were far greater then in renaissance europe
Please do tell me more

I don't think that was the implied question at all

I think you are wrong.

Well, you could castrate and assrape your slave without being sentenced for sodomy, you could make him wear collars with your name or "Pls bring me back to my master if you see me running free" writings on it, force him to adapt degrading nicknames for the rest of his lives or use any kind of funny torture or lethal game that came to your mind as long as the screams dont disturb your neighboors to the point that the rarely enforced fine for excessive cruelty would be dealth against you.

There is an account of an espeaciallly cruel but rich roman who supervised a certain province to have raised a great amount of lecherous lampreys (google em, horryfing!) in a tank in his villa.
He starved them, so he could feed them a slave to be sucked out of blood alife from time to time if the unfortunate victim had done a minor misconduct.

Id rather be a medieval serv, cruel lords were rare and confined by the church along the right of the serv to run away and geet away with it if he survived in a city for more then 3 years among similar laws which differed though europe.

Hell some darkage dukes even allowed their peasants to vote concerning the punishment of a serv because the power balance was a bit more equal than in the roman empire were slaves were often foreigners and not bound to the community.

>cruel lords were rare
Whereas cruel roman domini were commonplace? Mistreating houseslaves was considered absolutely barbaric in Rome, if you got a reputation in that sense (and you would, slaves gossiped amongst each other and slaves told their masters all kind of shit) people would look at you like a deviant. Just think of Antonius Hybrida, who was a fucking butcher. He was literally run out of Rome after being brought to trial for maiming provincials and slaves. He was ABSOLVED, but he still had to leave the city for half a decade until people forgot (after which he became consul due to literally have found a treasure in his place of exile and so being able to literally bribe the whole city into voting for him)

Gotta go with the one with the greatest technology. I mean people love to wank their favorite period but objectively speaking:
future > past

Though I might make do with the Roman one if I stay the same color (don't think black guy owning black slaves would be favorable), and 15th century decided to send the plague over to my area.

>literally have found a treasure in his place of exile

That sounds interesting, got more info on that?

I read it in Dunstan's Ancient Rome. Sorry I absolutely cannot be arsed to look up where exactly.

Still it happened.
The lamprey thing was punished because the emperor payed the dude a visit and was utterly disgusted by the cruelty but the fact that in the provinces beyond rome you could even get that far should show that it happened quiet often.

I mean, there are records of roman plebs booing at elephants being killed in the arena because they thought of them as gentle and cool animals.
Still north africa got emptied out of elephants.

Anything Veeky Forums doesn't like is either fedora or /pol/.

>found a treasure
more likely he robbed someone

>Be a highborn nobleman in western Europe in the 15th century, complete with own castle, lands, serfs and subjects
Where abouts in western Europe? I'm pretty sure the serfs in France were liberated by then, and probably other kingdoms in the west too.

Being a Roman would suck, even as a patrician. Their concept of honor and the shame culture that grew around it would have been stifling and oppressive, their whole system would seem to us so bloated, corrupt, and incompetent as to be comical were it not so damn gratuitous and lethal.

So would the medieval nobleman. Better back the right son in the succession war or you'll find your traitor head on a pike

Being a southerner would yield the most comfortable and technologically/medically advanced lifestyle. Sure it's hot as hell in the south but try living in a Mediterranean villa made out of stone. And what this user wrote would be a great idea if you were wanting to invest in your family's posterity. Instead of Andrew Carnegie dominating the early steel industry it could be your sons or grandsons.

You sound like a pussy.

First. Mostly to do weird sex things with my slaves.

>Well, you could castrate and assrape your slave without being sentenced for sodomy,
Lets hypothetically assume that I am into hetero sex, what are my options as rich Roman?

You're married to the one your father and her father picked for you, other than that you could always fuck whores, start an affair or go to depraved parties either way your reputation is screwed

If you are caught having an affair yes. However if you are smart about it, you can be discrete with your other lover. Anyway I'd probably go with Medieval nobleman, slavery for the most part is wrong. My second choice would be a Roman. But still we don't know what country in europe we are going to end up in and thats important.

If I could choose I'd be
Alexander the Great,
Caesar,
Aristotle,
Hammurabi (?)

As to your question,
I'd absolutely pick the patrician at the height of the Roman empire.

I would never live in that living cesspool of shit which was medieval Europe. Christianity degenerated it.

And I would not feel comfortable with being some stupid yank that owns slaves.

1400s highborn nobleman.

Because then I can live out my statecraft memes and try to make a strong centralized independant land from my lands and abolish feudalism early in an attempt to do so.

Or if that is too much of a meme to do then rome with sex slaves so I can be decedant and carefree while writing philosphy and enjoying politics (read watching my political enemies being ripped apart by my scheming)

You sound like a bad ass

But the second option is the less close to absolute power.

>not selling everything, moving north and starting a textile industry to mass produce uniforms in about 40 years

Actually no, in any of the options OP gives to us behaving accordingly to what's expected of you is extremely important to keep your position.

Let's look at it from another point of view
Would you be
1)slave in Roman empire
2)serf in Middle ages
3)negro slave in 1820
?

Highly depends on the kind of slave

The negro kind

>There are people on this board that would choose something other than having noble blood

Serf of course, if by option 1 you mean slave in some shit-ass quarry

bringing 60k a year in the 21st century, like I do now.
I live better than all your options

Then serf of fucking course.

I still believe the quality of living would be higher
>tfw you will never hold games on your large villa where men fight each others to death for your entertainment
>tfw you will never siege your neighbors keep, storm his walls and behead and/or rape his entire family
>tfw you will never sip a mint julep in your favorite easy chair whilst one of your negros gets flogged

I already have noble blood. It means fucking nothing, all that matters is your place in society and what privileges and obligations it entails. The landowner seems easily the comfiest option.

>1)slave in Roman empire
Being a pedagógus is pretty fucking comfy, even if you're technically a slave.
So it really depends, what kind of slave.
>2)serf in Middle ages
Here it depends more on the place. But i think this is the best overall option.

>people in the past didn't get cancer.

The third, but I sell everything off and leave the land to the freedmen to work and own themselves (assuming they're allowed to own land, otherwise I just free them and auction it off), and go to Europe to live it up in style.

The second doesn't seem awful either provided I'm in the HRE or southeast France.

As someone who's lived in Maryland, Arizona and North Carolina, this. Except for the fact that AZ is our own little slice of outback so I only want to live there with modern medical technology.

>try to make a strong centralized independant land from my lands and abolish feudalism early in an attempt to do so
So, you're going to start a minor feudal war and get your land taken from you, and possibly made an example of if in France due to them already dealing with/having just gotten done dealing with a century of another vassal getting uppity.

>not choosing No.1 and bringing the Romans modern mathematics and a basic knowledge of the scientific method, thereby accelerating the advance of civilisation by several centuries.

This is literally the best reason to pick option 1.

Bring a backpack full of textbooks. They'll worship you like a god because you're the only one who can read them.

I live in Virginia.

Summer is a bitch.

Number 1.

That is, depending on what time of the Roman Empire we're talking about.