Serfs were barely above slaves themselves. I doubt any serfs ever owned slaves.
They ruled the serfs/slaves ( serfs are slaves) and they lived well instead of in a dirt floor hut.
Slaves
In historical contexts, serfs are not considered slaves. Serfs were tied to the land they worked on and owed labor and other obligations to their lord, but they were not considered property like slaves.
Serfs were slaves who were owned by nobles.
Serfs were slaves who were owned by nobles.
how is aztec society orginized
slaves
Serfs were tied to the land and could not be sold, whereas slaves were considered property and were often bought and sold. Serfs typically had some rights and were subject to fewer harsh treatments compared to slaves. Serfs were also a part of the feudal system, while slaves were seen as items of property in various societies.
No they were slaves. Slaves don't own land.
Nobles and Serfs. Serfs(slaves) were most of the population.
Serfs and slaves were similar in that both were considered property, had obligations to their lords, and lacked freedom to move about as they pleased. However, serfs were tied to the land they worked on, whereas slaves were considered personal property and could be bought and sold. Serfs also had certain legal protections and some degree of autonomy over their own lives, while slaves had no legal rights and were completely under the control of their owners.
False. Serfs were legally bound to a certain piece of land and obligated to work for the lord who owned that land, but they were not considered slaves as they were not owned by the lord and did have some legal rights and protections.