No, a serf was a good deal lower than a knight.
A serf was an agricultural worker who was bound to the land he lived on and was not allowed to leave it. A serf was not a slave, because he could not be purchased or sold, but he was also not free to leave the place where he lived.
The knights were the lowest level of nobility. They were at a higher status than freemen, who were at a higher status than serfs.
You are not a serf.
Sir Knight or Sir (name)
their all from medieval times
If a lord gave a knight land with serfs on it the serfs would take care of it and if the knight moved the serfs wouldn't. Once you are a serf you can't go back neither can your family. So your children and their children and their children and so on have to be a serf. So to answer your question: A serf stayed with the land. I also gave you a definition on a serf. And there is a bunch of sentences with serfs in them above.
Vassal Serf is the latin word for slave
the vassal has power because he is a little higher class than a serf
A serf was a slave. Most slaves were taken in war or sold to pirates who sold them into slavery.
Feudalism
Ranks of honor higher than a knight typically include baron, viscount, earl (or count), marquis, and duke. These titles often denote higher social standing and greater land ownership or influence within the nobility. Additionally, in some orders of chivalry, ranks such as commander or grand master may also be considered higher than a knight. Each country may have its own specific hierarchy and titles associated with nobility.
The peasants were the lowest level of medieval society. They earned a living by providing food to the knights. As the lowest class, they were brutally punished or killed when they did not provide enough to the higher classes.
Yes, the baron got paid by the King for recruiting more people to be knights
Let's Go Higher - Jordan Knight song - was created in 2010-12.