0
Serfs were almost like slaves because they were bound to the land they worked on and were considered the property of the lord. They were obligated to work the land in exchange for protection and a small portion of crops, similar to how slaves were bound to their owners and forced to work without compensation.
What else can I help you with?
True or false serfs were the lord's slaves?
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.
Were serfs slaves?
In a way, yes. They were bound to the Lord's property, could not freely move from there, had to work for a number of days per week for the lord without being paid and in other ways also had very limited rights. On the other hand, they were - at least in Western Europe - not bought or sold or forcibly transported outside their region of birth. In Russia however they could be traded and transported against their will, so there they were for all practical porposes slaves.
How did the Emancipation Edict affect the quality of life for serfs?
The Emancipation Edict was a negative detriment to the life of serfs. With a major reduction in the work force, conditions for the serf who was in a voluntary lengthy contract became much harder.
What did the law consider slaves to be?
The law considered slaves to be property with limited or no legal rights. They were viewed as possessions that could be bought, sold, and inherited like any other asset. Their status as property allowed slave owners to control almost every aspect of their lives.
What did the knights have to do for the serfs?
Knights were responsible for protecting the serfs and the land they lived on from invading forces. They also collected taxes and ensured order and justice within their domain. Additionally, knights may have provided some basic services and resources to the serfs in exchange for their labor on the land.
Are serfs considered slaves in historical contexts?
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.
Did serfs have slaves?
Serfs were barely above slaves themselves. I doubt any serfs ever owned slaves.
What is the difference between the vassals and the serfs?
the vassals are the kings slaves and the serfs are like a nun and monks
How were the lives of nobles different from the lives of serfs?
They ruled the serfs/slaves ( serfs are slaves) and they lived well instead of in a dirt floor hut.
Why were serfs like slaves?
Serfs were similar to slaves in that they were tied to the land they worked on and were subject to the authority of the landowner. They were required to provide labor and goods to the landowner in exchange for protection and a place to live. While serfs were not considered property like slaves, they had limited rights and freedoms, similar to those held by slaves.
What are serfs similar to?
Slaves
What were the arrangement between the serfs and the nobles?
Serfs were slaves who were owned by nobles.
What were the arrangements between the serfs and the nobles?
Serfs were slaves who were owned by nobles.
How was the Aztec society orginized?
how is aztec society orginized
In Russia serfs were similar to?
slaves
What is Serfdom?
serfs where like slaves but they could leave serfdom is like slavery but the serfs could leave they just wouldn't have a place to live as they did being a serf to someones home
would slaves be considered peasants?
No . Unlike serfs and freemen slaves did not have rights and were sold to higher ranked people like kings
