A freeman was a person who was not bound to the land or obligated to provide labor to a lord, while a serf was a person who was bound to the land and required to provide labor to a lord in exchange for protection. Freemen had more freedom and autonomy compared to serfs who had limited rights and mobility.
St Petersburg was built largely by forced serf labor at appalling cost of course.
If his Lord sold the land, the serf would be passed onto the new owner.
A vassal was a subject of a monarch who held a fief from that monarch. In other words the vassal was a lord with an estate that consisted of one or more manors. In return for the fief, the vassal had to give an oath swearing to support the monarch as needed, such as to fight for him in wars and provide soldiers from his followers. A serf was a peasant who had no land of his own, but had a relationship with a lord that was in some respects like the relationship between the vassal and the monarch. Just as the vassal got land from the king, the serf was provided with a place to live and fields to farm, though the were not his to own. And just as the vassal supported the monarch with soldiers, the serf supported the lord with food, labor, or money for rent.
25 is 3 more away than 22
There is no practical difference between unlawful and illegal; they both refer to something that is against the law. In a riddle context, the use of 'unlawful' or 'illegal' could be a play on words to confuse the listener, but they essentially mean the same thing.
freeholders pay taxes . serfs work for their land
he pays his debt to the person he serves
A peasant and a serf are the same thing entirely.
A possible antonym of serf could be "free person" or "freeman," as a serf is a person who is bound to the land and essentially owned by a lord, whereas a free person has autonomy and is not bound to servitude.
A freeman was a tenant farmer who paid rent and had no duties to perform for the lord of the land. He worked hard, and had a life not all that different from a serf's. A freeman would have the advantage over a serf of being able to determine what work he was going to do on any given day. By contrast, the serf spent three or four days each week working for the lord or on common land. A freeman had the right to move off the land if he decided to do so, once his lease was up; the downside being the lord could arbitrarily tell him to leave when the lease was up. By contrast, the serf was bound to the land, and neither he nor the lord could unilaterally move him away. The freeman was technically required to protect himself in times of trouble. The serf was theoretically protected. A freeman could aspire to earn enough money to buy his own property. This would make him a yeoman, who did not have to pay rent, but could be called up in wartime to be an archer. There is a link below.
Great question! Saoirseach (a freeman) is contrasted with Daoirseach (a serf, a slave). The word is used in both Scottish Gaelic and Irish.
1st AnswerA medieval freeman was a person that was given some land in return for services to the king. A freeman had fifteen strips of land in each field but in return he had to work to pay for it, help with the ploughing at harvest and help give out duties to Peasants. A freeman could leave the site without permission of the manor lord and could marry anyone, even from a different manor. Another answer:A freeman was a peasant farmer who was not bound by the manorial obligations that serfs had. He rented his land as what was called a copyholder, meaning that he had a lease. While he did not have the serf's obligations, he also did not have the serf's rights, and could be put off his farm when his lease expired. There is a link below to the section of an article on serfs dealing with freemen.
A serf is a person who is bound to the land they work on and is subject to the control of a lord, whereas a commoner is a person who is not nobility but has more freedom to move and work. Serfs have limited rights and are tied to the land, while commoners have more autonomy and social mobility.
A man is an adult male human while a freeman has been released from a condition of slavery.
Almost nothing. But a citizen is man of a town, city, village, etc. A freeman may or may not even live in a town, city, village, etc. He may always be moving.
An antonym for "hostage" could be "freeman." While a hostage is someone held against their will, a freeman enjoys personal liberty and is not under coercion or confinement. This contrast highlights the difference between captivity and freedom.
a serf helped a vassal because the serf came with the vassals land and that helped him with the land and any other needs for land he was not a slave but one step above the slave