both were born in there social status
2nd answer: Slavery did exist in the middle ages, particularly in the early middle ages, but it steadily decreased over time, primarily due to the influence of the church, which opposed enslaving Christians. It had largely disappeared, at least in Western Europe, by the 13th century.
Serfs were not fully free individuals, but they were not chattel slaves. Serfs owed labor to their lord, but they also worked their own lands and animals. If fortunate or shrewd a peasant family could acquire more land and move from subsistence to generating a surplus for cash sale. Some serfs were able to hire other to do their required labor for them. They might also have hired men to assist with their farm work, and in some cases even had household servants. A very few acquired enough land to have tenants of their own, essentially becoming minor gentry landlords.
Also, not all peasants were serfs, some were free men. The status of serf or free did not always correlate to wealth. A free man might be a poor cottager, and a serf, despite his unfree status, might have considerable wealth.
Serfs were slaves tied to the land and lord and nothing would free them. Freemen were peasants who had bought their freedom.
In secular society, the order was:Royalty at the topNobilityFree people, including merchants, tradesmen, and so onSerfsand sometimes there were slavesKnights, who were usually considered to be the lowest rank of nobility.Peasants included freemen, serfs and slaves. Freemen were independent farmers. Serfs were dependents of nobles or landed gentry, to whom they owed allegiance; serfs were not entirely free, but were not slaves either. Most countries did not have slaves.
Brewers were freemen, and were above serfs but below the nobility, in the middle class with other merchants and tradesmen.
I am assuming the question is referring to rent. The rent to freemen on different manorial estates varied with the estate. The rents were provided in leases, and these were negotiated one by one. Freemen paid amounts that were similar to the rents of serfs. The only advantage of being a freeman was that you could leave whenever you wanted, and the disadvantage was that the lord could evict you whenever he wanted, both subject to the terms of the lease, of course.
feudal system or feudalism.
Serfs were slaves tied to the land and lord and nothing would free them. Freemen were peasants who had bought their freedom.
Serfs and Freemen
True.
the lords, knights, kings, queens, serfs, and freemen got it the best
The villains were considered freemen among the serfs, but a subject under the king Both villains and serfs exchanged manual labor on the manors grounds for produce and rent. These conditions continued into the 15th century when tenure and free labor gained prominence.
In secular society, the order was:Royalty at the topNobilityFree people, including merchants, tradesmen, and so onSerfsand sometimes there were slavesKnights, who were usually considered to be the lowest rank of nobility.Peasants included freemen, serfs and slaves. Freemen were independent farmers. Serfs were dependents of nobles or landed gentry, to whom they owed allegiance; serfs were not entirely free, but were not slaves either. Most countries did not have slaves.
No . Unlike serfs and freemen slaves did not have rights and were sold to higher ranked people like kings
Slaves
Brewers were freemen, and were above serfs but below the nobility, in the middle class with other merchants and tradesmen.
slaves
The European Serfs.
The highest. The ranks in order from highest to lowest are: Kings and Queens Knights and Nobles Lesser Nobles Freemen and Freewomen Serfs