government was separated in culture and geographically from the serfs. This caused a threat of revolt as the conditions for serfs to work and live were becoming too dire. There was also a famine meaning that serfs had to give away too much of there produce in the form of tax, circling back round to the fact that there were bad living conditions. You must also take into account the fact that Alexander II had took a 7 month tour of 30 different Russian provenances, meaning we would have seen the conditions they were living in.
Your question is not entirely correct in its premise; a serf is not a slave and does not have an owner. A serf is a subject of a land owner whom the serf would address as lord.
The Helots were serfs - bound to their land, providing a percentage of produce to the Spartan state - different from slaves who were owned outright and had no rights.
To become free
The colonists were infuriated that they were being taxed without representation in the government. The sugar act, however, is only one of the causes.
The African slave trade to the Americas and Europe was the result largely of wars within African tribes. Tribes and nations would war over territory or other common causes, and the victors would punish their captives by selling them into slavery. Those slaves were either sold to other tribes, or to other nations represented by slave ships from Europe.
Serfs were slaves and not a different group of people ( serf is Latin for slave). In the middle ages there was no emancipation for these people.
a slave
Vassal Serf is the latin word for slave
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
The serf. He was a slave.
It is Latin for slave.
Serf/slave
Your question is not entirely correct in its premise; a serf is not a slave and does not have an owner. A serf is a subject of a land owner whom the serf would address as lord.
Bedroom Serf
give serf land
Some people would say slave, but that is not really correct because a slave could be sold, and a serf could not. Also, a slave had to do whatever told, but a serf simply had to fulfill obligatory duties. A villein was very like a serf, except that a villein lived in town, but a serf was agricultural. A cotter was very like a serf, but we really do not have other information on what a cotter was. It is thought that the cotter was technically free to leave the land, but this is speculation.
The word "serf" means slave and a monk was of the clergy. They were different people with different stations in life.