A slave is personal property. And as such, the owner of the slave has paid for an investment and expects the investment to grow. Slaves were mistreated in many cases but treated well in many more. In the US in the late 18th and 19th centuries, a slave was a valuable commodity and thus only the wealthy plantation owners had more than a couple slaves. Poor sharecroppers could not afford a slave, and those that did well enough to purchase a couple slaves could ill afford for them to die or be unable to work because of mistreatment.
Serfs, not being personal property, were often seen as expendable by absentee lords who owned vast tracts of land across many countries. The condition of serfdom was technically as such that the serf agreed to work the lands he or she lived on and would abide by the will of his/her lord, and in return, the lord would protect the serf from outside invasion, marauders, barbarians, etc.
Like slavery, serfdom was heriditary. Those who bond themselves to serfdom bond their families and future sons and daughters into perpetuity.
Certain types of serfs, such as villiens, owned their own land but as a price for this were expected to till the lord's land for so many hours of the day/week. Cottagers were allowed their own homes but did not own any land and were expected to work the lord's land in return for respecting the sovereignty of the house/hut and garden.
Many serfs however did not even own the clothes they wore, all of this, the food they ate, the house they lived in, the land they worked, the clothes, animals kept.. everything except their naked selves, were the property of the lord. They were expected to work first for their lords crops and fields, then tend to their own harvest for themselves and their family. Most lords worth any respectability were expected to provide a meal to their serfs.
In some ways it was worse to be a serf than a slave. A serf tilled his lord's fields and if their was any time left, he had to till his own. A slave only tilled the master's fields and from these fields a certain allotment went to the slave. Also, a percentage of plantation slaves could attain prestigious in-house positions as nannies, house servants and such. Many serfs, tied to the land as they were, could not expect any other employ than full time crop harvesting, timber felling, fishing his lords streams, mining his lord's mines and hunting game for his lord. However, a serf still carried a level of dignity not afforded to the slave in the Western Hemisphere. He could attend the same church as a lord and would attend the same religious ceremonies and festivities as better classes. He probably worked harder, but was more dignified.
A serf was basically a type of slave. They were generally attached to the current lord's land. If a new lord bought the land, the serfs would be considered part of it. Servants were paid labor that were still inherently free peoples.
A slave is a human being owned as property to be used as their owner sees fit. A sharecropper is a tenant farmer who gives a share of the crops raised to the landlord in lieu of rent. The difference is that a slave is not considered a citizen and has no rights. A sharecropper is a citizen, usually with little means, but has the rights of a citizen.
antonym for serf: master
In a free society everyone was free and equal there were no slaves but a slave society everyone isn't created equal and others who are considered inferior are forced to serve others.
Servants get paid and volunterelly complete their tasks while slaves dont get paid and are forced to complete their tasks.
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
A serf was basically a type of slave. They were generally attached to the current lord's land. If a new lord bought the land, the serfs would be considered part of it. Servants were paid labor that were still inherently free peoples.
a slave
Vassal Serf is the latin word for slave
Serfs have to do their lords work, all day, Kinda like a slave, whereas Apprentice can learn one job and master it.
It is Latin for slave.
The serf. He was a slave.
Serf/slave
A peasant and a serf are the same thing entirely.
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
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.