Serfs and slaves: I always thought that the difference between serfs and slaves arose out of property law. Slaves were chattels: corporeal and detachable from land. Serfs were part of the real estate, and could only be bought and sold with the land. (This distinction still underlies American law, with most intangible property closer to t…
Serfs and slaves: I always thought that the difference between serfs and slaves arose out of property law. Slaves were chattels: corporeal and detachable from land. Serfs were part of the real estate, and could only be bought and sold with the land. (This distinction still underlies American law, with most intangible property closer to the law of chattels than realty.)
Hence the slightly redundant term "chattel slavery." Serf status is certainly preferable from the serf's perspective, at least as long as the land isn't populated beyond its carrying capacity.
Serfs and slaves: I always thought that the difference between serfs and slaves arose out of property law. Slaves were chattels: corporeal and detachable from land. Serfs were part of the real estate, and could only be bought and sold with the land. (This distinction still underlies American law, with most intangible property closer to the law of chattels than realty.)
Hence the slightly redundant term "chattel slavery." Serf status is certainly preferable from the serf's perspective, at least as long as the land isn't populated beyond its carrying capacity.