Score + - 1 Report post.
Posted on 2021-11-10 02:25:57 by Anonymous
Remove | Add note | Keep | Edit | Note history | Tag History | Previous | Next
1 comment (0 hidden)
Anonymous
Posted on 2022-01-15 15:55:06 Score: 0 (vote Up/Down) (Report as spam)
What philosopher is being misquoted here? If that were the case, the individual in question would NOT BE a serf, by definition. Per Encyclopedia Britannica:
>The essential additional mark of serfdom was the lack of many of the personal liberties that were held by freedmen. Chief among these was the serf’s lack of freedom of movement; he could not permanently leave his holding or his village without his lord’s permission. Neither could the serf marry, change his occupation, or dispose of his property without his lord’s permission. He was bound to his designated plot of land and could be transferred along with that land to a new lord.
Posted on 2021-11-10 02:25:57 by Anonymous
Remove | Add note | Keep | Edit | Note history | Tag History | Previous | Next
1 comment (0 hidden)
Anonymous
Posted on 2022-01-15 15:55:06 Score: 0 (vote Up/Down) (Report as spam)
What philosopher is being misquoted here? If that were the case, the individual in question would NOT BE a serf, by definition. Per Encyclopedia Britannica:
>The essential additional mark of serfdom was the lack of many of the personal liberties that were held by freedmen. Chief among these was the serf’s lack of freedom of movement; he could not permanently leave his holding or his village without his lord’s permission. Neither could the serf marry, change his occupation, or dispose of his property without his lord’s permission. He was bound to his designated plot of land and could be transferred along with that land to a new lord.
1