Serfdom

Serfdom was the status of many peasants under feudalism, specifically relating to manorialism, and similarsystems. It was a condition of debt bondage and indentured servitude with similarities to slavery, whichdeveloped during the Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages in Europe and lasted in some countries until themid-19th century.[1]

As with slaves, serfs could be bought, sold, or traded, with some limitations: they generally could be sold onlytogether with land (with the exception of the kholops in Russia and villeins in gross in England who could betraded like regular slaves), could be abused with no rights over their own bodies, could not leave the land theywere bound to, and could marry only with their lord's permission. Serfs who occupied a plot of land wererequired to work for the lord of the manor who owned that land. In return, they were entitled to protection,justice, and the right to cultivate certain fields within the manor to maintain their own subsistence. Serfs wereoften required not only to work on the lord's fields, but also in his mines and forests and to labor to maintainroads. The manor formed the basic unit of feudal society, and the lord of the manor and the villeins, and to acertain extent the serfs, were bound legally: by taxation in the case of the former, and economically andsocially in the latter.

The decline of serfdom in Western Europe has sometimes been attributed to the widespread plague epidemicof the Black Death, which reached Europe in 1347 and caused massive fatalities, disrupting society.[2] Thedecline, however, had begun before that date. Serfdom became increasingly rare in most of Western Europeafter the medieval renaissance at the outset of the High Middle Ages. But, conversely, it grew stronger inCentral and Eastern Europe, where it had previously been less common (this phenomenon was known as"later serfdom").

In Eastern Europe, the institution persisted until the mid-19th century. In the Austrian Empire, serfdom wasabolished by the 1781 Serfdom Patent; corvée continued to exist until 1848. Serfdom was abolished in Russiain the 1860s.[3] Prussia declared serfdom unacceptable in its General State Laws for the Prussian States andfinally abolished it in October 1807, in the wake of the Prussian Reform Movement.[4] In Finland, Norway,and Sweden, feudalism was never fully established, and serfdom did not exist; however, serfdom-likeinstitutions did exist in both Denmark (the stavnsbånd, from 1733 to 1788) and its vassal Iceland (the morerestrictive vistarband, from 1490 until 1894).

According to medievalist historian Joseph R. Strayer, the concept of feudalism can also be applied to thesocieties of ancient Persia, ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt (Sixth to Twelfth dynasty), Islamic-ruled Northern andCentral India, China (Zhou dynasty and end of Han dynasty) and Japan during the Shogunate. However, WuTa-k'un argued that the Shang-Zhou fengjian were kinship estates, quite distinct from feudalism.[5] James Leeand Cameron Campbell describe the Chinese Qing dynasty (1644–1912) as also maintaining a form ofserfdom.[6]

Melvyn Goldstein described Tibet as having had serfdom until 1959,[7][8] but whether or not the Tibetan formof peasant tenancy that qualified as serfdom was widespread is contested by other scholars.[9][10] Bhutan isdescribed by Tashi Wangchuk, a Bhutanese civil servant, as having officially abolished serfdom by 1959, buthe believes that less than or about 10% of poor peasants were in copyhold situations.[11]

The United Nations 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery also prohibits serfdom as apractice similar to slavery.[12]

Galician slaughter in 1846 was a revoltagainst serfdom, directed against manorialproperty and oppression.

HistoryRussia

EtymologyDependency and the lower orders

Becoming a serfClass system

ColoniFreemenMinisterialesVilleinsBordars and cottagersSmerdKholopsGaelic IrelandSlaves

DutiesRightsVariations

Dates of emancipation from serfdom in various countriesSee alsoReferencesFurther readingExternal links

Social institutions similar to serfdom were known in ancienttimes. The status of the helots in the ancient Greek city-state ofSparta resembled that of the medieval serfs. By the 3rd centuryAD, the Roman Empire faced a labour shortage. Large Romanlandowners increasingly relied on Roman freemen, acting astenant farmers, instead of slaves to provide labour.[13]

These tenant farmers, eventually known as coloni, saw theircondition steadily erode. Because the tax system implemented byDiocletian assessed taxes based on both land and the inhabitantsof that land, it became administratively inconvenient for peasantsto leave the land where they were counted in the census.[13]

However, medieval serfdom really began with the breakup of theCarolingian Empire around the 10th century. During this period,powerful feudal lords encouraged the establishment of serfdom

Contents

History

Costumes of slaves or serfs, from the sixth tothe twelfth centuries, collected by H. deVielcastel from original documents in Europeanlibraries

as a source of agricultural labor. Serfdom, indeed, was an institution that reflected a fairly common practicewhereby great landlords were assured that others worked to feed them and were held down, legally andeconomically, while doing so.

This arrangement provided most of the agricultural labour throughout the Middle Ages. Slavery persisted rightthrough the Middle Ages,[14] but it was rare.

In the later Middle Ages serfdom began to disappear west of the Rhine even as it spread through easternEurope. Serfdom reached Eastern Europe centuries later than Western Europe – it became dominant aroundthe 15th century. In many of these countries serfdom was abolished during the Napoleonic invasions of theearly 19th century, though in some it persisted until mid- or late- 19th century.

Serfdom became the dominant form of relation between Russian peasants and nobility in the 17th century.Serfdom only existed in central and southern areas of the Russian Empire. It was never established in theNorth, in the Urals, and in Siberia. According to the Encyclopedia of Human Rights:

In 1649 up to three-quarters of Muscovy's peasants, or 13 to 14 million people, were serfswhose material lives were barely distinguishable from slaves. Perhaps another 1.5 millionwere formally enslaved, with Russian slaves serving Russian masters.[15]

Russia's over 23 million privately held serfs were freed from their lords by an edict of Alexander II in 1861.The owners were compensated through taxes on the freed serfs. State serfs were emancipated in 1866.[16]

The word serf originated from the Middle French serf andwas derived from the Latin servus ("slave"). In LateAntiquity and most of the Middle Ages, what are now calledserfs were usually designated in Latin as coloni. As slaverygradually disappeared and the legal status of servi becamenearly identical to that of the coloni, the term changedmeaning into the modern concept of "serf". The word "serf"is first recorded in English in the late 15th century, and cameto its current definition in the 17th century. Serfdom wascoined in 1850.

Serfs had a specific place in feudal society, as did baronsand knights: in return for protection, a serf would resideupon and work a parcel of land within the manor of his lord.Thus, the manorial system exhibited a degree of reciprocity.

One rationale held that serfs and freemen "worked for all" while a knight or baron "fought for all" and achurchman "prayed for all"; thus everyone had a place. The serf was the worst fed and rewarded, but at leasthe had his place and, unlike slaves, had certain rights in land and property.

Russia

Etymology

Dependency and the lower orders

A lord of the manor could not sell his serfs as a Roman might sell his slaves. On the other hand, if he chose todispose of a parcel of land, the serfs associated with that land stayed with it to serve their new lord; simplyspeaking, they were implicitly sold in mass and as a part of a lot. This unified system preserved for the lordlong-acquired knowledge of practices suited to the land. Further, a serf could not abandon his lands withoutpermission,[17] nor did he possess a saleable title in them.[18]

A freeman became a serf usually through force or necessity. Sometimes the greater physical and legal force ofa local magnate intimidated freeholders or allodial owners into dependency. Often a few years of crop failure,a war, or brigandage might leave a person unable to make his own way. In such a case he could strike abargain with a lord of a manor. In exchange for gaining protection, his service was required: in labour,produce, or cash, or a combination of all. These bargains became formalized in a ceremony known as"bondage", in which a serf placed his head in the lord's hands, akin to the ceremony of homage where a vassalplaced his hands between those of his overlord. These oaths bound the lord and his new serf in a feudalcontract and defined the terms of their agreement.[19] Often these bargains were severe.

A 7th-century Anglo Saxon "Oath of Fealty" states:

By the Lord before whom this sanctuary is holy, I will to N. be true and faithful, and love allwhich he loves and shun all which he shuns, according to the laws of God and the order of theworld. Nor will I ever with will or action, through word or deed, do anything which is unpleasingto him, on condition that he will hold to me as I shall deserve it, and that he will performeverything as it was in our agreement when I submitted myself to him and chose his will.

To become a serf was a commitment that encompassed all aspects of the serf's life.

Moreover, the children born to a serf inherited the status of the parent, and were considered born into serfdomat birth. By taking on the duties of serfdom, individuals bound not only themselves but their future progeny.

The social class of the peasantry can be differentiated into smaller categories. These distinctions were oftenless clear than suggested by their different names. Most often, there were two types of peasants:

1. freemen, workers whose tenure within the manor was freehold2. villein

Lower classes of peasants, known as cottars or bordars, generally comprising the younger sons ofvilleins;[20][21] vagabonds; and slaves, made up the lower class of workers.

Colonus system used in the late Roman Empire can be considered as predecessor of Western European feudalserfdom.[22][23]

Becoming a serf

Class system

Coloni

Freemen

Freemen, or free tenants held their land by one of a variety of contracts of feudal land-tenure and wereessentially rent-paying tenant farmers who owed little or no service to the lord, and had a good degree ofsecurity of tenure and independence. In parts of 11th-century England freemen made up only 10% of thepeasant population, and in most of the rest of Europe their numbers were also small.

Ministeriales were hereditary unfree knights tied to their lord, that formed the lowest rung of nobility in theHoly Roman Empire.

A villein (or villain) represented the most common type of serf in the Middle Ages. Villeins had more rightsand higher status than the lowest serf, but existed under a number of legal restrictions that differentiated themfrom freemen. Villeins generally rented small homes, with a patch of land. As part of the contract with thelandlord, the lord of the manor, they were expected to spend some of their time working on the lord's fields.The requirement often was not greatly onerous, contrary to popular belief, and was often only seasonal, forexample the duty to help at harvest-time. The rest of their time was spent farming their own land for their ownprofit. Villeins were tied to their lord's land and couldn't leave it without his permission. Their lord also oftendecided whom they could marry.[24]

Like other types of serfs, villeins had to provide other services, possibly in addition to paying rent of money orproduce. Villeins were somehow retained on their land and by unmentioned manners could not move awaywithout their lord's consent and the acceptance of the lord to whose manor they proposed to migrate to.Villeins were generally able to hold their own property, unlike slaves. Villeinage, as opposed to other forms ofserfdom, was most common in Continental European feudalism, where land ownership had developed fromroots in Roman law.

A variety of kinds of villeinage existed in Europe in the Middle Ages. Half-villeins received only half as manystrips of land for their own use and owed a full complement of labour to the lord, often forcing them to rent outtheir services to other serfs to make up for this hardship. Villeinage was not, however, a purely uni-directionalexploitative relationship. In the Middle Ages, land within a lord's manor provided sustenance and survival, andbeing a villein guaranteed access to land, and crops secure from theft by marauding robbers. Landlords, evenwhere legally entitled to do so, rarely evicted villeins because of the value of their labour. Villeinage was muchpreferable to being a vagabond, a slave, or an unlanded labourer.

In many medieval countries, a villein could gain freedom by escaping from a manor to a city or borough andliving there for more than a year; but this action involved the loss of land rights and agricultural livelihood, aprohibitive price unless the landlord was especially tyrannical or conditions in the village were unusuallydifficult.

In medieval England, two types of villleins existed-villleins regardant that were tied to land villleins in grossthat could be traded separately from land.[22]

In England, the Domesday Book, of 1086, uses bordarii (bordar) and cottarii (cottar) as interchangeable terms,"cottar" deriving from the native Anglo-Saxon tongue whereas "bordar" derived from the French.[25]

Ministeriales

Villeins

Bordars and cottagers

Punishment with a knout. Whippingwas a common punishment forRussian serfs.[26]

Status-wise, the bordar or cottar ranked below a serf in the socialhierarchy of a manor, holding a cottage, garden and just enough landto feed a family. In England, at the time of the Domesday Survey, thiswould have comprised between about 1 and 5 acres (0.4 and 2.0hectares).[27] Under an Elizabethan statute, the Erection of CottagesAct 1588, the cottage had to be built with at least 4 acres (0.02 km2;0.01 sq mi) of land.[28] However, the later Enclosures Acts (1604onwards) removed the cottars' right to any land: "before theEnclosures Act the cottager was a farm labourer with land and afterthe Enclosures Act the cottager was a farm labourer without land".[29]

The bordars and cottars did not own their draught oxen or horses. TheDomesday Book showed that England comprised 12% freeholders,35% serfs or villeins, 30% cotters and bordars, and 9% slaves.[27]

Smerdy were a type of serfs above kholops in Medieval Poland andKievan Rus'.

Kholops were the lowest class of serfs in the medieval and early modern Russia. They had status similar toslaves, and could be freely traded.

In Gaelic Ireland, a political and social system existing in Ireland from the prehistoric period (500 BC orearlier) up until the Norman conquest (12th century AD), the bothach ("hut-dweller"), fuidir (perhaps linked tofot, "soil")[30] and sencléithe ("old dwelling-house")[31] were low-ranked semi-free tenants similar toserfs.[32][33] According to Laurence Ginnell, the sencléithe and bothach "were not free to leave the territoryexcept with permission, and in practice they usually served the flaith [prince]. They had no political or clanrights, could neither sue nor appear as witnesses, and were not free in the matter of entering into contracts.They could appear in a court of justice only in the name of the flaith or other person to whom they belonged,or whom they served, or by obtaining from an aire of the tuath to which they belonged permission to sue in hisname."[34][35] A fuidir was defined by D. A. Binchy as "a `tenant at will,' settled by the lord (flaith) on aportion of the latter's land; his services to the lord are always undefined. Although his condition is semi-servile,he retains the right to abandon his holding on giving due notice to the lord and surrendering to him two thirdsof the products of his husbandry."[36][37]

The last type of serf was the slave.[38] Slaves had the fewest rights and benefits from the manor. They ownedno tenancy in land, worked for the lord exclusively and survived on donations from the landlord. It wasalways in the interest of the lord to prove that a servile arrangement existed, as this provided him with greaterrights to fees and taxes. The status of a man was a primary issue in determining a person's rights andobligations in many of the manorial court-cases of the period. Also, runaway slaves could be beaten if caught.

Smerd

Kholops

Gaelic Ireland

Slaves

Reeve and serfs in feudal England, c. 1310

The United States had approximately 4 million slaves by 1860,[39] and the British Empire had 776,000 slaveswhen it abolished slavery in 1834.[40] The largest and longest lasting slave society in the Americas was Brazil,which in 1888 became the last American country to outlaw slavery.[41]

The usual serf (not including slaves or cottars) paid his feesand taxes in the form of seasonally appropriate labour.Usually a portion of the week was devoted to ploughing hislord's fields held in demesne, harvesting crops, diggingditches, repairing fences, and often working in the manorhouse. The remainder of the serf's time he spent tending hisown fields, crops and animals in order to provide for hisfamily. Most manorial work was segregated by genderduring the regular times of the year; however, during theharvest, the whole family was expected to work the fields.

A major difficulty of a serf's life was that his work for hislord coincided with, and took precedence over, the work he had to perform on his own lands: when the lord'scrops were ready to be harvested, so were his own. On the other hand, the serf of a benign lord could lookforward to being well fed during his service; it was a lord without foresight who did not provide a substantialmeal for his serfs during the harvest and planting times. In exchange for this work on the lord's demesne, theserfs had certain privileges and rights, including for example the right to gather deadwood – an essential sourceof fuel – from their lord's forests.

In addition to service, a serf was required to pay certain taxes and fees. Taxes were based on the assessedvalue of his lands and holdings. Fees were usually paid in the form of agricultural produce rather than cash.The best ration of wheat from the serf's harvest often went to the landlord. Generally hunting and trapping ofwild game by the serfs on the lord's property was prohibited. On Easter Sunday the peasant family perhapsmight owe an extra dozen eggs, and at Christmas a goose was perhaps required too. When a family memberdied, extra taxes were paid to the lord as a form of feudal relief to enable the heir to keep the right to till whatland he had. Any young woman who wished to marry a serf outside of her manor was forced to pay a fee forthe right to leave her lord, and in compensation for her lost labour.

Often there were arbitrary tests to judge the worthiness of their tax payments. A chicken, for example, mightbe required to be able to jump over a fence of a given height to be considered old enough or well enough to bevalued for tax purposes. The restraints of serfdom on personal and economic choice were enforced throughvarious forms of manorial customary law and the manorial administration and court baron.

It was also a matter of discussion whether serfs could be required by law in times of war or conflict to fight fortheir lord's land and property. In the case of their lord's defeat, their own fate might be uncertain, so the serfcertainly had an interest in supporting his lord.

Within his constraints, a serf had some freedoms. Though the common wisdom is that a serf owned "only hisbelly" – even his clothes were the property, in law, of his lord – a serf might still accumulate personal propertyand wealth, and some serfs became wealthier than their free neighbours, although this happened rarely.[42] Awell-to-do serf might even be able to buy his freedom.[43]

Duties

Rights

A serf could grow what crop he saw fit on his lands, although a serf's taxes often had to be paid in wheat. Thesurplus he would sell at market.

The landlord could not dispossess his serfs without legal cause and was supposed to protect them from thedepredations of robbers or other lords, and he was expected to support them by charity in times of famine.Many such rights were enforceable by the serf in the manorial court.

Forms of serfdom varied greatly through time and regions. In some places serfdom was merged with orexchanged for various forms of taxation.

The amount of labour required varied. In Poland, for example, it was commonly a few days per year perhousehold in the 13th century. One day per week per household in the 14th century. Four days per week perhousehold in the 17th century. Six days per week per household in the 18th century. Early serfdom in Polandwas mostly limited on the royal territories (królewszczyzny).

"Per household" means that every dwelling had to give a worker for the required number of days.[44] Forexample, in the 18th century, six people: a peasant, his wife, three children and a hired worker might berequired to work for their lord one day a week, which would be counted as six days of labour.

Serfs served on occasion as soldiers in the event of conflict and could earn freedom or even ennoblement forvalour in combat. Serfs could purchase their freedom, be manumitted by generous owners, or flee to towns orto newly settled land where few questions were asked. Laws varied from country to country: in England a serfwho made his way to a chartered town (i.e. a borough) and evaded recapture for a year and a day obtained hisfreedom and became a burgher of the town.

Scotland: neyfs (serfs) disappeared by the late 14thcentury.[45] However, in the salt and coal miningindustries a form of serfdom survived until the Colliers(Scotland) Act 1799.[46][47]

England and Wales: obsolete by 15th–16th century,[48]

Wallachia: August 5, 1746[49] (land reforms in 1864)Moldavia: August 6, 1749[49] (land reforms in 1864)Savoy: 19 December 1771Austria: 1 November 1781 (first step; second step:1848)Bohemia: 1 November 1781 (first step; second step:1848)Baden: 23 July 1783Denmark: 20 June 1788France: August 4, 1789Helvetic Republic: 4 May 1798Batavian Republic (Netherlands): constitution of 12June 1798 (in theory; in practice with the introductionof the French Code Napoléon in 1811)Serbia: 1804 (de facto, de jure in 1830)

Governorate of Courland: 25August 1817Württemberg: 18 November 1817Governorate of Livonia: 26 March1819Hanover: 1831Saxony: 17 March 1832Hungary: 11 April 1848Croatia: First steps in 1780 and1785.[50] Final step on 8 May 1848Austrian Empire: 7 September1848[51]

Bulgaria: 1858 (de jure by OttomanEmpire; de facto in 1878)Russian Empire: 19 February 1861(see Emancipation reform of 1861)Tonga: 1862Hawaii: 1835Congress Poland: 1864[52]

Georgia: 1864–1871

Variations

Dates of emancipation from serfdom in various countries

The proclamation by count JosipJelačić abolishing serfdom in theKingdom of Croatia, dated 25 April1848

Schleswig-Holstein: 19 December 1804Swedish Pomerania: 4 July 1806Duchy of Warsaw (Poland): 22 July 1807Prussia: 9 October 1807 (effectively 1811–1823)Mecklenburg: October 1807 (effectively 1820)Bavaria: 31 August 1808Old Finland in 1812 (as the area was incorporated intoGrand Duchy of Finland where serfdom hadn't existedin centuries, if ever)Nassau: 1 September 1812Spain: 18 March 1812 (first step; second step: 26August 1837)Argentina: 1813Governorate of Estonia: 23 March 1816

Kalmykia: 1892Iceland: 1894 (Vistarband)Bosnia and Herzegovina: 1918Afghanistan: 1923Bhutan: officially abolished by1959[11]

Tibet, People's Republic of China:29 March 1959, but use of "serf" forTibet is controversial[7][8][9][10]

AlipinBirkarlsColonus – early Medieval serfsCottarFeudalismFiefdomFolwarkFreeholderFugitive peasantsHacienda – Spanish manorsHelot – ancient Greek serfs

Indentured servantJosephinismKholopKolkhozMaenor – Welsh manorsManorialismMinisterialisPeonageRussian serfdom

Serfdom PatentSerfdom in Tibet controversySerfs Emancipation DaySharecroppingShōen – Japanese serfdomSlaverySmerdTaeog – Welsh serfsThrall – Anglo-Saxon serfsYeoman – English freeholdersRitsuryōFengjian

1. "Villeins in the Middle Ages | Middle Ages" (http://www.thefinertimes.com/Middle-Ages/villeins-in-the-middle-ages.html).

See also

References

2. Austin Alchon, Suzanne (2003). A pest in the land: new world epidemics in a globalperspective (https://books.google.com/books?id=YiHHnV08ebkC&pg=PA21). University ofNew Mexico Press. p. 21. ISBN 0-8263-2871-7.

3. "Serf. A Dictionary of World History" (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O48-serf.html).4. Edikt den erleichterten Besitz und den freien Gebrauch des Grundeigentums so wie die

persönlichen Verhältnisse der Land-Bewohner betreffend (http://www.westfaelische-geschichte.de/que4656)

5. Wu, Ta-k'un (February 1952). "An Interpretation of Chinese Economic History". Past & Present.1 (1): 1–12. doi:10.1093/past/1.1.1 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fpast%2F1.1.1).

6. Lee, James; Campbell, Cameron (1998). "Headship succession and household division inthree Chinese banner serf populations, 1789–1909". Continuity and Change. 13 (1): 117–141.doi:10.1017/s0268416098003063 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2Fs0268416098003063).

7. Goldstein, Melvyn C. (1986). "Re-examining Choice, Dependency and Command in theTibetan Social System-'Tax Appendages' and Other Landless Serfs". Tibet Journal. 11 (4): 79–112.

8. Goldstein, Melvyn C. (1988). "On the Nature of Tibetan Peasantry". Tibet Journal. 13 (1): 61–65.

9. Barnett, Robert (2008) "What were the conditions regarding human rights in Tibet beforedemocratic reform?" in: Authenticating Tibet: Answers to China’s 100 Questions, pp. 81–83.Eds. Anne-Marie Blondeau and Katia Buffetrille. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-24464-1 (cloth); ISBN 978-0-520-24928-8 (paper)

10. Samuel, Geoffrey (1982). "Tibet as a Stateless Society and Some Islamic Parallels". Journal ofAsian Studies. 41 (2): 215–229. doi:10.2307/2054940 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2054940).JSTOR 2054940 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2054940).

11. BhutanStudies.org.bt (http://www.bhutanstudies.org.bt/admin/pubFiles/3.landusechange.pdf)Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20080627061318/http://www.bhutanstudies.org.bt/admin/pubFiles/3.landusechange.pdf) 27 June 2008 at the Wayback Machine, T Wangchuk Changein the land use system in Bhutan: Ecology, History, Culture, and Power Nature ConservationSection. DoF, MoA

12. "Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions andPractices Similar to Slavery" (https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/supplementaryconventionabolitionofslavery.aspx). United Nations Human Rights Office of the HighCommission. Retrieved 23 February 2019.

13. Mackay, Christopher (2004). Ancient Rome: A Military and Political History. New York:Cambridge University Press. p. 298. ISBN 0521809185.

14. "Ways of ending slavery" (http://www.britannica.com/blackhistory/article-24160).15. David P. Forsythe, ed. (2009). Encyclopedia of Human Rights: Vol. 1 (https://books.google.com/

books?id=1QbX90fmCVUC&pg=RA3-PA464). Oxford University Press. p. 3.ISBN 9780195334029.

16. David Moon, Abolition of Serfdom in Russia: 1762–1907 (2002)17. "serfdom" (https://www.britannica.com/topic/serfdom). Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved

6 June 2017.18. "Khan Academy" (https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/world-history/medieval-times/euro

pean-middle-ages-and-serfdom/a/serfdom-in-europe). Khan Academy. Retrieved 6 June 2017.19. Marc Bloch, Feudal Society: The Growth of the Ties of Dependence.20. Studies of field systems in the British Isles By Alan R. H. Baker, Robin Alan Butlin21. An Economic History of the British Isles By Arthur Birnie. P. 21822. Craik, George Lillie (1846). "The Pictorial History of England: Being a History of the People, as

Well as ... - George Lillie Craik, Charles MacFarlane - Google Książki" (https://books.google.com/books?id=rxk5AQAAMAAJ&q=roman+colonus+feudalism&pg=PA545).

23. "The Edinburgh Review, Or Critical Journal: ... To Be Continued Quarterly - Google Książki" (https://books.google.com/books?id=DblZAAAAcAAJ&q=roman+colonus+feudalism&pg=PA449).1842.

24. "White Slavery in Colonial America: and Other Documented Facts Suppressed ... - GoogleKsiążki" (https://books.google.com/books?id=TfIAvlZnZuAC&q=villein+tied+land&pg=PA5).

25. Hallam, H.E.; Finberg; Thirsk, Joan, eds. (1988). The Agrarian History of England and Wales:1042–1350. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. p. 58. ISBN 0-521-20073-3.

26. Chapman, Tim (2001). Imperial Russia, 1801–1905 (https://books.google.com/books?id=EJCOl7S0UYgC&pg=PA83&dq&hl=en#v=onepage&q=&f=false). Routledge. p.83. ISBN 0-415-23110-8

27. Daniel D. McGarry, Medieval history and civilization (1976) p 24228. Elmes, James (1827). On Architectural Jurisprudence; in which the Constitutions, Canons,

Laws and Customs etc. London: W.Benning. pp. 178–179.29. Hammond, J L; Barbara Hammond (1912). The Village Labourer 1760–1832. London:

Longman Green & Co. p. 100.30. "eDIL - Irish Language Dictionary" (http://www.dil.ie/24771). www.dil.ie.31. "eDIL - Irish Language Dictionary" (http://www.dil.ie/37125). www.dil.ie.32. MacManus, Seumas (1 April 2005). The Story of the Irish Race (https://books.google.com/book

s?id=Y91ZHuZLCyAC&q=sencleithe&pg=PA294). Cosimo, Inc. ISBN 9781596050631 – viaGoogle Books.

33. "An interesting life through the eyes of a slave driver" (https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/rural-life/an-interesting-life-through-the-eyes-of-a-slave-driver-35409740.html).independent.

34. "Bothachs and Sen-Cleithes - Brehon Laws" (https://www.libraryireland.com/Brehon-Laws/Bothachs.php). www.libraryireland.com.

35. "bothach" (https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110810104507900).Oxford Reference. doi:10.1093/oi/authority.20110810104507900 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Foi%2Fauthority.20110810104507900) (inactive 29 December 2020).

36. "fuidir" (https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095837574).Oxford Reference. doi:10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095837574 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Foi%2Fauthority.20110803095837574) (inactive 29 December 2020).

37. "fuidir" (https://www.tearma.ie/q/fuidir/). téarma.ie.38. McIntosh, Matthew (4 December 2018). "A History of Serfdom" (https://brewminate.com/a-histor

y-of-serfdom/). Brewminate. Retrieved 17 February 2020.39. "Introduction - Social Aspects of the Civil War" (https://web.archive.org/web/20070714073725/h

ttp://www.itd.nps.gov/cwss/manassas/social/introsoc.htm). Archived from the original (http://www.itd.nps.gov/cwss/manassas/social/introsoc.htm) on 14 July 2007. Retrieved 4 December2011.

40. Historical survey > Ways of ending slavery (http://www.britannica.com/blackhistory/article-24160). Encyclopædia Britannica.

41. Hébrard, Jean M. (2013). "Slavery in Brazil: Brazilian Scholars in the Key Interpretive Debates"(https://doi.org/10.3998%2Flacs.12338892.0001.002). Translating the Americas. 1 (20190612).doi:10.3998/lacs.12338892.0001.002 (https://doi.org/10.3998%2Flacs.12338892.0001.002).hdl:2027/spo.12338892.0001.002 (https://hdl.handle.net/2027%2Fspo.12338892.0001.002).ISSN 2331-687X (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/2331-687X).

42. Hollister, Charles Warren; Bennett, Judith M. (2002). Medieval Europe: A Short History (https://books.google.com/books?id=G5chAQAAIAAJ&q=serf+richer+free). McGraw-Hill. p. 171.ISBN 978-0-07-112109-5.

43. Bailey, Mark (2014). The Decline of Serfdom in Late Medieval England: From Bondage toFreedom (https://books.google.com/books?id=SLjCAwAAQBAJ&q=manumission+serf&pg=PA64). Boydell & Brewer Ltd. p. 63. ISBN 978-1-84383-890-6.

44. Maria Bogucka, Białogłowa w dawnej Polsce, Warsaw, 1998, ISBN 83-85660-78-X, p. 7245. Richard Oram, 'Rural society: 1. medieval', in Michael Lynch (ed.), The Oxford Companion to

Scottish History (Oxford: University Press, 2005), p. 549.46. J. A. Cannon, 'Serfdom', in John Cannon (ed.), The Oxford Companion to British History

(Oxford: University Press, 2002), p. 852.47. The Colliers (Scotland) Act 1799 (text) (https://www.hoodfamily.info/coal/law1799act.html)

(Hood family and coalmining)48. Cannon, 'Serfdom', p. 852.49. Djuvara, Neagu (2009). Între Orient și Occident. Țările române la începutul epocii moderne.

Humanitas publishing house. p. 276. ISBN 978-973-50-2490-1.50. [1] (http://www.enciklopedija.hr/natuknica.aspx?id=32045) Croatian encyclopedia, 1780 queen

Maria Theresa introduced the regulations in Royal Croatia. 1785. king Joseph II introduced thePatent of freedom of movement of Serfs which gave them the right of movement, education andproperty, also ended their dependence to feudal lords.

51. Kfunigraz.ac.at (http://plato.kfunigraz.ac.at/dp/KONST/DOCS_F/KUDLICH.HTM) Archived (https://archive.is/20041029174052/http://plato.kfunigraz.ac.at/dp/KONST/DOCS_F/KUDLICH.HTM) 29 October 2004 at Archive.today

52. Emancipation of the Serfs (http://mars.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/russia/lectures/20emancipation.html) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20060907061852/http://mars.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/russia/lectures/20emancipation.html) 7 September 2006 at the Wayback Machine

Backman, Clifford R. The Worlds of Medieval Europe Oxford University Press, 2003.Blum, Jerome. The End of the Old Order in Rural Europe (Princeton UP, 1978)Coulborn, Rushton, ed. Feudalism in History. Princeton University Press, 1956.Bonnassie, Pierre. From Slavery to Feudalism in South-Western Europe Cambridge UniversityPress, 1991 excerpt and text search (https://www.amazon.com/Slavery-Feudalism-South-Western-Present-Publications/dp/0521363241/)Freedman, Paul, and Monique Bourin, eds. Forms of Servitude in Northern and CentralEurope. Decline, Resistance and Expansion Brepols, 2005.Frantzen, Allen J., and Douglas Moffat, eds. The World of Work: Servitude, Slavery and Laborin Medieval England. Glasgow: Cruithne P, 1994.Gorshkov, Boris B. "Serfdom: Eastern Europe" in Peter N. Stearns, ed, Encyclopedia ofEuropean Social History: from 1352–2000 (2001) volume 2 pp 379–88Hoch, Steven L. Serfdom and social control in Russia: Petrovskoe, a village in Tambov (1989)Kahan, Arcadius. "Notes on Serfdom in Western and Eastern Europe," Journal of EconomicHistory March 1973 33:86–99 in JSTOR (https://www.jstor.org/pss/2117143)Kolchin, Peter. Unfree labor: American slavery and Russian serfdom (2009)Moon, David. The abolition of serfdom in Russia 1762–1907 (Longman, 2001)Scott, Tom, ed. The Peasantries of Europe (1998)Vadey, Liana. "Serfdom: Western Europe" in Peter N. Stearns, ed, Encyclopedia of EuropeanSocial History: from 1352–2000 (2001) volume 2 pp 369–78White, Stephen D. Re-Thinking Kinship and Feudalism in Early Medieval Europe (2nd ed.Ashgate Variorum, 2000)Wirtschafter, Elise Kimerling. Russia's age of serfdom 1649–1861 (2008)Wright, William E. Serf, Seigneur, and Sovereign: Agrarian Reform in Eighteenth-centuryBohemia (U of Minnesota Press, 1966).

Further reading

Serfdom (http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-535485/serfdom), Encyclopædia Britannica (on-line edition).The Hull Project (http://www.domesdaybook.net/home/hullproject), Hull UniversityVinogradoff, Paul (1911). "Serfdom" (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Serfdom). Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.).Peasantry (social class) (http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-448160/peasant), EncyclopædiaBritannica.An excerpt from the book Serfdom to Self-Government: Memoirs of a Polish Village Mayor,1842–1927 (http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~atpc/heritage/history/h-life/peasant.html).The Causes of Slavery or Serfdom: A Hypothesis (http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2003_archives/001447.html), discussion and full online text of Evsey Domar (1970), "TheCauses of Slavery or Serfdom: A Hypothesis", Economic History Review 30:1 (March), pp. 18–32.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Serfdom&oldid=997073104"

This page was last edited on 29 December 2020, at 21:47 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using thissite, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the WikimediaFoundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

Wunder, Heide. "Serfdom in later medieval and early modern Germany" in T. H. Aston et al.,Social Relations and Ideas: Essays in Honour of R. H. Hilton (Cambridge UP, 1983), 249–72

External links