A possible antonym of serf could be "free person" or "freeman," as a serf is a person who is bound to the land and essentially owned by a lord, whereas a free person has autonomy and is not bound to servitude.
freeholders pay taxes . serfs work for their land
In a feudal system, a serf would remain a serf no matter how hard they were to work.
A freeman was a person who was not bound to the land or obligated to provide labor to a lord, while a serf was a person who was bound to the land and required to provide labor to a lord in exchange for protection. Freemen had more freedom and autonomy compared to serfs who had limited rights and mobility.
A freeman was a tenant farmer who paid rent and had no duties to perform for the lord of the land. He worked hard, and had a life not all that different from a serf's. A freeman would have the advantage over a serf of being able to determine what work he was going to do on any given day. By contrast, the serf spent three or four days each week working for the lord or on common land. A freeman had the right to move off the land if he decided to do so, once his lease was up; the downside being the lord could arbitrarily tell him to leave when the lease was up. By contrast, the serf was bound to the land, and neither he nor the lord could unilaterally move him away. The freeman was technically required to protect himself in times of trouble. The serf was theoretically protected. A freeman could aspire to earn enough money to buy his own property. This would make him a yeoman, who did not have to pay rent, but could be called up in wartime to be an archer. There is a link below.
facebook im
Serfs become fat when they eat pigs because that was all they could afford.
To become free
Great question! Saoirseach (a freeman) is contrasted with Daoirseach (a serf, a slave). The word is used in both Scottish Gaelic and Irish.
A peasant or serf could become a free man if: - he married a free woman - he ran away and wasn't found for a year He could also become a lord if he married a lady
1st AnswerA medieval freeman was a person that was given some land in return for services to the king. A freeman had fifteen strips of land in each field but in return he had to work to pay for it, help with the ploughing at harvest and help give out duties to Peasants. A freeman could leave the site without permission of the manor lord and could marry anyone, even from a different manor. Another answer:A freeman was a peasant farmer who was not bound by the manorial obligations that serfs had. He rented his land as what was called a copyholder, meaning that he had a lease. While he did not have the serf's obligations, he also did not have the serf's rights, and could be put off his farm when his lease expired. There is a link below to the section of an article on serfs dealing with freemen.
A Franklin was a freeman who owned land, but was not of noble birth. So not a noble, but not a serf, this is the origin of the term 'middle class'. Most franklins were farmers.