1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
vekshin1
4 years ago
10

In which way was the serf different from the slave?

History
2 answers:
seropon [69]4 years ago
6 0

Answer: Serfs could pass on their inheritances to their children and slaves could not.

Explanation:

A serf was not a property. They did not belong to a person. Their job was to work the land. However, a slave was seen as a property and could be owned by an individual. Taking this into consideration we can say that serfs got paid for their works and the money they received and the goods they had could be passed to their children on their inheritance.

mrs_skeptik [129]4 years ago
4 0
The serf was the worst fed and rewarded but they had their own place unlike slaves who could not own their own land or property.
You might be interested in
Explain how geographical characteristics affected the Inca economy.
ohaa [14]

Answer: The Inca Empire developed in a long strip that reached pretty much north to south along the western side of South America, the side that faces the Pacific Ocean. The geography was rugged - Andes mountains, the coastline deserts, and the Amazon jungle. The clever Inca found solutions for their geographic problems.

Explanation:

4 0
3 years ago
Which statement best explains the consequences of the decisions made at the Berlin conference of 1884
kow [346]

The Berlin Conference of 1884–1885 indicates the European competition for territory in Africa. It was also known as the <u>Congo Conference</u> or <u>West African Conference</u> and it was organized by Otto von Bismarck, first Chancellor of Germany.

During the 1870s and early 1880s Great Britain, France, Germany, and others began looking to Africa for natural resources as well as a potential market for the goods these factories produced.

The Scramble for Africa, which was the name given to the event of the occupation, division, and colonization of African territory by European powers,  led to conflict among these powers, particularly between the British and French in West Africa; Egypt; the Portuguese and British in East Africa; and the French and King Leopold II in central Africa. The competition between Great Britain and France led Bismarck to take action, and in late 1884 he called a meeting of European powers in Berlin.

In consecutive meetings, Great Britain, France, Germany, Portugal, and King Leopold II negotiated their requests to African territory, and they were then formalized and mapped. During the conference the leaders also agreed to allow free trade among the colonies and established a structure for them to negotiate future European claims in Africa.

As a result of the Berlin Conference: The Congo Free State was confirmed as the private ownership of “Congo Society”. Consequently, the territory of the Democratic Republic of Congo today. Also, nearly 2 million square kilometers passed into the hands of King Leopold II and it late became a Belgian colony.

The 14 signatory powers mentioned above have free trade across the Congo River basin and Lake Malawi. And the Niger and Congo rivers were free transit of ships.  

It was also a signed by the states an international prohibition to abolish the slave trade.

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Colonial patriots and loyalists would most likely have disagreed about the answer to which of the following questions
zepelin [54]

Hello,

I believe the correct answer in which you are looking for is: C. Does Great Britain have the right to exercise control over colonists?

To add some context and supporting factors to my answer, I will explain a bit. The rest of the answers were clear to both sides. The stamp and tea acts was something that stalled a lot of businesses in the colonies. And of course the colonists have historical ties to Britain, that's the whole reason the colonies even existed, because they did not agree to what Britain was doing and they decided to do what was right, and no matter how much they may hate to admit it, they do have ties to Britain. And D just doesn't relate to the subject that much and I would consider it irrelevant. So by process of elimination, the answer is C.

If this helped you at all, please mark brainliest.

-Austin  

8 0
3 years ago
How was the transcontinental railroad funded?
Lady bird [3.3K]

Answer:

state and US government subsidy bonds as well as by company issued mortgage bonds.

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
What's a primary characteristic of facism?
kirill [66]
Extreme nationalism
7 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • In an effort toward peaceful negotiations, President Polk sent ________________ to negotiate the Rio Grande border dispute and t
    13·1 answer
  • Which of the following historical events directly contributed to the start of the scientific revolution in the 16th century
    6·1 answer
  • Why are the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut important?
    15·2 answers
  • ANSWER IT FAST PLEASE &lt;3
    10·2 answers
  • Why did the four men stage the sit-in at the Woolworth’s in Greensboro?
    8·1 answer
  • From the book a Winkle In Time Is this correct
    12·2 answers
  • Why was it necessary for the framers to make it possible for future generations to change the US Constitution? Explain...
    14·1 answer
  • What was used by dictators to promote war and their ideas? proposals propaganda lebensraum​
    13·1 answer
  • Will mark brainlist I promise ... How did the Louisiana State Constitution of 1845 address the disagreement between rural and ur
    13·1 answer
  • _______ peripheral device is used to take a photograph.​
    6·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!