<span>Assuming that this is referring to the same list of options that was posted before with this question, <span>the correct response would be the book that was written by a veteran of the war itself, since this would be considered a "primary source". </span></span>
<h2><u>Answer:</u></h2>
Serfs were the laborers of lowest levels in many zones of medieval Europe, however, in some, there were slaves, who were at a lower level. Serfs were not slaves but rather were not allowed to leave the land where they worked.
Their commitment with their medieval master was shared; he had commitments to them, to give a place and ensure them, similarly as they had commitments to him, to give a piece of the product, or later, cash for lease. Serfs couldn't be purchased or sold.
They had a place with the land, not the ruler. In the event that the master sold the land, they ran with it. The new proprietor did not have the alternative of moving them off the land.
Answer:
I know in source 1 is attitude was not nice.
Explanation:
Answer:
Explanation:
The way that thier lives were still the same was that even though a slave got frred from one plantation they could still be picked up and worked. One way they are familiar is that they were both still treated wrongly. They both still got less than whites and they could still get beaten.
