What has using primary sources to evaluate the wilson and finkelman arguments taught you about making ethical assessments of historical figures?

Primary sources it appears he has change in opinion because in the first primary source Jefferson believes Africans have been violated of their rights and forced into a despondent life style, one that they do not deserve, but in the second primary source it explains the reason why emancipating slaves may not be in the slaves best interest. This quote defines this scenario, “real distinctions which nature has made; will divide us into parties, and produce convulsions.” Furthermore, in the third primary source Jefferson’s beliefs are made clear when he says “you know that nobody wishes more ardently, to see an abolition, not only of the trade, but of the condition of slavery: and certainly nobody will be more willing to encounter every sacrifice for that object.” And the fourth primary source assists this argument as it doesn’t support Finkelman’s idea, but rather Wilson’s.

Brainliest please??

in his book, the riddle of the rosetta stone, james giblin talks about how there was a young british polymath and physician named thomas young who made a lot of advances on the deciphering of the rosetta stone. he says that even though young made a lot of mistakes because he was working under false assumptions, he also made huge contributions like deciphering three out of the seven symbols (more than anyone else before him). young published his findings and continued his good work but he wasn't able to progress much further due to some unfavorable situations, he still laid the basis for many other scholars and of course for the man who has been generally known to have deciphered it, jean-françois champollion

oooh thx fsidnkjncjuhnzcusd