When analyzing a source, historian has to remain unbiased and free from personal feelings and opinions. They know that there are different source of an event and they may reveal different facts which could cross-check his argument. The objective historiography is possible only when the historian is unbiased and when different sources like archaeological, literary and other sources are cross-checked and interpreted independently.
Answer:
I believe it was Pharaoh Thutmose |||
Explanation:
Answer:
answer
Explanation:
They participated to try to bring black struggles to the light and try to end slavery freeing the slaves and allowing them to live normal lives (which we all know did not turn out the way they wanted too and ended up facing racial inequality rather than racial acceptance) At least I tried even though this answer might be trash
In the book he wrote, Equiano displayed his belief that free blacks often suffered worse conditions than slaves. In the W<span>est Indies, he met a free black </span>man<span> whose name was Joseph </span>Clipson<span>. </span>Clipson's<span> story was the basis of his realization. </span>Clipson<span> had freedom but was aggressively spoken to by a Bermuda captain who insisted that </span>Clipson<span> was a slave and that he had to take him to Jamaica. </span>Clipson protested but he was ignored and was forced to go aboard the captain's ship. Equiano wrote on his book that he had thought only slavery was dreadful, but the condition of a free negro was just as equally so. Their freedom was minimal and they lived in fear of constant abuses. There were no courts to listen to them and no law would protect their properties. When Equiano became a free black, he also encountered the same situation. Free blacks lived in an uncertain middle ground between slavery and freedom.<span> </span>
