I thought it would be alright to cite modern historians because in your post 343 you cite an article written in 2003 as the single source of support for your claim that . . . well, I'm losing track of what you do claim.
Anyway, the article you cited was named “Insurrections, Domestic” and contained this sentence that ostensibly relates to Thomas Jefferson's “domestic insurrections:”
“No section of the country was spared the largely urban anti-abortion rioting that began in the mid-1980s and continued at the start of the twenty-first century.”
Why is it you can cite modern sources that do not relate in any sensible way to Jefferson's writings but I can not cite modern historians that do?
That Jefferon's "domestic insurrections" referred to actual insurrections of loyalists against patriot governments, not to runaway slaves joining Lord Dunmore's British army.
And that 2003 article in my link was simply giving examples of what is considered a "domestic insurrection", including slave revolts.
However, there were no British "excited" slave revolts in 1776, nor did Lord Dunmore call for slaves to revolt.
jeffersondem: "Why is it you can cite modern sources that do not relate in any sensible way to Jefferson's writings but I can not cite modern historians that do?"
Cite whoever you wish, but the quote which could cinch your case would be from Jefferson himself legitimately saying, in effect:
So, in a nut-shell, here's the case against Jefferson's "domestic insurrections" = slave revolts: