How the White Man Invented Himself

Before there were “white people,” there were Englishmen, Scots, Frenchmen, and Dutchmen. So when did they become white—and why did it matter?

Image: Voltaire. Marble sculpture from 1781 depicting François-Marie Arouet, called Voltaire (1694–1778), French writer and philosopher. Sculpture by Jean-Antoine Houdon (1741–1828), located at State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, Russia.

The ship moved west beneath a sky that seemed to have no end.

For weeks it had crossed the Atlantic, its sails swollen with wind, its hull groaning against the sea. Above deck, sailors climbed rigging and shouted orders. The ocean stretched unbroken to the horizon. Below deck, where sunlight rarely reached, hundreds of captive Africans lay packed into spaces scarcely large enough to sit upright. The air was thick with heat and sickness. Iron rubbed skin raw. Water sloshed across the planks. Somewhere in the darkness, a child cried for a mother who could not reach him.

The merchants who owned the vessel would never see this scene. They waited instead in counting houses an ocean away, where human lives appeared as columns of figures in ledgers. Investors calculated risks. Insurers assessed losses. Planters anticipated deliveries. By the time the ship reached the Americas, the people below deck would be transformed into laborers, their bodies measured not by the lives they had lived but by the profit they might produce.

The voyage was one chapter in a story that would reshape the Atlantic world. It carried more than captives across the ocean. It carried the beginnings of a new way of thinking.

When Europeans first established colonies in the Americas, they did not possess a fully developed ideology of racial superiority. They brought with them older prejudices, inherited fears, religious assumptions, and symbolic associations. In Christian Europe, darkness had long been linked metaphorically with evil and light with purity. Foreign peoples were often viewed with suspicion. Christians distinguished themselves from Muslims, Jews, and so-called heathens. Yet these attitudes alone did not create anti-Black racism as it would later emerge. They were fragments waiting to be assembled.

The plantation economies of the New World provided the framework.

As sugar cultivation expanded across the Caribbean, as tobacco transformed Virginia, and as cotton spread across the American South, enslaved African labor became the foundation upon which immense fortunes were built. Fields stretched toward distant tree lines. Warehouses filled with valuable crops. Ships crowded harbor waters. Wealth flowed outward from plantations into banks, ports, factories, and commercial houses throughout Europe and North America.

The success of the system presented its beneficiaries with a problem they could not easily escape. The more prosperous slavery became, the more visible its contradiction became as well.

A Virginia planter might spend the morning reading essays about liberty and natural rights before stepping onto a porch overlooking hundreds of enslaved laborers working beneath the summer sun. The language of freedom surrounded him. The reality of bondage enriched him. Inside the house, books imported from London and Paris filled the shelves. Among them were the works of Voltaire, who mocked kings, challenged priests, and celebrated reason as the pathway to human progress. Yet the same philosopher who championed liberty also gave voice to a very different vision of humanity. Writing about Africans, he declared:

“…[white people are] superior to Negroes, just like Negroes are superior to monkeys, and monkeys are superior to oysters and to other animals of the same species.”

The words did not come from a plantation overseer defending slavery or a merchant calculating the value of human cargo. They came from one of the Enlightenment’s most celebrated minds. The planter needed only to lift his eyes from the page to the fields beyond his porch. The world described in those books and the world spread out before him did not appear incompatible. One spoke of liberty. The other produced wealth. Between them stood a growing body of racial thought that reconciled the two, allowing freedom and bondage to exist side by side. The contradiction stood before him every day in flesh and blood.

As the eighteenth century unfolded, that contradiction became increasingly difficult to ignore. The Enlightenment encouraged new discussions about reason, equality, and human rights. Political revolutions challenged old assumptions about authority and power. Americans celebrated liberty as the foundation of their new republic. Yet the same society that spoke so passionately about freedom remained deeply dependent upon slavery.

Ideas capable of reconciling those competing realities became extraordinarily valuable.

Voltaire was hardly alone. Across the English Channel, the Scottish philosopher David Hume—celebrated for his writings on reason, skepticism, and human understanding—arrived at remarkably similar conclusions. In his essay “Of National Characters,” Hume paused to offer what he presented as a simple observation about the peoples of the world:

“I am apt to suspect the negroes and in general all the other species of men (for there are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction betwixt these breeds of men. Not to mention our colonies, there are Negroe slaves dispersed all over Europe, of which none ever discovered any symptoms of ingenuity; tho’ low people, without education, will start up amongst us, and distinguish themselves in every profession. In Jamaica indeed they talk of one negroe as a man of parts and learning; but ‘tis likely he is admired for very slender accomplishments, like a parrot, who speaks a few words plainly.”

The passage did more than express prejudice. It assembled an argument. History, science, civilization, and nature were summoned as witnesses for the same conclusion: that racial hierarchy was neither accidental nor temporary but embedded in the natural order itself. Hume was not merely expressing an opinion. He was constructing a theory. History became evidence. Civilization became proof. Nature became explanation. Counterexamples were dismissed before they could threaten the conclusion. The language was measured, philosophical, even detached. That was precisely what made it so persuasive. Racial hierarchy no longer appeared as passion or prejudice. It appeared as reason itself.

Coming from one of the Enlightenment’s foremost philosophers, Hume’s words carried an authority that ordinary prejudice could never possess. Like Voltaire’s comparison of Africans to animals and Jefferson’s “suspicion” of Black inferiority, they clothed racial hierarchy in the language of rational inquiry. What ministers defended from the pulpit, philosophers increasingly defended from the study. By the close of the eighteenth century, religion and philosophy were no longer speaking past one another. They were reinforcing one another, helping to construct an intellectual architecture that did not simply justify slavery—it invented race.

Older religious traditions offered another source of explanation. Ministers returned to biblical stories and searched for evidence that hierarchy had been woven into creation itself. Among the passages they found, none would prove more influential than the brief and puzzling story of Noah, Ham, and Canaan in the ninth chapter of Genesis.

The passage itself was remarkably ordinary. After the floodwaters receded and the ark came to rest, Noah planted a vineyard, drank too much wine, and fell asleep naked inside his tent. Ham entered, saw his father’s nakedness, and told his brothers. Shem and Japheth, refusing even to look upon their father, walked backward into the tent with a garment stretched between them and covered Noah without turning their eyes. When Noah awoke and learned what had happened, he pronounced a curse—not upon Ham, the offending son, but upon Ham’s son, Canaan:

“Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.”

The words were few. Their consequences would prove enormous.

For centuries, Jewish, Christian, and Muslim scholars wrestled with the story because it raised questions the text itself refused to answer. Why did Noah curse Canaan instead of Ham? What exactly had Ham done? Why should a grandson bear the punishment for his father’s offense? The Bible offered no explanation. More striking still, it said nothing about race. Nothing about skin color. Nothing about Africa. Nothing about blackness.

Yet the silence of the text invited generations of interpreters to fill its gaps.

As Christian Europe expanded into Africa and the Atlantic slave trade gathered force, the old story began to change. Sermons lingered over Noah’s curse. Biblical commentaries quietly altered the object of the punishment. Canaan gradually disappeared from the story, replaced by Ham himself. Before long, Ham was no longer simply Noah’s son. He had become the imagined ancestor of all Black Africans. What had begun as a difficult passage concerning one ancient family slowly became, in the hands of theologians, a genealogy of race.

The transformation was so gradual that few noticed it taking place. A minister standing before his congregation on a Sunday morning did not announce that he was rewriting Scripture. He simply repeated what earlier commentators had taught. His listeners carried those lessons home. Children heard them at their parents’ tables. Students encountered them in catechisms and religious instruction. By the nineteenth century, the idea had become so familiar that many Christians scarcely distinguished between the words of Genesis and centuries of interpretation layered upon them.

Alexander Crummell understood how deeply the belief had taken hold. Looking back in 1862, he observed that the claim that Black people suffered under Noah’s curse had become “a general, almost universal, opinion in the Christian world.” It appeared, he wrote, “in books written by learned men; and it is repeated in lectures, speeches, sermons, and common conversation.” An interpretation had become common sense.

That was precisely its power.

The story no longer belonged only to the pulpit. It migrated into courtrooms, legislative halls, universities, and plantation houses. It offered something every slave society desperately needed: not merely a defense of slavery, but the assurance that slavery reflected the will of God. If bondage had been decreed in Genesis itself, then the plantation was not an act of human greed but part of a sacred order stretching back to the dawn of history.

The Bible had not changed.

Its interpretation had.

Congregations listened as ministers transformed an ancient narrative into an explanation for contemporary slavery. The biblical text itself said far less than its interpreters claimed, but that mattered little. The story provided what slave societies increasingly needed: a sacred justification for human bondage.

Religion was not alone. Science soon joined the effort. Across Europe and America, naturalists sought to classify the world with unprecedented precision. Plants, animals, minerals—and eventually human beings—were sorted into categories. Among the most influential was Carl Linnaeus, whose taxonomy assigned not only physical characteristics but moral qualities to different human varieties. Europeans were described as inventive and governed by laws. Africans, he suggested, were crafty, indolent, and governed by caprice. What began as classification quietly became hierarchy. Observation became judgment. Buffon, Blumenbach, and later Samuel George Morton extended these efforts, each claiming the authority of science while often reproducing the assumptions of their age. What Scripture and philosophy had begun, science increasingly presented as objective knowledge.

The timing was not accidental.

The age that proclaimed universal human rights was also the age that produced some of history’s most elaborate theories of racial hierarchy. As freedom expanded for some, the arguments for denying it to others became more refined. Race emerged not as the opposite of Enlightenment thought but as one of the ways many of its leading thinkers reconciled liberty with slavery.

No one embodied that contradiction more completely than Thomas Jefferson.

At Monticello, Jefferson worked in a study crowded with books, maps, scientific instruments, and correspondence arriving from London, Paris, and Philadelphia. From this room flowed ideas that would shape the modern world. Here he drafted letters, pondered republican government, and reflected upon the meaning of liberty. Beyond the windows lay another world entirely. Enslaved men, women, and children planted tobacco, harvested wheat, forged nails in the blacksmith shop, prepared meals in the kitchen, cared for the household, and sustained the plantation that made Jefferson’s life of learning possible.

It was here, surrounded by books and boundless confidence in the power of reason, that Jefferson confronted one of the central questions of the Enlightenment: Were the differences between peoples merely the product of history and circumstance, or did nature itself establish a hierarchy among human beings?

In Notes on the State of Virginia, Jefferson acknowledged uncertainty. But uncertainty did not prevent judgment.

“I advance it therefore as a suspicion only, that the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind.”

The sentence carried extraordinary authority because it came from no ordinary man. Jefferson was the principal author of the Declaration of Independence, the statesman whose words—“all men are created equal”—would echo across centuries and inspire democratic movements around the world. His conclusion was offered only as a “suspicion,” yet coming from Jefferson, even a suspicion acquired the force of political philosophy. Later generations would cite it not as speculation but as evidence.

The contradiction was never hidden from him. It was built into the daily rhythms of Monticello itself. Every page Jefferson wrote depended upon hands he did not free. Every scientific experiment, every philosophical reflection, every letter dispatched from his study rested upon the labor of enslaved people who cultivated his fields, maintained his home, and generated the wealth that purchased the books lining his shelves. The language of liberty flowed from his pen. The labor of slavery sustained the world in which he wrote.

Like Voltaire before him, Jefferson did not reject the ideals of the Enlightenment. He narrowed them. The plantation and the manuscript belonged to the same world. One extracted labor. The other explained why those who performed it could remain unfree. Together they transformed slavery from an economic institution into a racial order and inequality from a social practice into an article of reason.

Ideas alone could not sustain a racial order.

They had to become institutions.

In the colonies, racial thought moved from sermons, philosophical essays, and scientific treatises into statute books and courtrooms. What philosophers argued, legislators enacted. What ministers justified, magistrates enforced. Slowly, unevenly, colony by colony, the law transformed ideas about human difference into a system of inherited status. Once written into law, those ideas no longer depended upon persuasion. They became the architecture of everyday life.

The important turn came when slavery ceased to be merely a condition imposed on particular people and became a status passed from mother to child. In 1662, Virginia declared that children would inherit the status of their mothers. The law’s language was spare. Its consequences were vast. It made slavery reproductive. It transformed the wombs of enslaved women into instruments of property. It ensured that the child of an enslaved woman would enter the world already claimed.

Other laws followed. Baptism no longer guaranteed freedom. Interracial marriage was prohibited. Punishments hardened along racial lines. English servants and African laborers, who had once occupied overlapping worlds of coercion and dependence, were gradually separated into distinct legal categories. Europeans became white. Africans became Black. Freedom and bondage began to wear color.

This was how ideology became architecture. Not all at once. Not through a single statute. But through accumulation. One law defined inheritance. Another restricted marriage. Another limited testimony. Another distinguished punishment. Each statute appeared to answer a practical problem. Together they built a racial order.

By the time Jefferson sat in his study at Monticello, the contradiction was no longer merely philosophical. It had been made legal. The fields beyond his window were not sustained by prejudice alone. They were sustained by a system of law that had learned to turn human difference into property, ancestry into status, and birth itself into bondage.

Over time, slavery and Blackness became increasingly inseparable in the minds of Europeans and Americans. In earlier societies, slavery had encompassed people of many different backgrounds. Captivity had often resulted from war, conquest, debt, or punishment. In the New World, however, slavery came to be associated overwhelmingly with people of African descent. Generation after generation, laws reinforced the connection. Children inherited the status of their mothers. Skin color became a marker of legal position. What had begun as a labor system evolved into a racial order.

The transformation was gradual enough that many people scarcely noticed it occurring. A child born into the world of Atlantic slavery encountered its assumptions everywhere—in churches, newspapers, schools, courtrooms, and political speeches. By adulthood, those assumptions could seem less like arguments than facts.

Yet Black Americans understood the nature of the process with a clarity that many whites did not.

By the 1830s, the racial ideology that had been fashioned over centuries no longer confined itself to plantation fields or slave markets. It followed Black Americans into churches, schools, courtrooms, and city streets. It reached beyond the enslaved to touch even those whom the law recognized as free.

No one understood that better than the Rev. Theodore S. Wright. A graduate of Princeton Theological Seminary, an ordained Presbyterian minister, and a founder of the American Anti-Slavery Society, Wright embodied everything nineteenth-century America claimed to admire: education, piety, discipline, and moral character. Yet in 1836, while walking the streets of New York, he was assaulted by a Southern student who struck him while hurling racial insults.

The attack was shocking, but it was not surprising.

Years before, Wright had already described the invisible burden carried by every free Black American. His words remain among the clearest descriptions ever written of life under anti-Black racism:

“This is a serious business, sir. The prejudice which exists against the colored man, the free man is like the atmosphere, everywhere felt by him. It is true that in these United States and in this State, there are men, like myself, colored with the skin like my own, who are not subjected to the lash, who are not liable to have their wives and their infants torn from them; from whose hand the Bible is not taken. It is true that we may walk abroad; we may enjoy our domestic comforts, our families; retire to the closet; visit the sanctuary, and may be permitted to urge on our children and our neighbors in well doing. But sir, still we are slaves—every where we feel the chain galling us… This spirit is withering all our hopes, and ofttimes causes the colored parent as he looks upon his child, to wish he had never been born.”

Wright understood what many white Americans could not. Slavery was more than a legal institution; it was a way of organizing the nation’s moral imagination. A Black man might escape the auction block without escaping the assumptions that had made the auction block possible. He might own property, preach the Gospel, educate his children, and walk the streets as a free citizen, yet still feel, as Wright put it, “the chain galling us.” The chains had changed. They were no longer forged only in iron. They were forged in sermons that invoked the Curse of Ham, in books that ranked races, in philosophers who reconciled liberty with hierarchy, in laws that measured citizenship by color, and in everyday encounters that reminded Black Americans where society believed they belonged.

The assault in New York merely confirmed what Wright had long understood. The ideology that had once justified slavery had escaped the boundaries of slavery itself. It had become, in his unforgettable phrase, “like the atmosphere”—invisible to those who breathed it without consequence, inescapable to those forced to live beneath its weight.

That realization would shape generations of Black activists and intellectuals. Men and women like David Walker, Maria Stewart, Frederick Douglass, and Sojourner Truth recognized that the struggle before them was larger than emancipation alone. The chains that bound enslaved people were visible. The assumptions that justified those chains were often invisible, woven into the culture itself. Destroying slavery required confronting both.

Anti-Black racism did not descend from the heavens fully formed. Nor was it simply invented in a single moment by slaveholders seeking profit. It emerged through a long historical process in which economic interests, religious interpretations, scientific theories, political ideals, and cultural assumptions reinforced one another. The Atlantic slave system created extraordinary pressure to explain why a society devoted to liberty could tolerate human bondage. Over time, race became that explanation.

The result was one of the most powerful intellectual constructions in modern history. It allowed millions of people to celebrate freedom while denying it to others. It enabled democratic societies to coexist with slavery. And long after slavery itself began to crumble, the ideas built to defend it remained standing, embedded in institutions, habits, and beliefs that would shape the struggle for Black freedom for generations to come.

---

Intellectual Map

Primary Sources

Benezet, Anthony. Some Historical Account of Guinea, Its Situation, Produce, and the General Disposition of Its Inhabitants. London: J. Phillips, 1788.

https://archive.org/details/somehistoricalac1788bene/page/n6/mode/1up

Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave. Boston: Anti-Slavery Office, 1845.

https://docsouth.unc.edu/neh/douglass/douglass.html

Equiano, Olaudah. The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, or Gustavus Vassa, the African. London: Printed for and Sold by the Author, 1789.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/15399/15399-h/15399-h.htm

Hume, David. “Of National Characters.” In Essays: Moral, Political, and Literary, edited by Eugene F. Miller, 208, note 10. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1987. Originally published in 1753.

https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/hume-essays-moral-political-literary-lf-ed

Jefferson, Thomas. Notes on the State of Virginia. London: John Stockdale, 1787. Query XIV, 233. HathiTrust Digital Library.

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.32044009917931&seq=23

Jefferson, Thomas. Notes on the State of Virginia. London: John Stockdale, 1787.

https://docsouth.unc.edu/southlit/jefferson/jefferson.html

Linnaeus, Carl. Systema Naturae. 10th ed. Stockholm, 1758.

https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/726886#page/3/mode/1up

Long, Edward. The History of Jamaica. 3 vols. London: T. Lowndes, 1774.

https://archive.org/details/historyofjamaica02long/page/1/mode/1up

Morton, Samuel George. Crania Americana. Philadelphia: J. Dobson, 1839.

https://archive.org/details/Craniaamericana00Mort/page/n3/mode/1up

The Holy Bible. King James Version. Genesis 9:20–27, especially Genesis 9:25.

https://archive.org/details/GenesisKJV1611OriginalVersionBible

The Royal African Company. The Royal African Company Letter Book. Various editions and archival collections. British National Archives.

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C13807

Voltaire. Œuvres complètes de Voltaire. Vol. 22, Mélanges – Traité de métaphysique. Paris: Garnier Frères, 1879.

https://dn720002.ca.archive.org/0/items/oeuvrescomplte22voltuoft/oeuvrescomplte22voltuoft.pdf

Wright, Theodore S. “Prejudice Against the Colored Man.” Address delivered at the New York State Anti-Slavery Society Convention, Utica, New York, September 20, 1837. In C. Peter Ripley, ed., The Black Abolitionist Papers. Vol. 3, The United States, 1830–1846, 182–87. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1985.

https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/1837-theodore-s-wright-prejudice-against-colored-man/

https://archive.org/details/blackabolitionis0001unse/page/n5/mode/1up

---

Secondary Sources

Allen, Theodore W. The Invention of the White Race. 2 vols. London: Verso, 1994–1997.

Volume 1

https://arxiujosepserradell.cat/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/The-Invention-of-the-White-Race-Volume-1-Racial-Oppression-and-Social-Control-Theodore-W.-Allen-Jeffrey-B.-Perry-Z-Library.pdf

Volume 2

https://archive.org/details/inventionofwhite0000alle

Blackburn, Robin. The Making of New World Slavery: From the Baroque to the Modern, 1492–1800. London: Verso, 1997. https://archive.org/details/makingofnewworld0000blac

Curtin, Philip D. The Atlantic Slave Trade: A Census. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969.https://archive.org/details/atlanticslavetra0000curt

Davis, David Brion. Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. https://archive.org/details/inhumanbondage00davi

Drescher, Seymour. Abolition: A History of Slavery and Antislavery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.https://archive.org/details/abolitionhistory0000dres

Fields, Barbara J. “Slavery, Race and Ideology in the United States of America.” New Left Review 181 (1990): 95–118.https://files.commons.gc.cuny.edu/wp-content/blogs.dir/13230/files/2020/08/Fields_Slavery-Race-and-Ideology.pdf

Fredrickson, George M. Racism: A Short History. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002.https://archive.org/details/racismshorthisto0000fred

Giovannetti-Singh, Gianamar. “Racial Capitalism in Voltaire’s Enlightenment.” History Workshop Journal 94 (2022): 22–41. https://academic.oup.com/hwj/article/doi/10.1093/hwj/dbac025/6693575.

Jordan, Winthrop D. White Over Black: American Attitudes Toward the Negro, 1550–1812. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1968/2012. https://archive.org/details/whiteoverblackam0000jord

Morgan, Edmund S. American Slavery, American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial Virginia. New York: W. W. Norton, 1975. https://archive.org/details/americanslaverya00morg

Painter, Nell Irvin. The History of White People. New York: W. W. Norton, 2010.https://archive.org/details/historyofwhitepe0000pain

Sala-Molins, Louis. The Dark Side of the Light: Slavery and the French Enlightenment. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2006. https://archive.org/details/darksideoflights0000sala

Sweet, James H. Domingos Álvares, African Healing, and the Intellectual History of the Atlantic World. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2011. https://archive.org/details/bwb_P8-BJU-406

Thornton, John K. Africa and Africans in the Making of the Atlantic World, 1400–1800. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. https://archive.org/details/isbn_2900521627244

Walvin, James. Crossings: Africa, the Americas and the Atlantic Slave Trade. London: Reaktion Books, 2013.https://archive.org/details/crossingsafricaa0000walv

Williams, Eric. Capitalism and Slavery. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1944.https://archive.org/details/capitalismslaver00will_1