Making Excuses For Hume Slavery Racism A PDF
Making Excuses For Hume Slavery Racism A PDF
Making Excuses For Hume Slavery Racism A PDF
Making excuses for Hume: slavery, racism and a reassessment of David Hume’s
thoughts on personal liberty.
The literati of the Scottish Enlightenment have long been associated with the abolition
of slavery due to the writings of Francis Hutcheson and, famously, Adam Smith. Antislavery
activist Thomas Clarkson wrote in his own history of the abolition of the slave trade, ‘it is a
great honour to the University of Glasgow, that it should have produced, before any public
agitation of this question, three professors, all of whom bore their public testimony against
the continuance of the cruel trade.’1 That these three professors, Hutcheson, Smith and John
Millar, could be so lauded despite having written virtually nothing about the slave trade itself
demonstrates the close association the Scottish philosophers have had with antislavery since
the very beginning of the movement in Britain. The perception of the Enlightenment as force
in antislavery has been given a modern push by historians such as Roy Porter and Gertrude
Himmelfarb,2 however others, such as Dorinda Outram have quite reasonably argued that the
wonder at this confusion as many scholars, discussing the Enlightenment and slavery have
grouped philosophers from Scotland, France, Germany and North America into one uniform
movement, linking together such diverse thinkers as the French antislavery writer the
Marquis de Condorcet and the slave owner Thomas Jefferson. It is clear, when discussing
University, first challenged the ancient dictum of Aristotle that some men, due to their
physical strength and intellectual inferiority, were born to be slaves, while others were born
to be masters. In stating that all people, regardless of physical characteristics shared the
2
capacity for feeling pain and humiliation, it was irrational to presume than anyone was born
Enlightenment, the key figure for what is generally referred to as the second generation is the
sceptical philosopher David Hume. In her 2003 article entitled ‘The Contribution of the
Scottish Enlightenment to the Abandonment of the Institution of Slavery’ Alison Webster has
In common with the beliefs of many of his contemporaries he considered that black people
were inferior to white. He perhaps intended to emphasize the fact that as slaves, black people
were incapable of innovation and dexterity, partly because of their circumstances, a view
undoubtedly shared by Smith, Millar et al. All the same, Hume does seem to suggest an innate
inferiority in slaves, echoing Aristotle’s ‘natural state,’ and close to regarding them as ‘tools.’
However, it should be remembered that Aristotle believed that slaves were capable of ‘fleshly
pleasures,’ and Hutcheson believed that while slaves might not be intellectually superior, they
were more subtly endowed with ‘sense and feeling,’ and entitled to basic human rights. On
the evidence of his writing and the testimony to his humanity by his friends, perhaps we
should give Hume the benefit of the doubt and believe that he would have agreed with
Hutcheson.5
There has been much written regarding Hume and racism, particularly by Richard
Popkin6 and John Immerwahr7, and this paper will only skirt these much worn paths. What is
more significant for this study is the way in which this racism has been excused on the
strength of his other writings, particularly those presumed to attack the contemporary
institution of slavery. This paper will examine the particular essays that relate both to
Hume’s alleged criticism of the slave system and his comments regarding the inferiority of
3
non-whites, addressing the issue of Hume’s true contribution to the ending of British
involvement in slavery.
In discussing the contribution of David Hume to the general abolition zeitgeist of the
1790s there has always been a fractured understanding of his ideology toward the institution
of slavery. Hume, in the midst of his copious works, wrote very little on the subject of black
slavery, and when he did express his ideas, they were not without a sense of ambiguity.
Apologists for Hume’s political innovation and reforming ideology have been quick to point
out that his apparent ambivalence is no proof that this gentle humanist approved of the
practice. John B. Stewart makes a similar plea for Hume’s antislavery credentials when he
fruits of our garden, the offspring of our cattle, and the work of our slaves’ as perhaps a
‘thoughtless carryover from his studies in Roman law’ and ‘is not to be taken as evidence that
thoughtlessness to Hume rather than acknowledge a perhaps less than desired position on the
The writings most often cited to affirm Hume’s antislavery stance are contained
within his essay ‘Of the Populousness of Ancient Nations’. Primarily discussing the
institution of slavery within the classical Greek and Roman cultures, the essay’s referrals to
the contemporary practice are often asides, expressing a wry opinion or his own personal
The remains which are found of domestic slavery, in the AMERICAN colonies, and among
some EUROPEAN nations, would never surely create a desire of rendering it more universal.
The little humanity, commonly observed in persons, accustomed, from their infancy, to
exercise so great authority over their fellow creatures, and to trample upon human nature,
Throughout the essay Hume’s contemptuous regard for the cruelty of the ancients in their
practice of domestic slavery has given many a modern reader the strong impression that the
enemy of prejudice and superstitious intolerance similarly recognized the evil of plantation
However these apparently positive ideas are counterbalanced by his 1753 footnote in
a revised edition of his essay ‘Of National Characters’, which stated notoriously:
I am apt to suspect the negroes and in general all 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
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
Webster is not the only scholar to find these comments incongruous with an enemy of
African slavery. Eugene F. Millar, in an editorial comment regarding this footnote, is quick to
point out Hume’s opposition to slavery as a counterbalance to this obviously bigoted opinion,
citing ‘Of the populousness of ancient nations’.11 Others, seeing the potential for these
field of social science have argued that these remarks are, at worst, accidental expressions of
shared contemporary prejudices.12 John Immerwahr, in his 1992 article ‘Hume’s Revised
Racism’ attacks the suggestion that this footnote was an ‘off hand remark’ or an aberration
5
from his normal ideas. The fact that Hume himself edited the footnote in a final revision of
his works in 1777, altering some of his factual errors and references to polygenesis yet still
maintaining his notion of Negro inferiority, suggests that this position was well considered.13
Hume’s contemporary readers might have recognized the ‘man of parts and learning’ as
Francis Williams, a free black inhabitant of Jamaica who had garnered wide acclaim for his
scholastic achievements. Williams was educated at Cambridge University and later taught at
a school at Spanish Town, Jamaica. His Latin poetry was begrudgingly admired by Edward
Long, the historian and apologist for race-based slavery, through whom the only copies of
William’s works have been preserved. 14 Hume was well aware that there were contradictions
to his racist claims of universal black inferiority. Critics of his footnote drew attention to
some who were living proof against Hume’s claims, blacks famous for their cultural and
literary achievements. Williams himself attempted to get Hume to notice him and what he
did,15 however it is clear that the Scottish philosopher chose to ignore this evidence and keep
his footnote intact. It appears that whatever his sentiments of slavery, Hume’s ideas on race
Apologists for Hume, in citing ‘On the populousness of ancient nations’, have often
taken his criticisms of slavery at face value, without due consideration of the context of his
discussion, namely population estimates for the classical world. His dominant thesis
throughout the essay is to argue for the superior populousness of the modern world to the
ancient, being an indicator of more favourable conditions for societal development. To those
who looked back to classical Greece and Rome as a golden age of social and political
freedom, Hume sought to demonstrate that ‘human nature, in general , really enjoys more
liberty at present, in the most arbitrary government of EUROPE, than it ever did during the
most flourishing period of ancient times.’16 In introducing slavery into his argument for the
superiority of the modern world over the ancient, he distanced contemporary European
6
society from the ancient world, stating that domestic slavery ‘has been abolished for some
centuries throughout the greater part of Europe.’17 While Hume also made the point of
referring to the modern exponents of slavery, it is evident that he separated the slavery
condoned by Europe from that practiced in ancient Greece and Rome. Clearly the writer
carried a distaste for contemporary slavery and would not have wished to see it spread further
than its existing bounds, but discussions of black slavery in the American colonies and
‘some’ European nations fell beyond the scope of his thesis. His reference served an
illustrative purpose, connecting his current readers, who were familiar with modern slavery,
to the ancient world in which such an institution was widespread and ubiquitous. It was
ancient slavery that Hume wished to draw the readers’ attention to and his comments on the
contemporary practice were oblique and minimalist at best. While both Britain and ancient
Rome practiced slavery, it was only the ancients whose manners were rendered barbarous by
Hume made another distinction between the ancient practice of slavery and its modern
According to ancient practice, all checks were on the inferior, to restrain him to the
duty of submission; none on the superior, to engage him in the reciprocal duties of
gentleness and humanity. In modern times, a bad servant finds not easily a good
master, nor a bad master a good servant; and the checks are mutual, suitably to the
This argument should not diminish the reader’s view of Hume’s disdain of slavery;
however it does call into question his willingness to attribute the same level of debasement to
European slave owners as he does to those in the ancient world. In every step of this
potentially treacherous path of reasoning, Hume delicately avoids declaring that modern
slavery is as morally debasing to British society as he believes it was to the inhabitants of the
classical world. In critiquing the ideas of those who looked back to the past as a model,
Hume uses the issue of domestic slavery as one of the dividing walls between the past and the
used, the arguments that describe the shocking state of ancient slavery are not directly aimed
at the plight of the African slaves in Europe or the Colonies. For Hume, the ancient world
was inferior because they had domestic slavery – contemporary Europe did not therefore it
was superior.
It could be argued that Hume was distinguishing domestic slavery from colonial
slavery, implying that, as British households themselves did not generally keep slaves (the
total slave population in Scotland around this time was around seventy 20), this was the
shaping factor in modern superiority. In this regard, Hume’s commentary on ancient slavery
could stand unchallenged and his obvious disgust for the contemporary practice could reveal
his opinion without making any unintended political remarks. If this is indeed a correct
reading of ‘On the Populousness of Ancient Nations’ it is then incorrect to use this essay as a
more than an opinion of distaste at the institution, a sentiment shared by many, but not an
In the absence of any further comments by Hume on slavery, except for the 1777
revision of his footnote in ‘Of National Characters’, seeking out an opinion on whether he
would have been in favour of eradicating the contemporary practice is impossible. However
8
further reading of his works reveals an interesting window on his views regarding individual
liberty in the face of legitimized oppression. In an essay entitled ‘Of Some Remarkable
Customs’ Hume considers the issue of Royal Navy press gangs whose actions, while not
given official sanction under the law, were tacitly approved of by the crown. The author uses
the institution as an example of an exception to the maxim ‘that power, however great, when
however inconsiderable, which he acquires from violence and usurpation.’21 Hume agrees
that in allowing the pressing of seamen outside of the law, parliament has acknowledged that
the practice is better served in its unregulated form than if it were given legal authority. The
limited scope of the press gang’s actions was for Hume a rationale for their continuance
unopposed:
While this power is exercised to no other end than to man the navy, men willingly
submit to it, from a sense of its use and necessity; and the sailors, who are alone
affected by it, find no body to support them, in claiming the rights and privileges,
ministerial tyranny’ many would ‘support the injured party’23 and bring the institution to an
end. However to bring the press gangs under the law would result in one of two possible
harms; the gangs would be so limited in their actions by legal restraint that they would be
rendered ineffective in procuring seamen for the navy, or they would be given such power as
to be free to commit great abuses. In this light Hume believed ‘the very irregularity of the
practice, at present, prevents its abuses, by affording so easy a remedy against them’.24 He
was not against the idea of finding a method of manning the navy without harming the liberty
9
of the seamen, but he observed that no such method had yet been proposed. It is here that a
political pragmatism comes to the fore. He was not an idealist in the sense that he could
agree with Locke’s idea of the Original Contract, but instead argued that all power, even if
long inherited, had its origins in usurpation and violence.25 Press gangs, however distasteful,
were to be accepted because they provided a necessary function for the defence of Britain,
regardless of their harm to citizen liberty. One scholar, Steven J Wulf, has argued that this
example is not exceptional, but is representative of the entire sceptical system of Hume’s
political thought. In approaching politics with a mitigated scepticism, Hume may present
political maxims as mentioned above, however caution dictates that one must allow for an
exemption. Wulf goes on to argue that, ‘what Hume is recommending here is not political
mendacity, but rather occasional discreet silences’.26 Perhaps for Hume, colonial slavery was
less a positive good than an occasion for discreet silence, as its necessity as a tool for the
economic growth of the nation was perhaps a reason to overlook its objectionable nature.
For scholars of the origins of Abolition thought, there is much weight given to the
words of the Scottish literati, no matter how obliquely they wrote on the subject of slavery.
Many writers such as John Millar and Adam Smith wrote detailed critiques of contemporary
slavery, using the ancient institution to reference their arguments against the contemporary
practice. Hume’s thoughts on slavery are nothing more than intellectual speculation on a
philosophical argument that had little to do with building a case against the capturing and
enslavement of Africans. If there is any discussion of the morality of black slavery, the essay
appeared to argue that the modern practice was an improvement on the ancient, and part of
the case proving the superiority of modern Europe over classical Greece and Rome. Webster
may speculatively grant Hume ‘the benefit of the doubt’ and place him alongside the
pantheon of antislavery thinkers of the eighteenth century, but to do this one must ignore the
10
overtly racist footnote in one essay and disregard the context of the arguments in another.
That Hume’s racist remarks were widely used to support colonial slavery even during his
lifetime casts doubt upon any abolitionist stance readers may choose to impart to him.
Stewart may choose to call Hume’s rendering of slave labour as legitimate property a mistake
due to an assumption that Hume is making an attack on slavery in another work, but to find
that later reading to be in fact a denial that such slavery even occurs in the modern world
leaves such arguments without real merit. David Hume was not a proto Abolitionist but was,
at best, a thinker whose ideas were similar to many of the day; slavery was an unfortunate
institution, however its continuance was a necessary cog in the economic machine that
Endnotes.
1
Thomas Clarkson, The History of the rise, progress, and accomplishment of the abolition of
Lane The Penguin Press, 2000), 361; Gertrude Himmelfarb, The Roads to Modernity: The
British, French and American Enlightenments (New York: Vintage, 2005), 284.
3
Dorina Outram, The Enlightenment, Second Edition (Cambridge: Cambridge University
6
Richard H. Popkin, "Hume's Racism," in The High Road to Pyrrhonism, eds. Richard A.
Watson and James E. Force (San Diego: Austin Hill Press, 1980), 251-266, and ‘Hume’s
(1992), 481-48.
8
John B. Stewart, Opinion and Reform in Hume's Political Philosophy (Princeton, New
Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1992), 186-187.Ibid., p 186-187. Stewart is quoting from
(1992), 481-48.
14
Vincent Carretta, "Who was Francis Williams," Early American Literature 38, no. 2
(2003), 213-237.
15
Popkin, The Third Force in Seventeenth-Century Thought, 72-74.
16
Hume, Of the Populousness of Ancient Nations, 383.
17
Ibid., 383
18
Ibid., 384
19
Ibid., 384
12
20
Iain Whyte, Scotland and the Abolition of Black Slavery 1756-1838 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh