The Language We Use

At TREE, we believe that language matters. The words we choose shape how history is understood and how people are remembered.

Our approach is simple: precise, respectful, transparent.

Our Principles

  • We restore dignity to those whose lives were dehumanised by slavery.

  • We acknowledge that language shifts over time, and we remain open to reflection and review.

  • We prefer clarity and heritage-based descriptors over collective acronyms or umbrella terms.

Download our Words Matter sheet

Terms We Use

This page is frequently referenced by educators, writers, and institutions seeking language clarity - please cite TREE when quoting.

  • Preferred terms when discussing the systems, institutions, and inheritances shaped by empire and enslavement.

  • Precise language for the financial payouts given to enslavers after emancipation in 1834.

  • Acknowledges the continuing impact of enslavement across generations and the importance of legacy.

  • We use these terms to describe individuals after legal emancipation.

    Context is key: emancipation often came with apprenticeship or restrictions.

  • We use enslaved person/people to recognise humanity and make clear that enslavement was a condition imposed, not an identity.

  • Used instead of “slave owners.” This centres responsibility on those who imposed and profited from enslavement.

  • An inclusive, modern alternative to BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic), recognising that people of ethnically diverse heritage make up most of the world’s population.

  • Respectful terms for people of more than one heritage.

    TREE avoids mixed race in organisational language.

  • Used when describing broad communities connected to Africa and the Caribbean, in the past or present.

    Wherever possible, we name specific communities (e.g. Jamaican, Barbadian).

Terms We Do Not Use

  • BAME stands for Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic.

    TREE does not use this term as it is reductive, outdated, and groups together very different communities. We use Global Majority or name communities directly.

  • TREE does not use biracial in our organisational language. The term reduces identity to a simple label and does not reflect the depth of a person’s heritage and culture.

    Instead, TREE uses multi-heritage or dual heritage, which recognise ancestry and lived experience in a more inclusive way.

    We acknowledge that some people may choose to self-identify as biracial, and we respect that personal choice, but TREE is committed to language that promotes dignity and inclusivity.

  • TREE avoids this phrase as it positions people as minorities in relation to a supposed majority. We prefer Global Majority or the specific community name (e.g. Jamaican, Ghanaian, African Caribbean).

  • First and foremost, mixed race offers little respect or dignity to a person’s heritage and culture.

    The term is rooted in outdated ideas of dividing humanity into biological “races,” which modern science has shown to be false.

    TREE uses multi-heritage or dual heritage instead, terms that affirm ancestry and culture without suggesting people are “mixed” from separate races.

    We recognise that some individuals may choose to self-identify as mixed race, and we respect that personal choice. As an organisation, however, we are committed to language that centres dignity, inclusivity, and heritage.

  • Only in direct quotes, always contextualised.

    TREE uses enslaved people instead. The term slave defines a person by their condition, whereas enslaved person recognises their humanity and makes clear that enslavement was imposed upon them.

  • TREE does not generally use people of colour in our organisational language.

    While it is a familiar and widely used term, it defines people in contrast to “white” and groups very different communities together.

    We prefer to use Global Majority or name communities directly, while recognising the term’s common usage and being ready to explain our choice.

  • While widely used, TREE does not use this term in its organisational language.

    It can function as a broad label rather than a precise description of how inequality has been produced and maintained, both historically and in the present day.

    Our work focuses on naming the structures directly: enslavement, colonial wealth, systemic bias, and inherited inequalities, and how these continue to shape outcomes today.

Historical Language

Our archive contains language that is offensive and dehumanising. We reproduce such wording faithfully when publishing documents, but never without explanation. Where necessary, annotations provide context so harmful terms are critically understood rather than normalised.

“The people recorded in our collection were once reduced to numbers, assets, or legal claims. By choosing our words with care, we ensure they are remembered as human beings.”

Language is one way TREE turns private inheritance into public resource. Preserving the record while setting a standard for how we speak about enslavement and its legacies today.

TREE Terminology Framework

TREE adopts an organisational standard of progressive, inclusive language. Our approach is informed by leading academic, archival, and governmental guidance, including the Office for National Statistics (ONS), UNESCO, The National Archives, British Library, Museums Association and National Museums Liverpool.

We recognise that language evolves, and we regularly review our terminology to ensure it reflects both historical accuracy and contemporary respect. Our aim is to use language that restores humanity, clarity, and dignity to those represented within our collections and histories.