White "race"
The concept of a White "race" emerged in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as a part of early scientific racial classification systems. Pioneered by figures like Carolus Linnaeus and Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, these classifications were based on physical attributes and perceived beauty, rather than any objective criteria. Linnaeus categorized humans into four groups based on geographical origin, labeling Europeans as "White," while Blumenbach later revised this system to emphasize the "Caucasian" group as the ideal, establishing a hierarchy of races that, although intended to be equal, suggested an aesthetic superiority. American scientist Samuel George Morton contributed to these ideas by attempting to rank races based on cranial capacity, which further entrenched hierarchical views. Contemporary understanding recognizes these racial categories as socially constructed, lacking a biological basis, and emphasizes that genetic diversity within groups is greater than between them. Despite this, the historical frameworks of race continue to influence social, cultural, and political dynamics today. This overview reflects the complexities and evolving perspectives on the concept of race, particularly the classification of a White "race."
On this Page
White "race"
The notion of a White “race” is an invention of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and can be traced to the racial classification system of Swedish botanist Carolus Linnaeus (1707–1778; Carl von Linné) and other scientists writing during this period. German professor of medicine Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (1752–1840), in 1795, based his definition of racial types on subjective physical beauty, according to biologist Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002). Linnaeus, Blumenbach, and American scientist Samuel George Morton (1799-1851) all contributed to the definition of a White “race.”
In 1758, Linnaeus divided the human species into four groups based on geographical locations. They included Americanus, Europaeus, Asiaticus, and Afer (American, European, Asian, and African). He then proceeded to describe each group through specifying color, humor, and posture, respectively. In the case of the Europeans, he noted that they were White (color), sanguine (humor), and muscular (posture). Linnaeus’s classification system was consistent with the classical taxonomic theories during this time and did not suggest any hierarchical ranking.
Blumenbach, a student of Linnaeus, decided to modify his teacher’s classification scheme. Gould notes that Blumenbach wrote, “I have followed Linnaeus in the number but have defined my varieties by other boundaries.” Blumenbach had visited Mount Caucasus, the mountain range between Russia and Georgia, and found the people there to be exceptionally beautiful. He decided that these "Caucasians" represented the ideal racial group and placed them at the top of his revised classification scheme. According to Gould
Blumenbach then presented all human variety on two lines of successive departure from this Caucasian ideal, ending in the two most degenerate (least attractive, not least morally unworthy or mentally obtuse) forms of humanity—Asians on one side, and Africans on the other. . . .
Blumenbach posited the categories of Malay, as an intermediary between Europeans and Africans, and American, as an intermediary between Europeans and Asians. Although intended to be unranked, Blumenbach’s system was hierarchical and assigned aesthetic, though not moral or intellectual, worth to the races, as would be done later.
Morton, an American scientist, joined the "scientific" race debate by ranking the cranial capacity of human skulls to support hierarchical racial rankings. Initially, Gould notes, Morton estimated the size of the cranial cavity by filling it with sifted White mustard seeds, but this did not produce reliable results, so he switched to a one-eighth-inch diameter lead shot. His pseudo-scientific experiment supported existing hierarchical racial classifications: Caucasians had the largest cranial capacity and Black individuals the smallest.
Most modern scientists agree that such racial categories are artificial social constructs with no biological basis and that while genetics do point to regional differences among groups, intragroup variation is wider than intergroup variation. Among social scientists who study race, ethnicity, and genetic variation, population genetics and clinal models have gained favor over typological models such as those devised by Blumenbach or Morton. Nevertheless, historical categories of race remain salient concepts with real-world social, cultural, and political impacts.
Bibliography
Baird, Robert P. "The Invention of Whiteness: The Long History of a Dangerous Idea." The Guardian, 20 Apr. 2021, www.theguardian.com/news/2021/apr/20/the-invention-of-whiteness-long-history-dangerous-idea. Accessed 2 Nov. 2024.
Gould, Stephen Jay. "The Geometer of Race." Discover, Nov. 1994, la.utexas.edu/users/hcleaver/330T/330TGould%20Geometer%20of%20Race.pdf. Accessed 2 Nov. 2024.
Gould, Stephen Jay. The Mismeasure of Man. Rev. and expanded ed., Norton, 1996.
O'Neill, Dennis. "Models of Classification." Modern Human Variation: An Introduction to Contemporary Human Biological Diversity. Behavioral Sciences Dept., Palomar College, 2013.
Race Relations. New York Times Educational Publishing, 2019.
Schlegel-O'Brien, Kieran. "Stephen Jay Gould, from Evolution to Revolution." Advanced Science News, 1 Aug. 2022, www.advancedsciencenews.com/stephen-jay-gould-from-evolution-to-revolution.
Sussman, Robert Wald. The Myth of Race: The Troubling Persistence of an Unscientific Idea. Harvard UP, 2014.