Post #3: Aronson's Argument

   Hello, readers, and welcome back (or welcome if this is your first time here). I'm about three-quarters of the way through Race by Marc Aronson now, and the book is starting to come together quite nicely now. From the description provided with the book, I knew it would dive into the history and development of race, but I didn't anticipate how thorough and extensive it would be. In the beginning, Aronson's ideas were a bit difficult to follow, given that he starts his story in ancient times, which I have much less general knowledge about than, say, American history. The connections didn't make sense at first, but I kept note of the main points and moved forward to find that the story thus far has built upon itself. The original ideas set the stage for the development of new, slightly different ideas, each built on to the previous. I find the chronological presentation of Aronson's investigation to be effective in showing the connections and patterns throughout history, and I'd like to walk you through it.

   The first part of my reading, Before Race: The Ancient World, stars in Egypt with the Jews. They were said to have been slaves here until Moses had an enlightening encounter that established the Jews as God's Chosen People. They did not take on this role lightly, and they quickly became preoccupied with their unique relationship to God. A social divide was created, the Chosen Ones vs. God's enemies. This was the first major historical example of the "Us vs. them" phenomenon in which racism has its roots. This phenomenon is referenced several times throughout Aronson's work as historical groups try to distinguish themselves from the outsiders. Later, in Greece, victories against the Persians reinforced the idea that the Greeks were a superior race. Philosopher Aristotle taught that some people were naturally predestined to be superior and inferior, which largely depended on where they were born, and could be determined simply by looking at them: "True, free Greeks stood up straight. Natural slaves naturally stooped" (Aronson, 37). This ancient yet popular idea closely resembles the first pillar of race as we know it today: physical differences. Later still, after receiving mentorship from Aristotle, Alexander the Great spread Greek ideals through Egypt, which was divided by conflicted Greeks and Jews and plagued with foreign invasions. Eventually, Christianity arose as a combination of the two and became the official religion of Rome, but they too perceived themselves as superior. As Europe continued to fall prey to violent attacks, the divide between the Christians and the non-Christians grew deeper. The last straw for a crumbling empire was the seizure by Muslims of the land where Jesus had originally died, the Holy Land. Furious, the Europeans launched attacks against them, known as the Crusades, which turned out to be a cause that united Christians under the promise that if they fought for the Holy Land, they would be pure, saved Christians. The Crusades sparked a trend of warfare against non- Christians, and the question of who their enemies were became very important (Aronson, 69). According to Aronson, "the answer to that question helped lay the foundation for the modern idea of race."

   The second part of my reading, chapters five through nine, picks up as the Middle Ages begin, right around the aforementioned Crusades. Europe had expanded, but their ideas were further behind. They relied on ancient teachings like Aristotle's for information about the rest of the world's people, and Aronson shows how these ancient prejudices persisted even after hundreds of years: "In images of monstrous men, prejudices dating back to Aristotle and beyond merged with the Christian teaching and the superstitions of peasants" (Aronson, 79). Using these old ideas combined with new superstitions, Europeans were once again united by hate, but this time it was for the Jews and the monstrous men, who they weren't sure were even human. To distinguish between Christian and not, Europeans led the Inquisition, a period of interrogation and torture meant to expose fake believers. Jews as non-Christians were exiled to ghettos and had to identify themselves with certain clothing. The quest for religious purity moved to Spain, where "pure blood" was linked to one's true religious identity. This historical account is echoed by the third pillar of race, which is the inherited nature of physical differences. Around 1493, as Europeans traveled the world to spread their faith, they concluded that "not all humanity was created by God in the same way" (Aronson, 89). Aristotle's teaching appears again in 1510 as justification to conquer and enslave the "subhuman" Jews, Muslims, and monstrous men. It was also justification for Bartoleme Las Casas' later suggestion that Africans be enslaved in place of the Native Americans. According to another ancient idea obtained through a misinterpretation of the Bible, Africans were meant to be slaves (Aronson, 97). This sparked an enormous slave trade across the world, in which two million Africans were taken to Europe as slaves. This is another example of how prejudice has persisted throughout history to shape our actions. Then, around 1517, Martin Luther advocated for another purified version of Christianity, Protestantism, through Europe, with the help of the printing press. With it spread long- overdue doubts of ancient theories like monstrous men and Aristotle's teachings. Because these old ideas were no longer suitable, Europeans began to wonder what was responsible for the differences between people, which is where the Enlightenment comes into play. As hatred spread against Jews in Europe and the Irish in England, people put their faith into science and logic, which was intended to clear their biased heads and logically explain the world, but instead "forged the iron bonds of race" (Aronson, 122).

   The last reading I did, chapters ten through fourteen, cover the Age of Racism as a direct result of the Enlightenment. Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, a German scientist, created the ultimate theory as to why some people were so different: humans could be divided into different "races", each with its own physical and temperamental characteristics (Aronson, 123). He believed that the Caucasian people encountered were the "original humans", and he ranked other races as subsequently inferior. Just like the Greeks against the Persians in part one, the Europeans already believed they were the superior race, so this theory was widely accepted. However, there were so many variations and exceptions to Blumenbach's general theory that it became obsolete. French Author Joseph-Arthur Gobineau quickly replaced it with belief in the supremacy of the Aryan race. Even though slavery had been abolished at this point in America, many southern Americans sought to use political power to continue to oppress the Blacks. Lynchings were initiated against African Americans, which provoked deep thought in scientist Charles Darwin. He was focused on the science of human difference, but his theory of evolution and survival of the fittest was quickly warped to justify racism. Similar to Blumenbach's "scientific" theory, Darwin's science quickly became a subjective matter to the people. For example, Houston Stewart Chamberlain twisted this idea to support one of his own, which stated that Jews were a threat to the purity of the Aryan race in Germany. By the 1920s, though still confused and conflicted, there were "standards of whiteness", and the concept of race became well-known as a fact of life, which was a convenient way for 1920's America to begin restricting immigrants to purify the country per the warped standards of Darwin, Gobineua, and Blumenbach.

   As you can see, several ideas come up in each part of the book that was already established in a previous part. In part two, the scholars of the Middle Ages were heavily influenced by Aristotle's idea that climate created physical differences between people. Aristotle's teachings appear again in 1510 as justification for slavery. In part three, when Europeans widely accepted Blumenbach's theory that Caucasians were the superior race, it closely resembled the "natural superiority" that the Greeks suspected they had over the Persians in part one. The four pillars of race mentioned in Aronson's introduction are also regularly referenced in the context of certain historical periods. Going back to Ancient Greece, the first pillar (physical differences) was loosely established. During the Inquisition period in Spain, the second pillar (inherited differences) was established through the idea of "pure blood" and religious purity. These are just some examples of numerous repeating patterns and themes throughout Aronson's writing that effectively connects the events of the ancient past with our modern history. So far, the interconnected events and main ideas in Race are best summed up by Aronson himself:

" 'Race' is both the modern version of ancient divisions and entirely a product of our time".