Is it racist that white makes the first move in a game of chess?
Why would that be racist? Are you aware that black has advantages of its own by going last? Sure, statistically speaking white is more likely to win, but that may be more a result of the decisions that both players make while playing the game, as opposed to the extra turn white receives.
One advantage with being black is that you can see what white’s opening move is going to be. If you are a decent chess player, you will be able to know what the best options are for the first few moves that are played, since unlike middle game scenarios, there are only so many genuine moves that black can make in countering white’s play.
Above: Paul Morphy Playing Johann Lowenthal (1850)
By the fifth or sixth move, however, there are so many possibilities a player can make that by that point, any advantage that white may have initially gained by going first would have been cancelled by black responding accordingly based on white’s play, added by the near unlimited scenarios which can unfold throughout the course of an average game. The claim that there are more ways a chess game can unfold than there are atoms in the universe is therefore not an exaggeration; and neither are the advantages and disadvantages which both white and black face.
Above: A Fraction of the Atoms in the Universe
There was a time when there was no official rule regarding which colour went first; allowing either white and black could go first. It was not until the late nineteenth century that it became standard for white to go first and black to go last in the wake of chess evolving into a serious competitive game as opposed to its original roots as a social and even gambling game. The rule was largely introduced and enforced in tournament play from the late 1800s as a way to prevent ugly disputes regarding who would make the first move. Two pawns, one of each colour, would be hidden behind a referee or official in each hand and one or both players selected a hand. The colour pawn they chose would be the colour they would be stuck with.
Chess itself has changed over the millennia, and it was not until after 1497 with the publishing of Luis Ramirez de Lucena’s chess book that the game started to become noticeably similar to the version of chess that is known today. In fact, it is quite probable that until fairly recently in the game’s history there were many versions of the game being played by different people. Some versions of chess actually used a dice, and the number rolled dictated what pieces could or could not be moved.
Above: A Page From Ramirez’s Book
Luis Ramírez de Lucena - Wikipedia
This was seen as sacrilege by many Christian, Jewish and Islamic leaders of the time, due to chess being used as a gambling game where stakes could range from monetary losses to the severing of limbs. Chess being regarded as a game of chance as opposed to skill, due to the common use of dice, was also seen as being against the religious doctrines of the three main religions.
Above: Luis Ramirez de Lucena
The queen, for example, was by far the weakest piece on the board until only a few hundred years ago, as she could only move one square diagonally, as opposed to the modern queen that is capable of moving forward and diagonally like a modern rook and bishop (the latter was only able to move diagonally three spaces until more recently). In fact, it was Ramirez’s book which made the bishop and queen’s moves identical to modern chess. However, even the horse’s moves continued to evolve until as recently as the eighteenth century when players such as Francois Philidor popularised the modern horse’s ability to hop over other pieces.
Above: Cover of Philidor’s Book with Author’s Image
François-André Danican Philidor - Wikipedia
In the same sense, the colours determining which player goes first is also a fairly recent addition to the game. Whereas at one time, chess was seen as a gambling game or a social pastime: modern players tend to take the game far more seriously, with some players preferring to have the opening move while other players reportedly do better in countering their opponents. While chess may have been originally intended as a social pastime: the need for distinguishing who would go first was not as important, since most people playing chess as a social occasion were unlikely to be skilled. Additionally, the rules of chess were far less uniform than they are today.
Above: 1876 Painting of Chess Players by Thomas Eakins
Back then, there were probably hundreds of versions of the game being played, with the use of rolling dices to determine which piece would move next being a common example. Furthermore, even Bobby Fischer had sought to create an alternative version of chess which has been named by some as Fischer chess. Effectively, the major difference to Fischer chess compared to the chess that is currently being played, is that a player would have the right to choose where to place their rook, horse and bishop before the start of a game with the intention of creating more opening moves and scenarios, as Fischer complained that the current version of the game was too repetitive with its limited opening moves.
Above: Alleged Sketch of a Young Hitler and Lenin Playing Chess in 1909
Pictured: Hitler playing chess with Lenin
Interestingly, until as recently as the start of the 1900s, some chess rules did state that an opponent had to inform another player that their queen was either in danger or was in danger if moved to a certain square by calling “check” due to the modern queen’s power on the board being so unparalleled that it usually meant instant defeat for the player losing their queen. This rule was quietly dropped as more players became skilled enough to avoid losing their queen on a regular basis, added by chess becoming a fast-paced game, as opposed to the three or four days of playing that the older, more social version of the game typically took.
Above: Some Claim that the Chess Queen Represents the Virgin Mary
Chess has changed dramatically in its history. And while there is evidence that the game has been referenced for thousands of years with the word itself going back to at least the age of Charlemagne, if not earlier: it is almost a certainty that if a player from before the 1500s were to come play a game with a modern player, they would likely have no idea how to play our version and vice versa, despite both players calling their version of the game by the same name. It is similar to how Europeans call soccer football while Americans and Canadians use opposite terms; only in the case of chess, it is the rules as opposed to the name that has significantly changed.
Above: Replica of the Isle of Lewis Chess Board
Scientists Find Oldest Chess Piece
And since the rule making white the first piece to move on the board has only been around for about a century, I can state that it is safe to presume that if the creators of this particular rule were attempting to make a racist point about it, like-minded folks could just as easily have taken the initiative in the centuries before the rule existed.
No. So, here’s the thing. Chess was believed to have been invented in China 1,500 years ago. This then made it’s way to India and onwards into Persia, each time modifying the shape and colour of the set a little, but in essence the set of black and earthy brown/black colours were no more representative of race than black and white stones found next to a stream. Indeed, that’s very often how some of the sets were made.
Now, this means you have had brown and green:
White and Red:
White and brown:
Chrome:
Frosted glass:
Or even shot glass :)
It never started with racism and hasn’t evolved into racism. Plus, even the rules don’t have to be what they are. The standard rules are white goes first, but you can play handicap games with time or pieces. If you don’t like the casual games for that reason, as daft as I find it is, though I accept some folk may find they see it that way, then change it to restore balance.
