Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Viewing Single Post From: Human Bioderversity in Europe
New Member
Hi everyone. I'm a brand new poster here and I'm obviously someone very interested in HBD. I'll be posting a lot here, and to start, here's something that I recently posted on another forum, one that didn't contain that many people versed on human evolution. I didn't read through all of the posts on this board, so forgive me if some of this strikes you guys as old news. Here I go:

Here is a map I drew graphing the differences in average IQ for the different European nations:

Posted Image

The color codes represent national IQs, rounded up. I split the UK, Spain, and Italy into their constituent regions to show the important regional diversity in those countries. I drew most of these values from Richard Lynn's and Tatu Vanhanen's works, as well as these sources: Lynn, 2010a, Lynn, 2010b, IQ cline in Spain and Italy, IQ vs. Religiosity. Still, some of these are estimates (L & V's).

But the thing that becomes obvious is that—despite a few oddball outliers (e.g., Lithuania, Slovenia)—most of these follow the lines of the major ethnic groups in Europe. Overall, the Germanic groups (English, Germans, Dutch, Scandinavians, Austrians, Swiss) do the best, all with average IQs upwards of 100. Next are the North Slavs (Russians, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Belarusians, Ukrainians), who all have average IQs around 98. The Uralic groups (Finns, Hungarians, and Estonians)—originally from North Asia—also do well, as well as the Germans and Slavs, but they possess some Asian ancestry (something that is rather obvious when one looks at the Hungarian facial averages below).

Poorer showing are the Mediterranean countries, as evidenced by the poor scores of Portugal, southern Spain, southern Italy (with Sicily averaging an IQ of 90) and Greece. The Balkan region, populated by South Slavs, also fares poorly, but population genetics has shown these people are intermixed between the relatively new coming Slavs and the original Mediterranean peoples (mostly Dinaric). And finally, the Celts: the Irish, Scots and Welsh—also fare relatively poorly (except the Welsh), with Ireland averaging 92, and Scotland coming in at about 96.

France, with it's very mixed history, of Celtic (the ancient Gauls), Mediterranean, and Germanic heritage comes in with an average IQ of 98.

The decline in IQ in Spain and Italy can be explained by racial differences in the population; the northern parts of both countries contain a more Germanic stock, whereas the southern parts are more Mediterranean in origin. That the various European groups are separable into these ethnic subtypes becomes visible when you look at these facial averages (from The Postnational Monitor):


English, Dutch, German, Austrian, Swiss, Swedish
Posted ImagePosted Image Posted ImagePosted Image Posted ImagePosted Image Posted ImagePosted Image Posted ImagePosted Image Posted ImagePosted Image


Irish, Welsh
Posted ImagePosted Image Posted Image

North Slavs:

Russian, Polish, Czech, Ukrainian
Posted ImagePosted Image Posted ImagePosted Image Posted ImagePosted Image Posted ImagePosted Image


Lithuanian/Latvian composite:
Posted Image


Finn, Hungarian
Posted ImagePosted Image Posted ImagePosted Image

South Slavs:

Posted ImagePosted Image


Spanish, Italian, Greek
Posted ImagePosted Image Posted ImagePosted Image Posted ImagePosted Image


Posted Image


Posted Image

The previous two images are from Facial Averages of East Europe

Genetic analyses also confirm these relationships.

With the ongoing fiscal troubles in Europe, this has obvious implications. Here's a breakdown of the unemployment rates, as current as I could find them, in the various European countries, grouped by ethnic family, derived from Eurostat, and retrieved from the Google Public Data Explorer, except where otherwise noted. Nothing saying that these numbers are truly comparable from country to country, but it's still interesting to see:

Denmark: 7.1%
Sweden: 7.4%
Norway: 3.3%
Germany: 6.1%
Austria: 3.7%
Luxembourg: 4.6%
Netherlands: 4.3%
England: 7.8%

Lithuania: 15.6%
Latvia: 16.2%

Poland: 9.4%
Czech Republic: 6.4%
Slovakia: 8.4%
Russia: 6.5%
Ukraine: 9.5%
Slovenia: 8.4%
Croatia: 14.7%

Finland: 7.9%
Estonia: 12.8%
Hungary: 9.7%

Ireland: 14.5%
Scotland: 8.1%
Wales: 8.4%

Belgium: 7.5%
France: 9.9%

Spain: 21.2%
Italy: 8%
Greece: 15%
Portugal: 12.3%

Georgia: 16.9%

Armenia: 6.6%, (7.1%)

Note that the Germanic countries are doing fairly well, way ahead of the struggling Mediterranean countries. The Slavic countries are somewhere in between, despite the fact that all have fairly recently adopted market economies. In short, the productivity of Southern Europe lags behind that of the North, and as the IQ data demonstrates, this problem is to an extent intractable.

Some of these groups are very interesting; the Baltic region seems to be important for one reason: this appears to be the source of blue eyes. The Balts are the most blue-eyed people in the world, and the trait spread from there to much of Europe and as far east as Afghanistan it seems. This may have taken place during the barbarian invasions of Rome, as Baltic groups may have hitched a ride with German tribes, possibly the Vandals.

In appearance they appear to be intermediate to Germanic and Slavic groups, as is obvious as seen here going from Swedish, Lithuanian/Latvian, Russian:

Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

The IQ for the Baltic region is somewhat problematic. No values are available for Latvia, only estimates, so I went with Lynn's & Vanhannen's estimates, of 97. L&V originally estimated Lithuania's IQ to be also 97, however in their second book, this was revised all the way down to 91. One paper I found reported a value of 90 based on a 1999 sample of 259 8- to 12-year olds, agreeing with L&V's numbers.

Also, the unemployment data for the Baltic states (Lithuania: 15.6%, Latvia: 16.2%) does support the notion that these countries have slightly lower average IQ's than the countries that surround them. Why the Balts would stand out among the other European groups when much of their histories was shared with them is not clear. Newer measurements are needed (an online IQ test seems to yield values of 97 for the capital cities of both countries).

The Georgians appear to be the descended from the original inhabitants of the Caucasus. In appearance they seem to be similar to the Northern/Western European groups, and who knows, as the Caucasus is commonly considered to be the origin of Europeans (hence the term "Caucasian" and "Caucasoid"), perhaps this is because peoples from this area went on to populate the rest of Europe.
I could find no IQ data for Georgia, so I stuck with L&V's estimate of 94.

The Armenians appear to be their own people, an Indo-European group distinct from all other Indo-Europeans (like the Albanians), but who seem to have genetic and linguistic ties with the Greeks (as is obvious here). That Kim Kardashian is Armenian is obvious looking here:
Posted Image

The Armenians seem to have a reputation internationally similar to the Ashkenazi Jews, that is, as talented middle men. And indeed, it seems historically they have occupied that role. I could find no good IQ data for Armenia, only a reference (in the comments) that states that studies have shown that the IQ of Armenians in Armenia is 94, but of Armenians outside the country it is 107! A prolonged brain drain could have easily produced this result, however, Armenia is also known for a producing disproportionate share of chess champions. It is possible that the country's average IQ is fairly high. Again more study is needed.

Cochran and Harpending argue that the Caucasus was the origin of the original Indo-Europeans, who managed to impose their language and culture across Europe and Asia as far east as Northern India. C&H propose they were able to do this because they were the first true milk-drinkers—the first group to develop lactose tolerance. This gave them a competitive advantage that they used to impose their ways on the people they conquered. The Ossetians who live in the Caucasus are proposed to be their descendents.

Part of this exercise is to understand the origin of these differences. In lieu of The 10,000 Year Explosion, many ethnic and racial differences evolved recently, since the advent of agriculture. Indeed, it was the Greeks, and later the Romans (via the Etruscans), who were the first Europeans to embrace civilization, yet it seems it was the Germans and the Slavs—who embraced civilization later—who came to dominate Europe, especially since the fall of Rome. (The Balkan peoples, who remained continuously in civilization under the Byzantine and later the Ottoman Empire seems to have fallen short today.) But why? One could argue, in the vein that Harpending and Cochran would, that the Germans and the Slavs initially were not well adapted to civilization because after they arrived Europe was plunged into a Dark Age from which it didn't fully emerge until the Renaissance nearly 1000 years later. Perhaps the Germans possessed certain traits that, once shaped by civilization's pacifying influence, allowed them to dominate European history. These are interesting questions for research, now that we know that genes are inextricably linked to historical events.
Offline Profile Quote Post
Human Bioderversity in Europe · The Human Mind