ArticlePDF Available

The Intelligence of Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews in Serbia

Authors:

Abstract

The intelligence of 136 adult Jews in Serbia was tested with Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices. The sample had a British IQ of 103.5, significantly higher than the IQ of 100 of Northern and Central Europeans and of 91 in Serbia. The 30 individuals who identified themselves as Sephardi had a lower IQ (100.3) than the 22 who identified themselves as Ashkenazi (103.8), but most of the sample identified themselves as mixed Sephardi and Ashkenazi showing that the Sephardim and Ashkenazim are well integrated in Serbia.
MANKIND QUARTERLY 2015 55:4 352-359
352
The Intelligence of Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews in Serbia
Richard Lynn*
University of Ulster, Coleraine, Northern Ireland
Jelena Čvorović
Institute of Ethnography, Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences,
Belgrade, Serbia
*Corresponding author: lynnr540@aol.com
The intelligence of 136 adult Jews in Serbia was tested with Raven’s
Standard Progressive Matrices. The sample had a British IQ of 103.5,
significantly higher than the IQ of 100 of Northern and Central Europeans
and of 91 in Serbia. The 30 individuals who identified themselves as
Sephardi had a lower IQ (100.3) than the 22 who identified themselves as
Ashkenazi (103.8), but most of the sample identified themselves as mixed
Sephardi and Ashkenazi showing that the Sephardim and Ashkenazim
are well integrated in Serbia.
Key Words: Intelligence, Jews, Serbia, Progressive Matrices
Following the emancipation of the Jews in most of Europe in the nineteenth
century, it began to be asserted that Jews have an exceptionally high average
level of intelligence. In Britain, one of the first to make this assertion was Lord
Ashley, who observed in 1847 that “The Jews are a people of very powerful
intellect… they present, in proportion to their numbers, a far larger list of men of
genius and learning than could be exhibited by any gentile country. Music, poetry,
medicine, astronomy, occupied their attention, and in every field they were more
than a match for their competitors” (Vital, 1999, p. 179). Francis Galton (1869,
p.47) also believed the Jews are a highly intelligent people, writing in his
Hereditary Genius that they “appear to be rich in families of high intellectual
breeds”. In France, the Count de Gobineau (1853) discussed the cultural and
intellectual achievements of different peoples and concluded that the Aryans
(Northern Europeans) and the Jews were the two most intelligent peoples. In the
LYNN, R. & ČVOROVIĆ, J. THE INTELLIGENCE OF JEWS IN SERBIA
353
United States, the physician Madison Marsh (1874, p.343) wrote that the Jews
have “high average intelligence,” and in 1898 Mark Twain (1985, p.12) wrote that
the Jewish “contribution to the world’s list of great names in literature, science,
art, music, finance, medicine, and abstruse learning is way out of proportion to
the weakness of his numbers”.
This contention was frequently reiterated in the twentieth century. In Britain,
John Fraser (1915, pp. 30-1) in his book The Conquering Jew advanced the
thesis that the principal reason for Jewish achievement is that Jews are more
intelligent than Christians: "in alertness and knowledge, the Jew is the superior of
the Christian; the struggle between the sons of the North, with their blond hair and
sluggish intellects, and the sons of the Orient, with their black eyes, is an unequal
one; if the Russian dispassionately spoke his mind, I think he would admit that
his dislike of the Jew is not so much racial or religious as a recognition that the
Jew is his superior, and in a conflict of wits will get the better of him".
Writing four years later, Joseph Jacobs (1919, pp.55-7) gave an account of
the success of Jews in Germany and attributed this to Jews having high
intelligence: "German Jews are at the present moment at the head of European
intellect", hence, "a determinant number of Jews will produce a larger number of
geniuses than any equal number of men of other races." In the United States,
Thorsten Veblen wrote of the "intellectual pre-eminence of Jews in modern
Europe" (1919, p.35).
With the development of intelligence tests in the first decade of the twentieth
century, evidence began to accumulate substantiating the theory that Jews have
high intelligence. Studies showing this began to be published in the 1920s in
Britain and the United States, and more studies confirming this in the United
States were published from time to time throughout the twentieth century. In the
1960s a landmark book was published by Nathaniel Weyl and Stefan Possony
(1963) and a further book by Weyl (1966), which brought together the evidence
of the high Jewish IQ and achievement and discussed the reasons for this.
By the end of the twentieth century, it continued to be asserted that Jews
have a high IQ. Herrnstein & Murray (1994, p.275) wrote that "Whenever the
subject of group differences comes up one of the questions sure to be asked is
'Are Jews really smarter than everyone else?’” They showed that in the United
States Jews obtained an average IQ of 112.6 in relation to 100 for non-Jewish
Whites. Others who have reviewed the evidence on Jewish intelligence and
concluded that Jews have a high IQ include MacDonald (1994, pp.188-190);
Eysenck (1995, p.159): "as far as Jews are concerned, there is no question that
they score very highly on IQ tests"; and Michael Levin, who has written: “in every
MANKIND QUARTERLY 2015 55:4
354
society in which they have participated, Jews have eventually been recognised
(and disliked) for their exceptional talent” (1997, p.132).
The studies of the intelligence of the Jews have been reviewed by the first
author and are summarized in Lynn (2011, p. 316). This summary presents the
IQ evidence for the four principal ethnic populations of Jews. These are the
Ashkenazim, who are indigenous to northern and central Europe, but most of
whom are now in the United States and Israel; the Sephardim who were resident
in Spain until they were expelled in 1492, when they dispersed to various
locations, principally to the Balkans; the Mizrahim, who were indigenous to North
Africa and the Near East, most of whom are now in Israel; and the Ethiopian Jews,
who were indigenous to Ethiopia, and most of whom are also now in Israel. The
first three of these groups have some genetic affinity as they are all descended
from the same original stock in Palestine, as shown by Hammer et al (2000) and
Ostrer and Skorecki (2013). Ethiopian Jews do not have any genetic relationship
with the other Jewish peoples, but are descendants of Ethiopians who converted
to Judaism many centuries ago.
The conclusions of this study are summarized in Table 1. This gives the IQs
of the four ethnic Jewish populations in relation to a British IQ of 100 (sd of 15)
(column 1), the IQs of the Gentiles among whom these four Jewish populations
lived given in Lynn (2006) (column 2), and the difference between the two (column
3). The first row shows that the Ashkenazim have an IQ of 110, the Northern and
Central Europeans among whom they lived have an IQ of 100, and there is a
difference between the two of 10 IQ points. The Ashkenazi IQ of 110 is based on
studies in the United States, Britain, Canada and Poland. The second row shows
that theSephardim have an IQ of 98; and Europeans in the Balkans among whom
they lived have an IQ of 92.5, and there is a difference between the two of 5.5 IQ
points. The third row shows that the Mizrahim have an IQ of 91, the Arabs in the
Near East and North Africa among whom they lived have an IQ of 84, and there
is a difference between the two of 7 IQ points. The fourth row shows that the
Ethiopian Jews have an IQ of 68, the Ethiopians among whom they lived have an
IQ of 67. Thus, the IQ of 68 of the Ethiopian Jews is approximately the same as
that of other Ethiopians and sub-Saharan Africans given in Lynn (2006).
The IQ of the Sephardim is the least well-established of the four principal
ethnic Jewish populations. There have been no studies of the intelligence of the
Sephardim in the Balkans. Their IQ of 98 was estimated from the data presented
by Benbassa & Rodrigue (1995, p. 191) that in Israel the Sephardim fall about
midway between the Ashkenazim and the Mizrahim on a number of socio-
economic phenomena including average earnings and educational attainment.
LYNN, R. & ČVOROVIĆ, J. THE INTELLIGENCE OF JEWS IN SERBIA
355
Table 1. IQs of Jews and Gentiles.
Jews
IQ
Non-Jews
IQ
IQ difference
Ashkenazim
110
North/central
Europeans
100
10.0
Sephardim
98
Balkans
92.5
5.5
Mizrahim
91
Arabs
84
7.0
Ethiopians
68
Ethiopians
67
1.0
To fill this gap in the research literature, we report here a study of the
intelligence of Ashkenazim and Sephardim in the Balkans.
Method
The sample consists of Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews in Serbia. Jews have
been present in Serbia since Roman times. In the late 15th century, a large
number of Jews who had been expelled from Spain settled permanently in the
Balkans, including Serbia. Since that time approximately 80% of Serbian Jews
were Ladino-speaking Sephardi Jews, and 20% were Yiddish-speaking
Ashkenazi Jews. During the Second World War the Serbian Jewish population
was almost completely destroyed in the Holocaust. In the early 1990s there were
around 2500 Jews resident in Serbia. In the 2011 census there were 1185 Jews
in Serbia, with approximately 40% in Vojvodina (mostly in Novi Sad, a city in
Vojvodina, about 200 kilometers from Belgrade), and approximately 60% in
Belgrade, the capital city (Census Serbia, 2011).
In the present research, Jews were recruited through personal contacts and
community organizations led by the local rabbi, who heads the only remaining
functioning synagogue in Serbia, the Belgrade Synagogue. Personal in-depth
interviews were conducted in 2013 of Jews in Belgrade and Novi Sad. The data
collected include intelligence, age, gender, group membership (Sephardi or
Ashkenazi), complete genealogies including marital and reproductive histories.
The sample consisted of 136 Jewish adults (62 men and 74 women) with an
average age of 54.5 years.
The intelligence of the sample was tested with Raven’s Standard Progressive
Matrices (SPM). This is the most widely used of all “culture-reduced” tests,
measuring reasoning ability, general intelligence and Spearman’s g(Jensen
1998). The test has 60 diagrammatic puzzles with a missing part to be chosen
from several options. The participants were not paid for their participation and
there was no time limit placed on completing the test. Approximately two-thirds of
the sample were tested individually and one third was group-tested at the Annual
Jewish Family Seminar outside Belgrade.
MANKIND QUARTERLY 2015 55:4
356
Results
During the investigation, it was found that Ashkenazim and Sephardim are
well integrated. Only 22 of the participants identified themselves as Ashkenazi
and 30 as Sephardi, while 84 identified themselves as mixed. Table 2 gives the
SPM means and SDs for the Ashkenazi, Sephardi and Mixed groups. These are
followed by the American percentiles (US/PC) obtained in 1993 and given in the
American standardization sample by Raven et al (1996, p. 65, Table SPM 1). The
American percentiles are given because there are no satisfactory British adult
norms for the SPM. The next column (US/IQ) gives the American IQ equivalents
of the American percentiles. The last column gives the British IQ equivalents of
the American IQs obtained by deducting 2 IQ points from the American IQs in
accordance with the procedure adopted in Lynn (2006). Thus, the last row gives
a British IQ of 103.5 for the total sample. The Ashkenazim obtained a higher mean
score than the Sephardim but the difference is not statistically significant
(t=1.185). No adjustment to these IQs is made for a possible “Flynn effect”
increase in theBritish IQ because there was no increase in the SPM among adults
in Britain from 1979 to 2008 (Lynn, 2009).
Table 2. Means and standard deviations of Serbian Jews on the Standard
Progressive Matrices (SPM) test, US percentile, and IQ according to United
States and British norms.
Group
N
SPM raw score
US IQ
British IQ
mean
SD
Ashkenazim
22
53.3
4.0
105.8
103.8
Sephardim
30
51.4
6.6
102.3
100.3
Mixed
84
53.7
5.5
106.6
104.6
Total
136
53.2
5.5
105.5
103.5
Discussion
The results show three points of interest. First, the Jewish sample as a whole
obtained an IQ of 103.5. This is higher than the IQ of 100 of the Northern and
Central Europeans and confirms previous studies finding that Jews in Europe
have a higher IQ than non-Jewish Europeans. Second, the IQ of 103.5 of the
Jewish sample as a whole is substantially higher than the IQ of 88 for Serbia
reported by Rushton & Čvorović (2009) and of 91 for Serbia given in the most
recent calculations of national IQs given by Meisenberg & Lynn (2011) and Lynn
& Vanhanen (2012). This 12.5 points advantage of Jews in Serbia compared with
the general population confirms previous studies summarized in Table 1 showing
LYNN, R. & ČVOROVIĆ, J. THE INTELLIGENCE OF JEWS IN SERBIA
357
that Jews obtain significantly higher IQs than the populations among whom they
live.
Third, our objective to obtain an IQ for Sephardic Jews in Serbia had only
limited success. We did find that the Sephardi had a lower IQ (100.3) than the
Ashkenazi (103.8), as predicted. However, this is only a 3.5 IQ point difference.
Further, as noted above only 30 of the participants identified themselves as
Sephardim, and only 22 as Ashkenazim, and this difference is not statistically
significant. Most of the sample (N=84) identified themselves as mixed and their
IQ of 104.6 was slightly but not significantly higher than that of the Sephardim and
Ashkenazim. It is evident that the Sephardim and Ashkenazim are well integrated
in Serbia through intermarriage over a number of generations and even those
who identify themselves as Sephardim and Ashkenazim probably have some
mixed ancestry.
References
Benbassa, E. & Rodrigue, A. (1995). The Jews of the Balkans. Oxford: Blackwell.
Census Serbia (2011). Попис становништва, домаћинстава и станова . у Републици
Србији: Становништво према националној припадности - „Oстали“ етничке
заједнице са мање од 2000 припадника и двојако изјашњени.
(www.popis2011.stat.rs).
Eysenck, H.J. (1995). Genius: The Natural History of Creativity, Vol. 12. Cambridge:
University Press.
Fraser, J. (1915). The Conquering Jew. London: Cassell.
Galton, F. (1869). Hereditary Genius. London: Macmillan.
Gobineau, A. de (1853). Essai sur L’inegalite des Races Humaines. Paris: Didot.
Hammer, M.F., Redd, A.J. & Wood, E.T. (2000). Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish
populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences 97: 6769-6774.
Herrnstein, R.J. & Murray, C. (1994). The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in
American Life. New York: Free Press.
MANKIND QUARTERLY 2015 55:4
358
Jacobs, J. (1919). Jewish Contributions to Civilisation. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication
Society.
Jensen, A.R. (1998). The g Factor: The Science of Mental Ability. Westport CT: Praeger.
Levin, M. (1997). Why Race Matters. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Lynn, R. (2006). Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis. Athens, GA:
Washington Summit Books.
Lynn, R. (2009). Fluid intelligence but not vocabulary has increased in Britain, 1979-2008.
Intelligence 37: 249-255.
Lynn, R. (2011). The Chosen People: A Study of Jewish Intelligence and Achievements.
Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Publishers.
Lynn, R. & Vanhanen, T. (2012). Intelligence: A Unifying Construct for the Social
Sciences. London: Ulster Institute for Social Research.
MacDonald, K. (1994). A People that Shall Dwell Alone. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Marsh, M. (1874). Jews and Christians. The Medical Surgical Reporter 30: 343-344.
Meisenberg, G. & Lynn, R. (2011). Intelligence: A measure of human capital in nations.
Journal of Social, Political & Economic Studies 36: 421-454.
Ostrer, H. & Skorecki, K. (2013). The population genetics of the Jewish people. Human
Genetics 132: 119-127.
Raven, J., Court, J.H. & Raven, J.C. (1996). Standard Progressive Matrices. Oxford, UK:
Oxford Psychologists Press.
Rushton J.P. & Čvorović J. (2009). Data on the Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices
from Four Serbian Samples.Personality and Individual Differences 46: 483-486.
Twain, M. (1985) [1898]. Concerning the Jews. Philadelphia: Running Press.
Veblen, T. (1919). The intellectual pre-eminence of the Jews in modern Europe. Political
Science Quarterly 34: 33-42.
Vital, D. (1999). A People Apart: The Jews in Europe, 1789-1939. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
LYNN, R. & ČVOROVIĆ, J. THE INTELLIGENCE OF JEWS IN SERBIA
359
Weyl, N. (1966). The Creative Elite in America. Washington, DC: Public Affairs Press.
Weyl, N. & Possony, S. (1963). The Geography of Intellect. Chicago: Henry Regnery.
Article
Full-text available
Mihver Devletleri, 18 Nisan 1941 tarihinde Yugoslavya Krallığı'nı işgal ederek topraklarını kendi aralarında paylaşmıştır. Sırbistan'da ise Ulusal Kurtuluş Hükümeti adında Almanya'nın güdümünde bir devlet kurulmuş, Başbakanlığına da Sırp General Milan Nedić getirilmiştir. Nedić'in Başbakanlığa getirilmesinden sonra yapılan propaganda faaliyetleri ile Müttefik Devletleri ve Yahudiler, Sırbistan'ın ulusal düşmanları olarak inşa edilmeye başlanmıştır. Bu amaçla Nedić hükümeti döneminde Belgrad'ta 22 Ekim 1941-19 Ocak 1942 tarihleri arasında Büyük Masonluk Karşıtı Sergi (BMKS) düzenlenmiş ve bu sergide yer alan materyaller üzerinden hem Müttefik Devletlerine hem de Yahudilere yönelik nefret söylemine yönelinmiştir. Çalışmada Büyük Masonluk Karşıtı Sergi'de yer alan materyaller üzerinden Müttefik Devletleri'nin ve Yahudilerin ne şekilde Sırplar nezdinde düşman olarak inşa edildiğinin ortaya konulması amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla çalışma kapsamında belirlenen görseller, göstergebilimsel açıdan analiz edilerek, düşman inşasında kullanılan söylemlerin ortaya konulmasına çalışılmıştır. Çalışma sonucunda, BMKS yoluyla Müttefik Devletlerin Yahudilerin denetimi altında olduğu ve Siyonizm adına hareket ettiği mesajının verildiği öne sürülmekte ve bu şekilde Yahudilerin Sırpların düşmanı olduğu algısının yerleştirilmesine çalışıldığı iddiasında bulunulmaktadır. Axis Powers occupied Kingdom of Yugoslavia on April 18, 1941 and partitioned its territory among themselves. A state called as Government of National Salvation which was led by Germany in Serbia was founded and Serbian General Milan Nedić was appointed as prime minister. After Nedić became prime minister, Allied States and Jews began to be constructed as Serbia's national enemies with propaganda activities. For this purpose, the Grand Anti-Masonic Exhibition was held in Belgrade between 22 October 1941 and 19 January 1942 during the Nedić government and hate speech was developed against both Allied States and Jews through materials in the exhibition. In the study, it was aimed to reveal how Allied States and Jews were constructed as enemies in the eyes of Serbs through materials in the Grand Anti-Masonic Exhibition. For this purpose, visuals determined within the scope of the study were analyzed in terms of semiotics and it was tried to reveal discourses used in enemy construction. As a result of the study, it is asserted that through the exhibition the message was given that the Allied States are under the control of the Jews and working for the Zionism. The study, in this context, claims that the perception of Jews are the enemies of the Serbs was tried to be constructed in the society.
Article
Full-text available
The focus of this research is on the function of the holiday Purim in the life of Belgrade Jewish community. In diachronic perspective we are looking at general and local characteristics of the holiday, and different levels of its celebration (private, public sphere). In the studied community this holiday has undergone a transformation from a religious to a secular feast followed by revitalization of its religious context. This paper analyzes the mechanisms of various levels of recovery and conceptualization of this holiday, on the institutionalized level and in the form of spontaneous personal initiatives. We are looking at different functions of this holiday in broad social context and their diachronic changes. [Projekat Ministarstva nauke Republike Srbije, br. 177027: Multietnicitet, multukulturalizam, migracije savremeni procesi]
Article
Full-text available
"Human capital" is a key requirement for the establishment and maintenance of effective institutions. It is the ultimate requirement for innovation, efficient use of resources, and economic growth. This contribution describes two measures of cognitive human capital: the average IQ of the population, and the performance of school children on international scholastic assessment tests in mathematics, science, and reading. These two measures are shown to be closely correlated at the country level, and distinct from traditional measures of education. A measure of human capital is described that is derived from IQ and school achievement. Data based on measured IQ and/or school achievement are given for 168 countries and territories, and estimates based on neighboring countries with similar population, culture and economy are provided for 28 additional countries.
Article
Full-text available
Human capital" is a key requirement for the establishment and maintenance of effective institutions. It is the ultimate requirement for innovation, efficient use of resources, and economic growth. This contribution describes two measures of cognitive human capital: the average IQ of the population, and the performance of school children on international scholastic assessment tests in mathematics, science, and reading. These two measures are shown to be closely correlated at the country level, and distinct from traditional measures of education. A measure of human capital is described that is derived from IQ and school achievement. Data based on measured IQ and/or school achievement are given for 168 countries and territories, and estimates based on neighboring countries with similar population, culture and economy are provided for 28 additional countries. Japan is a rich country, and Nigeria is a poor country. There is no lack of explanations for this discrepancy. Some authors have offered geography as an ultimate explanation for economic disparities between countries and world regions (Diamond, 1997; Hibbs & Olsson, 2004; Nordhaus, 2006). Everything else being equal, countries with greater natural resources and greater proximity to world markets should be richer. Nigeria has more natural resources than Japan and is closer to the old industrial centers of Europe. Therefore Nigeria should be richer than Japan. History and culture fare not much better than geography as