Scholarly marriage patterns and Jewish overachievement
This post is based on quotes from Stampfer, S. (2010). Families, Rabbis and Education: Essays on Traditional Jewish Society in Eastern Europe.
It seems that among Eastern European Jews, being a promising Torah scholar made you an attractive prospect for arranged marriages. If a male's reproductive success was highly correlated with his academic potential (because he could marry into a richer family), and if moreover his wife was likely to be rather intelligent herself (since the smartest merchants would probably make the most money), this almost sounds like a selective-breeding program occurring through historical accident.
But I'm not sure I'm saying anything new here. It just surprised me that something like an intelligence selection effect, which I long thought probably took place somewhere, seems fairly well documented. It's possible it was based on Torah study. I think successful Torah study requires almost the same attributes as math and science, i.e., reasoning within complex systems. Apparently this took place over hundreds of years, probably enough for genetic selection effects to emerge, although I'm not sure here. (This may especially explain why successful Jews were so heavily clustered before the war, especially around Budapest.)
Having a prominent scholar for a son-in-law seems to have been a kind of conspicuous consumption (note that studying had to take place in public, rather than at home): "Study in a beit midrash was a public demonstration of the father-in-law’s economic stature and also a public demonstration of his commitment to the religious values current in Jewish society. Everyone who entered the study hall and saw the son-in-law sitting and studying knew that the father-in-law was well off and could support a young couple for a long period of time in addition to meeting the needs of his immediate family. The choice of a scholar as a son-in-law and the financial investment in support of Torah study was visible proof of a strong and deep love of Torah. This was in many respects a Jewish version of the conspicuous consumption that was common in other societies in very different ways." (p.19)
- This was quite costly: "During these years, the young groom would devote most of his time to the study of Talmud—usually in the local study hall (beit »idrash). In some cases the groom left for study ina yeshiva while his wife remained in her father’s house. A young groom of 12 or 13 never set out to earn a living immediately after his wedding. It is obvious that most Jewish fathers of young women were not able to extend support of this scope to all of their sons-in-law, and often not to any of them. The cost of supporting a young scholar who studied all day in the local study hall or yeshiva was not insignificant. If the young bride quickly became a mother, the costs mounted. Supporting a son-in-law and his family was a luxury that only few could afford." (p. 15)
It seems that attractiveness among Eastern European Jews was heavily based on scholarliness: "Physical strength and power were not seen as the determinants of a handsome man. Since commitment and scholarliness were valued, slim fingers and slight figure—which suggested an ascetic lifestyle and studiousness—were considered attractive among men." (p.32) "From the sixteenth century on, the ideal husband for an Eastern European Jewish girl was the scholar, the diligent, promising yeshivah student. Hence the criteria for the bride were that she be the daughter of well-to-do parents who were eager and able to support the scholar and his young family during the early years of their marriage, in an arrangement known as kest. Offering kest allowed the husband to continue his studies, while the bride, ideally an industrious, strong, healthy young woman, established a business of her own that would eventually enable her to take upon herself the financial responsibility for her husband and their children." (p. 44)
Although I have found nothing saying that academic potential was anywhere near the most important thing, these quotes do suggest it mattered: "For example, "Rabbi Yisra’el Meir Kagan (Hakohen) (the Hafets Hayim, 1838-1933) wrote about rich householders in 1881: 'Once respectful and merciful to the rabbis . . . had desired with all of their hearts to attach themselves to scholars [e.g. bring them into their families via marriage], to support them for a number of years at their table and to cover all of their expenses.'" (p. 22) "Once rich men had vied to marry off daughters to promising scholars and offered to support the young couples for years while the young grooms continued their studies." (p. 116)
Prominent families found sons through professional matchmakers, who also took "learnedness" into consideration: "The great majority of matches were arranged through the agency of others and every eligible person was open to marriage proposals, particularly from professional matchmakers. The figure of the matchmaker, or the shadkhan, was one of the stock figures of east European Jewish literature. Professional matchmakers, who were usually males, did not have an easy task. They had to consider factors such as physical attractiveness, learnedness, wealth, and family background. The effort invested in making a match could be quite remunerative and a successful match yielded a percentage of the marriage gifts to the successful matchmaker." (p. 32)
Cultural values must have made a difference, but they probably interacted with this more biological selection where being a scholar was attractive: "The emphasis on middle-class values impacted in various areas. In east European Jewish society a small percentage of the Jewish population was learned, yet even the working class, which was generally quite unlearned, did not see their children as destined to be equally unlearned." (p. 44)
This complements the selection effect already pointed out by Scott Alexander: "Jews were pushed into cognitively-demanding occupations like banker or merchant [which existed nowhere else in such complexity] and forced to sink or swim. The ones who swam – people who were intellectually up to the challenge – had more kids than the ones who sank, producing an evolutionary pressure in favor of intelligence greater than that in any other ethnic group."