Reproductive unequality in Iceland

[Mmiikkii]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1180299/#!po=21.4286

My goodness, the important part is already in the captions.

 

[Dogger]

It would be interesting to know if it was the social top that is the basis of the current Icelandic population. I would guess that they were the ones who had the best chance of having descendants even generations later.
It would be interesting to know if it was the social top that is the basis of the current Icelandic population. I would guess that they were the ones who had the best chance of having descendants even generations later

 

[Dogger]

It would be interesting to know if it was the social top that is the basis of the current Icelandic population. I would guess that they were the ones who had the best chance of having descendants even generations later.

 

[elghund]

According to this article, fewer than two million Icelanders have been born since its founding in the ninth century. The article also states that 35% of live-born babies in Iceland died by their first birthday in the 1830's and 1840's. In 1700, the population was just over 50,000, and its current population is just 376,000, including five percent of their population who identify as having Polish ancestry and one percent as having Lithuanian. Aside from the high infant mortality in the nineteenth century, I wonder how much of their population was lost to emigration to Scandinavia and elsewhere during those hard times. Chances of surviving an oceanic voyage elsewhere would have been much better than the chances of surviving one's first year of life in Iceland in the 1800s.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2173366