What do you think?
Rate this book
Inequality: A Genetic History
How genomics reveals deep histories of inequality, going back many thousands of years.
Inequality is an urgent global concern, with pundits, politicians, academics, and best-selling books all taking up its causes and consequences. In Inequality , Carles Lalueza-Fox offers an entirely new perspective on the subject, examining the genetic marks left by inequality on humans throughout history. Lalueza-Fox describes genetic studies, made possible by novel DNA sequencing technologies, that reveal layers of inequality in past societies, manifested in patterns of migration, social structures, and funerary practices. Through their DNA, ancient skeletons have much to tell us, yielding anonymous stories of inequality, bias, and suffering.
Lalueza-Fox, a leader in paleogenomics, offers the deep history of inequality. He explores the ancestral shifts associated with migration and describes the gender bias unearthed in these migrations—the brutal sexual asymmetries, for example, between male European explorers and the women of Latin America that are revealed by DNA analysis. He considers social structures, and the evidence that high social standing was inherited—the ancient world was not a meritocracy. He untangles social and genetic factors to consider whether wealth is an advantage in reproduction, showing why we are more likely to be descended from a king than a peasant. And he explores the effects of ancient inequality on the human gene pool. Marshaling a range of evidence, Lalueza-Fox shows that understanding past inequalities is key to understanding present ones.
Inequality is an urgent global concern, with pundits, politicians, academics, and best-selling books all taking up its causes and consequences. In Inequality , Carles Lalueza-Fox offers an entirely new perspective on the subject, examining the genetic marks left by inequality on humans throughout history. Lalueza-Fox describes genetic studies, made possible by novel DNA sequencing technologies, that reveal layers of inequality in past societies, manifested in patterns of migration, social structures, and funerary practices. Through their DNA, ancient skeletons have much to tell us, yielding anonymous stories of inequality, bias, and suffering.
Lalueza-Fox, a leader in paleogenomics, offers the deep history of inequality. He explores the ancestral shifts associated with migration and describes the gender bias unearthed in these migrations—the brutal sexual asymmetries, for example, between male European explorers and the women of Latin America that are revealed by DNA analysis. He considers social structures, and the evidence that high social standing was inherited—the ancient world was not a meritocracy. He untangles social and genetic factors to consider whether wealth is an advantage in reproduction, showing why we are more likely to be descended from a king than a peasant. And he explores the effects of ancient inequality on the human gene pool. Marshaling a range of evidence, Lalueza-Fox shows that understanding past inequalities is key to understanding present ones.
192 pages, Hardcover
Published February 1, 2022
15 people are currently reading
397 people want to read
About the author
Carles Lalueza-Fox
12 books12 followersCarles Lalueza-Fox is a Research Professor at the Institute of Evolutionary Biology (CSIC-UPF). He is a recognized global expert in paleogenomic studies on DNA recovery in extinct species such as the mammoth. Lalueza-Fox has published more than 100 articles in international scientific magazines, and in 2010, participated in the Neanderthal genome project directed by the biologist Svante Pääbo and published in Science magazine.
Currently, Lalueza-Fox is studying prehistoric populations in Europe. Besides his ongoing research, the author is interested in making science accessible to the wider public and has published several books on popular science.
Lalueza-Fox has received various awards for his work in disseminating scientific knowledge. In 2007, he was awarded the City of Barcelona Prize for Scientific Research and in 2018 the Narcís Monturiol medal from the Generalitat of Catalunya.
Currently, Lalueza-Fox is studying prehistoric populations in Europe. Besides his ongoing research, the author is interested in making science accessible to the wider public and has published several books on popular science.
Lalueza-Fox has received various awards for his work in disseminating scientific knowledge. In 2007, he was awarded the City of Barcelona Prize for Scientific Research and in 2018 the Narcís Monturiol medal from the Generalitat of Catalunya.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
November 9, 2022
"I predicted that inequality would differentially influence mortality in the current COVID-19 pandemic"
The author can't distinguish between the effects of a pandemic and society’s response to the pandemic. Or he wouldn't dare. Anyways, a pandemic cannot impose mandates and lockdowns or shutter schools.
The author can't distinguish between the effects of a pandemic and society’s response to the pandemic. Or he wouldn't dare. Anyways, a pandemic cannot impose mandates and lockdowns or shutter schools.
February 20, 2025
Me ha gustado mucho. Este es un inicio en empezar a leer no ficción
January 31, 2023
Interesting short science read melding anthropology, genetics, and history to show how social dynamics, global politics, and gender impact genetics. Overall thesis and organization unclear in intro but got better as book progressed. Despite the subtitle, I wouldn’t say it’s a “genetics” book per se.
January 11, 2024
Me recomendó este libro, un colega arqueólogo, y tengo que decir que mis expectativas eran bajas. Carles hace fácil y entendible la genética y la vincula con problemas actuales y pasados. Este libro es un resumen de la desigualdad desde los inicios de los tiempos y hasta la pandemia del covid del 2020. Además de vincular la genética con la arqueología, y como esta primera, confirma teorías arqueológicas mediante los genomas estudiados en diferentes puntos del mundo. Aunque; Aunque no sepáis nada de genética, este libro es para todo el mundo.
February 1, 2024
Cautiva con sus curiosidades, citas y multitud de referencias históricas. Se nota que el autor es un científico bien documentado. El libro ofrece una perspectiva sobre la evolución de la desigualdad a lo largo del tiempo, explorando su impacto en la genética de forma amena.
Con una narrativa un poco caótica al principio, te va envolviendo a medida que avanza el libro, y presenta conexiones entre momentos históricos clave, proporcionando una comprensión profunda de cómo la desigualdad ha dejado su huella en la sociedad y se evidencia en nuestros genes actuales.
Con una narrativa un poco caótica al principio, te va envolviendo a medida que avanza el libro, y presenta conexiones entre momentos históricos clave, proporcionando una comprensión profunda de cómo la desigualdad ha dejado su huella en la sociedad y se evidencia en nuestros genes actuales.
December 6, 2025
Un llibre més llarg i dens del que pot semblar a primera vista, però que parla de la relació entre la genètica i la desigualtat. Ens parlarà d'arqueologia, d'ADN antic, de genealogies i com des d'estos camps podem tindre una visió sobre la desigualtat de gènere, de poder social, de recursos... Hi ha arguments que es repetixen sovint entre capítols i algun desviament de l'argumentació principal, però fa un recull d'estudis interessants i perspectives noves que ens conviden a reflexionar sobre la desigualtat des de nous punts de vista.
May 27, 2022
Lalueza-Fox presents a rigorous look into the past with the latest genetic tools available to study evidence of ancient inequalities, and how they've impacted the diversity of modern human beings. It can get quite technical for a non-specialized reader, as Lalueza is well delved in both biology and archeology. Anyway, for the most part it is accessible and I find it to be an essential work to understand how one-dimensional and superficial the dominant analysis of inequality tends to be.
July 30, 2022
Paleogenetics was a field that I had never heard of before reading this book. The discussion on inequality caught my eye but the idea that even our genes carried evidences of inequality from ancestral times is a really mind-blowing one.
August 1, 2023
A fantastic book that creates relationships between culture and genetics, the bridge between David Reich and David Anthony.
March 3, 2025
Inequality is entangled in our genomes, but it also casts a long shadow over the future of society. We’ll need to decide sooner than later how we want to face it.
Inequality: A Genetic History is very dense for such a brief endeavor. Lalueza-Fox posits that there is a correlation between social inequalities and genetics.
It almost makes too much sense: In non-egalitarian societies, some people are at the top. Those people have greater access to resources that either benefit them directly (food, shelter) or their genetic offspring (differential access to reproductive partners both in quality and quantity). As a result, they are more likely to pass on their genes than those lower on the totem pole.
If we would like to fight inequality, however, a pertinent question to ask from the field of social psychology is to which extent people view it as a problem that needs to be addressed.
Archaeological data is heavily relied upon. Lalueza-Fox does spell this out clearly for the layperson: Material goods are sometimes found with bodies or in graves. When someone has a lot of these grave goods, we can assume they were wealthy and/or had power in their society. When we examine these remains and contrast them against individuals buried with fewer grave goods, we can make assumptions about the relationship between socioeconomic status and genetics.
From an anthropological perspective, it's possible to make assertions about this relationship using surnames, as surnames are passed to offspring and are often transmitted with generational wealth and other advantages.
Clark found that despite tens of generations...the surname was still a good predictor of social status in twenty-first-century Sweden—along with such variables as wealth, occupation, education, and even longevity.
In general, it takes at least four hundred years for elite surnames to converge with average-income families in society. Even in today’s Britain, Norman surnames (Baskerville, Darcy, Mandeville, Montgomery, Percy, Neville, Punchard, and Talbot) are overrepresented among the country’s elites.
This is partially due to an increasing lack of social mobility related to endogamous marriage practices (related to status, not blood...usually). Lalueza-Fox points out that just a few decades ago, it was common for doctors ($$$$) to marry nurses ($$), but nowadays doctors mostly marry other doctors. Likewise, lawyers marry lawyers. Economically, there is less differentiation within a household than there is across households.
Intergenerational social mobility is lower than we might think in our societies, and this is notably due to the existence of marked assortative mating—that is, people with similar phenotypes tend to mate more often than would be expected if mating were random. Even though we share environments in daily life, small details such as spoken accents or dress can indicate one’s social status, wealth, or educational level to a high degree of precision. Whether conscious or unconscious, assortative mating likely helps perpetuate past social differences.
Relatedly, endogamous marriage practices are a wealth of information for geneticists and anthropologists but a nightmare for public health. Despite the caste system in India being officially abolished in the mid 1900s, everyone still knows what their caste is/would be, and marrying within your caste is still a cultural norm.
This creates a lack of genetic diversity that wreaks havoc on the healthcare system in India (and countries with large expat communities, whether those countries realize it or not) because of increasingly prolific genetic mutations requiring medical intervention. Breeding in a selective circle is genetically hazardous, and if a large enough group does it, it becomes a public health issue.
There are implications beyond ethnic groups in Inequality; in regards to sex, Lalueza-Fox points out that differential reproductive viability (men are fertile from puberty till death whereas women experience menopause and are no longer fertile after ~50 years of age) means that practicing serial monogamy has basically the same genetic impact as polygamy when men are monopolizing the fertile years of their female partners.
Overall, I found it to be an enlightening read, but one that I wouldn't recommend to someone without at least a bachelor's in anthropology, archaeology, or a related field.
Inequality: A Genetic History is very dense for such a brief endeavor. Lalueza-Fox posits that there is a correlation between social inequalities and genetics.
It almost makes too much sense: In non-egalitarian societies, some people are at the top. Those people have greater access to resources that either benefit them directly (food, shelter) or their genetic offspring (differential access to reproductive partners both in quality and quantity). As a result, they are more likely to pass on their genes than those lower on the totem pole.
If we would like to fight inequality, however, a pertinent question to ask from the field of social psychology is to which extent people view it as a problem that needs to be addressed.
Archaeological data is heavily relied upon. Lalueza-Fox does spell this out clearly for the layperson: Material goods are sometimes found with bodies or in graves. When someone has a lot of these grave goods, we can assume they were wealthy and/or had power in their society. When we examine these remains and contrast them against individuals buried with fewer grave goods, we can make assumptions about the relationship between socioeconomic status and genetics.
From an anthropological perspective, it's possible to make assertions about this relationship using surnames, as surnames are passed to offspring and are often transmitted with generational wealth and other advantages.
Clark found that despite tens of generations...the surname was still a good predictor of social status in twenty-first-century Sweden—along with such variables as wealth, occupation, education, and even longevity.
In general, it takes at least four hundred years for elite surnames to converge with average-income families in society. Even in today’s Britain, Norman surnames (Baskerville, Darcy, Mandeville, Montgomery, Percy, Neville, Punchard, and Talbot) are overrepresented among the country’s elites.
This is partially due to an increasing lack of social mobility related to endogamous marriage practices (related to status, not blood...usually). Lalueza-Fox points out that just a few decades ago, it was common for doctors ($$$$) to marry nurses ($$), but nowadays doctors mostly marry other doctors. Likewise, lawyers marry lawyers. Economically, there is less differentiation within a household than there is across households.
Intergenerational social mobility is lower than we might think in our societies, and this is notably due to the existence of marked assortative mating—that is, people with similar phenotypes tend to mate more often than would be expected if mating were random. Even though we share environments in daily life, small details such as spoken accents or dress can indicate one’s social status, wealth, or educational level to a high degree of precision. Whether conscious or unconscious, assortative mating likely helps perpetuate past social differences.
Relatedly, endogamous marriage practices are a wealth of information for geneticists and anthropologists but a nightmare for public health. Despite the caste system in India being officially abolished in the mid 1900s, everyone still knows what their caste is/would be, and marrying within your caste is still a cultural norm.
This creates a lack of genetic diversity that wreaks havoc on the healthcare system in India (and countries with large expat communities, whether those countries realize it or not) because of increasingly prolific genetic mutations requiring medical intervention. Breeding in a selective circle is genetically hazardous, and if a large enough group does it, it becomes a public health issue.
There are implications beyond ethnic groups in Inequality; in regards to sex, Lalueza-Fox points out that differential reproductive viability (men are fertile from puberty till death whereas women experience menopause and are no longer fertile after ~50 years of age) means that practicing serial monogamy has basically the same genetic impact as polygamy when men are monopolizing the fertile years of their female partners.
Overall, I found it to be an enlightening read, but one that I wouldn't recommend to someone without at least a bachelor's in anthropology, archaeology, or a related field.
December 26, 2024
Relatively a short read and full of unique insights and perspectives. While I do enjoy the engaging substance, I would appreciate more connectedness, specifically following the line of viewing inequality via genetics throughout the chapters. This disconnect origin from the beginning and ending, made the reading a bit challenging (in my opinion). Nevertheless, it's a great book on history and covers migration to population with a brevity on politics, economics and scientific stance.
August 14, 2025
An interesting take on inequality through paleogenetics, which surprisingly can tell quite a lot about how early humans lived, for example by looking at how different families were buried, or analysis that shows the health conditions of a particular person. One big finding is that the genomes of the wealthy men of the past live on in much greater numbers of people today, while those of women do not. The author warns that rather than a future of higher diversity, it may actually be one of homogeneity among the rich due to increased assortative mating and the possibility of them paying to modify their genes for favourable attributes. Though at times quite dry and technical, the book is a good reminder than inequality is not a recent phenomenon but has been a feature of most of human history.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews