David Brydan

Who they are

The credential question had to be settled externally, because the book itself states none, on the title page, the copyright page or anywhere in the text. He is a professional academic historian of the twentieth century rather than a psychologist, and the book should be read as history written by a historian. That is not a criticism. It is the frame that makes his own declared scope intelligible: he says in the introduction that history cannot tell us whether intelligence is real, what it consists of, or whether it is nature or nurture, and he means it.

He is affiliated with the Centre for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine and with the Global History and History of Democracy research groupings at King's, and his publisher's author note records him as a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society. His previous books are Franco's Internationalists: Social Experts and Spain's Search for Legitimacy, Oxford University Press, 2019, available open access, and Internationalists in European History, Bloomsbury, 2021, co-edited with Jessica Reinisch. He edits the Bloomsbury Histories of Internationalism series and has recent journal articles in the International History Review in 2024 and the Historical Journal in 2023.

The archival work is the reason the book exists, across six repositories in three countries, and it is excellent. The Mass Observation material on ordinary people's experience of being tested, the UNESCO file on the Venezuelan ministry and the Black Education Movement papers at the George Padmore Institute are original and citable.

Two things have to be stated about method. He takes no technical position on heredity and states no heritability figure anywhere. Hereditarian and racial claims appear in the book only as attributed reported speech, from named historical figures, and he asserts none of them in his own voice. He also refutes none of them technically. His method is labelling and genealogy, showing where an idea came from and whom it served. That is a real historical method with real force, and it is not an evidence review, so his rejection of those claims should not be read as a scientific refutation of them. For the state of those questions this site goes to the primary literature.

One observable pattern is recorded here as a pattern in the text, with no motive characterised. Hereditarian figures are judged largely by association and genealogy. Alternative theories, multiple intelligences in particular, are judged by evidence. That asymmetry in the standard of proof is what the pages do. Why is not for this site to say.

Accuracy on the historical spine is good. Of eleven checkable items, nine were confirmed. One is a probable one-year slip on the coinage of the word eugenics, which is standardly dated to 1883 rather than 1882. One is an inflated figure on army testing, where this site carries about 1.75 million recruits across 1917 to 1919 rather than almost two million within a year.

No peer-reviewed academic review of the book could be found as of 24 September 2026. Given publication in February 2026 and scholarly review lead times of twelve to twenty-four months, that is unsurprising. Absence of review is neither endorsement nor criticism, and the question should be reopened in 2027.

Key papers

Brydan, D. (2026), Smart: A History of Intelligence, Footnote Press, February 2026. The book this site reads him through, with external verification of its historical spine.

Brydan, D. (2019), Franco's Internationalists: Social Experts and Spain's Search for Legitimacy, Oxford University Press. Available open access.

Brydan, D., & Reinisch, J., eds. (2021), Internationalists in European History, Bloomsbury.

Key ideas

Genealogy as critique. Showing where an idea came from and whom it served is a historical method with real force, and it is not an evidence review.

The use rule. Cite him for how intelligence has been defined, measured and used. Never for what it is or how heritable it is.

He asserts no hereditarian claim and refutes none technically. Those claims appear only as attributed reported speech from named historical figures.

The archival contribution is the book's value. Six repositories in three countries, with original material on how being tested was experienced.

An asymmetry in the standard of proof is visible in the text, with hereditarian figures judged by association and rival theories judged by evidence. The pattern is recorded; no motive is attributed.

Discipline-relative evidence metrics. Judging a historian's apparatus by a psychologist's citation conventions produces a false verdict, which is the rule his book forced this site to write down.

---