I am not sure I understand what you are saying in the beginning.Could you elaborate further? In the Ancient Times Children of slaves were most often slaves themselves unless their parents were freedmen. Children of freedmen could become slaves anytime if they became bankrupt, if they faced pirates, if they were poor, if their tribe/city/ nation lost the war. In the end what? 30-40% of the population in Roman timea were slaves. Then later in the middle ages societal mobility was possibly even worse. Children of serfs were serfs for literally centuries on end. And inbreeding..pretty much most rural populations were inbred. Because of distance. A villager married people from their village or at most the next village. People didnt move for more than a few kilometres from their place of birth till their death. In multireligious and multinational ancient and old empires it was even more restricted by religion and language/nation. In the Ottoman empire i.e christian village married in the house and the neighboring muslim village married in the house. The only thing that could put a temporary stop to inbreeding were wars and displacing of tribes/conquerors. I dont believe in what you said social dwarvinism. Thats borderline nazism from what you are describing. Different populations are just better adjusted to survive in their environment. People of the Andes are better adapted to survive in high heights than the people of the Steppes. People of the Steppes are better suited to survive in a arid environment with little protein by having lactose enzymes than a Zulu tribe person. Etc etc. Theres no better or worse its just more suited for the conditions that exist/existed in our place of origin.
Then what is your question exactly?? If slaves passed down genes? Every human passes down genes to their offspring. And since most of the genes that are "physical prowess" valued in sports cant be expressed with bad nutrition with limited protein it is irrelevant if someone is a slave or not a slave, black or white or whatever. At most endurance and fat deposits and resistance to diseases.
The differences between European slavery and slavery as practiced in the Americas was still different because it wasn't based on race. Anyway this is a discussion probably best served in another thread. For this thread slavery in other parts of the world either didn't try or wasn't able to breed humans for traits either.
I don’t think it does. Other than perhaps an elite athlete deciding to marry another elite athlete. Sometimes it is just not an obvious mixture of genes as well. The greatest basketball player of all time did not come from a great family of athletes and his kids are not great... the greatest baseball player of all time is the same... ditto for best football player. The greatest high school sprinter in 20+ years is a white kid from Houston that only started sprinting two years ago. So at the end of the day AA are no different than anyone else from a genetic specialization stand point.
