Consanguineous Marriages in the American Population by George B. Louis Arner
page 8 of 115 (06%)
page 8 of 115 (06%)
|
see why the men who discovered the use of fire, and selected the wild
forms of certain animals for domestication and of vegetables for cultivation, should not find out that children of unsound constitution were born of nearly related parents."[2] [Footnote 2: Maine, _Early Law and Custom_, p. 228.] Much space is given to the alleged "innate horror of incest," and frequent appeals are made to Scripture, wrongly assuming that the marriage of cousins is prohibited in the Mosaic Law. The origin of "prohibited degrees" is only conjectural. The Christian Church apparently borrowed its prohibitory canons from the Roman Law,[3] and a dispensation is still necessary before a Catholic can marry his first cousin. However, such dispensations have always been easy to obtain, especially by royal families, and even the marriage of uncle and niece sometimes occurs, as among the Spanish Habsburgs, and as recently as 1889 in the House of Savoy. [Footnote 3: Luckock, _History of Marriage_, p. 282.] The prohibition of the marriage of first cousins was removed in England by the Marriage Act of 1540,[4] but by this time the idea of the harmfulness of kinship marriage was so thoroughly impressed upon the people that they were very prone to look askance at such unions, and if they were followed by any defective progeny, the fact would be noted, and looked upon as a chastisement visited upon the parents for their sin. Naturally the idea became proverbial, and in some places it has influenced the civil law. |
|