Genealogy Chat

Was it legal for 1st cousins to marry in 1860? I cannot find a marriage, for ann george and thomas phillips. Am now 90% sure that ann and thomas were 1st cousins, so could they marry?

Hi Lynda, in my husbands tree there are first cousins married this was in 1870. Margaret

It has always been legal in the UK for first cousins to marry. In the 19th century it was quite common. Andrew.

many thanks

I've come across 2 certificates where it says Cousins German - maybe a term used when cousins marry? In both cases the mothers of the couple were sisters. Thanks for the confirmation, Jules

I have two cousins who married in 1937. You can't show this on GR, but can on FTM.

The use of the word german indicates they had an immediate ancestor in common. 'Brothers german' were children of the same parents, distinct from half brothers or brothers-in-law. 'Cousins german' were children of brothers or sisters or, as we identify them today, first cousins.

I am constantly amazed at how this Urban Myth has survived! It has never been illegal for first cousins to marry, although in Victorian times it was put about by the Medical profession that this would result in handicapped/insane children. Of course the Victorian medical profession knew nothing of genetics. Marrying your cousin will not result in handicapped children UNLESS there is a family history of such - Nature doesnt care WHO you have children with, and doesnt punish you for having children with your cousins. When this country was Catholic though, the Church made a nice little earner out of selling dispensations for cousin marriage and I think this is where the myth started, reinforced in Victorian times by know-all-know-nowt doctors. To be fair to the Catholic Church, their reluctance to perform cousin marriages (without a hefty purse) probably stemmed from ancient times when it was observed that marriage between two people who had relatives in common, often resulted in a handicapped or sickly child. This of course was because a faulty gene was being passed on twice, not once. OC

Speaking purely from the point of view of Genetics. I heard once that dog breeders get their best pups from father/daughter or mother/son breeding. I don't know whether anyone can confirm this? In any case it knocks the 'risk of an imperfect child' argument out of the window.

Grampa Jim I think this is correct - if you breed from excellent stock, you get even better stock! Farmers have known this since time immemorial - and also that the reverse applies, if you breed from poor stock, you generally get worse stock. OC

Grampa - yes, you're right. However, after doing this for umpteen generations it can be counter-productive & you need to go sideways to a relation for a couple of generations before coming back into line. It's even done by some on near incestuous lines - mum & dad produce daughter, daughter then mated to uncle or dad.

I think the Ancient Egyptian royal family practised incest, to keep the power within the family and prevent any uppity outsiders getting control. Look what happened when Henry VIII wanted to marry non-royal Anne Boleyn. It all ended in tears. Similarly, one of the reasons that the Lancastrians supported Henry VII's weak claim to the throne is because the Yorkist side was riddled with relatives of Edward IV's wife Elizabeth Woodville. nell