Main  Contacts  
Table of contents
PREFACE
CHAPTER-1-2
CHAPTER-3
CHAPTER-4-5-6-7
CHAPTER-8-9
CHAPTER-10-11
CHAPTER-12-13-14-15
CHAPTER-16-17
CHAPTER-18-19
CHAPTER-20-21-22
CHAPTER-23-24-25
CHAPTER-26-27-28
CHAPTER-29-30
CHAPTER-31.1
CHAPTER-31.2
CHAPTER-31.3
CHAPTER-32
CHAPTER-33
CHAPTER-34-35-36-37-38
CHAPTER-39-40-41-42
CHAPTER-43-44-45
CHAPTER-46-47
CHAPTER-48
CHAPTER-49-50
CHAPTER-51
CHAPTER-52-53
The Sex Life of the Gods. Michael Knerr. CHAPTER-1-2
CHAPTER-3
CHAPTER-4
CHAPTER-5-6
CHAPTER-7-8
CHAPTER-9-10
CHAPTER-11-12
CHAPTER-13-14
CHAPTER-15-16
CHAPTER-17-18

 

 

=Consanguineous Marriages= 

 

Consanguinity means blood relationship, and consanguineous marriages 

are marriages between near blood relatives. The physician is 

frequently consulted as to the permissibility or danger of marriages 

between near relations. The question generally concerns first cousins, 

second cousins, uncle and niece, and nephew and aunt. 

 

The popular idea is that consanguineous marriages are bad _per se_. 

The children of near relatives, such as first cousins, are apt to be 

defective, deaf and dumb, blind, or feebleminded, and what not. This 

popular idea, as so many popular ideas are, is wrong. And still there 

is of course, as there always is, some foundation for it. The matter, 

however, is quite simple. 

 

We know that many traits, good and bad, are transmitted by heredity. 

And naturally when traits are possessed by both father and mother they 

stand a much greater chance of being transmitted to the offspring than 

if possessed by one of the parents alone. Now then, if a certain bad 

trait, such as epilepsy or insanity, is present in a family that trait 

is present in both cousins, and the likelihood of children from such a 

marriage inheriting that trait is much greater than when the parents 

are strangers, the taint being present in the family of only one of 

the parents. But if there be no hereditary taint in the cousins' 

family, and, still more, if the family is an intelligent one, if there 

are geniuses in the family, then there cannot be the slightest 

objection to marriage between cousins, and the children of such 

marriages are apt to inherit in a strong degree the talents or genius 

of their ancestors. In short, if the family is a bad one, one below 

par, then marriage between cousins or between uncle and niece should 

be forbidden. If the family is a good one, above par, then marriage 

between relatives of that family should be encouraged. 

 

The idea that the children from consanguineous marriages are apt to be 

deaf and dumb has no foundation in fact. Recent statistics from 

various asylums in Germany, for instance, have shown that only about 

five per cent. of the deaf and dumb children were the offspring of 

consanguineous marriages. If 95 per cent, of the deaf and dumb had 

_non_-consanguineous parents, how could one say that even in the other 

five per cent, the consanguinity was the cause? If it were the other 

way around, then of course we could blame consanguinity. As it is, we 

can assume even in this five per cent, a mere coincidence, and we have 

no right to say that consanguinity and deaf and dumbness stand in the 

relation to each other of cause and effect. 

 

It is interesting to know that among the Egyptians, Persians, and 

Incas of Peru close consanguineous marriages were very common. The 

Egyptian kings generally married their sisters. This was common custom 


Page 1 from 8: [1]  2   3   4   5   6   7   8   Forward