2006-10-21 07:20:49 · 10 answers · asked by $Sun King$ 7 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
It was a fairly common practice in 19th century Victorian England. It didn't have any stigma, and this was before Mendelian genetics was discovered so the relative risks of genetic inbreeding were unknown. The "risks" of cousins procreating are hightly exaggerated in any case....even siblings procreating rarely produces serious problems.
2006-10-21 07:25:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
You are aware that MOST people FROM ALL cultures and areas around the world married their first cousins FOR OBVIOUS REASONS until probably the last century...right? (I admit the word "obvious" likely gives entirely too many people way too much credit.) You are aware why this was so, right? And you can grasp simple geography concepts...? So...your question is quashed due to invalidity and nonsensical result....but I'm sure you knew that....right? =) Believing in Darwin does not mean not believing in God. We are, indeed, God's creation, God's design...Darwin never disproved nor tried to disprove that....but whose to say evolution wasn't the way God designed it...or that it means we are not any less God's creation? That, and Darwin's thought process and research does not indicate the lack of intelligence or credibility you lend him due to his VERY NORMAL heritage...he may or may not be wrong...but Einstein was wrong a few times himself, and you'd look a fool to question his intelligence. People do not evolve or learn when every scholastic and creative thinker only vocalizes correct ideas....thats why they are called theories....many of which proven...many of which are disproven....all of which must be proven or disproven through critical thought and research. The fact that Darwin has not been disproven is proof enough of his validity and credibility. What songfairy below says is on point as well. People from the heirachies of MANY kingdoms, both European and elsewhere, often married either a close family member to preserve wealth and power or a member of an enemy family for truce. Its age old and died not long ago (in fact, in many "less modernized" countries, it continues).
2016-05-22 07:57:07 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The myths about marrying ones cousin are just that - myths. There is barely a difference in the odds that a child born to cousins will have a deformity or disease.
Many famous people were married to cousins...Albert Einstein's parents were cousins... FDR and Elenor Roosevelt were cousins, Prince Albert and Queen Victoria, and Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani was briefly married to his cousin.
Today, 20% of all married couples are cousins.
2006-10-21 07:36:56 · answer #3 · answered by misskate12001 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Experimentation
2006-10-21 07:22:16 · answer #4 · answered by Heck if I know! 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Love. It must have been uncontrollable love. She was beautiful. Smart. She held herself together well. Her walk was straight, good manners, intelligence, fashionable and grace.
However, she suffered from an extreme case of halitosis. (Severe bad breath) In fact, she was quite beautiful but rarely smiled, her teeth were very rotted due to soft enamel and bad hygiene. This caused many people to avoid her in social situations but Darwin loved her nonetheless.
True love in my opinion.
2006-10-21 07:29:58 · answer #5 · answered by 7aliens 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It was very common in his day. Ironically, it is a practice that many of his opponents have taken up in modern times.
2006-10-21 07:29:32 · answer #6 · answered by sverthfreyr 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
That was what rich people did in those days.
2006-10-21 07:22:59 · answer #7 · answered by Bebe 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was socially acceptable then, not tabboo as it is today
2006-10-21 07:30:19 · answer #8 · answered by Lisa G 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
love
2006-10-21 07:29:08 · answer #9 · answered by t_roy_e 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe he wasn't very evolved.
2006-10-21 07:25:45 · answer #10 · answered by flip4449 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋