incest in early civilizations
From the ruling families of ancient Egypt to those of modern Europe, the practice of family intermarriage was mandatory -- seen as being essential for the preservation of 'blue blood', if not family fortunes -- but the price paid for this inbreeding was often genetic defects in the form of mental or physical disabilities.
The practice of inbreeding goes back to the beginning of time, when there was no great people- gene-pool from which to choose a mate. In fact, the current religions promoting the Adam and Eve creation story explain that it was ordered by God that Adam lay with his daughters and Eve with her sons, and until recent times incest was still widely practiced -- and justified -- by the true believers.
Although it may shock us now to learn that Cleopatra's parents were brother and sister -- and her husband was her younger brother -- it must be understood that intermarriage was normal in all ancient civilizations and was expected of their ruling families.
Rather than strengthening the original traits of leadership and charisma that made their long-ago ancestors warrior kings and queens, interbreeding over many generations merely highlighted a host of unfortunate recessive genes that rendered the resultant progeny unfit to lead.
It was not until quite late in our history that genetic causes were found for a myriad of health complaints and deformities -- promoting laws against sexual relations between close relatives -- but such knowledge did not deter the European royals who continued to interbreed despite George III's madness, Hapsburg deformities and the incidence of hemophilia in the Romanovs and other European royals.
Despite advances in genetic knowledge - and the incredible suffering of royal children cursed by the results of their families marrying their first, second, third and fourth cousins, the royal interbreeding habit lingered.
In fact, Queen Victoria who, together with her first cousin and consort Albert spawned the entire cast of European royalty, flatly refused to listen to advice against intermarriage; and when Princess Elizabeth married Prince Philip of Greece she was similarly taking a risk. As you can see from the Royal Tree chart, Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip share Victoria and Albert as their great-great grandparents -- as do just about all members of Europe's royal families of their age.
Interbreeding was not always the result of keeping the family wealth in the family, or keeping the bloodline 'blue'. Because so many royal families owed their position to an alliance with powerful bishops, they were forced by religious restriction to marry an 'approved' person. In respect of the British royal family, the decrees of the Church of England against marrying a Catholic or a divorcee heavily circumscribed the choice of mate. Marriage with the divorcee Wallis Simpson cost Edward his throne in 1936, Princess Margaret was not forbidden to marry the divorcee Peter Townshend; and marriage with the divorcee Camilla Parker-Bowles could very well cost Charles his throne when the present Queen's reign ends.
The determination of the current generation of royals to marry 'out' will undoubtedly have a healthy influence on the future of their families and, who knows, one royal may emerge with such charisma and superior leadership qualities that he or she may very well make history once again.
Whether William and Harry will be encouraged by family protocol to choose a royal 'relative' as their brides -- or whether they select someone from the common gene pool -- remains to be seen!
The practice of inbreeding goes back to the beginning of time, when there was no great people- gene-pool from which to choose a mate. In fact, the current religions promoting the Adam and Eve creation story explain that it was ordered by God that Adam lay with his daughters and Eve with her sons, and until recent times incest was still widely practiced -- and justified -- by the true believers.
Although it may shock us now to learn that Cleopatra's parents were brother and sister -- and her husband was her younger brother -- it must be understood that intermarriage was normal in all ancient civilizations and was expected of their ruling families.
Rather than strengthening the original traits of leadership and charisma that made their long-ago ancestors warrior kings and queens, interbreeding over many generations merely highlighted a host of unfortunate recessive genes that rendered the resultant progeny unfit to lead.
It was not until quite late in our history that genetic causes were found for a myriad of health complaints and deformities -- promoting laws against sexual relations between close relatives -- but such knowledge did not deter the European royals who continued to interbreed despite George III's madness, Hapsburg deformities and the incidence of hemophilia in the Romanovs and other European royals.
Despite advances in genetic knowledge - and the incredible suffering of royal children cursed by the results of their families marrying their first, second, third and fourth cousins, the royal interbreeding habit lingered.
In fact, Queen Victoria who, together with her first cousin and consort Albert spawned the entire cast of European royalty, flatly refused to listen to advice against intermarriage; and when Princess Elizabeth married Prince Philip of Greece she was similarly taking a risk. As you can see from the Royal Tree chart, Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip share Victoria and Albert as their great-great grandparents -- as do just about all members of Europe's royal families of their age.
Interbreeding was not always the result of keeping the family wealth in the family, or keeping the bloodline 'blue'. Because so many royal families owed their position to an alliance with powerful bishops, they were forced by religious restriction to marry an 'approved' person. In respect of the British royal family, the decrees of the Church of England against marrying a Catholic or a divorcee heavily circumscribed the choice of mate. Marriage with the divorcee Wallis Simpson cost Edward his throne in 1936, Princess Margaret was not forbidden to marry the divorcee Peter Townshend; and marriage with the divorcee Camilla Parker-Bowles could very well cost Charles his throne when the present Queen's reign ends.
The determination of the current generation of royals to marry 'out' will undoubtedly have a healthy influence on the future of their families and, who knows, one royal may emerge with such charisma and superior leadership qualities that he or she may very well make history once again.
Whether William and Harry will be encouraged by family protocol to choose a royal 'relative' as their brides -- or whether they select someone from the common gene pool -- remains to be seen!
<< Home