> > > If the first husband was a cousin, no problem. > > > > > Was it legal when the future Henry VIII married Catherine of Aragon? > Going back to cousins, what the rank and file did I've no idea, but I > believe that at the time of the complex dynasties of the Yorks and > Lancastrians it was necessary to get a Papal Dispensation for cousins to > marry. This came up in the recent series The White Queen and its > companion documentary. The White Queen, like the Tudors, is junk history (though the author, Philippa Gregory,of the former, does appear to know better than the producers.) Under Catholic rules, most sorts of close cousin marriage were forbidden - it was a nice little earner for the chiurch, since in rural communities, cousin marriage was the norm and inevitable. There was only sense in it when a hereditary medical condition existed in the family. Fortunately, farmers, way before genetics had been heard of, had a good grasp of what constituted a 'non-doer' animal or human. The post-Catholic situation was dealt with by a Table of Forbidden Degrees' between which matrimony was forbidden. The thinking behind a block on marrying your deceased wife's sister was that 'man and wife were one flesjh, and that flesh was the husband's so her sister was his., and any connection between them was incest Typical somehow, that when this marriage was made legal, the converwse situation of marriage to a deceased husband's brother was not cleared up for 20 years.. A fascinating little (Church Court) addition to a ban on marriage between blood relatives was that godchildren were considered as within the forbidden degrees. Too bad if your father or mother had been godparent to the most eligible heiress in the village... she was your sister. . > EVE Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society