Thought all of you might find some of these sites interesting. You might note that the first site I listed is referring to the church/property issue as being the original reason for cousin marriages being forbidden. No other reason was necessary at the time and they didn't have the biological knowledge then to use that anyway. It's been proven, since this law was first issued by a church, that the chance of having flawed offspring from a cousin marriage are so small as to be practically nonexistent. Enjoy - you might be surprised and if you run into some of your own cousins marrying, you won't feel so strange about it. http://www.cousincouples.com/info/religion.shtml http://www.pemberley.com/pemb/adaptations/groupread/archive/messages/1938.html http://www.cousincouples.com/info/facts.shtml http://www.cousincouples.com/info/states.shtml ----- Original Message ----- From: "Amy Robbins-Tjaden" <atjaden@mindspring.com> To: <ILLIVING-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 8:55 PM Subject: [ILLIVING] Cousins marrying cousins One of the things I like best about genealogy is learning the historical, religious and cultural backgrounds of the societies in which various ancestors lived at various times. My own ancestry is filled with cousins who married cousins, including more than one pair of direct ancestors. This only happened, I've noticed, in my maternal lines, which are 100% Ostfriesen. In Ostfriesland it seemed, at least in my lines, that this practice was perfectly acceptable and not at all unusual. Sixteen of my maternal ggggrandparents emigrated to Woodford, Tazewell and Peoria counties in the 1850s. Their descendants weren't shy about continuing to marry cousins in this land. If you look at it from a practical standpoint, living in remote villages (as my families did on both sides of the ocean) with only feet or horses for transportation didn't leave one with too wide a marrying field. And land could be kept in the family after a marriage with both lines not losing anything. And ! they knew the families they were marrying into. And, and, and... Frankly, I've never understood what the big deal is about that anyway. Maybe it's in my genes. <grin> Much more a cause to raise my eyebrows was a direct ancestor down my paternal (Quakers from England) lines who fathered 26 children by three wives. Now that I find disturbing. A study of the Amish and Mennonite might reveal that with them intermarrying was common as well? If that turns out to be the case, would this still be a "genealogist's nightmare" or would it be something that can be understood and accepted given the cultural, historical and religious backgrounds of those people? Sincerely, Amy Robbins-Tjaden atjaden@mindspring.com amy@tjaden.com As this pair are my great-grandparents, I have taken it as a personal mission to disprove this finding. A real genealogist's nightmare, don't you think? Lot's of data, but still no conclusive evidence one way or the other. ============================== Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1 Source for Family History Online. Go to: http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetrial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB