There is nothing incestuous here, as surprising as it might seems for us in this days. On one side, the word incest itself do not imply only consanguineous relationship, although it was later taught in that way, hence its actual meaning, in the old days (including the Bible times when marrying within the family was the norm for some cultures) it actually refer to an illicit relationship within the family, this is without contentment, premarriage or when involving affairs. The Catholic church actually had follow this concept for the longest but the latter puritan influences (specially those of the USA) had turn the eyes away from this even if some type of relationships still legal (and pretty much natural like cousin marriages) on many countries, that including Mexico. The rules where also carefully made in order no to affect people of power and wealth to whom consanguineous relationships where no just common but politically and economically important, there are some lines that where never crossed though, but all in all cousins and uncle/aun-niece-nephew marriages where possible and totally legal with the "dispensas" which in turn where nothing but another way of making income to the church, like if a document would erase any genetic trace. :)
Rj Quiralta is correct in the original meaning of an incestuous relationship is different than our present common understanding or perception. In my research, I was surprised to discover that someone's parents had been accused of an incestuous relationship when there was no biological relationship between the spouses. This accusation was hidden in church documents that Were misplaced after their discovery and the church can't find them anymore. The claim is that when putting them back into their file there was a mistake and have just been misfiled. It turns out that the couple had their first two children before marriage. The father of the two children was a priest at the time of their birth and was allowed to leave the church and marry. The family later tried to hide the circumstances and dates so that it would seem as the kids were born after the priest's separation from the church.
In a different case:
It was only through an uncle and niece marriage that I was able to identify the uncles parents since prominent genealogist like Jaime Holcomb and Mariano Gonzalez Leal incorrectly listed this ancestor of mine as Dead at an early age. The dispensations that followed from grandchildren marrying relatives uncover this relationship. I wonder if there was a rift in the family because of this marriage and that is why the uncle was written off as being dead at an early age.
R.A.Ricci
Religious concepts
There is nothing incestuous here, as surprising as it might seems for us in this days. On one side, the word incest itself do not imply only consanguineous relationship, although it was later taught in that way, hence its actual meaning, in the old days (including the Bible times when marrying within the family was the norm for some cultures) it actually refer to an illicit relationship within the family, this is without contentment, premarriage or when involving affairs. The Catholic church actually had follow this concept for the longest but the latter puritan influences (specially those of the USA) had turn the eyes away from this even if some type of relationships still legal (and pretty much natural like cousin marriages) on many countries, that including Mexico. The rules where also carefully made in order no to affect people of power and wealth to whom consanguineous relationships where no just common but politically and economically important, there are some lines that where never crossed though, but all in all cousins and uncle/aun-niece-nephew marriages where possible and totally legal with the "dispensas" which in turn where nothing but another way of making income to the church, like if a document would erase any genetic trace. :)
RJ Quiralta
Incest
Rj Quiralta is correct in the original meaning of an incestuous relationship is different than our present common understanding or perception. In my research, I was surprised to discover that someone's parents had been accused of an incestuous relationship when there was no biological relationship between the spouses. This accusation was hidden in church documents that Were misplaced after their discovery and the church can't find them anymore. The claim is that when putting them back into their file there was a mistake and have just been misfiled. It turns out that the couple had their first two children before marriage. The father of the two children was a priest at the time of their birth and was allowed to leave the church and marry. The family later tried to hide the circumstances and dates so that it would seem as the kids were born after the priest's separation from the church.
In a different case:
It was only through an uncle and niece marriage that I was able to identify the uncles parents since prominent genealogist like Jaime Holcomb and Mariano Gonzalez Leal incorrectly listed this ancestor of mine as Dead at an early age. The dispensations that followed from grandchildren marrying relatives uncover this relationship. I wonder if there was a rift in the family because of this marriage and that is why the uncle was written off as being dead at an early age.
R.A.Ricci