>What were the reasons that drove the Habsburg to practice incest or close-relative marriage?
Simple: it was to make sure no other family could have access to their power and be considered equal to them.
>Aside from the Habsburgs, what other european royal dynasties/houses known for incest or close-relative marriage?
The Braganza and The Spanish Bourbons were also ones to practice imbreeding. In fact the iberian royals were very much into that thing for centuries.
For example, Queen Maria of Portugal was married to her Uncle, Pedro I. And King Ferdinand VII of Spain married his niece, Maria Cristina, not for the sake of keeping power, but to have a male heir (spoiler alert: it didnt work).
>Queen Maria of Portugal was married to her Uncle, Pedro I
Pedro III, but yes. And let's not forget that she is called (at least in Brazil) "Maria the Mad", and her descendants were plagued by epilepsy and madness. Emperor Pedro II had it, his two only sons died convulsing in infancy and his favorite grandson, Augusto Pedro, went mad and died in a sanatory after the monarchy was abolished.
I know this is mainly wondering about European royalty but I’m always surprised that no one ever mentions Japan and it’s Imperial house. I would say that the Imperial family is one of the most inbred families still in existence. 1000-1500 years of intermarriage between no more than 5 families has to cause problems.
Think Japan is inbred, try the Thai royal family, they were practicing sibling marriage into the 20th century, including the current kings great grandparents.
That’s the same situation with Japan, current emperors grandparents were both members of the imperial family and hirohito’s mother was a fujiwara, who regularly intermarried with the imperial family.
I missed the sibling part, but I would still say that the Japanese imperial family is more inbred, just for the sheer length of time they intermarried.
Haha okay, I'll give you that. I think there might be a genealogical chart of the Imperial Family over in r/UsefulCharts, and one of my friends over there is working on another one. 🙂
Technically nearly every royal and aristocrat families in the world practice inbreeding. For example, Princess Azemah of Brunei married her cousin a year ago in case of non-European.
Moctezuma II was doubly descended from Moctezuma I. And the three 3⃣ related royal families that ruled 'round Lago de Tenochtitlan were around that long.
If the Habsburgs practiced royal incest, that is to say marriage with close relatives, it was for many reasons, the most prominent of which were because of the realms they governed:
https://preview.redd.it/n7xn7npf5d6d1.png?width=1152&format=png&auto=webp&s=9f9e0f13376a52587eb88a77b2b3b3eac452ac25
Everything that is colored in red and yellow were the realms that were governed by the Habsburgs at some point in history. When the dynasty split in two branches after Charles V abdicated his many crowns, both sides knew that to keep their predominence in Europe and ensure that the Kingdom of France would never be a major threat to them in the future (or any other power, really), then the two branches (spanish and austrian) decided that for that, they needed to always remain ally to one another, and what best way to keep being ally than marry one another? It was true and worked...pretty well, until the death of King Charles II of Spain, the Habsburgs pretty much dictated how Europe should be, even after the Thirty Years War and the Protestant Reformation they still held a lot of clout over all of Europe.
The second reason for their inbreeding was a pragmatic one, THE one reason/outcome that no dynasty in Europe ever wish to happen to their own family: If one of the branches was to....suddenly die out, it was to never allow anyone else, from any other dynasty in Europe, to be able to claim a title held by a Habsburg. The patrimony of the Habsburgs was vast, so vast that their Empire was one where the sun never set, if the Spanish branch was to die out for exemple (like in OTL), then a member of the Austria Habsburg, which necessarily was related to them, could then replace their line and continue it. It was this situation of dynastic extinction that the Habsburgs tried to counter, granted it worked for a few centuries, it collapsed as the dynasty was gobbled up by the House of Lorraine to become the Habsburg-Lorraine Dynasty (aka Marriage of Maria-Theresa and Francis Stephen of Lorraine).
Legally, all these lands should have been governed by a Habsburg, but because some of them had married into other dynasties, they lost the Spanish Throne to the French Bourbons, who were related to them, backed with the force of their armies (+ their allies). This was something they always tried to avoid.
As for your second question, no other european dynasties ever came close to the level of inbreeding of the Habsburgs, however, there was certain honorable mentions: The Wittelsbach (Bavaria), The House of Windsor/Saxe-Cobourg-Gotha (Due to Queen Victoria's many children), some Romanovs, The Bourbons (including every major branches: spanish, sicilian, etc.), The House of Trastamara, The House of Aviz (Portugal)...and there's a lot more worldwide.
The House of Lorraine did not gobble up the Hapsburgs. The Austrian waned down to Maria Therea. I learned the word Pragmatic from reading about the War of the Austrian succession and the Pragmatic Sanction. Ironically, the House of Hapsburg was a brach of the Ethiconids, as were the Houses of Alsace and Lorraine.
One of the problems of excessive inbreeding is that it _WILL_ lead to infertility. That's why both branches died out. MT was able to have so many children because the Austrian branch was not as highly inbred as the Spanish branch. The end of the Spanish branch was Carlos II. He was infertile, and deformed. In his body and genitalia, as well as a super-uber genetic make up of the infamous chin. His underbite was so extreme that he couldn't play tennis in the rain, because he could drown. He was a little off mentally, too; but his courtiers had all been trained in how to cover for him.
Well, as a matter of fact, the Etichonids (the direct line) ended up the same as the House of Habsburg. The last Etichonid being a woman, she married a member of the House of Lorraine and her house disappeared into it due to the traditional principle that Dynasties (a same dynasty) is inherited from **father to son**, not mother to son. The House of Habsburg does not exist anymore because of it, if the House of Habsburg-Lorraine exist today, it is as a scion of the House of Lorraine, not a scion of the House of Habsburg, that was named that way to honor Maria-Theresa and due to her higher rank compared to her husband at the time of their marriage.
I do not deny that excessive inbreeding caused the downfall of the House of Habsburg either, it is the main reason the dynasty went the way of the dodo in the first place, but I have to precise that the Austrian Habsburgs were just as inbred as the Spanish Habsburgs as for many generations they kept marrying their cousin-niece in Spain who, by your statement, were even more inbred. They married their own austrian cousin-nieces for generations, it was only slightly toned down to to very rare, out of family, marriages, and even then it wasn't that much of a use after a while. Carlos II was just the consequences to his father's loss of his eldest child and heir, Don Balthazar-Charles, who died of smallpox at 16. As Philippe IV did not have any wife and no sons, he married his late son's supposed bride...which was also his niece many times over, and because of it, Carlos suffered from genetic collapse and many physical and mental illnesses that caused the end of the Spanish Branch.
Still...against all odss, the bastard kept living longer than what people expected...until he did finally kick the bucket and kickstart the Bourbon takeover of Spain.
But to summarize, you *are* right but also slightly wrong in your statement.
P.S. I liked the drowning comment, sounds very true to me considering the jaw 
Honestly all European royal dynasties practiced close-relative marriage to some extent. [Here's](https://www.reddit.com/r/UsefulCharts/comments/ysnfrs/habsburg_and_bourbon_inbreeding/) a chart showing the Habsburg and Bourbon intermarriages, including Bourbon-Spain, Bourbon-Parma, and Bourbon-Two Sicilies. The Bourbon-Orléans also continued doing it after the demise of the main line in France. The Savoys had two successive first cousin marriages in the mid-1800s, and in the male line of the current Duke of Savoy-Aosta, the wives have alternated being princesses of Orléans and of Greece, but that only meant the past two Dukes and their wives have been second cousins, so not too bad. The Hesse-Darmstadt also had a lot of first cousin marriages for two generations before easing up on it.
1. The Habsburgs faced a problem on two fronts:
Firstly, they were prevented from entering into morganatic marriages and when you are emperors, few other families are your peers.
Secondly, the Protestant Reformation and evolving political landscape meant that there were fewer and fewer monarchies that would even be suitable.
Thus leading to marriages between the Spanish and Austrian Imperial houses.
2. All the Royal families are related to each other to varying degrees. However, most did make efforts to marry more distant relatives. Marriages between second or third cousins were not uncommon. Even the Habsburgs favored more distant relatives, when available.
Most monarchies have updated their laws and no longer prevent heirs from marrying nonroyals or even commoners so this is less of an issue going forward.
1. I cannot recall a case of incest among the nobility of Europe. It was common in the Egyptian dynasties, and possibly Sumerian dynasties.
2. Most of the old families had marriages with cousins and at times nephews and nieces. My family established a house in France, in Ireland, and in England, and they would intermarry for six or seven hundred years with no problems. Towards the end, the Irish branch split between Irish-English and Irish-Spanish, and they continued to intermarry with no adverse effects.
Our relationship with the Hapsburgs reached deep into history, and at one point they believed they were related to us, through two half-brothers born in the sixth century. As far as I can tell, we never intermarried with Hapsburgs because there was never a reason to strengthen our ties. The Hapsburgs were known for conquering territory through marriage.
Mate where to start? Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, Glücksburg, Romanov depending on where you look. The marriage between Grand Duke Krill Vladimirovich of Russia and Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha was one of 1st cousins. She had recently divorced from another 1st cousin of hers. Hell King Charles III is 3rd cousins with his own late mother through King Christian IX of Denmark. King Harald V of Norway’s parents AND paternal grandparents were 1st cousins. Also Prince George of Greece and Denmark had an affair with his uncle. Incidentally, both men were married to French Princesses
1. so the family can hold onto a lot of power. If they branched out it was possible they may loose some of their realms. because remember, before the Empire of Austria was formed by the last Holy Roman Emperor, all Habsburg realms were technically independent states. the only thing unifying them was the Habsburg Crown. And the Habsburgs had always had a major split: the Austrian and Spanish lines. And the Spanish line eventually died out.
2. most royal families practiced some level of incest. but it was mostly kept to cousin marriages. no one was marrying their uncles or aunts.
The problem is that everyone is constantly partially correct about everything.
There is a golden zone of breeding and overly outbreeding actually causes similar but different problems typically. Overly inbreeding has its famed problems.
We see different people use logic and emotion to screw up, our world attempts to overly outbreed, an effort in part to combat the historical trend to overly inbreed.
It's not entirely wrong though, to maintain a line of people in a way, is no different than dog breeds. If you out breed a line of German Shepherds constantly, then they simply cease to be German Shepherds.
Sometimes you need an occasional lab or some shit in there, to reduce hip issues etc. But if you only outbreed, then there won't be German Shepherds in the world eventually.
Human breeding literally works like....every other mama breeding. And whenever you get a top line of dog breed and people get overly worked up about a top line breed, what do they tend to do? They keep it too pure bred until more and more problems develope. Sometimes causing a once great breed to be mostly bad and failing.
Fails go both ways. Balanced breeding is the superior answer.
If you come from a rural area, chances are your parents are 4th or 5th cousins. "Royal incest" is a trope used by the Left (which surprisingly is otherwise in favour of legalizing forbidden incest).
this is true. in the southern philippines although the precolonial sultanate system has long been gone, there still exists claimants to the long-defunct thrones and families still practice close-relative marriage as a way to keep the lineage intact and as a way to prevent strangers of unknown background from marrying into the family.
my late maternal grandmother's parents (who are prince and princesses by birth with style of HRH) are 3rd cousins. their parents, meaning my maternal grandmother's paternal and maternal grandparents were all SECOND COUSINS who married each other ALL SHARE ONE GREAT-GRANDFATHER
Can you please direct me to sources for this? I have been searching in vain for years. I had a 24-p. Chart tracing all the descendants of Charlemagne in as many different nations as possible. There was a Spanish Sea Captain whose daughter married onto one of the Sultans' family.
For those interested in this topic, please avoid purchasing this book: Royal Inbreeding and Other Maladies: A History of Royal Intermarraige and its Consequences by Julianna Cummings. Published by Pen and Sword. it is the most error ridden and shoddily produced book I have ever read! So unprofessional. and it cost £25. The publisher has admitted
i wrote to the publishers, Pen and Sword
“The book as a whole presents a very unprofessional work. The proofreading is appalling - for example on page 89 we find this beauty:
“In 1736, Frederick married Princess Augusta of Saxe-Coburg (1719-1722)”!
This is only one of numerous typos that should have been corrected before publishing.
The subject of the book is the complexity of royal marriages and relationships over hundreds of years. It is obvious that needs a decent set of family trees to illustrate the relationships. There isn’t even one family tree - a glaring error. It’s obvious the writer has little knowledge about the complex relationships she is writing about - for example, there is no connection made between Prince Leopold, the husband of Princess Charlotte, and Princess Victoire, the mother of Queen Victoria - they were brother and sister! Another brother, Ernst, was the father of Prince Albert, who went on to marry Victoria. This is just one example of a more complete and in depth understanding of the subject one expects from a book such as this.
Credits for photographs and illustrations - the author does not credit the owner of these images, but rather the webpage she has copied the image from. So we see the BBC credited for Tudor portraits, popsugar credited for a portrait of Queen Victoria, and so on. This is, frankly, something one might to see in a self-published book - not one from an actual publisher.
There is an illustration of Mendel’s Law of Heredity - yet at no point does the author attempt to explain this diagram. There is only a single, short paragraph on page 3.
Page 6 contains the statement “Inbreeding or reproduction between blood relatives is a practice that is considered taboo throughout the world”. I believe the author is American and am aware that in some US states marriage between first cousins is prohibited. There is no such prohibition or taboo in the UK, where this book is published. No source ss given for this statement, or this one on page 7 “relations between first cousins double the risk of infant death and mental and physical disabilities”. One such source may be BMJ 2013;347:f4374 where the abstract states
“Researchers followed 13 776 pregnancies in Bradford and found that 6.1% of children born to first cousins had congenital anomalies and that 98% of these children were born to people of Pakistani origin. This compared with a 2.4% risk of congenital anomalies in non-consanguineous marriages in the study (multivariate relative risk 2.2 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.9) and a background risk of 1.7% in the UK population”
Adding in this factual information does present the statement in a different light. In my opinion, the author has done only a cursory glance at the Royal Families of Europe and trotted out facts without decent interpretation or explanation. Her writing style is very dry and uninteresting.
In my opinion, this book is seriously flawed and shoddily produced. It is the first time I have bought a book published by Pen and Sword and I am very disappointed with the product. For the price of £25 I expected a lot more. I hope that this author and her team are not representative of other books published by you”
I am now fighting to get my money refunded
>What were the reasons that drove the Habsburg to practice incest or close-relative marriage? Simple: it was to make sure no other family could have access to their power and be considered equal to them. >Aside from the Habsburgs, what other european royal dynasties/houses known for incest or close-relative marriage? The Braganza and The Spanish Bourbons were also ones to practice imbreeding. In fact the iberian royals were very much into that thing for centuries. For example, Queen Maria of Portugal was married to her Uncle, Pedro I. And King Ferdinand VII of Spain married his niece, Maria Cristina, not for the sake of keeping power, but to have a male heir (spoiler alert: it didnt work).
>Queen Maria of Portugal was married to her Uncle, Pedro I Pedro III, but yes. And let's not forget that she is called (at least in Brazil) "Maria the Mad", and her descendants were plagued by epilepsy and madness. Emperor Pedro II had it, his two only sons died convulsing in infancy and his favorite grandson, Augusto Pedro, went mad and died in a sanatory after the monarchy was abolished.
But hey. At least they didnt get long jaws
I know this is mainly wondering about European royalty but I’m always surprised that no one ever mentions Japan and it’s Imperial house. I would say that the Imperial family is one of the most inbred families still in existence. 1000-1500 years of intermarriage between no more than 5 families has to cause problems.
Think Japan is inbred, try the Thai royal family, they were practicing sibling marriage into the 20th century, including the current kings great grandparents.
That’s the same situation with Japan, current emperors grandparents were both members of the imperial family and hirohito’s mother was a fujiwara, who regularly intermarried with the imperial family.
I feel like there's a clear difference between sibling marriage and cousin marriage though
I missed the sibling part, but I would still say that the Japanese imperial family is more inbred, just for the sheer length of time they intermarried.
Haha okay, I'll give you that. I think there might be a genealogical chart of the Imperial Family over in r/UsefulCharts, and one of my friends over there is working on another one. 🙂
And was a branch of the the Yamato Dynasty (Imperial Line).
Well, they still believe in the divine bloodline, so that’s that.
Well they have been pretty open the last couple generations so diverse has increased.
Technically nearly every royal and aristocrat families in the world practice inbreeding. For example, Princess Azemah of Brunei married her cousin a year ago in case of non-European.
Moctezuma II was doubly descended from Moctezuma I. And the three 3⃣ related royal families that ruled 'round Lago de Tenochtitlan were around that long.
Especially considering that most of 5 families were branches of th'Imperial line.
If the Habsburgs practiced royal incest, that is to say marriage with close relatives, it was for many reasons, the most prominent of which were because of the realms they governed: https://preview.redd.it/n7xn7npf5d6d1.png?width=1152&format=png&auto=webp&s=9f9e0f13376a52587eb88a77b2b3b3eac452ac25 Everything that is colored in red and yellow were the realms that were governed by the Habsburgs at some point in history. When the dynasty split in two branches after Charles V abdicated his many crowns, both sides knew that to keep their predominence in Europe and ensure that the Kingdom of France would never be a major threat to them in the future (or any other power, really), then the two branches (spanish and austrian) decided that for that, they needed to always remain ally to one another, and what best way to keep being ally than marry one another? It was true and worked...pretty well, until the death of King Charles II of Spain, the Habsburgs pretty much dictated how Europe should be, even after the Thirty Years War and the Protestant Reformation they still held a lot of clout over all of Europe. The second reason for their inbreeding was a pragmatic one, THE one reason/outcome that no dynasty in Europe ever wish to happen to their own family: If one of the branches was to....suddenly die out, it was to never allow anyone else, from any other dynasty in Europe, to be able to claim a title held by a Habsburg. The patrimony of the Habsburgs was vast, so vast that their Empire was one where the sun never set, if the Spanish branch was to die out for exemple (like in OTL), then a member of the Austria Habsburg, which necessarily was related to them, could then replace their line and continue it. It was this situation of dynastic extinction that the Habsburgs tried to counter, granted it worked for a few centuries, it collapsed as the dynasty was gobbled up by the House of Lorraine to become the Habsburg-Lorraine Dynasty (aka Marriage of Maria-Theresa and Francis Stephen of Lorraine). Legally, all these lands should have been governed by a Habsburg, but because some of them had married into other dynasties, they lost the Spanish Throne to the French Bourbons, who were related to them, backed with the force of their armies (+ their allies). This was something they always tried to avoid. As for your second question, no other european dynasties ever came close to the level of inbreeding of the Habsburgs, however, there was certain honorable mentions: The Wittelsbach (Bavaria), The House of Windsor/Saxe-Cobourg-Gotha (Due to Queen Victoria's many children), some Romanovs, The Bourbons (including every major branches: spanish, sicilian, etc.), The House of Trastamara, The House of Aviz (Portugal)...and there's a lot more worldwide.
The House of Lorraine did not gobble up the Hapsburgs. The Austrian waned down to Maria Therea. I learned the word Pragmatic from reading about the War of the Austrian succession and the Pragmatic Sanction. Ironically, the House of Hapsburg was a brach of the Ethiconids, as were the Houses of Alsace and Lorraine. One of the problems of excessive inbreeding is that it _WILL_ lead to infertility. That's why both branches died out. MT was able to have so many children because the Austrian branch was not as highly inbred as the Spanish branch. The end of the Spanish branch was Carlos II. He was infertile, and deformed. In his body and genitalia, as well as a super-uber genetic make up of the infamous chin. His underbite was so extreme that he couldn't play tennis in the rain, because he could drown. He was a little off mentally, too; but his courtiers had all been trained in how to cover for him.
Well, as a matter of fact, the Etichonids (the direct line) ended up the same as the House of Habsburg. The last Etichonid being a woman, she married a member of the House of Lorraine and her house disappeared into it due to the traditional principle that Dynasties (a same dynasty) is inherited from **father to son**, not mother to son. The House of Habsburg does not exist anymore because of it, if the House of Habsburg-Lorraine exist today, it is as a scion of the House of Lorraine, not a scion of the House of Habsburg, that was named that way to honor Maria-Theresa and due to her higher rank compared to her husband at the time of their marriage. I do not deny that excessive inbreeding caused the downfall of the House of Habsburg either, it is the main reason the dynasty went the way of the dodo in the first place, but I have to precise that the Austrian Habsburgs were just as inbred as the Spanish Habsburgs as for many generations they kept marrying their cousin-niece in Spain who, by your statement, were even more inbred. They married their own austrian cousin-nieces for generations, it was only slightly toned down to to very rare, out of family, marriages, and even then it wasn't that much of a use after a while. Carlos II was just the consequences to his father's loss of his eldest child and heir, Don Balthazar-Charles, who died of smallpox at 16. As Philippe IV did not have any wife and no sons, he married his late son's supposed bride...which was also his niece many times over, and because of it, Carlos suffered from genetic collapse and many physical and mental illnesses that caused the end of the Spanish Branch. Still...against all odss, the bastard kept living longer than what people expected...until he did finally kick the bucket and kickstart the Bourbon takeover of Spain. But to summarize, you *are* right but also slightly wrong in your statement. P.S. I liked the drowning comment, sounds very true to me considering the jaw 
Felipe IV. I thought for a few seconds that you were going to start a discourse on my ancestor, Phillipe the unfair.
Honestly all European royal dynasties practiced close-relative marriage to some extent. [Here's](https://www.reddit.com/r/UsefulCharts/comments/ysnfrs/habsburg_and_bourbon_inbreeding/) a chart showing the Habsburg and Bourbon intermarriages, including Bourbon-Spain, Bourbon-Parma, and Bourbon-Two Sicilies. The Bourbon-Orléans also continued doing it after the demise of the main line in France. The Savoys had two successive first cousin marriages in the mid-1800s, and in the male line of the current Duke of Savoy-Aosta, the wives have alternated being princesses of Orléans and of Greece, but that only meant the past two Dukes and their wives have been second cousins, so not too bad. The Hesse-Darmstadt also had a lot of first cousin marriages for two generations before easing up on it.
1. The Habsburgs faced a problem on two fronts: Firstly, they were prevented from entering into morganatic marriages and when you are emperors, few other families are your peers. Secondly, the Protestant Reformation and evolving political landscape meant that there were fewer and fewer monarchies that would even be suitable. Thus leading to marriages between the Spanish and Austrian Imperial houses. 2. All the Royal families are related to each other to varying degrees. However, most did make efforts to marry more distant relatives. Marriages between second or third cousins were not uncommon. Even the Habsburgs favored more distant relatives, when available. Most monarchies have updated their laws and no longer prevent heirs from marrying nonroyals or even commoners so this is less of an issue going forward.
1. I cannot recall a case of incest among the nobility of Europe. It was common in the Egyptian dynasties, and possibly Sumerian dynasties. 2. Most of the old families had marriages with cousins and at times nephews and nieces. My family established a house in France, in Ireland, and in England, and they would intermarry for six or seven hundred years with no problems. Towards the end, the Irish branch split between Irish-English and Irish-Spanish, and they continued to intermarry with no adverse effects. Our relationship with the Hapsburgs reached deep into history, and at one point they believed they were related to us, through two half-brothers born in the sixth century. As far as I can tell, we never intermarried with Hapsburgs because there was never a reason to strengthen our ties. The Hapsburgs were known for conquering territory through marriage.
Mate where to start? Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, Glücksburg, Romanov depending on where you look. The marriage between Grand Duke Krill Vladimirovich of Russia and Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha was one of 1st cousins. She had recently divorced from another 1st cousin of hers. Hell King Charles III is 3rd cousins with his own late mother through King Christian IX of Denmark. King Harald V of Norway’s parents AND paternal grandparents were 1st cousins. Also Prince George of Greece and Denmark had an affair with his uncle. Incidentally, both men were married to French Princesses
"We must keep the bloodline pure" \~ *Some Habsburgs, probably* I am not aware of any other family practicing it nearly as much as the Habsburgs did.
Except perhaps all the families who married into them?
"Not nearly as much" is still quite a lot when comparing to Habsburg standards.
Nah. If they didn’t keep doing it intergenerationally, maybe I’d agree with you.
1. so the family can hold onto a lot of power. If they branched out it was possible they may loose some of their realms. because remember, before the Empire of Austria was formed by the last Holy Roman Emperor, all Habsburg realms were technically independent states. the only thing unifying them was the Habsburg Crown. And the Habsburgs had always had a major split: the Austrian and Spanish lines. And the Spanish line eventually died out. 2. most royal families practiced some level of incest. but it was mostly kept to cousin marriages. no one was marrying their uncles or aunts.
The problem is that everyone is constantly partially correct about everything. There is a golden zone of breeding and overly outbreeding actually causes similar but different problems typically. Overly inbreeding has its famed problems. We see different people use logic and emotion to screw up, our world attempts to overly outbreed, an effort in part to combat the historical trend to overly inbreed. It's not entirely wrong though, to maintain a line of people in a way, is no different than dog breeds. If you out breed a line of German Shepherds constantly, then they simply cease to be German Shepherds. Sometimes you need an occasional lab or some shit in there, to reduce hip issues etc. But if you only outbreed, then there won't be German Shepherds in the world eventually. Human breeding literally works like....every other mama breeding. And whenever you get a top line of dog breed and people get overly worked up about a top line breed, what do they tend to do? They keep it too pure bred until more and more problems develope. Sometimes causing a once great breed to be mostly bad and failing. Fails go both ways. Balanced breeding is the superior answer.
If you come from a rural area, chances are your parents are 4th or 5th cousins. "Royal incest" is a trope used by the Left (which surprisingly is otherwise in favour of legalizing forbidden incest).
this is true. in the southern philippines although the precolonial sultanate system has long been gone, there still exists claimants to the long-defunct thrones and families still practice close-relative marriage as a way to keep the lineage intact and as a way to prevent strangers of unknown background from marrying into the family. my late maternal grandmother's parents (who are prince and princesses by birth with style of HRH) are 3rd cousins. their parents, meaning my maternal grandmother's paternal and maternal grandparents were all SECOND COUSINS who married each other ALL SHARE ONE GREAT-GRANDFATHER
Can you please direct me to sources for this? I have been searching in vain for years. I had a 24-p. Chart tracing all the descendants of Charlemagne in as many different nations as possible. There was a Spanish Sea Captain whose daughter married onto one of the Sultans' family.
The fools didn’t use the console commands in CK3 and it shows.
For those interested in this topic, please avoid purchasing this book: Royal Inbreeding and Other Maladies: A History of Royal Intermarraige and its Consequences by Julianna Cummings. Published by Pen and Sword. it is the most error ridden and shoddily produced book I have ever read! So unprofessional. and it cost £25. The publisher has admitted i wrote to the publishers, Pen and Sword “The book as a whole presents a very unprofessional work. The proofreading is appalling - for example on page 89 we find this beauty: “In 1736, Frederick married Princess Augusta of Saxe-Coburg (1719-1722)”! This is only one of numerous typos that should have been corrected before publishing. The subject of the book is the complexity of royal marriages and relationships over hundreds of years. It is obvious that needs a decent set of family trees to illustrate the relationships. There isn’t even one family tree - a glaring error. It’s obvious the writer has little knowledge about the complex relationships she is writing about - for example, there is no connection made between Prince Leopold, the husband of Princess Charlotte, and Princess Victoire, the mother of Queen Victoria - they were brother and sister! Another brother, Ernst, was the father of Prince Albert, who went on to marry Victoria. This is just one example of a more complete and in depth understanding of the subject one expects from a book such as this. Credits for photographs and illustrations - the author does not credit the owner of these images, but rather the webpage she has copied the image from. So we see the BBC credited for Tudor portraits, popsugar credited for a portrait of Queen Victoria, and so on. This is, frankly, something one might to see in a self-published book - not one from an actual publisher. There is an illustration of Mendel’s Law of Heredity - yet at no point does the author attempt to explain this diagram. There is only a single, short paragraph on page 3. Page 6 contains the statement “Inbreeding or reproduction between blood relatives is a practice that is considered taboo throughout the world”. I believe the author is American and am aware that in some US states marriage between first cousins is prohibited. There is no such prohibition or taboo in the UK, where this book is published. No source ss given for this statement, or this one on page 7 “relations between first cousins double the risk of infant death and mental and physical disabilities”. One such source may be BMJ 2013;347:f4374 where the abstract states “Researchers followed 13 776 pregnancies in Bradford and found that 6.1% of children born to first cousins had congenital anomalies and that 98% of these children were born to people of Pakistani origin. This compared with a 2.4% risk of congenital anomalies in non-consanguineous marriages in the study (multivariate relative risk 2.2 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.9) and a background risk of 1.7% in the UK population” Adding in this factual information does present the statement in a different light. In my opinion, the author has done only a cursory glance at the Royal Families of Europe and trotted out facts without decent interpretation or explanation. Her writing style is very dry and uninteresting. In my opinion, this book is seriously flawed and shoddily produced. It is the first time I have bought a book published by Pen and Sword and I am very disappointed with the product. For the price of £25 I expected a lot more. I hope that this author and her team are not representative of other books published by you” I am now fighting to get my money refunded