When did marrying a cousin become socially unacceptable?

[LionBird]

I'm a big Agatha Christie fan and noticed there are quite a few references to cousins being in a relationship. I'm rereading Taken at the Flood currently, which is set in 1946, and the main character is engaged to her cousin and nobody seems to think it's strange! Obviously it was quite common in royal circles too in the 19th century but post-WW2 isn't that long ago so I'm not sure how and when it became unacceptable to have a relationship with a cousin - can anyone shed some light on this?

It can be a loose term. My gran was best friends with her first cousin and they had kids the same age so those kids (my Mum) called each other cousins but technically were second cousins. These 'cousins' had 4 kids each who all lived near me so i always those kids my cousins. I think by definition they were 3rd cousins twice removed or something but they were always 'cousins' to us. If I had been in a relationship with one it wouldn't have been wierd. When many generations live in a place it must happen a lot.

I have a friend who is a north African Muslim and she says first cousin marriage is still common in her culture.

It does seem far less common than in the past - I think the moving away for education or work is the key factor so it probably started to be less common from the 1970/80 ?

Watch game of thrones

We were friends with a married couple who were first cousins. I'm guessing they married in the 1980's. They had several children but I have in the back of my mind they may have had blood tests done before trying to conceive, All the children were fit and healthy.

I hate to be the one to tell you but Thrones isn’t historically accurate.

This is really interesting to read - thank you for sharing

It's believed that the parents of King Tutankhamun were brother and sister.
He had quite a few deformities including a clubbed foot and walked with a cane.
He then married his half sister!

I recently discovered that my Dhs GGGG? Grandparents were first cousins. This is around 1850.

Their banns were read twice in church and then the marriage was stopped, because of the cousin thing I assume.

They got married out of the area the following year with the husband using his mother's maiden name as a second surname.

This would suggest that it was not OK in their Northamptonshire village!

No cousin marriages in my family, but there are several strong looks.

It's never been illegal in the UK unlike the USA.
But people knew the problems well before modern genetics I.e. the Hapsburg's.

As an Asian Muslim born in England, I can tell you it is getting less common. I'm 33. My mother's generation married their first cousins but the majority of marriages now are youngsters who are not related and have met through other means (work, online etc). Most youngsters don't want to marry their cousins anymore, they work and earn their own money and make their own choices. The chance of children being born with issues is also in their minds. Whilst it still happens, it's certainly getting less and less common.

When people started to understand more about how genetics 'work'.
Cousin marriages definitely increase the chance of a (recessive) genetic defect occurring in the offspring, and will be more so when cousins marry in a family where previous generations have also married cousins.

People who understand genetics.

I only had one male cousin who lived close enough for regular family contact. Even though I only ever saw him a handful of times a year, I thought of him more as a (very irritating) older brother. As we got into our late teens and twenties, he started flirting with me a lot and, honestly, it felt all shades of wrong. I have a bunch of male cousins I've never met and I suppose I don't know how I would have felt if similar had happened with any of them.

Better understanding of genetics after Watson & Crick in the 1950s, more mobile society, big social changes after the 2nd World War.

It depends on where you lived in the UK. For most lack of choice wasn't a reality since the industry revolution. There are some exceptions to this. What has surprised me doing my own family history is that many people moved around much more than you would have thought. Sometimes out of necessity other times due to wanting to take an opportunity.

My mum had an uncle who married a cousin in Canada in 1940s. The Catholic church made a point of saying they would only marry them if they refrained from having children. (They didn't). Given the Catholic church and it's attitude to contraception this has always struck me as odd in its own right. And I wonder about the practicalities of this if the couple followed the church's line on sex otherwise.

It shows that it was certainly taboo by the 1940s to marry your cousin though.

There's another cousin marriage in my mum's family. The woman was born in 1880 I think and was the youngest child. It looks like she ended up caring for her parents at a fairly young age. By the time they both died she was already in her 40s. She married her cousin the year after their death, so again there's some questions over whether that's because she didn't have the freedom to marry before for whatever reason or was simply that she hadn't found anyone else. (Keeping also in mind, that to be unmarried without your parents in the 1920s was also fairly still fairly difficult as a life because you couldn't do certain things - she would have been somewhat reliant on her two brothers for some legal matters).

I do think it's fascinating to see how attitudes to this have changed though.

The more closely related parents are - the higher the incidents of genetic issues. Communities with very high levels of consanguinity (Pakistani communities in the UK, Zoroastrian communities in India, isolated farming communities in Appalachia, Small Island communities everywhere…) have higher levels of all sorts of congenital problems.

Mostly we realise that preserving family wealth isn't worth the much higher risks of having profoundly disabled offspring now…

Historically, cousins might be married to keep name, title, land and money in the family. The power struggles between families after the Conquest are well documented with very young girls married off to much older male relatives just for breeding purposes or financial gain. It was an accepted practice everywhere, not just in this country.

In the Agatha Christie book I mentioned it wasn't specifically stated that the characters were first cousins but it's definitely positioned that way, because they attend small family gatherings with uncles and aunts together.

I know there are many cultures where marrying a first cousin is not only acceptable but also desirable (it's seen as a reliable marriage because you already know the family and are connected), so I suppose I'm asking how and when it became socially unacceptable in Western societies, since it seemed acceptable until fairly recently.

Strange that the marriage is legal then if the science says no.

In Europe, cousin marriage was prohibited by the Church by about 900 AD. Parish priests often kept a ‘kin book’ to ensure that people did not marry their cousins ( which included second cousins).

In medieval Europe, ‘consanguinity’ was often used as a ground for dissolving a marriage ( as divorce was not possible). The most famous example is probably Eleanor of Aquitaine and Louis of France; she then married Henry II of England.

The problems of inbreeding were well known, farmers took pains to buy or exchange rams , bulls and boars so that the flocks were continually refreshed with new blood.

My pils are second cousins. Discovered after the wedding... or actually at it when the family met up and realised! Contact list years before.

The oddest thing is they have photos of them playing together as children,older relatives dug them out.

First of all, apologies if anyone here is married to their first cousin!

I just personally find it icky because we were really close to all our cousins growing up, and we went on holiday together every year as kids.
So I only have my own experience with cousins to draw on.

But you do also run the risk of birth defects in any children you may have. You share grandparents, and your aunt and uncle become your parents in law-it just doesn’t sit right with me

I worked with a lady who married her first cousin. Their mum's were sisters and they grew up together. I find it so weird and 🤮. They had two children. Not sure about any genetic conditions as I don't work with her any longer.

It used to be somewhat common - and is still common in some communities - as a way of keeping money/property within families. For royals and similar, this also meant ruling over more area/people and/or having more power. That said, the Catholic Church has long frowned upon it/prohibited it - part of the reason why it kept detailed records of births, marriages etc.

However, since we started to understand genetics and other areas of science better, the risks of cousin marriage - especially over repeated generations - have become even more apparent. I suspect that started in the early to mid 20th century. That has made it feel especially icky.

Socially, I don't think cousin marriage was ever 'popular' among 'average' people in Britain - mostly as it feels too close to sibling marriage which has always been illegal. As for the cousin marriage in Agatha Christie books, as others have said that will often refer to more distant cousins rather than simply first cousins.

As an aside, I have a friend (early 40s) whose parents are first cousins (fwiw they're white English). Even she thinks it's weird!

I'm not sure it should be legal.
Certainly any first cousins planning to marry should be made very aware of the real potential for increased genetic/medical issues in any offspring they plan to have, especially if their families already have cousin marriage through the generations.