Pyrrhos: his son and daughters married?

[Tretii]

In all fairness, it's not fair to judge ANY culture by the norms of one. Just as we may find some cultures past and present barbaric and uncivilised, they may think the same as us.

The things that seperate different cultures are their values and morals more than anything else. Just because Incest is consider heinous now doesn't make it so then. If it wasn't for the bible, we might still be doing it (except in Norfolk where they are still doing it )! You may marry someone for their attractiveness and think nothing of the shame it could bring your family by marrying beneath yourself. Pyrrhos may find that appalling, but now it would be romantic and a good thing. Let them marry whoever they want!

Errm, they were doing it in Bible, in case you didn't know. The gizzer named Noah got screwed by all his three daughters as long as I member.
I think we are not doing it because we can distinguish between normal and [messed] up.

[Ca Putt]

and because it leads to retards if done too often -> habsburg

but youre right, it is not to us to judje if people who lived 2000 years before us were good or bad. they would probably find A LOT of stuff to detest in our society.

[Hax]

and because it leads to retards if done too often

No, it doesn't.

Pyrrhos' daughter was married to the tyrant of Syracuse. I'm not quite sure on his sons though.

[Recoil]

scuse hax, but doesnt inbreeding eventually produce children who are retarded (physically or mentally) after long enough? im not quite sure about the specifics, but i swear he had a point saying that

[Nobo]

I seem to remember something about hemophilia, but I'm not really sure if that really has to do with inbreeding

[Sumskilz]

No, it doesn’t produce retarded offspring, but it does increase the likelihood of them receiving genetic illnesses caused by recessive traits. Most genetic illnesses are caused by a mutation at a specific allele. For example, if a random mutation occurs at a specific allele in a royal bloodline, it isn’t really an issue as long as each individual has at least one good copy of the gene, but inbreeding increases the likelihood of having two copies of the bad gene and thusly the disease.

[Pontius Pilate]

No, it doesn’t produce retarded offspring, but it does increase the likelihood of them receiving genetic illnesses caused by recessive traits. Most genetic illnesses are caused by a mutation at a specific allele. For example, if a random mutation occurs at a specific allele in a royal bloodline, it isn’t really an issue as long as each individual has at least one good copy of the gene, but inbreeding increases the likelihood of having two copies of the bad gene and thusly the disease.

yes, about the gene thing. an example is that I have heard that due to inbreeding Charles V holy Roman emperor, had a slightly deformed/protruding chin that he and some of his predecessors carried.

In all fairness, it's not fair to judge ANY culture by the norms of one. Just as we may find some cultures past and present barbaric and uncivilised, they may think the same as us.

The things that seperate different cultures are their values and morals more than anything else. Just because Incest is consider heinous now doesn't make it so then.

I couldn't have said it better myself. We really don't have the right to judge what people thousands of years ago did, and whether it was right or wrong. We would just be implying our own modern ideas and morals to them, and twisting the image. I like to view the past and history in general, as it was then, with no bias or bull in it. You also, have to remember, Pyrrhos lived in a time before Judeo-Christian beliefs were dominant in the west. It was a whole different world back then.

[Intranetusa]

Errm, they were doing it in Bible, in case you didn't know. The gizzer named Noah got screwed by all his three daughters as long as I member.
I think we are not doing it because we can distinguish between normal and [messed] up.

I think it was actually his sons...which is a bit more disturbing.

But parent-child incest is WAYYYYY worse than brother sister incest.

[gamegeek2]

Why do we really care who they married? They married and had some fun. That's history. RTW engine doesn't represent it because it's usually considered unacceptable in modern society.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

The RTW engine is quite ridiculous in that regard. Women giving birth from 12 till 50... No divorces and no re-marrying after death of one. I think that part of RTW was programmed by some ultra-conservative christian from the "real America"...

[machinor]

In MTW you could marry your princesses to your sons. I once tried it out of spontanious boredom and it worked. The heir would get a living-secretly-in-incest-trait or something like that which had bad consequences if it got public.

In antiquity marriage wasn't about sexual attraction or love. It was about business and politics.

[desert]

I'm pretty sure incest wasn't acceptable back then either. At least, Oedipus didn't seem to think so.

He called his kids abominations which no man would want to look upon .

[Intrepid Adventurer]

Errm, they were doing it in Bible, in case you didn't know. The gizzer named Noah got screwed by all his three daughters as long as I member.
I think we are not doing it because we can distinguish between normal and [messed] up.

There's of course the theory that people used to be genetically stronger than we are now, because naturally we all degrade. So in that case Noah's daughters would have gotten healthy kids! In any case, it's only until Moses that the Bible comes up with rules against incest. There's no other way if Adam and Eve really existed, you know. (:

[Gleemonex]

There's of course the theory that people used to be genetically stronger than we are now, because naturally we all degrade. So in that case Noah's daughters would have gotten healthy kids! In any case, it's only until Moses that the Bible comes up with rules against incest. There's no other way if Adam and Eve really existed, you know. (:

Genes aren't "strong" or "weak", only recessive and dominant. Sumskilz' post sums it up nicely.

-Glee

[Celtic_Punk]

Romans thought it was disgusting, in practise it wasn't so much the same IIRC.

Some people think when they are kings they are divine, and when it comes to the Myths.... God's love their incest.

[gamegeek2]

Well, the gods really didn't have anyone else to marry (not counting mortals) - They're all one big family.

[Maion Maroneios]

Just wanted to make some things clear.

First of all, incest does not necessarily lead to retarded children. It's just preferred for two persons of different families to marry, because their children get different genes when the zygote is formed. So basically, if two brethren of first cousins marry and get children, their kids have a greater chance of getting the same genes, which in not good in most cases. There are cases of incest where their children are absolutely fine whatsoever. That's some basic genetics.

Secondly, in the ancient world (Greece, that is) marriage was a tool and had no emotional meaning. Women where wed to men with the sole purpose of producing good (male) citizens, not because the couple had feelings for each other. There are cases of couples being truly in love though, or rather getting to love each other in the course of time. But marriage was also used as a political tool, for example alliances where formed when nations allowed their royalty to intermarry. In many cases, women where also wed to close relatives because in that way her dowry would remain within the family.

Anyway just my two cents here.

Maion

[desert]

Really, continuous inbreeding is what causes all the deformed babies and the like.

For example, consider Disease a. It is, say, autosomal recessive like cystic fibrosis. This means that, if A is the normal version of the gene, and a is the messed-up version, you would need aa for the symptoms to manifest. So say that the messed-up allele "a" is common in a family, and two members of the family, one of whom is affected (Aa), and the other wildtype (normal) AA mate.. The cross would look something like this:

AA x Aa =

| Aa | Aa |
|----- |------|
| Aa | Aa |


So all of the offspring would be carriers, but none would exhibit symptoms of the disease. NOW...
say two of those kids also mate one day. That would look like:

Aa x Aa

So basically 1/4 AA, 1/2 Aa, and 1/4 aa, meaning 25% of the kids will now have the disease. Continual inbreeding, lets say the aa x Aa would lead to 50% having the disease. Eventually, almost everyone might have the disease.

Presumably this is a rare genetic disorder, and so if the original parents(AA x Aa) had mated with individuals outside of their own family, they would have most likely mated with someone who was AA, leading to a much smaller probability of a descendant having the disease.


Bleh.