Freed men were not slaves anymore, FD, but a good detail nevertheless.
Inbreeding was common in Rome, particularly among patricians who wanted their wealth kept in the family. It was also common after the fall of Rome, and particularly among the European aristocracy.
Quote:For some prominent examples of cousin marriages in ancient Rome, such as the marriage of Octavian's daughter to his sister's son, see the Julio-Claudian family tree. Marcus Aurelius also married his maternal first cousin Faustina the Younger, and they had 13 children. Cousin marriage was more frequent in Ancient Greece, and marriages between uncle and niece were also permitted there.[4] One example is King Leonidas I of Sparta, who married his half-niece. A Greek woman who became epikleros, or heiress with no brothers, was obliged to marry her father's nearest male kin if she had not yet married and given birth to a male heir. First in line would be either her father's brothers or their sons, followed by her father's sisters' sons.[36] According to Goody, cousin marriage was allowed in the newly Christian and presumably also pre-Christian Ireland, where an heiress was also obligated to marry a paternal cousin. From the 7th century the Irish Church only recognized four degrees of prohibited kinship, and civil law fewer. This persisted until after the Norman conquests in the 11th century and the synod at Cashel in 1101.[37] In contrast, contemporary English law was based on official Catholic policy, and Anglo-Norman clergy often became disgusted with the Irish "law of fornication".[38] Finally, Edward Westermarck states that marriage among the ancient Teutons was apparently prohibited only in the ascending and descending lines and among siblings.[39] First cousin marriage was also common among southern Italians as Sicily had a high percentage of cousin marriage of almost 50 percent in rural areas in the early 20th century.[40][41]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriageBut I'm curious. What's the direct support for inbreeding in the Koran?
I draw your attention to a certain country on your inbreeding map that has gone meticulously avoided to date: India, a country where 20-29% are allegedly inbred.
India is also an emerging world power, the second largest emerging economy in the world. If your thesis is correct, if inbreeding leads to a decline in living standards, technological development, "inclusive" systems of government, etc, etc, etc, how could India possibly have such a high level of economic growth?
I'd pose a simple solution to this enigma, but I'm not sure you'll agree with my answer.
Population.
India, quite simply, is an emerging world power because it has the world's second highest population in the world.
And yes, I know where you'll go with this. No, you'll say, India is an emerging world power because it has "elections", the heavy legacy of our past, bequeathed by that great past empire, Mother England.
To which my response will be, no FD, India is a democracy because it fought for its independence
from Mother. I'll also say that China is not a democracy but they're the second biggest economy in the world, so democracy couldn't possibly be the cause of wealth creation per se.
Oh - and China has "elections".
No, India is an emerging power
despite its high level of inbreeding and even its low average IQ score - a few points lower than all those Muslim countries.
So there you go again - not even a country's average estimated IQ score is the sole driver of national wealth/economic growth. India has high inbreeding, a low average IQ score, elections, and as much tintedness as all your Muselman countries put together.
But it does have a hell of a lot of people.
Ah.
Forum
Pages: 
