Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1999-03 > 0922292445

From: John Carmi Parsons <>
Subject: Re: De St. Liz and de Quincy
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 11:20:45 -0500 (EST)

Since dispensations were required for couples descended from different
marriages (i.e., different mothers OR different fathers) of one ancestor,
it would seem likely that bastard descents did not matter, since they too
would involve different sexual partners of one ancestor. In other words,
I doubt whether the marital status of the ancestral sexual partners did

I recall reading in a biography of Catherine the Great, however, that the
Russian Orthodox church was willing to regard kinship reckoned through
female lines as less weighty that than through males. It was for this
reason that the church allowed Catherine's marriage to Peter III, even
though they were related within prohibited degrees. (It's all academic
anyway, of course, since Peter most probably wasn't the father of Catherine's
son Paul.)

John Parsons

On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Todd A. Farmerie wrote:

> Dcrdcr4 wrote:
> >
> > First, I was told some years ago by
> > Lee Sheppard that dispensations were not required in cases of people being
> > related through bastard lines. In this case, you have a bastardy in both the
> > groom and the bride's ancestry. To be honest, I have never checked to see if
> > Lee was correct but I assume he was. He was quite definite about the matter.
> I have seen this claim too, but know of numerous examples in which the
> relationship requiring a dispensation is attributed to just such an
> illegitimate descent, so I do not know how true this is. If it is true,
> then there are a whole lot of dispensations needing reanalysis.
> taf

This thread: