epic marriage

[Georg von Simson]

>*        But vasudeva, the subhadra's father was the brother of kuntI,
>the
>*arjuna's mother, and hence the wife and husband were very close
>relatives.
>*        Is such a marriage (between first crossed cousins) a legal one?
>*       If not, the fact that zUra (biological father of subhadrA and
>*kRSNa) gave his just born daughter to kuntibhoja, son of his paternal
>aunt,
>*making him the legal father of kuntI, could make the marriage to be
>legal
>*(between third cousins)?
>
>*       I summarize:
>*(biological)
>*zUra > kuntI > arjuna
>*zUra > vasudeva > subhadrA
>*(official)
>*X > a woman > kuntibhoja > kuntI > arjuna
>*X > citraratha > zUra > vasudeva > subhadrA
>
>    The official marriage is very legal in the "Dravidian
>kinship" system.
>For a full analysis of this marriage pattern and
>earlier study by Henry Morgan, et al., (I have read
>that Iroquois Indians, australian tribes, .. also follow this)
>pl. see:
>Thomas Trautmann, Dravidian kinship, Univ. Michigan press
>
>Regards,
>N. Ganesan
>
The cross cousin marriage system may have been rather popular in ancient
India (particularlly within the nobility?) before (and even after?)
dharmazAstra authors tried to prohibit it by their sapiNDA, gotra and
pravara restrictions. There are several examples in the family of the
Buddha and the geneology of the first kings of Ceylon according to the
MahAvaMsa, cf. A. M. Hocart, "Buddha and Devadatta", Indian Antiquary 52
(1923), p. 267-72. You may be right that the introduction of Kuntibhoja in
the story was meant to make the case more acceptable. But, as you point
out, arjuna and subhadrA were still third cousins, and their marriage, as
far as I can see, not acceptable according to dharmazAstra. For the details
of the limiting rules see Kane, Hist. of DharmazAstra, Vol. II, Pt. I, p.
452 ff.

Regards,
Georg v. Simson