The problem with using the Panormia for the period after 1215 AD is that
the Fourth Lateran Council, in canon 50, restricted the prohibition to the
1st through 4th degrees of consanguinity. Also of interest, canon 52 tries
to regulate the use of hearsay evidence in testimony about degrees of
consanguinity and affinity..=
At 09:22 PM 12/1/2000 +0100, you wrote:
>Perhaps, you could find useful information about consanguinity and
>legitimation of children in the Panormia of Ivo of Chartres, Liber VII,
>especially Cap 76 ff. "In quo ramusculo consanguinitatis legitima fieri
>connubia possint." See, e.g., Migne's Patrologia Latina 161, col 1299ff.
>Although your problem is not answered there"expressis verbis" , it seems
>that consanguinity was regarded by Ivo and his predecessors exclusively as a
>biological , but not as a juristic phenomenon: E.g. "Conjugem ducere sicut
>non licet Christiano de SUO sanguine usque ad septimam gradum, sicut etiam
>nec licet de consanguinitate uxoris suae conjugem ducere propter carnis
>unitatem..." (Cap 79). Consanguinity could be defined by ONE parent, as a
>minimum. E.g: "Avus enim et avia TAM EX PATRE QUAM EX MATRE accipiuntur..."
>(Cap 90. ex Isidoro of Sev.). As regards Alain Fergent, I think that
>bastardy of a daughter HADVISA could not justify a marriage between his
>grandchildren, by any way. Probably one of the sources is false.
>More later, in a personal letter!
>PS: Hadvisa is NOT the same name as Heloisa!