"A man without a law is a beast."

Why is incest wrong? What is incest? When the Nine Witch-Queens include a mother and a daughter, Gratillonius will not have sex with both. Why not? I would not call that incest. However, I share his repugnance when his own daughter becomes one of the Nine. He says:

"'The law of Mithras forbids...A man without a law is a beast.'"
-Poul and Karen Anderson, Dahut, Chapter IX, section 2, p. 190.

I think that our ancestors devised the incest taboo for sound biological reasons, then invested this taboo with divine authority. I heed neither the law of Mithras nor that of Christ but my own moral judgment. As it happens, I have been brought up in such a way that I cannot be sexually attracted to close relatives because I do not see them as potential sexual partners in the first place so there is no temptation towards any incestuous relationship and, in that sense, it does not become a moral issue. However, I think that the taboo makes sense although it need not be legally enforced.

Dahut, fully at one with the Gods of Ys, wants to consummate her marriage to her father. An older Queen says:

"'...all that is to come will spring from you, how you bear your burdens and, what road you choose to fare.'" (pp. 191-192)

If Dahut had been able to accept, as her father suggests, that she is the first Queen free to let her prince find her, then maybe that would have been the new Age of Ys. Queen Forsquilis fears "'...a war between Gods...'" (p. 191) If it were that, then human beings would have to stop following Gods and begin to make their own destinies.