essay on types of marriage

• Parenting & Family Parenting Family Pregnancy
• Courses Marriage Save My Marriage Pre Marriage
• Quizzes Relationship Quizzes Love Quizzes Couples Quiz
• Find a Therapist

25 Different Types of Marriages

Angela Welch is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist and Licensed Chemical Dependency Counselor Intern from Valparaiso,IN. She earned her Master of Arts in Marriage and... Read More

Rachael Pace inspires with motivational articles on loving partnerships. She encourages making room for love and facing challenges together.

It’s no secret that marriage in different cultures doesn’t quite mean the same thing as it did just 100 years ago, and not the same as several hundred years ago.

It wasn’t that long ago that different types of marriage and relationships were all about security; in a world with limited opportunity, you wanted to make sure your future had some stability, and marrying was a big part of that. It’s only a recent development that people marry for love . 

Since the purpose of marriages is so diverse and twisted, there are different types of marriages you should know about. Here are 25 different types of marriages you should be aware of. 

25 types of marriages

The types of marriages can differ based on the purpose of the marriage and how the relationship between two people is defined. Here are 25 different types of marriages. 

1. Civil and religious marriage

These are two different types of marriages, often combined into one. Civil marriage is when the marriage is recognized by the state, while a religious marriage is when the recognition is received from a religious body, such as the church.

2. Interfaith marriage

Faith or religion makes up for a major part of ourselves and our lives. Previously, people from the same faiths would prefer to get married. However, as time progressed, people from different religions have also started to come together in a union. When people from two different religions decide to get married, it is called an interfaith marriage. 

3. Common-law marriage

Common-law marriage is a type of marriage when two people have decided that they are married and live together like husband and wife but do not have a certificate of registry.

4. Monogamous marriage

Monogamous marriage is the most common type of marriage people practice all over the world. It is when two people are married to each other without getting emotionally or sexually involved with anyone else outside the marriage.

5. Polygamous marriage

Polygamous marriage, though not as common now , used to be the norm several hundred years ago. It is when people have more than one official spouse. 

Polygamous marriage can be of two types – polygyny marriage and polyandry marriage. Polygyny is when a man has more than one wife, while polyandry is when the woman has more than one husband.

6. Left-handed marriage

Left-handed marriage is when two people from unequal social rankings get together in a union of marriage. It is also called a morganatic marriage. 

7. Secret marriage

As the name suggests, a secret marriage is when the marriage is hidden from society, friends, and family. When two people are secretly married but have not informed their family or friends about the same. 

8. Shotgun marriage

Most people plan their marriage and when they want to get married. However, a shotgun marriage is when a couple decides to get married because of an unplanned pregnancy.

Many cultures and societies look down upon having kids before marriage, and therefore, some people may decide to get married to save their reputation or the embarrassment to their families.

9. Mixed marriage

A mixed marriage is also called an inter-racial marriage. A mixed marriage is another one of the marriage types that is becoming popular lately. Previously, people would only marry in their own race. Now, people from different races also come together in the union of marriage.

10. Same-sex marriage

Same-sex marriages have also become common now. Though not as widely accepted as other types of marriage in sociology, same-sex marriages have been deemed legal in many parts of the world. It is when people who wish to marry people of the same sex come together to get married. 

A man marries a man, and a woman marries a woman – as opposed to the societal construct that only a man and woman can get married.

11. Love marriage

Love marriages are the types of marriages where people get married because they love each other. They meet each other, fall in love, and marriage seems like the next logical step to them. 

12. Arranged marriage

Arranged marriages are the opposite of love marriages. It is when the family finds a suitable match for an eligible bachelor or bachelorette, keeping in mind factors such as race, religion, caste, and any other specifics that they might have.

13. Convenience marriage

As the name suggests, a convenience marriage is when two people get married for reasons that bring convenience to their lives, and not because of love. These reasons can be practical, or financial.

14. Zombie marriage

This is when you both are docile and nice to each other in front of other people, and to them, you are still married. 

However, behind closed doors, you do not share any sort of a relationship. It has come to a point where you are not even sure if you both are really married in the essence of your relationship.

15. Group marriage

Group marriage is when one or more men are married to one or more women. It is different from a polygamous marriage because in this case, a group of people is married to each other, while in a polygamous marriage, a person just has multiple spouses.

16. Parenting marriage

Another one of the different forms of marriage that are very common these days is called parenting marriage. This is when two people decide to stay married to each other for the sake of their kids. 

They wait for the children to grow up, and become independent before they separate or file for a divorce.

17. Safety marriage

Safety marriage is when a marriage occurs because something tangible, mostly materialistic, is decided to be given in return. These terms are decided before marriage.

18. Open marriage

One more type of marriage that has recently become popular is open marriage . It is when two people who are officially married are allowed to see other people outside the marriage. It is a mutual agreement between two spouses.

To understand more about open marriages, watch this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nALP-EYOaMc&ab_channel=TODAY

19. Court marriage

A court marriage is when the couple skips the traditional ceremony, and directly applies for a marriage certificate from the court. 

20. Time-bound marriage

This type of marriage is when the agreement of marriage is bound by time. The couple decides that they will only stay married to each other for a specific time period.

21. The Partnership

In this type of marriage or in this form of marriage, the husband and wife act a lot like business partners. They are equals in so many ways. Most likely, they both work full-time jobs and share a lot of the household and child-rearing responsibilities equally.

In these types of marriages, the couples are interested in contributing their half in order to make a more cohesive whole. If you are in this type of relationship, you’ll feel out of balance when the other person isn’t doing the same things you are doing.

So if you feel like you need to have different roles, you’ll need to really dissect it and negotiate until you both feel you are still on equal footing. This applies to all aspects of the marriage—even the romance part. You must both be making equal efforts in this area.

22. The Independents

People who have these types of marriages want autonomy. They more or less live separate lives alongside each other. They don’t feel like they need to agree on everything because each person’s thoughts and feelings are separate from their own and valuable in their own right.

They give each other room to be who they want to be; they may even spend their free time apart. When it comes to doing things around the house, they tend to work separately in their areas of interest and on their timetables.

They may have less physical togetherness than other couples but feel just as fulfilled. People who enjoy these types of marriages will feel stifled if their spouse is too needy or wants to be together all the time. 

Just know that an independent isn’t pulling away because they don’t love you—they just need to have that independent space.

Check out this video of a couple talking about maintaining individuality and independence while being married:

23. The degree seekers

A couple in this type of marriage ceremony are in it to learn something. Many times the husband and wife in this relationship are quite different—even opposites. One could be good at something, and the other not so much, and vice versa.

So they each possess skills the other would like to develop. In essence, marriage is like a school of life. They are constantly learning from each other. They find it very stimulating to watch how the other lives and handles themselves in different situations.

Over time, they begin to pick up on their spouse’s skills and feel good about that process as it unfolds. 

If they ever feel like they are no longer learning anything from their spouse, they may feel disillusioned; so keep things fresh by constantly learning and growing for yourself, and so you can offer something to your degree-seeking spouse.

24. The “traditional” roles

This is the type of marriage depicted in old TV shows. The wife stays at home and takes care of the house and kids; the husband goes to work and comes home and reads the paper or watches TV. 

The wife has clearly defined roles, and the husband has clearly defined roles, and they are different.

In multiple marriages, when the husband and wife find joy in their roles and are supported by the other, it works well. But when the roles aren’t fulfilled, or their roles overlap, there can be resentment or loss of self.

25. The companionship

In this alternative marriage ,  the husband and wife want a life-long friend. Their relationship is familiar and loving. They are really after someone to share their life with—someone to be by their side through everything. 

There is less independence in this marriage, and that’s ok. They appreciate a lot of togetherness.

The bottom line

We hope this article was able to answer the question, “What are the different types of marriages?”

While there are various other types of marriages apart from the ones mentioned here, the truth is that different marriages occur due to different reasons. Marriage types are, therefore, defined based on these reasons. 

There is no definite answer to the question, “How many types of marriage do we have?” but these are the most common types of marriages.

Share this article on

Rachael Pace is a noted relationship writer associated with Marriage.com. She provides inspiration, support, and empowerment in the form of motivational articles and essays. Rachael enjoys studying the evolution of loving partnerships Read more and is passionate about writing on them. She believes that everyone should make room for love in their lives and encourages couples to work on overcoming their challenges together. Read less

Want to have a happier, healthier marriage?

If you feel disconnected or frustrated about the state of your marriage but want to avoid separation and/or divorce, the marriage.com course meant for married couples is an excellent resource to help you overcome the most challenging aspects of being married.

Take Course

Learn More On This Topic

Relationship

By pritam nagrale.

By Donna Hawkins

Approved By Jenni Jacobsen, Licensed Clinical Social Worker

Save Your Marriage

By rachael pace.

Same Sex Marriage

By marriage.com editorial team, relationship & marriage advice.

Approved By Jeannie Sytsma, Marriage & Family Therapist Associate

Forgiveness

By sarakay smullens, psychologist.

Approved By Angela Welch, Marriage & Family Therapist

Marriage Preparation

By kimberly kruse, marriage & family therapist, you may also like.

Emotional Intimacy

Approved By Dionne Eleanor, Coach

Zodiac Signs

By Kelli H, Licensed Clinical Social Worker

Approved By Christiana Njoku, Licensed Professional Counselor

By Draven Porter

Recent articles.

By Dylan Banks

By Kaida Hollister

Popular topics on married life.

Your Article Library

Essay on marriage: meaning, functions and forms.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Here is your essay on marriage, it’s meaning, functions and forms! 

Introduction :

Marriage and family sociologically signifies the stage of greater social advancement. It is indicative of man’s entry into the world of emotion and feeling, harmony and culture. Long before the institution of marriage developed, man and woman may have lived together, procreated children and died unwept and unsung. Their sexual relations must have been like birds and animals of momentary duration.

Image Courtesy : 2.bp.blogspot.com/–Zyo4IJENYk/TtuIdHcjm-I/AAAAAAAACwQ/Rg89UBiMU0A/s1600/lklk.jpg

Marriage as an institution developed over the time. It may have been accepted as a measure of social discipline and as an expedient to eliminate social stress due to the sex rivalry. The growing sense and sensibility may have necessitated the acceptance of norms for formalising the union between man and woman.

Meaning of Marriage :

Marriage is the most important institution of human society. It is a universal phenomenon. It has been the backbone of human civilisation. Human beings have certain urges like hungers, thirst and sex. Society works out certain rules and regulation for satisfaction of these urges.

The rules and regulations, which deal with regulation of sex life of human beings, are dealt in the marriage institution. We can say that the Marriage is as old as the institution of family. Both these institutions are vital for the society. Family depends upon the Marriage. Marriage regulates sex life of human beings.

Marriage creates new social relationships and reciprocal rights between the spouses. It establishes the rights and the status of the children when they are born. Each society recognises certain procedures for creating such relationship and rights. The society prescribes rules for prohibitions, preferences and prescriptions in deciding marriage. It is this institution through which a man sustains the continuity of his race and attains satisfaction in a socially recognised manner.

Sociologists and anthropologists have given definitions of marriage. Some of the important definitions are given below. Edward Westermark. “Marriage is a relation of one or more men to one or more women which is recognised by custom or law and involves certain rights and duties both in the case of the parties entering the union and in the case of the children born of it.

As B. Malinowski defines, “Marriage is a contract for the production and maintenance of children”.

According H.M. Johnson, “Marriage is a stable relationship in which a man and a woman are socially permitted without loss of standing in community, to have children”.

Ira L. Reiss writes, “Marriage is a socially accepted union of individuals in husband and wife roles, with the key function of legitimating of parenthood”.

William Stephens, the anthropologist, says that marriage is:

(1) A socially legitimate sexual union begun with

(2) A public announcement, undertaken with

(3) Some idea of performance and assumed with a more or less explicit

(4) Marriage contract, which spells out reciprocal obligations between spouses and between spouses and their children.

William J. Goode, the famous family sociologist has tried to combine the two objectives of marriage i.e. to regulate sex life and to recognize the newborn. It was perhaps for this reason that American sociologists came out with the statement that no child should be born without a father.

Although different thinkers have tried to provide definition of marriage, but there is no universally acceptable definition of marriage. There seems to be, however, a consensus that marriage involves several criteria that are found to exist cross-culturally and throughout time. For example, Hindu marriage has three main objectives such as Dharma, Progeny and Sexual Pleasure.

Individual happiness has been given the least importance. It is considered to be sacrament, a spiritual union between a man and a woman in the social status of husband and wife.

In Western countries, marriage is a contract. Personal happiness is given the utmost importance. People enter into matrimonial alliances for the sake of seeking personal happiness. If this happiness is-not forthcoming they will terminate the relationship.

Marriage is thus cultural specific. The rules and regulations differ from one culture to another. We can, however, identify certain basic features of this institution.

(1) A heterosexual union, including at least one male and one female.

(2) The legitimizing or granting of approval to the sexual relationship and the bearing of children without any loss of standing in the community or society.

(3) A public affair rather than a private, personal matter.

(4) A highly institutionalized and patterned mating arrangement.

(5) Rules which determine who can marry whom.

(6) New statuses to man and woman in the shape of husband and wife and father and mother.

(7) Development of personal intimate and affectionate relationships between the spouses and parent and children.

(8) A binding relationship that assumes some performance.

The above discussion helps us to conclude that the boundaries of marriage are not always precise and clearly defined. It is, however, very important institution for the society as it helps in replacement of old and dying population.

Functions of Marriage :

Marriage is an institutionalized relationship within the family system. It fulfills many functions attributed to the family in general. Family functions include basic personality formation, status ascriptions, socialization, tension management, and replacement of members, economic cooperation, reproduction, stabilization of adults, and the like.

Many of these functions, while not requiring marriage for their fulfillment, are enhanced by the marital system”. In fact, evidence suggests marriage to be of great significance for the well-being of the individual. Researchers have shown that compared to the unmarried, married persons are generally happier, healthier, less depressed and disturbed and less prone to premature deaths. Marriage, rather than becoming less important or unimportant, may be increasingly indispensable.

The functions of marriage differ as the structure of marriage differs. ‘For example, where marriage is specially an extension of the kin and extended family system, then procreation, passing on the family name and continuation of property become a basic function. Thus, to not have a child or more specifically, to not have a male child, is sufficient reason to replace the present wife or add a new wife.

Where marriage is based on “free choice,” i.e. parents and kinsmen play no role in selecting the partner, individualistic forces are accorded greater significance. Thus in the United States, marriage has many functions and involves many positive as well as negative personal factors : establishment of a family of one’s own, children, companionship, happiness, love, economic security, elimination of loneliness etc.

The greater the extent to which the perceived needs of marriage are met, and the fewer the alternatives in the replacement of the unmet needs, the greater the likelihood of marriage and the continuation of that marriage. At a personal level, any perceived reason may explain marriage, but at a social level, all societies sanction certain reasons and renounce others.

Forms of Marriage :

Societies evolved mannerism and method for selection of the spouses, according to their peculiar socio-economic and political conditions, and in accordance with their levels of cultural advancement. This explains on the one hand the origin of the various forms, of marriage and on the other the differences in the attitude of societies towards the institution of marriage.

Some have accepted it as purely a contractual arrangement between weds, while others hold it as the sacred union between man, and woman. Forms of marriage vary from society to society. Marriage can be broadly divided into two types, (1) monogamy and (2) polygamy.

1. Monogamy :

Monogamy is that form of marriage in which at a given period of time one man has marital relations with one woman. On the death of the spouse or one of the partners seek divorce then they can establish such relationship with other persons but at a given period of time, one cannot have two or more wives or two or more husbands.

This one to one relationship is the most modern civilized way of living. In most of the societies it is this form, which is found and recognized. It should be noted that on a societal basis, only about 20 per cent of the societies are designated as strictly monogamous, that is, monogamy is the required form.

When monogamy does not achieve stability, certain married persons end their relationship and remarry. Thus, the second spouse, although not existing simultaneously with the first, is sometimes referred to as fitting into a pattern of sequential monogamy, serial monogamy or remarriage.

Advantages:

Keeping in view the advantages of monogamy the world has granted recognition to monogamous form of marriage. The following are its advantages:

1. Better Adjustment:

In this form of marriage men and women have to adjust with one partner only. In this way there is better adjustment between them.

2. Greater Intimacy:

If the number of people in the family will be limited there will be more love and affection in the family. Because of which they will have friendly and deep relations.

3. Better Socialization of Children:

In the monogamy the children are looked after with earnest attention of parents. The development of modes of children will be done nicely. There will be no jealously between the parents for looking after their children.

4. Happy Family:

Family happiness is maintained under monogamy which is completely destroyed in other forms of marriage because of jealousy and other reasons. Thus, in this form of marriage, family is defined as happy family.

5. Equal Status to Woman:

In this form of marriage the status of woman in family is equal. If husband works she looks after the house or both of them work for strengthening the economic condition of the family.

6. Equalitarian way of Living:

It is only under monogamous way of living that husband and wife can have equalitarian way of life. Under this system husband and wife not only share the familial role and obligations but also have joint decisions. The decision making process becomes a joint venture.

7. Population Control:

Some sociologists have the view that monogamy controls the population. Because of one wife children in the family will be limited.

8. Better Standard of Living:

It also affects the standard of living within limited resources. One can manage easily to live a better life. It helps in the development of independent personality without much constraint and pressure.

9. Respect to old Parents:

Old parents receive favouring care by their children but under polygamy their days are full of bitterness.

10. Law is in favour:

Monogamy is legally sanctioned form of marriage while some are legally prohibited.

11. More Cooperation:

In such a family there is close union between the couple and the chances of conflict are reduced and there is cooperation between husband and wife.

12. Stability:

It is more stable form of marriage. There is better division of property after the death of parents.

Disadvantages :

1. Adjustment:

Monogamy is a marriage between one husband and one wife. So if the partner is not of choice then life loses its charm. They have to adjust between themselves but now-a-days divorce is the answer to their problem.

2. Monopoly:

According to Sumner and Keller, “Monogamy is monopoly.” Wherever there is monopoly, there is bound to be both ‘ins and outs’.

3. Childlessness:

Some inpatients can’t have kids or some barren cannot have kids. If one of the partners has some problem couples cannot have children. They have to suffer from childlessness.

4. Economic Factors:

Marriage in monogamy does not play part of income. They have to depend upon their own occupation for living. If they are poor they will remain poor. So monogamy effects the economic condition of man and woman.

5. Better status to Women:

Monogamy provides better status to women in the society. They are counted equal to men. Some people do not like this form of marriage.

6. Adultery:

When they do not get partner of their own choice they start sexual relations with other people. This also leads to the problem of prostitution.

2. Polygamy :

Distinguished from monogamy is polygamy. Polygamy refer to the marriage of several or many. Polygamy is the form of marriage in which one man marries two or more women or one woman marries two or more men or a number of men many a number of women. According to F.N. Balasara, “The forms of marriage in which there is plurality of partners is called polygamy”.

Polygamy, like other forms of marriage is highly regulated and normatively controlled. It is likely to be supported by the attitudes and values of both the sexes. Polygamy itself has many forms and variations. Polygamy is of three types: (i) Polygyny, (ii) Polyandry and (iii) Group marriage.

Let us now discuss forms of polygamy in details,

(i) Polygyny:

Polygyny is a form of marriage in which a man has more than one .wife at a time. In other words it is a form of marriage in which one man marries more than one woman at a given time. It is the prevalent form of marriage among the tribes, Polygyny also appears to be the privilege of the wealthy, in many African societies the rich usually have more than one wife.

This type of marriage is found in Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya and Uganda. In India, polygyny persisted from the Vedic times until Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Now polygyny is visible among many tribes of India.

Viewing polygyny cross-culturally, poiygynous families evidence specific organisational features:

1. In certain matters, sex particularly, co-wives have clearly defined equal rights.

2. Each wife is set up in a separate establishment.

3. The senior wife is given special powers and privileges.

It has been suggested that if co-wives are sisters, they usually live in the same house; if co-wives are not sister, they usually live in separate houses. It is believed that sibling can better tolerate, suppress and live with a situation of sexual rivalry than can non-siblings.

Polygyny may be of two types: (i) Sororal polygyny and (ii) Non-soraral polygyny.

Sororal polygyny is one in which all the wives are sisters. Non-sororal polygyny means the marriage of one man with many women who are not sisters.

Causes of Polygyny :

1. Disproportion of sexes in the Population:

When in any tribe or society male members are less in number and females are more, then this type of marriage takes place.

2. Out-migration of male Population:

To earn the livelihood male members migrate from one society to another. This way there is a decrease in the number of males than females and polygyny takes place.

3. Hypergamy:

Hypergamy also gives rise to polygyny. Under this system the parents of lower castes or classes want to improve their social status by marrying their daughters in the higher caste or classes.

4. Desire for male Child:

Among the primitive people importance was given to make children than females. Thus man was free to have as many marriages as he liked on the ground to get male children.

5. Social Status:

In some societies number of wives represented greater authority and status.

Particularly the leaders of primitive society increased number of wives in order to prove their superiority. A single marriage was considered a sign of poverty. So where marriage is taken as sign of prestige and prosperity the custom of polygyny is natural.

6. Economic Reason:

Where the people of the poor families were unable to find suitable husbands for their daughters they started marrying their daughters to rich married males.

7. Variety of Sex Relation:

The desire for variety of sex relations is another cause of polygyny. The sexual instincts become dull by more familiarity. It is stimulated by novelty.

8. Enforced Celibacy:

In uncivilized tribes men did not approach the women during the period of pregnancy and while she was feeding the child. Thus long period of enforced celibacy gave birth to second marriage.

9. More Children:

In uncivilized society more children were needed for agriculture, war and status recognition. Moreover, in some tribes the birth rate was low and death rate was high. In such tribes polygyny was followed to obtain more children.

10. Absence of children:

According to Manu, if wife is unable to have children, man is permitted to have more marriages. He further says if a wife takes her husband then he should live with her one year and take another wife.

11. Religious Reasons:

Polygyny was permitted in the past if wife was incapable of forming religious duties in her periodic sickness because religion was given significant place in social life.

12. Patriarchal Society:

Polygyny is found only in the patriarchal society where more importance is given to males and male member is the head of the family.

Advantages :

(1) Better status of children:

In polygyny children enjoy better status. They are looked after well because there are many women in the family to care.

(2) Rapid growth of Population:

In those societies where population is very less and birth rate is almost zero, for those societies polygyny is best suited, as it increases the population at faster rate.

(3) Importance of Males:

In polygyny males occupy higher status. More importance is given to husband by several wives.

(4) Division of Work:

In polygyny there are several wives. Therefore, there is a proper division of work at home.

(5) Variety of Sex Relations:

Instead of going for extra marital relations husband stays at home because his desire for variety of sex relations is fulfilled within polygyny.

(6) Continuity of Family:

Polygyny came into existence mainly because of inability of a wife to produce children. Polygyny provides continuity to the family tree. In absence of one wife other women in the family produce children.

Disadvantage :

1. Lower status of Women:

In this form of marriage women have very low status; they are regarded as an object of pleasure for their husbands. They generally do not have a right to take decisions about their welfare; they have to depend upon their husband for fulfillment of their basic needs.

2. Jealousy as stated by Shakespeare:

“Woman thy name is jealousy”. When several wives have to share one husband, there is bound to be jealousy among co-wives. Jealousy leads to inefficiency in their work. They are not able to socialize their children in a proper manner in such atmosphere.

3. Low Economic Status:

Polygyny increases economic burden on the family because in many cases only husband is the bread winner and whole of the family is dependent on him.

4. Population Growth:

This type of marriage is harmful for developing society and poor nations because they have limited resources Further increase in population deteriorates progress and development of that society.

5. Fragmentation of Property:

In polygyny all the children born from different wives have share in father’s property. Jealousy among mothers leads to property conflicts among children as a result property is divided and income per capita decreases.

6. Uncongenial Atmosphere:

Polygyny does not promise congenial atmosphere for the proper growth and development of children. There is lack of affection among the members. As such families have large number of members. They fail to provide proper attention to all of them. This gives rise to many immoral practices in the society.

(ii) Polyandry :

It is a form of marriage in which one woman has more than one husband at a given time. According to K.M. Kapadia, Polyandry is a form of union in which a woman has more than one husband at a time or in which brothers share a wife or wives in common. This type marriage is prevalent in few places such as tribes of Malaya and some tribes of India like Toda, Khasi and Kota etc. Polyandry is of two types:

(i) Fraternal Polyandry and

(ii) Non-Fratemai Polyandry.

(i) Fraternal Polyandry:

In this form of polyandry one wife is regarded as the wife of all brothers. All the brothers in a family share the same woman as their wife. The children are treated as the offspring of the eldest brother, it is found in some Indian tribes like Toda and Khasis. This type of marriage was popular in Ceylon (Srilanka at present).

(ii) Non-Fraternal Polyandry:

In this type of polyandry one woman has more than one husband who is not brothers. They belong to different families. The wife cohabits with husbands in turn. In case of Fraternal Polyandry, the wife lives in the family of her husbands, while in case of non-fraternal polyandry, the wife continues to stay in the family of her mother. This type of polyandry is found among Nayars of Kerala.

Causes of Polyandry :

1. Lesser number of Women:

According to Westermark, when the number of women is lesser than the number of males in a society, polyandry is found. For example, among Todas of Nilgiri. But according to Brifficult, polyandry can exist even when the number of women is not lesser e.g. in Tibet, Sikkim and Laddakh polyandry is found even though there is not much disparity in the number of men and women.

2. Infanticide:

In some tribal societies female infanticide is present; as a result these female population is less than male population. Further males do not enjoy good status. Therefore, one female is married to a group of brothers and polyandry exists.

3. Matrilineal System:

Just in contrast to above noted point, it has also been argued that polyandry exists in matrilineal system where one woman can have relationship with more than one man and the children instead of getting the name of father are known by mother’s name.

4. Poverty:

Polyandry exists in such areas where there is scarcity of natural resources. It is for this reason many men support one woman and her children.

5. Bride Price:

In societies where there is bridge price, polyandry exists. Brothers pay for one bride who becomes wife of all of them.

6. Division of Property:

To check the division of ancestral property polyandry is favoured. When all the brothers have one wife then the question of division of property does not arise.

7. Production and labour:

Polyandry not only avoids division of property but it also increases production in agriculture. All the brothers work together because they have to support only one family. Thus production and income increases, further there is no expenditure with regard to labour because all the husbands contribute their share of work.

8. Social Custom:

Polyandry exists in some societies mainly because of customs and traditions of that particular society. Generally, polyandry is found in such areas which are situated far away from modern developed areas.

(1) Checks Population Growth:

It checks population growth because all the male members of the family share one wife. As a result population does not increase at that rapid rate, the way in which it occurs in polygyny Therefore, it limits the size of the family.

(2) Economic Standard:

Polyandry helps to unhold the economic standard of the family. It strengthens the economic position of the family because all the members work for the improvement of the family.

(3) Greater Security:

With large number of males working after the family affairs, other members of the family especially women and children feel quite secure. Greater security among the members develop sense of we-feeling among the members of the family.

(4) Property is kept Intact:

In polyandry family does not get divided. The property of the family is held jointly and thus it is kept intact.

(5) Status of Women:

In polyandry one woman is wife of large number of husbands. As a result she gets attention of all the members and thus enjoys a good status in the family. She feels quite secure because in the absence of one husband other males are there to fulfill her basic needs.

Disadvantages:

(1) Jealousy:

When all the men have to share one woman, family quarrels and tensions are ought to be there. Husbands feel jealous of one another which adversely effect congenial atmosphere of the family.

(2) Lack of Model:

When children have large number of fathers they fail to select appropriate model for themselves. This adversely effects their personality configuration.

(3) Health of the Woman:

It adversely effects health of a woman because she has to satisfy several husbands. It not only has negative effect on the physical health but also on mental health of the woman.

(4) Sterility:

According to biologists if the same woman cohabits with several men, it may lead to sterility, further lack of sex gratification give rise to extra-marital relationship of husbands.

(5) Status of Men:

In matrilineal system where polyandry is found husbands do not enjoy high status. They do not give their name to the children.

(6) Lack of Attachment:

In many tribes where polyandry exists husbands do not live permanently with their families. They are visiting husband who visit the family for a specific period. They do not get love and affection of their children because children feel unattached to their fathers.

(7) Less Population:

This form of marriage decreases population growth. In some tribal societies where polyandry continues to exist may get extinct after a gap of few years.

(8) Loose Morality:

This is another outcome of this practice.

(iii) Group Marriage :

Group marriage is that type of marriage in which a group of men marry a group of women. Each man of male group is considered to be the husband of every woman of female group. Similarly, every woman is the wife of every man of male group. Pair bonded or Multilateral marriage are the substitute term for group marriages.

This form of marriage is found among some tribes of New Guinea and Africa. In India group marriage is practised by the Toda Tribe of Nilgiri Hills. Except on an experimental basis it is an extremely rare occurrence and may never have existed as a viable form of marriage for any society in the world.

The Oneida community of New York State has been frequently cited as an example of group marriage experiment. It involved economic and sexual sharing based on spiritual and religious principles. Like most group marriage on record, its time span was limited. Rarely do they endure beyond one or two generations.

Levirate and Sororate:

(i) Levirate:

In levirate the wife marries the brother of the dead husband. If a man dies, his wife marries the brother of her dead husband. Marriage of the widow with the dead husband’s elder brother is called Senior Levirate. But when she marries to the younger brother of the dead husband, it is called Junior Levirate.

(ii) Sororate:

In Sororate the husband marries the sister of his wife. Sororate is again divided into two types namely restricted Sororate and simultaneous Sororate. In restricted sororate, after the death of one’s wife, the man marries the sister of his wife. In simultaneous sororate, the sister of one’s wife automatically becomes his wife.

Concubinage:

Concubinage is a state of living together as husband and wife without being married. It is .cohabitation with one or more women who are distinct from wife or wives. Concubinage is sometimes recognised by various societies as an accepted institution. A concubine has a lower social status than that of a wife. The children of a concubine enjoy a lower status in the society.

Related Articles:

• Forms of Marriage: Polyandry, Polygyny and Monogamy
• Hindu Marriage: Aims, Ideals and Types

No comments yet.

Leave a reply click here to cancel reply..

You must be logged in to post a comment.

11.4 Marriage and Families across Cultures

Learning outcomes.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• State the anthropological definition of marriage.
• Provide examples of different forms of marriage across cultures.
• Summarize economic and symbolic dimensions of marriage (marriage compensations).
• Describe how marriage intersects with residence rules.
• Explain the social importance of remarriage obligations.

Anthropological Definition of Marriage

Marriage is the formation of a socially recognized union. Depending on the society, it may be a union between a man and a woman, between any two adults (regardless of their gender), or between multiple spouses in polygamous societies. Marriages are most commonly established to provide a formal structure in which to raise and nurture offspring (whether biological or adopted/fostered), but not all marriages involve reproduction, and marriage can serve multiple functions. One function is to create alliances between individuals, families, and sometimes larger social networks. These alliances may provide political and economic advantages. While there are variations of marriage, the institution itself, with a few notable exceptions, is universal across cultures.

Marriage is an effective means of addressing several common challenges within families. It provides a structure in which to produce, raise, and nurture offspring. It reduces competition among and between males and females. And it creates a stable, long-term socioeconomic household in which the family unit can more adequately subsist with shared labor and resources. All societies practice rules of marriage that determine what groups an individual should marry into (called endogamy rules ) and which groups are considered off limits and not appropriate for marriage partners (called exogamy rules ). These rules are behavioral norms in a society. For example, in the United States, individuals tend to marry within the same generation (endogamy) and usually the same linguistic group, but they marry outside of very close kin (exogamy). Those considered to be too closely related to marry are prohibited by rules of incest , a relationship defined as too close for sexual relations.

Across all cultures, there is an incest taboo , a cultural norm that prohibits sexual relations between parents and their offspring. This taboo sometimes extends to other relations considered too close for sexual relationship. In some societies, this taboo may extend to first cousins. In the United States, first-cousin marriage laws vary across states (see “Cousin Marriage Law in the United States” for current state laws). French anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss argued that incest is the original social structure because it naturally separates groups of people into two types—those with whom an individual has family ties (so-called biological ties ) and those with whom an individual can have sexual relations and establish ties.

Defining marriage can be complex. In the southern Andes of Peru and Bolivia, Indigenous people begin marriage with a practice known as servinakuy (with spelling variations). In servinakuy , a man and woman establish their own independent household with very little formal social acknowledgement and live together until the birth of their first child, after which they are formally considered to be a fully married couple. Not a trial marriage and not considered informal cohabitation, servinakuy is, instead, a prolonged marriage process during which family is created over time. Andean legal scholars argue that these unions should carry with them the legal rights and protections associated with a formal marriage from the time the couple begins living together (Ingar 2015).

Like all social institutions, ideas about marriage can adapt and change. Within urban Western societies, the concept of marriage is undergoing a great deal of change as socioeconomic opportunities shift and new opportunities open up for women. In Iceland, in 2016, almost 70 percent of children were born outside of a marriage, usually to committed unmarried couples (Peng 2018). This trend is supported by national social policies that provide generous parental leave for both married individuals and those within a consensual union, but the change is also due to the more fluid nature of family today. As norms change in Iceland across generations, it will be interesting to see if the practiced form of consensual union we see today eventually comes to be considered a sanctioned form of marriage.

Forms of Marriage

Anthropologists group marriage customs into two primary types: a union of two spouses only ( monogamy ) or a union involving more than two spouses ( polygamy ). Monogamy is the socially sanctioned union of two adults. In some societies this union is restricted to a man and a woman, and in other societies it can be two adults of any gender. Monogamy, because it produces an overall smaller family unit, is especially well adapted to postindustrial societies and cultures where family units are highly mobile (such as nomadic foragers). Monogamy also includes same-sex marriage. In June 2015, in Obergefell v. Hodges , the US Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in the United States, following earlier legal recognitions in many other Western countries. Today, same-sex marriage is legal in 30 countries. While the movement to legalize same-sex marriage has been long and tumultuous in many of these countries, same-sex marriages and unions have historically played significant roles in both Indigenous and Western societies.

Serial monogamy: Serial monogamy is a form of monogamy in which adults have a series of two-person monogamous marriages over a lifetime. It is increasingly common in Western societies, but it is also practiced in some small-scale societies, such as bands. In serial monogamy, divorce and remarriage are common.

Polygamy : Polygamy is the socially sanctioned union of more than two adults at the same time. In polygamous societies, families usually begin with a two-person marriage between a man and a woman. In some cases, the marriage will remain as a single couple for a long period of time or for the duration of their lives because of lack of resources or availability of partners. Adding partners is frequently a sign of status and is considered an ideal for families in polygamous societies. In some cases, too, polygamy is practiced to address extreme social stress due to things such as warfare or skewed population distributions caused by famine and high mortality rates. In her cross-cultural study of polygamy, cultural anthropologist Miriam Zeitzen (2008) noted a great deal of diversity within polygamy, from de jure unions that are formal, legal contracts (such as is found in Gambia) to de facto polygamy, which may be just as enduring, stable, and acceptable within a society (such as is found in Ivory Coast).

There are two principle kinds of polygamy, depending on the partners involved, as multiple men and multiple women in a single marriage (called group marriage ) is not common. Polygyny , which is the more common form of polygamy, is the marriage of one man to more than one woman. There is often marked age asymmetry in these relationships, with husbands much older than their wives. In polygynous households, each wife commonly lives in her own house with her own biological children, but the family unit cooperates together to share resources and provide childcare. The husband usually “visits” his wives in succession and lives in each of their homes at various times (or lives apart in his own). It is common, also, for there to be a hierarchy of wives based on seniority. Polygyny is found worldwide and offers many benefits. It maximizes the family labor force and the shared resources and opportunities available for family members and creates wide kinship connections within society. Commonly in polygynous societies, larger families are afforded higher social status and they have stronger political and economic alliances.

Polygyny is prevalent in Thailand today, with as many as one in four Thai men between the ages of 30 and 50 having a second wife, called a mia noi (minor wife). In her research in Thailand, cultural anthropologist Jiemin Bao (2008) studied polygyny among a group of lukchin Thai (Thai of Chinese descent). She found that the lukchin practiced polygynous marriages as a joint husband-and-wives economic enterprise, many times sending remittances back to family members still living in China. Bao found that husbands frequently seek their wives’ consent before adding another wife and that the family overall considers polygyny to create greater economic opportunities for all family members because multiple wives create a pool of stable laborers with individual skill sets. Even so, Bao observed turmoil and conflict even within economically successful polygynous families and observed that many marriages were conducted as if they were “cutting a business deal” (151). Gender politics of polygynous marriage among the lukchin often left women with few choices except to work for her husband’s family. Economic success for the family was culturally attributed to the male head of household and not his wives.

A second form of polygamy is polyandry. In polyandry , which is comparatively rare, there is one wife and more than one husband. Polyandrous marriages minimize population growth and may occur in societies where there is a temporary surfeit of males and scarcity of females or scarcity of resources. In fraternal polyandry , brothers marry a single wife. This is the most common in Nepal, where it is practiced by a minority of mainly rural families. Fraternal polyandry offers several benefits for societies like Nepal with scarce resources and dense population. Where there is extreme scarcity of land acreage, it allows brothers to share an inheritance of land instead of dividing it up. It reduces inequality within the household, as the family can thus collectively subsist on the land as a family unit. Also, in areas where land is scattered over large distances, it allows brothers to take turns living away from home to tend herds of animals or fields and then spending time at home with their shared wife. It also minimizes reproduction and population growth in a society where there is a very dense population (Goldstein 1987), as the wife can carry only one pregnancy at a time.

Postmarital Residence Rules

Following marriage, a couple begins a new family and establishes a shared residence, whether as a separate family unit or as part of an already established family group. The social rules that determine where a newly married couple will reside are called postmarital residence rules and are directly related to the descent rules that operate in the society. These rules may be adapted due to extenuating circumstances such as economic need or lack of housing. In the United States today, for example, it is increasingly common for newly married couples to postpone the establishment of a separate household when work, schooling, or children create a need for familial support.

There are five postmarital residence patterns:

• Under neolocal residence , a newly married couple establishes an independent household not connected to either spouse’s family. This pattern of residence is mostly associated with bilateral descent. While this is a norm in our own society, during times of economic stress or familial need, couples in the United States do occasionally live in the household of one spouse’s parents.
• More common worldwide is patrilocal residence , associated with societies practicing patrilineal descent. In patrilocal residence, the newly married couple establishes their new household with or near the groom’s father or the groom’s father’s relatives. What this means is that at marriage the groom remains within his household and/or family group, while the bride leaves her parents. Their future children will belong to the groom’s lineage.
• Matrilocal residence is associated with societies practicing matrilineal descent. In matrilocal residence, the newly married couple establishes their new household with or near the bride’s mother or the bride’s mother’s relatives. At marriage the bride remains within her household and/or family group, while the groom leaves his parents. Their future children will belong to the bride’s lineage.
• Less frequent but also associated with matrilineal descent is avunculocal residence , in which the newly married couple resides with or near the groom’s mother’s brother. In societies that practice avunculocal residence, the groom has commonly had a long-term relationship with his maternal uncle, who is part of his own mother’s matriline. By joining with household of the groom’s maternal uncle, the couple is able to benefit from both the husband’s and the wife’s matrilines.
• Under ambilocal residence , the couple decides which spouse’s family to live with or near. Ambilocal residence is associated with ambilineal descent. In ambilocal residence, the newly married couple will usually have made their decision about which spouse’s family to join with prior to their marriage. Their future children will then trace descent through that particular line.

Marriage Compensation

In all cultures, marriage is a consequential matter not only to the adults immediately involved, but also to their families and to the broader community. In societies that practice unilineal descent, the newly married couple moves away from one family and toward another. This creates a disadvantage for the family that has “lost” a son or daughter. For example, in a patrilineal society, while the wife will remain a member of her birth lineage (that of her father), her children and her labor will now be invested mostly in her husband’s lineage. As a result, in societies practicing unilineal descent, there is a marriage compensation from one family to the other for this perceived loss. Marriage compensation is the transfer of some form of wealth (in money, material goods, or labor) from one family to another to legitimize the marriage as a creation of a new social and economic household. It is not seen as payment for a spouse, but as recognition that the marriage and future children are part of one lineage rather than another (Stone 1998, 77). There are several forms of marriage compensation, each symbolically marked by specific cultural practices.

Bride wealth: Bride wealth (also called bride price ) is the transfer of material and symbolic value from the groom’s to the bride’s family. Depending on the cultural group, this may involve transfer of money, cattle, house goods, jewelry, or even symbolic ritual artifacts. Bride wealth is the most common form of marriage compensation across cultures. In her study of the Thadou Kukis of northeast India, Burma, and Bangladesh, Indian sociologist Hoineilhing Sitlhou (2018) explores how bride wealth has changed over time. Historically, the items exchanged included cows, copper gongs, silver earrings, and ceremonial clothing for the bride’s parents. Today, more contemporary items are offered, such as gold jewelry, cars, furniture, appliances, and land. One practice that has not changed is paying a portion of the bride wealth prior to the marriage ceremony and the remainder at some later point so that the groom remains in respectful debt to the bride’s family. In other societies, bride wealth must be paid in full before the marriage is considered legitimate. If marriages conducted using bride wealth end in divorce, normally the bride wealth (or equivalent value) is returned to the groom’s family to signify the dissolution of the contract.

Bride service : Similar to bride wealth, bride service involves a transfer of something of value from the groom’s to the bride’s family, but in this case the arrangement involves the contracted labor of the groom, whether before or after the marriage. Future grooms may work for months or years for the bride’s family (usually her father’s household) prior to the marriage, or husbands may work for months or years with the bride’s family after the marriage. In the first case, the groom completes his service prior to the marriage and then moves with the bride back to his family after the marriage. In the second case, the newly married couple remains in residence with the bride’s family until the service is concluded. The advantage of the second type of service is that frequently the wife is living with her mother when her first child (or children) is born. While her children are aligned with her husband’s family as far as descent (and inheritance), her parents are able to support the couple and their first child or children for a period of time.

The contractual obligations of bride wealth and bride service are not without conflict. In many unilineal societies, these obligations create a great deal of strife and conflict that can go on for years. What if the marriage is temperamentally difficult? What if the wife is barren or a child dies? What if the husband’s family suffers economic challenges that create a disparity between what he can offer their family of procreation and what the wife’s lineage could offer the children? Each of these situations creates conflict. Sometimes these conflicts between lineages (because marriage is seen as a contract with the larger family) spill over into the larger society and create larger social divisions.

Dowry : Dowry , a third form of marriage compensation, functions differently than bride wealth and bride price. Dowry is a form of material value, such as money, jewelry, house goods, or family heirlooms, that the bride brings into her own marriage to provide her with wealth within her husband’s lineage. In some societies women turn their dowry over to their husbands, but in other societies they retain rights to this wealth as married women. Among Nepalese Brahmans , sons inherit land and property equally at the death of the father, while women receive a dowry of clothing, jewelry, and household utensils from their own patriline at marriage (Stone 1998). They will use this wealth for status within the marriage. In other societies, women create a dual inheritance for their own daughters from their dowry, passing their dowry down through their daughters. Regardless of how the wealth is used, a woman’s most stable route to higher status within a patrilineal society is through the birth of her sons. It is sons within the patriline who will bring wives into their father’s household and increase the size and prominence of the patriline through the birth of their children. In patrilineal societies, women with many sons typically carry a higher social status.

While marriage compensation is most commonly associated with patrilineal societies, it is important to note that almost all marriages represent shared investments of one kind or another. Since marriage is the creation of a new family, spouses most often bring with them into their marriage their skills, traditions, and social networks, all of which carry symbolic weight within societies.

Remarriage Obligations

The many rules and corresponding obligations specific to marriage in unilineal societies (such as residence rules and marriage compensation) are evidence that families and communities invest a great deal in marriages and the formation of new families. So what happens if a young and newly married spouse dies? What about the marriage compensation and the new household? In many unilineal societies (most especially in patrilineal societies), remarriage obligations ensure that in these cases the marriage contract endures. Remarriage obligations require the widowed spouse to remarry someone from the same lineage in order to maintain the stability of the family unit.

There are numerous issues that affect when and how remarriage obligations are enacted. The factors that most affect remarriage obligations are the ages of the spouses and amount of time that has passed since the marriage occurred, the ages of the offspring and whether there are young children within the family unit, and the particular marriage contract and value of the marriage compensation. Cultures (and families) determine how best to enact these rules within their own value systems and based on current need. But the primary underlying purpose of remarriage obligations is to maintain the alliance that was made between the two lineages at the time of the marriage. These are intended to be enduring ties that benefit all members of each lineage.

If the husband dies and there is a surviving wife (now widow), under the levirate remarriage rule she will marry one of her husband’s surviving brothers. While levirate will not be invoked in every case, it is quite common when there are young children remaining within the immediate family unit. Because levirate is usually practiced in societies with polygynous families, a married brother taking an additional wife will not disrupt his existing family, and the new wife and her children will remain within the lineage where the children were born.

The sororate applies to situations in which the wife dies and there is a surviving widower. Under this remarriage rule, the deceased wife’s lineage must provide a replacement female, preferably the former wife’s sister. If her sisters are already married or there are no sisters available, another female from the same lineage can be sent as a replacement. Sororate allows young children from the first marriage to remain with their father in his lineage and also maintain a symbolic and emotional bond with their biological mother’s kindred.

Finally, there is also the highly variable practice of ghost marriage , where a marriage is performed between one or two deceased individuals in order to create an alliance between lineages. Among the Dinka and Nuer of South Sudan, a ghost marriage is similar to the levirate, with the deceased husband’s brother standing in for him in a ghost marriage. Unlike the levirate itself, any children from this second (ghost) marriage will be attributed to the deceased husband and not to the brother or the wider lineage itself. Among Chinese immigrants to Singapore, there are ghost marriage claims in which both spouses may be deceased (Schwartze 2010), continuing a tradition that began generations earlier (Topley 1955).

Arranged Marriages

While all marriages are planned, some are arranged, whether between the spouses involved and/or their families or through a third party. Today, an interesting adaptation of arranged marriages has developed involving online websites and hired marriage brokers to help individuals living in different countries find a suitable spouse from their birth culture. As transnational corporations spread worldwide and individuals become more highly mobile (even nomadic) for work, finding a spouse who shares the same cultural values can be difficult. Although there are marriage brokers for many different cultural groups, there is a proliferation of matchmakers for individuals of Indian nationality or descent. While not all of these sites are reputable, the explosion of marriage brokering businesses reminds us that marriage is, first and foremost, a cultural institution.

Kinship is an adaptive mechanism across cultures. While kinship systems vary, they each address critical elements for a social group. Through families of orientation and procreation and within kinship networks, households are created, offspring are produced, and alliances are established.

Mini-Fieldwork Activity

Kinship interview.

Do a kinship interview with a friend or peer. Collect information about their immediate family and relatives, including information about marriage and descent, being sure to note deceased relatives and any prior marriages. Draw a kinship chart that graphically depicts the information that you collected through the interview. Ask your participant informer to critique your chart, and then make any needed adjustments. Present the results of your project along with a reflection on the highlights of this work. What most challenged you, and how did this work help you better understand your friend/peer? What interesting things did you learn about their life?

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-anthropology/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Jennifer Hasty, David G. Lewis, Marjorie M. Snipes
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Introduction to Anthropology
• Publication date: Feb 23, 2022
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-anthropology/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-anthropology/pages/11-4-marriage-and-families-across-cultures

© Dec 20, 2023 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

A Brief History of Marriage, From the Stone Age to the New Age

Couplehood has been the primary social structure of our species..

Posted December 24, 2020 | Reviewed by Kaja Perina

• Making Marriage Work
• Find a marriage counsellor near me

This is a guest post by Harville Hendrix, adapted from his foreword to Stan Tatkin’s book Wired for Love.

Couplehood has been, from the dawn of human history, the primary social structure of our species, giving rise to larger structures of family, community, society, culture, and civilization. But interest in helping couples improve the quality of their relationships is a very recent phenomenon. What help couples got in the past came from their families or social institutions, primarily religious ones. But given that what happens in the home determines what happens in society, and given the perennial presence of conflict and violence between partners and among groups and cultures, we can conclude that the help was not very helpful. If we operate from the logical premise that healthy couples are essential to a healthy society, and vice versa, then “helping couples” should be elevated from a romantic sentiment—and a professional career —to a primary social value. The best thing a society can do for itself is to promote and support healthy couples, and the best thing partners can do for themselves, for their children, and for society is to have a healthy relationship.

The radical position of shifting focus from personal-centered needs to the needs of their relationship, and by extension, to the transformation of society, has been in the making only in the last 25 years or so. Prehistoric couples formed a “pair bond” for the purpose of procreation and physical survival. That all changed about 11,000 years ago when, according to the same body of research, the hunters and gatherers learned how to grow food and coral and breed animals.

No longer having to search for food, they settled down into small compounds and villages, and the concept of “property” that had to be protected arose. This concept may have applied at first only to animals and crops, but since children and women also needed protection, the concept eventually extended to include them. The second version of couplehood, the “arranged marriage ,” was born. It had nothing to do with romantic attraction , personal needs, or mature love and everything to do with social status, economic security, and political expedience.

The next incarnation of marriage began in the 18th century with the rise in Europe of democratic political institutions, which argued that everyone was entitled to personal freedom—and by extension, the freedom to marry the person of their choice. The door to marriage was increasingly romantic love rather than parental dictates, and this shift gave rise to the personal or psychological marriage designed to meet personal rather than social and economic needs. Until Sigmund Freud ’s discovery of the unconscious and the founding of psychotherapy at the end of the 19th century, it was little guessed that our unconscious minds are deeply involved in our personal choices and that our past interpersonal experiences have a powerful impact on our present adult relationships. The discovery that this was so led to the awareness that our choice of a partner, if it is romantic, is influenced by our unconscious minds more than our rational preferences.

The partner we unconsciously choose is dauntingly similar—warts and all, and especially the warts—to the caretakers who reared us. Help for couples was expanded from traditional (religious, familial) sources to an emerging mental health profession, whose members had varying degrees of training and competence.

The early models of marriage counseling were based upon the assumption that a couple consisted of two independent, autonomous persons who could use their learning capacity and cognitive skills to resolve their differences by regulating conflict about their differences. This was helpful to some couples whose issues were not so difficult, but for others, the conflict-resolution process was a failure. These more difficult couples were advised to engage in-depth psychotherapy to work through their long-standing personal problems independent of their relationship and to separate from each other with the assumption that when they came back together, free of their personal neuroses, they could meet each other’s needs, current and past, and create a satisfying relationship.

This model did not work very well. Most partners who were successful in their private psychotherapy tended to divorce rather than reconcile. The divorce rate reached about 50 percent, and here it has held steady for the past 60 years. The statistics on the success of marriage therapy have held steady at around 30 percent, not a shining success for this fledgling profession.

In recent years, we have discovered that the major problem with this model is its focus on the “individual” as the foundational unit of society and on the satisfaction of personal needs as the goal of marriage. This all gives birth to this narrative of marriage: If your relationship is not satisfying your needs, you are married to the wrong person. You have a right to the satisfaction of your needs in a relationship, and if that does not happen, you should change partners and try again to get the same needs met with a different person. To put it in more crass terms, your marriage is about “you,” and if it does not provide you with satisfaction, its dissolution is justifiable no matter the consequences for others, even the children.

This narrative has birthed the phenomena of multiple marriages, one-parent families, shattered children, the “starter” marriage, and cohabitation as a substitute for marriage, as well as a trend toward tying the knot at later and later ages. I believe a new narrative that shifts the focus from the self and personal need satisfaction to the relationship began to emerge in the last quarter of the 20th century. In the '70s, a new view of the self as intrinsically relational and interdependent began to challenge the reigning view of the self as autonomous, independent, and self-sufficient. The isolated and autonomous self was exposed as a myth. The origin of the human problem was relocated from the interior of the self to the failure of the relationship “between."

In the past 20 years, these insights have become the theme of the fourth incarnation of marriage, which I refer to as the “conscious partnership.” In this new narrative, commitment is to the needs of the relationship rather than the needs of the self. It goes something like this, “Your marriage is not about you. Your marriage is about itself; it is a third reality to which and for which you are responsible, and only by honoring that responsibility will you get your childhood and current needs met. When you make your relationship primary and your needs secondary, you produce the paradoxical effect of getting your needs met in ways they can never be if you make them primary."

What happens is not so much the healing of childhood wounds, which may in fact not be healable, but the creation of a relationship in which two persons are reliably and sustainably present to each other empathically. This new emotional environment develops pathways that are filled with the debris of the sufferings of childhood. Couplehood becomes the container for the joy of being, which is a connected relationship. And since the quality of couplehood determines the tenor of the social fabric, the extension of that joy from the local to the global could heal most human suffering.

Linda Bloom, L.C.S.W. , and Charlie Bloom, M.S.W. , are the authors of Secrets of Great Marriages: Real Truths from Real Couples About Lasting Love .

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Support Group
• International
• New Zealand
• South Africa
• Switzerland
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Marriage and Family

Carol r. ember, benjamin gonzalez, daniel mccloskey.

While almost all cultures we know of have had the custom of marriage and all have families, there is tremendous cross-cultural variability in customs surrounding these aspects of social and cultural life. Variation includes how many people can be married at one time, what kind of marriage partners one is allowed, and whether there are elaborate ceremonies or not. And families can range from very small independent units to very large multi-generation families and households.

Download: PDF | ePUB (ebook)

Families are essential for human development. Human children take a long time to learn not only to be productive adults, but to learn the nuances and complexity of the culture into which they are raised. Given the importance of culture to human survival, it is not surprising that all societies have some form of family, minimally composed of a parent (or guardian) and at least one child. Almost all societies also have the custom of marriage , so a marriage partner is usually part of the basic family unit. Marriage is commonly defined as a socially approved sexual and economic union, presumed to be more or less permanent, and entails rights and obligations between the married couple and any children they might have ( C. R. Ember, Ember, and Peregrine 2019 ) .

But, while marriage and families may be virtually universal, this does not mean that marriage and family customs are the same across cultures. Indeed, there is tremendous variability in almost every aspect of marriage, from the rules surrounding whom one can and cannot marry, how marriage is arranged, how couples get married, how many people can be married at a time, how long marriages last, and what conditions allow a marriage to be dissolved. And families vary in size and composition from a single-parent unit to very large multi-generation families and households. In this module, we concentrate on marriage and family customs involving at least one man and one woman because although homosexual behavior is not rare, same-sex marriage is rare cross-culturally. As discussed in the sexuality module, homosexual behavior, even if common, often coexists with heterosexual marriage practices.

Universality of Marriage

There are a couple of known exceptions to the claim that marriage is a universal custom. One exception from the past is the Nayar of the 19th century. The Nayar were a subcaste in India. A more recent example is the Mosuo or Na of Yunnan in southwest China. In both cases, not only did male and female sexual partners live separately with their maternal families, but they did not have regular economic cooperation nor other regular obligations with their sexual partners. And, in both cases, males were frequently absent. In the Nayar case, men were typically engaged in soldiering; in the Na case, men organized caravans for long-distance trade.

Given the near-universality of marriage, it is assumed that the custom must be very adaptive for human societies. There are a variety of theories about what particular problems make marriage adaptive. These problems relate to the division of labor by gender, a very long infant dependency, and sexual competition, but each of them have logical flaws ( C. R. Ember, Ember, and Peregrine 2019 ) . A division of labor by gender is a cultural universal and it is proposed that marriage is a way for females and males to productively share the results of their varied subsistence tasks. However, marriage is far from a necessary solution to the sharing problem. Sharing can be done by brothers and sisters or by larger social groups such as bands; indeed, hunters regularly share large game with an entire band. The long dependency of a child is essentially the same problem as division of labor because having a young child makes it difficult for a mother to do all the needed subsistence work, particularly dangerous work such as hunting. But as already discussed, sharing can be accomplished in other ways. Finally, the sexual competition argument points to the greater conflict among human males as compared to non-human primates. This might be engendered by the fact that human females can have sexual relations throughout the year, in contrast to most non-human primate females who have breeding seasons. However, there are also logical flaws to this argument. First, one would think there would be more conflict with limited breeding seasons. Second, other sexual rules could be invented, such as rules regulating rotation of partners.

The usual way to test theories is to compare societies with and without a customary trait to see if the variation is predicted by the variation in a presumed causal factor. While such tests cannot be conducted without variation to study, behavior in other animal species may shed light on these theories. Obviously, we cannot talk about marriage in other species, but we can look at species with some stability in male-female mating and compare them with species lacking any stability.

In a comparative study of 40 mammal and bird species ( M. Ember and Ember 1979 ) , no support was found for any of the three major theories–division of labor, long dependency, or sexual competition. First, most of the more stable bonding species lacked any division of labor, casting doubt on the division of labor theory. Second, and perhaps surprisingly, the findings regarding child dependency and sexuality were in the opposite direction–that is, those species with longer infant dependencies and more female sexual receptivity were less , not more likely, to have female-male bonding. The Embers did put forward a new theory which did predict male-female bonding well. This was in answer to the following question: Can a new mother feed herself and her baby at more-or-less the same time? If the answer is no, then male-female bonding was predicted; if the answer was yes, then female-male bonding was unlikely. This theory may explain why most bird species have bonding. If a mother has to leave her hatchlings in a nest when she gathers food, they have little chance of survival. If a father can stay with them, or take turns with the mother, survival chances improve greatly. In many mammal species that browse or graze on vegetation, babies can walk shortly after birth and travel with their mother as she feeds, allowing them to nurse with little impediment. Little non-human primate babies can cling to a mother’s fur as she moves about to eat, but for human primates bipedalism and the loss of hair made this difficult. Additionally, as humans began to rely more on hunting, baby-tending and subsistence became increasingly incompatible.

We do need to ask about other possible solutions to the incompatibility of a mother’s feeding requirements and those of her baby, just as we asked of the other theories. Why couldn’t two women cooperate? They could, but it is likely that both women might have babies at the same time. But more importantly, two women are likely to have twice as many mouths to feed and care for. And neither woman could likely provide game through hunting. What about brothers? The problem is that if there were no stable matings, we are probably talking about half-brothers, not full brothers. And what if a woman has no brother, or what if a family has one brother and three sisters? In contrast, a man and woman in a more-or-less stable union not only share one set of children, but have no conflicts regarding other children to support. Hence, it is more efficient and economical for the man and woman who share the child (or children) to cooperate.

Social Recognition of Marriage

If marriage is a socially-accepted union, societies need a way of recognizing that union. But recognition does not necessarily mean an elaborate ceremony. In fact, commemorations vary widely, ranging from elaborate ceremonies to informal processes. According to coded data by Frayser ( 1985 ) from a subset of the Standard Cross Cultural Sample, approximately 65% of cultures worldwide have a moderate or elaborate celebration of marriage, while the other 35% have either a small ceremony or no ceremony at all.

Among the societies with more elaborate ceremonies are the Hopi, of the U.S. Southwest, who practice a wedding ceremony that lasts four days. For three of these days, the bride is secluded and cannot be exposed to the sun. During this time she mainly grinds corn, signifying a symbolic payment of service to the groom’s mother for her son. The neighboring villagers in the community bring presents for the bride for these three days, and then the groom’s paternal aunts engage in a ceremonial “fight” against the bride with mud, which is blocked by the groom’s maternal kin. Finally, the last day consists of a ceremonial washing of the bride and groom to signify “the washing away of all ‘remaining traces of youth.’” The washing is followed by the couple’s hair being tied into a single knot ( Geertz and Lomatuway 1987 ) .

In other cultures, social recognition of marriage is dependent on a successful trial period. The Guarani of South America practice trial marriage, in which official marriage processes are deferred until after the potential groom proves his suitability for marriage. Schaden and Lewinsohn ( 1962 ) tells us that

Many men have a ‘companion’ before marriage. After speaking to the girl, the boy goes to her parents, not needing permission from his own parents. He takes his companion to the paternal home, where he lives with her for a while and where she cooks together with the boy’s mother. If there is a child from these relations and if they “hit it off,” that is, if there is accord, they discuss marriage ( 1962, 87 )

In still other societies, there may be little or no ceremony at all, such as for the Trobriand Islanders of northeastern Papua New Guinea. Silas ( 1926 ) explains that

Marriage is accompanied by hardly any public ceremony or rite…apart from the placing of the stones and an exchange of gifts between the husband and the relatives of the bride, there is no formal ceremony; the wife simply joins the man, and they “set up house” together ( 1926, 150 )

Cross-cultural researchers have examined the predictors of the degree of marriage ceremony complexity. Here are some of the main findings. Societies with more complex celebrations tend to have

Greater social involvement in the marriage ( Frayser 1985 ) .

Why? Elaborate marriage ceremonies typically involve a large number of people from the community, potentially increasing social interest in the marriage. Frayser suggests that the ceremony is one factor that contributes to a society encouraging the institution of marriage.

Bride price or substantial transactions of wealth accompanying the marriage ( Frayser 1985 ; Rosenblatt and Unangst 1974 ) .

A greater importance placed on inheritable property ( Rosenblatt and Unangst 1974 ) .

Why? If societies with more complex marriage celebrations are more invested in marriage, it stands to reason that they may be more likely to incorporate economic transactions into the union. Such transactions, such as bride price or dowry, reflect higher involvement in the establishment of a marriage.

Greater sexual regulation of women ( Frayser 1985 ) .

Confinement of women’s reproductive potential to one man ( Frayser 1985 ) .

A strict taboo on premarital sex for women ( Kitahara 1974 ) .

Why? Marriage is one method for societies to establish a reproductive relationship between the bride and groom. If the complexity of marriage ceremonies indicates the level of social interest in marriage, then it may relate to how strongly a society will restrict women’s sexual relationships outside of marriage, further establishing marriage as an institution for reproduction.

Extramarital sex or reproductive issues as grounds for divorce ( Frayser 1985 ) .

Why? Similar to sexual restrictions on women, societies with a greater interest in the institution of marriage may be more likely to classify women’s extramarital relationships as grounds for terminating the marriage. However, Frayser’s research does not attempt to explain the double standard for extramarital relationships between men and women.

Marriage Transactions

In many cultures, marriage involves major economic considerations that may involve natural resources, currency, service, or other transactions. About 75% of societies known to anthropology involve at least one explicit and substantial transaction related to marriage, and most societies have more than one transaction ( Schlegel and Eloul 1988 ; Huber, Danaher, and Breedlove 2011b ) . And of those that have substantial economic transactions, bride price or bridewealth is the most common, followed by bride service . Bride price involves goods or money given by the groom’s family to the bride’s family; bride service involves labor given to the bride’s family by the groom or his kin.

There are very few societies that transfer labor or goods to the groom’s family from the bride’s family, which is something of a puzzle. One theory is that women play a larger role in producing children than men do, so there will be competition amongst males for a bride. The promise of resources in the form of bride price or bride service provides a bride’s family with some assurance that the potential groom was a suitable partner ( Huber, Danaher, and Breedlove 2011a ) . Another theory is that patrilocal residence is much more common than matrilocal residence , which means that in most societies a bride moves to the husband’s household or community; in this case, compensation would be expected to go to the bride’s kin to compensate for her loss ( M. Ember 1970 ; Huber, Danaher, and Breedlove 2011b ) . The following findings are consistent with these theories:

Brides and their parents generally have a greater net gain in resources at the time of marriage than grooms and their parents ( Huber, Danaher, and Breedlove 2011a , 2011b ) .

The more likely that marital residence is with or near the husband’s kin, the more likely there is compensation to the bride’s kin ( M. Ember 1970 ) . Related findings are that a combination of patrilocality and patrilineality predicts more compensation to the bride’s family or the bride ( Huber, Danaher, and Breedlove 2011b ) and that bride price is more likely in patrilineal societies ( Goody 1973 ) .

Note that bride price transfers “wealth” horizontally within the parental generation. As long as families have daughters and the daughters marry, every family will receive bride price and pay out bride price when their sons marry. It does not create economic inequality between families. Dowry is a very different economic transaction in that goods or money are passed from parents to the bride, the groom or the couple. (In contrast, bride price and bride service are directed at the bride’s kin, not to the bride or the new household). In other words, with dowry there is a downward passage of wealth. Another type of dowry is indirect dowry . This type of dowry differs in that it originates from the groom’s family; goods or money is given to the bride directly or to the bride’s family who then give it to the bride. Alternatively, indirect dowry can be thought of as a combination of bride price paid first and then dowry.

Equal exchanges between kin groups also occur. In gift exchange, the kin groups of the bride and groom give each other gifts of about equal value. Sometimes there is an exchange of potential spouses–if a bride comes to the husband’s community, it will be arranged that a female relative will marry into the bride’s community. Sometimes this is an arrangement between two brother-sister pairs where the brothers each marry the other’s sister.

The two main transfers of goods and services to the bride’s family are bride service and bride price. Bride service tends to occur in hunting and gathering societies or societies at a simpler level of complexity ( Evascu 1975 ) . On the other hand, bride price

tends to occur in societies with non-intensive agriculture or pastoralism at middle ranges of complexity ( Schlegel and Eloul 1988 ; Evascu 1975 ) .

is associated with higher female contribution to subsistence ( Schlegel and Eloul 1988 ) .

is associated with bride theft ( Ayres 1974 ) .

Why? Substantial transactions make it more difficult to marry which increases the impetus to practice stealing a bride (although sometimes this is with her approval).

Dowry is more likely

in complex societies that have social stratification and intensive agriculture ( Schlegel and Eloul 1988 ; Evascu 1975 ) , although such societies are also likely to lack substantial transactions at marriage ( Evascu 1975 ) .

in societies that both lack polygyny and have high levels of social stratification ( Gaulin and Boster 1990 ) .

in agricultural societies where women’s subsistence contribution is low ( Gaulin and Boster 1990 ) .

Customs Regarding Whom One Can or Cannot Marry

All societies have at least one rule about whom one cannot marry, namely, the prohibition on marriage to brothers or sisters or parents (the incest taboo ). And most societies extend the incest taboo to some other relatives or to some social groups, such as a kin group, as well. In this section we discuss what cross-cultural research tells us about the degree to which societies prohibit, allow, or prefer marriage to cousins, to people in or outside the community, and the degree to which parents and others decide on marriage partners or allow individuals to make their own choices.

Community exogamy/endogamy

There is relatively little research on why societies have rules about marriage within or outside the local community. Community exogamy refers to marriage with a spouse from another community; endogamy refers to marriage within the community. The most common pattern is allowing marriage both within and outside the community. Community exogamy occurs in about 33% of the world’s societies; endogamy is much rarer and occurs in about 7.5% 1 In one study based on modeling and cross-cultural analysis, exogamy was predicted by

Small size communities and greater variation in rainfall ( Dow, Reed, and Woodcock 2016 ) .

Why? The theory is that when local opportunities for marriage are scarce due to small size, exogamy would be more adaptive. Rainfall variability is likely to produce uneven productivity between communities and exogamy provides more opportunities for movement to even out resources.

Cousin marriage

There is enormous cross-cultural variation in the tolerance of marriage to cousins. Some societies frown on cousin marriage so much that even distant cousins are forbidden. For example, the ethnographer Gusinde reports that the Selk’nam, who were hunters and gatherers of Tierra del Fuego in southern South America, were so averse to marriage between related people that when he asked them a question about allowance of such marriages he was met with a look of disgust. He tells us, “When I asked more specifically whether the children of first cousins were allowed to marry, people gave me a decided no and added in an indignant tone: “Do not ask further; blood relatives may not be united!” ( Gusinde 1931, 488–89 ) . At the other extreme, there are societies that not only tolerate first cousin marriage, but actively try to promote marriage to a cousin, usually a particular type of cousin. The Komachi, pastoral nomads of southern Iran, preferred marriage with kin who were no more distant than second cousins and about 70% were with first cousins ( Bradburd 1990, 115 ) . Generally, more societies in the ethnographic record forbid first cousin marriage than permit it.

What accounts for the allowance of first cousin marriage?

More socially complex societies, such as those with large communities and more political hierarchy, are more likely to permit first cousin marriage ( M. Ember 1975 ) .

Why? Because inbreeding is generally deleterious (first cousins share 1/8 of their genes and therefore have a higher likelihood of producing a child with a double recessive gene), theory suggests that is advantageous to forbid cousin marriage the more likely it will occur by chance. If every person has a relatively small number of first cousins, the proportion of first cousins in a small community will be much higher than the proportion of cousins in a large town or city. Therefore allowing some cousin marriage is not as problematic for overall reproduction of the group.

Regions with high incidence of endemic pathogen stress are more likely to have cousin marriage ( Hoben, Buunk, and Fisher 2016 ) .

Why? Although this finding seems contrary to the principle that high levels of inbreeding are generally deleterious, there are some pathogens for which recessive genes have been shown to lessen the serious consequences of the disease. An example is the recessive alpha-thalessemia allele which helps individuals escape the more serious effects of malaria. Note that the relationship between pathogen stress, although significant, is very weak.

Relatively small societies that have recently experienced severe loss of population due to introduced disease and that are also relatively small (more than 1,000 but less than 25,000 in the society) are more likely to allow first cousin marriage ( M. Ember 1975 ) .

Why? While first cousin marriage may have higher risk of offspring carrying harmful double recessive genes, severe population loss makes it more difficult to find eligible mates in societies that are already relatively small. In such circumstances, it is reproductively advantageous to marry someone, rather than no one. Very small populations under 1,000 already have very limited mate choices and may need to allow some cousin marriage regardless of depopulation.

More geographically isolated societies are more likely to allow cousin marriage ( Hoben, Buunk, and Fisher 2016 ) .

Why? Just as it may be difficult to find a non-related mate in a very small population, it may also be difficult in a geographically isolated population to find a mate without allowing marriage to cousins.

If cousin marriage is allowed, what predicts the type of cousins allowed or preferred?

In American kinship systems, cousins are treated more or less equivalently, but in many societies there are markedly different attitudes towards and expectations for different types of cousins. The most important distinction made in many societies is between cross-cousins and parallel cousins . To understand what a cross-cousin is versus a parallel cousin, it helps to think of the term “cross” as meaning related to you by “crossing” gender in the parental generation. Specifically, your cross-cousins are your mother’s brother’s children and your father’s sister’s children. Parallel cousins are related to you through the same gender–mother’s sister’s children and father’s brother’s children. In the diagram below, a circle stands for a female, a triangle for a male, and an equal sign for a marriage. Children from a marriage are symbolized by a downward line from the marriage. Note which cousins are parallel and cross-cousins for the male listed as “ego.”

This distinction mostly matters in societies with patrilineal or matrilineal descent because in such societies one set of parallel cousins is in your own kin group, while cross-cousins are generally not. So, in a patrilineal society, children will be in the same kin group as their father, their father’s brother, and their father’s brother’s children. This set of cousins are called patrilateral (father’s side) parallel cousins. Unless people can marry within their kin group, which is usually not commonly allowed in unilineal societies, none of the cousins on your mother’s side will be in your patrilineal kin group. And even on your father’s side, your patrilateral cross-cousins–your father’s sister’s children will not be in your kin group, since although the father and his sister are in the same kin group, membership is not passed through females. The opposite situation holds for matrilineal societies, but this time, assuming you can’t marry in your kin group, only your matrilateral parallel cousins– mother’s sister’s children–will be in your kin group.

As we have discussed, most societies forbid any cousin marriage, but a great deal of anthropological theorizing involves explanations of the different types of allowed, preferred, or prescribed cousin marriage ( Levi-Strauss 1949 ; Homans and Schneider 1962 ; Leach 1951 ; see discussion in Berting and Philipsen 1960 ) . Because of the complexity of that literature we will not discuss it here, but there are some general trends we can point to in the minority of societies that allow cousin marriage:

In societies that allow cousin marriage, the vast majority only allow cross-cousin marriage; parallel cousin marriage is relatively rare ( Korotayev 2000 ) .

Of those societies allowing cross-cousin marriage, symmetrical cross-cousin marriage (with both sets of cross-cousins) is much more common than asymmetrical cross-cousin marriage (one side of the family). One estimate is 70% of societies allowing cross-cousin marriage allow symmetrical compared with 30% for asymmetrical cousin marriage ( Coult 1965 ) .

Symmetrical cross-cousin marriage is somewhat more likely when economic transactions at marriage (such as bride price or dowry) are absent.

Why? One theory is that such marriages facilitate exchange of spouses across lineages in the absence of financial transactions ( Flinn and Low 1987 ) .

Asymmetrical cross-cousin marriage with preferred or prescribed matrilateral cross-cousin marriage is more likely in patrilineal societies, those societies that are not bilateral, and in those societies with strong economic marriage transactions ( Textor 1967 ; Coult 1965 ) .

Preference for father’s brother’s daughter marriage (patrilateral parallel cousin marriage) preference is more likely in patrilocal societies ( Flinn and Low 1987 ) .

Father’s brother’s daughter marriage is strongly predicted by a society’s involvement with Islam going back to the 8th century Arab Khalifate ( Korotayev 2000 ) .

Why? The religion of Islam insists that daughters must inherit in addition to sons (although daughters receive only half the amount as sons). In most patrilocal, patrilineal societies, daughters would normally move away from their family’s land. But since women in the Arab Khalifate region are typically secluded, women would be unlikely to be able to cultivate their portion of land, leaving it to be controlled by her husband. This would result in a patchwork of small plots of land controlled by different groups. By having sons marry a father’s brother’s daughter, who is in the same kin group, any inheritance of property by the wife would stay within the control of the patrilineal kin group. Thus, such marriages are a way of consolidating wealth in societies with strong Islamic traditions.

Arranged marriage or individual choice

Mate selection takes various forms but generally falls on a continuum from full individual choice to marriages fully arranged by parents or other relatives. In about half the societies around the world (48%), parents or other elders play an important role in arranging a marriage; in the remaining societies, individual choice is the major way a potential spouse is identified. However, sometimes parents still have to approve the choice. Only 31% of societies have full individual choice. 2

Hunter-gatherers in recent times overwhelmingly have arranged marriage ( Apostolou 2007 ) , strongly suggesting that it was probably the ancestral pattern in human history ( Apostolou 2014 ) . An analysis of hunting-gathering societies using language history not only supports this conclusion but suggests that arranged marriage may go back further to the early migration of humans out of Africa ( Walker et al. 2011 ) .

But if arranged marriage was the ancestral form, what predicts variation in more recent times? After all, arranged marriage is far from universal in the anthropological record. One important predictor is whether or not women engage in craft specialization or work outside the household–when they do so, there is a lower likelihood of arranged marriage ( Hull 1989 ) . This finding is consistent with anecdotal evidence that arranged marriage customs tend to break down with modernization.

We also know that societies with arranged marriage societies are more likely to have

extended families and/or unilineal descent groups ( Stephens 1963 ; Lee and Stone 1980 ) .

lower rates of premarital sex ( Apostolou 2017 ) .

negative attitudes towards female premarital sex ( Apostolou 2017 ) .

Why? Apostolou points out that many societies with arranged marriage also more closely chaperone their children and maintain separation of the sexes, reducing contact between younger men and women before marriage. Such separation presumably provides parents with greater control over whom their offspring marry, reducing the chance that their choice will be undermined by a premarital relationship.

low emphasis on love as a basis for marriage ( Hull 1989 ) .

Why? Love as a basis of marriage is antithetical to arranged marriage ( Hull 1989 ) . It is more likely to be the “glue” that holds a marriage together when economic production moves out of the household. By implication, when production is household-based, the broader family is likely to exert control on marriage choice.

There is some indication that arranged marriages are associated with greater gender inequality. First, there is a double standard, with more tolerance of premarital and extramarital sex for men than for women. Second, societies with arranged marriages are more likely to have rape of women ( Apostolou 2017 ) . Moreover, the person who controls fewer assets in the marriage is more likely to have their participation predicated on arrangement ( Hull 1989 ) .

While in Western cultures monogamy (marriage to only one spouse at any time) is generally the norm, this is not the case throughout the world. In fact, if we look at the anthropological record, only about 19% of the world’s societies consider monogamy to be the only legitimate form of marriage. 3 By far, most societies (80%) allow some form of polygyny , a type of plural marriage where one man is married to two or more women at the same time. Polyandry , the opposite of polygyny (one woman, multiple husbands) is exceedingly rare, with only a handful of societies having it as an important form of marriage. 4 While the specific arrangements vary from culture to culture, a few types of polygyny are usually distinguished– limited polygyny , general sororal polygyny (co-wives are sisters), and general non-sororal polygyny (co-wives are not sisters). 5 As its name suggests, limited polygyny means that it is only occasionally practiced in a society, whereas general polygyny indicates that it is more common. However, it is important to understand that even where polygyny is generally practiced most men will not have more than one wife at any given point in time. Some men will be unmarried, some men will only have one wife, and some will be currently monogamous but marry polygynously later. Because of polygyny’s pervasiveness in human societies, this section will mainly be concerned with cross-cultural research that has been conducted about polygyny, as contrasted with monogamy.

Many anthropological accounts report jealousy among co-wives. Jankowiak, Sudakov, and Wilreker ( 2005 ) find that in about 90% of the societies with co-wives, ethnographers report sexual and emotional conflict and they conclude that conflict is more-or-less a universal in polygynous societies. Polygynous societies appear to have responded to jealousy with certain common customs and rules that include: having separate quarters and kitchens for nonsororal co-wives, having rules about husbands sharing resources equitably, and having rules for sleeping with co-wives in rotation ( C. R. Ember, Ember, and Peregrine 2019, 245 ) . Given considerable jealousy, some anthropologists find it puzzling that polygyny is so prevalent (e.g., M. Ember ( 1974 ) ).

Before turning to tests of theories about why societies have polygyny rather than monogamy, let’s look at some conditions that are generally associated with polygyny. Polygyny is generally associated with

Moderate levels of societal complexity as indicated by ( Osmond 1965 )

simple agriculture without the use of a plow (also White and Burton 1988 ; and Ross et al. 2018 ) .

high dependence on animal husbandry (also Ross et al. 2018 ) .

communities with 100-1,000 residents.

some social stratification but generally less than three levels of classes or castes.

nomadic or dispersed settlements.

minimal state-level organization.

Male-oriented social systems

Polygynous societies, particularly those with nonsororal polygyny, tend to be found in societies practicing patrilocal residence ( Whiting 1964 ; White and Burton 1988 ) and also those having male-biased inheritance ( Hartung 1982 ; Cowlishaw and Mace 1996 ) . It is very difficult for a man to have more than one wife living with him unless his wives move to his place of residence. (Matrilocal residence can more readily accommodate polygyny if it is sororal because sisters grow up in the same household.)

Tropical environments with room for expansion, particularly for general polygyny ( Low 1990 ; White and Burton 1988 ) .

Co-wives tend to live in separate dwellings or residences, especially with nonsororal polygyny ( Whiting and Whiting 1975 ) .

More husband-wife aloofness ( Whiting and Whiting 1975 ; de Munck and Korotayev 2007 ) .

Polygyny is one of the most widely researched topics in cross-cultural research. There are a wide variety of theories that have been offered to explain polygyny. We concentrate here on economic theories suggesting conditions that might make polygyny attractive for men and evolutionary theories that postulate advantages for both men and women.

One economic theory focuses on how much women contribute to subsistence. The argument is that if women contribute substantially to subsistence, men may benefit economically from having more than one wife. Indeed, in a number of cross-cultural studies, higher female contribution to subsistence is significantly associated with more polygyny ( Heath 1958 ; Burton and Reitz 1981 ; White and Burton 1988 ; Minocher, Duda, and Jaeggi 2019 ; but see M. Ember 1984 ) . However, this overall finding comes with some qualifications. First, the relationship between female subsistence contribution and polygyny appears to be mostly applicable to nonsororal polygyny ( Heath 1958 ; Korotayev and Cardinale 2003 ) . Second, the relationship appears stronger in societies with simpler forms of agriculture ( Osmond 1965 ) . Note that the economic contribution argument fails to explain any advantages for women to be in polygynous marriages, nor does it explain why the opposite form of marriage–polyandry–is not generally found where men do most of the subsistence work.

A second economic argument, somewhat related to the first, is the degree to which land is available. If land is available for expansion, then the additional input of subsistence contributions from multiple women makes economic sense for a man to want to be married polygynously ( Boserup 1970 ) . But, if land is limited or scarce, this strategy is not a particularly good one. Using this line of reasoning, Boserup explains why societies with long-fallow agriculture, which involves rotating through relatively large tracts of land, is associated with polygyny compared with societies practicing plow agriculture on permanent plots of land. Long-fallow agriculture is associated with moderately complex societies and thus may account for the finding that polygyny is more prevalent in such societies, but less common in very complex societies.

Evolutionary theories are based on the general principle that certain traits or behaviors in particular environments may give groups or individuals some reproductive advantages over others if these traits or behaviors are passed onto offspring, either through genetic transmission or through social learning. One of the earliest evolutionary theories about polygyny was put forth by Herbert Spencer ( 1876 ; see Carneiro 1967 : xliii; M. Ember 1974 ; M. Ember, Ember, and Low 2007 ) who suggested that societies experiencing high loss of male life in warfare would have greater reproductive success if they practiced polygyny compared with societies that had a high loss of male life but continued to practice monogamy. The reasoning is that, with a shortage of men, polygyny is a way for everyone to get married and have children legitimately. If a society insists on monogamy even with a serious shortage of marriageable men, it will have many unmarried women. Obviously, women can have children without being married, but unmarried women generally face greater economic difficulties when trying to raise children. Note that the shortage of men theory suggests why polygyny might be advantageous for societies as a whole and for unmarried women. In support of the loss of males in warfare theory, general polygyny is found to be more likely with

Sex ratios favoring females ( M. Ember 1974 ; Barber 2008 ) .

Why? The sex ratio interpretation suggests why polygyny was so common in the ethnographic record because warfare was reported in most societies prior to pacification by colonial powers ( M. Ember 1974 ) . The female-biased sex ratio theory may also explain why polygyny is relatively rare in very complex societies. Complex societies tend to ave specialized or standing armies which means that male mortality in war may only be high among men in the armed forces ( M. Ember, Ember, and Low 2007 ) . In contrast, in socially simpler societies, the entire population of able-bodied men may be expected to be warriors. 6

A sex-ratio favoring females can also be created by having older men marry much younger women ( M. Ember 1984 ) . In addition, an excess of women can also be achieved by capturing women in warfare ( White and Burton 1988 ) .

Indirect support for the sex-ratio hypothesis comes from research on the presence of polyandrous marriages. While they are rarely the typical form of marriage in a society, societies practicing polyandry to some degree are more likely to have an opposite sex ratio favoring males rather than females ( Starkweather and Hames 2012 – see polyandry section below) .

High male mortality in warfare ( M. Ember 1974 , 1984 ) .

Why? A high male mortality in warfare may be the main cause of a sex-ratio favoring females. M. Ember ( 1984 ) notes that both a high male mortality in warfare combined with a discrepancy in age of marriage predict general polygyny more strongly than either condition alone. Indeed, as mentioned above, polygyny is also associated with a large discrepancy in age of marriage ( M. Ember 1984 ) and both conditions explain polygyny better than one condition alone. Ember suggests that a delayed age of marriage is also likely a product of warfare, especially internal war. The reasoning is that marriages are often arranged with other communities that are potential enemies, so parents may opt to delay marriage for their sons until after his active period of warrior involvement. Other causes of sex ratio imbalance in favor of females include migration of men for work or trade.

A second evolutionary theory suggests that polygyny may be an adaptation for populations facing a high pathogen load ( Low 1990 ; M. Ember, Ember, and Low 2007 ) . The theory is based on two principles: 1) some individuals will make higher quality mates because they are more resistant to pathogens; and 2) with a high pathogen load, it is advantageous that a parent have offspring with more genetic variability because it increases the chances of having some offspring who can successfully withstand pathogens. But why polygyny? Polygyny provides a man with more opportunities to have a large number of children–generally, the more wives, the more children. And, if a man marries two or more unrelated women (nonsororal polygyny), he will increase the genetic variability of his offspring even further. Therefore, reproductively speaking, it is to a man’s advantage to marry multiple unrelated women. Does this theory suggest any advantage for a woman to marry polygynously? Yes. Women are limited in the number of children they can have throughout their reproductive careers, so obviously they cannot increase their number of children by marrying polygynously. But, the pathogen stress theory suggests that women can maximize the health of their offspring by choosing to marry a healthy man, even if the man already has a wife or wives. The following findings support pathogen theory:

Higher pathogen load predicts polygyny ( Low 1990 ; Hooper 2006 ; Barber 2008 ; Minocher, Duda, and Jaeggi 2019 ) .

Why? Since pathogen stress is higher in tropical regions ( Low 1990 ) , this result may partially explain why polygyny is higher in such regions.

Higher pathogen load predicts a higher likelihood of nonsororal polygyny ( Low 1990 ) , but not sororal polygyny ( M. Ember, Ember, and Low 2007 ) .

Research conducted by M. Ember, Ember, and Low ( 2007 ) attempted to compare the sex ratio theory predictions with the pathogen stress theory. Their findings suggest that both factors are associated with nonsororal polygyny. However, they found that the complexity of a society introduced a qualification, namely that

High mortality rate predicts nonsororal polygyny in non-state societies, but not in state societies

Why? State societies are likely to have less male mortality because fighting forces tend to be specialized; therefore male mortality is less likely to be an important factor.

Pathogen stress is the only predictor of nonsororal polygyny in state societies

Why? Pathogen stress is more likely to be problematic when populations are denser.

Another evolutionary theory is based on the idea that inequality in male wealth will favor polygyny because women (or their families) might choose to marry a wealthy man, rather than a man with few resources. Research has found that

Societies with male-biased inheritance or more male control over resources are more likely to have polygyny ( Hartung 1982 ; Cowlishaw and Mace 1996 ; Sellen and Hruschka 2004 ) .

Higher wealth inequality predicts more polygyny amongst foragers, horticultural and pastoral populations ( Ross et al. 2018 ; Minocher, Duda, and Jaeggi 2019 ) , but not in societies with intensive agriculture. Societies with the highest degree of social stratification have less polygyny ( Minocher, Duda, and Jaeggi 2019 ) , which is contrary to the idea that male inequality generally will favor polygyny.

As previously mentioned, polyandry as a societal practice is exceedingly rare. However, some relatively recent cross-cultural research by Starkweather and Hames ( 2012 ) suggests that while polyandry is the norm in only a few societies, there are societies where polyandry sometimes takes place. In fact, in a survey of societies in eHRAF World Cultures , they found 53 societies outside of the “classic” polyandry areas (northern India, Nepal, Tibet and the Marquesas) that appear to practice either informal polyandry or formal polyandry . They call these instances “non-classical” polyandry. Informal polyandry is where two or more men are recognized as “fathers” and provide some help to the same woman and her children. Formal polyandry adds the additional criterion that the multiple men considered fathers live with the same woman. Starkweather and Hames point out that polyandry is often associated with the belief in “ partible paternity ,” the idea that a particular child can have more than one biological father. Their main findings are

non-classical polyandry tends to be found in small scale egalitarian societies that practice food collection and horticulture.

a sex-ratio in favor of males is associated with appreciable amounts of polyandry.

Why? Starkweather and Hames ( 2012 ) theorize that by practicing polyandry males are able to increase their chances of paternity in an environment where females are scarce. Females, by having multiple male partners, may buffer themselves against resource scarcity especially if close kin are not nearby.

Divorce, or the severing of marital ties, is found in the vast majority of societies in the anthropological record. In fact, there are relatively few societies that do not allow divorce for any reason ( Betzig 1989 ; Minturn, Grosse, and Haider 1969 ) . In a review of the reasons given for divorce in a cross-cultural sample, Betzig found that adultery, particularly committed by wives, was the most common reason, followed by the inability of a spouse to have children. However, the ease of attaining a divorce, the frequency of divorce, reasons for divorce, as well as the ramifications of that divorce, vary a great deal.

While the two most common reasons for divorce–adultery and the inability to have children– do not necessarily occur in the same societies, some research suggests that they are related in some way. Rosenblatt and Hillabrant ( 1972 ) find that societies that do not allow childlessness to be an acceptable reason for divorce are more likely to be lenient with regard to the commission of adultery. Why? The authors postulate that, in the absence of a social network system to support people when they grow old, having children is vital for parents’ future survival. It is important to note that the inability to have a child is often a function of a particular couple’s inability to have a child as a couple, not necessarily the inherent inability of a particular spouse to have a child. Adultery is one mechanism of producing offspring if a couple cannot have children.

Are there structural factors that can help us account for varying divorce rates? Although some research supports the idea that societies with matrilocal residence are more tolerant of divorce ( Minturn, Grosse, and Haider 1969 ) , other research does not find the relationship particularly strong when other factors are controlled ( Ackerman 1963 ; Pearson and Hendrix 1979 ) . Ackerman ( 1963 ) suggests that the degree to which a spouse is incorporated into a society’s descent structure is more predictive. Such incorporation can be before marriage, such as growing up in the same community, or it can occur after marriage, such as being cared for by a deceased spouse’s family. Ackerman ( 1963 ) finds that

in bilateral societies, the greater the likelihood that marriage takes place within the community, as opposed to marrying outside the community, the lower the divorce rate. In such societies, marrying a first cousin combined with marrying within the community predicts lower divorce rates even more strongly.

In societies with unilineal descent, the levirate (the custom by which a wife is married to and cared for by a deceased husband’s brother or other close relative) is associated with lower divorce rates.

Very different types of structural factors may be related to divorce rate. These relate to the degree to which the wife and husband are dependent upon each other for reproductive and economic success. Higher divorce rates are predicted by

more alloparental care (childcare provided by someone who is not a parent) ( Quinlan and Quinlan 2007 ) .

Why? Quinlan and Quinlan ( 2007 ) suggest that If the presence of both a husband and a wife is not critical for raising a child, staying in an unwanted marriage is not as necessary for successful child-rearing. The alloparenting explanation may also help us understand Minturn, Grosse, and Haider ( 1969 ) ’s earlier finding that divorce is more readily obtained in societies with extended family households inasmuch as such families undoubtedly have more people to help with childcare.

the higher the status of females in society ( Pearson and Hendrix 1979 ) .

Why? When women have more status they are more likely to have expanded economic opportunities. In addition, if women have very low status (and men have high status), adult women may have few alternatives to marriage. Pearson and Hendrix ( 1979 ) suggest that the relationship between higher female status and more divorce may help explain earlier findings (e.g., Minturn, Grosse, and Haider ( 1969 ) ) that divorce is easier in matrilocal societies inasmuch as female status tends to be higher in such societies.

Finally, the degree to which spouses choose their marriage partners may help us understand divorce rates. Broude ( 1983 ) finds that the following predict less divorce:

permissive attitudes towards premarital sex

individual choice in a marriage partner

Why? Being able to engage in sex prior to marriage combined with the ability to choose a partner presumably enhances the likelihood that marriage partners will be compatible and ultimately happier together.

Family Households

Though marriage primarily involves developing a social bond between those who are getting married, how their lives are shaped hinges heavily on the type of household they will live in. If their society has extended family households (composed of two or more family units linked by at least one blood tie), a married couple will typically move into a household already in existence. Extended family households range from small two-unit families, to large families with 3-4 generations of related individuals. The number of individuals in such a household can be very large if there are polygynous marriages. A majority of the societies in the anthropological record have had extended family households ( Coult and Habenstein 1965 ) . The minority of societies have independent family households. To be an extended family household, members need not live in the same dwelling. Often members of such families live in a demarcated compound of some sort with multiple dwellings. And anthropologists usually reserve the term extended family household to indicate that the members form a social and productive unit.

What predicts variation in family household form? Extended family households are more likely in societies where

Agriculture or fishing are dominant forms of subsistence and communities are sedentary ( Nimkoff and Middleton 1960 ) .

Why? Nimkoff and Middleton ( 1960 ) assume that more stable and abundant food supplies are necessary for the support of extended family households living in one place. They make the further assumption that agriculturalists and fishing people have more stable food supplies. As pointed out by Pasternak, Ember, and Ember ( 1976 ) , the problem with this reasoning is that most hunter-gatherer societies have multi-family bands that cooperate with each other, so clearly they can support multiple families. In addition, while extended families are associated with agriculture and sedentariness, the associations are very not very strong ( Pasternak, Ember, and Ember 1976 ) .

Social stratification is present ( Nimkoff and Middleton 1960 ) .

Why? The assumption is made that societies with social classes are likely to have private property and such property would create interest in keeping land together rather than dividing it into smaller and smaller pieces.

Societal complexity is mid-range ( Blumberg and Winch 1972 ) .

Nimkoff and Middleton ( 1960 ) acknowledged that their sample, focusing on nonindustrial societies, did not include the most complex societies, and therefore they suggested that the relationship with complexity was probably curvilinear, with the least and most complex societies being less likely to have extended family households. Blumberg and Winch found support for the curvilinear hypothesis both with data from a nonindustrial sample and then also with data from a country sample. Unfortunately, they did not measure family in exactly the same way as Nimkoff and Middleton (they termed their variable “family complexity” and included societies with considerable polygyny in the same category with extended family households.

“Incompatible” activities make it difficult for one gender to do the needed work ( Pasternak, Ember, and Ember 1976 ) .

Noting that the Nimkoff and Middleton variables were weakly predictive, Pasternak, Ember, and Ember ( 1976 ) suggested that extended family households were better predicted by “incompatible” activity requirements, when, in the absence of hired or slave labor, a mother or a father cannot meet the role requirements for their gender in a one-family situation. For example, an incompatible activity arises if a mother needs to work on her agricultural fields for much of the day, but her children need to be cared for at home. Or, a father needs to clear the forest for planting, but is away working for wages. The hypothesis is not only strongly predictive, but also predicts well in both agricultural and non-agricultural societies.

Consequences of Marriage and Family Forms

Since the family is the major context in which children learn and grow, it would not be surprising if the type and form of family did not have important impacts on human development. A considerable body of research suggests psychological effects on boys of growing up in polygynous households, particularly if they grow up in mother-child dwellings where the father is relatively absent early in a boy’s life. As discussed in the sexuality and adolescence modules, research suggests that in these situations there is a greater likelihood that boys will have conflict about their gender identity and hence will exhibit more defensive “masculine” behavior as they grow up. As part of defensive masculinity, women are often derogated. Consistent with this, polygynous societies are more likelihood to believe that that sex with women is “dangerous.” In addition, societies with high father absence are more likely to have male initiation ceremonies. In such ceremonies, males are often asked to demonstrate their “masculinity” by showing little pain during genital surgeries or in special tests of fortitude.

Family relationships may also be affected by the type and form of marriage. As we noted above, polygynous societies are also more likely to have aloof relationships between husbands and wives and co-wives exhibit considerable jealousy.

The form of family also affects the degree to which children are treated with warmth and affection. Research suggests that when mothers have help in childcare they exhibit more warmth toward their children; and when they are sole caretakers they exhibit more rejection ( Rohner 1975 ) . Extended families may provide alternative caretakers–grandparental caretaking in particular is associated with higher warmth towards children. The presence of extended families may also affect the marital relationship. Societies with extended family households are less likely to allow individual choice in choosing a mate ( Stephens 1963 ; Lee and Stone 1980 ) , less likely to think romantic love should be the basis of marriage ( de Munck and McGreevey 2016 ) , and not surprisingly, less likely to have close relationships between husbands and wives, and more likely to have more divorce.

There also may be broader societal consequences. Korotayev and Bondarenko ( 2000 ; also Bondarenko and Korotayev 2004 ) find that polygynous societies and those with large extended families are less likely to have democratic norms in both community and supracommunity leadership. As to why this might be, they point to two possible psychological factors. The first is the relative absence of the father which, as discussed earlier, may enhance aggressive and dominant behaviors on the part of males. The second may be related to that finding that polygyny is associated with lower warmth toward children presumably because mothers have little help in childcare ( Korotayev and Bondarenko 2000 ) . There are many negative outcomes in adulthood associated with low parental warmth, including low self-evaluation, less generosity, a negative worldview, and more hostility and aggression. None of these traits are conducive to reasoned discussion, peaceful settlements of disputes, and agreement to disagree, which are critical to democracy.

What We Don’t Know

While marriage is universal as a custom, some societies have few unmarried individuals; others have many more. Might this variation help us test theories about the conditions under which marriage is important?

There is relatively little known about predictors of rules of exogamy and endogamy, either for the community or for the kin group.

What might explain why matrilocal societies generally lack substantial transactions to the groom’s kin in contrast to considerable transactions to the wife’s kin with patrilocality?

While there is considerable research on the type of marriage and the conditions associated with it, aside from some research on aloofness/intimacy there is relatively little known about the quality of the marital relationship.

Exercises Using eHRAF World Cultures

Explore some texts and do some comparisons using the  eHRAF World Cultures  database. These exercises can be done individually or as part of classroom assignments. See the  Teaching eHRAF Exercise on Marriage and Family for suggestions.

This topical summary should be cited as:

Ember, Carol R., Benjamin Gonzalez, and Daniel McCloskey. 2021. “Marriage and Family” in C. R. Ember, ed.  Explaining Human Culture . Human Relations Area Files https://hraf.yale.edu/ehc/summaries/marriage-and-family , accessed [give date]

Photo Credits

• Nepalese Marriage Ceremony. 2012. Photograph by Krish Dulal, distributed under a CC BY-SA 3.0 license. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Marriage_Ceremony_09.JPG
• Mousou bride, Yunnan. 2016. Photograph by Rod Waddington, distributed under a Pixaby license. https://pixabay.com/images/id-1836315/
• Hopi woman dressing hair of unmarried girl. 1900. Photograph by Henry Peabody, public domain. https://catalog.archives.gov/id/520082
• Maasai family photo. 2015. Photograph by Looremeta92, distributed under a CC BY-SA 4.0 license. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maasai_Family_Photo_08.JPG
• Thai brideprice. 2008. Photograph by Tainscough, distributed under a CC BY-SA 3.0 license. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Thai_Bride_Price_2008.jpg
• Biertan divorce house. 2006. Photograph by Alessio Damato, distributed under a CC BY-SA 3.0 license. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Biertan_house_for_divorcing_people.jpg
• Independent family household. 2020. Photograph by Kingofkings_Lj, distributed under a Pixaby license. https://pixabay.com/images/id-5469309/

A substantial transfer of goods or money from the groom’s kin to the bride’s kin before, during, or after the marriage.

see : Bride Price

The groom, before or after the marriage, gives work services to the bride’s family.

The children of siblings of the opposite gender (i.e., the children of a woman and her brother are cross-cousins to each other).

A substantial transfer of goods or money from the bride’s family to the bride, the groom, or to the couple.

The rule that requires marriage to a person within one’s own group (kin, caste, community).

Two families that are connected by at least one blood tie that form a single social and/or economic unit. Extended families often include people from 3 or 4 generations.

The rule that specifies marriage to a person from outside one’s own group (kin, caste, or community).

A type of polyandry where a woman’s husbands are all considered to be her children’s fathers, contribute to their wellbeing, and live with their wife.

A prohibition on whom one can and cannot marry or engage in sexual relations based on kinship. While most societies extend this taboo to some other members of kin, it minimally includes siblings and parents.

Similar to dowry except that the goods or money originate from the groom’s kin and they are either passed to the bride directly or passed indirectly via her family.

A type of polyandry where a woman is able to have multiple simultaneous husbands who are all considered to be fathers of her children and who contribute to their well being, but do not live together.

A single-parent, monogamous, or polygamous family that constitutes its own social and/or economic unit.

A type of polygyny where only a limited number of men, usually those of greater wealth or social status, have multiple wives simultaneously.

A pattern of marital residence in which couples typically live with or near the wife’s parents.

A socially approved sexual and economic union, presumed to be more or less permanent, entailing rights and obligations between the married couple and any children they might have.

type of marriage limited to only one spouse at any given time.

type of polygyny in which a man is married to two or more women who are not sisters.

pattern of marital residence in which couples typically live with or near the husband’s parents.

The children of siblings of the same gender (i.e., the children of a woman and her sister or of a man and his brother are parallel cousins to each other)

The belief that a child can have more than one biological father.

Two or more men are married to one woman at the same time. Polyandry has two variations: formal and informal. See: formal polyandry and informal polyandry .

Two or more women are married to one man at the same time.

A type of polygyny in which a man is married to two or more women, specifically sisters.

Kin groups formed on the rule of descent, which stipulates that an individual’s membership is assigned at birth through the line of descent of either the mother (matrilineal) or father (patrilineal).

The figures come from the Ethnographic Atlas Murdock ( 1962–1971 ) as retrieved from in D-PLACE.org ( Kirby et al. 2016 ) ↩︎

These figures are based on data from the Standard Cross Cultural Sample which were coded by Broude and Greene ( 1985 ) ; these data on marriage were retrieved from D-PLACE variable SCCS739. Of the 148 societies in the Standard Cross Cultural Sample which Broude and Green coded 31.1% have full individual choice, 17.6% have individual choice that requires parental approval, 3.4% have individual choice that also require parental arrangement, 18.2% have either individual choice or arranged marriage, 16.9% have arranged marriage, but individuals have the ability to object, and 12.8% have fully arranged marriage. ↩︎

The figures in this paragraph and in the Figure are based on data from the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample ( Murdock and White 1969 ) ; these data on polygyny were retrieved from D-PLACE variable SCCS211. The Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS) is a sample of 185 societies. Figures from the SCCS also informed the included pie chart below. ↩︎

There are only 2 polyandrous societies in the SCCS. ↩︎

Of the various types of polygyny, limited is most common, followed by nonsororal polygyny, and then sororal polygyny. ↩︎

A cross-species study of mammals and birds M. Ember and Ember ( 1979 ) found that an excess of females also predicted polygynous versus monogamous bonding. Some studies have not found support for the sex ratio theory, but measures of polygyny were different ( Hooper 2006 ; Quinlan and Quinlan 2007 ) or variable was imputed ( Minocher, Duda, and Jaeggi 2019 ) . ↩︎

• How it works

Essay on Different Types of Marriages

Using the three different representations of marriage presented in the learning block (polyandry, arranged marriages, and walking marriages), fill in the graphic organizer below. In Part A, you will have to first identify the biases you have regarding marriage and their influence on your perspective of marriage. In Part B, you will then take an objective stance and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of these types of marriage. In Part C, you will create a question a social scientist might ask to further the investigation of marriage.

In this first step, do your best to identify three of your biases on marriage due to your culture and religion. The American culture and legal system generally allow only one type of marriage. What type of bias does this embed in us? The religions that people belong to and practice can also impact their biases toward marriage, depending on how their chosen religion defines marriage. How does this influence your perspective of marriage in general? How does this bias influence your perspective on these specific types of marriage?

The inability of the children to identify with their father and the jealousy among the husbands.

Lack of freedom to choose the spouses they truly love.

Possibilities of having more than one partner.

Influence of the Biases

In Polyandry type of marriage, a woman is married to more than one man as her husband as in the case in the video where the woman is married to the three brothers. Often, the children born in polyandry type or marriage are considered to be of the eldest brother. In some cases, the fatherhood of these children is established through a ceremony which in my view, may create a perception in these children that the other fathers may be their biological fathers denying their ceremonial fathers the respect they should be accorded. This kind of marriage also projects jealousy which is common with people in love. In arranged marriages, the spouses are brought together by other people who may be their relatives or friends. In such situations, marriage comes as a product of the opinions of other people but not love. Arranged marriages do not give individuals the opportunity to make informed decisions on the kind of people they want to spend the rest of their lives with. The parents and relatives operate on the assumption that their children are immature and impulsive to make sound choices regarding their spouses. In walking marriages where men stay in their own homes and are invited over, usually during the night hours to the womens bedroom, possibilities of a woman inviting more than one man to exist. The secrecy involved in this kind of marriage also gives room for witch hunt where a man can be interested in a particular woman while the woman is not. Such situations give room for the man to keep track of the man or men invited by such a woman and harm him as a result. Such kind of marriage does also not give room for a collective development as a man is bound to stay with his family all his lifetime.

While it is impossible to check our culture and biases at the door and become objective, we can identify our biases (as you have already done above) and try to ignore them to consider other points of view. In this next step, take a culturally relativistic standpoint (in other words, try to overcome your biases) and consider the tenets of each type of marriage. Why might these other forms of marriage be more successful or advantageous in certain contexts than the Western concept of marriage (based on love and monogamy)? Then, from that same culturally relativistic standpoint, also consider some possible drawbacks to these forms of marriage.

Type of Marriage Advantages Drawbacks

-Polyandry marriage helps in controlling population growth as the number of children that can be born of the woman is limited.

-This type of marriage is cost saving as it distributed the financial burden as well as other chores among the husbands.

-In cases of unity within the husbands and the wife, the family becomes stronger. -Polyandry marriage presents adverse effects to the health of a woman as it exposes her to the risk of acquiring the sexually transmitted infections.

-It also exposes women to psychological and behavioral changes which are common with the menstrual cycle.

-This type of marriage is also a hindrance to the social progress as all the husbands; mostly brothers are bound to one woman.

-Identification of the conceived children is also a drawback.

Arranged Marriages

-Arranged marriages make it easier for the couples to seek financial assistance from parents in their times of need.

-There is joint sharing of burdens between the families involved to lessen misfortunes.

-There are a better inter-family relationship in such cases making it easier to get together. -This type of marriage can create conflicts between families and partners in case of failures.

-Due to high dowry demands by parents, girls may end up unmarried.

-Adjusting to each other in arranged marriages is a problem as the spouses do not sufficient understanding of each others attitude.

Walking Marriages

-In walking marriages, there is a shared duty in taking care of the children.

-This type of marriage presents a stable family structure with no issues such as divorce and marriage conflicts.

-There is no lack of preference for particular gender by parents. -There is swapping of children to maintain gender balance.

-High risks of contracting sexually transmitted diseases.

-Lack of responsibilities by the fathers as some children end up not knowing their fathers.

Create a question: In this learning block, you were given a lot of information about marriage and what marriage means in different cultures. You were also asked to think about what marriage means to you. The next step is to take the information you have been given and create a question a social scientist might ask to further the investigation of marriage. For example, after reading about arranged marriages, you might ask: Are rates of depression higher in women in arranged marriages? Social scientists use existing information to come up with new questions. This is the iterative process of social science research.

What are the effect of polyandry type of marriage on the social and psychological development of the children?

Request Removal

If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the collegeessaywriter.net website, please click below to request its removal:

• Critical Thinking on Medicaid, Food Stamps, and WIC Policies
• Essay Example on How the Internet Has Changed Buying
• Hugo Film Analysis Example
• Social Media Informative Essay
• Male Gender Dominance in Families - Essay Example
• Essay on How Aiddo Treats Feminism in 'Changes'
• Culturally Sustainable Development - Article Review Example

Submit your request

Sorry, but it's not possible to copy the text due to security reasons.

Would you like to get this essay by email?

Sorry, you can’t copy this text :(

Enter your email to get this essay sample.

Don’t print this from here

Enter your email and we'll send you a properly formatted printable version of this essay right away.

How about making it original at only $7.00/page

Let us edit it for you at only $7.00 to make it 100% original!

Marriage Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on marriage.

In general, marriage can be described as a bond/commitment between a man and a woman. Also, this bond is strongly connected with love, tolerance, support, and harmony. Also, creating a family means to enter a new stage of social advancement. Marriages help in founding the new relationship between females and males. Also, this is thought to be the highest as well as the most important Institution in our society. The marriage essay is a guide to what constitutes a marriage in India. 

Whenever we think about marriage, the first thing that comes to our mind is the long-lasting relationship. Also, for everyone, marriage is one of the most important decisions in their life. Because you are choosing to live your whole life with that 1 person. Thus, when people decide to get married, they think of having a lovely family, dedicating their life together, and raising their children together. The circle of humankind is like that only. 

Read 500 Words Essay on Dowry System

As it is seen with other experiences as well, the experience of marriage can be successful or unsuccessful. If truth to be held, there is no secret to a successful marriage. It is all about finding the person and enjoying all the differences and imperfections, thereby making your life smooth. So, a good marriage is something that is supposed to be created by two loving people. Thus, it does not happen from time to time. Researchers believe that married people are less depressed and more happy as compared to unmarried people. 

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Concepts of Marriage

There is no theoretical concept of marriage. Because for everyone these concepts will keep on changing. But there are some basic concepts which are common in every marriage. These concepts are children, communication , problem-solving , and influences. Here, children may be the most considerable issue. Because many think that having a child is a stressful thing. While others do not believe it. But one thing is sure that having children will change the couple’s life. Now there is someone else besides them whose responsibilities and duties are to be done by the parents. 

Another concept in marriage is problem-solving where it is important to realize that you can live on your own every day. Thus, it is important to find solutions to some misunderstandings together. This is one of the essential parts of a marriage. Communication also plays a huge role in marriage. Thus, the couple should act friends, in fact, be,t friends. There should be no secret between the couple and no one should hide anything. So, both persons should do what they feel comfortable. It is not necessary to think that marriage is difficult and thus it makes you feel busy and unhappy all the time. 

Marriage is like a huge painting where you brush your movements and create your own love story. 

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Home / Essay Samples / Life / Love / Marriage and Family

Marriage and Family Essay Examples

Reasons for getting divorce - essay.

Divorce means the separation of the married couple from each other. It is a standard and a legal process of divorce, where the spouse can register for permanent separation from another if he or she is uncomfortable. In divorce essay this topic will be briefly...

The Right to Marriage and Family for Same-sex Couples

Marriage was once viewed as something much different from what it is now. It is a commitment between two individuals and the definition according to Google states, “in some jurisdictions specifically a union between a man and a woman”. This commitment varies between cultures; however,...

The Needs of a Man and the Needs of a Woman in Marriage

According to dictionary.com marriage is defined as the legal union of partners (man and women) in a personal relationship. The leading cause of most divorces today results in the needs of both partners being overlooked. The needs of a man are completely different from the...

Women Role in Writing Women’s Worlds by Lila Abu-lughod

Writing Women’s Worlds by Lila Abu-Lughod contains the past anecdotes, poems, and conversations of many women and young girls who live in a small village community in Egypt during and post World War 2. The critical ethnography talks about their troubles with the men in...

How Wilde Challenges the Traditional Ideals of Marriage and Relationships in an Ideal Husband

In An Ideal Husband Oscar Wilde presents two men Lord Goring and Sir Robert as two men who are ready to do everything it takes to save their love and satisfy the demands of their lovers. However, their separate lives meet at different points in the play....

The Concept of Marriage and Family in the Good Soldier by Ford Madox Ford

Marriage is usually being defined as a socially or ritually recognized union between spouses that also establishes rights and obligations between them, as well as between them and any children brought into the family. It takes many forms, varying all around the world as it...

The Reasons Why I Do not Want to Get Married

Everyone has a different way of life and love, you do not have to be like someone and imitate the same thing when you do not feel like it. Marriage is considered one of the great things of life. But not everyone is interested in...

Reasons and Effects of Divorce

The topic i have chosen to write this essay on is The Truth about Divorce. Most people think that people get divorced because they don't 'love' each other anymore but its alot more than that, it can be money issues, abuse, lack of communication, addiction...

Divorce Vs Toxic Relationship 

Divorce has become a debatable topic because of the loss of family structure and foundation. Living in a toxic relationship effects the two partners and their child, if any involved in negative ways. The reason why I chose this topic is because it has been...

Love, Family, and Marriages in the Elizabethan Times

The Elizabethan era is the epoch in the Tudor period of the history of England during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I (1558-1603), often referred to as the Golden Age in English History which represented the apogee of the English Renaissance and saw the flowering...

Trying to find an excellent essay sample but no results?

Don’t waste your time and get a professional writer to help!

You may also like

• Responsibility
• Reading Books
• Having a Baby
• Relationship Essays
• Beauty Essays
• Online Dating Essays
• Jealousy Essays
• Falling in Love Essays
• Happy Marriage Essays
• Teenage Love Essays
• Boyfriend Essays
• Types of Love Essays
• Wisdom Essays

samplius.com uses cookies to offer you the best service possible.By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .--> -->