How about the naturally-occuring division of labor and the long maturation periods required for human young? Most animals release their young to the world fairly early, humans need far more time to develop. Most animals have enormous amounts of behavior instinctively ingrained, humans don't and most of their inate behavior disappears very early. The infant searches for the nipple and when found the infant sucks. After that the behavior is lost, the infant searches for a mother who is expected to feed the child. No longer does a finger in the mouth fake out the child, no longer will just any breast do. Social mechanisms are at play. Then there is the mother-figure and father-figure dynamic. Children instinctly look for those attachments. If one of the two is gone, even Freud with all his failings recognized that people search for replacements and that husbands or wives in subsequent marriages subconsciously bear traits of parents or expectations of what the missing parent may have or should have been like. That is why marriage in some form or another is recognized even by some of the most athiestic psychologists and anthropologists and have been for years.
2007-02-01 09:35:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by Rabbit 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it has been a part of human civilization for too long for there to be one spot that we can point to and say "yes, this is where marriage began, this is the origin of marriage." However, it might be an idea for you, if you're interested, to study the marriage and relationship practices of ancient cultures. In ninth grade I read a list of laws from an ancient mesopotamian culture and a number of them pertained to relationships. Unfortuately I don't remember the name of that culture. That might help you. Also, if you want more information on marriage before it was such a big aspect of religion, go back before that religion started and look at the records on relationships that there are there. Religions are created by man and it is possible to find sources from before they existed.
Hope that helps. I didn't want your only response to be that guy that quoted the Bible.
2007-02-01 17:10:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by Kharm 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are looking at ancient civilizations I think.
I doubt if you are ever going to be able separate the institution of marriage from the ceremony of wedding. Even in the secular West, wedding is accompanied by a degree of ceremonial/ritual acts.
I suggest you go to Wikipedia and then check out any references it may give in a public library. You might also try opening an encylopedia (a book with alphabetical headings in several volumes) in a library and looking up marriage.
Marriage was known to the Romans, and to the Ancient Egyptians.
As for Genesis, it is neither credible nor reliable, as it was probably written by men with forked beards and funny hats (what's more they weren't even white!!!!).
2007-02-01 17:06:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by Augusta B 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
You're asking for a Cultural Anthropologist, that's a specific specialty within Anthropological studies.
I can tell you right now that there's no hard evidence simply because "Marriage" is a CONCEPT not found in THINGS.
2007-02-01 17:05:51
·
answer #4
·
answered by DEATH 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The book of Genesis in the Bible is the most credible anthropolical source stating the origin of marriage. It was an institution created by God, whether you choose to believe it or not.
2007-02-01 16:47:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by HolyLamb 4
·
0⤊
8⤋