Would the institution of marriage have developed in the absence of religion?

[LazyGun]

This question has arisen as a consequence of reading a notion posted by a contributor to a book I was reading. The author suggested that the institution of marriage as we understand it only happened because of religion - but thinking about that, I am not so sure. So what do you think? Would marriage have come about in a hypothetical world absent of any religious thinking?

[jake-the-peg]

I'm not sure a lot of this is obvious - well not to me at least

In what way is pairing for life in the animal kingom different from non-religious marriage?

What is the definition of marriage in the context of the question?

[naomi24]

That was the point I was making, Jake. There is no difference, apart from the fact that human beings have the chattels of life to consider.

[jake-the-peg]

Well the other question is what actually is marriage in a non religious context.

People who are cohabitors are not usually thought of as married because they haven't been through a ceremony to advertise the union

Does polyigamy and polyandry count as marriage - if so the 1:1 pairing of animals isn't that good an analogy either! and I'm sure we don't wan't to compare with a pride of Lions.

The idea of marriage is actually a bit slippery

[naomi24]

I suppose marriages in some societies could be compared to a pride of lions. On the other hand, some animals, like most people, choose to live on a one to one basis.

[Ankou]

even those who cohabit are covered in a legal aspect, common law etc.

animals have no such concept, which is why it wasn't a good analogy.

[naomi24]

It wasn't an analogy - it was an observation of the natural world.

[Ankou]

yes, kinship as i said. not marriage.

[naomi24]

What's this Ankou? Argument for argument's sake? You're not seriously saying there's no such thing as marriage in the animal kingdom? Well, there's a surprise. Thank you for that gem of wisdom. ;o)

[Ankou]

youre welcome

[LazyGun]

Just to reiterate - This post came about because I read a comment in an article contributing to a book. The author of the article was suggesting that the idea of marriage as we currently understand it was attributable to religion, and in the absence of religion, all other societal and cultural elements being essentially the same as now, marriage would not happen.

My gut reaction would be that this is incorrect, and that some equivalent to what we recognise as marriage would occur in a society that it is the same as ours except for the lack of religion. Pairing to bring up offspring seems a logical development. I must confess though, that I didnt really consider polyamory / polygamy, nor examples of communal living from the natural world, such as prides of lions, or troupes of meerkats etc.

I just thought the author was reaching a bit, attributing "marriage" to religion ;)

[jno]

Meerkats are extremely religious, and all their marriages have to be solemnised by the Great Meerkat.

[Ankou]

some of mhy best friends are meerkats.

[naomi24]

LG, I think perhaps the author was sporting his religiously rose coloured spectacles. ;o)