Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The trouble with the origin of the family is that no one really knows. Since Engels wrote The Origin of the Family. Private Property and the State in 1884, a great deal of new evidence has come in. Yet the gaps are still enormous. It is not known when the family originated, although it was probably between two million and 100,000 years ago. It is not known whether it developed once or in separate times and places. It is not known whether some kind of embryonic family came before, with, or after the origin of language. Since language is the accepted criterion of humanness, this means that we do not even know whether our ancestors acquired the basics of family life before or after they were human. The chances are that language and the family developed together over a long period, but the evidence is sketchy. Although the origin of the family is speculative, it is better to speculate with than without evidence. The evidence comes from three sources. One is the social and physical lives of non-human primates-especially the New and Old World monkeys and, still more, the great apes, humanity's closest relatives. The second source is the tools and home sites of prehistoric humans and proto-humans. The third is the family lives of hunters and gatherers of wild provender who have been studied in modern times. Each of these sources is imperfect: monkeys and apes, because they are not pre-human ancestors, although they are our cousins; fossil hominids, because they left so little vestige of their social life; hunters and gatherers, because none of them has, in historic times, possessed a technology and society as primitive as those of early humans. All show the results of long endeavor in specialized, marginal environments. But together, these sources give valuable clues.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kathleen Gough (1971) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: