Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T21:23:17.605Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Evolution of the Human Family

from Part IV - Group Living

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2020

By
Craig T. Palmer  and
Kathryn Coe
Edited by
Lance Workman ,
Will Reader  and
Jerome H. Barkow
Lance Workman
Affiliation:
University of South Wales
Will Reader
Affiliation:
Sheffield Hallam University
Jerome H. Barkow
Affiliation:
Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia
Get access

Summary

After describing common conceptions of the evolution of the human family as a unit, this chapter examines several problems with this conception and presents an alternative conception of the human family as a mechanism of tradition transmission instead of as a unit. It concludes with a discussion of some of the directions for future research generated by this reconception of the evolution of the human family.

The common conception of the family as a unit sees the evolution of the human family as a chain, in which each link in the chain is a successive form of family unit. Descriptions of this chain typically start with a hypothesized prehuman family unit that is largely based on comparisons with other primates and the fossil record, and end with the forms of family units found in the ethnographic record.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Evolutionary Perspectives on Human Behavior , pp. 158 - 166
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexander, R. D. (1974). The evolution of social behavior. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematic, 5, 325–383.Google Scholar
Alexander, R. D. (1979). Darwinism and Human Affairs. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Anthrobase (2009). Segmentary Lineage/Segmentary Opposition. www.anthrobase.com/Dic/eng/def/segmentary-lineage.htm.Google Scholar
Bohannan, L. (1958). Political aspects of Tiv social organization. In Middleton, J. & Tait, D., eds., Tribes without Rulers: Studies in African Segmentary Systems. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 33–66.Google Scholar
Chapais, B. (2008). Primeval Kinship: How Pair-Bonding Gave Birth to Human Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Coe, K., Palmer, A. L., Palmer, C. T., & DeVito, C. L. (2010). Culture, altruism, and conflict between ancestors and descendants. Structure and Dynamics, 4(3), 1–17.Google Scholar
Cronk, L. (1999). That Complex Whole: Culture and the Evolution of Human Behavior. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. (1982). The Extended Phenotype. Oxford: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Durkheim, E. (1961/1912). The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. New York: Collier.Google Scholar
Emlen, S. T., Wrege, P. H., & Demong, N. J. (1995). Making decisions in the family: An evolutionary perspective. American Scientist, 83(2), 148–157.Google Scholar
Evans-Pritchard, E. E. (1940). The Nuer. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flinn, M. V. (2011). Evolutionary anthropology of the human family. In Salmon, C. & Shackelford, T., eds., Evolutionary Family Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 12–32.Google Scholar
Fortes, M. (1969). Kinship and the Social Order: The Legacy of Lewis Henry Morgan. Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Fox, R. (1967). Kinship and Marriage. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Geary, D. C., & Flinn, M. V. (2001). Evolution of human parental behavior and the human family. Parenting: Science and Practice, 1(1 & 2), 5–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geary, D. C., Bailey, D. H., & Oxford, J. (2011). Reflections on the human family. In Salmon, C. & Shackelford, T., eds., Evolutionary Family Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 365–385.Google Scholar
Goodale, J. C. (1962). Marriage contracts among the Tiwi. Ethnology, 1(4), 452–466.Google Scholar
Goodall, J. (1986). The Chimpanzees of Gombe: Patterns of Behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gorelik, B. K., Shackelford, T. K., & Salmon, C. A. (2011). Between conflict and cooperation: New horizons in the evolutionary science of the human family. In Salmon, C. & Shackelford, T., eds., Evolutionary Family Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 386–398.Google Scholar
Hepper, P. (2011). Kin recognition. In Salmon, C. & Shackelford, T., eds., Evolutionary Family Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 211–229.Google Scholar
Hrdy, S. B. (2005). Mother Nature: A History of Mothers, Infants, and Natural Selection. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hughes, A. L. (1988). Evolution and Human Kinship. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Huntington, G. E., & Hostetler, J. A. (2002). The Hutterites in North America. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Keesing, R. (1975). Kin Groups and Social Structure. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Kramer, K., & Greaves, R. (2011). Postmarital residence and bilateral kin associations among hunter–gatherers: Pumé foragers living in the best of both worlds. Human Nature, 22, 41–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, G. (2000). The Mating Mind: How Sexual Choice Shaped the Evolution of Human Nature. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Mock, D. W. (2011). The evolution of relationships in nonhuman families. In Salmon, C. & Shackelford, T., eds., Evolutionary Family Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 51–62.Google Scholar
Murdock, G. P. (1949). Social Structure. New York: The MacMillan Company.Google Scholar
Palagi, E., & Norscia, I. (2013). Bonobos protect and console friends and kin. PLoS ONE, 8(11), e79290.Google Scholar
Palmer, C. T., & Begley, R. O. (2015). Costly signaling theory, sexual selection, and the influence of ancestors on religious behavior. In Slone, J., ed., The Attraction of Religion: Connecting Religion, Sex, and Evolution. London: Bloomsbury Press, pp. 93–107.Google Scholar
Palmer, C. T., Begley, R. O., Coe, K., & Steadman, L. B. (2013). Moral elevation and traditions: Ancestral encouragement of altruism through ritual and myth. Journal of Ritual Studies, 27(2), 83–96.Google Scholar
Palmer, C. T., & Coe, K. (2010). Parenting, courtship, Disneyland and the human brain. International Journal of Tourism Anthropology, 1(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, C. T., Coe, K., & Steadman, L. B. (2016). Reconceptualizing the human social niche: How it came to exist and how it is changing. Current Anthropology, 57(S13), S181–S191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, C. T., & Palmer, A. L. (2016). Why traditional ethical codes prescribing self-sacrifice are a puzzle to evolutionary theory: The example of Besa. Journal of the Association for the Study of Ethical Behavior/Evolutionary Biology in Literature, 12(1), 40–50.Google Scholar
Palmer, C. T., & Steadman, L. B. (1997). Human kinship as a descendant-leaving strategy: A solution to an evolutionary puzzle. Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems, 20(1), 39–51.Google Scholar
Palmer, C. T., Steadman, L. B., & Coe, K. (2006). More kin: An effect of the tradition of marriage. Structure and Dynamics, 1(2), 1–16.Google Scholar
Quirko, H. N. (2011). Fictive kinship and induced altruism. In Salmon, C. & Shackelford, T., eds., Evolutionary Family Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 310–328.Google Scholar
Rollins, B. Y., Belue, R. Z., & Francis, L. A. (2010). The beneficial effect of family meals on obesity differs by race, sex, and household education: the national survey of children’s health, 2003–2004. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 110(9), 1335–1339.Google Scholar
Sahlins, M. (1961). The segmentary lineage: An organization of predatory expansion. American Anthropologist, 63(2), 322–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmon, C. A., & Malcolm, J. (2011). Parent–offspring conflict. In Salmon, C. & Shackelford, T., eds., Evolutionary Family Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 83–96.Google Scholar
Smaldino, P. E., Newson, L., Schank, J. C., & Richerson, P. J. (2013). Simulating the evolution of the human family: Cooperative breeding increases in harsh environments. PLoS ONE, 8(11), e80753.Google Scholar
Steadman, L. B., & Palmer, C. T. (1995). Religion as an identifiable traditional behavior subject to natural selection. Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems, 18(2), 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steadman, L. B., Palmer, C. T., & Tilley, C. F. (1996). The universality of ancestor worship. Ethnology, 35, 63–76.Google Scholar
Stevens, J. M. G., Vervaecke, H., & Van Elsacker, L. (2007). The bonobo’s adaptive potential: Social relations under captive conditions. In Furuichi, T. & Thompson, J., eds., The Bonobos: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation. New York: Springer, pp. 19–38.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1974). Parent–offspring conflict. American Zoologist, 14(1), 249–264.Google Scholar
Turner, V. (1968). The Drums of Affliction: A Study of Religious Processes among the Ndembu of Zambia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
van den Berghe, P. L., & Barash, D. P. (1977). Inclusive fitness and human family structure. American Anthropologist, 79, 809–823.Google Scholar
Voland, E., & Voland, R. (1995). Parent–offspring conflict, the extended phenotype, and the evolution of conscience. Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems, 18(4), 397–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vonnegut, K. (1976). Slapstick, or Lonesome No More! New York: Delacorte Press.Google Scholar
West, S. A., El Mouden, C., & Gardner, A. (2011). Sixteen common misconceptions about the evolution of cooperation in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32, 231–262.Google Scholar
West-Eberhard, M. J. (1975). The evolution of social behavior by kin selection. Quarterly Review of Biology, 50, 1–33.Google Scholar
Wrangham, R. W. (1980). An ecological model of female-bonded primate groups. Behaviour, 75, 262–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, R. (1994). The Moral Animal: Why We Are the Way We Are. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×