> I’d look for societies that were individualistic rather than authoritarian as polygamy seems to me to be a function of patriarchy and power consolidation
I wonder whether patriarchy is a consequence of polygamy rather than a cause.
It's very hard to compete with a person who has dozens or hundreds of children. And women cannot have more ten or so children, even in a non-monogamous setting.
This advantage is most visible in a hereditary aristocracy where a man could have a stable base of heirs, a large group of natural allies and the political opportunities of arranged marriages for children.
But even working class farmers would have the benefit of more free labour, and the middle class merchants could enjoy networks of trust in which to conduct commerce.
Although monogamous and eventually growing out of the middle class, the first / second Rothschilds are an example of the latter business benefit of having many competent adult children.
I wonder whether patriarchy is a consequence of polygamy rather than a cause.
It's very hard to compete with a person who has dozens or hundreds of children. And women cannot have more ten or so children, even in a non-monogamous setting.
This advantage is most visible in a hereditary aristocracy where a man could have a stable base of heirs, a large group of natural allies and the political opportunities of arranged marriages for children.
But even working class farmers would have the benefit of more free labour, and the middle class merchants could enjoy networks of trust in which to conduct commerce.
Although monogamous and eventually growing out of the middle class, the first / second Rothschilds are an example of the latter business benefit of having many competent adult children.