Now, amongst the Australian natives wives are certainly lent, but only under strict rules; in the Arunta tribe for example no man will lend his wife to any one who does not belong to the particular group with which it is lawful for her to have marital relations—she is in fact, only lent to a man whom she calls Unawa, just as she calls her own husband, and though this may undoubtedly be spoken of as an act of hospitality, it may with equal justice be regarded as evidence of the very clear recognition of group relationship, and as evidence also in favour of the former existence of group marriage.
so 3 seems not-entirely accurate: they have something resembling group marriage. It’s unclear to me whether 1 holds strictly, or merely a weaker version like “Every man has access to at least one wife, sometimes, in a group arrangement”
as for 4, Aboriginal women marry shortly after puberty while men don’t marry their late 20s or even 30s, which could tilt the scale towards an excess of women in the marriageable pool
so 3 seems not-entirely accurate: they have something resembling group marriage. It’s unclear to me whether 1 holds strictly, or merely a weaker version like “Every man has access to at least one wife, sometimes, in a group arrangement”
as for 4, Aboriginal women marry shortly after puberty while men don’t marry their late 20s or even 30s, which could tilt the scale towards an excess of women in the marriageable pool