A Cross-Cultural Perspective on Romantic Love OR。 Williams jankowiak: Edward F. Fischer thnology, Vol 31, No. 2.(Apr, 1992), pp. 149-155 Stable url: http://inks.jstororg/sici?sici0014-1828%28199204%02931%03a2%3c149%03aacporl%3e2.0.co%3b2-2 Ethnology is currently published by University of Pittsburgh-Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.htmlJstOr'sTermsandConditionsofUseprovidesinpartthatunlessyouhaveobtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the jsTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that ap on the screen or printed page of such transmission STOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support @jstor. org httpiww Sat jun919:12:592007
A Cross-Cultural Perspective on Romantic Love William R. Jankowiak; Edward F. Fischer Ethnology, Vol. 31, No. 2. (Apr., 1992), pp. 149-155. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0014-1828%28199204%2931%3A2%3C149%3AACPORL%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2 Ethnology is currently published by University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/upitt.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. http://www.jstor.org Sat Jun 9 19:12:59 2007
A CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ON ROMANTIC LOVEl William R. Jankowiak University of Nevada, Las Vega Edward F, Fischer Tulane University The anthropological study of romantic(or passionate)love is virtually nonexistent due to the widespread belief that romantic love is unique to euro-American culture. This belief is by no means confined to anthropology. The historian Philippe Aries(1962), for example, argues that affection was of secondary importance to more utilitarian ambitions throughout much of European history. Lawrence Stone(1988: 16)goes further, insisting that"if romantic love ever existed outside of Europe, it only arose among the nonwestern nation-states' elite who had the time to cultivate an aesthetic appreciation for subjectiv nderlying these Eurocentric views is the assumption that modernization and the rise of individualism are directly linked to the appearance of romantic notions of The validity of an affectionless past is challenged by some historians who draw pon the insights of an earlier generation of anthropologists(e. g Lowie 1950 Westermark 1922)to argue that European preindustrial courtship was neither cold aloof, nor devoid of affection(Gillis 1988; MacDonald 1981; MacFarlane 1987 Pollock 1983). However, much of this revisionist work continues to explain instances of romantic love as a basis for marriage, ignoring the role romantic love plays in affairs(see Stearns and Stearns 1985). Consequently, little has been done to alter the prevalent opinion that romantic love is a European contribution to world culture Paul Rosenblatt (1966; 1967), a psychologist, in a pioneering series of holocultural investigations, correlated modes of cultural transmission and social organization to the emergence of romantic love as a basis for marriage. Writing within the 1960s functionalist milieu, he assumed like almost everyone else that the social construction of reality had a corresponding impact on the construction and expression of private sentiment. In effect, one assumed the other(see also Coppinger and rosenblatt 1968 The premise of much of this research is apparent: cultural traditions bind the individual emotionally into a web of dependency with others, thereby rechannelling or defusing the intensity of an individual's emotional experience This web of dependency, in turn, undermines the individuals proclivity to fantasize about a lover or the erotic(Averill 1980 de Rougement 1974: Dion and Dion 1988; Endleman 1989; Hsu 1981) Recently, some evolutionary-oriented anthropologists and psychologists have explored the possibility that romantic love constitutes a human universal(Buss
A CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ON ROMANTIC LOVE1 William R. Jankowiak University of Nevada, Las Vegas Edward F. Fischer Tulane University The anthropological study of romantic (or passionate) love is virtually nonexistent due to the widespread belief that romantic love is unique to Euro-American culture. This belief is by no means confined to anthropology. The historian Philippe Aries (1962), for example, argues that affection was of secondary importance to more utilitarian ambitions throughout much of European history. Lawrence Stone (1988:16) goes further, insisting that "if romantic love ever existed outside of Europe, it only arose among the nonwestern nation-states' elite who had the time to cultivate an aesthetic appreciation for subjective experiences." Underlying these Eurocentric views is the assumption that modernization and the rise of individualism are directly linked to the appearance of romantic notions of love. The validity of an affectionless past is challenged by some historians who draw upon the insights of an earlier generation of anthropologists (e.g., Lowie 1950; Westermark 1922) to argue that European preindustrial courtship was neither cold, aloof, nor devoid of affection (Gillis 1988; MacDonald 198 1; MacFarlane 1987; Pollock 1983). However, much of this revisionist work continues to explain instances of romantic love as a basis for marriage, ignoring the role romantic love plays in affairs (see Stearns and Stearns 1985). Consequently, little has been done to alter the prevalent opinion that romantic love is a European contribution to world culture. Paul Rosenblatt (1966; 1967), a psychologist, in a pioneering series of holocultural investigations, correlated modes of cultural transmission and social organization to the emergence of romantic love as a basis for marriage. Writing within the 1960s functionalist milieu, he assumed like almost everyone else that the social construction of reality had a corresponding impact on the construction and expression of private sentiment. In effect, one assumed the other (see also Coppinger and Rosenblatt 1968). The premise of much of this research is apparent: cultural traditions bind the individual emotionally into a web of dependency with others, thereby rechannelling or defusing the intensity of an individual's emotional experience. This web of dependency, in turn, undermines the individual's proclivity to fantasize about a lover or the erotic (Averill 1980; de Rougement 1974; Dion and Dion 1988; Endleman 1989; Hsu 1981). Recently, some evolutionary-oriented anthropologists and psychologists have explored the possibility that romantic love constitutes a human universal (Buss
150 ETHNOLOGY 1988: Fisher 1987; Tennov 1984). These researchers argue that humans have evolved the propensity to experience romantic love which can be recognized by a sudden, unrestrained passion often resulting in the individual entering into an immediate. if short term. commitment. In this view romantic love centers on a biological core that is expressed as love and enacted in courtship(Perper 1985) Concurring, Liebowitz(1983)draws upon biochemical research that suggests that the giddiness, euphoria, optimism, and energy lovers experience in early stages of infatuation is caused by increased levels of phenylethylamine (PEA),an amphetamine-related compound that produces mood-lifting and energizing effects (also see Fisher 1987). This evolutionary perspective suggests that romantic love arises from forces within the hominid brain that are independent of the socially constructed mind. From this perspective, romantic love must be present, in som form or another, within every culture This paper draws upon Murdock and White's(1969 )Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS) of 186 societies in order to identify those cultures in which romantic love, at least within the domain of private experience is present or absent. Unlike in the previous holocultural studies, whereby only the normative sphere was examined we focused on both the idiosyncratic and the normative for evidence of romantic love presence. By romantic love we mean any intense attraction that involves the idealization of the other, within an erotic context, with the expectation of enduring for some time into the future"(see Lindholm 1988. Romantic love stands in sharp contrast to the companionship phase of love (sometimes referred to as attachment) which is characterized by the growth of a more peaceful, comfortable, and fulfilling relationship; it is a strong and enduring affection built upon long term association (Hatfield 1988; Liebowitz 1983) METHODOLOGY The data for this project come primarily from the works recommended in the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS). By first consulting these authorities, we sought to control for Galtons problem Our research procedure was to first, examine the collective works of the ethnographic authorities recommended by murdock and White. If that material proved vague and therefore inconclusive, we then analyzed, whenever possible, the culture's folklore. When no folklore was available other supplemental ethnographies were examined, provided that the culture's subsistence system, social structure, and cosmological system had not undergone any significant transformation. For example, because Lizot(1985 )and Chagnon(1983 )both orked among unacculturated yanomamo, Lizot's account of Yanomamo love experience is cited as confirmation that romantic love was not an unknown subsistence base bears only a faint resemblance to the previous generation.The fact that Stearman(1987)found evidence of romantic love among contemporary town-d welling Siriono does not mean that some of the forest dwelling Siriono alse experienced romantic love. Consequently, her study could not be used to supplement Holmberg's(1969)account. a culture was dropped from our sample if: (1)there was no reliable or relevant source material available; (2) the SCCS's primary or supplemental authorities did
150 ETHNOLOGY 1988; Fisher 1987; Tennov 1984). These researchers argue that humans have evolved the propensity to experience romantic love which can be recognized by a sudden, unrestrained passion often resulting in the individual entering into an immediate, if short term, commitment. In this view romantic love centers on a biological core that is expressed as love and enacted in courtship (Perper 1985). Concurring, Liebowitz (1983) draws upon biochemical research that suggests that the giddiness, euphoria, optimism, and energy lovers experience in early stages of infatuation is caused by increased levels of phenylethylamine (PEA), an amphetamine-related compound that produces mood-lifting and energizing effects (also see Fisher 1987). This evolutionary perspective suggests that romantic love arises from forces within the hominid brain that are independent of the socially constructed mind. From this perspective, romantic love must be present, in some form or another, within every culture. This paper draws upon Murdock and White's (1969) Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS) of 186 societies in order to identify those cultures in which romantic love, at least within the domain of private experience, is present or absent. Unlike in the previous holocultural studies, whereby only the normative sphere was examined, we focused on both the idiosyncratic and the normative for evidence of romantic love presence. By romantic love we mean any intense attraction that involves the idealization of the other, within an erotic context, with the expectation of enduring for some time into the future2 (see Lindholm 1988). Romantic love stands in sharp contrast to the companionship phase of love (sometimes referred to as attachment) which is characterized by the growth of a more peaceful, comfortable, and fulfilling relationship; it is a strong and enduring affection built upon long term association (Hatfield 1988; Liebowitz 1983). METHODOLOGY The data for this project come primarily from the works recommended in the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS). By first consulting these authorities, we sought to control for Galton's problem. Our research procedure was to first, examine the collective works of the ethnographic authorities recommended by Murdock and White. If that material proved vague and therefore inconclusive, we then analyzed, whenever possible, the culture's folklore. When no folklore was available, other supplemental ethnographies were examined, provided that the culture's subsistence system, social structure, and cosmological system had not undergone any significant transformation. For example, because Lizot (1985) and Chagnon (1983) both worked among unacculturated Yanomamo, Lizot's account of Yanomamo love experience is cited as confirmation that romantic love was not an unknown experience. On the other hand, the present-day Siriono social organization and subsistence base bears only a faint resemblance to the previous generation. The fact that Stearman (1987) found evidence of romantic love among contemporary town-dwelling Siriono does not mean that some of the forest dwelling Siriono also experienced romantic love. Consequently, her study could not be used to supplement Holmberg's (1969) account. A culture was dropped from our sample if: (1) there was no reliable or relevant source material available; (2) the SCCS's primary or supplemental authorities did
CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ON ROMANTIC LOVE 151 not discuss courtship marriage or family relations; and ( 3) the inability of the coders to agree whether a specific passage conclusively indicated romantic love's presence(N=1). Using these criteria, twenty cultures were dropped, leaving us with a sample universe of 166 societies Besides the usual difficulties in finding reliable source material our primary methodological problem arose from the absence of any clear and consist usage of he terms love, lovemaking and lovers. Because ethnographers often fail to distinguish between love and sexual intercourse, it is unclear if they are referring to passionate love or only using a common metaphor for sexual interd order to distinguish between behaviors motivated solely out of lust or physical satisfaction from those motivated by romantic love, additional indices were required. thus the presence of romantic love in a culture was coded only when the ethnographer made a clear distinction between lust and love, and then noted the resence of love. There was, however, one exception. If the ethnographer claimed that romantic love was not present yet provided a folktale or an incident that demonstrated passionate involvement, his or her interpretation was rejected. Only two such discrepancies appeared in our sample population (i.e, Manus, Pakistan In over 250 ethnographic and folkloric studies examined not a single researcher explicitly defined romantic love. Those ethnographers who insisted that the phenomenon did not exist rarely noted which psychological attitudes or behavioral raits were absent. This lacuna arose from overlooking the exceptional or non normative act, as well as from failing to distinguish between lust and the two fundamental types of love experience; romantic and companionship love The most problematic cross-cultural studies are those that use high inferences indices. We were at pains therefore to find richly texture illustrations of romantie love's presences. Because many ethnographies did not supply such cases, we relied upon other indicative clues or indices. The criteria (listed below) are similar to those used in previous cross -cultural studies that sought to document the ecological and social factors responsible for the emergence of romantic love as a basis for marriage. These studies examined specific acts(e. g elopement, love magic, and love songs) that suggest choice for attachment and thus the presence of passionate affection With the exception of love magic, we used similar indices. It is important to stress, however, that we recorded as positive only those cases where the ethnographer recorded an expressive motive(i.e, mutual affection) and not an instrumental motive(i.e, meat for sex). If the ethnographer simply reported the presence of elopement, but did not supply additional information concerning the individual's motivation, then that culture was coded as romantic love absent. In this way our criteria are more precise than previous cross-cultural studies of romantic love. Moreover, unlike previous cross-cultural studies, we read whenever possible a culture's folklore. This proved to be the most fruitful means to document the presences of the romantic love. Finally, to determine the presence or absence of romantic love, only the initial phase of involvement (i.e, less than examined. The phase of the love relationships was determined through examining the ethnographic context Unless one of the indicators discussed below was present, we never inferred romantic love's presence The following indicators were used to assess the presence of romantic love within a culture during the first two years of involvement(marriage or other)
CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ON ROMANTIC LOVE 15 1 not discuss courtship, marriage, or family relations; and (3) the inability of the coders to agree whether a specific passage conclusively indicated romantic love's presence (N=l). Using these criteria, twenty cultures were dropped, leaving us with a sample universe of 166 societies. Besides the usual difficulties in finding reliable source material, our primary methodological problem arose from the absence of any clear and consist usage of the terms love, lovemaking and lovers. Because ethnographers often fail to distinguish between love and sexual intercourse, it is unclear if they are referring to passionate love or only using a common metaphor for sexual intercourse. In order to distinguish between behaviors motivated solely out of lust or physical satisfaction from those motivated by romantic love, additional indices were required. Thus the presence of romantic love in a culture was coded only when the ethnographer made a clear distinction between lust and love, and then noted the presence of love. There was, however, one exception. If the ethnographer claimed that romantic love was not present, yet provided a folktale or an incident that demonstrated passionate involvement, his or her interpretation was rejected. Only two such discrepancies appeared in our sample population (i.e., Manus, Pakistan). In over 250 ethnographic and folkloric studies examined not a single researcher explicitly defined romantic love. Those ethnographers who insisted that the phenomenon did not exist rarely noted which psychological attitudes or behavioral traits were absent. This lacuna arose from overlooking the exceptional or nonnormative act, as well as from failing to distinguish between lust and the two fundamental types of love experience; romantic and companionship love. The most problematic cross-cultural studies are those that use high inferences indices. We were at pains therefore to find richly texture illustrations of romantic love's presences. Because many ethnographies did not supply such cases, we relied upon other indicative clues or indices. The criteria (listed below) are similar to those used in previous cross-cultural studies that sought to document the ecological and social factors responsible for the emergence of romantic love as a basis for marriage. These studies examined specific acts (e.g., elopement, love magic, and love songs) that suggest choice for attachment and thus the presence of passionate affection. With the exception of love magic, we used similar indices. It is important to stress, however, that we recorded as positive only those cases where the ethnographer recorded an expressive motive (i.e., mutual affection) and not an instrumental motive (i.e., meat for sex). If the ethnographer simply reported the presence of elopement, but did not supply additional information concerning the individual's motivation, then that culture was coded as romantic love absent. In this way, our criteria are more precise than previous cross-cultural studies of romantic love. Moreover, unlike previous cross-cultural studies, we read whenever possible a culture's folklore. This proved to be the most fruitful means to document the presences of the romantic love. Finally, to determine the presence or absence of romantic love, only the initial phase of involvement (i.e., less than two years) was examined. The phase of the love relationships was determined through examining the ethnographic context. Unless one of the indicators discussed below was present, we never inferred romantic love's presence. The following indicators were used to assess the presence of romantic love within a culture during the first two years of involvement (marriage or other):
152 ETHNOLOGY 1. accounts depicting personal anguish and longing: 2. the use of love songs or folklore that highlight the motivations behind romantic involvement: 3. elopement due to mutual affection; 4. native accounts affirming the existence of passionate love and 5. the ethnographer's affirmation that romantic love is present. On the basis of the above indicators, each of the 166 societies were coded and labelled as either (a) love present or(b) love absent. The presence of any one of these indicators was taken as evidence of the presence of romantic love. Each researcher photocopied the page (s)on which he found indicators of romantic love At a later date the researchers independently recoded each others original coding to insure reliability. Unresolved disagreements (n=l)were dropped from the RESULTS TABLE 1: Culture Area and Romantic Love tic Lov Circum-Medit 22(95.7%) 1(4.3%) Sub-Saharan Africa 20(769%) 6(23.1%) East Eurasia 32(94.1%) (5.9%) Insular Pacific 27(93.1%) 2(6.9%) North ameri 24(828%) 5(17.2%) South Central america 22(84.6%) 4(154% DISCUSSION o provide a more revealing illustration of our findings, three ethnographic examples that are highly representative of the entire sample set are presented below ht the intensity, commitment, pathos and romantic idealization of the other. The examples illustrate through indigenous representations of romantic love (see #I and #2), and provide a case in which an ethnographer clearly distinguished between passionate love and lust(see #3) (1)Nisa, a Kung woman, who lived in a hunting and gathering society in the Kalihari desert, clearly differentiated between passionate and companionship love by drawing a distinction between a husband and a lover. Nisa notes that the former relationship is"rich, warm and secure. The [latter] is passionate and exciting although often fleeting and undependable"(Shostak 1981: 267). Nisa adds that when two people come together their hearts are on fire and their passion is very great. After a while, the fire cools and thats how it stays"( Shostak 1981: 269) (2) John Turi(1931), in his autobiography commented on some of the behavioral manifestations of infatuation that befelled many Lapp herders during
152 ETHNOLOGY 1. accounts depicting personal anguish and longing; 2. the use of love songs or folklore that highlight the motivations behind romantic involvement; 3. elopement due to mutual affection; 4. native accounts affirming the existence of passionate love; and 5. the ethnographer's affirmation that romantic love is present. On the basis of the above indicators, each of the 166 societies were coded and labelled as either (a) love present or (b) love absent. The presence of any one of these indicators was taken as evidence of the presence of romantic love. Each researcher photocopied the page(s) on which he found indicators of romantic love. At a later date, the researchers independently recoded each other's original coding to insure reliability. Unresolved disagreements (n=l) were dropped from the sample. RESULTS TABLE 1: Culture Area and Romantic Love Romantic Love + - Circum-Medit. 22 (95.7%) 1 (4.3%) Sub-Saharan Africa 20 (76.9%) 6 (23.1%) East Eurasia 32 (94.1%) 1 (5.9%) Insular Pacific 27 (93.1%) 2 (6.9%) North America 24 (82.8%) 5 (17.2%) South & Central America 22 (84.6%) 4 (15.4%) DISCUSSION To provide a more revealing illustration of our findings, three ethnographic examples that are highly representative of the entire sample set are presented below to highlight the intensity, commitment, pathos, and romantic idealization of the other. The examples illustrate through indigenous representations of romantic love (see #1 and #2), and provide a case in which an ethnographer clearly distinguished between passionate love and lust (see #3). (1) Nisa, a Kung woman, who lived in a hunting and gathering society in the Kalihari desert, clearly differentiated between passionate and companionship love by drawing a distinction between a husband and a lover. Nisa notes that the former relationship is "rich, warm and secure. The [latter] is passionate and exciting, although often fleeting and undependable" (Shostak 1981:267). Nisa adds that "when two people come together their hearts are on fire and their passion is very great. After a while, the fire cools and that's how it stays" (Shostak 1981:269). (2) John Turi (1931), in his autobiography, commented on some of the behavioral manifestations of infatuation that befelled many Lapp herders during
CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ON ROMANTIC LOVE 153 courtship. He writes that"the mind is often a little wild, especially in those who ave that sort of blood The explanation of why some folk have such weak blood that it is rather easy to upset them is that some people are of such an amorous nature that at the time they can think of nothing else .. and some folk are still i ve afterwards, but it is not everyone who is in love afterwards (3)During the Sung Dynasty(928-1233) the most popular tale among both the literary and nonliterate population was that of the Jade Goddess. It is a tale about Chang Po who falls in love with a woman who is already engaged when he felt that"the greatest desire of his was beyond him"(Lin 1961: 75), he loses interest in work and lapses into a prolonged despair, a love -despair that closely resembles that which was being discussed in the romance poems of Europe at the same time Finally, he confronts the girl about his love and discovers she has similar feelings They elope. After awhile, however, suffering from poverty and isolation, they decide to return home. On the night they are to leave, Chang po draws the girl into his arms and says"since heaven and earth were created you were made for me and I will not let you go. It cannot be wrong to love you"(Lin 1961: 74). In several ways, this tale runs parallel to the tristan and Isolde folk -legend and variations in its clear-eyed delineation of romantic love(see Jankowiak 1992) Although at least one incident of passionate love was documented in 147 out of 166 cultures or more than 88.5 per cent; no evidence was found for its existence in 19(11.5 per cent)of the cultures. Of the nineteen cases in which romantic love was not found, for example, only one ethnographer(Holmberg 1969 )makes the distinction between romantic love and lust and then proceeds to deny the presence of romantic love. The other eighteen ethnographies note that sexual affairs do occur, but do not explore the motive for entering into these, and thus we are unable to determine if romantic love is one of the motives These cultures are coded"romantic love not present. Nonetheless, we believe that these negative cases arise from ethnographic oversight rather than any set of cultural norms that prevent an individual from experiencing romantic affection. There are two explanations that may account for the African cultural area as having the higher percentage of inconclusiveness. First, the absence of folklore For example we were able to find folklore material for only four out of the 26 African cultures More importantly, we were not able to find any folklore for the seven cultures lassified as inconclusive. Second, in many African cultures passionate affection is expressed in a variety of nonverbal idioms seldom studied by an earlier generation of ethnographers(James Bell, personal communication) It is important to note that not everyone within a culture falls in love. This seldom occurs even in the so-called romantic cultures(i.e, Euro-American cultures) that celebrate passionate entanglements in its literature, films, and mythology. By the same token, this should not undermine our finding that in almost every culture there are some individuals who often in the face of severe negative sanctions, do fall in love Romantic love may in fact be muted though never entirely repressed by other cultural variables. Because researchers have rarely studied the relative frequency ch a perso falls in and out of love. it is unclear if romantic love is experienced with less frequency in those cultures that deny or disapprove of the emotional experience. The relative frequency in which members of a community experience romantic love may very well depend upon that culture's social organization and ideological orientation. Thus a greater proportion of Americans
CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ON ROMANTIC LOVE 153 courtship. He writes that "the mind is often a little wild, especially in those who have that sort of blood. The explanation of why some folk have such weak blood that it is rather easy to upset them is that some people are of such an amorous nature that at the time they can think of nothing else ... And some folk are still in love afterwards, but it is not everyone who is in love afterwards." (3) During the Sung Dynasty (928-1233) the most popular tale among both the literary and nonliterate population was that of the Jade Goddess. It is a tale about Chang Po who falls in love with a woman who is already engaged. When he felt that "the greatest desire of his was beyond him" (Lin 1961:75), he loses interest in work and lapses into a prolonged despair, a love-despair that closely resembles that which was being discussed in the Romance poems of Europe at the same time. Finally, he confronts the girl about his love and discovers she has similar feelings. They elope. After awhile, however, suffering from poverty and isolation, they decide to return home. On the night they are to leave, Chang Po draws the girl into his arms and says "since heaven and earth were created you were made for me and I will not let you go. It cannot be wrong to love you" (Lin 1961:74). In several ways, this tale runs parallel to the Tristan and Isolde folk-legend and variations in its clear-eyed delineation of romantic love (see Jankowiak 1992). Although at least one incident of passionate love was documented in 147 out of 166 cultures or more than 88.5 per cent; no evidence was found for its existence in 19 (1 1.5 per cent) of the cultures. Of the nineteen cases in which romantic love was not found, for example, only one ethnographer (Holmberg 1969) makes the distinction between romantic love and lust and then proceeds to deny the presence of romantic love. The other eighteen ethnographies note that sexual affairs do occur, but do not explore the motive for entering into these, and thus we are unable to determine if romantic love is one of the motives. These cultures are coded "romantic love not present." Nonetheless, we believe that these negative cases arise from ethnographic oversight rather than any set of cultural norms that prevent an individual from experiencing romantic affection.' There are two explanations that may account for the African cultural area as having the higher percentage of inconclusiveness. First, the absence of folklore. For example, we were able to find folklore material for only four out of the 26 African cultures. More importantly, we were not able to find any folklore for the seven cultures classified as inconclusive. Second, in many African cultures passionate affection is expressed in a variety of nonverbal idioms seldom studied by an earlier generation of ethnographers (James Bell, personal communication). It is important to note that not everyone within a culture falls in love. This seldom occurs even in the so-called romantic cultures (i.e., Euro-American cultures) that celebrate passionate entanglements in its literature, films, and mythology. By the same token, this should not undermine our finding that in almost every culture there are some individuals who, often in the face of severe negative sanctions, do fall in love. Romantic love may in fact be muted, though never entirely repressed, by other cultural variables. Because researchers have rarely studied the relative frequency in which a person falls in and out of love, it is unclear if romantic love is experienced with less frequency in those cultures that deny or disapprove of the emotional experience. The relative frequency in which members of a community experience romantic love may very well depend upon that culture's social organization and ideological orientation. Thus a greater proportion of Americans
154 ETHNOLOGY compared to Yanomamo or Tiv, may actually experience romantic love. We suspect that this is the case. However, until this is substantiated through further field research, it remains only a hypothesis CONCLUSION The fact that we are able to document the occurrence of romantic love in 88.5 per cent of the sampled cultures stands in direct contradiction to the popular idea that romantic love is essentially limited to or the product of Western culture Moreover, it suggests that romantic love constitutes a human universal, or at the least a near-universal The proposal that romantic love is a near-universal rests in part on subjective appraisal since there is no definitive boundary that marks near -universals.Brown ( 1991)suggests that a 95 per cent distribution might, by analogy with statistical tests of significance be a convenient marker of a near universal. Though our sample has less than a 95 per cent distribution of instances of romantic love, we have argued that the distribution is actually larger We furthermore concur with a position stated by Brown(1991: 44)that the distinction between universals and near-universals is often unimportant: "a near universal is universal enough If romantic love is a human universal, then it is important to explore its emic manifestations, within a variety of cultural settings. to date this has seldom been done(Abu-Lughod 1986; Cancian 1987), thus our understanding of the cross cultural variation in the styles of romantic expression is lacking At present there is no consensus concerning the relationship between cognition emotion, and behavior. romantic involvement is one sphere of human interaction that is in need of analysis. It is a project that will require the assistance of ethnographers who, in drawing a distinction between private experience and ultural expression of that experience, are able to enhance our understanding of the interplay between, on the one hand, the biopsychological factors that affect the perception of stimuli and, on the other, the culturally patterned attitudes that structure the framework for social action; thereby contributions will be made to anthropology's historical mission to study both the particular and the universal aspects of human experience NOTES 1. For their invaluable assistance or advice we thank: Harvey Bricker, Robert Carnero, Carol Ember Jan Finney, Nancy Flowers, Pat Gray, Ted Gragson, Elivin Hatch, Barry Hewlett, Nancy Mullenax Yolanda Murphy, william Oliver, Thomas Paladino, Hal Starratt, Doris Stone lizabeth Watts and for sharing his unpublished materials with us, Charles Lindholm 2. Thia definition is similar to the one used in previous studies which sought to account for the rise of romantic love as an ideological justification for marriage, is the standard definition used (x=.05 was between Sub-Saharan Africa and East Eurasia, We believe that this association is anomalous, resulting from biases in the ethnographic literature rather than reflecting real-world events BIBLIOGRAPHY bu-Lughod, L. Aries, P. 1962. Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life. New York
154 ETHNOLOGY compared to Yanomamo or Tiv, may actually experience romantic love. We suspect that this is the case. However, until this is substantiated through further field research, it remains only a hypothesis. CONCLUSION The fact that we are able to document the occurrence of romantic love in 88.5 per cent of the sampled cultures stands in direct contradiction to the popular idea that romantic love is essentially limited to or the product of Western culture. Moreover, it suggests that romantic love constitutes a human universal, or at the least a near-universal. The proposal that romantic love is a near-universal rests in part on subjective appraisal since there is no definitive boundary that marks near-universals. Brown (1991) suggests that a 95 per cent distribution might, by analogy with statistical tests of significance be a convenient marker of a near universal. Though our sample has less than a 95 per cent distribution of instances of romantic love, we have argued that the distribution is actually larger. We furthermore concur with a position stated by Brown (1991:44) that the distinction between universals and near-universals is often unimportant: "a near universal is universal enough." If romantic love is a human universal, then it is important to explore its emic manifestations, within a variety of cultural settings. To date, this has seldom been done (Abu-Lughod 1986; Cancian 1987), thus our understanding of the crosscultural variation in the styles of romantic expression is lacking. At present there is no consensus concerning the relationship between cognition, emotion, and behavior. Romantic involvement is one sphere of human interaction that is in need of analysis. It is a project that will require the assistance of ethnographers who, in drawing a distinction between private experience and cultural expression of that experience, are able to enhance our understanding of the interplay between, on the one hand, the biopsychological factors that affect the perception of stimuli and, on the other, the culturally patterned attitudes that structure the framework for social action; thereby contributions will be made to anthropology's historical mission to study both the particular and the universal aspects of human experience. NOTES 1. For their invaluable assistance or advice we thank: Harvey Bricker, Robert Carnerio, Carol Ember, Jan Finney, Nancy Flowers, Pat Gray, Ted Gragson, Elivin Hatch, Barry Hewlett, Nancy Mullenax, Yolanda Murphy, William Oliver, Thomas Paladino, Hal Starratt, Doris Stone, Elieabeth Watts and, for sharing his unpublished materials with us, Charles Lindholm. 2. This definition is similar to the one used in previous studies which sought to account for the rise of romantic love as an ideological justification for marriage, is the standard definition used by psychologists in their study of romantic love. 3. Out of all possible 2x2 combinations, the only significant association found using the chi-square test (x=.O5) was between Sub-Saharan Africa and East Eurasia. We believe that this association is anomalous, resulting from biases in the ethnographic literature rather than reflecting real-world events. BIBLIOGRAPHY Abu-Lughod, L. 1986. Veiled Sentiments. Berkeley. Aries, P. 1962. Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life. New York
CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ON ROMANTIC LOVE 155 Averill, J. 1980. A Constructivist View of Emotion. Emotion: Theory, Research and Experience, eds R. Plutchik and H. Kellerman, pp. 305-337. New York. Brown,D. 1991. Human Universals Buss, D. 1988. Love Acte: The Evolutionary Biology of Love. The Psychology of Love, eds. R. Sternberg and M. Barnes, pp. 100-118. New have Cancian, F. 1987. Love in America. Cambridge Chagnon, N. 1983. Yanomamo: The Fierce People. New York. Coppinger, R, and P. Rosenblatt. 1968. Romantic Love and Subsistence Dependence of Spouse Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 24: 310-318 Dion, K. L, and K. K. Dion, 1988. Romantic Love: Individual and Cultural Perspectives. The Psychology of Love, eds R. Sternberg and M. Barnes, pp. 264-289. New Endleman, R. 1989. Love and Sex in Twelve Cultures. New York. Gillis, J.R. 1988. From Ritual to Romance: Toward an Alternative History of Love. Emotion and Social Change, eds, C, Stearns and P. Stearns, pp, 87-122. New York. Hatfield, E. 1988. Passionate Love and Companionate Love. The Psychology of Love, eds R. Sternberg and M. Barners, pp. 191-217. New Haven Holmberg, A. 1969. People of the Long Bow. Garden City Hsu, F. 1981. Americans and Chinese: Passage to Difference. Honolulu Jankowiak, W. 1992. Sex, Death and Hierarchy in a Chinese City: An Anthropological Account. New Liebowitz, M.R. 1983. The Chemistry of Love. Boston Lin, Y, 1961. The Lolo of Llang Shan, New Haven. Lindholm, C. 1988. Lovers and Leaders: A Comparison of Social and Psychological Models of Romance d Charisma. Social Science Information 1-27. London Lizot, J. 1985. Tales of the Yanomami. Cambridge Lowie, R. 1950. Social Organization. New York MacDonald, M. 1981. Mystical Bedlam: Madness, Anxiety and Healing in Seventeenth-Centur MacFarlane, A. 1987. The Culture of Capitalism. Cambridge Mead. M New Guinea. New York Murdock nd D. White. 1969. Standard Cross-Cultural Sample. Ethnology 8: 329-69 ex sIg gy Pollock, L. 1983. Forgotten Children: Parent-Child Relations from 1500 to 1800. Cambridge. Rosenblatt, P. 1966. A Cross-Cultural Study of Child Rearing and Romantic Love. journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4: 336-338 1967. Marital Residence and the Functions of romantic Ethnology 6: 471-480 e Rougemont, D. 1974. Love in the Western World. M. Belgion, trans. New york. Shostak. M. 1981. Nisa. New York Stearman, A. 1987. No Longer Nomads: The Siriono Revisited. Latham Stearns, P,, and C. Stearns, 1985. Emotionology: Clarifying the History of Emotions and Emotions Standards. The American Historical Review 90: 813-836 Stone, L. 1988. Passionate Attachments in the West in Historical Perspective. Passionate Attachment ds. w. Gaylin and E. Person, pp. 15-26. New York Tennov, D. 19 Turi, J. 1931. Turi's Book of Lappland. Oosterhout. Westermarck, E. 1922. The History of Human Marriage, Vols. I-III. New York
CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ON ROMANTIC LOVE 155 Averill, J. 1980. A Constructivist View of Emotion. Emotion: Theory, Research and Experience, eds. R. Plutchik and H. Kellerman, pp. 305-337. New York. Brown, D. 1991. Human Universals. New York. Buss, D. 1988. Love Acts: The Evolutionary Biology of Love. The Psychology of Love, eds. R. Sternberg and M. Barnes, pp. 100-118. New Haven. Cancian, F. 1987. Love in America. Cambridge. Chagnon, N. 1983. Yanomamo: The Fierce People. New York. Coppinger, R., and P. Rosenblatt. 1968. Romantic Love and Subsistence Dependence of Spouses. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 24310-318. Dion, K. L., and K. K. Dion. 1988. Romantic Love: Individual and Cultural Perspectives. The Psychology of Love, eds. R. Sternberg and M. Barnes, pp. 264-289. New Haven. Endleman, R. 1989. Love and Sex in Twelve Cultures. New York. Fisher, H. 1987. The Four-Year Itch. Natural History 10:12-16. Gillis, J. R. 1988. From Ritual to Romance: Toward an Alternative History of Love. Emotion and Social Change, eds. C. Stearns and P. Stearns, pp. 87-122. New York. Hatfield, E. 1988. Pasaionate Love and Companionate Love. The Psychology of Love, eds. R. Sternberg and M. Barners, pp. 191-217. New Haven. Holmberg, A. 1969. People of the Long Bow. Garden City. Hsu, F. 1981. Americans and Chinese: Passage to Difference. Honolulu. Jankowiak, W. 1992. Sex, Death and Hierarchy in a Chinese City: An Anthropological Account. New York. Liebowite, M. R. 1983. The Chemistry of Love. Boston. Lin, Y. 1961. The Lolo of Llang Shan. New Haven. Lindholm, C. 1988. Lovers and Leaders: A Comparison of Social and Psychological Models of Romance and Charisma. Social Science Information 1-27. London. Lieot, J. 1985. Tales of the Yanomami. Cambridge. Lowie, R. 1950. Social Organization. New York. MacDonald, M. 1981. Mystical Bedlam: Madness, Anxiety and Healing in Seventeenth-Century England. Cambridge. MacFarlane, A. 1987. The Culture of Capitalism. Cambridge. Mead, M. 1930. Growing Up in New Guinea. New York. Murdock, G. P., and D. White. 1969. Standard Cross-Cultural Sample. Ethnology 8:329-69. Perper, T. 1985. Sex Signals: The Biology of Love. Philadelphia. Pollock, L. 1983. Forgotten Children: Parent-Child Relations from 1500 to 1800. Cambridge. Rosenblatt, P. 1966. A Cross-Cultural Study of Child Rearing and Romantic Love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4:336-338. 1967. Marital Residence and the Functions of Romantic Love. Ethnology 6:471-480. de Rougemont, D. 1974. Love in the Western World. M. Beigion, trans. New York. Shostak, M. 1981. Nisa. New York. Stearman, A. 1387. No Longer Nomads: The Siriono Revisited. Latham. Stearns, P., and C. Stearns. 1985. Emotionology: Clarifying the History of Emotions and Emotions Standards. The American Historical Review 90:813-836. Stone,L. 1988. Passionate Attachments in the West in Historical Perspective. Passionate Attachments, eds. W. Gaylin and E. Person, pp. 15-26. New York. Tennov, D. 1984. Love and Limerance. New York. Turi, J. 1931. Turi's Book of Lappland. Oosterhout. Westermarck, E. 1922. The History of Human Marriage, Vols. 1-111. New York
