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(BussA 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