Category Archives: social evolution

What Is “Romantic” in Romantic Love Across Cultures?

Posted on by

Once, Western historians and literary scholars believed that “romantic love” was invented by West-European civilizations during the Medieval and Early Modern periods. Beginning with the “courtly love” (amour courtois) of the 12th and 13th centuries in France, Spain, and Germany, the presence and importance of romantic love ideas in European literature increased over the following centuries.

What Was “Romantic” in the Early “Fin’amor””?

The trobadors of southern France, the trouvères of northern France, and the Minnesänger of Germany were the early poets and singers of love known as fin’amor, which meant “refined love” in the Occitan language, spoken at that time in Southern France and some regions of Italy and Spain.

This lyrical, melodic, and fascinating love of poems, songs, and novels was really “refined.” It was distinct from short-term passions and sexual desires. It was a kind of love centered on emotional attractions and attachments, a re-ordering of life priorities, and long-term commitments.

In medieval literature, romantic love was viewed as spiritual rather than physical and as a long-term rather than short-term experience. For trobairitz and troubadours, describing sexual desire as an appetite wouldn’t be an adequate way to depict how lovers felt about each other.

Hundreds of love stories, from “Tristan and Iseult” to “Floris and Blancheflour”, appeared in literature at the turn of the 12th century and enjoyed tremendous success throughout Western Europe.

“The Romance of the Rose” (“Le Roman de la Rose“) was a romantic medieval poem of love written in the Old French language. This poetry was a beautiful example of “courtly love” literature because it showed the art of romantic love through an allegorical dream.

The growth and flourishing of love fiction in Western Europe during the Central Medieval period (1000–1300 years) occurred at a time of an extensive increase in population, substantial urbanization, and a rise in gross domestic product per capita (see for review, Baumard et al., 2022; Duby, 1994). Growing economic development was an important factor in this literary evolution.

How Did Cultures Develop Their Notion of “Romantic Love”?

Western scholars thought that these European ideas of romantic love had disseminated over time across other cultures throughout the world.

However, recent studies have demonstrated that Indian, Japanese, Chinese, Arabic, and Persian cultures of the past centuries developed their own literary traditions of “romantic love” fiction concurrently and mostly independently from Western literature (Baumard et al., 2022; Karandashev, 2017).

How can we say that it was the same “romantic love” across all these cultural literary expressions? Researchers found that the plot and the narration of all these romantic stories available in different cultures have similar psychological elements of love. These are idealizations of the beloved, emotional attractions and attachments, re-ordering of life priorities, long-term commitments, and others (see Karandashev, 2017, 2019, 2021b).

All romantic novels, epic poems, and tragedies across different cultural traditions contain the same topics: “love at first sight”, “tragic separations”, “faithful love”, “suicide for love”, and alike. They are all the elements of content, genre, and style designed to stimulate people’s interest in love, pair bonding, and relationships.

These elements are easily recognizable in the romantic stories of the early and later historical periods. Let us consider a few examples.

Romantic Love in the Literature of Ancient Greece

The ancient Greek novels of the Early Roman Empire of the 1st–3rd centuries AD, “Leucippe and Clitophon,” “The Ephesian Tale,” and “The Aethiopica” are clearly romantic: young couple in love, of extraordinary beauty, are plunged by hostile fate into various adventures and dangers, until, in the end, for the most part after a rather long separation, they are united in a stable, faithful love for a life that is henceforth unchangingly happy” (quoted in Baumard et al., 2022, p. 507).

Romantic Love in the Literature of Ancient China

In the same way, the Chinese caizi-jiaren are romantic stories with all the key romantic elements. The protagonists are attracted by each other’s physical and personal qualities. They usually fall in love with each other at first sight. They also succeed in overcoming the obstacles and marrying each other. Thus, they represent an idealized couple.

“The Story of the Western Wing” by Wang Shifu (Xixiangji in Chinese) was the most well-known love story of the 13th century. It is about the adventures of the star-crossed lovers, Oriole and Student Zhang. This play influenced numerous later plays, novels, and short stories that were prominent in the Chinese cultural history of romantic love.

Romantic Love in the Literature of Other World Cultures

The plot and narrative of romantic love, along with corresponding literary elements, are evidently present in the Sanskrit love tale of East India “Nala and Damayanti”, in the Japanese jōruri play “The Love Suicides at Sonezaki”, in the Persian tragic romance “Khosrow and Shirin”, and in the Arabic old story “Layla and Majnun”.

Thus, we can see that the literary themes, plots, and narratives of “romantic love” have been omnipresent in many world cultures throughout human history. And they emerged and developed independently from each other, but surprisingly, during approximately the same periods when their societies experienced economic growth, an expanding population, and increasing urbanization.

How Did “Romantic Love” Emerge in the Literary Evolution?

Posted on by

We evidently recognize that “romantic love” can exist on both the plane of cultural ideas and the plane of individual realities. Folklore, poems, novels, and other pieces of literature and art represent the “ideas of love” as made-up fiction with the plots of stories and narration of behavior, perception, and emotions associated with love. This plane of love represents “what love can be.”

Individual experiences and expressions, “loving” interactions, and relationships with the loved one, on the other hand, represent the “individual and relationship realities of love.” This plane of love represents “what love really is.” In human societies, romantic love can exist in any of these forms or in both.

A Fascinating Literary History of Romantic Love

This article looks at when and how “ideas of romantic love” became important in the history of literary fiction across different times and places.

French and Spanish studies recently verified the cross-cultural universality of passionate love beliefs. Nicolas Baumard, Elise Huillery, Alexandre Hyafil, and their colleagues from France and Spain recently compiled and analyzed a huge database of literary fiction from the Middle Bronze Age to the Early Modern period, spanning across 3,800 years and 19 globe regions of the world (Baumard, Huillery, Hyafil, et al., 2022). They have demonstrated the cross-cultural universality of “the ideas of romantic love” in terms of plots and narration.

The Surprising Synchrony of the History of Romantic Love

Recent research has revealed that the emergence of romantic love in literary fiction in certain periods of history occurred not only in Western societies but also in other parts of the world. Literature historians have also documented a similar rise in the importance of love in literary fiction in the Arab world, Persia, India, China, and Japan across centuries. For example, romantic love appeared at nearly the same time in the Early Modern period in the literature of both the East and the West (Baumard et al., 2022; Karandashev, 2017).

Economic Wealth and Romantic Love

Studies suggest that the flourishing of romantic love in literature is a product of economic development in societies (Baumard et al., 2022; Duby, 1994).

Researchers discovered that economic development in ancient societies contributed to the rise in importance of romantic love by combining literary history, cultural evolution, causal methods, and model-based analysis. They demonstrated that higher incidences and prevalences of love themes in narrative fiction are strongly related to regional differences in economic development. The higher levels of economic development in these societies are associated with an increased abundance of romantic love literature in their cultures.

Similarly, anthropological studies have revealed that in horticulturalist and pastoralist societies, which are associated with low economic development, ideas of love for men and women are culturally marginal experiences and expressions. On the other hand, in societies with intensive agriculture and production, associated with relatively higher economic development, love can play a much more important role (Goody, 1998; Gregor, 1985/2008).

The Human Evolutionary Transition to the Consumption of Meat Could Create the Arts

Different interpretations of these findings are possible. Here is one of these possibilities. There is a common saying derived from our evolutionary past that “eating meat created art” in human history. What does it mean?

People in the gathering societies, whose main food was plants, were always busy searching for their subsistence. They were continually hungry. It is because plants provide them with low-energy resources for nutrition. So, people just did not have time to think about art and literature.

On the other hand, eating meat provides a higher energy resource for nutrition. So, people in societies that eat meat could afford to stop and think for some time about something else beyond their daily needs. Since they had not been hungry for a while, they were relatively free from thinking about food. Therefore, they had time to think about art.

Such an evolutionary idea sounds logically convincing, doesn’t it?

How Did Economic Development Increase the Cultural Importance of Romantic Love?

In the same vein, the economic development of a society liberates men and women from the constraints of daily hassles and concerns about subsistence and survival. Therefore, the economic development of societies, along with wealth, brings people freedom from their daily needs and the freedom to think about love. Consequently, these affluent conditions of life increase the cultural importance of love.

So, when individuals have more resources, they change their priorities. Love becomes more important for them than survival. Baumard and his colleagues showed how this is reflected in literature: narratives about war and status become less frequent than narratives about love (Baumard et al., 2022).

Only men and women who did not have to struggle daily for their subsistence and survival were able to think and write about love. They had spare time to write. Or, they had money to pay authors who could write and entertain them with romantic love ideas. And they had leisure time to read about all this. Others’ love is so entertaining to read about when one is affluent enough to relax and enjoy such reading.

For example, the remarkable variability of love fiction across time occurred in these societies.

“during the Roman period in Greece, the Abbasid Caliphate in the Arabic countries, the Heian period in Japan, and the Central Medieval, and Early Modern periods in France and England. In each case, this corresponds to periods of high economic development. By contrast, the level of romantic love appears to be lower in the least developed European areas (Wales, Ireland, Norway, Russia and to some extent Byzantium).”

“The convergence of Eurasian societies can be observed at the end of the time frame. France, England, Japan, India and China all experience an increase in romantic love.”

(Baumard et al., 2022, p. 512).

Who Invented “Romantic Love”?

Posted on by

A great variety of feelings, emotions, motivations, dispositions, traits, and values represent people’s experiences of love. Romantic love includes certain cultural ideas, beliefs, storylines, narrative schemes, and emotions. There are two realms in which romantic love exists: the realm of cultural ideas and the realm of individual realities.

Two Realms of Romantic Love

In the first case, the “ideas of love” are imaginary descriptions narrating “what love can be.” Writers, artists, and musicians use poetry, novels, and the fine arts to express creative narratives of stories, ideas, events, beliefs, and feelings of love.

In the second case, the “individual realities” are the experiences describing “what love is.” People describe love as their individual states, feelings, emotions, dispositions, traits, beliefs, and romantic behaviors.

The focus of this article is on the ideal models of love as they are presented in folk stories, novels, paintings, sculptures, and music portraying “what love can be.” They portrayed romantic love through cultural ideas, beliefs, stories, and depictions of the emotional lives of characters. For hundreds of years, oral folk stories and written novels have been the main ways that the educated elite in many cultures have come up with and spread these ideas about love (for a review, see Karandashev, 2017).

Did Europeans Invent “Romantic Love”?

Literary scholars, philosophers, and other thinkers previously believed that romantic love was a European invention with origins in “courtly love” in the 12th and 13th centuries. The presence and importance of love in European literature were enhanced during the Medieval and Early Modern periods. The ideas, stories, and descriptions of “romantic love” further developed in the following centuries.

Thus, it was once assumed that these European ideas of romantic love were disseminated in other cultures around the world. Recent studies, on the other hand, have shown that Arabic, Chinese, Indian, Japanese, and Persian societies all followed the same cultural patterns of literary evolution, mostly independently from each other.

Extensive research into the cultural histories of many different societies (Baumard, Huillery, Hyafil, et al., 2022; Jankowiak & Fischer, 1992; Karandashev, 2017) has shown that romantic love has existed in many different places and times.

Surprising Cross-Cultural Universality of Literary “Romantic Love”

A group of French and Spanish researchers recently completed a large-scale study that confirmed the cross-cultural universality of romantic love ideas. Nicolas Baumard, Elise Huillery, Alexandre Hyafil, and their colleagues did an amazing job of building an extensive database of ancient literary fiction from the Middle Bronze Age to the Early Modern period. They put together the literary data for 77 periods covering 3,800 years of human history and 19 geographical areas of the world (Baumard et al., 2022).

Baumard and his colleagues showed that romantic elements in Eurasian literary fiction have substantially expanded over the last millennium. They also found similar literary boosts earlier, in Classical India, Ancient Greece, and Ancient Rome. The researchers were also interested in learning what kinds of ecological, socioeconomic, and cultural factors play a role in such literary proliferation.

Romantic Love Is Interesting, but Largely for Those Who Are Wealthy Enough to Afford this Leisure

The authors found that higher incidences and a larger prevalence of love themes in narrative fiction strongly correlate with regional variations in economic development. The higher levels of economic development in these societies are associated with the increased abundance of romantic love literature in their cultures. The researchers were able to reconstruct the latent evolution of love. They also evaluated the roles of other facets of economic development and cultural diffusion.

Who and Where Invented “Romantic Love”?

The findings appear to show that romantic love emerged and evolved in various world cultures concurrently. And it happened in their early histories of economic development. Only relatively affluent people could afford to entertain themselves with the idea of romantic love. It is a luxury to contemplate romantic love. So, only men and women who don’t have to struggle every day for food, shelter, and survival could take advantage of such an opportunity.

The Recent Evolution of Mexican Marriage

Posted on by

For years, Mexican society has been a collectivistic society, with strong family bonds and cultural values of “familism.” People’s selves were deeply imbedded in family relationships. And both men and women valued their strong connections with family.

Traditional Mexican Marriage

In traditional Mexican communities, marriages have customarily functioned to maintain societal order, bonds of commitment, and social reproduction. The connections of responsibility, respect, and reciprocal obligations hold a family together. Men and women understood relationships and the fulfillment of traditional gender roles as their “real love.” Serving and caring for each other and for the common good of their family was the essence of marital love.

Romantic love is not a prerequisite for marriage. Intimate and companionate love and personal self-expression were of low value. Fulfillment of family duties for the sake of “familism” and good living together was of high value (Hirsch, 2007).

However, in the last 50 years, Mexican society, culture, and daily life have changed dramatically in both urban and rural settings. Men’s and women’s relationships have been transformed due to these cultural transformations.

Evolution of Mexican Marriage in Companionate Relationships

Accordingly, over these decades, Mexican marriages substantially evolved from the bonds of obligation to the bonds of love. The importance of love in premarital and marital relationships has grown significantly. The value of companionate love and relationships in marriage also increased (Hirsch, 2007).

The men and women of the younger generation speak about their marriage style in a new way, emphasizing making decisions together, talking, and spending time with their spouses and children.

Gender Equality in Modern Mexican Marriage

The marital lives of men and women have obviously shifted toward more gender equality. The gendered divisions of family labor are less stereotypical than before. Although some men may not wash clothes or change kids’ diapers, they may get up to get a glass of water during a meal. Many men abandoned traditional machismo ideology, turning to a more egalitarian personal identity. Their masculine power is commonly intertwined with the seemingly more equal division of family labor. They become more involved in housework and caring for their children (Hirsch, 2003, 2007; Gutmann, 1996).

For many women, their gender roles and experiences have also changed. They tend to be more socially involved, work full-time jobs, and visit friends and relatives. They have more decision-making power in their relationships and families. Many couples have changed their communication styles. They are more open to talking about their feelings, communicating more politely, being considerate of one another, and respecting their mutual rights within marriage (Hirsch, 2003, 2007).

Intimacy and Trust in Modern Mexican Marriage

The most noticeable generational differences in marital ideals of love are the increased values of intimacy and trust. Men and women more often communicate with each other and develop intimacy by sharing secrets and kisses. After they are married, they build and maintain emotional and sexual intimacy in their marriage. They view pleasure as the driving force that holds their relationships together.

However, early romantic ideas and relationships do not always carry over to later marriage life. Let us look at the marital life of Gustavo and Veronica. They have been married for just over two years. He works as a stone carver, and she looks after their two-year-old daughter. Here is an excerpt of the interview that Veronica gave to Jennifer Hirsch:

“She told me, laughing, that they first kissed after only two weeks of dating and that he wrote her love letters while they dated. Once they married, she recounted, they had sex several times a day, keeping things spicy with the lingerie he bought her and the porn videos they occasionally watch. Gustavo, in his conversations with Sergio about their marriage, spoke as well about their intimacy, emphasizing not just its physical aspects but the fact that he wanted to marry her, rather than any of his previous girlfriends, because of the quality of their communication and the strength of their emotional connection. There are ways, though, in which Veronica’s early married life differs little from her mother’s experience. She and Gustavo live in a two-room shack, adjoining his father’s house, which Veronica does not leave without his permission. She has no access to the money he earns – and is not even really sure how much it is. On Saturdays when the workday ends early, he will usually bring a kilo of deep-fried pork or rotisserie chicken for lunch – but sometimes he does not show up until the next morning, having left her lunch to get cold in the car while he drinks or plays pool with his friends. If she asks him where he was, he gets angry. Even if he wanted to leave her a message, though, he could not do so; his sisters hate Veronica – saying, among other things, that she is a whore because she worked as a waitress in a restaurant before they were married – and so they do not pass her telephone messages.”

(Hirsch, 2007, p.95).

When Romantic Love Was Real

Posted on by

Romantic love ideas and folk and literary stories filled with love, romance, drama, happiness, suffering, and tragedy have inspired educated people across centuries and cultures. They were fascinating, captivating, and often intriguing. The love stories were engaging and emotionally sweet, bitter, or, more frequently, bittersweet. They attracted the interest of readers and listeners. The romantic fantasies have been delightful. People shared them and talked about them (Karandashev, 2017).

Was “Romantic Love” Real in People’s Lives in the Past?

What about the reality of romantic love? Throughout history, romantic love has been largely a genre of folk tales, literary novels, and art. It was rarely imbedded in the real lives of people. Commoners were often preoccupied with daily subsistence tasks, but in their spare time, they enjoyed oral folktales of love. They were commonly illiterate, so they were unlikely to read love stories.

Moreover, their day-to-day hard work did not leave them much time to think and cultivate romantic love in their real lives. The practical daily love of doing and caring for others was more important than romance. These practical bonds were stronger than romantic ones.

The educated people of the middle and upper social classes had more leisure time to read about and contemplate romantic love. However, their various family obligations of social and economic sorts also did not give them much freedom to entertain romantic love in real life. Socially and economically, they could not afford to listen to their hearts. They needed to listen to their social minds and their reasonable duties. They needed to care more about their family interests than their individual choices. In this regard, they were more like collectivistic people than individualistic ones.

Many kings, queens, sultans, lords, sheiks, and other upper-level aristocracies and gentries could love romantically but could not afford to marry for love. They were tied to my family’s connections and responsibilities. Some dared to live out and embrace their romantic dreams of love, sometimes even getting married for love. Some succeeded, yet many others failed. Many of these true love stories ended in sad and unhappy ways (Karandashev, 2017).

How Did Western Cultures Adopt Models of Romantic Love?

The cultural evolution from conservative traditional societies to liberal modern societies gave men and women more freedom in love and marriage. Some cultural contexts have historically been more favorable to romantic love than others. This is why some cultures, such as France, England, Germany, Spain, Italy, and Russia, are more romantic than others, like Japan, China, India, and other countries in the East Asian and Middle Eastern cultural regions.

The folklore and literary genres and stories of courtly love emerged in French and Spanish cultures in the 11th and 12th centuries, with certain cultural evolutions in other European countries, such as Germany and Italy. Some literary critics believe these plots of courtly love were the origins of the literary genre of romantic love. I believe it was still courtly love. The real flourishing of romantic love in literary novels and art was in the 17th and 19th centuries in England, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, and Russia.

Many men and women in some European countries’ growing educated classes were more independent of social ties and family commitments, as well as economic dependency on their families. Some could afford to love and even marry for love. Their individualistic cultures gave them the possibility of real romantic love. They were more independent as individuals. That gave them the freedom of romantic love(Karandashev, 2017).

How Real Was Romantic Love Across Cultures in the 20th Century?

Only the 20th century allowed romantic love to prevail and even conquer marriage in some cultural regions of the world. Love marriages have become culturally normal in modern Western cultures, such as Western European and European American countries. It became possible because of their high geographic, economic, and relational mobility. Individualistic European American and West European cultures of the 20th century emphasized autonomy and individual choice. Men and women had more possibilities and partners to encounter. They were socially and economically independent, so they could afford to listen to their hearts’ love without social and family obligations. When they loved someone, they wished to marry their beloved.

Many East Asian and Middle Eastern societies have been collectivistic cultures with strong interdependence values. Even though the genres of romantic love were present in those cultural contexts across centuries, the number of romantic literary and artistic examples was lower compared to Western European cultures. Moreover, these were largely romantic dreams rather than romantic realities.

Even in the latter part of the 20th century, people in South-Asian, East-Asian, and Middle Eastern societies had relatively low geographic, socioeconomic, and relational mobility. Their collectivistic social norms underscored the cultural values of harmonious family interdependence and social duties rather than individual freedom. Even though men and women were free to dream about love, they were often not free to love in real life and relationships (Karandashev, 2017, 2022).

The only recent individualistic evolution in those collectivistic cultures has brought many more opportunities for men and women to follow their romantic love.

The Story of How Love Conquered Marriage

Posted on by

Love and marriage have, for centuries, been separate realms of human existence. Love was for aesthetic exploration, observational enjoyment, and entertainment, while marriage was the condition of social life. Kings, queens, and aristocracies of the past could sometimes afford to marry those they loved, unless other social obligations restrained their desires. Commoners were more preoccupied with their daily labor and subsistence needs. The commoners often did not have much spare time to entertain the idea of love for marriage. They needed to marry to survive, both economically and socially, and to raise their offspring.

Love as a romantic literary idea

The idea of romantic love has been cherished in novels, poetry, and music for centuries and across many cultures. People entertained themselves with such amorous dreams as idealistic phantasies created by the romantic literature of the past. However, the idea of romantic love was alien to the idea of marriage for a long time. Romantic stories in novels, poems, dramas, tragedies, and folklore tales were enjoyed by people from both the Western and Eastern worlds, as well as people from other territories (Karandashev, 2017; Jankowiak et al., 1992, 1995). However, marriage was not for love, but for life. So, matrimonial unions have been largely arranged marriages all over the world.

Social Realities Resisted the Ideas of Love.

In history, early attempts to marry for love were dramatic but mostly tragic, like in Shakespeare’s story of Romeo and Juliette. For practical reasons, the collectivistic cultures of Western societies in those times were organized around family, kin, and clan interests. The interests of individuals were mostly ignored if they contradicted the interests of the family.

Love was mostly for the entertainment of affluent people of high social classes who had leisure time to write, read, and watch plays. Not many dared marry for love. They understood that real social life could not afford them this luxury. It was largely true for both noble and affluent people and commoners.

The Advent of Modern Individualistic Societies

Nevertheless, those times, with the industrial revolution, increased geographical, economic, and social mobility, and the urbanization of the population, caused the development of individualistic cultures. These ecological, economic, and social factors precipitated the individualistic organization of societies that gradually transformed from their former collectivistic organization. These individualistic socioeconomic conditions of living make love marriages more ecologically, economically, and socially affordable. However, these conditions were affordable for some but not for all socioeconomic classes (Karandashev, 2017, 2019).

The development of modern, speedier transportation has increased ecological and geographic mobility in some social groups and strata of the population. People had more opportunities and choices for mate partners outside of their local endogamous community. The diversity of their marriage pools expanded, thus giving them more chances to find someone to whom they are attracted beyond their neighborhood and local residential area.

The Evolution of Individualistic Cultures Is Conducive to Loving marriages.

Only in the modern times of the 18th to 20th centuries did the idea of love for marriage and in marriage emerge in some Western cultures. Some men and women dared to overcome social limitations and marry their soul mates, to whom they were romantically attracted. Passionate love was involved in courting. At that time, romantic love was a difficult venture in life with limited economic and social resources. Some succeeded, while others did not. Later on, in the Western world, love marriages became more common and widespread. However, until the 20th century, they were still infrequent (Coontz, 2005; Karandashev, 2017; Singer, 1987).

In the 20th century, even further increased geographical, economic, and social mobility of the population and urbanization occurred in industrial societies. These socioeconomic conditions extended people’s affordances. These new opportunities provided more independence from family influence in mating choices and processes. “Dating” appeared as a new form of courtship. “Dating” provided greater opportunities for men and women to mingle, interact, and dance in public gatherings. Rather than their families, men and women took control of courting.

Gradual Social Acceptance of Love in marriage

Romantic love was accepted as a possible reason for marriage in economically and socially advanced Western countries. People from the middle and upper socio-economic classes recognized interpersonal attraction, free choice of partners, and love as the prerequisites for marital decision-making (Karandashev, 2017).

This cultural trend became especially apparent in many societies in the second half of the 20th century. Studies conducted in more than 30 countries in various geographic, ethnic, religious, and cultural groups revealed that men and women in those societies viewed mutual attraction and love as the most desirable qualities of potential mate relationships (Buss, 1994; Buss et al., 1990; Buss et al., 2001).

Thus, by the middle of the 20th century, love had conquered marriage in many Western countries.

In the following decades, this trend continued in many traditional collectivistic countries, such as India and Jordan, with old customs of arranged marriages (Kamble, Shackelford, Pham, & Buss, 2014; Khallad, 2005). Young men and women in socially modernizing societies choose attraction and love as prerequisites for marriage more than ever before.

What Is “Love Marriage”?

Posted on by

Love marriage is a marital relationship that is based on interpersonal love attraction. Men and women experience love attraction for each other and they rely on it in their decisions to marry. Love marriage assumes a mutual desire for a partner. The idea of a free choice and a personal decision to marry are the key features of love marriages. Love marriage is opposite to arranged marriages, in which parents and families decide who is suitable for marriage and who is not.

Cultural evolution from arranged marriages to love marriages occurs when societies evolve from collectivistic to individualistic types of cultures.

Individualistic Societies and Love Marriage

The modern economic, social, and cultural conditions in individualistic European American and European Canadian cultures, West European countries, Australia, and New Zealand are conducive to love marriages. Men and women in those societies have more personal and social rights. They are relatively independent of social institutions such as families. Modern life in those countries provides people with more extended personal and relationship affordances in their marital choices.

Individual autonomy, the independence of members of a social group in their relationships, human rights, gender equality, the independent model of self, self-determination rights, and freedom of choice are among the social norms emphasized in those individualistic societies.

Person’s Individuality in Individualistic Cultures

A person’s personal self is seen as distinct and independent from others. The autonomous self-concept encourages men and women to pursue their own views, personal desires, and preferences. Their individuality encourages open expressions of their unique selves, freedom of choice, and personal decision-making. Their individual selves are the main source of people’s thoughts, feelings, motivations, and behaviors. Social connections and interpersonal bonds are important, yet they assume individual autonomy. Individuals have the option to start and end their relationships  (see for review, Karandashev, 2021; Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Uchida, Norasakkunkit, & Kitayama, 2004).

Social Affordances and Love Marriage

Economic wealth, social progress, and modernization of the societies in those nations decreased the values of physical and economic security and the role of survival needs, which were prevalent in traditional materialistic and collectivistic cultures. This socioeconomic progress substantially extended the personal and social affordances of love marriage as an individual enterprise, compared to previous arranged marriages as a family enterprise.

Economic and social modernization of societies increased the values of quality of life, subjective well-being, and self-expression, which have become prevalent in modernized individualistic and postmaterialistic cultures (Inglehart 1997, 2015; Inglehart & Baker, 2000; Inglehart & Welzel 2005).

The Cultural Norms of Love Marriage

Currently, love marriages are common in individualistic countries. They are defined by the free choice of partners and the limited or moderate involvement of families and parents. Women and men are free to choose their mates based on their attraction, passion, and romantic emotions. Parents cannot limit their children’s mate selection choices.

Since the middle of the 20th century, love marriages have been considered culturally normative in Western societies, such as Western European, European American, and Canadian American cultures. For example, during the 1960s, the self-expressive paradigm of love became increasingly popular in the United States. For many Americans, love and marriage have become arenas for individual self-exploration, self-esteem validation, personal discovery, self-fulfillment, and self-growth (Finkel, 2018). Marriage’s function has shifted. Marriage became less necessary as a formal social institution. It became more affordable for those who opt for it and are able to choose.

In many other countries around the world, love marriages are also on the rise, especially in urban areas. Modern individualistic as well as collectivistic societies around the world vary in terms of their beliefs and actual cultural practices. Many countries are in the process of modernization. Anyway, modern cultural ideals expand social and relationship opportunities and affordances in many societies. The conditions give people more freedom in love, dating, and marriage (Karandashev, 2021; Karandashev, 2023). 

The Evolution of Marriage: From Arranged Marriages to Love Marriages

Posted on by

The cultural evolution of marriage coincides with the evolution of societies from traditional collectivistic societies to modern individualistic societies. Increased social mobility, economic wealth, and other ecological, economic, and social factors all contributed to this evolution. All these circumstances of living allow certain ecological, economic, social, and cultural affordances. These affordances are what a specific society can afford individuals to undertake in certain settings of their lives to maintain a balance of social and personal interests. The values of freedom of choice and societal responsibility in marriages vary substantially between collectivistic and individualistic societies.

Social evolution has been increasing people’s ecological, economic, and social affordances, which were limited in traditional collectivistic societies but have become more readily available in modern individualistic societies. Economic and social progress has been driving cultural evolution from arranged marriage to love marriage (for a review, see Karandashev, 2017, 2021).

Arranged Marriages in Traditional Collectivistic Societies

Arranged marriages have been typical for traditional collectivistic societies, which are characterized by several ecological, economic, and social conditions of living that reduce ecological, economic, and social affordability in marriages. Strong interconnectedness, ingroup relationships, interdependence of members, and determined social organization characterize societies with collectivist cultures.

People in those societies have low geographic, socioeconomic, and relational mobility. Subsequently, social norms in collectivistic East Asian, South Asian, and Middle Eastern cultures emphasize harmonious interdependence and the social responsibility of individuals as cultural values. Men and women have limited freedom of choice and interdependence in their marriages. They have limited options and limited control over who, when, and how they marry. The parents and family are in control of their marriage. Therefore, their marriages are commonly homogamous and arranged by their parents or other senior members of their kin or local community. These marriages help groups stay together and compete with other groups, which is good for social survival.

In arranged marriages, parents impose limitations on their sons’ and daughters’ selection of mates based on certain economic and social circumstances of their lives. Young men and women have limited influence on the selection of their mates and the arrangement of marriage. These limitations are usually due to low social mobility, a tendency toward ingroup homogamy, and strong outgroup negative stereotypes. All of these factors, for the sake of community interests, limit men’s and women’s options for free mating.

Love Marriages in Modern Individualistic Societies

Independent social connectedness, ingroup relationship independence of members, and self-determined organization characterize societies with individualistic cultures. Therefore, ecological, economic, and social conditions of living have increased the affordability of love marriages in modern individualistic societies. The cultural evolution of marriage has occurred; love marriages have become more typical.

People in those societies have high geographic, socioeconomic, and relational mobility. Subsequently, social standards in individualistic European American and West European cultures emphasize autonomy, independence from others, and freedom of choice as cultural values.

People have greater freedom of choice and independence in their marriage. They have many possible options and a larger pool of prospective partners for their marriage choice. Men and women can have their own control over who, when, and how they marry. Therefore, their marriages are commonly heterogamous, and prospective partners select each other on their own based on personal preferences, such as attraction and love.

The socioeconomic and cultural circumstances of life in individualistic societies, which are largely mobile and wealthy, provide more affordances for love marriages. Parents and family do not limit their children’s choice of marital partners and are only moderately involved. The bride and groom are in control of their marriage. However, studies conducted in an individualistic American setting revealed that involving friends and family helps with marital issues.

Love marriages are viewed as culturally normative in modern Western cultures, such as in Western European and European American societies.

Modernization Theory of Social Evolution

Posted on by

Modernization theory states that traditional societies grow into societies of the modern type as they adopt modern values, institutions, norms, rules of law, and social practices. Social modernization is usually associated with economic development, social wealth, and political power. Citizens of countries with modernized societies have more freedom, human rights, and better standards of living.

Weber’s and Parsons’ Theories of Modernization

The origins of modernization theories come from the modernization paradigm developed by German sociologist Max Weber (1864–1920) and American sociologist Talcott Parsons (1902–1979). These theoretical ideas considered two kinds of societies, which were labeled as traditional and developed countries.

That modernization theory explains how traditional societies can evolve into more developed societies due to the economic and social processes of modernization. This modernization theory was especially popular among social scientists in the second half of the 20th century. This early sociological theory of modernization was mostly theoretical and relied on scientific observations.

Modernization theory describes a social model of how “traditional” (“pre-modern”) societies progressively transform into “modern” societies. This gradual shift occurs as societies adopt modern values, norms, and practices. In this way, modernization theory strives to explain the process of social evolution in countries and identify the social parameters that contribute to their development and social progress.

The countries undergoing the process of modernization make a transition from societies governed by authorities and traditions to societies regulated by abstract principles and democracies. The developments of faster transportation, expansive urbanization, new efficient technologies, cost-effective production, extensive industrialization, and dynamic communication have been the main driving forces of such modernization. In modernized societies, traditional religious beliefs decrease in influence while rational and critical thinking increase in influence on human minds. While in traditional societies, families and collective communities are the fundamental units, modern societies are societies of individuals. The theory assumes that human agency controls the speed and success of such modernization.

Inglehart’s Evolutionary Modernization theory

The American political scientist Inglehart (1934–2021) proposed the Modernization Theory, which is empirically based on the data of wide-world surveys taken across several generations. The theory compares countries based on their economic, political, social, and cultural attributes and assesses them along the spectrum from traditional to modern societies. These types of societies have two cultural dimensions: materialism versus postmaterialism, and modernization versus postmodernism.

In societies that are characterized by high materialistic values, people highly value security, survival, economic growth, and the stability of the economy. In societies that are characterized by high postmaterialistic values, people have high values of freedom, humane society, social participation, self-expression, and tolerance of minorities (Inglehart 1997; Inglehart & Baker, 2000; Inglehart & Welzel, 2005).

The survival values, which emphasize physical and economic security, are prevalent in traditional materialistic cultures, while the self-expression values, which emphasize quality of life and subjective well-being, are prevalent in modernized postmaterialistic cultures. In this regard, the term modernization means the transition from societies with a prevalence of survival values to societies with a prevalence of self-expression values (Inglehart 1997, 2015; Inglehart & Baker, 2000; Inglehart & Welzel 2005).

The World Value Survey obtained data from 60 countries (Inglehart & Baker, 2000), which accounted for 75% of the global population. Researchers have demonstrated the crucial role of socioeconomic factors in the modernization of societies.

It appears that religions also play a role in modernization. The data showed that countries with a Protestant culture place a high priority on freedom of expression, whereas countries with an Orthodox culture place a low value on these values. However, the role of these religions can be linked to the countries’ current socioeconomic situations.

During modernization, countries evolve:

  1. From traditional values to secular and rational values.
  2. From cultural values emphasizing survival to values emphasizing self-expression.

Finally, Inglehart summarized his extensive research in the Evolutionary Modernization Theory, which describes how societies evolve over time along with changes in social values and human priorities (Inglehart, 2018).

How Is Cultural Evolution Different from Social Evolution?

Posted on by

Throughout the centuries, the interaction of biological, ecological, social, economic, and cultural factors has determined the evolution of human mental processes, behaviors, and social practices. Therefore, evolutionary approaches are currently popular not only in the biological sciences but also in the social sciences. Social scientists delve into research on cultural evolution that explains many biological and social phenomena that have appeared throughout human history and in contemporary cultural contexts (see for review, Karandashev, 2022).

What Is an Evolutionary Perspective?

For the comprehension of many events and facts in life, behavior, and society, the evolutionary approach, as a scientific framework of thinking and inquiry, is progressive, productive, and logical. According to general evolutionary theory, evolution is the process by which organisms, individuals, societal groups, ideas, cultural phenomena, artifacts, and societal institutions change over time. These changes occur due to changes in the physical, biological, and social environments and help people adapt, survive, and thrive.

Evolutionary processes in humans and societies happen at different levels, such as the level of individual life, the level of species, the level of local cultural groups, and the level of larger social groups. Because of mutations, organisms, species, social groups, and individuals possess a wide range of qualities, attributes, traits, and features. Some organisms, species, social groups, and individuals have better-suited qualities and are well-suited for their environment. Therefore, they are more likely to “survive,” “reproduce,” and pass on their qualities to a future generation (Karandashev, 2021).

What Is Behavioral Evolution?

The basic needs of humans are the same or similar. However, they live in different local biological and social conditions, which provide them with different ecological, economic, and social affordances to meet these needs. Therefore, they adjust and adapt accordingly. These are the sources of their biological and cultural evolution.

Due to various geographical, economic, and cultural circumstances, different societies and local communities can afford individuals to exhibit certain personality traits, behaviors, and social relations. For example, collectivistic and individualistic societies provide different sets of affordances for people. They differ in the ways in which they shape the personalities and behaviors of people.

Collectivistic societies are characterized by interdependent and often hierarchical social organizations. They have low geographic, social, and relationship mobility. Collectivistic societies’ social norms promote interdependent models of self in people while discouraging the open expression of emotions.

Individualistic societies are characterized by independence in social organization that is often egalitarian. They have relatively high geographic, social, and relationship mobility. Individualistic societies encourage people to develop independent models of themselves and to express their emotions openly (Karandashev, 2021).

What Is Social Evolution?

Social and cultural evolution are changes in social and human life that are based on the same evolutionary process and principles.

According to the evolutionary processes of social selection, societies acquire and transmit some social institutions, actions, and changes more easily than others. Such social transmission transforms and alters them. Organizations of social groups, human cooperation, and competition evolve over time because of the social and economic development of societies (Karandashev, 2021).

For example, social evolution favors human cooperation. From an evolutionary perspective, people who have lived more cooperatively are better suited to their environment. And over time, this capability has been passed down from one generation to the next, changing the way people live and work. The more cooperative type of personality evolved across generations. The evolution of people’s ability to work together also explains the social organization of communities and larger societies throughout history.

As a result, humans are more cooperative than other primates, and this makes a big difference (Tomasello, 2011).

What Cultural Evolution?

Cultural evolution explains how cultural knowledge, ideas, meanings, values, norms, and practices transmit and evolve over time according to the principles of variation, differential fitness, and inheritance (in similar ways as in biological species). Cultural evolution occurs when the environment supports certain social ideas, cultural values, social norms, behaviors, and personality traits over others.

The cultural evolution of languages, social organizations, human cooperation and competition, and cultural traditions and norms present such examples (e.g., Whiten, Hinde, Stringer, & Laland, eds., 2012; Mace, 2000; Mace & Holden, 2005, see for review, Karandashev, 2021). Some principles of genetic evolution, however, are not relevant to cultural evolution (Mesoudi, 2016; Mesoudi, Whiten, & Laland, 2006).