Love
 
Estimated Number of Printed Pages: 9
 
TOPICS COVERED: Everyone talks about how important love is in a relationship, blah, blah, blah. We all say that love is the most important thing in our lives, blah, blah, blah. But, for a lot of us, it doesn't seem to mean anything more than a soppy sentiment on a greeting card. Or that – people say "love," but what they're really talking about is sex. And I knew there have been literal millennia of history, cultures that even today that don't buy into love-based marriages at all. So I wondered: what is love? How did this thing called love end up being the most meaningful – and meaningless – word we know?
 
MEMOS ON RELATED INFORMATION: Family as a Social Institution, Marriage, Part One (Societal and Historical)
 
Links to Sources for this material are available below. Please also see The Factbook Sources page for further information regarding Factbook sources and their availability.
 
 

PAGE INDEX:

 

CHANGING THE MEANING OF ROMANCE

LOVE, HISTORICALLY

CONTINUING ROLE OF ROMANTIC LOVE IN OUR SOCIETY

 
 
 
 

CHANGING THE MEANING OF ROMANCE

 
 
Just look at how much the definitions of the words romance and romantic have evolved within little more than 100 years:
 


In an 1898 dictionary of phrase and fable, appeared the following definition:

Romance. A tale in prose or verse the incidents of which are hung upon what is marvelous and fictitious.

And the other hits for romance in the dictionary are describing books such as a satire by Swift, and Spenser’s the Fairie Queen. 1.
 
 
 
 
1929 (1931 Corrected) Oxford Concise Dictionary:
 
Romance:
"Vernacular language of old France mainly developed by distinguished from Latin, corresponding language of Spain, Provence, &c, (collect.) the languages descended from Latin . . . 2: Medieval tale usu. in verse of some hero of chivalry . . . prose or rarely verse tale with scene and incidents remote from every-day life, class of literature consisting of such tales; set of facts; episodes, love affair &c suggesting such tales by its strangeness or moving nature . . . ."
 
romantic:
"characterized by or suggestive of or given to romance, imaginative, remote from experience, visionary; subordinating form to theme, imaginative, passionate . . . fantastic unpractical, quixotic, dreamy . . . preferring grandeur or picturesqueness or passion or irregular beauty to finish and pro-proportion, subordinating whole to parts or form to matter (opp. classic, classical)." 2.

 
 
2003 On-line Oxford Concise Dictionary:
 
romance
"• noun 1 a pleasurable feeling of excitement and wonder associated with love. 2 a love affair. 3 a book or film dealing with love in a sentimental or idealized way. 4 a quality or feeling of mystery, excitement, and remoteness from everyday life. 5 a medieval tale dealing with a hero of chivalry, of the kind common in the Romance languages.
• verb 1 court or pursue amorously. 2 informal court the favour of. 3 romanticize.
— ORIGIN originally denoting a composition in the vernacular as opposed to works in Latin: from ROMANCE."

romantic
"adjective 1 inclined towards or suggestive of love or romance. 2 of, characterized by, or suggestive of an idealized view of reality. 3 (Romantic) relating to the artistic and literary movement of romanticism.
• noun 1 a person with romantic beliefs or attitudes. 2 (Romantic) a writer or artist of the Romantic movement.
— DERIVATIVES romantically adverb." 3.

 
 
 

CHANGING THE MEANING OF ROMANCE
CONTINUING ROLE OF ROMANTIC LOVE IN OUR SOCIETY

 
 
 

LOVE, HISTORICALLY

 
 
 
Greek romantic love was really lust, often brief, and equally often fatal. Early Greek (1100-1300 BC) marriages were a man “by purchase” (oxen) got a woman (with a dowry) and “love, in the truest sense, as a profound mutual tenderness and solicitude, comes to the Greeks, as to the French, after marriage rather than before; it is not the spark thrown off by the contact or nearness of two bodies, but the fruit of long association in the cares and industries of the home. The Homeric wife is as faithful as her husband is not.” He could have as many wives/concubines as he wanted; Theseus had so many, a historian catalogued them. 4.
 
 
 
This holds true in 5th Century Greece: “Romantic love appears among the Greeks, but seldom as the cause of marriage.” It leads to affairs (while prostitution was common, legal, taxed,, a man could buy a woman to live with him) not marriage; romantic love is a “a form of ‘possession’ or madness, and would smile at anyone who should propose it as a fit guide in the choice of a marriage mate.” Although now (with the assets of her dowry) the woman has to purchase the man! (Yea! . . . kinda.) The Greek man marries not for love but for his dowry, and children to ward off evil. And don’t forget that a man’s affection was properly directed to a younger boy. 5.
 
 
 
Being passionate – feeling passion – meant you were suffering – or, if not yet, would be soon enough. People quote Plato as being the one supporting the finding of your other half, because of the Symposium, but they forget that the story of the two-headed - four-legged creature split by the Gods is told by Aristophanes, the Greek comedian. It’s supposed to be for laughs. Instead, it is the goal of friendship/brotherhood/raising families by the state/etc which is the Platonic ideal.
 
 
 
At the end of the Greek area, poets were no longer writing about the faithfulness of wives, but about beauty. Sex was still everywhere. Men didn’t want to marry or have kids: infanticide was so pervasive that the death rate exceeded the birthrate. 6.
 
 
 
No romantic love in getting married, or even in Roman marriages, either; at first, it was for the sake of making babies, a useful wife and useful children. prostitution was around but in the shadows. but later, marriage was just a stepping stone in politics and wealth, so some didn’t even grow to love each other in marriage; serial divorces were common and frequent. prostitution became so big that brothel-keepers had their own guild. Over time, less Romans would marry; they would live together, with the woman leaving the house for three nights a year so that her property didn’t become his. 7.
 
 
 
Roman Stoics thought that marriage was for people who couldn’t control themselves sexually. 8.
 
 
 
Early Christians got married only to propagate the species. Sex was discouraged; love was between brothers. 9.
 
 
 
In the early middle ages, marriage continued to be a property arrangement. and despite the church, sex was all around; Arthur, Gawain, Roland, William the Conquerer, were all illegitimate. 10.
 
 
 
In the 12th Century, troubadours began to sing/write poems/etc spread an idea of love between two people: Joseph Campbell considers this to be the first in the West to think of it as that sort of personal relationship between individuals. Before that it was eros/lust -- and who the object was was secondary – or agape/spiritual – love of all neighbors as thyself. (That sort of personal experience would have been contrary to religious teaching/the church.) So it’s the troubadours who first come up with the idea that a “true marriage is the marriage that springs from the recognition of identity in the other, and the physical union is simply the sacrament in which that is confirmed.” 11.
 
 
 
But even the troubadours were singing in a land where marriage was about property, so that love would have come after the marriage, or with someone else. 12.
 
 
 
The historic Catholic church and its leading philosophers had a history of teaching that women were pretty much evil incarnate, served only to distract men from their higher purpose; sex and passion were bad, and should only be used for procreation. Thomas Aquinas thought that marriage was the least important sacrament because it was the least spiritual. Ideal marriage was that which was chaste; sex in marriage was regulated – the when and the how. 13.
 
 
 
Notwithstanding such condemnation, in the late 1400-1500s, arranged marriages in the patrician class were failing as Europe “seethed with lust.” The arranged marriages were fixed when the children were just seven or so, so romantic love had no role in marriage; instead, romance was outside the marriage. love was a synonym for sex and prostitution was a booming even respectable business (the famed courtesans). Sex was a priority for young woman, who if they weren’t married by 21 were spinsters or off to the convent, and the best way to prevent that was to get pregnant. 14.
 
 
 
From the Greeks and Middle Ages right up thru the Renaissance, romantic love is often thought of a bad thing; love/chivalry/courtly love may be a wonderful idea/feeling, the sex may be terrific, but it usually brings with it pain, suffering and/or death. and is not something that works out in life. It's a world where the heroes and heroines are Odysseus, Tristan and Yseult, Lancelot and Guinevere, Romeo, Juliet, Othello, etc. It's lovers who are in the second circle of Hell in Dante’s Inferno. And the Coy Maiden should give in to love – meaning sex – because she’ll be wormfood soon enough anyway. 15.
 
 
 
In the Renaissance et al 1300-1500s, marriage was for getting property and “love” was for getting some. In Italy, lots of men wouldn’t marry or put it off as long as possible; it was too expensive a process and not worth it. Poetry and love letters and mushy stuff abound -- but it was for seduction, not marriage. 16.
 
 
 
In fact, in the 1600s, romantic love was still considered at least in part, an actual sickness (you really were lovesick); that’s why Dutch painters of that time kept painting sad people in doctor’s offices. 17.
 
 
 
As time when on, love was allowed to be for the young, while they were young. 18.
 
 
 
Historians differ on if love became more important of the working class wanting to be free, or the bourgeoisie, but from the late 17th century, ideas of “marital affection” began to spread in society. However, they still believed that “Feelings of love during courtship considered a prelude to marriage but a danger during marriage.” Passions will turn attention away from the marriage. And a passion-based marriage will fade, while a land-based one won’t. Instead, it will only over time grow its own form of love relationship. 19.
 
 
 
By the 1700s, love begins to be the reason, but parental consent and property still reign supreme. By 1760s, Rousseau is writing that Emile can pick his own bride, but consult with his parents, and the ideal family is the agrarian unit. 20.
 
 
 
By the late 1700 - early 1800s, in Europe, British church and government were trying to clamp down on those flight-by-night romantic marriages, so adultery flourished: in Italy, women felt that once they’d married out of duty/prudence, and since marriage was indissoluble, “they were entitled to take a cavaliere servente (for love)” Everyone slept around: Byron claimed to have had sex with 200 women in 2 1/2 years – and paid 2,500 pounds for it. As long as the affair was kept quiet, it was fine. Think Les Liaisons Dangereux. 21.
 
 
 
Of course, it wasn’t like that in the New England Colonies. Well, it was and it wasn’t. Yes, there was adultery even in Plymouth, but the women were punished for it harshly (men less so) The Pilgrims expressed their devotion to God in terms of love and his devotion to them in equally human terms, so that effected how they viewed each other. Calvinism demanded strict self-awareness and self-inspection (remember, you had to prove you were by your acts one of the graced ones). Marriage was described as “the little church within the church” where each day you proved / experienced God/marriage as a sacrament. (This is a Puritan twist on Luther, who according to at least one historian thought marriage was a second rate institution). (Remember that the Mid Atlantic / Southern colonies were settled for different reasons by different people, so different rules applied there.) 22.
 
 
 
From 1740 to 1865 (as seen increasingly in popular media over time), developed a new construction of love, a “romantic love ideal” which included a belief in
1) love at first sight,
2) there is one true love,
3) love conquers all,
4) the beloved is near perfection, and
5) one should marry for love. 23.

 
 
A “new romanticism” began in England in the late 18th Century, spread to Europe, and then hit America’s shores by the beginning of the 19th century: “It was pluralistic, its manifestations were as varied, as individualistic, and as conflicting as the cultures and the intellects from which it spring. Yet romantics frequently shared certain general characteristics; moral enthusiasm, faith in the value of individualism and intuitive perception that the natural world was a source of goodness and man’s societies a source of corruption. Romantic values dominated American politics, art, and philosophy until the Civil War. The romantic exaltation of the individual suited the nation’s revolutionary heritage and its frontier egalitarianism. The romantic revolt against traditional formalities gratified those displeased with the narrow limits of neoclassic literature, painting, and architecture. The romantic rejection of rationalism comforted those opposed to religions encrusted with the intellectual remnants of Calvinism and led increasing numbers of Americans to turn to the fervors of camp-meeting revivalism or to the tenets of New England transcendentalism.” 24.
 
 
 
By 1800-1830, the American middle class was getting married for love. There are many different reasons, e.g. The French Revolution and the War of 1812; women’s rights movements and industrialization as discussed; early Puritan roots in self-awareness and self-knowledge took off in the emotionalism of the mid-1800s Great Awakening. It also acted to bridge the cultural gap between men and women in public society. The Victorian Era of self-control was self-control within society: it was equally about passionately revealing one’s true self within the private sphere/love. Therefore, Lystra too argues that rise of romantic love was about individuation within the society: two people declare their true identity as a way to express/create/establish their individualism. 25.
 
 
 
However, romantic love is this era wasn’t all happy endings, hearts and flowers; pain -- from loss, months long separations, death, war, etc. -- was an inherent part of love. 26.
 
 
 
“Strictly speaking, marriages arranged by parents for purely economic reasons had been infrequent even in the colonial period, and so they remained in the nineteenth century. Historians have found, however, that by the antebellum period people increasingly looked for romantic affinity between prospective partners while downplaying the economic considerations of the match. Strong romantic attachments now became the centerpiece of courtship. Ellen Rothman's study of the passionate courtships of middle-class northerners shows courting couples developing ‘genuine closeness in their relationships with one another.’ Prolonged courtships, marked by long letters and conversations, she argues, belie the notion that there was emotional distance between the sexes. Once married, couples often continued to enjoy close attachments to their partners. Historian Karen Lystra, while noting that such love faced an uphill struggle as long as ‘men still maintained massive legal, economic, and physical bases of superiority,’ points out that ‘the glue of companionate marriage’ could link men and women in an emotional bond that could weaken patriarchal authority. In antislavery households, husbands and wives tended to share their commitment to abolition and both would often join antislavery groups.” 27.
 
 
 
In the 1800s, sexuality, love, and marriage were seen as distinct and separable experiences; however, gradually, sexuality/eroticism became a goal of romantic relationships: “people who were in love were expected to be sexually attracted to each other (and people who were sexually attracted to each other were expected to be in love).” Happiness and sexual fulfillment became a goal for a relationship; duty, character, and spiritual union became less important. 28.
 
 
 
As American romantic literature is concerned, we’re talking about folks like Edgar Allen Poe, Nathaniel Hawthorne, James Fenimore Cooper, Washington Irving, into arguably the transcendentalists (Ralph Waldo Emerson et al.). 29.
 
 
 
In The Scarlet Letter, Nathaniel Hawthorne wrote:

“But, in the lapse of the toilsome, thoughtful, and self-devoted years that made up Hester’s life, the scarlet letter ceased to be a stigma which attracted the world’s scorn and bitterness, and became a type of something to be sorrowed over, and looked upon with awe, yet with reverence too. And, as Hester Prynne had no selfish ends, nor lived in any measure for her own profit and enjoyment, people brought all their sorrows and perplexities, and besought her counsel, as one who had herself gone through a mighty trouble. Women, more especially, – in the continually recurring trials of wounded, wasted, wronged, misplaced, or erring and sinful passion, – or with the dreary burden of a heart, unyielded, because unvalued and unsought, – came to Hester’s cottage, demanding why they were so wretched, and what the remedy! Hester comforted and counselled them, as best she might. She assured them, too, of her firm belief, that, at some brighter period, when the world should have grown ripe for it, in Heaven’s own time, a new truth would be revealed, in order to establish the whole relation between man and woman on a surer ground of mutual happiness.” 30.

 
 
But the Age of Realism brought on by the Civil War and industrialism see the romantic ideals as folly: “Intense individualism and soaring optimism had deteriorated into . . . self-centeredness, disappointment, and frivolous addiction to the pleasures of despair, pathos, and nostalgia. Romanticism had encouraged the worship of heroic outcasts and worthless chivalric ideals.” 31.
 
 
 
But elements of it – exaltation of love, intense introspection – had left their mark on American psyche which still have not been erased.
 
Between 1880 and 1940, love, sex, and marriage came to be defined as integrated, with the emphasis on marriage. That meant new demands on marriage, such as falling out of love or not being sexually fulfilled. 32.
 
 
 
By early 1900s, only romantic love was a valid reason to marry; arranged marriages – particularly those by immigrants – were seen as suspect/just ways to get around immigration laws. 33.
 
 
 
 
“Since 1940, sexuality has gradually been separated from marriage.” 34.
 
 
 
 

CHANGING THE MEANING OF ROMANCE
LOVE, HISTORICALLY

 
 
 

CONTINUING ROLE OF ROMANTIC LOVE IN OUR SOCIETY

 
 
 
In case you’ve thought that we have gotten past that “marriage for social gain” idea – some scholars point to the success of books like The Rules to dispute that. 35.
 
 
 
Described in more than one place as the “Stephen Hawking of love,” Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Irving Singer “wonders whether modern society may be replacing the pursuit of romantic love with the avoidance of it, possibly for reasons that are more than merely cynical. ‘For career reasons, people have been turning away from romantic love as we have known it,’ he observes. ‘It may be that the human race is evolving away from a need for this kind of love. Perhaps in 1,000 years there'll be some substitute. Technology may be taking us in that direction already -- even now, some MIT students fall in love with their computers.’" 36.
 
 
 
Head of the London School of Economics, Anthony Giddens states that the rise of romantic love has transformed the institution of family: when it was an economic unit, the couple was just a part of the family and not necessarily central to it. However, when love became the reason, then emotional communication and intimacy between the couple became the basis of the family unit. The idea that there is a “relationship” as something to talk about is very recent -- within the past 30 years. In the abstract, he argues that there is an idea of a “pure relationship” -- based on emotional communication, “where the rewards derived from such communication are the main basis for the relationship to continue.” This -- a democratization of emotions which parallels the democratization of society-- is a radical departure from old societal models. 37.
 
 
 
Even today, Father Ken Deasy regularly has to inform his congregation that marriage – that romantic attachment between a couple – is a valuable, holy, spiritual institution, and not of a lower order, because it’s still news to Catholics, who were taught – and often still believe – that when people marry for love, it's because they can’t bear the better, holier life of being celibate clergy. 38.
 
__________________________________
 
 
1. E. Cobham Brewer, Dictionary of Phrase and Fable (1898). Available at: http://www.bartleby.com
2. H.W. Fowler, The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English, Second Edition, Corrected Impression of 1931, Oxford University Press, Great Britain (1929).
3. J.A. Simpson and E.S.C. Weiner, The Compact Oxford English Dictionary (New/Second Edition), Oxford University Press, Inc., New York, NY (2000). Available at in on-line edition: http://www.askoxford.com/ http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/romancex?view=uk LINK to on-line dictionary
4. See, for example, Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster, New York (1935 et seq.) and Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth, Anchor (1991). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385418868/qid=1128370563/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
5. See, for example, Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster, New York (1935 et seq.) and Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth, Anchor (1991). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385418868/qid=1128370563/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
6. See, for example, Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster, New York (1935 et seq.) and Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth, Anchor (1991). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385418868/qid=1128370563/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
7. See, for example, Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster, New York (1935 et seq.) and Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth, Anchor (1991). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385418868/qid=1128370563/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
8. See Uta Ranke-Heinemann, Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven, Penguin Books, New York, New York (1991). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0140165002/104-2655861-4201507?%5Fencoding=UTF8&s=books&v=glance
9. See Uta Ranke-Heinemann, Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven, Penguin Books, New York, New York (1991). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0140165002/104-2655861-4201507?%5Fencoding=UTF8&s=books&v=glance
10. See Uta Ranke-Heinemann, Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven, Penguin Books, New York, New York (1991). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0140165002/104-2655861-4201507?%5Fencoding=UTF8&s=books&v=glance, Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth, Anchor (1991). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385418868/qid=1128370563/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
11. Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth, Anchor (1991). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385418868/qid=1128370563/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
12. Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster, New York (1935 et seq.) and Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth, Anchor (1991). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385418868/qid=1128370563/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
13. See Uta Ranke-Heinemann, Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven, Penguin Books, New York, New York (1991). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0140165002/104-2655861-4201507?%5Fencoding=UTF8&s=books&v=glance
14. William Manchester, A World Lit Only by Fire: The Medieval Mind and the Renaissance: Portrait of an Age, Little, Brown, Boston, MA (1992), pp. 68-76. Available through http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0316545562/qid=1128369960/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
15. Peter N. Stearns, editor-in-chief, Encyclopedia of European Social History from 1350 to 2000, Scribner, New York, New York (2001). Available through http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684805820/qid=1128370201/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 and William Manchester, A World Lit Only by Fire: The Medieval Mind and the Renaissance: Portrait of an Age, Little, Brown, Boston, MA (1992), pp. 68-76. Available through http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0316545562/qid=1128369960/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
16. Peter N. Stearns, editor-in-chief, Encyclopedia of European Social History from 1350 to 2000, Scribner, New York, New York (2001). Available through http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684805820/qid=1128370201/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
17. Peter N. Stearns, editor-in-chief, Encyclopedia of European Social History from 1350 to 2000, Scribner, New York, New York (2001). Available through http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684805820/qid=1128370201/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 William Manchester, A World Lit Only by Fire: The Medieval Mind and the Renaissance: Portrait of an Age, Little, Brown, Boston, MA (1992), pp. 68-76. Available through http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0316545562/qid=1128369960/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
18. Peter N. Stearns, editor-in-chief, Encyclopedia of European Social History from 1350 to 2000, Scribner, New York, New York (2001). Available through http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684805820/qid=1128370201/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
19. Peter N. Stearns, editor-in-chief, Encyclopedia of European Social History from 1350 to 2000, Scribner, New York, New York (2001). Available through http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684805820/qid=1128370201/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
20. Peter France (ed.), The New Oxford Companion to Literature in French, Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press, Oxford/New York (1995). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0198661258/qid=1123777704/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/104-0887680-4192712 and Peter N. Stearns, editor-in-chief, Encyclopedia of European Social History from 1350 to 2000, Scribner, New York, New York (2001). Available through http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684805820/qid=1128370201/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
21. Paul M. Johnson, The Birth of the Modern: World Society 1815-1830, Harper Collins, New York (1991), p. 507. Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060922826/qid=1128371343/sr=1-3/ref=sr_1_3/104-2655861-4201507?v=glance&s=books
22. TK
23. James J. Ponzetti, (ed.), International Encyclopedia of Marriage and Family, Second Ed. Macmillian Reference USA (2002). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0028656725/qid=1123776640/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-0887680-4192712?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 or http://www.galegroup.com/servlet/ItemDetailServlet?region=9&imprint=000&titleCode=M106&type=4&id=174024
24. Ronald Gottesman, et al., The Norton Anthology of American Literature, Shorter Edition, W.W. Norton & Co., New York, New York (1979), pp. 583-588.
25. See Karen Lystra, Searching the Heart: Women, Men and Romantic Love in 19th Century America, Oxford Univ. Press (1989). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0195074769/qid=1123777285/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-0887680-4192712?v=glance&s=books
26. See Karen Lystra, Searching the Heart: Women, Men and Romantic Love in 19th Century America, Oxford Univ. Press (1989). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0195074769/qid=1123777285/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-0887680-4192712?v=glance&s=books
27. Michael D. Pierson, Free Hearts & Free Homes: Gender and American Antislavery Politics, Univ. of North Carolina Press (2003). Available through: http://uncpress.unc.edu/chapters/pierson_free.html
28. James J. Ponzetti, (ed.), International Encyclopedia of Marriage and Family, Second Ed. Macmillian Reference USA (2002). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0028656725/qid=1123776640/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-0887680-4192712?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 or http://www.galegroup.com/servlet/ItemDetailServlet?region=9&imprint=000&titleCode=M106&type=4&id=174024
29. Ronald Gottesman, et al., The Norton Anthology of American Literature, Shorter Edition, W.W. Norton & Co., New York, New York (1979), pp. 583-588.
30. Nathaniel Hawthorne, Scarlet Letter
31. Ronald Gottesman, et al., The Norton Anthology of American Literature, Shorter Edition, W.W. Norton & Co., New York, New York (1979), pp. 583-588.
32. James J. Ponzetti, (ed.), International Encyclopedia of Marriage and Family, Second Ed. Macmillian Reference USA (2002). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0028656725/qid=1123776640/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-0887680-4192712?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 or http://www.galegroup.com/servlet/ItemDetailServlet?region=9&imprint=000&titleCode=M106&type=4&id=174024
33. Nancy F. Cott, Public Vows: A History of Marriage and the Nation, Harvard Univ. Press, USA (2002). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0674008758/qid=1123827518/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/002-0116027-5404024?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
34. James J. Ponzetti, (ed.), International Encyclopedia of Marriage and Family, Second Ed. Macmillian Reference USA (2002). Available through: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0028656725/qid=1123776640/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-0887680-4192712?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 or http://www.galegroup.com/servlet/ItemDetailServlet?region=9&imprint=000&titleCode=M106&type=4&id=174024
35. See Daniel Cere, "Courtship Today: A View from Academia," The Public Interest (Spring 2001). Archived at: http://www.thepublicinterest.com/archives/2001spring/article2.html and article on how marriages should be handled like mergers.
36. Eve Downing, "Living Love: Professor Talks of the Ties That Bind Us," Spectrum, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, MA, Vol. X, No. 1 (Winter 1998). Archived at: http://web.mit.edu/giving/spectrum/winter98/love.html
37. Anthony Giddens, "Runaway World," Reith Lecture 4, Washington, DC (1999). Archived at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/reith_99/week4/week4.htm
38. Ashley Merryman's observations regarding conversations between Rev. Kenneth Deasy and Rev. Deasy's sermons at St. Agatha's Catholic Church, Los Angeles, California.