Did romantic love exist in ancient times?
2007-03-13 08:58:04 · 16 answers · asked by Optimistic 6 in Social Science ➔ Anthropology
Know what?
I'm a psych major who has a serious thing for the squishy side of the science so I'm gonna' fall back on that.
There is a brain chemistry change that is tied to what we call love that is identifiably different from straight out lust.
This implies that, unless we've undergone microevolution since history has been recorded, lust and love both exist and are separate.
Additionally, over time, most people have a falling off of the intensity of love reactions (biochemically) unless it is "recharged" by intensification of feelings periodically.
This seems to follow the pattern of what we consider "romantic love".
This, of course, is somewhat different than the cultural or society defined concept of marriage or ideals of love.
So, the short answer is that romantic love and lust probably predates the culturally construed concept of love we have today...
2007-03-13 17:08:16 · answer #1 · answered by Deathbunny 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Romantic Love has existed since man was created...Today's concept of Love is all askew because it is all about Romance of Love...When the first, new and exciting stage changes to the Power Struggle Stage many in today's love society are quick to find a new romantic fix...
Love Has 3 Stages:
(1) Being Romantic
(2)Power Struggles
(3)Unconditional Acceptance
Love grows and changes. The heady emotional brew that brings couples together in the first place is very different from the love that emerges five or fifteen years down the road. Love relationships go through three stages. All are important and none can be circumvented if love is to flourish.
2007-03-13 09:15:48 · answer #2 · answered by double_klicks 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think romance existed more in ancient times. That's my personal openion of course. Why I think this way, is because women in general were not as confident as now, and also had to wait for marriage before sex. That way, waiting was a luxary time for the man, of course the difficult and scary time for the woman, but at least both looked forward how touching, kissing, naked, breasts - all those things would be when they got together. That's why I myself believe this was the 'romance' of two people looking forward and making effort to meet up, and make effort for helping and loving each other before sex.
Now, there is no time to make the dinner for the man, or show him that you love him, or - for women - since things go so fast, the sex, the boredom, or marriage then quick divorce, and there is no time to waist on a poetic love, or a singing birds in the sky
if i sound too romantic, i'm an artist and I know what i'm talking about, I know lots of women are just there for a good bung bung, and romance is out of their mind.
but then again, there are some ancient women like me, so go find one and good luck!
2007-03-13 09:04:35 · answer #3 · answered by Spark S 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's a great question. I wonder about that myself. I do believe that romantic love is a luxury, even in a time tested union. There is always room for that luxury to be fleeting when there is a commitment, but when the romance is there, I'm just about sure, it's most appreciated.
2007-03-13 13:34:33 · answer #4 · answered by sustasue 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wasn't around at the time, but I think there was a more honest recognition that within a loving relationship there were different kinds ... eros (passion) and agape (more partnership) .... and you dont have to get both in same place. Would you buy your bread at the butchers? And for marriage many people had a more practical viewpoint ... who can give what you need (social level, ability to provide, ability to reproduce, family alliances etc) and is available at the right time.
2007-03-13 09:07:52 · answer #5 · answered by hustolemyname 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes, Romantic love has existed for thousands of years...
2007-03-13 19:26:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm sure that it did only it was expressed differently. But I believe the basis of the "feeling" of romantic love is based on phermones so I don't see that as something that has changed over time.
2007-03-13 09:00:54 · answer #7 · answered by Nunya 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. No. It has been passed through the generations; especially during war-torn times. Walt Disney is to blame for brainwashing my generation ...
Here is the truth: The only love that is real is the love a mother animal has for her babies. That is pure unconditional love, and nothing else comes anywhere near to it. Anything else is not real love at all.
2:Yes because humans then really needed something above sex and the idea of reproduction to make them feel superior to other animals.
Therein lies our downfall.
2007-03-13 09:09:29 · answer #8 · answered by kiteeze 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
To even ask that question brands one as a post-modernist and relativist. Of course, romantic love has always been a human expression. Even baboons court.
2007-03-13 13:38:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
if it were only of this time there would never be any historical writing about great loves and the descriptions of such.this only comes from having felt it ,otherwise one can not speak of these things in depth if they have not experienced it. its ageless,that is where all the poems and stories come from that face that launched a thousand ships,the goddesses,why men have died and women swooned. here then ,now, and forever more
2007-03-13 09:11:14 · answer #10 · answered by raindovewmn41 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋