On Marriage for Love

I've no idea what it is that makes us suddenly question something we've generally held as true for a very long time. I do know that whatever it is, it usually strikes from ambush. On one occassion it happened to me this way:

My wife and I are avid readers, and a frequent topic for dinner conversation is the books we are currently reading. A few nights ago we fell to discussing various histories and historical novels we've read, and the subject turned at one point to the place of romance, courtship, and marriage in various cultures down through the centuries. Louise mentioned some legendary romances, which in turn reminded me of some entirely mythical pairings, and it wasn't long before we found ourselves trying to reconcile these stories with a well known "fact".

This "fact", so often repeated that it is usually accepted without question, is that marriage for love is a relatively modern notion. In prior centuries marriages were mostly arranged by the families of the bride and groom - indeed, this is still the case in many parts of the world. The idea of love, from the lyrics of Catullus to the baroque excesses of Middle-ages troubadors, was mainly the idle whimsy of the nobility, and was kept separate from actual matrimonial bonds. Marriage for love would not even have occurred to our remoter ancestors. Or so we imagined.

Marriage, historians tell us, was an alliance of families and fortunes, and not a pact based on mutual regard and affection ¹, although there are those who acknowledge a secondary place for love ². Writers of historical fiction generally follow this line if they wish to be taken seriously or, if they do not, are often dismissed as mere "romance novelists".

Modern social commentators, when examining the concept of marriage for love, often arrive at the conclusion that the "ancient ways" of arranged marriages make far more sense than the maudlin romanticism of the present. Contrary to the belief of many, however, this is far from the first time in history that this clash has occurred. Today's religious moralists and social Darwinists approach the proposition from different directions, but tend to arrive at the same destination, using arguments similar to those made 500 years ago ³.

Despite all, I can not help but wonder whether "the ways of our ancestors" are being clearly understood. If the ancients truly had such slight regard for love between a man and a woman as a reason for marriage, what was the purpose of the many myths, folktales and lyrics that dwell on the subject? Ovid was particularly fond of such tales, and preserved many:⁴

Pyramus and Thisbe were so dear to one another, they could not bear their parents' decision that they might not marry, and decided to elope. Thisbe arrived first at their rendezvous, a mulberry tree outside the city, but was frightened away by a lioness who had just made a kill. The lioness rent the cloak that Thisbe dropped behind her in her flight. When Pyramus arrived a little later and saw the torn and bloody cloak, and the tracks of the beast, he drew his sword and slew himself in his grief. When Thisbe returned and found her beloved's body, she took her own life in turn. The blood of the lovers stained the white berries of the mulberry tree a deep red, and that color has persisted to this day ⁵.

Orpheus, who loved Eurydice so greatly that he could not abide her death, braved the underworld armed only with his lyre. With sweet music he won away his wife from the Lord of Hades, on condition he not look upon her until they had won back to the world above. Orpheus was tortured with the growing conviction that his every step was taking him further away from his love, and at last could not forbear to look behind him, and so lost Eurydice forever.

Baucis and Philemon were an elderly married couple, whose most earnest prayer to the gods was that they both be taken by death at the same instant, so that neither one would have to endure life without the other.

Psyche, a mortal woman, and the love god Cupid, dared the displeasure of heaven with their love. They persevered through many trials, and at last won recognition for their marriage, and elevation to godhood for Psyche ("psyche" means "soul").

These are only a few of many tales of this sort, taken from but a single culture. Similar tales can be found in advanced cultures throughout the world. They do not appear to be the fancies and inventions of people who think of love as an issue of secondary importance. It may be objected that these are only stories, and not the true facts of everyday life. I would answer this objection on two levels. First, the stories of advanced cultures, from the great epics to fables and folk tales, illustrate the ideals toward which their people aspire ⁶. Secondly, the true facts of relations between married men and women, even in cultures popularly (and erroneously) regarded as somewhat grim and down-trodden, are far more loving than is often supposed ⁷.

It may be true that marriages of alliance are more common throughout most of history than marriages for love, and that love in a marriage was only a fortuitous circumstance. It seems plain from the stories of the people, however, that marriage for love is the ideal, and is far more sympathetically regarded, even when the affair ends in tragedy. By the same token, one would be hard put to find stories of any kind that sympathetically portray marriages of alliance.

Perhaps marriages for love are indeed a 20th century phenomenon; it would be a mistake, however, to believe that they are purely a 20th century aspiration. Rather, it is only in the last couple of centuries that we have enjoyed the luxury of fulfilling this most ancient ideal on a wholesale level.

Tim Eagen
June, 2001

Note: If your browser does not support javascript, or allow the opening of multiple windows, you can view my footnotes here.