• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The origins of romance: the middle east?

A

ataraxia

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 18, 2016
Messages
61,297
Reaction score
38,463
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Aaaah... candle light dinners by the Seine, with the crescent moonlight shining bright from behind the Eiffel tower. Standing under the window of your beloved and pining for even a quick glimpse of her sillhouette from the window, the heartache, the longing, the unrequited love... It seems the French created the concept of romance, no?

Well, yes and no. I was reading about the history of the concept of romance- and in Europe, at least, it does seem to have started over in France, around the medieval period. That time, especially after the 13th century, saw the introduction of a lot of romantic poetry and literature in Europe. Before that, it seems the concept really didn't exist. Specifically, it seems the concept started with the idea of "courtly love" and "chivalry", traced back to the French troubadours- the poets and musicians of the time. The term "courtly love" appears in only one extant source: Provençal cortez amors in a late 12th-century poem by Peire d'Alvernhe.

Courtly love - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org




But when you trace the history back even further, it seems the concept was brought to France from the middle east- through the European interactions with the middle east in the Crusades, as well as through Spain from the Moors. A few centuries before the troubadors, the middle easterners had started writing stories which would define romance for the first time. It seems this started around the 9th century- with stories like Layla and Majnun.

Layla and Majnun - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The origins of romance in the Middle East are deeply intertwined with the region's rich literary and cultural history, particularly through the development of Arabic and Persian love poetry and narratives. These traditions, often exploring themes of passionate, unrequited, and even mystical love, have significantly influenced both the region's own cultural landscape and, through various historical exchanges, Western literary traditions. Eventually, this idea of romantic love being intertwined with divine love for God, or used as a metaphor, were explored by Sufi mystic poets like Rumi.

  • Arabic Love Poetry:
    Arabic poetry, flourishing since pre-Islamic times, is filled with tales of love, longing, and loss. The concept of ishq (passionate, all-consuming love) and hubb (general love) are central themes, often expressed through vivid imagery and metaphors.

  • Persian Romance:
    The Persian literary tradition, particularly from the 10th century onwards, features epic romances like Vis o Ramin, which explore themes of love, loyalty, and tragedy. These narratives, often set in royal courts, feature complex characters and intricate plots.

  • Influence of Sufism:
    Sufi mystical poetry and philosophy often use the language of romantic love to express a believer's relationship with God, emphasizing themes of divine love and spiritual yearning.

  • Cultural Exchange:
    The Islamic Golden Age saw significant cultural exchange between the Middle East and other regions, including Europe. This exchange influenced the development of courtly love traditions in Europe, particularly through the spread of Arabic and Persian literary forms and themes.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/discover/epic-love-stories-arab-world-unrequited-longing#:~:text=The themes that enraptured the,values in the oral form.


Why did I start this thread? I dunno. I just never equated the middle east with the origins of the concept of romance, of all things. Just found it surprising. Anyone else have insights on this history?
 
Last edited:
BTW, the English translation of the Youtube video from the French Troubadors:


"If you could wrest your desire
From what you care about the most,
When you can't foresee satisfaction,
It would be one of the most wise actions of the world !
Because, of all the great follies that are out there,
The greatest is to the one who
Wants to consciously seek his loss,
And a double fault
This one makes
-And yet he will hardly be a fulfilled lover, the accomplished lover
Who will not find equal pleasure in good and evil, in joy and sorrow.
Everything would also be a pleasure for me,
Even though I am in deep misfortune,
If Love wanted to help me
So that the person I love and desire
Would pay me with a joy made up of enjoyment:
It is quite clear that it would be fitting
That he who suffers should receive good !
And I would accept a hundred pains with strength,
And it would be a joy and a pleasure and an honour for me
If after a hundred pains I was paid with a joy."
 
Last edited:
There are many references to concepts of romance in the Mahabharata and Ramayana.
 
I recommend the poetry of Rumi. Jalal (if I remember right) al-din Rumi. A Persian and a Sufi, the founder of the Mehlevi Order of dervishes, the so-called 'whirling dervishes'.
He wrote some romantic poetry that carries it's emotion right through the translation process.
It's not a poem but this is the Rumi quote I remember about love...

"Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it.”

This is the one I remember from him about religion...

"The eye through which you see God is the same eye through which God sees you."
 
phoenix2020 said:
There are many references to concepts of romance in the Mahabharata and Ramayana.
Click to expand...
I am not sure it's quite that idea of romance though. It's more about love, duty, and loyalty- not burning longing for the unattainable and unrequited love.

This idea of the burning of unrequited love as a good in and of itself: that's a very distinctly medieval idea (think, for example, of the forbidden love in Romeo and Juliet).

But I have to admit. It's a subtle distinction. I asked ChatGPT about the distinction. Here is what it said:

"That's a great and nuanced question. The difference between "romance" and "love/loyalty" is critical in tracing the historical development of romantic ideals. Here's how we might think about it:




1.​

  • Romance, as understood in the Western tradition (especially post–courtly love), usually involves:
    • Emotional idealization of the beloved
    • Longing and separation
    • The lover's suffering or devotion as ennobling
    • Love as a form of inner transformation or even spiritual refinement
    • Often extramarital or illicit elements (e.g. Lancelot and Guinevere, Tristan and Isolde, Majnun and Laili)
  • Love and loyalty, as depicted in many earlier epics and myths (including the Ramayana and Mahabharata), more often emphasize:
    • Duty (dharma)
    • Marital fidelity
    • Devotion within hierarchical relationships (e.g., Rama and Sita, or Savitri and Satyavan)
    • Familial or cosmic order rather than personal longing



2. While both epics contain deep emotional bonds, including stories of:​

  • Devotion and sacrifice (e.g., Sita’s fidelity, Savitri’s bravery),
  • Separation and yearning (e.g., Rama's exile and Sita's abduction),
  • Jealousy and attraction (e.g., Draupadi’s polyandrous marriage),
…the tone and function of love are different from the kind of introspective, passionate, psychologically rich romantic longing we find in, say, troubadour poetry or Persian ghazals.

Importantly, in Indian epics, love is usually:
Embedded in dharma (righteous duty),
  • Tied to social order, honor, and virtue,
  • Less focused on individual interiority and more on moral or cosmic implications.



3. If we want to trace the roots of romance as an inner, transformative longing, you're right to look to:​

Persian and Arabic poetry (Majnun, ghazals)
  • Sufi mysticism, where longing for the beloved becomes a metaphor for union with the divine
  • European courtly love, where emotional suffering becomes a mark of nobility

These traditions foreground emotion, subjectivity, and erotic sublimation—hallmarks of later romantic ideologies.

Conclusion​

Yes, the Mahabharata and Ramayana contain stories of love and deep emotional connection—but calling them “romantic” in the same sense as later Persian or European traditions may be anachronistic. They are epic and moral texts, not primarily explorations of personal, erotic, or transformative love in the modern romantic sense.

You're right to draw a distinction—and it's a meaningful one for understanding how the concept of romantic love developed historically and culturally."
 
Yes. I was surprised to learn that Rumi is one of the most read poets in... The United States!

Here is Madonna's adaptation of one of his poems:

 
LOL This topic makes me laugh when considering the context of the 21st Century.

Movies from the 80s and 90s are practically about men stalking women and women giving into it by today's standards.
 
aofie said:
LOL This topic makes me laugh when considering the context of the 21st Century.

Movies from the 80s and 90s are practically about men stalking women and women giving into it by today's standards.
Click to expand...

Not quite sure what you were saying here. Are you saying we were better off back then, or now? Or are we moderns completely off by the standards of the medievals?

And speaking of who has it the most right: is the idea of romantic love itself even a good idea? Many modern mental health professionals tell us it’s a toxic and dangerous way to think about relationships :

 

I'm saying pestering women for sex is wrong.

 
aofie said:
I'm saying pestering women for sex is wrong.

Click to expand...

Haha, funny!

But actually, this ideal of romantic and courtly love, at least from the medieval perspective, is actually not at all about the love physically. The longing and the journey are more important than the destination. That’s why it’s often considered pure or somehow in a higher, almost divine, plane. In fact, physical consummation was often seen as a sullying of such noble emotions.

It involved a knight's devotion to a noble lady, expressed through chivalrous acts, poetic displays, and respectful admiration, rather than physical intimacy. The focus was on the emotional and spiritual connection, with the lady often idealized and placed on a pedestal- seen almost as something more than human: an angelic figure from other-worldly ethereal realm.


See, for example, how the Renaissance poet Dante spoke of Beatrice. She was a real woman he had met a few times, but circumstances kept him from developing any sort of relationship with her. So he idealized her in his mind, and in his epic poem, the divine comedy, she becomes this angelic figure that guides him through purgatory and paradise.

Dante and Beatrice's relationship, as depicted in Dante Alighieri's Divine Comedy, is a central and complex one, characterized by idealized love and spiritual guidance. Beatrice, a real-life Florentine woman, became Dante's muse and a symbol of divine grace, guiding him through the realms of Purgatory and Paradise.

Beatrice and Dante Alighieri > A Love Story

Beatrice was Dante's true love: she was a real person, and Dante decided to use her as an important character in his masterpiece, The Divine Comedy.
www.florenceinferno.com

Can you hear the echoes of Rumi in this mixture of love for a woman and love for the divine, for the beautiful, for the otherworldly? In comparison, just the idea of physical sex alone seems so base and crass.
 
aofie said:
I'm saying pestering women for sex is wrong.

Click to expand...
Courtly love was really a civil arrangement to benefit the families of the people getting married. Very few people in this era and any human era up until very recently actually married because they love a person. The way it worked in the past is you were betrothed by your parents to marry somebody. You learn to love each other or live with each other and that's all it was.
 

Courtly love was not really about marriage at all. In fact, it was about unattainable love. It was about learning to relish the pain of not being able to attain your true beloved, and learning to enjoy the misery and sting of it. The intensity of the pain, while remaining pure and unsullied by the consummation of physical desire, was thought to be purifying for the soul- hence the mystical and divine aspects explored by poets like Rumi.

Think Romeo and Juliet. If you read the story of Leila and Majnun, written in the Middle East centuries earlier, it is eerily similar- it was about two star cross lovers that were forbidden to be together by their families. In more recent time, the theme is repeated in a musical like West Side Story.

It may have been also a way for people to also fool around on the side after they were married with other people, in the name of Courtly love.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Courtly love was really a civil arrangement to benefit the families of the people getting married.
Click to expand...

I asked ChatGPT, and it clarified how courtly/romantic love is actually the exact opposite of a marriage relationship. It framed it in terms of Lacanian psychoanalysis, and even the philosophy of Slavoj Zizek!

“Courtly love revolves around an unattainable object—a noblewoman, usually married or out of reach. The point isn’t to consummate the love, but to sustain the longing. In Lacan’s terms, the lady functions as the "objet petit a"—the unattainable object-cause of desire.

“The object of courtly love is essentially ungraspable… it is this very impossibility that generates the lover’s desire.” —Lacan, The Ethics of Psychoanalysis
2. Surplus Enjoyment Through Suffering

The suffering of the courtly lover—his sighs, songs, self-denial, and noble anguish—are not just unfortunate side effects. They are the enjoyment.

This is jouissance: pleasure that is found in pain, enjoyment sustained precisely because the object of desire remains out of reach. The more the beloved is idealized and inaccessible, the more intense the longing—and the more surplus enjoyment is generated.

3. The Lady as a Cruel Superego Figure

Lacan also points out that the Lady in courtly love often functions like a harsh superego—an enigmatic figure who commands strange acts (like fighting a dragon or fasting for a year), never grants full satisfaction, and yet becomes the axis around which all desire turns.

She commands suffering, and the lover enjoys obeying her impossible demands. This is precisely surplus jouissance.
4. Slavoj Žižek: Love as an “Artificial Obstacle”

Žižek often cites courtly love as a cultural form where the obstacle is the true source of enjoyment. The social impossibility of union with the Lady becomes the very condition for desire to flourish.

Modern equivalents include:

Obsessive longing for someone who is emotionally unavailable
Romantic narratives where the “almost” is more compelling than the actual union
Fetishistic or idealized crushes that would collapse if consummated
So yes—romantic longing, especially in the form of courtly love, is a perfect example of Lacanian surplus happiness:
It’s not about getting the thing. It’s about circling endlessly around it, suffering pleasurably, and sustaining desire precisely because the object is forever deferred.

Would you like an example from literature—like Dante and Beatrice, or Lancelot and Guinevere—to flesh it out further?”
 
Middle East? May be...

The story of Gilgamesh is one of the oldest known tales, and it looks like the tablet dwelled on this idea in passionate detail.

The meteorite, incidentally, to which this is compared, was a baetyl. Fallen from Heaven, it was bound to be worshipped from ancient times. The AI does not know whether it is the exact same baetyl that was brought to Rome by the Empress Heliogabalus, one of the most renowned transgender women of history. From there, it was later moved back to its more rustic location in Syria, which eventually was converted to a church of Saint John the Baptist. The Christians took pleasure in ceremoniously destroying the massive stone, but I expect surviving pieces of it were moved by Nabaean traders. Just so a black stone soon after arrived at Makkah, where an ambitious leader by the name of Muhammad devised an inventive way for four leaders to share equally in parading its holiness. Whether that is the same ransomed stone that is on display today, at the geographic center of all Muslim devotion, is an additional question, but ... maybe.
 
the picture above is from an old German manuscript called Manesse.
 
Rumpel said:
the picture above is from an old German manuscript called Manesse.
Click to expand...

Interesting!

I believe in central Europe troubadors were called meistersingers. In England they were called minstrels.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…