That law both affects and is affected by the surrounding culture is a proposition so obvious as to hardly need mentioning. Yet the precise direction and nature of this relationship is among the most vexing problems in comparative (or any) law. Is law a reflection of the surrounding culture or one of its principal constitutive elements? Do countries have a legal culture, or subculture, that is distinct from their more general cultural tendencies or is this a contradiction in terms? What does culture consist of in the first place: is it primarily a question of attitudes, institutions, or some combination of the two, and which of these is likely to be more important in a legal context? Are countries becoming more similar in their legal and nonlegal cultures – the so-called globalization phenomenon – or is this merely a comforting myth? Is the term “culture” itself of any real value, or is it so prone to generalization and misstatement as to do more harm than good?