Eurasia > Europe + Asia
The old methods of dividing the continent of Europe and Asia should go the way of the dodo. In its place should be the super continent of Eurasia. My argument for this is based on the inability to delineate the boundaries between these two regions, especially when it comes to the Caucasus region.
Before I proceed with my argument, I would like to emphasize that my arguments have nothing to do with the people who live in these boundary regions, or how similar their cultures are with different peoples. Engaging in this form of argument could lead to arguments that the United States is a part of Europe because a vast majority of its people are of "European" ancestry.
Rather, the only way to deal with the Europe-Asia continental divide is to look at it from a strictly geographic perspective.
Ultimately, if one looks at this giant land mass, one should look at it through the most scientific means possible today. That would be plate tectonics. If one looks at the plate tectonics of Europe and Asia, one will see that two plates do not exist demarcating Europe and Asia, but rather, there is a continuous plate that connects the region from the mid-Atlantic to Japan.
Ultimately, this new continental definition (Eurasia) is more coherent than using arbitrary and capricious lines separating Europe and Asia.
In the past, one separated the different parts of modern-day Turkey into Europe and Asia because of the convenient location of the Bosphorous straits, where this body of water was a clear separation of Europe and Asia.
However, there is no body of water separating the Caucasus region, but rather a vast mountainous expanse known as the Caucasus region, forming the northern part of the Armenian plateau (which extends all the way down to Lake Urmiah (Iran) and Lake Van (historic Armenia).
So how could one divide Europe from Asia in the Caucasus region? One could do so by extending Europe all the way down to the Araxes river. However, extending the line south to the Araxes has no real coherent reasoning, other then the fact that it is the current boundary Iran shares with Armenia, Nagarno-Karabagh and Azerbaijan; ultimately arbitrary man made lines demarcating jurisdictions.
If one uses this definition, one must further use geographic reasoning in explaining why Europe does not extend further south to incorporate lake Van and lake Urmiah.
The current demarcation uses an arbitrary line along the north Caucasus mountain range. Once again, this delineation also lacks any coherent justification why Asia does not extend further north to envelope the entire area that separates the Black Sea from the Caspian Sea.
Using any line in between the conventional or current definition, or any line outside of these two areas, will also lacks any coherent justification.
Thus, to avoid any arbitrary and capricious line-drawing, and to be scientifically coherent, the old methods of dividing the continent of Europe and Asia should go the way of the stegasoraus, and in its place should be the super continent of Eurasia.
5 Comments:
Some people may disagree with you (on what basis apart from caprice I don't know), but indeed the divisions between Europe and Asia are mutable and arbitrary. On some maps, Armenia is considered part of Europe (thus the dividing line is somewhere near the Ural mountains), and for a time, countries like Romania weren't really considered European. It's funny how Turkey and the Caucasus is most affected by this. Something tells me religion is responsible for the demarcation, in which case Armenia is christian, but most other countries in that part of the world aren't.
That is true.
My argument presupposes that geography should be the sole factor in determining geographic properties.
Although it probably is more interesting to draw geographic maps based on culture, it is also very imprecise, and subject to demographic changes.
But then again, why would anyone expect geographers to make geographic distinctions when you have every person with a euro-centric view trying to push what should be in and out of europe, with the sole understanding that europe is better than asia.
frankly, it is just a landmass
once again, i have not read the above "blog", nor do i intend to due to the fact that the word count exceeds my attention span.
in closing, asia wishes
I propose building a wall to mark steadfast boundaries. It worked for China. And interestingly it has a history in the Caucasus:
"The Gates of Alexander were a mythical barrier supposedly built by Alexander the Great in the Caucasus to keep the uncivilized barbarians of the north (usually associated with the Gog and Magog legend) from invading the land to the south. The gates were a popular subject in medieval travel literature, starting with the Alexander Romance in a version from perhaps the 6th century AD. The wall has been frequently identified with the Caspian Gates of Derbent, Russia (see below).
In the Alexander Romance, Alexander chases his enemies to a pass between two peaks in the Caucasus known as the "Breasts of the World". He decides to imprison the "unclean nations" of the north, which include Gog and Magog, behind a huge wall of steel or adamantine. With the aid of God, Alexander and his men close the narrow pass, keeping the uncivilized Gog and Magog from pillaging the peaceful southern lands. The nature of the pass is never very clear; some sources say it is a pass between mountains, while others say it is a pass between the peaks and the Caspian Sea."
¡Benjaminista!, where would you build your wall?
that is the question that must be answered, and why at that location.
PS. How did you come across my blog? It is pretty cool that you are the first person to comment who I do not know
Post a Comment
<< Home