Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I overthinking this phrase?

As an Asian studies major it seems to mean anything Not Asian (Russia, China, Japan, India - covered by british history though), S/SE Asian countries. Typically does not cover native americans (of which there were relatively a fraction as elsewhere) or the tribal wars of Africa.

I also took the usual core lib arts Great Religions class - Islam, Judaism, Christianity.

Anyhow Western Civ is the Mid East/Europe branching out and leading most advancements since it did not stay insular like most places did (outside of Xian trying to trade with Persia to get horses bigger than donkeys finally).
It covers 1000s of years and many eras - biblical times, Mesopotamia, Turks, Romans, Crusades, Industrial Era, Americas trade, 20th century . It's hilarious it is covered in one course in 9th or 10th grade.

I think it largely depends on the methodology being used. You could make an argument that ancient Mesopotamian civilization almost falls into its own category, possibly along with the Kushites, Minoans and Egyptians. Following Alexander those regions (minus Kush/Sudan) and including most of Roman Europe could largely be considered "classical" up until the fall of the Roman Empire (and the rise of the Parthians in the Middle East). With the rise of Islam and the Roman Catholic-Orthodax schism the European, North African and Middle East could be divided into 3 parts; Western, Orthodox and Islamic. United States and Canada, along with most of the Anglo-sphere would fall under the "Western" umbrella IMO.

More difficult to define would be a region like the Baltic and where exactly the Orthodox-Western divide is (or whether there even is one). Also does Latin America fall into the "Western" category? Are the Greco-Roman "classical" civilizations distinct from "Western" civilization? A lot of this could be considered largely subjective and greatly depends on the methodology/definitions being used.

Here's an interesting video with a modern map of one person's opinion of where the break down lies for all global civilizations. Time stamped. Go to 2:30 if the time stamp doesn't work.



I'm reluctant to put to much thought into this reply as I don't know if OP is asking this question in good faith or not.

From what I can gather, it's anything that at some point got filtered through or appropriated by Europeans and their descendants. So people who esteem "western culture" will claim the zero but not Islam. They will view Hinduism as backward but refer to Roman and Greek mythology as "the classics".

In the past, it was more explicitly just about culture that originated in or descended from Europe without a lot of values or subtext associated. But now it's often a coded way of talking about white supremacy.

Depends on the geographical and cultural “east” the one thinking about it is. Most common is European / anglo / Christian. It could mean Western Europe / US / Canada / Australia.

Anonymous wrote:Am I overthinking this phrase?

As an Asian studies major it seems to mean anything Not Asian (Russia, China, Japan, India - covered by british history though), S/SE Asian countries. Typically does not cover native americans (of which there were relatively a fraction as elsewhere) or the tribal wars of Africa.

I also took the usual core lib arts Great Religions class - Islam, Judaism, Christianity.

Anyhow Western Civ is the Mid East/Europe branching out and leading most advancements since it did not stay insular like most places did (outside of Xian trying to trade with Persia to get horses bigger than donkeys finally).
It covers 1000s of years and many eras - biblical times, Mesopotamia, Turks, Romans, Crusades, Industrial Era, Americas trade, 20th century . It's hilarious it is covered in one course in 9th or 10th grade.

I think only you know how much thought you've put into the phrase.

I'd classify it as the human culture of the western hemisphere.

Am I overthinking this phrase?