Sorry Europe, Australia and Antarctica, there are only Four Continents
December 27, 2014
I’m preparing to teach a new class this spring, Geography of the World Economy. I’m really looking forward to it.
In preparing my syllabus I find myself wanting to be able to share a coherent hierarchy and regional partition of Earth’s surface with my students who, as business majors and future competitors in an increasingly globalized economy, will likely need to be able to refer to various parts of the world to communicate plans and ideas. Unfortunately, I don’t think a coherent system exists. So, as part of my course preparation I will try to contribute some thoughts along the same lines as my regional geography of the US.
The first challenge I want to take on is the definition of a continent. The word “continent” and its use in reference to large land masses comes from the Latin, terra continens, meaning continuous land. The definition is not based upon some sort of size threshold whereby extremely large islands, i.e., a land mass completely surrounded by water, can be considered continents. As such, Antarctica and Australia are enormous islands, not continents. Sorry, mates….and, uh, penguins. It’s just geography, nothing personal.
So we’re left with two enormous, continuous and connected land masses. In the Western Hemisphere we have North America and South America connected by the very narrow Isthmus of Panama. And, in the Eastern Hemisphere, we have Europe and Asia connected to Africa at the very small Sinai Peninsula.
So, just five continents, right? No.
As is often the case, a Euro-centric view of things enabled the establishment of Europe as a separate continent and this precedent has been maintained for historical reasons. But, if you look at a satellite image of the Eastern Hemisphere you may notice that the Ural Mountains, generally considered to be the border between Europe and Asia is not terribly narrow, not at all similar to Panama or Sinai. So, while Europe is certainly a major world region, it is not a continent, nor is Asia for that matter (unless Europe is thought to be a subset of Asia). Instead, we must ignore the illusion of the Isthmus of the Urals and recognize Europe and Asia combine to form the world’s largest continent, Eurasia.
That makes four distinct and continuous land masses. My apologies to your social studies teachers who have been mistakenly dividing the world into six or seven continents. My apologies to Europe, Australia and Antarctica but you’ve been downgraded. Europe is a region. Australia and Antarctica are islands.
There are only four continents: Africa, Eurasia, North America and South America.
Next up, world regions.
40 Comments
[…] Blog post about Continents […]
[…] Continents […]
So, yeah, this is a poor-man’s “I wannabe” article. It can be found right here in this quote “The word “continent” and its use in reference to large land masses comes from the Latin, terra continens, meaning continuous land.”
Let’s first establish that modern geology is what modern terms are defined by. Otherwise this teacher, Justin, would be very dead by now having only earned salt for any work he does. The word “salary” comes from the Latin for salt and in the Roman Empire payment was sometimes made in actual salt. Then it was valuable. Today, not so much. But by Justin’s definition, he could only earn Sodium Chloride (not even the many scientific salts, “a chemical compound consisting of an ionic assembly of cations and anions”, just “a white crystalline substance which gives seawater its characteristic taste and is used for seasoning or preserving food”, which is sodium chloride), and never get currency or gold.
Next, modern geographic terminology defines a continent as ” the continents correspond to areas of continental crust that are found on the continental plates, but include continental fragments such as Madagascar that are not counted among the geopolitical continents”. Now, one can argue that the separate geological plates are grouped together politically, but that actually means there are more continents than we conventionally claim, not fewer.
Lastly, lets look at Justin’s direct conflict in his own words. He is using the tern “continuous land” to mean continent. An island is “continuous land” in of itself. So, when Justin says “The definition is not based upon some sort of size threshold whereby extremely large islands, i.e., a land mass completely surrounded by water, can be considered continents. As such, Antarctica and Australia are enormous islands, not continents”, he is saying islands can be continents, therefore they aren’t. By that logic, anything that is also is not. This is proving that all numbers are equal to zero, and thus math is impossible. Good luck getting anything done without math, especially in science.
Again, if you are arguing politically that continents don’t exist, thus borders don’t exist and so on, then good luck proving your house has walls and you own anything there.
Yeah. Sorry you’re so upset about this. Maybe you’d feel better if you posted your own article on your own blog.
I can’t believe it. This is the most misleading article from a geography teach I haven’t ever seen. The definition of continent is exactly the opposite.
There are really just 4 continents in the world:
Afro-Eurasia
America (North and South combined)
Antartica
Australia
I think this quote says it all: “This is the most misleading article from a geography teach I haven’t ever seen.”
Sorry to hear you didn’t actually see the article.
In my opinion, there would be just three large enough landmasses whose continental crusts are independent
– Euramerafrasia (Europe, America, Africa, Asia, sans Madagascar and Iceland)
Eurasia and Africa are connected by the Sinai peninsula.
Eurasia and America’s continental platforms are connected by the Bering strait, whose depth is never more than mere 49 meters.
Madagascar, Iceland, and lesser islands not laying upon the continental platform do not belong to the continent.
– Sahul (Australia and New Guinea)
Australia and New Guinea are conneccted by the Arafura Sea.
– Antarctica
Your Euramerafrasia only gets 1 result via Google search LOL.
There are 6 continents:
australia
antarctica
africa
eurasia
south am.
north am.
nope
I believe in only 4 continents. AfroEurasia, the Americas (as a whole), Australia and Antarctica.
Believe what you like, but “continent” = continuous land. That ain’t Australia or Antarctica.
Your argument ignores the fact that the Americas are also a separate landmass. If Australia can’t be considered a continent because it is isolated from other continents then nor can the Americas. Therefore Eurasia/Africa being the biggest continuous continent is the only continent.
If you include the Americas, what’s your justification, their size? You have picked an arbitrary size limit then. What is it based on?
Australia not only has it’s own continental shelf, it has it’s own fricken tectonic plate: https://earthhow.com/7-major-tectonic-plates/ As does Antarctica.
God help your students if you pass of this nonsense as an education.
Oh no! Another blow to the status of my beloved country, Australia. So not only are we a small economy with an even smaller population, now we are just a dirty big island and not even the biggest one. Please don’t tell our Prime Minister. Our past ones love to swan about the world stage pretending we are an important and influential country. That’s why we end up in so many awful wars/conflicts that we shouldn’t be in and most Australians hate. 😀
This is the most scientifically illiterate thing I have read all week. There are 8 lithospheric plates that house individual continental landmasses. Eurasian, North American, Antarctic, South American, Australian, Arabian, and Indian. You should probably take a Geology 101 class, as your understanding of a continental plate (continent) and an island is significantly flawed.
Hi Bryan,
Thanks for your kind words. If you look up the word “continent” you’ll find it doesn’t have its origins in plate tectonics. So your argument is incontinent. See what I did there? 🙂
Cheers,
Justin
I believe there are four continents. America, since I believe that North and South America are connected. Afro-Eurasia. Europe is not a continent, it’s connected to Asia. Eurasia is connected to Africa. Australia, it’s not really connected to another continent. Antarctica, which is kind of an exception since there are no countries on Antarctica.
i know only 4 continets and that is Eurasia, Africa,n.America And S.America.
First of all Mr, Yee, it looks like you do not even acknowledge the existence of Africa. I would like to suggest that the only real continent id Africa because it has never moved. All others are man made imaginations and creations. It seems when the Europe names it and defines it, it comes into existence!!. This is all mercantilism at work with a world curved out and defined for the benefit of the European. It is true that just as in History, the story of the European’s experience is what we study in most of our disciplines; why not World Geography. Please give me something authentic to think about to debate!!
What about Plate Tectonics?
I keep the concepts separate for a few reasons: (1) I’m a geographer, not a geologist; (2) use of the term “continent” predates plate tectonics and continental drift theory; and, (3) no one refers to the Juan de Fuca plate as a continent. I guess I’m more interested in the proper colloquial place-name usage than any effort to pursue a scientifically sound definition. Mostly it just seems clear that neither Europe, Australia nor Antarctica qualify, at least not to the same extent, as “continuous” land masses.
I can’t understand your reasoning. All land masses are islands surrounded by oceans. Have you picked an arbitrary size limit? And if so what is that size limit and how did you come to that conclusion?
Try looking at a map, buddy. The “continuous” part of continental applies to North & South America, Africa and Eurasia. It doesn’t apply elsewhere.
Justin, you’re not explaining “continuous” at all. You say N. & S. America are continuous, but Australia is not. You say tectonic plates do not apply to the definition. So what is the criteria that the Americas fill to be considered two “continuous” continents that Australia does not? The only viable reason you have is that the Americas are bigger. So you have picked an arbitrary size limit as your defining feature of a continent, as per Per’s suggestion.
Or do you mean to suggest that continents MUST be connected? If Africa and Eurasia were separated by a large and deep body of water, would neither then be continents, as they do not “continue” on to another continent? In this hypothetical world, it would seem ridiculous to claim neither are continents as they are such massive land masses, simply because they do not “continue.”
In my opinion, (as this is all we are really debating; the abstract definitions and categorisations of language) there would be six continents: Africa, Eurasia, Australia, South America, North America, and Antarctica, as well as two subcontinents: The Middle East and India. I base this off the combination of land masses on tectonic plates.
Thanks for sharing your opinion. You sounded somewhat sensible until you tossed the Middle East into the equation.
The Middle East is a geopolitical word, the Arabian Subcontinent is a better word to use than the Middle East.
Europe is a peninsula in east of Asia. Actually Europe is a Western Asia. Finish! This is an undisputed scientific and geographic reality. The acceptance of Europe as a separate continent is because of Christianity, racism, cultural and social discrimination. For example I am a Turkish. Turks actually is an Eurasian nation like Russians. We are not a Middle Eastern. Our real homeland is Tuva Republic in South Siberia district (Altai Mountains). I mean we are actually South Siberian Nations. We are relative wih Finnish, Estonians, Hungarians (Especially Szekely Turks in Romania), Bulgarians, Kipchaks, Cumans, Tatars, Kazakhs, Karaim Turks in Latvia, Gagauz Turks in Moldova, Crimean Turks in Ukraine etc. We are old nations in the Europe. For example Scythians – Sakha Turks are an old European nations and empires in Europe. Ottoman Empire, Avars, Attila’s Huns, Golden Horde Empires. Who is European or not? The first Turks (Look at Proto-Turks in Chinese History) were a blonde race. There are still blonde Turks today (Kiphcak, Cumans. Gagauzia, Western Thracia, Szekely Turks, some Tatars and Bulgarians). In Europe, Slavic-speaking nations are called Slavic, but the same thing is not said for nations belonging to the same language family as Turkish. NO NOOO TURKS AND FINNISH, ESTONIANS, HUNGARIANS IS NOT RELATIVES. FOR EXAMPLE HUNGARIANS CLOSE TO SLAVS AND GERMAN. YES I SEE… THIS IS FUCKING PAN SLAVISM AND GERMAN AFFECTS ONLY AND WITH THE HELP OF CHRISTIANITY.
Correction: Europe is a peninsula in West of Asia.
For someone capable of bringing up a provocative and interesting question, you’re sure a douche when people disagree with you.
Sorry you feel that way Mr. Ear Lobe. Sarcasm occasionally seems overly harsh without the benefit of body language or verbal nuance. And perhaps I get irritated once in a while. On the flip side, I don’t think I called anyone a derogatory name like “douche” so there’s that.
What makes Australia and Antarctica not continuous?
They’re both surrounded by ocean whereas the continents are connected.
Every land mass on earth is completely surround by water. Just because there are narrower portions of said land masses does not make them not surrounded by water. By your definition Haiti and The Dominican Republic are 2 separate continents, since size plays no part. Oh it has to narrow somewhere in the land mass? Well then Spain, Florida, and numerous other peninsulas are actually continents. Terrible logic. If you want to use continuous land literally, which you try but fail miserably to do, there are no continents on earth. Every single piece of land ends on all sides. Also north and south America are separated by the Panama Canal so I guess man created 2 islands and killed 2 continents eh? The way to have a true continent, by your definition, would be a ring shaped piece of land that encircles the globe and is therefore definitively continuous.
Right, Florida and Haiti are continents. Thanks for setting me straight.
What you said is wrong. The four continents are Afro-Eurasia, America (North and South combined), Antarctica and Australia.
I know it’s a difficult pill to swallow, “Perth” Andy. But, chin up, there’s nothing wrong with living on a large island.
According to Stephen Hawking’s book “Unlocking the Universe”, geographically, there are only four continents that are not separated by water: Afro-Eurasia (57% of the land surface), the Americas (28.5%), Antarctica (9%) and Australia (5%). The remaining 0.5% is made up of oceanic islands, mostly scattered within Oceania in the central and south Pacific Ocean. The man-made Suez and Panama Canals are disregarded. So you are correct that the world has 4 continents, but you have ignored the two little ones and split the two big ones into two components, that’s weird.
According to Stephen Hawking’s book “Unlocking the Universe”, geographically, there are only four continents that are not separated by water: Afro-Eurasia (57% of the land surface), the Americas (28.5%), Antarctica (9%) and Australia (5%). The remaining 0.5% is made up of oceanic islands, mostly scattered within Oceania in the central and south Pacific Ocean. The man-made Suez and Panama Canals are disregarded. So you are correct that the world has 4 continents, but you have ignored the two little ones and split the two big ones into two components, that’s weird.
I disagree.
According to “justinholmanography” you are 100% correct Sir!