User:Litzi813/sandbox

Civilizations are often only considered to be a civilization, if they are more "advanced" or "complex" in terms of technology and agriculture. Historically, nomad and native civilizations are considered to be uncivilized or "abnormal".

When learning about civilization there was often a need to emphasize European civilizations and under appreciate eastern civilizations. There are many reasons for why this Eurocentric viewpoint took over history classes and textbooks. One of the reasons is religion. At the time of making of history religion was important for every aspect of civilization. People depended on religion, legally, politically, socially, and culturally, all around the globe. Many countries led with Christian inspired viewpoints, while some led with Muslim viewpoints, and other with Judaism or Hinduism viewpoints. But regardless of where people were, and what their religious beliefs were, religion cultivated every part of day-to-day lives. Some examples of this can be in Roman Catholic countries, people studied astronomy in order to explain how god created the cosmos where the reason for Gregorian Reform was to explain and further exceed God’s power. In Islamic countries, people studied astronomy for the sole purpose of knowing which direction to pray in. Therefore, it makes sense that when European and American countries started recounting history about powerful civilizations, they would only include Christian led civilizations. However, this Eurocentric viewpoint came at an expense though, where now multiple historians are upset and discouraged with the lack of information on other rich civilizations outside of the European circle. And have written many articles highlighting powerful civilizations all throughout the Eurasian continent, and the cultural richness and significance outside of the Eurocentric circle.