Should we cancel Europe? Literally, as a continent, it’s status should be revoked.

[Costanza]

​

Why the “Europe-as-a-peninsula” view is reasonable​

• Physical-continuity: Europe is not a separate landmass — it’s the western extremity of the single, enormous Eurasian landmass. From a purely spatial/geomorphological viewpoint it’s a projection (a large promontory) of that landmass into the Atlantic.
• Tectonics don’t insist on a Europe–Asia split: Plate boundaries don’t line up with the traditional Europe/Asia border; much of “Europe” sits on the same Eurasian plate as large parts of “Asia.” That undermines any claim that Europe is a separate geological continent.
• “Peninsula of peninsulas”: Europe itself is made of many peninsulas (Iberian, Italian, Scandinavian, Balkan), so calling the whole thing a peninsula is consistent with its shape.

Why we usually call Europe a continent anyway​

• Historical and cultural convention: The Europe/Asia distinction grew from ancient Greek geography and was reinforced for millennia by cultural, political and intellectual distinctions. Continents are as much cultural-historical categories as physical ones.
• Practical geography: Treating Europe as a separate continent is useful for history, politics, economics, sports, education and maps — it groups many countries with shared historical interactions.
• Conventional borders exist: Geographers use boundaries (Ural Mountains, Caucasus, Bosporus, etc.) to define Europe for clarity, even if those boundaries are arbitrary.

Bottom line​

If your criterion is pure physical geography or geology, calling Europe a peninsula of Eurasia is defensible and arguably more "accurate." If your criterion is convention, history, or cultural geography, calling Europe a continent is sensible and widely practical. Both views are legitimate — they just answer different questions.

There’s a perfectly reasonable, long-standing argument that “Europe” is best understood as the western peninsula of the larger Eurasian landmass rather than a separate continent. That argument appears in physical geography, in critical work on the idea of “continents,” and in geopolitical thought.

Why it’s a reasonable argument ​

• Physical/geomorphological fact: Europe is continuous with Asia on the same continental crust and tectonic plate in many places; many reference sources explicitly call Europe the western projection (peninsula) of Eurasia. Encyclopedia Britannica
• Conceptual critique: Geographers and historians have shown that “continents” are partly historical/cultural categories (metageography) rather than purely natural units; from that perspective the seven-continent scheme is conventional and revisable. Wikipedia
• Geopolitical practice: Geopolitical thinkers who use “Eurasia” as a strategic unit treat Europe as part of a larger continental system rather than as an isolated block. JSTOR+1

Who’s made this argument (representative list)​

• Martin W. Lewis & Kären E. Wigen — The Myth of Continents: A Critique of Metageography (1997).
  A key scholarly critique arguing that continental divisions (including Europe/Asia) are constructs shaped by history, politics and culture rather than simple physical facts. Wikipedia
• Halford J. Mackinder (early 20th century) — “The Geographical Pivot of History” (1904).
  Not arguing in exactly the same language, but Mackinder’s influential geopolitical writing treats Europe as part of a larger “World-Island”/Eurasia and repeatedly stresses the strategic unity of the landmass. His work underpins many debates that diminish the idea of Europe as wholly separate. JSTOR+1
• Contemporary regional/geopolitical scholars writing about “Eurasia” or “Greater Eurasia” (e.g., Gudrun Diesen and others) who explicitly frame Europe as the western peninsula or as integrated within Eurasian geoeconomic strategies. SAGE Journals+1
• Textbook and reference geographies (Britannica, encyclopedias, atlases). They commonly describe Europe as the westward-projecting peninsulas of Eurasia — i.e., they acknowledge both the conventional continent label and the peninsula fact. (See Britannica). Encyclopedia Britannica+1
• Popular and academic blogs/critical geographies (GeoCurrents, journal articles) that revisit the “myth of continents” and map how the Europe/Asia split arose culturally and historically rather than from a tidy natural boundary. GeoCurrents+1

Types of arguments you’ll see (quick taxonomy)​

1. Physical/geomorphological: Point out continuity of landmass, tectonic/peninsular morphology — conclusion: Europe is a peninsula of Eurasia. Encyclopedia Britannica
2. Conceptual/metageographical: Show that “continent” is a historical category (Lewis & Wigen) and therefore open to reconception. Wikipedia
3. Geopolitical/economic: Emphasize integrated Eurasian systems (trade, strategy), which treat Europe as part of a larger whole (Mackinder; modern “Eurasia” scholarship). JSTOR+1
4. Pedagogical/political: Critique the political effects of keeping Europe separate (e.g., Eurocentrism) — overlaps with the critiques you were raising about centering Western tradition. Wikipedia+1

Reconsidering Europe as a peninsula of Eurasia is both defensible and supported by serious scholarship; the dispute is mostly about what category you want to use (physical/tectonic accuracy vs. historical-cultural convenience). If your goal is to push back on Eurocentric framings, reframing Europe as part of Eurasia is a historically and conceptually well-grounded move that many scholars and geopoliticians already make.