All cultures and ideas are built on previous ones, whether the art in prehistoric cave, the invention of fire, the formation of clans and kinship, the wheel, the use of steel. These had no identifiable Western attributes or led toward the Western canon of thought or the development of a “more identifiable Western idea”? Hammurabi’s code of law had profound effect on Western Thought.
Are you saying there were no Greeks or Romans in Egypt, Sumeria or the Indus valley or that they were isolated from all Western areas so their ideas and cultures had no effect on Western Thought?
This infusion of cultures is well-established throughout the historical record of art throughout the ages—even in prehistoric art. To say something is not “Western” because it is primitive, is saying that there was never an origin of Western Civilization and it just appeared fully-formed one day.
The author spoke of “western thought” not in absolute terms, but rather in contrast to other civilizations or modes of thought.
Western civ is a hybrid civilization born of classical (Greek) and Judeo-Christian (Biblical) parents. It came into existence, in any identifiable way, when these fused during late antiquity and the early Middle Ages.
Its two parent civilizations went back another 1500 years or so, but were almost completely separate during most of this period, having very little influence on each other.
Prior to that, while obviously civilizations existed from which western civ drew much, I fail to see how they can be said to BE western civ, as opposed to some other civilization. Their contributions are part of the common stock of all civilizations, not uniquie to or specifically associated with western civ.
Sorry if I’m explaining my thoughts poorly.