Historical canon of your country

[johan neeskens]

The Dutch government have come up with what we call a historical canon, in other words a standard overview of Dutch history. As you can see here:

http://entoen.nu/default.aspx

it's basically a billboard-style overview of the most historical events and figures throughout Dutch history to give schools but also Dutch people in general a better sense of historical awareness, i.e. of what has shaped our country. It's under much discussion by the way as naturally some historians feel that certain events are left out while others that should've been included were not.

What are the top 10 events or historical figures that you feel should feature in your country's canon?

[96Squig]

As far as I know Germany does not have a historical canon, but I did have a discussion about it in one of my werkgroepen here so I do know a bit about the topic and have an opinion:

First of all, I think it is right that every citizen of a country should have at least a brief overview over his country's history. If that gets done via a canon or a good curriculum in school is matter to discussion, I like the curriculum better, but can't really say why, maybe because it is more flexibel. The canon has the advantage to also be useful for say foreigner who come to sai country and want to learn something about it's history (ie me).
At the other hand I think that, especially in primary school, local history is important. And by that I don't mean historical sights near one's place which somehow has had an impact on the country's history, but the history of the place you groe up in. Obviously, this is easier to get and more included in the Dutch canon for Amsterdam than for Balk in Friesland. So the curriculum in school has to go further than the canon and the teachers have to see the canon as another medium and guideline, which does not give everything though.

As to a German canon, I don't think that would be possible. To understand and value one historical phenomena, one has to know what happened before and what happened afterwards.

[johan neeskens]

As far as I know Germany does not have a historical canon, but I did have a discussion about it in one of my werkgroepen here so I do know a bit about the topic and have an opinion:

First of all, I think it is right that every citizen of a country should have at least a brief overview over his country's history. If that gets done via a canon or a good curriculum in school is matter to discussion, I like the curriculum better, but can't really say why, maybe because it is more flexibel. The canon has the advantage to also be useful for say foreigner who come to sai country and want to learn something about it's history (ie me).
At the other hand I think that, especially in primary school, local history is important. And by that I don't mean historical sights near one's place which somehow has had an impact on the country's history, but the history of the place you groe up in. Obviously, this is easier to get and more included in the Dutch canon for Amsterdam than for Balk in Friesland. So the curriculum in school has to go further than the canon and the teachers have to see the canon as another medium and guideline, which does not give everything though.

As to a German canon, I don't think that would be possible. To understand and value one historical phenomena, one has to know what happened before and what happened afterwards.

A canon has limitations of course. I can understand the idea behind it though, it was inspired by the fact that Dutch children don't know the simple facts of Dutch history anymore. History education in Holland went from just offering up the simple facts to completely the other side of the spectrum. My generation knows by heart when the Battle of Nieuwpoort was for example, that was hammered in at primary school, but younger generations have no idea. They came up with the canon to offer up the historical facts that everybody in Holland should know.

[96Squig]

A canon has limitations of course. I can understand the idea behind it though, it was inspired by the fact that Dutch children don't know the simple facts of Dutch history anymore. History education in Holland went from just offering up the simple facts to completely the other side of the spectrum. My generation knows by heart when the Battle of Nieuwpoort was for example, that was hammered in at primary school, but younger generations have no idea. They came up with the canon to offer up the historical facts that everybody in Holland should know.

I think simply learning historical facts is wrong though, it is much more important to get the historical context right, than learning the date of the event. That is easier than anyways, and kids get more interested in history.

[johan neeskens]

I think simply learning historical facts is wrong though, it is much more important to get the historical context right, than learning the date of the event. That is easier than anyways, and kids get more interested in history.

Can you get the historical context right when you don't even know the exact timeframe? I reckon you need to know the basics before you can move on to context.

[taosjohn]

The Dutch government have come up with what we call a historical canon, in other words a standard overview of Dutch history. As you can see here:

http://entoen.nu/default.aspx

it's basically a billboard-style overview of the most historical events and figures throughout Dutch history to give schools but also Dutch people in general a better sense of historical awareness, i.e. of what has shaped our country. It's under much discussion by the way as naturally some historians feel that certain events are left out while others that should've been included were not.

What are the top 10 events or historical figures that you feel should feature in your country's canon?


For the US its a lot easier to do with people than events (get down to ten , I mean)

1. George Washington

2. Benjamin Franklin

3. Edward Preble

4. Richard Wilson

5. Sojourner Truth

6. Abraham Lincoln

7. Theodore Roosevelt

8. Thomas Avla Edison

9. Franklin Delano Roosevelt

10. Jackie Robinson (or Rosa Parks or Martin Luther King-- its hard to pick one exemplar for a populist idea...)

(11. would, I think be Betty Friedan...)

as opposed to:

1. Founding of Jamestown

2. Revolution

3. John Adams builds a navy

4. Louisiana Purchase

5. Mexican War

6. Gold at Sutter's Mill

7. Civil War

8. Golden Spike

9. Spanish American War

10. WW 1

11. Great Depression

12. WW2

13. Cold War

14. Space Race

15. Gulf War 2

And even there I am counting as "events" what are really slices of context...the actual driving of the golden spike wasn't THAT big a deal-- butit symbolizes a huge slice of achievement.

Now which five of those am I supposed to leave out? And how can a history much longer and in many ways even richer than the US' like the Netherlands' be caught in ten entries?

[DoctorD]

The US is founded on a tradition of personal knowledge and certainty, not a received canon. Therefore it would be difficult for Americans to come up with a list everyone would agree on.

who are Edward Preble and Richard Wilson again?

[taosjohn]

The US is founded on a tradition of personal knowledge and certainty, not a received canon. Therefore it would be difficult for Americans to come up with a list everyone would agree on.

who are Edward Preble and Richard Wilson again?

Edward Preble was Commodore of the US fleet before Tripoli in the Tripolitan war. Jefferson sent him out with a collection of junior officers specifically because he felt earlier expeditions had failed due to jealousies and avarice of rank among the Revolutionary veterans. A happier analisis and decision has rarely been made.

Fletcher Pratt in re the war of 1812--

"For not the least remarkable feature of this war is that it was won by a man five years in his grave. With a single exception (Perry on Lake Erie) every winning battle of the war was fought by Preble's boys; with three exceptions (Joseph Bainbridge of Frolic, Charles Morris of Adams, Smith of Congress every one of Preble's boys who reached command brought in a British battle flag, while Blakely, Stewart, and Worthington got two apiece and MacDonough the standards of a whole fleet.

This would not be singular had Preble taken a large portion of the navy list with him to the Mediterranean, or if the group he took had been subject to some process of selection. But Preble took the smallest of all the Mediterranean fleets; he had less than a seventh of the navy's officers and... had not even a bowing acquaintance with any... before the Tripoli campaign. A glance at the Navy list shows that Preble's seventh ...had become a third by 1812, the total commands during the war [of 1812] being 17 for Preble's boys to thirty five for the non-Preble graduates. The old commodore... was ... partly responsible.. as there were far fewer casualties from resignation among the young men who served under him than in the service at large, but ...the fact that a third of the commaders, forming a well-marked special group should do all of the fighting... is so far beyond probability as to demand special explanation.

Nor can this special explanation be found in the origins, background, or character of the officers...men most various form all classes of society with all degrees of education, economic background, and temperment. There is no common denominator but their experience under Preble... The men he pushed to promotion invariably turned out well , and those he passed over seldom made brilliant records.

... the secret lies perhaps in care for subordinates. It is notable that the commanders who served under Preble were universally beloved by their men, and this characteristic, though it was to pass through curious mutations, became a distinguishing characteristic of the American Navy, never entirely lost. "

That is much abridged-- he cites several other characteristics of Preble's command and that of those who served under him, including intelligence, tactical restraint until a risk was justifiable by potential gains, and an instinct for when to accept, when to protest, and when to not wait for orders.

But the point is more than what Preble did for the Navy of 1812. He established a tradition of tactical competence on top of the professional proficiency Truxton left him; and as important as the War of 1812 ultimately was, the succeses of the Navy of 1812 defined the parameters of sea warfare to the entire profession until Mahan pointd out that they had changed... The history of our nation right through the Alabama claims is shaped in huge degree by the ideas of Edward Preble and those young officers he trained on the job in a war...

[taosjohn]

Did I say Wilson?-- brain bubble

Congressman and Col Richard Johnson of the frontier parts of the war of 1812--

"Rumpey Dumpsey, Rumpsey Dumpsey
Col Johnson kilt Tecumseh"

19th century campaign ditty...

Actually its unlikely he did; he killed a large opponent when seriously wounded himself, and it was almost the last act of the battle. The frontier's education, what there was of it. was classical and the culture tended to heroic myths...

What Johnson did do was work out the tactics and strategy of mounted riflemen for use in indian campaigns; in the process although almost unknown himself he provided the template for the tactics of John Wilson, Buford, and ultimately Sheridan which broke Stuart and Forrest, won the Civil as well as Indian wars, and essentially replaced classical cavalry tactics with those of mech infantry before the mech part had even been invented.

The Battle of the Thames was more Johnson's victory than Harrison's, and important enough; but the campaign leading up to it demonstrated that his mounted rifles were extremely effective against regular British foot-- and ingrained his tactics into several generations of frontier officers, who brought them back east for the Civil War and expanded them to full field campaigns. In turn the French and German war colleges observed and understood; in 1940 the Germans had the money for true mechanized war, and the rest is well known...

As a historical figure he's important but not so much in a league with the others I named. But as a military thinker he's on a par with Khalid and maybe even Alexander; and his contribution has had importance to us as a nation in three different contexts-- the frontier, the Civil War and WW2. He's the least of my choices, but I'll stand by him.

[Mountainia]

I would go with:

1. Formation of continent following the split with Pangea - Hey, I could go further back, but this is a good starting place.

2. First human habitation from Asia starting anywhere from 40K years ago (debatable) to 13K years ago.

3. European visitation and colonization starting around 1500 causing large decline of previous populations due to disease and conflict.

4. English settlements in Virginia and Plymouth.

5. Revolution and establishment of government based on current political ideas.

6. Spread of population to California and the great plains.

7. Division of society due to slavery leading to Civil War.

8. Industrialization and urbanization of the population.

9. Globalization of economies leading to involvement in foreign wars (WWI and II).

10. Spread of rights to entire population (Sufferage, Civil Rights Act.)

These read like chapters, but I suppose I could pick a representative from each to make a more specific list.

The interesting thing to me is how multi-disciplined you can make this list. It contains geography, political science, biology, anthropology, economics, war, and others. And you could probably define ten entirely different chapters and still come up with a compelling story line.

[taosjohn]

I would go with:

1. Formation of continent following the split with Pangea - Hey, I could go further back, but this is a good starting place.

2. First human habitation from Asia starting anywhere from 40K years ago (debatable) to 13K years ago.

3. European visitation and colonization starting around 1500 causing large decline of previous populations due to disease and conflict.

4. English settlements in Virginia and Plymouth.

5. Revolution and establishment of government based on current political ideas.

6. Spread of population to California and the great plains.

7. Division of society due to slavery leading to Civil War.

8. Industrialization and urbanization of the population.

9. Globalization of economies leading to involvement in foreign wars (WWI and II).

10. Spread of rights to entire population (Sufferage, Civil Rights Act.)

These read like chapters, but I suppose I could pick a representative from each to make a more specific list.

The interesting thing to me is how multi-disciplined you can make this list. It contains geography, political science, biology, anthropology, economics, war, and others. And you could probably define ten entirely different chapters and still come up with a compelling story line.

I chose to take an implicit time scale from the term "country;" but I like this list a lot too.

[DoctorD]

Thanks taosjohn. Those are the unsung types who truly make a difference.

[Mountainia]

I chose to take an implicit time scale from the term "country;" but I like this list a lot too.

Your lists made sense. I was trying to show how flexible you could be with this idea.

Each list has some kind of perspective. For example, someone with a more pan-european view might had had an issue with my point #6, "Spread of population to California and the great plains." Some Texans, New Mexicans, and Californians might object to that point since their families had been living in those areas for over a hundred years by the mid-nineteeth century.

I like to try to understand things from a blended view of history, including as many different perspectives as possible. But the trouble here is that some of the views are no longer available to us. Not everyone wrote things down or lived to tell about it.

[96Squig]

Can you get the historical context right when you don't even know the exact timeframe? I reckon you need to know the basics before you can move on to context.

YOu need the basic timeframe, but not every date (or even year) exactly (ie end of the 18th centure instead of 1785 for example) to study history if you ask me. And while studiing the context, you get the timeframe anyways. History as a science relies so heavy on books, I don't see why pupils can't just look the dates up in those books.

When I was trying to get a list done for Germany, our history 'only' being 150 years old as a nation, I couldn't even limit the history to 10 incidents... If I were to include the history of a 1000 years, this is when the first time someone was called 'deutsch', That would be impossible to make such a list.

[Alex_K]

YOu need the basic timeframe, but not every date (or even year) exactly (ie end of the 18th centure instead of 1785 for example) to study history if you ask me. And while studiing the context, you get the timeframe anyways. History as a science relies so heavy on books, I don't see why pupils can't just look the dates up in those books.

That's exactly what I do actually...

When I was trying to get a list done for Germany, our history 'only' being 150 years old as a nation, I couldn't even limit the history to 10 incidents... If I were to include the history of a 1000 years, this is when the first time someone was called 'deutsch', That would be impossible to make such a list.

I've scientifically proven that you need 18 :D:

498
751
800
843
1077
1250
1356
1495
1517
1648
1806
1848
1871
1914
1919
1933
1949
1989

[JanBalk]

Sweden
1. Viking era
2. Birger Jarl and the creation of Sweden as one state
3. Union of Kalmar
4. Gustav Vasa, end of the Union, Sweden as a modern state
5. Gustavus Adolphus and the 30years War, start of the Swedish empire
6. Charles XII, end of the Swedish empire
7. Loss of Finland
8. Union with Norway
9. WorldWars and Neutrality
10. SocialDemocrats and the creation of the "Swedish Model"

[johan neeskens]

Now which five of those am I supposed to leave out? And how can a history much longer and in many ways even richer than the US' like the Netherlands' be caught in ten entries?

The official Dutch canon has more than 10 entries also, I just thought it more practical to limit it to 10 for the purpose of this thread. But if you wish to include more, go ahead!

[johan neeskens]

YOu need the basic timeframe, but not every date (or even year) exactly (ie end of the 18th centure instead of 1785 for example) to study history if you ask me. And while studiing the context, you get the timeframe anyways. History as a science relies so heavy on books, I don't see why pupils can't just look the dates up in those books.

When I was trying to get a list done for Germany, our history 'only' being 150 years old as a nation, I couldn't even limit the history to 10 incidents... If I were to include the history of a 1000 years, this is when the first time someone was called 'deutsch', That would be impossible to make such a list.

Did you see the English translation of the Dutch list?

http://entoen.nu/lijst.aspx?lan=e

As you can see they have picked out specific timeframes that shaped the history and culture of our country, from the first officially printed phrase in the Dutch language through to Srebrenica. THe list isn't without fault but I believe that when you read it, it does give you a good idea of what the building blocks of Dutch society today are.

Maybe if you use that reasoning you could also come up with a list for Germany? Our list starts in pre-historic times long before the Netherlands were a country also.

[96Squig]

That's exactly what I do actually...



I've scientifically proven that you need 18 :D:

498
751
800
843
1077
1250
1356
1495
1517
1648
1806
1848
1871
1914
1919
1933
1949
1989

So. Why not 1868? why not 1922? why not 1929? Why not 1945? Why not 2001? Why not 2003? Why not 1950?

[96Squig]

(...)
Maybe if you use that reasoning you could also come up with a list for Germany? Our list starts in pre-historic times long before the Netherlands were a country also.
trying to fill Alex' extended list with words:


498 Clivis I becomes christian
751 Pippin becomes king of Francia
800 Charlomagn becomes Emperor (the English language lacks a good translation for Kaiser!!!)
843 Francia gets divided into a German, a Burgundish and a Western Francish part
1077 Walk to Canossa
1250 no idea
1356 Golden bull (law of the German empire)
1495 The eternal peace in the German empire
1517 Luther's 12 thesis, Reformation and protestantism
1648 end of the 30 years war, peace of westfalia
1806 end of Napoleon's reign, congress of Vienna
1848 German revolution
1866 Prussia kicks Austria out of Germany, more or less
1871 unification of German, Franco-German war
1914 WW1
1919 End of WW1, revolution, Versailles
1922 inflation
1929 World economical crisis
1933 Nazi's Machtergreifung
1945 end of WW2
1949 foundation of GDR and FRG
1989 Reunification, end of the cold war
1995 first time German soldiers on foreign soil (Bosnia)
2003 Germany's 'no' to the war in Iraq