home education system primary education lower secondary education upper secondary education contact


The teaching of history in the Netherlands
 

 

 

 

 

The Dutch history canon: a never-ending debate?! An Addendum to the article by Huub Kurstjens

By Drs. H.K.J. (Huub) Kurstjens, test developer for history and politics at CITO (Institute for Test Development), Arnhem (The Netherlands)

One year later … (1)

When I wrote this article one year ago, I couldn’t immagine what impact the canon would have, not only on history as a subject at school, but also on education and even on society in general. To be brief: the canon has become a hype.

The Minister of Education decided that the canon will be compulsary from the beginning of the new schoolyear in August 2009 and for all pupils in the Netherlands in the age from 8 to 14. The national curriculum and the textbooks will be changed and implemented from that date on. Moreover, the government decided to raise a new National Historical Museum, based on the canon. This museum will give an overview of Dutch History based on the canon, similar to the idea and concept of the German ’Haus der Geschichte’ in Bonn and Leipzig . After an open competition with other cities in the Netherlands, the government decided to locate the museum in Arnhem (eastern part of the Netherlands), in an area together with other national museums. The costs for building the museum are estimated at 50 million euros. In 2011 the museum should open its doors. From then on, the government will spend 12 miljoen euros each year for the exploitation of this museum.

Figure 3: An impression of the new National Historical Museum at Arnhem that will be built in the shape of a ‘canon-tower’.

Together with the cultural and historical canon, a lot of new, different canons were derived from the original canon-idea. To give an impression of all kinds of canon-ideas:

  • Canons based on a theme like: Dutch movies, (classical) music, christianity (roman-catholic as well as protestant), the history of water, occupation during the Second World War, feminism, education, social work, photography, etc. (2)

  • Canons based on sciences like: natural sciences (‘bčtacanon’) and social sciences (‘gammacanon’) (3)

  • Canons based on a region like local history (some cities made a canon of their own history), provincial history and even European (4) and world history (5).

  • All kinds of tests and quizes (very inventive and original, but based on very divergent views. (6)

  • Supportive didactical material, for instance a Canon Treasure Chest with all kinds of historical objects, ‘canonmovies’ , etc., etc. 

The real debate of course is whether or not the government should and could implement the content of a cultural-historical canon on every Dutch school for every Dutch pupil, irrespective of his or her background. Therefore the debate is about identity. And the debate on identity is a very sensitive one.

After the assassination of two famous Dutchmen (Pim Fortuyn, a successful, charismatic politician, shot on May 6th 2002 by an anti-globalist, and Theo van Gogh, a famous provocative filmmaker, assassinated by a Dutch Muslim on November 2nd 2004), the debate of what part history should play in the Netherlands aroused. Should not everybody know something about the roots of our country, i.e. Dutch history, including immigrants? Is history not an outstanding example of a subject to connect people in order to understand our roots and the position of citizens in the current society? But what is the contribution of historians in that debate? Historians, according critics, write books wich are too specialistic containing too much detailed information written in an inaccesible language for ‘normal’ people. At the same time: Dutch people are alienated from their own history although there is a big need for knowledge of the past.

The emphasis in history education for many years has been on ‘education’ rather than on ‘content’. At the same time the chronology in textbooks has gradualy been replaced ever since the eighties by a thematical approach. These two developments, together with a deep need for more and profound knowledge in a confused society, caused the raise and need for historical knowledge in general and a historical canon in particular. Who are we? What are the essential values of the Dutch? What are the features of the Dutch? All these questions became pregnant because of the presence of more and more immigrants. The multicultural society became a multicultural drama in the eyes of some people. If we demand integration from immigrants, then we should first ask ourselves in which they should integrate, what kind of values and traditions should be taken over from the Dutch culture and history.

Ever since the Second World War, nationalism had a negative connotation in the Netherlands. It was generally accepted that a feeling of (western) superiority was misplaced in an open society. To put it more strongly: due to the open Dutch society based on a long history of trade with foreigners, the Netherlands became what they are now: one of the richest nations in the world. But the last decade, fear has got the upper hand. Fear of terrorism, fear of strangers and immigrants, fear of the impact of ‘strange’ religions, fear of losing Dutch values. In short: fear of losing its own identity (whatever that may be). A nation, known worldwide for its trading history and liberal way of thinking, for its tolerance and hospitality, suddenly became a nation of fear that turned against itself in search of something that could bind it together into a nation, in search of its identity, in search of … its own history.

In order to get more proud of themselves, the Dutch tried to invent a new kind of nationalism: a sure and clear idea of what the nation stands for, the values and traditions that bound the nation in the past and gave it glory. Some politicians nowadays pretend to have found one clear unvariable identity based on our history that can make us proud.
But isn’t it the task of every historian to search the past in a critical way and not to use or misuse it for political reasons? That is why the idea of the canon is not by definition wrong. It should not be a tool for nationalism, but a means to explain history to a broad public that in general shows to be indifferent to things concerning the past. Therefore history should be made accessible again by telling stories, by criticising the past but at the same time also to be proud of heroes. Empathy is the keyword, but also a sentiment that could be misused if knowledge wasn’t at the same time the other weight for the counterbalance. And that brings me to my conclusion. The fifty items of the current cultural and historical canon contain merely stories. It opens ‘windows’ to the past but without factual knowledge. Something should be known for example about slavery (as a point of criticism) or Rembrandt (to be proud of) but what exactly is not clear. Some people say that this is good, because now the threat of indoctrination and state pedagogics is not predominant anymore. Other people say it’s a pity that there still is no basic framework on which we can teach and learn history on a common base. We are having this discussion for a long time now and so we can say that the circle is round again. Like I paraphrased Pieter Geyl in the beginning of this article: history is a never-ending debate.

And what about the debate between the approach in history education, the struggle between the ‘ten historical periods with characteristic aspects’ and the ‘the canon with fifty items (‘windows’) that opens the past through stories’? Well, a really Dutch solution evolved: the merging of the specific illustrations of the canon and the ten periods became a fact. It did not turn out to be satisfactory for everyone, but it is a good example of a typical Dutch value: the policy of compromising, ‘the poldermodel’.

(June 11, 2008)

1. With thanks to Evelyn Reichard for her comment concerning the English version of the text.
2. Look for an overview at Histoforum
3. Bčta canon 1 and Bčta canon 2
4. Historie te vangen in canon
5. Even the famous Dutch historian Prof Wesseling contributed the debate by describing a canon for worldhistory
6. Some examples of tests, games and quizzes: