History is more than a couple years in a row
“Are you now or before the chronology?” Interrumpeerde Jan Marijnissen Minister Plasterk last week during the heated discussions about the National History Museum (NHM) in the Lower House. The two directors of the new museum building, the chronological canon broad-based and a design of five ‘worlds’ conceived as’ me and us’ and’ land and water. It is a kind of thematic fields. And since the word ‘theme’ in debates about history education has been in a bad light, it is their design received with mixed feelings. Plasterk was not the point and replied drily that he is not a primitive discussion wants to suck. There are various ways in his chronology shape.
The Court today agrees on two points: one on the location of the new museum, and a chronology. Most parties strongly insist on the chronology. Of SP-MP Marijnissen do not fifty ‘canon windows’ to even the ten periods of history professor Piet de Rooy are excellent. If there is only one “order independence” in the museum, and not ‘postmodern stew’ is now-called opinion leaders are not things that interest them soon ‘postmodern’.
But what is the chronology determine how the museum will look like? Making chronologies (periodiseren) is one of the key tasks of historians. Developments in time to see it get over the immense past. Periodiseren happens in all scientific work done, history lessons and exhibitions. Depending on the genre and medium developed in this period, turning points, fracture surfaces, floors and side road.
Historians make a distinction between diachronic and synchronic approaches between the long-term and the deepening of a period. Both are necessary for understanding the past.
Historians respecting the chronology, but the strict time sequence is not determined by the consistency in a story, history or exhibition process. Determines “the perspective of the historian who post looks,” says the theorist made Piet Blaas. In other words, historians know the outcome of the development and on the basis of their perspective on the past in a meaningful relationship between time varying events. For example, the consistency in a history of the First World War, the Franco-German controversy are. You can start with the end in 1918, then go back to the Franco-German war in 1870 and for presenting the history of the war in 1914. The combination of the year is not neutral but expresses a vision.
In a strict time sequence, we continue stabbing in a meaningless report. If I tell a child: The king died and a few days later the queen died, I am working on a chronicle. But if I tell: The king died and a few days later the queen died of grief, that is the beginning of a story.
Studies show that young children have little sense of time. This should be taught, then history may arise. In the Netherlands it is the national Christian recalled moments in the collective memory imprinted from Prince to 4 and May 5 These traditions provide a sense of cohesion and continuity.
The best place to realize time to teach the school. Around their 14th year in young people’s sense of time more or less fully present. Then they understand how long ago the Roman limes was built and how many years later, the Reformation began.
It is therefore unwise to use a chronological format for all age groups that the National Historical Museum to visit. In fact, the mandate of the directors is a museum for all Dutch people: young and old, native and newcomer, high and low skilled. That is no easy task. They may have therefore devised a broad concept of five worlds that seem to act as separate rooms with five time perspectives on Dutch history. For various groups to operate a variety of museum presentations with modern interactive techniques required. A (nostalgic) chronology is sufficient or not.
Whatever you think of the Dutch concept, indeed it contains a chronology, otherwise there is no redress. Just like not everyone who chronology. Marijnissen has apparently a certain chronology in mind, probably one that he himself 45 years ago at the primary school has shown.
