Literally ALL of History Until 1700 (According to Dutch Education)
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 02. 2023
- Watch next: "Every Significant Mongol Successor State; How The Mongols Fell in 1857"
• Every Significant Mong... -~-
#possiblehistory #history #dutch #education #rome
Have you ever wondered what history education is like in other regions?Then this is the video for you! In this video I will go though all of history from the start up to the Age of Absolutism.
If you like the content please like, comment and subscribe, it helps smaller channels like mine to get noticed!
If you want to support the channel you can go to my Patreon or become a member! You will get early access to video's and will be allowed to suggest priority video subjects!
/ possiblehistory
/ @possiblehistory
www.buymeacoffee.com/Possible...
Possible Extra's a channel where we do not necessarily history related stuff, like podcasts and more!
/ @theobserverph
Gaming Channel:
/ @deletedchannel1010
Feel free to follow or join our social media platforms:
/ possiblehistory
/ possiblehistor1
/ discord
/ possible_history0
Most of our music by Beta Records. He's great, check him out!
Link: goo.gl/peHHCX
A lot of other music by Kevin McLoad. The Copyrightfree Music Creator
/ kevinmacleodarchive
Thank you all for watching! Let me know if you're interested in a part 2, or a video in which I explore what I think the shortfalls in my eductation system were. As always, please consider leaving a like and a comment, even a simple comment like "hi" helps the video out massively! Subscribe for 1-2 (alternate) history video's every single week.
where is the part about the genocide of the Dutch in Indonesia or the genocide of western European countries in America and Africa
@@carkawalakhatulistiwa If you think there is no attention for that you are mistaken. In recent years that guilt driven history has become far more prominent. Probably too much
wow you have a much better education than here in britain most of what i know is self taught all our history classes taught us was about william the conqueror the english civil wars then the world wars nothing about the empire clearly the governments way of dealing with that past is to burry it. though honestly out of the five years of history classes we spent three of them on the world wars, yes there important but you havnt taught us about the act of union the war of the roses and the the other major internal wars of england or how ere technicly ruled by the french or god forbid roman britania, just hay guys did you know we won the second world war and the nazis are evil
I would love to see both.
It would be very Nice.
In Japan, we learned two histories, Japanese history and world history. It is taught this way because Japan pretty much didn't participate in the international power struggle for most of the history before modernization, except for rare instances like mongol invasion and the conquest of Korea in the late 1500s.
As for the world history, emphasis was placed on large empires like Chinese dynasties, Roman empire, Persian empire, and Byzantine empire, and glossed over European politics in the early modern era except for events like Napoleonic wars and Renaissance.
I know it's the same in the US, when I was in we took US history and World History, in the state of Georgia we even looked at the history of our state in particular
Wait you guys call the invasion of Korea (during Hideyoshi government) an conquest!?
@@felps1917 Do conquest and invasion have different meanings or connotations? English is not my first language, so I might have misused it here.
@@Yutaro-Yoshii not exactly but conquest in English meaning you guys are there to conquerer, subjugation and assumption of control of a place.
Invasion is like a more broad term, meaning you just make incursion inside of place, why? Well, could be for pillage, could be for conquest, could be for subjugation and vassalization of the state or could be lulz.
I ask that bc I always thought the Japanese school always whitewashed their wrongdoing in neighbors states like Taiwan, Korea and China for example
@@felps1917 Ah, I see your point now. We actually did learn about those Hideyoshi's conquest in detail, presumably because it's not as loaded as WW2, whose subjects are still alive today.
It is a shame how our education system doesn't teach us a lot about our HRE and Frankish ties and history. Medieval Netherlands was a very intresting place.
It used to be taught I think in the 60s that the Dutch were a merger of Franks, Saxons and Frisians, but now the entire early to late middle ages are skipped, and the Dutch state, not the people, are taken as the focus point. With of course a heavy bias towards Holland
@@sebe2255 in my school in north holland we didnt learn anything about how the netherlands looked before the spanish owned it, only a few things about the bishop of utrecht, but nothing else. Not even about burgundy
Yeah, the pre-Spanish age is almost completely ignored.
Sorry but the Roman Empire is *far* more relevant to the history of the Netherlands than… the history of the Netherlands.
@@azlanadil3646 Not at all. It didnt shape the netherlands in any way, it didnt have a cultural impact on the netherlands, a large chunk of the netherlands hasnt even been owned by the romans. The only thing that the romans did that is important is that they left a few artifacts.
People have to realise that this is the stuff taught to teenagers who mostly dont care and also have 10+ other subjects to worry about. Ofcourse its going to be limited in its explanation. You are being taught the big lines and the stuff that impacted Europe and mainly the Netherlands. The Mali empire or some civilisation in India just isn’t terribly relevant.
yes but some of the stuff is outdated and wrong, or so vague that it lead to wrong misconceptions, and these issues should be addressed at least, and ideally solved.
It’s not just that it doesn’t mention stuff outside of Europe. It oversimplifies things within europe massively. Why even try to do a comprehensive history if you have to simplify to the point of causing misconceptions. Better to focus on one period in more detail if time is a constraint.
People in my country barely know anything about figures like Napoleon or Bismarck or even WW1. Imo pretty vital to understand Europe and the world.
@@abadyr_ he's basing the entire video on a book he had back when he was in school, and depending how old he is this might be a very long time ago. It's expected that the books are outdated
@@jotteredits history classes are only supposed to give you a basic understanding so you can more easily look up things if you're interested, they aren't supposed to be comprehensive
I'm so glad that italian education talks about so many things, there are chapters for asian and northern Europe history but there were always too many things to do that teachers always told us to skip them. Probably many things were skipped in this video because otherwise it would've been too long, but many things were completely ignored
As a Dutchman I can tell you that he didn't skip very much, most of history is skipped in Dutch history class
Yeah, but there's still a lot that Italian education does not tell you about
@@capitanjulietti3436 obviously, not everything can be told, I exagerated, but it tells a lot, at least about the most influential nations. I should go and read again what is precisely told in the history books, but still there is a lot
Here in Greece history lessons are absolute dogshit. Especially when we enter Byzantine history. What they do is throw out a bunch of dates and names and tell us to memorize them. They completely ingnore anything that doesn't have to do with Greece, even like 90% of Roman history is just thrown under the bus. But what infuriates me most is the fact that the books focusing on modern history completely ingnore facts in favour of nationalistic fiction. Anyway just sharing my pain as a student and sorry for making you read this.
@eon gerbe another fact about the slave trade that is ingnored is that Africans sold Africans most notably in the kingdom of the Congo. In fact a few politicians from African countries have apologized for the slave trade witch is something that many former slave trading countries have yet to do. It's so stupid that countries that are considered third world have been able to accept fact rather than fiction unlike their richer counterparts (not all African countries have accepted their history I'm just stating a few examples).
'Try to not get mad at horrible oversimplification and inaccruances' Challenge!
True
As a Lutheran I definitely got a little annoyed at the inaccurate oversimplification of Lutheranism
As a fellow dutchy who has PTSD from the "Geschiedenis werkplaats" book and its many, many, many flaws I'd love to see this become a series where you break the flaws down. Great video! :)
“The first ever religion to have one god”
Zoroastrianism: am i joke to you?
Zoroastrianism only began in the fourth century BC
Great video, roughly sums up what i remember from my highschool days.
I'd only say that we did have a bit more coverage from the Stone Age and the earth potteries of the netherlands and the bog bodies as well as more mentions of the Frisian kingdoms and the bonifatius being murdered in dokkum as well as Grutte Pier.
I think it's a lot more fun to see break down what is missing in here as I think from 1700s onwards our history books more or less get things correct, especially because of how much attention is given to the later parts.
Are you Frisian? If not it is funny the Frisians got more time than the Franks
As a bulgarian I can say this is LEAGUES ahead of what I got
Hopefully you do pre history at least
You have to be kidding. Bulgarian History taught in school is better. Or maybe you just didn't have a good teacher.
@@georgizlatinov1792 Also possible but I feel events were even more heavily generalized,especially the medieval period which is infuriating considering we ourselves were a major power back then
@@somemeansfish8987 Fair point. Noone can summarise a few years of a subject taught in school in such a short video.
Hm, now I see why Bulgaria keeps doing the same mistakes in politics
This is actually a pretty great summary of Dutch history? Especially when it's intended for teenagers that don't care about history and have other things going on. I can attest that the education system in my country for instance is far worse
It is a good summary of the Dutch history if you take the Dutch state as a central point. If you want to know more about the Dutch people from before the 80 years war you will be sorely disappointed. The connection of the Dutch to the Franks for example is not even mentioned, even though we are directly descended from them. Frisians get lucky here because they still have the same name at least lmao
This stuff is bucketloads better than my country's education system
The book skips that Cortez and his 300 spanish soldiers were aided by the natives. It skips that european diseases killed 90% of the population of the Americas.
It makes it sound like Europeans were so unimaginably mighty, that they simply walked in and conquor everything with extremely small numbers. Talk about white superiority... (i am Eurpean myself, and do not have guilt over what has happened, but rather would like for people to understand what happened.)
@@sebe2255 The only time there had been something mentioned about the Netherlands from before Spanish rule and after the romans, was that we once had a pope from utrecht, which was just a fun little fact my history teacher was happy about
Tbh, there’s quite a bit of stuff to be desired, but it’s a good history book overall. Meanwhile, here in Bulgaria, our history books act like we’re the center of the universe, teaching us literally nothing apart from what was going on in Bulgaria. Like, it’s horrible; we literally jump from 1400 to 1750, because between that time period we were under the Ottomans and there was nothing interesting going on in Bulgaria until we started actively rebelling against them. Forget about the most important centuries for Europe, or even what was going on during the early Ottoman days. No, Bulgaria is the world and everything else is a black hole that spits out Byzantines and Turks every now and then
I remember that we basically had a seperate year that was focused on Sebian history like that, skipping everything we had nothing to do with, the rest of the years we learned world history normally... I see no problem with that
I will disagree. И аз съм българин. 7th grade we studied the ancient world, from Summer and Akad to the fall of the Roman Empire, it was very encompassing for a childern's textbook. 9th grade was European Medieval History and we literally covered 60% of everything interesting which went on in Europe during the 5th to 15 Century. 10th grade was focused on Rennaisance and Early modern and literally during that period nothing happened in Bulgaria, so one school year with pretty much 0 focus on our country. 11th grade was pretty much 20th century with focus on Germany, France, Russia and the US decade by decade and I give it to you last year was only Bulgarian History
@@thequantitychannel1299 а, аз около четвърти клас се преместих в Германия, тази част явно съм я изпуснал
I think you had a poor historical education. I am from Bulgaria and we went through history (world history too) in a relatively deep manner. I for sure feel significantly more educated than most of my Western or Eastern peers. But I guess it really depends on the teacher as well.
That happens just like us in Greece we are jumping from the fall of Constantinople to the greek war of independence
As an indonesian the history education i got throughout the school was very localized. Usually it started from prehistoric era humans, paleolithic, mesolithic, neolithic, megalithic, then it goes to the age of past empires, from the first empire in the region; kutai kartanegara, then to the more famous ones like sriwijaya and majapahit, after that the colonialism era then continue to state building in the 1920s until 1945 independence and some years after that(this piece of history is usually explained in more details) and lastly the various country's regimes and rebellion movements until 2000s(reformation era).
As a Dutch person I wonder to what degree our colonisation is portrayed as a negative. Not that I mind, I am aware there were plenty of dark chapters there. I just hope that if I were to visit, people dont look at me weirdly.
@@ariearie7953 luckily no one would see you differently just because of the past history, you will be treated as an ordinary tourist, or most likely some people will go with excitement and say things like "did you know that my great great grandfather has this relation with the dutch" or something like that lol
When I was in school in New Zealand we didn't cover any history that was more than 100 years old, other than passing mentions. I only took the compulsory parts of history and dropped it as soon as I could, of course. I hated history right up until the moment I left school, now I really like it.
That fucking train disaster…
Is Maori history taught a lot in new zealand or is it glossed over completely?
@@donpollo3154 I'm certain a lot more is taught now, but 20 years ago there was not much at all. The problem wasn't really that it was Maori history but that it was New Zealand history and that just wasn't considered to be important (outside of WW1 and 2).
It's an outcome of the concept known as "cultural cringe", where you think other cultures are better or more important than your own. This has receded somewhat but used to be very strong. An example is that Britain granted NZ independence in 1931 but NZ refused to agree to that until 1947.
@@korakyslol, lmao even
the education system is completely outdated now.
I'm a french student in Paris of 4ème (equivalent of 8th grade in the US)
-We barely scraped Napoleon
-Skipped the Middle Ages
-Ancient Greece and the Roman empire were yeeted out the picture
-Just seen once Columbus and only him
-7 years war, 30 years war not mentioned once
-100 years war resumed by a movie
-Colonial Empires seen only to say slavery bad
-Only talked about 3 personalities of the ages of enlightenment (les lumières)
-4 hours about the entire French Revolution
-Somehow talk more about the US than France itself (in the last year)
-Not a single mention of the Vikings, Normands, Bretons or Occitanie (not in the History class at least)
-Maybe said something about Osman but wrote nothing down
-All the religious wars also resumed to a movie
-Maybe will talk about the nationalisation of church goods but we only have one semester left
-Apparently we will have 1 year to learn the whole 20th century
Education Nationale looking good
Damn, I thought History class in Germany with its extreme hyperfocusation on the Nazi Era was shit, and yet we somehow spend more time on the French Revolution than actual Frenchmen. WTF?
It is also full of ideology and simplification
Napoleon I, De Gaulle (post-liberation) and Napoleon III are seen only with a dim view (only May 68 and the 5th republic for de Gaulle, the fact that Napoleon III reestablished an empire from a republic (despite having a parliament and allow republican in it but we don't talk about it) and Napoleon I has a slaver and a ruthless conqueror) Mitterrand and Léon Blum are seen positively with almost no mention of VLG, Pompidou and any other presidents
The 1st and 2nd world war were won only thanks to the Americans the USSR only plays a minor role in the victory of the allies
The Battle of France was not lost because of bad command but only because the Germans were "better"
Same thing for the EU seen only in a good way no room for contradiction or criticism
Nothing on the Algerian crime and the pied-noirs we only see French crime
And many others, for me school should be neutral which is not currently the case and this will surely influence students in their future life
@@Sagoner Well, i'm almost agreeing whit you but the URSS killed almost 2/3rd of all Wehrmacht soldiers, draining massive manpower from the Atlantic wall, the battle of Britain and the western front.
The change of focus from the UK to the URSS also helped the British against the never ending attacks against London and the war machine.
The French lose in the Ardennes not because of german technological superiority but because the French high command and administration was dog sh*t.
From the tank division commanders to the ever changing Presidents and governments.
Surprise attack from a forest also helped but the impossibility to deploy troops against the breach was at the end of the day because of the administration
@@titotito2466 I was saying this from the point of view of the education nationale, I completely disagree with these remarks, I was just repeating what I had been "taught"
@@Sagoner agree
Here un Spain history is taught this way:
Until 1st of ESO (12 years old more or less), we see a summary of history very shallow, like, we learn a little about the romans, the medieval age, the age of discovery and the XIX and XX centuries (only big events like the french Revolution or the World Wars, the spanish civil war is also kinda taught, not that much).
Is from 1st ESO onwards that history is taught with more details.
In this year, we learn about ancient history, first the paleolithic, then the neolithic, then the Babylonians civilisations, then Ancient Egypt, then Ancient Greece, and lastly, Ancient Rome.
In 2nd ESO we jump to medieval history, we see both the Byzantines and the Carolingians, but most of the year is focused talking about medieval iberia, learning about the caliphate and the muslim world, the muslim conquest of Iberia end the following Reconquista. The year ends with the explanation of Columbus arrival to the new world, the Protestant Reformation and Spanish dominance over the Americas.
3rd ESO doesn't have History (we have Geography), so we skip to 4th ESO.
Here we continue History where we left it.
We begin with a summary of the XVI century and we see the 80 Years War, the union with Portugal and the 30 Years War.
Then we jump to the XVIII century, that begins with the Spanish War of Succession. We focused greatly on the Ilustration to then jump to the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars.
After that we see the liberal revolutions of XIX Century and the German and Italian reunificarions, the Industrial Revolution, the new colonial expansion of european powers, both World Wars and the Cold War.
Then we get to 1st Bachillerato, with only people who chose the modality of Bachillerato with History see it (they see global history more, things like the Japanese empire or the Otoman empire un more detail (I didn't took this modality of Bachillerato so I don't really know what they do).
And finally 2nd Bachillerato, the grade that I am right now. Where History is mandatory again and we see the whole history of our country (many are pushing to only teaching history XIX Century onwards, as it's a pretty dense syllabus). I'll skip until 1788, as I've already talked about what we see before that. In that year, Carlos III dies, and is succeeded by his son Carlos IV. We see his reign, the following Napoleon invasion of Spain, his defeat, the liberal Constitution of 1812, the lost of spanish Anerica and the rest of the reign of Fernando VII (the son of Carlos IV, the one in charge of the country while all of that happened). Then the reign of Isabel II, the arrival of liberalism and industrialisation in Spain and all the political inestability that happened un her reign (a bad one, with coups and civil wars, like the carlists ones). Then the Gloriosa Revolution, her abdication, the Sexenio Revolucionario (that includes Amadeo de Saboya's reign and the 1st Spanish Republic), the Restauración (the return of the Bourbon monarchy that includes the Spanish-American War of 1898 and the war in Morocco), the dictatorship of Miguel Primo de Rivera (1923-30), the second Spanish Republic, the Civil War, Franco's dictatorship and the transition to democracy after his death.
Keep in mind that Spain's education system varies between regions, but it's mostly what I said.
I'm actually very impressed. British history doesn't start before 1066 according to our history books (at least in high school, I was too immature to remember anything in primary school aside from we briefly did something on the tudors). And learning about the byzantines or the rise of islam? Just forget it.
our syllabus went back to the Romans but no further and hardly did the period from the Roman retreat to 1066. Our exam board would have allowed us to also do the rise of Islam but the school never chose it
British education still imposing Norman propaganda on the peasants! No but seriously, the anglo-saxon invasion of Britain and the “heptarchy” are incredibly interesting historical subjects. I was also surprised by my girlfriend (who is English) not knowing anything about it despite living in an area named after King Æthelstan
@@sebe2255 agreed bruh
@@sebe2255 kind of weird that a piece of English history that's part of the standard Belgian curriculum would not feature in the English one
I'm surprised by the lack of education of the rise of Islam in Britain or education about African empires given the massive multiculturalism in Britain
Then again this is the same country that practically refuses to talk about atrocities by the British empire so maybe I shouldn't be surprised
Don’t worry, it’s not just you who had a bad history education, in Spain it’s not to great either, especially after the High Middle Ages (I guess we influenced you enough in that aspect)
the UK is pretty abysmal as well except some schools have now been picking more diverse topics and in the later years you are more likely to do something not as centered on Britain.
I think every country is the same
Don't know how it is in the rest of Spain but here in Catalonia even spanish history in general felt kind of underdeveloped with a big focus on independence movements, aside from that there was a decent bit on the union on the crowns of Castille and Aragon (probably just because it relates to why it's a part of Spain), the reconquista was pretty glossed over and I struggle to even remember any mention of the american colonies. WW2 had like a page or two IIRC.
@@saifors Catalonia becoming the ultimate clown world
I like how every country has a history class with time periods when "nothing happened in the world"
I am 23 now so it is a few years ago i was in Dutch history class but it was a little bit different for me:
- history class doesn't start with Ancient greeks, it starts with Hunter gatherers slowly converting into farmers during pre-history.
- Then we get the Egyptians and Mesopotamia who are able to create cities and specialised jobs due to a constant surplus in agricultural product.
Then we get ancient greece and most of what was said in the video.
Also Dutch history education very much wants to divide history in "time periods" and we need to know like 5 "key elements" of important developments during the 10 time periods.
I was in VWO (the highest middle/high school eduation except Gymnasium which is the same as VWO but with Greek and Latin classes). VWO is 6 years of school. The first 3 years we go through all of history a little bit deeper than in Elementary school.
Starting at class 4 half the school drops history classes entirely because you need to choose which "package" of classes you want to follow: socio-economic (which includes history classes) or natural-technical. In class 4 and 5 we go through all of history again but again more detailed than the first 3 years. In year 6 we focus on like 4 different specific parts of history that will be key to passing the central exam (usually at least something with the Dutch revolt and the World Wars).
Yeah, I don’t get why he skipes the hunter gatherer and Mesopotamian parts, I graduated a few years ago but it was included. My little brother is still in school and sometimes I help him with history, it’s really oversimplified but not nearly as oversimplified as this video implies.
There is a big gap between the ancient greeks and the Dutch revolution though. But you are right, they are very much focused on getting people to understand a few key events or processes. Which is honestly fine, most students don’t care anyway, but it does result in a complete lack of context
Having done HAVO-> VMBO -> HAVO about 23 years ago, I can attest we also had the same. Stone age-> hunter gatherers-> Neolithicum-> Ancient Egypt -> Ancient greece -> Ancient Rome -> The great migration -> feudals and lords -> Habsburg Netherlands -> Calvnism vs Catholicism -> William the Silent -> Revolt against Spain -> VOC -> ... and then it went beyond 1700. Including the history of the USA -> Napoleon -> The industrial revolution -> 1st world war -> 2nd world war -> The Dutch Indies and birth of Indonesia -> The Korean War -> The vietnam war -> The cold war aaand that's where our history high school lessons kind of ended.
Everyone dropping history class is familiar to me. The last two years, I would show up to class, the teacher would give me some assigned reading, and leave me to do it in an empty class room while she worked on grading other students and went to the staff room to do teacher stuff. She would still ask me if I had questions beforehand, or copy some pages from her instruction book. There was seriously no money for textbooks, we had gone through a merger that did bugger all for our school, and then we found out the exams hadn't even been requested for any of our final year students. And this was in the year that MAVO was completely dropped in favour of VMBO, so if we couldn't pass the exam, we'd all go back to first year VMBO. Thanks for that, Oranje Nassau College.
Huh, with my history classes in the Netherlands, bout a decade ago, we started with the bell beaker culture, and some of the ancient river civilisations.
Other than that it's pretty similar to this video
Yeah, currently in my last year of public education. We still learn about that. Though I find he also oversimplifies or is just blatantly making it seem worse on purpose in some parts.
Our education could be better but it’s definitely not as bad as this video makes it seem. Can’t say anything about how bad it was a decade ago obviously
my history classes in the US were of 2 types: US history (around the 1700s onward, no we did not really talk about colonialism very much aside from Columbus) and world history, in which the only thing i remember learning about was the cradles of civilization. i feel like it would've been beneficial to learn about the kind of stuff you talked about in this video because ignoring basically everything before 1776 isn't a particularly good way to learn about history
This was very interesting look on a different perspective of history. It is amusing to see the Eastern Europe being an empty void for most of the time and then stuff popping up out of nowhere when they suddenly become semi relevant lmao
This concept idea for videos is so cool! It’d be awesome to see this for other countries
As someone who only recently left school, I am glad to see history education got better since whenever you left it, since my class certainly didn't skip Egypt and Mésopotamia (did ignore China except for the silk road but... Well I don't know how relevant more wouldve been when there was so much else to learn)
Oh, my favourite and terrifying topic for me - schoolboard edition of history...
I'm a teacher myself (for now, at least), and I'd taught History in secondary school classes. There will be a much of info, so be advised. I'm from Belarus, and in our secondary education History as arts divided in two subjects: the World History (later WH) and the History of Belarus (HoB). WH lasts from 5th to 11th grades, while HoB - from 6th. Recently, a "partially concentric" style was adopted, so in 10 and 11 grades (the high school itself) both of Histories are repeated in hasteful manner.
The WH starts from the brief evolution of human species description up through the Stone Age and appearence of first statehoods. Ancient Egypt, then Mesopotamia follow suits, after which Persia, Phoenicia, Canaan, India and China of 3000 to 500-s BC and Mesoamerica are described rather scarcely. Later, Classical period of both Greece and Rome are described with much more attention. Next year's course starts with a fall of Western Rome and emergence of Frankish kingdom of Merovingians and Carolingians simultaneously. Each of major regions such as England, HRE, Iberia and France are described, with some generic themes of societal, economical, religious and cultural development. Byzantine Empire is mentioned too, as well as how it had been evolving (and, actually, portrayed as a much more developed state rather than it's western counterparts up until the year of 1204). Then attention shifts to Eastern Europe, particularily to Rus' and Russia and Western Slavic countries of Poland and Bohemia, with almost nonexistant citing of Hungary and Romanian principalities existence. Remaining third of programme is about Muslim, Hindustani, Sinitic civilizations with a very scarce Sub-Saharan Africa and Pre-Columbian America flavour. From Early Modern period, such regions clusters are maintained as chapters up to nowadays, with variations in order: W. Europe + North America, E. Europe, Middle East, Far East and Africa + Latin America. Of course, for the ones who have a curiosity, about the WW2, studybooks are very keen on blaming the Western powers in the war beginning, as well as accusing them on having an intention to "lure the N@zis against the USSR"; portrayal of the Soviets is positive, yet not overwhelmingly. It's curious, though, that apart from it Modernity period is described rather neutrally and, I would even say, dully.
The HoB, however, is centered around Belarus, as one could anticipate, and it starts in Prehistory as well, but a story focuses on statehoods such as Ancient/Kievian Rus', Polotsk and Turov-Pinsk Principalities (claiming that the latter are first Belarusian political entities ever), the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Russian Empire, the USSR and it's co-founder member of the BSSR and, of course, modern post-Soviet Republic of Belarus. Statelet of the non-Communist Belarusian People's Republic is mentioned, but scarcely, while, shall we say, legitimacy of our modern state is implied to be rooted to it's Bolshevik predecessor. Slowly, but steadily, however, educational focus is shifting from the Medieval period towards the XIX-XXI centuries due to complex reasons, and more emphasis on the current politics is made with a bunch of explanations you could expect. Overall, the main focus is on politics and, to a lesser degree, on diplomacy and administration, secondary on socioeconomics, and tertial importance is granted to nationalities, cultures and religions evolution. Microhistory is close to nonexistant, sorry.
For I have little to no knowledge about current foreign educational history narratives, I cannot say, is everything above makes an evidence of good or bad narrative in school education. What I can say, however, that way of teaching is overly complex in topics range, yet very shallow in depth, forcing students to have a relatively wide, yet thinnier-than-air grasp on history made up on raw data on sometimes questionable narrative skeleton remembering. Of course, most of students wish to study nothing at all, and even if they wish (mainly for pure pragmatic reasons such as exams), History is not their most beloved subject. But, on contrary, students, as I noticed, are more interested in the WH - just as I did; while they had to learn the latter because of mandatory examination, just before graduating, on the HoB, not the WH.
Hope you enjoy, and I express my gratitude for everyone who spent their time onto this text.
Love your videos! You give a great entry to alt history!
Definitely needs a part 2
This is the best channel I have ever seen, two bangers a week.
Here in Spain in the last 4 years of mandatory education its like:
1st course: Prehistory, Egypt and Mesopotamia, Greece, Rome
2nd course: Middle Ages and art history until the low Middle Ages
3rd course: From the fall of Constantinople (very lightly mentioned) to the 5th Bourbon King (Carlos IV), basically we interchange broader history parts with ones more centered in Spain, also art history until neoclassicism
4th course: contemporary history from the French Revolution to either WW1 or WW2 depending on time, also interchanging parts of broader history with ones more focused on Spain
Also in 1st, 2nd and 3rd courses there were between 1 or 2 geography exams per course because yes
I did those years in semi-private school, but the programme was directed in that school directely from the Autonomic Counsellery (basically the organ that each autonomous community has here in the education aspect)
"broader history parts with ones more centered in Spain" uhm, excuse me, but this era is about the time when "Spain" arguably includes two thirds of both Americas, Austria, half of Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, and more. Unless "broader history" is Ottoman, Asian or African, it's also arguably "centered in Spain", or at least Spanish interests (The Thirty Years War wasn't primarily fought in Iberia, but Spain was involved).
@@LibertyMonk Perks of being the definitive global empire, every history is your history
@@LibertyMonk Yes, but in the parts we talk about broader history we talk about things like the Renaissance, the wars of religion and all of that, of course in things like the wras of religion Spain is part of it, but Spain's contribution is less talked about than in the part focused on Spain, although we only review foreign affairs during Carlos I, Felipe II and the war of succesion in the parts focused on Spain, those are ussualy a bit more centered towards internal affairs
as a dutch person myself, i've been so buzy with all kinds of topics that i forgot how barebones our history classes actually are, boiling it down to nothing but simple terms for memorization
Part 2 or follow up would be cool!
I saw your chat gbt video it's a pretty interesting I'm using it to create alternate history stories the one I'm working on the most is the German Japanese empire
Love to see you do this for other education systems in other countries
Great video! I someone who completed primary and secondary education in England and now I am on an A-Level history course (equivalent of an Abitur in Europe I believe) and the history education here seems to be much more different.
In Primary, history is much more localised and there doesnt seem to be such a defined curriculum, so we learnt about the the great fire of London in 1666, London Blitz, but also wider English history such as the Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Tudors and Romans. The Horrible Histories BBC children's show is a good look into what we learn about generally. Primary history was never examined. Locally, we also learnt about gentrification and migration.
Really, the only compulsory subject in history an English child needs to know about is the Holocaust, which I saw lessons on in both primary and secondary education.
In secondary, history gradually became more analytical and Year 7 lessons focused on the if legendary figures such as King Arthur and Robin Hood really existed and we were encouraged to learn more about it for example. Through Year 8 and Year 9 we had lessons on the English Civil War and the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars and talked a lot about the why and the how just as much as what actually happened. When learning about the Peninsular War for example, we questioned if it was an unnecessary action. We also learnt about the Black Death.
As you can tell, we never really learnt about history chronologically and by the GCSE we had 3 courses on different events. It differs by what the school chooses but our ones were on the First World War, the Restoration era of Charles II and the Weimar Republic and Nazi Germany's politics, economics and society.
We never had multiple choice questions in our exams and the questions were more about judging the value of a source or explaining the importance of factors.
This sort of education makes English students critical, analytical and prepares them for Academia as we focus on small courses and learn in depth, however, a lot of general English and British history is left out. For example, few in my A Level class knew about the Battle of Agincourt while only arrogant me knew about the Act of Union in 1707 :p
A Level courses again differ on school choice but our ones are the Tudor dynasty and the Russian Revolution to the death of Stalin. There is also coursework on British Imperialism in Africa. I will post a link to a list of aqa courses when I'm at home if I remember.
Sorry for the jumbled mess this is, I wrote it on a bus
This is interesting! In Italy we learn history in a chronological order from the prehistoric age to 1950s (sadly, even tho history books cover what happens all the way to the year they were written, teachers often aren't able to go past 1950s because they are slow). We cover all the history that I mentioned three times: in elementary school, in middle school and in high school, starting again from the prehistoric age every time you go from one to the other. The only topic that we don't learn in chronological order is the Holocaust, which we remember every year around the international holocaust remembrance day. Almost every subject, except maybe math, is studied in this chronological order; even when we study scientific subjects, we start from the older experiments and theories and study how researchers slowly discovered more and more about that science and how the older theories were debunked. That is also true for the teaching of literature, philosophy, history of art, etc etc. University is different tho, because it is organised in different courses that follow more specific topics.
It's interesting to see how in the UK (and I think in the US too?) subjects are approached in a completely different way rather than in chronological order. I think each of this two systems has its advantages and disadvantages. Sorry for my English btw lol
Wow I am new here so I didn't know you where also Dutch. Great video dude.
please do make a part 2 and 3 would be fun to see
especialy since i never got the full dutch history version we get teached at school since mine skipped over a lot
During the second part of high school I took history as an elective. It was quite interesting as in the 2 years, we had 4 topics that were each given a half year to go through. The topics were: Chinese history, American history (with a focus on what happened between the end of the civil war and the end of Jim Crow, very interesting and depressing), The Dutch revolution and golden age and decolonization. It was my favourite class (I’m a microbiologist) and was given to all 50-ish history students at once in a university style presentation. I learned a lot from it and it helped me understand the world a lot better. I did also learn all this, but that was during my primary and early high school days. It’s general “here, now you understand the world a tiny bit” type of stuff. It’s far from complete, but it has to be taken into account that it’s taught to bored, sleep deprived early teens.
Maak een deel 2 hiervan!
I'm slightly offended that the Dutch don't learn about dominating part of the Brazilian Northeast, Recife in particular.
The Dutch invasions and their expulsion are an essential part of Brazilian colonial history.
The invasion was organized by the West India Company and the Brazilian administrator was John Maurice, Prince of Nassau-Siegen (according to Wikipedia, in Brazil we call it Maurício de Nassau)
While perhaps incomplete in some parts, it is interesting to see which periods and which aspects are put into focus and given more attention.
4:25 lmfao Rome never splits I love this.
I cannot stop laughing with how bad your school taught you history I love how weird and out of order certain parts are
I’m Dutch and this video is grossly oversimplifying how our history is taught. And also wrong on many parts. For example we start with hunter gatherers and Mesopotamia not Greece.
We do learn about rome splitting. It even comes back later in the video about the crusades. It’s not clearly stated in the book but your teachers ofcourse tell about it. It’s expected you know a lot more then just the things covered in the book.
Things seem out of order because he also covers that quite bad. Sometimes like when covering the spread of Islam the book tells ahead a little. Whilst here he blatantly states like it’s told that way.
I think that he either just had a bad teacher or a very old book. I’m in my finishing year and this video is definitely not up to date to the modern curriculum
@@onneheijsteeg8507 Well from what I remember my teachers probably told less I taught and learned most of my history knowledge myself but I will eventually take ap world and euro so it may talk about a lot.
Also yes I know this does oversimplify a lot I don't think schools care about accuracy at all in history mostly just telling you "what you need to know" It would make sense if this was outdated too.
@@onneheijsteeg8507 From what I remember history lessons basically skip the entire early to late middle ages. Which does explaine why the split between western and eastern rome is hardly adressed beyond getting a mention. As the consequences of the split are glossed over
"Judaism, the first religion to only have one god..."
-Dutch Education
"Am I nothing to you?"
-Zoroaster
Since when was school history meant to teach about the entirety of the world's history? Your average student already doesn't see how learning about Romans is relevant to their life, people always think specifically the section or niche of history they are into should be taught more about in school.
Many countries do that and it's way better, a narrow point of view only limits knowledge not expands it
@@LordSandwich27 you are only going to teach so much in a secondary school history curriculum.
Since forever? Where do you start if not the begining? I remember i had to learn about neandertal and cromagnon, bronze age and first writings, first cities, and what not...
@@tadadada609 I'm Dutch and we did learn about that stuff. At least around 10 years ago when I had the subject.
Agreed. Learning about the history of your continent,your country and the ancient civilisations relevant to the world at large is good enough. There is no need for,say, an South African history book to go in great detail about the Roman Empire, no matter how interesting it is.
It's almost as if education for children is to prepare them for general information they might need in life.
Now I am not racist by any means of the imagination, but I doubt most people in life will ever need to know about what happened in Ethiopia in the year 1278.
However knowing their history of their own nation is on the other hand much more important, cause it's part of their culture.
If people want to deepen their knowledge, that's where education after middleschool is for.
Agreed. People also generally learn about their region and country and general knowledge for one people may be different to another's.
Can you make a video on Queen Elizabeth marrying one of her suitors because you did one with Ivan but Elizabeth had so many other suitors that wanted to marry her you can make a compilation video of all of them in multiple videos
I think it would be interesting
Trust me, Every good teacher and student is frustrated with the material.
Teachers wants a more broader ranges of topics, and students also want more depth
At least if they are interested in history in the first place! The reason is that it's specifically Dutch, and Dutch-Related topics that made the cut.
In Canadian History in high school, we start with WW1, then the roaring 20s and dirty 30s, WW2, Cold War, and that’s it, but everything is centred around Canada.
I personally think we should have started with the end of the Napoleonic wars since that sets up WW1 which sets up everything else.
I think they start with WW1 since that’s supposedly when “Canadian identity” began to be a thing. Basically WW1 boils down to “main causes of the war, the entente and the triple alliance, assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, Schlieffen plan, Vimy Ridge led by Canadian General Sir Arthur Cury(who is from my home town), Russians pull out, America takes their place. Allies win.
Roaring 20s focused on wealth(specifically I remember an ad talking about how it was fine to leave the lights on since electricity is super cheap), stock markets, a little on prohibition in the US. Then the reason for the stock market crash being that everyone realized how fragile the whole thing was all at once. Everyone is scrounging to get by, I think the dust bowl gets mentioned, basically Canadian politicians just copy American ones with stuff like the new deal.
WWII: it’s very important to note that Canada went to war independently this time (4 days after the UK), we learn about the treatment of Jews, the landings at Normandy, and that largely Canadian forces liberated the lowlands leading to mass immigration from those areas after the war(I think my grandparents actually fall into that category. Apparently it was “the thing to do” at the time.
Cold War: explain the formation of NATO and the Warsaw pact, lots of proxy conflicts, Suez crisis which emphasizes heavy Canadian presence in the UN Peacekeeping task force. Then there are a bunch of little Canadian things like the Avro Arrow which I’m not sure why we talked about it since nothing came of it. And then the rest focused on the Quebec separatist movement and the terrorism of the FLQ and the emergency powers used by Prime Minister PE Trudeau. I’m from Ontario, so I am curious as to how this part is taught in Quebec itself. I also wonder how the emergency powers but will be taught in the future since they were used again so recently with the Truckers convoy.
Prior to high school, we aren’t really taught much about history other than very surface level “when did Europeans find Canada” stuff like Lief Ericson, and Jacque Cartier. Like that’s literally it. What were their names, and where did they come from. They don’t even explain how the English really got into Canada.
The Napoleonic wars didn't set up WW1... It could be argued that the unification of Germany, thus the Franco-Prussian war led up to it insofar as it changed the balance of power in Europe...
But really, the cause was everyone wanting more land, revenge of some kind and to test their new weapons. These are always the causes of wars.
As far as Canada, they could start their history lessons with what is known of pre-Europeans tribes roaming the land of today's Canada before the Europeans, with the first Europeans settlement there (why they came and why they stayed), with the 7 years war (french and indian war) and its aftermath (which might be enough to explain why the Québecois want to keep speaking French), with the war against the USA when the Canadians and the British burned down Washington (which explain in part why Canada is independent)...
There is plenty to talk about if the politicos cared to have it talked about.
@@abadyr_ I would argue it did. The end Napoleonic war reset the concert of Europe leading to the 100 years of “peace” and spread the ideas of nationalism that would ultimately upset the balance of powers set up at the end of the war with the formations of Germany and Italy, and the destabilization of the Austrian empire. The upset in the balance of power ultimately allowed for the conditions of the war to occur, as Germany became the New Napoleonic France, as a state so powerful it forced an alliance of all remaining powers to take them down.
But maybe I’m missing something, feel free to challenge my perception further.
It was fairly similar in New Zealand.
I think starting with the Napoleonic Wars is not earlier enough though, I think school history classes should start at the Big Bang. I know this sounds like a joke but I'm actually serious. Compartmentalising history too much means kids don't get a chance to see that history is all connected and not just a bunch of facts.
@@korakys Wouldn't the Big Bang fall under Science though?
@@Kromiball I suppose there are two ways to look at history: past events where humans documented evidence of them, or all past events regardless of contemporary documented evidence. I prefer the latter view and in taking that view then it does not make sense to separate written history and "science" history.
I would like to see a part 2 and flaws plz
Here in Hungary, we flat out skip Napoleon because he is apparently not relevant for hungarian history. It's legit like Rakoczi independance war and 100 year timeskip to the Congress of Vienna. Absolutely maddening.
As a (new) Dutch History teacher, I'd like to make a sidenote that to be fair, this book (Geschiedeniswerkplaats) is by myself and the other history teachers I've talked to regarded as the worst history book on the market. Sadly it is also the most commonly used history book in Dutch schools I think.
Brazil history
We have egipicians and greeks and them rome and then feudalism and Merchantilism, then Portugal discovers Brasil and the world starts, then slavery, napoleon, independence , monarchy and then Brazil get a perfecly democratic republic and become best country
Great content but wth did you do with the maps?
As a Dutch i can confirm this is true we don't get any information about Asia only about Indonesia because it was a colony nothing about africa and just a little bit about the Middle east its more about the government systems primarily the Dutch one and how the people of Nederland's lived in this time
It makes perfect sense. The main points of history education are teaching the methods of history and to explain the historical development of the country.
Stuff that happened somewhere else and had no influence on the country is less important. In the end you can only fit so much into a curriculum and have to prioritise the most rellevant parts of history.
This was not the education in history that I got. It was certainly lacking parts but not this bad.
A lot does get mentioned but only briefly. Some things like african empires not at all.
Dutch history class is very flawed. Not horrible.
Good thing a lot had changed.
all of what was covered in the video is more or less important in order to understand dutch history, there's litterally nothing relevant about any african empire when it comes to the netherlands
@@firecreeper2249 What is relevant when it comes to the Netherlands is the middle ages though, which beyond a basic and seemingly unnecessary explanation of feudalism were entirely skipped
Interesting take...
Things changed though. Ik doe dit jaar GS VWO examen en het lijkt hierop, maar er zijn ook hele grote verschillen.
Gigachad Eastern Rome surviving, Very nice
14:02 Woooow, I didn't know the dutch called the Duke of Alba the "Iron Duke" lol. Is that a reference to Otto von Bismarck or it already was his nickname at that time?
Which year did you graduate? I (vwo 2018) do remember at least a token passage in the book about achnaton/ monotheism in ancient egypt, though this might be me miss remembering something the teacher added pit in his slideshow for some extra flavour, big up meneer Nieland.
this is genuinely a pretty accurate summary of european history, damn
Yeah, that’s the problem - it’s about everything but us
Do a part 2
I think a video pointing out the flows is better, but would also watch how your school thought the rest of history ( especially since the colonial part is likely the peak of Dutch history)
I feel sad that the only way to study around those days are by alternative hard to find books and singular articles in internet, you can't trust school books anymore.
The romanian education was kind of... not properly reformed 10 years ago but the history curriculum was alright, however the teachers I've been having where bad at teaching and overtly emotional. The 6th grade and 8th grade was for the most part but the early Habsburg empire, the Lutheran reformation and a little bit of colonial history despite we were supposed to learn our own history at that time😬
I would love to see what flaws there are in the history you mentioned because I already can see a few.
in my first 4 years we also used this exact book... the modernizations were decent after that but the exam was very shallow and had no depth to any of the subject (which was kinda sad)
We are jumping back and forth in the timeline like it's a Rick and Morty episode
Honestly the most interesting part of this is that they say “Jesus called himself a prophet”, as if that’s the important thing there. Jesus definitely associated himself with being a prophet, but he also calls himself God, which I would have thought is much more important.
Part 2 when?
Also I was taught quite a bit more about the prehistoric era
Would be great to have some more info about from what year, what age group and if this was from an christelijke school or a more open school?
You forgot about the prehistoric part, I recall it from school as that was the most interesting part to me, lol.
PH: Wat doe jij dan nog op zo laat?
Me: Jou videos kijken, wat anders? Lol
Interesting how shortly they teach about the conflicts of religions, absolutism and enlightenment, I remember it being a very important part in history lessons in Germany
Great summary, the only notable difference is that my class definitely didn't skip the ancient Egyptians.
I like how southern Italy basically turns into Sicily and Naples, while the color scheme imply that the Ostrogoths are still in charge.
I haven't even started watching this yet, but how incredibly fascinating a topic. I was a history major in college (UC Santa Cruz) and I seriously considered going the Ph.D. route at one point (I got fucked over by my advisors, but no harm done), and one of my primary interests was Dutch history. I was told that if I really wanted to learn about Dutch history I'd need to go to the Netherlands. Looks like something similar has come my way.
Tbh , its so much better than Britain's. Like sure, this is Eurocentric but British secondary school is so Anglo-Centric except selected modules some schools take
1 minute in and it's already way different than the history lessons I've gotten and I'm from the Netherlands as well. Maybe it's important to state the year you were born and the level of education you've had? Curriculi change over the years.
Hello fellow dutchy i dint know ur dutch 2 i Will learn Some thing for school with this episode and can you Plessers make aan other episode so i would know more for my school
I need a sequel. How else am I supposed to know what happens after 1700?
The education of my country is wierd. We began learning world history in 5th grade, then stopped in 8th grade to learn the history of our country, and the resumed world history again. What we learned basically was:
5th Grade: Sumer, Babylon, Ancient Egypt, Judea, and a little bit of Hindus Valley.
6th Grade: Hindus Valley (again), Persia, Greece, Alexander the Great and Rome (until Constantine).
7th Grade: Middle Ages, Islam, the Crusades, the Ottomans, Safavids, Mughals, as well as China.
8th Grade: Our National History.
9th Grade: WW1 and WW2.
10th Grade: WW1 and WW2 again.
11th Grade: The Cold War.
7:30 best map of medival poland ever
Its so weird that i learned about Charlemagne in primary school but he was completely skipped in highschool
growing up in australia my school taught us 1. ancient egypt and china existed (and women had less rights). 2. feudalism was a thing in europe and in japan, also the oda clan conquered the capital and became the emperor. 3. the spanish conquests of the aztecs, in decent detail (just the conquest though and not a day after) and some stuff about the columbian exchange. some stuff about the frontier wars, maybe the goldrush and federation then ww1 happened, probably something about gallipoli but mainly that australia didn't pass conscription laws and was like the only one to not. and thats IT.
granted i didn't take any history electives after this but for context of how bad the education was, i saw the picture of hitler standing in front of the eiffel tower and being so confused because it took until i played hearts of iron 4 at the age of 16 learn that france capitulated.
a big reason why it was so limited was because the subject was split so in each year that 1 semester was history and the other was like geography, which is like, hey i know what an aquifer is but i think there was a few more important subjects in history that could've been covered. (the revolutions, the entire victorian era, ww2, anything in africa, anything in the cold war, the roman empire, the meji restoration, Napoleonic wars, the history of the russian empire, the british empire and the british east india company)
everyone trashes on the american education system, but in high school we do a pretty good job of covering a vast amount of subjects, from the polish lithuanian commwealth to the daimyos of japan.
7:31 you know, I may not remember that much from my Polish history lessons, but I for sure ain't seen Poland stretch that far west at any point in time 😂
I suspect it is supposed to represent the Western Slavs in general and not just the Poles, like the Polabians
While this takes huges leaps in the continuity is still better than the education i recive in south america lmao(venezuela to be exact) literally we jump from the indian tribes, to the wars of independence(and general history of venezuela), to world war 2, ending in the russian, chinese and cuban revolutions
Curioso como se pasan la época del imperio español...
@@VictorLdVS Solomente hablan del sistema de castas lmao
@@Hainser curioso que hablen de eso teniendo en cuenta que Venezuela es uno de los países con más descendientes de españoles, pero supongo que lo importante en este caso es hacer demagogia.
I also have a history book like this and i live in the netherlands
As a Turkish student. I think they got the asian part as "not real". The Ottomans and 600-700's being the complete reasons of roman empire's fall. And after Ottomans (turks) getting the full job done at east. This things are very important but not accepted i think.
People worry about the history of other parts of the world, which I mostly think is silly, it’s Dutch education about their history. What is really unfortunate is the hilarious lack of depth and massively vague nature of the important history. We have the same problem in the us. I can easily watch hours of history content, but I was constantly checking how long was left on this. You perfectly nailed the feeling of public education lol.
Bro heb je VWO gedaan? Want ik heb een hoop van deze dingen nog niet gehoord op school, en heb het allemaal zelf uitgezocht (ik sta een 9 voor gs trouwens)
doe je mavo of zit je nog in de onderbouw? want je gaat voor HAVO en VWO dieper in op wat er allemaal gebeurd is, dit komt mij allemaal bekend voor
@@kj_heichou Nope, ik zit ik Havo 5. En ik ga volgend jaar naar VWO 5. Dus uhhh misschien ligt het aan mijn school...? Hoe dan ook, geschiedenis is te makkelijk voor me dus misschien ligt het wel aan mijn school xD
@@ObliviAce welke methode gebruik je? Bij mij op school word Feniks gebruikt
@@kj_heichou ze gebruiken hun eigen methode. Ik zit op het mondial college leuvensbroek (nijmegen). Komt dat je bekend voor?
@@ObliviAce hun eigen methode? Interessant
That's genuinely worse than the education I got in middle school, granted this was one text book
please note that there are multiple companies that sell different school books in the netherlands this is not the universal dutch view of history.
In Portugal, we learn we were the first to explore in the mid XV century, while the rest of the eurotrash were killing each other, with wild abandonment, but mainly we started with the Early Paleolithic, the Neolithic, the fertile crescent, writing, and only then do we get to Greece.
Huh as far as i can remember we always learned about the hunter gatherers first and then really quickly the guys who invented writing and then the Egyptians, and only then the greeks get mentioned 😊
I love how the Romans just like don't take Greece until after Gaul.
German History Education next please!!
Can you make a video like this but for history acording to the american edecatuoion system
No bots PLS!
Seems to be a universal truth that public school history education is lacking, based on the comments.
Here in the US I had the option to take a class other than world history (they incentivized this bc the other class gave college credit) and the mandatory history class, US History, was full of propaganda.
I learned more history in one 15-week university history course than I did in 4 years of high school 💀💀💀
Wow, as a javanese this is very interesting to me. Of course as the national curriculum deviation from history is expected but in this way is a bit.. odd or how do I say it? its like theyre trying half heartedly one way and then switch up the other way. I dont know why I expected they would start from literally stone age history but thats how they teach it here lmao.