Prince Joachim has been praised to the skies for its new documentary on the history of denmark.
But there is also room for improvement. According to experts is the second article that was posted Wednesday night on DRK, both the superficial, simplified, and simplistic.
this is the sound of it among others from kongehusekspert and historian Michael Bregnsbo from the University of Southern denmark.
“There is a part relation, and explanations of danmarkshistoriske events and phenomena, which seem to me to be too brief, superficial, simplified, and simplistic,” says the historian.
He believes that the series neither is ‘much worse or better’ than so many others on the same subject. In some cases it is even maybe a little better.
In the second section, prince Joachim of denmark on the foundation of democracy and examines among other things the list of kings.
Michael Bregnsbo points out that not being told very much about the ‘regular population’s living conditions’ or whether the kings have been oppressive.
“The view of history expressed, is history seen from above, from the eliternes, and from the taste of royal point of view. The regular population is only as subjects and only when they are necessary to explain the taste of royal acts,” he says, and adds, to the history of enough was experienced differently, depending on whether you were king or peasant.
the Historian is not surprised by the way history has been made, as it is prince Joachim, who is the host and says:
“It is the royal history of denmark, and how it must be. Would you have had a history of denmark seen from below, from the peasants and clothes perspective, yes, then they had had to find another narrator and host,” he says.
Historian and kongehusekspert Sebastian Olden-Jørgensen agree that certain parts of the documentary is too superficial.
He believes, among other things, that the section on the campaign in the Ditmarsken in the 1500s, when king Hans is defeated by the peasants, has been cut down too much.
“He will not said once that the peasants are flooding the marshes. The episode is almost incomprehensible. And I do not understand, how it to be the beginning of democracy. It gets they didn’t communicated properly,” says the historian, who also believes that prince Joachim might have had more perspective when he talks about the fact that king Frederik VII introduced democracy.
“He Polobet portrays the not democracy took here in the country as a konflikthistorie. The whole thing is very harmonized, and it is not entirely the story. He might also have said, that Frederik VII was not particularly suitable as a king.”
Sebastian Olden-Jørgensen roses, however, prince Joachim of denmark for his fortælleevner.
He believes that the documentary both the beauty and sensuality about it’.
Something more critical is kongehusekspert and author Søren Jakobsen.
in the light of recent months discussions about Joachim eligibility for årpenge during his stay in France, he believes that it is thought-provoking that prince Joachim in the documentary review of the constitution.
“When you put your hand on the first bill of rights, wearing white gloves, so it is peculiar that prince Joachim – while this recording is being recorded – even override the constitution by moving abroad and not ask if he may take his apanage with – even though it says in the constitution, that he should ask Parliament,” he says, and adds:
“Thus comes to exhibit the slightly arrogant side of prince Joachim of denmark, for he knows the constitution. He knows that he probably should have asked the Danish Parliament, but he did not. It puts a stain on this otherwise excellent series.”
Søren Jakobsen has also, however, praises to the prince, who in the documentary does not unpack his ancestor’s mental state into.
“I have not previously heard any royal describe the Christian VII as a lunatic. All know, of course, that he was lunatic, but it is not something that the royals had previously come,” he says.
the Criticism bounce off the historian Asser Amdissen, who has been with to make the documentary with prince Joachim.
“This topic is so large, so it is always superficial. And prince Joachim tells the also, that it is his personal interpretation of history. So of course, it is superficial and skitseagtigt, and how is it when you have history to make,” he says and adds that there will always be critics to any interpretation of the history.
