Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton May 7, 2016

Diagrams of the past: How timelines can aid the growth of historical knowledge

Marc Champagne

Marc Champagne is an Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Trent University. He holds a PhD in Philosophy from York University in Toronto and a PhD in Semiotics from the University of Quebec in Montreal. He publishes regularly in major philosophy and semiotics journals and has a forthcoming book (with Springer) titled Consciousness and the Philosophy of Signs: How Peircean Semiotics Combines Phenomenal Qualia and Practical Effects.

EMAIL logo
From the journal Cognitive Semiotics


Historians occasionally use timelines, but many seem to regard such signs merely as ways of visually summarizing results that are presumably better expressed in prose. Challenging this language-centered view, I suggest that timelines might assist the generation of novel historical insights. To show this, I begin by looking at studies confirming the cognitive benefits of diagrams like timelines. I then try to survey the remarkable diversity of timelines by analyzing actual examples. Finally, having conveyed this (mostly untapped) potential, I argue that neglecting timelines might mean neglecting significant aspects of reality that are revealed only by those signs. My overall message is that once we accept that relations are as important for the mind as what they relate, we have to pay closer attention to any semiotic device that enables or facilitates the discernment of new relations.

About the author

Marc Champagne

Marc Champagne is an Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Trent University. He holds a PhD in Philosophy from York University in Toronto and a PhD in Semiotics from the University of Quebec in Montreal. He publishes regularly in major philosophy and semiotics journals and has a forthcoming book (with Springer) titled Consciousness and the Philosophy of Signs: How Peircean Semiotics Combines Phenomenal Qualia and Practical Effects.


Allein, G. & J. Barwise (eds.). 1996. Logical reasoning with diagrams. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195104271.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Ankersmit, F. 2013. Representation as a cognitive instrument. History and Theory 52(2). 171–193.10.1111/hith.10663Search in Google Scholar

Atã, P., B. Bitarello & J. Queiroz. 2014. Iconic semiosis and representational efficiency in the London underground diagram. Cognitive Semiotics 7(2). 177–190.10.1515/cogsem-2014-0012Search in Google Scholar

Bar-Hillel, M. 1980. The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments. Acta Psychologica 44(3). 211–233.10.21236/ADA045772Search in Google Scholar

Birdsell, D. S. & L. Groarke. 1996. Toward a theory of visual argument. Argumentation and Advocacy 33(1). 1–10.Search in Google Scholar

Bordron, J. F. 2011. L’iconicité et ses image: Études sémiotiques. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.10.3917/puf.bord.2011.01Search in Google Scholar

Boyd Davis, S. 2012. History on the line: Time as dimension. Design Issues 28(4). 4–17.10.1162/DESI_a_00171Search in Google Scholar

Bundgaard, P. & F. Stjernfelt. 2010. Logic and cognition. In Paul Cobley (ed.), The Routledge companion to semiotics, 57–73. London & New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Carelli, M. G. 2011. Timelines of past events: Reconstructive retrieval of temporal patterns. Advances in Cognitive Psychology 7(1). 49–54.10.2478/v10053-008-0101-5Search in Google Scholar

Champagne, M. 2013. Choosing between the long and short informational routes to psychological explanation. Philosophical Psychology 26(1). 129–138.10.1080/09515089.2011.631999Search in Google Scholar

Christian, D. 2010. The return of universal history. History and Theory 49(4). 6–27.10.1111/j.1468-2303.2010.00557.xSearch in Google Scholar

Clark, W. 1923. The Gantt chart: A working tool of management. New York: Ronald Press.Search in Google Scholar

Curry, J. R. 2009. Examining client spiritual history and the construction of meaning: The use of spiritual timelines in counseling. Journal of Creativity in Mental Health 4(2). 113–123.10.1080/15401380902945178Search in Google Scholar

Danesi, M. & M. Bockarova. 2014. Mathematics as a modeling system: A semiotic approach. Tartu: Tartu University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Danto, A. C. 2007. Narration and knowledge, including the integral text of analytical philosophy of history. Columbia, NY: Columbia University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Deely, J. N., B. Williams & F. E. Kruse, (eds.). 1986. Frontiers in semiotics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Dennett, D. C. 1991. Real patterns. The Journal of Philosophy 88(1). 27–51.10.2307/2027085Search in Google Scholar

Denial, C. J. 2013. Atoms, honeycombs, and fabric scraps: Rethinking timelines in the undergraduate classroom. The History Teacher 46(3). 415–434.Search in Google Scholar

Derrida, J. 1996. Archive fever: A Freudian impression. Eric Prenowitz, trans. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.10.2307/465144Search in Google Scholar

Dondero, M. G. & J. Fontanille. 2012. Des images à problèmes: Le sens du visuel à l’épreuve de l’image scientifique. Limoges: Presses Universitaires de Limoges.Search in Google Scholar

Eco, U. 2000. Kant and the platypus: Essays on language and cognition. Alastair McEwen, trans. New York, San Diego & London: Harcourt Brace & Company.Search in Google Scholar

Euler, L. 1835. Letters of Euler on different subjects in natural philosophy, Vol. 1. New York: J. & J. Harper.Search in Google Scholar

Fernandez, A. A., K. França, A. H. Chacon & K. Nouri. 2013. From flint razors to lasers: A timeline of hair removal methods. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology 12(2). 153–162.10.1111/jocd.12021Search in Google Scholar

Gershell, L. J. & J. H. Atkins. 2003. A brief history of novel drug discovery technologies. Nature Reviews: Drug Discovery 2(4). 321–327.10.1038/nrd1064Search in Google Scholar

Giaquinto, M. 2007. Visual thinking in mathematics. Oxford: Clarendon.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199285945.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Glasgow, J., N. Hari Narayanan & B. Chandrasekaran (eds.). 1995. Diagrammatic reasoning: Cognitive and computational perspectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Goldstein, L. 1976. Historical knowing. Austin: University of Texas Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hammer, E. M. 1995. Logic and visual information. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language & Information.Search in Google Scholar

Hoffmann, M. H. G. 2011. Cognitive conditions of diagrammatic reasoning. Semiotica 186(1–4). 189–212.10.1515/semi.2011.052Search in Google Scholar

Hoodless, P. 1996. Time and timelines in the primary school. London: Historical Association.Search in Google Scholar

Ihde, D. 2000. Timeline travails. Science (New Series) 287(5454). 803.10.1126/science.287.5454.803bSearch in Google Scholar

James, W. 1977. The writings of William James: A comprehensive edition. John J. McDermott, (ed.), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jerram, L. 2013. Space: A useless category for historical analysis? History and Theory 52(3). 400–419.10.1111/hith.10676Search in Google Scholar

Kahneman, D. 2011. Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.Search in Google Scholar

Knauff, M. 2013. Space to reason: A spatial theory of human thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262018654.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Ketner, K. L. 1981. The best example of semiosis and its use in teaching semiotics. The American Journal of Semiotics 1(1–2). 47–83.10.5840/ajs198111/23Search in Google Scholar

Korallo, L., N. Foreman, S. Boyd-Davis, M. Moar & M. Coulson. 2012. Can multiple ‘spatial’ virtual timelines convey the relatedness of chronological knowledge across parallel domains? Computers and Education 58(2). 856–862.10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.011Search in Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lange, F. A. 1877. Logische Studien. Iserlohn: J. Baedeker.Search in Google Scholar

Leibniz, G. W. 1903. Opuscules et fragments inédits de Leibniz. Louis Couturat, (ed.), Paris: Alcan.Search in Google Scholar

Leuridan, B. & A. Froeyman. 2012. On lawfulness in history and historiography. History and Theory 51(2). 172–192.10.1111/j.1468-2303.2012.00620.xSearch in Google Scholar

Magnani, L. 2011. External diagrammatization and iconic brain co-evolution. Semiotica 186(1–4). 213–238.10.1515/semi.2011.053Search in Google Scholar

Mancosu, P., K. Froven Jørgensen & S. Andur Pedersen, (eds.). 2005. Visualization, explanation and reasoning styles in mathematics. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/1-4020-3335-4Search in Google Scholar

Maran, T. 2007. Semiotic interpretations of biological mimicry. Semiotica 167(1–4). 223–248.10.1515/SEM.2007.077Search in Google Scholar

Masterman, E. & Y. Rogers. 2002. A framework for designing interactive multimedia to scaffold young children’s understanding of historical chronology. Instructional Science 30(3). 221–241.10.1023/A:1015133106888Search in Google Scholar

Mazzetti, A. & J. Blenkinsopp. 2012. Evaluating a visual timeline methodology for appraisal and coping research. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 85(4). 649–665.10.1111/j.2044-8325.2012.02060.xSearch in Google Scholar

Miller, G. A. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63(2). 81–97.10.1525/9780520318267-011Search in Google Scholar

Moktefi, A. & S. J. Shin (eds.). 2013. Visual reasoning with diagrams. Heidelberg: Birkhäuser.10.1007/978-3-0348-0600-8Search in Google Scholar

Moyer, R. S. & T. K. Landauer. 1967. Time required for judgements of numerical inequality. Nature 215(5109). 1519–1520.10.1038/2151519a0Search in Google Scholar

Nakatsu, R. T. 2010. Diagrammatic reasoning in AI. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.10.1002/9780470400777Search in Google Scholar

Neurath, O. 1935. Erster internationaler Kongress für Einheit der Wissenschaft in Paris 1935. Erkenntnis 5(1). 377–406.10.1007/BF00172336Search in Google Scholar

Newman, M. H. A. 1928. Mr. Russell’s ‘causal theory of perception’. Mind 37(146). 137–148.10.1093/mind/XXXVII.146.137Search in Google Scholar

Norman, D. A. 1991. Cognitive artifacts. In J. Millar Carroll (ed.), Designing interaction: Psychology at the human-computer interface, 17–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ouellet, M., J. Santiago, M. Jesús Funes & J. Lupiáñez. 2010. Thinking about the future moves attention to the right. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 36(1). 17–24.10.1037/a0017176Search in Google Scholar

Panofsky, E. 1939/1972. Studies in iconology: Humanistic themes in the art of the renaissance. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.10.4324/9780429497063Search in Google Scholar

Panofsky, E. 1955. Meaning in the visual arts: Papers in and on art history. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Search in Google Scholar

Peirce, C. S. 1931–1958. The collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. C. Hartshorne, P. Weiss & A. W. Burks, (eds.), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Pietarinen, A.-V. 2006. Signs of logic: Peircean themes on the philosophy of language, games, and communication. Dordrecht: Springer.Search in Google Scholar

Pietarinen, A.-V. 2011. Existential graphs: What a diagrammatic logic of cognition might look like. History and Philosophy of Logic 32(3). 265–281.10.1080/01445340.2011.555506Search in Google Scholar

Pietarinen, A.-V. 2014. Natural propositions naturalized. Cognitive Semiotics 7(2). 297–303.10.1515/cogsem-2014-0015Search in Google Scholar

Pombo, O. & A. Gerner (eds.). 2010. Studies in diagrammatology and diagram praxis. London: College Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Rosenberg, D. 2007. Joseph Priestley and the graphic invention of modern time. Studies in Eighteenth-Century Culture 36. 55–103.10.1353/sec.2007.0013Search in Google Scholar

Rosenberg, D. & A. Grafton. 2010. Cartographies of time: A history of the timeline. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.Search in Google Scholar

Roth, P. A. 2007. The disappearance of the empirical: Some reflections on contemporary culture theory and historiography. Journal of the Philosophy of History 1(3). 271–292.10.1163/187226307X229362Search in Google Scholar

Russell, B. 1910–1911. Knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 11. 108–128.10.1093/aristotelian/11.1.108Search in Google Scholar

Scaife, M. & Y. Rogers. 1996. External cognition: How do graphical representations work? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 45(2). 185–213.10.1006/ijhc.1996.0048Search in Google Scholar

Sebeok, T. A. 1981. The play of musement. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Sebeok, T. A. 1991. What sense is language a ‘primary modeling system?’ In M. Anderson & F. Merrell (eds.), On semiotic modeling, 327–339. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110849875.327Search in Google Scholar

Shin, S. J. 1995. The logical status of diagrams. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511574696Search in Google Scholar

Simone, R. (ed.). 1995. Iconicity in language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.110Search in Google Scholar

Smoller, L. 1994. History, prophecy, and the stars: The Christian astrology of Pierre d’Ailly, 1350–1420. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Sperling, G. 1960. The information available in brief visual presentations. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied 74(498). 1–29.10.1037/h0093759Search in Google Scholar

Stjernfelt, F. 2007. Diagrammatology: An investigation on the borderlines of phenomenology, ontology, and semiotics. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-5652-9Search in Google Scholar

Stjernfelt, F. 2014a. Diagrams, narratives and ‘reality.’ Sign Systems Studies 42(2–3). 412–416.10.12697/SSS.2014.42.2-3.12Search in Google Scholar

Stjernfelt, F. 2014b. Natural propositions: The actuality of Peirce’s doctrine of dicisigns. Boston, MA: Docent.10.1007/s11229-014-0406-5Search in Google Scholar

Stjernfelt, F. 2015. Swampman encounters an immediate object. Cognitive Semiotics 8(2). 155–172.10.1515/cogsem-2015-0008Search in Google Scholar

Stone, L. 1979. The revival of narrative: Reflections on a new old history. Past and Present 85(4). 3–24.10.1093/past/85.1.3Search in Google Scholar

Twyman, M. 1979. A schema for the study of graphic language. In P. A. Kolers, M. E. Wrolstad & H. Bouma (eds.), The processing of visible language, 117–150. New York: Plenum.10.1007/978-1-4684-0994-9_8Search in Google Scholar

Van Langendonck, W. 2007. Iconicity. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (eds.), The oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, 394–418. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Westerhoff, J. C. 2001. A world of signs: Baroque pansemioticism, the Polyhistor and the early modern Wunderkammer. Journal of the History of Ideas 62(4). 633–650.10.1353/jhi.2001.0041Search in Google Scholar

Windelband, W. 1900/1998. History and natural science. Theory and Psychology 8(1). 5–22.10.1177/0959354398081001Search in Google Scholar

Wood, S. 1995. Developing and understanding of time-sequencing issues. Teaching History 79(2). 11–14.Search in Google Scholar

Yakura, E. K. 2002. Charting time: Timelines as temporal boundary objects. The Academy of Management Journal 45(5). 956–970.10.5465/3069324Search in Google Scholar

Zerubavel, E. 2003. Time maps: Collective memory and the social shape of the past. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226924908.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2016-5-7
Published in Print: 2016-5-1

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton

Downloaded on 7.12.2022 from
Scroll Up Arrow