National canons of history sparked intense debate among historians over the last years, history educators have regularly shown concerns regarding these canons. The main arguments are that history is instrumentalized for political purposes, and that canons are incompatible with multiculturality. In this study, the cases of the Netherlands and Belgium (Flanders) are used to discuss these concerns. The aim of this article is to gain a more complex understanding of the use of canonical discourse in the setting of history education. The current study actualizes and reconsiders Banks' typologies of knowledge, and applies them to multicultural history education. Hence, the canon debates in the low countries are contextualized from an international perspective of debates on canon and history teaching. It is argued that both national canons specifically intend to confront popular knowledges and historical myths with academic historiographic discourses. More particularly both canons seek to include discourses on minority groups and multiculturality, which may benefit the use of transformative knowledge in history education. The use of canonical discourses however must not be reduced to transmission. Beside qualification history education also strives towards socialization and subjectivation. It is discussed how a thoughtful use of canonical discourse may add to realizing these purposes of education.