Post-New Order Indonesian Historiography: Reformation, Revisionism, and Historical Debates

The fall of Suharto's New Order regime in 1998, triggered by the Asian Financial Crisis and the Indonesian Reformation movement, ignited a powerful demand for historical rectification. This process, known as pelurusan sejarah (rectification of history), initially sought to reallocate praise and blame, revisiting foundational national events. Key episodes scrutinized included the Serangan Umum (General Offensive) in Yogyakarta, the events surrounding the 30 September 1965 coup (Gestapu), and the controversial Supersemar document that transferred power from Sukarno to Suharto. The Ministry of Education, under Minister Yuwono Sudarsono, revised national school textbooks by 2000, diminishing Suharto's role, elevating the Sultan of Yogyakarta, and questioning Supersemar's authenticity. However, this early revisionism remained limited, sidestepping the army's actions in 1965-66 and silencing the victims of that violence, despite appeals from the Society of Indonesian Historians (Masyarakat Sejarawan Indonesia).

The revised textbooks effectively erased the New Order's political narrative, retaining only mentions of its economic achievements and collapse due to KKN (Corruption, Collusion, Nepotism). An optimistic twenty-five-page narrative on the Reformation replaced it. Scholar Henk Schulte Nordholt critiqued this result as an eventless history disconnected from actors and political context. Simultaneously, wider societal censorship lifting spurred a publishing renaissance. Works by leftist icons like Tan Malaka and Mas Marco Kartodikromo were republished, alongside pro-Sukarno literature, ethnic-centered regional histories, and biographies. Crucially, long-taboo subjects, such as the 1965-66 mass killings, began to be addressed in public discourse, breaking decades of enforced silence.

A formal declaration of historiographical independence occurred at the Seventh National History Conference in Jakarta in October 2001. This gathering heralded the rise of a younger generation of historians, termed the Third Generation or Reformation generation. Scholar Mestika Zed presented a seminal paper, "Menggugat Tirani Sejarah Nasional" ("Criticizing the Tyranny of National History"), condemning the monolithic state narrative. Bambang Purwanto critiqued the Sartono Kartodirdjo school for its colonial-era focus and anachronism, advocating strict scientific historical methodology. He warned against merely swapping old orthodoxies for new ones, arguing that replacing Suharto with the Sultan as hero repeated the New Order's own de-Sukarnoization of history.

Conversely, historian Asvi Warman Adam, involved in the official pelurusan sejarah project, argued its goal was inclusive democratization, not new dogma. He cited the 2004 curriculum mandating multiple interpretations of the 1965 coup as a success. However, this reform proved fragile. By early 2007, the Attorney General moved to ban the new textbooks and overturn the 2004 curriculum, which had offered balanced perspectives on the 1948 Madiun Affair and the 1965 coup. The state justified this by claiming the texts violated Pancasila principles by covering Marxist thought. This resurgence of fanatical anti-communism, fueled by persistent military influence, aimed to reinstate the New Order's official version of history, as seen in works like Aminuddin Kasdi's Kaum Merah Menjarah (The Reds Plunder).

In response, a Yogyakarta workshop on alternative history in mid-2007 united young intellectuals, activists like Hilmar Farid, and journalists like Maria Hartiningsih. Purwanto presented research debunking Kasdi's narrative, showing how local religious leaders manipulated land ownership before 1965. Various NGOs also intensified efforts to document the 1965 killings. Schulte Nordholt argued that a history omitting these victims is inauthentic, creating a "people without history." He questioned whether Indonesian historiography could liberate itself from the state's conceptual framework. This critique is valid, yet must account for Indonesia's profound societal transformation since colonial times, which fundamentally alters the state-society relationship and the practice of history-writing.

The contemporary Indonesian state is fractured into competing groups, far from the monolithic New Order bureaucracy. The populace is now 90% literate, with a vast university system and unprecedented access to information via satellite TV and YouTube. The New Order, unlike the Dutch, invested resource revenues into education, creating a critical public. While the government may desire a statist historiography, it cannot rely on an uneducated populace as past regimes did. The written word has lost its "intrinsic magic," becoming a tool for nearly everyone, much like batik patterns once reserved for royalty.

Post-authoritarian freedom has fostered a diverse political and intellectual landscape. The explosion of historical publishing post-1998—approximately 1,600 books in Adrian Vickers's database—contradicts the "people without history" notion. Nationalism remains the largest topic, followed by Islam, with many studies on indigenous Islamic forms by scholars like Azyumardi Azra. Social and regional histories have flourished, reflecting political decentralization. Western historiography has also evolved, moving beyond J.C. van Leur's critiques. Schulte Nordholt, for instance, deconstructed the colonial pax neerlandica myth using a report by tobacco planter C. Amand (1872), which revealed Java's colonial state was sustained by a network of rural crime and jagos (local strongmen).

Western historians now often validate local traditions, even if unscientific by older standards. This less arrogant stance carries its own problems, as many local histories are highly polemical. Validating one view often invalidates another in Indonesia's deeply contested past, where historical interpretation is inflamed by societal fault lines: ethnic conflicts (including against Chinese Indonesians), religious strife, and the hard-line Muslim versus secularist divide. The Society of Indonesian Historians is hoped to mitigate the production of inflammatory, one-sided histories.

A future national history cannot be as tyrannical as its predecessors, lacking a monopoly in today's diverse society. It must confront past political manipulation, particularly the pariah status assigned to certain groups. The most glaring issue is the 1965 regime change. President Abdurrahman Wahid broke this taboo, apologizing for his Nahdatul Ulama militia's role and calling for investigations—a step toward reconciliation that remains incomplete. Chinese Indonesians, another stigmatized group used as scapegoats, especially during the 1998 crisis, also require historical reintegration beyond caricature.

Moving forward, academic and textbook historiography must transcend the New Order's divisive framework. It must develop an inclusive history that acknowledges multiple narratives and victims, engaging with rather than silencing the darkest chapters. The proliferation of perspectives, the educated citizenry, and global interconnectedness suggest that while the battle over history is intense, a return to a single, state-enforced orthodoxy is increasingly improbable. The challenge for Indonesian historians is to navigate this contested terrain with scholarly rigor, contributing to a more nuanced and truthful collective memory.

TIMELINE/KEY DATES:
- 1942 (March): Japanese conquest of Indonesia
- 1945 (17 August): Declaration of Independence
- 1945-9: ‘Revolution’ against Dutch re-colonization
- 1948 (September): Madiun Affair

- 1949-62: Darul Islam rebellion
- 1949-57: Parliamentary Democracy
- 1955: First elections
- 1958 (February): PRRI rebellion
- 1957-65: Sukarno’s Guided Democracy
- 1962: Dutch cede West Irian to Indonesia

- 1963-5: Konfrontasi (with Malaysia)
- 1965 (30 September): Gestapu (coup attempt)
- 1965-8: Establishment of ‘New Order’ under President Suharto
- 1975: Annexation of Timor
- 1976: Aceh insurgency begins
- 1998: Asian Financial Crisis; ‘Reformation’; Suharto resigns
- 1999: Restoration of free elections
- 2002: Timor gains independence

KEY HISTORICAL SOURCES:
- Abdullah, Taufik, Sejarah lokal di Indonesia (1979).
- Azra, Azyumardi, The Origins of Islamic Reformism in Southeast Asia (2004).
- Hatta, Mohammad, Portrait of a Patriot (1972).
- Noer, Deliar, The Modernist Muslim Movement in Indonesia (1973).
- Onghokham, The Residency of Madiun (Ph.D. dissertation, 1975).
- Sartono Kartodirdjo, The Peasants’ Revolt of Banten in 1888 (1966); Protest Movements in Rural Java (1973); Sejarah Nasional Indonesia (1975).
- Sukarno, Indonesian Political Thinking (1970); Under the Banner of Revolution (1966).
- Yamin, Muhamad, 6000 Tahun Sang Merah Putih (1950).

BIBLIOGRAPHY:
- Carey, P.B.R., The British in Java (1992).
- Cowan, C.D. & Wolters, O.W. (eds.), Southeast Asian History and Historiography (1976).
- Curaming, Rommel, ‘Towards Re-Inventing Indonesian Nationalist Historiography’ (2003).
- Hall, D.G.E., Historians of Southeast Asia (1963).
- Iskandar, Teuku (ed.), De Hikajat Atjeh (1958).
- Karsono, Sony, ‘Setting History Straight?’ (MA thesis, 2005).

- Kumar, Ann, Surapati, Man and Legend (1976).
- Leur, J.C. van, Indonesian Trade and Society (1967).
- Macgregor, Kate, History in Uniform (2007).
- Purwanto, Bambang, Gagalnya Historiografi Indonesiasentris? (2006); Menggugat historiografi Indonesia (with Adam, 2005).
- Reid, Anthony & Marr, David (eds.), Perceptions of the Past in Southeast Asia (1979).
- Ricklefs, M.C., Modern Javanese Historical Tradition (1978).
- Sartono Kartodirdjo, Indonesian Historiography (2001).
- Schulte Nordholt, Henk, ‘De-Colonising Indonesian Historiography’ (2004); ‘A State of Violence’.