Indonesia: Peoples and Histories New edition Edition

I purchased this book by chance (didn't have a history of Indonesia on my bookshelves, thought maybe I should) and I certainly didn't know much about Indonesia before reading it (my daughter majored in Southeast Asian Studies, but the closest I ever got was Singapore). So I certainly can't judge the author's research (but assume that Yale University Press wouldn't have published the book if it were not sound).
Speaking as a layperson, I LOVED this detailed, nuanced account of the peoples who eventually became Indonesians. Yes, the author's style is a bit cool and understated, so the book begins slowly, but the boxed "Capsules" and Taylor's balanced portrayal of ordinary people as well as elites creates a wonderful texture.
The four earlier reviews sometimes make legitimate points but can also be partisan. (Of course, in a broad history we all look for topics of particular interest to us -- Is there too little on Buddhism? On Islam? Too much? Was some ruler or writer or activist omitted? Since I "had no horse in this race" I found the balance just fine. No, actually, I enjoyed the fact that Taylor paid attention to Indonesian women.)
What I liked most about this work (the clue is in the title: Indonesia, Peoples and HistorIES) is the way in which Taylor explores parallel histories, competing accounts, and imaginary histories -- Javanese vs. Sumatran, Hindu vs. Muslim, Dutch vs. Asian, elite vs. village, Aceh vs. Ambonese, Chinese/Indonesians vs. Japanese, and many more. The result is a story of how history is created, as well as the creation of the nation of Indonesia.
What I liked least about this work is the totally inadequate provision of historical maps! Boo! Hiss!

Good introduction to history of Indonesia. Not much information on pre-Islamic period, but that is because records written on palm leaves (lontar) did not survive; not this author's fault. This book served me well as preparation for a trip to Bali.

While this has a lot to recommend it, the author seems to be excessively politically correct. It would seem that she has no familiarity with mainstream economic analysis, but is perhaps overly familiar with Marxist economics. She seems to feel that value is only created by farmers/laborers and needs to remind of it. Her many boxed digressions are interesting, but the one on Hinduism and Buddhism is so strange, that it did make me question the validity of her work in areas I'm less familiar with. She says that the Dutch did not try to convert the Islamic, Hindu or Buddhist Indonesians because they regarded Asians as essentially different (inferentially a racist outlook). I would like to know her source for this, since the pragmatic observation that there were far too many of them and they were too attached to their religions to make forced conversion possible seems like a much more obvious reason for the decision.

I found this book to be a slog of a read. I understand the daunting task of assembling a history of such a diverse people but I found this book to be vague, opinionated, non-linear, overwhelmingly negative in outlook, and the author's knowledge of the surrounding regions and Islam seems to be quite limited.

Anyone who endeavors to write an account of Indonesia's history and people will be challenged to narrow down not only the events and ethnic diversity but also the perspectives that interpret the relation between the two. Jean Taylor's approach is not meant to be a chronological play-by-play of history. Nor does this excellent book intend to provide a comprehensive "who's who" to satisfy the competing narratives surrounding so many islands, kingdoms and traders.

What Jean Taylor does instead is provide distinct neo-encyclopedic accounts of key periods and personalities; a discussion of important concepts that shape the identity of Indonesia. Each chapter includes a reading list of sources which still leaves a smattering of comments that beg for a specific citation. Making up for it, the author was intentional on including more insights on the female contributions and percepctions to a number of the historical events.

In a way, the final chapter becomes a grabbing conclusion where the land, borders, peoples, narratives and revisionist history paint the intriguing picture of contemporary Indonesia. By the time Taylor describes Acah's shari'a developments and East Timor's independence, the reader is struck with a real sense of awe for the archipelago's political evolution.

"Indonesia Peoples and History" begins with the islands' connection to the regional economy and religious influences. The various Hindu and Buddhist kingdoms established key trading posts with specific emphasis on the Islands of Java and Sumatra. As with any religion that emphasizes lineage and a sacred land, the farther flung Hindus, and later Muslims, adopted, evolved or simply fabricated blood lines that satisfied the religion's leadership or class requirements. Legends, impossible to prove true or false, established personalities on which to build historical identities or a religious exceptionalism.

The book's easy reading style allows for selective skimming on topics such as the roots of various kingdoms (Srivijaya, Majapahit, Mataram, Demak), the accounts of famous and infamous vigilantes or "jagos" (Trunajaya, Surapati, Cik Sepanjang, Diponegoro) and the key players and events of competing imperialist armies (Portuguese, Dutch, Japanese, British). This collection of names, heroes, places and events are the ingredients that bake the diversity of narratives that compete for the story of Indonesia and at the same time create its very identity.

The reader will further understand Jean Taylor's method and purpose with the number of sections that begin "Most western accounts..." or a similar preface to counter a local narrative. The book provides a critical eye against the "easy" accounts of history, conveniently ignored by the Indonesian solidarity mission and too readily exoticised by Dutch and British recordings. The strongest unifier is a common enemy. Indonesia's wonderfully complex history found that enemy in the Dutch. History would record, however, that the Dutch were friend and foe to at least Java's competing kingdoms, "Java's kings always returned to the VOC to save their thrones (pg. 184)." As is always the case with imperialism, the counter-factual to the historical events favors the 'could-have-beens'.

Islamic expansion was equally competitive if through different means and purposes. Jean Taylor records that the Portuguese expansion into Indonesia occurred at the same time that Islamic kingdom competed for the same territory. Islam's unique feature in Java and Sumatra was its attachment to the Malay language, using the Arabic script only as the "sacred" alphabet. As the Dutch and Portuguese forced their way into trading ports, a number of Islamic jihads sought to expand Muslim influence along coastlines and in many cases, into the interiors of Sumatra, Java and Sulawesi (pg. 123, 140). The famous North African voyager and scholar of the 14th century, Ibn Battuta, would gauge Muslim piety in Mali in the same manner as that of Western Indonesia: public prayers and the intent to expand Muslim teachings through jihad.

On a number of occasions, the author re-iterates the Muslim reticence or intentional rejection of Western technology. In many ways, this point mirrors that of Bernard Lewis, writing on the decline of the Ottoman Empire. It would appear that in both 19th century Turkey and the Muslim kingdoms of Indonesia, literature and many forms of technical advancement were slowed as a result. While the Indonesian narrative suffers from selection bias, the Western narrative resorts to purposeful ignorance against Islamic history and influence. There has always been an unbalanced interest from the West in the history of Hindu and Buddhist culture and ceremony.

The narratives continue to compete through the imperialist and colonial missions of the Dutch and the Japanese. As someone who has studied the colonization of Africa at length, I found the Dutch example in Indonesia to be quite different. Beyond the complicit nature of the Javanese princes in Dutch colonialism, the Dutch were also not known for the massive displacement of populations, as in some colonies. The concerted immunization campaigns of the early 20th century are at least one reason why Java's population boomed. It might also be noted that the Dutch sought to eradicate many of the same practices that the Muslim leaders despised, to include the practice of burning the widow after a husband's death and banning slavery outright.

Far from perfect, the Dutch did enable a large number of Indonesian businessmen, supported a widespread education effort and ended a long series of local civil wars; whose end-state, absent colonial intervention, is the counterfactual fodder for "Nusantara", or greater Indonesia (pg. 253). Nusantara, however, doesn't take into account the Malay, Java, Arab, Chinese, Japanese inter-competition that could have resulted in any number of resulting nations.

The Dutch were replaced by the Japanese in what Taylor calls one of the fastest imperial expansions in modern history. One imperialist power is often forgotten with the arrival of the next. But Japan, instead, played to the narrative of the Dutch enemy. Japan allowed the formation of political movements and encouraged Indonesian display of national symbols. It was at this point that the narratives would finally complete their national purpose. Sukarno evened borrowed the Dutch concept of Indonesia to declare the new territorial integrity from "Sabang to Merauke".

Sukarno's Panca Sila five points became the foundation, the very ethos that would attempt to unite the 17,000 islands. By 1985, Panca Sila was mandated in the education systems and required training for all government employees (pg. 362). Panca Sila did not endorse any religion over another except that it refused the choice to be atheist. Dozens of Muslim movements would then follow, each with its own interpretation of how Islam would be organized in Indonesian life and culture.

One of the few counter-narratives of Sukarno and Suharto's Indonesia came consistently from Aceh in Northern Sumatra. In East Timor, language was a tool of secession; Tetum over Bahasa Indonesia. No national narrative is comprehensive to every people in a state. According to Jean Taylor's account of Sukarno's nationalist strategy, "There was no place in national history for parallel histories of Indonesian societies, no perspective that showed the Dutch occupying a tiny space while Indonesian actors assumed the larger roles (pg. 342)."

The Indonesian narrative that sat well with many Muslims, especially orthodox Muslims preferred to take advantage of the Islamic majority as a national identity, selective of history with perhaps a few embellishments. "The history constructed in pesantrens (local Islamic schooling) began with Adam and Eve, named Indonesian ancestors who pointed the way to Islam, identified society's true leaders as descendants of Muhammad or of renowned theologians (pg. 342)."

Modern Indonesia, as for any country, will only be understand through its historical evolution and the narratives that influence its identity. For Indonesia, identity is a political, social and religious requirement. The case study of the Indonesian "ethos" continues to be extremely important both academically and practically. This book is an excellent addition to the discussion and a great read for anyone with their eyes on Indonesia.