• Journal of International Area Studies (JIAS)
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.155-180
• /
• 2011

This paper aims at comparing the metanarrative and East Timor's local narrative in Indonesia during the Suharto's regime. Although these history writings have different political goals, the patterns of writings are ironically similar. Both of the history writings show strong nationalistic history writing patterns. Yet, in the writings, these histories place different interpretations on the historical events. In the metanarrative, local dynamics are seen through the diagrams of the nation and nationhood. This narrative finds the roots of the "ethnie" from some kingdoms in Java and Sumatra. These kingdoms, which throve based on the Hindu-Buddhist culture, achieved a territorial unity to a degree, covering some parts of Java and Sumatra. The glorious past disappeared with the advent of the colonial rule. The metanarrative then emphasizes the unity of the ethnic groups in the archipelago, which fiercely resisted against the colonial exploitation and oppression. By this, these ethnic groups were defined as "the masses," the collective identity, which had a same goal to achieve the national independence. In addition, some local histories, which took positive attitudes toward the European forces, were simply left out from the metanarrative. All the separatist movements taking place in the republic were also described as the anti-unifying forces. On the other hand, the goal of the history-writing in East Timor was to enhance the sense of nationalism and create the perception of the "East Timorese." The fundamental aim was the separation from Indonesia. In the narrative, the nationalist politicians overcame the problem of the non-existence of any memories of the glorious past with the awakening of the idea of "the imagined gloriousness of the past if there was no colonial rule." In addition, the narrative overemphasizes the memory of the colonial rule for 450 years under the Portuguese rule in order to stress the fact that it was the colony of Portugal, not of the Netherlands. Finally, the narrative shows how the East Timorese collectively fell to the status of slaves. By this, the political leaders of East Timor evoked the notion that it was recolonized by Indonesia, under which the East Timorese were demoted to the status of slaves. This notion of "slave-master" relationship then became the motives for the independence struggles in East Timor.