The Peasant Revolt of Banten by Nina Mariani Noor

Kartodirjo explains the rebel’s activities in very detail accounts which are usually overlooked by historians. It seems to me that he was doing something unusual for historians in writing a narrative at that time. In other words, he was doing an innovation in writing history by taking detailed events into account. I think, his way in narrating the history about the revolt in Banten makes this book is interesting and enjoyable to read. For me, reading this book does not look like reading other history books which are usually boring. Moreover, the very detailed events included in the book show the richness of data he had and also his thoroughness and carefulness in writing the book.
Furthermore, in getting data, Kartodirjo did not only rely on written data but also oral data which come from several personal testimonies. What interesting is that there are some testimonies from women like from Nyai Mas Ayu Kamsiah,Mas Ayu Rapiah that are considered in this book. For me, this is what I call “a real history” in which historians see the stories that are originated from the actors and eyewitness themselves as valuable. However, I hardly found testimonies from Hajis parties which were actually the main actors in the rebellions. In addition, it seems for me that most of the testimonies came from “the victims” and very limited from “the actors”. I think, it would be better if he added some more testimonies from “the actors” like haji or tarekat leaders.
In terms of tarekat, I do agree with Kartodirjo’s opinion that there were competitions among tarekat leaders at that time, but I think the rivalries were only about gaining as many as followers to get survived. These circumstances still happen nowadays, not only between different tarekat but also within the same tarekat but different leaders.
I was a bit unsatisfied on the reason why Haji Mardjuki suddenly went back to Mecca just before the revolt happened. Kartodirjo only gave some provoking questions left for the readers. Why did not he try to elaborate more on those reasons? I think it would make this history more fruitful and balance.
Finally, I do agree that the rebellion in Banten, in some components were well prepared and well designed. However, since it lacked of good strategy and long term planning, and highly depended on religious leaders in individual who played very significant roles, the rebellion only lasted for a short time and it can be said that it failed to combat colonialism from Banten. Just like other revolt in other areas in Indonesia then.