Banten Rebellion, 1750-1752

Factors behind the mass participation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The Banten Rebellion of 1750 has been described in two recent standard accounts in totally different ways. M. C. Ricklefs emphasizes the political conflicts between the ruler and the elite in court circles as a principal cause of the uprising, 1 while J. Kathirithamby-Wells views this event as a consequence of the economic exploitation of an oppressed people. 2 Why has this same event been depicted so differently? I believe that their viewpoints represent two different historiographical traditions of studying rebellions in Southeast Asia. In general, rebellions in Southeast Asia in pre-colonial times are interpreted as uprisings by political elites who attempt to snatch the throne. I would like to call this the 'traditional approach.' Rebellions occuring in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries are commonly seen as resistance movements by an oppressed peasantry opposing the absolute power of colonial governments. I would call this the 'national-history approach.' Ricklefs' standpoint is close to 'traditional approach,' while Kathirithamby-Wells uses the 'national-history approach'.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)613-651
Number of pages39
JournalModern Asian Studies
Volume37
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2003 Jul
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

participation
Southeast Asia
resistance movement
political conflict
colonial government
well
event
political elite
history
nineteenth century
twentieth century
exploitation
elite
cause
Rebellion
Participation
economics
South-East Asia
Uprising
National History

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Banten Rebellion, 1750-1752 : Factors behind the mass participation. / Ota, Atsushi.

In: Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 37, No. 3, 07.2003, p. 613-651.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{976656e3dc034fe5afe17fd6999276d0,
title = "Banten Rebellion, 1750-1752: Factors behind the mass participation",
abstract = "The Banten Rebellion of 1750 has been described in two recent standard accounts in totally different ways. M. C. Ricklefs emphasizes the political conflicts between the ruler and the elite in court circles as a principal cause of the uprising, 1 while J. Kathirithamby-Wells views this event as a consequence of the economic exploitation of an oppressed people. 2 Why has this same event been depicted so differently? I believe that their viewpoints represent two different historiographical traditions of studying rebellions in Southeast Asia. In general, rebellions in Southeast Asia in pre-colonial times are interpreted as uprisings by political elites who attempt to snatch the throne. I would like to call this the 'traditional approach.' Rebellions occuring in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries are commonly seen as resistance movements by an oppressed peasantry opposing the absolute power of colonial governments. I would call this the 'national-history approach.' Ricklefs' standpoint is close to 'traditional approach,' while Kathirithamby-Wells uses the 'national-history approach'.",
author = "Atsushi Ota",
year = "2003",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1017/S0026749X03003044",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
pages = "613--651",
journal = "Modern Asian Studies",
issn = "0026-749X",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Banten Rebellion, 1750-1752

T2 - Factors behind the mass participation

AU - Ota, Atsushi

PY - 2003/7

Y1 - 2003/7

N2 - The Banten Rebellion of 1750 has been described in two recent standard accounts in totally different ways. M. C. Ricklefs emphasizes the political conflicts between the ruler and the elite in court circles as a principal cause of the uprising, 1 while J. Kathirithamby-Wells views this event as a consequence of the economic exploitation of an oppressed people. 2 Why has this same event been depicted so differently? I believe that their viewpoints represent two different historiographical traditions of studying rebellions in Southeast Asia. In general, rebellions in Southeast Asia in pre-colonial times are interpreted as uprisings by political elites who attempt to snatch the throne. I would like to call this the 'traditional approach.' Rebellions occuring in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries are commonly seen as resistance movements by an oppressed peasantry opposing the absolute power of colonial governments. I would call this the 'national-history approach.' Ricklefs' standpoint is close to 'traditional approach,' while Kathirithamby-Wells uses the 'national-history approach'.

AB - The Banten Rebellion of 1750 has been described in two recent standard accounts in totally different ways. M. C. Ricklefs emphasizes the political conflicts between the ruler and the elite in court circles as a principal cause of the uprising, 1 while J. Kathirithamby-Wells views this event as a consequence of the economic exploitation of an oppressed people. 2 Why has this same event been depicted so differently? I believe that their viewpoints represent two different historiographical traditions of studying rebellions in Southeast Asia. In general, rebellions in Southeast Asia in pre-colonial times are interpreted as uprisings by political elites who attempt to snatch the throne. I would like to call this the 'traditional approach.' Rebellions occuring in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries are commonly seen as resistance movements by an oppressed peasantry opposing the absolute power of colonial governments. I would call this the 'national-history approach.' Ricklefs' standpoint is close to 'traditional approach,' while Kathirithamby-Wells uses the 'national-history approach'.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0042202399&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0042202399&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S0026749X03003044

DO - 10.1017/S0026749X03003044

M3 - Article

VL - 37

SP - 613

EP - 651

JO - Modern Asian Studies

JF - Modern Asian Studies

SN - 0026-749X

IS - 3

ER -