Writing ‘Anniversary’ in Historical Perspective: A Way to Find Identity

, Abstract After the Reformation era, especially after implementing the Regional Autonomy Law, each regional government (city and province) in Indonesia has again conducted studies and re-established their ‘anniversary’. Besides focusing on legal and political aspects, historical perspectives in research and determining anniversaries can be used to find the regional identity. Based on it, regional governments can determine the direction of their development. Through the historical method and experience-based approach, this article focuses on the historical method in determining regional anniversaries.

distributing and equitably using national resources and balancing central and regional finances. In addition, regional autonomy is also carried out with democratic principles that pay attention to regional diversity (Pranoto, 2010, p. 11).
Regional governments are given broad opportunities to manage and develop their regions. Therefore, the ability and independence of the region is a must. Consequently, each region will strive hard to advance its region and improve the welfare of its people through extracting and developing regional resources to the fullest on the initiative and strength of the region itself. To achieve this, it is necessary to raise the solidarity of all residents so that they feel they belong, are obliged to develop, share in the results and finally have pride and loyalty to their region. One form of raising solidarity is the development of regional identity. In this connection, the excavation and writing of 'anniversary' can be used to develop regional identity, which in turn encourages the creation of regional community solidarity and togetherness, which is very useful for development.
Meanwhile, the development of an area, such as a city, has experienced a rapid development with the complexity of the emerging elements. Because the development of a region is no longer as simple as in the past, an 'anniversary' researcher needs a method and an analytical knife that can reveal the smallest parts and provide the meaning behind what is seen (Makkelo, 2017). Therefore, the main focus of this article is what is the methodological basis of the research and the establishment of an 'anniversary'? Then, how can the determination of 'anniversary' be a guide for finding the regional identity?

Method
This article focuses on initiating the writing of 'anniversary' from a historical perspective to seek regional identity. This article uses the literature review method by exploring books and articles on historical methods and 'anniversary'. A literature review is a discursive essay by conducting a critical study of specific topics (Research Guide, 2023). Therefore, the main focus of the literature review is to develop new arguments based on literature exploration (Ramdhani et al., 2014, p. 48). In addition, literature related to the history of the formation of cities in Indonesia is also used to provide a comprehensive understanding of experience-based 'anniversary' research. The results are then analysed and synthesised by comparing and selecting to conclude (See Wasino and Hartatik, 2020;Lubis, 2020).

Is the Regional 'Anniversaries' a History?
Conceivably some people ask about the relationship between 'anniversary' and history. Is 'anniversary' merely a day of birth? Or is it just a celebration of the milestone of the birth of a district, city, province or country? Or is the 'anniversary' part of the history of the community itself? It's not exceptionally challenging to answer these questions, but they can lead to many versions of the answer. An 'anniversary' or what can be called a birthday is a moment when an organism is born to start a new life. These organisms can be people (humans), state institutions, provinces, districts, cities, villages, companies, and so forth. The birth of an organism is usually confirmed by something easy to remember, such as planting a tree, a note, and so on. In the modern world, the birth of an organism is usually not only 'remembered', but also supported by evidence such as certificates, birth certificates, notary certificates, and so on.
If the born organism is 'only' a human, then it is not difficult to determine the time of its birth. In ancient times, for the tetenger (sign or characteristic) of a baby's birth in Java, for example, it was enough to use a pasaran day (the five-day cycle of the Javanese calendar called Pancawara includes, Kliwon, Legi, Pahing, Pon, and Wage). For instance, Friday Kliwon, Monday Pahing or Tuesday Legi, and so on have their meaning, which is symbolised by the calculation of the day and pasaran. The Javanese assume that certain days have special meanings symbolised in Javanese reckoning or petungan dina (day reckoning). The concept of day and pasar is used in the intricacies of marriage, making wells, planting rice, origins of wuku, making fences, applying doors, the nature and characteristics of women as well as the good and bad days of birth (Aji et al., 2020).
Meanwhile, the cycle of commemoration of the birthday is carried out every selapan (35 days), a combination of the Javanese and Islamic calendars. In a newborn baby, for example, the Javanese people call it puputan, marked by the release of the baby's navel (Aswiyati, 2015). Awareness of time is usually associated with natural events; for example, A man was born on Friday Kliwon when Mount A erupted for the first time or A man was born during the era of rats, and so on (about the religiosity of Mount Merapi see: Hendro, 2018). Today, when time awareness is so high, every family will record the date of birth and even make proof of birth by creating a formal birth certificate. Like the birth of a child, a region also experiences a process to be formally born, which is the initial momentum of its life. Just as the birth of a baby is taken into account when he comes out of his mother's womb, the birth (read: formation) of a region, even though it goes through a long process, is usually determined when he starts his right to life officially through a decree, decree, declaration, and so forth.
This description illustrates that an 'anniversary' or birthday is solely a formality of the culmination of the birth process of a new organism. Why is it only a formality of a process? This is related to the fact that the organism will never be born (formally) without being preceded by a process of history. The term 'history' has two different meanings. First, 'history' is everything that happened in the past-every thought, action, and event. In this sense, 'history' is undoubtedly one of the broadest concepts understood by human reason. However, 'history' has a second meaning: past stories, such as books, articles, films, and lectures. A historian must understand that the past (all the thoughts and events that happened) is gone forever. The only contact historians have of the present with the past is through the relatively few records left by people who lived before them and through the records historians wrote based on those records (Salevouris & Furay, 2015, p. 14). Following James Davidson and Mark Lytle, 'history' is not 'what happened merely in the past'; on the contrary, 'history' is the act of selecting, analysing, and writing about the past. Writing 'history' is done and consciously constructed, not a collection of static data scattered in archives (Davidson & Lytle, 2000, p. xviii in Salevouris & Furay, 2015. In the case of the Indonesian revolution for independence, for example, the Proclamation of Independence on August 17, 1945, would never have been born without being preceded by previous processes such as the meetings of the Investigative Body for Preparatory Efforts for Indonesian Independence/Badan Penyelidik Usaha-Usaha Persiapan Kemerdekaan Indonesia (BPUPKI), the Preparatory Committee for Indonesian Independence/Panitia Persiapan Kemerdekaan Indonesia (PPKI), the Rengasdengklok Incident, and so on, which gives the meaning that the idea of Indonesian independence legally and formally was obtained through a long process of struggle, was not a 'gift' for the colonisation practices that were taking place at that time (Rinardi, 2017). So, the surrounding processes are no less important than the 'momentum of birth' itself. Something will never be born if the process fails. Thus, the momentum of birth is a significant moment.
What is the relationship between 'anniversary' or birthdays with history? 'Anniversary' is only one of the climaxes of a historical process. Thus, the determination of an 'anniversary' must be accompanied by a description and explanation of the historical process that led to the phenomenon of the birth of a particular area. In defining historical explanation, Kuntowijoyo provides guidelines for historians to adhere to three main points, namely 1) historical explanation is interpreting and understanding (hermeneutics and verstehen); 2) historical explanation is an explanation of the elongated time; and 3) historical explanation is an explanation of a single event (Kuntowijoyo, 2008, p. 10). Hence, in the process of selecting and declaring an 'anniversaries', historians must understand the context and background of the birth of the area. The historical condition of the birth of a region is inherent because it was not born from a social vacuum. The birth of a region must have a particular social and historical context. Therefore, disclosing 'anniversary' also means that it is necessary to fulfil the criteria in writing history and can be accounted for methodologically.

Methodological Perspective in Writing Regional 'Anniversaries'
As noted in the previous section, the research and writing of 'anniversary' should be methodologically justifiable. Research and publication on an 'anniversary' should ideally be written using the principles of historical research by applying the historical method. In a general sense, the historical research method is the process of examining and critically analyzing the records and legacies of the past (Gottschalk, 1986, p. 32). However, historians are social and cultural beings, which gives the impression that history is less a science and more an art. It is constructed through imagination at a given moment rather than discovered through experimentation or objective methodology. The past can reveal truths that are part of one's personal and collective life (Claus & Marriott, 2017, p. 8). Nevertheless, all historians recognize the need to explore the limits of historical knowledge and the place for historians to create and transform knowledge when they encounter fragments of the past in the present. To undertake this appropriately, history must understand the techniques and methods of selecting and interpreting historical evidence (Claus & Marriott, 2017, p. 15).
As a process of writing history, research on 'anniversaries' requires historical methods, namely a systematic attempt to collect historical sources, examine them critically, and present the results of a synthesis, usually in written form (Garraghan, 1957, p. 33). From this definition, there are three main steps, namely the collection of historical sources (heuristics), source criticism, and writing which involves a process of interpretation. First, the activity of collecting historical sources is a technique for obtaining traces of the past (Renier, 1997, p. 113), which includes activities to search for and collect historical sources, which can consist of both written and unwritten materials which can be in the form of objects, stories, people, social systems, and so on. It means that historical research depends on what is known as historical traces, namely anything left by past events which state the truth of the historical event itself. Historical sources can be classified into two groups, namely primary and secondary sources. Primary sources are information obtained directly from people who witnessed the incident with their own eyes. Meanwhile, secondary sources come from the testimony of a second party or not from those who witnessed or experienced the historical event themselves (Notosusanto, 1975, p. 19).
Second is source criticism, namely the process of examining historical sources to assess or test the historical sources that have been collected. In the repertoire of historical methods, there are two types of criticism: external and internal. External criticism determines the authenticity of a historical source, meaning whether the source is genuine or physically fake. To ascertain whether a source is authentic, historical researchers must at least ask five questions to historical sources. First, when was the historical source created (date)? Second, where was the manuscript made (location)? Third, who made it (the author)? Fourth, from what material was the source made (analysis)? Fifth, was the source created in its original form (integrity)? (Garraghan, 1957, p. 168). If historical sources can be used to answer these questions convincingly, they are authentic. For this purpose, basic historical knowledge is needed, such as palaeography, epigraphy, genealogy, numismatics, etc.
Internal criticism helps determine the credibility of a historical source. This internal criticism is more related to the contents of a document in the sense of whether the contents or information contained in a source whose authenticity has been confirmed can be trusted. To gain the credibility of a source, it is also necessary to ask various critical questions regarding the maker of the historical source in question by identifying the person to find out whether he wrote the source, whether that person is honest and courageous in the sense that he is willing and able to express the truth in the source he left behind, then also whether he has the appropriateness to write the source, and so on. Apart from that, to properly test a historical source's credibility by collaborating with other more independent sources. In this way, if the information provided by a historical source turns out to be untrue, fraud can be detected (Gottschalk, 1986, pp. 95-117). Historical researchers must also be sensitive to determine which sources they believe in, especially those related to diverse points of view (Storey, 2011, p. 36).
The third is interpretation. At this stage, historical researchers must understand the true meaning of the evidence that has been criticised. There are five types of interpretation, namely verbal interpretation (language, vocabulary, and grammar as well as context), technical (intent), logical, psychological, and factual (Wasino & Hartatik, 2020, pp. 101-110). It must be done because historical facts obtained from sources after being criticised often have not shown meaningful unanimity. Instead, they are scattered facts that usually have no relation. Therefore, this problem must be overcome by assembling the scattered facts by conducting analysis and synthesis with an interpretation based on the topic being studied unanimously.
The analysis process here refers to studying the facts from historical sources and then compiling them into a synthesis, relating them to other facts. This synthesis process cannot be carried out without using historical researchers' interpretations of the relationships between these facts because these facts are often separate and say nothing about the relationship of one fact to another. Interpretation cannot work without explanation. In this stage, historical researchers sometimes need to borrow concepts and theories from the social sciences to provide interpretations and explanations of the relationships between facts that historical researchers have discovered. Several disciplines, such as archaeology, anthropology, literature, and geography, can assist historical researchers in constructing relationships between facts to make them more meaningful (See Claus & Marriott, 2017, pp. 345-413).
Fourth, if all the processes and steps above have been taken, then the stage of writing (historiography) is reached. This stage is the final step for historical researchers to reconstruct the past. After going through these various processes, historical researchers must put it into written history or history as a story. In this case, historical researchers' talents and individual abilities greatly colour their writing. So, it is appropriate that the writing of 'anniversaries' as an account of the past needs to use research principles in historical science so that it can be accounted for scientifically. As a scientific process, historical researchers should be equipped with historical methods and ways of thinking through understanding the five fundamental concepts of historical thinking: change, causality, context, complexity, possibility and subsequent history (the big six). With this in mind, historical research is hoped to be more current and critical (Zed, 2018).

Regional 'Anniversaries': Writing the Past for the Future
In the realm of anthropological studies, a social phenomenon called birth or 'anniversary' is part of the life cycle of an organism. In the culture of people worldwide, essential milestones in human life are always commemorated in the form of ceremonies which in anthropological terms are referred to as rites of passage or life journey ceremonies or life cycle ceremonies (Koentjarningrat, 1980). In Javanese culture, for example, essential milestones in the human life cycle that are commemorated or celebrated in ritual ceremonies are from when a woman is seven months pregnant (mitoni), to birth (brokohan), to sepasaran (1 pasar = 5 days in the Javanese calendar), selapanan (35 days), tedak siti (tradition of setting foot on the ground for a child). Thus, on to the moments that are considered necessary after death starting from telung dina (3 days), mitung dina (7 days), matang puluh (40 days), to the ceremony of mendhak sepisan (1 year commemoration of death), mendhak telu (3 year commemoration of death) (See also Koentjaraningrat, 1984;Karim, 2017). To carry out this ritual, the Javanese hold a slametan. For the Javanese, slametan means a core ritual that implies symbolic meaning, such as the mystical and social unity of those participating (Maulana, 2018, p. 60).
The question is whether the crucial milestones must be commemorated or celebrated through a particular ceremony. Of course, besides having a religious or belief dimension, the life cycle ritual also has a socio-cultural dimension. The religious dimension or belief is related to efforts to build harmony with the unseen and divine realms. Society, through individuals, builds harmony with natural and supernatural forces so that the unseen world provides security and serenity for individuals in society. For this reason, individuals in society must also give something to the supernatural through ritual ceremonies. Giving something can be through specific offerings or sacrifices or by saying certain prayers. Thus, there is some exchange between the human realm and the supernatural realm. There is a give and take between the human world and the world of the supernatural or the world of spirits.
In addition, these rites of passage also have a social dimension. In this case, in general, rites of passage also function to build social harmony. The life cycle ceremony is an initiation ceremony for entering new individuals into a certain level of community life. The circumcision ceremony (sunatan or khitanan), for example, is something that has a different nuance between Arabic and Javanese (for the tradition of female circumcision in Java, see Rosyid, 2020). Non-Javanese circumcision is used as a momentum for initiation ceremonies in the rites of the passage cycle. Even though there has been a shift in meaning, the function of circumcision for society remains the same (for instance, see Bakti et al., 2021). Circumcision, which is celebrated in the form of a ceremony, is a form of initiation, introduction, and even a declaration to all levels of society that a new individual has become an adult and must be accepted among the adult groups in that community. This initiation ceremony can achieve social harmony between community members and individuals who have just entered a particular stage of community life. New individuals can adjust to society, and vice versa; society can accept the presence of these new individuals.
Identical to life cycle ceremonies for individual human organisms in society, 'anniversary' is a part of the life cycle. Every critical milestone in the life cycle is deemed necessary to be celebrated. In an institution's life, 'anniversary' is the most critical moment. In contrast to the individual human organism, which cannot escape death, which is why life cycle ceremonies and death are also carried out, then in the life of an institution, a death seems 'avoidable' or at least postponed. Therefore, the commemoration of the death of an institution is not carried out. For institutions, social recognition is much more needed than harmony with the supernatural. Therefore, it can be understood that for an institution, 'anniversary' is essential for an institution to perpetuate and develop its life.
Affirmation and commemoration of the 'anniversary' ceremony will reaffirm the existence and function of this institution in society. Every time an 'anniversaries' ceremony is held, or a birthday, the community is invited to return to their enthusiasm to carry out and develop the functions of institutions in society. So, one of the functions of the 'anniversary' commemoration is to carry out reinforcements for the spirit of the community, which may have faded for a year. With the commemoration of birthdays or 'anniversary', it is hoped that the institution will continue to live and develop with the community's support.
The description above provides a clear picture of a connection between the past, the present, and expectations about the future. An 'anniversary' or the day of birth of an institution is an issue in history because it is related to the past. Meanwhile, the effort to trace and determine 'anniversaries' is an initiative and the result of contemporary ideas about the past Benedicto Croce once expressed that writing history or historiography is a contemporary thought about the past (present thoughts about the past (Croce, 1959, p. 44). Meanwhile, historical events and facts are actually 'dead' in historical researchers' or historians' minds or experiences. In understanding the past, historians reminisce about those past events in their minds and then put them in writing (Abdullah & Surjomihardjo, 1985, p. 133). Therefore, as Wilhelm Dilthey expressed, historical writing is a product of the present, that history can answer questions about the nature of contemporary reality (Boudeon & Cherkaoui, 2000, p. 323). Historians write 'anniversary' history not intended for the sake of the past itself but for the benefit of the present and even the future. This is due to the fact that the past has disappeared, can no longer be seen, the perpetrators have died, and they have no interest anymore. Meanwhile, the current generation, which traces and writes the history of 'anniversaries', is interested in current challenges and future aspirations. Thus, remember that tracing and writing the history of 'anniversaries' is an attempt to write down the past for the sake of the future.

Regional 'Anniversary' and Historical Truth
The fact that the writing of 'anniversary' history is not for the benefit of the past but for the benefit of the present and the future does not mean that historical researchers can indulge their interests in uncovering historical truth. In this case, the principle that must still apply is that writing history is a form of contemporary accountability for the past. Historical science also has idealism as a means to uphold the values of truth and justice. Thus, efforts to achieve historical truth must still be a reference for writing 'anniversary' history. This is also following what was expressed by Jean-Paul Sartre: "... the duty of the intellectual is to denounce injustices and abuses of power, and to fight for truth, justice, progress, and other universal values" (For example, see Morrow, 1994& Neuman, 1994.
The crucial question is what is historical truth, and what is its relation to the nature of writing 'anniversary' history? What is historical truth or historical truth? As it is known that truth can have various meanings, such as circumstances that correspond to specific facts or certain realities or something that corresponds to real things, actual events or actuality. Truth can also mean something from an original source or an ideal standard. In ancient times truth referred to firmness or sincerity in action. The direct opposite of truth is a lie. Various theories and views about truth continue to be debated among scholars and philosophers. There are different claims to the question of what is truth; what determines what is right or wrong; how to define and identify truth; whether truth is subjective and relative or objective or absolute.
In historical science, historical truth also has unique characteristics that may differ from truth in other sciences. Truth in history is relative. Truth in history refers more to statements about the past, not about the past or facts in history itself (Aron, 1959, p. 153). The past and its facts remain the same and do not change, although the opinions of people or historians about the past may change (Ankersmit, 1987, p. 117). Thus, the historical truth contained in historical writings is always an unfinished process. Even when historians reveal well-established facts, it is always possible for historians to differ radically in their interpretation of the same facts. Therefore, readers of history must approach other people's writings with a critical attitude, and this also causes historical truth to be relative.
The description above clearly illustrates that historical truth is not an absolute truth. Indeed, there are historical facts whose truth cannot be denied (hard facts), such as the events of the Proclamation of Independence on August 17, 1945. Regardless, there are also historical facts whose truths are still debatable as soft facts. The main criterion for determining historical truth is the availability of historical sources regarding historical facts, undoubtedly the authenticity and credibility of these historical sources. However, this historical truth is contextual and inherent in the era. What was considered historical truth in the past may not necessarily be considered historical truth today. What is considered historical truth today may only sometimes be considered historical truth in the future. This is determined by various factors, including the discovery of more authentic and credible historical sources and the emergence of a new reinterpretation of the determination of an 'anniversary'. In the realm of historical science, rewriting history or rewriting history is common or even something that cannot be avoided (inevitable).
An example is the determination of the 'anniversaries' of Central Java Province on August 15, 1950, which is considered controversial (about Central Java Province anniversary, see Sejarah Singkat Hari Jadi Provinsi Jawa Tengah, 2017). According to some parties, this determination was not based on historical studies. This determination has eliminated a number of significant historic events in Central Java, such as the events of the five days of fighting in Semarang, Palagan Ambarawa, to the holding of the first National Sports Week/Pekan Olahraga Nasional (PON) in Surakarta. According to Soeparto Tjitrodiharjo, Chairman of the Central Java 45 Regional Daily Council, several governors during the early days of the province's formation were also not recognized and lost to history. Based on historical tracing, the birthday of Central Java Province should have fallen on August 19, 1945. This was based on PPKI provisions which determined the number of provinces to be part of the Republic of Indonesia, including Central Java (Budiwiyati, 2011).

Regional 'Anniversary' and Historical Objectivity
Today various groups in Indonesian society seem apathetic about discussing objectivity in writing Indonesian history. This is closely related to the attitude of the New Order government and, to a certain degree, the Reform Government in treating Indonesian history, especially regarding the G30S 1965. Many have questioned or even challenged the truth and objectivity of writing history around the 1965 tragedy. Many books in circulation contain various historical studies that lead to proof that the version of G30S history written by or with the approval of the New Order government is a form of distortion and darkening of history so that history needs to be straightened out (See Purwanto and Adam 2005). The Indonesia-centric historiographical tradition is considered to have failed to reconstruct Indonesia's past because it does not present the past optimally and does not provide alternative perspectives (See Purwanto, 2006, p. xiii-xv).
If historical truth is related mainly to records or historical sources, then historical objectivity is mainly related to applying historical research method in general. There has long been a debate about whether history is subjective or objective. Historical works contain elements of subjectivity and objectivity at the same time. According to Walsh, subjectivity in historical research and writing is also quite prominent; for instance, there are likes and dislikes, prejudice, differences in interpretation, and differences in moral beliefs (Walsh, 1959, p. 216). Even this subjectivity begins to be seen when a historical researcher begins his research to choose a research topic. At this stage, subjective historical researchers' interests are very decisive.
Furthermore, subjectivity also surfaced when historical researchers began to collect historical sources and then when selecting and criticising sources. The historical researcher concerned will select and assess which historical sources are appropriate and not appropriate, which may be different when compared to other historians when researching the same matter; likewise, when historical researchers reach the final stage of historical research, namely historiography, which is determined by the taste and style of language as well as the diction of the historical writer.
In this context, historical objectivity lies in the general use of historical method in historical research. In addition, objectivity also lies in the openness of the use of historical method steps used by historical writers both in terms of background topic selection, methods of collecting historical sources, selection and criticism of historical sources, the process of analysing and synthesising historical facts as well as interpretation and style writing. With this openness, readers can openly understand what the historical writer did. With this openness, readers and other historians also have the opportunity to criticise the work. Thus, as previously stated, in the realm of historical science, reviewing and re-writing historical works that existed before is commonplace or even a necessity. In this way, objectivity in historical works can also be upheld. Of course, this kind of thing needs to be applied in research and writing on the 'anniversaries' of a government institution.

The History of Regional 'Anniversary' and Identity Discovery
In the previous section, it has been described that as a consequence of demands for regional autonomy, each region must strive hard to advance its region and improve the welfare of its people through optimal exploration and development of regional resources for the region's progress. Regional autonomy emphasises that the more the regions have independence, the more successful the regional autonomy mission will be. In the framework of building regional independence, spiritual efforts are needed to build solidarity among all community members in the area so that they feel they belong, are obliged to develop, share in the results and ultimately have pride and loyalty to their region. One effort that can be made to build solidarity is by building regional identity. This is where the excavation and writing of 'anniversary' can be used to develop a regional identity to encourage the creation of solidarity in the region. So thus, there is a relationship between the writing of 'anniversary' history and with interest in exploring and finding community identity in the past as a collective memory and then being developed in the present and the future.
Concerning this collective memory, Bernard Lewis has divided history into three types: remembered history, recovered history, and invented history (Lewis, 2009). To the history of 'anniversary', perhaps it is fascinating to refer to history as remembered history, a collective memory regarding statements about the past based on what people remember. Even though people's memory itself works based on what is remembered and what is considered essential and meaningful, what is considered meaningful is closely related to or cannot be separated from shared identity as a community. In this sense, history can be used as a driving force for change. However, undoubtedly, it is not confident that what people remember is in accordance with what happened. Therefore, research that can be scientifically accounted for regarding society's collective memory is also needed.
Meanwhile, what is meant by recovered history refers to a condition in which people have forgotten certain past events and figures because they were not considered necessary, and then they were rediscovered by foreigners. At first, the discovery was not greeted with enthusiasm. However, with specific changes, the past is used as an essential moment for change. For example, the figure of King Cyrus from Persia, the discovery of Majapahit by Dutch scholars, and so forth. Invented history is a fabrication of history, from falsification to removing historical evidence that conflicts with actual interests. This is what often creates public scepticism and cynicism about historical truth.
The description above clearly shows that writing 'anniversary' has a strategic function in building a community's identity. The study of 'anniversary' can function as an initial milestone for the search for identity by discovering cultural values and enthusiasm, as well as cultural objects left behind. The discovery of past self-identity materials combined with present-day creativity will give birth to cultural works (both in the form of ideas and social and material systems) distinct from other communities. In this context, maybe writing anniversaries has the same purpose and function as writing local history, which can be used to find regional identity (for instance, see Warto, 2017;Hariyono, 2017). In turn, regional identity can become the basis for forming national identity (for example, see Yuliati, 2013), where the ultimate goal is, of course, not only regional development on the one hand but also national development on the other. Apart from that, like local history, the writing of 'anniversaries' can also be interpreted as an attempt to provide an alternative by freeing oneself from the mainstream narrative (Sulistiyono, 2016).
Regarding the relationship between historical disciplines and society, Kuntowijoyo advised that being a history researcher in Indonesia is an adventure and a risky business. If historical researchers are responsive to people's demands (political needs, etc.), they have done well for society but have neglected their scientific discipline. Meanwhile, choosing to be an independent researcher is also wrong because it means harming the community itself, and historians will only live in an ivory tower. To reconcile this dilemma, historians must be able to serve society without harming their intellect (Kuntowijoyo, 2000).

Conclusions
From the description above, several important points can be drawn. Research and writing on 'anniversary' should be method accounted for in history using solid historical sources. Research and writing on 'anniversary' using historical method will better fulfil the principles of historical truth and objectivity. Research and re-writing history, including the history of 'anniversary', is natural in historical science. It can be used to explore and enrich regional identity, which is very much needed to raise solidarity in the context of national development in the era of regional autonomy, both now and in the future.