|
|
By Okall Langu*
August 24, 2009
Posted to the web on August 24, 2009 |
|
|
|
The controversy surrounding the Anyuak Luo identity issues demand an honest debate and swift resolution by the Anyuak people. The debate and resolution are necessary to pave way for the development and establishment of a standard Luo language as a lingua franca within the Luo Communities Organization member ancestral regions. For LUCO to begin dreaming that a standard Luo language could be established within the LUCO member ancestral regions, the regions must be on record as identifying themselves with the Luo language and as being proud as bona fide descendants of the Luo heritage in clear and non-controvertible terms. Luo identity must reign supreme.
A cursory review of the easily accessible literature within the public domain reveals the presence of a disturbing and torturous mystique as to whether the Anyuak mythology places the “Anyuak people as being Luo” or the “Luo people as being Anyuaks,” and such mystique is bound to bubble up sooner or later and could derail the noble efforts being contemplated about establishing Luo language as a lingua franca within the LUCO member ancestral regions. This necessarily conjures up a discussion point which should be thrashed out by the experts and that is: Are the Anyuaks Luo or are the Luo Anyuaks?
I posit here that the Anyuaks are Luo and not the other way round, but that the Anyuak mythology, for some unknown reason, evades positing the Anyuak as Luo people, and indeed even avoids embracing the Luo identity as the fulcrum from which the Anyuak genesis and being rotates. The mythology appears to depict the Anyuak people simply as the Anywaa. A cursory review of available literature lays bare this supposition. Further discussion will illustrate. At the second annual LUCO conference held in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, on August 15, 2009, the following communities which claim Luo heritage were represented: Acholi, Alur, Anyuak, Chollo, Padhola, JoLuo, Lango, and Pari. Other communities such as Berin, JumJum, Kumam and others not yet registered with LUCO might have been represented but their presence was not as conspicuous as the former eight.
The literature reveals that of the former eight, almost each—the Acholi, Alur, Chollo, Padhola, JoLuo, and Lango—enshrine themselves first and foremost with the Luo identity as the fulcrum from which their being and genesis rotates; but, not unequivocally so the Anyuaks. Wikipedia records the genesis and being of the Anyuaks of southern Sudan through a seven-page narrative titled, Akobo, Sudan. No mention of the word “Luo” graces this Akobo narrative. Wikipedia also has a four-page narrative regarding the Anyuaks of southeastern Ethiopia under a piece titled, Anuak. Here, the Anyuaks are described as a river people… scattered along the banks and rivers . . . in the Gambella region who “come from a family of Nilotes,” [but] “are believed [author’s emphasis] to have a common origin with their northern neighbors, the Luos and Shilluk.” Again, no direct unequivocal assertion in Wikipedia that the Anyuak are Luo.
There exists in the United States an organization of the Anyuak community called the Anywaa Community Association in North America (ACANA). The ACANA website in introducing Anyuak people under “About US” mentions nothing about Luo; although, to due credit, professor Robert Collins under “History” mentions that the Anyuaks “are Luo speaking people…,” this, the only relation made connecting the Anyuak with Luo, and no more. In an article posted in the Anyuak Media on August 21, 2009, the author, D.M. Koch, exalts the traditional system of governance “that our people of the two Nilotic communities—Anyuak and Cholo (Shilluk) have.” The article is titled, Sudan: Anyuak and Cholo Kingdoms are Our National Heritage. There is praise for His majesty King Adongo Agada Akway Cham Gilo of Anyuak shown dancing during a traditional Anyuak crowning of the king ceremony. Author Koch laments how ‘our’ rich culture is being threatened by globalization and ignorance in some circles, and stops there to leave it up to the readers to suggest plausible avenues for rescue.
Koch’s article is laden with references of mythologies which could easily be passed on to the Anyuak and Chollo progenies under a banner manifesting that the Anyuak mythologies derive their accounts and legends from the Anyuak ancestors of old, the Luo. Yet, alas, Koch attempts no mention, whatsoever, of the Luo identity being the source of the Anyuak heritage. Amalgamation and promotion of Luo identity is what is needed to perpetuate Luo, and by extension, Anyuak culture. Anyuak and Chollo are Luo culture. Luo identity is the fulcrum from which their being and identity rotates. To lament the erosion of the Anyuak culture without interjecting the supremacy of the Luo heritage as being the source of the culture is to miss an invaluable ingredient that is required to perpetuate the cultural-identity mix.
Most other Luo groups do not appear to possess such identity problem. There are no mystiques surrounding Luo identity as being the non-controvertible genesis of the rest of the LUCO member communities. A Wikipedia narrative titled Acholi declares easily that the Acholi are a Luo people said to have come to northern Uganda from Bahr el Ghazal in southern Sudan. The Alurs, under a title Alur People is equally easily narrated as being “part of the larger Luo group, whose language is mutually intelligible with Acholi.” As to Anyuak language, “Anuak or Anywa” is said “to be a Nilo Saharan language family.” According to Wikipedia’s title, Anuak Language, the Anyuak language spoken in Ethiopia is not Luo, but is shown to have far distant roots in Luo. The Reference.com under a five-page narrative titled Shilluk, shows the Chollo people—as the Shilluk prefer to be called—tracing their history to Nyikango and parent stocks of the Luo who were then inhabiting Wij Pach at north Bhar El Ghazal. Wikipedia under the title, Luo family of ethnic groups, posits, easily, the Chollo as being a branch of the Luo.
Wikipedia’s title, Jopadhola, states Jopadhola, also known as Badama, were Luo migrants who arrived in southeastern Uganda from south Sudan in the 16th century. Oral history narrates that Owiny, the leader of the Kenyan Luo, was a brother of Adhola, the leader of the Jopadhola, who settled in Tororo instead of proceeding to Kenya and Tanzania. The Ugandatravelguide.com easily posits that “the JoPadhola are Luo.” The Lango—also known as Langi—concede that they have lost most of their ancestral language, but embrace their assimilation into Luo, and assert that the Langi they speak is a Luo language. Wikipedia: “Many Langi identify with the Luo, refuting the theory that they are Ateker.”
Professor Bethwel Ogot of Kenya places the area of the origin of the Luo as southern Sudan. The Luo of Kenya and Tanzania or JoLuo crossed into the present day Kenya and Tanzania between 1500 and 1800, these, according to Wikipedia title, Luo family of ethnic groups. The JoLuo easily declare their identity as being the Luo of Kenya or the Luo of Tanzania. And the Jur Chol as easily the JoLuo of Sudan.
In a sense, the conglomeration of the JoLuos, the Luos of Kenya and Tanzania who speak a standard universal Luo language, Dholuo, illustrates what a LUCO member ancestral region with a single universal standard language could look like at language implementation. Wikipedia, under the title, Luo (Kenya and Tanzania), shows present day Kenya Luo as consisting of 24 sub tribes, each in turn comprising various clans and subclans, with “Jo” meaning people of: Jo-Gem; Jo-Yimbo; Jo-Ugenya; Jo-Seme; Jo-Kajulu; Jo-Karachuonyo; Jo-Nyakach; Jo-Kabondo; Jo-Kisumo; Jo-Kano; Jo-Asembo; Jo-Alego; Jo-Uyoma; Jo-Sakwa; Jo-Kanyamkago; Jo-Kadem; Jo-Kwabwai; Jo-Karungu; Abasuba (Jo-Suna; Jo-Gwasi; Jo-Kaksingri etc); Jo-Kasgunga; Jo-Kanyamwa; Jo-Kanyada; Jo-Kanyidoto; and Jo-Kangundho. Imagine these subgroups and their varied regions as comprising the present day Shilluk, Pari, Thur, Alur, Acholi, Lango, Kumam, Jopadhola, Joluo, Jurchol, Anyuak, Maban, Funj, Jumjum, Blanda Boore, and others.
If a standard universal language could be developed within a region comprising twenty-four varied groups and subgroups commingled from all the different groups of the original Luo ancestry as happened in Kenya and Tanzania, it sure can be done within a region comprising less than twenty four groups and subgroups. What is required is an unwavering fidelity to a universal identity, a disciplined commitment to purpose, and a hitherto unimagined dedication, support, and deference to competent founding fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters and—above all—to visionary elders like those with which we happen to be blessed at the present moment. This is how our fore-folks did it, this is how we in the present generation could do it, and this is how we could have to do it to assure our posterity the gift of a generation.
To conclude, the foregoing discussion suggests that if a standard Luo language is to be established as a universal language or lingua franca in the original Luo ancestral regions and if success is to be expected, all communities, including the Anyuak, must first and foremost embrace the Luo identity as being supreme over the identity of their own particular community as a group. It must be seen without a doubt whether or not the Anyuak, for example, are embracing without equivocation the Luo supremacy over their own Anywaa identity. Embrace and exhibition of the supremacy of the Luo identity as the source of the being of the varied Luo community groups is the fulcrum from which the development and establishment of a Luo lingua franca will rotate; and it is the pivot from which the establishment must be launched. APPENDIX
Consider the similarities in the following assorted words from Akobo literature with their counterpart words being used within the JoLuo and Dholuo sub community and language groups in Kenya and Tanzania. They shed light into the feasibility of implementation, given that the word-roots are already in existence and easily traceable.
Nyuak—Sharing; sharing together the joy and agony, best or worst (Anyuak)
Nyuako or Nyuakruok—Sharing, teaming up, joining together in times rough and smooth to accomplish a purpose (Dholuo)
Tiernam—(place in Luo ancestral region in Sudan)
Dier nam—(middle of lake or river; lake center or river center) (Dholuo)
Dikony—(place in Luo ancestral region in Sudan)
Kony—Help, Dikony—can help, Konyo—to help, Konyi—to help you (Dholuo)
Ciro—(place in Luo ancestral region in Sudan)
Chiro—Market, Siro—Market (Dholuo)
Agwei River; Walgak—(places in Luo ancestral region in Sudan)
Wagai; Wagwer—(places in Luo ancestral region in Kenya) (Dholuo)
Wanga-Ading—(place in Luo ancestral region in Sudan)
Sawagongo—(place in Luo ancestral region in Kenya) (Dholuo)
Ojwaa—(Name from Anyuak Kingdom sub tribes from Luo ancestral region of Sudan)
Ojwang—Person’s name from JoLuo sub tribes ancestral region of Kenya (Dholuo)
Ajwaa—Wooden Mancala Board Game, This game Baare in Anyuak (Dholuo)
Thim—(place in Luo ancestral region in Sudan)
Thim—Wilderness, place of dark forests (Dholuo)
Piny-Udo—(place in Luo ancestral region in Sudan)
Piny—Country, nation, ground (Dholuo)
Gilo— Legendary leader from Luo ancestral region in Sudan
Ogilo—Clan name in Luo ancestral region of Sudan
Gem Kagilo—Community place in Luo ancestral region in Kenya (Dholuo)
Nyagilo—Person’s name in Luo ancestral region in Kenya (Dholuo)
Alil—Clan name in Luo ancestral region of Sudan
Olil—dark; pitch dark like at night, no light (Dholuo)
Agulbool—place in Luo ancestral region in Sudan
Agulu—pot (Dholuo)
Obang—Person’s name in Luo ancestral region of Sudan
Obange—Phrase, nickname meaning fearless, warrior, brave (Dholuo)
Niykango—Legendary leader from Luo ancestral region in Sudan
Odera Akango—Ruler or King in Luo ancestral region in Kenya (Dholuo)
--*-- --*-- --*-- --*--
*Okall Langu is Chairman of the Board of Directors, Luo United Communities Organization. He can be reached at:
Related Information:
|
