The Reel are Neither Dinka Nor Nuer: A Rebuttal to Abolich Makoi’s Flawed and Confused Opinion Article
7 min read
The Atuot (Reel) Ethnic Group is a Cultural, Linguistic and Distinct Ethnicity: The Reel Are Neither Dinka (Jieng) Nor Nuer (Naath) — A Rebuttal To Abolich Makoi’s Flawed and Confused Piece of Article Published By PaanLuel Wël On 23rd April 2020
Yen Reel diaal e ca ye mɛ̈ɛ̈th ke Thůkrëël, Kudual duc!!!
By Bol Joseph Agau Adhil, Juba, South Sudan
Monday, April 27, 2020 (PW) — Let not the political affiliation and shared territorial peaceful, harmonious and tranquil living together be misconstrued as being of one ethnicity and tribe. In this case even the Dinka ethnic groups fight themselves. This assumption could make Jurmananger in Gogrial to be Apuk Dinka, Luo of Mapel, Kwarjina, Kwec Jwok to be Dinka as well.
Let not artificial unity be forged forcefully to assimilate Apɛ̈k by enticing them with a xenonym word “Atuɔ̈t” a meaningless word that is not used by the two communities to identify themselves to themselves except that the larger outsider world calls the two “Atuɔ̈t” like how the Jieng/Muonyjang nationality is known by outsiders as Dinka. This has been clarified by the Apaak Mapuor Declaration of July 14th 2018. This Declaration summarily states clearly, Apaak Mapuor is not Atuot(Reel) but a subsection of the Dinka(Jieng) ethnic group. Refer to that document from Chairperson of Apaak Youth Association in the name of Bol Majok Kuch.
Let not an ethnic community identity be lost as it’s traded off to fetch political favours and favoritism from the majority ethnic group as it used to be after the 1956 independence of the Sudan and subsequent Southern Sudan politics of ethnicity.
I would like to stressfully remind the Reel Ethnic Group that the Southern war against the many regimes in Khartoum was an identity war. The Arabs falsely coined a religious tribal ideology of Islamism and Arabism as a uniting factor for the Sudan. Late Dr. John Garang in many occasions lectured this false identity to the South Sudanese and I was a beneficiary in one of the lectures. These lectures are available on internet and you can find them on YouTube.
The Reel identity crisis started in 1960 – 1980s and was fortunately halted by the SPLA/M war as the Southern Sudan became a territory of the SPLA/M and no more elections were held so that the Reel politicians could ingeniously use the “Atuot(Reel) are Dinka” campaign syndicate to maneuver and garner votes to thrust a Reel minority politician to the District Commissioner Position or to the Parliamentary position and or a Governor position for that matter.
The Reel tribe lived and still lives with the neighbouring Dinka groups like the Cic Dinka in North East, the Aliab in the East and the Apek Dinka in the West and Agar Dinka at a sharp triangle at Kondok area near Pulthil.
For intellectual purposes I would like to compare and contrast the following exonyms used by the anthropologists;
- Dinka is the name outsiders call Jieng/Muonyjang;
- Nuer is the name outsiders call Naath;
- Shilluk is the name outsiders call Collo;
- Jurcol is the name outsiders call Luo;
- Atuot is the name outsiders call Reel;
With these few examples, it looks very awkward and to make things worse silly to add two outsiders name of Dinka and Atuot and someone wants to claim that Dinka Atuot or say Atuot Dinka. This has been said many times for almost 50 decades for political reasons but the people on ground don’t call themselves Atuot as they speak. They speak Thůkrëël as the language of the five subtribes that make up the Reel Tribe i.e. Luac, Jileek, Akot, Jekueu and Jekeye.
The writer averred that the five Reel subtribes above are added to Apaak subsection of Dinka above to come up with the union called Atuot. This is the biggest failure of comprehension of ethnicity and tribal formation and processes. It is not so manual and artificial as such. The unity of Reel and Apek can’t be anchored in a xenonym whose meaning needs definition. The two communities are identities that call themselves what they are for the language distinction. Reel are called Reel because they speak Thůkrëël. Apek are called Apek because they speak Thůngapek. Neither the Reel nor the Apek are ready to give up their language for the other, therefore, the failure of one to assimilate the other. The Reel meant business and assimilated the Mundari families, the Dinka families, the other pieces of migrants that settled with them. These people today identify themselves as Reel not what they were before the immigration period.
The writer claimed artificially without anthropological back up, that most of Reel subtribes are Dinka, this is untrue and an assumption. The families that came to join the already solidified tribe of Reel like the Luac and Kok (Cic from Malek – Sultan Madit Maker version). It has always been assumed that Kok are Agar because of hearing there are Kok in Rumbek. This name Kok was derived by the migration of a lady with her two sons Kuar and Paderjong. Kok was sired by Yom and named Kok with his brothers Kuar and Paderjong they make the largest subtribes of Jekeye. Jekeye were the original Reel who assimilated most of the non Reel in their territory. Yesterday I had a chance to visit Sultan Madit and I learned that “lůny” in Thůkrëël or “lony” in Thoknaath means a lion.
In earlier anthropological encounter of the Atuot people as an identity, Schweinfurth (1873) had this to say about the Atuot tribe, NOT Dinka Atuot, “……..the Atuot would prove to be difficult people to subjugate because of their skilled used of bows and arrows…”
R.Gessi (1892) had a reference to a tribe called Atuot which is still now independent and its presence renders traveling dangerous. The government has not yet succeeded in subjugating it.”
With this written reference, I would like to challenge my lost cousin Abolich Makoi to find himself time to read the accounts of the literate authorities that found our illiterate communities and got the fresh account before politics of ethnicity in the Southern Sudan and Sudan.
In the Upper Nile Province Handbook 1926 – 1931 notes compiled and edited by Douglas Johnson, it is clearly stated in the Yirrol District Chapter that the Atuot are not Dinka according to the records that our great great grandfathers gave to the Turks, Egyptian, the Northern Arabs and the English later, we have never been Dinka and shall never be but we are good neighbours.
Why the Reel tribe is a linguistic and distinct tribe is very clear, it is not blurry as it is conceived by some people. It is the trading of an identity for political favours from the majority ethnic group that blurs it. And this bad practices started recently in 1960s. This notion is an inconsistency that will make the Reel confused incase the power wielding changes course tribally, for instance, a Toposa becomes a power in the South Sudan nation, those Reel who think they are Dinka politically will have to hardly switch to claim being Toposa and create artificial reasons like what my brother Abolich Makoi coined to throw a cheap and most simplistic argument by roping and tethering the whole tribe in a tribal camp where it doesn’t really belong.
If Reel with all their culture, customs, traditions, cultural practices, skills, economy, sociopolitical, education which are stored in Thůkrëël is moved arbitrarily to be forcefully assimilated, it will be the biggest rupture of the time. This will make the liberation war meaningless as we fought for our identities in unity to live in diversity.
For our Dinka neighbours, the Reel “aa ‘guel’ thongatut” instead they speak Thongmuonyjang Atut, a language that does not exist. Whenever in a meeting and a Rel gets up to speak, it is embarrassingly a norm to tell a Rel speaking in Thůkrëël to speak in Thongmuonyjang so that it is heard by the rest of the people.
If Reel are Dinka, like the Bor, the Twic, the Ngok, the Abielang, the Ageer, the Nyiel, the Agar, the Cic, the Aliab, the Gok, then why don’t they have a Thongmuonyjang accent so as you can say in English, the speaker is speaking with Thongmuonyjang Reel accent like we can say, e jiem Boor, e jiem Agar, e jiem Malual, e jiem Luanyjang etc.
The writer, Mr. Abolich Makoi got lost and his last signature says and I quote;
“The author, Abolich Makoi, is a Humanitarian and a concerned Atuot youth from Reel……….”
This is the testimony and manifestation of a confused person of his identity. How can you say for instance, that this is a concerned Dinka from Jieng? What is the difference of Dinka and Jieng if it is not total confusion and lack of comprehension of the words used to define the same thing. Reel are the same people that the outsiders call Atuot right from the beginning of the formation of this tribal union by the five Thůkrëël speaking groups.
I have ignored the other wild claims of Dinkanisation of the Reel by Abolich Makoi because they are meaningless to the Reel intellectuals and politicians at this time.
The Author, Bol Joseph Agau Adhil, is a practicing Advocate and a concerned citizen in the state affairs; he can be reached on the following address: Email: djbol2008@aol.com
About Post Author
