Romani History
Romani History |
|
Romani History
A new theory on Romani history based on ongoing research into recorded and factual evidence is being prepared by Ronald Lee and other scholars, including Ian Hancock, Marcel Cortiade and Adrian Marsh. Using language studies, blood groupings, DNA tests and the factual evidence in the writings of the period by Firdausi and other scholars at the Ghaznavid court of Mahmud and later, the Persians, Armenians, Turks and Greeks, the theory suggests that a group of Indians numbering in the thousands were taken out of India by Mahmud Ghazni in the early 11th century and incorporated as ethnic units, along with their camp followers, wives and families, to form contingents of Indian troops to serve in the Ghaznavid Emirate in Khurasan as ghazis and in the bodyguard of Mahmud and his successors. The existence of such troops is well documented in contemporary histories of the Ghaznavids, as is their participation in the battles in Khurasan. The theory goes on to explain that in 1040, the Ghaznavid empire was overthrown by the Seljuks and that the Indian contingency, numbering around some 60,000, were either forced to fight for the Seljuks and spearhead their advance in their raids into Armenia, or fled to Armenia to escape them. In any event, the Indians ended up in Armenia and later, in the Seljuk Sultanate of Rûm. These proto-Romanies remained in Anatolia for two to three hundred years and during that time they abandoned their military way of life and took up a nomadic lifestyle based on artisan work, trading, animal dealing and entertainment. Gradually, small groups wandered westwards across the Bosporus to Constantinople and from there up into the Balkans to reach Central Europe by 1400, leaving local groups in all the regions they had passed through. Roma made their home in almost all countries of Europe where it has been, and still is, the failure of all of the governments of those countries to provide protection for Roma against persecution and massive discrimination by the police, local authorities and the local population that are the causes of the present conditions. Under the Geneva Convention on Refugees, this is tantamount to official persecution and allows Roma to seek refugee status in signatory countries. Little action is taken to prevent massive job discrimination in the workplace, housing and public sectors. In Romania and elsewhere, employment ads in the local papers are allowed to state: No Roma wanted or words to this effect. Roma are in effect living in a state of Apartheid in the New Democracies. In the Czech Republic signs appear in windows of discotheques, cinemas and restaurants stating: No dogs or Gypsies allowed! Now that Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland are EU members and the other new democracies that have large Romani populations are in line for EU membership in the near future, it remains to be seen whether conditions will improve for the Roma, or will proposed improvements be endlessly delayed or even abandoned. If the evidence of the treatment of Roma in some of the long-established EU countries is any example, such as the deplorable refugee camps in Italy, the campsite problems in Britain, prejudice and actual persecution in Germany, Austria, France, Britain, Italy and elsewhere, the future of Sinti and Roma in Europe is not all that promising. The problem is not so much one of ethnic or national rights of Roma as minorities, where the present focus now lies, but of fundamental human rights as guaranteed under the United Nations Charter of Human Rights.
Yvonne Slee
Regarding Mr. Joshi's "I think" posting -- in light of what we are beginning to understand about our history, our ancestors represented many different related peoples who came together outside of India to become the first Romanies. By preferring one group who were "blacksmiths, strongmen, acrobats, dancers, bear trainers, monkey trainers" etc. to another that he defines as "mobile traders and business men" he might be charged with playing into stereotypes. It is quite likely that there were Lohars and Sansis and Banjaras (or the ancestors of those people 1000 years ago) in the pre-Romani population, and would have been a part of the service providers (camp followers) -- with the troops brought out of India by the Ghaznavids. But our findings do not support the idea that our population today descends from one single Indian people, but from several, and has continued to incorporate other peoples since that time. We must go beyond just "thinking" or "preferring" a historical scenario for subjective reasons -- I'd be very pleased to see some objective evidence from Mr. Joshi to support his position.
Yanko
I support the statement of Prof. Hnacock.
Finally Mahmoud from Ghazna (who created the Ghaznavid Empire), felt 17 times into the Panjab area in 14 years, everytime he took well educated workers into Slavery. So its right that we are not really a homogene group that were taken away from their Homeland.
I'm very happy that finally we start to work on our own History, like the European Roma Forum on its pleanary Session in Dec. 2006 demanded, Roma should write the Roma History.
Check http://www.RomaHistory.com for an overview, it was published 2002 as an book. Its in English, German and Romanes, the Italian translation is completed the French, Spanish, Mazedonian version is in Translation, please feel free to translate the text into other languages, so that we can inform so many people as possible.
Dewlesa
Marko D. Knudsen
East Meets West Roma youth Network
RomNews Society
It would seem very likely that Roma are mostly descended from the non-combatant camp followers in the Hindu contingents in the Ghaznavid army rather than the fighting men who suffered heavy losses fighting the Seldjuks in Khurasan. We are not saying we are all "Rajputs" or "all Banjara" or all some other existing Indian group. We are a mixed Indian people composed of Rajput troops and a greater number of camp followers of many castes and groups speaking related Indian dialects derived from Sanskrit and our only common language was originally the military koïné used by Hindus in the Ghaznavid army which contained a lot of Persian words. This later became our language in Anatolia as our ancestors augmented it with Armenian, Greek and other loan words. It is also undeniable that this original Indian group of refugees would also have mixed with other peoples in Anatolia and later after the entry into Europe, with Europeans.
Ronald Lee
Ronald's class binder, New 343H1 The Romani Diaspora in Canada, is published by Canadian Scholars' Press, Inc., and can be ordered directly from them. Canadian Scholars' Press Inc., 180 Bloor Street., W., Suite 801, Toronto, ON, Canada, M5S 2V6, Tel. 416-929-2774. Order from www.coursepack.ca
I do not claim that all Romanies today descend from Rajput soldiers. That would be foolish. What I do claim is that the Indo-Ghaznavid wars were the cause of the move away from India. I also state that among the Indians who left, the militia constituted only a small minority, the majority consisting of camp followers, NOT just males and NOT just high-caste kshattriyas, honorary or otherwise.
Over the centuries, very many non-Indians have added to the genetic, linguistic and cultural identity of Romanies.
Let me say too that this is not even my theory -- it has been proposed by different people for over a century. Here are some of them.
de Goeje, (1876: 32) "In the year 1000, we find bands of Zotts in the army of Abû-Naçr ibn-Bakhtiyâr, in Persia and Kirmân (Ibno-'l-Athîr, ix., p. 114). In 1025, al-Mançûra was conquered by Mahmûd al-Gaznawî, because the prince of this town had forsaken Islamism."
Clarke (1878: 134) "It was from the Ghaznevide conqueror and at home that the independence of the Jats received its death-blow. The victorious army of Mahmoud, when returning laden with spoil from the Somnauth expedition of 1025, was attacked and pillaged by them on the banks of the Indus. Their temerity was chastised with exemplary rigour. Broken and dispersed by the resistless arms of the Sultan of Ghazni, they were not, however, annihilated."
Leland, (1882). "Jat warriors were supplemented by other tribes . . . they were broken and dispersed in the eleventh century by Mahmoud."
Burton, (1898: 212) "Sultan Mahmoud carried with him in A.D. 1011 some two hundred thousand [Indian] captives, the spoils of his expedition."
Woolner (1914:123-126) "In 1025 the Jats stole part of Mahm d's booty. The Tabaqât-i-Akbari describes a conflict of fleets, after which Mahm d succeeded in breaking the power of the Jats;" Mahmud of Ghazni's forays led to the "wiping out" of the Indian dialects of Ghand ra (now northwestern Pakistan and eastern Afghanistan) and the destruction of the Jats.
Kochanowski (1968: 27-28) "Our own inter-disciplinary studies have shown that the Gypsies are Rajputs who left northern India."
Lech Mróz (1992: 40) "I consider it likely that the Gypsies' ancestors arrived in Iran in the time of Mahmud of Ghazni, as a result of his raids into India.".
Bhalla, Vijender (1992: 331-332). "Rajputs occupy the [genetic] position nearest the Gypsies.
Bajram Haliti (2006:6) "Some time between the tenth and eleventh centuries, the largest groups of Roma left India and the main cause was invasion of the great emperor Mahmud Gazni, who led 17 raids in western India."
Bhalla, Vijender, 1992. "Ethnicity and Indian origins of Gypsies of Eastern Europe and
the USSR: a bio-anthropological-perspective," in K. Singh, ed., Ethnicity, Caste
and People, Moscow & Delhi.
Burton, Sir Richard, 1898. The Jew, the Gypsy and El Islam. Hollywood: Thew Angriff
Press.
Goeje, Michael-Jan de, 1876. "Bijdrage tot de geschiedenis der Zigeuners." Koninklijke
Akademie van Wetenschappen: Verslagen en Mendeelingen, 2(5):56-80.
Haliti, Bajram, 2006. India and Roma. Kosovo: Central Office of Roma.
Kochanowski, Vania de Gila, 1968. "Black Gypsies, white Gypsies," Diogenes, 63:2 - 47.
Leland, Charles Godfrey, 1882. The Gypsies. New York: Houghton, Mifflin & Co.
Mróz, Lech, 1992. Geneza Cyganów i Ich Kultury. Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Fundacji
'Historia Pro Futuro.'
Woolner, A.C., 11913-1914. "The Indian origin of the Gypsies of Europe," Journal of
the Panjab Historical Society, 2:118-137.
I can add that I also believe that we as a people did not form an ethnic identity until the stay in Anatolia, nor did Romani begin to crystallize into one language until then. Furthermore, while this was happening, groups were leaving for Europe in separate moves, at least three major ones, which would account for the dialect divisions now apparent (and explained by Courthiade with his three strata). I elaborate on this in my recently published chapter entitled "Our need for internal diplomatic skills," in Valeriu Nicolae & Hanna Slavik, eds., Roma Diplomacy. Brussels: European Roma Information Office. 2007.
Ian Hancock
For more information on the Roma culture go to these sites.
Click here to go to Yvonne's Historical Gypsy book website
Click here to go to the Romani Literature website