HBD Books

Madonna was booed off stage this week for taking the opportunity during a performance to lecture Romanians about their alleged mistreatment of Gypsies.  This comes a few months after “human rights advocates” were up in arms about the way the Irish treated their unwanted visitors.  One might wonder why everybody from the Romanians to the Irish seems to pick on the Gypsies.  The San Francisco Chronicle reports

Europe’s 7 to 9 million Roma people face widespread prejudice in Romania – where estimates of their numbers vary between 500,000 and 2 million – and other countries. The European Union’s rights agency has said Roma face “overt discrimination” in housing, health care and education, despite many government programs designed to help them.

Does this sound familiar to American readers?  A minority is singled out by the government for special help, but only makes the news most for the “discrimination” they face.  The paper continues,

Since Romania joined the EU in 2007, thousands of Roma have moved west to richer European countries, where many live in squalid camps with no access to health services, education, basic sanitary facilities or jobs. More than 700 encampments have been built in Italy, where Gypsies have been met with hostility and blamed for begging and street crime.

They are “blamed” for begging and street crime.  Are they actually responsible for them?  The author never tells us, and must not think it’s relevant.

Imagine that you break into my house.  I go and hit you over the head.  The local paper reports that “Mr. Hoste hit his neighbor over the head after blaming him for breaking into his house” without ever mentioning that you actually did.  If anything, the article implies that my claim wasn’t true, because the reader thinks that if it was it would’ve been relevant to what subsequently happened and thus mentioned.  Wikipedia tells what eventually happened with the Roma in North Ireland.

In June, 2009, twenty Romani families were terrorised from their homes in the Lisburn Road, Belfast, Northern Ireland. Up to 115 people, including women and children were forced to seek refuge in a local church hall, before being moved by the authorities to a safer location.[50] An anti-racist rally in the city on 15 June to support Romani rights was attacked by youths chanting neo-Nazi slogans. The attacks were condemned by Amnesty International, [51] and political leaders from both the Unionist and Nationalist traditions in Northern Ireland.[52][53] Following the arrest of three local youths in relation to the attacks, the church where the Romanies had been given shelter was badly vandalised. Using ‘emergency funds’, Northern Ireland authorities assisted most of the victims to return to Romania.[54][55]

Good for the Irish!  Community activism at it’s finest.  Without this thuggery the Roma would still be commiting crimes and living off welfare.  When the government won’t listen to the people, it’s nice to see them take things into their own hands.  If white men were willing to fight to keep foreigners out of their countries, who would face them down?  UN “Peace Keepers”?  Notice that the political leaders took the side of the parasitical minority and the nationalists still got their way. This is a model for future activism.

In his book A People That Shall Dwell Alone, MacDonald presented the Roma as a group other than the Jews that can be said to have undertaken a group evolutionary strategy.

Based on linguistic and genetic evidence, the Roma (Gypsies) derive from India.  Based on vocabulary of basic words, grammatical structure and sound correspondence, the Romani language has been found to be of Indian origin.  Romani is similar to Sanskrit but developed after it.  It shows close affinity with several modern Indian languages, but assignment to any one modern Indian language group remains controversial.  Based on linguistic evidence, Fraser suggests that the Romani originate as an Indian low-caste of wandering musicians, but the issue of the origins of the Romani within India remains controversial.

The genetic evidence is consistent with the origins of the Roma as a small founding population splitting from a single ethnic group in India…Roma populations are more genetically heterogeneous than are indigenous European populations, presumably indicating an older history…

Presently there are 8-10 million Roma in Europe, with the densest concentrations in Eastern Europe and the lowest concentrations in Scandinavia.  The first records of the Gypsies in Europe west of the Balkans date from the early 15th century.  Gypsies appeared rather suddenly in the historical record, posing as Christian pilgrims under leaders with impressive titles.  “In the entire chronicle of Gypsy history, the greatest trick of all was the one played on western Europe in the early 15th century.  Since it was a Christian obligation to aid pilgrims, especially pilgrims with documents of recommendation from rulers, Gypsies began their sojourn by taking advantage of the Christian piety of the age.  The Gypsies produced letters of passage from high government officials such as King Sigismund of Hungary, representing themselves as penitents for the sins of their ancestors who had rejected Christian teachings.  As a result of the sins of their ancestors, they were required to wander the earth as pilgrims seeking charity from others.

At first treated with respect, Gypsies soon acquired a reputation as thieves, fortune tellers, and horse traders of dubious honesty.  An early 15th century German chronicle stated, “they were…great thieves, especially their women, and several of them were seized and put to death.”  Similarly, an early 15th century Italian chronicle noted, “the women of the band wandered about the town, six or eight together; they entered the houses of citizens and told idle tales, during which some of them laid hold of whatever could be taken.  In the same way they visited the shops under the pretext of buying something, but one of them would steal…for they were the most cunning thieves in the world.”  In the following century, the status of the Gypsies deteriorated from being subsidized as pilgrims to being persecuted and expelled because of their thieving ways.

In later centuries, descriptions of Gypsies as thieves derive from multiple independent sources throughout Western Europe, from Scandinavia to Italy and Spain.  The stereotype of Gypsies included exotic, colorful dress and being of a different ethnic group distinguished by dark skin and other physiognomic features…The most common Gypsy occupations were seen as that of beggar or fortune-teller, but Gypsies were also seen as horse dealers, metal workers and musicians…

There were attempts at forced assimilation, as in 1767 when Empress Maria Theresa of Austria forbade Gypsies to set themselves apart in language, dress, or occupation.  In 1773 Gypsies were forbidden to marry each other, and children older than 5 were to be taken away and raised in non-Gypsy homes.  A similar policy of forced assimilation was introduced in Spain in the 17th century and persisted for 150 years with varying levels of severity and success.  For example, in 1746 Gypsies were restricted only to certain towns, with the stated goal of having one Gypsy family per 100 residents of the town.  Their were severe penalties for engaging in a wandering lifestyle, culminating [in] the imprisonment of between 9000-12,000 Gypsy men at hard labor from 1749-1765.  The general tendency throughout Europe was to either banish Gypsies or force them to settle down in one area rather than persist in a traveling lifestyle…

A general trend down to the present is for Gypsies to avoid wage labor, such as work in factories.  Another common trend is for Gypsy children not to be enrolled in school or to be enrolled at much lower rates than the surrounding populations.  For example, in the 1980s in the European community, only 30-40% of Gypsy children attended schools regularly and half had never been to school.  The illiteracy rate among adults was typically over 50% and in some areas over 80%.

The Roma have a fairly elaborate social structure based entirely on kinship in which kinship relations become ever more diluted as one moves from the immediate family to the Rom nation.  In the Romany groups living in the U.S. studied by Sutherland (1975), the basic household consisted of a three-generation extended family, often including more than one married child and their children.  At the next level Romany families are organized in familia consisting of several related families typically under the leadership of one individual, usually a male (the rom baro-‘big man’) who has exhibited leadership and negotiating abilities.  Closely related households constituting a familia tend to live in nearby areas.  The next level of organization is the vitsa or tribe.  The vitsa, sometimes translated as ‘clan’, in not a face-to-face social grouping but rather a set of familia descended from a common ancestor.  Families from different vistas avoid living near each other, but do regard each other as Rom.  In addition, the kumpania is a social grouping of households and familiyi.  It is not based on kinship but serves to regulate interactions of diverse Rom who are working in a particular area.  A kumpania may consist of only one familia that actively prevents non-relatives from being members, or it may include familia of different vitsas who live in an area and are subject to the economic, political, and moral regulation embodied in the Rom legal system.  The highest level of social organization is the natsia or nation.  In Sutherland’s (1975) study there were four natsia operating in the U.S., the Machwaya, Lowara, Kalderasha, and Churara.  These groups have different dialects, customs, and appearance but acknowledge the others as Rom.

The kris Romani is the main Romany legal institution.  It serves as a mechanism for solving economic (e.g., infringement of fortune telling territory, stealing from another Rom) and social disputes and contracts (e.g., marriage and divorce) among the Rom.  Members of the same vitsa regard themselves as relatives with obligations to help in time of need.  In general, helping and obligations for ritual events such as funerals are at the level of the vitsa, which we have seen, is a kinship group…

Conflicts within Rom society generally occur on the fault lines created by kinship relationships.  Close relatives generally cooperate with each other in conflicts, while non-relatives are viewed as untrustworthy.  “It can be concluded from the alignment of sides that closeness of kin relationship is the single most important factor in determining political alliance.”  Allegiance to other Rom is a direct function of kinship distance in a hierarchically branching social organization: People have most allegiance to their familia, then to their vitsa, and to the kumpania, and finally to the natsia.

Marriage. The Rom derive from India where the endogamous sub-caste or jatis, typically defined by profession, is the primary unit.  Marriage among the Rom is endogamous.  Endogamous wandering groups based on profession remain common in India, and, like to Rom, these groups typically have ideologies of purity and cleanness that serve to separate themselves from other groups.  Sutherland (1975) found that endogamy had increased among the Rom in the U.S., since marriages occurred more commonly among closely related visti rather than among unrelated vitsi.  Fraser (1992/1995,239) also finds increasing tendencies toward endogamy as well as consanguinity (marriage of blood relatives), although marriage between first cousins is not approved.  However, marriages with people from other vitsas in the same Kumpania may be made in order to create closer kinship ties within working groups.  Traditional Rom marriage occurred with bridewealth, but the practice has died out in many groups.

For the Rom, high fertility is something of a social obligation.  Having large numbers of children gives prestige to a family, while a woman who cannot have children is a failure.  Fertility in Sutherland’s (1975) sample was high, averaging 7 children per family at a time when the total fertility rate in the United States as a whole was approximately 1.9.  The household size was correspondingly large, averaging 8 and with many comprised of more than 10 people.

Rom fertility has been a source of friction with surrounding populations.  During the 1960s, the Communist government of Czechoslovakia embarked on a policy of forced assimilation involving spreading Gypsies throughout the population, requiring full employment, and ending illiteracy and “parasitism.”  The 1965 census revealed that one out of 11 births was a Gypsy.  The Gypsies had a young population with a very high birth rate, and by 1980 the population had increased over 30% since the 1965 census.  During this period, the government pressed women into sterilization after having several children.  Conflict between Rom and non-Rom were exacerbated in Eastern Europe after the downfall of Communism.

Whereas the Jews, especially the Ashkenazim, have tended toward a high-investment reproductive style characterized by high intelligence and an emphasis on education, the Gypsies tend toward a low-investment reproductive style.  Bereczkei (1993) found a very low sex ratio among Hungarian gypsies associated with a variety of other traits characteristic of a low-investment style of reproduction compared to Hungarians: higher fertility, longer reproductive period, earlier onset of sexual behavior and reproduction, more unstable pair bonds, higher rate of single parenting, shorter interval of birth spacing, higher infant mortality rate, and higher rate of survival of low-birth-weight infants.  The gypsies would appear to be a low-investment group evolutionary strategy.

Social Identity Process and the Policing of Group Boundaries.  The Rom think of themselves as morally superior, and this self-appraisal is not threatened by the oftentimes negative attitudes held by the gadje (i.e., non-Rom).  They enjoy deceiving the gadje and do their best to prevent outsiders from getting information about them, so much so that obtaining information about them is difficult and much of what they tell anthropologists must be taken with a grain of salt.

For the Rom, the maintenance of boundaries between themselves and the gadje…is a continuous, almost daily concern.  It is based on two factors: (a) social contact with gadje is limited to specific kinds of relationships, namely economic exploitation and political manipulation for advantage.  Purely social relations and genuine friendship are virtually impossible because of the second factor; (b) a whole symbolic system and set of rules for behavior (romania) which place the gadje outside social, moral and religious boundaries in a multiplicity of ways, the most important being marime [ritually unclean] status.

Because of their uncleanliness, the houses of the gadje must be cleaned with powerful detergents before a Rom family may move in…

This strong sense of we/they is reinforced by the intensely social nature of Rom society…In small face-to-face social groups with the intensive sociality of the Rom, the major topics of conversation revolve around talking about each other.  As is typical of collectivist groups, reputation within the group is extremely important.  “No individual can afford to ignore anyone’s statements concerning his reputation no matter how unfounded in fact they may be.  Gossip can make or break a person’s reputation, and when it occurs it must be fought immediately.  To ignore gossip would be tantamount to admitting guilt.”…

Ingroup Cooperation and Altruism.  As is the case among historic Jewish groups, the Rom exhibit an ingroup-outgroup morality in which lying to the gadje and being secretive and elusive toward them are socially expected forms of behavior.  Charity to needy Rom is a social obligation.  Families have an obligation to take in homeless relatives for at least several months and even non-relatives expect to help out.  A woman who took in large numbers of homeless Rom stated “Gypsies must always help one another,” and “I could never deny food or shelter to Gypsies who need it if I can possibly provide it.”  If a member of the Kumpania is arrested, there is a concerted effort by all to secure the person’s release, including especially collections to pay fines and legal fees.

On the other hand, attitudes toward the non-Rom world are amoral.  The legality of an activity is a consideration only because engaging in it might result in penalties such as being arrested.  Stealing from a gadje is not considered immoral, and in fact the Rom have a myth in which God allows them to steal food and other necessities because a Gypsy had swallowed a nail intended for the crucifixion of Jesus.  Mitigating this sense of ingroup morality, Gypsy criminal activities tend to be minor.  In Sutherland’s study, Gypsies were typically not involved in felonies like murder, rape or robbery, but tended to be cited for shoplifting, traffic violations, and violations of the garbage laws.  Welfare payments were a way of life for many in Sutherland’s sample…

Mechanisms Regarding Conflicts of Interests within the Group.  Romany groups are notoriously contentious while nevertheless exhibiting a great deal of solidarity.  Early accounts dating from the 15th century describe the Gypsies as organized under leaders who exact obedience from their subjects.  Rom who violate social group norms may be judged to be marime (unclean) and denied social intercourse, including commensality, with other Rom…As in historic Jewish groups, a sentence of marime is leveled not only against the violator but his or her family as well, thus rendering it all the more effective as a deterrent against violating group norms.  Associating with gadje is one means of becoming marime, as in the case of a young woman who accepted employment with a gadje firm.  After being found and returned to her family by relatives, this woman and her family were sentenced to marime for a specified period of time…

Rom political power is not egalitarian.  Success for a man within the Rom community is predicted on possessing certain qualities: wealth, an aggressive wife, a large family, a reputation for being able to manipulate the gadje, a willingness to help other Rom, and the ability to speak well in assemblies…

Ecological Specialization and Resource and Reproductive Competition.  The Roma are territorial in the sense that newcomers must get permission from existing families and sometimes pay fees to them in order (to) settle in an area.  Such practices are similar to those in traditional Jewish communities where other Jews could not underbid families with trading monopolies, and the local Jewish kehilla regulated migration of other Jews into the community.  Rom families attempting to discourage other families from invading their territory would report the illegal activities of the immigrant families to the authorities-itself an indication to the extent to which Rom ecology involves activities perceived as exploitive by the wider society.  One of the main functions of Rom leaders was to develop good relations with the welfare agencies and the police department, the two agencies of the gadje that most impact the life of the Rom…

The resources important in Sutherland’s study were fortune telling licenses and welfare payments…

The Rom value being able to obtain money from the gadja by outwitting them.  Apart from deception and illegal activities, common tactics include making a loud commotion to embarrass the target, alternating flattery and hostility, and begging and pleading.  These activities require an extraverted personality type, and the Rom regard shyness as a severe liability.

Adjusting to the Assimilative Pressures of Compemporary Western Societies.  Sutherland (1975) finds that American Rom are aware of gradual changes toward a more sedentary life style, but notes that they still traveled a remarkable percentage of the time.  Her survey indicated that families traveled during the summer months and on average spent 42% of their time on the road, with the percentage rising to 50% for young families…A common strategy is to stay in one place long enough to obtain welfare and then obtain further money while traveling, returning to the original area long enough to maintain their welfare payments and hiding their assets while doing so.