Constructing the ethnic Gypsy

In 1974 Thomas Acton, writing in New Society, stated that the Gypsies, ‘or more properly Rom, or Romanichals, are an Indian people who, leaving India in the tenth century, have slowly dispersed, like Jews, all over the world’. ¹ In one sentence correct ethnic labels are applied, origins identified, indications given of a diaspora and parallels made with the Jews. In short, ethnicity is established. Although the approaches and style of the many authors forwarding an ethnic definition vary in points of detail, the primary intention is to present the Gypsies as a legitimate ethnic group with the same cultural distinctiveness and, importantly, rights as any other ethnic people. For most Gypsiologists the primary and linked determinants, the solid core, of ethnicity are Indian origin, Romani language and distinctive culture. An image is provided of ethnic unity and of the Gypsies as being a ‘unique example of an ethnic whole perfectly defined’. ² In order to give further weight to this representation it is also claimed that Gypsies now see themselves as an ethnic group, adding the all-important element of self-ascription. ³ One key indicator of this approach is the use of the terms ‘Rom’, ‘Rrom’, ‘Romany’ and ‘Roma’ which separates Gypsies from non-ethnic Travellers and also from non-Gypsies, usually referred to as gadzo, gajé, gajo or gaujo. The case for Gypsy ethnicity is built by confirming that Gypsies meet all the criteria for ethnicity identified in the previous chapter.