МИЛЕНИЈУМ ОДЛАСКА ПРЕДАКА РОМА ИЗ СЕВЕРНЕ ИНДИЈЕ И ЊЕГОВ ЗНАЧАЈ ЗА ДАНАШЊЕ ДРУШТВЕНЕ ОДНОСЕ У ЕВРОПИ
THE MILLENNIUM OF THE DEPARTURE OF THE RROMS’ ANCESTORS FROM NORTHERN INDIA AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE FOR TODAY’S SOCIAL RELATIONS IN EUROPE

Summary/Abstract: The contribution first focuses on the scientific significance of exodus of the Rroms’ ancestors from India and the necessity of a clear, non-passionate approach to this historical fact, free of any ideology of praising, disparaging, justification or the like. Indian academic and cultural authorities celebrated the Millennium by the end of 2018 (anniversary of Sultan Mahmud’s arrival in front of Kannauj). This article first deals with 6 quotations spanned between 1422 and 1630 indicating the Rroms’ Indian origins and it attempts an explanation for the following 140 years of silence on this topic, until a new wave of mentions of the Indian origin in scholarly publications. It depicts the historical conditions of this “discovery” (in fact rather a rediscovery), including a paragraph devoted to the European geographers’ vision of the earth in Antiquity and the Middle Ages. The legend of the discovery by Vályi István is deconstructed and due recognition is given to Johann Chr. Rüdiger’s conclusions. The analysis of the English translations of Firdawsi’s Shahname results in rejecting the frequently quoted poetic and political passage of this masterpiece as a possible historical source. The successive stages leading to the identification of the deracination of the population of the city of Kannauj during the XXth century are discussed one by one: first the finding out of the area of origin, on a linguistic basis by Sir Ralph Turner, then the time of the exodus, also on a linguistic basis by Ian Hancock, and finally the circumstances of this exodus relying on Arabic sources. The main logical argument to support this thesis is that no other massive displacement westward of any population ever occurred from an Indian city situated in the area which has already been identified by Turner as the place of origin of the proto-Rromani language and in the period under consideration – except for a similar deportation, 4 years earlier, actually from Thāneśvar a city belonging to the same kingdom as Kannauj. A chapter is eventually devoted to an outline of the narrative of the deracination and its context, as it can be figured out from the sources, analysis and crosschecks. Clichés which have been rooting unrealistic and biased accounts into widely circulated publications are also addressed. The arguments supporting the identification of the deracination of the winter 1018–1019 from Kannauj as the start-point migration, in one go, of the proto-Rroms from India are exposed, including the so-called Kalā pani taboo because it sheds light onto the conditions of the exodus. An attempt of linguistic with social etymology for the words Gypsy and Циганин is also inserted. In so far the name “Rrom” (mentioned for the first time in Europe in 1385) is concerned, it arose from the late Sanskrit form omba “percussionists, musicians, artists, dancers, actors – performing mainly in spiritual plays” and its use as an ethnonym can be explained due to the fact that among the deportees from Kannauj there were probably a great number of omba artists, in this prominent city of art, spirituality and culture. The general conclusion is mainly devoted to the epistemological need of detailed and serious research and analysis of facts, an attitude which has been recently neglected and often overshadowed by approximate political allegations, especially in the Rromani field. Biased interpretations of history and ungrounded doubts about reality are detrimental for the harmony of today’s societies, while a de-dramatized exposition of the mechanisms of History are a source of social cohesion, especially when appropriate contextualization is provided along with narratives.

• Details
• Contents