• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Where Did the Romanies/Gypsies Begin their Journey?

K

KeyserXSoze

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Jun 2, 2002
Messages
944
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1191889.htm
Romany Gypsies came out of India
Anna Salleh

Legend has it that European Gypsies came from Egypt but a new genetic study has shown they came from a small population that emerged from ancestors in India around 1000 years ago.

The research, by Professor Luba Kalaydjieva of the University of Western Australia and team, looked at the origins of eight to 10 million people in Europe commonly known as Gypsies.

Roma, Romani or Romany are other names for this community, which has featured in movies such as Latcho Drom.

"[The research] is the best evidence yet of the Indian origins of the Gypsies," the researchers write in an article published online ahead of print in the American Journal of Human Genetics.

The researchers were first alerted to the idea that the Romany may be descended from a small founder population when they discovered that certain genetic mutations in the population were shared in people who were not directly related.

This occurs in other groups that have developed from small founder populations such as the Finns, Ashkenazi Jews, the population of Quebec in Canada and possibly the Australian island state of Tasmania, Kalaydjieva, told ABC Science Online.

Kalaydjieva and team have been studying the genetics of Romany people for over 10 years.

In this recent study, which will be published in the October issue of the journal, the researchers analysed five genetic mutations linked to certain diseases, such as the neuromuscular disorder myasthenia.

The aim was to try and estimate when the original founder population arose and when it split off into different groups of Romany.

The researchers studied the diversity of the chromosomes that carry the genetic markers. Over successive generations, the region around the genetic markers become more and more diverse.

By applying a known rate of genetic change in DNA, the researchers worked out the founder population emerged from the ancestral population 32 to 40 generations ago, or 800 to 1000 years ago.

An Indian origin

As well as looking at over 1100 samples of Romany from Europe, they studied six samples from India and found that the similarity in genetic markers supported the theory that the founder group, of perhaps under 1000 people, came from India.

The idea that Romany people came from India was first proposed 200 years ago based on similarities between their language and the Indian language Sanskrit, said Kalaydjieva. But such studies were inconclusive.

"There are quite a few examples where a population adopts a language but this does not necessarily mean its biological roots belong to the same place as the larger population that speaks this language," she said.

"So from the biological point of view we have provided we have provided the best evidence so far that this is indeed a population that derives from the Indian subcontinent."

Kalaydjieva and team's analysis of disease genetic markers supported the scientists' previous research on male and female genetic markers.

"It all points in the same direction," she said.

Gypsy: a loaded term

Kalaydjieva said scientists commonly used the term "Gypsy" but this was politically and historically loaded.

"Initially Gypsies were called Gypsies because Europeans believed, and this was a legend that the Gypsies maintained themselves, that they came from Egypt," she said.

But she said Gypsies had been persecuted due to superstition, racism and prejudice. The term Gypsy had become increasingly given a pejorative meaning, being used to describe a social category with a wandering nomadic way of life, rather than a biological population. Many people from that group now preferred to be called Roma, Romani or Romany.

She said the term Romani or Romany, strictly speaking linguistically and historically, described Balkan Gypsies. These people were a sub-group of European Gypsies and the scientific term Gypsy was a more generic term to cover the biological population.

Today people descended from European Gypsies live all over the world, even Australia. In Bulgaria alone there are at least 50 groups with different traditions, cultures, dialects and adopted religions.
Click to expand...
 
It's said that place names with "engine" in them are to do with gypsies camping there, and them being identified as "indians"
 
Faggus said:
It's said that place names with "engine" in them are to do with gypsies camping there, and them being identified as "indians"
Click to expand...
I am scratching my head trying to think of a single place name with 'engine' in it :confused:
 
Fire Engine... erm...

Anyway, what are they doing investigating where Romanies came from? Surely a more interesting question is where the Aborigines came from - and probably an area where the University of Western Australia would have access to more resources.

According to the book I am reading, they appeared in Australia 23 thousand years ago - long before any record of sea crossings by humans - despite the fact that Australia has always (in human times) been an island.

Or are Aborigines still the "invisible people" of Australia? :hmph:
 
er... is it just me?

sorry, but to me it's no news - i've always read that gipsies came from india as a well known fact. maybe the news is that now they have the DNA evidence? but the concept is not new at all. i'll also add that my italian etymological dictionary says that <zingaro> (gipsy) means <belonging to a population from india that came to europe in the XII century> etcetera. and the etymology is <from the greek athinganos, untouchable, and it refers to certain haeretic sects>. so it looks like it's been well known for a while.
 
Re: er... is it just me?

ginoide said:
sorry, but to me it's no news - i've always read that gipsies came from india as a well known fact.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree, we were taught that at school and that was a looooong time ago.
 
ginoide said:
sorry, but to me it's no news - i've always read that gipsies came from india as a well known fact.
Click to expand...

I agree, I was under this impression too. I had also read about the Sanskrit connection before but I guess that the Genetics project is more conclusive evidence.

One of the more interesting (well to me it was) tales I have read about the origins of the Gypsies, is that they were the makers of the nails that were used in the Crucifixion and that is why they are nomadic, unable to stay in one place due to the shame of being paid to make the nails. I've forgotten where I originally read that...
 
i guess so too, and as i tried to convey in my first post maybe i didn't get the point; anyway <Romany Gypsies came out of India> sounds like news, not like proof; and while it probably is proof, it certainly is no news. the correct title for the article should have been >genetic evidence proves Romany Gypsies did come from india, as we were taught>. but i guess that woulnd't be very effective.
god, i'm so pedantic today. when RL knocks on my door, being pedantic is my last refuge... sorry ppl
 
A similar situation exists with celtic roots, years ago George Burrows suggested (iirc) a correspondence between many Sanscrit, Romany and both p and q celtic words - in the 1800's!
 
...they've only JUST worked out that the Romani came from India? Well, better late than never...But its good to have the harder evidence. I might have an Anatolian bump, shovel teeth and asiatic eyes that bely my pasty face, but this will firm up the much neglected history of a much disliked people. Interesting to see genetic proof for something that, linguistically, was very clear - although of course, 'Indo European' strains are also easily detected in Europe - take for example, the term for man - in Romani/Sanskrit manush, in German, mensch.

Has to be remembered though, that this is a complex phenomenon - not all nomadic Europeans are of Romani descent - in Scotland and Ireland for example, you have the so called 'Tinkers' - remnant of ancient Celtic castes that in later times (i.e. post 1500s!) mingled with Romanies as they arrived from continental Europe. Then you have the Laps, the Maragatos, etc...

The nail and crucifix is an old tale, often used in reference to Tinkers - the two versions have positive and negative poles - one says that the Tinker refused to make the nail, and thus was forced by the Romans to wander eternally. The other of course, has the tinker pocketing the money but being cursed by God to wander. My Grandmother also used to hold to Cain and Abel - the blessed Abel being the nomadic herder and Cain the jealous and unworthy farmer - and that we were 'Abel's kin'. I never pointed out to her though, that as Abel snuffed it before apparently knowing his wife, that this was impossible - unless of course, he was getting up to things with his sheep...

All part of course, of the process of spinning myths to protect against the gadjes/flatties/gorgers - which goes right back to the claims made by the first Gypsies that they were christian refugees from the Kingdom of Prester John, driven out by the Turks. Anyone interested in comparable groups still living in India, should do a google on 'gadiola lohars'
 
Thats what I was thinking too. old news.

But Latin and other indo european languages are similar to sanskrit too. (known about for 200 years or so)

and if you look on the racial map, we are all from India.

I like to see the Romanis too, its a shame they are so unnaproachable.
 
taras said:
Fire Engine... erm...

According to the book I am reading, they appeared in Australia 23 thousand years ago - long before any record of sea crossings by humans - despite the fact that Australia has always (in human times) been an island.

Or are Aborigines still the "invisible people" of Australia? :hmph:
Click to expand...

As an Aussie, I'll answer this one.

Actually quite a lot is known about the origins of the Australia's Indigenous people. Your book has the dates way out. Current estimates have it that they arrived between 40000 to 60000 years ago, and passed through what is now Indonesia. Back then, Australia, Indonesia and New Guinea were one land mass, so it wasn't all sea crossings. They know this 'cause of archeological findings and such. Before that, I'm not entirely sure about where they came over from, but at a guess, just about all human groups were spreading out from Africa.

The Aboriginal people have been here a very long time. Much longer than humans have been in Europe it seems.

And as to the 'invisible people' comment - no they aren't.

Please don't take this as a personal attack or anything, but it does annoy me to hear British people criticise Australia for what the Aboriginal people went through. Don't forget it was Britain who invaded and colonised Australia and started the process of genocide in this country. That it continued for so long is a very shameful part of Australia's history, and one that the current generation is still learning to deal with. What really gets to me is when I hear British people giving us a hard time, and never seeming to consider the part their own ancestors had in it all. How much damage did Britain do through it's days of conquoring? How many cultures did it destroy?

None of us are responsible for what our ancestors did, but we all benefit from what they did. And some people still suffer. Those of is in the colonised countries are the ones left to pick up the pieces and deal with the past, and it's consequences to the present. In Britain you don't have that problem, 'cause it isn't right in front of you all the time.

<hops down off soapbox>

Again, sorry about the rant. Please don't take it personally.
 
its a shame they are so unapproachable
Click to expand...

Well, not ALL of us I hope - although I am, admittedly, somewhat hybrid and furthermore, domesticated.

It was a good point though, made by Maeve about the aborigines - too often, The Old World sniffs at what happened in the new after we had so wantonly mucked the place up. Having said that, Indian reservations in the US did continue after Independence, and questions could be asked about carrying on our mistakes, rather than turning away from them. But, yes, our culpability should be admitted.

Was wanting to ask you though Maeve - and this is purely to get your perspective, and not intended as an attack - what is the current situation in places like Western Australia, where the treatment of Aborigines in modern times has been fairly notorious - compared at its worst, to South Africa? Are things improving there? Obviously we hear of Pauline Hanson (who I understand is coming out of jail...?) leader of the One Nation Party, and her targetting of Aborigines in particular. Any perspective on that? Is she as ominous and threatening as she at times, is made to sound?
 
Cruithne said:
Was wanting to ask you though Maeve - and this is purely to get your perspective, and not intended as an attack - what is the current situation in places like Western Australia, where the treatment of Aborigines in modern times has been fairly notorious - compared at its worst, to South Africa? Are things improving there? Obviously we hear of Pauline Hanson (who I understand is coming out of jail...?) leader of the One Nation Party, and her targetting of Aborigines in particular. Any perspective on that? Is she as ominous and threatening as she at times, is made to sound?
Click to expand...

Really it varies all over. I live on the eastern side of Australia so not all that familiar with WA. In a lot of areas now, Indigenous people have been given back their land, but that doesn't mean that things are still great. Aboriginal communities have big problems with alcohol and family violence, though in some areas it is illegal to bring alcohol into a community. (Made so at the request of the local elders).

One town I lived at in NSW, although there was no traditional land ownership, the local elders were very prominent at the community and some taught at the university there.

There is no legal segregation anymore - hasn't been for years, but racism is still there, unfortunately. Worst thing is, i think that Aboriginal people are more likely to be given jail sentences than non-Aboriginal people, so lots of them end up in jail. They had been trying to stop that, but I don't there has been big improvements.

As for Pauline Hanson, well your a bit behind the times there. She isn't leader of One Nation anymore, and actually did jail time for electoral fraud (or something like that). Bit of a set up actually. She's running for the senate in our elections next month as an Independent. Will be interesting to see how she goes.

Our current government is extremely racist. When Pauline Hanson first started with her rants, it was kinda shocking stuff, but unfortunately it's now sorta the politically mainstream views. Not specifically her views on Aboriginal people, more immigration and stuff like that.

Pauline Hanson is a loud mouth. She is no real threat personally. There was a lot more going on behind the scenes with her. People using her to manipulate public views - long story. Could go into it for you if you wanted. Probably said enough for one post I guess ;)
 
No mention that there were several waves of aboriginal immigrants??
 
How could you Aussies persecute this lovely lady?

You horrid lot! ;) :p (only joking)

Was she the woman who said something along the lines of, 'I'm not a xenophobe . . . er, what's a xenophobe?'

Carole
 
Sorry, off-thread, I know, but, Cruithne, how do you pronounce your name??

Carole
 
And there I was expecting Truganini....

(Her husband, however, looked a charming fellow...)
 
carole said:
How could you Aussies persecute this lovely lady?

You horrid lot! ;) :p (only joking)

Was she the woman who said something along the lines of, 'I'm not a xenophobe . . . er, what's a xenophobe?'

Carole
Click to expand...

:D

No, the classic quote is, when she was asked by a reporter if she was a xenophobe, she looked confused and said in a very nasal voice:

"Please explain?"

Was a truely beautiful moment in journalism.

:rofl:
 
Homo Aves said:
No mention that there were several waves of aboriginal immigrants??
Click to expand...

I think your right there. I can't remember all the details. I have a book of readings somewhere from a subject I took at uni about Aboriginal society pre-Invasion (unfortunately I didn't get to finish it cause of health problems) - which may have more detailed info. I could dig it out if anyone is really interested.

Perhaps we should start a new thread?
 
Maeve said:
:D

No, the classic quote is, when she was asked by a reporter if she was a xenophobe, she looked confused and said in a very nasal voice:

"Please explain?"

Was a truely beautiful moment in journalism.

:rofl:
Click to expand...

Psst..She back! :eek!!!!:
 
Homo Aves said:
(isnt there already one?)

Yes, lets call it `Pygmies in Oz.
Click to expand...

If there is, I don't know where it is.

Pygmies????..... Don't you know the rhyme:

"Australian born
Australian bred
Long in the legs
And thick in the head..."

No Pygmies here, mate :D
 
for Carole...

CROO-hee-nya

Or just Croothin, if you can't be bothered with Gaelic glottals...

Incidentally Maeve, thanks for the update on wee Pauline - bless her - very interesting...
 
Maeve said:
:D

No, the classic quote is, when she was asked by a reporter if she was a xenophobe, she looked confused and said in a very nasal voice:

"Please explain?"

Was a truely beautiful moment in journalism.

:rofl:
Click to expand...

That's the one I was thinking of, Maeve! Silly cow! (her, not you!! :) )

Carole
 
I'm heading off on holiday for a week, so if anyone wanted any me to do that info on Aboriginal origins it'll have to be when I get back. If anyone is interested, just leave a message here and I'll do it when I get home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top