For the attention of the Institute for the Study of the Issues of National Minorities (www.ispmn.gov.ro): Mr. Director, there currently exists, in Romania and Europe, a terrible confusion between Roma and Țigani. The Institute you are leading has tried to clarify the enigma of this name, by publishing the book Rom or Țigan, the dilemmas of an ethnonym in Romanian space (Rom sau Ţigan, dilemele unui etnonim în spațiul românesc). The book published by your institution does not give any explanation to Romanian society regarding the name Rom, but one of its authors, the famous Nicolae Gheorghe, himself a Țigan – according to his own words – explains his motive for declaring himself Rom, so that he could have access to resources, specifically, funds destined for the Roma (C). In other words, according to the laws in force, Nicolae Gheorghe declared a false identity, this being punishable by law. Mr. Mihai Neacşu, director of the National Centre for Romani Culture (CNCR), imposed, through the institution he leads, the personality cult of Nicolae Gheorghe, he who refused the identity of Rom.
Identity theft and constant confusion date back hundreds of years
“Rudolf Stumf, in Schweitzer Chronik, published about 1546, and Guler in his Rhoetia, published in 1616, both reported that the original Țigani/Gypsies had returned home, and then a lazy and desperate group took their place, blackening their faces and wearing foreign clothes, and tried to convince the world that they were identical with the Egyptians.” (Source: https: //archive.org/stream/journalofgypsylo02gypsuoft#page/220/ mode / 2up )
The Venedic Gypsy Language
What has escaped the “keen” vision of modern tsiganologists is an observation by Aventino in his work Annales ducum Bojariae. We are indebted to Bataillard for the keen anthropologist’s eye (1) with which he noted the anomaly that Aventino documented in the 14th century. Aventino says that the Gypsies spoke a special language, called Venedic, “Experienta cognovi eos uti Venedica lingua” (I know from experience that they use the Venedic language). But the language of the Roma is called Romani. The priest, Andrew de Ratisbon, gave a Vocabularium Venedicum in his 1711 work Historia etymologici linguae Germanicce hactenus impensi. An analysis of the vocabulary of the Venedic language yields a zero match between the Romani and Venedic languages. But we find that Venedic was related to Slavic. Aventino stated that Gypsies had a special language. If they were Roma, why did Aventino not mention the Romani language? Because they were not Roma … the Gypsies about whom all the tsiganologists speak, led by Dukes Andrash, Panuel and Shindel, as described by Aventino, the medieval author quoted by all respected tsiganologists, were not Roma, but a different race, who spoke … the Venedic language, as we see recorded by Aventino, who himself had heard that language spoken. A foreign traveller in the Romanian Lands, Lorenzo Hervas y Panduro (1735-1809) finds (A) also the existence of two different languages named as “Gypsy”, one mixed with Slavic and German, and one Indian: “In Catalogo he confirms that the language of the Gypsies is made up of German, Slavic and Romanian. In Cat. lenguas, on the other hand, he correctly describes the language of the Gypsies as an essentially Indian language; in Transylvania it would have been a mixed language that would also contain many Romanian words”. How could it be the language that Panduro presented as being Slavic and German, the language named as Venedic in the 14th century by Aventino? In any case, we have three testimonies for this interpretation: the first was Aventino, who in the fourteenth century heard from the Gypsies that their tongue was called Venedic, the second, the priest Andrew de Ratisbon in 1711, who gave the only known vocabulary of lingua venedica, a Slavic language spoken in Germany, and the last, the Spanish traveler L.H. Panduro, described a Gypsy language composed of German, Slavic and Romanian. As a vernacular term in Romanian, Venetic means foreign, coming from other lands. So, the Venedic Gypsies were not Roma, but Slavs, originating from along the Vistula, as we shall see below. The Spaniard, Panduro, was a linguist, so it was impossible for him to be mistaken when he claimed that one of the Gypsy languages spoken in Romania in 1700 was Slavic. It is clear that he had heard a dialect of the Venedic language.
The Romanian researcher, Sorin Paliga, quotes Iordanes, who in the sixth century in Getica, 119, mentioned Venethi, one of three related tribes (Sclaveni, Anti, and Venethi). In Sorin Paliga’s work he tells us that the slaves of the Romanians and of the Arabs were, in fact, these Sclaveni, a tribe of the Venedi who sold their children into slavery. So the etymology of the word sclav (slave) comes from the name of a tribe. Also, curiously, the word Ațigan, originally the name of a tribe, has become synonymous with ‘slave’ … What is really interesting is that Iordanes, quoting Tacitus (late first century CE), places the Venedi somewhere near the source of the Vistula, which Aventino, 1400 years later, confirms about the Gypsies speaking the lingua Venedica … Venetic, in the Greek form venetikós, means “outsider, unbeliever”, i.e. Pagan. The Sclaveni were “tall, reddish-faced and not very white of skin”, according to Sorin Paliga’s description. The footnote on page 7 of Paliga’s work, The Linguistics and Archeology of the Early Slavs (Lingvistica şi arheologia slavilor timpurii, editura Cetatea de Scaun, 2009) tells us that this word, venetic, also appears in Finnish, but was also known by Pliny the Elder in the form eneti – Naturalis Historia XXXVII, 43.
Lorenzo Hervas y Panduro may have been right to claim that the language of the Gypsies was made up of Slavic and Romanian, because during the same period a vocabulary of the Venedic language was also recorded. Another writer, Sir Thomas Browne (2), also states that the language of the Gypsies was Slavonic: “… their first appearance was in Germany in 1400, and they had not been seen before in other parts of Europe… that they had initially settled not far from Germany, is more likely because of their language, which was a Slavonic language.”
In 1422, when the Italian monk Hieronymus of Forlí asked the newly-arrived Indians (Cingari?) where they had come from, they said that only some of them were from India. In Muratori’s 19th volume, we learn that these mysterious Indians, Cingari, came to Rome on August 7, 1422, and only some claimed to be from India: et ut audivi aliqui dicebant quod erant de India. Could the others, who were not Indians, be the speakers of the Venedic language? And the Athinganoi, as we shall see later, came from Little Egypt, located in … Greece, Methoni Province (3). They, of course, spoke Greek. And Münster in Cosmographia universalis (B), dated 1550, tells us that the language of the Gypsies he met was Rotwelsch, a thieves’ cant.
The Țigani were Greeks, as the Romanian proverb says, but also their testimonies recorded in the medieval documents that the Cingari were Indian, as they themselves testified to the monk Cesario Vecceli in 1590. But who were the Indians described by Brother Hieronymus in 1422? Enigmas of history … It is certain that the Indians who went to Rome in 1422 were not the Indians described by Cesario Vecceli, as both Hieronymus in 1422 and Vecceli in 1590 described them as newcomers to Italy.
The Moldovan Gypsies of Dimitrie Cantemir, speakers of a Greco-Persian dialect
A popular Romanian proverb asserts that the Gypsy is a Greek with a black tongue (Zane, Proverbs of the Romanians, Vol. VI, p. 133). And Moldovan ruler, Dimitrie Cantemir (1673-1723) in 1716 in Descriptio Moldavia, stated that “Gypsies are scattered throughout the whole of Moldova, and there is no boyar who does not have a few families of them as slaves. When and from where these people came to Moldova, they themselves do not know, nor is there anything about them in our chronicles, and they all speak a language mixed with many Greek and Persian words, and they do no other work but the crafts of goldsmithing and blacksmithing, and also they are similar to the other gypsies from other countries, they have the same character as those; and their most important deeds, and the signs by which to know them, are laziness and petty larceny”. We cannot know with any certainty anything about the language of the Gypsies described by Cantemir as being a mixture of Greek and Persian without any clear examples, but we can assert with certainty that he was not referring to the Roma, because we know that in 1837 Mihail Kogalniceanu declared in his Outline of the Gypsies (Schiță despre Țigani) that the Romani language is Indian. The fact that the leading luminary did not characterize the language of the Gypsies as also having Indian words, or at least words of obscure origin, permits us to assume that the Gypsies who spoke Greek mixed with Persian described by Cantemir were not Roma but Athinganoi, since a popular saying claims that the Gypsy is a Greek with a black tongue. And the Greeks speak Greek. It is obvious that the ruler is confusing the Athinganoi with the Roma, or with other nomadic tribes, in the period of which he speaks: and they are also likened to other Gypsies from other countries. So it is about the similarity of Moldovan Gypsies with Gypsies from other European countries, probably based on shared trades and living in tents. Dimitrie Cantemir knew 11 foreign languages, including Turkish, Persian, and Arabic. Was a member of the Berlin Academy of Sciences, who knew so many languages, unable to notice the presence of Indian words in the language of the Gypsies? The fact that Dimitrie Cantemir does not mention the presence of Indian words in the language of the Gypsies justifies us in asserting that the Roma were not the Gypsies mentioned by Cantemir as living in Moldova. Much has been said about the Rudari community, who were and still are confused with the Roma. I have discovered that in their language, as described by Dimitrie Cantemir, there is a Persian word dăstău, (dast in Persian means ‘handle’) which refers to a tool used to carve wood.
European Testimonies on Gypsy Languages
Peter Bakker talks about the Spanish Gitanos in his article “Genesis of Calo”: around 1600 it was recorded that they spoke Greek (4). Dimitrie Cantemir clearly knew that the Gypsies in other countries were the same as those in the Romanian Lands, that is, Greek speakers. It seems, however, that there existed two groups called Țigani/Gypsies, one speaking Greek and the other speaking Romani … The mystery, though it appeared to be solved, deepens, because we do not really know to whom the sources quoted by Bakker refer, probably the Spanish Gitanos were the Greek Athinganoi, who had been known since the 1300s as “Egyptians”. It is known that the name “Egyptian” is the etymological source of the Spanish word “Gitano”. Richard Bright quotes Grellman, who in turn quotes a manuscript, describing Țigani/Gypsies in Romania, following the traditional Romani trades, adding Rudari and Corturari, and remembering the Egyptians as well! At that time, a distinction was made between the Corturari and the Egyptians. Although the Corturari Roma still exist, the Egyptians disappeared from modern Romanian history, although in a Habsburg imperial decree, the Gypsies are also referred to as “Egyptians”. Also very interesting is the recent discovery (5) in a letter by Gregorios II of Cyprus (1283-1289), Patriarch of Constantinople, which mentions the taxes collected from the so-called Egyptians and Țigani (ὀ τοὺς καὶ Αἰγυπτίους καὶ Ἀθιγγάνους). We must not forget that the Athinganoi were also called Egyptians, and their land near Methoni, Greece, was called Gyppe or Tzingania, and they even referred to themselves as “the Little Egyptians”. Why “Little”? Because the same Greek territory inhabited by Țigani was also called Little Egypt, Egypt Minor, or Methoni. Bakker also quotes P. Martin Delrio who wrote in 1608 in Disquisitionum Magicarum that the language of the Gitani “was a vernacular invented by them to replace their own language, which they had forgotten” (quoted in Spanish in Pabano 1915:197). Well, the Spanish Roma still spoke their language in 1900, so who could the Gitanos (Egyptians), who had forgotten their language, be? Possibly, some of those Spanish Athinganoi / Gypsies / Gitanos that Peter Bakker says were reported to be Greek speakers.
Other “Gypsy” languages spoken in the Romanian Lands: Syrian, African and Egyptian, as shown by the testimony of the Syrian deacon Paul of Aleppo, who visited Romania in 1650, regarding the language of the Gavaons, which we will discuss below:
Gavaons – Kurdish Gypsies?
Regarding the Gypsies who called themselves Gavaons in their own language, they are known to have lived for hundreds of years in slavery in the Romanian Lands. Petre Petcuț claimed that the Gavaon Gypsies came from the city of Gavaon in India. There is no precise data about their language, nor about their ethnic origin, but Nicolae Costin states that they were from Gava, in Israel. Nicolae Costin attempts to attribute a biblical origin to all nations, as they were in the past. Here is the fragment from Nicolae Costin’s work: “Ebuzin, the second son of Hanaan, ruled Jerusalem and Gava, after which are named are the Gavaoni, etc.” (The Chronicle of the Land of Moldavia (Letopisețul țării Moldovei), p. 77 Bucharest, 1942)
Obviously, we can scarcely accept the Jewish origin of the Gavaons, but it is noteworthy that Nicolae Costin attempts to establish an identity of the Gavaons, a sign that during his time, the Gavaons could no longer remember who their ancestors had been. Appealing to the similarity of names, there are still Gypsies known as Gevende in Turkey today. In Études Tsiganes, no. 3/1991, author Ruddiger Benninghouse, in the article Les Tsiganes de la Turquie Orientale, page 51, says that “in Adiyaman there is a group of gypsies called Gevende, different from the Karachi Dom. This name derives from the Kurdish word goven – dance”. About the Dom language, the author states that it is called Domani. We have a different ethnic origin from the start for these enigmatic Gavaon Gypsies. Could these Gavaons have been Kurds, and their language a mixed Kurdish dialect? The only Gypsy word Nicolae Costin reports in his work is the word MANO, about which he says: See those untruths that they wrote; as they say, mano in Gypsy. There is no such word in modern Romani. But in the Indian languages, mano is an imperative and means accept, understand! But we cannot rely on just one word to establish the origin of a people, because many words from different languages resemble each other, although we may suspect that it refers to the language of the Gavaons, because Nicolae Costin has just established their ethnic origin. The autonym Gavaon spans a period of more than a hundred years in documents about slavery. Did the Gavaons originate in the Jewish region called Gava? Or could Nicolae Costin have been misled? Or, indeed, could the Gavaon Gypsies in Romania be the parents of the Gevende Gypsies in Turkey, different from the Indian Dom settled in Turkey?
Gypsies or Tatars?
The Gypsies were erroneously called Tatars in many European countries like Sweden and Germany, probably because of the deformation of the word Kartas with which they begged for food. The only mention of the Tatar language is a mysterious expression recorded by Lesný Vincenc (1916) in his writing, Cikáni v Čechách a na Moravě, page 201. This author cites a medieval manuscript dating back to 1314, called Dalimilova Kronika, in chapter 82 of which it says that Tatars when they beg for bread say “Kartas boh”. Well, although this phrase may seem to be Indian, it is not in Romani but neither is it in the Tatar language, because Lesný Vincenc quotes the Mongolian language expert Bernhard Jülga who asserts that it is not the Tatar language, but the Romani language, the expert arguing that the expression translates as “keras bokh” – “we make hunger”. But, as a native speaker of Romani, I say with the same authority as Bernard Jülga that neither is it the Romani language, but … a different language. Because in contemporary Hindi “we do” is said as “ham karta he”, but in the Romani language that word “kartas” does not exist. We reproduce the original fragment in archaic Czech language (6), as it appears in Lesný Vincenc’s book:
“Léta ot narozenie Jezu Krista milostivého po tisiúciu po dvú stú po čtyřech dcětech druhého Kartasi jdiechu, taterščí spytáci biechu.Na pět set těch ľudí jdieše, a tento obyčej jich bieše. Klobúčky vysoké velmi jmějiechu, rúcho krátké a tobolky nosiechu.Všickni v nohavičkách chodiechu, holi dlúhé v rukú držiechu.Když piti chtiechu, s břěha nakloňmo pijiechu, když chleba prosiechu, “Kartas boh” tak mluviechu; pro to jim Kartasi vzdechu.”
An approximate, partial translation is: “in the year 1242 after the birth of the Merciful Jesus Christ .. the Kartas Tatars … Five hundred of these people … and they have this habit, they have very high hats, short robes … carrying staffs … When they want drink … when they beg for bread they say Kartas boh … that is why they are called Kartas.”
On page 202, Vincenc reproduces an old German translation of the Dalimila manuscript: Vnd wen si peteln brot, si nantin “gartas” Got vnd ruften “Kartas wo”; darvm hiz man si do Kartas mit dem nomen. Gartas seems to be the name of God, Gott in German, and Boh is also the name of God in the Slavic languages …
The Indian Cingari are different from the Athinganoi
The Indian Cingari are another race, it seems. About the exonym Ceangar, we find that it is also pronounced Žingar in India (http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/gypsy-i
). The name consists of two Persian words chun–lime, and gar–maker. Could this Persian word, Žingar, be the source for the Italian Zingarra, the name of the Gypsies in Italy? According to their traditions, the Chungari left Iran in ancient times (K. S. Singh, People of India, Rajasthan, part one, vol. XXXVIII). If they are emigrants, it is likely that the exonym derived from their profession. The Indian Chungari do not have a special language but speak the Indian regional languages of their home territories.
In Studies and Materials of Medieval History, vol. IX, in the article Historical Transylvanian Literature in Hungarian (16th century), two Hungarian authors are quoted: „Some of Székely’s notes can be linked to those of Heltai in that they refer to the demographic situation at the time when the Hungarians became settled. In describing the events during the reign of Charlemagne, he says of Pannonia: “But at that time Hungarians did not live here, but many sorts of people: Wallachians, Avars, Alans, Slavs, and other races, of which we can now see only very few”. The same information is repeated on the next page where it does not mention Avars, but mentions instead Ostrogoths, Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs and Țigani/Gypsies” (Vekov, 102: 1978). Heltai Gáspár wrote his Chronicle between 1510–1574, so we should believe him when he states that the Gypsies lived in Pannonia during the time of Emperor Charlemagne (742/748 – † 28 January 814).
In this case, the Cingari Indians were different from the Gypsies of Heltai’s Chronicle. Cesare Vecellio (1590) in his work “Degli habiti antichi et moderni di diverse parti del mondo” correctly names them as Indians: Cingara orientale, overo donna errante (Eastern Cingara/Gypsy, or nomadic woman).
In the Byzantine Empire, the Athinganoi did not permit themselves to be touched, as we can see from the text Byzantine Anathemas (9th century), which researcher Ellie Cohen quotes in her book History of the Byzantine Jews: A Microcosmos in the Thousand Year Empire. The name Athinganoi, untouchables, comes from the practice of the Sabbatean heretics, who attested their practice with the formula “do not touch me, for I am pure” (cf. Ellie Cohen, 76). And the priest Timothy of Constantinople wrote in 600 CE, in Repression of Heretics, that “those now called Athinganoi” did not touch anybody. It is, therefore, an autonym stemming from the practice of not touching. So the word Țigan was not imposed from the outside, in mockery of the Țigani, but was used by the them to distinguish between their Christian sect and outsiders.
Finally, we conclude that the homophony between the Indian Cingar and the Greek Athinganoi, with various forms of pronunciation (Zingar), gave rise to … 500 years of confusion.
It seems that the Romanian and European researchers, specialists in the history of “Gypsies” (Țigani), confuse all those who call themselves Țigani with the Roma. This confusion is unjust. Ethnicity is characterized though language, which is the supreme expression of ethnicity. In the Middle Ages, the writers who described the nomads in Europe, stated that they spoke different languages. For example, in archaic German, the word zigeuner meant nomad, and not slave as it did in Romanian. Aventino wrote that the Gypsies whom he met spoke the Slavic language called Venedic. Münster said that the Gypsies he described in 1550 spoke the Rotwelsch dialect. The language of the enigmatic Gavaon Gypsies of the Romanian Lands seems to be a Kurdish dialect, in my humble opinion, and not a Semitic one, as in the opinion of Miron Costin. In 1650, the Syrian deacon Paul of Aleppo visited the Romanian monasteries, and noted that there were slaves there from Syria, Egypt and Africa … It is beyond any doubt that the people he described were Syrians, since he himself was Syrian. He certainly spoke with them in the language of their homeland …
On the other hand, many different Indian groups set out from India towards Europe. I have arranged this list in chronological order, showing the exodus of several different Indian peoples that have migrated to Europe. I stress that all of them had their own languages. And today, speakers of the dialects called Domari, from Turkey or Israel, do not understand one another with speakers of the dialects called Romani in Europe:
1. In 2166 BCE, the first colony of Indians in ancient Armenia was mentioned, who were converted some centuries later, by force, by St. Gregory the Enlightener of Armenia, to Christianity.
2. Then in Persia, in 450 BC, the Indians brought by King Bahram Gur.
3. In 700 CE, when the Arabs attacked the Indian province of Sindh, and enslaved the Jatt Indians. Regarding the Indian Jatt population, Maidani’s collection of Arabic proverbs specifies that the Zott are prisoners from Sind. Mafātīḥ al-‘Ulūm, the work of Persian statesman al-Khwārizmī, was compiled in 975-997. He wrote about the Zott: “the Zott are the keepers of the roads. These people are, strictly speaking, of Sindhi origin, also called Djattan”. This book is one of the oldest Islamic encyclopedias. We see that the Jatt are described as the prisoners of the Arabs taken from Sindh. From Goeje, MJ de (Michael Jan), Mémoire sur les migrations des Tsiganes à travers l’Asia, pp. 6-7: “Don’t teach the Police Commissioner how to do investigations, and don’t teach a Zott to steal”. The author notes, regarding the first, that the Zott are villainous people, and regarding the second, that every Sindhi of low origin claims to be the son of a king. (Freytag Collection, Prov. II, 580, N. 609). The Arab attack on Sindh occurred in 700 CE.
4. In 1250, the Mongolian General, Sali Noyan, brought Hindu slaves from Hindustan and Kashmir to the villages of Inju in the 1250s, according to footnote no. 26, on page 113 of Irfan Habib’s work, Economic History of Medieval India, 1200-1500: Rashidu’dd Fazhullah notes in Jami’u’t Tawarikh, I, p.66, that the Hindu slaves present in Inju’s villages in Iran in his time (about 1300 CE) were the descendants of the numerous Hindu slaves gathered by the Mongolian conqueror Sali Noyan in his raids in Hindustan and Kashmir in the 1250s. A Syrian Dom said that their elders remembered that they originated in the Mongolian era, around the 1260s CE. (http://www.domresearchcenter.com/journal/14/syria4.html)
5. Approximately 1800 CE, came the last modern exodus from India ̶ the Parya Indians, who currently live in Iran and Afghanistan. “According to the Parya themselves, their ancestors migrated from India through Afghanistan around the turn of the 19th century”. Elena Marushiakova, Vesselin Popov, Gypsies in Central Asia and the Caucasus, p. 13.
In both Iran and Afghanistan, the majority population confuses the nomads, referring to them with either Indian or Arabic names: “The same label ̶ along with the names Hindustoni-Lyuli, Afgon-Lyuli and Chingar / Changar ̶ is given to other ethnic communities in the region, such as the Kavol and Chistoni, who migrated to the territories of modern Uzbekistan and Tajikistan from Afghanistan in the same period … The local population is unaware of their distinctiveness and perceives the Parya, Kavol and Chistoni as one and the same community” (Gypsies in Central Asia and the Caucasus, Elena Marushiakova).
Suppose that the descendants of the speakers of the multitude of languages in medieval Romania had completely forgotten their linguistic identity, becoming fully Romanianized. They do not even imagine that their ancestors could have spoken the Venedic, African, Syrian, or Egyptian languages. All these Țigani/Gypsies now believe themselves to be Roma. Probably some languages are not spoken any more because of the prohibition imposed by the Empress Maria Teresa, forbidding the use of the Gypsy language under the threat of beating with a staff. Angus Fraser was misled, but not only him, but all modern tsiganologists! When writing about the Roma, they called upon secondary sources, not primary. Dukes Andrash, Panuel, and Zindelo, described by Aventino in the 15th century as being the leaders of the Gypsy pilgrims, were not Roma but Venedic. The confusion is due in part to Lionardo di Niccolo Frescobaldi, who visited Modon in 1384, “who reported that he saw a number of Romiti outside the city walls, whom he took as penitents praying for forgiveness of their sins”. Romiti was the name of the citizens of the Byzantine Empire, speakers of Greek, naturally. The difference is that the European Roma belong to the Indian Dom caste, a name pronounced Rom even by Indian Doms. The wife of an Indian Dom is called Domni or Romni, just like the wife of a European Rom. The plural is Roma: the Gypsies.
End the confusion. Anyone who does not speak the Romani language, learned at home, is not a Rom, but only a Gypsy, whether his ancestors were nomads, or came from among the slaves, or were Christian heretics called Athinganoi by religious practitioners.
1-Paul Bataillard, Beginning of the Immigration of the Gypsies into Western Europe in the Fifteenth Century, in Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society ser.1 vol.2 1890/1891, page 45: a strange assertion, but perhaps interesting, for it would seem to indicate that there were numerous Gypsies in Bavaria at this time, who had come from the region of the banks of the Vistula.
2-Sir Thomas Browne’s Works, edited by Simon Wilkin, volume III, page 289, William Pickering, London, 1835.
3 – In the letter of Gregorios II of Cyprus (1283-1289), the Patriarch of Constantinople, in which are mentioned the taxes collected from the so-called Egyptians and Gypsies (ὀ τοὺς καὶ Αἰγυπτίους καὶ Ἀθιγγάνους).
4 – It seems that the sources that bear witness to this fact date from before 1600, according to the article From Iberian Romani to Iberian Para-Romani Varieties by Krinková, Zuzana, page 32.
5-Gregorios II of Cyrpus (1283-1289), Patriarch of Constantinople, also called the Gypsies Egyptians, probably because in theological parlance, any heretic was comparable to the Egyptians, of whom the Jews were slaves.
6 http: //tyfoza.no-ip.com/vestnik/html/knihy/vestnik11/texty/vest11-0204.htm
A-Eugenio Coseriu, Romanian Language in Front of the West: From Generbradus to Hervas: Contributions to the History of Knowledge of the Romanian language in Western Europe (Limba română ȋn faţa Occidentului: De la Generbradus la Hervas: contribuţii la istoria cunoaşterii limbii române în Europa occidentală), Dacia Publishing House Cluj-Napoca 1994.
B-D. M. M. Bartlett, Munster’s Cosmographia universalis, in JGLS (3), 31 (1952), pp. 83-90.
C-N.G .: “And if you can have access to resources by playing the Romani card it’s good, because at a certain point we are all Roma”. (Rom sau Țigan, Dilemele unui etnonim în spaţiul românesc –
Rom or Țigan, the Dilemmas of an Ethnonym in Romanian Space, page 336, Cluj, 2012)
Translated by Dr. Natalie Winter.