Desicritics Author: Alin Dosoftei

India - Bharat - Tenjiku: One Reality, More Perspectives (Part 2)

Alin Dosoftei — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:20:52 EDT

Some personal opinions

So, more words describing, obviously, just one reality. The first assumption would be that they mean the same thing, that Tenjiku shogi is, you know, an Indian shogi, or, in an alternative history with an East Asian prevalence worldwide, an Indian file is, you know, a Tenjiku file. How else, the common logic goes, when they describe the same reality? This is helped by the fact that, in most of the cases, a certain culture would have available just one such imagery. In this manner, it is not questioned its relation with the segment from reality it is supposed to describe. There may be many other names in other cultures describing their own segments from about the same area of the reality (most certainly the segmentations will not be the same in different cultures). But who cares? Usually they will not remain face to face, because they will ignore each other, trivialize each other, dispute each other, subordinate each other (8) or assimilate each other. Hence, it is preserved the appearance of the "one and only", the unquestioned identification between imagery and reality. These are perceived as the same thing and the reality's uniqueness is bestowed also upon that imagery. Obviously, as the time elapses, this relation will need adjustments and patchings to help the imagery keep the pace with the reality or to confront other rival imageries, hence the notions of truth and untruth.

This tends to obliterate the fact that, in practice, the relations between such words speak rather of the relations between the cultures that employ them. This may become more visible in cases like that from above, where the vivacity of Tenjiku, face to face with the contemporary almighty Indo, speaks rather of the successful integration of the Japanese culture in the Western framework, that "Tenjiku dream food, Indian restaurant" mirroring the slogan "Japanese spirit, Western techniques". In the contemporary context, Tenjiku is an established part of the Japanese spirit, while India comes as a result of the integration in the Western framework (of course, here I am writing about India as the Western imagery, not about the society from the contemporary state with this name). If that segment from reality itself is not very vocal, any description of "what everybody knows" about it ends up easily in describing instead the worldview of those who "know" (as you can see from this very article that says very few about the Desi people).

Another such example, from that article reminded at the beginning about Rom as reality and Gypsy as imagery, the only true Gypsies are only the non-Roma who have the Gypsy imagery established in their culture. It should be pointed out that the non-Roma who are vehement in imposing the Gypsy imagery on the Roma, they themselves can be characterized according to this imagery. They are some exotic Gypsies or some violent, destructive Gypsies who make no distinction between their personality and the Roma they encounter, therefore adulating or punishing the latter as a psychological projection (the defense mechanism that attributes to the others one's own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts). Through this process a matter of fantasy is used for interpreting the real life. It becomes normal and it happens this anomalous violence or adulation, the word Gypsy becomes a safe haven for such behavior. They need to accept the existence of their acquired Gypsy cultural features and then to deal with them. Moreover, those societies that have the Gypsy imagery as part of their culture, must acknowledge that they used the Roma's minority non-vocal status as escapism for otherwise unaccepted behavior, developing antisocial "Gypsy excrescences" in their people's minds. In order to create a functional broad society, instead of thinking how to get rid of the "abnormal Gypsies" that appear on their retinas, they have to aim correctly and deal with the Gypsy part of their own culture.

Back to the main theme, in this less usual case (9) when two such imageries remain face to face, for an outsider that belongs neither to the Japanese nor to the Western culture, having just an unexplored relation with South Asia (10), this looks like the right place to put a long awaited question: which of them is the reality, the "one and only", also which of them represents the truth (the usual human cultural connection with the reality)? Their successful cohabitation in the same framework, each with its own coherence, vivacity, makes clear that none of them is the unique reality, they are relative, there may exist an infinite number of such images about South Asia, also that the reality is not comprised by such frameworks of imageries. They shouldn't have met each other in such a manner if they would have desired to preserve the appearance that they really describe something from the real life.

What about Bharat, as an autochthonous image of this culture? Technically, its structure is no different from the other images, it is one of the infinite number of possibilities, but, obviously, it makes a big difference that it stems from the reality it describes. In such cases, this kind of image is different from the others as much as it is connected to its reality. Theoretically, nothing impedes an outsider to have a fine understanding of a certain segment of reality, but in practice the insiders have chances to know much better. Every instance (both at individual level and at the level of a certain culture) is a particular one concerning both the self-understanding and the understanding of the others. The difference between the self-image and the identity may be visible in cases, like the groups of people emigrating in other cultural areas, when, exactly because of clinging too much on their self-image they had back home, they lose the connection with their cultural identity (one of the most common ways of cultural assimilation).

I wrote somewhere else my views about the relation between the unique reality and the existing images, about the ethnic minorities losing their identity because of too much confidence in their self-image, also about the historical cases when this convenient "one and only" view was questioned, opening ways for other relations with the reality. In the last case, for the scope of this article, I would like to write also here that the relation between the now acknowledged plurality of images and the unique reality became organized by absolute purity rules when only a part of a local society understood it or by relative purity rules when the entire local society clarified its view. As long as it does not appear a clear human understanding of the relation between the reality and the imagery, these purity rules are employed to keep this relation working (in the absence of the belief in the firmness of the images).

I named relative purity rules those rules that underline how every image is relative and absolute purity rules those emphasizing that there is just one reality. The different stress results from different contexts. When an entire local society becomes aware of the reality and of the infinite possibilities to interpret it through imagery, relative purity rules appear to permit further on the use of the images as the main known drive of the social life (and in the same time to keep official their relativity). The Desi society employs relative purity rules publicly expressed through the Dharmic religions and, more or less among non-Dharmic Desis, through some popular Desi peculiarities of their way of life. These purity rules found an important expression in the caste system, as an understanding of the infinity of simultaneously possible ideals/self-images. It is acknowledged that any ideal/self-image does not grasp fully the reality, emphasizing that there is a reality without attributes beyond such points of view.

The absolute purity rules are employed by marginal groups, parts of broader societies, which from a certain moment in history made the difference between reality and imageries. These groups do not assimilate, because their ethnic identification is not based anymore on self-imagery, but on the reality of their identity. The cultural relation between the reality and the images grows differently from the above case of the relative purity rules, as a result of their marginal status. Their public image may have an infinite number of shapes too, but, in practice, it needs to include assimilations of features from the self-imagery of that broad society's dominant culture. Thus it is possible for these populations to be a more or less coherent part of that society, without losing their identity.

This ubiquitous one and only local imagery is not a problem per se, but the way it is dominated and used by the mainstream requires continuous clarifications about its relative nature, about the fact that the marginal group and the powerful majority do not understand it in the same manner. Facing the way it is taken for granted by the others, it must be reminded every moment that it exists a lively reality and that "we stand by it", amid frozen imageries taken for granted. If the usual expression of the relative purity rules is the caste system, as a simultaneous plurality of self-images, the absolute purity rules make the difference between us and the others. Both "us" and "the others" are images, only that "us" is the safe area where any popular imagery of the moment may be considered according to its relative status. Further, as "we" consider any image as relative, we understand that any person or people among the "others" have too their own reality beyond their self-image. Hence we don't decide about who are the others, if there appear images and stereotypes saying that this is "this" and that is "that", they remain relative. We keep all the options open, the only limit being their reality, the same as we think about us. That neutral area from "Journey to the West" becomes permanent, it is not used just for a study of the own identity, for answering "who am I among the others" and then turning back to the realm of the self-imagery, but for remaining face to face with any other person/people we may encounter. It is us and them, all in the same space, in the same time, each with its own vivacity, in an institutionalized manner.

The people that I know employing such absolute purity rules developed this identity clarification: Yehudim (Jews) and Goyim (non-Jews), Nihonjin (Japanese) and Gaijin (non-Japanese). The Romani people has both relative purity rules (the Romani caste system) and absolute purity rules: Roma and Gaje (non-Roma). It is a long way from the concept of barbarian (the assumed or implied vision of the others, from a localized point of view) that denies the culture and the identity of the others just because it does not fit the self-image of a certain person/cultural group. In this manner it is possible to remain face to face with any other cultural group, to employ dominant imageries from localized cultural areas without becoming localized. In the case of the Roma, they even became the maintainers of parts of some other people's traditions. In Hungary, Romania, Spain and other countries an important part of the local folk music is continued and improved by Roma. The Romani music evolves in more layers, that aiming only at the Romani public, that enjoyed by both Roma and non-Roma (whether they feel the same thing or they ascribe different messages to the song) and that focused only on the non-Roma.

Trying to keep the text in the scope of this article, I did not add more information about the worldview of these populations. However I should emphasize that bringing them together in this context does not mean that any features of one group may be extrapolated indiscriminately to the others. Each of them has a unique identity, fact visible in the way they envisage their public presence. This position among a majority with an unquestioned focus on the public images supposes that any self-description needs to establish the reality as a coherent presence in the realm of images. In the cases when they came with a public position about their identity, they employed too identification symbols involved in localized threads of history. However, these symbols are non-imaginary; they express the effort of such groups to keep their focus on the reality, hence they have no attributes: the Divinity with an unpronounceable name of the Jews, the nameless Emperor of Japan.

The difference between the ways they appear these indescribable (through images) identities comes from their position in their relation with the others. In the Japanese case, the clear geographical difference between "us" and the "others", the homogeneity and the safety of our area does not request further clarifications about who we are. The symbol of the reality does not require being opposable to the others, it is for us to keep us meaningful among the others. Also it is not necessary to become historically involved in the decision making process. As long as there is this clear demarcation, any turning point is bound to keep further the contact with the reality. The Japanese society alone cannot take for granted images.

In the Jewish case, the context made that the official public presence was envisaged as involvement in non-Jewish historical frameworks. But how could someone become entangled in a worldview where the personal identity would be reduced to some rigid images? After some good centuries there appeared Moses' model of clarifying the difference between somebody's imaginary identity, as it is taken for granted by the involvement in non-Jewish history, and the lively Identity beyond any description. This separation (with the subsequent involvement in history and assuming of responsibilities by the latter) makes possible a decision making process considering the non-Jewish history, but avoiding being trapped by its localized perspective. This supposes also constructing a historical thread and identify with its details in order to be visible among non-Jews.

The Romani culture does not have yet a public position about itself and the rest of the world. It depends on the local communities and on the individuals the way they negotiate and adjust their position in the local frameworks, in an informal manner that must not limit the Romani identity by assuming some transient self-images. Devel (from Sanskrit देव-Dev meaning Divinity), the same as the other Dharmics' Bhagvan/Ishvar and the Japanese Kami-sama, keeps all the options open, does not become too specific, a "somebody", by getting entangled in localized histories. However, the Roma had neither a local central position as the Dharmics from South Asia (that would make possible a society according to our worldview), nor a clear and homogeneous geographic space like the locally marginal Japanese (that would facilitate a formal public presence without entanglements). As a minority, an involvement in non-Romani histories would require many self-limitations (as it can be seen in the Jewish case), it has to adapt to the others' "one imaginary thread" policy, by keeping a clear adherence to a single historical thread. The others' concept of the "one and only" (image) has to be transferred to the details that signal the presence of the realistic worldview in the realm of images taken for granted.

Roma, unlike the Jews, have also relative purity rules, we can't say that the details of one historical direction are true while of the others are untrue. All are true in their own realm (depending on the construction of that truth how much they are also feasible, connected to the reality) and ultimately all are simply relative. Their details are bound to keep them as mental constructions, distinct from reality. While I see the clear transcendental aspect of the Jewish Divinity's involvement in local histories (the view of the absolute purity rules), I can't overlook the relativity of this involvement's product, its historical thread (the view of the relative purity rules). Diachronically, it is all right, any change or novelty keeps counting on the lively identity, but synchronically, the details of the historical thread used for self-identification make it just one among an infinite number of existing or possible ideologies. And the necessity to regard them (these acquired details) as absolute, as the truth, creates undesirable self-limitations.

From a Romani point of view, the diversity of historical threads is too obvious. A Romani person identifies in an absolute manner as obviously Romani (the absolute purity rules, the diachronicity), but also identifies as just a part of the society, through the accumulated personal deeds (the relative purity rules, the synchronicity). Usually these deeds tend to evolve as the Romani caste system, a system that makes possible the simultaneous existence of all emerging historical directions. In the relation with the local spirituality, these relative purity rules manifest through the assimilation of features from all available religions, creating puzzling (for the non-Romani majority) mixtures in Abrahamic multireligious areas, like the combinations of features from Christianity and Islam in the Balkans, of the Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant branches of Christianity in Transylvania. This while the Romanipen (the Romani worldview) remains invisible to the image-accustomed non-Romani eyes. This practice of assimilating or experimenting features from any encountered spirituality is something normal in South Asia, as a result of the same relative purity rules. The worldview does not really depend on some ossified details. These can be helpful, but they are not absolute (and, because of this, people are also not afraid that they might lose their identity by knowing something new).

So, this is the (now a millennium old) Romani issue concerning the way to have a public presence as a minority, but without identifying with transient self-images. From the point of view of the prevalent non-Romani environment in the areas we live, it is expected from us to come with a selection of features and say "this is us" in order to become visible, otherwise we exist only at an informal level. If we don't come with a self-image, our place in their set of explanatory images about the world won't remain empty anyway. This is how it was born the imaginary Gypsy, filling the place of our public reality with non-Romani images. Expressing our informal status, until recently, in English it was written with lower-case, as gypsy. As different and non-assimilable as we may be, they could not see us as a distinct ethnic group. However, if someone cannot or does not want to see a segment of reality, this does not mean that segment cease existing. In real life we became parts of the local societies, the areas with long-term and strong Romani presence having important Romani influences (Southeastern Europe and Iberian Peninsula).

Until recently, the Romani people could survive more or less with this informal lifestyle, as some unofficial Romani social islands. However, the modernity creates a new perspective, a network of relations connects more and more the local and global social levels. Island or not, each part has to accept this network and work within it. Obviously, the issue of the Romani public formal presence becomes unavoidable. This is also the main drive of this article. The essay on the names and the images of South Asia was necessary both for elucidating what means India (and who are really our cultural relatives) and for clarifying some things about the Romani worldview.

It is necessary to address this misdirected relation with the locally available imagery of India. This constructed origin of the Roma with no correspondent in real life keeps us in limbo, preventing the connections with people sharing the same culture. It misdirects also the emerging Romani intelligentsia. This India is supposed to be that cultural area the Roma come from, but in reality the meanings conveyed by this notion are just a part of the Western culture. Without realizing it, Roma who want to become cultured on local basis think from the very beginning from a different point of view. Many times, this "Gateway of India" is the start of assuming the Western perspective, hindering alternatives. And, being void of any interesting Desi features, it either vanishes quickly from the horizon of the locally educated Rom or it becomes a fetish. Here it should be said that any connections with South Asia were lost in the turmoiled 11th century, right after the emigration, also that the emergence of locally educated Roma is a new phenomenon, of the 20th-21st centuries (mostly the last decades are significant).

Of course, the Western worldview is not a problem per se, it just happens to be the main cultural worldview of the areas inhabited by Roma. If it would have been useful for the Romani people, it would have determined until now some kind of synthesis or assimilation, there was plenty of time. But the Western educated intelligentsia remains sterile, no vision with a popular support appeared until now. And, as the time elapses, the lack of Romani public representation in the contemporary world only produces more disfranchisements. Usually, whether they identify with the other environment or they manage somehow to keep a personal equilibrium, they get some non-Romani eyes and then they try to "catch" the Romani identity in a selection of images (as it is the habit of self-expression among the local non-Roma). This is very appreciated by the non-Roma but it is not good from a Romani point of view, remaining effectless, only determining lack of interest, amusement, ridiculing or even marginalization of these "pioneers".

And here I arrive to the other thing highlighted by this article, the Romani vision of "one reality, more perspectives", of keeping all the options open (regarding the interpretation of the reality). Currently there is a widespread opinion (including among an important part of the Romani intelligentsia) that Roma have a backward mentality, they can't understand even simple things. It should be made clear that these non-Romani things are understood very well, but it is unacceptable to become limited by their details. They are employed only from their relative perspective. Hence many things that define in a very self-confident and limited manner segments from reality are not likely to be assumed in a local non-Romani framework, this would cause severe maiming of the personal identity.

I don't know why nobody questioned why these "backwards" resisted in the heartlands of the Western civilization at the height of its cultural influence, when any other cultural areas had to redefine themselves according to it. Some "backwards" with no territorial basis, totally involved in the non-Romani economy for making a living (as the Romani caste names show), employing in the communication with the non-Roma the local non-Romani mental frameworks in order to make possible some mutual understanding, even preserving for the non-Roma some non-Romani traditions, but still always keeping their own point of view. The populations that accept their "backward" status (compared to a "superior" population) cannot handle the novelties brought by the encounter with other culture(s), experiencing a crumbling of their worldview. Their survival is facilitated by geographical isolation, by the minimization of the contacts with the others' novelties, they have to remain alone for not losing their soul. In the case of the Roma and of the other populations employing purity rules, on the contrary, the constant checking of the contacts with the others is not for being alone, but for keeping safe areas where any novelty preserves its relative status, preventing the creation of an inflexible mindset.

These purity rules prevent also the development of a history only determined by a momentary mindset and external circumstances, the history won't simply go in whatever direction may appear available (especially when there arise image-related issues). Every turning point has to stem from the lively identity focused on the reality, otherwise it won't happen anything, there will be a deadlock. During such a stalemate there appear many opinions, there are many theoretical solutions that look available, but any proposed direction will remain sterile, it will not have popular support unless it is obvious that it counts on the lively identity. In the other cases, there were even some Jews that went to Birobidjan in Far Eastern Soviet Union or to Uganda (some of the proposed locations of Israel), in the years 50s-60s of the 19th century there were many trends in the Japanese society regarding a response to the end of the seclusion, but the history started to move on only when it was obvious that the relation with the reality was not lost.

Hence, these contemporary attempts to "civilize"/"modernize" the Roma, in a direct or veiled manner, do not earn support at a popular level. Anyway, besides disrespecting the basics of the Romani culture, they are only pushing and keeping the Roma in a second-class citizen status. They result from giving credit to the current public image of Roma as "backward" and "exotic", becoming focused on interpreting elements of the Romani culture with locally available non-Romani cultural tools. For example, a few weeks ago, in Rumania, it was proposed (by the local Roma's Party) a law aiming at punishing the parents that organize the marriage of their underage children. In practice, this would target only the Roma from some castes (that use to follow this Desi custom). Their reasoning was that it is necessary to become "civilized", to come with a clean image of "civilized" Roma, in order to become a functional part of the modern world. "We are not from Congo", said Nicolae Pǎun, the leader of this party (Congo being in Rumania a popular epitome of backwardness).

As well-intended as they might have been as a theory (from an assimilated point of view), in practice, such initiatives have the opposite effect. They imply that now Roma are abnormal and they will become normal by impersonating the non-Romani neighbors (with the alternatives of assimilating, of becoming an "exotic" clown or of making official the second-class citizen status). It is obviously necessary to do something about the underage arranged marriages, but this should come as a continuity of the Romani culture, it should have a meaning from a Romani point of view. The fact that this practice exists does not suppose an overall inability of the Romani culture, this is certainly not the end of the world. Such opinion is just the result of thinking from the point of view of the local non-Romani majority, which perceives itself as the "normal" one (by employing a "cleaned" self-image), while rejecting the others as "backwards".

The local non-Roma should understand too that the current attempts of "civilizing" the "backwards" are not the first in the Romani history and, the same as in the previous ones, most of the Roma will evade them, especially in areas with high Romani presence. Instead highlighting those assimilated, the "good Roma" who see the Romani culture with local non-Romani eyes, they should be aware of the majority who (unless the Romani culture will have an official presence) will have available only the social positions of "exotic" clowns or officially second-class citizens. Even from a pragmatic point of view, keeping millions of Roma out of the broad society is increasingly inconvenient nowadays. There should be a New Deal that would consider the existence of the Romani worldview and would turn into something positive the multiculturalism of the overall local societies.

The package of measures for ending the current gap the Roma are experiencing should be a clear and popular expression of the Romani worldview. The idea that impersonating the others would solve all the problems only produces dimness and dysfunctional social groups, as it may be seen in so many clueless populations worldwide. However, at a popular level, Roma are not at all amazed by this perspective, we are already civilized and we have a very strong worldview. Moreover, from a Romani point of view, there is no such distinction suggesting there is an antonymy and not a continuity between "traditional" and "modern", a distinction implying that a population sees its identity changing according as its knowledge about the world changes. With such a mental framework, the Roma would have been assimilated few generations after the migration out of the Subcontinent.

This concept of "civilizing" would only make official the current "backward" and "exotic" status, barring any attempt of cultivating the personal culture. It would make permanent the inefficient interpretations of the Romani culture from local non-Romani points of view. For example, the Romani musicians do not use sheet music, a Romani song develops as an improvisation on a certain basic framework. The contemporary "civilizing" attempts would only make official the "exotic" status of this music, with no possibility to cultivate it. The fact that they "do not use sheet music" (the local non-Romani perspective) will continue to define this music, instead beginning an official cultivation of the improvisations on the basic framework.

I want to make clear that I don't disapprove the basic intentions of Roma's Party, on the contrary, it is very necessary a political representation, but it is important to say that their question after every election ("why don't Roma vote for our party?") does not have the answers they propose. This focus on "civilizing"/"modernizing" (thus implying that Roma are abnormal and they have to assimilate), instead coming with a clear Romani point of view, is very unappealing and disrespectful. A century and a half ago, the Japanese too were considered some isolationist backwards, also they accumulated a technological gap that nobody was imagining they will get rid of. If they would have really believed in that public image, becoming ashamed of themselves and accepting their "backwardness" and "exoticism", most certainly they would have remained a Third World overpopulated and hungry country, caught in the vicious circle of the "civilizing" attempts without visible results, with corrupt leaders able to think efficiently only about their own welfare. Instead, the post-seclusion times are the best part of the Japanese history (from a synchronic point of view).

In the contemporary context there is no other way but to work on a public framework of the Romani worldview. It is necessary to cultivate the Romanipen and to become cultured from its point of view, instead of inventing (with the help of the easily available local cultural tools) the same square wheel with no use in the real Romani life. Of course, this would not imply a rejection of other worldviews, there is nothing to reject, only that they should be considered as they are, as one of the many relative worldviews, and employed considering the limits set by their imageries (plus, it should not be overlooked their practical importance, for communicating with the local non-Romani majorities). It should be said clearly that mastering any local image-based cultural worldview does not necessarily make a Rom literate in the personal culture.

It is necessary to turn the tables, to come with a Romani type of history, to put the Romani worldview in an appropriate public framework. Anyway, this would be comprehensive and respectful enough to consider any other known type of history, permitting us to connect with the rest of the world. It would be much more adapted to the "modernity", with a potential of becoming prestigious, of opening new ways for the human development, and it might be also interesting and inspiring for the others. In this sense, it is necessary a focus on becoming literate, cultured from the point of view of the personal culture, then it comes naturally the formal cohabitation with the other cultures. Here, a problem that needs clarification is this Western image of India void of any Desi features, misleading any attempts to clarify the features of our culture. For example, not even a simple thing like the Romani caste system was recognized until now. The notion of India includes the concept of caste system, but this does not share too much with the real Desi life, being focused on an interpretation of the four varn from the point of view of the European counterparts from some millennia ago. It is mostly oblivious of the jati as the meaningful unit of the Desi caste system and of many other features that may be observed also among Roma.

If some feel like, they may consider reinventing the wheel, expressing publicly the Romani culture as exclusively a diasporic endeavor. But I doubt the feasibility of this approach (and what happened until now makes clear that I am right), as a marginal culture with no territorial basis there is no room for such an attempt. Also, it is important to know how it works an entire society that keeps all the options open, in order to understand and cultivate it. Otherwise, the marginal status would only permit comparisons with the majority, once going publicly. Even in the Japanese case, with their clear and homogenous geographical space, as they don't have a local central position, they have no choice but to compare with the others. Hence there appear self-descriptions of the Japanese society as a tree that grows from a pot (as a result of the purity rules), its roots do not touch the Earth. As long as the local broad society praises certain vegetative and inflexible aspects of the social life, such peripheral people cannot help but to think of themselves as an unusual population. This, as long as they cannot come with a decisive public explanation of the fact that from a broader perspective they are in touch with the reality, not living in a self-limiting worldview. That "Earth" that is not really touched by the Japanese roots is just one of the infinite possibilities of interpretations of the World with vegetative cultural tools, one of the "planets Earth" created by any of the existing or possible worldviews.

Anyway, when we will succeed to express publicly the Romanipen, there will come out the same basic features of the other Dharmic religions, when we will manage to cultivate the Romani music, there will appear something similar to the concept of rāg and so on. Obviously, a good understanding of the cultural tools available in contemporary South Asia makes a big difference; it is not necessary anymore the Sisyphean attempt of self-explaining by comparisons with the local non-Roma (otherwise this article would not have been possible). This besides the aspects of the Romani culture that would always remain as a potential, they can't be expressed in diaspora. The diasporic perspective remains important as usually, this clear view of what belongs to the personal culture and what does not (otherwise this article would not have been possible either). If I would think again about the tree symbol, in South Asia there are sacred trees venerated on local basis. However, as a society that keeps all the options open, the wish is to preserve the relative status of the social life's vegetative aspects and even to go beyond them, fact presented in the Dharmic literature as a tree that has to be cut down. This is understood as a theory, as something that has to be done somehow. It is not applied in the social life (only experimented by individuals), such a direct action would only continue a cause-effect chain, offshoots will sprout again. In the homeland it is almost impossible a collective self-uproot from a localized view. Diaspora is the place where one has to stay true to its own reality, where it is clarified what is the personal reality and what is the self-image. If a tree is still growing, it needs to stay in a pot, otherwise it will get rooted in another "planet Earth", another worldview, following soon the assimilation. Further on, the roots will touch neither that "planet Earth" of the homeland, nor the others encountered elsewhere (the moksh of the Dharmic religions). And then the homeland's society that keeps all the options open becomes again important, because in diaspora it is almost impossible a thoroughgoing public self-expression by keeping all the options open.

Such a future direction of the Romani public popular presence would not necessarily imply the "Israel" model, a massive and planned Romani migration in Bhārat. The first half of the 20th century were different times, now the people are increasingly mobile, the communication becomes easier day by day (also the major political players are interested in maintaining the stability, they are quite interdependent (11)). The focus would be on assuring the rights of the Romani minorities everywhere and the freedom of traveling. Once it becomes obvious that it exists an interesting Desi reality beyond whatever imageries may appear, the broad Desi environment would emerge naturally as the adequate space for expressing and cultivating the Romani culture. In this environment, the state of Bhārat/India comes out as the main political system (without neglecting the other South Asian states and the rest of the Desi diaspora). This not only because it comprises most of South Asia, but for being grounded on the basic Desi cultural features, not on particular groups. For the intermediary years of establishing popular relations between Roma and the other Desis, it should be said that the former would not be just consumers of social resources but also suppliers. The Romani worldview will enrich the Desi cultural area. The cultivation of the Romanipen is bound to produce some prestigious and efficient public expressions (very necessary for relating to the rest of the world as a non-territorial minority). Also, in the perspective of an increased South Asian presence worldwide, we have an intimate knowledge and understanding of an important part of the world, which may foster inter-cultural communication. In a millennium of living in diaspora, we always had a non-violent approach in relations with the local people, always promoting the mutual respect. In the perspective of a normalization of the relations between the Roma and the local non-Roma, with the help of the public presence of the Romani culture, this knowledge would be beneficent for both Desis and non-Desis, a lively expression of the millenary non-violent Desi relations with the rest of the world.

For the reasons detailed above it appeared the habit of favoring the use of the words Desi and Bhārat(i), instead India(n), among the Roma who learned about the real Desi people, once it was opened the way by affirming the reality of the Romani people and dissociating from the externally imposed Gypsy imagery. Probably the Roma are currently the only population that pays attention to the word India, is interested in what it really means. The people from South Asia have a local central position, it doesn't matter too much what the others think about them, while the rest of the world just takes for granted the meanings conveyed by India and other locally developed imageries. However, for the diasporic Roma, the situation looks different, determining the deadlock described above. Hence, for example in Rumania, among Roma, it is employed the female name Indonezia (the Rumanian spelling of Indonesia). On the one hand, Indonesia is a different cultural area, on the other hand it is notable that at a popular level it was perceived this word's connection with India (in the usual speech, this is mostly ignored, it is perceived as a full-fledged word). Or Indira, another female name, mostly from the 1970s-1980s, when Indira Gandhi was the prime-minister of India. At a popular level it was assumed that it had something to do with India (while, in fact, it is a Sanskrit word meaning "splendor", "beauty"), this illustrating also the lack of opportunities and of progress in knowing more about the other Desis, folk etymologies are the best thing many can do. Or an interest in the Native Americans, because, at a popular level, they are also Indians. And many other side-tracks "supplementing" India's lack of Desi features.

As I said before, this issue determine uncertainties among Roma who want to become more involved in the local broad societies, many times resulting in either hiding or fetishizing the cultural background. In the former case, the tendency is to impersonate the local non-Roma, to interpret the Romani culture through a local non-Romani worldview, hoping that this identity twist will give them a public and personal stability. In the latter, it is the same tendency of impersonating the local non-Roma; assuming the imagery of the "Indian" identity, in spite of what may think some clueless people, supposes assuming the same local non-Romani worldview. In this sense, I find evocative that special episode "Back where they came from" of the sketch comedy show Goodness Gracious Me. In this show, focused on the contemporary issues of the Desi minority in UK, among the recurrent characters there are the two families of Rabindranaths (referring to themselves as the "Robinsons") and Kapoors (the "Coopers"), who refuse to acknowledge their background, becoming very upset when somebody names them Indians. Well, it is true that they, the same as any other Desis, do not fit the Indian imagery; however, lacking a serious alternative for a public presence, they claim to be English, trying to impersonate stereotypical English families, with humorous results. In the special episode they arrive by mistake, to their dismay, exactly in India. They keep distance from the local people and are relieved when a Western person is offering to help them. However, this guy doesn't consider himself really a Westerner, he assumes the stereotypes of the "Indian spirituality" (that makes this imagery so suitable for fetishization). He becomes their guide, while all along the episode, in the background there are integrated sketches with issues from the contemporary Bhārati social life or with Western reporters at work enforcing the Indian imagery. The same as in the creation process of "Journey to the West", the "Englishmen" and the "Indian" go somewhere in the desert (to an ashram), away from the Desi social reality, in order to find the true India. Here a "cultural clash" follows soon, the Western "Indians" and the Desi "Englishmen" telling each other they live in a fantasy.

The fact is (besides the specific Romani issue that determined this article) that in the contemporary society it is increasingly odd to take for granted such imageries. In the times of writing "Journey to the West", the author(s) didn't have other choices, they really had no idea about the Desi society. In this sense, it is not much to reproach in the image of Tianzhu from this book, this is largely a polite one, inspired by the only image they knew (of their own society). When the characters arrive there by the end of the book, they say that "the country is mostly like our Great Tang Empire, only that the merchandise is cheaper". Even the religious spectrum is the same: Buddhism and Taoism. However, nowadays the reality of whatever cultural area is more and more available and unavoidable. And in the contemporary increasingly multicultural societies it is more than ever necessary to have a viable alternative for a public presence, other than impersonating prevailing local imageries.

Hence, in this particular case, it should be made clear that saying that Roma come from India is as accurate as saying that Roma come from the Moon. The meanings conveyed by the word India have no correspondent in real life, they comprise one of currently available imageries about South Asia, created in other cultural areas. Yes, there is a state known by this name and it is no problem to use this word when it implies it only as a state among others. However, when there are implied the cultural meanings of this word, it is necessary to say that the reality of its society is different. On a relative scale of accuracy, it makes more sense saying that Roma come from Bhārat. Only the imaginary Gypsies came from the imaginary India to settle in the Western imagination.

--------

8) By establishing a hierarchical relation between the "strong" one and the other "backwards" (this when the "backwards" themselves accept their status).

9) Cohabitations between more such images occur also in other areas of the world (just to remind the rest of East Asia or the area of South Asia), but they don't remain face to face; usually they are composed of various degrees of ignoring, trivializing, disputing, subordinating each other or by diverse stages of assimilating each other. Hence they tend to be hazy, unlike this practical contemporary demarcation between what is Japanese and what is not. A demarcation that does not imply rejection or overcoming of the others, on the contrary, self-respect tied with recognition of the other, permitting cohabitations of more images.

10) Here I am writing about the entire group's cultural level, where it does not matter too much what individuals know or know not, do or do not.

11) Of course, there is no guarantee that the international largely peaceful status quo will remain forever, but after some decades the situation of the Roma will not be the same either, there will be other terms, other issues to discuss.

India-Bharat-Tenjiku: One Reality, Many Perspectives

Alin Dosoftei — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 06:23:34 EDT

Probably accustomed to expect differences between reality and local public imageries I could not overlook the existence of at least three established and independent perceptions of the same South Asian/Desi civilization. One is that of the Desi people themselves, but there is also that of the Western society and that of East Asia. As it usually happens in such cases, generic names coagulated and represented publicly the identity of these imageries. I would like to present the evolution of these names and of the notions they invoke. I will insist more on East Asia, because the perspective of Tianzhu/Tenjiku is less known now on the global stage, needing more description, and also because of the contemporary local meeting and cohabitation between its imagery and the Western one of India. And finally, a presentation of the reasons that determined me to do this research.

First, the perspective of the Desi people. The ancient geography mixed the knowledge of those times with spirituality in creating the local perspective, by describing the Earth as divided into seven concentric islands, separated by intermediate oceans. The innermost is Jambudvip (जम्बुद्वीप), “the island of the Jambu (Rose Apple) tree”. It comprises the area known by the Desis of those times, while the other islands are rather spiritual. In the ancient texts there appear descriptions of Jambudvip’s mountain ranges, river systems and the proposed identifications with contemporary geographic names suggest that, besides South Asia, it encompasses also parts of Central Asia. In this area, the territory of the Desi culture is named Bhārat (भारत) or Bhāratvarsh (भारतवर्ष, “the realm of Bhārat”), after the legendary ruler Bhārat, mentioned in Mahābhārat as the unifier of this land. There are used also other names, among them it deserves to be mentioned Aryavart (आर्यावर्त, “the abode of the Aryans”) or Aryadesh (आर्यादेशी, “the country of the Aryans”), describing only the northern and central parts of the Subcontinent.

The perspective of the Middle Eastern cultural area, and afterwards also of Europe, starts to develop after their discovery of South Asia. The encounter happened in the North-West and that particular territory gave also the name for this view. The name of the river Sindhu (known in English as Indus), pronounced according to the rules of the Iranian languages, gave Hindush in Avestan (mentioned in an inscription from the times of Darius I). This evolved in Hind (ہن), but also Hindustan (ہندوستان) as “the territory of the Hindus”, first in Persian, afterwards also in Arabic. In the modern era, after India became independent in 1947, there appeared a certain differentiation between the geographic inclusions of these two variants, Hind referring rather to the modern state of India, while Hindustan to South Asia as a whole. Not in another important language from this area, Turkish, using only Hindistan for India, while Hint means “Indian, Indo-“. Hindi got a specialized meaning, naming the bird known in English as turkey. Because of a popular uncertainty about where it comes from (in fact it is from Central America), in each of these languages it appeared a fancy exotic origin, Turkish in English, Indian in Turkish. In other local languages there appeared close derivations from that Persian name, for example in Hebrew, Hodu (הודו).

Further, this word was borrowed in Europe, as India, first in Greek (Ἰνδία), then in Latin and other European languages. In both Middle Eastern and European cultural regions this name gathered and assumed in its semantic area the local perception of the Indian subcontinent, according as it developed a local tradition, not necessarily connected to the culture it was supposed to describe. Longer the distance, more unclear it became the region this word was referring to in real life. In his influential travel book from the end of the 13th century, Marco Polo, after coming back from his journey to East Asia, describes as Greater India the territory from Coromandel Coast to Baluchistan, as Minor India the territory from the delta of Krishna river to Champa (contemporary South Vietnam), while Middle India is Abyssinia (East Africa). On his way back to Europe he even sailed along these coasts he presented, but as the European concept of India was unknown there (the South Asians will “discover” India some centuries later) and, as it tends to happen in such cases, a real communication between different worldviews did not occur so easy, he just continued to apply the perspective acquired at home.

This European tradition of describing as Indian (1) various populations not known before the Age of Explorations continued for some other centuries. Although it became clear in a few years that they arrived in a new continent, it remained and it lasted the initial naming as Indians of the native people from the Americas. Many other indigenous populations were named Indians, but usually these denominations were not as enduring as in the Americas.

The geographic European perspective of the Indies evolved into the distinction between the West Indies (Caribbean region in Central America) and East Indies (South and South-East Asia). Further in South-East Asia, the mainland was named Indochina, as an area between India and China, while the maritime area was named Indonesia, the “Indian islands” (from nesos, meaning island in Greek). Indochina gained a more specific geopolitical meaning as the colony French Indochina, comprising the contemporary states of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, while the name of Indonesia was appropriated by the former colony Dutch East Indies, after proclaiming the independence in 1945 (until then Indonesia was mostly an academic term).

Nowadays they fell into oblivion (except some linguistic areas presented below) the “Indian” times of the Western perspective regarding South-East Asia and Oceania, although, even in the second half of the 18th century, explorers like James Cook or La Pérouse used very confidently the name “Indians” for the local people. Just to remind of few examples from their journals, like the description of Timor as shared between the Dutch, Native Indians and the Portuguese, the presentation of the native people from Polynesia as Indians, including the Indian villages in New Zealand, the Indian vocabulary and Indian cultural customs recorded in Tahiti (James Cook); the details of the plight of the local Indians from Manila area, in Philippines, under continuous threat from the attacks of the southern Moors (La Pérouse).

In Dutch, as the language of the former rulers of an important part of South-East Asia, there survive until today some Indian overlapping. Even by the first half of the 19th century, the native people of those colonies were named Indianen (“Indians”), for example, in the royal decrees of Dutch king William I (1815-1840). Later, the Dutch authorities will change their name to Inlander (“Natives”). The new name was adopted also by the local languages, by employing the translation of the word “native” (for example, Pribumi, in the language known as Indonesian after 1945). In 1836, Raad van Indië (Council of India), the central board of the Dutch colonial administration in South-East Asia, will change its name to Raad van Nederlands-Indië (Council of Dutch India), as a result of the increased visibility of British India from South Asia. The colony will be known in most of the other languages as the Dutch East Indies. Indië and the adjective Indisch (Indian) will remain popular words in Dutch. As the speakers of this language had a direct involvement in this area, the context made a disambiguation whether it was (usually) about Nederlands-Indië or (sometimes) about Brits-Indië (British India). The adjective continued to be used as an ethnic name for the people from Dutch East Indies with mixed European and Asian ancestry, known as Indische Nederlanders (Indian Dutchmen). Later, after Indonesia’s independence, they will be known also as Indo.

The word India will appear in Dutch, after this country’s independence, as a precise term for the new political entity. The move Nederlands-Indië -> Indonesië and Brits-Indië -> India will be replicated also in the local languages. In Indonesian: Hindia Belanda (Dutch India) -> Indonesia and Hindia Britania (British India) -> India. In Dutch, the words Indië and Indisch continue to be used for describing the area known in English as East Indies. For example, Indische Subcontinent (“Indian Subcontinent”), but also Indische Archipel (“Indian Archipelago” for the Malay/Indonesian Archipelago). In the usual speech, Indisch, besides “Indian”, may mean “Indonesian” (there is the neologism Indonesisch as the plain word). There are also the adjectives Indiaas (usually confined to describe modern India) and Indiaans (only for the Native Americans).

Unlike in the Americas, as the time elapsed, in South-East Asia and Oceania it mostly receded the initial naming of the local people as Indians. The reasons would be the proximity to those who were the initial inspiration for this word, also the fact that the natives remained the main cultural group in the area (it did not emerge another dominant cultural group that would have continued to see them as Indians, as it happened in the Americas). In Philippines, for example, the local people who were animists, later undertaking various degrees of Christianization, were named indios (“Indians”) by the Spanish rulers, although they were different from the people from the Subcontinent. This while the local Muslims were named moros (“Moors”), although, besides the religion, they had nothing in common with the Moors from North-West Africa (Maghreb) (2). Basically, both local indios and moros belong to the same cultural area. Nowadays, the Indian part of that Western worldview applied to Philippines is gone, but the Moorish part is quite alive. In the meantime, the latter got a life of its own (3), as there did not appear encounters and vicinities with “those” Moors and subsequent identity issues (the same as in the Americas “those” Indians were not a local reality to raise identity questions when compared to the local Indians). Also it matters that they remain a marginal group, their public image continue to be defined by the uneasy Muslim-Christian relations of the colonial times. This while for the Christian majority the term indio became meaningless, those who named them like this disappeared from the local political stage, thus they surfaced the various ethnic identities previously encompassed by that name.

The contemporary endeavor to give a clearer name for the native populations of the Americas (as Native Americans, American Indians, Amerindians and many others) does not enjoy yet this popular appeal. Quite the contrary, in some Latin American countries, it is used the word hindúes (Spanish)/ hindus (Portuguese) for the people from India/South Asia in order to make a distinction from the local indios. In Spanish, the traditional meaning of hindú is that of an adherent to the religion of Hinduism, but, in this case, it is used the word hinduista for the religious sense. In Portuguese there is no such difference, but it is also available the word indiano, employed only for people from India/South Asia, irrespective of their religion. Here it is worthy to say that some languages have already distinct words (stemming from the same root) for the two meanings. For example, in German, the people from the subcontinent are Inder (with Hindus for the adherents to Hinduism), while the Native Americans are Indianer. In Latin American Spanish and in Brazilian Portuguese there is some more vagueness because indio preserved the meaning of native people, appearing in expressions like indios latinoamericanos (“Native Latin Americans”), indios australianos (“Native Australians”), indios africanos (“Native Africans”), indios siberianos (“Native Siberians”) and others. It is encouraged the use of expressions like Native, Autochthonous, Aborigine, Indigenous peoples: pueblos nativos, autóctonos, aborígenes, indígenas (Spanish), povos nativos,autóctones, aborígines, indígenas (Portuguese).

Contemporary South Asia

As this European perspective benefited of the Western society’s prime position in the modern era, it compelled recognition worldwide, including in South Asia proper (when the local people finally learned too about the notion of India). Here, in the meantime, the related Middle Eastern perspective was already established as a result of the conquests originating from North-West. The originally Persian words Hind and Hindustan were employed in the local languages together with Bharat and, later, India. All these names acquired popular alternative uses, depending on the context, more or less reminding of their perspective. After it began the European prevalence, Hind and Hindustan, as non-European words, but still sharing obviously much with India (not just phonetically), were included also in the Western nomenclature. They enjoyed some advantages, they were assumed easier for identification in the World perceived with Western eyes. Thus there were enforced words like Hindustani/Hindi, for the continuum of dialects, respectively the modern standardized language with Sanskrit register from the north of the Subcontinent or there were coined words like Hinduism, for the local religious view, as described through the patterns of the Abrahamic religions. Freedom fighters like Champakaraman Pillai and Subhas Chandra Bose promoted the now famous salutation Jai Hind to inspire the people in their quest for independence. These evolutions were part of the on-going identity clarification, both from the point of view of the Desis seeking a place in the prevailing Western worldview and from the point of view of the Westerners codifying the notion of India. They went in parallel with the clarification, briefly described above, of the boundaries from real life of the cultural area of India.

After 1947, all of these names were inherited by the modern state known worldwide as India. The fact that this state does not comprise the entire territory known in history by these names created a post-Partition necessity for employing other denominations of this cultural area, mainly geographical ones, like South Asia or Indian subcontinent. The former implies only this specific restricted meaning (otherwise, theoretically, it should include also South-West Asia/Middle East and South-East Asia). South Asian is employed for the people whose common culture gives the coherence of this region. These names did not gain yet a popular usage. Worldwide, at a popular level, the concept of India, with all its cultural Western meanings, tends to be tantamount to the entire area of the Subcontinent (4). This case may be contrasted with that of Indonesia, presented above, when the name, because it was previously used only for academic purposes, could make successfully the switch to the main political entity that assumed it after decolonization.

This issue did not rise until now to a public debate because the specific problems of the relations between the successor states of the British Raj do not entangle too much in the Western imagery of India (this imagery is largely void of Desi features). Also, the fact that these problems are not well known outside the Subcontinent, they remain some “internal matters”, does not create an imperious necessity to clarify the identity for the World stage. Things tend to look different for those who emigrated from the Subcontinent. The essential cultural identity, taken for granted at home and leaving room for those more specific issues, comes to the forefront for those who live as local minorities elsewhere. Whether it overcomes or not those specific problems, it becomes also a daily reality when compared to the non-South Asian majority.

Hence it became a real necessity for these minorities to have clear names for identifying this underlying cultural identity, regardless of the particular South Asian country they come from. For those who emigrated before the Partition (mostly as indentured servants in the Caribbean, East Africa, Indian Ocean islands, South-East Asia and Oceania), it remained at hand the name Indian. For the contemporary migration (mostly in the rich Western countries and in the Gulf) the term “South Asian” gained a practical importance, although, at this moment, it did not attain a popular level. There appeared also popular denominations, like Desi or simply Asian. The latter is employed only in UK, as a popular acknowledgement (after the Second World War) of the South Asian people’s preponderance among the UK citizens who trace their ancestry to Asia. The people from other Asian cultural areas identify by their specific ethnicity. Obviously, it remained a local name, in many other regions with South Asian emigration it would be unrealistic; plus, if taken too seriously, it would require huge changes in the perception of Asia.

The use of the term Desi appeared too in Anglo-Saxon areas (UK and North America). It is a word found in many South Asian languages, derived from the Sanskrit desh (देश, "country, region"). This became des in popular speech (in some languages also in the formal register). Thus des(h)i means “from the homeland, local” as opposed to vides(h)i/pardesi, i.e. “foreign(er)”. Its use in South Asia varies according to the possible meanings encompassed by the opposition local/foreigner, be it South Asian/non-South Asian, a region of South Asia/rest of the World, sometimes traditional/modern. In diaspora it started to be employed for self-identification, as a term encompassing all the South Asians, first only within the community, as a colloquialism. It gained a public presence according as the advent of Internet and of other communication means enabled the worldwide expression of insular groups, spreading the use of this term in other areas and giving a popular expression to the emerging Desi identity as part of a multicultural world.

Among the other names employed at this moment by the South Asians, it deserves to be mentioned the term Brown, alluding to the skin color in a multiracial diasporic context (mostly in the areas where the skin color may be perceived as an identity feature). Its use remains sporadic and it does not surpass a certain informal level, since there are many other populations that may be considered Brown. Also it is not exhaustive, it does not encompass the physical features of all the South Asians, many may be considered rather White or Black.

East Asia

The East Asian perspective of the World shares with the previous ones the usual starting point of its view in the geographic area of its own culture. The other parts of the World are then included by relating them to this center. In this case, such perspective is visible also in the local geographic names. The country known in the Western worldview as China has the native name 中国 (Zhōngguó), meaning “The Country from the Middle (of the World)”. The Chinese name of Indochina, 中南半島 (Zhōngnánbàndǎo) means “the peninsula from the south of the Middle”, while Japan, from Rìběn, the Chinese pronunciation of 日本, means “The origin of Sun”, i.e. the East.

The cultural area of South Asia became known through the trade route of the Silk Road. Hence, in this case also, the first region of contact was that of the Sindhu River. It makes some sense, because otherwise, in the absence of a maritime connection, the forests of Yunnan-Assam or the Himalayan Range would have been difficult to cross. The oldest Chinese writing (preserved until today) about this area appears in 史記 (The Recordings of the Grand Historian), by Sima Qian (about 1st century BCE – 1st century CE), based on the reports of Zhang Qian’s explorations in Central Asia. It is employed the name 身毒, which may be pronounced as Juāndú, Shēndú or Yuándú. The phonetic evolution of the language makes now difficult to know the exact sounds, however it is obvious that the word is derived from Sindhu. Subsequently, there appear many other variants, at least thirty, for naming this region. In 山海經 (Classics of the Mountains and Seas), a mythological geography from about the same era, it appears under the name 天毒(Tiāndú). In the 5th century, in 後漢書 (Book of the Later Han), it appears as 天竺(Tiānzhú), a name that will become the most popular according as the Buddhism will spread in all East Asia.

It is not very clear the origin of 天竺 (Tiānzhú). Studying the name variants and the linguistic context of those times, it is probable that these characters were pronounced then as Xiandu, again pointing to an origin from Sindhu. It is also possible that the Buddhist monks favored the character 天 (tiān) because it means Heaven (to emphasize the specificity of South Asia as the origin of Buddhism). One of the other names, 西天(Xītiān), meaning “Western Heaven”, was more direct in making such a connection. The position this religion gained in the East Asian societies enforced the importance of the newly-created notion of Tianzhu, for a far-off neighbor, beyond deserts and mountains, but in the same time the source of religious enlightenment. Further, it will get more consistency and stability according as the popular level will assimilate it in its worldview. It will expand also geographically, beyond the initial Chinese core, in Korea, pronounced as Cheonchuk, in Japan, as Tenjiku, or in Vietnam, as Thiên Trúc. In Korean it is also written with Hangul script: 천축.

The word entered in the common usage, becoming part of new names and expressions. For example, a variant of shogi (Japanese chess) is named 天竺將棋 (Tenjiku shogi). One of the three main Buddhist architectural styles from Japan’s Kamakura period (1192-1333) is 天竺様 (Tenjiku yō), the Tenjiku style. 天竺鯛科 (Tiānzhú diāokē), meaning “Tianzhu breams”, is the Chinese name of the Apogonidae family of fishes. Or 天竺牡丹 (Tiānzhú mǔdān in Chinese, Tenjiku botan in Japanese), meaning “Tianzhu/Tenjiku peony”, for dahlia, 天竺葵 (Tiānzhú kuí in Chinese, Tenjiku aoi in Japanese), “Tianzhu/Tenjiku mallow”, for geranium.

Obviously, there are many Buddhist monasteries in East Asia that include Tianzhu/Cheonchuk/Tenjiku in their name. In Japan there was also a village named Tenjiku (now merged in the city Nishio from the Aichi prefecture). In 799, some Tenjiku people were shipwrecked there, bringing to Japan the first seeds of cotton. Later, the event started to be celebrated as the Cotton festival, centered on the local Tenjiku temple, the only temple in Japan dedicated to the cotton. In Japanese, tenjiku got also the meaning of thick cotton sheeting (nowadays used mostly for bags, curtains).

The second character, 竺(zhú in Chinese, jiku in Japanese), is employed as a short form for Tianzhu/Tenjiku, often included in compound words related to Buddhism. For example, 竺学 (Zhúxué in Chinese, Jikugaku in Japanese), meaning Tianzhu/Tenjiku studies, i.e. Buddhist studies or 竺書 (Zhúshū in Chinese, Jikusho in Japanese) as Tianzhu/Tenjiku scriptures, i.e. Buddhist scriptures. In China, 竺 (Zhú) appears also as the family name of people whose ancestors presumably had some relation with Tianzhu and/or with Buddhism.

The same as the Western notion of India, Tianzhu developed independently of the reality it was supposed to describe, becoming a meaningful part of the local cultural structure. In this sense, it is evocative the evolution of the popular perception of Xuanzang’s endeavors and travels. This Buddhist monk became famous for his seventeen year journey to Tianzhu (629-646). Motivated by the poor quality of the Buddhist texts available at that time in Tang dynasty’s China, he decided to go to the source. He spends many years traveling and studying in monasteries and universities from Tianzhu, coming back with hundreds of Buddhist texts that he will keep translating for the rest of his life.

Along the centuries, his exploits gained a legendary status in the popular imagery, culminating, about a millennium later (end of the 16th century), with the publication of the strongly fictionalized novel 西遊記 (Journey to the West), with Wu Cheng’en as the probable author. The book enjoyed wide success in all East Asia, becoming part of the local basic cultural luggage. In China proper, it became one of the Four Great Classical Novels, group that gathers the most influential classical Chinese fiction. There are very interesting and significant changes that occurred between the travel accounts (preserved in Xuanzang’s own book, 大唐西域記 - Great Tang Records of the Western Regions) and this novel. While most of the years abroad of the real travel were spent in Tianzhu (the trip from China: 629-630, back to China: 643-646), in Journey to the West, although reminded and discussed along the book, Tianzhu became just the goal. It is rather the “Western Heaven” where, once arrived, one may experience the enlightenment.

As the novel’s title suggests, the epic develops around the journey’s trials (also around the previous exploits of Sun Wukong, the disciple of Xuanzang). The journey itself and the sparsely populated territory between the two civilizations become important. This neutral area gives occasion for unfolding the appeal of this book, as an adventure story featuring a plethora of characters that mirror and satirize the Chinese society. On another level, the journey is an allegory of the path towards enlightenment, in the same time bringing to surface the popular integration of Taoism, of the Chinese mythology and folk religion into the local understanding of Buddhism. In this sense, the novel succeeds in expressing the way the local branch of Buddhism became Chinese (and, together with it, also the notion of Tianzhu), the manner it was assimilated in the local culture. Rather than a journey to somewhere else, it is the second part of the round trip determined by the novelty of the Buddhism. It is the coming back, the rediscovery of the Chinese self, giving voice to the way the people became again self-assured Chinese, now with Buddhism and Tianzhu as meaningful parts of the Chinese culture. That neutral area was used primarily as a possibility for self-study; hence, they became less important narrations about the people from Tianzhu.

In about the same time, in 1584, it was published another book, with much less impact, 新編西竺國天主實錄 (The new accounts about the Divinity from West Tianzhu), the first Christian catechism in Chinese. The Europeans who arrived for some decades in East Asia became too the objects of a local exotic identity shift similar to their own indiscriminate Indianization of much of the World. They were imagined as coming from some part of Tianzhu. The Jesuit priests supported this perception and assumed the Tianzhu identity, because of its prestigious and spiritual nature. They hoped to supersede the East Asian Buddhism, by presenting the Christianity as the new and the true religion from Tianzhu. Hence, Michele Ruggieri, the author of this attempt of a localized New Testament, signed as 天竺國僧 (a monk from Tianzhu), using the character 僧, designating a Buddhist monk. The endeavor produced few results, because of subsequent cultural misunderstandings, inconclusive public debates with the local religions, increased awareness of the Europeans’ expansionist intentions, plus conflicts between the Christian factions.

After some time, the initial Tianzhu/Tenjiku impersonation became unimportant. The Christianization project did not succeed, also the high Catholic clergy in Europe was not very enthusiast to hear of Jesuits dressing in Buddhist robes. The East Asian states became resistant to the European colonial ambitions; usually, their official reaction was to restrict the communication between their citizens and these foreigners. Nevertheless, the European presence increased year by year, the balance of power continued shifting towards their side. In the 19th century, the local political entities will be forced to become part of the Western shaped World stage (including the Western-imagined India and having no idea about Tianzhu/Tenjiku).

In 16th century Japan, as it became obvious that the newcomers belong to a previously unknown culture, they were named 南蛮 (Nanban), “Southern Barbarians”, due to a perceived unmannered behavior. It was not changed the pre-modern Japanese worldview consisting of the three civilized regions, 三国 (Sangoku, “The Three Countries”: Japan, China, Tenjiku) and the rest of the barbaric world. The term Tenjiku continued, in an ever-changing manner, to name miscellaneous people, like Jesuits, dark-skinned people from South Asia proper, South-East Asia or Africa. As long as direct contacts between Japan and Tenjiku were scarce, the Japanese too were not very sure about the limits in real life of this cultural area. For example, even by the end of the 19th century, the Hawaii archipelago was presented as a part of Tenjiku to the prospective Japanese emigrants.

The arrival of the Europeans facilitated also the travels abroad. Tenjiku Tokubei, sometimes dubbed by the Westerners as “Marco Polo of Japan”, became the most famous traveler of those times, after narrating in 天竺渡海物語 (The story of sea travels to Tenjiku) his journey to South-East and South Asia (hence his name). His trips occurred at the beginning of the 17th century, just before the closure of Japan’s borders and the ban of contacts with non-Japanese people. Subsequently, his image, besides that of a pioneer, evolved also into that of a strange Japanese person, sometimes a magician, living and experimenting in the neutral area between what is culturally Japanese and what is not, making him a popular character in stage plays.

In the same years of Japan’s seclusion, Hiraga Gennai, a multivalent personality of the 18th century, wrote under the pen-name 天竺浪人 (Tenjiku rōnin). In Japanese this means “a Tenjiku masterless samurai”. The expression, now part of the Japanese speech, is a pun, with Tenjiku as an inverted word for 逐電 (chikuden), meaning “absconding”. His main literary successor, the fiction writer Morishima Chūryō, employed the pen-name 天竺老人 (Tenjiku rōjin, “Old Tenjiku man”), to allude to Hiraga.

By the half of the 19th century it became impossible to keep countering the Western military strength and to preserve the status-quo. After some decades of uncertainties, there followed the inspired Meiji reforms, well rendered by the catchphrase 和魂洋才 (Wakon-yōsai, “Japanese spirit, Western techniques”). By making this difference, they enabled the integration of the Japanese society in the prevalent Western framework, without losing the identity, without becoming uncertain and confuse. The Nanban perspective of the Westerners was abandoned (5) and the Japanese state began to relate with the rest of the World through the Western geographical framework.

This included also the notion of India. In Japanese it is pronounced Indo, writtenインド,with katakana (the script employed for neologisms), the version endorsed by the Japanese Foreign Ministry. It is also written with kanji: 印度. Sometimes it appears the word インディアン (Indian), as an adjective, in expressions borrowed directly from other languages (usually English), or as a noun, designating various people known as Indians. Becoming obvious that India does not convey the same views, perceptions and traditions as Tenjiku (although it is well known that they describe segments from about the same area of the real life), it did not occur a substitution; they began a cohabitation that continues until today.

Indo introduced its own series of Japanese words and expressions. For example, インド・ヨーロッパ語族 (Indo-Yōroppa gozoku, “Indo-European languages”), インド・ルピー (Indo rupī, “Indian rupee”), インド洋 (Indoyō, Indian Ocean), インドライオン (Indoraion, “Indian lion”), インディアンペーパー/インディア紙 (Indianpēpā/Indiashi, “Indian paper”), インディアンジュエリー (Indianjuerī, “Indian jewelry”), インディアンサマー (Indiansamā, “Indian summer”), アメリカ・インディアン (Amerika Indian, “American Indian”), イースト・インディアン (Īsuto Indian, “East Indian”). Besides coming with borrowings, the word began producing new expressions inside the Japanese language. Apples were also among the novelties of early Meiji era’s opening to the rest of the world, time when the area of Hirosaki emerged as the main producer of this fruit in the country. In 1875, a new cultivar of apple obtained in Hirosaki was named インドリンゴ/印度林檎 (Indo ringo, “Indian apple”).

Indo appears also in borrowed compound words of the Western geographic perspective: インドネシア (Indoneshia, “Indonesia”), インドシナ (Indoshina, “Indochina”). As a side note, シナ/支那 (Shina), the Japanese correspondent of the English word China, appears only in such contexts. The Meiji reforms introduced its official use (together with Indo and other Western geographic names), replacing the East Asian 中国 (Chūgoku, “The country from the middle”). During the following Sino-Japanese wars, the exotic and potentially colonialist meaning of Shina was used to the point that it became an ethnic slur. At the end of the Second World War, China requested that Japan must cease using Shina and reinstate Chūgoku.

インド人/印度人 (Indojin, “Indian person”) may mean Indian (citizen of India), but also Hindu. The word for Hinduism is インド教/印度教 (Indokyō, “Indian teachings”). The English counterparts themselves have the same meanings as above, only that afterwards the initial h made the difference from the contemporary state (6). In order to avoid the misunderstandings, it appeared another neologism, ヒンドゥー (Hindū), spreading in the Japanese mass-media the use of the words ヒンドゥー教 (Hindūkyō, “Hindu teachings”) for Hinduism and ヒンズー教徒 (Hindūkyōto, “follower of Hindu teachings”) for the Hindus. The change did not occur yet for “Hindu philosophy” (less present in the news): インド哲学/印度哲学 (Indo tetsugaku, “Indian philosophy”), or short, 印哲 (Intetsu).

Comparing 印哲 (Intetsu) and 竺学 (Jikugaku, “Tenjiku studies”, i.e. “Buddhist studies”), the two words reflect well the carvings made by the Western and the East Asian worldviews. Both equated the country’s name with their own perception of the local religion, determining the subsequent differences in the substance of this religion. The histories of the two cultural areas determined also the different approaches to these religions. Intetsu, the Western perspective, is a philosophy, a wisdom, accessible to individuals through a personal endeavor (its second character, 哲, tetsu, means “wisdom”), while Jikugaku is intrinsic to the social texture, it comes with the acquiring of local social skills (its second character, 学, gaku, means “learning”).

The differences between the notions invoked by Tenjiku and Indo (as a whole, not just religious) become obvious in South Asian-related customer-oriented contexts, like the presentation of the Indian restaurants in Japan. For example, on the website of this Indian restaurant, the presentation goes 天竺夢料理 (Tenjiku yume ryōri, “Tenjiku dream food”) and then 印度屋 (Indoya, “Indian restaurant”). Each name comes with its own identity. Plus, this gives some idea about the place, the significance of these two notions in the contemporary Japanese society. Tenjiku brings the cultural value, while Indo comes with the identification in the real world. Of course, these roles are not inherent, it is just a contextual share of attributions. It rather brings to light the existence of the two component parts of any cultural notion, similar to the concepts of signified and signifier from the structuralism. Once, Tenjiku had applicable both the cultural value and the identification in the real world, the same as nowadays India has both of these layers in the Western world. In an alternative history, with an East Asian prevalence worldwide, one may imagine an inverted situation with a Tenjiku restaurant in UK having a presentation: “Indian dream food, Tenjiku restaurant”.

This does not mean that Tenjiku and Indo are somehow “maimed” and then combined into something new inside the Japanese cultural context. Each of them remains an independent notion with its own imagery and coherence (briefly sketched above), they convey different feelings, while the Japanese society knows the cultural values and the identifications in the real world of both of them. However, knowledge is just potentiality. When it comes to applications in real life, to basic things like the presentation of a restaurant, requiring both attending to the customers’ most reliable cultural tastes and an accurate identification in the real word, the solution is such a share of responsibilities. Also, this does not mean that now Tenjiku is a “frozen” notion or a matter of the past. It is alive as usually, see for example this recent Tenjiku series of sake (日本酒), where the name Tenjiku is employed for its cultural value, as an established cultural brand in the Japanese context.

Such cohabitation between 天竺/천축 (Tianzhu in Chinese, Tenjiku in Japanese, Cheonchuk in Korean) and 印度/インド/인도 (Yìndù, in Chinese; Indo, in Japanese; Indu, in Korean) happens, more or less, in all East Asia (7). The contexts of the former notion are not well known outside this cultural area, hence the word itself did not become yet familiar elsewhere. It appears in cases that do not require explanations about what it means and about its position in the real world, like localizations of East Asian video games or translations of East Asian fiction. There is some knowledge about it among the segment of non-East Asians who developed an interest in the entertainment produced in this area. For the fans of Japanese dorama, Tenjiku, together with words like itadakimasu, tanuki, faito, Kimutaku, is part of the inherently acquired vocabulary (without the need to know how they are written in Japanese). The most recent dorama featuring “Journey to the West”, in 2006, had even a secondary English title, “Road to Tenjiku”.

Part 2 of this article

--------

1) It is very probably that also the few instances when the Roma arriving in Europe (in the 15th-16th centuries) were described as coming from India or they said that they came from India (together with the presumed Egyptian origin), were rather the results of the locally available choices of describing the "otherness". India and the pre-Muslim Egypt represent the exoticism par excellence in Europe, perceived as less threatening cultural areas that make possible fantasies. The notion of India must have been acquired in Europe (it was not even known in South Asia at the time of emigration) and, the same as that of Egypt, employed for making meaningful in the local context the Roma and the visible differences, rather than supposing the knowledge of the origin.

2) The Moors happened to be the most familiar Muslims for the Western Europe of those times (and the name Moor itself was an exonym employed in Western Europe).

3) It really created a new local identity out of about ten distinct ethnic groups scattered in Southern Philippines, which, besides this Moro framework, did not experience another local historical communality.

4) Just to remind of a simple thing like the Indian restaurants run by Sylheti Bangladeshis in UK and USA. They have no other choice of naming as long as Indian remains worldwide the only strong South Asian brandname.

5) It appeared the official 外国人 (Gaikokujin, “person from other country”) or the popular 外人 (Gaijin, “person from outside”), naming the non-Japanese people.

6) In Chinese, Hinduism is 印度教 (Yìndùjiào, “Indian teachings”), Hindu is 印度教徒 (Yìndùjiàotú, “follower of Indian teachings”) and Indian (citizen of India) is 印度人 (Yìndùrén, “Indian person”). In Korean there is the h that makes the difference: 힌두교 (Hindugyo, “Hindu teachings”) is Hinduism and 인도 (Indu) is India.

7) Also in Vietnam, geographically part of Southeast Asia, but historically and culturally related to East Asia. In Vietnamese: Thiên Trúc for Tiānzhú and Ấn Độ for Yìndù.

Names of the Romani People

Alin Dosoftei — Mon, 24 Dec 2007 01:21:25 EST

The ethnic names used by the contemporary branches of the Romani people are Rom/Chhavo, Kalo, Manush, Sinto. The common roots of all these branches are proved by the similarities of their culture and language. The fact that groups using one of these names live in remote geographical areas and employ in subsidiary also some of the other names indicates that initially the ancestors used concomitantly all these ethnic names, they did not employ an unique denomination. This situation lasted during the crystallization of the Romani ethnic group along the 12th century and probably some other centuries onwards. Then, after emigrating in all Europe and parts of Middle East, every local group began to use only one of the names as the main one, the others remaining secondary.

Rom is the singular masculine grammatical gender (the plural is Roma, but there are dialects that use Rom also for plural), while Romni is the singular feminine (Romnya is the plural). They mean “married man, husband”, respectively “married woman, wife”. The unmarried are named Chhavo (boy) / Chhey (girl) / Chhave (plural common for both genders). The proper way to address a heterogeneous group is Romale thay Chhavale! ("Roma and Chhave!"). This internal separation between married and unmarried is employed because in the Romani culture the marriage is the most important event in life. This view extends also to the name given for the non-Roma: Gaj/o, -i, -e for married ones and Rakl/o, -i, -e for the unmarried (some groups employ also for the others words like Goro/Gero, Das, Payo).

Many groups choose also this word for self-identification among the non-Romani populations. They use the word to designate the culture and its elements (like the language). Also in Hungarian-speaking areas of the Carpathian Basin a group has the name Romungre ("Hungarian Roma"), while those from the Great Britain name themselves Romnichal (with the first probable meaning of "Romano son").

In English, the adjective Romani is employed in contexts like “Romani language”, “Romani custom”. Usually it stands for all the declension in the original language: Roman/o, -i, -e, but sometimes they appear utilizations of the original declension in the Romani language. There is also the spelling Romany but the first one is preferred since it is the way the other Indo-Aryan languages are spelled: Hindi, Marathi, Bengali, Kashmiri etc. The Romani dialects are spelled also like this: Lovari, Jambashi, Erli, etc. and even the dialects of other languages spoken by Roma (with only Romani vocabulary) like Pogadi. The word Romanes, which sometimes appears in English, is the adverb, meaning “in the Romani way, manner”.

In some groups the sound "r" from Rom is pronounced stressed and it is sometimes written Rrom. This spelling tends to be employed more in Romania, with the scope of not being confused with the prevailing Latin population, the Romanians. This resemblance of the ethnic names sometimes leads to confusion, but they don’t have a common etymology. Romanian comes from Romanus (“citizen of Rome” in Latin), as they are the descendants of the settlers from the Italian city of Rome, mixed with the local population. The same is for the Swiss speakers of Romansh, also originally from Rome. After the emergence of democracy in Romania in 1990 and the end of the state policy of assimilation, it became possible also in this country to be used in public the ethnic name Rom. The subsequent reaction of an important part of the Romanian majority was to deny the historical existence of such an ethnic name, supporting the idea that it was inspired from their own ethnic name, Romanian, that both ethnic names have a single origin. However, in this case it should be reminded that, while all the Romanians are in a close relation with the Roma, on the other side, only a part of the Roma are in close relations with the Romanians. Many Roma, neither they nor their ancestors, never set foot on the territory inhabited by Romanians. The Romanians are a particular case from a Romani point of view and not otherwise. Following the logic of those who support a single origin for Romani and Romanian, one draws the conclusion that Romanian has Sanskrit origin (keeping in mind that this name was first recorded some centuries after the arrival of the Roma in contemporary Romania, with the meaning of “common people”).Moreover, until the 19th century, the endonym of the Romanian people was Rumîni. Români is a modern nationalist creation of the Romanian elite, to look more similar to the name of the Italian capital, Rome (Roma in Latin), in order to emphasize their Latin identity. This name, incidentally, came also closer to the name of the Romani people. They should be open minded and accept the different origin of these two ethnic names.

Those settled in the contemporary territory of France name themselves Manush, meaning “person, human being”. Those who arrived in Iberian Peninsula in the 15th century use to identify themselves as Kale (meaning “blacks”). The group from Northern Wales is named also Kale. The same self-denomination is employed also in Finland by another group and usually appears written with Finnish orthography: Kaale. The group that settled in the German-speaking areas has the name Sinti, probably a word of European origin, adopted by the end of the 18th century (the previous names recorded for this area were Kale and Manush).

These names have basic, fundamental social meanings, probably as the result of the circumstances of the Romani people's ethnogenesis in the 12th century. They express the consciousness of the basic South Asian identity as revealed while living among non-South Asians, the same as the name Desi, of the new South Asian diaspora emerging from the emigrations of the last two centuries. These names reflect also somehow the conditions of the two emigrations. While the word Desi indicates the continuity of the connections with the motherland and an ambiguity of the assertion of the South Asian identity in diaspora, the Romani names express a regrouping around the basic tenets of the South Asian identity and the desire to continue it (probably also because they considered themselves as the only survivors), in the context of the 11th century violence against the Northern Indian society.

The Romani people received a variety of names in the local languages of the areas they settled. Usually the etymology of these denominations expresses the first impressions the newly arrived made on the local people. In many languages the word naming them is a corruption of Egyptian, like the English Gypsy, Spanish Gitano, Greek Yieftos or French Gitan. It seems that they were mistaken for Egyptians because they arrived in Europe through an area named “Little Egypt” (in Southern Balkans) or maybe because they fit the local imagery of Egyptians as exotic dark-skinned people performing witchcraft (since the times of the Roman Empire, Egypt was in Europe the symbol of exoticism par excellence). Another series of local names comes from the Greek word athinganoi (intangible): Ţigan (Romanian), Çingene (Turkish), Cigány (Hungarian), Zigeuner (German), Zingaro (Italian), Cigano (Portuguese). This naming could be due to a perceived resemblance to a heretic contemporary Christian sect performing witchcraft, or, other opinion, simply because Roma didn’t like to be touched by Gaje. Other names like Heiden ("Heathens") in Dutch or Tattare ("Tatar") in Swedish give also hints about the beginning of some strenuous interethnic relations. The common denominator of these names is that the image expressed by them strays from the reality, creating parallel notions used only by non-Roma. In many cases, these names designate also non-Romani persons who are perceived as fitting this image.

Why for some decades persons belonging to the Romani people are striving for the replacement in the public use of the word Gypsy (and the other localized names) with Romani? First of all this is not something isolate, it is a contemporary phenomenon that some ethnic groups reject the foreign ethnic names (exonyms) and promote the ethnic name used by themselves (the endonym). Usually it is a matter of image in the contemporary context of the global society's organization according to the ideology of nationalism. These people are minorities in every state they live (in most cases they are scattered in more states) and for various reasons (like geographical isolation or cultural differences) the nationalism did not became popular among them. Thus they tend to have a low participation in the administration, a low influence in the centers of power of those states and in the selection of the notions and ideologies conveyed among the broad society. As a consequence they do not participate in the construction of the ethnic images that circulate in the society and thus the ethnic images about themselves stray from the reality; lacking the communication, they are attachments to the self image of the majority. The names these people are known by the majority are perceived as full-part of the alien images and their etymologies remind the status of strange, awkward people, like Eskimo (from " raw meat eater" in Algonquin), Lapp ("wild", “backward” in Scandinavian languages), Berber (from "barbarian" in Latin), Hottentot (from "stutterer" in Afrikaans), also these many names the Roma are known in the countries they live. There is a common contemporary attitude (without any direct connection between these people) to reject the foreign names and to employ instead, at the state level if possible, their own names which always mean "man", "human being": Inuit, Saami, Amazigh, Khoi, Romani.

A sovereign entity is seldom attempting to uphold the use of its native name among the rest of the world. Such a rare case occurred in 1935, when the ruler of then named Persia, Reza Shah Pahlavi, decided that the foreigners should name his country as Iran, the native name, not Persia, the way it was known abroad. Usually, people living in countries of their own, with their own public life, even if they are named with other words by the foreigners, tend not to be bothered by them. They are not affected by the inherent stereotypes to a level that would trigger the promotion of the self-denominations, because they don’t live in the same “household” with the rest of the World, they don’t share their daily life with the others. At most, some local problems with the neighbors.

As a conclusion, this assertion of the endonym is a product of the modernity, employed by some ethnic groups who become vulnerable, for various reasons, to the ideology of nationalism. In history, the responses of such ethnic groups varied according to the evolution of the identity ideologies employed by the broad society. For example, in the case of the population known in English as Jews, in the first part of their history, they were known by two names: Israelites and Hebrews. The former name appears to be an endonym, while the latter an exonym. The use of the word Hebrew by the non-Jews of those times (written in their languages as Habiru/Apiru) indicates the circulation among them of a caricatured and malevolent image about the Jews. They are described as thieves, outlaws, inferior to the non-Jews. The same as in the case of the Gypsy word, Habiru designated also non-Jewish persons, but who probably were perceived as fitting in that specific image. In Torah, the name Hebrew appears when Jews communicate with non-Jews or when the author wants to make a distinction between the Jews who support the Jewish side and those who support the non-Jewish side. The name Israelite appears in the other contexts, regarding the life in the community (2). However, since there was no conscious separation between the specific items of the ethnic groups, like in the modern nationalism, it did not appear the need to assert the endonym among the non-Jews.

Later, the malevolent nature of the word Hebrew lessened, because the non-Jewish populations who used it with that specific meaning disappeared from history. In the meantime, it appeared also a third name, Judaeean (which produced in modern English the word Jew), from the name of Judaeea, the geographical area of the surviving two Jewish tribes from the initial twelve. As the ideology of nationalism began to spread in the society, the Jewish population preferred to use the name Israelite in the relations with the non-Jews. This name being appropriated by the new state of Israel, in 1947, the Jews who remained citizens of other countries switched to one of the words Jew or Hebrew in the local languages, depending on which expressed better the Jewish identity.

Regarding the modern public use of the Romani endonyms, until now it focused mostly on the word Rom/Romani. It gained some acceptance also among the branches that use it only with the meaning of a married person or as an adjective. The Sinti, who are not especially different among the Romani groups (3), were encouraged by the German and Austrian authorities to stick to their name and to consider them a different ethnic group. The reason is that, after most of them were killed during the Holocaust, few live in this countries and it is easier to label the other newly arrived Roma as foreigners, as opposed to the local Sinti, who live there for centuries. This is presented as a reason for the speedy expulsions of the Roma that are immigrating, especially since the Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe in 1990 (already dozen of thousands were expulsed) (4). This led to the appearance of the awkward term “Roma and Sinti” when it is about the Romani people, with statements like “Romani language is the language spoken by Roma and Sinti”.

To solve this issue that could bring undesired separations, it appeared the idea to use the adjective Romani as the common denominator for all the branches and castes. Some use the word Rom only with the first meaning of “husband”, but the adjective Romani is employed by all the groups to describe themselves in contexts like “Romani language”, “Romani culture” or “Romani person”. It is promoted by some Romani personalities, like the scholar Ian Hancock (5). The word should be used as a noun, singular: Romani, plural: Romanies. It gained some acceptance also in the Spanish language: romaní (singular), romaníes (plural).

References:

(1) Matras, Yaron, 1999, Johann Rüdiger and the study of Romani in 18th century Germany. Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society, fifth series 9, 89-116 (here in PDF)

(2) http://www.geocities.com/genesiscommentary/hebrews.html

(3) They use the word Romani as an adjective. Also it is notable that a Romani group living in contemporary Poland (that includes territories which until the end of the Secod World War were German-speaking), having similarities of dialect with them, are named Polska Roma.

(4) Cahn, Claude, 1996, Divide and deport (Roma & Sinti in Austria), European Roma Rights Center, (here in PDF)

(5) Hancock, Ian, 2001, Ame sam e rromane d�ene / We are the Romani People, The Open Society Institute, New York

Roma - The Invisible Desi People

Alin Dosoftei — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 12:09:31 EST

Thinking about how to begin a proper introduction of my people in a Desi cyberspace, it seemed to me that, at least in the contemporary context, such info looks rather worthy of an ultimate 2 crore question on KBC. What do you think of this: name the South Asian population emigrated from the Subcontinent a millennium ago, nevertheless preserving all this time in the European, American or Australian heartlands of the Western civilization the caste purity rules, their Indo-Aryan language, whose number is nowadays of about 15-20 million people.

The background of the answer is a less noticed South Asian emigration that landed in the Byzantine Empire. It happened in the 11th century, in the context of Mahmud Ghazni’s attacks in Northern India. Until nowadays the details of this migration remain unclear. The ethnic names point rather to basic meanings, not to a specific group: Rom (married person)/ Chhavo (unmarried person), Manush (human being), Kalo (black). They remind somehow of the other more recent Diaspora name, Desi, expressing the consciousness of the basic South Asian identity, as revealed while living among non-South Asians. The choices of names may reflect also the conditions of the two emigrations. While the word Desi indicates the continuity of the connections with the motherland, the Romani names express a regrouping around the basic tenets of the South Asian identity and the desire to continue it wherever they live. In the 11th century’s context, when the Byzantine Empire was in a continuous conflict with its eastern neighbor, the Seljuk Empire, it would have been impossible to preserve any link with the Subcontinent. It is also probable they imagined themselves as the survivors, after witnessing that temporary destruction of the North Indian society.

Thus it appeared the Romanipen (in the last years named also Romani Dharm), the code of conduct adapted to the minority status, focused on the preservation of the identity. In this sense, for enforcing the internal social coherence, the Romanipen employs the usual South Asian means. The phralipen (brotherhood) is the main pillar of the community, emphasized, for example, by calling those of the same age as phral (brother) or phen (sister) and the older as kak (uncle), bibi (aunt). There is a set of purity rules that everybody has to keep, it is not enough just to be born in a Romani community to be considered part of it. The code is enforced by the public opinion of the community, which shuns the persons that disregard the social life inside it, everybody has to be careful of the lajav (shame). When it is necessary to judge a dispute, to clarify the application of a rule or other uncertainties, a group of pativale (respected and trustworthy) Roma assemble to debate and give a verdict.

When the Romani population grew in certain areas, the caste system reappeared, as they specialized in different economic niches. For example, in South Eastern Europe, where there are dozens of castes. This part of Europe remained until nowadays the territory with the highest Romani population (80-90% of the worldwide Roma until the middle of the 19th century, 60-70% today), also with the most important Romani influence in the local society. The other important area is Spain (mostly the southern province of Andalusia). In such territories the Romani influence is obvious in music (the proportion of Romani singers exceeds by far the percent of the Romani minority in most countries), spirituality (for example, in Romania, the use of the tilak of ash on the forehead, to keep the state of well-being). The linguistic influence is important also. Again, in Romania, the most used modality to make a family name is by adding -escu to somebody’s name (see for example the names of the Romanian presidents), or to make a locality name, by adding –eşti (for example, Bucureşti – “At Bucur” in Romani, Bucharest in English, the capital of Romania). As a note, Roma and Romanians are different people, the latter are the descendants of the colonists from the Italian city of Rome, hence their name.

Then, what causes this lack of public knowledge about us? It is mostly to the discrimination encountered by our ancestors in the new areas of settlement. The local population was not very keen to accept the existence of the Romani culture, implicitly of a multicultural society. Its focus was on assimilation, coming with “explanations” for the differences, like those medieval descriptions of the Roma as some Europeans who darken their faces and speak gibberish, in order to look different and fool the others. Then, as the time elapsed and it appeared more and more clear that this people still remains different in certain aspects, these differences were not accepted as cultural ones, as belonging to another world view. They were distorted in order to look like the local majority are right and Roma are wrong, all of this despite the non-violence of the Roma, the peaceful arrival, the absence of any attempt to destabilize the local structures.

Thus it appeared the Gypsy imagery, as a malevolent caricature of the Roma, taking the public place and perpetuating a cultural rift. The Roma became an invisible population, almost nothing is known in public about our way of life. Nobody is interested in it, as long as it is dismissed as a non-culture or as a counter-culture. When there are attempts of clarifying who are the Roma, these tend to present the Romani culture from the point of view of the non-Romani local cultures, further deepening the misunderstandings.

On the other side, the Roma remained with a specific organization unrecognized by the others, struggling continuously for the survival of the unofficial Romani social islands. At the popular level there are, of course, many contacts between Roma and non-Roma, as presented above in the examples of Romani local influences. However, officially, nothing happened until now. This determined a perception of the Roma as second-class citizens, as easy scapegoats for any mishaps of the local majorities. Many times we shared discrimination patterns with the other historically non-assimilated European minority, the Jews. Both had to face paranoid accusations like bringing plague in Europe, stealing or killing children, various conspiracy theories, all culminating with the annihilation attempt of the Holocaust. However, for the Jews it was easier to find communication bridges, due to the similarities of the world view.

In the pre-modern context, the people managed to survive and preserve the identity. However, the advent of the modernity changes the rules of the game. It becomes obvious that the lack of involvement in the public life has far worse consequences, in many cases it determined already the institutionalization of the disfranchisement. Also the flexibility of the social life, the increased possibilities of communication, raises the pressure for self-identification and self-characterization among people from different cultures. This would be also the background of my approach, I am part of a Romani society that has to find rapidly ways for a public presence, a public voice.

It becomes clear that the social life is not the same as centuries ago and that we cannot continue to remain at an unofficial level in order to preserve our identity. For some years I have been working on a presentation of the Romani people, trying to come also with some ideas. As a result of the increased worldwide visibility of the Subcontinent and of the Desi diaspora recently emigrated, I was able to find more appropriate cultural tools for such a presentation, showing us as normal people from the point of view of our world view, departing from the usual public abnormalization. Recently I posted online what I wrote until now, in order to support the Romani focus of the upcoming Pravasi Bharatiya Divas, hoping that this secret with such ample historical proportions will come to light.