Robert Lovell Prt 2

 Continued form previous page:-

This writing shows a personal positive bias toward the Wood Welsh Romany familia, while showing the Lovell's and Boswell's in a very negative light - again I ask Why? Perhaps as the Wood familia were the first to befriend the rai’s there was no need to include other Romany.

It is understandable that the Woods would not want to share their newfound ‘friends’ that provided them with elevated social standing and a degree of legal protection. And why would the rai’s want to further complicate matters when research grants were being handed out to study PURE Gypsy culture.

 After all it would of been in the best interest of both parties to keep the status quo and an ideal way to do that was to bring into the question the background and therefore purity of other Romany. The forming of a society and publishing a criteria of what a ‘Gypsy’ was, led to the exclusion of those who did not fit the scholars exotic/romantic image of things Romany.

 Repeatedly Sampson pushed his claim that ONLY the Woods family & direct relatives were proper WELSH Romany at that point in time. Other familia it seems were accepted as Gypsies but not of the favoured Welsh clans. As claimed in a conversation between Augustus John and Sampson “we can boast of no deeper Gypsy than an English Lovell” (Sampson, A:1997).

It would seem that Sampson was in two minds when it came to the purity of the Romani race. If the Woods were the model of authenticity and spoke in deep Romanes, how is it my own Dadus could still name most living things and carry out sentences to at least to the same degree as the tape recording made in the mid-20th century of Hywel and Manfi Wood; apparently the last known speakers of Welsh Kale Romanes?

My father spoke in the old tongue and passed the chib (language) down to me, until his death in 1997. He could not read or write to any great degree, and for many years had no other folkie of his generation to rokker (speak) with. The refusal of the rai to acknowledge the existence of other Welsh Romanes speaking familia is puzzling and I can only surmise as to why.

Another example of how this agenda was reinforced, was in the arrival dates of Romany into Wales - of these I mean the Kale. It is reported in various writings that the Wood tribe entered north Wales sometime in the early 17 to mid 1700's, from Somerset. Census records show Wood, Lovell and Boswell with their adopted English surnames in many parts of England right back to the 1500's. Were these Kale, or did the Kale nav only start upon the arrival of the Woods family in North Wales!

It has been passed on to me by my father that us Lovell’s FIRST landed on the South East coast sometime in the early 1700’s, and that along with other Roms had fled from Spain due to the Gypsy clearances going on then.

These dates are further backed up by Sylvester Boswell (‘The Book of Boswell’ 1970:Ebenezer Baylis & Son Ltd London).

Information (handed down from his Great-Great grandfather Shadrick Boswell) dates the arrival of Boswell, Hearne, Heron, Lee and Lovell around 1750, with some of the groups travelling up into Wales. Boswell also goes on to say that they did not speak any English only Romanes.

 If this oral history is accurate, it is curious that in less than 150 years later Sampson & co claim that only the Woods & direct relatives could still speak deep Romanes. It is clear at this time there were other Romany families in north Wales such as my own folki & others. Written and oral history agrees that some of the above named families were already in Great Britain stretching as far back as the 1500’s. Were they the earlier relatives of the groups that arrived in the 1700’s - Yes, I would believe so. As with any folk seeking a safe haven for themselves and their children the forebears, of the now well-established families would of sent word to those left behind.

This was my personal experience when working with Czech Roma that came to Aotearoa in the mid 1990’s and claiming asylum from the racial hatred and prejudice in the Czech Republic. The first families to arrive had little English and no idea how life would be for them (other than it would be safer for them as Roma). This safety was guaranteed, as New Zealand is a signatory of the United Nations charter regarding refugee quotas.

Not all familia were granted entry permits only those who could prove that their lives were in danger if they returned to their home country. Within a year of the first arrivals more followed and in nearly every case it was Roma themselves who sent back information of how to be successful in gaining entry to and citizenship of Aotearoa. This indicated to me that the ‘Gypsy Grapevine’ smoothed the passage of other familia then and continues to do so today.

 If the above is true then there certainly were more Kale Romany in the UK than Manfri Wood write in his book (In The Life of A Romany Gypsy). So the idea that only 500 Kale existed in Wales at that time AND were all descendants of Abraham Wood seems really far-fetched.

I don’t believe for one minute that Lovell’s, Hearn’s, Cooper’s, Boswell’s and Lee’s were any less Kale than the Wood familia. Perhaps these navs (names) are not very much included because they didn’t stay in one place long enough to be ‘captured’. More likely the folki then would of shunned the attention preferring to be left alone to get on with life. After all, what would have been the use of books and studies to them - nothing as it was not their world.

So the ones who were not considered Gypsy enough were actually the ones who were still living the traditional way; while their more sedentary cousins became assimilated into the British culture. It seems like rai and rom alike ended up believing in the myth of the 500 Kale. In accepting the exotic romanticised tame Gypsy tales, the baro rai and their chosen ones have immortalised themselves into the history books of today.

Not all that Sampson, Yates and other collectors of Gypsy folklore wrote, was published. Sitting in the archives of the University of Liverpool are letters and poems some of which call into question the morals of the rais. Romanes was used in poems that at times were of a very basic sexual nature. Now from my own upbringing I know it’s marime (taboo) to speak of these matters in mixed company, let alone boast of such exploits.

Examples from Anthony Sampson’s book “The Scholar Gypsy” (111:1997)

Oh dear, O sweet ,O lovely Dora

As all these memories I renew

My – call it ‘presser, dear, or ‘borer’

Stands as a monument to you

I think of you with your dear feet up

And MINJIE an inviting feast

But now alas! Your got your street up

And kar must wait three days at least!

  And;

Always merry is the kari

Always doing funny things

Mutering, karying, cumering minjes

Always doing funny things

I feel I need to APOLIGISE to folki reading this, as it’s not my intention to offend. I am certainly no prude but would never use terms as in the above excerpts. BUT, I do feel in the search for the truth some things must be shown, as these so-called secret poems show the rai’s in a very unsavoury light.

How disrespectful to Romany to use their language in such an insensitive and insulting fashion. And, what about the abuse of trust in a situation where the rai had such power over those they were studying. These so called ladies and gentlemen of academia who claimed they were saving Romany language & culture were clearly unethical in their words and who knows in what actions? With this in mind HOW can anything they wrote be held in esteem and be taken as tatchoben (truth).

Where does all this leave the many descendants of Romany families today? In reality nowhere as we have been disenfranchised from our culture by a clever group of gorgo’s. In my mind they carried out a form of genocide against us but instead of the mass slaughter in Hitler’s death camps during WW2, the deed was carried out with their pens.

While in the UK I located some of my direct kin, most living now in houses where in general their neighbours would not know they were Romany folkie. These cousins know who they are even though much of their history has been lost to them. They did not choose to turn their backs on cultural links but had it ripped away from them as during the war years officials closed down traditional stopping sites. Social Services then proceeded to take chavvies from those who were deemed as unsuitable parents.

Over and again, similar things happened not just in Great Britain but also in countries like Australia where Aboriginals were separated from their lands and their families. All done under the hand of the Mighty British Empire - An Empire that bred and educated the very people we know of as the baro rai’s.

Today there are many Gypsy researchers and scholars. It was an honour to meet some of them and I’ve found to my relief some of these modern day rai don’t hold with the eurocentric views of old. A majority of the literature is about breaking with the myth-making of the past and to portray Romany in a more positive, respectful and accurate manner.

One such researcher is Simon Evans, who I met at Singleton, Sussex in 2007.

In his book ‘Stopping Places: A Gypsy History of South London and Kent’ (University of Hertfordshire Press), Evans writes about the obsession of 18th century scholars with their Gypsy subjects and how their theories are now at the base of the modern day ‘quest of authenticity’ amongst Romany today.

According to Evans once the Gypsiologists had ‘established the Asian origins of the language, they then assumed that those people who were the darkest and spoke most Romany were the most ‘authentic’ Gypsies. They were obviously closest to their ethnic origins, the thoroughbreds with the best pedigree, and therefore top of the Gypsy hierarchy’ (Introduction 4-5:2004)

So, are we to suppose if people are dark, travel around and speak Romanes that they are ‘authentic’. On my travels, I have met those who say that only those who travel and stay on sites are Romany. Are you a real Gypsy just because you live a travelling lifestyle? What of those on the road in the UK (and here in NZ) who are not of the ratt but new age travellers and claim they are REAL.

Once in the UK I spoke with a new age traveller woman who was living in a vardo with her partner and their son and selling goods on the roadside. As I approached I greeted her in Romanes, she at once became hostile towards me saying they were not Romany (I hadn’t asked) but that her son attended a travellers school and was learning the language, therefore he was-would be a real Romany?

This kind of thinking often by non-gypsies has in part been encouraged by the writings of Gypsyologists; and more directly by a lack of action on gorgo officials as to the legal status of Gypsies and what rights can be given them.

I witness this form of culture sucking on a regular basis, here in Aotearoa there are several groups of travelling people. The main group call themselves the ‘Gypsy Fair’ (notice capital G) and they travel around New Zealand in house-trucks over summer setting up on council reserves and selling trinkets and fortune-telling.

On several occasions over recent years, I have spoken with these so-called gypsies asking if any of their people were of Romani background. The answer was no BUT we think we could have a family link then the usual remark - a granny or uncle who was dark skinned. One chap even went as far as to tell me that there were no real Romany left and he knew as he had travelled in the United Kingdom and not found any - That the fair was authentic because they were living the life thus saving the Gypsy culture?

These groups advertise their arrival at each place with posters and looking at them I saw pictures of folki I know. I think that Gordon Boswell and his wife would be extremely surprised to see themselves riding along with their grai & vardo in a New Zealand town!

I asked the leader of that particular group where they got the photos from and he said oh we just download pictures from the internet. Do you have permission to use this material I asked him, well no but we are Gypsies. I noticed though that the following year the posters were entirely different!

People such as these are stealing our history and culture from all Romani. It seems that in the twenty-first century that little has changed since the day of the rai and that it is OK to take on the romantic gypsy image. I find it disgusting that these ‘pretend gypsies’ are accepted in society when the Romani race are not – this pral & prala (brother & sister) is not OK.

Whether it was the intention or not of the rai, the result of their actions and deeds has not as many claim helped to save Romany history and culture but foster misguided beliefs. Where there were once strong ties between groups now they are divided by confusion and mistrust.

An example of this is played out on one of the many online chat sites where the question of who/what is a Gypsy results in personal slurs and public denegation of folki born of the ratt. The racial criteria would seem to be ‘avoiding contact with gorgo’, ‘leads a travelling life’, ‘lives on a site’, ‘has a swarthy complexion (just to name a few)!

 USE GOOGLE TO SEARCH THIS SITE

  CLICK ARROW TO

  SCROLL DOWN

  MENU

  EMAIL

  S.J.DAY