From Romanes language we can assume that Roma have been settled for a long period in India, in the same way that we would assume –laying aside historical proofs– that they have lived for a long time in the Balkans and Eastern Europe. Notwithstanding, we know that Roma are not a Balkanic or Slavic people. With the same criterion, we can say that they are not Indo-Aryan.
With regards to linguistic aspect, it is not this site’s topic, so I would only give some brief comments and sometimes I would mention some terms in Romanes that have Semitic, Egyptian, Canaanite or other origins.
It is very probable that Romanes would not be the original language spoken by Roma, in fact, this language is being built with the passing of time and it is still not "mature". The fact that a people may lose its own language is not unlikely, indeed, a great number of Roma do not speak Romanes and have adopted other languages as their own tongue. We can also consider Jews, who lost their own language for a period longer than 2500 years (since the Babylonian exile until the rebirth of the State of Israel). For many centuries, Jews spoke Aramaic, Yiddish, Ladino, etc. The fact that Hebrew exists today as the national language is unique in history. Many other languages have disappeared for ever even if the people which spoke them exist until today. Ancient Egyptian was extinct thousands years ago; Egyptians adopted Coptic, and also this one is today only a liturgical tongue. Ancient Egyptians’ offspring today speak Arabic, a Semitic language, even though they are not a Semitic people.
So it is not unlikely that the original language of Roma would not be Romanes. As a people without homeland, has not adopted any pre-existing language but has built its own tongue by taking from those of host countries (it would not be logical to think that Roma in India would have known to count only up to 5 and that they would have learnt the remaining numbers when they arrived in Greece).
So, I believe that it is more reliable a research based on culture and spirituality rather than on language, as they can reveal us atavic links with the origins. Taking in consideration these facts, I believe possible that Roma’s origin is in the Middle East, followed by a long stay in Persia and Media, and a subsequent shifting to the Indus Valley and Rajasthan.
However, it would be possible also that they spoke an Indo-European language since the beginning, because as it is shown in the following map, Indo-Aryan tongues were widespread in the Fertile Crescent while those Semitic were spoken in a reduced area in Central Mesopotamia, from where they expanded subsequently.
The Middle East at the dawn of civilisation
| Indo-European peoples | Mediterranean peoples | Semitic peoples |
I am not asserting that Roma are Semitic; what in any case can be proved is that in their origins and first centuries of their existence as a people they have been indelibly influenced by a Semitic culture and that their spiritual development is Semitic.
Hebrews are a Semitic people born in Egypt. A family of Babylonian background (from Ur in Chaldea), formerly settled in Canaan, emigrated in Egypt. Yakov-Yisrael’s family, which for Egyptians was "impure" because of their Semitic race, was given hospitality in the Eastern region by the Nile Delta; there they became a nation within four centuries. Part of this period probably coincides with the Hyksos’ rule over Egypt (Hyksos is a name translated from the Egyptian word "Hekau-khasut"); they were a people of unknown origins and Semitic (or maybe Indo-European?) language, whose traces have been lost after their expulsion from Egypt. Their origins and destiny remain a mystery. It has been supposed that Hyksos might be identified with "Rasena" (Etruscans), but they may also be Roma’s ancestors. Expulsed from Egypt, it is known that for a while Hyksos settled in Mydian, near Sharuhen. It is likely that Hyksos would have had good relationships with Hebrews in Egypt. This fact would have been also a reason for the Egyptians’ aversion to Hebrews. Hyksos may also have adopted the faith in the Only God. Egyptian sources assert that Hyksos worshipped Seth, Osiris’ murderer, who may be identified with the God of Israel. An inscription of queen Hatchepshut states that Asiatic rulers (referring to Hyksos) ignored Rha, because they had chosen as lord only Seth (rocky shrine of Beni-Hassan). We know also that in Canaan and neighbouring area there were some peoples that worshipped the God of Israel. Yethro, Mosheh’s father-in-law, resident in Mydian, was not an Israelite but worshipped the God of Israel. Yethro is said to be of the race of "Kenites" (Qeynites), who lived in peaceful relationships with the other peoples of Canaan (Judges 1:16 and 4:11). This name may refer to Hyksos, that would have been welcomed by peoples that feared Egyptian expansionism. Indeed, when king Shaul of Israel organized the slaughter of Amalekites, he warned Kenites living in that territory to "escape so as not to be destroyed" (I Sh’muel 15:6). Kenites were considered Hebrews’ allies. The word "Kenites", according to some scholars, means "tinkers", "blacksmiths", "metal-forgers". Hyksos succeeded in taking the Egyptian kingdom because they had forged weapons and were skilled horsemen. About Hyksos’ language nothing is known, but they may have kept some Egyptian words: "rom" to say man, "kham", the sun, main divinity of Khemet, the name Egyptians gave to their own land; kham in Aramaic means "sunburnt".
 |
 | |
| Remec = mankind | Kemet = Egypt |
It would be a likely hypothesis
to identify Hyksos with Kenites, and these with Roma. Tzo'an, a city built
on the Nile Delta, seems to have been originally founded by the Hebrews and
was their main residence in Egypt. Tzo'an was in some way related to Hevron
in Canaan since before Avraham's times; in fact, Hevron was the favourite home
of the Hebrew Patriarch and it was probably Tzo'an where he took residence
during his stay in Egypt. Some decades later, when Yakov and his family settled
in Egypt, it was given them the region of Goshen, of which Tzo'an was the
main inhabited centre. The same city became Egypt's capital during the Hyksos'
rule, which was a natural choice, if the Hyksos were indeed a Hebrew people
(although the identification of Tzo'an with Tanis and this with Avaris is
not certain, the Nile Delta region was anyway the main settlement of the Hyksos
rulers). Egypt was officially monotheistic during the Hyksos' period. It is
interesting to notice that Roma are called "Tzo'ani" in modern Hebrew,
a word that identifies them directly with the Hyksos' ancient capital in Egypt!
There are also other tribes in the ancient Middle East considered to be either
Kenites or close to them: In Bereshyit 25:3, these tribes are mentioned among
the offspring of Avraham and Qeturah: the Ashurim, Letushim and Le'ummim.
The Assyrian records give a brief description of them: The Ashurim (not to
be confused with the Assyrians) were described as "travelling merchants";
the Letushim were those who "sharpened weapons"; and the Le'ummim were somewhat
enigmatically described as "chiefs of those who inhabit the isles (oasis?)",
the significance of which phrase is now lost to us. From this information,
it would appear that they were very similar to the Qeynites who inhabited
within Midyanites and Israelites, and are identifiable with tribes of Gypsies
(Gypsies are still known as "Ashura" by Indians, as well as some Israelites
of India, but this denomination is likely related to the Assyrians, with whom
the Hebrews arrived in India).
See Appendix: The Mysterious "Hyksos" and the Hebrews
During the Hyksos’ rule
times we can say that Egypt was the only land in which reigned quiet and plenty.
In the Middle East the coexistence of very different peoples living in the
same territory became unbearable. Many wars and famine drove not only Hebrews
but also many others to take shelter in Egypt, all of them settled in the
Eastern region by the Nile Delta, assigned by Egyptians to "Asiatic" immigrants
(they were not allowed to live together with Egyptians by ritual impurity
reasons).
In Mesopotamia, a Semitic people, Chaldeans, supplanted completely Sumerians,
the former inhabitants. It was a period in which Semitic peoples experienced
a strengthening of their own nationality. Assyrians succeeded Accadians in
exerting their hegemony on the region, and Arameans settled in Syria. Semitic
expansion towards the west compelled other peoples to emigrate. Those which
did so by first were Aryans, that from East Anatolia and through the steppes
of Central Asia reached and conquered India. It was not in this time that
Roma arrived in the Indus Valley, otherwise they would have assimilated completely
Aryans’ culture. Anyway, not all Indo-Europeans left the Middle East area.
An Aryan-speaking group, the Hurrites, were able for some time to consolidate
a kingdom under their ruling caste, the Mitanni.
Assyrians shattered the Hurrian power of Mitanni (the kingdom of Hanigalbat,
whose capital Washukkana was completely ruined), pushing on as far as the
Mediterranean coast. Indo-European peoples were reduced to insignificant kingdoms
and city-states. Only nations near to Caucasus (Urartu -Tilgarimmu) and those
of the Iranian region achieved political unity.
Canaan and the neighbouring area was a mixture of peoples and small kingdoms
almost continuously fighting against each other. The native population belonged
to Mediterranean stock: Canaanites (known also as Phoenicians, whose national
name was Kan’ana), Amurru, inhabitants of the inland, and Philistines, coming
from the sea (probably from Crete). Indo-Aryans, who ruled over the Middle
East before Semitic expansion, were numerous in Canaan: Hittites, Hivvites
and Jebusites, and Horites (Hurrites) in Negev. Besides them, there were Semitic
groups of Aramean background ethnically related to Hebrews: Ammonites and
Moabites settled to the east of the Jordan and Salty Sea (Dead Sea), Edomites
and Amalekites took possession of the Horites’ kingdom. Farther in the south
there were living undisturbed some Semitic peoples of Arabia: Mydianites,
Nabateans, and others. It was in such context that the Hebrews’ Exodus from
Egypt took place.
Hebrews would have not been the only Semites settled in Egypt: As well as
Yakov-Yisrael’s family, other Aramean families would have sought refuge and
welfare in the rich land of the Nile. In fact, the Torah confirms us that
together with Israel, a large crowd of mixed races followed Mosheh to leave
Egypt (Exodus 12:38).
May have been Roma’s ancestors among them? When Hebrews in the desert of Mydian
found an unknown substance, they asked themselves "man-ho"? (Exodus 16:15),
from this expression comes the word "manna", and this is the same word that
in Romanes means bread. It may be only a coincidence…
There are anyway in Romanes language some other words that have an evident
Hebrew origin, for instance, "kinas" = "to buy", "kepara" = "compensation",
or particularly significant, the name of the day before Shabat: "Parashtuné",
literally "Parashat day"!
Another interesting
fact regards the name of the place where the Tower of Babel was built, that
is Borsippa or Barsippa, near ancient Babylon. Such name is meaningful in
Romany language: the term "bor/bar" is identical with the Romanes
"bar", which means "stone", but also "stronghold",
and "sippa" is almost equal to the Romanes word "shiba'",
plural of "shib", tongue - therefore, "Bar-shiba'" means
"Tower of the Tongues" in Romanes language. It might be only a coincidence,
but might be not...
Concerning the way followed
by Hebrews in the Exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea and the identification
of the biblical Mount Sinai, researches done until now have not been sufficiently
accurate so as to reach a conclusion which may be certain. I consider that
archaeologists have sought proofs of the Exodus in the wrong places. The mountain
which today is called Mount Sinai is not the one mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures,
which I want to follow in order to give a solution to this controversy.
Who said that Mount Sinai is that one so called today? It has been a woman
whose knowledge about history was equal to nothing: Helen, the Roman emperor’s
mother. Muslim Arabs, whose knowledge of pre-islamic history is also very
poor, called that mountain "Djebel Musa" (Mosheh’s Mount). Several mountains
have been suggested in the Sinai peninsula and in Midyan, Northwestern
Arabia, and many controversial evidences are presented by different scholars
without reaching a definitive conclusion.
