The time when they arrived, has been as little certified, as the particular place where they landed. Perhaps, the before-quoted chronicle of Bologna may afford some insight into this matter. It relates, as appears by the context, from the mouth of the leader of the horde which it describes, that these people had been five years wandering about in the world, previously to their arrival at Bologna. Now, if this account is to be depended on, they cannot have arrived in Europe earlier than the year 1417. But before attaching credit to this relation, we are to consider, whether the author of it be deserving of credit. To place any confidence in Gipsey narrations, in general, would be very imprudent; as there are too many proofs that their sayings are mere nonsense, and contradictory prattle: but the case in question seems to be an exception. All the inconsistency and falshoods which the Gipseys reported, concerning whence they came, with the reasons for their wandering, have an end in view. But with regard to time, if they knew, they are more to be trusted, as no injury could be expected to result from the knowledge of a mere date. Now, the inference to be drawn is, that the leader of a horde might not only know how long he had retired from Egypt, or Asia Minor, and travelled about in Europe, as the time had been short; but it may also be supposed, that he said what he knew. In the mean time, we will compare this cited term, of five years, with other circumstances, and see whether they make for or against our argument. The first enquiry would be, Whether there are any earlier authentic accounts of their appearance in Europe, than 1417? But we do not find such any-where. [113] The second question to be decided is, Whether, if they were not seen towards the Black Sea before 1417, they could in one year’s time have reached the North Sea? This doubt requires little consideration. A year was quite sufficient for people like the Gipseys, who never tarried long in a place, to have migrated even far beyond where they were found. Again, if they were not in Moldavia and Wallachia earlier than the year 1417, and yet appeared during the same year in the neighbourhood of the North Sea, what great difference would it make if they came from a province next beyond Moldavia or Wallachia, travelling a few miles further to arrive at the same place? It is therefore very credible that 1417 was the period of their arrival.
Although, immediately after their coming into Germany, they spread so rapidly, that in 1418 their names were recorded in the annual publications of almost every part of the country, yet particular places seem to have been favoured by them. Thus, in Bavaria they were not noticed till 1433; and they must have very quickly withdrawn themselves from these parts, as six years afterwards it was remarked, as somewhat new and extraordinary, that in this year (1439) the Gipseys, a pack of scoundrels, a vagrant gang, were come into that country, with their king, whose name was Zundl.
They did not travel together, but in different hordes, each having its leader, sometimes called count: at other times their leaders were dignified with the titles of dukes or kings of Lesser Egypt. One horde which arrived at Augsburgh in 1419, although it consisted of only seventy men, had even two of these dukes, beside some counts, with them. But what sort of creatures these great men among the Gipseys were, has been explained in another place. (Vide p. 72, & seq.)
If Stumpf be right, the number of these people must have been very considerable. Those alone who came into Switzerland in 1718, women and children included, were estimated at 14000. But here he, or his authority, seems to have greatly miscounted. It is true, that he likewise remarks, they did not keep all together, but went about in separate parties; notwithstanding this, his account is much to be doubted. By what is to be found concerning particular hordes, there were none which exceeded one or at most two hundred. That which went to Augsburgh in 1419 consisted of but seventy men: therefore if they had been so numerous as Stumpf asserts, there must have been at least a hundred such hordes dispersed through Switzerland. It was at this time (1418) that Gipseys were first seen at Zurich; they were a swarm, whose leader’s name was Michael. Four years had elapsed before they were known at Basil—part of the very horde of this Michael. Would not some other tribe have got to Basil before these, if they had been so numerous? Thomasius adopts this number of 14000 without suspicion, and understands it to comprehend the whole multitude all over Germany; but then he does not appear to have quoted Stumpf’s testimony in the sense it was meant. Many hordes of them must certainly have arrived, as they spread every-where so prodigiously; but to persist in any nearer investigation of their numbers, would be only useless trouble.
Their possessions were, as at present, small, and their whole arrangement singular; besides which, according to the Eastern custom, they hung ragged clothes about them, instead of other garments. Their leaders only were exceptions. Several had horses, asses, or mules, with them, on which they loaded their tents, and effects, with the whole family into the bargain. They had also dogs in their train, with which Kranz asserts they used illegally to destroy game: but probably the dogs were kept not so much for that purpose, as to take fowls and geese.
CHAPTER II.
On the Sanctity, Passports, and Difference, of the former from the latter Gipseys.
At the first arrival of the Gipseys in Europe, it was generally believed that they were Egyptians and pilgrims, constrained to wander on account of religion. This mistake originated from their own relation; but when required to give a more circumstantial detail of the reasons for their pilgrimage, they varied very much from each other. Some of them declared that they were compelled to make this emigration as an atonement for their forefathers having, for some time, apostatised from the Christian faith: others asserted that the king of Hungary had seized their country, and imposed on them this penance of wandering. A third party represented that God had signified to them the necessity of this pilgrimage, by an universal sterility in their country. They supposed this punishment to have been inflicted on account of sin committed by their ancestors, in refusing to receive the infant Jesus, when carried by his Mother and Joseph to Egypt, as an asylum from the persecution of Herod. The term of their pilgrimage was to be seven years.
No evidence is necessary to determine that these were mere fables; and it is astonishing that men should be found to adduce long-winded proofs of the origin of these people, grounded on no better authority than such idle tales. We have not now any positive grounds remaining, to shew how these legends were invented, or what gave rise to them; but the real truth seems to be merely, that upon being asked whence they came, they answered from Egypt; and there is no reason existing to deny their having come from that country. Now priests, monks, or perhaps other people, might wonder why they should quit a place to which the holy family had fled for refuge, unless their forefathers had been guilty of some transgression on that occasion; but, be this as it may, all that could be said, with regard to the origin of their legends, would be only mere conjecture. Let it therefore suffice to say, they chose to be considered everywhere as pilgrims; and this profession met with the more ready belief, as it coincided with the infatuation of the times.
The credulity with which people cherished the idea that the Gipseys were real pilgrims and holy persons was attended with the consequence, that they were not only tolerated, but, if the information on this head may be relied on, they everywhere received assistance, with express safe-conducts. These safe-conducts are mentioned in several old writings. Münster declares, not merely, in general terms, that they carried about with them passports and seals from the Emperor Sigismund and other princes, by means of which they had free passage through different countries and cities, but that he had himself seen an attested copy of such a letter, in the possession of some Gipseys at Eberbach. Besides Kranz, Stumpf, and Guler, Laurentius Palmirenus also agrees in this statement; but the latter writer is guilty of a mistake, in confounding the Emperor Sigismund with Sigismund king of Poland. The Gipseys at Bologna, likewise, shewed an instrument from Sigismund; but he appears to have granted this to them, not as emperor, and in Germany, but in Hungary, and as king of Hungary. A pass of another king of Hungary, Uladislaus II. which the Gipseys obtained chiefly on account of their supposed sanctity and pilgrimage, might be quoted. They were not destitute in Transylvania, if it be true, as asserted, that they received this sort of letters of protection from the princes of the house of Bathory. Wehner says, that the Gipseys in France likewise quoted ancient privileges, granted to them by the former kings of that country. Crusius, Wurstisen, and Guler, mention papal permissions, which these people acquired, for wandering, unmolested, through all Christian countries, so long as the time of their pilgrimage lasted.