Chapter II

Mr. Leland’s style of reasoning, his lack of candour, and his reserve as to how he took up the Gipsy question, and to whom he had been indebted at first for some of his ideas, detract very much from the desire that one would naturally have to put confidence in him. His many confident assertions about what others have grave doubts and his frequent contradictions have a similar effect.

In _The Gipsies_ there is very little told us of the race _in_ America (not _American_ Gipsies) of any kind, and yet Mr. Leland says that it will

“Possess at least the charm of novelty, but little having as yet been
written on this extensive and very interesting branch of our nomadic
population” (Pref. III.).

In my Preface I said:—

“To the American reader generally the work will illustrate a phase of
life and history with which it may be reasonably assumed he is not
much conversant; for, although he must have some knowledge of the
Gipsy race generally, there is no work, that I am aware of, that
treats of the body like the present” (p. 7).

And I illustrated the race in America in notes to the work, and in as much as I could well introduce in my long Disquisition, bringing in that part of it which had its origin perhaps from the settlement of the American Colonies. When Mr. Leland borrowed from my work for his article in _Johnson’s Cyclopædia_ he gave the name of the book with the _London_ imprint, while from the first page to the last it showed that it was an _American_ book, based on a _Scotch_ MS.; and the copy which he used in all probability bore a _New York_ imprint.

I admit this of Mr. Leland, that, by availing himself of the hard labours of others, at least to give him a start, he has added greatly to our knowledge of the Gipsy language, so far as I know and can judge; but that is nearly all that can be said of him. What he has told us of the information got from a native of India as to the Gipsies there being called “Syrians” shows that he was merely in good luck in falling in with the man from whom he obtained it; while, if it is reliable, it confirms my conjecture, although of that it does not seem to have been his business to inform the world. His chapter on the “Shelta or Tinkers’ Talk,” picked up also as it were by accident from a stray tinker, is indeed of great interest; but the world has reason to question his judgment when he says that “it is, in fact, a language, for it can be spoken grammatically, and without using English or Romany” (p. 371). Another occasion for questioning his judgment is when he says that “Mr. [Walter] Simson, had he known the ‘Tinklers’ better, would have found that, not Romany, but Shelta was the really secret language which they employed, although Romany is also more or less familiar to them all” (p. 371); for almost anyone by reading the _History_ can see the absurdity of it. {15}

This book of Mr. Leland (although described in the Preface as “Sketches of experiences among the Gipsies”), to justify its title of _The Gipsies_, should have been constructed on some plan and scientifically arranged, with a great variety of particulars, and no extraneous matter or padding in it. In place of that we have little but random sketches or scenes connected with the race. There is no principle running through it, for we are told in the Introduction that

“The day is coming when there will be no . . . wild wanderers . . .
and certainly no Gipsies” (p. 15). And after describing how English
sparrows have driven so many kinds of native birds out of
Philadelphia, he says, “So the people of self-conscious culture and
the mart and factory are banishing the wilder sort . . . As a London
reviewer said when I asserted in a book that the child was perhaps
born who would see the last Gipsy, ‘Somehow we feel sorry for that
child’” (p. 15). And in describing English fairs, as represented by
that at Cobham, he says, “In a few years the last of them will have
been closed, and the last Gipsy will be there to look on” (p. 142).

Profound research and philosophical observation and reasoning do not seem to constitute Mr. Leland’s forte. It is a little puzzling to decide how to treat a man like him; for his “confident assertions” in regard to the disappearance, or what some would call the _extinction_, of the race are but “contradictions” of his own information and opinions; saying nothing of what I published at great length on the perpetuation of the Gipsies in a settled state, all of which he admits having “carefully read.” Among Mr. Leland’s information is the following:—

“Go where we may we find the Jew. Has any other wandered so far?
Yes, one; for wherever Jew has gone there too we find the Gipsy” (p.
18). “It . . . . has penetrated into every village which European
civilization has ever touched. He who speaks Romany . . . . will
meet those with whom a very few words may at once establish a
peculiar understanding . . . This widely spread brotherhood . . . are
honestly proud that a gentleman is not ashamed of them” (p. 25).
“Communities of gentlemanly and lady-like Gipsies’” in Russia (p.
25). “All the Gipsies in the country are not upon the roads. Many
of them live in houses, and that very respectably, nay, even
aristocratically. Yea, and it may be, O reader, that thou hast met
them and knowest them not . . . It is intelligible enough” that such
a Gipsy “should say as little as possible of his origin, . . . and
ever carefully keep the lid of silence on the pot of his birth” (p.
272). “The Gipsy of society, not always, but yet frequently, retains
a keen interest in his wild ancestry. He keeps up the language; it
is a delightful secret; he loves now and then to take a look at ‘the
old thing’ [one of my phrases, as I have already mentioned] . . . I
know ladies in England and in America, both of the blood and
otherwise, who would give up a ball of the highest flight in society
to sit an hour in a Gipsy tent, and on whom a whispered word in
Romany acts like wild-fire. Great as my experience has been I can
really no more explain the intensity of this yearning, this
_rapport_, than I can fly. My own fancy for Gipsydom is faint and
feeble compared to what I have found in many others” (p. 274).

One would naturally conclude that this _race_ is not disappearing as “British birds are chasing American ones out of Philadelphia”; and that it could not be said that “the child is perhaps born who will see the last Gipsy,” even in his primitive condition. {16}

Mr. Leland explains, in his chapter on Cobham Fair, how the Gipsy problem “puzzled and muddled” him.

“I was very much impressed at this fair with the extensive and
unsuspected amount of Romany existent in our rural population . . .
There were many men in the common room, mostly well dressed, and
decent even if doubtful looking. I observed that several used Romany
words in casual conversation. I came to the conclusion at last that
all who were present knew something of it” (p. 140). And of eleven
kinds of people that were at the fair, he said that “there is always
a leaven and a suspicion of Gipsiness. If there be no descent, there
is affinity by marriage, familiarity, knowledge of words and ways,
sweethearting and trafficking, so that they know the children of the
Rom as the house-world does not know them, and they in some sort
belong together” (p. 140).

In my Disquisition on the Gipsies I said:—

“In Scotland the prejudice towards the name of Gipsy might be safely
allowed to drop, were it only for this reason, that the race has got
so much mixed up with the native blood, and even with good families
of the country, as to be, in plain language, a jumble, a pretty
kettle of fish, indeed” (p. 427).

Mr. Leland continues:—

“No novelist, no writer whatever, has as yet _clearly_ explained the
curious fact that our entire nomadic population, excepting tramps, is
not, as we thought in our childhood, composed of English people like
ourselves. It is leavened with direct Indian blood; it has, more or
less modified, a peculiar _morale_.” “It is a muddle, perhaps, and a
puzzle; I doubt if anybody quite understands it” (p. 140).

Had Mr. Leland said that, with the exception of myself, “no writer whatever” had even alluded to the phenomenon described, I believe he would have stated what was true. I endeavoured to explain it in a Disquisition of 171 pages, which he indirectly admitted he “carefully read”; so that if I did not “clearly explain” the “puzzle and muddle” it must have proceeded from a lack of intellect on my part, or on his in not understanding me. Since then I have frequently expatiated on and described it, but I am not aware that Mr. Leland has seen what I wrote on these occasions. In _The Scottish Churches and the Gipsies_ I said that the Gipsy problem “may at first present an aspect of a ‘labyrinth of difficulties’”; but that to solve it “there is little intellect wanted for the occasion, but such as it is it should be allowed to act freely on the subject of inquiry” (p. 23). To judge of Mr. Leland’s works on the Gipsies one would think that he had been indebted to no one for anything; so that it is remarkable he should have complained that _novelists_ should not have “clearly explained” to him what he himself should have told us—particularly as he spoke of his “great experience” among the Gipsies—unless it appears that even to novelists he—as a professional writer taking up a subject that came to his hand—has been indebted for putting him on the track for repeating or illustrating an “oft-told tale.” {18} We can easily imagine how Mr. Leland got “puzzled and muddled” in contemplating his subject when he says so positively that the Gipsies are disappearing as “British birds are chasing American ones out of Philadelphia”; and that the mixed state of Gipsydom seen at Cobham Fair “was old before the Saxon Heptarchy” (p. 140). What he said he could find in “no writer whatever” was elaborately described in the book which I published. That he used for his own purposes, and then apparently turned round and threw out his heels at it.

I have spoken of Mr. Leland’s “confident assertions,” but I have space merely to allude to some of them. Among these are the following:—That there is no mystery about the origin of the Gipsies (p. 331), and that “it is a matter of history that, since the Aryan morning of mankind, the Romany have been chiromancing” (p. 225); that “among those who left India were men of different castes and different colours, ranging from the pure Northern invader to the Negro-like Southern Indian” (p. 24); that the Gipsies in Egypt have lost their tongue (p. 296); that the English Gipsy cares not a farthing “to know anything about his race as it exists in foreign countries, or whence it came” (p. 34); and that there is hardly a travelling company of dancers, musicians, singers, or acrobats, or theatre “in Europe or America in which there is not at least one person with some Romany blood” (p. 332). This at least is common, I dare say very common. On one occasion I looked over the show-bill while in MS. of an English Gipsy company who travelled in America with a small panorama. {19a}

The conclusion which I drew of Mr. Leland after reading his Cyclopædia article was that, apart from the language, he knew little of the _subject of the Gipsies_. The knowledge of the language has given him the entrée into the circle of a certain class of the Gipsies, leading to a “flash-in-the-pan” knowledge of them; but not constituting him a reliable guide on the whole question under consideration; for, in keeping with his “confident assertions” generally, he disposes of it by saying that “the child is perhaps born who will see the last Gipsy.” {19b}

As long as Mr. Leland has stuck to his subject he has confirmed what I said in the work published by me, although he has made no acknowledgment of it in any way. Even on the subject of the tinkers in England, he—so far as he may be considered an authority—has confirmed what I said of their being Gipsies of mixed blood:—“These are but instances of, I might say, all the English tinkers. Almost every old countrywoman about the Scottish Border knows that the Scottish tinkers are Gipsies” (p. 508). He also speaks of John Bunyan having been a “half-blood Gipsy tinker” (p. 213). He was only justified in saying that he was of “mixed blood”; but he made no allusion to my long argument (pp. 313 and 506–523) in defence of it, which I published in _Notes and Queries_ on the 12th December, 1857, and illustrated it in two shorter articles in the early part of 1858, in which the outline of the _History of the Gipsies_ was given; so that the question of Bunyan’s nationality has been before “all England” for a quarter of a century unanswered.

What I wrote in _The Scottish Churches and the Gipsies_ is equally applicable to Mr. Leland:—

“As I have said of Mr. Borrow, any one treating of such a subject as
the Gipsies should, so far as space allowed, ‘comment on and admit or
reject the facts and opinions of his case as discovered and advanced
by others,’ and not ‘put forth his own ideas only, as if nothing had
been said by others before or besides him’” (p. 12).—“I think that
what I have written and published on the Gipsies should have been
treated with more candour and courtesy, at least with more care and
consideration, by others who have done likewise, saying nothing of
the press. I also think that I have embraced almost all, if not all,
of the principles connected with the existence and perpetuation of
the race; so that others in discussing them should ‘comment on and
admit or reject’ what I have advanced, and I think proved, in place
of putting forth opinions apparently without due investigation” (p.
14).—“His illustrations of their language, in common with those of
other writers, are very interesting, . . . and the occasional, as if
accidental, remarks made by the Gipsies, at intervals, bearing on the
Gipsy question proper, are of importance” (p. 17).—“He gives us
nothing of the philosophy of the existence, history, perpetuation,
development and destiny of the tribe and its off-shoots. He seems to
use his eyes and ears only, and with those and his turn for writing
he has given us some really good sketches and scenes . . . But
besides using the eyes and ears in connection with such a subject, it
is necessary to exercise the intellect to discover and explain what
is not obvious or hidden, and illustrate the meaning and bearing of
what is described . . . His book however interesting parts of it may
be, is not calculated to serve any ultimate purpose of importance;
nor is it written in a regular or systematic manner . . . Nothing
can make a subject like that of the Gipsies attractive (if it can
ever be made attractive) to the better classes of readers, and
perpetuate an interest in it, but by treating it in such a way as
will combine a variety of facts, well arranged and illustrated, and
principles; out of which can be constructed a theory or system that
can be discussed and proved by a reference to the facts and
principles given . . . These writers are useful in their ways, but
beyond that they _spoil_ the subject of the Gipsies, in consequence
of the ‘utter absence in them of everything of the nature of a
philosophy of the subject’; which is peculiar to ‘all the works that
have hitherto appeared on the Gipsies’ (_Dis._, p. 532), so far as I
have seen or heard of them” (p. 18).—“A knowledge of the science of
race, in the essential meaning of the word, and especially as it
applies to the Gipsies, cannot be said to be even in its infancy.
Still, it might have been asked, what could two Scotch Gipsies
propagate, in body and mind, but Gipsies? They certainly could not
give origin to Jews or _common_ Scotch; but Gipsy Scotch or Scotch
Gipsy would infallibly follow” (p. 19).—“Of late years a number of
publications and articles, of more or less importance, on the Gipsies
have appeared in Great Britain. Some of these doubtless had their
origin in the work published by me in 1865, although no
acknowledgment was made of it in any way; and yet the most of the
_original_ MS. of it was prepared before Mr. Borrow had apparently
even thought of writing on the race” (p. 17), (that is, between 1817
and 1831).—“If they really have at heart the desire of knowing and
informing the public ‘all about the Gipsies,’ why do they so
persistently lead it inferentially to believe that the mass of
information on the subject, in all its bearings, published by me has
no existence? One would naturally think that they would grasp at it,
and illustrate and supplement it; and _prove_ anything in it to be
wrong that they allege or suppose to be so, and _let me hear of their
objections_” (p. 17).

With all his professed candour in regard to _all_ who have written on the subject of the Gipsies, and cooperating with his “colleagues” in connection with it, why did Mr. Leland not take it up from where it was left by me, and used by him for his article in _Johnson’s Cyclopædia_! In place of amusing the world with the fictions that the Gipsy race is disappearing as “British birds are chasing American ones out of Philadelphia,” and that “the child is perhaps born who will see the last Gipsy,” he might have assisted me in “breaking down the middle wall of partition” between them and the rest of the world; so that the Gipsy race, at least in its off-shoots, may be acknowledged openly, and allowed as such to take their places in society, as “men and brethren,” which in many instances they do now, although unknown to the world.

Notwithstanding all that has been and could be said of Mr. Leland as a writer on the Gipsies, and of the work under review, _The Gipsies_, taking it all in all, is an interesting book, and deserves to be well read. {21}

* * * * *

ADVERTISEMENTS.

EVER since entering Great Britain, about the year 1506, the Gipsies have been drawing into their body the blood of the ordinary inhabitants and conforming to their ways; and so prolific has the race been, that there cannot be less than 250,000 Gipsies of all castes, colours, characters, occupations, degrees of education, culture, and position in life, in the British Isles alone, and possibly double that number. There are many of the same race in the United States of America. Indeed, there have been Gipsies in America from nearly the first day of its settlement; for many of the race were banished to the plantations, often for very trifling offences, and sometimes merely for being by “habit and repute Egyptians.” But as the Gipsy race leaves the tent, and rises to civilization, it hides its nationality from the rest of the world, so great is the prejudice against the name of Gipsy. In Europe and America together, there cannot be less than 4,000,000 Gipsies in existence. John Bunyan, the author of the celebrated _Pilgrim’s Progress_, was one of this singular people, as will be conclusively shown in the present work. The philosophy of the existence of the Jews, since the dispersion, will also be discussed and established in it.

When the “wonderful story” of the Gipsies is told, as it ought to be told, it constitutes a work of interest to many classes of readers, being a subject unique, distinct from, and unknown to, the rest of the human family. In the present work, the race has been treated of so fully and elaborately, in all its aspects, as in a great measure to fill and satisfy the mind, instead of being, as heretofore, little better than a myth to the understanding of the most intelligent person.

The history of the Gipsies, when thus comprehensively treated, forms a study for the most advanced and cultivated mind, as well as for the youth whose intellectual and literary character is still to be formed; and furnishes, among other things, a system of science not too abstract in its nature, and having for its subject-matter the strongest of human feelings and sympathies. The work also seeks to raise the name of Gipsy out of the dust, where it now lies; while it has a very important bearing on the conversion of the Jews, the advancement of Christianity generally, and the development of historical and moral science.

LONDON, _October_ 10_th_, 1865.

SECOND EDITION.

* * * * *

SIMSON’S HISTORY OF THE GIPSIES.

575 PAGES. CROWN 8VO. PRICE, $2.00.

NOTICES OF THE AMERICAN PRESS.

_National Quarterly Review_.—“The title of this work gives a correct idea of its character; the matter fully justifies it. Even in its original form it was the most interesting and reliable history of the Gipsies with which we were acquainted. But it is now much enlarged, and brought down to the present time. The disquisition on the past, present, and future of that singular race, added by the editor, greatly enhances the value of the work, for it embodies the results of extensive research and careful investigation.” “The chapter on the Gipsy language should be read by all who take any interest either in comparative philology or ethnology; for it is much more curious and instructive than most people would expect from the nature of the subject. The volume is well printed and neatly bound, and has the advantage of a copious alphabetical index.”

_Congregational Review_. (Boston.)—“The senior partner in the authorship of this book was a Scotchman who made it his life-long pleasure to go a ‘Gipsy hunting,’ to use his own phrase. He was a personal friend of Sir Walter Scott . . . His enthusiasm was genuine, his diligence great, his sagacity remarkable, and his discoveries rewarding.” “The book is undoubtedly the fullest and most reliable which our language contains on the subject.” “This volume is valuable for its instruction, and exceedingly amusing anecdotically. It overruns with the humorous.” “The subject in its present form is novel, and we freely add, very sensational.” “Indeed, the book assures us that our country is full of this people, mixed up as they have become, by marriage, with all the European stocks during the last three centuries. The amalgamation has done much to merge them in the general current of modern education and civilization; yet they retain their language with closest tenacity, as a sort of Freemason medium of intercommunion; and while they never are wiling to own their origin among outsiders, they are very proud of it among themselves.” “We had regarded them as entitled to considerable antiquity, but we now find that they were none other than the ‘mixed multitude’ which accompanied the Hebrew exode (Ex. XII 38) under Moses—straggling or disaffected Egyptians, who went along to ventilate their discontent, or to improve their fortunes. . . . . We are not prepared to take issue with these authors on any of the points raised by them.”

_Methodist Quarterly Review_.—“Have we Gipsies among us? Yea, verily, if Mr. Simson is to be believed, they swarm our country in secret legions. There is no place on the four quarters of the globe where some of them have not penetrated. Even in New England a sly Gipsy girl will enter the factory as employe, will by her allurements win a young Jonathan to marry her, and in due season, the ’cute gentleman will find himself the father of a young brood of intense Gipsies. The mother will have opened to her young progeny the mystery and the romance of its lineage, will have disclosed its birth-right connection with a secret brotherhood, whose profounder Freemasonry is based on blood, historically extending itself into the most dim antiquity, and geographically spreading over most of the earth. The fascinations of this mystic tie are wonderful. Afraid or ashamed to reveal the secret to the outside world, the young Gipsy is inwardly intensely proud of his unique nobility, and is very likely to despise his alien father, who is of course glad to keep the late discovered secret from the world. Hence dear reader, you know not but your next neighbour is a Gipsy.” “The volume before us possesses a rare interest, both from the unique character of the subject, and from the absence of nearly any other source of full information. It is the result of observation from real life.” The language “is spoken with varying dialects in different countries, but with standard purity in Hungary. It is the precious inheritance and proud peculiarity of the Gipsy, which he will never forget and seldom reveal. The varied and skillful manœuvres of Mr. Simson to purloin or wheedle out a small vocabulary, with the various effects of the operation on the minds and actions of the Gipsies, furnish many an amusing narrative in these pages.” “Persecutions of the most cruel character have embittered and barbarized them. . . . Even now . . . they do not realize the kindly feeling of enlightened minds toward them, and view with fierce suspicion every approach designed to draw from them the secrets of their history, habits, laws and language.” “The age of racial caste is passing away. Modern Christianity will refuse to tolerate the spirit of hostility and oppression based on feature, colour, or lineage.” The “book is an intended first step for the improvement of the race that forms its subject, and every magnanimous spirit must wish that it may prove not the last. We heartily commend the work to our readers as not only full of fascinating details, but abounding with points of interest to the benevolent Christian heart.” “The general spirit of the work is eminently enlightened, liberal, and humane.”

_Evangelical Quarterly Review_.—“The Gipsies, their race and language have always excited a more than ordinary interest. The work before us, apparently the result of careful research, is a comprehensive history of this singular people, abounding in marvelous incidents and curious information. It is highly instructive, and there is appended a full and most careful index—so important in every work.”

_National Freemason_.—“We feel confident that our readers will relish the following concerning the Gipsies, from the British Masonic Organ: That an article on Gipsyism is not out of place in this Magazine will be admitted by every one who knows anything of the history, manners, and customs of these strange wanderers among the nations of the earth. The Freemasons have a language, words, and signs peculiar to themselves; so have the Gipsies. A Freemason has in every country a friend, and in every climate a home, secured to him by the mystic influence of that worldwide association to which he belongs; similar are the privileges of the Gipsy. But here, of course, the analogy ceases. Freemasonry is an Order banded together for purposes of the highest benevolence. Gipsyism, we fear, has been a source of constant trouble and inconvenience to European nations. The interest, therefore, which as Masons we may evince in the Gipsies arises principally, we may say wholly, from the fact of their being a secret society, and also from the fact that many of them are enrolled in our lodges. . . . There are in the United Kingdom a vast multitude of mixed Gipsies, differing very little in outward appearance, manners, and customs from ordinary Britons; but in heart thorough Gipsies, as carefully and jealously guarding their language and secrets, as we do the secrets of the Masonic Order.” “Mr. Simson makes masterly establishment of the fact that John Bunyan, the world-renowned author of the ‘Pilgrim’s Progress,’ was descended from Gipsy blood.”

_New York Independent_.—“Such a book is the History of the Gipsies. Every one who has a fondness for the acquisition of out-of-the-way knowledge, chiefly for the pleasure afforded by its possession, will like this book. It contains a mass of facts, of stories, and of legends connected with the Gipsies; a variety of theories as to their origin . . . and various interesting incidents of adventures among these modern Ishmaelites. There is a great deal of curious information to be obtained from this history, nearly all of which will be new to Americans.” “It is singular that so little attention has been heretofore given to this particular topic; but it is probably owing to the fact that Gipsies are so careful to keep outsiders from a knowledge of their language that they even deny its existence.” “The history is just the book with which to occupy one’s idle moments; for, whatever else it lacks, it certainly is not wanting in interest.”

_New York Observer_.—“Among the peoples of the world, the Gipsies are the most mysterious and romantic. Their origin, modes of life, and habits have been, until quite recently, rather conjectural than known. Mr. Walter Simson, after years of investigation and study, produced a history of this remarkable people which is unrivalled for the amount of information which it conveys in a manner adapted to excite the deepest interest.” “We are glad that Mr. James Simson has not felt the same timidity, but has given the book to the public, having enriched it with many notes, an able introduction, and a disquisition upon the past, present, and future of the Gipsy race.” “Of the Gipsies in Spain we have already learned much from the work of Borrow, but this is a more thorough and elaborate treatise upon Gipsy life in general, though largely devoted to the tribe as it appeared in England and Scotland.” “Such are some views and opinions respecting a curious people, of whose history and customs Mr. Simson has given a deeply interesting delineation.”

_New York Methodist_.—“The Gipsies present one of the most remarkable anomalies in the history of the human race. Though they have lived among European nations for centuries, forming in some districts a prominent element in the population, they have succeeded in keeping themselves separate in social relations, customs, language, and in a measure, in government, and excluding strangers from real knowledge of the character of their communities and organizations. Scarcely more is known of them by the world in general than was know when they first made their appearance among civilized nations.” “Another curious thing advanced by Mr. Simson is that of the perpetuity of the race . . . He thinks that it never dies out, and that Gipsies, however much they may intermarry with the world’s people, and adopt the habits of civilization, remain Gipsies, preserve the language, the Gipsy mode of thought, and loyalty to the race and its traditions to remote generations. His work turns, in fact, upon those two theories, and the incidents, facts, and citations from history with which it abounds, are all skillfully used in support of them.” “There are some facts of interest in relation to the Gipsies in Scotland and America, which are brought out quite fully in Mr. Simson’s book,” which “abounds in novel and interesting matter . . . and will well repay perusal.” “Pertinent anecdotes, illustrating the habits and craft of the Gipsies, may be picked up at random in any part of the book.”

_New York Evening Post_.—“The editor corrects some popular notions in regard to the habits of the Gipsies. They are not now, in the main, the wanderers they used to be. Through intermarriage with other people, and from other causes, they have adopted more stationary modes of life, and have assimilated to the manners of the countries in which they live . . . As the editor of this volume says: ‘They carry the language, the associations, and the sympathies of their race, and their peculiar feelings toward the community with them; and, as residents of towns, have greater facilities, from others of their race residing near them, for perpetuating their language, than when strolling over the country.’” “We have no space for such full extracts as we should like to give.”

_New York Journal of Commerce_.—“We have seldom found a more readable book than Simson’s History of the Gipsies. A large part of the volume is necessarily devoted to the local histories of families in England (Scotland), but these go to form part of one of the most interesting chapters of human history.” “We commend the book as very readable, and giving much instruction on a curious subject.”

_New York Times_.—“Mr . . . has done good service to the American public by reproducing here this very interesting and valuable volume.” “The work is more interesting than a romance, and that it is full of facts is very easily seen by a glance at the index, which is very minute, and adds greatly to the value of the book.”

_New York Albion_.—“An extremely curious work is a History of the Gipsies.” “The wildest scenes in ‘Lavengro,’ as for instance the fight with the Flaming Tinman, are comparatively tame beside some of the incidents narrated here.”

_Hours at Home_ (_now Scribner’s Monthly_).—“Years ago we read, with an interest we shall never forget, Borrow’s book on the Gipsies of Spain. We have now a history of this mysterious race as it exists in the British Islands, which, though written before Borrow’s, has just been published. It is . . . the result of much time and patient labor, and is a valuable contribution toward a complete history of this extraordinary people. The Gipsy race and the Gipsy language are subjects of much interest, socially and ethnologically.” “He estimates the number of Gipsies in Great Britain at 250,000, and the whole number in Europe and America at 4,000,000.” “The work is what it professes to be, a veritable history—a history in which Gipsy life has been stripped of everything pertaining to fiction, so that the reader will see depicted in their true character this strange people. . . . And yet, these pages of sober history are crowded with facts and incidents stranger and more thrilling than the wildest imaginings of the romantic school.”

NEW YORK: JAMES MILLER.

NOTICES OF THE BRITISH PRESS.

THE ENGLISH UNIVERSITIES AND JOHN BUNYAN, AND THE ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA AND THE GIPSIES.

“In this pamphlet Mr. James Simson again does battle in support of his contention that Bunyan was a Gipsy—a thesis first promulgated by him in an elaborate work on the Gipsies, published in 1865. He is indignant at Mr. Froude for ignoring the discussion of the question in his recent biography of Bunyan, and he comments in strong terms on the dicta of Mr. Francis H. Groome, in the article ‘Gipsies,’ in the new edition of the _Encyclopædia Britannica_, that John Bunyan ‘does not appear to have had one drop of Gipsy blood.’” “Mr. Simson’s tractate will be perused with deep interest by all students of the customs and history of the Gipsies.”—_Edinburgh Courant_, _November_ 3, 1880.

“In this pamphlet Mr. James Simson, editor of _Simson’s History of the Gipsies_, states his grounds for believing that John Bunyan was a Gipsy, and invokes the assistance of the Universities to investigate the matter and put it beyond the possibility of doubt. It may not matter much whether or not the ‘immortal dreamer’ was a Gipsy; and we do not think Mr. Simson attaches any great importance to the circumstance _per se_. What he aims at, we believe, is to stir up some interest in the Gipsy race, and this he thinks may be done were the public to have their sympathies awakened by the fact that John Bunyan was a descendant of it. By way of supplement, Mr. Simson criticises some statements made in an article in the _Encyclopædia Britannica_, on the Gipsies. The curious in the subject of Gipsy lore will doubtless find in the pamphlet matter that will interest them.”—_Perthshire Advertiser_, _October_ 28, 1880.

“Mr. Simson suggests, and supports, on arguments that have the highest bearing on anthropological questions, the theory that John Bunyan was a Gipsy. The great secret that civilised Europe has even now amongst it a few individuals who are descended from a Hindoo race, and are capable, by reason of the fact that they have a particularly original soul of their own, to reconcile some of the difficulties between the eastern and the western schools of thought, may be the real future fact of modern anthropology. The difficulty is, of course, where and how to find the Gipsies. We have been much pleased with Mr. Simson’s pamphlet. It is not every writer who has treated the subject in his philosophical manner; and we are glad to perceive that he strongly accents the fact that a person may be a Gipsy and yet be entirely ignorant [not absolutely so] of the Gipsy language. Evidently Mr. Simson has studied anthropological problems at first hand, and apart from the speculators who have regarded language as the first key to the science of man.”—_Public Opinion_, _October_ 15, 1880.

CHARLES WATERTON, NATURALIST.

“That Mr. Simson had a duty—to himself as well as to the public—to perform in justifying his previous remarks about Charles Waterton, by writing this monograph, is unquestionable. Although it is a somewhat difficult task unsparingly to point out the mistakes and shortcomings of a man, when he can no longer defend himself, without seeming to be guilty of an offence against the old rule—_Nil nisi bonum de mortuis_—Mr. Simson may fairly claim credit for having adhered to the Shakespearian advice in regard to fault-finding; for, if he has extenuated nothing, he has set down naught in malice. The example of Charles Waterton, country gentleman and naturalist, may serve as a useful warning to students of natural history, by teaching them that only the most patient investigation and careful reflection can produce results that will be of real and permanent value to science. They have here the example of a man who had most excellent opportunities for such investigations, as well as the strongest taste for their pursuit, and who, by an exact and systematic method of study, might have made most important additions to our knowledge of natural history. But by inaccurate observation, by a certain looseness of statement, and by taking things for granted instead of personally verifying them, he has greatly diminished the value of his labours. Mr. Simson, though his task is to set right the unduly high estimate in which the squire of Walton Hall has been held as a man of science, shows an appreciation of the strong points of his character that completely takes away any appearance of censoriousness; and his work incidentally affords an interesting study of the man himself, who, in his personal life and his enthusiastic devotion to natural history, showed a strong individuality that is quite refreshing in this age of conventionalities.”—_Aberdeen Journal_, _August_ 30, 1880.

* * * * *

AMERICAN EDITION OF 1878, WITH APPENDIX.

210 _Pages_, _Octavo_, _Cloth_. _Price_, $1.25.

CONTRIBUTIONS TO NATURAL HISTORY, AND PAPERS ON OTHER SUBJECTS. BY JAMES SIMSON, EDITOR OF SIMSON’S “HISTORY OF THE GIPSIES.”

NOTICES OF THE BRITISH PRESS.

Dublin University Magazine, July, 1875.

“The principal articles in this volume that have reference to natural history originally appeared in _Land and Water_, and are, in many respects, highly interesting. Concerning vipers and snakes, we are presented with a good deal of information that is instructive, not only as regards their habits generally, but also with respect to points that are in dispute among naturalists.” “For instance, it is a vexed question whether, under any circumstances, the young retreat into the stomach [inside] of the mother snake. A great authority, [?] Mr. Frank Buckland, affirms that they do not; while our author is as positive that they do. And he certainly, with reason, contends that the question is entirely one of evidence, and, therefore, should be settled ‘as a fact is proved in a court of justice; difficulties, suppositions, or theories not being allowed to form part of the testimony. In support of his own views, Mr. Simson has collected a large body of evidence that undoubtedly appears authentic and conclusive.” “Of the miscellaneous papers in this volume, the best is a critical study of the late John Stuart Mill. Taken altogether, the volume is very entertaining, and affords pleasing and instructive reading.”

Evening Standard, June 8, 1875.

“It is with real pleasure we see these Contributions to _Land and Water_ no longer limited to the columns of a newspaper, whatever may be its circulation. For the excellence and charm of these papers we must refer the reader to the volume before us, which cannot fail to interest and instruct its readers. Their variety and range may be gathered from the subjects treated:—Snakes, Vipers, English Snakes, Waterton as a Naturalist, John Stuart Mill, History of the Gipsies, and the Duke of Argyll on the Preservation of the Jews.”

London Courier, June, 1875.

“The Natural History Contributions, which are very interesting, though partaking largely of a controversial nature, deal chiefly with questions affecting snakes and vipers. Of the other Contributions, the most attractive and readable is the one which contests some of Mr. Borrow’s conclusions in his well-known account of the Gipsies. Mr. John Stuart Mill forms the subject of a slashing dissertation, which is not likely to find much favour with the friends of the departed philosopher.”

Rochdale Observer, June 19, 1875.

“The study of natural history has a peculiar charm for most people, but for Lancashire folk it seems to have a special interest. Perhaps the most striking feature of the book at the head of this notice is the variety of topics touched upon; topics which, although apparently incompatible and incongruous, are, nevertheless, both curious and interesting. The author certainly brings a large amount of special knowledge to the discussion of the questions he introduces, and the essays are undoubtedly well written. Our readers will see that the work is full of controversial matter, embracing natural history, theology, and biography, and consequently will suit the taste of those who like to enter into discussions which excite the feelings, and in which abundance of energy and ability is displayed. The book is certainly ably written, and the author shows himself to be a man of large accomplishments.”

Liverpool Albion, June 18, 1875.

“The articles are written in a very readable manner, and will be found interesting even by those who have no special knowledge of natural history or interest in it. The Gipsies are competitors with the snakes for Mr. Simson’s regards, and several papers are devoted to these mysterious nomadic tribes. Perhaps the most curious paper in the volume is written to prove that John Bunyan was a Gipsy, and a very fair case is certainly made out, principally from Bunyan’s own autobiographical statements. With the exception of the papers on John Stuart Mill, to which we have already alluded, and which are far worse than worthless, the book is one which we can recommend.”

Newcastle Courant, June 11, 1875.

“The bulk of these Contributions appeared in _Land and Water_. We think the author has done well to give them to the public in the more enduring form of a well got up volume. The book contains, also, a critical sketch of the career of John Stuart Mill; some gossip about Gipsies; and the Duke of Argyll’s notions about the preservation of the Jews. Altogether, the book is very readable.”

Northern Whig, June 17, 1875.

“This volume consists of Contributions to _Land and Water_ by a writer well-known as the author [editor] of a standard book on the Gipsies, and is evidently the production of a clear, intelligent, and most observant mind. Mr. Simson adds a number of miscellaneous papers, including a masterly, though severe, criticism of John Stuart Mill—‘his religion, his education, a crisis in his history, his wife, Mill and son,’—as well as several desultory papers on the Gipsies, elicited, for the most part, by criticisms on his work on that singular race.”

Western Times, June 29, 1875.

“The preface to this volume is dated from New York, and the contents bear marks of the free, racy style of transatlantic writers. The volume closes with a paper on the ‘Preservation of the Jews.’ The writer deals with his several subjects with marked ability, and his essays form a volume which will pay for reading, and therefore pay for purchasing.”

Daily Review, June 11, 1875.

“We need only mention the other subjects—Waterton as a Naturalist, Romanism, John Stuart Mill, Simson’s History of the Gipsies, Borrow on the Gipsies, the Scottish Churches and the Gipsies, Was John Bunyan a Gipsy? and, of course, the literary ubiquitous Duke of Argyll on the Preservation of the Jews. The only paper we have not ventured to look at is the last, in the dread that on this question the versatile Duke might be found, as in the matter of the Scottish Church, verifying the French proverb—_Il va chercher midi à quatorze heures_—a work in which the author of this volume is an adept, in quiet, quaint, and clever ways, however, which make it interesting.”

NEW YORK: JAMES MILLER.

CONTENTS.

PAGE. VIPERS AND SNAKES GENERALLY 7 WHITE OF SELBORNE ON THE VIPER 10 WHITE OF SELBORNE ON SNAKES 17 SNAKES SWALLOWING THEIR YOUNG 23 SNAKES SWALLOWING THEIR YOUNG 25 SNAKES CHARMING BIRDS 30 MR. FRANK BUCKLAND ON ENGLISH SNAKES 31 MR. GOSSE ON THE JAMAICA BOA SWALLOWING HER YOUNG 33 AMERICAN SNAKES 36 AMERICAN SCIENCE CONVENTION ON SNAKES 36 CHARLES WATERTON AS A NATURALIST 39 ROMANISM 49 JOHN STUART MILL: A STUDY. HIS RELIGION 69 HIS EDUCATION 82 A CRISIS IN HIS HISTORY 90 HIS WIFE 97 MILL AND SON 105 SIMSON’S HISTORY OF THE GIPSIES 111 MR. BORROW ON THE GIPSIES 112 THE SCOTTISH CHURCHES AND THE SOCIAL EMANCIPATION 150 OF THE GIPSIES WAS JOHN BUNYAN A GIPSY? 157 THE DUKE OF ARGYLL ON THE PRESERVATION OF THE JEWS 161 INDEX 171 APPENDIX. I. JOHN BUNYAN AND THE GIPSIES 183 II. MR. FRANK BUCKLAND AND WHITE OF SELBORNE 187 III. MR. FRANK BUCKLAND ON THE VIPER 192 IV. THE ENDOWMENT OF RESEARCH 199

FOOTNOTES.

{7} These two letters, dated the 5th and 19th of May, 1882, were in answer to a short one from a clergyman of the Church of England, acknowledging the receipt of a copy of my _Reminiscences of Childhood_, _etc._, which contained an Appendix on John Bunyan and the Gipsies.

{11a} The text represents the article as originally written.

{11b} I endeavoured, unsuccessfully, to get another reading of this book before saying that “no reference was made in it to mine.” I alluded, from memory, to _my_ part of it. On examination I find that the only indirect reference to it is the following:—“Mr. Simson, in his _History of the Gipsies_ [that is, in the _Disquisition on the Gipsies_] asserts that there is not a tinker or scissors-grinder in Great Britain that cannot talk this language; and my own experience agrees with his declaration, to this extent—that they all have some knowledge of it, or claim to have it, however slight it may be,” (p. 4). I did not express myself so absolutely as represented by Mr. Leland, who did not see fit to mention the double authorship of the book; the subject of which I took up from where it was left by Walter Simson. This double authorship may prove a little confusing to the reader when the book is alluded to.

{11c} See second note at page 19.

{12} In _The English Gipsies_, _etc._, Mr. Leland writes:—“I asked a Copt scribe if he were Muslim, and he replied, ‘_La_, _ana Gipti_’ (‘No, I am a Copt’) pronouncing the word _Gipti_, or Copt, so that it might readily be taken for ‘Gipsy.’ And learning that _romi_ is the Coptic for a man, I was again startled; and when I found _tema_ (tem, land) and other Romany words in ancient Egyptian (_vide_ Brugsch. _Grammaire_, _etc._) it seemed as if there were still many mysteries to solve in this strange language.” Of some Egyptian Gipsies Mr. Leland says that “they all resembled the one whom I have described . . . They all differed slightly, as I thought, from the ordinary Egyptians in their appearance” (p. 193).

{14} Tacitus makes Caius Cassius, in the time of Nero, say:—“At present we have in our service whole nations of slaves, the scum of mankind, collected from all quarters of the globe; a race of men who bring with them foreign rites, and the religion of their country, _or probably no religion at all_.”—_Murphy’s Translation_.

{15} Perhaps the most interesting scene connected with the Gipsy language in Scotland, given in the _History_, is that at St. Boswell’s (pp. 309–318). The word “Tinkler,” assumed by and applied to the Scotch Gipsies, seems to have been used from a desire to escape the legal responsibility attaching to the word “Gipsy.”

{16} It is not only puzzling, but provoking to decide how to treat a writer like Mr. Leland, for sometimes he shows a great deal of knowledge of his subject, and sometimes apparently nothing of it—one assertion contradicting another on the same question. What in reality has an antipathy between birds, or the idea of “people of self-conscious culture and the man and factory,” or the destiny of the American Indians to do with the destiny of the Gipsies? For he says, “Gipsies in England are passing away as rapidly as Indians in North America” (_The English Gipsies_, _Pref. X._). As a native of the United States, Mr. Leland must know that these Indians become extinct, and of the Gipsies in England that although there are comparatively few “dwellers in tents” of full blood, so called, there are many, many thousands of more or less mixed blood following various callings, or in various positions in life, as he has frequently admitted. The distinction between “old-fashioned” Gipsies and other members of the tribe is but trifling with the subject.

The following extracts from _The English Gipsies and their Language_ are interesting:—

“Other writers have had much to say of their incredible distrust of
_Gorgios_ and unwillingness to impart their language, but I have
always found them obliging and communicative” (Pref. V.).—“In every
part of the world it is extremely difficult to get Romany words even
from intelligent Gipsies, _although they may be willing with all
their heart to communicate them_” (p. 17).—“Now the reader is
possibly aware that of all difficult tasks, one of the most difficult
is to induce a disguised Gipsy, or even a professed one, to utter a
word of Romany to a man not of the blood” (p. 37).—“Be it remembered,
reader, that in Germany, at the present day, the mere fact of being a
Gipsy is still treated as a crime” (p. 74).—“Though the language of
the Gipsies has been kept a great secret for centuries, still a few
words have in England oozed out here and there from some unguarded
crevice” (p. 78).—“The very fact that they hide as much as they can
of their Gipsy life and nature from the _Gorgios_ would of itself
indicate the depths of singularity concealed beneath their apparent
life” (p. 153).—“Behind it all . . . . the fierce spirit of social
exile from the world in which they lived . . . and the joyous
consciousness of a secret tongue and hidden ways” (p. 156).—“A
feeling of free-masonry, and of guarding a social secret, long after
they leave the roads and become highly reputable members of society.
But they have a secret, and no one can know them who has not
penetrated it” (p. 174).

With all that has been said, the words which I have put in italics have a curious meaning—that the Gipsies in giving their language to “strangers” “may be willing with all their heart to communicate them”! I have explained this subject at length in the Disquisition (pp. 281 and 282) in reference to Mr. Borrow and others, not in regard to the willingness and stupidity, but the shuffling of the Gipsy in giving the meaning of words, although isolated and abstract ideas might occasionally puzzle some of them; for they translated to Mr. Borrow the Apostles’ Creed, sentence by sentence. The Lord’s Prayer, given by Mr. Borrow, Mr. Leland admits to be “pure English Gipsy” (p. 70). I do not think Mr. Leland states, with what stock of words and how acquired, he first approached the Gipsies, and how he used them, to get inside of the guard of the tribe.

{18} In the Preface to _The English Gipsies and their Language_, Mr. Leland says that all that it contains “was gathered directly from the Gipsies themselves” (v.); that he did not take “anything from Simson, Hoyland, or any other writer on the Romany race in England”; and that nothing is a “re-warming of that which was gathered by others” (x.). All that appears strictly true; yet he says nothing of how he was “put on the track for repeating or illustrating an ‘oft-told tale.’” But he says:—

“If I have not given in this book a sketch of the history of the
Gipsies, or statistics of their numbers, or accounts of their social
condition in different countries, it is because nearly everything of
the kind may be found in the works of George Borrow and Walter
Simson” (xi.).

He did not find much of the kind mentioned in Mr. Borrow’s books, so far as I remember, and omitted to say that I had written very fully on the points stated. It would have been interesting to have been told by Mr. Leland about his being “puzzled and muddled” at what he saw at Cobham Fair, how he came to write, nine years before that, as follows:—

“There have been thousands of _swell_ Romany chals who have moved in
sporting circles of a higher class than they are to be found in at
the present day” (p. 92).—“It may be worth while to state, in this
connection, that Gipsy blood intermingled with Anglo-Saxon, when
educated, generally results in intellectual and physical vigour” (p.
174).—And where was it that he found the idea that John Bunyan was a
member of the Gipsy race (p. 63), if it was not as elaborately given
in my Disquisition?

{19a} One of Mr. Leland’s “confident assertions” is that “the English Gipsy cares not a farthing ‘to know anything about his race as it exists in foreign countries, or whence it came’”; which is not a fact. He seems to have misinterpreted the _English Gipsy_ peculiarity which assimilates _in appearance_ to the _native English_ one, as I have written thus in the _History of the Gipsies_:—“Though Gipsies everywhere, they differ in some respects in the various countries which they inhabit. For example, an English Gipsy of pugilistic tendencies will, in a vapouring way, engage to _thrash_ a dozen of his Hungarian brethren” (p. 359). And of the more mixed kind of Gipsies, I have said:—“In Great Britain the Gipsies are entitled, in one respect at least, to be called Englishmen, Scotchmen, or Irishmen; for their general ideas as men, as distinguished from their being Gipsies, and their language indicate them at once to be such, nearly as much as the common natives of these countries” (p. 372).—What is described very fully throughout the _History_, and especially in the note at pp. 342 and 343, about the different colours or castes of the Gipsies, meets Mr. Leland’s remarks about those who left India. Thus:—“What are full-blood Gipsies, to commence with? The idea itself is intangible; for, by adopting, more or less, wherever they have been, others into their body, during their singular history, a pure Gipsy, like the pure Gipsy language, is doubtless nowhere to be found” (p. 342).

{19b} With the limited space at his disposal for his cyclopædia article, Mr. Leland could not be expected to tell us much in it about the Gipsies. In it he says that “their hair seldom turns gray, even in advanced age, unless there be ‘white’ blood in their veins”; that, “like North American Indians, the Gipsies all walk with their feet straight”; and that “there are nearly 100 English Gipsy family names, most of which are represented in America.” And further:—“At the present day the Romany is the life of the entire vagabond population of the roads in England, it being almost impossible to find a tinker or petty hawker who is not part Gipsy. There are now but a few hundred full-blooded _tent_ Gipsy persons in England (1874), but of . . . house-dwellers, who keep their Gipsy blood a secret, and of half-breeds . . . or of those affiliated by blood, all of whom possess the great secret of the Romany language to a greater or less degree, there are perhaps 20,000.” “The tinkers in England are all Gipsies.”

Including _all_ of “the blood” in _various_ positions in life, there are doubtless _vastly_ more of the tribe in England than 20,000, considering the time they have been in the country, and the healthy and prolific nature of the race.

{21} The same remark applies to _The English Gipsies and their Language_.