PRŒSTEN EILERT SUNDT’S WORKS ON THE NORWEGIAN GIPSIES.

The very important works relating to the Norwegian gipsies which have been compiled and published for the Norwegian Government, by Proesten Eilert Sundt, are peculiarly interesting, not only as affording the most recent and reliable information regarding this singular people, but from the many details and facts which are noted, as to their modes of life, language, religion, customs, and occupations. The first work, “Beretning om Fante-eller Landstrygerfolket i Norge,” published in Christiania in 1850, followed by another edition, published, Christiania, 1852,142 contain the results, and the most reliable information that Proesten Sundt, then a candidate for holy orders, could collect during two years’ patient and persevering research. During this period, he was able to obtain with tolerable accuracy, their probable number, and a great amount of reliable information, relating to their habits, means of existence, and, above all, the prospect of inducing them to abandon their ordinary mode of life. Proesten Sundt had many facilities to aid him in accomplishing this undertaking, with the sanction and authority of the Norwegian Government. He had free access to all local and public records and documents, and thus had unusual opportunities of satisfying himself, from time to time, and testing the truth and falsehood of the accounts given to him by the gipsies. Again, his clerical character was a ready passport to every village clergyman and Proestgaard.

Proesten Sundt describes the Norwegian gipsies as a race of yellowish-brown, black-haired people, having dark, piercing eyes, and who are of foreign and suspicious aspect. Wandering incessantly, up and down the country, they frequent the most devious and solitary roads and ways between Stavanger and Agershuus, and, northwards, away to Throndjhem and Finmark.

Their bands vary in number, and consist of men, women, and children, provided, sometimes, with horses, carts, and some few domestic animals, particularly pigs. They assume the most varied characters, and some of them are tinkers, sievemakers, horsedealers, and horse-doctors, and, in fact, follow many of those occupations generally adopted by the gipsies of every country, as most compatible with a roving life. Proesten Sundt also states that many are plunderers and robbers, and our own experience has clearly shown, that the gipsies, deservedly or otherwise, have acquired a very indifferent reputation in Norway.143 They are clearly regarded with far less favour than in England, where the romantic life they lead has furnished endless incidents for the novel, the drama, and the feuilleton of the press. This, and their strange, wandering life, and mysterious origin, may account in some degree for the passing interest they at times create and obtains for them, here and there, par souffrance though it be, occasional shelter and protection. The earliest mention, according to Proesten Sundt, of the gipsies in Norway, is to be found in an Ordinance of 1589, and he is of opinion that they did not enter by way of Denmark and South Sweden, but through the north of Sweden, and Duchy of Finland; in fact, through North Russia.

Another reason stated by Proesten Sundt, why the gipsies are regarded with a mixed feeling of fear and aversion, is on account of a belief, of which the Norwegian peasant cannot altogether divest himself, that the foreign-looking “Fanter” has power to bewitch both man and beast.

They invest these wanderers with supernatural powers, a power which has occasionally been attributed to some of the peaceful Laplanders, who dwell in Norwegian Finmark; for Laing says, in his work on Norway, page 411, when referring to the Laplanders, “The idea of witchcraft is not entirely worn out; and the bonder have many tales of the supernatural powers of the old fjelde women.”

Originally, these wanderers were all of pure gipsy blood; but in recent times they have gradually become, in many instances, mixed with a section of the Norwegian population, vagrant outcasts or “Skoiern,” a class which they would at one time have refused all intercourse with; and the result is, the occasional mixture of fair-haired children.

The blending of such a strain of Norwegian blood would not improve, but rather have a deteriorating effect. This has not happened to the same extent in England, where the admixture has often been from those of the better class of the English population, to the proportionate advantage of the gipsy tribe.

Yet, even in England, there is a feeling among gipsies, once still stronger than it is, against mixed marriages, and one of their own people is generally preferred to the gorgios.

Since the beginning of the present century, Norwegian laws relating to gipsies have been made much less stringent, and therefore more easily enforced. The regulations, also, with regard to all persons being required, at a certain age, to know how to read and write, and to be confirmed, has consigned many gipsies to prison, until they were sufficiently instructed, as mentioned at page 301 of this work.

From inquiries made by Proesten Sundt, it appears that gipsies who remember “the good old times,” deeply lament their admixture with other blood, and formerly, according to their accounts, a gipsy woman who had consorted with a fair-skinned man, became “food for fire;” that is, she was tied to a stake, and burnt. In the case of male offenders, the old gipsy law was less severe; for they were expelled the tribe. His doom—“fallen i brodt”—was pronounced, and he became an outcast for ever.

It would appear that Proesten Sundt’s efforts to reclaim the Norwegian gipsies met with little success, and he found much which led him to fear, that it is very improbable they will ever adopt the habits of civilised life. An irrepressible desire to wander seems natural to the race; and even their children, adopted and well-treated by farmers and clergymen of the country, generally run away to the woods, in search of their relatives, as soon as they are able. From the accounts given by Proesten Sundt, it would seem that the Norwegian gipsies are much lower in morality than the gipsies of some other countries. It is a mere chance if they are baptized; they seldom, if ever, frequent church; an impenetrable mystery surrounds the death of their aged people. No Norwegian pastor has ever been present at the burial of a gipsy, unless, indeed, we except such as may have died in prison. Though Proesten Sundt carefully questioned the gravediggers of the parishes wherever he went, one alone was able to remember that he had once dug a grave for a gipsy.144

Nothing being known as to what becomes of their dead, it is not singular that the Norwegian people believe that the gipsies kill their aged parents and relatives, to save themselves the trouble of taking care of them. This conclusion is quite contrary to our own experience of the English gipsies, who exhibit great affection towards their aged people, many of whom have survived to great ages, receiving to the last constant care and attention.145

Proesten Sundt says the gipsies vehemently deny that they kill their old people, but state that, in former days, the aged people killed themselves, and that even yet, weak folk end their days as their fathers did.

It may be imagined by some, that the gipsies may have been of the same race as the nomadic Laplanders, but it is conclusively shown that the Norwegian “Tatare” or “Fantefolket” are not in any way belonging, either in blood, or in language, to the Laplander of Finmark. With regard to language, it is entirely different, and we have extracted from Proesten Sundt’s work, published in 1852, some words of comparison between the Norwegian gipsy and the Norwegian Lap, having added the synonymous English, English gipsy, Hindee, and Sanscrit words.

From this comparison of words, it appears that the Romany has no resemblance or affinity to the Lap; whilst the similarity of the Norwegian Tater, or gipsy language, to that spoken by the gipsies of all the countries of which examples are given, leaves no doubt that they speak one language, peculiar to themselves.

The Norwegian gipsies are mentioned as a warlike race, travelling with weapons, especially knives, and a dangerous weapon, called “Tjukei.” This weapon, used by the Norwegian gipsies, is most commonly made of Bamboo cane, and is about the length of a walking stick, being covered with hide or leather. The middle of it, where it is held, is covered with brass, and both ends of the “tjukei” are heavily loaded with lead. It is formidable, and a blow from it is often most dangerous. The Norwegian gipsies use this weapon with much skill, twirling it round in their hand with wonderful rapidity, passing it dexterously from one hand to the other, in an almost imperceptible manner, a feat which enables them to continue the combat after an arm is disabled, and also to attack their opponent where it is least expected. The “tjukei” seems to be used in similar manner to the Irish shillaly, with which an Irishman is so expert.

As the Tinklers, or Scottish gipsies, the Norwegian gipsies seem to have had their feuds and disagreements, ending in severe fighting and bloodshed. Their animosity and feelings of revenge were doubly dangerous, from the uncontrolled and strong impulses of their nature, the full extent of which can scarcely be comprehended by a kairengro, or housedweller. Even in England, curious instances of wild revenge have occasionally occurred, resulting in the death of one party. On the occasion of such contentions in Norway, the women often join in the fray, and an instance of the ferocity of the gipsy women is given by PrÆsten Sundt, as occurring at Ullensaker, some time since, at a fight which took place between two strong bands of Norwegian gipsies, which was long remembered in the district. Two of the gipsy women there fought with such violence and determination, that at last they stood face to face, without a shred of clothes left for their comfort and convenience.

This hostile encounter of Norwegian Tatare is similar to some of the gipsy contests mentioned by Simpson as occurring occasionally between bands of Scotch gipsies; One fight occurred at Rommano, on the 1st October, 1677, between two gipsy clans—the Fawes and the Shawes—about some spoil, after Haddington fair, when old Sandie Fawe and his wife were both killed, and George Fawe dangerously wounded. In the February following, old Robin Shawe and his three sons were hung for killing Sandie Fawe and his wife. Dr. Pennecuik erected on the spot a dove-cote to commemorate the battle, with the following inscription:—

Another fierce contest is described as having occurred in the spring of the year 1772 or 1773, the battle originating from the encroachments of one tribe on the district assigned to another, the fertile source of many gipsy quarrels.

This battle happened near Hawick, and, according to Simpson, the celebrated Alexander Kennedy, a handsome, athletic man, at the head of his tribe, with little Wull Ruthven, the father-in-law of Kennedy, and commonly known over the country as the Earl of Hell, and Muckle Wull Ruthven, a man of uncommon stature and personal strength, with Kennedy’s wife, Jean Ruthven, and a great number of inferior members of the clan, males and females, including children, were opposed to old Robert Tait, Chieftain of his horde, whose forces consisted of Jacob Tait, young Robert Tait, three of Tait’s sons-in-law, Jean Gordon, old Tait’s wife, and a train of youths of both sexes, of various ages, composing his family adherents. The whole of the gipsies were armed with cudgels, except some of the Taits, who carried cutlasses, and pieces of iron hoop, notched and serrated, and fixed at the end of sticks.

This fray appears to have been prolonged with desperate determination, both parties observing silence, and nothing being heard but the heavy rattle of their sticks, till at last the Earl, who had retired to get his wounds dressed, seeing his daughter, Kennedy’s wife, dreadfully wounded, lost heart, and, with the rest of his party, fled, leaving Kennedy alone, with the infuriated Taits striking at him on all sides. Kennedy, who handled his cudgel with extraordinary dexterity, judiciously retreated to the narrow bridge of Hawick, where he was severely pressed by the Taits, and there is little doubt they would have killed him, but for his advantageous position. With one powerful sweep of his cudgel, he disarmed two of the Taits, and felled another to the ground. Kennedy’s determined stand, single-handed, without a follower left, against all the Taits, excited a warm interest and sympathy in his favour among the inhabitants of the town, who had witnessed the conflict with amazement and horror. When Kennedy broke a cudgel on his enemies with his powerful arm, they handed him another, till at length a party of constables arrived to his relief, and apprehended the Taits; but as none of the gipsies were actually slain, the Taits were afterwards set at liberty. In this battle, it was said that every gipsy, except Alexander Kennedy, the brave chief, was severely wounded. Simpson remarks, that what astonished the inhabitants, was the fierce and stubborn disposition of the gipsy females, who, when they were knocked down senseless to the ground, rose again with redoubled vigour and energy for the fight. This conflict was called by the English gipsies, the “Battle of the Bridge.”

Many other instances could be given with regard to gipsy contests; but enough is before the reader to show that the wild, lawless life of the Norwegian gipsies was formerly equalled by those of Great Britain, especially in Scotland, where they often carried arms, and in some instances, their bands were attached to some noble house, from whom they derived occasionally protection. It is a peculiar feature of their history, that in almost every country through which they wandered, they have at times drawn upon themselves the strongest hostility of the administrators of the law, and very often a policy of extermination; yet they have still managed to survive, as a distinct people, still clinging to many of their hereditary usages and nomadic habits with singular tenacity.

Proesten Sundt observes, that it is strange, living, as they do, in small detached bands, they should still retain so many usages, traditions, and habits in common. The true reason he conceives to be, that their meetings are more frequent than we could suppose possible.

On the authority of an old gipsy, he states that when a band comes to cross roads, they are accustomed to place on the right-hand side of the one they are following, some small twigs of fir, upon which they lay a small stone, in order that the wind may not displace them. Any one passing who does not know the meaning of the sign, either does not attach any importance to it, or, at most, thinks that a child has been there at play. The object of the sign is to show to another band where they may meet with their own people; and it is always of great service to such good “Romany” as may require food and shelter, to be able thus to distinguish the route by the sign called the “patron,” placed at intervals on some gipsy trail.

In the winter, the Norwegian gipsies use another sign, which they make in the snow with their whips. The sign is called by them “faano,” and resembles a sack with the mouth closed.

These two signs are very useful when two bands agree to travel in company; for, in order to avoid attracting attention, they are obliged to have always at least one day’s journey between the two parties; and it is by the aid of these signs, they are able to follow each other with ease. At times, too, messengers pass between the bands, to give timely warning should the authorities he in pursuit of them.

Proesten Sundt cautiously hesitated to believe this, as well as much which the gipsies told him; but the authority of Borrow upon this subject, and from the practical and certain information we ourselves have gained, as to the use of “patrins,” leave no reason to doubt the truth of the account given by the Norwegian gipsy.

In August, 1855, a royal proclamation, in reference to further efforts to be made to control and reclaim, if possible, all Norwegian and Swedish gipsies, gave additional evidence of the interest with which they were regarded by the authorities, and a large sum of money having been voted by the “Storthing,” Proesten Sundt was enabled to publish his work, “Forsat Beretning om Fantefolket.” Christiania: 1859.147 In this work the author gives most minute particulars concerning the success of his efforts, and quotes the cases of upwards of four hundred individuals, who had been maintained at the charge of the State, during the years 1855-9, at a comparatively trifling expense. The children had also, in most cases, been placed with peasant families. Proesten Sundt gives a vivid picture of the vicissitudes in life of the gipsies, who, however, cannot be said to be neglected by the authorities. In 1862, Proesten Sundt issued a small volume, entitled “Anden Aars Beretning om Fantefolket,” which contains many interesting and additional particulars relative to the Norwegian gipsies. This was followed by a Special Report of 56 pages, issued in 1863, and a small volume of 113 pages, published in 1865, both relating to the Norwegian gipsies.