BOOK REVIEW

Title: The Roma-Gypsy Presence in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth 15th – 18

Centuries
Author: Mróz, Lech
Publication: Budapest : Central European University Press. 2015
Pages: 322

SUMMARY

Lech Mórz analysis 400 hundred years worth of documents from different sources in
order to reconstruct, not individual stories, but the collective experience of the Romani -
Gypsy community in the Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth from the first document
mentioning a Cygan (Gypsie) in the first decade of the 14th century until the first half of
the 18th century.

CRITIC

Lech Mórz book spreads out through a little more than 300 pages. Divided into eight
chapters and one final resume of conclusions. This work is based on a detailed literature
and archive research about the presence of gypsies in the Polish-Lithuanian Common
Wealth. It is important, to fully comprehend the thesis of Mórz, to mention that all the
documents gathered in this research can be classified as “official” in nature. This means
that all documents were written by an authority of some kind (local, religious, etc) for a
specific purpose and with legal value and recognition.

Even though it's not directly acknowledge by Mróz, there is a strong deconstructivist
sense in this work. Primary evident by the recurrent preoccupation on the phenomenon
of “representation”. This could explain, as it is mention above, why all documents
selected by the author are “official documents”. Contrary to simple epistolar or personal
documents, where we can only infer the individual author´s thinking, this rather
"institutional" evidence allows us to analyze the logical thinking not only of the writer
but also of the institution that he or she represents, in other words, it allow us to look
into a wider and collective frame of ideas.

The author lays ground his argument by reviewing some of the stereotypes that erosion
the foundation of the contemporary gypsie studies. Although, following a
deconstructionist logic, it is stablished that these stereotypes work within a frame of
predisposing ideas and “evidence.” Given the fact that Mróz is a historian, he focuses
on reviewing the archival documents available to fill up the blanks of this depictions.

Through the book various "forms of representation" get questioned. From

the introduction, Mróz, points out artist and writers in general, according to the author,
they are, in a great manner, responsible to give birth to the “folklore curiosity” image
of gypsies, based mostly in a self indulging bohemian spirit, originated in romanticism
and dragged mostly untouched until present time. From chapter one, the deepest
criticism is directed to scholars. According to Mróz most academic research have
"normalize" a certain type of prejudice assumptions about the gypsie "culture" by
reproducing "unsustained historical statement". Among many misconceptions, the
majority correspond to the most negative representations as criminals, nomads and
fortune tellers.

Even when this repeatedly lack of rigorous analysis could be approach in many different
ways, Mróz use it as proof to a predominant narrative that pushes historians to validate
a "representation" of history that resonates with the one they already have. This in
return reinforce the modern stereotypes in academic and general culture. Puting the
matter in a vicious cycle.

This academic bias as important as it is, it only one of the elements in Mróz proposal.
The same deconstruction methodology its applied to the subjects of the "representation"
itself. Probably one of the most interesting chapters of the book (Chapter 3) focuses on
a certain family - group of gypsies. In a period of 20 years, they utilized the view that
non-gypsies had towards them as an advantage in order to improve their living
conditions as travelers. According to a numerous collection of presentation letters, they
fed the myth of a noble descendence from Egypt minor, in order to gain the simpathy of
those who were responsible to allow them safe passage.

Although the letters presented in this chapter referred to one group only it is established
by Mróz that this strategy was common among various groups contributing, in the long
term, to the foundational ethos of modern Romani communities and organizations.

It is also worth noting that in a faithful postmodern fashion, the author keeps a self-
awareness related to this book itself. Commenting on the selection of the title Mróz says
that he was motivated to use both the Romani -a contemporary term- as well as the
Gypsie adjective, to fulfill with todays rules of political correctness. A declaration such
as this helps us to undoubtedly understand the central role of the concept of
"representation" and "narrative" in the ethos of this book, keeping in mind that even the
author can not escape from them.