All were Gypsies with a broadly comparable fate but not necessarily in contact with each other and without shared aims beyond the self-evident minimum of a desire to be let live in peace to be allowed to earn a living and that their way of life tolerated thus without institutions able to represent their collective interest to the wider world.
The motivation lacking hitherto to represent Gypsy history in an atlas is attributable to Gypsies having been without the staple ingredient of historical atlases: their own realm. Whilst historical atlases can and increasingly do demonstrate other aspects of history they tend to focus on issues concerning national territories. Nonetheless the singular history of the Gypsies as a noteworthy phenomenon warrants its demonstration in maps.This is supported by developments in the last century towards a collective consciousness as of a people evolving among Gypsies. […]
[...] As to identity the chosen approach was to avoid entering into the seeming at times to be somewhat self-serving debate into the intricacies or doubts about the Indian ancestry of all those recognized by their surroundings – and themselves – as Gypsies instead accepting them as such irrespective of lineage. It applies to the Gypsies as to other ethnicities that it is not a requirement in order to follow their history to expect all of the members or even the majority to share a particular lineage. Belonging to an ethnie and having common ancestry are distinct matters.”
