A later opinion is, that the Gipseys are a horde of Tartars, which separated from the multitude under Timur, when he invaded western Asia, about the year 1401. The supposed proofs are:—First, because the Mongols (Mongols and Tartars are here reckoned one and the same people) are just as nomadic as the Gipseys. Secondly, because these have sometimes declared themselves to be Tartars. Thirdly, because the Gipsey king mentioned by Aventin, whose name was Zundel or Zindelo, a Mongol chan, was a descendant from the great Zingis: as Zindelo is a very easy change from Zingis. Fourthly, because among the several states into which the Mongol empire was divided after the death of Zingis, one was called Dsongar, and the members of it Dsongari, which agrees perfectly with Zingari. Fifthly, because the Tartar and Gipsey languages have a great affinity to each other; for during a late war between Russia and the Porte, a commander of Crim Tartars, by name Devlet Gueray, signalised himself very much; and this Devlet is perhaps derived from Devla, the Gipsey appellation for the Deity, and may be a name under which the Tartars reverence any thing respectable. Sixthly, and lastly, because the time of Timur’s expedition agrees very well with the first appearance of the Gipseys.—This is an opinion founded on six points; and one might add, in further conformation of it, that this hypothesis will reasonably determine how the Gipseys, such poor wretches in general, came to be so well stored with gold and silver at their first arrival in Europe, as Stumpf and others assert. If they were part of Timur’s followers, it was very likely to be plunder taken from the people they had conquered.
Of all these grounds, that adduced from the favourable concurrence of chronological events has the most weight, but proves neither more nor less than the bare possibility of the thing. With respect to the first point, it is not so clearly established. The Tartars are herdsmen, and the quality of the pasture for their cattle implies a fixed residence. Gipseys, on the contrary, are ignorant as to tending cattle, nor have they the smallest idea about breeding them. Further, whether they are Tartars, because they represent themselves as such, or have been declared such by other people; whether Zindelo is a Mongol chan, because his name is easily derived from Zingis; whether the language of the Tartars bears a near affinity to that of the Gipseys, because a native of Tartary was found whose name, Devlet, is perhaps derived from the Gipsey word Devla, and as that word among the Gipseys signifies God, it may possibly among the Tartars signify something like it;—all this must be left to the reader’s discretion. If such assertions are admitted for proofs, then the Gipseys must be Bohemians, because they are called so in France. Thus Chiflet must have been of Gipsey or Tartar descent, because his name may possibly be derived from Devla or Devlet. The Franks, too, are probably derived from the Trojans, because Pharamond, their king’s name, may be formed from Priamus. Dsongari and Zingari compared with each other do coincide, except that the latter is only the Latin termination given by the learned. But, besides all this, if the Gipseys must be Tartars at all events, where are the Tartars’ broad faces?—Where is their courage?—Where are the zealous religious principles with which the Tartars honour the Deity, and, upon occasion, fight for him? Finally, with regard to language, this contradicts rather than supports the opinion we are discussing. The language of the Tartars is Turkish; that of the Gipseys is quite different, as will be hereafter proved.