Note 8 — Chapter II · ROUMANIAN-GYPSY STORIES

The word cĭohanó, which throughout I have rendered ‘vampire,’ is of course identical with Paspati’s Turkish-Romani tchovekhano, a ‘revenant’ or spectre, which, according to Miklosich, is an Armenian loan-word, and in other Gypsy dialects of Europe means ‘wizard, witch.’ This vampire story is a connecting link between the two meanings8; but whether the story itself is of Gypsy or of non-Gypsy origin is a difficult question. We have four versions of it—two of them Gypsy, viz., this from Roumania, and one in Friedrich Müller’s Beiträge; and two non-Gypsy, viz., Ralston’s ‘The Fiend’ (Russian Folk-tales, pp. 10–17), and one from Croatia (Krauss’s Sagen und Märchen der Südslaven, i. 293). Hahn’s ‘Lemonitza’ (ii. 27) also offers analogies. Krauss’s and Müller’s are both much inferior to Ralston’s and our Roumanian-Gypsy one; and of them, although Ralston’s opens best, yet its close is immeasurably inferior. For in it, as in the Hungarian-Gypsy variant, the flower transforms itself merely to eat and drink. But Ralston’s story, it will probably be urged, is a typical Russian story, so must needs be of Russian origin. To which I answer, Irish-wise, with the question, How then did it travel to Croatia, to the Gypsies of Hungary and Roumania? That the Gypsies, with never a church, should make church bells might seem unlikely, did we not know that at Edzell, in Forfarshire, there is a church bell that was cast by Gypsies in 1726. So Gypsy story-tellers may well have devised some domestic narratives for their auditors, not for themselves. And this story is possibly theirs who tell it best.