Project Education of Roma | History Roma Children Council Conseil of Europe de l´Europe in Europe Internment in France 5.3 1940 - 1946 Internment in France

1940 - 1946 Marie-Christine Hubert

Identifying “Gypsies” and Tracking their Movements | Compulsory Residence Orders for “Nomads” in the Third Reich | Internment in the Unoccupied Zone | Internment in the Occupied Zone | After the Liberation | Daily Life in the Camps | Cases of Deportation from French Internment Camps

In France there were two different but parallel approaches to the so-called “Gypsy question”. The French approach of using internment as a way of bringing the “Tsiganes” (“Gypsies”) into the mainstream of society prevailed over the German approach of internment as the first step to mass murder. Thus France’s Roma, unlike those living in other countries under German occupation, were not exterminated in the camp at Auschwitz. However, they did not escape persecution: whole families were interned in special camps throughout the country, both during and after the occupation.

Introduction Internment Camps for “gypsies” 4 Zone governed from the in France during World War II German headquarters in Brussels Whereas in the 1930s in Germany the Ill. 1 (by Jo Saville and Marie-Christine Hubert, from Bul- so-called “Gypsy question” was view- letin Association des Enfants Cachés, No. 8 March 1998) 4 ed as a complex one, involving racial, NB. The other interment camps for Jews are not shown 3 Zone annexed social and cultural features, French on this map by Germany authorities, although drawing upon a 1 Forbidden zone 1 well-established tradition of anti-“Gy- Louviers 2 Restricted psy” resentments, followed a more or Zone 3 less social approach in their need to Montlhery deal with the “Gypsy problem”. Avo- PlenÉe Jugon 5 Coray Rennes St-Maurice 2 iding public use of racial criteria, they Pontivy Montsûrs aux-riches postulated a population category in Grez-en-bouËre Coudrecieux Hommes Peigney choisel Mulsanne Jargeau 1912, “nomads”, which, although ne- Moisdon-le-riviÈre ver clearly defined, meant “Gypsies” Motreuil-bellay Moloy exclusively. From then on life for Roma La Morelierie Arc-et-Senans in France became more and more diffi- Poitiers cult. In 1940 the first “Gypsies” were Monsireigne interned in camps both in the occupied 6 “Free” zone until 5 Zone under th and the unoccupied parts of the country. occupation nov. 11 1942 About half of the pre-war “Gyp- Les Alliers 6 sy” population of France, some 13,000 people, were interned in special camps MÉrignac 7 Italian zone from Nov. 11th 7 throughout the country. Apart from 1942* to Sept. 8th 1943, then being interned, they suffered diseases under german rule (inc. corse) and hunger and, in many cases, were recruited for forced labour. Although Demarcation line there are no records of mass depor- until Nov. 11th 1942 saliers tation on racial grounds until the end Rivesaltes of the war, not even in the occupied Lannemezan La BarcarÉs part of France, at least more than 200 argÈlÉs “Gypsies” of French origin were mur- dered in Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald Main French internment camps for “nomads” * “Départements” as in that period and Auschwitz-Birkenau. Internment camps where “Gypsies” and Jews were held at the same or at different times Identifying “Gypsies” and Tracking their Movements Compulsory Residence Orders for “Nomads” in the Third Reich Internment in the Unoccupied Zone Internment in the Occupied Zone

Ill. 3 (Detail) Ill. 2 Decree-law of April 6, 1940. Article 1 reads: “La circulation des no- “Nomads” in the camp at Montreuil-Bellay (Département mades est interdite sur la totalité du territoire métropolitain pour la Maine-et-Loire), 1944. This was the biggest internment camp durée de la guerre.” (The circulation of the “nomads” is prohibited in for “nomads” in France, with up to 1,000 people interned. France for the duration of the war.) (from Hubert 1999, p. 76) (from the archives of the Département Bouches-du-Rhône)

an exaggerated sense of insecurity in traders) and “nomads”. Article 3 of the Identifying “Gypsies” and people‘s minds whilst, at the same time, law, defining the category of “nomads”, Tracking their Movements the laws against vagrancy and begging directly targeted Roma. From that time were proving ineffective at curbing the on the French authorities used only the There had been Roma in France since itinerant way of life. one term “nomads” to encompass Roma the 15th century, but they again came to In 1895 the government con- and “Gypsies” of all kinds. [Ill. 4] official notice only at the end of the 19th ducted a census of all itinerants. It recor- This new administrative catego- century. It was at this time that Roma ded more than 400,000 itinerant people, ry was subjected to multiple constraints. freed from slavery in the Principalities 25,000 of them “nomads” travelling as Every individual aged 13 and over was of Romania arrived in France and the groups in caravans. Faced with pressu- required to carry an “anthropometric re- rest of Western Europe. Many of these re from public opinion, the legislators cord card” containing the particulars of Roma joined the already sizeable num- worked from 1907 to 1912 to draft new the civil status, two photographs (side bers of itinerant people (other Roma, laws aimed at identifying itinerants and and full-face views), his fingerprints and seasonal workers, vagabonds, travelling tracking their movements. information on his physical characteris- merchants, beggars, vagrants) who ro- On July 16, 1912, the government tics. If he stopped in any district he had amed the French countryside in search enacted a law which particularly targe- to have his card stamped by a public of- of a better life during a period of econo- ted Roma, though it was addressed to all ficial, both on arrival and departure. The mic hardship. itinerants. The “Loi sur l’exercice des head of the family also had a group card The “Tsiganes” (“Gypsies”) professions ambulantes et la réglemen- showing the civil status of everyone were especially stigmatised. They were tation de la circulation des nomades” travelling with him. Vehicles carried a blamed for every conceivable crime – (Law on the Exercise of Travelling Oc- special registration plate. Records were thieving, pilfering, poaching, swindling, cupations and Control of the Movement now held on “nomads” in prefectures child abduction and even for spreading of Nomads) distinguishes three cate- and at the Ministry of Interior. The aut- disease. The press blew up these real gories of travelling people: “travelling horities knew who they were and could or supposed offences, helping to spread merchants”, “forains” (itinerant market track their movements. [Ill. 5]

With the war, the vice tightened around the spies, they were gradually excluded from Compulsory residence Roma. Along with communists and foreig- society and effectively banished. orders for “nomads” ners, they were in effect the first French On October 22, 1939, a military in the third reich victims of the conflict. Suspected of being decree prohibited them from travelling in

  Council of Europe Roma | History Project Education of Roma Children in Europe

Internment in France 5.3 1940 - 1946

Ill. 4 “Law on the Exercise of Travelling Occupations and Control of the Movement of Nomads” “Regardless of nationality, all persons travelling in France who have no domicile or fixed abode and do not come into any of the categories stipulated above shall be deemed to be nomads, even if they have assets or claim to exercise an occupation. These nomads must Ill. 5 carry an anthropometric record card.” Anthropometric record card. (translated from the Official Journal of July 19, 1912) (from the archives of the Département Bouches-du-Rhône)

eight “départements” of Western France public banned itinerants from travelling prefect then published a decree requi- and from making camp in two “départe- anywhere in metropolitan France for ring them to be resident in one or more ments” (Indre-et-Loire, Maine-et-Loire). the duration of the war and made them designated districts. As no budget had The military authorities invoked Article subject to compulsory residence orders. been adopted for implementing the de- 5 of the Law on the State of Siege which Officially, this measure was meant to re- cree, the “nomads” were allowed to dated from August 9, 1849, and had pre- duce the risks of espionage; unofficially move around within a specified radius viously been used during World War I to the aim was to force the “Tsiganes” to to find work and the means to provide justify interning the “Gypsies” in “clea- settle. [Ill. 3] for themselves. The invasion by Ger- rance camps” and “suspects’ camps”. The gendarmerie initially car- man troops in May 1940 prevented that On April 6, 1940, a legislative ried out a census of “nomads” carry- this decree was implemented country- decree issued by the president of the re- ing an anthropometric record card. The wide.

at Argelès-sur-Mer (Pyrénées-Orien- 1941, the prefect of Hautes-Pyrénées Internment in the tales) by October 30, 1940. They were assembled all the “département” ’s “no- unoccupied zone then transferred to the camps at Barcarès mads” on the Lannemezan plateau, and and Rivesaltes and in November 1942 to then placed them in a ruined hospital gu- The Roma in Alsace-Lorraine, like the the camp at Saliers (Bouches-du-Rhône). arded by the gendarmerie. Jews, were expelled to the unoccup- [Ills. 6, 7] Between October 1940 and Au- ied zone where the Vichy Government In the rest of the unoccupied zone gust 1944 some 1,400 “nomads” were imposed compulsory residence orders compulsory residence orders remained interned in the two camps in the unoccu- (“assignations à residence”) on them or the norm. In reality the fate of the Roma pied zone, by sole decision of the Vichy interned them in camps originally built depended on the goodwill of the pre- Government. The German invasion of to house Spanish republicans. Thus 376 fects, who could intern any “nomads” the zone in November 1942 had no bea- “Gypsies” were being held in the camp they judged undesirable. Thus, in April ring on their fate.

On October 4, 1940, the German guard. The French authorities were in Internment High Command in France ordered the charge of organising the whole ope- in the transfer of “Gypsies” in the occupied ration, the Germans simply giving a occupied zone zone to camps under French police few instructions: families were not to

  After the Liberation

Pleenee jugon jargeau grez en bouere 10/40 09/04/42 22/11/40 - 01/06/46 23/10/40 montreuil bellay 12/40 08/11/41 19/01/45 Montsurs 16/12/40 03/08/42 PONTIVY 13/05/42 Louviers 10/40 moisdon la riviere Mulsanne 17/11/40 peigney 07/11/40 15/04/42 01/12/41 01/09/41 22/11/40 07/05/41 02/03/41 08/07/42 15/04/42 coray jargeau 01/11/40 01/12/41 05/03/41 - 31/12/45 arc et senans choisel coudrecieux 06/41 02/03/41 05/11/40 la morellerie 10/42 06/12/40 08/11/41 11/09/43 07/41 montlhery lannemezan moloy 27/11/40 01/04/41-1944 barenton été 41 21/04/42 11/04/41 09/10/42 monsireigne 12/41 15/07/42 24/10/40 boussais argeles sur mer le barcares rivesaltes 18/11/40 11/40 10/40 poitiers 12/40 12/42 10/40 29/12/43 24/11/44 rennes saint maurice Merignac saliers 10/40 - 12/44 21/06/41 - 18/12/45 10/40

Ill. 6 Internment of “Gypsies” in France from 1940 to 1946: camp-by-camp chronology of arrivals, transfers and releases. (from Hubert 1999, p. 68)

be split up, children were to be given ve legality, had published a prefectural set up on an urgent and ad hoc basis in schooling. internment decree which thus transfor- October 1940. “Nomads” held in Mé- From mid-October the “Feld- med a German order into a French le- rignac (Gironde) and Boussais (Deux- kommandanten” (field marshals) gave gal act. In this way, in the eye of public Sèvres), for example, were moved to the prefects instructions on how to en- opinion and the internees, the responsi- the Route de Limoges camp in Poitiers force the order, specifying which people bility for internment lay with the French (Vienne). At the end of December 1940 were concerned: “All persons of French authorities alone. The internment of the about 1,700 “nomads” and “forains” or foreign nationality who have no fixed “Gypsies” was a German initiative car- were interned in 10 camps. [Ills. 8, 10- abode and who roam the occupied region ried out by the French authorities. 12] in the Gypsy manner (“nomads” and “fo- By October 31, 1940, some 400 In Eastern France camps were set rains”), whether or not they are in pos- “nomads” were already interned in six up from April 1941 onwards. In the Dé- session of an anthropometric record card camps in the occupied zone. The pace of partement Doubs, Roma were interned or personal identity card.” internment quickened after the publica- in the former Royal Saltworks of Arc-et- Unlike the French, the Germans tion of the German order of November Senans, a building which is now a UN- defined “Gypsies” in very broad terms. 22, 1940, which prohibited the exercise ESCO World Heritage Site. In the Dé- They applied racial, but also social cri- of travelling occupations in 21 “départe- partement Yonne, they were held in the teria. Both nomadic and settled persons, ments” in Western France. At the same forecourt of a disused railway station at whether integrated into society or not, time the Roma were expelled from the Saint-Maurice-aux-Riches-Hommes. were designated as “Gypsies”. Knowing coastal zone, together with Jews and fo- At the end of 1941, about 3,200 that since 1912 the French only official- reigners. The Germans themselves then “nomads” and “forains” were interned in ly recognised persons who carried an an- expelled and interned all those they re- 15 camps. Chief among these were Jar- thropometric record card as “Gypsies”, garded as “Gypsies”: “nomads” who car- geau (Loiret), Poitiers (Vienne), Mois- in 1940 the Germans tried to impose ried an anthropometric record card but don-la-Rivière (Loire-Inférieure) and their own definition of a “Gypsy”, but also “forains”, settled persons publicly Coudrecieux (Sarthe). without success. known to be “Gypsies” and “asocials” In November 1941 the Germans The gendarmes applied the Ger- such as tramps and other vagrants. decided to reorganise these camps in or- man definition only in that they carried These numerous internments der to reduce their running costs, ease out their arrests on the basis of the pre- made it necessary for more structured the pressure on guards and stop the fectural decree published in their “dépar- camps to be opened, to receive the “no- many escapes. Like the “Zigeunerlager” tement”. The prefects, anxious to preser- mads” interned in camps that had been (“Gypsy” camps) in Germany or Aust-

  Council of Europe Roma | History Project Education of Roma Children in Europe

Internment in France 5.3 1940 - 1946

“Show” camp at Saliers (Bouches- du-Rhône)

The camp at Saliers (Bouches-du-Rhône) has a special history because it was designed as a propa- ganda instrument. In an attempt to refute Swiss and American press allegations that too many oppo- nents of the Nazi regime were dying in internment in the south of France, the government decided to set up “show” camps. Following the failure of the camps at Noé and Récébédou (“hospital” camps that soon had to be closed because of bad conditions for internees), in March 1942 it decided to set up a camp exclusi- vely for “nomads”. Based in the Camargue where there is a certain “Gypsy” tradition, it resembled a typical village of the region. Once again this was a dismal failure: the beaten earth floors dissol- ved into mud whenever it rained, the cabins were crawling with parasites, etc. Internees escaped en Ill. 8 masse. Main entrance to the Route de Limoges Camp at Poitiers (Départment Hau- Ill. 7 te-Vienne) (from Hubert 1999, p. 74)

ria, these camps were now organised on in three different “départements”, 18 the numbers peaked at 1,018 internees. a regional basis. Coudrecieux, Montlhéry and Moisdon- [Ill. 2] This was the background for the la-Rivière, were moved to the camp at In January 1943 some 2,200 “no- establishment of the biggest internment Mulsanne (Sarthe). On August 3, 1942, mads” were interned in eight camps. The camp for “nomads”, the camp at Montreuil- the 717 internees were transferred to drop in numbers when the camps were Bellay (Maine-et-Loire). Between April Montreuil-Bellay to join internees moved reorganised is due to the release of “fo- and July 1942 internees from camps there from two other camps. On August rains”.

The correspondence between the Gene- camps – made it possible to revise the After the Liberation ral Inspectorate for the Camps and the number of Roma interned in France General Inspectorate of Administra- downwards. Up to 1992 an estimate tive Services is highly revealing: both of 30,000 was widely accepted. A new The transfers continued even after the parties agreed that internment should figure was arrived at by checking the liberation. On January 19, 1945, the be replaced by compulsory residence camp records held in “départemental” “nomads” in Montreuil-Bellay were orders. This piece of legerdemain en- archives and more precisely by analy- moved to two other camps. Though abled the authorities to remain within sing the numbers camp by camp. Ta- some were freed, 734 “nomads” were the law, since the decree making “no- king care not to count the same peo- still being held in three camps. In De- mads” subject to compulsory residence ple several times over, we calculated cember 1945 the camps at Jargeau orders was still in force. figures of 4,600 internees in the occu- and Saint-Maurice were finally closed Only with the law of May 10, pied zone and 1,400 in the free zone, down and their internees released. 1946, which set the statutory date for that is to say a total of 6,000 internees. Unlike other victims of the oc- the cessation of hostilities and de facto Given that some records are incom- cupying forces, the Roma were not repealed the decree of April 6, 1940, plete, it can be assumed that between systematically liberated after the sum- did the authorities agree to release the 6,000 and 6,500 people were interned mer of 1944, or even after May 8, Roma unconditionally. Les Alliers, the as “nomads” in 30 French internment 1945. Just like the Vichy Government, last internment camp for “nomads”, camps, or roughly half the Roma po- the new French authorities viewed in- was then closed down on June 1, 1946. pulation present in France in 1939. ternment of the “nomads” as a first An update of the many transfers [Ill. 1] step towards forcing them to settle. – some internees served time in 4 or 5

  Daily Life in the Camps Cases of Deportation from French Internment Camps

Ill. 9 Ill. 10 “Gypsy” internees at the Rivesaltes camp. Huts used to house “nomads” in the Route de Limoges camp in Poitiers (Vienne). (from Hubert 1999, p. 67) (from National Archives, photographic section (NAps), F7 15109, January 6, 1942)

mises rapidly became uninhabitable. The Internment was all the more dif- DAILY LIFE IN THE CAMPS beds no longer had mattresses or blan- ficult in that the “nomads” had to cope kets. The huts were infested by fleas and on their own. Unlike other categories lice. In Haute-Marne the “nomads” were of internees, they received no aid from France’s Roma were interned on Ger- interned in a disused fort which no longer outside. They could not count on their man orders with the collaboration of the had doors, windows or running water. At own families, which were also interned French authorities and the assent of the Mulsanne the huts were roofed with cor- or were too poor to help, and they had majority of public opinion, which re- rugated iron, freezing in winter and stif- no help from charity which did a great mained totally indifferent to the fate of lingly hot in summer. Where they could, deal for other categories of internees. So the people interned. the Roma preferred to live in their cara- they were not able to supplement their More than 90% of these were of vans rather than in huts which were insa- rations, as other internees did. Only the French nationality. Many foreign Roma nitary and unsuited to their way of life. Red Cross, the Secours National chari- seem to have left the country at the out- The Roma suffered from the cold ty and one or two religious foundations break of war. Some were interned as fo- because they no longer had any clothes. came to their aid – in isolated cases. reigners in camps in Southern France, These had been left in their caravans, Despite all this, severe cachexia and such as Gurs. which in turn had usually been aban- oedemas so widespread elsewhere were One of the main features of the doned at the roadside when their owners not very common. [Ills. 2, 6-13] Roma’s internment was that whole fami- were arrested. Having no fuel, the inter- Internment may not have been lies were held together. In contrast to the nees at Moisdon-la-Rivière had no opti- an initiative of the French authori- Jews, the men were not separated from on but to burn the floor boards of their ties, but they made use of it as a way their women and children. The integrity huts for heating. of bringing the “Tsiganes” into the of the family group was fully respected. According to numerous reports, mainstream of society. The children Children made up 30–40% of all inter- they also went hungry. In some camps were sent to school, usually within the nees. such as Coray (Finistère), the adminis- confines of the camp. In the camps at The Roma spent these six years of tration made no provision for feeding Les Alliers and Saliers orphans and confinement in conditions of the greatest them. The men worked outside the camp children abandoned or temporarily se- hardship. Often the camps were built on while the women and children stayed in- parated from their parents were placed a plain or a hillside at the mercy of the side, to dissuade the men from escaping. in the care of welfare authorities or elements, as at Lannemezan. They were Elsewhere the funds earmarked were in- religious institutions. The authorities poorly equipped or even insanitary. Not sufficient or arrived late, especially du- thought that on their own the children being designed for this purpose, the pre- ring the first few months. could be “socialised”, provided they

  Council of Europe Roma | History Education of Roma Children in Europe

5.3 Internment in France 6-7 / 8 1940 - 1946

Ill. 11 Ill. 12 Camp infirmary at Mérignac (Gironde). Interior of barracks at camp Mérignac (Départment Gironde). (from NAps, F7 15099, February 18, 1942) (from Hubert 1999, p. 74)

had no further contact with their origi- occupied countries, including the At- permission from the prefect in the dis- nal environment. lantic Wall, and later for the Compulso- trict of their arrival and departure and For the adults, social integration ry Labour Service. The numbers requi- sometimes from the German authori- was through work. In addition to their sitioned were quite small because many ties. Once released, they were subject to usual duties, internees worked for pri- internees escaped. The Germans were compulsory residence orders under the vate companies inside the camp itself. also reluctant to take on a workforce, decree of April 6, 1940. In very extreme Others worked outside the camp, in far- which they judged to be “unskilled and cases, the local population who did not ms and forestry holdings but always gu- work-shy”. want the Roma their area, successfully arded by a few gendarmes. Part of their It was extremely difficult for applied for them to be re-interned. pay was withheld to meet the cost of Roma to gain their freedom. They had The Roma did everything they their internment. to own a house or produce a proof of ac- possibly could to escape. The camp at The Germans also requisitioned commodation certificate, be accepted by Arc-et-Senans was closed down in Sep- this workforce for the Todt Organisa- their host locality, have a clean record tember 1943 because so many people es- tion, which built major projects in the of conduct from the camp, and obtain caped from it.

Route de Limoges camp in Poitiers, had been sent were not skilled workers, Cases of deportation supposedly, according to the camp com- they sent them to the Nazi concentrati- from French mandant, to work in factories in Germa- on camps. internment camps ny. In fact, these Roma never reached According to various reports yet the German factories. They were moved to be corroborated by other sources, the For a variety of reasons the Nazis ne- to the Royallieu camp in Compiègne events in Poitiers were not unusual. It ver ordered the deportation of France‘s before being transferred to Oranien- seems that Roma subject to compulsory Roma to Auschwitz for extermination. burg-Sachsenhausen on January 23. On residence orders in the unoccupied zone Therefore, there was no mass deportation June 23 another 25 men were moved to were arrested by the French authorities on racial grounds. Some Roma interned Compiègne. On June 26, 23 of them left and then handed over to make up the la- in France, however, were deported to the for Buchenwald. Why? It seems that bour quotas demanded by the Germans. camps at Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald the prefecture handed over these Roma Then, like the Roma from the Poitiers and even Auschwitz-Birkenau. to the Germans so that young, settled camp, these unfortunates were sent to On January 13, 1943, 70 men workers would be spared. Once the the Nazi concentration camps and not to between the ages of 16 and 60 left the Germans realised that the people they factories in Germany.

  Council of Europe Roma | History Project Education of Roma Children in Europe

Internment in France 5.3 1940 - 1946

Ill. 13 Camp at Saint-Maurice-aux-Riches-Hommes (Yonne). (from NAps, F7 15110, June 1943)

The camp records for Ausch- for places close to the camp. They then The deportation was carried out witz-Birkenau reveal traces of about returned to their region of origin where under the “Auschwitz Decree” of De- 40 Belgian and French Roma interned they were rounded up by the Germans cember 16, 1942, according to which in France from 1940 to 1943. Arrested in the autumn of 1943, interned in the all “Gypsies” in the Greater Reich were on the outskirts of Rouen (Seine-Infé- Dossin barracks in Mechelen/Malines to be deported to the camp at Ausch- rieure), these Roma were interned at (Belgium) and then deported to Ausch- witz-Birkenau. It is the only recor- Montlhéry and then at Montreuil-Bel- witz as part of Convoy Z on January ded deportation from French territory lay. In summer 1943 they were freed 15, 1944. This convoy included 144 which was made on racial grounds. and given compulsory residence orders French Roma.

CONCLUSION the goal set by French authorities right measures likely to encourage the “no- at the start of the 20th century, namely mads” to settle once they left the France’s Roma escaped exterminati- forcing the Roma to settle, since the camps: schooling for the children, on because France was not part of the nomadic way of life was seen as the work for the adults, Christian teaching Greater Reich. But they did not escape only thing preventing them from being for all and compulsory residence or- internment. Although ordered by the integrated into society. ders. The authorities in power after German authorities, internment was The French authorities thus the liberation continued this policy as seen as a golden opportunity to achieve made use of internment, together with a matter of course.

Bibliography

Filhol, Emmanuel (2004) La mémoire et l’oubli. L’internement des Tsiganes en France 1940-1946. Paris: L’Harmattan | Etudes Tsiganes (2/1995, Volume 6) 1939-1946, France: L’internement des Tsiganes | Hubert, Marie-Christine (with Peschanski, D. / Philippon, E.) (1994) Les Tsiganes en France 1939-1946. Paris: CNRS Editions | Hubert, Marie-Christine (1999) The internment of Gypsies in France. In: Kenrick, Donald (ed.) In the shadow of the Swastika. The Gypsies during the Second World War 2. Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press, pp. 59-88 | Kenrick, Donald / Puxon, Grattan (1974) Destins gitans. Des origines à la solution finale. Paris: Calmann-Lévy | Maximoff, Matéo (1993) Routes sans roulottes. Romainville / Paris: Editions Matéo Maximoff | Pernot, Mathieu (2001) Un camp pour les Bohémiens. Mémoires du camp d’internement pour nomades de Saliers. Arles: Actes Sud

© Council of Europe. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be project Education of translated, reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic Roma Children in Europe (CD-Rom, Internet, etc.) or mechanical, including photocopying, recording http://www.coe.int/education/roma or any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior permis- Council Conseil sion in writing from the Publishing Division, Directorate of Communica- of Europe de l´Europe http://romani.uni-graz.at/romani tion (F-67075, Strasbourg cedex or [email protected]) http://www.coe.int