International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health Article Social Structure in a Roma Settlement: Comparison over Time Michal Kozubik 1,2 , Daniela Filakovska Bobakova 3,4,5 , Rastislav Rosinsky 6, Martina Mojtova 1, Miroslav Tvrdon 1 and Jitse P. van Dijk 2,3,4,* 1 Department of Social Work and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences and Health Care, Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, 949 74 Nitra, Slovakia; [email protected] (M.K.); [email protected] (M.M.); [email protected] (M.T.) 2 Department Community & Occupational Medicine, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 AV Groningen, The Netherlands 3 Olomouc University Social Health Institute, Theological Faculty, Palacky University Olomouc, 771 11 Olomouc, Czech Republic; daniela.fi[email protected] 4 Graduate School Kosice Institute for Society and Health, Faculty of Medicine, Safarik University, 040 01 Kosice, Slovakia 5 Department of Health Psychology and Research Methodology, Faculty of Medicine, Safarik University, 040 01 Kosice, Slovakia 6 Institute of Roma Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences and Health Care, Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, 949 74 Nitra, Slovakia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 30 August 2020; Accepted: 30 September 2020; Published: 7 October 2020 Abstract: The objective of the present study was to compare the social structure and internal establishment of a Roma community in two historical periods: in the 18th century and the present. We analysed Samuel Augustini ab Hortis’s work, “Von dem Heutigen Zustände, Sonderbaren Sitten und Lebensart, Wie Auch von Denen Übrigen Eigenschaften und Umständen der Zigeuner in Ungarn” (On the Contemporary Situation, Distinctive Manners and Way of Life, as Well as the Other Characteristics and Circumstances of Gypsies in Greater Hungary), written in 1775–1776. Using content analysis, we subsequently compared his findings with our recent data from analogous qualitative research in a geographically-defined area of north-eastern Slovakia, the same region in which Augustini lived. Data collection was intensely conducted in 2012–2013 and once more in 2017–2019. The qualitative methods included direct observation, semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Four key informants and more than 70 participants collaborated in the study. The greatest difference we observed compared to the 18th century was the absence of a leader of the community, a “vajda”, whose status was taken over by a new social class of “entrepreneurs”. The most vulnerable group of the segregated and separated Roma communities are the “degesa”, the lowest social class. They face a phenomenon consisting of so-called triple marginalization: they live in one of the most underdeveloped regions of the country, they inhabit segregated settlements and they are excluded by their own ethnic group. The socioeconomic status of the richest classes has changed faces, while the socioeconomic status of the lowest has not. We found a misconception among helping professionals (e.g., social workers) regarding the homogeneity of the Roma community. This calls for more attention to the erroneous use of the ethnic-based approach in the helping professions. Keywords: Roma; social structure; comparison; 18th century; 21st century; Slovakia Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7311; doi:10.3390/ijerph17197311 www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7311 2 of 13 Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, x 2 of 12 1.The Introduction Roma population is the largest transnational ethnic minority in Europe, characterized by linguisticThe [1–3], Roma cultural population [4,5] and is thehistorical largest hete transnationalrogeneity [6–8]. ethnic Roma minority are thus in Europe,not a single, characterized homo- geneousby linguistic group of [1– people3], cultural [9–13]. [4 ,5Many] and aspects historical of Roma heterogeneity culture have [6–8]. changed Roma areover thus the notcenturies, a single, buthomogeneous some of them group are still of peoplethe same [9– 13[14].]. ManyWe know aspects of comparisons of Roma culture of various have changed areas of over public the centuries,health withbut regard some ofto them Roma, are such still theas housing, same [14 ].nutrition, We know death of comparisons and illnesses of various [15–18], areas in different of public historical health with periods.regard However, to Roma, suchthese as studies housing, lack nutrition, information death on and the illnessesinternal [social15–18 ],structure in different of geographically- historical periods. definedHowever, Roma these settlements studies in lack such information historical compar on the internalison. For social this reason, structure we ofdecided geographically-defined to focus on the internalRoma establishment settlements in and such social historical structure comparison. of settlements For this (towns, reason, village we decided peripheries to focus and on segregated the internal settlements)establishment and and to compare social structure them with of settlements their descriptions (towns, village from peripheriesapproximately and segregated250 years ago. settlements) Fur- thermore,and to compare we also themattempt with to their outline descriptions a stratificati fromon approximately model of the inhabitants 250 years ago. of Furthermore,one particular we set- also tlement.attempt to outline a stratification model of the inhabitants of one particular settlement. Currently,Currently, according according to toqualified qualified estimates, estimates, ther theree are are about about 440 440 thousand thousand Roma Roma in inthe the Slovak Slovak RepublicRepublic [19], [19 which], which is isabout about 8% 8% of of the the total total Slovak Slovak population. They livelive eithereither integratedintegrated within within the themajority majority population population or or scattered scattered in in groups groups with with various various degrees degrees of of concentration concentration (Figure (Figure1). 1). Figure 1. How do Roma live? (Slovakia). Source: Kerekes, 2019 [20]. Figure 1. How do Roma live? (Slovakia). Source: Kerekes, 2019 [20]. Of the estimated 440,000 Roma living in the Slovak Republic, 332,000 are settled in 1052 concentrations separatelyOf the estimated from the majority440,000 population.Roma living The in spatialthe Slovak and socialRepublic, distance 332,000 between are settled Roma and in 1052 the majority con- centrationspopulation separately has existed from for centuries.the majority Government population. policies The andspatial legislation and social have distance contributed between significantly Roma to andthe the situation. majority In thepopulation 1950s, Law has No existed 74/1958 for on Permanentcenturies. SettlingGovernment of Nomadic policies Persons and bannedlegislation the nomadichave contributedway of life significantly [21]. The transition to the fromsituation. a totalitarian In the state1950s, towards Law No a democratic 74/1958 on society Permanent which Settling started in of the Nomadic1990s plunged Persons the banned Roma community the nomadic into way even of greater life [21]. social The isolation. transition The from changes a totalitarian post-1989 caught state Romato- wardsunawares, a democratic and the Romasociety population which started was not in prepared the 1990s for plunged the new situation.the RomaThe community current position into even of the greaterRoma social in Slovakia isolation. is also The influenced changes post-1989 by developments caught Roma in the unawares, Czech Republic and the since Roma the population separation in was1993, not theprepared pre-1989 for history the new of situation. Czechoslovakia The current and the position transition of the to democracyRoma in Slovakia and market is also capitalism influ- encedthereafter. by developments The Communist in the regime’s Czech policiesRepublic before since 1989the separation regarding the in living1993, the conditions, pre-1989 education history of and Czechoslovakia and the transition to democracy and market capitalism thereafter. The Communist working patterns of the Roma continued, determining the growth potential of the Roma communities. regime’s policies before 1989 regarding the living conditions, education and working patterns of the The changes which took place after 1989 have resulted in social stratification of the Roma population, Roma continued, determining the growth potential of the Roma communities. The changes which and this has crucially affected their way of life [22,23]. took place after 1989 have resulted in social stratification of the Roma population, and this has cru- The social structure of the various types of Roma communities has been described in terms of cially affected their way of life [22,23]. social exclusion [23,24]. The European Commission [25] defined exclusion in terms of limited access The social structure of the various types of Roma communities has been described in terms of to the resources necessary for participation in social, economic and political life. In the context of social exclusion [23,24]. The European Commission [25] defined exclusion in terms of limited access social exclusion, a number of dimensions are identified [26–28]: an economic dimension (long-term to the resources necessary for participation in social, economic and political life. In the context of unemployment, income poverty, dependence on social benefits and participation in alternative ways social exclusion,