Méry Ratio of Budapest has just published two very profound and in-depth historical atlasas from the rich compilations of András Bereznay. The Historical Atlas of the Gypsies: Romani History in Maps is in many ways a trailblazer. To my knowledge no such synthesis has been attempted or been published to the present in English. It is a collection of 52 maps worldwide, with 52 parallel essays on the facing pages which explain what is not self-explanatory in the maps on their own. The maps are arranged chronologically according to the known traces of Gypsy/Romani settlements and wanderings. The publication of this amazing Atlas has been made possible with the generous support of the Pro Minoritate Foundation located in Budapest. The Foreword was written by Zsolt Németh the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Hungarian National Assembly. He points out that Bereznay’s Atlas shows us that the identity, past wanderings, and ethno-cultural characteristics of the Roma can be presented geospatially (7). He also stresses that the naming of the Gypsy/Roma communities is made difficult by the divided and complex character of their history and place in the world with their many subgroups defined by their economic status, differing languages, geographic dispersal, and variety of internal social hierarchies.

The maps are supported by a detailed listing of 134 sources, with each source indicating the map(s) for which it provided information or data. The Atlas also has a rich index of both place names and personal names (122–129). These index listings are also cross-referenced to the individual maps. Bereznay uses a great variety of explanatory symbols and colors, which are frequently clarified in boxes on the individual maps. These in turn are supplemented by the place names of settlements, where Gypsy/Roma traces are provided with dates. The wanderings and cross-border movements are indicated by arrows; these can at times become confusing due to their numbers and the ever increasing cluster of dates which increase greatly as we move from the 15th century to the present. However, this Atlas can be a great teaching tool in PowerPoint, or even in more traditional slide presentations for history, political science, or sociology instructors in minority studies classes or seminars. For researchers, the maps provide excellent overviews which can guide or supplement Gypsy/Roma-focused data collection.

The second Atlas, the Historical Atlas of Transylvania, reflects many similar mapping solutions as the Historical Atlas of the Gypsies. However, the former is at the same time more focused geographically (Carpathian Basin and East-Central Europe) and based on a more extensive listing of sources. It includes 109 maps with explanatory essays on facing pages, plus a time line (232–233) that provides a visual summary of the settlement and political control over the region. This Atlas is also a “first,” as Zsolt Németh’s introduction states: Transylvania has “… never before been presented in one volume in a geospatial way, with mapped connections between culture, history and location” (8). This volume achieves this threefold service in a masterful way. Like the Gypsy/Roma atlas, the Transylvania atlas is also a useful teaching aid. It too provides great material for PowerPoint presentations. Furthermore, for researchers who deal with East Central and Southeastern European minorities, the Atlas provides a good starting point and backdrop at the same time.

The Atlas introduces Transylvania with two physical maps on facing pages, one with current Romanian place names, the other with the historical Hungarian place names (14–15). This is followed by 14 maps which summarize the fate of Transylvania within the context of the fluid first thousand years of tracable history. From this point on the Atlas focuses on the settlement of the region and its demographic profile (Maps 16, 19, 20–23, 27, 30, 34, 61, 79, 93, 95, 106–107), its main economic features, and the religious and cultural evolution of its inhabitants as part of the Hungarian domains until 1920, and as part of Romania since then. I was particularly interested in those maps that dealt with the educational and cultural evolution (Maps 37–38, 62, 64,71–72, 88) of the region and particularly maps 93–95 which dealt with the region’s 20th century ethnic profile and the treatment of the Hungarian community in the interwar period.

This compilation of maps and documentation is supported by a place name and personal name index (240–250) and a fine collection of 149 sources (234–239) and an essay that effectively presents the objectives and methods of the Atlas. However, it could have used a general presentation of the symbols used as a preface to the maps, thus supplementing the specific symbols used for the individual maps. One other criticism I have is that the term “Romanian” is used throughout even for periods before the 19th century for a people that were referred to as “Vlachs” or “Wallachians” prior to that century. Two other minor points, one factual, one stylistic, that need correction are the statement that “Unitarianism” became an “accepted religion” in 1571 rather than in 1568 when Europe’s first Edict of Toleration was issued by the Diet of Torda (108, map 48). The second is the error that Ottoman troops “depraved” rather than “deprived” Prince Rákoczi I of his Wallachian and Moldavian vassals (124).

Both atlases are masterpieces of the printing and publishing trade. The quality of the paper is a heavy 170 gram, matt velure, on which the print is attractive, clear, and a refined read. (Only the Index print would have deserved some enlergement!) Both volumes are a pleasure to hold and peruse. Méry Ratio deserves credit for producing books that are physically attractive. I highly recommend both these volumes for all quality libraries, but particularly to those university libraries which have institutes or departments that focus on the fate of minorities or have a regional focus that includes Europe or the former Soviet Empire and the former Ottoman Empire. They are a magnificent achievement and these words are not used lightly.