N. 1 (2026)
Essays

Ritual Apologies: The Kalderash Conflict Resolution System

pdf (Italiano)
Riccardo Mazzola
University of Macerata
Ciprian Sandu
Babeș-Bolyai University
DOI: https://doi.org/10.54103/1972-5760/31942

Published 2026-06-24

Keywords

  • apology,
  • informal justice,
  • Kalderash Roma,
  • conflict resolution,
  • legal anthropology

How to Cite

Mazzola, R., & Sandu, C. (2026). Ritual Apologies: The Kalderash Conflict Resolution System. Sociologia Del Diritto, 53(1). https://doi.org/10.54103/1972-5760/31942

Copyright (c) 2026 Riccardo Mazzola, Ciprian Sandu

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Abstract

This article develops the Apology Model (AM), a theoretical framework for explaining community-based, customary systems of conflict resolution in which apologetic acts and their acceptance operate as socially regulated transactions. Rather than treating apology as a private emotion or a purely linguistic formula, AM conceptualizes it as an institutional sequence through which a wrong is made publicly intelligible, responsibility is allocated, and social closure is produced through recognizable uptake. The framework is specified and examined through an in-depth analysis of the Kalderash (căldărari) Roma justice system in Romania. Drawing on fieldwork-based interviews, the article examines how disputes are settled across multiple arenas, including the Kris (community court), regulated fighting, and mechanisms such as gossip and avoidance. Particular attention is devoted to the ways reconciliation becomes publicly certified and durable, often through ritualized re-acceptance gestures and material devices (including payments) that signal accountability without reducing forgiveness to a market exchange. While the Kalderash case is the primary empirical focus, the article argues that AM provides a portable analytic lens for comparative research on informal justice, especially where honor, reputation, and membership are at stake.
pdf (Italiano)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Abu-Nimer, M., (1996), Conflict Resolution Approaches: Western and Middle Eastern Lessons and Possibilities, The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 55, 1, pp. 35-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1536-7150.1996.tb02706.x
  2. Ahmed, S., (2004), The Cultural Politics of Emotion, Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.
  3. Austin, J.L., (1962), How to Do Things with Words, Oxford, Clarendon Press.
  4. Bennett, C., (2008), The Apology Ritual: A Philosophical Theory of Punishment, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  5. Benoist, J., (2012), Cosa rende sociali gli atti sociali? Osservazioni sul realismo sociale di Adolf Reinach, in De Vecchi, F., ed., Eidetica del diritto e ontologia sociale, Sesto San Giovanni-Udine, Mimesis, 2012, pp. 229-244.
  6. Bohannan, P., (1957), Justice and Judgement Among the Tiv, London, Oxford University Press.
  7. Bottoms, A., (2003), Some Sociological Reflections on Restorative Justice, in von Hirsch, A., Roberts, J.V., Bottoms, A., Roach, K., Schiff, M., eds., Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing or Reconciliable Paradigms?, Oxford-Portland, Hart, pp. 79-114.
  8. Braithwaite, J., Gohar, A., (2014), Restorative Justice, Policing and Insurgency: Learning from Pakistan, Law & Society Review, 48, 3, pp. 531-561. doi: 10.1111/lasr.12091
  9. Brutti, N., (2017), Law and Apologies. Profilo comparatistico delle scuse riparatorie, Torino, Giappichelli, 2017.
  10. Celermajer, D., (2009), The Sins of the Nation and the Ritual of Apologies, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  11. Chereji, C. R., Sandu, C., (2018), Romania: The Kris Procedures. A Brief Incursion in the Roma Community-Based Dispute Management Mechanism. Conflict Studies Quarterly, 24, pp. 3-11.
  12. Cirillo, L., Colón de Carvajal, I., Ticca, A.C., (2016), I’m Sorry + Naming the Offense: A Format for Apologizing, Discourse Processes, 53, 1-2, pp. 83-96. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2015.1056691.
  13. Drew, P., Hepburn, A., Margutti, P., Galatolo, R., (2016), Introduction to the Special Issue on Apologies in Discourse, Discourse Processes, 53, 1-2, pp. 1–4. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2015.1056689.
  14. Goffman, E., (1971), Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order, New York, Basic Books.
  15. Grigore, D., Sarău, G., (2006), Istorie și tradiții rrome, București, Editura Salvați Copiii.
  16. Grigore, D., (2008), Romanipen “Fundamente ale identității romilor”, in Turda, G., ed., Monitor cultural-educativ, București, Miram, pp. 72-90.
  17. Hann, C., (2000), Social Anthropology, London, Hodder & Stoughton.
  18. Horelt, M.-A., (2019), Dramas of Reconciliation: A Performance Approach to the Analysis of Political Apologies in International Relations, Baden-Baden, Nomos.
  19. Ide, R., (1998) ‘Sorry for Your Kindness’: Japanese Interactional Ritual in Public Discourse, Journal of Pragmatics, 29, 5, pp. 509-529. doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(98)80006-4
  20. Kampf, Z., Löwenheim, N., (2012), Rituals of Apology in the Global Arena, Security Dialogue, 43, 1, pp. 43-60. doi: 10.1177/0967010611431095
  21. Lang, S.D., (2002), Sulha Peacemaking and the Politics of Persuasion, Journal of Palestine Studies, 31, 3, 2002, pp. 52-66. doi: 10.1525/jps.2002.31.3.52
  22. Lazare, A., (2005), On Apology, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  23. Leach, E.R. (1954), Political Systems of Highland Burma: A Study of Kachin Social Structure, London, Bell and Sons.
  24. Mani, R., (2002), Beyond Retribution: Seeking Justice in the Shadows of War, Cambridge, Polity Press.
  25. Mannozzi, G., Lodigiani, G.A., (2017), La giustizia riparativa. Formanti, parole e metodi, Torino, Giappichelli.
  26. Mazzola, R., (2020), Componere. Offesa e riconciliazione nell’ordinamento vendicatorio, Milano, Giuffré.
  27. Mazzola, R., (2021), Sulla natura della composizione. A partire dalla (meta)teoria del dono di Marcel Hénaff, Rivista internazionale di filosofia del diritto, 98, 1, pp. 129-154.
  28. Mazzola, R., (2023), Chiedere scusa. Studio di filosofia del diritto, Napoli, Editoriale Scientifica.
  29. Mazzola, R. (2025), Riti di riconciliazione. La giustizia riparativa in ottica transculturale, Jura Gentium, 22, 1, pp. 77-98.
  30. Minow, M., (2003), Between Vengeance and Forgiveness: Facing History after Genocide and Mass Violence, Boston, Beacon Press.
  31. Moisă, F., (2000). Experiences, achievements, and perspectives on programs for Roma, International seminar on Roma issues, Cluj-Napoca, January.
  32. Owen, M., (1985), Apologies and Remedial Interchanges: A Study of Language Use in Social Interaction, Den Haag, Mouton.
  33. Pely, D., (2009), Resolving Clan-based Disputes Using the Sulha, the Traditional Dispute Resolution Process of the Middle East, Dispute Resolution Journal, 63, 4, pp. 80-88.
  34. Pely, D., (2011), Where East Not Always Meets West: Comparing the Sulha Process to Western-Style Mediation and Arbitration, Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 28, 4, pp. 427-440. doi: 10.1002/CRQ.20028.
  35. Piasere, L., (2016), I Rom d’Europa. Una storia moderna, Roma-Bari, Laterza.
  36. Rappaport, R. A., (2002), Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  37. Rohne, H.-C., Arsovska, J., Artesen, I., (2008), Challenging Restorative Justice: State-based Conflicts, Mass Victimisation and the Changing Nature of Warfare, in Artesen, I., Arsovska, J., Rohne, H.-C., Valiñas, M., Vanspauwen, K., eds., Restoring Justice after Large-scale Violent Conflicts: Kosovo, DR Congo and the Israeli-Palestinian Case, Portland, Willan, pp. 3-45.
  38. Sandu, C., (2018), Romania: Traditional Conflict Resolution Mechanisms Used by the Roma Communities, Conflict Studies Quarterly, 22, pp. 95-108.
  39. Scheff, T.J., (2000), Shame and the Social Bond: A Sociological Theory, Sociological Theory, 18, pp. 84-99. doi: 10.1111/0735-2751.00089
  40. Saxon, E.D., (2018), Peacemaking and Transformative Mediation: Sulha Practices in Palestine and the Middle East, Cham, Palgrave.
  41. Smith, N., (2008), I Was Wrong: The Meaning of Apologies, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  42. Stănescu, C., (2004). Romii căldărari, in Alexandrescu, G., ed., Tradiții ale romilor din spațiul românesc, București, Organizația Salvați Copiii, pp. 23–31.
  43. Tavuchis, N., (1991), Mea Culpa: A Sociology of Apology and Reconciliation, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
  44. Teitel, R.G., (2002), Transitional Justice, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  45. Terradas Saborit, Ignasi, (2008), Justicia vindicatoria : de la ofensa e indefensión a la imprecación y el oráculo, la vindicta y el talión, la ordalía y el juramento, la composición y la reconciliación, Madrid, CSIC.
  46. Turner, V., (1980), Social Dramas and Stories about Them, Critical Inquiry, 7, 1, pp. 141-168. doi: 10.1086/448092
  47. Turner, V., (1982), From Ritual to Theatre: The Human Seriousness of Play, New York, Performing Arts Journal Publications.
  48. Tuso, H., Flaherty, M. P., eds., (2016), Creating the Third Force: Indigenous Processes of Peacemaking, Lanham-Boulder-New York-London, Lexington.
  49. Tuso, H., (2016), Indigenous Processes of Conflict Resolution. Neglected Methods of Peacemaking by the New Field of Conflict Resolution, in Tuso, H., Flaherty, M. P., eds., Creating the Third Force: Indigenous Processes of Peacemaking, Lanham-Boulder-New York-London, Lexington, pp. 27-52.
  50. Wagatsuma, H., Rosett, A., (1986), The Implications of Apology: Law and Culture in Japan and the United States, Law & Society Review, 20, 4, pp. 461-498.
  51. Wright, M., (2011), Restorative Justice: A New Response to Crime and Conflict, Mediares, 17-18, pp. 11-56.
  52. Yamasaki, J.W., (2006), Japanese Apologies for World War II: A Rhetorical Study, London-New York, Routledge.
  53. Zehr, H., (2002), The Little Book of Restorative Justice, Intercourse, Good Books.