Great Britain, British Jews, and the international protection of Romanian Jews, 1900-1914: a study of Jewish diplomacy and minority rights

 
29
situation. The press mainly took interest in the Romanian Jewish question at 
times of crisis, such as the Romanian Peasant Revolt of 1907. 
 
Romanian official documents complement British sources and clarify the 
Romanian position. Two series of publications should particularly be 
mentioned. The Romanian official publication Monitorul Oficial incorporates 
information on anti-Jewish legislation and parliamentary speeches of political 
leaders on the Jewish question. Romanian censuses contain some useful data on 
Jewish statistics; although one has to remember to take account of the 
unavoidable inaccuracies and the possibility of misrepresentation. When 
examining ‘attitudes of Romanians’ in this study, it is mainly the opinions of 
Romanian elites that are taken into account. When the sentiments of the lower 
strata of society, such as peasants, are addressed, it is always clearly indicated. 
 
A large number of pamphlets and books in the Romanian Jewish question 
were published during the late nineteenth century and the early twentieth 
century. Two opposite tendencies prevailed in the publications: they were 
either pro-Jewish or pro-Romanian. Contemporary pamphlets were not written 
by British Jews very often, and thus they are not very helpful for the opinions of 
the British Jewry. However, some of them are very useful sources for certain 
details, such as anti-Jewish legislation in Romania, although information on 
legislation can also be gathered from the Monitorul Oficial. Edmond Sincerus’s 
Les juifs en Roumanie: Depuis le Traite de Berlin jusqu´a ce jour: les lois et leurs 
concequences (1901) remains the most extensive account on anti-Jewish 
legislation in Romania. As an example of a standard pro-Romanian pamphlet, 
Jean Lahovary’s La Question Israélite en Roumanie (1902) can be mentioned.
56
 
International legal aspects and the legal position of the Jews were often 
emphasised in contemporary writings. Francis Rey, a French specialist in 
international law, produced articles (in 1903 and, later, in 1925) on the aspects of 
international law in relation to the Romanian Jewish question; these are 
essential in understanding how contemporaries saw the international treaties, 
such as the Treaty of Berlin. 
  
 
 
                                                           
56
 
  Edmond Sincerus was Elias Schwarzfeld’s pseudonym. Schwarzfeld was a 
Romanian Jewish novelist and historian who was expelled from Romania in 1885 
after being active in the campaign for Jewish emancipation. Jean Lahovary was a 
Romanian politician. 

---

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2  THE ROMANIAN JEWISH QUESTION IN THE 
NINETEENTH CENTURY 
 
 
2.1  The rise of the Jewish question 
 
 
Permanent Jewish settlements had existed since the Middle Ages in the 
principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia  — sometimes also called the 
Danubian Principalities. Wallachia, the southern part of future Romania, and 
Moldavia, the north-eastern territory, had been ruled by native princes in the 
Middle Ages. In the early 16th century, the principalities came under Ottoman 
rule. In an effort to ward off the growing influence of Russia in the early 18th 
century, the Ottoman government established the Phanariot system. Moldavia 
and Wallachia were ruled through Ottoman-appointed hospodars, usually 
members of Greek families from the Phanar district of Constantinople. Russia 
exerted a great influence after 1750 and continued to do so for a century.  
 
Most Jews had arrived in order to establish small towns and to engage in 
trade. The number of Jews in the area grew slowly until the beginning of the 
nineteenth century. The juridical situation of Jews and popular attitudes 
towards them varied, often depending on individual rulers and economic 
fluctuations.
1
 Compared to their treatment in Russia, Jews were treated 
relatively benignly in the Principalities.  
 
The position of Jews in the Danubian Principalities before the mid-
nineteenth century was restricted by a number of legal regulations, which did 
not form a consistent unity that could be called a special policy on Jews. 
Regulations on Jewish life that were in force in the eighteenth century included 
higher taxes for Jews, occupational restrictions, a prohibition on buying various 
kinds of property in the villages, and a ban on building synagogues made of 
stone. Non-Christians could not testify in court or marry Christians. These 
                                                           
1
  
For the early history of Romanian Jews, see, for example, Schwarzfeld 1901a, 26- 54. 
Brociner 1910 is much more detailed, but Schwarzfeld presents a compact overview 
on the development of the situation. 

---

 
31
measures were not originally directed against Jews in particular, but against 
non-Christians in general.
2
 
 
The Moldavian northern border was open, without any serious entry 
controls. The opportunity to move south was taken by many Polish Jews who 
escaped the disturbances related to the partitions of Poland and the subsequent 
repressive Russian rule. During the reign of Czar Nicholas I, Russian anti-
Jewish policy gained strength, in the shape, for example, of harsh military 
service. Immigration of Jews from Russia to the Danubian Principalities 
escalated at the same time. The Jews came mainly from the so-called Pale of 
Settlement — the territory that Russia had acquired in the partitions of Poland, 
and, in principle, the only region in the Russian Empire in which Jews were 
allowed to reside. Economic aspects also played a role in Jewish immigration. 
The Treaty of Adrianople of 1829 opened Moldavian frontiers to European 
trade. This increased the influence of Jewish merchants, especially in the 
absence of a native Romanian commercial middle class. Thereafter, Jewish 
immigration to the Principalities from Russia, as well as from Austrian Galicia 
and the district just north of the Moldavian border, Bucovina, was substantial 
until the end of the century.
3
 
 
By the Treaty of Adrianople in 1829, Moldavia and Wallachia, although 
still nominally under Turkish control, had become more autonomous and 
Russian control was further reinforced. The first major document codifying the 
Jewish legal position in the Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia was the 
Organic Statutes of 1831/1832. The Statutes were legal codes that together 
functioned as the constitution in the Principalities. Among other stipulations, 
the Statutes limited political rights to the Greek Orthodox population. There 
were also special Jewish taxes. Those aliens who were not able to support 
themselves were classified as vagabonds and were liable for expulsion. This 
measure had far-reaching consequences in the late nineteenth century. 
Moldavia’s statutes on Jews were harsher than Wallachia’s. Generally, the 
regulations were restrictive to a certain degree but could be circumvented, for 
instance, by bribery.
4
 However, articulated anti-Jewish feeling in Romania truly 
began to show after the mid-nineteenth century. This was the time when the 
Principalities were on their way towards unification and national 
independence. 
 
The situation of Jews in the Principalities was first discussed 
internationally in the 1850s. After the Crimean War, the problem of Romanian 
status and the degree of its autonomy under Turkish rule was addressed by the 
Great European Powers. The Jewish problem was also touched on in this 
context. The Convention of Paris in 1858 granted the Romanian provinces 
autonomous status, and they were placed under the joint protection of the 
Powers.
5
  
                                                           
2
  
Kellogg 1995, 46. Non-Christians referred to both Muslims and Jews. 
3
  
Parkes 1946, 93-94.  
4
  
Butnaru 1992, 17; Kellogg 1995, 47; Wolloch 1988, 43. 
5
  
Jelavich 1977, 115. See Appendix.  

---