“The Serbs play games with human life; murder is nothing in their eyes.”

– J. E. Bluet, British consul in Belgrad in 1860

Abstract: Between 1863 and 1865, the condition of the Jewish population in Serbia became the subject of significant diplomatic correspondence and international advocacy. Drawing on dispatches sent by British consuls in Belgrade, letters from the Board of Deputies of British Jews, and interventions by the Alliance Israélite Universelle, this article examines the dual pressures facing Serbian Jewry: the reformist sympathies of Prince Michael Obrenović, contrasted with the hostility of the Serbian National Assembly and segments of the press. At the same time, violent assaults—including the murders of Jacob Alcalay and Salomon Albinon—underscored the vulnerability of Jews in Serbia. By situating these events within the broader struggle for Jewish emancipation in nineteenth-century Europe, this study highlights the role of international Jewish networks, Anglo-Ottoman diplomacy, and Serbian domestic politics in shaping the fate of this minority community.

Introduction

The “Jewish Question” was one of the defining social and political issues of nineteenth-century Europe. In France, the Revolution had granted Jews equal rights in 1791, while emancipation spread unevenly across Central Europe during the nineteenth century.¹ Yet in the Balkans, where nation-building coincided with the decline of Ottoman suzerainty, Jewish communities often remained marginalized, vulnerable to violence, and dependent upon foreign intervention.²

In Serbia, the years 1863–1865 witnessed both reformist gestures and episodes of violence. Prince Michael Obrenović presented himself as a patron of Jewish welfare, yet his efforts clashed with the hostility of the National Assembly and the Serbian press. Meanwhile, British diplomatic dispatches and petitions from Jewish organizations in London and Paris provide a unique record of this tension.

This article reconstructs the condition of Serbian Jews during this period by analyzing three interrelated themes: (1) the reformist yet ambivalent policies of Prince Michael; (2) the persistence of violence, including the murders of Jacob Alcalay and Salomon Albinon; and (3) the interventions of international Jewish advocacy networks.

Historiographical context

Most scholarship on Jewish emancipation has concentrated on Western and Central Europe. Jacob Katz’s Out of the Ghetto remains a foundational account of emancipation’s uneven trajectory, while Bernard Wasserstein has emphasized the gap between legal equality and social acceptance.³ In the Balkans, however, scholarship has lagged, with notable exceptions including Esther Benbassa’s studies of Ottoman Jewry and Mark Levene’s work on minorities in the late Ottoman world.⁴

The rise of the Alliance Israélite Universelle, founded in Paris in 1860, marked a watershed in Jewish history. Adolphe Crémieux and other founders envisioned a transnational body to defend Jews facing persecution, particularly in Eastern Europe and the Ottoman Empire.⁵ In Britain, the Board of Deputies of British Jews, under Sir Moses Montefiore, played a parallel role, lobbying the Foreign Office and acting as intermediary between local communities and European governments.⁶

The Serbian case highlights how emancipation in Southeastern Europe depended not only on local politics but also on international advocacy and diplomacy.

The diplomatic setting: Serbia, the Ottoman Empire, and Britain

Serbia in the 1860s remained formally under Ottoman suzerainty, though with increasing autonomy. Prince Michael Obrenović sought to modernize the state and to secure recognition from European powers.⁷ Britain, while careful not to interfere directly in Serbian internal affairs, maintained a consular presence in Belgrade and responded to petitions concerning the Jewish community. Dispatches from Consul General George J. Ricketts in 1863 reveal both awareness of Jewish grievances and the Foreign Office’s cautious stance.⁸

Prince Michael and the ambivalence of reform

Prince Michael’s reign (1860–1868) is often remembered for efforts to modernize Serbia and consolidate its independence.⁹ His policy toward Jews reflected this reformist spirit, though constrained by domestic opposition. In 1864, he established two state-funded schools for Jewish children, a gesture warmly acknowledged by Sir Moses Montefiore in London.¹⁰

Yet Prince Michael’s goodwill faced resistance from the Serbian National Assembly, whose deputies regarded Jews as foreigners and “heretics.” British consular reports stressed that, despite the Prince’s sympathy, he feared that emancipating Jews would provoke accusations of favoritism and undermine his position.¹¹ Thus, while progressive in rhetoric, his reforms remained limited.

Violence and persecution: 1865

The case of Jacob Alcalay

On 16 January 1865, Jacob Alcalay, a Jewish merchant in Chalatz, disappeared under suspicious circumstances. His body was later found near the synagogue courtyard. Medical examinations suggested strangulation, followed by the forced ingestion of sulfuric acid to simulate suicide.¹² Serbian authorities dismissed the case as suicide, a conclusion rejected by Jewish leaders and by reports sent to the Foreign Office.¹³

The murder of Salomon Albinon

Soon afterward, another case horrified the community. Salomon Albinon, a poor Bosnian Jew and father of seven, was attacked by an innkeeper and his sons during his journey to Belgrade. He was imprisoned, tortured, and eventually killed with an axe before his body was thrown into the Sava River.¹⁴ The perpetrators openly boasted of the murder. Although arrested, the delay in prosecution underscored negligence on the part of local authorities.

The press and the role of Svelovide

Both murders occurred against a backdrop of increasing hostility in the press. The newspaper Svelovide published virulent anti-Jewish articles, linking Jews to treachery and foreignness.¹⁵ The government’s suppression of Jewish responses while allowing anti-Semitic articles to circulate suggested at least tacit complicity. British consuls directly associated the rise of violence with these inflammatory publications.¹⁶

International advocacy and jewish solidarity

The Board of Deputies of British Jews

The Board of Deputies, under J. M. Montefiore, mobilized petitions on behalf of Serbian Jews. Their correspondence with Prince Michael combined gratitude for his educational reforms with appeals for full civic equality.¹⁷ The Board also enlisted the Foreign Office, which forwarded petitions and lent diplomatic weight to Jewish concerns.

The Alliance Israélite Universelle

The Alliance, under Adolphe Crémieux, simultaneously appealed to the Ottoman Grand Vizier and the Serbian government.¹⁸ By providing Serbian Jews with access to European capitals, the Alliance gave local grievances international visibility.

Britain’s role

British consuls in Belgrade acted as intermediaries, transmitting Jewish petitions and reporting on incidents. While the Foreign Office maintained a cautious policy of non-intervention, its willingness to convey Jewish appeals reflected Britain’s role as a guarantor of minority rights within the Ottoman sphere.¹⁹

Analysis: the limits of reform and the dynamics of prejudice

The Serbian case reveals the paradox of emancipation in a nationalizing society. On one hand, Prince Michael’s initiatives—particularly the establishment of schools—demonstrated reformist intentions. On the other, entrenched hostility in the Assembly, tolerance of anti-Jewish propaganda, and failure to prosecute perpetrators reflected structural resistance to Jewish equality.

The murders of Alcalay and Albinon exemplify how Jews remained vulnerable to both violence and judicial neglect. International advocacy partially mitigated this vulnerability, ensuring that Jewish grievances could not be ignored. Yet the dependence on foreign protection also reinforced perceptions of Jews as outsiders aligned with external powers.

Conclusion

The plight of Serbian Jews between 1863 and 1865 demonstrates the complexities of emancipation in the Balkans. Prince Michael’s reformist gestures were undermined by domestic hostility, while violent incidents revealed the precariousness of Jewish life.

At the same time, the Serbian case illustrates the emergence of international Jewish solidarity. Through the efforts of the Board of Deputies in London and the Alliance Israélite Universelle in Paris, local grievances were transformed into matters of European diplomacy. British consuls played a limited but crucial role as intermediaries.

Ultimately, the Serbian Jewish experience reflects both the limitations of national reform and the growing power of transnational advocacy in the nineteenth century.

References

1. Jacob Katz, Out of the Ghetto: The Social Background of Jewish Emancipation, 1770–1870 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973).
2. Mark Levene, War, Jews, and the New Europe: The Diplomacy of Lucien Wolf, 1914–1919 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), esp. ch. 1.
3. Bernard Wasserstein, Vanishing Diaspora: The Jews in Europe since 1945 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996), 11–20.
4. Esther Benbassa, The Jews of the Balkans: The Judeo-Spanish Community, 15th to 20th Centuries (Oxford: Blackwell, 1995).
5. Aron Rodrigue, French Jews, Turkish Jews: The Alliance Israélite Universelle and the Politics of Jewish Schooling in Turkey, 1860–1925 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990).
6. Abigail Green, Moses Montefiore: Jewish Liberator, Imperial Hero (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010).
7. Stevan K. Pavlowitch, A History of the Balkans, 1804–1945 (London: Longman, 1999), 78–82.
8. Dispatch from G. J. Ricketts to Earl Russell, Belgrade, 16 September 1863, in Authentic Documents on the Present Situation of the Jews in Serbia.
9. Pavlowitch, History of the Balkans, 85–87.
10. Letter from Sir Moses Montefiore to Prince Michael, 1 October 1864, in Authentic Documents on the Present Situation of the Jews in Serbia.
11. Dispatch from J. E. Bluet to Earl Russell, Belgrade, 26 December 1864, ibid.
12. Report of the Committee of the Alliance Israélite in Belgrade, 21 January 1865, ibid.
13. Dispatch from J. E. Bluet to Earl Russell, 21 January 1865, ibid.
14. Report of the Committee of the Alliance Israélite in Belgrade on the murder of Salomon Albinon, 23 January 1865, ibid.
15. Russo to Crémieux, Belgrade, 2 February 1865, ibid.
16. Dispatch from J. E. Bluet to Earl Russell, 29 April 1865, ibid.
17. J. M. Montefiore, letter to Prince Michael, 1 October 1864, ibid.
18. Alliance Israélite Universelle correspondence with the Grand Vizier, 1863, ibid.
19. Earl Russell to Mr. Bluet, Foreign Office, 15 March 1865, ibid.