Fearing Jewish Plaintiffs: International Intervention and Jewish Power in Nineteenth-Century Morocco

• In Event: Authority beyond Autonomy: Re-thinking Jewish Power in the Medieval and Modern Mediterranean

Abstract

During the second half of the nineteenth century, Jews in Morocco became the subject of increasing concern among foreign diplomats and governments. Consular officials increasingly intervened on behalf of Moroccan Jews believed to be victims of crimes or abuse. Although they cited the principle of religious tolerance and freedom, their motivations mainly lay in their desire to use the plight of Jews as an excuse to meddle in the internal workings of the Moroccan state. At times diplomats even resorted to force when championing the cause of Morocco’s Jews.
The ability of Jews to successfully mobilize foreign diplomats on their behalf meant that Jews were increasingly successful in pressing their legal claims both in local courts and with the Moroccan state. Jewish victims of theft or Jewish creditors awaiting the payment of outstanding debts could collect the money owed them with greater ease. Particularly successful were those Jewish plaintiffs with foreign protection or nationality, which gave them extraterritorial status and privileged access to the ministrations of consular officials. But Jews in general—whether protégés or no—gained a reputation for effectively mobilizing the law in their favor, to the point that many Muslims came to fear being accused of a crime or of failing to pay their debts to their Jewish creditors. More and more Muslims assumed that an accusation levied by a Jew would be heeded, whether true or not.
Drawing on correspondence among Jews, the Moroccan government, and consular officials, this paper argues that the increasing weight of international pressure shifted the balance of power among ordinary Muslims and Jews, as well as between the Moroccan state and its Jewish subjects. I suggest that Jews’ social, legal, and political status cannot simply be summed up by the opposition of inequality to equality. Rather than seeing foreign intervention on Jews’ behalf as a mere step along the path from dhimma (Jews’ legal status under Islamic law) to emancipation, I show that there were situations in which Jews effectively inverted the social and legal hierarchy without abolishing or even questioning the principle of Islamic superiority.

author

• Jessica M. Marglin, University of Southern California