Shakespeare’s Invocation To Overlook Differences Between Jews And Christians For Economic Prosperity In The Merchant Of Venice

The Jews who flocked to England following the Norman Conquest “remained sharply separated from, at any rate, the common people around them by peculiarities of speech, habits and daily life”. Such dissimilarities “aroused dread and hatred in an ignorant and superstitious age”. Charging interest for the money they brought with them to England was their primary source of income. “Thus, living as semi-aliens, growing rich as usurers, and observing strange customs, they occupied in the . . . 12th century a position that was fraught with danger”. Anti-Semitism was growing in Europe, partly fueled by the false allegations that the Jews were murdering Christian children for religious rituals. Rising anti-Semitism in Europe reached England by the mid-12th century. “The official stance of the Christian Church slowly shifted from tolerance of Jews to increasing hostility. This influenced the views of ordinary people”. In 1290, King Edward I under pressure from the Parliament expelled the Jewish population from England. The Jews that left England in 1290 under the Edict of Expulsion were not officially re-admitted until Oliver Cromwell invited them in the 1650s. The small number of Jews who remained in England pretended to be Christians under Queen Elizabeth’s reign. Queen’s Chief Physician, Rodrigo Lopez, was also a Portuguese Christian convert with Jewish ancestry. In 1594, Earl of Essex accused Lopez of conspiring to poison the monarch. Lopez was convicted of high treason, hanged and quartered in the same year. The unfortunate incident likely revived the anti-Semitic notions among the people in London, inspiring William Shakespeare to write a play in 1596-7 that was centred around a law case between a Jew and a Christian. According to literary critic Harold Bloom, “Shakespeare’s grand, equivocal comedy The Merchant of Venice is . . . profoundly anti-Semitic work”. This essay argues that Shakespeare’s play The Merchant of Venice is not an anti-Semitic play but an invocation to overlook differences between Jews and Christians for economic prosperity. In the late Middle Ages, the Jews acted as money lenders because all forms of usury were not allowed under the Christian doctrine. Moreover, a series of laws put in place by the late 1200s disallowed the small Jewish population in England from owning property. This restricted their ability to make a living by other means other than usury. With the Christians been unable to lend money for interest, an increasingly demanding service was left in the hands for Jews allowing them to comfortably gain wealth. Religious policies in the Elizabethan England suggest that the society was considerably tolerant towards other religious groups, provided they conformed to Christian practices. However, with the expulsion of Jews from England in the 13th century, it is unlikely that the Londoners in Elizabethan England had met anyone practising Judaism. At the same time, the city of Venice accommodated Jews who were mistreated and expelled from other European nations. They lived in the ghetto which was a separate area where Jews were compelled to live and locked up in the night. Considering there were no Jews openly following Judaism and living the religious lifestyle in London, the Venice ghetto atmosphere was not a common sight in Shakespeare’s London.

Nonetheless, the common European anti-Semitic notions towards mysterious Jews were not uncommon in England. In other words, the Londoners knew no Jews but the Jewish stereotypes. In such an era, Shakespeare writes a play that publicly enacts the insults and mistreatments towards Jews. The antagonist of Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice is the Venetian Jewish moneylender Shylock. Because Jewish people were often moneylenders and they held the monopoly in the market, it allowed them to charge the high-interest rates. The Jewish usurers were ultimately reputed as greedy, unsympathetic money lenders in the society. Shakespeare depicts Shylock with many negative stereotypes, in the play. Shylock does not receive any respect from the Christian Venetians. The Christian characters in the play rarely address Shylock by his name. He is often called “the Jew” and even referred by other hurtful references such as “dog Jew” or “currish Jew”. He is even compared to the devil in several occasions during the play. In Act 2, Scene 2, Launcelot refers to Shylock as the devil’s incarnation on earth: LAUNCELOT. Certainly the Jew is the very devil incarnation. In the next Act, Solanio refers to Shylock as the devil: SOLANIO. Let me say amen betimes lest the devil cross my prayer, for here he comes in the likeness of a Jew. Later in the trial scene towards the end of the play, when Shylock refuses to show mercy to Antonio and insist on a pound of flesh even when he is offered thrice the amount, he loaned Antonio in return. In this instance, he emerges as a monster thirsty for Christian blood. Shylock is even vilified beyond his profession. The play depicts him as a father who lacks love, compassion, and tolerance towards his own daughter. Instead of his daughter out there in the world that is unkind towards Jews, Shylock worries over the wealth stolen from him; “a passion so confused” from a father: “A sealèd bag, two sealèd bags of ducats, Of double ducats, stol’n from me by my daughter! And jewels, two stones, two rich and precious stones, Stol’n by my daughter! Justice! Find the girl! She hath the stones upon her, and the ducats!” The Merchant of Venice was written for a Christian audience whose chances of knowing a Jew in person was highly remote. However, Shakespeare’s London audience was familiar with the stereotypical Jew portrayed in the play through their society’s characterisation of Jews based on the fear of the other. Shakespeare seems to be portraying his Jewish antagonist on stage in a manner his audience could easily relate to a Jew in their imagination. He convinces his audience to agree with him by depicting a Jewish villain through Shylock before creating a platform for his antagonist to vocalise the grievances of the Jewish community. The public hanging and quartering of the monarch’s Chief Physician with a Jewish ancestry for high treason did not improve the possibility of the mistreated and misunderstood Jews to gain a platform to explain themselves or express their plight to other Londoners.

The Merchant of Venice takes the stage in London in this atmosphere. Shakespeare builds his antagonist humane and complex; someone who attempts to navigate the struggles of life as a Jew while dealing with all the human emotions. In the first Act, Shylock tells all the ways he has been disrespected and mistreated by Antonio when he reaches Shylock to borrow three thousand ducats: SHYLOCK. Signor Antonio, many a time and oft In the Rialto you have rated me About my money and my usuances. Still have I borne it with a patient shrug, For sufferance is the badge of all our tribe. You call me misbeliever, cut-throat dog, And spit upon my Jewish gaberdine, And all for use of that which is mine own. Although Shylock seems unreasonably vindictive at the end, he is not all unsympathetic in this instance. For those reasons alone, Shylock could refuse to lend money to Antonio: What should I say to you? Should I not say, ‘Hath a dog money? Is it possible A cur can lend three thousand ducats?’ Or Shall I bend low, and in a bondman’s key, With bated breath and whispering humbleness, Say this: ‘Fair sir, you spat on me on Wednesday last, You spurned me such a day, another time You called me dog, and for these courtesies I’ll lend you thus much moneys’? Shylock expects an apology from Antonio as respect to a fellow human for treating him unkindly before he grants the loan. However, Antonio’s response is “I am as like to call thee so again, to spit on thee again, to spurn thee too”. Among a Christian crowd, Shylock is given an opportunity to express how disrespectful other Christians treat the Jews and an opportunity for himself to extend his hand for a functional relationship with the other group: SHYLOCK. Why look you, how you storm! I would be friends with you and have your love, Forget the shames that you have stained me with, Supply your presents wants, and take no doit Of usuance for my moneys, and you’ll not hear me. If The Merchant of Venice is ‘profoundly anti-Semitic work’ as Bloom claims, Shakespeare could circumvent the scenes where Shylock has the opportunities, to speak to a Christian crowd about their unkindness towards the Jews. Shylock’s rather long speech in Act 3, Scene 1 lets him humanise the Jews to a Christian crowd that sees them greedy, revengeful and bloodthirsty: SHYLOCK. He hath disgraced me and hindered me half a million, laughed at my losses, mocked at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends, heated mine enemies, and what’s his reason? I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same disease, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that. If you wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, Revenge! The villainy you teach me I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction. Shakespeare seizes the opportunity to convince his audience who already agrees with him alone the play’s narrative that the Jews are imperfect, just as the Christians. Shylock tells all the ways in which Jews are alike the Christians: Jews and Christians resemble the same on the outlook, and their emotional responses are not different. Shylock questions the hypocritical nature of Christian humility before a Christian crowd. He inadvertently tells the crowd that it is the Christians who turn them into monsters by willfully treating them less than human. If The Merchant of Venice only aimed to feed the anti-Semitic notions in the society, it was not necessary for the playwright to create an opportunity for Shylock’s speech raising the questions with innate ability to feel sympathetic towards his plight and the Jews plight. The speech establishes pathos among a crowd initially hostile towards the character. “Most historians locate in the 16th century the beginning, or at least the maturing, of Western capitalism” (Encyclopedia Britannica). By the 16th century, a number of European nations were involved in progressive international trade that was shaping economics, culture, politics and advancing international relations.

The European monarchies, merchants and traders were taking advantage of the new lands discovered, trade with the East and slave trade which showed promising potential to grow. “Shakespeare lived in the midst of an economic revolution that was changing Europe from an agrarian economy to a commercial economy, from a feudal and aristocratic society to a commercial, democratic, middle-class society”. The social, cultural and economic changes elsewhere in Europe were simultaneously taking place in England. However, Shylock’s conversation with Bassanio in Act I, Scene 3 reveals international trade in Venice was already in an advanced stage compared to England, specifically London at the time: “He hath an argosy bound to Tripolis, another to the Indies . . . , he hath a third at Mexico, a fourth for England”. The Christian ban on money lending was disrupting the developing monetary economics in Venice that was becoming an international hub towards the end of the 16th century, and the Jews as usurers saved the day. With the changing economies, Shakespeare foresees the potential in London to take over Venice as a commercial hub in the future (introduction to The Merchant of Venice). International trade that was gaining popularity in the Early Modern Period raised the need for functional finance and capital institutions. “The Early Modern era . . . thinkers, from John Calvin to Adam Smith, condemned excessive interest rates while accepting the need for loans with interest as part of Europe’s emerging capitalist economies”. Shakespeare’s London was commercialising and the Londoners were Christians. Therefore, lacked money lenders who were not restricted by Church laws to loan money. In Act 1, Scene 3 Shylock mopes that Antonio brings down the interest rates in Venice revealing aspects of lending and borrowing in Early Modern Age: SHYLOCK. He lends out money gratis and brings down The rate of usance here with us in Venice. Antonio could not lend money for interest as a Christian. Therefore, he lends money for no interest resulting in lower interest rates in the Venetian money market. Christian merchants like Antonio could not continue to lend money with no return when money must be invested in new ventures in a rapidly developing economy. On one hand, the Jews were monetarily liquid and unrestricted by religious laws that disallow them to lend money for interest. On the other hand, a multitude of money lenders in the economy reduces the borrowing cost of money. The Christian approach to usury in many ways forced the Jews into money lending in other parts of Europe. London could also benefit from Jewish money lenders by reconciling cultural and religious differences.

The considerably tolerant religious policies under Queen Elizabeth paved the path for possible Jewish resettlement in England. However, true reconciliation could only stem from a wholehearted conversation in the society on how they perceive the other group, overlook their differences and accept them as fellow human beings before they are invited back into England. Shakespeare’s play The Merchant of Venice invokes a conversation to build a mutually beneficial relationship between the two communities. The playwright presents the differences between the two religious groups. He further presents the many ways in which they could be useful to each other: BASSANIO. If it please you to dine with us. SHYLOCK. Yes, to smell port, to eat of the habitation which your prophet the Nazarite conjured the devil into. I will buy with you sell with you, talk with you, walk with you, and so following; but I will not eat with you, drink with you, nor pray with you. Shakespeare lays out ways in which the two communities can interact socially while observing their religions apart. As the essay demonstrates, by writing a Jew-hating play, Shakespeare pleases his audience in order to reach his audience. The play is anti-Semitic in order to reach the Elizabethan audience with a sly criticism of their treatment of the Jews. From a different perspective, The Merchant of Venice is a play about the Jew-haters (the Christians). Nonetheless, the play balances and challenges many different perspectives in a plea to be reasonable in the face of changing social and economic tides. By welcoming Jewish money lenders to facilitate the capital requirement in the economy, London had the potential to become the next international commercial hub in England and Europe. Shakespeare sees the future potentials in his city and guides his city to take advantage of the opportunities. The play is not an anti-Semitic play; it is a sly criticism of how Jews were treated by Christians and a call to overlook the religious differences for economic prosperity.

Works Cited

1. Abrahams, B. Lionel. “The Expulsion of the Jews from England in 1290.” The Jewish Quarterly Review, vol. 7, no. 1, University of Pennsylvania Press, October 1894, pp. 75-100. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1450332.
2. Ambrosino, Brandon. “Four Hundred Years Later, Scholars Still Debate Whether Shakespeare’s ‘Merchant of Venice’ Is Anti-Semitic.” Arts & Culture, Smithsonian Mag, www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/why-scholars-still-debate-whether-or-not-shakespeares-merchant-venice-anti-semitic-180958867.
3. Bronstein, Herbert. “Shakespeare, the Jews, and The Merchant of Venice.” Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 1, Oxford UP, 1969, pp. 3-10. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2868968.
4. Byrne, Philippa. “Why were the Jews expelled from England in 1290?” Resources-Schools, University of Oxford, 2017, www.history.ox.ac.uk/::ognode-62416::/files/teaching-resources-expulsion-jews.
5. Cooper, Zaki. “Christian approach to usury forced Jews into money lending.” Financial Times, The financial Times Ltd., www.ft.com/content/a7d42dc6-3604-11e5-b05b-b01debd57852.
6. Doran, Susan and Norman Jones, editors. “Awareness of the Outside World.” The Elizabethan World, Routledge, 2014, pp. 675. Gershon, Livia. “Usury in Historical Perspective.”
7. The Journal of Business Ethics, JSTOR Daily, daily.jstor.org/usury-historical-perspective. Kish-Goodling, Donna M. “Using ‘The Merchant of Venice’ in Teaching Monetary Economics.” The Journal of Economic Education, vol. 29, no. 4, Taylor & Francis, Ltd., 1998, pp. 330-39. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1182923.
8. Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Penguin Random House UK, 2015. Sierra, Horacio. New Reading of The Merchant of Venice. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2013, pp. 172. “The Emergence of Modern Europe, 1500–1648.” History of Europe, Encyclopedia Britannica, inc, britannica.com/topic/history-of-Europe/The-emergence-of-modern-Europe-1500-1648.