‘Truth will come to light’: The Historical Prism

  • Joan Ozark Holmer
Chapter

Abstract

Generally applauded throughout the world today are the depth and variety of Shakespeare’s perceptions in pondering the human condition and his theatrical enactment of these insights in powerful dramatic form. But if we would claim Shakespeare as our contemporary, we must in reciprocal fairness attempt to be his contemporary as well. We must travel back in time to his world, with its own language, beliefs, habits, and perceptions. We should gratefully acknowledge that scholars have written extensively about the importance of the Ptolemaic model of the universe, the idea of hierarchical order governing the macrocosm and microcosm in this great Chain of Being, and the new philosophical theories as well as scientific discoveries that develop in the late Renaissance, eventually upending the traditional model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    C. S. Lewis, The Discarded Image: An Introduction to Medieval and Renaissance Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970) p. 222.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    C. W. R. D. Moseley, Shakespeare’s History Plays: Richard II to Henry V, Penguin Critical Studies, ed. Bryan Loughrey (London: Penguin, 1988) p. 5.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    For Renaissance critical theory, see William Rossky, ‘Imagination in the English Renaissance: Psychology and Poetic’, Studies in the Renaissance, 5 (1958) pp. 49–73, esp. 58–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cf. John Milton, Paradise Lost, ed. Merritt Y. Hughes (New York: Odyssey Press, 1962) Book V, 11. 100–9.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    O. B. Hardison, ‘Shakespearean Tragedy: The Mind in Search of the World’, UC, 6 (1986) p. 80.Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    Madeleine Doran, Endeavors of Art: A Study of Form in Elizabethan Drama (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1954) pp. 3–6, 370–6.Google Scholar
  7. 9.
    M. M. Mahood (ed.), The Merchant of Venice, New Cambridge Shakespeare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987) p. 8.Google Scholar
  8. 10.
    Lawrence Danson, The Harmonies of ‘The Merchant of Venice’ (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1978) p. 2.Google Scholar
  9. 11.
    Horace, Ars Poetica, in Satires, Epistles, and Ars Poetica, trans. H. Rushton Fairclough (1926; rev. & rpt. London: William Heinemann, 1929) pp. 478–9, ll 333–4, 343–4: ‘omne tulit punctum qui miscuit utile dulci, / Lectorem delectando pariterque monendo’.Google Scholar
  10. 12.
    See Sir Philip Sidney, An Apology for Poetry, ed. Forrest G. Robinson (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merill, 1970) pp. 23–4; 22, 38, 46.Google Scholar
  11. See Spenser, ‘A Letter… to … Sir Walter Raleigh’, in The Faerie Queene, ed. Thomas P. Roche, Jr (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1978) p. 15.Google Scholar
  12. 13.
    Milton, Areopagitica, in John Milton: Prose Selections, ed. Merritt Y. Hughes, Odyssey Series in Literature (New York: Odyssey Press, 1947) pp. 224–5.Google Scholar
  13. 14.
    Nashe, Pierce Penilesse (1592), in The Works of Thomas Nashe, ed. Ronald B. McKerrow, 5 vols (1904–10; rpt. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1958) vol. 1, pp. 213–14.Google Scholar
  14. 16.
    Arthur Sherbo (ed.), Johnson on Shakespeare: The Yale Edition of the Works of Samuel Johnson (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958–90) vol. 7 (1968) p. 62.Google Scholar
  15. 17.
    A. Kirsch, Shakespeare and the Experience of Love (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981) p. 4.Google Scholar
  16. See also Marion Trousdale’s astute analysis of a sixteenth-century view of language and literature in Shakespeare and the Rhetoricians (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1982) esp. pp. 114–18, 125–33, 146–51, 160–72.Google Scholar
  17. 18.
    Cf. Barbara Lewalski, ‘Biblical Allusion and Allegory in The Merchant of Venice’, SQ, 13 (1962) pp. 327–8.Google Scholar
  18. 19.
    John Milton, Paradise Lost, ed. Merritt Y. Hughes (New York: Odyssey Press, 1962) ll. 589–94, pp. 199–200.Google Scholar
  19. 20.
    See The Geneva Bible (a facsimile of the 1560 edition), intro. by Lloyd E. Berry (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969).Google Scholar
  20. 21.
    J. R. Brown (ed.), The Merchant of Venice (New Arden Shakespeare) (1955; rpt. London: Methuen, 1969) p. xxxvii.Google Scholar
  21. 22.
    See Richmond Noble, Shakespeare’s Biblical Knowledge and Use of the Book of Common Prayer (1935; rpt. New York: Octagon Books, 1970) pp. 6–12, 58–9.Google Scholar
  22. Cf. Naseeb Shaheen, Biblical References in Shakespeare’s Tragedies (Newark: University of Delaware Press; London and Toronto: Associated University Presses, 1987) pp. 27–8.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Frank McCombie, ‘Wisdom as Touchstone in The Merchant of Venice’, New Blackfriars, 64 (1982) n. 13Google Scholar
  24. Naseeb Shaheen, ‘Shakespeare’s Knowledge of the Bible — How Acquired’, ShakS, 20 (1988) p. 212.Google Scholar
  25. 27.
    In the extant vernacular drama of the Elizabethan period, there appear to be only four plays that feature Jewish characters: Wilson’s The Three Ladies of London (1584)Google Scholar
  26. Marlowe’s The few of Malta (1588; revival 1594)Google Scholar
  27. Greene’s Selimus (1594)Google Scholar
  28. and Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice (1597)Google Scholar
  29. 28.
    For information about several Jews in Elizabethan England, two ‘known’ (Joachim Ganz and Nathaniel Judah) and one secret (Ferdinand Alvares), see Salo W. Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews, 2nd edn, 16 vols (New York: Columbia University Press, 1952–76) vol. 15, pp. 126–7Google Scholar
  30. See R. Popkin, ‘A Jewish Merchant of Venice’, SQ, 40 (1989) pp. 329–31.Google Scholar
  31. 29.
    See Lucien Wolf, ‘Jews in Elizabethan England’, Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of England, 11 (1924–7) pp. 8–9Google Scholar
  32. C. J. Sisson, ‘A Colony of Jews in Shakespeare’s London’, E&S, 23 (1937) pp. 38–51Google Scholar
  33. Mahood, p. 19; Encyclopedia Judaica, 16 vols (Jerusalem: Encyclopedia Judaica, 1972) vol. 6, pp. 752–3.Google Scholar
  34. 30.
    See, e.g., Arthur B. Stonex, ‘The Usurer in Elizabethan Drama’, PMLA, 31 (1916) pp. 190–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Arthur B. Stonex, ‘Money Lending and Money-Lenders in England During the 16th and 17th Centuries’, in Schelling Anniversary Papers (New York: Russell & Russell, 1923) pp. 263–85Google Scholar
  36. Celeste Turner Wright, ‘Some Conventions Regarding the Usurer in Elizabethan Literature’, SP, 35 (1934) pp. 176–97Google Scholar
  37. Celeste Turner Wright, ‘The Usurer’s Sin in Elizabethan Literature’, SP, 35 (1938) pp. 178–94Google Scholar
  38. J. W. Draper, ‘Usury in The Merchant of Venice’, MP, 33 (1935) pp. 37–47Google Scholar
  39. E. C. Pettet, ‘The Merchant of Venice and the Problem of Usury’, E&S, 31 (1945) pp. 19–33Google Scholar
  40. Laura Caroline Stevenson, Praise and Paradox: Merchants and Craftsmen in Elizabethan Popular Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984) pp. 92–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. and Norman Jones, God and the Moneylenders: Usury and Law in Early Modern England (Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, 1989) pp. 29, 172–3Google Scholar
  42. 31.
    G. K. Hunter, ‘The Theology of Marlowe’s The Jew of Malta’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institute, 17 (1964) p. 214.Google Scholar
  43. 32.
    Alan C. Dessen, ‘The Elizabethan Stage Jew and Christian Example: Gerontus, Barabas, and Shylock’, MLQ, 35 (1974) pp. 231–45, esp. 243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 33.
    See Geoffrey Bullough (ed.), Narrative and Dramatic Sources of Shakespeare, 8 vols (1957; 5th imp. London and Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul and New York: Columbia University Press, 1977) vol. 1, pp. 450–1, 476–82.Google Scholar
  45. For an interesting but uneven argument that Wilson’s work is a source for Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice, see G. W. Cameron, Robert Wilson and the Plays of Shakespeare (Riverton, New Zealand: G. W. Cameron, 1982) pp. 68–72.Google Scholar
  46. 34.
    M. J. Landa, The Jew in Drama, intro. Murray Roston (1924; New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1969) p. 78.Google Scholar
  47. Cf. Barbara Tovey, ‘The Golden Casket: An Interpretation of The Merchant of Venice’, in Shakespeare as Political Thinker, eds John Alvis and Thomas G. West (Durham: Carolina Academic Press, 1981) pp. 233–4: ‘the play also contains a veiled criticism of Christianity … what Shakespeare takes to be a corresponding flaw in the principles of Christianity’.Google Scholar
  48. Cf. Walter Cohen, who suggests that although the Christians in the play ‘have fairly settled accounts with Shylock… the trouble is that Christianity has not’, see Walter Cohen, ‘The Merchant of Venice and the Possibilities of Historical Criticism’, ELH, 49 (1982) p. 773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 35.
    Heiko Augustinus Oberman, Wurzein des anti-Semitismus (The Roots of Anti-Semitism in the Age of Renaissance and Reformation), tr. James I. Porter (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984) p. xi, et passim, esp. Ch. 18, ‘The Jew and “We Wicked Christians’”, pp. 123–4, and ‘Epilogue: The Stony Path to Coexistence’, pp. 138–43.Google Scholar
  50. See Stanley M. Garn, Human Races (Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, 1961) pp. 3–9Google Scholar
  51. For the complicated modern identification of Jews, see John R. Baker, Race (New York and London: Oxford University Press, 1974) pp. 232–47.Google Scholar
  52. 37.
    See Michael Ragussis, ‘Representation, Conversion, and Literary Form: Harrington and the Novel of Jewish Identity’, Critical Inquiry, 16 (1989) pp. 113–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 38.
    For the entire play, see H. S. D. Mithdal (ed.), An Edition of Robert Wilson’s ‘Three Ladies of London’ and Three Lords and Three Ladies of London’, in The Renaissance Imagination, vol. 36 (New York: Garland, 1988).Google Scholar
  54. See William Monter, Ritual, Myth and Magic in Early Modern Europe (Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press, 1984) p. 156.Google Scholar
  55. 41.
    See David C. McPherson, Shakespeare, Jonson, and the Myth of Venice (Newark: University of Delaware Press; London and Toronto: Associated University Presses, 1990) pp. 61–7.Google Scholar
  56. 42.
    Cf. also, Salo W. Baron, Arcadius Kahan et al., Economic History of the Jews, ed. Nachum Gross (New York: Schocken Books, 1975) pp. 56–7.Google Scholar
  57. 43.
    Regarding the history of religious toleration, see also Joseph Lecler, S.J., Toleration and the Reformation (London: Association Press, 1960)Google Scholar
  58. Henry Kamen, The Rise of Toleration (New York: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1967)Google Scholar
  59. Elisabeth Labrousse, Pierre Bayle, 2 vols (The Hague, 1963–4)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 44.
    Elizabeth Labrousse, ‘Religious Toleration’, in Dictionary of the History of Ideas: Studies of Selected Pivotal Ideas, 4 vols (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1968–73) vol. 4, p. 114Google Scholar
  61. 45.
    For a modern literary portrayal of this matter, see the short story ‘The Lame Shall Enter First’, by Flannery O’Connor, in The Complete Stories (1946; rpt. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1974) pp. 445–82: ‘I don’t care if he’s good or not. He aint right!’ (p. 454).Google Scholar
  62. 48.
    See Joseph ben Gorion, A Compendious … History of the Latter Times of the Jews’ Common Weal, trans. Peter Morwyng (London: Richard Jugge, 1561).Google Scholar
  63. 57.
    See T. Wilson, A Discourse upon Usury [1572], ed. R. H. Tawney (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1925) p. 363.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    See Robert Pitcairn’s Criminal Trials in Scotland …, vol. 1, pt 2 (1569–1593) (Edinburgh: William Tail and London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green, & Longman, 1833) pp. 222–3.Google Scholar
  65. 67.
    C. Spencer, The Genesis of Shakespeare’s ‘The Merchant of Venice’, Studies in British Literature, vol. 3 (Lampeter, Dyfed, Wales: Edwin Mellen Press, 1988) pp. 79–80.Google Scholar
  66. 70.
    See Margaret Hotine, ‘The Politics of Anti-Semitism: The Jew of Malta and The Merchant of Venice’, N&Q, 38 (March 1991) pp. 35, 38.Google Scholar
  67. 71.
    See William Camden, Annates — Tomus Alter, & Idem: or The History of the Life and Reign of… Elizabeth, trans. Thomas Browne (London: Thomas Harper, 1629) p. 105.Google Scholar
  68. Cf. Arthur Dimock, ‘The Conspiracy of Dr. Lopez’, English Historical Review, 9 (1894) pp. 440–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 75.
    See Frank Marcham (ed.), The Prototype of Shylock: Lopez the Jew … An Opinion by Gabriel Harvey (London: Waterlow & Sons, 1927) p. 11.Google Scholar
  70. 77.
    See J. E. Neale, Queen Elizabeth I (1934; rpt. Harmondsworth: Pelican Books, 1971) p. 340.Google Scholar
  71. 84.
    See Irving Ribner (ed.), The Complete Plays of Christopher Marlowe (New York: Odyssey Press, 1963).Google Scholar
  72. 85.
    D. M. Cohen, ‘The Jew and Shylock’, SQ, 31 (1980) pp. 53–63.Google Scholar
  73. 88.
    Leonard Tennenhouse, Power on Display: The Politics of Shakespeare’s Genres (New York and London: Methuen, 1986) p. 56.Google Scholar
  74. 89.
    See Miles Mosse, The Arraignment and Conviction of Usury. That is, The iniquity and unlawfulness of usury, displayed in six Sermons, preached at Saint Edmunds Burie in Suffolke, upon Proverb 28.8 (London: Widow Orwin, 1595) pp. 30–2.Google Scholar
  75. 91.
    For a clear and concise summary, see Raymond De Roover, San Bernardino of Siena and Sant’ Antonino of Florence: The Two Great Economic Thinkers of the Middle Ages, in The Kress Library of Business and Economics, ed. James P. Baughman, no. 19 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press Printing Office, 1967) pp. 28–33.Google Scholar
  76. 92.
    For the development of the idea of ‘love’s wealth’, see John Russell Brown, Shakespeare and His Comedies, 2nd edn (London: Methuen, 1962) pp. 61–75Google Scholar
  77. 93.
    Thomas Moisan, ‘“Which is the merchant here? and which the Jew?”: Subversion and Recuperation in The Merchant of Venice’, in Shakespeare Reproduced: the Text in History and Ideology, eds Jean E. Howard and Marion F. O’Connor (New York and London: Methuen, 1987) p. 192.Google Scholar
  78. 97.
    Thomas Lodge, Wit’s Misery and the World’s Madness: Discovering the Devils Incarnate of This Age (1596), in The Works of Thomas Lodge, ed. Edmund W. Gosse, 4 vols (1883; rpt. New York: Russell & Russell, 1963) vol. 4, pp. 37–8.Google Scholar
  79. 104.
    Carl F. Taeusch, ‘The Concept of “Usury”’, JHI, 3 (1942) pp. 291–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 106.
    Gerald Friedlander, Shakespeare and the Jew (London: George Routledge & Sons; New York: E. P. Dutton, 1921) p. 5.Google Scholar
  81. 107.
    Cecil Roth, A Short History of the Jewish People, rev. and enl. edn (London: East and West Library, 1969) p. 215.Google Scholar
  82. 108.
    See David McPherson, ‘Lewkenor’s Venice and Its Sources’, RenQ, 41 (1988) p. 463 n. 23.Google Scholar
  83. 111.
    See John T. Noonan, The Scholastic Analysis of Usury (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1957) p. 35.Google Scholar
  84. All references to Chaucer’s works will be to The Works of Geoffrey Chaucer, ed. F. N. Robinson (Cambridge: Riverside Press, 1961).Google Scholar
  85. 112.
    J. Shatzmiller, Shylock Reconsidered: Jews, Moneylending, and Medieval Society (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990) p. 71.Google Scholar
  86. 114.
    Hermann Sinsheimer, Shylock: The History of a Character (1947; rpt. New York: Citadel, 1964) p. 131Google Scholar
  87. Benjamin Nelson, The Idea of Usury: From Tribal Brotherhood to Universal Otherhood, 2nd edn (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969) pp. 99–100Google Scholar
  88. 118.
    See W. Perkins, A Golden Chain, trans. R. H., 2nd edn (Cambridge: John Legatt, 1592) sigs N8r-0.Google Scholar
  89. 120.
    John Lyon, The Merchant of Venice, Harvester New Critical Introductions to Shakespeare (Hertfordshire: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1988) p. 27.Google Scholar
  90. 123.
    See, e.g., Richard Greaves, Society and Religion in Elizabethan England (Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1981) pp. 599–608Google Scholar
  91. I. P. Ellis, ‘The Archbishop and the Usurers’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 21 (1970) pp. 33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 124.
    See Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans. Talcott Parsons, 2nd imp. (1930; London: G. Allen & Unwin, 1948).Google Scholar
  93. R. H. Tawney, Religion and the Rise of Capitalism (1926; rpt. New York: Penguin Books, 1947).Google Scholar
  94. 125.
    See R. C. Evans, ‘Shakespeare, Sutton, and Theatrical Satire: An Unreported Allusion to Falstaff’, SQ, vol. 40 (1989) p. 493.Google Scholar
  95. 128.
    Robert Wilson’s The Three Ladies of London (1584) is not generally accepted as a source for our play, but in it a Jewish moneylender in Turkey is opposed by a despicable Christian merchant from Italy. Bullough rightly identifies Wilson’s Gerontus as ‘an entirely virtuous moneylender’ (p. 450).Google Scholar
  96. 129.
    P. N. Siegel, ‘Shylock and the Puritan Usurers’, in Studies in Shakespeare, ed. Arthur D. Matthews and Clark M. Emery (Coral Gables: University of Miami Press, 1953) pp. 129–38.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Joan Ozark Holmer 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joan Ozark Holmer

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations