The Trial Of Shylock In Shakespeare's The Merchant Of Venice

In Shakespeares, The Merchant Of Venice, a Jewish moneylender, Shylock, was in trial over a contract. This contract was between Shylock and Antonio, another main character who was a Christian, which stated that Antonio must pay back the 3000 ducats that he borrowed in 3 months, in failure to do so Antonio must give Shylock one pound of his own flesh. Antonio failed to pay him back so a trial was held and the contract was presented so that Shylock could and would be allowed to collect “his” pound of flesh from Antonio. However, this trial is clearly presented as being unfair towards him for various reasons. In my opinion, as well as many other people, the trial was only unfair towards Shylock because he was a Jewish man. For starters, this trial can be called unfair because of the reason Shylock was unable to collect “his” one pound of flesh from Antonio that was stated in the contract between them. Even Balthazar said, “It must not be. There is no power in Venice Can alter a decree establishèd. 'Twill be recorded for a precedent, …show more content…
Why should Shylock 's fate be put on trial based on Christian Law when he is a Jew? What is considered a crime in a Christians point of view may not be a crime in the beliefs of a Jew. Just as both religions have different beliefs towards matters like this. Based on how Shylock acts towards Antonio, it seems that he believes in an eye for an eye. As well as for Christians, they believe more towards forgiveness and mercy which ironically they show little mercy towards Shylock in the trial. It is just unfair for a Jew to be held in trial in a Christian court. This is the same idea if it were the other way around, a Christian would not want to be in a Jewish court simply because they are two different religions with two different beliefs. So then why would a Jew be in Christian court? The answer is that they shouldn 't