Chapter XIII: Act V (2)

Plutarch mentions the “spirits running up and down in the night”; Vergil, that “spectres strangely pale were seen under cloud of night.”[45] Ovid[46] says: “And everywhere appeared ghastly spryghtes” (Golding). Lucan mentions the ghosts; so does Lydgate. But none of the above state that “graves have yawned and yielded up their dead.” Pescetti supplies a close parallel:

“Si son visti grand’ombre, de’ sepolcri
Uscite, andar per la città vagando,
Nelle persone alto terror mettendo.”

The battle in the clouds is mentioned by Ovid,[47]

“For battells feyghting in the cloudes with crasshing armour flew,
And dreadfull trumpets sownded in the ayre, and homes eeke blew.”

(Golding.)

Lucan says: “Trumpets sounded and black night, amid the silent shades, sent forth an uproar as that with which the cohorts are mingled in combat.”[48] In Shakespeare the combat is closely associated with the drizzling of blood upon the Capitol. This is not found in Lucan, while Ovid, in a detached phrase, says:

“It often rayned droppes of blood.”[49] (Golding.)

Shakespeare speaks of the “noise of battle hurtling in the air” and of the groans of the dying. Pescetti has all that Ovid mentions in this connection, closely connected and associated with the shouts and groans in the heavens. This latter is not found in Ovid.

“Giunon con spaventosi, orribil tuoni,
Con spessi lampi, e fulmini tremendi,
Con infauste comete, con istrane
Pioggie di sangue, e grandini di pietre,
Con sembianze di pugne, con orrendi
Strepiti di tamburi, e suon di trombe,
Con alte grida, pianti, urli, e lamenti,
Uditi nel suo regno hà mostro, quanto
Sia contra noi d’ira, e di sdegno accesa.”—P. 74.

The comet is mentioned by Plutarch, but as occurring after Caesar’s death. Lucan mentions comets; so do Vergil and Ovid. They are also in Pescetti. The omen of the beast without a heart is recorded by Plutarch, but not as occurring on the day of the assassination. Appian so has it and so it appears in Pescetti.

From the foregoing it is evident that Shakespeare could have derived through Pescetti the omens not mentioned by Plutarch. The Italian seems to have made use of all the generally available authorities. There is, however, one omen mentioned by Shakespeare which is not found in any of the assumed sources. There is no mention of the lions which Casca saw, nor of the lioness which whelped in the street. Vergil speaks of the “ill-omened dogs” and of “cities resounding with the howling of wolves by night.”[50] Lucan[51] supplies a closer parallel.

“... wild beasts were seen,
Leaving the woods, lodge in the streets of Rome.”[52]

Lions are not mentioned, but Lydgate, translating Boccaccio, who in turn derived from Lucan, has the following:

“Lyons and wolves came down from the forest
Wyth many other beastes sauagyne;
Came to the cite, and some agayne kynde,
Spake as do men in Bochas as I fynde.”[53]

Pescetti goes as far as Ovid or Vergil. Following them, he writes,

“Per le piazze, alle case, a i tempi intorno,
Notturni cani urlar si son uditi.”—P. 75.

Yet none of the sources quoted above makes mention of the lioness whelping in the streets. Lydgate affords the closest parallel, and was probably one of Shakespeare’s sources unless we are willing to concede to the dramatist a far deeper and wider knowledge of the classics than even the most enthusiastic advocates of his learning have dared to maintain. The whelping of beasts is noted as ominous in Julius Obsequens;[54] but Shakespeare could hardly have derived from such an obscure authority.

From the foregoing examination of the various portents and prodigies included in “Julius Caesar” it is evident that, excluding those plainly derived from Plutarch, and the matter of the lions, Shakespeare could have obtained all the rest from Pescetti. Owing to his habitual method of manipulating and transforming material not directly found in his main source, it becomes exceedingly difficult definitely to fix the dramatist’s obligations to his minor sources. The case under consideration is typical. It is certain that Plutarch did not furnish all the hints Shakespeare employed. There seems to be no good reason for denying him a knowledge of Ovid. He certainly was acquainted with Golding’s translation. Nor can we fairly assume ignorance of such a mine of information as Lydgate’s work furnishes. It is altogether probable that in the composition of the particular scenes discussed, Shakespeare employed a wider range of sources than has been credited. Nevertheless, while he might have built up his incidents from a selection from various authors, Pescetti’s account, containing in its one hundred and three lines by far the most comprehensive extant account of the omens, set with an eye to dramatic effect in a tragedy dealing with the death of Caesar, and accompanied by touches not recorded elsewhere, formed the most convenient source for the dramatist.

Besides, Shakespeare’s whole handling of the supernatural element is reminiscent of Pescetti’s use of the same material. The Italian sought to give his drama a portentous background; Shakespeare succeeded in doing so in a manner which, however greatly superior dramatically, seems nevertheless but an extension of Pescetti’s efforts.

The evidence herein presented is cumulative; the case for Pescetti does not rest here. Not only could Shakespeare have derived from Pescetti the historical matter not found in Plutarch, but his treatment of certain original scenes in his drama bears a very close resemblance to the same scenes as they occur in “Cesare.” This is particularly striking in portions of the Brutus-Cassius action.

-----

Footnote 25:

In Pescetti the Priest’s recital of the omens consists of some one
hundred and three lines. Muretus has Calpurnia’s recital to the nurse
of the dream wherein she beheld Caesar’s bleeding body, and the
following:

_Calp_: Audere desine tu prius
Tuaeque si adeo spernis uxoris metum
Movere vatum oraculis minacibus,
Periculosam qui tibi hanc lucem admonent:
Si spectra, si te auspicia, si fibrae monent
Cavere, et hunc meum timorem comprobant:
Quid in paratam pertinax mortem ruis?

_Caes_: Quando timorem ponere aliter non potes,
Ne nos tibi queraris omnino nihil
Tribuere, mittatur Senatus in hunc diem. Lines 343–52.

Hereupon D. Brutus protests to Caesar and the latter yields. Grévin
has substantially the same account. For Muretus and Grévin I use
Collischonn’s reprint. See Bibliography.

Footnote 26:

Life of Caesar, p. 98, Skeat’s edition.

Footnote 27:

Op. cit., p. 194.

Footnote 28:

Rather Appian’s almost parallel account.

Footnote 29:

In the “Cornélie” of Garnier (1574) he also warns Caesar.

Footnote 30:

Pharsalia, Book IX., lines 1–23.

Footnote 31:

J. C., Act I., Sc. III, L. 1–32.

Footnote 32:

In Hamlet I, I, 113 seq. we read.

_Hor._ A mote it is to trouble the mind’s eye.
In the most high and palmy state of Rome,
A little ere the mightiest Julius fell,
The graves stood tenantless, and the sheeted dead,
Did squeak and gibber in the Roman streets;
As stars with trains of fire and dews of blood,
Disasters in the sun; and the moist star
Upon whose influence Neptune’s empire stands,
Was sick almost to doomsday with eclipse.
And even the like precurse of fierce events—
As harbingers preceding still the fates,
And prologue to the omen coming on,—
Have heaven and earth together demonstrated
Unto our climatures and country men.—

The text is obviously corrupt. These lines do not appear in the Folio,
nor is there any trace of them in the earliest quarto. It has been
conjectured that the poet suppressed this passage in representation,
after he had written “Julius Caesar.” Certainly the similarity to
Pescetti is striking. The “dews of blood” are again mentioned; also
the eclipse of the moon, neither occurring in Plutarch.

Footnote 33:

In an account of a visit to London written by Thomas Platter, a
merchant of Basle, he mentions a performance of “Julius Caesar,” Sept.
21, 1599. (Ency. Brit., XI. ed., Art. Shakespeare.)

Footnote 34:

See “Georgics,” Book I., lines 463–488, for Vergil’s account of the
omens.

Footnote 35:

Lucan’s account is found in the Pharsalia, Bk. I., lines 523–583;
Ovid’s in the Metamorphoses, Bk. XV., lines 783–798.

Footnote 36:

Lydgate’s “Fall of Princes,” Boke Sixte, Chap. XI., Leaf CXLVI.,
Edition of 1558 (see Bibliography).

Footnote 37:

Translation by Golding, Ed. 1575.

Footnote 38:

Works of Christopher Marlowe. Edited by Alexander Dyce. London. Wm.
Pickering, 1850.

Footnote 39:

Tethys maioribus undis
Hesperiam Calpen summumque impleuit Atlanta. Phar. Bk. I, L.
555.

Footnote 40:

Proluit insano contorquens vertice silvas
Fluviorum rex Eridanus, camposque per omnes
Cum stabulis armenta tulit. Geo. Bk. 1, L. 481 ff. Ed.
Teubner.

Footnote 41:

Translation by Davidson. Harper’s Classical Library, New York, 1896.

Footnote 42:

Lydgate says:

Another token pitous for here
Which astonied many a proude Romayne
Dead bodies dyd in the feldes appere
Which in battayle had afore be slayne,
Fro their tombes rising where they layne,

Footnote 43:

Obscenaeque canes importunaeque volucres
Signa dabant. Georgics, Bk. I., line 470.

Footnote 44:

Tristia mille locis Stygius dedit omina bubo. Met., Bk. XV. Ed.
Teubner. L. 791.

This Golding quaintly translates,

The Screeche owle sent from hell,
Did with her tune unfortunate in every corner yell.

Footnote 45:

et simulacra modis pallentia miris
Visa sub obscurum noctis. L. 477. Georg. I.

Footnote 46:

umbrasque silentum
Erravisse ferunt. L. 797. Met., XV.

Footnote 47:

Arma ferunt inter nigras crepitantia nubes,
Terribilesque tubas, auditaque cornua caelo. Met., XV. Ll.
783–4.

Footnote 48:

Insonuere tubae et quanto clamore cohortes
Miscentur tantum nox astra silentibus umbris Phar., Bk. I.,
578–80.
Edidit.

Vergil has,

Armorum sonitum toto Germania caelo
Audiit. Georg., Bk. I., l. 474.

Footnote 49:

Saepe inter nimbos guttae cecidere cruentae. Met., Bk. XV.,
l. 788.

Appian mentions the rain of blood in connection with the crossing of
the Rubicon.

Footnote 50:

. . . . . . . .; et altae
Per noctem resonare lupis ululantibus urbes. Geo., Bk. I.,
l. 486.

Footnote 51:

Siluisque feras sub nocte relictis
Audaces media posuisse cubilia Roma. Phar., Bk. I, ll.
559–60.

Footnote 52:

Translation by Marlowe.

Footnote 53:

Falls of Princes, Bk. VI.

Footnote 54:

Julius Obsequens, CXV., mentioned by Sykes in op. cit.

THE BRUTUS-CASSIUS SCENES

Especially important for our purpose is the fact that Pescetti makes use of materials and situations not found in the historians but later used by Shakespeare. Of these perhaps the most significant is to be found in the conversation between Brutus and Cassius regarding Antony. This is one of the most striking parallels to be found in the play. In Pescetti, as later in Shakespeare, Cassius strenuously favors the killing of Antony along with Caesar, and the reasons he advances are almost exactly those found in Shakespeare. As in the latter’s tragedy, Brutus allows his magnanimity to overbalance his prudence, so in Pescetti, Brutus uses almost the same arguments against Cassius’ plan as he uses in Shakespeare’s work.

Plutarch nowhere specifically states that Cassius opposed Antony’s entry into the conspiracy, or suggested his death.[55] Thus in the life of Marcus Antonius we read: “This was a good encouragement for Brutus and Cassius to conspire his death, who fell into a consort with their trustiest friends, to execute their enterprise, but yet stood doubtful whether they should make Antonius privy to it or not. All the rest liked of it, saving Trebonius only. He told them that, when they rode to meet Caesar on his return out of Spain, Antony and he always keeping company, and lying together by the way, he felt his mind afar off; but Antonius finding his meaning, would hearken no more unto it, and yet notwithstanding, never made Caesar acquainted with this talk, but had faithfully kept it to himself. After that, they consulted whether they should kill Antonius with Caesar. But Brutus would in nowise consent to it, saying, that venturing on such an enterprise as that, for the maintenance of law and justice, it ought to be clear from all villany.”[56] In the life of Marcus Brutus, Plutarch writes: “For it was set down and agreed between them, that they should kill no man but Caesar only, and should entreat all the rest to look to defend their liberty. All the conspirators, but Brutus,[57] determining upon this matter, thought it good also to kill Antonius, because he was a wicked man, and that in nature favored tyranny; besides, also, for he was in great estimation with soldiers, having been conversant of long time amongst them; and especially having a mind bent to great enterprises, he was also of great authority at that time, being Consul with Caesar. But Brutus would not agree to it. First, for that he said it was not honest; secondly, because he told them that there was hope of change in him. For he did not mistrust but that Antonius, being a noble-minded and courageous man (when he should know that Caesar was dead), would willingly help his country to recover her liberty, having them an example unto him to follow their courage and virtue.”[58]

In Pescetti the conspiracy has been hatched before the play begins, as is evident from the following lines. Thus Cassius, finding Brutus in the gloom of early morning apostrophizing the shade of Pompey, asks:

“Qual pensier ti molesta, e si per tempo
Abbandonar ti fa le molli piume?”—P. 15.

to which Brutus replies,

“Oggi, Cassio, disposto ho di dar fine
A quel, che già per noi s’è divisato.”—P. 16.

namely, the death of the tyrant. Brutus and Cassius enter the temple to pray for the success of their enterprise, while the Priest, and then the Chorus holds the stage. On their reappearance immediately thereafter, the two conspirators discuss the details of the assassination. I will quote the entire dialogue relating to Antony.

_Cas._— Parmi d’avere scorto in Marcantonio
Disio di dominar: perciò s’in tutto
Vogliam la patria assicurar, spegniamo
Anco lui col Tiranno, e fuor de gli occhi
Tragghiamci questo stecco, che potrebbe,
Quando che sia, non poca briga darne.
Che tu sai ben, quanto li siano amici
I veterani, e quanto acconcio ei sia
Gli animi a concitar del volgo insano.

_Bru._— S’ad altri, oltre al Tiranno, darem morte,
Si stimerà dal volgo, che le cose
Sempre stravolge, e falsamente espone,
Che non disio di liberar la patria,
Ma privato odio, e brama di vendetta
A ciò sospinti n’abbia, e di quell’opra,
Onde da noi s’attende eterna fama,
N’acquisterem vergogna, e biasmo eterno:
E dove nome di pietà cerchiamo,
Sarem del titol d’empietà notati;
Nè perciò a noi gran fatto avrem giovato;
Che non è Marcantonio huom, di cui deggia
Altri temer gran fatto, un’huomo al ventre
Dedito, e al sonno, e ne’ piacer venerei,
Nelle dissolutioni, e nell’ebbrezze
Snervato, e rotto osarà prender l’arme
Contra color, che nulla ebber giammai
Amicizia con l’ozio, o col piacere,
Ma tutta trapassar lor vita in duri
Studi et in faticosi aspri esercizi?
E ’l veder a che fin pervengan quelli,
Ch’altrui cercan di tor la libertade,
E la recente morte del Tiranno
Spaventarallo in guisa, che s’in lui
Fosse di dominar alcun disio
Subito spegnerassi. Cas.—È Marcantonio
Dedito certo all’ozio, et ai piaceri,
Ma di lui per contrario non si trova
Altri più forte, e coraggioso, e delle
Fatiche, e de’disagi paziente,
Quando e’fa d’uopo; onde si poca stima
Non è da far di lui: di ciò che dica
Il volgo, il volgo sciocco, ben dovemo
Noi poco conto far, che chi si muove
Per le voci del volgo, è più del volgo
Lieve, e incostante. Br. In somma e’non si deve
Punir, chi non hà errato, e a me non basta
L’animo di dar morte a chi nocciuto
Non m’hà, nè fatto ingiuria. Cas. A me più saggio
Sembra colui che’l suo nemico uccide
Pria, che l’offenda, che colui, che dopo
Ch’è stato offeso, vendica l’ingiuria.

_Bru._— Non il pensier, ma l’opra punir vuolsi;
Oltra, che chi m’accerta, ch’ei tal mente
Abbia, qual dici? Chi può dentro il petto
Suo penetrar? e ciò, che vi nasconde,
Veder? Gli uman pensier sol Giove intende.

_Cas._— Bruto, tu se’ troppo pietoso: voglia
Il Ciel, che questa tua pietà non sia
Un giorno a noi crudel. Nel risanare
Dall’ulcere nascenti i corpi il ferro,
E ’l fuoco oprar convien, che tu ben sai,
Che ’l medico pietoso infistolisce
La piaga, e spesso tutto il corpo infetta.

_Bru._— Col troncar della testa all’altre membra
Troncasi ogni vigore, ogni possanza.

_Cas._— Nell’ Idra ov’una testa si troncava,
Ivi ne rinascean subito sette.

_Bru._— Pur alla fine anch’ella estinta giacque.

_Cas._— Sì, ma da un figlio dell’eterno Giove.

_Bru._— Chiunque ama virtù, figlio è di Giove;
Ma ciò lasciam da parte, et ogni nostro
Pensier intorno si raggiri, e volga
Alla morte di Giulio.[59]—Pp. 25–27.

In Shakespeare we have the following:

_Dec._— Shall no man else be touched but only Caesar?

_Cas._— Decius, well urged: I think it is not meet,
Mark Antony, so well beloved of Caesar,
Should outlive Caesar: we shall find of him
A shrewd contriver; and you know his means,
If he improve them, may well stretch so far
As to annoy us all: which to prevent,
Let Antony and Caesar fall together.

_Bru._— Our course will seem too bloody, Caius Cassius,
To cut the head off and then hack the limbs,
Like wrath in death and envy afterwards;
For Antony is but a limb of Caesar:
Let us be sacrificers, but not butchers, Caius.
We all stand up against the spirit of Caesar,
And in the spirit of men there is no blood:
O, that we then could come by Caesar’s spirit,
And not dismember Caesar! But, alas,
Caesar must bleed for it. And, gentle friends,
Let’s kill him boldly, but not wrathfully;
Let’s carve him as a dish fit for the gods,
Not hew him as a carcass fit for hounds;
And let our hearts, as subtle masters do,
Stir up their servants to an act of rage
And after seem to chide ’em. This shall make
Our purpose necessary and not envious:
Which so appearing to the common eyes,
We shall be call’d purgers, not murderers.
And for Mark Antony, think not of him;
For he can do no more than Caesar’s arm
When Caesar’s head is off.

_Cas._— Yet I fear him,
For in the ingrafted love he bears to Caesar—

_Bru._— Alas! good Cassius, do not think of him:
If he love Caesar, all that he can do
Is to himself, take thought, and die for Caesar;
And that were much he should, for he is given
To sports, to wildness and much company.

_Treb._— There is no fear in him; let him not die;
For he will live and laugh at this hereafter.

—II., i, ll. 154–191.[60]

The statements in the above quotation which can, however faintly, be traced to Plutarch, are the love of Antony for Caesar, his power both as Consul and general, his ambitious mind, and, at some length, his loose manner of living.[61] But nowhere does the biographer mention this last among the reasons urged by Brutus for his salvation, nor that he was but a “limb of Caesar.” Nor, in the handling of this scene by either Pescetti or Shakespeare do we find Brutus considering Antony a noble-minded man, who, once Caesar were dead, would gladly help his country regain her liberty.

The reasons urged by Cassius are in substance exactly the same in Pescetti as in Shakespeare. They are either entirely absent, or only faintly indicated in scattered hints throughout Plutarch or Appian. The similarity is at times almost verbal. Thus Cassius, in urging the death of Antony says:

E fuor degli occhi
Tragghiamci questo stecco, che potrebbe,
Quando che sia, non poca briga darne.

Translated this reads,

And from our eyes
Let us pluck this thorn, which might,
Some time or other, cause us no little annoyance.

Shakespeare makes Cassius exclaim,

And you know his means
If he improve them, may well stretch so far
As to annoy us all.

Sir William Alexander in his “Tragedy of Julius Caesar” (circa 1604–7), in the course of the same debate, puts the following in the mouth of Cassius:

Well Brutus, I protest against my will
From this black cloud, whatever tempest fall,
That mercy but most cruelly doth kill,
Which saves one, who once may plague us all.

Works of Stirling. Edition 1870, Glasgow, p. 280.

While it is still to be proved that Alexander borrowed anything from Shakespeare, it is certain, as will be shown later,[62] that he not only followed Grévin, but also derived many hints from Pescetti. Although Plutarch was a common source for all three authors, it is certainly remarkable to find them all, in the same scene, using exactly the same term to characterize the threatened activity of Antony. Pescetti, Shakespeare, and Alexander agree in making Cassius urge the conspirators to kill him, for fear, that if spared, he might _annoy_ them all.

Cassius says further:

... We shall find of him
A shrewd contriver;

And in a later scene when Brutus says of Antony,

“I know that we shall have him well to friend,”

Cassius replies,

“I wish we may. But yet have I a mind
That fears him much; and my misgiving still
Falls shrewdly to the purpose” (Act III., Sc. 1, ll.
144–147).

And again, in the scene between Brutus and Cassius regarding the former’s resolve to permit Antony to speak at Caesar’s funeral, Cassius urges:

Brutus, a word with you,
(_Aside to Bru._) You know not what you do: do not consent
That Antony speak in his funeral:
Know you how much the people may be moved
By that which he will utter?—III., Sc. 1, ll. 232–236.

All this is very similar to Cassius’ argument:

“Che tu sai ben, quanto li siano amici
I veterani, e quanto acconcio ei sia
Gli animi a concitar del volgo insano.”

As Brutus cannot be persuaded, Cassius adds:

“I know not what may fall; I like it not.”—III., 1, l. 244.

In Pescetti, his reply to Brutus’ magnanimous but shortsighted attitude is:

“Bruto, tu se’ troppo pietoso: voglia
Il Ciel, che questa tua pietà non sia
Un giorno a noi crudel.”

All that Plutarch gives us of Brutus’ counter-arguments is as follows:

“First, for he said it was not honest; secondly, because he told
them that there was hope of change in him.”[63]

Furthermore, we read:

“But Brutus would in nowise consent to it, saying, that venturing on
such an enterprise as that, for the maintenance of law and justice,
it ought to be clear from all villany.”[64]

In Pescetti, Brutus says:

“S’ad altri, oltre al Tiranno, darem morte,
Si stimerà dal volgo, che le cose
Sempre stravolge, e falsamente espone,
Che non disio di liberar la patria,
Ma privato odio, e brama di vendetta
A ciò sospinti n’abbia, e di quell’opra,
Onde da noi s’attende eterna fama,
N’acquisterem vergogna, e biasmo eterno;
E dove nome di pietà cerchiamo,
Sarem del titol d’empietà notati:
Nè perciò a noi gran fatto avrem giovato.”[65]

Note his solicitude for the opinions of the people. Witness the parallelism, almost verbal at times, between the above and Shakespeare’s treatment.

“... This shall make
Our purpose necessary and not envious;
Which so appearing to the _common_ eyes,
We shall be called purgers, not murderers.”

Again in Pescetti:

_Bru._— “. . . . . . . In somma e’ non si deve
Punir, chi non hà errato, e a me non basta
L’animo di dar morte a chi nocciuto
Non m’hà, nè fatto ingiuria.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Col troncar della testa all’altre membra
Troncasi ogni vigor, ogni possanza.”[66]

Compare this with Shakespeare:

_Bru._— “Our course will seem too bloody, Caius Cassius,
To cut the head off and then hack the limbs,
Like wrath in death and envy afterwards;
For Antony is but a limb of Caesar:
Let us be sacrificers, but not butchers, Caius.

. . . . .

And as for Mark Antony, think not of him,
For he can do no more than Caesar’s arm
When Caesar’s head is off.”

Again Pescetti’s Brutus says:

_Bru._— “Che non è Marcantonio huom di cui deggia
Altri temer gran fatto, un’huomo al ventre
Dedito, e al sonno, e ne’ piacer venerei
Nelle dissolutioni, e nell’ebbrezze
Snervato, e rotto osarà prender l’arme
Contra color, che nulla ebber giammai
Amicizia con l’ozio, e col piacere.”

Thus in Shakespeare:

_Bru._— “And that were much he should, for he is given
To sports, wildness and much company.”[67]

Not only are these scenes in both dramatists almost exactly parallel in sentiment, but the abruptness of the conclusion and the sequence of the following scenes are noteworthy. Pescetti dismisses the idea thus:

_Bru._— “Chiunque ama virtù, figlio è di Giove;
Ma ciò lasciam da parte, e ogni nostro
Pensier intorno si raggiri, e volga
Alla morte di Giulio.”—P. 27.

In Shakespeare, Trebonius, whom Plutarch represents as opposing Antony’s entry into the conspiracy, lightly dismisses the subject:

_Treb._— “There is no fear in him; let him not die;
For he will live and laugh at this hereafter.”—II., 1, ll.
190–92.

It is peculiar that in both Pescetti and Shakespeare the sequence of the immediately following scenes is the same. In the former Brutus proceeds to detail the plans for Caesar’s assassination, and as he finishes, Portia enters. He concludes:

“Ma giamo ad informar del tutto gli altri,
Acciò gli spirti destino, e le forze,
Et apparecchin l’arme all’alta impresa.”—P. 28.

This is closely followed by the entry of Portia. In Shakespeare the conspirators discuss ways and means of getting Caesar to the Capitol.

Towards the conclusion we have:

_Cas._— “The morning comes upon’s: we’ll leave you, Brutus:
And, friends, disperse yourselves; but all remember
What you have said and show yourselves true Romans.”

—II., 1, 221.

Soon after Portia enters. It is also noteworthy that Brutus and Cassius in both plays perfect their plans in the early morning. There is no warrant for this in Plutarch or Appian.

Another striking parallel in situation and treatment is to be found in the behavior of the conspirators during the conversation of Lenate (Popilius Lena) with Caesar immediately preceding the murder. This is Plutarch’s[68] account: “Another Senator, called Popilius Lena, after he had saluted Brutus more friendly than he was wont to do, he rounded softly in their ears, and told them: ‘I pray the gods you may go through with that you have taken in hand; but withal dispatch, I reade you, for your enterprise is bewrayed.’ When he had said, he presently departed from them, and left them both afraid that their conspiracy would out.... When Caesar came out of his litter, Popilius Lena (that had talked before with Brutus and Cassius, and had prayed the gods they might bring their enterprise to pass) went unto Caesar, and kept him a long time with a talk. Caesar gave good ear unto him: wherefore the conspirators (if so they should be called) not hearing what he said to Caesar, but conjecturing by that he had told them a little while before that his talk was none other than the very discovery of their conspiracy, they were afraid every man of them; and, one looking in another’s face, it was easy to see that they were of a mind, that it was no tarrying for them till they were apprehended, but rather that they should kill themselves with their own hands. And when Cassius and certain other clapped their hands on their swords under their gowns to draw them, Brutus, marking the countenance and gesture of Lena, and considering that he did use himself rather like an humble and earnest suitor than like an accuser, he said nothing to his companions (because there were many amongst them that were not of the conspiracy) but with a pleasant countenance encouraged Cassius. And immediately after Lena went from Caesar, and kissed his hand; which showed plainly that it was for some matter concerning himself that he had held him so long in talk.”[69]

Note that Plutarch, outside of Lena’s remark, cites no sayings of the conspirators, but describes their demeanor only. Appian does likewise. Pescetti follows his account faithfully, but in spirit very similar to Shakespeare’s treatment. In Pescetti, Caesar is accosted by Lena, who begs a favor for a friend. Their conversation is entirely too lengthy for dramatic effectiveness. Previous to this episode, Brutus, at the beginning of the fourth act, confides to Cassius his belief that the conspiracy will be discovered, if indeed it has not already been revealed to Caesar. Among other statements he says:

“Senza sangue rimasi dianzi, quando
Ci s’appressò Lenate, et in disparte
Trattine, nell’orecchia fin felice
All’impresa auguronne, e dubitai,
Che già non fosse discoperto il tutto.”—P. 88.

In the scene between Lenate and Caesar, Cassius, marking the former’s approach to the Dictator, says,

“Bruto, noi siam spediti; ecco Lenate,
Che ragiona con Cesare in secreto.”—P. 107.

And then following:

_Bru._— Questo ch’importa a noi?

_Cas._— Come ch’importa?
Non sai, se la congiura gli è palese?

_Bru._— T’intendo: ahi che valor, dove fortuna
S’opponga, nulla val. Stiam preparati,
Per proveder, se fia bisogno, al nostro
Scampo, e alla libertà farci la strada,
Se non possiam con altro, col passarci
Co’pugnali l’un l’altro il fianco, o ’l petto.—P. 107.

Lenate and Caesar continue their talk. Cassius’ fears are increasing. He says,

“Gli occhi teniamo intenti, e se fa cenno
Che presi siam, pria che ci leghi alcuno,
Sciogliam noi l’alma da corporei lacci.”—P. 107.

Near the end of the conversation Brutus says,

“Respira, ò Cassio, che li parla d’altro,
Per quel, che di quì posso dal sembiante
Comprender, e da gesti.”—P. 109.

After Lenate leaves Caesar, Cassius, turning to the former, exclaims,

“M’è ritornata l’anima nel corpo.
Il tuo parlar con Cesare n’hà messo,
Lenate, in gran spavento?”

To which Lenate replies,

“Dubitando
Della mia fede, avete dubitato,
Ch’un muto parli. Sievi pure il cielo
Propizio, com’io vi sarò fedele.”

This entire scene, as others in Pescetti, make us regret that his slavish subservience to his models caused him to smother his dramatic ability in an avalanche of verbiage. He shows, in spite of many omissions, a true perception of the dramatic possibilities of his material. Had he only been able to condense his work by almost three-quarters, his tragedy would rank high as a representative of its type. Shakespeare uses the same material, takes out his few ounces of gold, and casts away the tons of dross. Nothing that can impede the swiftly approaching climax is tolerated, yet everything necessary to heighten the suspense is introduced.

_Pop._— I wish your enterprise to-day may thrive.

_Cas._— What enterprise, Popilius?

_Pop._— Fare you well
(_Advances to Caesar_)

_Bru._— What said Popilius Lena?

_Cas._— He wished to-day our enterprise might thrive.
I fear our purpose is discovered.

_Bru._— Look, how he makes to Caesar: mark him.

_Cas._— Casca,
Be sudden, for we fear prevention.
Brutus, what shall be done? If this be known,
Cassius, or Caesar never shall turn back,
For I will slay myself.

_Bru._— Cassius, be constant:
Popilius Lena speaks not of our purposes;
For, look he smiles, and Caesar doth not change.[70]

These scenes are not only significant from a critical standpoint; they are historically of prime importance. In Muretus and Grévin the matter of Antony’s entry into the conspiracy is confined to a few lines; Pescetti is the first to give it more importance and the first to employ material which later reappears in Shakespeare’s work. The Popilius Lena scene is even more important, for it is in “Cesare” that we find the first dramatic treatment of this significant episode. Shakespeare’s treatment almost exactly parallels the work of his humble predecessor.

Pescetti seemed well aware of the dramatic value of suspense. In “Julius Caesar”, Shakespeare’s use of this device is much commended, but in this particular play he seems to have been anticipated by the Italian. The preceding scene is not the only one wherein it is employed by Pescetti. Some time before, D. Brutus joins Cassius and M. Brutus, deploring the perversity of fortune.[71] He fears that Caesar has scented the conspiracy and will not attend that day’s session of the Senate. The introduction of this matter at this time strongly resembles Shakespeare’s use of the same device, under the same circumstances. Cassius says to D. Brutus:

_Cas._— Bruto tu sè turbato.

_D. B._— E n’hò cagione.

_Cas._— Che c’è?

_D. B._— S’appon fortuna, à desir nostri.

_Cas._— . . . . . . . . . . . . .
“Ma che cosa incontrat’è, ch’interrompe
I nostri alti disegni?

_D. B._— S’è pentito
D’ir in Senato Cesar, e dimane
Come dianzi vi dissi, prende à guardia,
Del corpo suo cinquanta huomini eletti:
Et ò pur, che non abbia qualche cosa
Della congiura, e dell’ insidie udito.”—Pp. 92–93.

In Shakespeare we read:

_Cas._— “But it is doubtful yet
Whether Caesar will come forth to-day or no;
For he is superstitious grown of late,
Quite from the main opinion he held once
Of fantasy, of dreams and ceremonies.
It may be these apparent prodigies,
The unaccustomed terror of this night,
And the persuasion of his augurers,
May hold him from the Capitol to-day.” Act II., I, l. 194
ff.

In both dramas the object is the same; to awaken doubts in the spectators’ minds as to the ultimate success of the plotters and to awaken an interest in the means whereby the conspirators succeed in overcoming Caesar’s suspicion. The difference in content in the parallels seems due to the fact that while Pescetti follows Appian, Shakespeare follows Plutarch.

-----

Footnote 55:

Neither does Appian.

Footnote 56:

Shakespeare’s Plutarch. Ed. by W. W. Skeat, page 164.

Footnote 57:

Appian says: “Some of the Conspirators” (1578 Ed.).

Footnote 58:

Plutarch, page 119. Skeat.

Footnote 59:

This scene goes far beyond Muret and Grévin. In Muretus the scene is
confined to the following lines:

_Cass._— . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unus mihi nunc scrupulus restat:
Unane opera confodiendum
Cum Caesare ipso censeas Antonium?

_Bru._— Jam saepe dixi, id esse consilium mihi,
Salvis perimere civibus tyrannida.

_Cass._— Perimatur ergo ab infimis radicibus,
Ne quando post hac caesa rursum pullulet.

_Bru._— Latet sub uno tota radix corpore.

_Cass._— Itan’ videtur? amplius nil proloquar.
Tibi pareatur; te sequimur omnes ducem.
Vide modo, ut, cum opus erit, adsis. Brut. videro. Lines
184 ff.

Grévin differs but slightly. Cassius says:

Mais j’ay je ne sçay quoy qui mi detient pensif.
N’estes vous pas d’advis que de force pareille
Nous abordions Antoine, à fin qu’il ne resveille,
L’orgueil de ce Tyran en ses nouveaux amis?

M. Brute.

Je vous ay tousjours dict que ce n’est mon advis.

Cassius.

Si seroit-ce bien faict, arrachans la racine,
Avecque le gros tronc de tout ceste vermine,
De peur qu’ell’ ne revive, ou que le pied laissé,
Ne resemble celuy qui l’auroit devancé.

M. Brute.

C’est assez, soyez prest, pendant que je regarde,
Que chascun de mes gens se tienne sur sa garde. Lines 508
ff.

Cassius exults in the prospect of liberty and the scene closes. It is
curious to remark the simile regarding Antony’s relations to Caesar
which runs through Muretus, Grévin, Pescetti and Shakespeare. In all
Caesar is likened to a trunk of which Antony is simply an appendage.

Footnote 60:

Julius Caesar, II, I, ll. 154–191.

Footnote 61:

Particularly in “Marcus Antonius,” page 161.

Footnote 62:

Page 114 et seq.

Footnote 63:

“Marcus Antonius,” p. 119. Skeat.

Footnote 64:

“Marcus Antonius,” p. 164. Skeat.

Footnote 65:

Pescetti throughout this scene follows Appian rather than Plutarch.
Appian says: “Some thought that Antony ought to be killed also because
he was consul with Caesar, and was his most powerful friend, and the
one of the most repute with the army; but Brutus said that they would
win the glory of tyrannicide from the death of Caesar alone, because
that would be the killing of a king. If they should kill his friends
also, the deed would be imputed to private enmity and to the Pompeian
faction.” (Civil Wars, Bk. II, Ch. XVI., White’s Trans.)

Footnote 66:

This parallel is noted by Ayres (in work cited before).

Footnote 67:

Noted by Ayres.

Footnote 68:

Substantially the same in Appian.

Footnote 69:

Marcus Brutus, p. 117–118.

Footnote 70:

J. C., Act. III., Sc. I, ll. 14–27.

Footnote 71:

P. 91 ff.

THE CHARACTER OF CAESAR

Of all Shakespeare’s portraits, there are few which have so puzzled his critics as that of Julius Caesar. Their ingenuity has been taxed to the utmost to account for a characterization so at variance with historical fact, and many have been the theories advanced in explanation. It is not my purpose to detail this controversy. The facts are commonplaces of Shakespearian study. Neither is it necessary to set forth all the many and various tributes wherein Shakespeare, in his other works, and in “Julius Caesar” itself, gives ample evidence of his appreciation of Caesar’s true greatness. What I do purpose to show is the marked similarity between the conception of Caesar’s character in Shakespeare and that found in Pescetti.

It must be understood that I employ the term characterization as applied to Pescetti’s dramatis personae for lack of a better term. In his type of the drama very little of the characterization is brought out by the clash of conflict, although, as I have before pointed out, there are passages in “Cesare” in which this is to some extent true. We gain our conception of character more through a recital of the characteristics or traits of his persons, rather than through a revelation in action.

To Shakespeare, therefore, “Cesare” would not have appealed as a drama; but as a history or a recital of the feelings animating various persons during certain situations, it had its attractions. I purpose to show in just what manner Shakespeare in his delineation of Caesar may have availed himself of the material provided by this long forgotten work.

It has been claimed, and in my opinion, erroneously, that Shakespeare’s peculiar characterization of his titular hero was due to his lack of classical knowledge. Surely such a charge can not hold against the Veronese rhetorician, whose livelihood depended on his classical training, and who did not hesitate to dispute with Tasso. Yet his characterization brings into relief many of those features which have in Shakespeare’s portrait so aroused the surprise and chagrin of critics.

Professor Harry Morgan Ayres[72] traces these peculiarities in Shakespeare’s delineation of his titular character to the influence of a Renaissance idea of Caesar which had its ultimate source in the Hercules Oetoeus of Seneca, found its way into the Renaissance drama through Muretus, and had become traditional in Shakespeare’s time. No claim is advanced of any direct relation of “Julius Caesar” to preceding versions, but the similarity in certain particulars existing between the various characterizations of Caesar is emphasized. That Grévin’s portrait should be markedly similar to that of Muretus is but natural in view of the former’s open plagiarism. Pescetti also owes much to the noted humanist. The latter made Caesar a grandiloquent braggart. Pescetti, following his example, makes Caesar’s boastfulness a prominent trait of his character. Yet neither Muretus nor Grévin emphasizes Caesar’s vacillation, nor this indecision, which, seemingly through the Italian’s drama, found its way later into Shakespeare’s portrait.

While it is quite possible that the traditional conception of Caesar supposedly prevalent in Shakespeare’s time influenced his peculiar delineation of the Dictator, there is apparently no good reason for excluding the possibility that the dramatist’s notion of his titular hero’s traditional character was confirmed by an examination of Pescetti’s work, if indeed he did not derive from the latter all the hints supposedly due to the tradition fixed by Muretus.

Like Shakespeare, Pescetti is not lacking in appreciation of Caesar’s greatness; of his courage, patriotism, magnanimity. Thus Cassius says to Brutus,

“Tu sai, ch’egli è feroce, e ne’ perigli
Non si sgomenta punto, anzi diviene
Allor più ardito, e coraggioso, quando
Maggior vede il periglio.”[73]

In his dedication, the highest compliment he can pay to Alfonso d’Este is to number the mighty Julius among his ancestors. In the prologue his approaching death troubles the gods, and Jove promises for him immortality among the celestials as the only fitting reward for his merit, while ruin and destruction await his assassins. In the play the First Messenger refers to him as “huom divino.”[74] The Chorus sings his praises:

“Così dunque
Quei, che pur dianzi un folgor fu di guerra,
Un’ Achille, un Alcide di possanza,
Un’ Ulisse di senno, e d’accortezza,
Un Ciro, un Alessandro d’ardimento,
Di magnaminità, di cortesia,
Estinto giace miserabilmente.”—P. 127.

Criticism cannot be too guarded in considering as evidence of personal bias the words of an author’s character, but cumulative evidence is certainly not without its influence. The chorus later in the play refers to Caesar again, and as

“Del più saggio, e più forte
Huom, ch’arme unqua vestisse.”[74]—P. 131.

The Chorus of Soldiers towards the close of the play sings his praise. Decimus Brutus, trying to persuade Caesar, runs the whole gamut of the latter’s deeds.

Nor does Pescetti, any more than Shakespeare, begrudge him credit for his courtesy and magnanimity. Regarding this trait, Professor MacCallum calls particular attention to the passage in “Julius Caesar” wherein Artemidorus urges the consideration of his petition:

_Art._— Hail, Caesar! read this schedule.

_Dec._— Trebonius doth desire you to o’er-read,
At your best leisure, this his humble suit.

_Art._— O Caesar, read mine first; for mine’s a suit
That touches Caesar nearer: read it, great Caesar.

_Caes._— What touches us ourself shall be last served.—III., 1, 3–8.

This is nowhere suggested in Plutarch. It is, indeed, quite easy to regard this magnanimous action as the caprice of a man so intoxicated by success that he has lost all sense of social perspective; a real Colossus, for whom the ordinary motives of men seem too insignificant for his semi-divine being. Pescetti’s Caesar leaves no room for the exercise of surmise. In the scene between Lenate and the Dictator, Caesar is courteous and magnanimous beyond criticism. Lenate felicitates Caesar, who replies:

“E tè, Lenate, a pien contento renda.
Che chiedi? in che può Cesare, Lenate
Servir? in c’hà dell’ opra sua bisogno?”—P. 106.

Lenate praises Caesar’s courtesy, and Caesar tells him to name his suit, for he will deny him nothing. Lenate begs a military appointment for Quinto Fulvio. Caesar says:

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

“A lor di soddisfarti io ti prometto,
Et in soddisfacendoti maggiore
Riceverò, che non farò servigio,
Ch’à somma grazia, e a singular favore
D’esser da tà servito mi rech’io:
E se, qual tu me lo dipingi, fia,
Come fia veramente, che Lenate
Sò, che non mente, i premi all’ opre uguali
Andranno, e sarà Cesare con lui
Quel, che stat’ è con gli altri.”

At the conclusion of this scene he remarks,

“Huom, che d’umanità si spogli, indegno
Stim’ io del nome d’huomo, e fu più degno
Di ruggir fra Leon, fremer frà gli Orsi,
Urlar frà i Lupi, e sibilar frà i Serpi
Nelle selve, negli antri, e nelle grotte,
Che formar nelle terre umani accenti.”—Ces., pp. 106–110.

This, while rather declamatory, rings true.

Still, in spite of this consideration of Caesar’s nobler traits, Pescetti so emphasizes his weaknesses that the total impression we receive from his characterization is not at all in keeping with that which we derive from the Caesar of history. True, Pescetti does not mention the Dictator’s physical failings; but the same pride, the same thrasonical boastfulness, the same vacillation are to be found in both characterizations treated in a manner singularly similar.

Caesar, on his first appearance, while he displays traits which apparently are hard to reconcile with his future statements, strikes one note which predominates throughout; that of boastfulness. His very first words are:

“Magnifica, superba, e veramente
Qual darsi ad un Pontefice conviene,
La cena fu, che Lepido iersera
Ne diè. . . .”—P. 62.

His sense of his own importance, and of the honors due to his position, is evident. He comments philosophically upon the delights of conversation around the banqueting board. This gives Antony an opportunity to dilate upon the mutability of human fortune. Caesar replies,

“Quest’ instabilità, quest’ inconstanza
Delle cose mondane, à me ricorda,
Che lo stato presente, in che m’ hà posto,
O fortuna, ò valor, non mi prometta
Perpetuo, ma, ch’ io creda, e stia sicuro,
Che si debba mutar, quando, che sia.”—P. 66.

It must be borne in mind that Caesar is talking to an intimate friend and companion in arms. Antony takes the occasion to warn him:

“Della fortuna io t’assicuro, ch’ella
Non ti sie mai contraria sì nel crine
Avvolte l’ hai le mani. Dall’ insidie
Ben t’esort’ io guardarti de’ nemici.
Molti offesi da te si tengon; molti
Portano invidia alla tua gloria; alcuni
Abbaglia il tuo splendore: altri patire
Che tu lor sii superior, non ponno.”—Pp. 66–67.

Caesar replies:

“Diman cinquanta de’ più fidi, e forti[75]
Scer della legion decima i voglio,
Che mi stien di continuo al fianco, e scudo
Mi sien contra ogni inganno, e forza esterna.
Ch’io non son mica si di senno privo,
Nè m’hà sì la dolcezza inebriato
Delle prosperità, ch’io non conosca,
Quant’ abbia di temer giusta cagione:
E già d’insidie non sò, che m’è stato
Susurrato all’ orecchie: ma i disegni
Schernirò di chi tenta oltraggio farmi.
Ma ciò poc’ or mi preme, e mi dà noia:
Più mi dà noia, e preme il ricordarmi
Ch’ invendicata ancor resti la morte
Di Crasso. . . .”—Page 67.

He longs to see the Roman eagle triumphant, and Rome mistress of the world.

This speech of Caesar’s is noteworthy. The dictator affirms that the intoxication of success has not blinded his common sense. He has reason to fear treachery, yet just what is contemplated against him he does not know. He despises those who would harm him. That humbled Rome has not yet wreaked vengeance on the Parthians concerns him far more. Here again this concern of Caesar for the welfare of others finds its echo in Shakespeare’s lines,

“What touches us ourself shall be last served.”

There is no historical warrant for this attitude in this particular connection.

Courageous words! But be it noted that Pescetti’s Caesar in the presence of Antony does not wish to convey the impression of fear. He hastens to voice his scorn of treachery, even as he recounts his suspicions. This man, who prides himself on his self-command, is destined to fall an easy victim to his own vanity. His own self praise opens the way for Antony’s flattery:

“Alla fortuna, al valor tuo riserba
Quest’ alta impresa il cielo, acciocchè nulla
A tuoi gran vanti, alle tue glorie manchi:

. . . . . . . . . . .

O quali omai trovar si ponno al tuo
Merto conformi titoli, e cognomi?
Son vili i Magni al vincitor de’ Magni.
Al del salir convien, por man bisogna
A titoli, e a nomi de gli Dei.
Divine l’opre son, divini i fatti
Divino è il tuo valor, divini ancora
Esser vogliono i titoli, e i cognomi,
Di che la grata età t’addorni, e fregi.—Pp. 68–69.

_Ces._— Con quai nomi m’appelli il mondo, o quali
Titoli egli mi dia, poco mi cale.
A me basta, ch’ ei sappia, e legga, e narri
Le da me oprate cose in pace, e in guerra;
Onde ne resti la memoria viva
Al par del Sol, con cui gareggi, e giostri
Di chiarezza, e splendor la gloria mia.”—P. 69.

The dialogue has become a duet of praise, in which Antony seeks to outsing his master. Finally Caesar says,

“Delle sovrane lodi, onde m’addorni,
Molto mi pregio, ò Antonio, e con ragione,
Poscia, che vengon da colui, che, come
Scorge, così di dir hà per costume
Il vero, e in bocca hà quel, ch’egli hà nel cuore,
Ch’è così saggio, e candido, che come
Esser nel giudicar non può ingannato,
Così nel dir altri ingannar non vuole.”—P. 70.

He accepts Antony’s praise because he feels that it is true, coming from the heart of a sincere and plain-speaking friend. He reposes the same faith in Antony’s judgment as is the case in Shakespeare. Thus, when he speaks of Cassius, Antony tells him,

“Fear him not, Caesar; he’s not dangerous;
He is a noble Roman, and well given.”

A few lines later, Caesar says,

“Come on my right hand, for this ear is deaf,
And tell me truly what thou think’st of him.”

In “Cesare” to Calpurnia’s entreaties he retorts:

“Donna, tu spargi le parole al vento;
Resta di più pregar, se saggia sei;
A i lamenti, alle lagrime pon fine,
Che vedrai sorger pria dall’ Occidente,
Et attuffarsi il Sol là, dond’ ei nasce,
Ch’ io presti fede a i sogni, che possanza
Habbian di frastornarmi dall’ imprese
Già destinate i sogni, od i prodigi

. . . . . . . . . .

Esca di questo petto anzi lo spirto,
Che’ l timor c’ entri, e massime de’ sogni,
Ch’ altro non son, che vane ombre, e fantasmi.
Quel, che di me prefisso è il ciel, conviene,
Che sia: ne per por mente a sogni, ò a segni
Potrò schivarlo, e folle à me colui
Sembra, che teme quel, che per consiglio,
Nè per saver uman non può schivarsi.”[76]—Pp. 76–77.

Let it be noted that Caesar is addressing Calpurnia in the presence of the Priest, and it would ill become the conqueror of the world to show fear or vacillation before them. He is discussing his wife’s dream, yet in spite of his expressed disbelief in omens, it was he who ordered the fateful sacrifice, which, as the First Messenger announces after the catastrophe, he himself inspected. Evidently he was in doubt even then, but his vanity and the urging of the conspirators lured him to his doom. Compare his boasts of fearlessness with Shakespeare:

“Would he were fatter! but I fear him not:
Yet if my name were liable to fear,
I do not know the man I should avoid
So soon as that spare Cassius....

. . . . .

I rather tell thee what it is to be fear’d
Than what I fear: for always, I am Caesar.”[77]

Yet immediately thereafter he wishes Antony to give him his true opinion of Cassius. What for?

Still, in spite of his outwardly expressed contempt of the omens, Pescetti’s Caesar yields, just as does Shakespeare’s, when the crafty Decimus plays on his vanity. In the presence of the conspirators he soliloquizes:

“Chi da consigli governar si lascia
Delle donne, più d’esse è vano, e stolto;
Tuttavia forza è, ch’oggi condescenda
Al voler della mia, s’aver vuò pace,
E tormi questa noia dalle spalle.
Ma tanto, e così insolito timore,
Ond’ è si fieramente tormentata,
Non è senza cagion: e benchè tema
In me non abbia luogo, pur sospetto,
Che qualche tradimento alla mia vita
S’ordisca, et ho di sospettar cagione.
Ma sia che può: s’è destinato in cielo,
Ch’io muoia, e muoia: a voglia sua mi tolga
La morte, che non può, se non illustre,
E glorioso tormi: Andrà sotterra,
Qualunque volta dal mortal sia scarca,
L’ombra mia di trionfi, e spoglie addorna:
E tal di me qui rimarrà memoria,
Che finchè giri il ciel fia con stupore
Cesare mentovato; e quel, che bee
Il Tanai, l’Ibero, il Tigre, il Gange,
Attonito udirà narrar il Reno,
Il Nilo, e l’Ocean domati, e vinti
E l’Africa, e la Spagna del Romano
Sangue da me inondate, e’l gran Pompeio,
C’hà del suo nome pien tutti i confini
Dell’ampia terra, vinto, e d’ogni sua
Gloria, d’ogni suo onor spogliato, e privo:
Morrà il terren, che fra pochi anni ad ogni
Modo hà da sciorsi in polve: ma immortale
Rimarrà del mio nome la memoria.
Abbastanza ho vissuto alla natura,
Et alla gloria, Omai ch’à far mi resti,
Per più glorificar il nome mio
Non veggio. Asceso sono à quella altezza,
Cui non è pari in terra; oltre alla quale
Non può salir, chi del terreno incarco
Non si spoglia, et isgrava, e mette l’ale.”[78]

These are certainly “high astounding terms,” but doubt and fear are at work, and this Caesar’s long cogitations are very much like the whistling of a small boy to keep up his courage. When Decimus approaches, and informs him that the Senate is assembled, and awaits him, he says,

“Debbol dir, ò tacer? i preghi e i pianti
Di mia mogliera avuto hanno possanza
Di farmi variar proponimento;
Oltre ch’io temo, e ’l mio timor fondato
È, non sopra fallaci, e vani sogni,
Ma sopra certi indizi, e chiari segni,
Che sien ordite alla mia vita insidie.”—Page 95.