“Albin tanto al morir, quanto al dar morteAll’ ingiusto Signor siam preparati:Però succeda, come piace al cielo.Se l’opre de’ mortai rimira GioveCon occhio giusto, à fin felice, e lietoScorgerà i pensier nostri, ch’all’ altruiSalute, all’ altrui ben rivolti sono.”—Ces., p. 93.
“Albin tanto al morir, quanto al dar morteAll’ ingiusto Signor siam preparati:Però succeda, come piace al cielo.Se l’opre de’ mortai rimira GioveCon occhio giusto, à fin felice, e lietoScorgerà i pensier nostri, ch’all’ altruiSalute, all’ altrui ben rivolti sono.”—Ces., p. 93.
“Albin tanto al morir, quanto al dar morteAll’ ingiusto Signor siam preparati:Però succeda, come piace al cielo.Se l’opre de’ mortai rimira GioveCon occhio giusto, à fin felice, e lietoScorgerà i pensier nostri, ch’all’ altruiSalute, all’ altrui ben rivolti sono.”—Ces., p. 93.
“Albin tanto al morir, quanto al dar morte
All’ ingiusto Signor siam preparati:
Però succeda, come piace al cielo.
Se l’opre de’ mortai rimira Giove
Con occhio giusto, à fin felice, e lieto
Scorgerà i pensier nostri, ch’all’ altrui
Salute, all’ altrui ben rivolti sono.”—Ces., p. 93.
“He only, in a general honest thoughtAnd common good to all, made one of them.”—J. C., V., v, 71.
“He only, in a general honest thoughtAnd common good to all, made one of them.”—J. C., V., v, 71.
“He only, in a general honest thoughtAnd common good to all, made one of them.”—J. C., V., v, 71.
“He only, in a general honest thought
And common good to all, made one of them.”—J. C., V., v, 71.
It is certainly significant, that with a wealth of material to draw upon, both Pescetti and Shakespeare should, in regard to Brutus, treat the available sources in a manner so similar. Pescetti excludes much historical matter which he might have employed; Shakespeare makes practically the same exclusions. Thus the histories contained sufficient data upon which to found a formidable indictment against Caesar, but both chose to overlook them and to found the conspirators’ cause on comparatively insignificant accusations. In both dramas, certain phases of Brutus’ character are emphasized to the exclusion of others. Much is said of his virtues: nothing, not even by his enemies, of his vices. In their inclusions, a similar parallelism exists between the two dramatists. Pescetti, with a keen perception of the dramatic value of that phase of Brutus’ character, assigns to his mistaken idealism in sparing Antony, a far more significant position in the development of his tragedy than did his predecessors.[117]Here we get an individual treatment of this dramatic crux which has a striking similarity to that in Shakespeare. It leaves us with the same conception of Brutus’ practical failings, with the same misgivings which we experience in the work of his great contemporary.[118]Unlike Muretus and Grévin, Pescetti does not overlook the importance of the Popilius Lena incident, and by his treatment he introduces an element of suspense which Shakespeare could well use to advantage. Though both dramatists used practically the same source, Pescetti’s individual touches seem reflected in Shakespeare’s handling of this episode. Again, unlike his predecessors, Pescetti was fully alive to the value of the Brutus-Portia scenes, and reveals Brutus in his domestic relations very much as Shakespeare does some ten years later.[119]Finally, in both dramas theprotagonist is but a pawn moved by invisible powers, pursuing his fated way against an ominous and supernatural background. In both tragedies, destiny has its ghostly precursors; in the one to arouse the hero to action, in the other, to herald his doom.