THE HANDLING OF THE SUPERNATURAL ELEMENT

Shakespeare’s skill in the handling of the supernatural element in “Julius Caesar” has been much commended. The omens and prodigies are distributed in such a way as best to emphasize the tragic element and they serve to invest the entire play in an atmosphere of portent. For his material he drew largely upon Plutarch, but he also introduces matter apparently indicating a familiarity with Ovid, Vergil, Lucan, and Suetonius. Pescetti makes use of the supernatural element to a far greater extent than do his predecessors.[25]His recital of the omens and the prodigies embraces almost every item which the industry of a Renaissance scholar could cull from the pages of Plutarch, Ovid, Vergil, Lucan, Suetonius, and Appian. With a single exception, all the omens mentioned by Shakespeare and not directly traceable to Plutarch, can be found in Pescetti, whose treatment of the entire supernatural element affords some interesting parallels.

Plutarch’s account, which furnished Shakespeare the bulk of his material, is as follows:

“Certainly destiny may easier be foreseen than avoided, considering the strange and wonderful signs that were said to be seen before Caesar’s death. For, touching the fires in the element, and spirits running up and down in the night and also of the solitary birds to be seen at noondays sitting in the great market-place, are not all these signs perhaps worth the noting, in such a wonderful chance as happened? But Strabo, the philosopher, writeth, that men were seen going up and down in fire; and, furthermore, that there was a slave of the soldiers that did cast a marvelous burning flame out of his hands, insomuch as they that saw it thought he had been burned; but when the fire was out, it was found he had no hurt. Caesar self also doing sacrifice unto the gods, found that one of the beasts which was sacrificed had no heart: which was a strange thing in nature, how a beast could live without a heart. Furthermore there was a certain soothsayer that had given Caesar warning long time before, to take heed of the day of the Ides of March, (which is the fifteenth of the month), for on that day he should be in great danger. That day being come, Caesar going into the Senate-house, and speaking merrily unto the soothsayer, told him ‘the Ides of March be come’: ‘so they be,’ softly answered the soothsayer, ‘but yet are they not past!’ And the very day before, Caesar, supping with Marcus Lepidus, sealed certain letters, as he was wont to do, at the board: so, talk falling out amongst them, reasoning what death was the best, he, preventing their opinions, cried out aloud, ‘Death unlooked for!’ Then, going to bed the same night, as his manner was, and lying with his wife Calpurnia, all the windows of his chamber flying open, the noise awoke him, and made him afraid when he saw such light; but more, when he heard his wife Calpurnia, being fast asleep, weep and sigh, and put forth many fumbling lamentable speeches; for she dreamed that Caesar was slain, and that she held him in her arms.”[26]

Professor MacCallum, commenting upon this account says: “It is interesting to note how Shakespeare takes this passage to pieces, and assigns those of them for which he has a place to their fitting and effective position. Plutarch’s reflections on destiny and Caesar’s opinion on death he leaves aside. The first warning of the soothsayer he refers back to the Lupercalia, and the second he shifts forward to its natural place. Calpurnia’s outcries in her sleep and her prophetic dream, the apparition of the ghosts mentioned by her amongthe other prodigies, the lack of the heart in the sacrificial beast, are reserved for the scene of her expostulation with Caesar, and are dramatically distributed among the various speakers; Caesar, the servant, Calpurnia herself.”[27]

Pescetti also takes this same passage[28]and distributes the various sections in a manner similar to Shakespeare’s treatment, but dramatically infinitely inferior. He, however, devotes nearly two hundred and fifty lines at the beginning of the third act of “Cesare” to a dialogue between Antony and Caesar, rather tediously moralizing on destiny and Caesar’s opinion on death. The only purpose, dramatically, is to continue the feeling of impending disaster created in the previous acts and to give Antony an opportunity of warning Caesar to beware of treachery.[29]The warnings of the soothsayer are entirely disregarded; the only intimation we receive of this very effective scene is the announcement of the messenger in the fifth act that a paper which gave all the details of the conspiracy, and which Caesar had had no opportunity to read, had been found clutched in his dead hand. Nearly half his second act is occupied by a long drawn out dialogue between Calpurnia and the servant regarding the former’s fears, and the terrible dream she has had. The Priest, in the third act, together with Calpurnia, recounts the portents to Caesar, and tries to dissuade him from disregarding the manifest tokens of the gods’ displeasure. The inspection of the sacrificial beast without a heart is reserved for the expostulation of the Priest. Pescetti, like Shakespeare, thus attempts a distribution of the supernatural which tends to emphasize the impending catastrophe and to invest his play in an atmosphere of portent very similar to that created in “Julius Caesar.”

In both dramas ghosts play important parts. Dramatically, it is quite probable that Pescetti was only following the Senecan tradition when he introduced the ghost of Pompey, but, historically, it seems that he was indebted to Lucan forthis hint. The poet in Book IX. of the “Pharsalia” describes how the soul of Caesar’s foe, leaving the tomb, soars to the abode of the blessed, and thence, looking down upon the earth, inspires the breasts of Brutus and Cato.[30]This is the episode which probably furnished Pescetti hints for the employment of the ghost of Pompey as the prime exciting force upon the Brutus of his play.

Now, Plutarch mentions the apparition which appears to Brutus at Philippi, as Brutus’ “ill angel” (page 104, J. C., Skeat). Shakespeare calls it “Caesar’s ghost,” thereby immeasurably enhancing its dramatic significance. That he should be compelled by his keen perception of its dramatic fitness so to handle this episode, seems a very reasonable conclusion; still, in view of his obligations to Pescetti, it would not be stretching probabilities too far to suggest that the Italian’s use of the shade of Pompey was not without its influence in the composition of this particular scene. What a fitting example of poetic justice! That Pompey’s shade should rouse Brutus to execute vengeance on a Caesar held responsible for his death; that this same ghost-inspired zealot should in turn have his own doom pronounced by the shade of his victim, closes a cycle of nemesis which surely must have appealed to the great poet.

But it is in regard to the disturbances in the elements, and the attendant prodigies, that we get a marked parallel between the two plays. Casca, while the storm is raging, exclaims:

In addition to the supernatural elements recounted in Casca’s speech, Calpurnia trying to dissuade Caesar, says:

“... There is one within,Besides the things that we have heard and seen,Recounts most horrid sights seen by the watch.A lioness hath whelped in the street;And graves have yawned and yielded up their dead;Fierce fiery warriors fight upon the clouds,In ranks and squadrons and right form of war,Which drizzled blood upon the Capitol;The noise of battle hurtled in the air,Horses did neigh, and dying men did groan;And ghosts did shriek and squeal about the streets.”—II.,II, 14.. . . . .“When beggars die there are no comets seen;The heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes.”

“... There is one within,

Besides the things that we have heard and seen,

Recounts most horrid sights seen by the watch.

A lioness hath whelped in the street;

And graves have yawned and yielded up their dead;

Fierce fiery warriors fight upon the clouds,

In ranks and squadrons and right form of war,

Which drizzled blood upon the Capitol;

The noise of battle hurtled in the air,

Horses did neigh, and dying men did groan;

And ghosts did shriek and squeal about the streets.”—II.,II, 14.

. . . . .

“When beggars die there are no comets seen;The heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes.”

“When beggars die there are no comets seen;

The heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes.”

The servant reporting the sacrifice says:

“Plucking the entrails of an offering forth,They could not find a heart within the beast.”

“Plucking the entrails of an offering forth,

They could not find a heart within the beast.”

The Priest in “Cesare” in his soliloquy exclaims:

“Giunon con spaventosi, orribil tuoni,Con spessi lampi, e fulmini tremendi,Con infauste comete, con istranePioggie di sangue, e grandini di pietre,Con sembianze di pugne, con orrendiStrepiti di tamburi, e suon di trombe,Con alte grida, pianti, urli, e lamenti,Uditi nel suo regno hà mostro, quantoSia contro noi d’ira, e di sdegno accesa.Nettun volto hà sossopra tutto il suoImmenso regno, e sì gonfiato hàl’onde,Che parea, che de’ suoi confin volesseUscir, e tutta subissar la terra;. . . . . . . . . .L’antica madre s’è più volte anch’essaScossa sì, che parea, che il grave pondoDell’huom malvagio, che sostien, volesseScuoter del tergo suo, et in più luoghiPer inghiottirlo hà il vasto seno aperto:Ne pur questi gran corpi, ond’ogni cosaSi genera, ma molti ancor de’ mistiPredetto han gli infortuni, e i danni nostri.”—Pp. 74–75.

“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 contro noi d’ira, e di sdegno accesa.

Nettun volto hà sossopra tutto il suo

Immenso regno, e sì gonfiato hàl’onde,

Che parea, che de’ suoi confin volesse

Uscir, e tutta subissar la terra;

. . . . . . . . . .

L’antica madre s’è più volte anch’essaScossa sì, che parea, che il grave pondoDell’huom malvagio, che sostien, volesseScuoter del tergo suo, et in più luoghiPer inghiottirlo hà il vasto seno aperto:Ne pur questi gran corpi, ond’ogni cosaSi genera, ma molti ancor de’ mistiPredetto han gli infortuni, e i danni nostri.”—Pp. 74–75.

L’antica madre s’è più volte anch’essa

Scossa sì, che parea, che il grave pondo

Dell’huom malvagio, che sostien, volesse

Scuoter del tergo suo, et in più luoghi

Per inghiottirlo hà il vasto seno aperto:

Ne pur questi gran corpi, ond’ogni cosa

Si genera, ma molti ancor de’ misti

Predetto han gli infortuni, e i danni nostri.”—Pp. 74–75.

In other portions of the Priest’s soliloquy we read:

“Nè questi pur co’ lor maligni aspetti,Ma la Luna ecclissata, anzi di goccieSanguigne tutta sparsa, e’l Sol d’oscuro,E ferrugineo vel coperto il volto.. . . . . . . . .Da mille tetti udito s’è lo stigioGufo versi cantar lugubri, e mesti;In mille tempi gli ebani, e gli avori,Lagrimar si son visti, e sudar sangue;Per le piazze, alle case, a i tempi intornoNotturni cani urlar si sono uditi,E strider importune, e infauste streghe.Si son viste grand’ombre, de’ sepolcriUscite, andar per la Città vagandoNelle persone alto terror mettendo.Il monte, che ad Encelado le spalleCol suo gran peso calca, e preme, rotteLe bollenti fornaci hà tai torrentiDi Zolfo, e di bitume vomitati,E tante fiamme, e sassi liquefatti,Ch’inondate, e distrutte,Le soggette campagne hà de’ Ciclopi.Ma quel, che più d’ogni altro mi spaventaE, che l’interiora di ciascunaVittima mostran miseri, e infeliciAvvenimenti, atroci, orribil mali:Perchè in alcune non si trova il cuore,In altre è guasto il fegato, o ’l polmone,Altre di negro fel son tutte sparse,Segni tutti evidenti di gran mali.”[32]—Pp. 75–76.

“Nè questi pur co’ lor maligni aspetti,Ma la Luna ecclissata, anzi di goccieSanguigne tutta sparsa, e’l Sol d’oscuro,E ferrugineo vel coperto il volto.

“Nè questi pur co’ lor maligni aspetti,

Ma la Luna ecclissata, anzi di goccie

Sanguigne tutta sparsa, e’l Sol d’oscuro,

E ferrugineo vel coperto il volto.

. . . . . . . . .

Da mille tetti udito s’è lo stigioGufo versi cantar lugubri, e mesti;In mille tempi gli ebani, e gli avori,Lagrimar si son visti, e sudar sangue;Per le piazze, alle case, a i tempi intornoNotturni cani urlar si sono uditi,E strider importune, e infauste streghe.Si son viste grand’ombre, de’ sepolcriUscite, andar per la Città vagandoNelle persone alto terror mettendo.Il monte, che ad Encelado le spalleCol suo gran peso calca, e preme, rotteLe bollenti fornaci hà tai torrentiDi Zolfo, e di bitume vomitati,E tante fiamme, e sassi liquefatti,Ch’inondate, e distrutte,Le soggette campagne hà de’ Ciclopi.Ma quel, che più d’ogni altro mi spaventaE, che l’interiora di ciascunaVittima mostran miseri, e infeliciAvvenimenti, atroci, orribil mali:Perchè in alcune non si trova il cuore,In altre è guasto il fegato, o ’l polmone,Altre di negro fel son tutte sparse,Segni tutti evidenti di gran mali.”[32]—Pp. 75–76.

Da mille tetti udito s’è lo stigio

Gufo versi cantar lugubri, e mesti;

In mille tempi gli ebani, e gli avori,

Lagrimar si son visti, e sudar sangue;

Per le piazze, alle case, a i tempi intorno

Notturni cani urlar si sono uditi,

E strider importune, e infauste streghe.

Si son viste grand’ombre, de’ sepolcri

Uscite, andar per la Città vagando

Nelle persone alto terror mettendo.

Il monte, che ad Encelado le spalle

Col suo gran peso calca, e preme, rotte

Le bollenti fornaci hà tai torrenti

Di Zolfo, e di bitume vomitati,

E tante fiamme, e sassi liquefatti,

Ch’inondate, e distrutte,

Le soggette campagne hà de’ Ciclopi.

Ma quel, che più d’ogni altro mi spaventa

E, che l’interiora di ciascuna

Vittima mostran miseri, e infelici

Avvenimenti, atroci, orribil mali:

Perchè in alcune non si trova il cuore,

In altre è guasto il fegato, o ’l polmone,

Altre di negro fel son tutte sparse,

Segni tutti evidenti di gran mali.”[32]—Pp. 75–76.

The soliloquy of the Priest seems to be a composite of the omens and prodigies mentioned by Ovid, Vergil, Plutarch, Appian, Suetonius, and Lucan. Ovid and Vergil seem to be his main sources.

Almost all of the ancient authorities mention the supernatural in connection with the life of Caesar. The extraordinary prodigies and portents attending his crossing of the Rubicon and his assassination are recorded in more or less detail. Among the authors accessible to Shakespeare, Ovid was available in the translation of the Metamorphoses made by Arthur Golding in 1567 and several times reprinted before 1600. Appian had been translated in 1578, while Marlowe’s translation of Lucan’s first book, while it remained unpublished till 1600 (after the first performance of “Julius Caesar”),[33]may have been known to the dramatist in manuscript. But the substance of Lucan’s account was accessible in Lydgate’s translation of Boccaccio’s “De Casibus Virorum Illustrium.” While Lucan mentions only the omens preceding Caesar’s entry into Rome at the beginning of the Civil Wars, his work was a favorite source for the matters mentioned. Neither Vergil’s “Georgics”, nor Suetonius’ “Lives”, had as yet been translated.

The question of Shakespeare’s classical learning does not concern us. The problem at issue is not whether the dramatist might have obtained his information directly from the ancient authors or through available translations. The following discussion purposes to adduce the evidence in support of the contention that Pescetti was the source of most, if not all, of the non-Plutarchian matter included by the dramatist in his handling of the supernatural.

That Shakespeare could not have built up his recital from an imaginative transformation of Plutarch’s hints seems precluded by an examination of the various sources already mentioned. These contain the substance of the non-Plutarchian matter; it remains to establish Pescetti’s claims against this evidence.

While there is a striking agreement as a whole in the various accounts of the classic writers, no single one contains all the omens recorded by Shakespeare. Pescetti, however, not onlyhas the most comprehensive extant record but he accompanies his account with individual touches which seem reflected in Shakespeare’s subsequent treatment.

An examination of the portents mentioned by Shakespeare reveals the following which can be traced to Plutarch: the flaming hand; the men all in fire walking up and down; the bird of night at noon-day hooting and shrieking in the market place; the beast without a heart; the comet. In addition we have the following not indicated by the biographer: the tremendous storm; the earthquake; the raging seas referred to by Casca; the wild beasts roaming the streets; the civil strife in the heavens; the dead leaving their sepulchres; the battle in the clouds.

Taking the earthquake first, a comparison of the available sources reveals the following: Casca says to Cicero,

“Are you not moved when all the sway of earth,Shakes like a thing unfirm?”

“Are you not moved when all the sway of earth,

Shakes like a thing unfirm?”

Vergil mentions the earthquakes in the Alps and the openings of the earth as portents of Caesar’s death.[34]Lucan[35]says “The Alps shook off their ancient snows,” while Lydgate[36]has

“Earthquaues sodayne and terribleOuertourned castels up so doune.”

“Earthquaues sodayne and terrible

Ouertourned castels up so doune.”

In Ovid we read,

“And with an earthquake shaken was the towne.”[37]

Pescetti mentions not only the earthquake, but he adds the violent upheaval of the seas, together with an individual touch peculiar to him alone which seems reflected in Shakespeare’s treatment.

“Nettun volto hà sossopra tutto il suoImmenso regno, e sì gonfiato hà l’onde,Che parea, che de suoi confin volesseUscir, e tutta subissar la terra;E quanti legni han questi dì solcatoIl mar, tanti egli n’ha miseramenteO trangugiati, o in duri scogli spinti.L’antica madre s’è più volte anch’essaScossa sì, che parea, che’l grave pondoDell’ huom malvagio, che sostien, volesseScuoter dal tergo suo, et in più luoghiPer inghiottirlo hà il vasto seno aperto.”—Pp. 75.

“Nettun volto hà sossopra tutto il suo

Immenso regno, e sì gonfiato hà l’onde,

Che parea, che de suoi confin volesse

Uscir, e tutta subissar la terra;

E quanti legni han questi dì solcato

Il mar, tanti egli n’ha miseramente

O trangugiati, o in duri scogli spinti.

L’antica madre s’è più volte anch’essa

Scossa sì, che parea, che’l grave pondo

Dell’ huom malvagio, che sostien, volesse

Scuoter dal tergo suo, et in più luoghi

Per inghiottirlo hà il vasto seno aperto.”—Pp. 75.

The disturbance of the waters is not mentioned by Plutarch or Ovid. Casca does not specifically state that such a condition of affairs prevailed; he uses it as a comparison. But such a disturbance is indicated in Lucan. In Marlowe’s[38]translation we read:

“The ocean swelled as high as Spanish CalpeOr Atlas’ head.”[39]

“The ocean swelled as high as Spanish Calpe

Or Atlas’ head.”[39]

Lydgate has

“Wyth flodes rage, hydious and horribleNeptunus dyd great distruction.”

“Wyth flodes rage, hydious and horrible

Neptunus dyd great distruction.”

Vergil speaks of the overflow of Eridanus,[40]

“Eridanus, king of rivers, overflowed, whirling in mad eddy whole woods along and tore away the herds with their stalls over all the plains.”[41]

Of all these possible sources Pescetti supplies the closest parallel; Vergil and Lydgate seem too remote for considerationin this connection. Were we to exclude Lucan on the ground that his account deals with a different period of Caesar’s career, Pescetti’s case would be still further strengthened, for the Italian contains not only the substance of Casca’s outburst, but there is a similarity in both style and sentiment. Where Pescetti says,

“Nettun volto hà sossopra tutto il suoImmenso regno, e sì gonfiato hà l’onde,Che parea, che de’ suoi confin volesseUscir, e tutta subissar la terra:”

“Nettun volto hà sossopra tutto il suo

Immenso regno, e sì gonfiato hà l’onde,

Che parea, che de’ suoi confin volesse

Uscir, e tutta subissar la terra:”

Shakespeare supplies the more poetic,

“I have seenThe ambitious ocean swell and rage and foamTo be exalted with the threat’ning clouds.”

“I have seen

The ambitious ocean swell and rage and foam

To be exalted with the threat’ning clouds.”

Again, the earthquake is mentioned in close connection with the raging of the waters, a feature missing in the other possible sources, while Casca’s statement regarding the anger of the gods finds its counterpart not only in this portion of Pescetti’s recital, but later where the dramatist, detailing other manifestations of the gods’ displeasure, says,

“Giunon . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . hà mostro, quantoSia contra noi d’ira e di sdegno accessa.”

“Giunon . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . hà mostro, quanto

Sia contra noi d’ira e di sdegno accessa.”

Such a condition of affairs is only faintly adumbrated in Ovid or Lucan.

The slave with the burning hand is from Plutarch. The “hundred ghastly women transformèd with their fear” seems a specification of the terror inspired by the ghosts as recorded by Pescetti,

“Si son viste grand’ombre, de’ sepolcriUscite, andar per la Città vagandoNelle persone alto terror mettendo.”[42]—P. 75.

“Si son viste grand’ombre, de’ sepolcri

Uscite, andar per la Città vagando

Nelle persone alto terror mettendo.”[42]—P. 75.

Plutarch mentions the men in fire, but says nothing of the fear inspired by them or by the ghosts.

The “bird of night sitting at noon-day upon the market place, hooting and shrieking” was probably primarily derived from Plutarch’s “solitary birds to be seen at noon days sitting in the great market place.” The biographer calls them “solitary birds” and makes no reference to any hooting and shrieking. Vergil refers to the “presaging birds”;[43]Ovid says that the Stygian owl gave omens of ill in a thousand places;[44]Lydgate speaks of the “fowles at noonday”; Marlowe, translating Lucan, that “Ominous birds defil’d the day.” Pescetti, almost literally translating Ovid, has:

“Da mille tetti udito s’è lo stigioGufo versi cantar lugubri e mesti.”

“Da mille tetti udito s’è lo stigio

Gufo versi cantar lugubri e mesti.”

He calls the bird the owl: Shakespeare refers to “the bird of night, hooting and shrieking.” The Italian could here supply as much as any of the other non-Plutarchian sources.

Calpurnia says,

“Graves have yawned and yielded up their dead.”

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 appearedghastly 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’ sepolcriUscite, andar per la città vagando,Nelle persone alto terror mettendo.”

“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.)

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

“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]

“... 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 forestWyth many other beastes sauagyne;Came to the cite, and some agayne kynde,Spake as do men in Bochas as I fynde.”[53]

“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.

“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.

Back to Index Next