Arthur Broke or Brooke (d. 1563), translator, was the author of “The Tragicall Historye of Romeus and Iulieit written first in Italian by Bandell, and nowe in English by Ar. Br. In ædibus Richard Tottelli.” The colophon runs: “Imprinted at London in Flete Strete within Tremble barre at the signe of the hand and starre of Richard Tottill, the XIX. day of Nouember An. do. 1562.” The book was entered in the Stationers’ Register late in 1562 as “The Tragicall History of the Romeus and Juliett with sonettes.” The volume is mainly of interest as the source whence Shakespeare drew the plot of his tragedy of “Romeo and Juliet.” It is written throughout in rhymed verse of alternate lines of twelve and fourteen syllables. Broke did not (as the title-page states) translate directly from the Italian of Bandello, but from the “Histoires Tragiques extraictes des Œuvres de Bandel” (Paris, 1559), by Pierre Boaistuan surnamed Launay and François de Belle-Forest. Broke does not adhere very closely to his French original: he develops the character of the Nurse and alters the concluding scene in many important points, in all of which he is followed by Shakespeare.

Romeus and Juliet

  Those who have hitherto spoken of Brooke’s poem, have not spoken of it as it deserves…. In general the tale is told with much simplicity, and the descriptions are sometimes elaborately minute, and afford very striking and graceful pictures.

  Brooke declares that he had seen the same argument lately set forth on the stage, and there would thus appear to have been some early dramatic version of the theme which has not come down to us, though it may have been known to Shakspere, and used by him. In any case, Brooke’s own poem must have furnished the basis for Shakspere’s crowning treatment of the story. It was Brooke who first gave prominence to the character of the Nurse, and put into her mouth speeches which the dramatist followed in parts with curious fidelity. It was Brooke also who invented the scene of Romeo’s despair in the Friar’s cell after the murder of Tybalt, and it was he who called Friar Lawrence’s messenger John instead of Anselm. Nor was “Romeus and Juliet” an unworthy model. It was a well-proportioned narrative, in long flowing couplets, consisting of an Alexandrine followed by a Septenar. This metre, which Surrey had made fashionable, was skillfully handled by Brooke, and in spite of overdone antithesis, and of occasional luxuriance of sensuous description, balanced by a vein of sententious moralizing, the poem was warmed with true pathos, and showed an eye for dramatic types and situations. But dominating every other personality is that of Fortune, who sports with her victims as she pleases, lifting them to a height only afterwards to cast them down in her rage. The same conception of Fortune was inspiring at almost the same date “The Mirror for Magistrates,” and it should certainly be borne in mind in the consideration of the play.

  This poem is composed in rhymed iambic verses of twelve and fourteen syllables alternately, whose rhythm indeed jogs somewhat heavily along, but is not unpleasant and not too monotonous. The method of narration is very artless, loquacious, and diffuse; it resembles the narrative style of a clever child, who describes with minute exactitude and circumstantiality, going into every detail, and placing them all upon the same plane.