Given the document below, you have to determine if "Yes" or "No", the summary is factually consistent with the document.

Document:
LARTIUS: O general, Here is the steed, we the caparison: Hadst thou beheld-- NAME_1: Pray now, no more: my mother, Who has a charter to extol her blood, When she does praise me grieves me. I have done As you have done; that's what I can; induced As you have been; that's for my country: He that has but effected his good will Hath overta'en mine act. COMINIUS: You shall not be The grave of your deserving; Rome must know The value of her own: 'twere a concealment Worse than a theft, no less than a traducement, To hide your doings; and to silence that, Which, to the spire and top of praises vouch'd, Would seem but modest: therefore, I beseech you In sign of what you are, not to reward What you have done--before our army hear me. NAME_1: I have some wounds upon me, and they smart To hear themselves remember'd. COMINIUS: Should they not, Well might they fester 'gainst ingratitude, And tent themselves with death. Of all the horses, Whereof we have ta'en good and good store,

Summary:
1. In this excerpt from NAME_2's play "NAME_3", NAME_1 is praised for his intelligence and strategic thinking and is bestowed the name Caius NAME_1 NAME_3, honoring his achievements.
2. Despite his newly-acquired status and gifts, NAME_3 remains humble, refusing some rewards and asking to free a man who once betrayed him.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
St