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

Document:
Messenger: Spies of the Volsces Held me in chase, that I was forced to wheel Three or four miles about, else had I, sir, Half an hour since brought my report. COMINIUS: Who's yonder, That does appear as he were flay'd? O gods He has the stamp of NAME_1; and I have Before-time seen him thus. NAME_1: COMINIUS: The shepherd knows not thunder from a tabour More than I know the sound of NAME_1' tongue From every meaner man. NAME_1: Come I too late? COMINIUS: Ay, if you come not in the blood of others, But mantled in your own. NAME_1: O, let me clip ye In arms as sound as when I woo'd, in heart As NAME_2 as when our nuptial day was done, And tapers burn'd to bedward! COMINIUS: Flower of warriors, How is it with NAME_3 Lartius? NAME_1: As with a man busied about decrees: Condemning some to death, and some to exile; Ransoming him, or pitying, threatening the other; Holding Corioli in the name of Rome, Even like a fawning greyhound in the leash, To let

Summary:
1. This excerpt from a play features NAME_1 discussing battles, tactics, and fighting alongside Cominius.
2. NAME_1 pleads for the chance to face his significant foe, Aufidius, in the upcoming combat, while Cominius and Lartius make arrangements for securing their progress and protecting their territory.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
Start your answer explicitly with "Yes" or "No", and if you