Antony is Julius Caesar's right hand man and also gets in power by after Caesar is killed. After Brutus gave Antony permission to speak at Caesar’s funeral he decided to use that to his advantage at convince the people to go against Brutus using a pathos. This was a much better approach to the situation then Brutus who used gravitas and logos. Antony was trying to use a more relatable and empathetic approach to his speech and he was also trying to explain that Caesar cared about his people. He did this by saying that “when the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept.”
This suspense helps him in the long run with his goal of persuasion. The plebeians listen to what he has to say, between that time of hearing the will, and start to agree with the pleas Mark Antony makes. “‘Tis good you know not that you are his heirs; For, if you should, O, what would come of it!” In this quote Mark Antony means that the people of Rome change their beliefs so often, like they did about Caesar after Brutus spoke, what would happen it they acquired Caesar’s inheritance. Therefore, the initial feelings the people get when hearing the words of Antony is guilt.
For starters, Brutus’ attempt of persuading the Romans during his speech was to convince them that it was right to kill Caesar. His excuses for killing Caesar were the following; because Caesar was too ambitious, and the Romans would’ve been slaves if he had lived. He was convincing the Romans that the conspirators were good people, who wanted no
In Brutus’ oration he answers the question of why he decided to kill Caesar. Brutus answers the question by saying, “this is my answer: not that I loved Caesar less, but I loved Rome more” (3.2.22-24). This answer from Brutus appeals to the Romans’ sense of nationalism. Brutus inflames the mob’s feeling of passion and pride for their country. This use of pathos is very powerful and well crafted; however, Mark Antony outsmarts him.
But to succeed, they need the help of Caesar’s right hand man and good friend, Brutus. In this scene, Cassius, the head conspirator, attempts to use ethos, pathos, and logos to convince Brutus to turn against Caesar. Cassius uses his knowledge of Caesar’s failings and his past with Caesar to prove he is a knowledgeable and credible source, while also trying to invoke feelings of anger in Brutus. Cassius mainly uses the device pathos by trying to invoke emotions in Brutus to turn him against Caesar. “Why should that name be sounded more than yours?
Brutus demonstrates loyalty to Rome which makes him vulnerable to being manipulated. Cassius convinces Brutus to join the conspiracy by proclaiming, “‘Brutus’ and ‘Caesar.’ What should be in that ‘Caesar’? / Why should that name be sounded more than yours?
He did what others would dare to never do, kill the king to save Rome. In Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, Brutus has the more effective speech because he is more persuasive with motive, pathos, and character trait; he provides a powerful speech that is more loyal and humbling to the country of Rome. The literary term motive, applies to the reason a character does something, and Brutus and Marc Antony both show motive in their speeches. For instance, Marc Antony’s motive for refusing to read Julius Caesar’s will is to avoid
Mark Antony is trying to win over the people of Rome by his very effective use of rhetoric. In his speech, his overall point is to persuade the Roman citizens that Brutus’s claim of Caesar being ambitious is not true. Antony’s use of rhetorical devices such as a rhetorical question give the people a good message. When he is telling them that Caesar brought many captives to Rome, he asks, “Did this in Caesar seem ambitious” (3.2.18). Antony’s rhetorical question was very effective since he is making the people question Brutus’s claim.
In the story, “Killing Caesar,” by Jon Herman, different viewpoints are shown towards how others see Caesar as a leader. “To the people, Caesar was more god than man,” and, “He was too dangerous and tyranny must not stand,” show the two viewpoints: a tyrant or a hero. Julius Caesar is better known as a hero, even after some negative things he did. Caesar had great power as a ruler and had many achievements in Rome. He improved the life for each individual and proved to be a hero by has actions.
All throughout history we have seen numerous assassinations of heads of state. Most of these assassinations can trace their cause to a disagreement with a certain person or group of people. While we can say that assassinations such as Abraham Lincoln’s was not justified for it was dealt at the hands of a man who was enraged at the President’s idea to allow African Americans to vote, the case is different in Julius Caesar. Here, we see a man in a position to become an extremely powerful ruler of Rome and once he is assassinated the question becomes: was it justified? I believe that the assassination of a head of state can be justified, specifically in reference of Julius Caesar, because of Caesar’s greed, his selfishness, and the danger that he poses to Rome.