INTRO: Brutus wrong because Brutus implied in

INTRO: In the
Tragedy of Julius Caesar, a play, by William Shakespeare, two acquaintances of
Julius Caesar give an oration on behalf of Caesar’s assassination. His
assassination was due to a conspiracy by Roman senators. Marcus Brutus, a
conspirator, and Mark Antony, a friend of Caesar’s, gave their speeches in
front of the people of Rome, which made the people believe that Caesar’s death
was for the good of Rome or that ___. Both men’s speeches tied in together and
differed in many ways through rhetorical devices.

 

BODY 1: Brutus
and Antony both use rhetorical appeals in their funeral speeches for Caesar. Both
men utilize Logos throughout their speeches. Mark Antony employs Logos to prove
Brutus wrong because Brutus implied in his speech that Caesar was ambitus and
that was why he had to be killed. For instance, Antony states that Caesar was a
war hero who brought back captives for ransom that benefitted Rome (Act _,
Scene _, Lines __). In addition, he adds that Caesar refused the crown three
times (Act _, Scene _, Lines __). Brutus uses Logos in questioning the audience.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

He says “Would you rather that Caesar be alive and you be slaves?” (Act _,
Scene _, Lines __). He says that to give proof to the audience that he was
right to kill Caesar. If Caesar had lived, he would have enslaved every Roman
citizen by taking over power and becoming a dictator.

 

BODY 2: In contrast, they use the rhetorical
strategies in different ways. Brutus uses Ethos in his speech (Act 3, Scene 2,
Lines 13-15) and he is trying to tell the Romans that they should believe him
because he is represented as an honorable man. Antony uses Pathos when he reads
Caesar’s will in his speech. By reading aloud the will and telling the people
that Caesar was going to leave money and land to everyone it makes them feel
guilty. (Act _, Scene _, Lines __)

 

 

BODY 3:

 

CONCLUSION: All things considered, the men’s funeral orations
had both similarities and differences. Uniquely, rhetorical devices had a preponderance
that made their speeches alike.