In The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, Brutus and Mark Antony gave speeches right after Julius Caesar's death. Both said things that others didn't know and tried to make themselves look as if they had nothing to do with the murder. Brutus and Antony used different types of emotions to reach to the audience. Brutus used ethics while Antony used persuasive characteristics in his speech. Antony's speech wasn't really ethic. The first speech that is said is from Brutus. In his speech he wants to prove that Caesar's death was justified and all his reasons were valid, and also hopefully gain the trust of fellow Romans. In Antony's speech he is trying to prove that the people who killed Caesar are wrong. But he has a harder job because he is speaking by permission of Brutus. Therefore he can not just flat out say anything, he has to discretely drop hints about is case. …show more content…
The difference is that Antony genuinely feels sad for Caesar's death. Meanwhile Brutus is only pretending to feel sad over the death. Brutus refers to himself as "a dear friend to Caesar". This makes Brutus seem as if he is loyal to kill a good friend "for the good of Rome". since Antony is actually upset about the death he says "my heart is in the coffin there with Caesar". By this quote alone we can see how much Caesar really meant to Antony. In both speeches we see elements of hyperbole. This is an exaggeration of language that shocks the listener. Brutus says "had you rather Caesar was living and die all slaves?" This would never happen but it helped the speech and Brutus's case since the audience is naive. Antony also uses hyperbole when he said "when the poor hath cried, Caesar hath wept." Caesar might have not cried but but say he was helps the audience think that Caesar wasn't a bad