When comparing two brilliant speeches that are presented in the Tragedy of Julius Caesar it is incredibly hard to pick which one I m a fan of. But that is only because of the dramatic irony that foreshadows the play for me. So expecting that you either have read this magnificent play or you haven't, you can decipher for yourself which one you choose to support. Both have their points in common but both have so many differences that it can make it confusing on which one is better.
Before Brutus began his speech he said "Cassius go into the other streets and part the numbers. Those that will hear me speak, let 'em stay here; those that will follow Cassius, go with him;..." (Act 3.2) We can clearly see here that he is appealing to Ethos here by wanting the crowd of citizens to chose who they will
…show more content…
He first starts out by saying "You gentle Romans-". (Act 3.2) He wants to come off friendly and kind so that he can have their attention. He says later on in his speech "I speak not to disapprove what Brutus spoke, but I am here to speak what I do know. You all did love him once, not without cause. What cause withholds you then to mourn for him? O judgment, thou art fled to brutish beasts, and men have lost their reason! Bear with me, my heart is in the coffin there with Caesar, and I most pause till it come back to me." (Act 3.2) Mark Antony's argument is very well crafted. He uses rhetoric to discredit Brutus' speech. This is ethos. He doesn't just come right out and say, no, Brutus is wrong. he's trying to create this argument so the people come to that conclusion on their own. He says, "Yet Brutus says he was ambitious, And Brutus is an honorable man." (Act 3.2) His criticism of Brutus is very undermining. He wants to praise Brutus instead making sure that he's not putting him down. But while he's praising him he's also invalidating his