Plays are an important part of our human culture. One of the best play writers, William Shakespeare wrote a play called “Julius Caesar” which was about the real roman king Julius Caesar. After Julius Caesar died in the play, two important characters, Antony and Brutus went up and made their speeches. Using the 3 writing forms ethos, pathos and logos, I will decide the winner of these two conflicting speeches. This is written by Ramy Alawar, a freshmen high school student that resides in the country of America. Ethos is the rhetorical device to convince someone through trust, or ethics. I believe that both Marcus Brutus and Mark Antony had strong uses of ethos. Brutus starts his speech with a strong use of ethos saying “Romans, countrymen, and lovers! Hear me for my cause, and be silent, that you may hear: believe me for mine honor, and have respect to mine honor, that you may believe” (1). Brutus was saying that all his honor was to be considered …show more content…
I feel like Mark Antony did a lot better than Brutus in using pathos. Pathos is Mark Antony’s most strategically used form of speech. He uses a little bit of pathos in his first speech saying that “He was my friend, faithful and just to me” (4), This says Caesar was a good man, and was unjust to murder. Antony then talks about the stabs in Caesar, he points out the stabs of Casca and Cassius, but doesn’t bring much attention to them. Then he brings attention to Brutus’s stab, Antony says “This was the most unkind cut of them all” (8), He then gets angry, and so do his fellow Romans. He sums his point up by rhetorical irony, saying that the work that the conspirators have done is “honorable”. Brutus’ pathos was not used much, he just used continuous repetition of saying Caesar was a close friend of his, and he was sad to let him go. Due to Antony’s strong use of pathos and Brutus’ mediocre use of pathos, Mark Antony done better than