In the play Julius Caesar by, Julius Shakespeare, both Antony and Brutus give speeches after Caesar died. Brutus tells the people that it was for the good of Rome and had to be done. Brutus also backs up his claim by giving examples of how “ambitious” Caesar was. Antony on the other hand wanted to persuade the Roman people that what Brutus and the conspirators was wrong and they need to seek revenge. Both Antony and Brutus use Ethos, Logos, and Pathos, which are tools used in speaking or writing to persuade people. Ethos is an appeal based on the character of the speaker, Logos is an appeal based on logic or reasoning, and Pathos is an appeal based on emotions. Antony's speech is better than Brutus's because he is more persuasive and is more …show more content…
This shows that Caesar wasn't ambitious and trustworthy. Antony uses his emotions to also win the people's trust. Antony is talking about the emotional story of how Caesar was murdered. He brings the people to a sad state and the Romans start to respect Antony more. Brutus thought that his reasoning behind the assassination of Caesar would be enough to persuade that the killing of Caesar was the right thing to do. Brutus only relied on his honorability and thought that would be enough, but it …show more content…
Brutus uses ethos the most in his speech, he was considered very honorable by the Romans. Since he was very honorable everyone believed that anything that came out of his mouth had to be true. Brutus had an easier time to win over the people of Rome. Antony is constantly questioning Brutus. Antony targets the credibility and character of Brutus when he says; “And Brutus is an honourable man.” (III.ii.1631). Antony repeats that phrase when he wants to prove that they are not as honorable as they seem. Antony gives an example of how the conspirators are doing something dishonorable. He tries to persuade the crowd that their interpretation of the conspirators may be wrong, and that they weren't honorable men at all. Antony finally persuades the crowd without saying what the conspirators did