Antony uses many rhetorical devices in his speech from logos to pathos and many more but, the most effective rhetorical device in Antony's speech is logos because, in Antony's speech he pulls from the people's strings and emotions to get the people of Rome to get on his side and not Brutus’s side. Antony uses logos in many ways and uses it in the best possible way he can. Anthony's goal by using the rhetorical device logos, is that he is trying to make everyone one not on Brutus’s side about the reason why he killed caesar. The first example of how Antony uses logos in his speech is, He stated that, “I come not, friends to steal away your hearts. I am no orator as Brutus is.”
The appeals in Antony’s speech were persuasively better than the use of them in Brutus’s speech. Marc Antony uses all three appeals in his speech to make a very sturdy argument. An example of logos in his speech is when he states, “He hath brought many captives home to Rome Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill: Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?” This speech is Antony stating facts of Caesar’s work which proves that he is not ambitious and does not deserve to be killed. Antony also uses ethos and pathos when he says, “He was my friend, faithful and just to me.”
Brutus’s and Antony’s speech both have fairly different meanings. Though you can find some similarities in their very eloquent speeches. Out of all the rhetorical devices one thing they use quite often is rhetorical question. For example in Brutus’s speech he says, “Who is here so base that would be a bondman?”. Antony uses, talking about crowning Caesar, “Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?”.
Antony knows the truth of the people, that is why his speech contains more pathos and ethos than Brutus’s. The outcome of the speeches are very similar. At the end of both, the crowd cheers for their leader because they are fickle and easily persuaded. One of Brutus’s fatal flaws was leaving and letting
In Brutus’s speech he used ethos and logos to try and control the people of Rome. He was stoic and blinded of what Antony was capable of. He wanted to change their minds about the conspiracy and the murder of Caesar. Brutus says “Had you rather Caesar were living, and die all slaves, than that Caesar were dead, to live all free men” (III, i, 23-24).
Brutus believed that having a king would also be going against everything he knew since Rome was independent. Antony made his speech mainly about Brutus and how he is a
Antony has a way of using people’s words against them, and making the whole counter argument based on the betis of his enemy in this case. Brutus and Antony have obvious different views on the situation that had just happened. Antony, however, does not have to fight for the meaning of his actions like Brutus does. He simply manipulates the key points of Brutus’ deception to provide himself with a support from the people. By definition of verbal irony, manipulation of a contrasting phrase is a good way to persuade anyone to at least see what you are speaking about and
Antony, unlike Brutus, does not speak badly about anyone throughout his speech. While Brutus pulled the crowd to his side by telling them dreadful things about Caesar’s intentions, Antony swayed the crowd by talking about Caesar’s deeds, repeatedly asking the crowd “was this ambition?” (3.2.25). Brutus’s main claim is that Caesar cared
At first, it confused the citizens but then it altered the meaning of it. They caught on and realized that Brutus was definitely not an honorable man. The sarcasm that he uses in his speech gives him credit by making fun of Brutus’ loyalty, and making his argument weaker. Antony used logical strategy when he gives examples of Caesar’s nobility in order to show that the conspirators were wrong by killing
The two speech differed by the amount of people that were reached to the crowds. Neither Brutus or Mark Antony targeted their speeches toward a specific audience. In my opinion, Mark Antony had a much more
These two men's speeches reveal their characters. Brutus' speech seems cold, stiff, formal, schooled, and rehearsed. While Antony couldn't have rehearsed his own speech because the assassination took him completely by surprise. Brutus was a rational man who appealed with reason and logic. He believes in "honor" and "respect", that other men can be persuaded by reason.
Brutus and Mark Antony had very different purposes in their speeches. Brutus was attempting to convince the people that he had viable reasons for killing Caesar. He also wanted to show them that he was still honorable. Brutus also had to convince the people to let him live. He had to sway their opinions so that they would understand why he did what he did.
In Brutus’s speech he stands above the crowd of the Roman people. I think he does this because he portrays himself has higher or better than the Roman people. In Marc Antony’s speech he walks down to the crowd and interacted with the crowd a lot more. Antony’s sees himself has one of the Roman people, not better or higher
In the two stories, they both have different tones and ideas. Each person is different and has different stand points . None of them share the same ideas or points however some share a few things. Brutus speech seems stiff and rehearsed.
Although Antony was also a senator, he took no part in the assassination and was nothing more than and observer. With Marc Antony’s use of logos, verbal irony, and repetition, he pulled through to give the more persuasive argument between his and Brutus’ speech. To make his speech more persuasive than Brutus’, Marc Antony uses a great deal of logos as supporting evidence towards his arguments. He uses logos when saying, “When.. the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept: Ambition should be made of sterner stuff...”
