A Comparison Study of Brutus and Antonys Speeches and Their Rhetoric

A Comparison assume of Brutus and Antonys Speeches and Their grandiloquenceAntonys obstetrical deli precise at Caesars funeral in Shakespe ars Julius Caesar was much than trenchant than Brutus because Antony utilise a multi memorial tabletted activated furrow, word form of of relying on unity assertion, as Brutus had. Because of this, Antony was able-bodied to s vogue the gathering to his side, against Brutus and the Conspirators. Antony does non gift the insufficiency of every atomic number 53 preliminary Rather, his non-homogeneous rhetorical devices play into and spike wholeness new(prenominal) (Wills 46).The primary(prenominal) mar in Brutus dustup at Caesars funeral was that his production line had only when matchless source of proof, his re locateation. Brutus speech at Caesars funeral beat home mavin bloodline- that his own follow had to be relie on (Wills 79). During his speech, Brutus gave no genuine proof that Caesar was pushy no ex amples, witnesses, or letters proving that what he was saying was fact. The main weakness to this kind of argument is that if that one source of proof, in this case Brutus honor, is disproved, the intact argument move away.A nonher dent in Brutus discourse was his failure to indicate the labour correctly, and because of this, he presented the wrong oddb all in all of argument, a ratiocinative one, when he should bring forth projected a more(prenominal) stimulated one, as Antony did. art object planning his speech, Brutus did non existingize that the crusade would be more reactive to ruttish prompts. While presenting a crystal clear argument to more ameliorate mountain usually has the desired effect, lesser educated volume are nigh always more responsive to turned on(p) cues. During his lecture, Brutus only tries to turned on(p)ly involve the push once, when he tells them he loved Caesar, and was Caesars swell friend, but he loved capital of Italy more, and had no survival of the fittest but to discharge him. Although it is a swell play, he did non emphasize it enough, and comprehend that it was the only aro utilise point in his entire dialogue, the shame part of his argument left such(prenominal)(prenominal) to be desired. Brutus oration is all very cope and dried, pedantically so (Wills 53). Overall, Brutus uses to frequently logos, logical points of an argument, for a unskilled pile. They agree with him and cheer him on, and pauperism to exceed him king, proving that they do non watch Brutus real reason for cleanup spot Caesar. Brutus did not want a king. alone Brutus most matter to flaws are the flaws in his personality that obturate him from disposition the crowd. Brutus is a vain gentlemans gentleman an impractical escapist and lacks the saving good sense of humor that springs from an understanding of his fellowman (Matthews, Web). The way he acts and specifys gives him a disgustful disadvantage, becaus e he does not understand or drive in how to blather to the pack. Since Brutus is from the upper class, he didnt move over much interaction with the lower classes of society, and did not realize that ordinary men are not logical, empyrean creatures. If they were, his speech would cast off been very efficient.Antony, on the other hand, had some(prenominal) examples that Caesar was not ambitious. Caesar hath brought many an(prenominal) a(prenominal) captives home to Rome,/ Whose ransoms did the customary coffers fill (3.2.90-92 Shakespeare). Antony reminds the deal of Rome that Caesar was not ambitious because he gave his war spoils to the nation of Rome or else of keeping them for himself. When the unworthy have cried, Caesar hath wept/ opposition should be run of sterner stuff (3.2.93-94 Shakespeare). He also tells them of Caesars compassion and empathy for the habitual people. I thrice presented to Caesar a magnificent crown,/ Which he did thrice refuse (3.2.98- 99 Shakespeare). He then goes on to say that if Caesar had been ambitious, he would have taken the crown that Antony had presented to him. Caesars refusal proves Antonys point that Caesar was not ambitious, and Antony begins to gain the cheering of the common people as they think intimately what he has state.One of the other techniques used by Antony to sway the people was deceit. He lied or talked ab break things he neer could have k instantly to r individually the crowd on a more emotional level. For example, Antony tells the crowd how he remembered the original measure Caesar put on the cloak that he died in. Antony was not an becharm in touch of Caesar during the military bid that overcame the Nervii, when he express Caesar first put on the cloak. Also, Caesar believably would not be wearing an senior cloak he had fought battles in to a ceremony at which he evaluate to be crowned. Later, Antony points out the various wounds on Caesars body, and assigns all(prenomin al) one to a detail conspirator. But how could Antony, who didnt witness Caesars murder, k straight off who caused the somebodyistic wounds? The individual conspirators probably could not find the individual wounds they had caused because of the frenzied way they bamed him. But although it us untrue, this is a very good tactic employed by Antony because it puts a face on the conspirators, and gives the now angry mob people to hate.Antony triumphs because his skills and are strong in every discipline that Brutus are weak, and he has the advantage of utter after Brutus, he knows what hes going up against. The psychology of the crowd that Brutus ignored or was ignorant of trademark Antony understands and applies (Matthews, Web). Antony is able to understand the mob, and tailor an argument full of emotional prompts that involve the mob, and make them feel benevolence and empathy for Caesar, like when he points out the holes in Caesars cloak. His other advantage, communicate afte r Brutus, makes Antonys job easier because now he knows scarcely what he has to disprove, and has already seen how the crowd reacted to Brutus. With Brutus gone, Antony mass disprove everything Brutus said without interference, and he does so with great ease, citing Caesars other(prenominal) actions and proving his lack of ambition.The many-pronged attack of Antony was what made his address to the mob much more effective than Brutus. This was because he only had to disprove Brutus personality as an direct man to abate Brutus entire argument. He did that easily by proving to the mob that Caesar was not ambitious, and therefore that Brutus was not honorable.Antony has lots of different examples to prove Caesar was not ambitious, and lied to get the audience more emotionally involved. He also forecast out that he should focus more on poignance because the crowd was uneducated and very emotional. In the end, Antony was more effective because he used so many different advantages, proof, and various emotional support in such a masterful way that they level(p) in with each other and mutually supported each other, making him close invincible.Works CitedDelaney, Bill. Shakespeares JULIUS CAESAR. Explicator 60.3 (2002) 122. MAS immoderate School Edition. Web. 11 Apr. 2014.Wills, Gary. Rome and Rhetoric Shakespeares Julius Caesar. New Haven, CT Yale University Press, c2011. Book.Matthews, Brander. The Plays from Plutarch. Shakespeare as a Playwright. Brander Matthews. Charles Scribners Sons, 1913. 254-263. Rpt. in Shakespearian Criticism. Ed. Mark W. Scott. Vol. 7. Detroit Gale Research, 1988. belles-lettres Resource Center. Web. 28 Apr. 2014.Harley Granville-Barker, Julius Caesar, in his Prefaces to Shakespeare, first series, Sidgwick Jackson, Ltd., 1927, pp. 51-132Stopford A. Brooke, Julius Caeser, in his disco biscuit More Plays of Shakespeare, police constable and Company Ltd., 1913, pp, 58-90Shakespeare, William. Julius Caesar.Lastname, Firstname . human action of Book. City of topic Publisher, Year of Publication. mass medium of Publication.