Speeches are a predominant skill used by great figures throughout history. Important ideas are efficiently conveyed through a balance of emotion and logic, which can greatly impact the audience when delivered impartially. In The Tragedy of Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, two major characters, Marcus Brutus and Mark Antony, individually delivered a speech at Julius Caesar’s funeral, hoping to inveigle the audience to their side; in the outcome, Mark Antony ultimately delivers the most efficient speech, using an equal amount of rhetoric integrated into his reason to appeal to the audience’s intuition.
Along with ethos, Antony and Brutus also incorporated pathos into their speeches to evoke the public’s passion and sentiment, which was used as leverage to get their reasoning across. Antony begins his approach by enforcing guilt, “But yesterday the word of Caesar might/ have stood against the world; now he lies there. / And none so poor to do him reverence.” (III. ii. Lines 47-49) With addressing so, Antony manages to make it seem like it was the Romans’ fault for allowing the death of Caesar to occur, the rush of guilt disquiets the audience as Caesar passed with no solid reasoning. However, Brutus uses a bolder statement to deeper impact the spectators, “I have the same dagger for myself, / when it shall please my country to need my death.” (III. ii. Lines 34-35) By using the tactic of flag waving, he greatly appealed to the Romans by declaring that he’d die if they wanted him to. Also, Brutus’ statement seemingly gives the audience a source of power as his death is in the Romans’ hands. With this, Brutus displayed a more significant use of pathos, his words going to such extremities as to say that he’d end his life for the people of Rome, which in turn gave the audience a greater emotional impact.
To deepen their arguments, Antony and Brutus built rhetorical questions into their speeches to influence their audience. Brutus came first testing the public’s sense of nationalism, asking, “Who is here so / vile that will not love this country?” (III. ii. Lines 21- 22) With this, Brutus’ statement of killing Caesar to protect Rome enhanced, making it seem like anyone who stood out to contradict him would be perceived ill reputed by Rome. However, Antony’s usage of rhetorical question is based on logos, this combination of rhetoric boosts his statement, swaying the crowd to his favor, “I thrice presented him a kingly crown,/ Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?” (III. ii. Lines 24-25) Brutus’ arguments are primarily established with “Caesar’s ambition” and “honour,” but during this statement, Antony exposes the defect in Brutus’ speech. Again, Mark Antony surpasses Brutus’ speech, his management of rhetoric is superior to Brutus’, he abuses the flaws in Brutus’ speech, which creates a greater impact on the audience.
127 our experts are availableright now
As established, speeches with a balance of rhetoric vastly alters the outcome beneficially, the audience connects with the speaker and comprehends the logic through the speaker’s perspective. Antony’s ability to manipulate the audience’s instincts turned the crowd towards his favor. Although, Antony structured his speech similarly to Brutus, Antony intelligently dissembled Brutus’ points and created reasons which protected Caesar’s reputation, thus, making Antony the clear victor.
