Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar

Sample Solution

    In William Shakespeare's play Julius Caesar, both Antony and Brutus have the opportunity to present their claims during their funeral orations. As they speak, each character aims to justify their actions and sway public opinion in their favor. By developing strong rhetorical strategies, the author allows readers to compare these speeches and determine which one is more effective.

Brutus opens his speech by expressing compassion for those who grieve Caesar’s death. In doing so, he establishes a sympathetic tone that continues throughout the rest of his address: “Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more” (III.ii). He then provides a logical explanation for why it was necessary to kill Caesar; Brutus emphasizes how he had no personal vendetta against him but acted out of what he believed was best for Rome. To support this claim further, he refers back to the conspirators’ intentions from prior acts: “We were all born free as nature would have us; So were we cossed by nature...Whilst you [Caesar] do confess that publicly/Which here you come not to deny” (III.ii). Here, Brutus effectively argues that while they all initially sought mutual freedom under Julius Caesar’s rule, it eventually became clear that this could not be achieved without removing him as ruler due to his ambition and disregard of others' opinions and rights. On the other hand, Antony begins by affirming Brutus’ claim—in contrast with Brutus who spoke directly on behalf of himself—and reaffirms its validity after citing examples from common knowledge: “You all did see...When that the poor have cried/Caesar hath wept” (III.ii). Through this reference, Antony asserts two points simultaneously—that even commoners held great esteem for Caesar despite his aristocratic status and vice versa—while also supporting both sides of public sentiment at once. Immediately following this point however is when Antony changes direction entirely by citing evidence from previous events regarding inappropriate behavior from certain senators leading up to Caesars death: ”And when much grievance could not be evaded/He [Caesar] chose rather die than lie enslaved" (III III) . This provides an excellent counterargument against those who believe Julius should have been removed as leader since it implies there might still have been other options available beyond just having him killed if members of senate had only acted differently beforehand.. By employing such powerful rhetoric devices in both speeches ,Shakespeare successfully allows readers to interpret either one or both sides interpretations as valid while also providing insight into which is ultimately more convincing overall . While claiming selfless motives ,Brutus defends his reasoning behind murdering Julius through carefully constructed logic while avoiding any mention of personal gain or vengeance -making a powerful case overall . On the other hand ,Antony counters with equally compelling evidence combined with emotionally charged language-effectively making an argument in favor for allowing justice take its course over murder instead . Thus ,it can be said that despite being valid points on either side ,Antony's speech was overall more persuasive due largely greater emphasis on emotion over logic .