Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Cicero's speeches
Cicero short essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Marcus Tullius Cicero can be noted as many things; orator, statesman, lawyer, and writer to name a few. Through friendships, that were both personal and strategic, and even disdain, Cicero’s role and his position in Roman society were neither static nor steady. The correspondence Cicero shared with some of Rome’s more prominent figures between 68 and 43 B.C serve as evidence of Rome’s political climate and the key leaders involved. Cicero’s letters are more than simple social interactions among comrades. Rather there is a strategy in whom, how and why these letters are addressed and written the way they are.
In writing to some of the most prominent Roman leaders of the time, including all three members of the First Triumvirate, the polite manner in which these men address one another is not surprising. For example, Cicero conveniently ends his letter to Lentulus Spinther complimenting both him and his son (#6). Some of most outward examples of politeness are found in Cicero’s writings to Brutus and Brutus’ responses thereof, in which they both refer to one other frequently as “my dear.” Their exchanges also end with a compliments of one anther’s children. Cicero writes that there is “no better training in manly excellence” than the imitation of Brutus himself (#2, #3). But
…show more content…
In a letter to Cassius, this dual purpose is stated very clearly by Cicero, who keeps Cassius public standing in mind “both for the sake of the commonwealth, which has always been dearer to [him] than anything else in the world, and for that of [their] mutual affection” (#5). This, though written to Cassius specifically, speaks to the general advantageous nature of a relationship of the sort. Further, Cicero’s letter to Crassus, to which he regards as no ordinary letter but as a “covenant,” is another example which proves that these letters are much social works as they are political negotiations, which include both an exchange of information and influence aimed at an agenda
Cicero’s essay, titled On Duties, presents a practical approach concerning the moral obligations of a political man in the form of correspondence with his young son. Essential to the text, the incentive for Cicero to undertake On Duties emerges from his depleted hope to restore the Republic within his lifetime. Cicero therefore places such aspirations in the hands of his posterity. The foremost purpose of On Duties considers three obstacles, divided into separate Books, when deciding a course of action. Book I prefatorily states, “in the first place, men may be uncertain whether the thing that falls under consideration is an honorable or a dishonorable thing to do” (5). Cicero addresses the ambiguities present under this consideration and codifies a means through which one can reach a justifiable decision. Subsequently, he expounds the four essential virtues—wisdom, justice, magnanimity or greatness of spirit, and seemliness—all of which are necessary to conduct oneself honorably. As a result, the virtues intertwine to create an unassailable foundation upon which one can defend their actions. Cicero’s expatiation of the four virtues, though revolving around justice and political in context, illuminates the need for wisdom among the populace in order to discern a leader’s motivations. This subtly becomes apparent as Cicero, advising his son on how to dictate decision-making, issues caveats regarding the deceptions that occur under the guise of virtue.
Playwright, William Shakespeare, in the play Julius Caesar, utilizes many instances of rhetorical devices through the actions and speech of Caesar's right-hand man, Mark Antony. In the given excerpt, Antony demonstrates several of those rhetorical devices such as verbal irony, sarcasm, logos, ethos, and pathos which allows him to sway the plebeians. The central purpose of Mark Antony’s funeral speech is to persuade his audience into believing that Caesar had no ill intentions while manipulating the plebeians into starting a rebellion against their new enemies, Brutus and the conspirators.
To gain the support of the jurors, Cicero frequently resorts to flattery, addressing them as “gentlemen” (Cicero, p.129) or “wise men” (Cicero, p.139), saying “I have every confidence in your judgement” (Cicero, p.135), or complementing them on their “customary discernment” which allowed them to recognize Caelius’ oratory ability (Cicero, p.146) and he also uses such phrases as “men like yourselves” which imply their superiority (Cicero, p.140). At other times he attempts to entertain them to gain their support. In fact, pervasive throughout the majority of his discourse he assumes a rather flippant and light-hearte...
By examining these two different views of Roman politics: Polybius’ The Histories of Polybius and Quintus Cicero’s Handbook on Canvassing for the Consulship as well as examining Plutarch’s Fall of the Roman Republic account on the collapse of the Republic in the lives of Sulla, Pompey, and Caesar it will be clear how friendship, specifically the private ambition of a few citizens and their rivalry for office, was the internal decaying factor that destroyed the Roman Republic. According to Polybius, the Roman Constitution was “the best of any existing in my time” (Polybius 467). He defines friendship as “whoever gives any sign of an inclination to you, or habitually visits your house” (Cicero 37).
“Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more.” (3.2.24) This quote reflects the motive of Brutus for the assassination of his friend, Caesar. I believe Brutus killed him not out of disrespect, but in a selfless act to protect Rome from the decree of Caesar yet to come. I also believe that he did this out of force from the manipulation from his “friend” Cassius. In Shakespeare's “Julius Caesar”, Brutus’ two most significant characteristics are virtue and unconscious hypocrisy. In order to fully understand these characteristics, it is necessary to analyze all other contributing characteristics, the manipulation of friendship that Cassius uses against him, and the motivations for
On that first fateful day, when Romulus struck down his own brother Remus, the cauldron of Rome was forged in blood and betrayal. The seeds on the Palatine hill cultured one of the most potent and stretching empires of human history. Though this civilization seemingly wielded the bolts of Zeus, they were infested with violence, vanity, and deception. Yet, one man—or seemingly “un”-man—outshone and out-graced his surroundings and everyone within it. He brought Rome several victories and rescued his beloved country from an early exodus, thus providing her a second beginning. This man was Marcus Furius Camillus, and against a logical and emotional mind, he was oft less than loved and celebrated. At times he was disregarded, insulted and even exiled—irrevocably an unwarranted method to reward Rome’s “Second Founder.” This contrast of character between hero and people was perhaps too drastic and too grand. The people were not yet ready to see Marcus Furius Camillus as a model of behavior to be emulated—to be reproduced. Hence, much of Livy’s Book 5 provides a foundation for the Roman people to imitate and assimilate a contrasting, honest, and strong behavior and temperament
One of the first occasions presented was the plotting of Caesar’s assassination. Cassius, Casca, Trebonius, Ligarius and the other conspirators all wanted to rid Rome of Caesar. However, not one of them could give the green light.” They needed one who held a high place in the hearts of the people, to support them and to justify their actions. They needed an “honorable” man.
Rome was the superpower of the Mediterranean area and after many rebellions and political changes Rome needed a high-class system to help spread news. Political news and social gossip became equally important through the people's eyes. News in the city was distributed by either the town’s forum, dinner parties, or convivia. While news outside was spread through letters. Letters allowed important information to reach elite members of society while traveling or to keep personal communication. Since some of the letters were more casual, the roman elite included abbreviations and other quirky writing styles within. The majority of where historians find their information on the different tones is from a man named Cicero. Cicero wrote the most diverse
Caesar's connection and relationship with Brutus was also very strong. Allowing Brutus to speak to Caesar shows his respect fo...
In his speech, Brutus appeals to the loyalism of his audience by making intertwining arguments of ethos, pathos, and logos. He begins by establishing his ethos by asserting his status as an honorable fellow Roman worthy of their respect. He expands on this ethos by dividing it into three parts: his love of Caesar, his loyalty to Rome, and his relationship to his audience. Brutus tells his audience that he was a “dear friend” to the man he murdered, invoking a pathetic sense of sympathy from his audience. However, as he says himself, it was “not that [he] loved Caesar less, but that [he] loved Rome more,” strengthening his ethos as a loyal countryman with the interests of his audience at heart. After establishing an emotional connection to his audience and earning their trust, Brutus explains his logic
Brutus’ tragic flaws are part of what makes him a tragic hero. In Julius Caesar, Brutus is a great example of a tragic hero. His tragic flaws are honor, poor judgement, and idealism (Bedell). In Shakespeare’s plays, the tragic hero and his flaws cause the downfall of the play (Tragic Flaws).
In William Shakespeare's tragic play Julius Caesar, an under appreciated factor of flattery and persuasion plays an important role in the choices of the leaders. Cassius uses flattery with Brutus. Decius uses flattery with Caesar, and Antony uses flattery with Brutus.
2)Cicero, Marcus Tullius., George William Featherstonhaugh, and Anthony Imbert. The Republic of Cicero,. New-York:: Published by G. & C. Carvill, 108 Broadway., 1829. Print.
Two powerful leaders, one power hungry whose ambitious ideas lead to his downfall, the other mindful of people who deserve their higher positions. A true leader is someone who has a vision, a drive and commitment to achieve what's best. In the play written by William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Brutus and Caesar are one of the main characters. They demonstrate leadership qualities that are still relevant to today. They are both very ambitious characters; however, they do so for different reasons and differ in their openness to others. There are many similarities and differences that lie between them. Both are noble and great men with loyal followers and neither man questions the rightness of his own path. Both made crucial mistakes that resulted in their death. However, Caesar acts out of love for for himself, his country, and to retain his power as ruler of Rome. Brutus on the other hand acts out of love for freedom of Rome. This essay will discuss and compare their qualities as leaders as well as their styles and how they are effective/ineffective in the play.
Julius Caesar - A Comparison of Brutus and Cassius In the play Julius Caesar, written and performed by William Shakespeare, there are many characters, but two, Brutus and Cassius, stood out. The play begins in Rome, where a celebration of Julius Caesar's victory over the former ruler of Rome, Pompeii. The victory leads to Caesar's betrayal by his jealous companions. Senators and other high status figures are jealous of Caesar's new and growing power, while others, like Brutus, fear the tyrannical rule Caesar could enforce.