Julius Caesar Rhetorical Analysis

688 Words2 Pages

In William Shakespeare’s play, Julius Caesar, Mark Antony calls upon “Friends, Romans, [and] countrymen” to lend their ears to him in order to convince the populace of Rome to rise against the conspirators that had murdered him. The main conspirators, Casca, Cassius, and Brutus, portray Caesar as a tyrannical ruler with a terrible ambition for power and express that in killing Caesar, they have only done what is best for Rome. However, after indirectly dispelling Brutus’ claim that Caesar was ambitious, Mark Antony’s rhetoric persuades the auditors into a state of rebellion through his cunning use of language. Antony veils his words when speaking to the crowd of Romans because he is given permission to speak at the funeral on the one condition …show more content…

However, this is only after Brutus explains the reasons behind the assassination of Caesar. Brutus also states that he may do this on the condition that Antony does not display the Senators in a bad light. Although Antony agrees, he makes the most of his having the last word by masterfully delivering words that are meant to stir the crowd. He then progressively and repetitively mentions the terms honorable and ambition, which put both under the microscope for the plebians. Antony then begins work on persuading the crowd that Brutus was wrong in killing Caesar and that Caesar should actually be …show more content…

He then deceptively tells the crowd to “have patience” because he does not wish to “wrong the honorable men whose daggers have stabbed Caesar” in reading them the will. This portrays Antony as honorable amongst the people, as he does not wish to tear down the reputation of another man. When the crowd responds with shouts of “they were traitors. ‘Honorable’ men,” Antony knows he has them in the palm of his hand. It is then that Antony delivers the coup-de-grace by revealing to the crowd Caeser’s will, which promises, “every Roman citizen [...] seventy-five drachmas.” Unlike Brutus, Antony is more connected with the people of Rome in his speech. Rather than speaking logically and intellectually, Antony’s words come from a place of emotion and relatability, and in doing so establishes a sense of camaraderie with the

Open Document