Julius Caesar Rhetorical Analysis

Words: 698
Pages: 3

Title of Your Report In Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, Antony’s speech is more effective than Brutus’s because Antony studied the Roman people and knew how they react to certain rhetorical appeals, whereas Brutus was faulty in his examination of the crowd therefore causing the crowd to follow Antony. Antony was a masterful orator, appealing to the people's sense of why Caesar was murdered. Antony painted a picture with his words showing the people that the conspirators were nothing more than power hungry beasts. Antony's use of pathos, rhetoric, as well as his use of logical fallacies are what riled up the audience. While Brutus was speaking Antony was studying the plebians, and he noticed something Brutus failed to realize. Antony saw that the people did not make decisions based on logical and ethical statements, but rather what connects …show more content…
“They used psychological tactics, guilt, and emotions to appeal to the patriotism and loyalty of the public”(Howard). This fallacy has been used many more times and it continues to be one that is effective, and can be hard to detect if not paying close attention. Brutus and Antony are both very skilled speakers in their own ways. Brutus also used fallacies in his argument, so why was he not successful? The answer to that is Brutus thought the people would appeal to what he appeals to. Antony, however, spoke to the people the way they think and would want to listen. People throughout history have shown they make irrational decisions based on their current emotions, rather than taking time to think and make logical choices. Antony played into that characteristic the majority of people in that era had. The use of rhetorical appeals and fallacies is not something that is just used by Brutus and Antony. This style of speaking is used everyday in large companies, politics, even in a conversation with