Julius leads the honorable Brutus to think negatively

Julius Caesar had a drive for power which leads the honorable Brutus to think negatively of Caesar and began to question if he was best fit for being king of Rome. In the stage play “Julius Caesar” by William Shakespeare. Caesar had most of the power and decided to not listen to anyone except the ones who told him things he liked to hear. The acts of Caesar had driven the conspirators and Brutus to plot against Caesar, the honorable Brutus wanted to show his love for Rome and joining the conspirators is what he saw was the best solution. So Brutus and the conspirators planned to take Caesar’s life from him and that is exactly what they had done. Brutus then had to explain or convince to the people of Rome that the act they had committed was for the best. Mark Antony, a great friend of Caesar had then stood up for the many things Caesar had in mind and he was one of the few that Caesar thought was trustworthy besides Brutus. After the death of Caesar, Mark Antony had told Caesar he will take great revenge for him and that shows great passion for the love he had for Julius Caesar. Both Marcus Brutus and Mark Antony had delivered speeches at Caesar’s funeral, they both had very convincing speeches. Although one stood out more than the other, even though both speeches have many similarities Mark Antony’s usage of assertion and anecdotes was more effective.    Some of the specific persuasive languages that Antony and Brutus had in common was repetition and exaggeration. The first similarity the men had in common was repetition. In Brutus’s speech repetition was used with only one word which was “offended”. Brutus used this word to try and show the people that he was not guilty and the act that he had committed was the right thing to do. Which turned into a rhetorical question, “Who is here so rude that would not be a Roman”(JC.3.2.32)? Brutus used this to try and challenge the audience to follow his approach and make the people believe that Caesar was truly unhonorable. Now in Antony’s speech were repetition was is mainly used in two words, “honorable/honor” and “ambition/ambitious”. Antony reused these words to show how ambitious Caesar was on being king/ruler of Rome. Due to the things Caesar has accomplished, he was very respected and honorable. Another point was to show that if the conspirators and Brutus were so ambitious and honorable as Brutus said, they would not have thought about killing Caesar let alone actually taking his life from him.”He was my friend, faithful and just to me”(JC.3.2.13). The use of these words allowed Antony to get the audience’s attention to show that Brutus and the conspirators were wrong and Caesar did not deserve to die. Now that Brutus and Antony both had used exaggeration and repetition, they both have different opinions and messages to send to the audience.    On the contrary, Brutus’s usage of connotation and Antony’s usage of sarcasm. When Brutus used connotation which is a feeling were a word adds greater meaning than if it was originally given. Brutus had used the word “love” to highlight his love for Rome was much more significant than his love for Caesar. “Had you rather Caesar were living and die all slaves, than that Caesar were dead, to live all free men”(JC.3.2.12-14)? The usage of connotation was very important due to the fact it helped get the people on Brutus’s side and to feel sorry for him since he had killed his friend so he tried to justify that they had killed Caesar for the greater good of Rome. Although for Antony’s speech, Antony used sarcasm which was to then bring awareness to the audience to turn the people against Brutus and the conspirators. “Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest– For Brutus is an honorable man; So are they all, all honorable men–(JC.3.2.9-11). Saying how noble Brutus was even though Brutus was Caesar’s best friend. As a result, Brutus and Antony’s form of connotation and sarcasm gave the audience different perspectives on who was wrong and who was right.    Notwithstanding, both Brutus and Antony had plausible speeches and arguments.  Broadly Antony had a better speech due to the organization of assertion and anecdotes. To explain, Antony used assertion to make the audience more interested in what he had to say. An assertion is when an idea is presented as fact without full explanation or evidence. Antony used assertion to grab the audience into knowing Caesar’s will.”I found it in his closet, tis his will:”(JC.3.2.58). Also saying, “Have patience, gentle friends, I must not read it; It is not meet you know how Caesar loved you”(JC.3.2.69-70). Antony had presented the “will” to make the citizens love Caesar and to show that Caesar did truly care about the people of Rome. Secondly, Antony used anecdotes to show the audience how great Caesar was and what good qualities Caesar had. Anecdotes are short personal stories to connect with the audience and add evidence to an argument. The anecdote Antony had used was how honorable and ambitious Caesar was. “When the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept:”(JC.3.2.19). To say that if the people of Rome was saddened, Caesar himself was, even more, sadder for his people. This technique in Antony’s speech made his more effective because it showed a whole other side to Caesar which was the complete opposite of what Brutus had stated about Caesar.    A common argument against this position of Antony’s speech being more effective and saying Brutus’s speech was better. Others may think that because of the use of Brutus’s exaggeration. The one thing people may not understand that with using too much exaggeration and can cause the audience to think that the speaker is overdoing the speech or that the speaker is becoming irritating and annoying. For example, Brutus kept exaggeration his love for Rome and that kind of love did not meet up with Caesar. “Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more”(JC.3.2.11-12). It was like Brutus was trying to cover up his wrongdoing of killing Caesar so he felt the need to exaggerate the topic of his love and that he did it for Rome. With the amount of exaggeration in his speech could lead the people of Rome that he was lying. This is why using different persuasive techniques and devices to persuade the audience with real evidence to back it up is more effective. Antony’s speech was more understood and more clear without overdoing it.    In summary, when Brutus and Antony both used exaggeration to prove their love for Rome and Caesar, it gave the audience a clear understanding that they were loved also not just Caesar. With both Brutus and Antony’s contradictions, they had successfully got their points across to their audience. Out of all of the literary devices used to persuade the audience, Antony’s speech was more effective with the use of assertions and anecdotes by showing the conspirators true form and manipulative ways. Also showing how amazing and selfless Caesar was towards his people.  Antony showed that Caesar was not the bad guy and showed all the false information put upon Caesar with using literary devices and techniques.