Caesar Gladiators

Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) was one of the most outstanding leaders in history. He was the first ruler of the Romano-Hellenic civilization and achieved his goals with great success throughout his life of 56 years. He was assassinated by the conspirators, who accused him for practicing tyranny. This essay will discuss whether it was right for the conspirators to murder Caesar and what its consequences were.

However, the most important use of a rhetorical question is in the last line where he challenges his audience if there “comes such another [Caesar]?”. Here the rhetorical question serves to summarize the greatness of Caesar and to pass the responsibility for future actions onto the listeners. As a result, the people will be more likely to act against the conspirators after they have realized there will not be anyone as good as Caesar.

In William Shakespeare's play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, two speeches are given to the people of Rome about Caesar's death. In Act 3, Scene 2 of this play Brutus and Antony both try to sway the minds of the Romans toward their views. Brutus tried to make the people believe he killed Caesar for a noble cause. Antony tried to persuade the people that the conspirators committed an act of brutality toward Caesar and were traitors. The effectiveness and ineffectiveness of both Antony's and Brutus's speech to the people are conveyed through tone and rhetorical devices.

In the play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, an honorable man, Brutus, is planning to overthrow the soon to be king, Julius Caesar. Brutus is persuaded by Cassius that Caesar is a liar, too ambitious, weak, and not fit to be Rome’s king. Brutus soon believed Cassius, and they and the conspirators made a plan to kill Caesar. After Caesar’s death, Brutus planned to justify his actions of killing Caesar at his funeral in his speech to the people. After Brutus’s speech, the citizens of Rome were all in agreement that Brutus did the right thing for Rome. Brutus then decides to allow Caesar’s best friend, Antony, to speak in honor of Caesar. Antony speaks, and he convinces the citizens that Brutus’s actions were unjust and turned the people against Brutus.

Roman charioteers and Roman gladiators were at the pinnacle of the entertainment industry during ancient Roman times. They both had large followings, were keys to political power, and were the reasons for architectural masterpieces. Charioteers and gladiators, however, were quite different in many ways. They had differences in backgrounds, in risks of their profession, in their professional careers, and in the various things they can stand for and represent.

Gladiators were a huge part of the Roman society and a large part of Roman culture. The people of Rome loved gladiator battles. The Roman coliseum was built in order to fit the standards of a bloody, brutal battle while also being able to keep thousands of Roman citizens comfortable and entertained.

The most predominate and important aspect In the play Julius Caesar, by William Shakespeare are the speeches given to the Roman citizens by Brutus and Antony, the two main charaters, following the death of Caesar. Brutus and Antony both spoke to the crowd,using the same rhetorical devices to express their thoughts. Both speakers used the three classical appeals employed in the speeches: ethos, which is an appeal to credibility; pathos, which is an appeal to the emotion of the audience; and logos, which is an appeal to the content and arrangement of the argument itself. Even though both speeches have the same structure Antony’s speech is significantly more effective than Brutus’s.

In Roman history, some elite men held certain values that they felt strong enough to take their life in order to defend it. In William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, there are certain characters portrayed to show how a person’s values or ideas can change their behavior and influence some significant decisions. The protagonist of the play, Marcus Brutus, supports this thought by having an idealistic view on the world and by showing his patriotism toward Rome. In William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, Shakespeare uses Brutus as an honorable, idealistic man in order to show the depth that a high-class Roman man will go through in order to defend his honor.

Brutus uses a proud tone conveyed by many literary devices to convince the audience that Caesar's murder was justified. Brutus asks, "Would you rather, Caesar were living, and you all die slaves, than that Caesar were dead, so you all live freeman" (Shakespeare 3.2.20-22). Brutus tries to persuade the audience that Caesar's murder was justified through the use of a rhetorical question and a hyperbole. He tells the audience if Caesar was not killed, Caesar could have become a dictator, and the people would have been oppressed. This persuasive question gives the Roman citizens time to contemplate what Brutus is saying, and prompts them to visualize the

In 1599 the famous English writer, William Shakespeare, wrote the play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar. The story takes place toward the end of the Roman Republic in 44 BC in Ancient Rome. The play follows the words and actions of the Roman senators, plebeians and their emperor Julius Caesar. As the story begins, readers find out the many of the senators are not pleased with Caesar as a ruler of the Roman people. Two characters, Brutus and Cassius are especially passionate about killing Caesar to end his rule. Through discussing plans and creating alliances, the senators get their way and murder Caesar on the foreshadowed Ides of March. One question that comes up while reading the play is was Caesar’s assassination really justified by the murderers? Although he did show signs of hubris, or excessive pride, Caesar’s assassination by the conspirators was not justified because their reasons were based on theories and biased opinions, Caesar was a good man, and his murder was committed for the good of the people killing him and not for the good of Rome.

Julius Caesar (100-44BC) was one of the greatest men produced by ancient Rome and he remains today a famous personality in world history (Barlow 2005). The conspirators were wrong to murder Julius Caesar in three ways. Firstly, they were morally wrong in the removal of Caesar. Secondly, they failed to consider a practical benefit to Rome in the murder of Caesar, resulting in only more problems. Lastly and most importantly, the conspirators were wrong to murder Julius Caesar because they placed their interests before those of Rome.

Plutarch considers Julius Caesar’s assassination to be justified. He believed the group felt they had to keep their plans in secret with a select few which they could trust to further their cause. Despite the fact that there prophesies and warnings alerting Caesar to his eminent Demise, the assassins continued their plan feeling that they would be deemed as “noble leaders of the commonwealth” when they had done this great deed. Because of Caesars hand in the murder of Pompey, it was believed to be a “divine appointment” to hold a senate meeting where there statue of Pompey stood for whom they also sought vengeance. Therefore at the start of the meeting, Plutarch states that when Cassuis turned and faced Pompey’s statues, this when Caesar walked in the room and the men struck him, making it look like it was providence. At the end, Brutus was prepared to make a speech but there was nothing but chaos. The elitist group had come to the agreement to only kill Caesar but when they sought Antony as a threat, Marcus felt enough had been done “restore Rome and saved Antony’s life,” illustrates

Should Julius Caesar have been killed? This question has plagued history for years without a real answer. Julius Caesar was corrupt and all powerful, and his death saved Rome. It really is that simple; he declared himself dictator for life and ignored the Senate’s power. A man with that much power can only hurt a nation.

In The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, rhetorical devices are commonly used to persuade the audience. During the speeches many devices were effectively used to convince the Romans to choose the side of the argument being presented. Mark Antony’s speech ended up being more effective than Brutus’s due to his use of pathos throughout to help his point be made that Caesar did not deserve to