Compare And ContrastThe Tragedy Of Julius Caesar And Jacques-Paul Marat

       In William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, although Marc Antony is allowed to make a speech at Caesar's funeral, he must not speak ill of either the conspirators or Caesar.  Antony was infuriated with Caesar's assassination, and wants to seek revenge on his killers as well as gain power for himself in Rome's government.  He must persuade the crowd that has gathered that Caesar's murder was unjust, and turn them against Brutus and Cassius.  He tries to stir his listeners' anger, rousing them into action and yet say nothing bad about his enemies.  Marc Antony uses several persuasive devices in his speech, which allows him to successfully convince the citizens of Rome to turn

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.

Brutus allows for Caesar’s good deeds to be buried, while Antony tries to bring them back to life. Antony mentions: “He hath brought many captives home to Rome, Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill: Did this in Caesar seem ambitious? When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept; Ambition should be made of sterner stuff” (III.ii.89-93). Though Antony is successful in his persuasion, the audience is never allowed to forget the conspirator’s outlook on the ordeal, and they are heavily influenced by dramatic irony (Crowther, Crystal).

In his soliloquy, Antony praised Caesar’s great personality but at the same time, he would keep saying positive things about Brutus. An example is when he says, “He was my friend, faithful and just to me; / But Brutus says he was ambitious, / And Brutus is an honorable man.” (3.2.85-87). The way in which he spoke and by telling the citizens the context of Caesar’s will, turned the mob against Brutus and the rest of the conspirators. The anger possessed by the countrymen can be shown when a plebeian says, “Most noble Caesar! We’ll revenge his death!” (2.2.244). This betrayal by Antony caused Brutus to break off their friendship.

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.

Antony, another Julius Caesar character, employs three Machiavellian skills: using fickleness to his advantage,“...while you treat them well, they are yours” (Prince 3), and ruling by fear. Antony’s objective was revenge toward the conspirators for killing Caesar. Antony also successfully used the fickleness of the Roman people to his advantage. After Brutus explained why the conspirators had killed Caesar, the crowd was understanding and agreed with the conspirator’s actions. The Roman peasants are convinced; they even want Brutus as their new emperor, with better qualities than Caesar. The plebians say, “Caesar’s better parts / Shall be crowned in Brutus” (3.2.54-55). But the level of the masses’ support for Brutus did not deter Antony’s opinion of the wrongdoing of the conspirators. In Antony’s speech, he spoke both confidently and assertively, which led to Antony convincing the crowd to support his cause and fight against the conspirators. Additionally, in Machiavellian style, Antony understands the crowd’s perspective; they need praise to believe in Antony’s cause. Antony appeased the Roman masses when Antony

In the tragic play Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare, the ruler of Rome, Julius Caesar, is stabbed to death by some of his so-called friends. Brutus, one of Caesar's best friends, is approached by some of the other senators to join the conspiracy to kill Caesar. Brutus weighs his options and decides to join the conspirators for the good of Rome. At Caesars's funeral, Brutus gives a speech to convince the citizens that the conspirators were right to kill Caesar. In contrast, Antony gives a speech to convince the Romans that there was no real reason to kill Caesar. Both characters try to persuade the audience, but they achieve different tones using literary and rhetorical devices. The tone of Brutus' speech is prideful, while the tone of Antony's speech is dramatic and inflammatory.

Centuries after the murder of a rising dictator, students, historians, and linguists alike continue to study the death of Julius Caesar as immortalized by William Shakespeare’s play, The Tragedy of Julius Caesar. In this tragedy, Shakespeare examines the days preceding Caesar’s downfall, and the aftermath that ensues. The tragedy describes Marcus Brutus, a character with noble and honorable intentions, influenced by Cassius to support a conspiracy against an ambitious politician, Julius Caesar. Brutus, Cassius, and other conspirators succeed in ending Caesar’s life, but are forced to flee when Rome turns against them. Much controversy has arisen over who is the tragic hero of the play. A tragic hero is a noble character who, despite his greatness, is led to destruction by his own fatal flaw. Although many argue Brutus is the tragic hero due to his prominent role in the play and his heroic, yet flawed, character, Shakespeare remains justified in the naming of his play. In Shakespeare’s accurately titled tragedy, Julius Caesar, rather than Brutus, remains the tragic hero of the play due to his heroic qualities, his fatal flaw, and Brutus’ ineligibility as the tragic hero.

Throughout life people experience several obstacles and losses, however, one of the most difficult challenges to overcome is the loss of a beloved. In William Shakespeare’s well-known play, Julius Caesar, most of the characters face the death of a loved one including Mark Antony who watched the assassination of his friend Caesar. Not only did Caesar’s best friend, Brutus, plot against and murder Caesar, Brutus also attempted to justify his actions at Caesar’s funeral by accusing Caesar of being “ambitious.” Despite Brutus’ strong prestige among the citizens of Rome, Antony provides a benevolent and compassionate speech on behalf of Caesar. In comparison to Brutus, Mark Antony delivered the most adequate speech, because he effectively used the

William Shakespeare's epic and tragic telling of the story of Julius Caesar, provides an interesting and helpful way of examining history in a dramatic context. The concept of violence is evident throughout the entire play. The interpretative quality of violence, and the relative effectiveness of its usage, provides a useful lens for understanding this work. For this essay, I intend to examine the three characters of Brutus, Cassius and Marc Anthony using this particular focus. I will demonstrate how each of these characters and their relationships to violence appears as basically relative and open to interpretation. This quality of violence helps demoralize its use while telling a tale of historic significance and simultaneously revealing useful examples of how this forceful technique and its effects are subjective in nature.

Antony first bids the crowd, “‘You all do know this mantle; I remember the first time ever Caesar put it on’” (3.2.171-172). Using a semblance of mourning and by telling the story of Caesar’s mantle, Antony portrays his and Caesar’s deep friendship; the flashback to the past serves to move the reader to sympathize with Antony. Therefore, the pathos Antony creates serves to demonstrate that one simply needs the personable connection to Caesar and Antony in order to sympathize with them. Finishing his oration, Antony describes himself as “a plain, blunt man, that love my friend;” showing his devotion to Caesar, Antony declares, “‘Here was a Caesar! When comes such another?’” (3.2.220,253). By this, Antony officiates his friendship and the deep love he felt for Caesar; this ultimately gives Antony the advantage of the listener’s sympathies. While Brutus first employed logic to win over his listener, this passage demonstrates how Antony’s expression of friendship becomes the defining trait of his speech that makes it more believable than Brutus’s. Antony, with his charge that no one greater than Caesar will come soon, at this point wins over his listeners using his simple expression of friendship. Therefore, logic, as seen in Brutus’s speech, cannot overcome the persuasive power of

The tragic and untimely death of Julius Caesar, a condemned Roman tyrant, triggered William Shakespeare's creativity. In his play Julius Caesar Shakespeare writes of the treacherous conspirators, Marcus Brutus and Caius Cassius, and their plans to assassinate their Roman leader, Julius Caesar. The story continues to explain how Caesar's loyal friend, Marc Antony, helps avenge the brutal murder. After Antony receives soldiers to fight his battle, his character begins to change. The  fair and faithful Marc Antony transforms to a darker and more deceitful character. Marc Antony is not suitable to rule Rome because he holds a grand desire of great power, his conceit

Brutus, a conflicted senator obsessed with his civic duty, convinces the people of Rome that his motives in killing Caesar were just and noble by rhetoric. Brutus is the only conspirator to have impersonal motives in killing Caesar. In fact, his motives are trying to find the best solution for Rome, and in the end, he must make the hard choice of killing his best friend for his homeland. As early as Brutus’ conversation with Cassius in Act I, Brutus exhibits this deep love and respect for Rome and how this love is conflicting with his love for his friend, Caesar: “[P]oor Brutus, with himself at war, / Forgets the shows of love to other men” (I.ii.51-52). Brutus brings up this internal conflict again when he tells the crowds that although he did love Caesar, he loved Rome and its people more. After Brutus’ murder of Caesar, he realizes that the issue of the public opinion of Rome is of the utmost importance. Because of this love for Rome, Brutus uses rhetoric to persuade these plebeians to approve of him and his cause. When Cassius warns Brutus about “how much the people will be moved / By that which [Marc Antony] will utter[!]” (III.i.252-253), Brutus tells Cassius that letting Marc Antony speak “shall advantage us more than do us wrong” (III.i.261). In these cases, Brutus demonstrates his awareness of

This fluctuating behavior has a critical significance by creating different interpretations of Caesar making the audience unable to justify Caesar’s eventual death. During the funeral, both Antony and Brutus, close friends of Caesar, speak. Antony defends Caesar by saying, “When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept; / Ambition should be made of sterner stuff. / Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;” (Shakespeare 3.2.91-96). In this quote, Antony focuses on the honorable things Caesar has done by emphasizing his sympathy with the poor. Antony indicated that Caesar was not ambitious, and did not deserve his murder, showing an interpretation of Caesar’s character. However, Antony also indicated that Brutus called Caesar “ambitious”. This shows how Brutus has interpreted the behavior of Caesar another way by focusing on the dishonorable actions of Caesar. Both interpretations can be substantiated by instances of Caesar’s behavior within the play, which creates doubt in the audience’s mind of Caesar’s true character. This causes the audience to also be unable to determine whether Caesar truly deserved to die because his personality can be interpreted in different