Comparing Marc Antony And Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Congressional Address

Both Marc Antony’s funeral speech and Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Congressional Address were very important. Marc Antony’s funeral speech took place after the stabbing and murdering of Julius Caesar, while Roosevelt’s Congressional Address took place after the bombing at Pearl Harbor. The stabbing of Julius Caesar was a betrayal by Brutus and Cassius, and the Pearl Harbor bombing was a Japanese attack on a Hawaiian naval base. No matter what the purpose of the speech was both men used persuasive techniques to get their point across and to develop emotions in the audience toward the event at hand. These two men have two different purposes for writing and sharing their speeches. In the funeral speech by Antony he is expressing his feelings and emotions about Caesar's death to the crowd. In his funeral …show more content…
The persuasive techniques allowed the men to appeal to the audience's emotions. Both speakers used logos, ethos, and pathos, as well as other techniques to persuade the audience. Logos uses logic to persuade the audience. Ethos refers to convincing the audience using ethical appeals. While pathos uses emotions to persuade the audience. These two men used these persuasive techniques to their advantage. In Roosevelt’s Congressional Address he says “As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.” This statement by Roosevelt uses ethos, Roosevelt is using his credibility as president and commander in chief of the Army and Navy to assure the people of their protection. In Marc Antony’s funeral speech he says, “Friends, Romans, and Countrymen.” This line of the speech uses ethos, because Antony is calling the audience by name. He is calling the audience what they are, friends, Romans, and countrymen. No matter what technique that is used the speaker can still appeal to the audience's