In the play, Julius Caesar, Shakespeare demonstrates the behind the scenes of Julius Caesar’s assassination. Caesar’s assassination was planned by many people, as they all were fearful of Caesar’s great power. Brutus was one of the most important conspirators of the assassination as he was the one who stabbed Caesar last and took Caesar’s reign as the ruler of Rome. Shakespeare emphasizes Brutus’ skillful manipulation of the Roman plebeians to believe that he had good and noble reasons to assassinated Caesar by using persuasive appeals such as the Ethos, Pathos, and Logos.
Brutus precisely crafted his speech using a plethora amount of literary devices such as parallelism and rhetorical questions in order to reinforce his credibility in front …show more content…
When Brutus states, “With this I depart: that, as I slew my best lover for the good of Rome, I have the same dagger for myself when it shall please my country to need my death” (III. ii. 43-46) he is claiming that he is willing to kill himself for the sake of Rome, if that’s what the people want. When Brutus says this, it makes the plebeians feel loved and grateful that he cares about them. The use of foreshadowing in this phrase gives adds suspense into the story, as many began to feel hinted about the coming events in the story. By saying this Brutus claims that he won’t be the same leader as Caesar and that the people of Rome mean more to him than his own life. This is an emotional approach in order to convince the plebeians to believe that assassinating Caesar was a good thing. Another approach Brutus took to appeal to plebeians’ emotions was when he said, “There is tears for his love; joy for his fortune; honour for his valour; and death for his ambition,” (III. ii. 26-28). Brutus made this claim to discuss his emotions about Julius Caesar and how he respected the dictator, as well as, how he had to kill him because of his selfish ambition for more power. Brutus demonstrated repetition in his statement by saying “for his” 4 times. This figurative language was used to …show more content…
Brutus claims to have loved Caesar but recognizes the public will clearly “demand why Brutus rose against Caesar” if this were really true (III. ii. 19-20). This employment of syllogism implies that the public believes someone who loves Caesar would not oppose him, but Brutus opposed him, therefore Brutus did not love Caesar. Brutus’s shrewd use of syllogism illuminates his acknowledgement of the thoughts the plebeians harbor is regards to the atrocity he committed. The Romans then consider giving Brutus the time of day, as this statement demonstrates his thorough knowledge of the topic. In an attempt to convince the audience he has committed no wrong, Brutus notes that he has “done no more to Caesar than you shall do to Brutus” when in a similar situation (III. ii 33-34). Brutus uses an analogy at this juncture to compare his method in handling Caesar to what the infuriated plebeians would do in his shoes. This analogy aids Brutus in relating to the Romans that it is hypocritical and illogical to be angered about something they themselves would have undoubtedly done. Brutus slyly plants uncertainty in the plebeians, as they no longer strongly believe Brutus is guilty of a
Brutus precisely crafted his speech using a plethora amount of literary devices such as parallelism and rhetorical questions in order to reinforce his credibility in front …show more content…
When Brutus states, “With this I depart: that, as I slew my best lover for the good of Rome, I have the same dagger for myself when it shall please my country to need my death” (III. ii. 43-46) he is claiming that he is willing to kill himself for the sake of Rome, if that’s what the people want. When Brutus says this, it makes the plebeians feel loved and grateful that he cares about them. The use of foreshadowing in this phrase gives adds suspense into the story, as many began to feel hinted about the coming events in the story. By saying this Brutus claims that he won’t be the same leader as Caesar and that the people of Rome mean more to him than his own life. This is an emotional approach in order to convince the plebeians to believe that assassinating Caesar was a good thing. Another approach Brutus took to appeal to plebeians’ emotions was when he said, “There is tears for his love; joy for his fortune; honour for his valour; and death for his ambition,” (III. ii. 26-28). Brutus made this claim to discuss his emotions about Julius Caesar and how he respected the dictator, as well as, how he had to kill him because of his selfish ambition for more power. Brutus demonstrated repetition in his statement by saying “for his” 4 times. This figurative language was used to …show more content…
Brutus claims to have loved Caesar but recognizes the public will clearly “demand why Brutus rose against Caesar” if this were really true (III. ii. 19-20). This employment of syllogism implies that the public believes someone who loves Caesar would not oppose him, but Brutus opposed him, therefore Brutus did not love Caesar. Brutus’s shrewd use of syllogism illuminates his acknowledgement of the thoughts the plebeians harbor is regards to the atrocity he committed. The Romans then consider giving Brutus the time of day, as this statement demonstrates his thorough knowledge of the topic. In an attempt to convince the audience he has committed no wrong, Brutus notes that he has “done no more to Caesar than you shall do to Brutus” when in a similar situation (III. ii 33-34). Brutus uses an analogy at this juncture to compare his method in handling Caesar to what the infuriated plebeians would do in his shoes. This analogy aids Brutus in relating to the Romans that it is hypocritical and illogical to be angered about something they themselves would have undoubtedly done. Brutus slyly plants uncertainty in the plebeians, as they no longer strongly believe Brutus is guilty of a