Choosing vanilla over chocolate ice cream is a worry free and non consequential choice to make, but being the verdict of whether or not the leader of a country should die, requires a little more thought. Major decision making is no place for doubt. In Julius Caesar, written by William Shakespeare, ancient Rome is depicted by Julius Caesar claiming the title “dictator for life”. He has made government reforms such as expanding the senate, forgiving debts, and allowing foreigners to have citizenship in Rome. These reforms left the previous senate members virtually powerless, and a conspiracy arose with the intent to prevent Caesar’s control from turning to tyranny. The conspiracy consisted of Cassius, Casca, Cinna, Brutus, and other respected …show more content…
The purpose of a rhetorical question is not to give the answer right away, but to have the audience really think through what they just said. This thought provoking literary device was used by Brutus to showcase how an oath will diminish the integrity of their plan. “What need we any spur but our own cause to prick us to redress” is a line from the play that translates to do we need any incentive but our cause to motivate us to make the most informed decision possible (Shakespeare 2.1. 134,135). The conspirators have to reflect on why terminating Caesar is their only option. In their eyes, Caesar has become too powerful and will only harm everyone around him. They have to set the balance of power straight, and even the slightest hint of doubt will dismiss the entire meaning behind the conspiracy. If the lives of your people are not what guide you to do the right thing, then your motives are as corrupt as Caesar. Brutus goes on to pose the question “And what other oath than honesty to honesty engaged that this shall be or we will fall for it” (Shakespeare 2.1. 137-139). The code of conduct for a roman is set by the standards of honesty, loyalty, bravery, and virtue. When Brutus provokes this question the conspirators have to distinguish revenge for pomey from morality. Romans will fight for what they believe in, or fall while fighting for it. When the possibility of being discredited as a true roman is at stake, it is effortless to follow the …show more content…
Cassius has boasted about the noblest, Brutus, to the point of being able to visualize Brutus as a leader. The others are not going to compete with this, where Cassius brought up the oath, and was quickly shut down. If Brutus was not interested in persuading the conspirators to oppose the oath, he would not have used three different literary devices twice, each. Instead of just responding with no, he goes on to address why an oath is unnecessary. To confirm that they understood him, he ended his speech with “Is guilty of a several bastardy if he do break the smallest particle of any promise that hath passed from him” (Shakespeare 2.1. 149-151). This indicates that being a true roman is their number one priority, and Brutus would not inform the others that breaking the promise of an oath would take that away from them without there being a purpose for it. Brutus is convincing Cassius and the others by making very agreeable statements to insure that they are on the same page as
Firstly Brutus one of the conspirators was a very big part in the death of Julius. If Brutus did not convince Caesar to go to the senate that day as in document C he would not have gone. But Brutus who was said to be Caesar 's friend in Doc C wanted him to stop so Brutus himself could gain power. Cassius the other big conspirator openly expressed his hatred. This is shown in document A where after a war Caesar gave money to low class people.
In Cassius’s speech to his brother he uses the method Ethos and establishes credibility and appeals to ethics or morals. One of the ways he does this is by saying that “[their] fathers say There was a Brutus once who would have brook’d The eternal devil” (Shakespeare 20-21). This shows that wiser people before them said that Brutus was strong and therefore, lends a hand towards Cassius’s argument that he should take action. Also by stating “I, as Aeneas, our great ancestor Did from the flames of troy upon his shoulder… Did I the tired Caesar” (Shakespeare 20-21).
The rhetorical questions help get his point across quickly, while further strengthening his argument. It states in his speech: “I thrice presented him a kingly crown, which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?” If Caesar was really as ambitious as Brutus says he was, he would have taken the crown the very first time in order to lead Rome to success. Antony continues on to say, “ He has brought many captives home to Rome whose ransoms did the general coffers fill: did this in Caesar seem ambitious?” This shows the crowd that the emperor Julius Caesar wasn’t really ambitious at
Cassius' argument that he presents to Brutus in order to get him to join the conspiracy is effective in appealing to Brutus' love of democracy because he uses pathos and develops ethos. Cassius establishes his credibility to his friend Brutus by flattering him, so that Brutus does not suspect that he is being manipulated. As he prepares to use careful language to tip Brutus to his side, Cassius takes a moment to sing Brutus' praises, so Brutus will believe that all Cassius has to say is in his best interest. He begins by telling his friend, "...since you know you cannot see yourself / So well as by reflection, I, your glass, / Will modestly discover to yourself / That of yourself which you know not of" (Shakespeare 1.2.67-70).
What— did one of us strike down the most powerful man in the world in order to support robbers? Should we now dirty our fingers with lowly bribes and sell the mighty offices that we hold for whatever gold we can get our hands on? I'd rather be a dog and howl at the moon that be that kind of Roman.” (Shakespeare 169) Brutus is painfully obvious (at least he is from Cassius’ point of view) when he confides to Cassius that he believes that Cassius wasnt as honest about what his intent and motives for killing Caesar were.
There are many other reasons for Brutus to not join the conspiracy and this paragraph will consider those arguments. To begin, one argument could be that Caesar was Brutus’s friend and that it is not okay to be unfaithful to your friend moreover to stab them in the back. To conclude that argument, Brutus in every way was just trying to save the people of Rome from dictatorship and eventually the fall of Rome. This act from Brutus was unselfish and really displays how much Brutus sympathize the people of
The Manipulation of Rome “O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts”(Shakespeare.III.ii.103). In Julius Caesar, the key protagonists, Brutus and Antony, witness the death of Caesar, Rome's powerful leader. Brutus believes that the death of Caesar benefits Rome, but Antony on the other hand, believes that Caesar was wronged and wants to avenge his dear friend. Both characters push their beliefs onto Rome through their speaking styles and personalities.
Throughout his speech, Brutus makes use of rhetorical questions to appeal to the emotions of the crowd. He asks the people of Rome to consider whether Caesar was ambitious, to which the crowd responds that he was. Brutus then asks whether it is nobler to let Caesar live and let the consequences fall where they may or to take arms against a sea of troubles and end them (3.2.13-16). This rhetorical question effectively portrays Brutus as a man of noble character, acting in the best interest of Rome. Moreover, Brutus also makes use of parallel structure in his speech.
Brutus uses rhetorical questions, faulty reasoning and hyperboles to create the tone of persuasion while convincing the Roman people to be on his side. To start off his funeral speech, he wants the citizens to trust and believe what he has to say about Caesar, Brutus announces; “Believe me for mine honor, and have respect for my honor, that you may believe me”(Shakespeare 42). In this case, faulty reasoning is shown because Brutus has done nothing to prove him honorable to the citizens. Given that, he has no evidence that he is trustworthy, Brutus still try’s to persuade the crowd to believe what he has to say about Caesar is true, which is
During the meeting with the Conspirators at his home, Brutus says to them, “No, not an oath” (II.i.125) because “what other oath” is better “than honesty to honesty engaged” (II.i.137-138). Brutus believes they do not need to pledge an oath because he already thinks they are loyal to Rome and that none of them will “palter”. Even before getting to know the rest of the conspirators, he already assumes that they are all there to plan the assassination of Caesar in order to make Rome a better place. All the conspirators, excluding Brutus, have a personal reason on why they want to kill Caesar, whether it is out of envy or pure hatred, but Brutus does not see that they harbor strong resentment towards Caesar. When the conspirators were talking about killing Caesar, Cassius brings up that they should kill Antony too, but Brutus dismisses that notion by claiming that “Antony is but a limb of Caesar” (II.i.179).
In their introductory scene a discussion is taking place about Caesar's claim to the throne. Through this discussion the audience learns a lot about Cassius and Brutus’s values . It is revealed that Brutus is an honorable man who believes in the general good of mankind. He states, (1.2 84-89)“ What is it that you would impart to me?/ If it be aught toward the general good, / Set honour in one eye and death
In Act I, Scene ii, Cassius primarily employs ethos to gain Brutus's attention, logos to contest Caesar's power, and pathos to arouse Brutus’s passion. The use of ethos drove Brutus to listen and become a conspirator. Lines such as “ were I a common laughter, or did use / To stale with ordinary oaths my love to every protester …, then hold me dangerous” (I, ii, 72 - 78) instantly buys Brutus’s trust.
First, Cassius uses ethos, pathos and logos to manipulate Brutus into joining the conspirators. When Cassius first mentions joining the conspirators Brutus is sceptical and asks him “into what
When Brutus was speaking to the people of Rome about how he helped assassinate him, he justified it by saying, “not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved / Rome more” (3.2.23-24). Even though Brutus is close to Caesar, he has to think about the city he serves first. Brutus wants to do what is best for Rome so if that means he has to harm a friend, he will do so for the greater good of the city he knows and loves. All it took was the conspirator to talk to Brutus a little bit to make him realize Caesar’s potential danger and say “That at his will he may do danger with” (2.1.18).
The conspirators feel no one person should have to much power while the Roman people want their beloved Caesar to rule over them. We should not kill Caesar even though granted illegal citizenship to those who lived in Gaul and over the years has put many of them in the Senate. Caesar may have done this to get new perspectives in the senate-house instead of having the same narrow-minded people all the time ( Baker, 118 ). He made a law saying that it is illegal to wage war without the other party attacking first. Shortly after this, he broke his law in Gaul while serving his proconsul.