Compare and contrast Brutus’s and Antony’s funeral orations for Caesar, and explain the significance of your observations. You might, for example, discuss the extent to which each oration reflects the character of the speaker and/or you might discuss the nature of the rhetorical strategies used by each speaker. Pay very close attention to the language and structure of each speech.
Act III is characterized by some of the best oratory work written by Shakespeare. Antony and Brutus speak at Caesar’s funeral. Each of them gives a different opinion about Caesar. Right after the assassination, there is a lot of commotion happening, and a large crowd has gathered in front of the Roman Senate seeking justice and truth for what happened. Brutus conceded Antony to speak after himself to the crowd as long as he would not speak negatively of the conspirators.
Brutus speaks first by stating that Caesar was ambitious, and wanted to be king, taking away civic freedom and rights away from the people. Caesar had gained great political power after returning from his successful wars against Pompey. And the Republic seemed at great risk with such large power into one man’s hands. Caesar was truly unmatched in power. So Brutus, and several of the other senators, believed that killing Caesar would be for the greater good of the Republic.
The words that could summarize Brutus’s speech are at the very end of his oration: “With this I depart, that, as I slew my best lower for the good of Rome” (Act III, ii, 44-45). Brutus’ speech is quick to the point, idealistic, and initially effective. Prior to the speech, Brutus is already considered by reputation as an honest, honorable and wise man. There are not any continuous repetitions other than the fact that he loved Caesar. By restating that he loved Caesar, he slowly convinced the crowd that he cannot be blamed for the killing. He committed the assassination for the best for the Republic. “Not that [he] loved Caesar less, but that [he] loved Rome more” (Act III, ii 24). Caesar was slayed because of the presumed ambition of becoming a tyrant that would have caused great harm to the people of Rome. There is no use of rhetorical questions throughout the speech, except for the very end, where Brutus finishes strongly, by grasping the crowd’s support. He asks them: “Who is here so base that would be a bondman?” (Act III, ii, 29), because that is what he believed that would have happened if Caesar remained dictator. Brutus’ point is all based on the ‘if’ and the ‘may’. He often mentions those two words in his speech, which do not give a sense of authority and confidence on his behalf.
The audience’s opinion was greatly influenced by Brutus’ persuasive speech, up to the point where the Plebeians were saying to “Bring him with triumph home unto his house” (Act III, ii, 48). In ancient Rome, family dynasties and origins were considered to be really important, Roman politicians often attributed their origins to the Pagan Gods. Therefore, it is a great compliment to receive. It is a very intellectual speech, which does not have much interaction n with the people present. He does not leave his pedestal, whereas Antony does. It has several idealistic ideas. After Brutus, it was Antony’s turn to speak. Unfortunately for Antony, a supporter of Caesar, the crowd appeared to be hostile due to Brutus’ speech and believed that the assassination was completely justified.
But Antony’s rhetorical ability convinced a hostile audience into a friendly one. His was a nearly impossible feat. With such great odds, he managed to create turmoil in order to avenge Caesar’s death and gain support for the members of the Second Triumvirate. Perhaps, his only advantage was that he had the last word. Mark Antony proved to be a successful military commander with Caesar in the Gallic wars. And he also proved to be an effective orator by using different figures of speech and jests to arouse the crowd at the right moment. Therefore, as honorable and impressive as Brutus’ speech may have been, the conspirators had their houses burned and were margined to far regions of the Republic, in order to escape from Caesar’s avengers. The inclusion of several repetitions, rhetorical questions and verbal irony are used to convince his audience.
Antony’s initial part of his strategy starts by showing himself as neutral. Before the speech, he agreed to Brutus that he would not talk negatively about the conspirators. And coming in as neutral would have been the most logical action to take as he also had a hostile audience. He only “[came] to bury Caesar, not praise him” (Act III, ii, 73-75). Then he works on the crowd’s pathos by saying that Caesar was his friend, he was just to him and faithful. His goal is to initially create interest, sorrow and sadness for Caesar’s death. One can feel the love and grief for Caesar through this expression. The attributes given to Caesar: just, faithful and simply that he was a friend, are the description of a normal respectable person, not the one of a dictator. Antony is his speech renders good and evil concrete. Only evil things were said of Julius after his death, and the good was buried with his bones. It reminds the crowd of the great conquests and wealth brought to Rome in the previous years. Many citizens benefited from his acts.
The second part of his strategy, after grasping the crowd’s pathos, was to use irony. He called Brutus an honorable man. It did not give away Antony’s intentions right away, and showed as respectful. But when Antony repeated it throughout his speech with rhetorical questions, the tone became mocking and insulting. He asked “Brutus is an honorable man, isn’t he?” (Act III, ii, 94). It altered the literal meaning of being honorable. Brutus’ honor is being sarcastically being put into question weakened the conspirator’s argument.
Brutus’ main explanation to the crowd was that Caesar was an ambitious man. The ambitiousness is not truly proven, but only presumed by the conspirators due to Caesar’s great power and success. They assumed that he wanted to be king. And Antony works on this minor flaw that is in Brutus’s speech. He turned the conspirators’ main motive into a faulty one. With the use of tautology, Antony proves them wrong and questions their honor with irony:
You all did see that on the Lupercal
I thrice presented [Caesar] a kingly crown,
Which he did thrice refuse. Was this ambition? (Act III, ii, 95-98)
Also, to further undermine Brutus’ honor, he points out that Brutus was Caesar’s angel, but yet, he was the one that betrayed him. The inclusion of these several repetitions, rhetorical questions and verbal irony proves to be so effective to nullify any previous arguments or speeches that denounced Julius Caesar. The crowd understands that he was slain for no good reason.
Antony’s next step in his strategy was to give visual proof to the crowd of the carnage that happened.
There is nothing noble about someone being mercilessly stabbed over 20 times. Caesar was unarmed and killed, outnumbered, in secrecy. He brings his body into the forum, covered in his bloody cloak. He then uses an anecdote to persuade his listeners even further. He describes the mantle and the first time he saw it on Caesar. The first time Caesar wore it was when he brought great glory to Rome by defeating the enemy. But there now it lay, full of blood and shredded by daggers.
Antony relives Caesar’s assassination from his point of view. He points out to the tears on the mantle and described how betrayed Caesar felt, as Brutus was his friend. Caesar pardoned Brutus more than once in the past, when he decided to side with Gneus Pompeus in the recently ended civil war.
He then shows the body to the crowd after rousing them even more with the injustices that Caesar had. His mutilated body created further indignation and grief.
Mark Antony strategically ends his speech by reading Caesar’s will. This was to further prove that his deceased friend actually cared about Rome and its citizens. During the speech, he often mentioned the will, and how he could not read it because it would put the conspirators into shame. He teased the crowd until they finally begged him to read it. Caesar, to everyone’s initial disbelief, left everyone a sum of money and part of his estate for the country.
This final evidence sparks rage into the general opinion, and more importantly, the mob present at the forum.
Antony’s speech was not very intellectual or idealistic, like Brutus’. But instead, it included key elements that won him the argument such as irony, anecdotes, determination, and actual evidence such as Caesar’s own body and will. He stepped down of the pedestal, mingled with the commoners and interacted with them. This proved to be much more effective, because his ideas were more concrete and better strategically said.
Work Cited:
I used these following secondary sources to better help me understand the figures of speech employed by Antony.
Shakespeare, William. Julius Caesar. Ed. Samuel Thurber. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1919.Shakespeare Online. 26 Feb. 2013. < http://www.shakespeare-online.com/plays/julius_3_2.html >.
Payal, Khullar. Julius Caesar. Summary of Mark Antony’s Speech in Julius Caesar. Enotes.com http://www.enotes.com/homework-help/give-summery-mark-antony-s-speech-mention-comment-78753
Susan Hurn. Julius Caesar. Summary of Mark Antony’s Speech in Julius Caesar. Enotes.com http://www.enotes.com/homework-help/give-summery-mark-antony-s-speech-mention-comment-78753