Julius Caesar Rhetorical Analysis

Megan Phan

Sutton Pd. 5

Pre-AP English 10

17 May 2018

The Power of Persuasion

The murder of Julius Caesar is not only a turning point in history, but it is also a turning point in William Shakespeare’s play. This play features members of Roman society persuading one another to succeed in their own end goals, despite how life-threatening these goals may be. To accomplish these goals, the characters had to employ various rhetorical devices. In the play, Julius Caesar, Shakespeare suggests that rhetoric has the capability to influence change in the opinions within reality. This relationship between rhetoric and reality is reinforced by the close examination of Cassius’ encouragement speech, Antony’s funeral speech, and Cassius’ argumentative

speech. 
Rhetoric, the art of persuasive language, is used in Act 1 Scene 2 to help Cassius encourage Brutus into joining him to fight against Caesar and his growing power. Cassius is trying to get Brutus to understand his opinion of Caesar as Cassius believes that Caesar is an unworthy leader.

In his argument, Cassius reminisces on a memory of him and Caesar swimming in a river. Before reaching their determined destination, “With lusty sinews, throwing it aside / And stemming it with hearts of controversy. / But ere we could arrive the point proposed, / Caesar cried, ‘Help me Cassius, or I sink!’” (I.ii.115-118). Though Cassius is just mentioning that he had to save Caesar from drowning, Cassius is using ad hominem to allude to the fact that Caesar is weak and unfit for the crown. Cassius depicts this by only highlighting the portions of the story line where Caesar is seen as being cowardly. In his encouragement speech, Cassius does mention Caesar and Cassius as “throwing [the waves] aside / And stemming it with hearts of controversy”. This does describe how both Caesar and Cassius fought hard against the roaring water and mention their competitiveness; however, it focuses more on how both of them are like that and how not just Caesar exhibits these traits. To add on to this point, Cassius even (mentions) Caesar’s cry –– “‘Help me Cassius, or I sink’”. Cassius is doing this to attack Caesar’s character. He is successful as this allows Brutus to think about Caesar from the same perspective as Cassius. Cassius drives his point forward as he proceeds to describe how Caesar has “now become a god, and Cassius is / A wretched creature and

must bend his body / If Caesar carelessly but nod on him” (I.ii.118-120). Through his use of reductio ad absurdum, Cassius builds the image of how powerful Caesar is in comparison to himself. He does this with the use of exaggeration and titling Caesar a “god” and himself a “wretched creature”. With evidence from Cassius’ story justifying that Caesar is incapable of being a “god”, the Brutus knows that Cassius’ statement is false which is what makes this line completely absurd. Yet Cassius still (says) this because it pushes Brutus to question whether Caesar should still be treated as a god or even still be considered for a position as King of Rome; therefore, Cassius can get Brutus to accept Cassius’ perspective of Brutus and agree to take down Caesar. With Cassius effectively using the rhetorical devices of ad hominem and reductio ad absurdum, he succeeds in his efforts to influence Brutus to change his mind.

Pathos and irony are used in Antony’s funeral speech to alter the opinions of the plebeians. After Caesar’s tragic death earlier in Act 3, Antony now needs to persuade the plebeians to turn against those who murdered his best friend. To do so, Antony needs to create an emotional connection with the plebeians to gain their full trust. He does this by claiming that his “. . . heart is in the coffin there with Caesar, / And [he] must pause [his speech] till it comes back to [him]” (III.ii.116-117). Antony uses pathos to draw out the emotions of his audience. Antony reveals his emotions to his audience through his METAPHOR of his heart being “in the coffin there with Caesar”. This metaphor subtly REVEALS where his love and loyalty lies, as
AND how he must “pause his speech till it comes back to [him]” REVEALS even more of his emotions as it not only tells the audience where his loyalty lies, but it also SHOWS them how emotional he is getting because of Caesar’s death.
By doing so, he emphasizes on how much he truly loved Caesar and how miserable he is now that Caesar is dead
and allow the plebeians to sympathize with him. This sympathy leads them to adopt the viewpoint of Caesar’s murder as being cruel and heartless, rather than being an “honorable man” (III.ii.103). Utilizing this newly built connection, Antony turns the

Using this newly built connection between the plebeians, Antony decides to turn the crowd away from Brutus’ side. Antony claims that “When the poor hath cried, Caesar hath wept; / Ambition should be made of sterner stuff. / Yet Brutus says that he was ambitious, / And Brutus was an honorable man” (III.ii.100-103). Antony implies that Caesar was a good leader because he cared about his people. Brutus stated that he murdered Caesar because Caesar was too ambitious, and here Antony’s statement refutes Brutus’ point. A good leader is one who is saddened by the misfortunes of his people; thus, showing that he cares and is sympathetic of his people. Antony provides evidence that the conspirators wrongfully murdered a man who was not ambitious; hence, igniting the anger of the plebeians. Through Antony’s use of pathos in his funeral speech, he turns the murder of Caesar around in his favor.

Reality can be easily influenced by rhetoric. This is evident in the argument between Brutus and Cassius in Act 4, Scene 3 of Julius Caesar. Their argument gets to the point where Cassius has given up in fighting against Brutus and begs “Come, Antony, and young Octavius, come, / Revenge yourselves alone on Cassius, / For Cassius is aweary of the world—” (IIII.iii.96-98). Although it may seem as if Cassius wants Antony and Octavius to come after him and kill him, he really does not want that to happen. He is only mentioning this to get Brutus to understand how he is feeling. His use of reductio ad absurdum exaggerates his feelings of isolation and in turn causes Brutus to be more sympathetic of him. These sympathetic feelings allow Cassius to effectively persuade Brutus to see the truth in their reality. To furthermore add on to his argument, Cassius presents Brutus with his bare chest and his dagger. This gesture urges Brutus on to kill Cassius. Before Brutus has a chance to react, Cassius says, “Strike, as thou didst at Caesar. For I know / When thou didst hate him worst, thou lovedst him better / Than ever thou lovedst Cassius” (IIII.iii.110-112). In the last lines of this heated argument, Cassius raises awareness to Brutus’ betrayal of Caesar and accuses Brutus of not loving him. Cassius uses pathos to target Brutus’ emotions and in doing so, Cassius persuades Brutus into forgiveness. CONCLUDING SENTENCE

Though the murder of Julius Caesar was cold and heartless, it would have never been made clear if it were not for the rhetorical devices employed by Antony. Rhetoric has the capability to influence this change on reality. With rhetorical devices enhancing arguments and how reality is perceived, both Cassius and Antony came of their arguments victorious over Brutus. Without this relationship between rhetoric and reality, these members of Roman society could not of succeeded in their efforts against Brutus.

ADD INTERESTING THOUGHT FOR READERS TO THINK ABOUT