Julius Caesar Persuasion Analysis

Joseph Wong once said,” Influence is the compass. Persuasion is the map.” In Act III, Brutus and Antony both used the technique of persuasion to win over the favor of the people in Rome. At the beginning of the act, the people of Rome had high respect for Brutus, as well as Antony. By the end of the act, the audience’s views were sculpted by the speeches of the two men. Both men swayed the audience, but Antony seemed to have gained the approval of the public. Consequently, the conspirators were not favored by the people of Rome because of Antony’s speech. Following the assassination of Caesar, both Brutus and Antony needed to sway the people of Rome into their individual point of view. The crowd of Romans were not very intelligent, they lacked the logical thinking for making big decisions. Therefore, the people of Rome could be easily persuaded if the right things were mentioned. Brutus first declared his speech and it seemed as though the public were on his side. He used logical thinking and gave examples of the tyranny that Caesar would have brought to Rome if he was crowned as king. Before Antony said his speech, the crowd strongly trusted Brutus and gave thought about what he had announced about Caesar. However, after Antony gave his speech the people had a different opinion on how they felt about Brutus and the conspirators.
There are not many comparisons in the two men’s speeches. Hence, the reason behind this is because the two men are not alike. Brutus is honorable, gullible and naive and Antony is clever and persuasive. Brutus used facts and reasoning behind the reason he and the conspirators assassinated Caesar. While Antony used emotion to move the audience. In his speech, Brutus mentions all the harmful things that Caesar would have brought to Rome and Antony speaks about what is in Caesar’s will and also goes against the thought of Caesar being