Drew Miller

Ms. Woelke

AP English Language / Period 6

24 October 2016

Julius Caesar Rhetorical Devices - Original

In act II, scene ii of Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare (1599), the conspirators,

among them Decius Brutus, plan to assassinate Julius Caesar at a senate meeting. That night,

Calphurnia, Caesar’s wife, has a dream that Caesar would be murdered. Shortly after Calphurnia

recounts her dream to Caesar in the comfort of their own home, Decius Brutus, a close friend of

Caesar’s, shows up and offers an alternate explanation of the dream to Caesar. Caesar finds this

alternative very appealing, and is ultimately convinced to attend the senate meeting which will,

unbeknownst to Caesar, be the death of him. Through the use of powerful rhetoric and the

appeals of ethos and pathos, Calphurnia and Decius provide explanations for the former’s dream,

but ultimately, Decius offers a more compelling argument in the eyes of Caesar.

Calphurnia explains her dream to Caesar in a convincing manner by establishing a sound

basis with the use of ethos and appealing to Caesar’s emotions with the use of pathos. Calphurnia

is able to primarily achieve a persuasive stance by declaring that she has “never stood on such

ceremonies” (1). By saying this, Calphurnia arranges a situation in which she immediately grabs

Caesar’s attention by implying that whatever she may say next must be of immense significance.

This establishes Calphurnia’s credibility even further than being Caesar’s wife by showing

Caesar that she is a very rational person in the sense that she has never believed in or paid

attention to omens. Calphurnia also appeals to Caesar’s emotions by telling Caesar that “the
heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes” (20). This furthers a previous claim in

which she implies that the commotion she saw in her dream was directed at Caesar. If her dream

were insignificant or directed at anybody else, there would not be nearly the amount of mayhem.

By reminding Caesar of his prestige and immense role in society, Calphurnia directs her

argument at the emotions and thought process of Caesar. Calphurnia provides a durable argument

as to why Caesar should stay away from the assemblage of the senate through the use of ethos

and pathos.

Decuis provides a coercive argument as to why Caesar should attend the senate meeting

through the profound use of pathos and flattery. Decius’ primarily utilizes pathos throughout his

argument. Decius is able to get under Caesar’s skin by telling him that if he doesn't show at the

senate when they offer him the crown again, “their minds may change” (58). Decius recognizes

that appealing to Caesar’s ambition and reputation is the optimal means of convincing Caesar to

attend the congregation. This use of pathos shows Decius’ command of the conversation. Decius

immediately exhibits a broad knowledge of his target audience, Caesar, which gives him

additional persuasive power. Decius also employs flattery in order to make Caesar more

susceptible to persuasion. Toward the end of Decius’ argument, he mentions that his reason for

providing this alternate explanation was his “dear, dear love to [Caesar’s] proceeding” (65). By

proclaiming his great love and admiration for Caesar, Decius is able to flatter him, which in turn

leaves Caesar with a positive view of Decius. The use of flattery reaffirms Decius’ manipulative

command of the discussion. Decius’ use of pathos and flattery in his argument allows for him to

command the exchange and ergo convince Caesar to attend the senate meeting.
 Despite two compelling arguments from Calphurnia and Decius, Caesar cannot decide to

both stay at home and go to the senate. Caesar takes Decius’ argument to be more effective and

attends the senate meeting. Calphurnia’s argument is less impressive to Caesar because she failed

use pathos thoroughly and maintains a sorrowful and fearful tone. Calphurnia does in fact use

pathos, but she mostly simply recounts her dream with a fearful and anxious tone as it occurred

to her. Decius’ argument maintains a positive and upbeat tone when describing a dream that had

just been interpreted as a fateful and ominous. This exuberant tone immediately makes Decius

more effective due to the nature of people. People like to be told good things. It is also

immediately clear that Decius is close to Caesar. When Decius arrives, Caesar fully explains

Calphurnia’s dream and his current decision to remain at home. This event is important because

Caesar could have easily given an alternate reason for staying home without mentioning the

dream. This shows that he has a close relationship with Decius, but it also opens an opportunity

for Decius to capitalize on the dream, which he did. The closeness of Decius and Caesar

immediately gives the reader that Caesar will be convinced by Decius and not Calphurnia.

Decius provides a more impactful argument due to his impactful use of pathos and his

capitalization on his relationship with Caesar.

Both Calphurnia and Decius provide compelling arguments as to why Caesar should

either stay at home or attend the senate meeting. Both utilize ethos and pathos, but Decius’

additional use of flattery allows for him to make a more compelling argument to Caesar. Through

the use of rhetoric including the appeals of ethos and pathos, Calphurnia and Decius make

compelling arguments to Caesar, but Decius is ultimately more effective, which leads to the

downfall of the grand Julius Caesar.