Alejandra C.

Up until the Third Act of "Julius Caesar" by William Shakespeare, there are three major candidates who possess certain persuasive appeals. Those being: Cassius, Antony, and Brutus. Though some more influential than others, they each serve an important role in decision making.

Of the three, Cassius is the most persuasive. Cassius has a significant advantage over the two when it comes to the persuasive appeals of Nomos and Pathos. He began showing his form of influence early in Act 1, Scene 2 with his conversation with Brutus which led him to state,

"I was born free as Caesar; so were you;
 We both have fed as well, and we can both
 Endure the winter's cold as well as he." I, ii, 104-106.

Here Cassius is using Nomos by forming a connection which claims that he and Brutus are just as equal to Caesar when it comes to authority. Cassius is taking a mild risk by implying that due to the fact that Brutus and Caesar are friends. Not only that, but he is also trying to turn Brutus against Caesar since he desires Caesar's power. Just at the fact that Brutus is taking into consideration what Cassius has said, emphasizes how great he is at persuading. Anyone would think that when their friend is being talked about in a negative manner that they'd defend them but that's not the case here. Instead of refuting, Brutus is thinking and as he is doing so, his thoughts are beginning to shape just in the way Cassius wants them to. Cassius is the master mind behind the whole act. If it weren't for him, the situation would be far different. This initial step, is the start to Cassius' excellent persuading manners. Apart from using Nomos, Cassius also uses Pathos.

"Be you content. Good Cinna, take this paper;
 And look you lay it in the Praetor's chair,
 Where Brutus may find it; and throw this
 In at his window; set this up with wax
 Upon old Brutus' statue." I, iii, 147-150.

That is Brutus' second master plan, and it ends up working out perfectly fine.
After his rant to Brutus, Cassius almost has Brutus right where he wants him, in order to completely persuade him into turning against Caesar, he tricks him into thinking the people want him to speak and rise so as to fix the wrongs. However, Cassius did not imply anything that legitimately included Caesar's name in the letter. Here Pathos is used to overwhelm Brutus with a feeling of guilt for not standing up earlier. This causes Brutus to take matters into his own hands which diminish his cautiousness. Certainly, persuading is Cassius' specialty because he doesn't even have to mention what he exactly wants in order for Brutus to realize it for himself. In some sense, it's as if the letter had a complete impact on Brutus though it lacked much information or explanation. Another form of Pathos is security. As said by Cassius,

"Some to the common pulpits and cry out
"Liberty, freedom, and enfranchisement." III, I, 88-89.

After only having to persuade Brutus, Cassius' plan began to transfer into other people's minds. It continued to progress and as it did, people were being persuaded into his way of thinking. The assassination of Caesar brought forth security for Romans because apparently tyranny was dead. Cassius' words became an action as everyone began to shout of joy and cover themselves with Caesar's blood. Not only did Cassius' plan work out, but he distracted everyone by excluding himself from the wrong doings and made it seem as if he was innocent. A sneaky yet influential person like him would make the best leader.
After Cassius, comes Antony. Likewise, Antony is able to persuade others through Pathos and this time through Logos. First off, Pathos was used during his speech. As stated by Antony,

"My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar.
 And I must pause till it come back to me." III, ii, 116-117.

After Antony said that, he began to weep which caused the Romans to pity him. Because he was being pitied, that brought him a step closer to changing the people's minds about Caesar's assassination. Although Antony eventually wins the people over, he would make a decent leader because he is too much of a two-faced bipolar person. With that being said, it can almost be guaranteed that Antony himself is unsure of what he truly wants since he can be a fickle minded person. A leader must always be confident and sure of what he wants and if one doesn't possess that, his leadership skills won't be completely horrible, but neither will they be great. Antony may have flaws but his persuasive skills aren't terrible. In fact, at some point, he was very descriptive as he explained exactly where Caesar was stabbed by the others.

"Look in this place ran Cassius' dagger through...
 Mark how the blood of Caesar followed it..
 .. This was the unkindest cut of all...
 great Caesar fell." III, ii, 186-201.

Antony's manner of using Logos to emphasize his expert testimony was extremely gratifying to the Romans. Being able to know in exact detail what happened, gives off a greater impact for Antony's advantage. Details will help create vivid images of the assassination, which will tie back in with pity as Romans begin to realize how horrible the act committed was.

Finally, comes Brutus. Brutus is different from Cassius and Antony because he lacks more than the good he possesses. Sure, in the beginning of Act 3, Scene 2, Brutus was able to persuade the people into thinking that he as well as the others did the right thing in killing Caesar in exchange for their freedom, but he wasn't able to keep the people to think that way. Soon enough Antony won them over. First off, Brutus cares too much about what others think and feeds off of their opinions rather than being original. He said it himself.

"No, Cassius, for the eye sees not itself
 But by reflection, by some other things." I, ii, 58-59.

That shows just how much of a follower Brutus truly is. No one wants a leader than runs strictly on other's opinions. Brutus is like a puppet being handled by everyone else. He'd only be torn apart by other people's thoughts and opinions of him if he ever gained enough power to be a leader. Because he does not view things with his own eyes, he's emotionally weak which results in lack of certifications or possibly known experience; being Ethos. Apart from Ethos, he also lacks common sense. Brutus' reasoning is simply idiotic. He said,

"Grant that, and then is death a benefit.
  So we are Caesar's friends, that have abridged
  His time of fearing death." III, i, 115-117.

That statement has got to be by far the dumbest in the entire first three acts. Anyone with even the slightest amount of intelligence would know that by doing something that another person is afraid of, is not an advantage. It makes no sense. It's like "Oh, that person is afraid to die? Lets solve their problem by killing them!" How dumber can someone be? Brutus is simply mess. Before worrying about what other people think, he should worry about his own problems. Overall, Cassius is the more successful persuasive person. The other two have flaws that need to be fixed if they want to be at Cassius' level of mentality because no one wants a follower ruling them.