Compare and contrast the funeral speeches of Brutus and Antony Essay Example

Compare and contrast the funeral speeches of Brutus and Antony Essay Example Compare and contrast the funeral speeches of Brutus and Antony Paper Compare and contrast the funeral speeches of Brutus and Antony Paper Firstly, Brutus decides to make his speech first, which is a bog mistake, because the plebians will only really remember the last speech that was made, thus making Brutus speech less effective. Brutus would usually speak in a verse language, but in his speech he spoke in prose, to try and come down to the plebians level and he thinks that they will appreciate that. However, Antony speaks as he should, in verse and the plebians respect that and expect him to speak like that, so as soon Antony starts his speech, they already like it more than Brutus. Also the first sentence of each speech is significant. Brutus starts his speech with Romans, countrymen and lovers! . This is a great start to the speech because it shows how Brutus is equal to the plebians, and the plebians like to think that they are equal to someone as great as Brutus, and therefore are on Brutus side. However, Antony starts his speech and goes one better and starts his speech by saying Friends, Romans, countrymen . The most significant word is friends, it shows how he is fond of the plebians, and that he wants to be their friends. The plebians feel surprised, and overwhelmed by this, so straight away into Antonys speech, when they were on Brutus side just minutes before, the plebians are on Antonys side. Both of them use a rhetorical question in their speech, to challenge the plebians. Brutus asks Had you rather Caesar were living, and die all slaves, than that Caesar were dead, to love all free men? He then asks that if any of them want to be slaves, then stand up. By saying this he is challenging the plebians, and making it hard for them to disagree with him. In Antonys speech he asks I thrice presented him a kingly crown, which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition? Because the plebians dont understand why a person would turn down the crown if they wanted to be king, they believe that Caesar never wanted to be king. So when Antony asks this question, it questions them whether he really was as good as they thought? He then challenges Brutus speech by saying yet Brutus says he was ambitious. This challenges whether Brutus was right in what he said, and makes the plebians think twice about whether to believe him. Brutus speech is trying to persuade the plebians to be on his side, and to make them agree with what he says, by using rhetorical questions. Antonys, however, is to make them question whether Brutus was right.. He repeats himself a lot, saying that Brutus is an honourable man. This may seem that he is praising him a lot, but actually, by repeating it, he is taking the meaning out of it. So when the plebians first here him say it, they agree with him that Brutus is honourable, but after the last time he says it (which is a lot of times) they almost get sick of him saying that and start to disagree with the fact that Brutus is honourable, and therefore turning on Brutus. Brutus tries to make the fact that Caesar is dead a good thing, whereas Antony gradually builds his speech up, and makes it seem like a tragedy. He starts this off by coming up to do his speech with the coffin next to him, instantly making the plebians feel sad. He excuses himself saying he is too emotional, and pretends to cry, and this makes the plebians want to cry, so now they dont like the fact that Caesar is dead. He then finds Caesars will in his pocket, and pretends he didnt know it was there. The plebians shout for him to read it out, but he insists not. This just makes them want it to be read out even more. The will is almost a prop for Antonys speech, making it more effective, but Brutus had no such prop, making his speech less effective. Antony then agrees to read the will, and to make it even more effective, he makes them stand around the open coffin. This is like another prop for the speech, and when the plebians see the body, it makes them more emotional and makes them hate Brutus even more. Before he reads it, he builds it up. He tells them to prepare to cry, even though some already are. He trails where the blood was, describing his death. This makes the plebians really emotional, and makes them want to kill Brutus. They all shout to kill Brutus, but Antony stops them and tells them to stay. This part of the speech is very clever by Antony, as it turns them on Brutus, and makes them love him. Overall his speech is a lot more effective than Brutus. Brutus was effective at the time, but it didnt have a cutting edge to it. The fact that Antony went last also didnt help, because now the plebians will only remember his, and forget about Brutus. A director would tell Brutus to play the role as if Brutus were very confident. This is because he thinks he has gotten away with it, and that he has won the plebians over. He also has no idea that Antony will make such a good speech after him, he thinks that it will be a speech that will praise Brutus.

Overview of Mali History and Independence

Overview of Mali History and Independence Malians express great pride in their ancestry. Mali is the cultural heir to the succession of ancient African empires – Ghana, Malinkà ©, and Songhai – that occupied the West African savannah. These empires controlled Saharan trade and were in touch with Mediterranean and Middle Eastern centers of civilization. Kingdoms of Ghana and Malinkà © The Ghana Empire, dominated by the Soninke or Saracolà © people and centered in the area along the Malian-Mauritanian frontier, was a powerful trading state from about A.D. 700 to 1075. The Malinkà © Kingdom of Mali had its origins on the upper Niger River in the 11th century. Expanding rapidly in the 13th century under the leadership of Soundiata Keita, it reached its height about 1325, when it conquered Timbuktu and Gao. Thereafter, the kingdom began to decline, and by the 15th century, it controlled only a small fraction of its former domain. Songhai Empire and Timbuktu The Songhai Empire expanded its power from its center in Gao during the period 1465-1530. At its peak under Askia Mohammad I, it encompassed the Hausa states as far as Kano (in present-day Nigeria) and much of the territory that had belonged to the Mali Empire in the west. It was destroyed by a Moroccan invasion in 1591. Timbuktu was a center of commerce and of the Islamic faith throughout this period, and priceless manuscripts from this epoch are still preserved in Timbuktu. (International donors are making efforts to help preserve these priceless manuscripts as part of Malis cultural heritage.) The Arrival of the French French military penetration of the Soudan (the French name for the area) began around 1880. Ten years later, the French made a concerted effort to occupy the interior. The timing and resident military governors determined methods of their advances. A French civilian governor of Soudan was appointed in 1893, but resistance to French control did not end until 1898 when the Malinkà © warrior Samory Tourà © was defeated after 7 years of war. The French attempted to rule indirectly, but in many areas, they disregarded traditional authorities and governed through appointed chiefs. From French Colony to French Community As the colony of French Soudan, Mali was administered with other French colonial territories as the Federation of French West Africa. In 1956, with the passing of Frances Fundamental Law (Loi Cadre), the Territorial Assembly obtained extensive powers over internal affairs and was permitted to form a cabinet with executive authority over matters within the Assemblys competence. After the 1958 French constitutional referendum, the Republique Soudanaise became a member of the French Community and enjoyed complete internal autonomy. Independence as the Republic of Mali In January 1959, Soudan joined Senegal to form the Mali Federation, which became fully independent within the French Community on 20 June 1960. The federation collapsed on 20 August 1960, when Senegal seceded. On 22 September Soudan proclaimed itself the Republic of Mali and withdrew from the French Community. Socialist Single-Party State President Modibo Keita – whose party Union Soudanaise-Rassemblement Dà ©mocratique Africain (US-RDA, Sudanese Union-African Democratic Rally) had dominated pre-independence politics – moved quickly to declare a single-party state and to pursue a socialist policy based on extensive nationalization. A continuously deteriorating economy led to a decision to rejoin the Franc Zone in 1967 and modify some of the economic excesses. Bloodless Coup by Lieutenant Moussa Traorà © On 19 November 1968, a group of young officers staged a bloodless coup and set up a 14-member Military Committee for National Liberation (CMLN), with Lt. Moussa Traorà © as Chairman. The military leaders attempted to pursue economic reforms but for several years faced debilitating internal political struggles and the disastrous Sahelian drought. A new constitution, approved in 1974, created a one-party state and was designed to move Mali toward civilian rule. However, the military leaders remained in power. Single Party Elections In September 1976, a new political party was established, the Union Dà ©mocratique du Peuple Malien (UDPM, Democratic Union of the Malian People) based on the concept of democratic centralism. Single-party presidential and legislative elections were held in June 1979, and General Moussa Traorà © received 99% of the votes. His efforts at consolidating the single-party government were challenged in 1980 by student-led, anti-government demonstrations, which were brutally put down, and by three coup attempts. The Road to Multi-Party Democracy The political situation stabilized during 1981 and 1982 and remained generally calm throughout the 1980s. Shifting its attention to Malis economic difficulties, the government worked out a new agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). However, by 1990, there was growing dissatisfaction with the demands for austerity imposed by the IMFs economic reform programs and the perception that the President and his close associates were not themselves adhering to those demands. As demands for multiparty democracy increased the Traorà © government allowed some opening of the system (the establishment of an independent press and independent political associations) but insisted that Mali was not ready for democracy. Anti-Government Rioting In early 1991, student-led, anti-government rioting broke out again, but this time government workers and others supported it. On 26 March 1991, after 4 days of intense anti-government rioting, a group of 17 military officers arrested President Moussa Traorà © and suspended the constitution. Amadou Toumani Tourà © took power as the Chairman for the Transitional Committee for the Salvation of the People. A draft constitution was approved in a referendum on 12 January 1992 and political parties were allowed to form. On 8 June 1992, Alpha Oumar Konarà ©, the candidate of the Alliance pour la Dà ©mocratie en Mali (ADEMA, Alliance for Democracy in Mali), was inaugurated as the President of Malis Third Republic. President Konarà © Wins Election In 1997, attempts to renew national institutions through democratic elections ran into administrative difficulties, resulting in a court-ordered annulment of the legislative elections held in April 1997. It demonstrated, however, the overwhelming strength of President Konarà ©s ADEMA Party, causing some other historic parties to boycott subsequent elections. President Konarà © won the presidential election against scant opposition on 11 May. Amadou Toumani Tourà © General elections were organized in June and July 2002. President Konare did not seek reelection since he was serving his second and last term as required by the constitution. Retired General Amadou Toumani Tourà ©, former head of state during Malis transition (1991-1992) became the countrys second democratically elected President as an independent candidate in 2002 and was reelected to a second 5-year term in 2007. Source Public Domain, US Department of State Background Notes.