While indeed the admirers of the ancients
fix as the boundary, so to say, of antiquity, the period up to Cassius
Severus who was the first, they assert, to deviate from the old and plain
path of the speaker, I maintain that it was not from poverty of genius or
ignorance of letters that he adopted his well known style, but from
preference and intellectual conviction. He saw, in fact, that, as I was just
now saying, the character and type of oratory must change with the
circumstances of the age and an altered taste in the popular ear. The people
of the past, ignorant and uncultured as they were, patiently endured the
length of a very confused speech, and it was actually to the speaker's
credit, if he took up one of their days by his speech-making. Then too they
highly esteemed long preparatory introductions, narratives told from a
remote beginning, a multitude of divisions ostentatiously paraded, proofs in
a thousand links, and all the other directions prescribed in those driest of
treatises by Hermagoras and Apollodorus. Any one who was supposed to have
caught a scent of philosophy, and who introduced some philosophical
commonplace into his speech, was praised up to the skies. And no wonder; for
this was new
and unfamiliar, and even of the orators but very few
had studied the rules of rhetoricians or the dogmas of philosophers. But now
that all these are common property and that there is scarce a bystander in
the throng who, if not fully instructed, has not at least been initiated
into the rudiments of culture, eloquence must resort to new and skilfully
chosen paths, in order that the orator may avoid offence to the fastidious
ear, at any rate before judges who decide by power and authority, not by law
and precedent, who fix the speaker's time, instead of leaving it to himself,
and, so far from thinking that they ought to wait till he chooses to speak
on the matter in question, continually remind him of it and recall him to it
when he wanders, protesting that they are in a hurry.