OJ' LITERATURE OF ANCIENT GREECE The average speech of Lysias has a real claim on the world's attention as a model of what Dionysius calls the 'plain' style of prose — every word exact, every sentence clear, no display, no exaggeration, no ornament except the inherent charm and wit of natural Attic. It is not, of course, a work of art in the same sense as a poem of Sophocles. Speech-writing was a 'techne' in the sense that it had rules and a purpose, but its purpose was to convince a jury, not to be beautiful. We are apt to be misled by Cicero and the late writers on rhetoric. They talk in technical language; "This ditrochasus brought down the house," says Cicero, when probably the house in question hardly knew what a ditrochaeus was, or even consciously noticed the rhythm of the sentence. They tell us of the industry of great men, and how Isocrates took ten years composing the Panegyricus. This is edify- ing, but cannot be true ; for the Panegyricus contemplates a particular political situation, which did not last ten years. The tone of the orators themselves is quite different from that of the rhetoricians, whether late like Dionysius, or early like Alkidamas and Gorgias. Except in Isocrates, who, as he repeatedly insists, is a professor and not an orator, we find the current convention about oratory to be the same in ancient times as in modern — that a true speech should be made extempore, and that prepared or professional oratory is matter for sarcasm. If yEschines likes to quote an absurd phrase from Demosthenes, it is no more than a practical politician would do at the pre- sent day. The points in ancient prose which seem most artificial to a modern Englishman are connected with euphony. Ancient literature was written to be read aloud, and this reading aloud gives the clue to the rules about
