And perhaps this could explain why its much easier to understand older texts(19th century and earlier, when a single sentence could take up half a page) when they are read out loud? In other words, maybe they were designed to be read out loud?
It used to be the accepted view that in Greco-Roman antiquity reading was normally aloud -- I've never heard this view applied to any society in the modern era, so I'm guessing this is what your source was referring to.
But it's not true for Greco-Roman antiquity either. Almost the whole of the argument that reading was always aloud in antiquity depends on a single late passage, in Augustine's Confessions 6.3, where Augustine describes intruding on Ambrose's reading and sitting in silence, and pondering Ambrose's motives for sitting in silence so long and wondering why he was reading to himself. This is not only a misreading of the Augustine passage, it also neglects literally dozens of much older pieces of evidence on the subject.
However, the counter-argument wasn't put together until 1997, so if you found this in a source written before that point, the author shouldn't be censured for being wrong -- just out-of-date. Here's part of an old thread that goes into details. As far back as we can look, there are many more references to reading that imply silent reading than those that imply reading aloud. Some of them are as explicit as the Augustine passage. The problem that has kept Augustine at the top of the citation list for so long is that the Greeks in particular routinely used metaphors of "speaking" and "hearing" for what texts say.
Here are the earliest relevant references, all from the fifth century BCE: