What do you think?
Rate this book
Empire and Communications
It’s been said that without Harold A. Innis there could have been no Marshall McLuhan. Empire and Communications is one of Innis’s most important contributions to the debate about how media influence the development of consciousness and societies. In this seminal text, he traces humanity’s movement from the oral tradition of preliterate cultures to the electronic media of recent times. Along the way, he presents his own influential concepts of oral communication, time and space bias, and monopolies of knowledge.
288 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1950
34 people are currently reading
484 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
December 5, 2012
A comprehensive look at history of communications from antiquity to the 50s, when the author died. This book was his swan song, and wasn't accepted well in the academic community. The book shifts many paradigms of communication and its role in legal systems, governance and economic development. Below is my longer review:
Harold Innis is effectively one of the first economic historians. His investigation into communications in empires that prospered and later collapsed, was aimed at finding answers to contemporary (after First World War) economic problems. The results of his efforts formed a new paradigm. As with anything new, his approach to looking for answers in distant history through second hand sources was frowned upon by the scientific community for lacking sophistication and, what they called, “inferior colonial perspective” on the history of the world.
However, in the introduction of Empire and Communications, Alexander John Watson calls the book and Innis’ findings nothing less than “prophetic.” Even though he was denounced as a serious scholar because of his commoner background and, what his contemporary colleagues thought to be, a mediocre knowledge of economy and history, Innis’ study of communications of antiquity has laid the foundations for the work of such communication star-scholars as Marshall McLuhan. It was McLuhan’s quoting Innis’ work in his books that brought the renewed interest in the latter’s work.
A number of concepts that Innis discovered in his study of history of communications may be applied today. For example he refers to “Civilizations can only survive through a concern with their limitations, and in turn through a concern of their institutions, including empires.”
In part of his introduction to the historical study he conducted, Innis quotes Bryce who sums up that all past empires had a tendency towards aggregation, which in turn is almost the very reason for their demise. An example of Rome’s highly centralized top-down organization is brought forward as invoking such strong centrifugal and centripetal forces that destroy it within and without. From this example Innes extrapolates the importance of efficiency of communication, especially when time and space in vast empires such as Rome, determined the formation of power structures.
Innis goes as far back as Egypt and Babylonia. He places a great deal of importance to the development of writing and reading as a major step in furthering the power of the ruling class and ultimately the Monarch. “With the use of papyrus the systems of administration became one of numerous officials. Administration and its dependence on writing implied religious sanctions which meant encroachment on law.”
The rise of the Greek civilization “was apparently accompanied by a change from voluntary to obligatory [aristocratic form of government]. Innis quotesThirlwall, who eloquently describes the validity of the notion that the legal system is entirely in the hands of the aristocracy, i.e. those in power “In the absence of a written code, those who declare and interpret laws may be properly said to make them.” However, a key point is evident in Innis’ conclusions about the Greek civilization. He firmly believes that it is “the spread of writing that contributed to the collapse of the Geek civilization by widening the gap between the city-states.” He also concludes that it is the oral tradition of the Greeks, that prevented them from forming an absolute monarchism and theocracy.
Through Innis’ detailed examination of the influence of papyrus, paper and later, the printing press, he continues to weave a thread of the written word and its influence on legal systems in different societies.
Harold Innis is effectively one of the first economic historians. His investigation into communications in empires that prospered and later collapsed, was aimed at finding answers to contemporary (after First World War) economic problems. The results of his efforts formed a new paradigm. As with anything new, his approach to looking for answers in distant history through second hand sources was frowned upon by the scientific community for lacking sophistication and, what they called, “inferior colonial perspective” on the history of the world.
However, in the introduction of Empire and Communications, Alexander John Watson calls the book and Innis’ findings nothing less than “prophetic.” Even though he was denounced as a serious scholar because of his commoner background and, what his contemporary colleagues thought to be, a mediocre knowledge of economy and history, Innis’ study of communications of antiquity has laid the foundations for the work of such communication star-scholars as Marshall McLuhan. It was McLuhan’s quoting Innis’ work in his books that brought the renewed interest in the latter’s work.
A number of concepts that Innis discovered in his study of history of communications may be applied today. For example he refers to “Civilizations can only survive through a concern with their limitations, and in turn through a concern of their institutions, including empires.”
In part of his introduction to the historical study he conducted, Innis quotes Bryce who sums up that all past empires had a tendency towards aggregation, which in turn is almost the very reason for their demise. An example of Rome’s highly centralized top-down organization is brought forward as invoking such strong centrifugal and centripetal forces that destroy it within and without. From this example Innes extrapolates the importance of efficiency of communication, especially when time and space in vast empires such as Rome, determined the formation of power structures.
Innis goes as far back as Egypt and Babylonia. He places a great deal of importance to the development of writing and reading as a major step in furthering the power of the ruling class and ultimately the Monarch. “With the use of papyrus the systems of administration became one of numerous officials. Administration and its dependence on writing implied religious sanctions which meant encroachment on law.”
The rise of the Greek civilization “was apparently accompanied by a change from voluntary to obligatory [aristocratic form of government]. Innis quotesThirlwall, who eloquently describes the validity of the notion that the legal system is entirely in the hands of the aristocracy, i.e. those in power “In the absence of a written code, those who declare and interpret laws may be properly said to make them.” However, a key point is evident in Innis’ conclusions about the Greek civilization. He firmly believes that it is “the spread of writing that contributed to the collapse of the Geek civilization by widening the gap between the city-states.” He also concludes that it is the oral tradition of the Greeks, that prevented them from forming an absolute monarchism and theocracy.
Through Innis’ detailed examination of the influence of papyrus, paper and later, the printing press, he continues to weave a thread of the written word and its influence on legal systems in different societies.
September 27, 2016
Innis writes socio-economic historiography like Hemingway fiction. Sentences are spartan in the book's main sections while footnotes and appended scribblings vy for the position of shortest syntactically incomplete semantic units. Comes with a downright silly bibliography -- a roughly estimated average of four works cited per page. Sometimes obtuse (which has mostly to do with syntax, in some cases with terminology) and always dispassionate (an attitude McLuhan in the foreword calls "a lack of a fixed point of view; ie a mosaic approach" (speaking of which, the later chapters of the book feel very familiar to any reader of McLuhan's and show clearly where the latter got his self-admitted inspiration)). Innis casts a rock in the historical pond by putting communication (technology) in the limelight and tracing its development throughout and influence on pivotal moments in human history (mostly limited to the ancient mediterranean cultures plus the west) and while even the more critical reader can't but be thankful for a recalibration taking into account historically underlit elements, one can't help but wonder if tackling such a huge subject (ie the evolution of human society starting from Mesopotamia all the way to the early Cold War) with such an obsessive lens (namely, comm tech) isn't leaving any other angle -- potentially even móre important -- unseen.
Nevertheless, astounding in scope and erudition and frequently eye-opening in conclusions/interpretations (such as recasting the American civil war as essentially newspaper-driven, pointing to the lawyer class as a de facto synthesis of aristocracy and clergy and naming monopolies of knowledge, the intellectual chasms they irrevocably open w/r/t the public at large and mass culture as the biggest enemies of the West (or any culture, for that matter)), Empire and Communications is a challenging though potentially rewarding read, remaining for the most part totally accessible to amateurs such as myself.
Nevertheless, astounding in scope and erudition and frequently eye-opening in conclusions/interpretations (such as recasting the American civil war as essentially newspaper-driven, pointing to the lawyer class as a de facto synthesis of aristocracy and clergy and naming monopolies of knowledge, the intellectual chasms they irrevocably open w/r/t the public at large and mass culture as the biggest enemies of the West (or any culture, for that matter)), Empire and Communications is a challenging though potentially rewarding read, remaining for the most part totally accessible to amateurs such as myself.
January 14, 2016
Are you kidding me? This is a supposed classic in communication studies, so I wanted to like it. And being that it's held in such high regard, I naturally had high expectations going in (though, I admit, those expectations were tempered by my familiarity with scholarship in the field). The problem is that this work speaks volumes as to why theories in communication studies are so utterly lacking in anything approaching scientific rigor.
There might be something to the idea that the medium of communication shapes societies and their subsequent development. It's a plausible idea. In fact, I'll go further: It's almost obviously true in certain cases. For example, developments in writing and the printing press led to decreased power from the Church, sure. However, Innis wants to go further than that and thinks he's uncovered a deeper principle at work. He claims that certain mediums of communication are grounded in a concept of space and others in a concept of time, and it is the bias that societies have toward one or the other that influence their development.
Mediums grounded in time, Innis says, are more durable and those grounded in space are less durable. But I'm still not entirely sure why this durability criterion should be at all important when discussing communication mediums and their impact on societal development. He claims that more durable mediums (time mediums) are suited to decentralization and hierarchy in social institutions, while space mediums are just the opposite. However, he never clearly states why this should be the case. Nor does he truly explain why tendencies toward hierarchy or decentralization should be doing the work that his theory requires. They're just claims he makes with astonishingly little support. The fact that he can place these concepts into a historical narrative with various facts peppered in shows nothing except an inclination toward storytelling.
I'll end by saying that Innis' writing is not "difficult" or "academic." Those are the descriptions I read before starting this book. Actually, the word people are looking for is "bad." The chapters are composed of paragraphs that are essentially successions of historical facts, often with no apparent order. Transitions between ideas are employed sparsely, if at all. Irrelevant details have been consistently added to each chapter seemingly for the sake of demonstrating breadth of research. He's a charlatan, and it shows.
Avoid.
There might be something to the idea that the medium of communication shapes societies and their subsequent development. It's a plausible idea. In fact, I'll go further: It's almost obviously true in certain cases. For example, developments in writing and the printing press led to decreased power from the Church, sure. However, Innis wants to go further than that and thinks he's uncovered a deeper principle at work. He claims that certain mediums of communication are grounded in a concept of space and others in a concept of time, and it is the bias that societies have toward one or the other that influence their development.
Mediums grounded in time, Innis says, are more durable and those grounded in space are less durable. But I'm still not entirely sure why this durability criterion should be at all important when discussing communication mediums and their impact on societal development. He claims that more durable mediums (time mediums) are suited to decentralization and hierarchy in social institutions, while space mediums are just the opposite. However, he never clearly states why this should be the case. Nor does he truly explain why tendencies toward hierarchy or decentralization should be doing the work that his theory requires. They're just claims he makes with astonishingly little support. The fact that he can place these concepts into a historical narrative with various facts peppered in shows nothing except an inclination toward storytelling.
I'll end by saying that Innis' writing is not "difficult" or "academic." Those are the descriptions I read before starting this book. Actually, the word people are looking for is "bad." The chapters are composed of paragraphs that are essentially successions of historical facts, often with no apparent order. Transitions between ideas are employed sparsely, if at all. Irrelevant details have been consistently added to each chapter seemingly for the sake of demonstrating breadth of research. He's a charlatan, and it shows.
Avoid.
March 5, 2023
Harold Innis' book "Empire and Communication" is a thought-provoking and insightful exploration of the relationship between communication technologies and the rise and fall of empires throughout history. Innis argues that the ability to control and monopolize information is crucial for any empire to maintain its power, and that communication technologies play a crucial role in this process.
One of the key themes of the book is the idea that different communication technologies have different effects on the societies that use them. Innis identifies two basic types of communication technologies: time-biased and space-biased. Time-biased technologies, such as stone tablets and manuscripts, are durable and long-lasting, but are difficult to disseminate widely. Space-biased technologies, such as paper and printing presses, are lightweight and easily transportable, but are less durable.
Innis argues that the rise of empires has often been linked to the development of space-biased communication technologies that allow for the rapid dissemination of information across vast distances. For example, the invention of the printing press in Europe in the 15th century helped to facilitate the spread of ideas and information, which in turn helped to fuel the growth of the European empires.
However, Innis also notes that the same communication technologies that help to build empires can also contribute to their downfall. As empires become more complex and bureaucratic, they become increasingly reliant on centralized systems of communication and control. This can create vulnerabilities that can be exploited by external enemies or internal dissidents."Empire and Communication" is a fascinating and thought-provoking exploration of the role of communication technologies in the rise and fall of empires throughout history. Innis' insights into the ways in which different communication technologies shape the societies that use them are still relevant today, and his analysis provides a useful framework for understanding the ways in which modern communication technologies are reshaping our own world.
One of the key themes of the book is the idea that different communication technologies have different effects on the societies that use them. Innis identifies two basic types of communication technologies: time-biased and space-biased. Time-biased technologies, such as stone tablets and manuscripts, are durable and long-lasting, but are difficult to disseminate widely. Space-biased technologies, such as paper and printing presses, are lightweight and easily transportable, but are less durable.
Innis argues that the rise of empires has often been linked to the development of space-biased communication technologies that allow for the rapid dissemination of information across vast distances. For example, the invention of the printing press in Europe in the 15th century helped to facilitate the spread of ideas and information, which in turn helped to fuel the growth of the European empires.
However, Innis also notes that the same communication technologies that help to build empires can also contribute to their downfall. As empires become more complex and bureaucratic, they become increasingly reliant on centralized systems of communication and control. This can create vulnerabilities that can be exploited by external enemies or internal dissidents."Empire and Communication" is a fascinating and thought-provoking exploration of the role of communication technologies in the rise and fall of empires throughout history. Innis' insights into the ways in which different communication technologies shape the societies that use them are still relevant today, and his analysis provides a useful framework for understanding the ways in which modern communication technologies are reshaping our own world.
March 1, 2015
A highly condensed examination of the role of media in civilizations. Fusion of papyrus and stone resulted in an unstable Egypt Empire. Babylon was aslo struggling in the balance of monarch and priests' monopoly of knowledge, stone and clay. Greek nourished from an oral tradition. Byzantine survived with parchment while papyrus costed Roman its empire. Then came the paper and print press, then business industry and in the other continent newspaper found its dominance in a brand new country.
October 21, 2020
This is a really fascinating book. I really would like to read it again in a physical edition; it is quite a hassle to read the footnotes in the kindle.
June 20, 2020
I wanted to give this book a much higher rating because there are a lot of good ideas there that I'll be mulling over for a long time. But the deficiencies are just too significant and pervasive to ignore. I'll start with the bright spots.
The overall premise, that communications technology and social practice defines the form that empire takes is striking and illuminating. Also the idea that, fundamentally, empires must address problems of space and problems of time in how communications are used to control their dominion is powerful. Also, there are many ideas just tossed in that struck me - among them seeing evolution of the holy word (i.e., Torah) as a step toward replacing/limiting the authority of powerful dynastic rulers, looking at the differences between French and English (common) law as an extension of written/legalistic traditions versus oral traditions.
But little or nothing is proven. The book feels like a machine gun of historical trivia for the most part. Statements bounce from person to person, place to place, era to era... with little regard for creating even an argument that could be framed as subject to debate, inquiry, or refutation. It remains much more a collection of research notes that might sometime create a viable body of work than a realized corpus. In the end, it lack of focus and lack of verifiability are critical flaws for the book as a source of knowledge.
What saves it from complete failure is that as a source of inquiry, it remains powerful to this day. I'm still wondering if the rise of a twitter-fueled presidency was inevitable in this analysis. And if we can learn anything about how we might move forward now that we have one. So read the book if this is your thing -- it was worth the time and the money. But don't hold out hope for it to be more than it is.
The overall premise, that communications technology and social practice defines the form that empire takes is striking and illuminating. Also the idea that, fundamentally, empires must address problems of space and problems of time in how communications are used to control their dominion is powerful. Also, there are many ideas just tossed in that struck me - among them seeing evolution of the holy word (i.e., Torah) as a step toward replacing/limiting the authority of powerful dynastic rulers, looking at the differences between French and English (common) law as an extension of written/legalistic traditions versus oral traditions.
But little or nothing is proven. The book feels like a machine gun of historical trivia for the most part. Statements bounce from person to person, place to place, era to era... with little regard for creating even an argument that could be framed as subject to debate, inquiry, or refutation. It remains much more a collection of research notes that might sometime create a viable body of work than a realized corpus. In the end, it lack of focus and lack of verifiability are critical flaws for the book as a source of knowledge.
What saves it from complete failure is that as a source of inquiry, it remains powerful to this day. I'm still wondering if the rise of a twitter-fueled presidency was inevitable in this analysis. And if we can learn anything about how we might move forward now that we have one. So read the book if this is your thing -- it was worth the time and the money. But don't hold out hope for it to be more than it is.
June 9, 2020
There is something really interesting here, but I think it might take another time or two and some context for me to really grasp what it is. Innis's stated goal at the start of these lectures is to explore a culture's texts and modes of textual production as products shaping economic, governmental, and cultural forces. He does this through a method of intense historical excavation, such that this is kind of the names/dates/figures kind of text that often people are warned against writing. But he organizes this around the notion of inherent biases in communicative media and practices, and their support or encroachment upon elements of time/space and centralization/decentralization. But to my reading, it sometimes seems as if the attributes that he gives to particular communication media are inconsistent across their application different circumstances, and the reasoning behind those distinctions is never really fully explained, save maybe it is contained in the listing of names/dates/figures that reside around his assertions. As such the book was, at times, very opaque. It was interesting, and the style of it, as remarked upon in the introduction, is definitely a part of its argument that deserves more attention, but as an experience it was at times a bit much. Will definitely need to do some deep thinking about this one, as I'm sure there are some major elements to its construction and thesis that I ought to attend to more carefully.
January 8, 2022
Intro had some interesting concepts and then the historical sections dragged a bit (in part because I wanted more picking apart of his sources and conclusions) and then the final chapter was VERY interesting and got me thinking about nationalizing tendencies right now and Twitter/social media as space media and what might be more durable now and why podcasts do not check Twitter as radio did newspapers in the early twentieth century—Brandon Taylor's recent substack letter about algorithms driving people towards sameness and the time limitations of Wordle come to mind too.
Some favorite quotes:
"Dominance of monopolies of knowledge in the centre of civilizations implied limitations on the fringes, particularly with new languages compelled to emphasize simplicity rather than complexity in writing. Marginal classes as well as marginal regions demanded simplicity and weakened the position of elaborate systems of the scribes."
"Historical writing is distorted by over-emphasizing periods and regions in which durable materials prevail and under-emphasizing periods and regions in which impermanent or unknown materials prevail."
Some favorite quotes:
"Dominance of monopolies of knowledge in the centre of civilizations implied limitations on the fringes, particularly with new languages compelled to emphasize simplicity rather than complexity in writing. Marginal classes as well as marginal regions demanded simplicity and weakened the position of elaborate systems of the scribes."
"Historical writing is distorted by over-emphasizing periods and regions in which durable materials prevail and under-emphasizing periods and regions in which impermanent or unknown materials prevail."
December 13, 2025
For a book written on the importance of communications, Empire and Communications poorly communicates the author's central ideas.
Those central idea that state communications concentrate either time or space, which then impacts the political functioning of a state, is certainly interesting. Unfortuately, Innis attempts far too much for a ~200 page book, jumping from ancient Egypt to modern Britain in his coverage, and lengthily quoting from secondary sources for short summaries of the times he writes about. What comes out is an interesting topic point - "The spread of the Roman Empire was profoundly influenced by paper communications" - followed by paragraphs of summary with little expounding of introductory topic.
Ironically, this book reads as an oral lecture, condensing large amounts of information with argumentative points sprinkled in, yet with less focus on the flow and connection of sentences and ideas. Had Innis narrowed his historical scope and focused more on expounding his central topic in depth, this would have been a much more readable book.
Those central idea that state communications concentrate either time or space, which then impacts the political functioning of a state, is certainly interesting. Unfortuately, Innis attempts far too much for a ~200 page book, jumping from ancient Egypt to modern Britain in his coverage, and lengthily quoting from secondary sources for short summaries of the times he writes about. What comes out is an interesting topic point - "The spread of the Roman Empire was profoundly influenced by paper communications" - followed by paragraphs of summary with little expounding of introductory topic.
Ironically, this book reads as an oral lecture, condensing large amounts of information with argumentative points sprinkled in, yet with less focus on the flow and connection of sentences and ideas. Had Innis narrowed his historical scope and focused more on expounding his central topic in depth, this would have been a much more readable book.
October 18, 2024
A survey of world history focusing on communications media. Literally, clay vs stone vs. papyrus vs. parchment vs paper vs. radio. Note this book, written in 1972, stops before television, not to mention the internet. I believe the author would see television as a continuation of radio, since neither need literacy. The internet is interesting in that it is the first truly mixed medium (that's my interpretation).
At 170 pages, the pace must be brisk. In fact, the flow is so choppy and abrupt, it reads at times like the outline of a much longer book. Still, the author's influence on Marshall McLuhan means those interested in the topic should read this book.
At 170 pages, the pace must be brisk. In fact, the flow is so choppy and abrupt, it reads at times like the outline of a much longer book. Still, the author's influence on Marshall McLuhan means those interested in the topic should read this book.
August 31, 2023
An interesting look at how communication technology influenced means and methods of governing. Start with clay tablets and works through papyrus, parchment, paper, and since it was written in 1950, ends with Radio. You can see how it influenced Marshall McLuhan. It does tend to devolve into a list of facts - one damn thing after the other - but some of the facts are interesting. Some of the conclusions as to how communication media affected government can sometimes seem tendentious, but insightful in any case.
May 7, 2022
The work that inspired McLuhans own adventures into changing our understanding of media and communication. Harold Innis regales us with the history of communications and how different modes of state are effected by these changes in communication. How cultures shift and change when they are introduced to a new mode of communication. How writing changes everything. You get the picture. Great work.
February 24, 2021
Innis has no intention of "dumbing down" the message of this book. As such, while a fascinating historical overview of the uses of various communicative forms and their social, political, and economic impact, this book will require readers to pay close attention rather than take a cursory glance.
August 14, 2016
How much impact had writing in its different incarnations had on world history? How does changes in writing technologies influence the outcomes of empires? This (or something akin to this) is the thesis of Harold A. Innis in this short, but difficult to read (so they say), book.
You don’t have to be a history buff to enjoy this different outlook proposed by Innis. Maybe, as myself, you’ll reach Innis by reading Marshall McLuhan’s The Gutenberg Galaxy. In any case, Innis’ proposal makes you think again about the role writing has had on human culture, history, and even evolution.
Well argued for, with good and substancial examples, this book provides much food for thought and, as McLuhan develops these ideas, becomes a whole different way to look at contemporary clashes and events (be them social, political and even religious).
You don’t have to be a history buff to enjoy this different outlook proposed by Innis. Maybe, as myself, you’ll reach Innis by reading Marshall McLuhan’s The Gutenberg Galaxy. In any case, Innis’ proposal makes you think again about the role writing has had on human culture, history, and even evolution.
Well argued for, with good and substancial examples, this book provides much food for thought and, as McLuhan develops these ideas, becomes a whole different way to look at contemporary clashes and events (be them social, political and even religious).
Currently reading
September 25, 2008The second of 2 classic comm. theory books (the 1st is The Bias of Communication-1949) by Harold Innis, whose theories of 'time-binding' and 'space-binding' media were very influential on Marshall McLuhan, and all who followed in his wake. Heavy going, but worth it.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews