History of Communication Study

Communication continues to be a popular major at colleges and universities. Companies seek people who can craft creative messages in a variety of different media. As well, our society continually calls for critical thinking and analytical skills, which are also at the root of effective communication.

Most of us understand that humans have always communicated, but many do not realize that the academic study of communication has taken place for thousands of years.

In this chapter, we’ll cover the evolution of communication from its origins as a field that primarily focused on the spoken word, to its current iteration of a broad and dynamic field encompassing many intersections of experiences which provide insight into messaging and meaning making.

As you read through this material, reflect on the following questions.

To fully appreciate the current state of communication study, it’s important to have a historical perspective—not only to understand the field itself, but also to know how you ended up in a Communication class or major. Over time, the study of communication has largely been prompted by the current social issues of particular time periods. Knowing this, we’ll examine the pertinent questions, topics, and scholars of the Classical, Medieval, Renaissance, and Enlightenment periods to find out what they learned about communication to help them understand the world around them. Next, we will highlight the rapid growth of contemporary communication.

There is a historical bias that gives the accomplishments of male scholars in Ancient Greece the greatest recognition for the early development of our field. Because society favored and privileged European males, it is often difficult to find written records of the accomplishments of others. Nevertheless, many of the earliest influences of Communication study also came from feminine and Eastern perspectives, not just the men of ancient Greek society. No doubt you’ve heard of Aristotle, but ancient Indian literature shows evidence of rhetorical theory pre-dating Aristotle by almost half a century. In fact, Indians were so attuned to the importance of communication, they worshiped the goddess of speech, Vach (Gangal & Hosterman). The Theosophical Society states: To call Vach ‘speech’ simply, is deficient in clearness. Vach is the mystic personification of speech, and the female Logos, being one with Brahma….In one sense Vach is ‘speech’ by which knowledge was taught to man…..she is the subjective Creative Force which…becomes the manifested ‘world of speech. The Mypurohith Encyclopaedia tells us that: Vach appears to be the personification of speech by whom knowledge was communicated to man….who, “created the waters from the world [in the form] of speech (Vach).”

Unfortunately, many of our field’s histories exclude works other than those of Ancient Greek males. Throughout the book, we try to provide a balanced view of the field by weaving in feminine and Eastern traditions to provide you with a well-rounded perspective of the development of communication study around the world. Let’s start by focusing on the earliest period of the Old School – The Classical Period.

The Classical Period (500 BCE-400 CE)

Aspasia, Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato are credited with providing some of the early foundation of communication that we still refer to today. It was at the Lyceum approximately 2,500 years ago that Aristotle and other rhetoricians taught public speaking and persuasion, which marks what we refer to as the Classical Period of Communication study.

If you’ve taken a public-speaking class, you’ve probably learned and applied principles of public speaking developed during the Classical Period. During this time, people placed high value on the spoken word and argumentation skills, accentuated emotion and logic to persuade others, and developed guidelines for public presentations. It is largely agreed-upon that the formal study of communication began approximately 2,500 years ago in Greece and Sicily. It is here that we will begin our tour of Ancient Greece with the “fantastic four”—Aspasia of Miletus, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle—who have come to be regarded as the foremother and forefathers of rhetoric and the field of Communication as a whole. Then, we’ll turn to scholars who extended the work of the fantastic four—Corax, Tisias, Cicero, Quintilian and Pan Chao.

CC BY 4.0                                                 PDM 1.0

In the time of ancient Greece, society still predominantly believed that men should be the ones to receive education. Because of this, it is often difficult to find written records of the accomplishments of others. The argument can be made that our field primarily emphasizes the contributions of men because women were routinely excluded from education as well as other public institutions during this time. As William Harris wrote in his book Ancient Literacy, it is worth noting that several women actively contributed to this period (Harris), by participating in and receiving educational opportunities not afforded to most women. This begs the question, “If some women were receiving advanced education and producing work in philosophy and rhetoric themselves, then it becomes more puzzling to explain the absence of any surviving texts by them” (Bizzell & Herzberg 26). So, who can we look to as an example of a prominent female scholar during this early period?

One such example is Sappho of Lesbos. Sappho was one of few whose works survived the test of time. Sappho was born on the isle of Lesbos and, while not Athenian born, her work carried significance to the creation of rhetoric as we know it today. She was most known for her poetry and her ability to use pathos in her performances to be persuasive.

The Debate of Socrates and Aspasia

Perhaps the most prominent and influential female scholar during this period is Aspasia of Miletus (469 BCE). She serves as an excellent example of an educated woman who is often credited as the “mother of rhetoric” (Glenn). Although relatively little is known about her scholarship because of her disappearance from history circa 401 BCE, Aspasia of Miletus is believed to have taught rhetoric and home economics to Socrates. Her influence also extended to Plato, a student of Socrates, who argued that belief and truth are not always interchangeable. Even Cicero used Aspasia’s lesson on induction as the centerpiece for his argumentation chapter in De Inventione (Glenn). Aspasia’s social position was that of a hetaera, or romantic companion, who was “more educated than respectable women, and [was] expected to accompany men on occasions where conversation with a woman was appreciated, but wives were not welcome” (Carlson 30). As an educated Milesian woman, she worked hard to set herself apart as a political theorist, rhetorician, and to Pericles’s inner circle, and even a teacher to young girls and women. It has been noted by rhetoricians that “her school for young women doubled as a meeting place for Pericles’s inner circle” (Ballif). In this circle she made both friends and enemies as a result of her political savvy and public speaking ability.

Public Domain Mark 1.0 Universal

Aspasia was described as one of the most educated women of her era and was determined to be treated as an equal to men (an early feminist to say the least!). She was born into privilege in Miletus, a Greek settlement on the coast of Western Turkey, and did not have many of the same restrictions as other women, working her way to prominence most often granted only to the men of her time. During this period Pericles, the Athenian ruler and Aspasia’s partner, treated Aspasia as an equal and allowed her every opportunity to engage in dialogue with the important and educated men of society. Socrates acknowledged Aspasia as having one of the best intellects in the city. With this intellect and the opportunities presented to her, Aspasia was politically progressive, influencing the works of many of the men who are most often credited with founding our field (PBS).

With Aspasia’s work influencing his education, Socrates (469-399 BCE) greatly influenced the direction of the Classical Period. Most of what we know about Socrates comes from the writings of his student Plato (429-347 BCE) who wrote about rhetoric in the form of dialogues where the main character was Socrates. This era produced much discussion regarding the best ways to write and deliver speeches, with a great deal of the debate focusing on the importance of truth and ethics in public speaking.

Plato wrote about rhetoric in the form of dialogues where the main character was Socrates. From these writings, the idea of the dialectic was born. While this term has been debated since its inception, Plato conceptualized dialectics as a process of questions and answers that would lead to ultimate truth and understanding. Think for a moment about contemporary situations where people use this process. Have you ever had a discussion with a professor where they questioned you about your interpretation of a poem? Consider the role that a therapist takes when they ask you a series of questions to bring greater clarity in understanding your own thoughts, motives, and behavioral patterns. These are just two examples of dialectic at work. What others can you think of?

While Plato contributed a great deal to classical rhetorical theory he was also very critical of it. In Georgias, Plato argued that because rhetoric does not require a unique body of knowledge it is a false, rather than true, art. Similarly, Socrates was often suspicious of the kind of communication that went on in the courts because he felt it was not concerned with absolute truth. Ultimately, the legal system Socrates held in contempt delivered his fate. He was tried, convicted, and executed on charges of atheism and corrupting Athenian youth with his teachings (Kennedy). This same sentiment applies today when we think about lawyers in our courts. In the famous O.J. Simpson case in the 1990’s, Johnnie Cochran became famous for his phrase “If the glove doesn’t fit, you must acquit.” This received great criticism because while this phrase was rhetorically effective in persuading the jury, it didn’t really speak to the absolute truth of the facts of the case. This rationale was often credited as the reason O.J. Simpson was found not guilty.

The Classical Period flourished for nearly a millennium in and around Greece as democracy gained prominence in the lives of Greek citizens. As we have stated, social problems have guided the development of Communication study from the earliest periods. During this time, people found themselves in the courts trying to regain family land that earlier tyrants had seized. Thus, trying to regain family land through the court system became a primary social problem that influenced the focus of those studying Communication during this time. Early Communication practitioners sought the best methods for speaking and persuading. Although the concept of lawyers as we know them did not yet exist at this time in ancient Greece (Scallen), people needed effective persuasive speaking skills to get their family land back. Where did they learn these skills? They learned them from early speech teachers known as Sophists. Resourceful individuals such as Corax and Tisias (400’s BCE) taught effective persuasive speaking to citizens who needed to use these skills in courts to regain land ownership (Kennedy).

Historical records suggest that these two were among the first professional communication teachers that made use of the latest findings in communication for practical purposes. They also formed the basis of what we now recognize as professional lawyers (Scallen). Another Sophist, Isocrates (436-338 BCE), felt it was more important for a speaker to adapt to the individual speaking situation rather than have a single approach designed for all speaking occasions. It is likely that your public speaking teachers explain the importance of adapting to your audience in all communication situations.

Arguably the most famous Greek scholar, Aristotle (384-322 BCE). This is because he believed rhetoric could be used to create community. As we’ve highlighted, a dialectic approach allows people to share and test ideas with one another. Aristotle entered Plato’s Academy when he was 17 and stayed on as a teacher where he taught public speaking and the art of logical discussion until Plato’s death in 347 BCE. He then opened his own school where students learned about politics, science, philosophy, and rhetoric (communication). Aristotle taught all of these subjects during his lectures in the Lyceum next to the public gymnasium, or during conversations he had with his students as he strolled along the covered walkway of the peripatos with the Athenian youth.

Aristotle defined rhetoric as the “faculty of discovering the possible means of persuasion in reference to any subject whatever” (Aristotle, trans. 15). We want to highlight two parts of this definition as particularly significant: “the possible means” and “persuasion.” “The possible means” indicates that Aristotle believed, like Isocrates, in the importance of context and audience analysis when speaking; a specific situation with a particular audience should influence how we craft our messages for each unique speaking situation.

Say you want to persuade your parents to give you a little extra cash to make it through the month. Chances are you will work through strategies for persuading them why you need the money, and why they should give it to you. You’ll likely reflect on what has worked in the past, what hasn’t worked, and what strategy you used last time. From this analysis, you construct a message that fits the occasion and audience. Now, let’s say you want to persuade your roommate to go out with you to Mexican food for dinner. You are not going to use the same message or approach to persuade your roommate as you would your parents. The same logic exists in public speaking situations. Aristotle highlighted the importance of finding the appropriate message and strategy for the audience and occasion in order to persuade. For Aristotle, rhetoric occurs when a person or group of people engage in the process of communicating for the purpose of persuading.

Aristotle divided the “means of persuasion” into three parts, or three artistic proofs, necessary to persuade others: logical reason (logos), human character (ethos), and emotional appeal (pathos).

Ethics — Logic — Passion (emotion)

By Spaynton – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=75742083

Ethos Logos Pathos

Logos is the presentation of logical, or seemingly logical, reasons that support a speaker’s position. When you construct the order of your speech and make decisions regarding what to include and exclude, you engage in logos. Ethos occurs when “The orator persuades by moral character when his speech is delivered in such a manner as to render him worthy of confidence…moral character…constitutes the most effective means of proof” (Aristotle, trans. 17). Ethos, in short, is the speakers credibility. Credibility is built upon establishing proof and evidence as well as drawn from the audience’s perception of the speaker. The final proof, pathos, occurs when a speaker touches particular emotions from the audience. Aristotle explains, “the judgments we deliver are not the same when we are influenced by joy or sorrow, love or hate.” (Aristotle, trans. 17). In present day, commercials are often judged as effective or ineffective based on their use of pathos. Many times we consider commercials effective when they produce an emotional response from us such as joy, anger, or happiness.

Cicero (106-43 BCE) and Quintilian (c. 35-95 CE) deserve recognition for combining much of what was known from the Greeks and Romans into more complete theoretical ideas. Like Aristotle, Cicero saw the relationship between rhetoric and persuasion and its applicability to politics (Cicero, trans. 15). Think of politicians today. Quintilian extended this line of thinking and argued that public speaking was inherently moral. He stated that the ideal orator is “a good man speaking well” (Barilli). Is your first impression that politicians are good people speaking well? How do Aristotle’s notions of ethos, logos, and pathos factor in to your perceptions of politicians?

Cicero is most notable in the field of Communication for creating what we call the five canons of rhetoric, a five-step process for developing a persuasive speech that we still use to teach public speaking today. Invention is the formulation of arguments based on logos–rational appeal or logic. Arrangement is ordering a speech in the most effective manner for a particular audience. Style or expression means “fitting the proper language to the invented matter” to enhance the enjoyment, and thus acceptability of the argument, by an audience (Cicero, trans. 21). Memory, a vital skill in the Classical Period, is less of a requirement in today’s public speaking contexts because we now largely believe that memorized speeches often sound too scripted and stale. Notes, cue cards, and teleprompters are all devices that allow speakers to deliver speeches without committing them to memory. Finally, delivery is the use of nonverbal behaviors such as eye contact, gestures, and tone of voice during a presentation. If you have taken a public speaking class, have you used some or all of these to construct your presentations? If so, you can see the far reaching effects of the early developments in communication on what we teach today.

We want to round out our discussion of the Classical Period by highlighting the work of Pan Chao (c. 45 CE-115 CE). She was the first female historian in China and served as the imperial historian of the court of emperor Han Hedi. She was a strong believer in the benefits of education, and was another of the early female pioneers to argue for the education of girls and women. Writing, in Lessons for Women, on the four qualifications of womanhood (virtue, words, bearing, and work), she said that womanly words, “need be neither clever in debate nor keen in conversation,” but women should “…choose words with care; to avoid vulgar language; to speak at appropriate times; and to not weary others (with much conversation), [these] may be called the characteristics of womanly words” (Swann 86).

Even though it began 2500 years ago, the Classical Period was filled with interesting people who made great strides in the formal study of Communication to help with the social problems of their day. The Classical Period laid the foundation of our field and continues to impact our modern day practice of studying and performing communication. You have likely learned concepts from the Classical Period in your public speaking classes. Next, let’s examine the Medieval Period and its further development of our field.

The Medieval Period (400 CE-1400 CE)

In contrast to the Classical Period, which saw tremendous growth and innovation in the study of Communication, the Medieval Period might be considered the dark ages of academic study in our field. During this era, the Greco-Roman culture was dominated by Christian influence after the fall of the Roman Empire. The church felt threatened by secular rhetorical works they considered full of pagan thought. While the church preserved many of the classical teachings of rhetoric, it made them scarce to those not in direct service to the church. A secular education was extremely hard to obtain during the Medieval Period for almost everyone.

Even though Christianity condemned communication study as pagan and corrupt, it embraced several aspects of the Classical Period to serve its specific purposes. The ideas from the Classical Period were too valuable for the church to completely ignore. Thus, they focused on Communication study to help them develop better preaching and letter writing skills to persuade people to Christianity. Emphasis was placed on persuasion and developing public presentations, both oral and written. Like the Classical Period, those in power continued to stifle women’s participation in Communication study, keeping them largely illiterate while men served as the overseers of the church and the direction of academic inquiry.

One of the most recognizable people from this era was Augustine (354 CE-430 CE), a Christian clergyman and renowned rhetorician who actually argued for the continued development of ideas that had originated during the Classical Period. He thought that the study of persuasion, in particular, was a particularly worthwhile pursuit for the church. Augustine was a teacher by trade and used his teaching skills as well as knowledge of communication to move “men” toward truth, which for him was the word of God (Baldwin).

With the exception of Augustine, the formal study of Communication took a back seat to a focus on theological issues during the Medieval Period. Fortunately, the study of Communication managed to survive as one of the seven branches of a liberal education during this period, but it remained focused on developing presentational styles apt for preaching. Boethius and the Archbishop Isidore of Seville made small efforts to preserve classical learning by reviving the works of Cicero and Quintilian to persuade people to be just and good. Nevertheless, aside from Augustine’s work, little progress was made during the remaining Medieval years; the formal study of Communication literally plunged into the “dark ages” before reemerging during the Renaissance.

The Renaissance (1400-1600 CE)

Powered by a new intellectual movement during this period, secular institutions and governments started to compete with the church for personal allegiances. As more people felt comfortable challenging the church’s approach to education, reinvigorated attention to classical learning and fresh opportunities for scholarly education reemerged. As with the two previous periods we’ve examined, obtaining education for women was still tough, as many social limitations continued to restrict their access to knowledge.

Despite the continued oppression, several brave women took advantage of the changes brought in by the Renaissance. Christine de Pisan (1365-1429) has been praised as “Europe’s first professional woman writer” writing 41 pieces over a 30-year period (Redfern 74). Her most famous work, The Treasure of the Cities of Ladies, provided instruction to women on how they could achieve their potential and create for themselves lives rich in meaning and importance. According to Redfern, while “she neither calls herself a rhetorician nor calls The Treasure a rhetoric, her instruction has the potential to empower women’s speech acts in both public and private matters. Her most important lesson is that women’s success depends on their ability to manage and mediate by speaking and writing effectively” (Redfern 74).

Italian born Laura Cereta (1469-1499) initiated intellectual debates with her male counterparts through letter writing. Yet, given the difficulties women had earning recognition in the educational arena, many of her letters went unanswered (Rabil). Despite these obstacles, she continued her education with diligence and is considered one of the earliest feminists. Through her letters, she questioned women’s traditional roles and attempted to persuade many to alter their beliefs about the role of women and education.

Ideas surrounding issues of style in speaking situations received significant attention during the Renaissance period. Petrus Ramus (1515-1572) paid great attention to the idea of style by actually grouping style and delivery of the five canons together. Ramus also argued that invention and arrangement did not fit the canon and should be the focus of logic, not rhetoric. Ramus, who often questioned the early scholars, believed that being a good man had nothing to do with being a good speaker and didn’t think that focusing on truth had much to do with communication at all. Needless to say, he had a way of making a name for himself by challenging much of what early scholars thought of truth, ethics, and morals as they applied to communication.

In contrast to Ramus, Francis Bacon (1561-1626), a contemporary of Shakespeare, believed that the journey to truth was paramount to the study and performance of communication. Bacon was an English Philosopher who was well known for being the father of empiricism. According to Bacon, reason and morality required speakers to have a high degree of accountability, making it an essential element in oration. Ethics, truth, and morality all have an integral place in communication. Cicero classified ethics under the canon of Invention and directly related a speaker’s credibility with an audience.

Scholars like Cereta, de Pisan, Ramus, and Bacon all furthered the study of Communication as they challenged, debated, and scrutinized well established assumptions and “truths” about the field developed during the Classical Period. Their works reflect the dynamic nature of the Renaissance Period and the reemergence of discussion and deliberation regarding the nature and uses of communication. The works of these scholars were a springboard back into a full-blown examination of communication, which continued into The Enlightenment.

A maturing Europe continued to see a lessening of tension between the church and secular institutions, and the transformation of the Communication field was a reflection of broader cultural shifts. Modernizations, such as the printing press, made written materials much easier to copy and reproduce rapidly. This made text readily available to the masses through newspapers, books, and pamphlets. This sparked a rise in literacy rates and forever changed the ways people learned and communicated. This era was the precursor to the industrial revolution and began the rapid changes in the development of our field that were to come.

Golden, Berquist, and Colemen point to four prominent trends in theory during the Enlightenment. First, neoclassicism revived the classical approach to rhetoric by adapting and applying it to contemporary situations. Second, the eclectic method of belletristic scholars offered standards of style for presenting and critiquing oration, drama, and poetry. Englishman Hugh Blair (1718-1800) advocated the notion of good taste and character in communication encounters, and a book of his lectures was so popular that his publisher stated, “half of the educated English-speaking world was reading Blair” (Covino 80). Third, the psychological/epistemological school of rhetoric applied communication study to basic human nature, knowledge, and thought. The Scottish minister and educator, George Campbell (1719-1796), tried to create convincing arguments using scientific and moral reasoning by seeking to understand how people used speech to persuade others. Finally, the elocutionary approach concentrated on delivery and style by providing strict rules for a speaker’s bodily actions such as gestures, facial expressions, tone, and pronunciation.

One could say the Enlightenment Period served as a bridge between the past and the present of Communication study — the Old and the New School. During this period, people used many of the early approaches to further explore communication in ways that would ignite an explosion in the Communication field in the 20th Century. While we’ve quickly covered 2400 years of communication study, let’s look at the 20th century, which witnessed more advances in communication study than the previous 2400 years combined.

Summary

Our history tells us that men and women from all cultures have been interested in observing and theorizing about the role of communication in multiple contexts—government, politics, law, religion, technology, and education. The Old School of communication study consisted of four major periods of intellectual development—Classical, Medieval, Renaissance, and Enlightenment. The Classical Period (500 BCE-400 CE) gave birth to seminal figures who set the foundation for communication study. Plato (428-348 BCE) introduced the concept and practice of the dialectic. Aristotle (384-322 BCE) defined rhetoric and three necessary proofs for persuasion. Cicero (106-43BCE) contributed the canons of rhetoric—invention, arrangement, expression/style, memory, and delivery.

As the church dominated public life in the Medieval Period (400-1400 CE), there was little intellectual development. St. Augustine is one who stands out for his continued development of rhetorical theory and its relationship to the church.

The Renaissance (1400-1600 CE) was a rebirth of sorts as Christine de Pisan (1365-1429) and Laura Cereta (1469-1499) continued the tradition of Aspasia and Pan Chao in securing educational opportunities for women. Ramus further developed the canons by combining style and delivery while Bacon continued his work following the classical tradition.

The final period, the Enlightenment (1600-1800), is characterized by intellectual trends—neoclassicism, the eclectic method of belletristic scholars, psychological/epistemological study of rhetoric, and the elocutionary approach.

The New School of communication study brought about more formal academic departments of Communication in the 1800-1900s and will be discussed in more detail next.

Key Terms and People

arrangement
Aristotle
audience analysis
Aspasia
Augustine
canons of rhetoric
Cicero
classical period
Corax
delivery
dialectic
eclectic method of belletristic scholars
enlightenment
Francis Bacon
invention
Isocrates
Laura Cereta
medieval period
memory
neoclassism
Pan Chao
Petrus Ramus
Plato
psychological/epistemological school of rhetoric
Quintilian
renaissance
rhetoric
Socrates
sophists
style
Tisias
Vach

References

Adams, Tracy. “Christine De Pizan.” OUP Academic, Oxford University Press, 1 June 2017, academic.oup.com/fs/article/3859856.

Aristotle. Rhetoric. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts. Dover Thrift Eds edition. Mineola, N.Y: Dover Publications, 2004. Print.

Baldwin, Charles S. “St. Augustine on Preaching.” The Province of Rhetoric. N.p., 1965. 158–72. Print.

Barilli, Renato. Rhetoric. U of Minnesota Press, 1989. Print.

Bizzell, Patricia, and Bruce Herzberg. The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present. Second Edition edition. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. Print.

Blumer, Herbert. Movies and Conduct. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1933. Internet Archive. Web. 30 Jan. 2015.

Burke, Kenneth. A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969. Print.

—. A Rhetoric of Motives. New Ed edition. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969. Print.

—. Language As Symbolic Action: Essays on Life, Literature, and Method. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968. Print.

Carlson, Cheree. “Aspasia of Miletus: How One Woman Disappeared from the History of Rhetoric.” Women’s Studies in Communication 17.1 (1994): 26–44. Print.

Cereta, Laura. Collected Letters of a Renaissance Feminist. Ed. Diana Robin. University of Chicago Press, 1997. Print.

Cicero, Marcus Tullius. De Inventione, with an English Translation by HM Hubbel. N.p., 1960. Print.

Cooley, Charles Horton. Human Nature and the Social Order. Transaction Publishers, 1992. Print.

—. Social Organization: A Study of the Larger Mind. C. Scribner’s, 1911. Print.

Covino, William A. Magic, Rhetoric, and Literacy: An Eccentric History of the Composing Imagination. SUNY Press, 1994. Print.

Delia, Jesse. “Communication Research: A History.” Handbook of Communication Science, Edited by Charles R. Berger and Steven H. Chaffee. Ed. Charles R. Berger and Steven H. Chaffee. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 20–98. Print.

Dewey, John. The Human Nature and Conduct: An Introduction to Social Psychology. Henry Holt and Company, 1922. Print.

—. The Public and Its Problems: An Essay in Political Inquiry. Penn State Press, 2012. Print.

Gangal, Anjali, and Craig Hosterman. “Toward an Examination of the Rhetoric of Ancient India.” Southern Speech Communication Journal 47.3 (1982): 277–291. Taylor and Francis+NEJM. Web. 30 Jan. 2015.

Glenn, Cheryl. “Rereading Aspasia: The Palimpsest of Her Thoughts.” Rhetoric, Cultural Studies, and Literacy, Edited by Frederick Reynolds. Ed. Frederick Reynolds. New York: Routledge, 2009. 35–43. Print.

Golden, James L. et al. The Rhetoric of Western Thought. Iowa: Kendall, 2000. Print.

Golden, James L., and Edward P. J. Corbett. The Rhetoric of Blair, Campbell, and Whately. SIU Press, 1968. Print.

Gray, Giles Wilkeson. “Some Teachers and the Transition to Twentieth-Century Speech Education.” History of Speech Education in America. Ed. Karl Wallace. N.p., 1954. 422–46. Print.

Harris, William. Ancient Literacy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991. Print.

Hovland, Carl I. “Reconciling Conflicting Results Derived from Experimental and Survey Studies of Attitude Change.” American Psychologist 14.1 (1959): 8–17. APA PsycNET. Web.

Hovland, Carl I., Arthur A. Lumsdaine, and Fred D. Sheffield. Experiments on Mass Communication. (Studies in Social Psychology in World War II, Vol. 3.). x. Princeton, NJ, US: Princeton University Press, 1949. Print.

Hovland, Carl, Irving, Janis L., and Kelley, Harold, eds. “Communication and Persuasion.” Psychological Studies of Opinion Change. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953. Print.

Kennedy, George Alexander. Classical Rhetoric & Its Christian & Secular Tradition from Ancient to Modern Times. Univ of North Carolina Press, 1999. Print.

Laswell, Harold. Propaganda Technique in the World War. New York: Knopf, 1927. Print.

Laswell, Harold Dwight, Ralph Droz Casey, and Bruce Lannes Smith. Propaganda, Communication, and Public Opinion: A Comprehensive Reference Guide. Princeton, NJ, US: Princeton University Press, 1946. Print.

Lazarsfeld, Paul Felix. Radio and the Printed Page: An Introduction to the Study of Radio and Its Role in the Communication of Ideas. New York: Duell, Pearc and Sloan, 1940. Print.

Lazarsfeld, Paul Felix, Bernard Berelson, and Hazel Gaudet. The People’s Choice: How the Voter Makes up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign. New York: Columbia University Press, 1965. Print.

Lazarsfeld, Paul Felix, Cantril Hadley, and Frank Stanton. “Current Radio Research in Universities.” Journal of Applied Psychology 23 201–204. Print.

Lazarsfeld, Paul Felix, and Frank Stanton, eds. Communication Research, 1948-1949. New York: Harper, 1949. Print.

Lewin, Kurt. “Self-Hatred among Jews. Contemporary Jewish Record, IV.” Resolving Social Conflicts: Selected Papers on Group Dynamics. N.p., 1941. Print.

—. “Frontiers in Group Dynamics I: Concept, Method, and Reality in Social Science, Social Equalibria, and Social Change.” Human Relations 1.1 (1947): 5–42. Print.

—. “Frontiers in Group Dynamics II. Channels of Group Life; Social Planning and Action Research.” Human Relations 1.2 (1947): 143–153. hum.sagepub.com. Web. 2 Feb. 2015.

—. “Some Social-Psychological Differences Between the United States and Germany.” Journal of Personality 4.4 (1936): 265–293. Wiley Online Library. Web. 2 Feb. 2015.

Lippmann, Walter. Public Opinion. Transaction Publishers, 1946. Print.

Mead, George Herbert. Mind, Self, and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. University of Chicago Press, 2009. Print.

Park, Robert E. “The Natural History of the Newspaper.” American Journal of Sociology 29.3 (1923): 273–289. Print.

Park, Robert E., Ernest W. Burgess, and Roderick D. McKenzie. The City. University of Chicago Press, 1984. Print.

Park, Robert Ezra. The Immigrant Press and Its Control. Harper & Brothers, 1922. Print.

PBS. “Aspasia of Melitus.” www.pbs.org/empires/thegreeks/htmlver/characters/f_aspasia.html. N.p., Oct. 2005. Web.

Plato. Phaedrus. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1956. Print.

Rabil, Albert. Laura Cereta, Quattrocento Humanist. New York: Cornell University Press, 1981. Print.

Rarig, Frank M., and Halbert G. Greaves. “National Speech Organizations and Speech Education.” History of Speech Education in America: Background Studies. Ed. Karl Wallace. New York: Aplleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1954. 490–517. Print.

Redfern, Jenny R. “Christine de Pisan and the Treasure of the City of Ladies: A Medieval Rhetorician and Her Rhetoric.” Reclaiming Rhetorica: Women in the Rhetorical Tradition. Ed. Andrea A. Lunsford. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1995. 73–92. Print.

Rogers, Everett M. A History of Communication Study: A Biographical Approach. New York: The Free Press, 1997. Print.

Smith, Donald. “{Origin and Development of Departments of Speech}.” History of Speech Education in America. Ed. Karl Wallace. Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1954. 447–470. Print.

Swann, Nancy Lee. “Pan Chao: Foremost Woman Scholar of China. No. 5.” University of Michigan Center for chinese, 1932. Print.

Theosophy Northwest. “Collation of Theosophical Glossaries: V – Vd.” COLLATION OF THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARIES 2006. Web.