5. History and theory
Problems in historicizing architecture
So far in this book, we have considered several different
origins for modern architectural historiography. The disci-
plinary fi eld we have considered is one that emerged, in part,
at the end of the nineteenth century from the systematic study
of architectural history within the rubric of cultural history.
As it did so, it encountered the increasingly formalized teach-
ing of architectural history in professional schools and acad-
emies of architecture. We have treated the problems of this
modern fi eld of architectural history as three-dimensional,
involving the interplay of frameworks and approaches, mate-
rials and evidence, and audience. Other formulae might have
worked just as well, or better, but this approach has allowed
us to make two basic points at some length. The fi rst is that
the shifting defi nitions of architecture, historical and contem-
porary, have shaped the content of architectural history and
the methods of its analysis. The second is that architectural
history draws a crucial aspect of its legitimization as a fi eld
of research and teaching from architectural practice, the
present-day exigencies of architecture, and the demands of
an architect-readership.
This does not mean that architectural history is inevitably
prone to anachronism. Many historians of architecture work
precisely against this tendency by recovering, in the modes