SUMMARY 

The History of Architecture has been usually treated by Historiography as part of Art History. However, it has a nature that makes it specific by the link that builds between the different possibilities of historiographical approaches, therefore, it should not be absorbed as a subordinate field to the History of Art, but constituting a field of its own. 

The History of Architecture will be presented in its constituent polyphony, which makes it point of convergence between the different historiographical practices, being able to make the dialogical bridge between Cultural History, Social History, Economic History, History of Science and Technology and even Political History 

 

INTRODUCTION 

It is difficult to specify when the History of Architecture formed an object of specific knowledge within the historical record or historical chronicle. Polybius and Herodotus left precious reports on Ancient Greece and, although their focus were not edifications, there is a portrait of the apogee and of the greek architectural decay by the chroniclers point of understanding. The “century of Pericles”, the c. V BC – that, from the point from an architectural and sculptural point of view, it could be called “the century of Phidias” – it is apprehended from the text of these authors. 

 

The first systematized record that comes to us, through the Renaissance, is that of Marco Vitrúvio Polião who, in his “Ten Books on Architecture”, dedicated to Cesar Augusto, reveals much of the construction techniques of the 1st century AC. and reveal the paper of Architecture and the Architect in Roman Society. It is from Vitruvius that we receive the beacons of Architecture, so that the architectural work is considered as such: Firmness, Utility, Beauty (Firmitas, Utilitas, Venustas). 

It is to the Renaissance's interest in Vitruvius that he emerges not only as a architect, but also as a theorist and historian of architecture. In a way, it was inspiring for Andrea Palladio to write his “Four Books on the Architecture”, one of the landmarks of the theory and history of Architecture.  

 

The Baroque, with its totalizing proposal and its maximum expressiveness in the arts plastic arts, especially in architectural theatricality, generated the origin of the systematization of plans and models, the reproduction of games of scales and perspective, so that the architect's idea could be reproduced and built by the builders. 

The birth of History and Historiography as domains of scientific knowledge, in the nineteenth century, linked the History of Architecture to the History of the Arts, constituting sort of a subdiscipline of it. The dawn of the 20th century brought interest specific in turning the History of Architecture into a specific field of historiography knowledge, with pioneering studies conducted by architects and not by historians. 

 

This is a trend maintained until today, with most of the works developed by architects, the work of Giulio Carlo Argan being an exception to this trend. Historians up to the present time have not given due importance to the History of Architecture and the fact that it lends itself to multi, trans and interdisciplinary readings only within historiography but also in the dialogue between history and other disciplines such as philosophy, theology and sociology, for example. The major focus of Historiography in this sense has been the history of the city(s), being of greater relevance the works of Lewis Mumford and Fustel de Coulanges, the latter going back to the 19th century and focused especially on the old city.  

In this sense, there is a serious deficiency in the training of historians regarding the History of Art, as in most curricula this discipline is offered - when the is – as an optional, elective or non-mandatory subject. It often lacks historian the perception that architectural monuments are sometimes documents more eloquent than the printed or handwritten documents to which we are familiar in our historiographic mister.  

 

On the other hand, the training of architects has privileged utilitarianism and what could call “projectism” as an epitome of the formation of the architecture student: about the architectural project, about the final product of the architect's work efforts are concentrated and, often, the History of Architecture is taught as a the history of the buildings, sometimes disconnected from a historical context and of the social, political and economic dynamics that regulate the life of man and society. 

It is necessary to go beyond architects and architectural historians to better understand the evolution of architectural concepts and techniques. How put example, understand the Baroque and its totalizing vocation without limiting ourselves to the reading of the thinkers who, like Rosário Villari and José Antonio Maravall, devoted themselves to studying baroque man and civilization? Likewise, if we seek to understand the Romanesque or Gothic architecture, we cannot do without the classics of philosophy, theology and history, remembering that, in this historical frame, the great formulators and architects of the projects were not the architects, but the popes and bishops, kings and nobles. It is from the writings of Saint Augustine or Saint Thomas Aquinas that we will extract the cosmovision of a society and an era. 

 

There are authors who are mandatory reading in the History of Architecture, such as, for e.g. Banister Fletcher, Auguste Choisy, Christian Norberg-Schulz, Giulio Carlo Argan, Leonardo Benévolo and Sigfried Giedeon, among others. In common, these Architectural historians have the fact that they are not historians, but architects, exception of Giedeon. 

The richness of the History of Architecture is exactly being able to establish a field dialogue between the different historiographical knowledge, integrating the conceptions of Architecture to the concepts of Art and Aesthetics (the latter, perceived within the perspective Hegelian) and, equally, of Politics, Sociology, Theology and Economics.  

In this sense, the History of Architecture constitutes a specific field of Historiography, which by aggregating and integrating knowledge from other domains historiographical data, allows the enrichment of the vision of academics who dedicate themselves to the subject: architects, historians, philosophers and sociologists. 

Since it is not possible to dissociate the History of Architecture from the History of Urbanism and if it succeeds in detaching the formation of cities and their history from political dynamics, economic and social factors that engendered them, the History of Architecture can now be enriched with the deepening of the reflections that involve the analysis process cities and their formation and development. 

 

If some historiographical trends lend themselves more adequately to the study of History of Architecture, such as Cultural History, Economic History or History of Mentalities, for example; others, such as microhistory, can reveal creative approaches and peculiar nuances involving the History of Architecture. 

Therefore, within Pierre Bourdieu's perspective on fields theory, I postulate that the History of Architecture is not taken as the exclusive property of architects or historians, as both have to contribute, providing paths and knowledge new, new epistemological and hermeneutical proposals to integrate knowledge and actions. This indicated path will be able to give rise to original and creative aims, always increasingly rich and enriching in the approach to the History of Architecture. 

In this way, what is now proposed is the consolidation of the autonomy of the History of Architecture, now treated as a discipline with hermeneutics and epistemology own, no longer a subsidiary of the History of Art. 

I apologize to those who expected a presentation along the more canonical lines of a communication presentation, but I surrendered to the French model of making a I stand up for what I believe. 

 

Bibliography 

ARGAN, Giulio Carlo. História da Arte como História da Cidade. S. Paulo: Martins Fontes,  

1992. 

ARGAN, Giulio Carlo e FAGIOLO, Maurizio. Guia de História da Arte. Lisboa: Estampa,  

1992. 

BAUMGART, Fritz. Breve História da Arte. S. Paulo: Mrtins Fontes, 2007. 

BENEVOLO, Leonardo. História da Cidade. S. Paulo: Perspectiva, 1983. 

BREITLING, Stefan et al.. História da Arquitectura: da antiguidade aos nossos dias. Colônia:  

Könemann, 2001. 

CHOISY, Auguste. Histoire de l’Architecture. Paris: Vincent, 1954