Architecture and Historical Representation

As a basis for the professionalization of their field, architectural historians have assumed the autonomy and verifiability of historical knowledge. Central to these premises is the view that the archives and monuments of the past are the primary sources of the discipline. The historian's task is conceived as the gathering, selection, and verification of facts, the interpretation of which is presented in “literary” form for the sake of communicability. As such, a separation of form from content is assumed. However, recent studies in historiography insist on the determinant role played by the language of the historian upon the representation of history. In these works, critical insights developed in the fields of linguistics, rhetoric, and literary theory are brought to bear upon the analysis of historical accounts, pointing to the other “source” of history: discourse and rhetoric. This article reassesses the link among history, literature, and language. It raises the issue of the nature and authority of historical narratives and encourages rethinking their role within the discipline of architecture.