Abstract
As an accident of its historical development, architectural history suffers from captivity to analytical assumptions that were invented in the nineteenth century to justify the claims of the architectural profession. This paper questions the utility of several of the elementary categories of architectural history, including the assumption of aesthetic universals, of the individual work as the unit of analysis, and the distinction between creator and audience, and proposes a “landscape” approach to architectural history that acknowledges the multiplicity and fragmentation of environmental meaning.
Full Text 
Sign-in/Register to access full text options
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Published version (
Free)
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
