The complex interrelationship between figurative art and dramatic art is one of the major questions of historiographie analysis not the scenography and the theatrical stagecraft in a narrow context but figurative art not directly connected with theater production. I propose some general methodological considerations in an attempt to trace the motives which lie behind the need to bring together the study of theatrical phenomena and of iconographie evidence. Present historiography emphasizes the notion of theater as ephemeral. When the theatrical event has passed, the historian is left with little else but fragmentary evidence (text, sketches, musical arrangements, or, nowadays, films or recordings) unable to revive the totality and the emotionality of the event. The farther we delve back into past centuries, the more arduous the task since sources become increasingly rare and fragmentary. Faced with the evanescence of their subject matter, theater scholars have chosen to study specific aspects of theatrical production (the text, the scenery, the theater's site or building, the actor) l or to revive or reconstruct a single play (as Elie Konigson in La Representation d'un Mystere de la Passion a Valenciennes en 1547) .2 In both cases one must refer to figurative art sources, very often indirect ones, believed to reflect the theatrical phenomena in a visual rather than verbal manner.