ABSTRACT
Art history is one of the most prestigious fields in the humanities. On the two fronts on which it operates most powerfully— the study of style and the study of iconography—it has had great influence on other humanistic disciplines. The assertion of stylistic identity between seventeenth century works as different as a church facade and a landscape painting goes to an extreme which few art historians would accept. There are many practical reasons why the study of art is primarily historical in its concerns. The difference between critical and historical assumptions and biases can be seen most clearly and importantly in the differing ways in which art historians and students of literature think of style. It seems clear that the various academic disciplines and departments have become altogether too fenced off from each other.
