Abstract

Beginning with an article by Hans Robert Jauss, which detects in Hans Belting some "unease" towards hermeneutics, this paper claims instead that Belting, in his studies, manifests deep hermeneutic awareness, among other things indebted in many respects to Jauss' reception theory itself. Nonetheless, it is still possible to notice some "unease," which emerges in the way Belting considers hermeneutics among the "methods and games" of history of art. In this regard, Belting's analysis – concerning the relationship between iconology and hermeneutics and between philosophical and art historical hermeneutics – appears densely loaded with meaning but also partial. This is due to the fact that he limits himself to critically discussing only one tendency, well represented, in his eyes, by Wilhelm Dilthey, Hans-Georg Gadamer and Hans Sedlmayr, the latter being the only representative of art historical hermeneutics that Belting takes into account.