Textual research and interpretation relevant to the history of art is an activity of hermeneutics. The discussion stirred up by Guo Moruo's article The Discovery of Wang, Xie Epitaph and the Authenticity of the Orchid Pavilion Preface has not ceased so far. The academic significance of this discussion goes far beyond the authenticity of the Orchid Pavilion Preface ，and constitutes an excellent example of hermeneutics. First of all, Guo Moruo's historical research method towards ancient historical data, his premise and assumptions on the counterfeit works in particular, has already contained a procedure of hermeneutics, in which an assumption is made in advance and then a collection of relating data follows up. This method depends mainly on hypothesis. The indirect historical data correlate with each other through logic and reasoning that rely on subjective imagination. Secondly, the historical dating method centering on stylistic and ideological histories depends on the circular argument and procedure of hermeneutics, too. That's why a textual research which applies basically the same materials tends to reach widely divergent, even opposed results. The collision of textual research proves a crisis it is faced with, because the so-called significance of historical materials and facts shows in organizing the messy historical facts to an overall layout and organic integrity, not in any new historical materials. History itself doesn't automatically present significance. The purely objective historical research builds on researchers' recognition to their limitations and their constant self-reflection. Then, a real sense of history is a comprehensible and meaningful diagram view constituted by a series of related historical documents. It is unnecessary to study the history, if the historical materials themselves can speak. Because historical materials need to be interpreted, human beings constantly rewrite history. Generally, we claim that historical texts communicate historical truth. But every real statement of facts is not the guarantee of a historical diagram view without distortion. Therefore, simple literature criticism can't restore the original truth of history. What we get from literary documents is fragments in the historical perpetual flow. How to collage historical fragments to the complete conception and thought and even a concrete thought is not only the task of textual criticism but it depends on ideologists' explanations. Actually, any textual criticism is impossible without explanation, and it shows certain tension in their relation.  In the research of art history, textual criticism of historical materials and judgment of styles can't shake off the pre-understanding and circular argument from subjective value standpoint. Only when admitting the effect of pre-understanding in the research of art history, the researchers can be more conscious in the limitations of their research methods, more objective to explore methods of the research of art history and more prudent to make a judgment. As the fact proves, to distinguish between truth and fake in the ″Ku-shih-pien″ school fails to distinguish true ancient books from those fake ones, but to misunderstand ancient book formats in modern perceptions. In other words, when we doubt ancient books, we would rather allow those ancient books change our concept than judge their authenticity. It is in this sense that the pre-knowledge with goodwill is more reliable and meaningful than the pre-knowledge with complete subversion of the tradition in the research of traditional culture.