In The Transfiguration of the Commonplace, Arthur Danto seeks to give an account of art which can, among other things, enable us to distinguish between several visually indistinguishable canvases, where some of the canvases are not works of art; and those canvases which are different works of art, even different genres, all this in spite of their being impossible to distinguish visually. In the course of the extended development and defense of his theory, he imagines a culture of Barbarians who fail to include historical properties as constituent of artworks. I am interested here in defending the Barbarian from Danto's onslaught.