The Construction of the Sacred Space

House of Religions, Milan

The Construction of the Sacred Space

House of Religions, Milan

 The Construction of the Sacred Space
House of Religions, Milan

as part of the visiting professorship of

Univ.-Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Uwe Schröder

M. Sc. Oliver Wenz

Lehr- und Forschungsgebiet Raumgestaltung

Fakultät für Architektur
Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen

in cooperation with

Prof. Raffaella Neri

Composizione Architettonica e Urbana

Dipartimento di Architettura
Ingegneria delle Costruzioni e Ambiente Costruito
Politecnico di Milano

Architectural Design for Complex Constructions

Studio I
2nd Semester 2019
Content

I. Introduction 6
I.I Topos and Type as Elements of Spatial Design
I.II Topos
I.III Type
I.IV The Spatial Design of the City

II. Project “The Construction of the Sacred Space” 30

II.I Assignment

III. Allocation of Spaces 36

III.I Specification of Functions and Sizes

IV. Project Areas 40

IV.I Site Plans

V. Seminar “The Type of the Scared Space” 62

V.I Assignment

VI. Submissions 64
VI.I Project
VI.II Seminar

VII. Collection of References 66

VII.I General References
VII.II Churches
VII.III Mosques
VII.IV Synagogues

VIII. Symposium “Holy Spaces” 82

VIII.I Programme
VIII.II Participants

IX. Excursion “Sacred Spaces in the Rhineland” 88

IX.I Exhibition “JAA19”

X. Schedule 90
X.I Procedure

XI. Annex 92
XI.I Bibliography
XI.II Documentation
“…, we could say that the experience of sacred space makes possible
the “founding of the world”: where the sacred manifests itself in space,
the real unveils itself, the world comes into existence. But the irruption
of the sacred does not only project a fixed point into the formless
fluidity of profane space, a center into chaos; it also effects a break
in plane, that is, it opens communication between the cosmic planes
(between earth and heaven) and makes possible ontological passage
from one mode of being to another. It is such a break in the hetero-
geneity of profane space that creates the center through which com-
munication with the transmundane is established, that, consequently,
founds the world, for the center renders orientation possible. Hence
the manifestation of the sacred in space has a cosmological valence;
every spatial hierophany or consecration of a space is equivalent to a
cosmogony. The first conclusion we might draw would be: the world
becomes apprehensible as world, as cosmos, in the measure in which
it reveals itself as a sacred world.”1

1
Mircea Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane. The Nature of Religion, New York 1959, p. 63f.

4
1

Fig. 1: Basilica of Sant’Ambrogio, Milan.

5
I. Introduction

I.I Topos and Type as Elements of Space Design

…, our characterization of the inhabited city draws less on figurative

forms and relies instead on the spatial appearance of the architec-
ture, since the meaning of the “city” is conveyed directly and prima-
rily only through its spaces. The description is therefore based upon
perceptions of spatial phenomena: which is to say the spatiality of
the city.
Regarding the architecture, we take for granted an understanding of
space that attributes a phenomenal independence to architectonic
space within the differentiated spatiality of the lifeworld and alongside
other conceptions of space, i.e., those derived from the natural or
social sciences or from cultural studies: architecture situates, “founds
and joins” spaces, which appear within and/or amidst buildings, and
which consistently function as inner spaces by virtue of their structu-
ral boundaries. Otherwise, they do not function as spaces, at least not
architectural spaces, but as other types of spaces, for example outer
spaces, which also along to the spatiality of the city.
Against the background of contemporary phenomenological re-
search into urban space,2 a reflective spatial understanding of archi-
tecture not only makes possible a theoretically grounded conception

2 3

6
 of an architecture of the spaces of the city, but also holds out the
prospect of a reception of the architecture of the city that has lap-
sed into discursive neglect, one whose initial formulation was un-
dertaken in the 1960s, for example, in the theoretical and practical
work of Oswald Mathias Ungers and Aldo Rossi. Here, the point of
departure lies in a confrontation between a fundamentally ‘formal’
conceptualization of the city versus its spatial conceptualization:
morphology – typology.
In a speech delivered in Berlin in 1963 on the occasion of his ap-
pointment to the Technical University, Ungers lays out his principles
of spatial design, which he illustrates with numerous architectural ex-
amples, thereby articulating a contemporary conception of space in
an exemplary fashion:
“At the moment when the human individual consciously detaches an
isolated and firmly delineated segment from the infinitely extended
and unbounded space of nature, and in some way encloses it – if
only with a gesture – (…), he already creates architecture, albeit in the
widest sense.”3

2
See in particular the writings of Jürgen Hasse, for example Was Räume mit uns ma-
chen – und wir mit ihnen. Kritische Phänomenologie des Raumes, Freiburg/Munich 2014.
3
Oswald Mathias Ungers, Prinzipien der Raumgestaltung (speech delivered on the oc-
casion of his appointment to the TU Berlin in 1963), in arch+ 65, October 1982, pp. 41ff.
Fig. 2–5: Oswald Mathias Ungers, Prinzipien der Raumgestaltung.3

4 5

7
The term “space of nature” must be called into question: if he refers
to a natural-scientific conception of space, then everyday perception
would be excluded, and anyway, it would be impossible, given this
conception, to subtract any part of it; if however he addresses the
spatiality of the lifeworld, then this is hardly perceptible as infinitely
extended or unbounded: even the extended landscape itself, with the
contours of the topography and sky, finally, founds a space and pro-
vides entity with spatial orientation. The “space of nature” then refers
to a “space” that does not appear to be inherently spatial at all, gi-
ven that it lacks the boundedness that distinguishes a space – in any
event an architectonic space – per se. Only the imagined procedure
of transformation, of “isolation,” “separation,” “enclosure,” spatiali-
zes space and allows architecture to emerge. Immediately evident in
Ungers’ statement is on the one hand the adoption of a modern, re-
lational conception of external space, and on the other a traditional,
absolute conception of architectural space, one that is bound up with
the discipline of architecture, and which is seemingly directed against
the relational model. This definition aims toward a unified identity of
space, yet addresses incommensurable realities.
Where it is a question of reflecting on the spatiality of the city, in any event,
the “space of nature” as a physical-mathematical model leads nowhere.
The absence of the architectonic-theoretical conception of space is
expressed in particular in the typology debate of that time, for exam-
ple by Aldo Rossi, who comprehends the category of the type – through
his reliance on the doctrine of types (Dictionnaire Historique d’ Archi-
tecture, 1788–96) propounded by the French theoretician Quatremère
de Quincy (1755–1849) – as the “idea of architecture as such,” as
“that which – despite all changes of sensibility or understanding – al-
ways constitutes the principle of architecture and of the city.”
“We want to stipulate,” Rossi sums up, “that typology is the idea of an
element which plays a specific role in the shaping of form; and that it
is a constant.”4
Rossi’s cryptic definition of type raises new questions: is type an
idea or a principle of architecture? And what role does it assume in
the shaping of form? In the context of his considerations of typolo-
gy, in any event, space, spaces, and spatiality are deemed unworthy
of mention…

4
Aldo Rossi, “Das Konzept des Typus” (1965), in arch+ 37, 1978, pp. 39ff.
Fig.: 6: Cover of arch+ 65, 19823; 7: Cover of arch+ 37, 19784.

8
6 7

In architectural discourse, it is simultaneously the irresolute quality of

the conception of space involved as well as the absence of any reflec-
tion on space that (under the impress of architectural modernity) mili-
tates against the theoretical development of architectonic space or of
the spatiality of the city – i.e. in emulation of art-historical conceptions
of space5 – and that hence determines the so-called ‘formal’ path of
the architecture of the city.
Our characterization of the architecture of the spaces of the city takes
up this ‘formal’ conception and its analytical methodologies. In its es-
sential determination of the discipline, it begins from an autonomous
notion of space, one that conceives of architecture, in the theoretical
tradition, as space design. In grounding this conception, we begin
with a reception of the history of space and of spatial theory in archi-
tecture and not – as is still the case with the ‘formal’ conception of the
architecture of the city – with a critique of a still-open modernity, one
that consequently leads toward an eccentric historicization of archi-
tecture, one which excludes modernity itself.

5
For an overview, see Jantzen, H., Über den kunstgeschichtlichen Raumbegriff (1938),
Darmstadt 1962.

9
I.II Topos

An architectural body – a house, for example – is entirely replete with

form and space. How senseless – and wholly contrary to percep-
tion – it is to assume that the concept of the body6 in architecture
refers solely to the substantial, which is to say to the materially-bound
form, and to regard the space in between as being distinct from this
material form – as mere so to speak ‘empty space,’ basically as a kind
of ‘nothing’ that is left blank by the architectural substance.
In contradistinction to mathematical space, architectonic space is
always interior space, and as such, is never empty, but is instead
replete: it is filled with proportion, scale, program, meaning, atmo-
sphere, presence, and so forth, and is bound up with this fullness, and
therefore a genuine counterpart to form, a complementary element of
the architectural body.7 Analogously, it is this fullness of architectonic
space that makes it possible, with reference to the architectural body,
to speak not just of the solidity of form, but also of the solidity of
space. And already the notion of a simple inverted model, according
to which a cavity is conceived as being full, increases awareness of
this situation.

8 9

10
Not unlike a house, a city too is such a ‘thing,’ and can therefore be
characterized as an architectonic body. To the extent that courtyards,
streets, and squares present themselves as architectonic spaces – as in-
teriors – they are bound up with form and forms in a complementary and
contrasting way. Where such spaces are deprived of their complemen-
tary connection to the form, i.e. by exiting “architectonic proportion,”8
and hence undergoing a transformation so that they are perceived as
external intervals rather than an inner extension, they appear now in
general as outer outer spaces, which as such, to be sure, fall outside
of the architectonic body, not however from the spatiality of the place.
6
“Any thing can be called a body to the extent that it appears as a self-enclosed whole, as
an individual being which has its own existence; which is to say as a thing in a so-to-speak
scientific conceptualization,” in DWB = Deutsches Wörterbuch von Jacob und Wilhelm
Grimm, 16 vols. in 32 sub-volumes. Leipzig 1854–1961. Quellenverzeichnis Leipzig 1971,
vol. 11, cols. 1833–1838.
7
On the withdrawal from mathematical space, see Bollnow, O. F., Mensch und Raum,
Stuttgart 1963, pp. 16–18.
8
An interior space that is bound up with the architectonic body possesses “architectonic
proportions.” This awareness rests on a perception of reality, and pertains to the question
of scale; a “proportional formula” that could determine this proportionality of interior and
exterior spatiality in a ‘quantifiable’ way does not exist.
Fig. 8–11: Architectonic Body – Space and Form: “City”; Spatial analysis of “Turin”.

10 11

11
To speak of outer or exterior spaces by no means suggests however
that these spaces appear to us as infinitely extended or unbounded. A
landscape, for example, is on the one hand shaped in formal terms by
the physiognomy of the earth, by mountains, forests, meadows, and
roads, and is on the other spatially determined by the concavity of the
sky, the valley, the forest, the clearing, or the cave. In other words: we
call spaces outer spaces which lie outside of architecture – or more
precisely outside of the architectonic body – but whose impact on
perception is still entirely that of inner space. In contemplating places,
then, we need not switch from one conception of space to another,
from an architectonic to a natural-scientific or mathematical concep-
tion, nor from an absolute to a relational understanding of space. We
remain wholly at the level of intuition or perception, and therefore no
longer speak of ‘the’ urban space, but instead of the city of spaces
and of the spaces of the city.9

12 13

12
The forgetting of the city: modernism confounded the city with the
landscape, thereby sacrificing its outer inner spatiality!
These differentiated inner and outer spaces of the city, including the
characteristic forms associated with them, can be described in ty-
pological terms – a precondition, in my view, for their purposeful and
functional application in design…
Reflected in the city of spaces is the cultural constitution of urban
society. To the extent that the place introduces natural and artificial,
social, cultural, and temporal references in its spaces and forms, the
term “topos” involves a descriptive characterization of the place as
the spatiality of the place.
9
See present author and Denk, A. (eds.), Stadt der Räume. Interdisziplinäre Überlegungen
zu Räumen der Stadt, Tübingen/ Berlin 2014.
Fig. 12–15: Architectonic Body – Space and Form: “City”; Spatial analysis of the “Ville
radieuse, 1930, Le Corbusier”.

14 15

13
16

Fig.: Present author, Pardié. Concept for a City after the Time Regime of Modernity, Co-
logne 2015, p. 15; 16: Aachen, red-blue plan, plan segment “City”: red / light red = enclo-
sure: on all sides (covered) / not on all sides (uncovered), blue / light blue = linkage: rural or
landscape / urban, white line = space formation: active boundary (wall), black line = space
formation: passive boundary (marking, profiling).

14
17

Fig. 17: Aachen, red-blue plan, plan segment “City and House”: red / light red = enclo-
sure: on all sides (covered) / not on all sides (uncovered), blue / light blue = linkage: rural or
landscape / urban, white line = space formation: active boundary (wall, floor, ceiling, roofs),
black line = space formation: passive boundary (marking, profiling), shaded area I (white) =
dedication: exclusive, shaded area II (black) = dedication: inclusive.

15
I.III Type

The spatiality of the place describes reality, or as the philosopher says:

“That which takes effect, is effected.” (“das Wirkende, Gewirkte”10)
The form of life that is bound up with it is called “dwelling.” To dwell
means to make use of spaces, and it is for the sake of dwelling that
architecture “founds and joins” spaces of a very special kind. Col-
lective dwelling engenders the originary and at the same time largest
architectonic space, the square, while solitary dwelling engenders the
most remote, and at the same smallest architectonic space, the cell or
chamber. This is true to the extent that we disregard for the moment
the spatiality of the wall and the element of the opening as indepen-
dent spaces…
The constitution of spaces for dwelling is the task of architecture, and
the corresponding act of “founding” and “joining” necessitates an
idea. For only the spatial envisioning of a socially constituted form of
dwelling erects the large house: which is the idea of the city!

10
“The real [das Wirkliche] brings to fulfillment the realm of working [des Wirkenden], of
that which works [wirkt].” From Martin Heidegger, “Science and Reflection,” pp. 155–182
in The Question of Technology and Other Essays, transl. and with an introduction by Wil-
liam Lovitt, New York 1977, here p. 159. German: “Das Wirkliche ist das Wirkende, Ge-
wirkte: das ins Anwesen Her-vor-bringende und Her-vor-gebrachte.” See Martin Heideg-
ger, “Wissenschaft und Besinnung” (1953), in Martin Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe, I. Abtei-
lung: Veröffentlichte Schriften 1910–1976, vol. 7, Vorträge und Aufsätze, p. 43.

16
18

Fig. 18: Giambattista Nolli, Pianta Grande di Roma, 1748: Detail with Piazza Navona (605).

17
The square of the city is preceded by the idea of the common and
familiar events of the market, assembly, or festival. The square is de-
dicated to the recurring events of urban life. To begin with, the ar-
chitectonic idea of the square gives rise to space as an idea; only
subsequently does it structure the form through which the square
appears as a space. At times, architectonic ideas can be traced
back to a small number of archetypal spaces which have been han-
ded down by the early culture of dwelling; in the case of the square,
for example, the archetype of the clearing within the forest. Just
think here of the Vitruvian legend of origins: a clearing created by
a slash and burn method becomes the first place of settlement for
early humankind…
We argue here that a type is determined by an ideal space or sequen-
ce of spaces; that it bears with it characteristic inner or outer forms;
that it is identifiable as a unity within the spatiality of the city; and that
it is dedicated to a recurrent event of dwelling.
A courtyard, for example, is outlined by the covered ground and rising
walls, and is delimited above, finally, only by the circumscribed cano-
py of the sky. As an architectonic space, it finds its upper terminus
through the unity of the walls and the “missing” roof, which – like a
window onto a landscape – is present as an extended opening toward
the outer spatiality of the heavens. Manifested through the emergence
of space – i.e. architectonic space – is the interior. The closeness of
the walls, that is to say the relationship between the extension of the
covered ground and the surrounding wall heights, establishes this in-
ner space – regardless of whether it is roofed or unroofed. Only where
the space stretches beyond the architectonic proportions does the
inside escape, does an external, outer spatiality begin to appear.

18
19

Fig. 19: Albrecht Dürer, Der heilige Hieronymus im Gehäus, 1514.

19
20

Fig.: Cesare Cesariano, Vitruvius / Di Lucio Vitruvio Pollione de architectura libri dece […],
Como: Gotardus de Ponte 1521; 20: The courtyard with arches.

20
21, 23 22, 24

Fig.: 21: The courtyard with four columns; 22: The Corinthian courtyard, 23: The courtyard
without eaves; 24: The Tuscan courtyard.

21
25

Fig. 25: Piero di Cosimo, The Early History of Man: The Forest Fire, c. 1502.

22
23
By admitting the outer, architecture excludes the inner: this is our mo-
dern spacelessness!
The interior is devoted to the various spatially-extended forms of
dwelling, as it is from this source that architectonic spaces acquire
their purposeful fullness, their scale. Over the course of architectural
history, the courtyard appears in highly various structural contexts:
in cloisters, schools, and universities, in hospitals, and so forth; in
the building and in the city: it may therefore be dedicated to an over-
arching purpose, one that goes beyond the specific function of the
respective architectural context and which aims toward community,
collective life: a place of encounter…
For the architectonic conception, the type supplies the ideational sub-
stance; for the design, it furnishes a kind of spatial rough draft. The
numerous variations with which we are familiar are for the most part
objectivations of one and the same type, which the topos – which
is to say: the spatiality of the place – contributes to shaping. To the
extent that the cultural sponsorship sustains the determinative ideal
of the spatial conception of dwelling, the per se timeless, unalterable
type engenders topical objectivations. Mirrored in them is the cultural
history of collective dwelling and of the city, in whose memory the
architectonic types have been preserved.

24
26

Fig. 26: Hans Eschebach, Map of Pompeii, 1969/1981/1991, in id. and Liselotte Esche-
bach, Pompeji vom 7. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis 79 n. Chr., Cologne 1995.

25
I.IV The Spatial Design of the City

The external description of the city determines the “topical norm,”

which is to say: the claim of the city or the place on the design, and
the inner description of the house determines the “typic ideal,” which
is to say: the claim of the house on the design. In this sense, “topos”
and “type” are bound up with one another as antitheses: the success-
ful design mediates between the two. According to the concept, the
spaces which architecture brings to appearance are therefore neither
subtracted from another space, nor do they repress another space or
other spaces; instead the architecture brings them forth autonomous-
ly, and they are then joined to the spatiality of the lifeworld.
Mirrored in the “founding and joining” of such spaces is the urban
culture of habitation, while the differentiation of the spaces refers to
the societal disposition of the inhabitants. The architecture allows the
spaces to appear within the contours of built forms: the constructive
and material shapes of these forms are manifest as the shells of these
spaces, while their interiors are discernible in the urban engraving of
their surfaces. Spaces and forms are bound up with the architectonic
body; in its interior, they appear in the proportionality of the city.11

11
Lecture delivered in the framework of the symposium Architektur im Kontext. Gone for
Good! Hat Typologie noch Perspektive, Fachbereich Architektur, TU Kaiserslautern, June
8, 2018; cf. also Die zwei Elemente der Raumgestaltung, in present author (ed.), Die Idee
der Stadt / L‘idea della città. Konzepte einer rationalistischen Architektur, Cologne 2009.

26
27

28

Fig.: Leon Battista Alberti, Palazzo Rucellai, Florence c. 1458; 27: Street facade; 28:
Ground floor plan with the loggia towards the Piazza Rucellai.

27
29

Fig. 29: Fra Carnevale, The Ideal City, c. 1480–1484.

28
29
II. Project: “The Construction of the Sacred Space”

Buildings which contain sacred spaces and which in their entire-

ty – their space and form – constitute holy places, point in their pur-
pose to the religious constitution of those who live in the city, the
community. Liturgical events, rites and ceremonies, constitute the
“aesthetic use” (“der schöne Gebrauch”) of such spaces.
And architecture? Architecture has to found the place, to provide a
space for the constitution of inhabitants and the possibility of “use”
in the first place, to situate these dispositions through their own crea-
tive means – in space and time, in the inner and in the outer space,
in form and material, in light and in silence – as atmosphere within
the building.
As mentioned in the previous chapter the design approach is metho-
dologically based on two foundational analyses: an analysis of type
(which is to say, of the design task) and an analysis of topos (which
is to say, of place). Both analyses take the concept of space as a
point of departure. Investigated, defined and chosen as the design
premise for the project in the first case will be the stipulated spa-
tiality of the house; in the second case, the existing spatiality of the
place. Elaborated on the basis of these two preliminary theses – type
and topos – will be a synthesis – spaces in spaces – which will
serve subsequently as the basis for the design process and for the
design concept.

30
30

Fig. 30: Paolo Zermani, San Giovanni, Perugia 2007.

31
II.I Assignment

Based on the individual concept, one of the presented sites in the

following chapter is to be chosen for the design project. You are as-
ked to design a building or an ensemble of buildings which can be
understood as a component of the city of Milan, the quarter, and its
immediate neighborhood. Develop a building, which spatially, formally
and in its purpose integrates adequately into the spatial urban context
and clearly positions itself within it while ‘responding’ to the existing
structure of the place.
The current social and spatial ideas and notions of the city are to be
critically addressed and given an architectural expression. An analy-
sis of the spatial constitution of the city of Milan and of its typical
elements provides a central basis for the spatial design of the city. An
analysis of the historical and of the present disposition of the specific
urban spatial conditions of the project area presents the city of Milan
as the location of the design project.
A critical analysis of the historical environment and the different layers
of the urban context showing the traces of history, provides further in-
formation on the place. Moreover, questions dealing with the connec-
tions to the surrounding urban spaces as well as the spatial integra-
tion into the surrounding blocks, the quarter, and the overall city are
to be considered.
The specification of the type “Sacred Space,” further differentiated
here as a “House of Religions,” provides information on the particular
constellation of spaces of the house or the houses. The house itself
is to be understood as a place for prayer, study, contemplation and
celebration. The different needs and requirements resulting from the
various uses are to be taken into account when designing the spaces
and their arrangement among one another.

32
31

Fig. 31: Wandel Lorch Architects, New Synagogue, Dresden 2001.

33
“Hallowing begins when a specific zone is detached from space as a
whole, when it is distinguished from other zones and one might say
religiously hedged around. This concept of a religious hallowing ma-
nifested concurrently as a spatial delimitation has found its linguistic
deposit in the word templum. For templum goes back to the root τεμ,
to ‘cut,’ and thus signifies that which is cut out, delimited.”12

12
Ernst Cassirer, The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Volume 2: Mythological Thought,
New Haven 1955, p. 99f.

34
32

Fig.: 32: Antonio Monestiroli, Fifth expansion of the Great Cemetery, Voghera 2003.

35
III. Allocation of Spaces

You are expected to provide clear design concepts and statements

concerning the spatial organization and structure of the “House of
Religions” with regard to the type of use, the collective spaces, the
house’s relationship to the city and its integration into the urban space
(public sphere, private sphere, connection, delimitation etc.).
Public and open to anyone, the house would be dedicated to the
three great religious communities of Jews, Muslims and Christians. It
would be a place to pause for a moment, for prayer, contemplation,
reflection, interdisciplinary religious teaching on the history and the
current role of the religions and at the same time it is a place for festi-
vities and communal celebration.
Taking the self-conceptions of the three religions into account, this is
only possible if theological differences are not put aside, but preser-
ved. The house and its spaces are to be designed in such a way that
each of the religions has its own separate space for worship. How-
ever, it should be possible to open these separate spaces to a central
space for collective use. Separately in the respective spaces of each
religion and at the same time in direct contact with each other, the
“House of Religions” would be a church, a synagogue and a mosque
under ‘one roof’.13
The central space would provide a sacred space and constitute a
spatial link between the three separate spaces of worship. The de-
gree of opening between the general and the specific sacred spaces
would have to consider the resulting mutual exposure and influence
carefully. Generally the simultaneous use of the separate sacred
spaces should be possible without resulting in mutual visual and
acoustic disturbances.
Great attention should be paid to the expression and the spatial qua-
lity of the sacred spaces. What are the specific and describable pro-
perties of a spatial experience that is perceived to be ‘sacred’? What
are the characteristics of the atmosphere thus experienced? How can
a space be endowed with a sacred aura through architectural means?

13
The project “The Construction of the Sacred Space: House of Religions, Milan” acts on
suggestion of the international competition “House of Prayer and Learning at Petriplatz,
Berlin” held in 2012.

36
33

Fig. 33: Renato Rizzi, Parma Inattesa. Lo Spazio del Pudore, Parma 2013.

37
III.I Specifications of Functions and Sizes

The necessary scale and the spatial integration of secondary spaces,

for example office and seminar spaces, room of the facility manager,
bar, kitchens, storage rooms (chairs, tools, cleaning materials etc.),
rest rooms, mechanical rooms etc. is to be considered in accordance
with the overall concept of the project.
The specific procedure of worship of the three religions involves ad-
ditional spaces, e.g. registry, washing, space for the Imam etc. These
spaces are to be integrated in the spatial concept of the building. The
general hierarchy of spaces and their conncections among one ano-
ther are to be developed thoroughly.
The following suggestions regarding the sizes of the spaces of wor-
ship might be used as an open guideline that is to be interpreted ac-
cording to the individual idea of the project.

Central Space 100–300 m2

Sacred Space Christianity 100–200 m2
Sacred Space Islam 100–200 m2
Sacred Space Judaism 100–200 m2

38
34

Fig. 34: Paul Böhm, Central Mosque and Islamic Cultural Centre, Cologne 2018.

39
IV. Project Areas

Eight areas in the city of Milan are proposed for the design of the
project “The Construction of the Sacred Space: House of Religions,
Milan”. Each of them is constituted by individual spatial qualitites and
differentiated conncections to the surrounding spaces of the urban
tissue to allow for a broad range of conceptional approaches. The
specific spatial situations might be categorised as follows:

I. “Vacant Lot”
I.I Viale Monza, p. 42f.
I.II Via Doria, p. 44f.

II. “Block”
II.I Porta Volta, p. 46f.
II.II Cimitero Monumentale, 48f.

III. “Square”
III.I Piazza Prealpi, p. 50f.
III.II Viale Emilio Caldara, Viale Monte Nero, p. 52f.

IV. “Park”
IV.I Porta Vittoria, p. 54f.
IV.II Via Jenner, Via Livigno, p. 56f.

V. “Suburbia”
V.I Via Padova, p. 58f.
V.II Piazza Tirana, 60f.

IV.I Site Plans

The pages 41–61 present figure-ground plans and aerial views of the
above-mentioned sites. In the course of the design project *.pdf- and
*.dwg-files of the site plans will be provided.

40
 V.I
I.I
IV.II
III.I

I.II
II.II

II.I

IV.I
III.II

V.II

35

Fig. 35: Milan, Figure-ground plan, S. 1:100.000.

41
36

Fig.: Milan, I. “Vacant Lot”: I.I Viale Monza; 36: Figure-ground plan, S. 1:5.000.

42
37

Fig. 37: Aerial view.

43
38

Fig.: Milan, I. “Vacant Lot”: I.II Via Doria; 38: Figure-ground plan, S. 1:5.000.

44
39

Fig. 39: Aerial view.

45
40

Fig.: Milan, II. “Block”: II.I Porta Volta; 40: Figure-ground plan, S. 1:5.000.

46
41

Fig. 41: Aerial view.

47
42

Fig.: Milan, II. “Block”: II.II Cimitero Monumentale; 42: Figure-ground plan, S. 1:5.000.

48
43

Fig. 43: Aerial view.

49
44

Fig.: Milan, III. “Square”: III.I Piazza Prealpi; 44: Figure-ground plan, S. 1:5.000.

50
45

Fig. 45: Aerial view.

51
46

Fig.: Milan, III. “Square”: III.II V.le Caldara, V.le Monte Nero; 46: Figure-ground plan, S. 1:5.000.

52
47

Fig. 47: Aerial view.

53
48

Fig.: Milan, IV. “Park”: IV.I Porta Vittoria; 48: Figure-ground plan, S. 1:5.000.

54
49

Fig. 49: Aerial view.

55
50

Fig.: Milan, IV. “Park”: IV.II Via Jenner, Via Livigno; 50: Figure-ground plan, S. 1:5.000.

56
51

Fig. 51: Aerial view.

57
52

Fig.: Milan, V. “Suburbia”: V.I Via Padova; 52: Figure-ground plan, S. 1:5.000.

58
53

Fig. 53: Aerial view.

59
54

Fig.: Milan, V. “Suburbia”: V.II Piazza Tirana; 54: Figure-ground plan, S. 1:5.000.

60
55

Fig. 55: Aerial view.

61
V. Seminar: “The Type of the Sacred Space”

The seminar approaches the topic “The Construction of the Sacred

Space” from two directions. The first one intends an empirical-analyti-
cal approach and evolves from the study and the description of ratio-
nal processes and their physical appearance. The second one aims at
an intuitive, playful approach, for example by associative connections
and contextual transfers. Ideally the results of both approaches would
eventually lead to the conception of an elaborated idea summarising
both approaches without contradiction.14 In preparation of the design
project the seminar offers an in-depth examination of the theoretical
basics of the type of the ‘Sacred Space’ and introduces to the archi-
tectural design process of the project.

V.I Assignment

In groups of two students the sacred spaces of Christianity, Islam

and Judaism as well as the shared Central Space are described ana-
lytically with regard to their function, use, purpose and atmosphere.
The results are presented in written form with indication of sources
and references.
In addition to this written part each group designs a picture for each of
the four sacred spaces mentioned above. The pictures are supposed
to show an idealised version of the specific interior space in a spa-
tial-atmospheric representation. How can a sacred atmosphere be
established by means of architecture? What are the differences bet-
ween the sacred spaces of these three religious communities? And
what is the appearence of the Central Space, which is not directly
affiliated with a specific religion?
The results of the seminar are presented on eight DIN A2 sheets per
group, four sheets with texts and four sheets with pictures.

14
See also: Oswald Mathias Ungers, Morphologie. City Metaphors, Cologne 1982.

62
Fig. 56: Simon Ungers, Seven Sacred Spaces, Cologne 2003.

63
VI. Submissions

Drawing guidelines, consistent layouts and scales will be developed

collectively in the course of the project. The same applies to the mo-
dels and their materiality.

VI.I Project

I. Model of the urban context, S. 1:2.000/1:1.000;

material and layout on agreement;

II. Model of the building, S. 1:200;

material and layout on agreement;

III. Concept and idea, S. 1:2.000/1:1.000 or/and other scales;

consequent and consistent continuation of the analysis to the pre-
sentation of the concept, of the higher idea of the design and of its
integration into the urban context shown in a figure-ground plan and
further analytical drawings as necessary;
written commentary on the concept and idea of the design with re-
gard to the project assignment;

IV. Site plan, S. 1:500 shown as a top view of the roof;

V. Floor plans, sections, elevations, S. 1:200;

complete floor plan showing the concept for the overall situation and
the urban context;
further floor plans, elevations and at least one cross-section and one
longitudinal section as well as additional drawings as necessary for
the thorough presentation of the project;

VI. Sectional view, S. 1:20;

illustrative and constructive representation including all the necessary
information to convey the character, the materiality and the atmo-
sphere of the spaces or the facade;

VII. Libero;
perspective views of the interior space and of the urban context as a
spatial-astmospheric representations;

further drawings on agreement depending on the individual concept;

64
VIII. Sketch book;
documentation of the design stages showing the conceptional ap-
proach and its further elaboration with written explanations and indi-
cation of dates as necessary;
representation of the specific character of the individual project;
representation of the general character of the urban spatial concept;

IX. Documentation booklet;

drawings showing the complete representation of the project;
photos of the model and sketches as necessary;
texts explaning the concept and the idea;
digital documentation on CD (see XI.II, p. 93).

VI.II Seminar

I. 4 sheets DIN A2;

analytical description of function, use, purpose and atmosphere of the
synagogue (sheet I), the mosque (sheet II), the church (sheet III) and
the central space (sheet IV);
layout on agreement;

II. 4 sheets DIN A2;

spatial-atmospheric representation of an ideal interior space of the
synagogue (sheet V), the mosque (sheet VI), the church (sheet VII) and
the central space (sheet VIII);
layout and technique of representation on agreement.

65
VII. Collection of References
VII.I General Refereces

59

60

57

58 61

66
62

63

18

66

64

65
67

67
68

71

69

72

70 73

68
Fig. p. 66: 57: Jean-Nicolas-Louis Durand, Well of the Citadel of Turin; 58: Étienne-Louis
Boullée, Municipal Palace; 59, 60: Étienne-Louis Boullée, Cenotaph for Newton; 61: Si-
mon Ungers, Seven Sacred Spaces.

Fig. p. 67: 62: Étienne-Louis Boullée, Municipal Palace; 63: G. Muzi, A. Alpago Novello,
T. Buzzi, O. Cabiati, Monument to the Fallen, Milan; 64: Rotonda della Besana, Milan; 65:
Étienne-Louis Boullée, Cenotaph/Tomb; 66: Carlo Moccia, Axonometric view of the interi-
or of the Torre Museo, Crotone; 67: Louis Kahn, National Assembly Building, Bangladesh.

Fig. p. 68: 68: Simon Ungers, Seven Sacred Spaces; 69: Étienne-Louis Boullée, Metropo-
litan Church of Corpus Christi Day; 70: Simon Ungers, Seven Sacred Spaces; 71: Giovan-
ni Muzio, Angelicum Convent, Milan; 72: Kazimir Malevich, Gota 2-a; 73: Étienne-Louis
Boullée, Metropolitan Cathedral in the Form of a Greek Cross with a Domed Centre.

69
VII.II Churches

74

77

78

75

76 79

70
80

83

81

84

82 85

71
86

89

87

90

88 91

72
Fig. p. 70: 74: Étienne-Louis Boullée, Church of the Madeleine; 75: Rudolf Schwarz,
Church St. Theresia, Linz; 76: Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Robert F. Carr Memorial Chapel
of St. Savior; 77: Benedictine Abbey Maria Laach; 78: Dominikus Böhm, Church of St.
Peter and Paul, Dettingen am Main; 79: Dominikus Böhm, Church of St. Joseph, Zabrze.

Fig. p. 71: 80: Leon Battista Alberti, Basilica of Sant‘Andrea, Mantua; 81: Dom Hans van
der Laan, Convent of Jesu Moder Marias, Tomelilla; 82: Mario Botta, Church of San Gio-
vanni Battista, Mogno; 83: Leonardo da Vinci, Study of a Central Church; 84: Church of
San Sepolcro, Milan; 85: Le Corbusier, Notre Dame du Haut.

Fig. p. 72: 86: Leon Battista Alberti, Basilica of Sant‘Andrea, Mantua; 87: Basilica of San
Carlo al Corso, Milan; 88: Giovanni Muzio, Church of St. Antonio, Cremona; 89: Dominikus
Böhm, Church of St. Engelbert, Cologne; 90: Peter Zumthor, Bruder-Klaus Field Chapel,
Wachendorf; 91: Emil Steffann, Franciscan Church of St. Marien, Cologne.

73
VII.III Mosques

92

95

93

96

94 97

74
98, 99

100

103

101

102 104

75
 108

105

109

106

107 110

76
Fig. p. 74: 92: Mosque of Ibn Tulun, Cairo; 93: Mosque of al-Hakim, Cairo; 94: Louis Kahn,
Mosque of National Assembly Building, Bangladesh; 95: Selimiye Mosque, Edirne; 96:
Nasir al-Mulk Mosque, Shiraz; 97: Louis Kahn, Mosque of National Assembly Building,
Bangladesh.

Fig. p. 75: 98: Üç Şerefeli Mosque, Edirne; 99: Al-Aqmar Mosque, Cairo; 100: Umayyad
Mosque, Aleppo; 101, 102: Great Mosque, Samarra; 103: Imam Mosque, Isfahan; 104:
Great Mosque, Samarra.

Fig. p. 76: 105: Jameh Mosque, Isfahan; 106: Mosque of Ibn Tulun, Cairo; 107: Great Mos-
que, Seville; 108: Abu Dulaf Mosque, Hypothetical plan; 109: Great Mosque, Kairouan;
110: Hagia Sophia Mosque, Istanbul.

77
VII.IV Synagogues

114

115

111

112
116

113 117

78
 121

118

122

119

120 123

79
124 127

125 128

126 129

80
Fig. p. 74: 111: New Synagogue, Berlin; 112: Synagogue of Tell-Hum, Capharnaum; 113:
Old Synagogue, Essen; 114: Synagogue, Ostia; 115, 116: Louis Kahn, Hurva Synagogue,
Jerusalem; 117: Scola Spagnola, Venice.

Fig. p. 75: 118: Synagogue, Frankfurt am Main; 119: Scola Levantina, Venice; 120:
Roonstrasse Synagogue, Cologne; 121: Jacobstempel, Seesen; 122: Westend Synago-
gue, Frankfurt am Main; 123: New Synagogue, Berlin.

Fig. p. 76: 124: Synagogue, Pesaro; 125: Medieval Synagogue, Regensburg; 126: New
Synagogue, Berlin; 127: Old-New Synagogue, Prague; 128: Great Synagogue, Florence;
129: Synagogue, Worms.

81
VIII. Symposium “Holy Spaces”

Sacred spaces belong to the inventory of the inhabitated “spatiality”

of the city. Among the architectural spaces of the city – which we
want to be understood, right from the beginning, in a limiting sense as
interior spaces and as places of an inner spatial sense – they can be
seen to be special places; they belong to the “other” spaces, to which
Foucault assigns a heterotopological character as “counter-sites” and
“realised utopias,” as spaces outside of all spaces, which are inscribed
into the very institution of society.
The purpose and use of sacred or holy spaces mark them as comple-
mentary spatial formations which are – as the opposite – separated
from and connected to profane or everyday urban spaces.
“The inward and outward do not stand side by side, each as a sepa-
rate province; each, rather, is reflected in the other, and only in this
reciprocal reflection does each disclose its own meaning.”15

15
Ernst Cassirer, The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Volume 2: Mythological Thought,
New Haven 1955, p. 99.
Fig. 130: Antonio Monestiroli, Church of San Carlo Borromeo, Rome 2011.

130

82
VIII.I Programme16

09.30 Introduction
Raffaella Neri, Uwe Schröder

10.00 The Architecture of the Church

Mons. Giancarlo Santi (Milan)

10.30 The Architecture of the Mosque

Attilio Petruccioli (Bari)

11.00 The Architecture of the Synagogue

N.N.

11.30 On the Archaic of Time and Space

Renato Rizzi (Venice)

12.00 Lunch break

14.00 Dom Hans van der Laan

Caroline Voet (Antwerp)

14.30 On the Seven Sacred Spaces by Simon Ungers

Uwe Schröder (Aachen/Bonn)

15.00 Place, Time, Land, Light, Silence

Paolo Zermani (Florence/Parma)

15.30 The Church of San Carlo Borromeo and other Projects…

Antonio Monestiroli, Tomaso Monestiroli (Milan)

16.00 The Central Mosque in Cologne

Paul Böhm (Cologne)

16.30 The New Synagogue in Dresden and other Projects…

Wolfgang Lorch (Darmstadt)

17.00 The Form of the Sacred Space

Federica Visconti, Renato Capozzi (Naples)

17.30 On Monumentality
Carlo Moccia (Bari)

18.00 Discussion

16
The symposium “Holy Spaces” is scheduled for March 18th 2019 and will be held at the
Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci. The exact location will be announced in
due course.

83
VIII.II Participants

Paul Böhm
studied architecture at the Technical Universities of Berlin and Vienna
before working at numerous prestigious architecture offices, such as
with Richard Meier in New York and the office Böhm, where he be-
came partner in 1997. In 2001 he founded his own architecture of-
fice. Paul Böhm is a professor at Institut für Entwerfen-Konstruieren-
Gebäudelehre (IEKG) at the TH Köln – University of Applied Sciences.
He is a member of the board of the cultural centre Haus der Architek-
tur in Cologne.

Renato Capozzi
graduated in architecture from the Università degli Studi di Napoli
before obtaining the title of Doctor of Research in Architectural Com-
position at the IUAV of Venice. From 2006 to 2012 he was a con-
tract professor at the Faculty of Architecture in Naples. He is currently
associate professor in Architectural and Urban Composition at the
Department of Architecture of the Università degli Studi di Napoli “Fe-
derico II” and as professore aggregato, he has held the course on
Theory of Contemporary Architectural Research and the Laboratory of
Architectural Composition I.

Wolfgang Lorch
studied architecture at the Technical University of Darmstadt and the
ETSA Barcelona. He became Chair of the BDA Saar in 1999 and was
a professor at the Stuttgart Technology University of Applied Sciences
from 2001 to 2003. Since 2003 Wolfgang Lorch has held the Chair
of Construction and Experimental Design at the Technical University
of Darmstadt.

Carlo Moccia
graduated from the Faculty of Architecture in Pescara. Since 1995
he has taught at the Faculty of Architecture at the Politecnico di Bari,
where he is a professor of Architectural and Urban Design. He is a
member of the Teachers College of Architectural Design for Mediter-
ranean Country PHD at the Politecnico di Bari. His projects have been
featured in a number of architectural exhibitions including the 10th
International Architectural Exhibition at the Biennale of Venice in 2006,
where he won the “Lion of stone”.

84
Antonio Monestiroli
graduated in architecture from the Polytechnic University of Milan,
where he went on to teach Architectural Composition at the Faculty of
Architecture in 1970. In 1997 he was one of the founders of the Facul-
ty of Civil Architecture in Milan, where he was Dean of the Faculty from
2000 to 2008. He is professor emeritus at the Polytechnic University
of Milan. His teaching positions include work at the Faculty of Archi-
tecture in Pescara and the IUAV in Venice, visiting professorships at
the Syracuse University in New York in 1979 and at the Department
of Architecture of the Delft University of Technology in 2004. His re-
search focuses on the topic of design theory. His designs, models
and drawings have been featured in numerous exhibitions all over
the world.

Raffaella Neri
studied architecture at the Polytechnic University of Milan and re-
ceived a PhD in Architectural Composition at the IUAV in Venice. She
is professor in Architectural and Urban Composition at the Polytechnic
University of Milan and part of the teaching board of the PhD course
of the IUAV University in Venice. Her research mainly focuses on ar-
chitectural theory, on the problem of the urban project in the modern
city and on the role of construction in architectural design. She parti-
cipated in many architectural competitions; in 1996 she won the Na-
tional Architectural Prize Luigi Cosenza.

Attilio Petruccioli
is professor of Landscape Architecture and the Dean of the School of
Architecture at the Politecnico di Bari. From 1994 to 1998 he was the
Aga Khan Professor of Design for Islamic Societies at the Aga Khan
Program for Islamic Architecture at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology. From 2012 to 2013 he was the Msheireb Property Chair
at Qatar University. His research interests include the methodology
of design as well as traditional urban environments and housing and
their restoration and revitalization. He has been involved in the publi-
cation of more than 32 books on the topics of architectural design and
the history of Islamic architecture.

85
Renato Rizzi
is professor at the Instituto Universitario di Architettura in Venice. Fol-
lowing his graduation from the faculty of architecture, he collaborated
with Peter Eisenman for more than 10 years. His designs have been
met with high critical acclaim, winning many prestigious architectural
competitions. Amongst these are awards for his designs of the Egyp-
tian Museum in Cairo, the Palace of Sports in Trento and the Shake-
spearean Theatre in Danzig.

Mons. Giancarlo Santi

is presbyter of the diocese of Milan. Following his graduation in archi-
tecture at the Polytechnic University of Milan and in theology at the
Faculty of Theology of Milan, he is responsible for the Cultural Herit-
age Office (Ufficio Beni Culturali) of the diocese of Milan and heads
the Pontifical Commission for the Cultural Heritage of the Church
(Pontificia Commissione per i Beni Culturali della Chiesa). He is also
responsible for the National Cultural Heritage Office of the General
Secretariat of the Italian Episcopal Conference. He is currently a lec-
turer at the Catholic University of Milan and president of the AMEI
(Association of Italian Ecclesiastical Museums).

Uwe Schröder
studied architecture at the Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hoch-
schule Aachen. In 1993 he founded his own architectural practice in
Bonn. After teaching positions in Bochum and Cologne, he was pro-
fessor for Design and Theory of Architecture at the TH Köln – Univer-
sity of Applied Sciences from 2004 to 2008. Since 2008 he has been
professor at the Chair of Spatial Design at the RWTH Aachen, while
holding visiting professorships at the Università di Bologna from 2009
to 2010, the Università degli Studi di Napoli “Federico II” in 2016, the
Politecnico di Bari in 2016 and the Università degli Studi di Catania
in 2018.

86
Federica Visconti
graduated from Università degli Studi di Napoli “Federico II”, where
she received a PhD in 2001. She is associate professor at the Univer-
sità degli Studi di Napoli “Federico II”, where she has taught various
courses related, amongst other topics, to the Evolution of Landscape
Architecture, the typological and morphological characteristics of ar-
chitecture, on the topic of open spaces, architectural and urban com-
position, and the theory and technique of architectural design. She
has published numerous works, e.g. on the transformation and urban
morphology of the city.

Caroline Voet
studied architecture in Antwerp and at the Architectural Association
in London. Before founding her own practice in 2004, she was project
architect at Zaha Hadid Architects in London and Christian Kieckens
in Brussels. She holds a PhD in design strategies. Her research in-
terests include the development of architectural language, spatial
systematics and design strategies. Since 2017 she is a tenured as-
sistant professor at the Faculty of Architecture of KU Leuven, where
she teaches architectural theory and practice. Caroline Voet was an
invited lecturer at ETH Zurich and Leibniz University Hannover and
holds a guest professorship at TU Delft since 2016. She has received
numerous prizes both for her architectural design as well as her publi-
cations including the DAM Architectural Book of the Year Award 2018.

Paolo Zermani
is professor of architectural composition at the Faculty of Architecture
of the University of Florence. He has taught the master‘s degree in
theology and architecture of churches at the Theological Faculty of
Central Italy and at Syracuse. He is the founder of the conferences on
Identity of Italian Architecture and the Gallery of Italian Architecture in
Florence. His work has been featured in numerous exhibitions and in
international publications, such as the Italian Ottagono and the Japa-
nese A+U Architecture and Urbanism.

87
IX. Excursion “Sacred Spaces in the Rhineland”17

In Spring the excursion “Sacred Spaces in Rhineland” will take us to

selected architectural works in Aachen, Cologne and surrounding ci-
ties. During our trip we will visit both historic and contemporary works
of sacred architecture by prominent architects like Dom Hans van der
Laan, Dominikus Böhm, Rudolf Schwarz, Heinz Bienefeld and many
others. Besides the specific building tradition of sacred architecure
in the Rhineland, these works also bring up general questions about
space, form and atmosphere of sacred buildings and will thereby
broaden our understanding of the meaning of the sacred.

IX.I Exhibition “JAA19”

On occasion of the annual “JAA” exhibition of the Faculty of Architec-

ture of the RWTH Aachen the Department of Spatial Design will exhibit
student works of the winter semester 2018/19 dealing with the topic
of “The Construction of the Sacred Space”. In addition several invited
guests coming from different professional backgrounds will give short
lectures on the individual approach of the sacred with regrad to their
specific discipline.

17
The excursion is scheduled for May 6th–10th 2019 in Aachen. The exact time schedule,
detailed information on the locations and the general prodecure will be announced in
due course.

88
131

Fig. 131: Dom Hans van der Laan, St. Benedictusberg Abbey, Mamelis 1968.

89
X. Schedule

No. Date Time, Place Event

I Mo., 25.02.2019 10.15, III.D Introduction,

Tu., 26.02.2019 09.15, III.D Organisation

II Mo., 04.03.2019 10.15, III.D Site Visits

Tu., 05.03.2019 09.15, III.D

III Mo., 11.03.2019 10.15, III.D Design critique

Tu., 12.03.2019 09.15, III.D

IV Mo., 18.03.2019 09.30, … Symposium

Tu., 19.03.2019 09.15, III.D Design critique

V Mo.–Th., 10.15, III.D Workshop I

25.–28.03.2019

VI Mo., 01.04.2019 10.15, III.D Design critique

VII Mo., 08.04.2019 10.15, III.D Design critique

VIII Mo., 15.04.2019 10.15, III.D Design critique

IX Mo., 29.04.2019 10.15, III.D Design critique

X Mo.–Fr., … Excursion
06.–10.05.2019

XI Mo., 13.05.2019 10.15, III.D Design critique

XII Mo., 20.05.2019 10.15, III.D Design critique

XIII Mo., 27.05.2019 10.15, III.D Design critique

XIV Mo., 03.06.2019 10.15, III.D Design critique

XV Mo.–Th., 10.15, III.D Workshop II

10.–13.06.2019

XVI Mo., 15.07.2019 … Final Presentation

90
XI. Procedure

The work on the project “The Construction of the Sacred Space:

House of Religions, Milan” (p. 30ff.) and the seminar “The Type of the
Sacred Space” (p. 62f.) is conducted in groups of two students. Week-
ly meetings for individual design critiques with each group accompa-
ny the work on the project and the seminar throughout the semester.
Based on both sketched and printed plan materials as well as carton
models the progress of the project is presented and discussed.
At the beginning and at the end of the semester workshops serve
to facilitate the start of the project respectively to finalise it. Interim
presentations are conducted on a regular basis to discuss general
questions and the overall progress together with the other groups.
Special events like the symposium “Holy Spaces” (p. 82ff.), the excur-
sion “Sacred Spaces in the Rhineland” (p. 88f.) and lectures broaden
the context of the project and offer in-depth discussions of specific
aspects of the topic.
The regular meetings will take place in the teaching room III.D in Via
Andrea Maria Ampère, 2, building 11, Politecnico di Milano. Times,
places and events, which are not listed in the schedule above, will be
announced in due course.

91
XI. Annex

XI.I Bibliography

Sacred Architecture
Maurizio Bergamo, Spazi Celebrativi. Figurazione Architettonica. Simbolismo Liturgico,
Venice 1994.
Goffredo Boselli (ed.), Spazio Liturgico e Orientamento, Convegno liturgico internazionale
di Bose, Magnano 2007.
Adam Caruso, Helen Thomas (ed.), Rudolf Schwarz and the Monumental Order of Things,
Zurich 2016.
Ernst Cassirer, The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Volume 2: Mythological Thought, New
Haven 1955.
Adriano Cornoldi, L’Architettura dell’Edificio Sacro, Roma 2000.
Mircea Eliade, Il Sacro e il Profano (1956), Torino 1973.
Alberto Ferlenga, Paola Verde, Dom Hans van der Laan. Le Opere, gli Scritti, Milan 2000.
Michel Foucault, Andere Räume, in Karlheinz Barck (ed.), Aisthesis. Wahrnehmung heute
oder Perspektiven einer anderen Ästhetik, Leipzig 1993, p. 39–46.
Glauco Gresleri, I Luoghi e lo Spirito, Venezia 1991.
Simon Ungers, Seven Sacred Spaces, Cologne 2003.
Caroline Voet, Dom Hans van der Laan. A House for the Mind, Antwerp 2017.

General References
Otto Friedrich Bollnow, Human Space, London 2011.
Renato Capozzi, L’Architettura dell’Ipostilo, Florence 2016.
Andreas Denk, Uwe Schröder, Rainer Schützeichel (ed.), Architektur. Raum. Theorie. Eine
kommentierte Anthologie, Tübingen/Berlin 2016.
Jörg Dünne, Stephan Günzel (ed.), Raumtheorie. Grundlagentexte aus Philosophie und
Kulturwissenschaften, Frankfurt am Main 2006.
Carlo Moccia, Architetture 2000–2010, Florence 2012.
Antonio Monestiroli, La Metopa e il Triglifo. Nove Lezioni di Architettura, Rome/Bari 2002.
Raffaella Neri, Ragioni della Costruzione, Ragioni dell’Architettura, in EdA Esempi di Archi-
tettura, vol. 3 n. 2, 2016, p. 77–88.
Camillo Orfeo (ed.), Antonio Monestiroli. Uwe Schröder. José Linazasoro. Carlo Moccia.
Luciano Semerani. Lectiones. Riflessioni sull‘Architettura, Naples 2018.
Wolfgang Pehnt, Paul Böhm. Buildings and Projects, Fellbach 2016.
Atillio Petruccioli, After Amnesia. Learning from the Islamic Mediterranean Urban Fabric,
Bari 2007.
Renato Rizzi, Il Daimon di Architettura, Sesto San Giovanni 2015.
Uwe Schröder, I due Elementi dell‘Edificazione dello Spazio. Scritti Scelti, Florence 2015.
Jean-Paul Thibaud (ed.), Gernot Böhme, The Aesthetics of Atmospheres, London 2017.
Oswald Mathias Ungers, Architettura come Tema/Architecture as Theme, Milan 1982.
Oswald Mathias Ungers, Morphologie. City Metaphors, Cologne 1982.
Federica Visconti, Pompeji. Città Moderna/Moderne Stadt, Tübingen/Berlin 2017.

92
XI.II Documentation

The documentation is to be submitted on a CD at the final presentation of the project. The

CD is to be labeled according to the name convention described below. (SS19_PM_AbXy)

Folder and file name convention

Summer semester 2019_Politecnico di Milano_Student‘s name e.g. Carla Giorgio
e.g.: SS19_PM_CaGi

Folder names
SS19_PM_AbXy_01_Sheets
SS19_PM_AbXy_02_Drawings
SS19_PM_AbXy_03_Pictures
SS19_PM_AbXy_04_Texts
e.g.: SS19_PM_CaGi_01_Sheets

01_Sheets (*.pdf, vector-based, to scale, not resized):

All sheets of the final presentation
e.g.: SS19_PM_CaGi_Sheet01.pdf

02_Drawings (*.dxf 2010):

Pictogramme _ 01 / 02 / 03 /… _ Scale 1:XXX
e.g.: SS19_PM_CaGi_P_01_200.dxf

Floor plan _ …/ 1st Basement Floor / Ground Floor / 1st Floor /… _ Scale 1:XXX
e.g.: SS19_PM_CaGi_F_1BF_200.dxf

Section _ 01 / 02 / 03 /… _ Scale 1:XXX

e.g.: SS19_PM_CaGi_S_01_200.dxf

Elevation _ North / West / South / East _ Scale 1:XXX

e.g.: SS19_PM_CaGi_E_N_200.dxf

Axonomectric view _ Scale 1:XXX

e.g.: SS19_PM_CaGi_A_200.dxf

03_Pictures (*.tiff, at least 15,8 x 9,8 cm at 600 dpi):

Photos, renderings, reference picture etc.
e.g.: SS19_PM_CaGi_Picture01.tiff

04_Texts (*.doc):
Concept text, foot notes, bibliography etc.
e.g.: SS19_PM_CaGi_Text01.doc

93
“[The house] is our first universe,
a real cosmos in every sense of the word.”18

18
Gaston Bachelard, The Poetics of Space, Boston 1994, p. 41 (p. 4).

94